Senate hearings on the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act are on again, but it doesn't seem as if the State Department is all that enthusiastic. From the New York Sun, with thanks to S.:
WASHINGTON - The State Department's last-minute withdrawal from a Senate hearing yesterday into Saudi Arabia's sponsorship of terrorism maddened lawmakers and hearing witnesses, who faulted the State Department for soft-pedaling on Saudi Arabia in advance of a visit to the kingdom tomorrow by Secretary of State Rice.Yesterday morning's Judiciary Committee hearing - titled "Saudi Arabia: Friend or Foe in the War on Terror?" - featured testimony by investigators and analysts of the Saudi kingdom who told the committee's chairman, Senator Specter, a Republican of Pennsylvania, and its ranking Democrat, Senator Leahy, of Vermont, that Saudi Arabia has been ineffective in curbing the propagation of anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-American ideologies.
The director of Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, Nina Shea, testified that the Saudis had also distributed extremist Wahabi "hate materials" at mosques here in America inciting violence against Jews and Christians. Committee members also showed video clips of Muslim clerics urging, over Saudi government-controlled television, that "throats must be slit" and "skulls must be shattered" in the fight against infidels. The video was translated and provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute.
Conspicuously absent from the proceedings, Messrs. Specter and Leahy said, was a representative of America's Department of State. Both senators repeatedly denounced the State Department's absence from the hearing as a "disappointing" development....
Read it all.
Pardon my stating the obvious. This is a major story. It reveals a major internal obstacle in dealing with the Islamic threat. Are we our own worst enemies? Can we not stand the light of truth? Very distressing.
"...Saudis had also distributed extremist Wahabi "hate materials" at mosques here in America inciting violence against Jews and Christians. Committee members also showed video clips of Muslim clerics urging, over Saudi government-controlled television, that "throats must be slit" and "skulls must be shattered" in the fight against infidels."
Our dhimmi State Department is saying it's more important to be in the favor of oil rich Saudi Arabia then to protect American citizens from the poison they peddle.
There is always talk about War for Oil, Blood for Oil, Conservatives bad, you know the drill. But who is really benefiting from Saudi dollars and contracts? Who are these people in our State Dept. who are nestling their heads and allegiance in the bosom of the very individuals who want to erase us?
This is disturbing.
Our dhimmi State Department is saying it's more important to be in the favor of oil rich Saudi Arabia then to protect American citizens from the poison they peddle.
Disturbing?? No, this is treason!!!
Don't listen to the chatter. Watch the actions. Remember, Rumsfeld thought it would be better to create a new intelligence agency within the Army.
If our DOD head is saying this, it means that both State and the CIA are merely politicized bureaocracies staffed with ACLU types and professional status quo professionals. State is a friend of the established power order - big oil, big paid off politicos, etc.
Bush is getting sandbagged at State as he isn't one of their kind of people. The CIA is so feminized and emasculated, they missed obvious terror threats leading to 9/11. It has been military, local police and border patrol who are doing 99% of the anti-terror stuff. The CIA is about as effective as the Dept. of Education.
Depressing, but true.
The State Department has a long, sorry history of Arabist quislings entering the revolving door in the service of the US and leaving the revolving door in the service of Saudi Arabia.
But honestly, how can one blame them for insulating their Saudi masters when the CIC provides such a mighty example in this respect.
Congress needs to pass the American Accountability Act.
The State Department is peppered with Muslim-Saudi sympathizers; many are there from the Clinton days, but also Bush has put many M-S sympathizers in State and elsewhere in the federal security apparatus, mainly through the efforts of Grover Norquist and his influence on Carl Rove. The Ramadan dinners and the Koran in the Whitehouse library are indicative of the level of M-S infiltration at the highest levels. Not to mention holding hands with the king.
Paul Sperry's "Infiltration, How Muslim Spies and subversives have Penetrated Washington" is a great synopsis on this sad state of affairs.
The Saudi Accountability Act is a potential light in the darkness. However, the potential for buying this off with oil money is huge. Spector and Leathy will have to summon up a lot of courage to push this ahead. And it has to pass veto-proof; we know where Bush will come down on this.
Does the dog wag the tail or the tail wag the dog? Does the superimperialist capitalist USA wag the poor [mezquino y pobre], Third World Saudi Arabia? Or does superrich feudalist Saudi Arabia wag the national bourgeoisie of North America? I'm gettin confuseder 'n confuseder.
Does this mean that Saudi Arabia really controls the Washington DC crowd? Or that the DC crowd has its own reasons for fawning over the Saudis and pretending to be beholden to them?
Without going into all the legal and constitutional implications, which branch of government makes the laws in the USA? Is the executive branch obliged to testify to the legislative branch? Is the US Government a govt of law or one of executive whim?
Now, if the Saudis really control DC, then that would require a revision of the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist and post-colonialist dogmas.
Or maybe State and the cia have something to hide?
I'm gettin confuseder and confuseder.
As dear Umar Khayyam asked, Who is the Potter and Who the Pot?
Also conspicuously absent from the hearings, the Saudis' favourite local lobbyists, but then I guess they're too busy harassing Spencer for inciting Islamophobia.
As I watched these hearings on CSPAN last night, I could't help but feel that maybe some in Washington were catching on to the Islamic phenomema that threatens us all. Yet even though I am encouraged, there still is much that needs to be done to increase the awareness of Americans of the real nature of islam.
Senator Schumer is a case in point. His questioning and critism was directed at the Saudi regime and "Wahabism". Most Americans and those with influence still cannot bring themselves to criticise "Islam".
The Wahabis are a tribe. They practice a religion called Islam. Their religin is based on the same Qoran that all Muslims adhere to.
We must realize that ultimately the real problem is not the Saudi regime but the Prophet Mohamed. If we cling to the notion that Islam is a religion of peace that is being corrupted or "hijacked" by renegades we will not be able to confront this challange.
As usual, Steve Emerson was brilliant. There was also tesimony from another witness who I believe was a former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. He used terminology that unfortunately is all to frequent with the main stream media. He described the head honcho immans of Saudia Arabia as "very conservative". Just the other day a Reuters story of the Iranian leader described him as an "ultraconservative". If you listen closely, this typ of description happens time and time again.
Why would a news organization use this description to describe a homicidal maniac? What policies and beliefs would make him a conservative as the term is used in Western societies?
Conservatism in the US generally means the support of free markets, less regulation, lower taxes, less government intervention and more private enterprise. There is no evidence that these militant Islamists support any of this. Quite the contrary. They usually support more state control of the private sector, more regulation etc. So why call them conservative if only to confuse people.
The Iranian leader (I can't even spell or pronounce his name) recently threatened to hang some of the members of the fledgling Iranian stock exchange. This is a conservative?
The State Department cannot speak openly or honestly about what they know. The State Department might as well plead "the fifth".
The fact that the State Department does not show up is increminating enough, and not of just the Saudi's. It shows that the State Department has full knowledge of the scale of operations and does not want to admit it and does not want it known to the public.
If anyone can ever get the State Department in front of these hearings, they will claim "National Security" and say nothing.
The State Department has a differant agenda and end result, then what the Americans want.
It appears that we all need to put pressure on our senators & representatives ;-) and the GOP to get our lame duck president (who I voted for...sigh) to stop fooling around with both the state dept. and the saudi wahabi-ists. After all are we not at war??
When I was young, traitors were shot and seditionists were jailed. Gee, what happened????
If you saw these hearings, you witnessed the most outrageous performance put on by Mr. Anthony Cordesman, a prominent consultant on "National Security" and "Middle Eastern Affairs" for ABC News, and a member of "The Center for Strategic and International Studies..."
What struck me most was his 100% apologetics for the Wahhabi Lobby -- This gentleman has been a consultant to the US Government, and had wide access and media exposure in the aftermath of 9/11 and the leadup to the Iraq War2... But what was most striking was his strenuous and jarring defense of all things Saudi in the face of some pretty damning evidence of the Saudi Government's hatred spewing jihad inspiring "educational" curriculum...
If Mr. Cordesman represents the callibre of consultancy the the media and the US Government over the past 3 decades regarding Islamic fascism -- then it becomes COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT why we are in such a mess, and why so many are so misguided as to who our enemy is, and what we are confronted with. This man's performance was shameful -- and the excuses, distortions, and prevarications he put forward to conceal, confuse, and divert the attention of the Senate away from Wahhabism and Saudi Arabia was nothing short of treasonous.
How deep is the infiltration of the Wahhabi Lobby? How many more are there like this fascist lacky -- this Islamic Quisling ? I wonder -- they have betrayed their nation of origin, perhaps in exchange for cash and prizes, or positions of power and prestige -- but I have no doubt he has betrayed us, and sold America up the river....
Please, americans! break with Saudi Arabia, they´re the problem.
Does anyone know where we could download transcripts of the hearings? Perhaps video.
Has anybody thought about suing the US State Department for committing treason and/or endangering national security?
I seriously don't see why not. It seems to me that is what these people are doing. If they do not know by now THEY are endangering US national security somebody should MAKE THEM AWARE of it ASAP.
One other thought: there is merit to the complaint (often uttered by the lefties) about US foreign policy being compromised by the powerful corporate/industrial lobby. Maybe we need to study and deal with this issue more intensively than we have been doing. I can see it is causing a great deal of alienation even among the posters on this website. It definitely is having an impact on the effectiveness in our conducting the war on terror.
Saudi Arabia has been ineffective in curbing the propagation of anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-American ideologies.
To say the least http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2384
Porter Goss is dealing with all the liberal mindset that Clinton put into one of the organizations, nariz. But like all things good, it takes time.