Thread: Saudi judge:permissible to kill the owners of satellite TV channels which broadcast i

Originally Posted by Texpat

OBL was a Saudi royal at one time.

No he wasn't. he is the son of a very wealthy Saudi Businessman. His father has close association with the royals, but isn't one himself.

Originally Posted by Christopher

There are plenty of politicians that do not want anything to do with the Saudis, but the US can't move forward on alternative sources because of the liberals who do not want to do a damn thing to help this country.

True, it's not easy to advance with a foot firmly on the brake, and the libs are that foot.

Oil will always be needed, if only as a lubricant and byproducts, but the West cannot gain its independence from the desert rats without a feasible alternative.

Originally Posted by keda

but the West cannot gain its independence from the desert rats without a feasible alternative.

Odd the biggest oil supplier to the US is hardly a desert rat country.

Originally Posted by keda

True, it's not easy to advance with a foot firmly on the brake, and the libs are that foot.

The libs have help. Republican Governor of California has the biggest foot of them all.

Originally Posted by keda

Originally Posted by Christopher

There are plenty of politicians that do not want anything to do with the Saudis, but the US can't move forward on alternative sources because of the liberals who do not want to do a damn thing to help this country.

True, it's not easy to advance with a foot firmly on the brake, and the libs are that foot.

Oil will always be needed, if only as a lubricant and byproducts, but the West cannot gain its independence from the desert rats without a feasible alternative.

The liberals don't want to do anything for the country, and are holding back development of alternative energy resources?

I thought I heard it all, but I don't cease to be amazed by the marvles that are dreamed up in the lofty heights of right-wing 'thought' processes. LOL

Originally Posted by TizMe

Originally Posted by Texpat

OBL was a Saudi royal at one time.

No he wasn't. he is the son of a very wealthy Saudi Businessman. His father has close association with the royals, but isn't one himself.

He is the son of the owner of Bin Ladin Tractors - the Caterpillar dealer in Saudi.

In the far way back -late 1960's early 70's ? - he was working for his father as the head of the financial dept of the company and, as the CAT service manager for the area, I used to collect cheques from him to cover non warranty work my engineers carried out on their machines.

Seemed like your average rag head then !!!

Bin Laden Group is way more than just tractors. I think that they have their hand in every major construction and engineering project that goes on in KSA.

OBL's grand father was a originally a Yemeni immigrant. They are the wealthiest non-royal family in the kingdom.

Does it matter which political party is holding back alternative energy sources.
Fact is that the US (and the rest of the western world) is applying double standards in the Middle East.
Saudi Arabia has a repressive radical Muslim regime/dictatorship managing the countries politics. Yet hardly a word of criticism and certainly no intervention from the west as SA is the head of OPEC and can control world oil prices by varying output. Anyone remember the 1974 oil crisis? Virtually the whole world went into recession. But now the Saudi Royals are playing ball with the west and in return they get not only moral support but the latest in military arms. And it ain't just the US prostituting their purported desire for democracy and freedom in the Middle East in exchange for cheap(er) oil. Brittan and Europe are also guilty.

The wests claim of the high moral ground in dealing with Middle East countries like Saudi, Iraq and Iran is quite clearly a farce. Its all about money and maintaining the status quo re oil production and therefore the world price, (in $USs of course).

Originally Posted by keda

Kalif Omar set his torch to the library at Alexandria, custodian to the most immense gathering of knowledge in the history of Mankind; and it is said night became day for six months before the flames were subdued....because the edifice contained some manuscripts which did not please in praise of Islam.

Not quite-

Destruction of the Library
Ancient and modern sources identify four possible occasions for the destruction of the Library:

1. Julius Caesar's Fire in The Alexandrian War, in 48 BC
2. The attack of Aurelian in the Third century AD;
3. The decree of Theophilus in 391 AD;
4. The Muslim conquest in 642 AD or thereafter.

Library of Alexandria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the Muslim conquest- the facts of which are widely disputed anyway- the legend goes that the books were used to heat bathwater for soldiers- hardly turning night into day for six months.

Most scholars think that the Alexandria library never regained it's full glory after the original sacking by Julius Caesar. Whatever destruction ocurred during the Muslim conquest is comparable to the looting of the Iraqi (or Babylonian) National Museum under the nose of the US invading forces in 2002.


As for the loony Sharia Judge, a clear case of religious orthodoxy or fundamentalism vs. secularism.

The plain fact is, the penalty for heresy in the Sriptures of all three monotheistic religions is death.

Originally Posted by Panda

Does it matter which political party is holding back alternative energy sources.
Fact is that the US (and the rest of the western world) is applying double standards in the Middle East.
Saudi Arabia has a repressive radical Muslim regime/dictatorship managing the countries politics. Yet hardly a word of criticism and certainly no intervention from the west as SA is the head of OPEC and can control world oil prices by varying output. Anyone remember the 1974 oil crisis? Virtually the whole world went into recession. But now the Saudi Royals are playing ball with the west and in return they get not only moral support but the latest in military arms. And it ain't just the US prostituting their purported desire for democracy and freedom in the Middle East in exchange for cheap(er) oil. Brittan and Europe are also guilty.

The wests claim of the high moral ground in dealing with Middle East countries like Saudi, Iraq and Iran is quite clearly a farce. Its all about money and maintaining the status quo re oil production and therefore the world price, (in $USs of course).

Precisely. The West have been prostituting themselves long enough, and it's way past time for a forward thinking crew of leaders with more than a ball between them to think further ahead than the next election and knuckle down for independence from the barons via a feasible alternative energy source.

Sure we've done well so far, discovery plodding along in fits and starts with the occasional eureka lurching it forward three spaces...and as sure it's only a matter of time before we stumble upon whatever it is that triggers the beginning of self sufficiency.

But though it looks fine on paper, it's not good enough to earmark $x bn over n years for R&D so some people can sleep soundly at night thinking how rich they're going to be while others dream about what will never happen because there are too many conflicting interests in the boardrooms and bedrooms of power.

We have the brains and the resources and existing knowledge at our disposal, but more important the instinct to advance, which is what brought us out of the stone age in the first place. What's missing are many things, not least the will to set aside projects of lesser importance to focus on independence, via that elusive feasible alternative energy source. Also holding us back are complacency, idleness born of prosperity, and self interest.

The alternative is simple, let the barons take over swathes of the West, which they'll be more than happy to do. How? Easy. Oil is sovereign and finite, and as it's depleted the price must rise to meet with the natural laws of supply and demand, which doesn't include hikes from that other natural phenomenon, games people play. Never mind trashing the $100 psychological barrier, $500 or even $1000 could soon look cheap.

It won't happen overnight, but at which price level does the global financial machinery start grinding to a halt, and at which level is it doomed?


For the usual suspects: read again, slowly, find a word or phrase you can twist or take out of context and attack or cling to in response, and get a hardon by ignoring the rest of the post. In other words, do what you're best at.

Originally Posted by keda

Originally Posted by Christopher

There are plenty of politicians that do not want anything to do with the Saudis, but the US can't move forward on alternative sources because of the liberals who do not want to do a damn thing to help this country.

True, it's not easy to advance with a foot firmly on the brake, and the libs are that foot.

Oil will always be needed, if only as a lubricant and byproducts, but the West cannot gain its independence from the desert rats without a feasible alternative.

This is like watching a nature show, seeing the not-so-intricate mating patterns of the lesser-spotted-disinformationist.

The first, preening and plucking, comes in and states something completely at odds with logic, common sense, and verifiable, objective, fact. The second - smelling the excreted mating scent in the air - arrives shortly thereafter to witness the mating dance before then cocking his own leg to spray and repeats the previous load of bollocks.

And this is how right-wingers give birth to brand new 'facts'. This new 'fact' shall then enter the lexicon of other lesser-spotted-disinformationists in the vicinity and be repeated and repeated in an ever higher pitch of chattering.

Precisely. The West have been...

This post is surprisingly and refreshingly clear on this subject, well done.

At present, the emphasis in alternative energy sources is on diversifying, the latest fashion to hit the newsrooms being bio-fuel. The issue will become more pressing and a solution which can do without oil/gas altogether must rise to the top of the agenda, whether the industry lobbies like it or not.

Originally Posted by Christopher

There are plenty of politicians that do not want anything to do with the Saudis, but the US can't move forward on alternative sources because of the liberals who do not want to do a damn thing to help this country.

My god, you really are a basket case aren't you.

Is there a doctor in the house?

Originally Posted by zedhex

Originally Posted by Christopher

There are plenty of politicians that do not want anything to do with the Saudis, but the US can't move forward on alternative sources because of the liberals who do not want to do a damn thing to help this country.

My god, you really are a basket case aren't you.

Is there a doctor in the house?

Well, you got to blame somebody havnt you?

Its either the tree hugging Liberals or the corrupt Big Oil Republicans, but couldn't be the ignorant voting masses who just want to drive gas guzzlers without paying more.
You hear the term "Protecting American Interests" a lot in US foreign policy political speeches re the Middle East. People seem to nod in approval when they hear that term, but what does it really mean? The politicians like to sell it to the public as protection against terrorism when they are pushed into a corner to explain. But we all know it really means cheap gasoline at somebody elses expense. After the 1974 oil shock every political party knows the value of keeping the Middle East under control by military force or otherwise.

The sooner the USA breaks free of their oil dependance the better for the whole world, -- less US meddling in other countries affairs, less wars and less terrorism.

er... I'm confused. Are you replying to Christofer or to me?