kakki wrote: > Hey Lori, > > Thanks for your support recently. I appreciate it. > > Honest question by me. Why would the Saudis officially want to support > terrorism against us?
I don't think they would, officially. bin Ladin is a Saudi, and his reasons for terrorism include revulsion that the US has military bases on the 'holy land' and that we support Israel. Probably, as you say, a Saudi businessman would be able to overlook alot more than, say, a militant fundamentalist. The Saudis threw bin Ladin out of their country, so I don't think there is any one unified 'Saudi' that represents all Saudis any more than there is a unified American viewpoint. > I'm not saying that aren't but why would they when > they get most of their income from the West and have something like $500 > billion in holdings in the U.S., including the majority part of AOL-Time > Warner and CNN? really? > > > Are they playing both sides of the fence here? But if they wanted the U.S. > gutted, why, when they have too much $$ tied up there? > > I have read some opinions that the US are not attacking the Saudis because > they have holdings on such a great piece of the US economy. But why has > Saddam always been the target? Why did Clinton bomb Iraq relentlessly > during his administration without either UN or Congressional approval? Why > didn't people protest then? The alternative media like The Nation and Democracy Now certainly did try to raise awareness about Clinton's bombing, but mainstream press never really picked up on it. But I see mainstream press ignoring key issues all the time. > I ask not to be provocative - I am trying to > figure it all out. > > Kakki
