"Why aren’t we seeing any Jihadi activity in Qatar and Kuwait and Bahrain?"

But we do. A member of the ruling Al-Thani family, who learned that the FBI was about to arrest a terror suspect, warned him so that he could make his escape. The ruling sheik permits the Der-Sturmer-cum-Tass Al-Jazeera, which is the leading propaganda organ, world-wide, of the Jihad and its nonsense and lies, and is directly responsible for attacks on Americans in Iraq, helped to warn an Al-Qaeda. Powell's attempts to win some kind of Qatari support met with failure. People keep confusing the outward and visible signs of sweet reasonableness with the essential awfulness of these countries. So what if the ruling sheik has a chic wife, supposedly promoting women's rights? How does that help us, the Infidels, to stop the murderousness of Al-Jazeera? I must disagree with those who argue that Qatar is not doing its bit for the Jihad; it is, it is.

And Kuwait, grateful Kuwait, whom we rescued in 1991? Have women been given the right to vote as yet? And what about all those permanent residents who are not Kuwaiti -- how are the Infidels among them treated, especially those domestic servants who, when they happen to end up in a Kuwaiti entourage in London, and manage to escape, tell horror tales of their treatment? And what about Kuwaiti contributions to madrasas and mosques worldwide, which along with those from the U.A.E., need to be examined. Saudi Arabia is awful, but it is hardly Saudi money alone that is the problem.

Though there are some remarkable Kuwaitis -- and for some reason the Behbehani quarter of Kuwait now comes to mind -- who know and are unafraid to say what Islam really is, most are in the camp of Jihad. Let's not start seeing the sheikhdoms as brimming with moderates.

As for Bahrain, lots of Shi'a there. Not as badly treated as the Shi'a of al-Hasa (the eastern oil province of Saudi Arabia), but not immune to the Iranian siren-songs either.

It would be truer to say that the sheikdoms have a number of worries. While the inhabitants are not to be trusted (that al-Thani family member, that Al-Jazeera poision) and should be read the riot act, one is overlooking a little fact. They dislike the Infidel Americans as much as the Iraqis do. But just as the Iraqis will try to make us stay on, in order to take the casualties as we keep the peace between Sunni and Shi'a, Kurd and Arab (why the hell should we? Let them fight it out, and take the casulaties themselves--the more the better), the Qataris and the Kuwaitis and the Bahrainis are willing to overcome their deep and inculated hatred for us (expressed far more charmingly, and without the deep feeling that, for example, Egyptians and Jordanians and Syrians bring to the task), because they have all these bullying neighbors. Kuwait had to be saved from Saddam Hussein. That threat seems to have gone -- or has it? And what about Iran, and the appeal to the Shi'a of Bahrain? Or what about the Big Bully of the Arabian Peninsula, Saudi Arabia itself? Do not forget the Buraimi Oasis dispute of 1954-1956, when the Saudis tried to claim territory belonging to Abu Dhabi, or the Saudi support of the "Royalists" in Yemen (and that proxy battle between Nasserite Egypt and Saudi Arabia should also, like the Iran-Iraq War, have gone on forever -- from our point of view), or the Saudi support of the Dhofar rebellion in Oman.

It is largely fear of Iranian, and especially Saudi aggression, that gives us what slim welcome we have in Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain, and nothing else. The idea that we have a commonality of interest, of ideas, of civilisation with any of these pipsqueak plutocracies is nonsense. Our Founding Fathers would have despised the notion.

Whatever the charges made that the Kuwaitis, Qataris, and Bahrainis are not doing their bit for the Jihad should be seen for what it is: just a call to the locals to attack American servicemen there. If the local regimes do not embrace and second these attacks, it is not because they are "pro-American" but because they want the American military presence there for their own purposes, to protect them from Iran and Saudi Arabia. And that's it.

Such attacks should not be interpreted to mean (and there are always idiots in Washington willing to compose a little drama with "bad" Arabs and the "good" Arabs who really are on our side, and only need a little support and a little concesson here and there. But perhaps it is not a drama, but a kind of situation comedy, in which, episode after episode, the Policymakers try this, try that, and are always surprised, always being disappointed, because they keep avoiding noticing what, in the Middle East, and wherever there are Muslim states, is the Elephant in the Room -- Islam itself.

When they make a list of "friends" in the Middle East (areKuwait, or Bahrain, or Qatar, our "friends" in the way that Singapore, Israel, Australia, Costa Rica and Iceland are our friends? Could they ever be? Why not? (Hint: the answer has five letters, and begins with "I" and ends with "M").

Hugh - Thanks for the information.

A simple sports analogy will suffice: "They all bat for the same team!"

As for no liquor in Saudi Arabia, I'm just ROFLMAO over that one. Isn't alcoholism supposed to be part of King Fahd's problem? And he's not the only one either. Drugs, alcohol, prostitution, homosexuality, all the sins of the West are alive and well in the Dark Kingdom.

Helen is right. If you are connected, ANYTHING is available here.

jay

Quite so.
Anything is available there. And everything is well hidden under the smokescreen of Islamic 'piety'.

Jay:

Helen is right. If you are connected, ANYTHING is available here.

And of course, they have their own version of "Sin City" right nearby.

I'm fairly certain that the slogan used in the current Las Vegas ad campaign ("What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas") was stolen from Bahrain.

That's true. Bahrain is the local vacation spot, at least in the Eastern Province. You see lots of out-bound traffic on Wednesday. Late Friday night, the causeway is packed coming back.

Hotel lounges are full of - I'm making an educated guess here - Saudi men in what they call "national dress" drinking and trying to pick up women.

Unlike Saudi Arabia, Bahrain does not export enough oil to maintain a petroleum-based economy. They have shifted their economy to banking, commerce and tourism. They know that terrorism is bad for business. And they know that money, like tourists (consider Bali), goes where it feels safe.

jay

You are all correct: A good friend of mine who was stationed in Bahrain said that the Alcohol and prostitutes and gambling was wide spread there. They have all the same vices as the west but they don't have the balls to admit it. She said it was the most hypocrital thing that she had ever witnessed in her life. They talk about how decadent the west is and yet they are immersed deeply in it themselves. Money talks and bullshit walks. That is islam.

I've been stationed at several Army installations that teach foreign officers, including ones from several countries in the Middle East.

It's usually pretty easy to find the officers from the Islamic countries in the evening. All you have to do is head for the nearest stip joint.

This article looks to me like a Saudi government/royal family information operation for internal security purposes. Obviously, REAL mujahideen would not target the Protectors of Mecca, Medina, etc, but would instead focus on the apostates over in the Gulf states.

Hmm...that should be "strip" joint

A not uncommon attitude among Saudis is that conduct outside the Kingdom really doesn't count.

Jay Stevens:

A not uncommon attitude among Saudis is that conduct outside the Kingdom really doesn't count.

Plus, acting like Westerners makes it a lot easier for them to trick American women into marrying them.

Flippin hell this page is filled with comments by disbelievers... !!!!

This page angers me!
I am the prophet, fear my wrath!!!