Report on 9/11 Suggests a Role by Saudi Spies If this article in the NY Times is accurate, then The Saudi request that the classified pages be made public, and the Bush refusal to do so, is a cooperative effort to keep the public from knowing the Saudi involvement rather than an attempt to protect intelligence methods etc as had been claimed by Bush. Ot, Bush is right (we won't know) and the Times wrong. Take your choice.
posted by Postroad
on Aug 2, 2003 -
"In the most recent issue of the Arms Sales Monitor, the Arms Sales Monitoring Project finds that the War on Terror has provided the U.S. military with an excuse to begin arming regimes that had previously been blacklisted for human rights abuses, weapons proliferation, or brutal conflict" - Federation of American Scientists.
The content of this document gives rise to a range of issues. Can arming new friends with advanced weaponry strengthen the long-term security of the U.S, or will this ultimately ensure renewed hostility arising from an apparent readiness to take sides in foreign conflicts?? One year on from 9/11/01, has the moral high-ground implied by the 'War Against Terrorism' been fatally eroded by turning a blind eye to the questionable ethics of 'friendly' states (the records of the Saudis, and arguably, the Israelis and others, may also be a case in point)?
posted by Doozer
on Sep 11, 2002 -
Our enemies the Saudis. In a must-read editorial, Michael Barone makes a scathing attack on U.S. support of Saudi Arabia. Does anyone else cringe when they hear G.W. Bush speak on how much he wants to protect freedom and fight totalitarianism?
posted by bobo123
on May 27, 2002 -