Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas Friedman: Bin Laden in Every Saudi Home
newsmax ^ | June 1st 04 | Thomas Friedman

Posted on 06/01/2004 2:04:33 AM PDT by F14 Pilot

Repeated terrorist attacks by homegrown al-Qaida operatives on Saudi Arabian oil interests show that a civil war is raging inside the key strategic U.S. ally, the New York Times' Thomas Friedman argued on Sunday.

"You could do a revisionist history of 9/11 that basically describes this as a [Saudi] civil war," Friedman said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "There's a real problem inside Saudi Arabia."

Friedman said that after the 9/11 attacks, while Saudi leaders publicly expressed their regrets, Saudi citizens privately sympathized with Osama bin Laden.

"Right after 9/11, you know, I was in neighboring United Arab Emirates," he recalled. "An Emirates official said to me - he'd just come from a conference in Saudi Arabia - he said, 'Tom, let me tell you something. Bin Laden is in every home in Saudi Arabia.'"

The Times columnist argued that bin Laden struck the U.S. primarily as "a way of undercutting what he saw as the strongest prop of the Saudi ruling family."

He urged President Bush to use the Saudi turmoil to recruit European nations to join the U.S. in helping to stabilize Iraq - telling them:

"'Guys, we've now got a Saudi Arabia that's got a low-grade civil war going on. We have Saudi opposition groups, al-Qaida sympathizers, attacking fortified oil installations. We need to put Iraq - tilt that on the right direction. The last thing we need is two unstable countries there."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; arab; arabworld; binladen; iraq; middleeast; oil; saudi; saudiarabia; terrorism; thomaslfriedman; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
BUSH 2004 for a FREE MIDDLE EAST, for a SAFER WORLD
1 posted on 06/01/2004 2:04:34 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cindy; RaceBannon; nuconvert; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Grampa Dave; tet68; SJackson; norton; piasa

PING!


2 posted on 06/01/2004 2:14:50 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (John ''Fedayeen" sKerry - the Mullahs' regime candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

More and more I am coming to feel that
this is not about oil.
This struggle is for control of the Holy cities.


3 posted on 06/01/2004 2:24:28 AM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

Friedman's off his meds again. I love how a terroist action of 22 people has been transformed into Civil War. There is aslo the implication that if we had not gone into Iraq the Saudis would be in great shaoe and would be oh so helpful.


4 posted on 06/01/2004 2:27:37 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist
I don't know what Friedman's slant is, but when he says that Bin Laden is a silent hero to many muslims I think he is right on the money. And in Saudi Arabia that is a given, especially now that more and more Saudis are finding themselves working when a mere decade ago they could sit back in leisure and have the foreigners do all the work. Bin Laden becomes more and more appealing to the average Saudi.
5 posted on 06/01/2004 2:33:11 AM PDT by spetznaz (Nuclear missiles: The ultimate Phallic symbol.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

Do you really think that SA is in the middle of a civil war?


6 posted on 06/01/2004 2:38:02 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

So radical Islam is "normal" Islam?


7 posted on 06/01/2004 2:40:58 AM PDT by The Raven (<<----Click Screen name to see why I vote the way I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist; spetznaz

Saudi society is a restricted/controlled society that you might not hear much from


8 posted on 06/01/2004 2:41:12 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (John ''Fedayeen" sKerry - the Mullahs' regime candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

Of course not!


9 posted on 06/01/2004 2:41:46 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (John ''Fedayeen" sKerry - the Mullahs' regime candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tet68

And you would be making the same mistake that Lord Kitchener and the British did in WWI which caused this mess.
They thought that control of the holy cities and the religious leadership would unify Islamic Arabs and give them control over the Middle East as they overthrew the Ottoman Empire.
What happened instead was the chaos we're still dealing with.
Read 'A Peace to End All Peace' by David Fromkin for more info.


10 posted on 06/01/2004 2:42:23 AM PDT by dyed_in_the_wool (Why do Al Qaeda and DNC press releases always sound the same?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

Yes, Saudi Arabia does have a low grade civil war. My bet is that it is going to get much worse before it gets better. The House of Saud has been in trouble for some time and that trouble is getting worse.


11 posted on 06/01/2004 2:46:25 AM PDT by Tom D.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

I love how the Iraq invasion caused everything, ignoring the fact that 9/11 happened before Bush implemented ANY mid-East policy.


12 posted on 06/01/2004 2:49:18 AM PDT by dyed_in_the_wool (Why do Al Qaeda and DNC press releases always sound the same?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz
"Bin Laden becomes more and more appealing to the average Saudi."

If so, it reveals the myopic ignorance of the Saudi people. Do they think Laden and Queda are going to bring them some benefit? What, regime change from the royal family? A new era of peace and democracy and religious pluralism? Sharing the wealth? Non-violent society?

13 posted on 06/01/2004 2:49:20 AM PDT by Rennes Templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

Its one action in what is clearly a concerted and on-going campaign. Saudi Arabia is most certainly at war with itself and methinks the violence is only going to worsen.

The worst part is that while I believe most Saudis do not support the bloodthirsty methods of Qaeda, their hatred for the repressive thieves currently in power leaves them open to being sucked into a vacuum.


14 posted on 06/01/2004 2:52:26 AM PDT by Carcharodon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tom D.

I think that the fact that the Saudi's are going against OPEC to pump more oil is a strong indication that something is afoot. Clearly, this action is intended to help Bush. I think the royal family knows that they would not fare well under Kerry.


15 posted on 06/01/2004 2:53:15 AM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tom D.
Well I doubt it. Whose side is the army going to be on? Most likely it we will see a power struggle between the Abdullah branch and the Sultan branch of the House of Saud. We should be cheering the SUltan branch on. AQ is kidding themselves if they think that they can overthrow the House of Saud. Most average Saudis I have met wants more liberalization of their society, not less. The last thing they want is to be ruled by another Taliban. You will see further crackdowns over this an a movement towars the Sultan faction. That would be good for us.
16 posted on 06/01/2004 2:55:39 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist
Actually, I think it is at least as much an inter-dynastic struggle between factions in the House of Saud.... and the interior minister's side hates the west and loves the Islamists.

There is no such thing as a "good" Saudi prince.

17 posted on 06/01/2004 3:01:28 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist
I have no way of knowing whether or not there is anything fermenting over there, and as I said I did not know if Friedman had a slant. He may have one, but I really don't follow his work (let's say the only Friedman I am versed with is a certain man called Michael). And saying there is a civil war going on over there, even a low-intensity one, seems like a huge stretch to me.

However I do know that Usama has a certain cult status with many muslims ....including our beloved 'allies' in Saudi Arabia.

18 posted on 06/01/2004 3:03:44 AM PDT by spetznaz (Nuclear missiles: The ultimate Phallic symbol.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Well duh.

Why do you think we went to Iraq ?

SA was the target not Iraq and it's working like a charm. All we have to do is literally pull a 180 to put down the Wahabbis after they fall for the bait.

The smart money has been into gold for a year in anticipation of this event and its impact on global oil.


BUMP

19 posted on 06/01/2004 3:06:50 AM PDT by tm22721 (May the UN rest in peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
Well the Sultan branch was mostly educated in the West, have strong contacts here and lots of investments. They are the "technocrat" branch of the royal family. As such the have more influence in the oil industry. They are the ones that are push SA to stand up to OPEC (and incidentally keep pricing oil in dollars.) The other branch is more traditional and relies on historical roots to the Wahabbisis. They hae been struggling about this this issue and the "technicrats" have been saying all along that Abdullah could not control AQ with theolder methods. So in the strategic sense, yes there are "good" princes. Few foreign leaders do anything else than look what they perceive to be the interest of their nation, and obviously this is most often tied to their own personal interests. The notion of "good" leaders in some moral sense is not very useful to us as there are not to many of them. Blair himself would turn on us if all of Europe turned on him.
20 posted on 06/01/2004 3:12:00 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tm22721

So, have you bought off on the idea that this whole move into Iraq is really over oil?

I don't think so. I think the war is to serve notice to any Middle Eastern state that they had better not be harboring and training terrorists.


21 posted on 06/01/2004 3:12:04 AM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

You caught that too!


22 posted on 06/01/2004 3:12:23 AM PDT by wita (truthspeaks@freerepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

Well in that case I agree with you.


23 posted on 06/01/2004 3:12:50 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Little Tommy is just waking up the "big" plan that is needed to actually solve problems in the mideast. The governments of Saudi, Syria, Iraq all have to go. 5 years from now he'll be saying how he foresaw it all, while neglecting to mention how he criticized it as it was implemented.
24 posted on 06/01/2004 3:14:03 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

All these problems in a country that supplies much of the oil for the world and Hanoi John wants to use up the US oil reserves to cut the price by a nickel.


25 posted on 06/01/2004 3:20:58 AM PDT by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wita

The left has no solution to Islam - the typical altruist response of enabling appeasement won't work here and they know it.

My guess is they'll still try to apologize for them and join their side - similar to the Palestians.


26 posted on 06/01/2004 3:22:54 AM PDT by The Raven (<<----Click Screen name to see why I vote the way I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

In Saudi...yes.Wahabbiism is mainstream Islam there and the
sponsorship of clerics, mosques and university places stems directly from the government.

Almost 60% of SA university students are registered in
religious degree programs,it is an easy meal ticket, after graduation they are guaranteed a government paycheck for life.

The problem then arises of supply and demand...there are only n amount of congregants in SA and therefore where is an
ambitious young cleric got to go to start his own gig?


27 posted on 06/01/2004 3:29:03 AM PDT by ijcr (Age and treachery will always overcome youth and ability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tet68
More and more I am coming to feel that
this is not about oil.
This struggle is for control of the Holy cities.
____________________________

Those so called holy cites were the main revenue source for the Saudis before they got oil wealth. Saudis reaped huge profits (and still do) from Mohammedans making Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca.
28 posted on 06/01/2004 3:32:58 AM PDT by dennisw ("Allah FUBAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist
Chaos, murder and anarchy favors the Islamic terrorists and Jihadists.
29 posted on 06/01/2004 3:34:50 AM PDT by dennisw ("Allah FUBAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

Met a friend Saturday, who has gone over to the dark side and is now quoting from the dum dem playbook, one of which is the line, that going to war in Afganistan is fine, but there was no compelling reason to be in Iraq. This from a West Point grad who was medically retired from the US Army after suffering from the debillitating effects of Gulf War Syndrome. He was there during Gulf War I. He collapsed one day and it was three weeks later in Germany when he woke up.

I find it very interesting that the leftists are able to ignore the plethora of famous dems who voted to go to war in Iraq for a number of very valid resons, number one, and umentioned, was the necessity to fight somewhere besides NYC. His wife said to me, in front of him, that ever since his accident, (another one) he has gone off the deep end. That all remains to be seen. My point is, Islam wasn't even on his limited radar screen.


30 posted on 06/01/2004 3:38:32 AM PDT by wita (truthspeaks@freerepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Bin Laden is in every home in Saudi Arabia.'

Karl Marx is in every home in America.

I know a guy, Steve, the son of an American gagillionaire business exec/venture capitalist, who has made it his life's ambition to promote pacifistic socialism as a means of redistributing the wealth he saw accumulated by his parents--and which he subsequently inherited--and by folks like them. He is a Quaker Parson, and spends a few years at this , and then that meeting house, as a self-employed change agent. He mixes in local politics...respected leader of the community...and agitates for the whole gamut of freedom-destroying programs we , here, loathe. He sincerely thinks communism , done right, is the answer to what ails us.

Add a militant edge to Steve, and you've basically got Bin Laden, I think. The methods differ, but the end is similar: control society to make it 'more fair'. "We'll do it myyyy wayyyy." They have the same delusions. After you have all the money you need, what do you do? Some try fame; some try infamy. There's a 'special' personal hubris having been anointed to be the leader of the huddled masses.

America is a society in which, having nothing, and being anybody, one can actually become a rich venture capitalist. Saudi, from what I gleaned from my brother (he lived there ten years on a compound, an engineer for a major contractor) is no such place: there is no integrating, no equal opportunity, no Western paradigm to truly reward the non-Saudi Heratio Alger. The Sauds have the dough, and they're gonna keep it. They pay everybody to do work for them...and pay pretty well; but it's like putting on a space suit and working on the moon....you gotta come home, eventually.

Seems there are a lot of non-Saudi Arabs, and non-Arab Muslims, within the country who want a shot at the wealth and opportunity guarded selfishly by the Royals and extended tribe; and a lot of neighboring Arab states that are jealous of the trick of fate that landed Saud in a "mansion in Beverly Hills".

I think these are the natural allies of OBL. (strictly with regard and limited to the issue at hand) He's a rich kid with a guilt complex and a mission to destroy his parents' world. Steve wants oligarchical socialism; Osama wants....religious? oligarchical socialism.

America will survive the onslaught of 'Steves"; but Saudi Arabia cannot survive the onslaught of 'Osamas' unless they amend themselves, and embrace a little Adam Smith in their econimic thinking. Otherwise, their experiment is finite, and they will be evicted.....by the next bunch of winners in life's lottery.

31 posted on 06/01/2004 3:52:50 AM PDT by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Which is just why they will come down hard on them.


32 posted on 06/01/2004 4:01:27 AM PDT by CasearianDaoist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tm22721
SA was the target not Iraq

Yes it was. We could not just pile into Arabia because of the oilfields. In that sense this war is, indeed about oil. If we go at Arabia directly, we could well lose the oil wells and thus waging the larger war would be made far more difficult and would crash America's economy. The Wahhabis don't care about the oil wealth and would blow the wells if we went in. We have to do it by indirection. Invading Iraq, instead, is safer because all arabs recognize that America has a legitimate gripe with Saddam and that Bush has a legitimate gripe with him also. That means everything to the arabs. National interest is a non-concept. Personal, tribal and family revenge is all important.

33 posted on 06/01/2004 4:03:33 AM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

PING!


34 posted on 06/01/2004 4:11:23 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (John ''Fedayeen" sKerry - the Mullahs' regime candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: the_Watchman
the idea that this whole move into Iraq is really over oil?

It is about winning against resurgent Islam which is centered in the Wahhabi sect in Arabia. Winning this war will be made tremendously more difficult if we lose access to Arabian oil. The goal is the eradication of Islamism but if we lose the oil we crash the economy. If we go straight at the Wahhabis they will go for the oil wells and they apparently have a number of them booby trapped as it is. So yes, the near term is all about oil. If we don't secure the oil we are in a world of drek economically and militarily. It will take too long to convert our tanks over to solar power.

35 posted on 06/01/2004 4:12:21 AM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

One of Friedman's rules must be never to take America's side, especially during a Republican administration.


36 posted on 06/01/2004 4:14:04 AM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

Many on the left seem to feel(I started to say "believe"-not appropriate) that if the saracens conquer America they will naturally turn to the Liberals to run the place, recognizing the superior breeding and education and knowintg that they care.


37 posted on 06/01/2004 4:16:42 AM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wita

If we would not have gone into Iraq at the time (when politically possible) - we would have slipped into a similar situation that Clinton was in....and Saddam and Iraq would have grown into an evil mess.


38 posted on 06/01/2004 4:26:20 AM PDT by The Raven (<<----Click Screen name to see why I vote the way I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
In the latest terror attack in SA timed conveniently of course, 22 people dead, all but three of them foreigners. Three of the four gunmen, believed linked to al-Qaeda managed to escape!

Managed to escape...al-Qaeda it appears has already infiltrated the government apparatus and a pessimistic but realistic view is that the destabilization of Saudi Arabia is already on the horizon. China is already importing as much oil as Japan will likely accomodate itself to the new order in SA...and what does that mean for us?

39 posted on 06/01/2004 4:27:02 AM PDT by eleni121 (Preempt and Prevent---then Destroy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
The Times columnist argued that bin Laden struck the U.S. primarily as "a way of undercutting what he saw as the strongest prop of the Saudi ruling family."

To my recollection, this is accurate. Bin Laden was waging an insurgent action to undermine the House of Saud. There is a civil war there in the sense that the religious leaders, (Wahabbists) are opposing the political leaders (House of Saud).

The Sunni extremists are exporting their twisted theology with oil money, which puts us in the position of financing our enemies' brainwashing operations. At the same time, the Shiite extremists (Iran) are truly in the crosshairs of the US, and have been for 25 years.

Bush didn't name the Saudis in his 'Axis' speech, regrettably. If he carefully made the distinction between the Wahabbists and the rulers, he would have been safe politically, I think.

40 posted on 06/01/2004 4:32:15 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (Stop the war. ********** NUKE EM NOW !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

The Saudi Royal Family ara Wahabi


41 posted on 06/01/2004 4:43:06 AM PDT by weegie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

I was actually using "good" (in quotes, note) in General Philip Sheridan's sense with respect to "good" Indians.


42 posted on 06/01/2004 4:48:36 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

'Do you really think that SA is in the middle of a civil war?'

Although you didn't direct this comment to me, I do wish to respond with a comment of my own. The House of Saud is on the brink of collapse, from within. I do not think there is a Saudi civil war...yet. But the stage has been set for one, and it will erupt within five years.


43 posted on 06/01/2004 4:56:12 AM PDT by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

Follow the Friedman Formula. A conversation with an all-knowing, non-identified individual, triggering his agenda-driven twisted mind.


44 posted on 06/01/2004 5:14:52 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dasboot; TexasTransplant; imintrouble; thesummerwind; Fiddlstix; Teacher317; philetus; E.G.C.; ...
America is a society in which, having nothing, and being anybody, one can actually become a rich venture capitalist.
America is the society whose government's mission is " . . . to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

The blessings of liberty imply a continuous quest for improvement by and for the people, the success of which can be gauged by comparing the prosperity of an American secretary to day with that of Queen Victoria in her (1819-1901) day. Factor in the advantages in refrigerated food, health care, communications, and transportation which the modern American enjoys, and the comparison is actually pretty balanced. And to that you must add in the likelihood that that secretary's children will get more education and have a higher standard of living than she herself enjoys - yea, even unto the possibility of having a venture capitalist in the family . . .

That is the "donut" of which conservatives can speak. Journalism exists to entertain us with novelty, and the "donut" above changes only slowly and thus scores pretty low on the novelty chart. It is the "hole in the donut" which is the source of most of the short-run excitement. That creates a natural propaganda wind which the unprincipled political opportunist ("liberal") sails.

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

45 posted on 06/01/2004 6:11:59 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

Perhaps he meant to say "Bin Laden in every editorial room".


46 posted on 06/01/2004 6:17:20 AM PDT by Vinnie_Vidi_Vici
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ought-six

Interesting points.. Most of the Arab states, if not all, blame Israel for all the problems in the world!...over the yrs the Saudis have skillfully manipulated theirs and others populations. The royal family has no one to blame except themselves for the coming turmoil.

Will they go after the Wahabbis? Nope...they will pander to them.
One thing for certain the American people are learning real quick some things us ex pats(former) have been saying for yrs...NEVER EVER TRUST THESE PEOPLE!

What will happen is hard to say but let's recall a report that was leaked aoubt a yr ago.......about the US taking over the oil fields of Saudi...interesting times folks!


47 posted on 06/01/2004 6:23:05 AM PDT by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: CasearianDaoist

Do you really think that SA is in the middle of a civil war?

No. From where I sit, all the Saudis appear to be reading from the same page. Killed some expat cooks and maids? Not muslims? Okie dokie, just amble out of there and nobody gets hurt. Hows the wife? See ya at the mosque!


48 posted on 06/01/2004 6:29:33 AM PDT by kinghorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dyed_in_the_wool
" I love how the Iraq invasion caused everything, ignoring the fact that 9/11 happened before Bush implemented ANY mid-East policy."

Yes, forgotten by all the anti-Bush Bile-Bloviators, is that at 9-11, the only thing the President had done in regard to the Middle-East was to become the first US Prez advocating establishing a Palestinian State.

49 posted on 06/01/2004 6:29:49 AM PDT by cookcounty (LBJ sent him to VN. Nixon expressed him home. And JfK's too dumb to tell them apart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

Media bias bump.


50 posted on 06/01/2004 6:38:58 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson