The Schumer-Collins bipartisan letter

March 15, 2005 11:05 AM

Senators Charles Schumer and Susan Collins urge stronger action on Saudi Arabia | "Sen. Schumer said, It is a massive contradiction that a country we call an ally could be both so regressive in their own country and so brazen in its propagation of anti-American, anti-women, anti-Semitic books, publications, and practices. American security is undermined as the Saudi government exports these hateful commodities to millions beyond its borders, planting the seeds for new generations of terrorists and totalitarian Wahhabi leaders." In the recent past, Schumer has demanded answers on the Islamic Saudi Academy in Arlington, VA—where Omar Abu Ali graduated as 1999 valedictorian—and on the growing Wahhabi influence in the U.S.
posted by jenleigh (41 comments total)

This has, of course, always been a concern - my only explanation for our actions heretofore is that we signed some sort of oil-for-political-blindness agreement back in the day. I'm glad some congresspeople are stepping up, though if this gets much attention oil is going to go up to like $60 a gallon.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 11:12 AM on March 15, 2005

I for one would like to form an "anti-wahhabist" A team.
I'll be the faceman

These fukers want to live in the 12th century, I say let 'em.

On an Island in the middle of the Pacific.
posted by stevejensen at 11:21 AM on March 15, 2005

Susan Collins finally did something interesting. Huh.
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:28 AM on March 15, 2005

Chuck Schumer's domestic politics leave me cold, but I must admit that he often has the right of the argument when it comes to foreign policy.

I think that the al-Saud family will eventually tire of the Wahabbi clerics, or determine (a la Iran in the last 1970s) that they were becoming too much of a threat for the monarchy. On that day I wouldn't want to be a Wahabbi cleric, I'll tell you what...
posted by MattD at 11:28 AM on March 15, 2005

What has pissed me off about this so-called "War on Terror" is that from the beginning Saudi Arabia has been specifically exempted from almost all the tightened immigration restrictions put in place since 9/11, even though 15/19 September 11 hijackers were Saudi and had Saudi passports. That's without even going into the fact that two of the hijackers were given money by Saudi representatives to rent an apartment in San Diego.

That's certainly given me the not-altogether-unjustified idea that the "War on Terror" wasn't really about terrorism in the first place.
posted by clevershark at 11:30 AM on March 15, 2005

More on the Islamic Saudi Academy:

Saudi Institute:
The Islamic Academy is a private institution wholly financed by the Saudi government. The director, Ibrahim Al-Gosair, and his Saudi staff are given diplomatic status. In fact, because of diplomatic immunity, the school lies only under the jurisdiction of the State Department. Saudi citizens constitute 50 percent of the student body while the remaining half includes Arab and Muslim-Americans. The Saudi Academy teaches an intolerant form of Wahhabi Islam to young Muslim children.

Free Muslims:
Ismail Selim Elbarasse, who is accused by federal officials of helping to manage the finances of the radical Muslim group Hamas, worked for 14 years as an accountant at a Saudi school in the Washington suburbs that has been criticized as a breeding ground for Islamic extremism.

Officials at Islamic Saudi Academy in Northern Virginia said yesterday that Elbarasse - who was stopped with his family near the Bay Bridge on Friday after officers spotted his wife videotaping from their car - was "terminated" from the school in 1998, the year he was jailed for refusing to cooperate with a federal investigation into Hamas' finances.

Feminist.org:
The Washington Post reports that Islamic schools in the U.S. receiving funds from Saudi Arabia may be promoting anti-U.S., anti-Christian, and anti-Semitic views. The report focuses on the Islamic Saudi Academy in northern Virginia. According to the Washington Post, an eleventh grade textbook at the school tells students that “one sign of the Day of Judgment will be that Muslims will fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: ‘Oh Muslim, Oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him.’”
posted by jenleigh at 11:31 AM on March 15, 2005

come now people, what will the Saudis (and other O-PECK nations) do once the world does not need the oil. That is the real question.

look to the Sufis to see a glimmer of the future.

(I admire the sufi teachings)
posted by clavdivs at 11:34 AM on March 15, 2005

what will the Saudis (and other O-PECK nations) do once the world does not need the oil.

An unlikely prospect, at least until the US stops its tenure as the "SUV nation".
posted by clevershark at 11:41 AM on March 15, 2005

“one sign of the Day of Judgment will be that Muslims will fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: ‘Oh Muslim, Oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him.’”

Sigh, even the trees hate the Jews. At least the kids at the Wahabbi schools will ace the anti-semitism section of the SATS.

Lunatic and vile yes, but comedy gold. I might join up if I was promised a few more howlers like this.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:59 AM on March 15, 2005

i think it's tragic.
posted by Substrata at 12:13 PM on March 15, 2005

Stop trying to duck the issue, did John Kerry really earn throw away his medals?
posted by Damienmce at 12:15 PM on March 15, 2005

Cheers to Senator Schumer. I feel a little better :>
posted by dhoyt at 12:15 PM on March 15, 2005

15 of 19 from Saudi Arabia.

None from Iraq.

/me throws up
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 12:17 PM on March 15, 2005

Mean Mr. Bucket,
You don't think Saddam was clever enough to give them Saudi passports? Freedom haters are a tricky bunch, their hate of freedom gives them dark powers, that's why we must be ever vigilant and not go on lots of vacations.

Also, What do buckets throw up into? People? even bigger buckets? Let me know.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:25 PM on March 15, 2005

Via Freedom House:

WASHINGTON, DC, January 28, 2005- Freedom House’s Center for Religious Freedom released today a new report exposing the dissemination of hate propaganda in America by the government of Saudi Arabia.

The 89-page report, “Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques,” is based on a year-long study of over two hundred original documents, all disseminated, published or otherwise generated by the government of Saudi Arabia and collected from more than a dozen mosques in the United States.

The propagation of hate ideology by Saudi Arabia is known to be worldwide, but its occurrence within the United States has received scant attention until now. Within worldwide Sunni Islam, followers of Saudi Arabia’s extremist Wahhabi ideology are a distinct minority, as is evident by the millions of Muslims who have chosen to make America their home and are upstanding, law-abiding citizens and neighbors.

posted by dhoyt at 12:36 PM on March 15, 2005

Better get to work on that alternative energy policy. Otherwise these words are going to have no bite.
posted by MillMan at 12:47 PM on March 15, 2005

I think it's safe to assume that Divine_Wino is joking... no one could make that statement with a straight face, not even if they were a member of the Bush Administration.

dhoyt -- those Saudi links have been known for a while to people like myself who spent the last year reading books like "Sleeping with the Enemy" by Robert Baer. If anyone thinks the Saudis don't have a lot of extremists preaching hate and violence inside the United States, well, it's time for those people to wake up.
posted by clevershark at 12:49 PM on March 15, 2005

Frontline recently did a fantastic history of this country, House of Saud. It covers the rise of the Saud family, including their tenuous pacts with the Wahhabi and how the U.S. came to "ally" itself with this wacko country. It's even-handed and very well done.

I imagine there may be a bittorrent of it somewhere. Hell, it's PBS. It might even be legal!

We're going to have to wait for at least 3.75 years to do anything about Saudi Arabia. The Ass Clowns in the White House are not going to be listening to the liberal whinings of Sens. Schumer and Collins.
posted by mcstayinskool at 12:59 PM on March 15, 2005

I think it's so cute when the righties get with the program like three years after it's been obvious to everyone else.
posted by dame at 12:59 PM on March 15, 2005

I am a member of the Bush Administration, however I was joking.

To not be joking for a moment, which for me is like a monkey or a male teenager to not be jerking off, I sure do wish we spent a little of that war money funding non-wahabbi schools in those same places that the Saudis are funding their wahabbi schools. And I sure do wish our intelligence services were worth a crap and I sure as hell do wish that the war on terror was like even 5% more about eliminating the causes and sources of terror (including poisonous US foreign policy and economic policy AND religious wackadoos and their attendant power-mad warlord homies) rather than another excuse for "homeland security" dudes to eat Surf 'n Turf at the Waikiki Hilton on the public dime. (On preview, ditto Dame and mcstayinschool). I'm generally a no-war at all guy, but if someone had to get some of the business end why wasn't it Saudi and Pakistan (their respective governments and intelligence services, that is)

Allright, enough of that, back to the seltzer bottle.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:03 PM on March 15, 2005

Better get to work on that alternative energy policy. Otherwise these words are going to have no bite.

No. No. No. Peak Oil is your friend. Once we truly and firmly hit Peak - no more SUV's, no more global warming. And finally that human population contraction the earth desperately needs.

C'mon. Drive like mother fuckers. BURN MORE OIL!
posted by tkchrist at 1:19 PM on March 15, 2005

I think it's so cute when the righties get with the program like three years after it's been obvious to everyone else.

To take one prominent publication as an example, Saudi Arabia has been scrutinized by righties since long before 9/11—just not harshly enough by the righties in the White House, unfortunately.

Schumer is a Democrat, btw, and the other 15 senators who signed the letter represent both parties.
posted by jenleigh at 1:40 PM on March 15, 2005

Once we truly and firmly hit Peak - no more SUV's, no more global warming. And finally that human population contraction the earth desperately needs.

A "hard landing" stemming from having very little tech and infrastructure in place to replace oil might result in the death of everyone. At this point there may not be much we can do, though. Hold on tight.

I still have hope, I know of people who were selling their SUVs when gas went over $2.00 last summer. If we go to $2.50 this summer, hopefully more people will ditch their SUVs.
posted by MillMan at 1:44 PM on March 15, 2005

I want to see an english translation of the Arabic version of the Islamic Saudi Acadamy's web page. I bet it's not what you see on there when you click on the English version.
posted by salad spork at 1:55 PM on March 15, 2005

Stephen Schwartz, Weekly Standard:
"FOR MONTHS, a behind-the-scenes, seldom-mentioned debate has raged in the West, over the origins of the "foreign fighters" attacking the U.S., coalition, and local anti-jihadist forces in Iraq. Some, including Saudi dissidents like Ali al-Ahmed of the Saudi Institute and myself, have suspected Iraq's dangerous southern neighbor, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, of being the main source.

"The predominance of Saudis in Iraqi terrorism also goes a long way toward explaining the other fact that Western media and government have been reluctant to admit: the role of Wahhabism as an inciter of violence against Shias. Wahhabis hate Shias even more than Christians and Jews, because, as Saudi schools (including those like the Islamic Saudi Academy in the United States) teach, Christians and Jews have their own religions that are openly opposed to Islam, but Shias want to "change Islam," which the Wahhabis consider the personal property of the Saudi rulers. Few in the West seemed to notice earlier this week when 2,000 people assembled in Hilla, near Baghdad, to protest a car bombing that killed at least 125. The demonstrators chanted "No to terrorism! No to Baathism and Wahhabism!"
posted by jenleigh at 1:59 PM on March 15, 2005

Not far to go; my truck runs better on high-test, and around here it's over $2.20.

We invaded the wrong frickin' country.
posted by alumshubby at 2:00 PM on March 15, 2005

Schumer should GHOFB.
posted by AlexReynolds at 2:13 PM on March 15, 2005

Schumer is a Democrat, btw

Yeah, I would be aware of that seeing as I just voted for him. I was talking about you & dhoyt & all the yappers who were going on about Afghanistan and Iraq when anyone with half a brain knew they should have been saying Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. But I'm just cranky today.
posted by dame at 2:13 PM on March 15, 2005

Actually, that was substanceless. I'm glad that people are finally getting the Saudi thing, though I would really rather they hadn't squandered the post–September 11 momentum and attention on useless wars instead. And I can't help but wonder how many more years we're going to spend pouring money into Pakistan, land of many training camps, vast repression, unpunished nuclear proliferation, and cold bin Laden trails before people finally get a clue.

Very little, very late.
posted by dame at 2:23 PM on March 15, 2005

millman wrote: I still have hope, I know of people who were selling their SUVs when gas went over $2.00 last summer. If we go to $2.50 this summer, hopefully more people will ditch their SUVs.

Unfortunately, they will sell them, not 'ditch' them. That means someone else will buy them and drive them. My point is that any effect of gas pricing on guzzledom will be delayed for a while.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 2:49 PM on March 15, 2005

Schumer is a Democrat, btw...

So, fucking what. He's a senator from New York playing to the grandstands--his local urban Jewish constituency.

We may have made a devil's bargain with the House of Saud, who in turn have made a devil's bargain with the Wahabi elements who fund the overseas madrassahs but who will replace the House of Saud if it falls?

The best organized elements in Saudi society--the very same Wahabi extremists.

Despite all the wanking of the Just Add Water Democracy crowd, the fact is we are better off dealing with the present elite until the day and time Saudi Arabia has enough institutions of civil society to make the transition to a democratic regime. The same is true for Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Egypt and all the present authoritarian states we support--no one in the Bush administration ever promotes democracy for Dubai or Kuwait, I notice--or oppose, depending upon their status among the pro-Likud neocon ideologues who have hijacked the foreign policy of America. Depose Assad and the Syrian Baath party? Fine--but who replaces him and them?

Consider this sidebar--Applications of Islamic Law--to the NYT article A World of Ways to Say 'Islamic Law', which lists the status of Sharia law in various Islamic countries. Note the entry for Turkey:

TURKEY

Legal Codes

The constitution protects freedom of religion. The government oversees the country's 75,000 mosques and other religious facilities.

How It Works

The military, judiciary and other branches of government discriminate against those they consider proponents of Islamic fundamentalism and Shariah. Observant Muslims in the military are reported to be expelled as threats to secularism; civil servants suspected of Islamist activities are not promoted or are fired. Bans on Islamic head scarves at universities and among civil servants are enforced.

Why is Turkey so adamantly secular? Because of Kemal Ataturk.

What are the chances a Kemal Ataturk will come to power in Syria if Assad is deposed or in Saudi Arabia if the House of Saud falls?

Zip.

Secularism is not going to come to the Mideast at the barrel of a gun. Iraq alone is proof of that.

Instead of thumping the tubs about the evil, awful Wahabis, why aren't we funding secular education and secular institutions in any of these countries ? Because it's too complicated for the sound bite crowd ? Let's just ignore the complexities and topple all the present regimes--yeah, that's the ticket. Can you say Islamic Republic of Saudi Arabia? With a regime that will make Prince Abdullah look like a pro-Israeli Gloria Steinem in comparison ? Oh, that will be great, especially as we have no troops with which to invade or occupy said Islamic Republic.

Here's a newsflash--we were not attacked by the Kingdom of SaudiArabia on 9/11. We were attacked by a para-state entity called Al Qaeda:

To fight such dangerous tactics, Western governments will also need to adapt. In addition to military, intelligence, and law enforcement responses, Washington should start thinking about how U.S. policies are perceived by potential recruits to terrorist organizations. The United States too often ignores the unintended consequences of its actions, disregarding, for example, the negative message sent by Washington's ongoing neglect of Afghanistan and of the chaos in postwar Iraq. If the United States allows Iraq to become another failed state, groups both inside and outside the country that support al Qaeda's goals will benefit...

In countries where extremist religious schools promote terrorism, Washington should help develop alternative schools rather than attempt to persuade the local government to shut down radical madrasahs. In Pakistan, many children end up at extremist schools because their parents cannot afford the alternatives; better funding for secular education could therefore make a positive difference.

The appeal of radical Islam to alienated youth living in the West is perhaps an even more difficult problem to address. Uneasiness with liberal values, discomfort with uncertain identities, and resentment of the privileged are perennial problems in modern societies. What is new today is that radical leaders are using the tools of globalization to construct new, transnational identities based on death cults, turning grievances and alienation into powerful weapons. To fight these tactics will require getting the input not just of moderate Muslims, but of radical Islamist revivalists who oppose violence.

To fight these tactics will require getting the input not just of moderate Muslims, but of radical Islamist revivalists who oppose violence.

Ooh, could that involve Understanding Islamism ?

We can blow shit up real good but when it comes to nation building, we suck. They had an election, albeit a cooked book election, in Iraq about 190 days ago. Where's the government ? Nowhere--the Shias and the Kurds cannot agree on the status of Kirkuk, among other things. All the feel good soundbites in the world about elections and democracy can not erase the clouds of civil war implicit in the struggle over just that one city. Apart from the devil's bargain we made with the House of Saud, there's another devil involved in MidEast democracy--as in the devil is in the details.

Complex situations do not have simple answers. Except to the simple minded. Depose the House of Saud and Al Qaeda may very well become a state. Who will be better off then ? Better the devils you know than the ones you don't.
posted by y2karl at 3:36 PM on March 15, 2005

So, fucking what. He's a senator from New York playing to the grandstands--his local urban Jewish constituency.

It was in response to this:

I think it's so cute when the righties get with the program like three years after it's been obvious to everyone else.

...after which I pointed out that Schumer may take umbrage at being labeled a "righty".

In any case, thanks for the links, Karl. Interesting as always. The hostility & withering sarcasm, not so much.
posted by jenleigh at 3:53 PM on March 15, 2005

Hadn't heard of the ISA til now. More links:

Washington post

MSNBC
posted by dhoyt at 4:10 PM on March 15, 2005

You know, I would actualy have supported a war against saudi arabia in response to 9/11, rather then a war in Iraq in response to nothing. Hell, I wanted to see the taliban go out of bussness before 9/11...
posted by delmoi at 4:27 PM on March 15, 2005

dame: What's your beef with pakistan? Seems like having a pro-western dictator is better then Chaos and lose nukes.

Besides, After we invade Saudi, we'll have all that precious, precious oil...

mmm...

Actualy, I'm not sure what to think about Saudi Arabia. A reformation would take 20 or 30 years and by that time, how much oil are they going to have? Saudi without oil sounds like a dangerous place If we took over, the population would blame us for the ensuing depression.

On the other hand, once oil runs out, it's going to be a bad scene and who knows what's going to come out of it.
posted by delmoi at 4:38 PM on March 15, 2005

In any case, thanks for the links, Karl. Interesting as always. The hostility & withering sarcasm, not so much.

I know, I should really work on that suffering fools in silence thing.

By the way, remember Walid Jumblatt, leader of a Lebanese intifada ?

He said last week that he informed US envoy David Satterfield during a visit to Lebanon that he opposed the disarming of Hezbollah, which is considered by Washington as a terrorist organization.

"We should not forget that Hezbollah is a main partner in any future (political) coalition," said Jumblatt, who has repeatedly asked Hezbollah to join opposition ranks.

Jumblatt reaches out to Hezbollah

Oh, the complexity!
posted by y2karl at 4:43 PM on March 15, 2005

The Bush family is way too tight with the House of Saud for this letter to mean anything. Too little noise way too late. And Karl is gonna be really pissed at these folks too! This stuff was common knowledge long before 9/11, wasn't it? Surely I'm not the only one knew most of this crap, was I?

Here's another little goodie for consideration: the darling of DC, Grover "drown it in the bathtub" Norquist had a very close relationship with these Wahabi bastards in DC. So much so that he should be in Gitmo.
posted by nofundy at 4:50 PM on March 15, 2005

Secularism? You've got to be kidding me.

Why would the US as a geopolitical entity, its politicians, or its citizens want to spread secularism when the US has only disdain for secularism and western enlightenment?

The current debate in the US isnt whether or not we should put up religious dogma in courthouses and public buildings, but how big they should be. Placards are fine it seems, but giant monuments might be a little too much. Newdow's legitimate request to question the validitiy of mentioning the specific monotheistic god in our national pledge was met with ridicule to the point the Senate of the United States took the pledge in public and shouted "under god," for emphasis.

Bush's biggest PR and political success is his faith-based programs, which are nothing more than the handing out of tax payer money to Churches and other religious institutions, while the GOP does its best to kill government, thus secular-ish, social services.

To the middle-east the US is a Christian nation that is hostile to Islam. I'd say that's pretty spot-on. To assume the US is this great secular nation and an exporter of the ideals of western enlightenment is to be pretty naive.

Interestingly enough, this does tie in with the geopolitical situation. A great deal of support for Israel and its policies in regards to palestinian come from a base and senators who believe in the end times philosophy of the second coming, which requires that land be under Jewish control.

The current US president puts his religious convictions and extremist religious constitients ahead of most of his policies.
Bush and his religious positions are quite popular to Americans. He is not an extremist when you consider the whole of America.

The current Supreme Court of the US tends to vote in favor or secularism, but only with a razor-thin 5-4 majority, which will change when Bush appoints another Scalia or Thomas.

Lets just face the facts and admit the US has much more in common with Saudia Arabia than one would normally like to admit and the US is not a country up to the task of spreading secularism when it can't get it right at home.

>Why is Turkey so adamantly secular? Because of Kemal Ataturk.

Granted. But much of Turkey's reforms are for the sole purpose of joining the EU. The fires of western enlightenment and democracy still burn in Europe and EU knows how to spread them. Hint to the Americans, it doesn't involve bombs.
posted by skallas at 6:20 PM on March 15, 2005

Bush Sends Top Aide to Anti-Semitic Saudi Conference
Bush Later "Compliments" Saudi Leader on "Successful" Conference

Throughout and surrounding the conference, various Saudi clerics noted that "Jews and the Christians are Allah's enemies," and that Jihad -- including attacks by insurgents in Iraq -- is appropriate. In a poem read before Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan, it was noted that Osama bin Laden "was sent by the Jews."

"It is self-delusional that President Bush would show such poor judgment in sending a top envoy to this anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-American parley -- even after contemptible statements are read on Saudi state television during the run-up to the conference, and even after a very pointed warning from Senator Frank Lautenberg that this conference is nothing that the United States should be associated with," said National Jewish Democratic Council Executive Director Ira N. Forman. "President Bush had sufficient warnings before the conference that America should denounce it, not participate in it. But he chose instead to send a top White House official to lead an American delegation.
posted by jenleigh at 8:25 PM on March 15, 2005

What's your beef with pakistan? Seems like having a pro-western dictator is better then Chaos and lose nukes.

Well, demoi, I don't know that I'd say that a pro-western dictator *is* good for us. I don't like my country being associated with a dictatorship, especially one that oppresses a bunch of Muslims. Kind of gives them a good reason to hate us and to get all gooey and fundy. Combining nationalism & religion rarely if ever turns out well.

And it isn't that we tolerate Musharraf; we give him obscene amounts of money. That worked out so well with the Taliban, or as they were called when we were paying them, the muhajadeen. Or consider Iran. Backing the Shah was a great plan that caused no blowback whatsoever.

And you know where else the Saudis fund schools, schools much worse than those referenced above? Pakistan. And under Musharraf they flourish.

I can't pretend to know enough about Pakistani politics to predict who would govern in Musharraf's stead, but his government hasn't been so trustworthy on the nuke front. In fact, when they found out one of their scientists was selling info to the highest bidder (including North Korea, if I recall), they gave him a slap on the wrist & the U.S. went along because Pakistan was going to help us find bin Laden. But--oops!--that trail is now cold.

It isn't a pretty scene & I cannot imagine it getting better. There are always going to be some wackos out there who want to kill us. The solution isn't draconian measures and devil's bargains for some short term "security." It's making a genuine case for secularism (which, as skalls points out, we're not in the best position to make, though I would say too that the EU is not the promised land--they could take some assimilation lessons from North Americans, for instance). Sometimes making this case is simply not saying much and keeping indigenous movements free from the "U.S. lackey" tag. In other cases, perhaps in Pakistan, it could be funding free schools that could compete with the madrasses whose primary appeal is the abscence of fees and presence of free food.

In any case, the aim is to give most non-wackos a reason not to cast their lots with the nutsos, thereby isolating them. Supporting Musharraf has no place in it at all.
posted by dame at 9:46 PM on March 15, 2005

An unlikely prospect, at least until the US stops its tenure as the "SUV nation".

another fine example of ignorance. Will you trunce on the rapid economic progress (sic) of China who is consuming oil at almost a geometric rate? Do you see the U.S. figures concerning personal vechile comsumption (e-arl) is low compared to the ships, planes, and home heating fuel? (notice the rise in natural gas prices) No, you want to SUV bash. The world needs to change soon concerning oil-gasoline consumption. History shows us that Electric cars were considered the future but gasoline engines were cheaper for the consumer and better for the oil producers.
posted by clavdivs at 11:37 AM on March 17, 2005