Monday, December 11, 2017

Why is There No 'SaudiGate'?

Imagine if Russia -- instead of doing what it has been accused of doing last year -- had funded and facilitated an attack on US soil that killed thousands of Americans. Then imagine that US policymakers, rather than punish the Kremlin by cutting diplomatic ties, imposing sanctions, seeking legal recourse, or all of the above, covered up its involvement in the attack and continued to treat it as a loyal ally. Imagine if the president who presided over that attack had decades of intimate personal and financial ties to members of the Russian elite and subsequently spirited dozens of Russian nationals out of the country before law enforcement could interrogate them.

More

Imagine if, despite full knowledge of the Kremlin's once and ongoing anti-American activities, successive presidents heaped praise on Russia's authoritarian government, sold it weapons, and made regular pilgrimages to wine and dine with its leaders.

Imagine if an army of Russian lobbyists operated on Capitol Hill to ensure Washington's pro-Kremlin line, eventually pressuring American leadership into actively assisting it in carrying out one of this decade's worst war crimes. ...

Thankfully, in the real world, none of this applies to Russia. It does, however, perfectly describe Saudi Arabia. ...

Over three decades, Saudi Arabia has successfully ingratiated itself at the highest levels of power in the United States. The Saudi ruling class has provided favor after favor to American officials, insinuated itself into the good graces of both high-ranking officials and reporters, and donated a steady stream of many millions of dollars to a bipartisan group of policymakers, including two of the country's foremost political dynasties, receiving the backing of the United States in return.

It's done all this while openly spreading fundamentalist ideology and assisting extremists in carrying out attacks on Americans, and in spite of the voting public's distaste for the regime.

Comments

"...Bush originally nominated Henry Kissinger to head the commission investigating the attack."

Okay. I did not know that.

#1 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-12-10 04:23 PM

Fahrenheit 9/11

#2 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-10 09:26 PM

Answer: because every administration in the last 30 years is smeared with filthy Saudi money.

#3 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2017-12-11 03:29 PM

Because the Saudi government is not the same as the large number of rich Saudi royals who gave money to various terrorist organizations that eventually used that money for the attack. It's a couple of degrees removed.

Also, they have lots of oil for us.

#4 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-11 05:43 PM

Pelosi took impeachment off the table, and Obama looked forward. That's why we didn't go after Saudi Arabia.

Fahrenheit 9/11 had a whole segment on this, but nobody cared.

#5 | Posted by chuffy at 2017-12-11 05:56 PM

If we had a Saudigate, who would sell our oil to for dollars and use those dollars to buy advanced weapon systems from us?

#6 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2017-12-11 06:24 PM

If we had a Saudigate, who would we get to team up with Israel against Iran in the upcoming war?

#7 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2017-12-11 06:25 PM

HeRAT,

Excellent points. You should have included that a Saudi Ambassador in the USA funded and personally helped one of the hijackers get an apartment in San Diego. Bush made sure he got a free ride out of our country without being interrogated by the FBI, as did other bin Laden family members, when no one else was permitted to fly. When the FBI traced the flow of hi-jacker support money to the Saudi border, the Saudi Government refused to let them know who inside Saudi Arabia provided that money.

Saudi Arabia has the most horrible government on the planet earth. When Idi Amin sought sanctuary, they welcomed him in.

#8 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-11 07:13 PM

there's only one way to explain it.
youtu.be

#9 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-12 12:47 AM

If we stopped supporting the Saudis then Iran would get an advantage and we can't have that, though now Russia is giving them anyway and winning friends in the ME. We should learn from our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is no advantage to be had by making friends with any of the ME nations. The best advantage would be had by walking away from them and staying away from them. They are cancer, all of them.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-12 08:37 AM

There is no "Saudigate" because the males in the Bush family would be exposed as "paling around with a sworn enemy". Bushco and the house of Saud are partners in crime.

#11 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2017-12-12 07:29 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

The Humiliation of Aziz Ansari (116 comments)

Bloomberg: Food Stamps Should Be Spent on Food (105 comments)

Trump Doing Massive Damage to Federal Courts (81 comments)

California Bullet Train Cost $2.8 Billion (62 comments)

White House Doctor Says He's Not Nuts (53 comments)

Meet the Liberal CEO of Sonic Drive-In (42 comments)

$100,000 to Charity If Trump Steps on Accurate Scale (32 comments)

Feds Plot Massive NoCal Immigration Sweep (30 comments)