| Why aren't we looking into the Saudi role in San Bernardino attack?
| Wednesday, December 09, 2015
|Shooter Tashfeen Malik was radicalized in Saudi Arabia, her Pakistani family said.
In the years following the 9/11 attacks, important American officials and politicians regularly declared that the mass murderers had sneaked into the U.S. through Canada.
The subtext was clear: Canada, which had declined to help invade Iraq, was soft on terror.
It was a massive, sprawling lie, but a convenient one. It played well with the anti-immigration crowd, and helped distract Americans from the nasty truth: that 15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of an ally that has actually bankrolled terror: Saudi Arabia.
These men entered the U.S. directly and legally, on visas issued by the U.S. government, and some of them were supported once in America by Saudi consular officials.That last bit of information remains officially suppressed by the White House, even though it's widely known to be in Congress's 9/11 report because, you know, it might embarrass the Saudi government.
Which must remain protected from the embarrassing fact that Saudi individuals, charities and clerics cultivate and fund extremism around the world.
(Ask Hillary Clinton. "Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide," and its government is not doing much about it, she wrote in a leaked 2009 memo when she was secretary of state.)
George W. Bush, in his address to Congress a few weeks after 9/11 — several days after Osama bin Laden's relatives had been quietly hustled out of the country on a private jet — promised a "war on terror," but avoided any mention of the hijackers' nationalities.
He in fact referred to the Saudis only once, in a sympathetic reference to how their nation is plagued by terrorists, just like America.
Saudi women are treated better than immigrants, but are still severely oppressed, and treated like chattels of the male population.
If that all sounds like the modus operandi of ISIS, which the Saudis have been accused of having funded and armed before becoming a stout ally in the U.S. bombing campaign, well, the shoe does fit.
The Saudis have actually threatened to sue anyone who makes the ISIS comparison, but objectively, it's not unreasonable.
The main difference is that the Saudis are extremists who managed to create a nation and have it recognized. And of course their king doesn't claim to lead a new caliphate.
Read it all here................
|posted by D.Swami Gwekanandam @ 4:00 PM