Rumsfeld calls report criticizing Saudi Arabia 'clearly harmful'

Associated Press | August 7, 2002

[HAL9000]

(Pentagon-AP) -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says it's "clearly harmful'' to make public a report criticizing Saudi Arabia.

Rumsfeld says the report doesn't reflect the views of the U-S government -- nor he adds -- even the Defense Policy Board.

He explains the report was prepared by the Rand Corporation and presented to a closed meeting of the defense group, which includes former government officials and experts.

The report claims the Saudis are active at every level of the terror chain. And it says the kingdom is America's "most dangerous opponent'' in the Mideast.

Rumsfeld says Saudi Arabia reflects a "broad spectrum of opinions.'' And he notes the kingdom is wrestling with a number of issues, including the fact that many of the September eleventh hijackers came from Saudi Arabia.

The defense secretary's harshest comments were aimed at those responsible for leaking the report. He says this probably came from someone who wanted to appear important.

(Copyright 2002 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) </blockquote

[HAL9000]

Rumsfeld probably has steam coming out of his ears over this leak. I hope he can find out who leaked it and mete out the appropriate punishment. And the particular morons at the Rand Corporation who delivered this idiotic proposal should be banned from stepping foot in the Pentagon again.

Speaking of the Rand Corporation, I participated in a telephone survey they were doing a few weeks ago. The final set of questions was - had I considered stocking up on Cipro lately?

[LarryM]

Why was the proposal idiotic? Rumsfeld was only mad because it was leaked. It may have been leaked deliberately to put the Saudis on notice.

[joesbucks]

Agreed.....If this report is factually correct, then what's the problem?

Also, this was not an internal government leak as there were policy makers both past and present on hand when it was handed out.

The problem this poses is that the cat is out of the bag and it may make it difficult for the administration to from a perceptual standpoint navigate with the Saudi's. Then again, with this becoming public information, it may make the Saudi's more proactive to clean up it's own house.

[teletech]

We need to find the messenger and kill him pronto, he speaks the truth and for that he shall die! May God bless the United States of America, and may God help the United States of America.

So I guess what Rummy is saying is we KNOW what the Saudis are but we can't talk about it??

[sharktrager]

Actually, I agree w/ Rummy, but for a different reason.

I believe the US and the Saudi's are playing the same game. Both are pretending to be friends and allies on the surface, but know that there ill be a time when they'll throw down. Right now both receive certain benefits from the farce.

Neither side wants their plan to be public, even if it is painfully obvious.

[philosofy123]

Rumsfeld is just fooling the media. On the surface, I guess the US supposed to be friend of Saudi Arabia. I think, after we got f##ed by the Saudis on 9/11, we need to invade that country, and make them pay for the economic damage that their petrodollars help finance and their hate helped create. Rumsfeld and anybody else who think that Saudi Arabia is our friend, must have his head examined!

[ffrancone]

And the particular morons at the Rand Corporation who delivered this idiotic proposal should be banned from stepping foot in the Pentagon again.

I am curious as to why you think a proposal citing the Saudi's as acting contrary to US interests on a wide range of terrorism related issues is 'idiotic.' Seems to me there is a lot of evidence supporting the report.

[PoorMuttly]

So it was leaked on purpose...or not. Cool.

My Dad used to advise me to deprive the enemy of what he wanted of you. Ours seem to want to have us figured out...mostly by reading our own media !

I guess that rat-hole is being plugged...or smoke being blown into it. Didn't I hear somebody mention smoking them out of their holes....their systems, methods, networks...

I hope we DO have an administration this formidable. In war, ya need that sort of thing.

[babygene]

I guess since the Rand Corporation is a corporation they can say or leak anything they want.

To me, it sounds right on target.

[HAL9000]

Why was the proposal idiotic?

Because Bush, Rumsfeld and the rest of the administration have been trying to emphasize, clearly and unambiguiously, that the War on Terrorism is not a war against Saudi Arabia, and we expect their cooperation.

The Saudi's paranoia level was raised sharply in their dealings with Madeline Albright. Bush is trying to get back to the status quo ante.

Unfortunately, a few low level politicians in the Pentagon and the RAND Corp. are trying to undermine his strategy, which would harm his credibility with the nations he is trying to influence. There could be severe consequences, internationally and domestically.

[gcruse]

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says it's
"clearly harmful'' to make public a report criticizing
Saudi Arabia.

Harmful in the same way the head of the Drug War
characterized Canada's move to lessen the penalties
for possessing marijuana.  "It may force us to
reexamine our position."   Dangerous, indeed.

[SerpentDove]

>>And the particular morons at the Rand Corporation who delivered this idiotic proposal should be banned from stepping foot in the Pentagon again. <<

I presume you have read the report?

[spqrzilla9]

"Strategy" ? Ignoring the fact that Saudi Arabia is in reality actively financing terrorism directed against the United States is not a "strategy".

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I was a real fan (pun intended) of Sally Rand, the founder.

[Thud]

Looks more like a means of distracting attention from the pending invasion of Iraq.

[Thud]

LarryM,

You said: "Why was the proposal idiotic? Rumsfeld was only mad because it was leaked. It may have been leaked deliberately to put the Saudis on notice."

It may have been leaked to serve other purposes too.

[TheBattman]

You know, sometimes the truth hurts!

[Thud]

The best disinformation comes in three flavors:

Untrue statements by people who sincerely believe it to be true;

True statements by people who sincerely think those are false;

True statements which create misleading impressions, or distract attention from subjects the perpetrator does not want the intended victims to look closely at.

[fogarty]

Who cares what the Saudis think? Does Rummy actually even think they can be trusted? The Bush administration is foolish if they do not know what the vast majority of military and most of the US already feel: Saudi Arabia is an enemy. They are the foundation of the entire Islamic terrorist movement.

[HAL9000]

I guess since the Rand Corporation is a corporation they can say or leak anything they want.

All of the defense contractors are corporations. That does not mean it is legal to "leak anything they want", especially if the information is classified..

[PoorMuttly]

Yum.


...cough.

[PoorMuttly]

Hey. Now THEY know about The Three Flavors TOO!


doh.

[oldvike]

15 of 19

[Hugin]

I guess since the Rand Corporation is a corporation they can say or leak anything they want.

Not true. Laws against leaking classified info apply to private citizens as well as government employees. Also to get the job in the first place Rand Corp would have had to sign non-disclosure agreements.

[ken5050]

This is all classic disinformation.....did you see the pics of the airbase in Qatar posted today....this will drive the Saudis nuts......exactly what Rummy wants them to do...worry big time

[babygene]

I beg to differ with you. What they presented was an opinion, their opinion. Opinions can hardly be classified.

As it turns out, many (including myself) share this opinion. The Saudis need to be smashed like a bug. They are not our friends and never have been.

[daniel boob]

I'm trying to figure out why the folks at Rand are morons. It seems to me that they're probably right. Saudi allows us access for military purposes, keeps a good diplomatic relationship, and seems to be a friend.

It seems though, that they are harboring, and maybe training, terriosts. I think in the end, when we begin to broaden the scope of the terriost hunt, as Rumsfield as suggested, that we will be in a difficult situation with Sauid Arabia because of this duality.

Am I wrong?

[Mr. Jeeves]

Rumsfeld probably has steam coming out of his ears over this leak.

I have a pet theory (wishful thinking?) that the forthcoming attack on Iraq will also involve a Saudi front.

[HAL9000]

The main problem with the Saudis was their funding of the madrassas in Pakistan that were the breeding grounds of the Taliban and Al Qaeda - and money was apparently sent to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. The U.S. is pressuring the Saudis to cut off those funds, and has achieved some success on this.

On the other hand, the Saudis have facilitated U.S. military operations there, despite the opposition of extremist elements. And they have been cooperative in keeping the supply and price stable - the economy would be in the tank otherwise.

It doesn't make any damn sense to have a war against Saudi Arabia if we can use diplomatic pressure to get them to cooperate.

[daniel boob]

I agree with your post. It probably takes a PhD to understand the goverence in that region, but you are probably right that this can be disspelled with diplomacy instead of force. But the real litmus test is when we begin an assualt on other areas, Iraq for instance.

Will there be gnashing of teeth by SA or will they posture for the cameras, all the while remaining ambivalent - or even helpful - to our actions in the region. My deep question is; are they a real friend to the US or to the region?

My original reply attempted to understand why you called Rand a bunch of morons. I personally believe they hit the nail on the head with their report.

[daniel boob]

PS - I should say that I think it's wrong for the report to be leaked and Rumsfield is clearly right to be irritated.

[Stavka2]

Yes, how absolutely evil of them to speak sense and point the finger where all the bought politicos don't dare. But even you will get the point after the next terror bomb goes off and its Saudies doing it again.....well maybe.

[Stavka2]

Why yes the Saudies are cooperating so well by denying FBI access to files, not arresting a damn person, continuing to recognize the Taliban, sending millions to more Islamic nutjobs, refusing the use of American bases in Saudi, writing such "wonderful" pieces about the US/Iseal and Russia...and just being all around SWELL guys.

[Stavka2]

Personally, I hope the Saudies are so scared that their gonads are half way up to their colons.

[Stavka2]

On the other hand, the Saudis have facilitated U.S. military operations there, despite the opposition of extremist elements. And they have been cooperative in keeping the supply and price stable - the economy would be in the tank otherwise.

Total bull. The Saudies have flat out rejected the use of US bases from day one of this escapade. They have further continued sending cash straight to the Taliban and other nutjobs. As for oil, doesn't work that way. First, they are only one of several dozen producers. They have been actively trying to jerk up the price, which has been ofset by Russia who holds now a major portion of the market. The Saudies need the US more then the US needs them. Simply put, try eating oil for a meal...doesn't work. At the same time, they are the worst human rights abusers around....don't bother with this pro Saudi arguement crap, the time for all that passed on 9/11...or do you ignore that 15 came from Saudi RICH families?

[HAL9000]

At the same time, they are the worst human rights abusers around

That's what they said about the Shah of Iran when he was in power, and look at how much things have "improved" since he was removed.

The title of "worst human rights abusers around" goes to the Chicoms, Iraq, Iran and North Korea. The Saudis aren't even in the same league.

[pgkdan]

Rummy's mad because the report leaked. He knows that every word in that report is true. Saudi Arabia is our enemy and we should admit it and start dealing with it.

[pgkdan]

15 of 19

'nuff said.

[pgkdan]

and money was apparently sent to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. The U.S. is pressuring the Saudis to cut off those funds, and has achieved some success on this.

Saudi Arabia IS unding suicide bombers and their families. What success in curbing that funding can you cite? Do you think they missed their terrorist fundraising goals with their last telethon?

[HAL9000]

What success in curbing that funding can you cite?

The U.S. demanded that the Saudis cut off funds to the madrassas that were teaching anti-American hatred in Pakistan, and if I recall correctly, they agreed to do so.

[NetValue]

One of the primary benefits of diplomacy is that by using its language and techniques, nations and leaders do not have to face up to and deal with the truth.

In the war on terrorism we have lost touch with the truth. Some of the big lies: Arafat is not a "terrorist"; Saudi Arabia is a friend; Iran is becoming moderate; Islam is a peaceful religion.

We are burying our national righteousness in lies. We are losing our way.

Message to politicians on both sides: State the facts. Face the facts. Act upon the facts. Act alone if you must, but for God's sake, act.

Make the world safe for truth, justice and the American way.

[Stavka2]

The "it'll only get worse" argument is the last defense of scoundrels. Sorry, I don't buy into it. It might get worse and it might get better, but to always keep the devil you know doesn't quite work out well...especially when he's a venomus, lieing, backstabbing little bastard who wouldn't even be there if the US was spending $10 billion defense dollars protecting his melicious arse.

[Stavka2]

The U.S. demanded that the Saudis cut off funds to the madrassas that were teaching anti-American hatred in Pakistan, and if I recall correctly, they agreed to do so.

Really? Last I checked it was the Pakistanies who decided to close them down, not the Saudies who NEVER cut funds.

[HAL9000]

The question was raised at two days ago at the State Department briefing -

QUESTION:  The President and many others in the administration have talked about the financial aspect of the war on terror being very important.  With that respect, talking about the madrasas in Pakistan, what steps have been taken on the financial side that you know of to cut off funding, or the funding streams that come from outside Pakistan and go into the madrasas?  Saudi Arabia comes to mind, Syria.

MR. REEKER:  I don't know.  I don't have any figures with me at this time.  We can check back with the counterterrorism people and look at that. 

Hopefully, the statistics will be reported soon.

My recollection of the news reports several months ago is that the Saudis were slow to respond to our complaints about their government funding madrassas in Pakistan that were promoting violence against the U.S., but they did eventually cut off at least some of the funds.