Today on Blogcritics
Home » My Conversation With Bush About Saudi Arabia

My Conversation With Bush About Saudi Arabia

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

So I was sitting around the other day, shooting the breeze with President Bush.

We talked about the weather, how his mother is doing and other little tid bits like how he thinks that he (as prez) has a right to know what everyone in America is reading and buying at their local bookstore. I didn’t challenge him on the issue because I thought that it might ruin my chances of him picking up the bill for my latte. Plus the House of Reps did their job on that issue anyway. Anywho…

After a good 30 minutes of trying to wrap my mind around how he functions on only vanilla flavored lattes for lunch, I finally had to get in his face and ask him the big question. I said, “Mr. President.. dude… What is up with Saudi Arabia”?

He looked at me with that look he gives people when he’s annoyed, cornered and racking his brain for the best Rove-spin on the subject and he slowly takes a sip on his vanilla latte (extra sugar) and stares for a long moment. Finally he says “They’re our friends and a strong ally on the war against terror.”

I laugh to myself as I remember what our government REALLY thinks.

( Senior Pentagon civilians and members of Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff reportedly see Saudi Arabia as an enemy. In fact, some neoconservatives believe that a U.S. invasion of Iraq and the institution of a democratic, pro-U.S. Iraqi government, which would become a major oil exporter to the West, would allow the United States to solve an even greater problem: Saudi support for radical Islamic terrorists. The reduced U.S. dependence on Saudi oil, resulting from the conquest of Iraq, neocons say, would allow the United States to finally stand up to the Saudis on the issue of terrorism. Yet the official position of the Bush administration is at the other end of the spectrum: that the Saudi regime is a friend.)

I press him again… “Mr. President… what the HELL is going on with Saudi Arabia”? I mean, we call them friends yet they smack us up side the head with our oil supply on a daily basis and continue to call communist nations like China “friends” before us! Most of the participants from 9/11 were from SAUDI ARABIA! Osama (Dunno-where-he-be) Bin Laden is originally from Saudi Arabia AND now, with this so called “War on Terror” in Iraq, we are continually fighting insurgents that are mostly coming from SAUDI ARABIA!! Oh, and not only that… (he looks away at a young little chippy in a short skirt) there is growing evidence coming from our own government (the Pentagon) that wealthy Saudis are funding these wacko-mojo insurgent kooks!

“Mr. President..” I said, “Can you explain why our administration has not and WILL NOT address the fact that Saudi Arabia might be the real threat to our national security and our real concern regarding this so called “War on Terror”? There is even extensive evidence that your administration censored 28 pages of the 9/11 report to cover up suspected Saudi involvement! Mr. President, PLEASE let me know why there are continuous allegations that terrorists are getting help from inside Saudi Arabia and yet, we do nothing about it except continue to call them our ally in this war?

Bush looks and me… hands me the check for my latte and danish and mumbles something about global warming and Iran and slowly gets up to flirt with the chippy.

I’m just trying to get answers here and all I get is another bill, directly from the president to the average American. I’m a fair guy though, I accept the bill and give him the “zip up your fly” nod. (I want him to have a chance at baggin this babe!) After all, I still believe a president works better and harder for the American people when he’s getting a little love on the side. This one needs all the help he can get.

Granted, I can see the problems with questioning the Saudis. As Baer states ” It wouldn’t take much, he argues, for Saudi militants to get hold of potent weapons, cull a small force from the largely disaffected population, and carry out an attack on the country’s vital oil infrastructure. Halting the flow of Saudi crude would send world oil prices sky high and, in a worst-case scenario, could lead to regional war and global economic collapse.”

Sounds pretty bad to me.

As I watch the president make feeble attempts at flirting, I ponder the darker side of his mind. Does he really think it’s ok to LIE to the American people to slowly gain an American stronghold in the Middle East to ultimately control our precious flow of oil for the future, or is it better to tell us the truth?

I’m guessing that the truth (that Saudi Arabia is our real enemy) would be too painful and costly to our American pocketbooks. And that might be the real story and the REAL truth.

www.yensid.org

Powered by

About Yensid

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Pretty lunatic posting. But thanks anyway…

  • http://www.yensid.org Yensid

    That is the big question here. WHO are the real lunatics? The people who blindly support our mission in Iraq as the right thing to do, or those of us who question what it all means and whos really to blame.

  • SFC SKI

    You were away about 2 weeeks ago when we beat the Saudi issue to death.
    Look it up if you want to see the pros and cons of fighting with or invading Saudi Arabia.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    The lunatic part wasn’t the questioning about the wisdom of invading Iraq. That’s quite common.

    And the lunatic part wasn’t the questioning about the role SA plays in global terrorism. That’s also a common refrain.

    The lunatic part was about Bush chasing some tail, like he’s the GOP counterpart to BJ Clinton.

    Bush simply does not operate that way. I could not suspend my disbelief once you went there.

  • http://www.yensid.org Yensid

    Holy crap! RJ’s got a webcam on Dubya 24/7! Lemme see! Lemme see!!

  • JR

    At the Republican National Convention in 1988, (Bush) was asked by a Hartford Courant reporter about what he and his father talked about when they weren’t talking about politics.

    Pussy,” Bush replied.

  • Bennett

    Hey Yensid, nice writing.

  • Nick Jones

    Nice satire, Yensid. And I love that Salon link, JR.

  • gracefulboomer

    Delightful juxtaposition .. brilliant .. drawing out the quick defense of Bush (no philandering, thank you very much!)
    So everything else can be excused, ignored, explained away, because being faithful to one’s wife is now the only benchmark of morality.
    So much so, that as long as Bush remains faithful we can not even entertain- ‘I could not suspend my disbelief’- the possibility- ‘lunatic posting’- that this administration invaded Iraq because it could, rather than admit that the Sauds killed us on 9/11 and that we must change our ways, educate our people, invest in healthy alternative fuels, and wean ourselves from dependency on an insane bunch of IslamoFascists who have managed to combine Wahhabi Islam with the very best of Nazi ideaology.

    Junkies are like that. Your supplier beats your girlfriend and wants a little on the side, well geez.. . he’s dependable and your squeeze needs the hit, too.
    Your dealer talking down your home boys, shooting up the neighborhood, spreading lies, laying back and running out the good folks, consolidating power and running everyone else off the corner- just business. Someone is going to benefit and it might as well be you.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Wow, pretty lunatic comment, boomer… ;-/

  • JR

    You’re view of reality is pretty much discredited, RJ.

  • gracefulboomer

    ‘I’m guessing that the truth (that Saudi Arabia is our real enemy) would be too painful and costly to our American pocketbooks. And that might be the real story and the REAL truth.’

    Just agreeing with the author on this.
    My ‘pretty lunatic comment’ (the analogy of the U.S. being a junkie to the oil of Saudi Arabia-the supplier) is not original so I can not claim ownership. The shoe fits. period.

    Did google search-
    U.S. junkie for Saudi oil and came up with Results 1 – 10 of about 18,700 for ‘U.S. junkie for Saudi Oil.’ (0.30 seconds)
    :)

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Doesn’t the US get roughly the same amount of oil from Mexico and Venezuela as it does from SA?

    And even if it doesn’t, oil is an international commodity. If SA refuses to sell it to us, they still have to sell it to somebody. (It’s pretty much their entire economy…)

    And then we could purchase it from whoever they sell it to, at a slight premium (middlemen take their cuts, after all…).

    So, IOW, our relationship with SA is not the problem. The problem is radical Muslim crazies who want to kill all of us. Some of them are from SA, but most of these bastards are from somewhere else.

  • gracefulboomer

    Of course you are assuming that the fact that oil is fungible ends further discussion.
    The fungibility factor is used by both the left and the right for their own purposes. That is the beginning not the end.
    The left argues that without oil from Saudi terrorism could not funded. This is only partially correct.
    The right argues that if the Saud royals were overthrown an even worse fundamentalist regime would seize power.
    I agree with you that either way the Sauds have to sell oil.
    It would be more expensive without the ‘special’ relationship we have with the Saud Royal family.
    It is not just the amount of Saudi oil that we import vs. other oil producing nations. It is role the Sauds play in OPEC (setting oil prices) and their unique capacity to increase production rapidly in response to market conditions.
    The crazies from other nations you speak of are nations in the Saud orbit of influence. The Sauds have spent more spreading Wahhabi Islam than the Soviet Union did during the Cold War. The Sauds have literally changed whole Muslim nations from moderate to Sunni controlled loosely based Sharia societies.
    Just take a pictorial tour of the MidEast, Pakistan, Afghanistan, P.I., Sri Lanka, and Africa starting in the early 70’s to the present.
    Everywhere Saud aid and influence have gone, radicalization and internal dissent (away from modernization and multiculturalism) has followed.
    James Woolsey (former DCIA) described Saudi Arabia as the ‘epicenter of terror funding’ and like a ‘spider web’ everywhere the Sauds have sent money, maderras, aid, and Wahabbi Islam, terror campaigns and instability have followed.
    It is and has always been about ideology, not oil. IslamoFascism killed us on 9/11 not oil.
    Oil revenues was the means that financed the attacks, not the reason for the attacks.
    The dirty little secret is just how much (affect & effect) the Sauds have played in our covert and overt foreign policy. The Sauds literally financed most of our dalliances in Central and South America.
    They (the Sauds) hold U.S. Treasury bonds and finance part of our national debt.
    Please don’t be so naive as to assume that all of the market’s depression after 9/11 occurred because of the attack. The Saud Royals panicked after 9/11, withdrew and had to be coddled back in to U.S. markets by this administration.
    It is the interrelationship of Saud and U.S. investments and our own perceived ‘national security’ which keep us dependent.
    Just think of the Sauds as a Mafia family .. with absolute control of the oil revenues and only after the Royals get their share is the actual government of Saudi Arabia funded.

    Where is ‘somewhere else’? Is that an euphemism like ‘foreign fighters’?

  • mosquito buzz

    It is interesting to see how people think and perceive other cultures and issues from distance, and just make crazy statements that have no solid ground.
    I am an American working in Saudi Arabia, and I have seen the good job Saudis have been doing in fighting terrorism. I am just wounding if Americans, back home, know that Saudis have suffered from terrorism as much as we did!!!!!! This makes any allegation that Saudis support terrorists falls apart. Talking about oil makes me also wonder if many Americans know that Saudis are our friends for the last 60 years. They have increased, many times, the supply of oil to keep a reasonable price for a global prosperity. They are also smart enough to know that a high price will make us seek other alternatives. Interestingly enough, when the price of oil drops down so dramatically in the 90s, we did not help Saudis, although Saudi Arabia is the best market for our products among many countries in the area..
    It is my understanding that Saudis also have called for an international conference to set up a strategic platform of oil production that will help in keeping the world economic growth. Have we heard any oil producing country to do that or cares that much about us? I DOON”T THINK SO.

  • gracefulboomer

    ‘Saudis have suffered from terrorism as much as we did!!!’

    Are you logically challenged or a paid propagandist of the Saudi government?

    American and western compounds are being hit, those jointly owned by Saud/western corporations, and U.S. military installations supporting the Saudi military or oil interests, even the attack on the compound (2003) housing many Muslim internationals once housed westerners, and the insane Islamic terrorists even apologized for the faulty Intel as they had assumed westerners still resided in the compound that was hit.
    Do the math.

    02/91- shots fired at U.S. Military transport bus, injuring 3 American soldiers

    11/95- U.S. training facility Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
    5 Americans killed, 60 wounded of which 34 were Americans

    06/96- Khobar Towers U.S. Military Complex Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
    19 American soldiers killed, 500 American soldiers wounded- 60 American soldiers wounded severely

    11/00- (2) Car bombs kill 1 British citizen, injure 4 other British citizens Saud/Brit/Boeing joint aircraft supplier
    RIYADH, Saudi Arabia

    12/00 – A Scottish man is injured by a blast in Khobar

    03/01 – A Briton and an Egyptian are injured by a bomb outside a Riyadh book shop

    05/01 – An American is seriously injured by a bomb in Khobar

    03/01 – A Briton and an Egyptian are injured by a bomb outside a Riyadh book shop

    06/02- Car bomb kills respected British Banker- RIYADH, Saudi Arabia

    09/02- Car bomb kills German electronics tech – Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    There are, of course, more bombings- this list is far from complete.

    The suggestion that Saudi Arabia has ‘suffered from terrorism as much as we did’ is insulting and ludicrous.
    Much like the child who kills his parents and throws himself at the mercy of the court declaring that he is an ‘orphan.’

  • Maria

    Well … I used to be like Gracefulboomer in terms of the way I think about Saudi Arabia, but after living in Bahrain and visiting Saudi Arabia, make some friends as my work demands – trading and real estate-, I found them very peaceful people. They can not believe of what is being written about them in the American media. Gracefulboomer seems to close an eye and open another. He or she mentioned the American victims but overlooked the Saudi victims of terrorist acts. Tens of Saudi families as I understand have lost their kids, their fathers, or one of their families and u did not mention any incident relates to their suffering from terrorism !! . How dare we as American to look at the other side and deny such efforts by Saudis in fighting terrorism?

  • gracefulboomer

    By all means post those Saudi families, those *’ tens of Saudi families who have lost their kids.’*
    Are you not confusing the ‘Saudi lost kids’ with the Saudi suicide bombers who make up the largest marjority of suicide bombers going into Iraq and killing our American Troops?
    Clearly as the postings of the terrorist killings in Saudi Arabia illustrate most of the victims (killed and wounded) have been American, European, and foreign nationals or third world nationals.

    05/04- Saudi gunmen storm Swiss engineering firm, ABB
    5 Westerners killed, two Americans, two Brits, and one Australian
    Saudi officials said those who carried out the May 1 attack — all four of whom were also killed in the exchange of fire that day — were on the list of wanted militants, and all were from Arab nations.

    05/29/2004- 25 Hour Multi-Location Attacks
    CNNcom Syrian-American Witness- ‘Attackers Hunted Westerners’
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/30/saudi.eyewitness/index.html
    Oil City of Khobar, Saudi Arabia, 22 killed – 19 from other countries
    Most of the dead were among the 6 million expatriates who work in the Saudi petroleum industry and other jobs.
    Besides an Egyptian boy aged 10 (caught in the cross-fire) the dead included three Saudis, one American, one Italian, eight Indians, three Filipinos, two Sri Lankans, one Swede, one South African and one Briton.

    06/04- gunned down in cold blood, point blank range, with Saudi ‘minder’ present
    2 BBC reporters, 1 killed – 1 paralyzed for life

    06/08/04- American shot dead in Saudi Arabia, Second fatal attack on Westerners in three days
    Compound for westerners in Khaleej- Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    June 11–19, 04- Saudi terrorists kidnap and execute Paul Johnson Jr., an American engineer working for Lockheed-Martin Corp
    Paul Johnson was beheaded in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Video was taken of beheading and posted on Islamic web sites.

    12/04- U.S. Consulate General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia attacked with explosives
    Saudi officials say third world nationals taken hostage, 5 third world nationals and 3 Saudi attackers killed

    Are you suggesting that we become more sensitive to the Saudi families who have lost their insane Islamic terrorist family members?

  • Maria

    Hello Gracefullbomer, you seem to love twisting facts. I think readers are smart to understand that I meant Saudi people who lost their kids and lovely relatives because of terrorism. If you deny that, then your statistics are questionable. I don’t have the statistics, otherwise I would post them. Twisting facts and not appreciation reality that Saudis have suffered from terrorism as we did and that they have been doing an excellent job in fighting terrorism will lead us to no where but to illusion and a dark tunnel

  • gracefulboomer

    I have posted the terrorist attacks within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia does not have a free press, censors its internet content, and writes dual news coverage – one for western press pick-up coverage and some truly Anti-American vast conspiratorial oddly mixed stories with a bit of nationalism and religiously mixed reporting sort of thrown together in a faintly poetic use of a lot of allegory. I read both and am still waiting for stories on ‘those tens of tens of Saudi families.’
    The only illusion is your statement of fantasy and supposition that ‘the Saudis have suffered as much as we have… terrorism.’ You can’t post the facts because your statement is just not factual.

    You, not me, are creating a ‘dark tunnel’ while assuming wrongly that no one else posting in this forum travels, or has lived in the westernized compounds provided by the Islamic host countries. Throwing out Bahrain in your posting is not useful.
    Comparing Bahrain to Saudi Arabia is comparing apples and oranges. Much like a tourist who spends a month beachfront in Central or South America and then writes glowingly of a culture they have not really been exposed to- 8 or so blocks back from the tourist area. It is the height of naivety and humorous really.

    On a different note, there was a world wide glut of oil in the nineties. So it would not have been in the Saudi national interest to sell their oil higher than the newer emerging non-OPEC oil producing nations. Look it up… you might also want to spend some time on ‘the Saudi oil embargo of 1973.’

    The Sauds waited 2 years after 9/11 to seriously address terrorism. The terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia against western targets in May of 2003 has prodded the Sauds.
    For more information about their progress and in areas where their cooperation is less than stellar read Analysis Paper #4, Feb 2005, Brookings Institute- ‘Confronting Passive Sponsors of Terrorism.’
    Another source is the senate version of ‘The Saudi Accountability Act of 2005.’ Easily available on the web.
    The Rand Institute, Jamestown Foundation, Council on Foreign Relations are among the many think tanks which have published ongoing and updated studies on the many multilayered connections of Islamic terror and the role of Saudi Arabia.
    I also highly recommend the Jan. 2005 report from Freedom’s House Center for Religious Freedom –
    ‘Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques’
    An international study you may find informative was published by General Intelligence and Security at the Hague entitled-
    ‘From Dawa To Jihad- The Various Threats From Radical Islam To The Democratic Order’ http://www.avid.nl

    I enjoy reading the newspapers from Bahrain. Today there is a very nice letter written to the editor in defense of expatriate workers.
    ‘Why The Resentment?’
    http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/story.asp?Article=115323&Sn=LETT&IssueID=28095

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    What, exactly, should the Saudi Royal Family do? Kill huge numbers of their own people, because many are religious fanatics?

    That doesn’t exactly jibe with Bush’s support for Global Human Rights and Democracy…

    Perhaps they are doing a decent, though half-hearted, job. They do their best to control their internal loons while happily selling us their oil.

    Compare that to the alternative: Muslim Fundies in power who issue a jihad against all non-Muslims, and gleefully open their borders to countless foreign fighters in Iraq whose goal is to kill Americans.

    So, while I’m not exactly in love with the current rulers in SA, they are they best choice campared to the other shitty option…

  • gracefulboomer

    On what factual basis are you able to separate the beliefs of the Saudi Royal Family from ‘their own people’?
    Name one high or even low ranking royal who is anything other than a Wahhabi- there are no Shias, Sufis, moderate Sunni, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or any other religious group represented among any of the rough count of (5,000 to 8,500).
    Even the Shia minority – about 20% in Saudi Arabia are geographically isolated and severely repressed, disenfranchised, and considered infidels.
    Off the top of my head I even think most of their (Shia) religious symbols, cemetery markers and shrines have been destroyed Taliban style.
    There are no other indigenous peoples of varying faith and belief in Saudi Arabia. Not allowed-zip.

    Why do you think the imported work force is isolated in “compounds?”
    A cookie for you if your guess is that the compounds were a solution to the very real possibility that mixing the natives with people from other cultures and background and religions would ‘pollute’ and ‘defile’ the one group of people in the whole world who are practicing true blue Islam, and the infidel presence on the soil of KSA desecrate and sully Islam.
    The exception is only for those who can provide a needed service for true Islam, with self limiting interaction and only for the maintenance and continuation, and propagation of the one true faith. Same applies for Saudis who leave for higher education or advanced skill levels.
    And this ‘solution’ was reached by a religious council in consultation with the King and delivered by the issuance of an official Fatwa.

    Anything other than expousing the only sanctioned form of Islam and adhering to the Wahhabi principles would be an act of apostasy.
    Are you implying or suggesting that any other form of Islam other than Wahhabi or Salafist (interchangeable term) is allowed in the KSA?
    That when it gets down to the short hairs there can be dissension?
    The Sauds did not attain power by defying the only allowed and practiced form of Islam but by pledging to intermarriage bonds with the Wahhab clan to maintain, defend, enforce and promote Wahhabism throughout the world as the only true form of Islam – their basis for rule of the country is therefore absolute and divinely inspired.

    The KSA is not a country with differing political factions, religious factions, cultural factions, social factions. Not allowed-zip.
    You are applying western standards to a country which has none. Not allowed-zip.
    Why is it so easy for the average person to be able to wrap themselves around and understand the ideologies of Socialism, Communism, Nazism, Democracy, and any other -ism- and yet fail so miserably to understand that Wahhabism, the official and only religion of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the governmental, cultural, social, legally sanctioned, binding idealogical modality that makes up the KSA?

    How far does deniability go? If state-owned KSA media and state owned, state built, and state funded KSA mosques and state funded KSA mullahs fan hatred, preach anti-Americanism and state owned and operated KSA schools teach anti-Americanism hatred and train potential terrorists, and state sanctioned KSA charities under the official Seal of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia fund, encourage, promote terrorists does it matter that there may not be a direct organizational connection between the state KSA government and the terrorists who killed 3,000+ of us on 9/11?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    graceful:

    I guess you support an overthrow of the SA regime by the people?

    How well do you think that will turn out?

    Is the present SA gov’t filled with bastards? Yes.

    Would a “democratic” SA gov’t be filled with even more vicously murderous anti-American bastards? Yes.

    I choose the devil we know…

  • gracefulboomer

    ‘I guess you support an overthrow of the SA regime by the people?’ -JR

    No, I would support an invasion of Saudi Arabia and seizure of all Saudi oil fields.

    ‘How well do you think that will turn out?’ -JR

    Badly, if we lead the invasion like we conducted the invasion into Iraq. I am not against the war in Iraq, just questioning why it was the first country … so rushed.
    We had take to the bank Intel without hyperbole on the KSA.

    ‘Is the present SA gov’t filled with bastards? Yes.’ -JR

    Ideologically driven bastards, no less. A military, social, economic, cultural, expansionist ideology wrapped up in the bright bow of religion.

    ‘Would a “democratic” SA gov’t be filled with even more viciously murderous anti-American bastards? Yes.’ -JR

    Would pre-war Germany have become more and more viciously murderously Anti-American, even, say, if it had been wracked by civil war and a change in leadership?
    Yes, probably, because unchecked ideology always seeks its’ purest form. Functional or dysfunctional.
    Before ‘winning the hearts and minds’ of expansionist ideological Germany and Japan – the first was firebombed to hell and back and the second glowed.
    Change can not occur until the ideology has become too painful, too expensive, and seen as a discredited failure by the people. (Ignominy and shame.)

    ‘Choose the devil we know..’ -JR
    ‘Compare that to the alternative: Muslim Fundies in power who issue a jihad against all non-Muslims, and gleefully open their borders to countless foreign fighters in Iraq whose goal is to kill Americans.’ – JR

    No cynicism here, none, but I am just not convinced that ‘we do know this devil’. I am not even being argumentative..

    Your second comparison isn’t just an alternative possible hypothetical.. it is reality happening right now with the current crop of ‘Muslim Fundies in power’ who are ‘gleefully open their borders to countless foreign fighters’ and they are ‘killing Americans.’ The Saudis continue killing Americans- right now- so I do not understand- are you saying it doesn’t count yet-until some magical number is reached or something?

    LEADING AL QAIDA INSURGENTS OPERATE IN IRAQ
    06/28/2005
    exp…
    ‘About 3,000 to 5,000 Saudis have been fighting the U.S. military in Iraq.’
    http://menewsline.com/stories/2005/june/06_28_4.html