Birthdays, weddings and anniversaries cannot be celebrated publicly, as they are considered ‘inventions’ of the infidels, and therefore, are not tolerated. Deviation from the government’s edicts can result in public flogging, the loss of work and total social isolation. Free and independent thinking is made even less possible by the economic dependence of the Saudi people on its government. . It controls all public utilities, the oil industry, religious and educational institutions, ground and air transportation, and virtually the entire health care system. All the money from oil sales goes directly into the King’s coffers; who then allocates funds in consultation with senior members of the Royal family.
Despite all this, the west continues to fete the Saudi regime and even behave with toe-curling subservience to its whims and concerns. After visiting Afghanistan last month the new US Defense Secretary, Robert Gates visited Riyadh and ‘briefed’ the Saudi monarch, Abdullah on the current situation. Concerned about the situation in Iraq, the Saudi King apparently ““wanted to hear reassurances from us that we have a strategy, and they expressed their strong hope that we succeed.” Gates was more than happy to oblige his host. By no means is America alone in its courtship of the despotic House of Saud. Despite being critical of American foreign policy, Russian President Vladimir Putin met King Abdullah in Riyadh during a high level delegation visit on February 11-12.
The next time you hear George Bush or Tony Blair decrying the anti-democratic nature of a regime, ask yourself this question; how can we confidently claim to stand for democracy and human decency while our governments continue to support regimes like this?
Article comments
1 - MBD
Yeah, we should tell Saudi Arabia to take their oil and shove it up their ass.
An oil boycott will teach them a lesson.
2 - methuselah
IMO the turning point was in 1973 when OPEC manipulated oil prices. We, the USA, had a choice between pursuing the new technoogies, alternate energy, altered tax subsidies and national conservation policies toward energy independence, or we could depend on future political and warfare policies to control foreign oil. We chose the latter, and that was a big mistake that continued our dependence on SA scoundrels and led to 9/11 and the iraq invasion. In 1973 (and following) we tied our fortunes to the fortunes of the Saudi family, to our disadvantage.
3 - Sooli
This article has quite a few fallacies, even though for the most part it is accurate (70% imho).
But I only have time to make one observation only, and I believe it is the most important:
The writer fails to mention the modern-day influences of al Qa'ida, such as Israels subjugation of the Palestinians, Israel's invasions of Lebanon, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Saudi's (and others) "hosting" of US & UK forces, the 1990's sanctions on Iraq, and "Western" blind support of all despotic, brutal, and corrupt regimes in the region (including Israel), among other modern-day popular greivances.
This is what motivates people who join al Qa'ida, this is where it draws its popular base from, and this is what all radical groups in the region -Wahabi and non-Wahabi- focus on to draw support and justify their acts.
Claiming that al Qai'da has commited violent acts of terrorism simply because it is "Wahabi" (which it is not) is far from the truth, and is a clear attempt to divert us from the true issues at hand.
The reasons why all extremists are violently angry at "the West" are the exact same reasons why moderates in the region and abroad are moderatly angry at "the West".
It is modern day political events that have driven some people to extremism and violence. If it was simply ideoligy, then millions of non-Muslims in the region would have been killed first, especially those in modern-day Saudi Arabia.