A View from the Eye of the Storm

[Sox62]

Originally posted by Sixpence
And what does that have to do with the translation of books?

They do not translate books,because they wish to keep their people ignorant to what happens outside of their country.When oil rich countries have wealthy royalty,while keeping most of the people in a state of poverty,or poor countries in the region are ruled with an iron fist by a dictatorship,they have no desire to let their people see things are better elsewhere.

You mentioned you could probably find other countries that translate as little,and quite probably you are correct.But the question is;are they doing this in a deliberate attempt to keep their people in the dark,or merely because they may happen to be a very poor country?

[Sox62]

Sixpence,I should have mentioned that you are correct that Saudi Arabia does it as well.That's why the article stated"entire region".

I'll put it to you this way;if the U.S. was not friendly to S.A.,the problem would STILL be there,and they would still be keeping their people ignorant.

The article was about problems in the region,not U.S. policy with Saudi Arabia.

[NUKE]

The transaltion of books is such a minor point in the speach..... to "hone" in on that is missing the overall point by miles.

[Sox62]

Originally posted by NUKE
The transaltion of books is such a minor point in the speach..... to "hone" in on that is missing the overall point by miles.

 Countries that support terrorism deliberately keeping their people ignorant of the outside world is hardly a minor point,imho at least.

[Nash]

It's almost the entire point, afaic.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Nash
It's almost the entire point, afaic.

really?

[NUKE]

The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the Arab league

I thought this was the main point.

[Nash]

the root of the problem isn't that they're dysfunctional. that's the result.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Nash
the root of the problem isn't that they're dysfunctional. that's the result.

so where does the transaltion of books figure in that argument?

Are they dysfunctional because they don't translate a lot of books?

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Toad

First, if you can show the Saudi Government itself is supporting Al-Q, please do so.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47815-2004Jun16.html

"The Saudi government may have "turned a blind eye" to charities that funded al Qaeda but was not directly involved in financing the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, according to findings released yesterday by the Sept. 11 commission."

Lol, pretty convenient huh, Toad? Everyone seems to be turning a blind eye, huh? So they can "donate" to "charity", but not be linked to al-qaeda, that's good, that's real good.

"Al Qaeda nevertheless found "fertile fundraising ground in the Kingdom," where religious extremism flourishes and charitable giving is considered an obligation."

Ok Toad, let me get this straight, you still seemed convinced that Iraq had these huge stockpiles of WMD that were sent somewhere or hidden or whatever. But you look at what I show you about saudi arabia and their funding of al-qaeda and say there is no "proof" of that. The hypocrisy of it all is killing me.


Rebuffing oil contracts? Have you noticed the price of gasoline lately? Did you notice the market reaction when Saudi Arabia vowed to pump more oil with the aim of lowering crude oil prices from record highs? At this stage of the US economic recovery and world economic expansion I don't think that's working against us.

Oh yeah, it went down 20 cents after going up 70 cents, yeah, woohoo! BTW, this is from 2002
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2561937.stm

If so, it wasn't just China. Do you know the details? Did US companies make competitive or lower bids and still lose the contract?

So let's see, we spend HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars securing THEIR region, then give contracts to someone else cause they gave them a lower bid. But you know something Toad, we now have an ace up our sleeve,  WE NOW HAVE INFLUENCE OVER THE PRICE OF OIL IN A BIGGER RESERVE THAN THEIRS. This Iraq thing is working out pretty good now, huh?

Or is this the Saudi way of saying they don't appreciate US pressure to reform

So, in other words, their saying they will change their views is BS

... you know, the pressure you say doesn't exist?

Pressure in the form of hollow words is anything but pressure

Human Rights?
Human rights organization approved along with minor reforms

" the new Saudi organization will work together with the government" so, basically, one in the same

"Confirming that the organization will be guided by the country’s Islamic value system"  Oh boy, so they will be making sure the women give to "charity"


Wait, let me guess, that's not fast enough for you. We should threaten the Saudis with a good nuking unless they speed up reform, right?

Well Toad, we invaded Iraq for alot less. But you know something Toad, i'm starting to like this Iraq thing. They want to give those contracts to someone else? That's ok, we will deal with our, er, the Iraqi government. We will drop the price of Iraqi oil and pump those wells dry! This is gonna be good.

Threatening to go to the Euro? So you think they should ignore intelligent financial management of their country, ignore doing what they think is best for the sake of what? Our friendship? If the Euro is a better investment, what would YOU do?

Do you remember when those saudis flew those planes into TWC? Do you remember what al-qaeda said to why they chose TWC? They were trying to ruin our economy, their main goal was to destroy our economy. Do you think if they ever succeed in bringing down the dollar, that saudi arabia would hesitate to make the switch?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/crisis/2003/1010oilpriceeuro.htm

You seem to think it has no merit, I think it has more than you think.

Or is this their response to US pressure to reform their system that you say doesn't exist?

If you say hollow words, I will say there is no pressure. But if you say we now have control of Iraqi oil, than yes, I will give you that.

You're thinking an unverified, untraceable E-Mail is a reliable source document? No comment, that says it all.

Maybe not, but I think their obligated donations to "charity" does.

How are they helping us?
1. They are certainly helping our economy (although it may be short term) by lowering world oil prices.

Again, after raising it 70 cents and making a killing, they lower it 20 cents. It's the same thing over and over Toad, they do it all the time, nothing new here.

2. They finally seem to be going after the A-Q operation in their country.

Let me get this straight, al-qaeda is running around in their country and they do nothing, but one cuts an American's head off, so they kill that one cause he made them look bad. But where they did kill him, i'll give you that one.

I riskily assume they are doing much more with us behind the scenes to help track down and neutralize the A-Q organization and supporters.

I hope you are right Toad, I really do, but I don't trust them, not even close, they speak with a forked tongue. But you have inadvertently shown me the light. I am warming up to this Iraqi thing, seriously. I think there is a method to Bush's madness. Not only did we get rid of saddam, we're gonna stick it to the saudis. I think i'm coming around.

[Toad]

What have they done with those charities post-9/11? I think a lot of things changed around the world then.

Sure, there were charities in Saudi that supported A-Q. Beyond that, there are charities right here that contributed and are contributing to A-Q. There are charities that say they don't but do around the world. The UK comes to mind.

I don't think there's any direct connection post-9/11 with the Saudi government. If you have one, let's see it.


Would you be happier if the Saudis had decided NOT to pump more oil. They're one vote in OPEC. I think, looking back over the years, that they're one of the more moderating influences in that organization. Who's the oil guy here? Charon? Let's ask him.

And they've done things for us. It's a 60 year relationship with doors that swing both ways. I think we lost those contracts because they were P.O.'d about Bush's reform initiative. Before it got watered down at the G8, it was a pretty hot button issue with them. But, of course, get the Euros involved and it gets massaged so no one's feelings get hurt.  

BTW, you're dreaming if you think we're going to control Iraqi oil exports. They'll have their own government in two weeks and I'll be suprised if they let us call the tune on their oil. VERY suprised after the "drilling" the UN gave them up the rear on the "Oil for Food" deal. I bet they keep their hand on the pipeline spigot. Besides you don't want to sound like a "no war for oil" ijit do ya?

How do you know it's hollow words? You were willing to give SH 12 years and far more on failing to account for his WMD. You want instant reform in Saudi though right? You never did answer.. think we ought to give 'em 24 hours and then nuke 'em or what?

The new human rights commission is not "one in the same". Go look at who's on it. Did you think they were going to entirely abandon "Islamic values"? Boy, you sure don't ask for anything unreasonable do ya? Maybe they should convert to Christianity in 24 hours or we nuke 'em, right? Go SIX!

What I remember is this: it wasn't anyone in the Saudi government that flew into the WTC. Do you remember that had they brought down our economy the Saudis would have lost thiers too? They were essentially fully invested in the dollar. You blame them for diversifying? I have more "world stocks" in my portfolio lately too. Duh.

Your E-mail reference is still laughable.

Review OPEC procedure again; how they vote. The Saudis are one of the more moderate voters over history.

They haven't been "doing nothing" for quite some time. They're after A-Q and we have government to government links with them in this pursuit. The FBI is over there for sure and I assume CIA as well... working WITH them.

They've done better at killing them than we have I believe. At least about as well.

I didn't say I trusted the Saudis. This whole thing started when you took off on a tangent and rather than discuss what this speaker said, you chose to "Blame Saudi Arabia!!!> for everything.

No one said they were "good guys". No one said they were not involved in the Islamic Militant Mess. Even the speaker says they've got to be addressed as a problem.

But the idea that they're the sole problem is laughable. The idea that we can force immediate change on them is more laughable.

Ready to nuke 'em unless they agree to your ultimatums? Go SIX!

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Toad

What have they done with those charities post-9/11?

I don't know, you tell me.

Sure, there were charities in Saudi that supported A-Q. Beyond that, there are charities right here that contributed and are contributing to A-Q. There are charities that say they don't but do around the world. The UK comes to mind.

So let me see, they got money from other places, so that makes it ok. Oh, and this al-qaeda that is alive and well you talk about saudi arabia, you think they are there just to hang out and have a BBQ? No, they are collecting for "charity". But wait, I can't "prove" that.

I don't think there's any direct connection post-9/11 with the Saudi government. If you have one, let's see it.

And there is no connection between al-qaeda and saddam, nor was there of WMD post UN resolution. No concrete "proof", yet you seem to believe that. You seem to believe only "proof" that fits your agenda Toad.


Would you be happier if the Saudis had decided NOT to pump more oil.

Huh?? They do it all the time!! Now that is laughable.


BTW, you're dreaming if you think we're going to control Iraqi oil exports.

Lol, you're kidding right? Pssst, we already do.

I bet they keep their hand on the pipeline spigot. Besides you don't want to sound like a "no war for oil" ijit do ya?

Listen, they may get their own government, but if you think our troops are coming home soon, don't count on it. If we leave, Iran and saudi influence are going to flood into Iraq(like they haven't already, eh?). And if you think we are going to let the likes of Iran or saudi arabia, or anyone else get control of that spigot, you're nuts.

How do you know it's hollow words?

Well, show me "proof" of reform. And if you say that commission again, then tell me what they have done.

I guess we should give them 24 hours and nuke them?

Well, to steal a line from Reagan "there you go again"

Did you think they were going to entirely abandon "Islamic values"?

You mean the ones where God comes down and kills all the Jews? Ahhh, yes!
 
Maybe they should convert to Christianity in 24 hours or we nuke 'em, right? Go SIX!

There you go again.

What I remember is this: it wasn't anyone in the Saudi government that flew into the WTC.

I don't think they were from Iraq either, nor were they iraqi citizens.

I have more "world stocks" in my portfolio lately too. Duh.

And if that stock continues to fail, you drop it like a hot potato. Duh.

Your E-mail reference is still laughable.

And so are bias speaches calling a whole people "dysfuntional"

Review OPEC procedure again; how they vote. The Saudis are one of the more moderate voters over history.

http://www.economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2705562

"Nearly every OPEC producer, save Saudi Arabia, is already producing about as much oil as it can."

Now there are tidbits we can both use, however, you cannot deny they had the ability to keep those prices from going up in the first place.

They haven't been "doing nothing" for quite some time. They're after A-Q and we have government to government links with them in this pursuit. The FBI is over there for sure and I assume CIA as well... working WITH them.

In that article, it notes reports of saudis flooding over the border to fight in southern Iraq, but where I cannot give you concrete "proof" of that, I guess you do not believe it. Was there not a pipeline hit in southern Iraq?

I didn't say I trusted the Saudis. This whole thing started when you took off on a tangent and rather than discuss what this speaker said, you chose to "Blame Saudi Arabia!!!> for everything.

There you go again

I mentioned his speach was bias, mentioned why I thought it was bias. Then I  mentioned how we partake in the ignorance of the people by supporting governments that keep their people ignorant. We can go from the shaw of Iran(talk about ruling with an iron fist), saddam, to an extent the financing of OBL. But the one we support now is saudi arabia, so that is the one I mention.

No one said they were "good guys". No one said they were not involved in the Islamic Militant Mess. Even the speaker says they've got to be addressed as a problem.

One of his valid points, as I said he had some.

But the idea that they're the sole problem is laughable.

I don't remember saying they were the sole problem, there are others, like Syria and Iran, but we do not support them, they are part of the "axis of evil". But hey, they do not sit on the largest oil reserves.
 
The idea that we can force immediate change on them is more laughable.

And to think we can win the war on terrorism without taking off the kid gloves is even more laughable.

 Ready to nuke 'em unless they agree to your ultimatums? Go SIX!

And there you go again (in sarcastic Reagan voice)

[Toad]

There's an article out today from the US Treasury saying the Saudis are doing good things to cut down on the the flow of funds to A-Q. But then, you'll say the US Treasury is lying for Boooosh right?

No, I'm saying that you may have unreasonable expectations. It would seem Islamic charities AROUND THE WORLD are giving money to A-Q. That it's just not a Saudi problem alone. But hey, keep on playin "Blame Saudia Arabia!" on your MP3.

No, A-Q is trying to overthrow the government/royal family in Saudi. So it would seem we have a choice. Which side do YOU want to be on in that fight?

Try to keep up. The only things I've said here on this BBS (and anywhere else too) about A-Q and SH were:

1. The Czechs think there was a meeting between the Iraqi Intell guy and the hijackers.

2. It's pretty clear there was an A-Q related terrorist camp making ricin in Northern Iraq and I don't buy the "that area was out of SH's control" line. The no-fly zone prevented his fixed wing air ops there but did nothing to restrict his ground ops.

Dodged the question again. Would you be happier if the Saudis had NOT moderated oil prices right now?

What's laughable is that you apparently think the Saudis control OPEC.

No, we don't control Iraqi oil. It'll come clear to you after June 30 I guess. Maybe later for you I guess.

I think US troops will be there for quite a while. There's going to be a major battle for control of Iraq. But the idea that the US will dictate their oil policy is crazy. They'll sell on the world market like the rest of the producers. Their production levels are essentially fixed due to their oil infrastructure. Lastly, their delivery is uncertain and will be throughout the coming war.

LOL. Mr. "Immediate". Let's see.. they started in March 2004 and they haven't instituted a true democracy with equal rights for women. What's slowing them up, anyway?

You're the one that wants everything immediately. Sorry,chum. Life isn't like that, no matter how many huge problems Hollywood wraps up for you in 120 minutes.

There YOU go again. You spent your entire time in this thread singing "Blame Saudia Arabia" and now you start dragging in Iraq in nonsensical comparisons.


And so are bias speaches calling a whole people "dysfuntional"

Go back to Reading Comprehension 101. That's NOT what he said.

I'd say this part of YOUR link verifies my comment about the Saudis being moderates in OPEC:

This spare capacity allows the Saudis to moderate oil-price spikes.

They have done precisely this at various times: during the Iran-Iraq war, when output from both countries was disrupted; during and after the first Gulf war, when output from Iraq and Kuwait was lost; and last year, when civil strife in Venezuela and Nigeria curbed output from both countries on the eve of last year's invasion of Iraq (which itself disrupted Iraqi output).

Produce the juice

The Saudis remain keen to moderate prices by using their buffer capacity.

There's Palestinians and Islamics flooding over the Syrian border to fight in Iraq, there's Iranians flooding over that border to fight in Iraq. Again, no one said "there's no Islamic militants in Saudi Arabia".  You, however, are the one saying the Saudis are the ONLY problem; in truth, they're a part of and typical of the problem as the guy who made the speech points out... if you read it for content.

Guess what.. I'll bet there's Iranian oil in American refineries right now!
 

And to think we can win the war on terrorism without taking off the kid gloves is even more laughable.

The idea that the way to get more cooperation from them is by Taking off the kid gloves" right now, as they are moving more and more against A-Q is beyond stupid. They're cooperating. So we should slap them harder, right?

Read the papers, man. The Saudis are farther "into the fight" than they've ever been and your suggestion is to threaten them and take off the kid gloves. Mr. Immediate.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Toad

There's an article out today from the US Treasury saying the Saudis are doing good things to cut down on the the flow of funds to A-Q. But then, you'll say the US Treasury is lying for Boooosh right?

There you go again

No, I'm saying that you may have unreasonable expectations. It would seem Islamic charities AROUND THE WORLD are giving money to A-Q. That it's just not a Saudi problem alone. But hey, keep on playin "Blame Saudia Arabia!" on your MP3.

Well, forgive me for high expectations, but we label syria and iran as part of an "axis of evil", we invade Iraq, saudi arabia gave more money to al-qaeda than anyone else, so how should I expect us to treat them??

No, A-Q is trying to overthrow the government/royal family in Saudi.

Oh really, can you show me proof of that? And the kind of proof you demand. And BTW, that would be just fine with me, I would like nothing better than a justification to invade saudi arabia. Does that overthrow seem like reality now? Like al-qaeda would bite the hand that feeds them and give us a chance to crush them at the same time. Talk about opportunity knocking, overthrow, don't get my hopes up.

The Czechs think there was a meeting between the Iraqi Intell guy and the hijackers.

And this isn't a reach? The Czechs think is a reason to go to war? Boy, you demand alot of proof from me, but the Czechs think is reliable. Geeez

It's pretty clear there was an A-Q related terrorist camp making ricin in Northern Iraq and I don't buy the "that area was out of SH's control" line.

It's pretty clear , huh? How clear? Clear proof? Or do the Czechs think this happened?

Dodged the question again. Would you be happier if the Saudis had NOT moderated oil prices right now?

According to the article I gave you, saudi arabia is the only opec country not producing to it's full capacity, so if they did, would not the price be lower? I don't know about you, but i've been paying two dollars a gallon for gas. And I am to be happy with this?

What's laughable is that you apparently think the Saudis control OPEC.

Are not you the one who said we can't ruffle their feathers because of their vote and influence in opec?

No, we don't control Iraqi oil. It'll come clear to you after June 30 I guess. Maybe later for you I guess.

Right here, right now, who controls that flow of oil?

I think US troops will be there for quite a while. There's going to be a major battle for control of Iraq. But the idea that the US will dictate their oil policy is crazy.

Well, is it crazy to say we will have strong influence with their oil policy? Or will you throw the black helicopter thing at me?

Their production levels are essentially fixed due to their oil infrastructure.

Well, and I could be wrong, I was to believe our tax dollars are being used to rebuild this infrastructure, so would it be too much to ask for a little in return?

LOL. Mr. "Immediate". Let's see.. they started in March 2004 and they haven't instituted a true democracy with equal rights for women. What's slowing them up, anyway?

And I guess getting them to give up on God coming down to kill all the jews is going to take some time, eh? Sorry for asking for so much so soon.

You're the one that wants everything immediately. Sorry,chum. Life isn't like that, no matter how many huge problems Hollywood wraps up for you in 120 minutes.

Well, we got all those troops half way around the world and conquered a country pretty quick, but I guess a firm stance with the saudis is going to take a 20 year plan


{B]You, however, are the one saying the Saudis are the ONLY problem[/B]

Again, show me where I said they are the only problem?

in truth, they're a part of and typical of the problem

Right, like syria and iran, so maybe we should start treating them the same, no? Listen Toad, they sit back and play mickey the dunce over and over, and I don't know about you, but I am getting a little tired of it.

Guess what.. I'll bet there's Iranian oil in American refineries right now!

Good, I hope we stole it.
 
The idea that the way to get more cooperation from them is by Taking off the kid gloves" right now, as they are moving more and more against A-Q is beyond stupid. They're cooperating. So we should slap them harder, right?

I guess time will, we will see. But in the meantime, if you meet a saudi prince, you can shake his hand, i'm not.

Read the papers, man.

I do, and not only is al-qaeda there, but thnx to saudi cooperation they are chopping American's heads off. But I guess to expect an immediate stop to that would be expecting too much

I've had enough Toad, you have your thoughts about it, I have mine. I hope you are right, really, cause if it were up to me, they would be included in that axis of evil, and maybe that is premature, but if things don't start to change, I am not the only one who is going to have those feelings.

[Pongo]

Good to see that Americas best and brightest have been convinced they have to defend the people that attacked the WTC. And attack and invade those that didnt but blame them.

Time to launch the USS George Orwell. CVN 100