Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Defending the Indefensible

The House of Saud. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. KSA. The Saudi's. WhoTF are these people? And how is that the American government is willing to allow American citizens to languish as kidnap victims in that country - but no other?

Iran takes 52 hostages and the U.S. was willing to send special forces by Helicopter... KSA has hundreds of American citizens held hostage and we wipe the Web clean of their existence... Just who are these Saud's?

A brutal, repressive, cruel, and heartless bunch with only the hooligans of the Third Reich as competition (well, maybe Uncle Joe and good old Pol Pot)... and the U.S. supports this bunch blindly and unequivocally.  But why?

Because the political upheaval that will strike the U.S. AFTER any major political upheaval strikes KSA is just too terrible to be considered by all of the folks in D.C., who have dedicated their lives to getting where they are, to contemplate. Because the International Bond Market might well shut down America's ability to borrow to continue its asinine budgets for its military and social programs (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and now SNAP, the former Food Stamp program). You see, all of these programs will fail the people depending on them... irrespective of the voluminous Horse Sh*t being promulgated in the "progressive" MSM.

("Oh, how can you be so heartless?" you might ask.... I am not heartless... the International Bond Market is. If there are 10 miners trapped in a shaft, and enough O2 for 8, is the recognition of this circumstance "heartless"?  I define "heartless" as being willing to addict the American people to social programs that absolutely, positively won't be there for them... and I include the military in that... the military has been a release valve to soak up excessive unemployment amongst the young for the past several decades.  That, too, is gong to come to a screeching halt.)

So here we are, America, land of the free, home of the brave... providing support for what is for all intents and purposes a Mafia family running a country of 29,000,000 or so human beings... a nation where men are not permitted to  vote and women are not permitted to  drive or to travel without the permission of their closet male relative, and that INCLUDES women who happen to be American citizens who want to come home but cannot because their Saudi husbands won't "let" them.

Doesn't that sound just a wee bit strange to you? Where is the F*&ing outrage from FemiNazi of State Clinton? Why is it that a Libertarian (Republican) like yours truly has to point this out when we have any number of Feminists in the Cabinet, Senate, and House of Representatives?

Good Lord, sometimes I think I am the only normal person left... 

Anyway... here's the deal.  Even the House of Saud cannot hold back the wind.  This is going to happen, though I have no idea "when" - and it could easily happen in Iran first, which is almost as bad - the House of Saud is going to fall. When it does Oil will trade between $150 and $400 forever more, and America's car-driving-pro-choice-vegetarin-Great Society-adhering goofballs will still be protesting that "Life Ain't Fair"... but in a whole different ball game.

8 comments:

bureaucrat said...

As Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" detailed, the relationship between the (George) Bushes and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was deep and surprisingly strong. They are both old oil men. Whether KSA has the 260 billion barrels of oil still left is up for debate. We do know KSA has some of the best petroleum engineers in the world, for obvious reasons.

But the Saudis also have some things working against it. 2% of the people are immensely rich and 98% are immensely poor. Their police state is designed to keep their "youth bulge" (that every other Muslim country also has) under control. KSA's trends makes it sound a lot like Egypt and the US in some respects (disappearing middle class).

It is too bad Matt Simmons died before we could see if any of his "Twilight in the Desert" comes to pass. He was going a little nuts during the BP oil spill time, and he died with a small cloud over him (his reasoning on financial media during that time was crazy at best).

PioneerPreppy said...

The feminazi's don't say anything because all they really want are more allies against White Men. They don't really care who is exploited or stoned or beaten as long as it gives them some support at the ballot box and more female superiority.

Not crying out against female abuse in the Middle East gives them Muslim support at the polls here. Just like they used whatever means to get the early civil rights votes back in the 60's. Look at NOW's playbook they ally with any and every special interest group they can in the hopes of having a voting ally.

I am sure the political power of oil keeps those few in our government who would say something quiet as well.

Greg T. Jeffers said...

PP:

It is a disgrace.

westexas said...

Saudi oil production and net oil exports have been below their 2005 rate (when "Twilight in the Desert" was published) for five straight years--despite annual oil prices all exceeding the 2005 level, with four of the five years since 2005 showing year over year increases in oil prices.

This is in marked contrast to the rapid increase in production net net oil exports from 2002 to 2005, in response to rising oil prices.

Stumpjumper said...

FWTW, I lived in Saudia Arabia prior, during, and after the desert war. Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and Desert Calm. KKIA. Most are not poor. The poor are the third world nationals they hire out to accomplish their blue collar work. American women that marry a Saudi and move to Saudi Arabia will get a rude shock. They are not like the West and never have been.

FWIT, Saudi oil is naturally pressurized in the ground so all they have to do is turn a valve to get what they need that day. Stumpjumper

westexas said...

Re: Stumpjumper

The key point that Matt Simmons made was basically that Saudi Arabia is not immune from the laws of physics.

Anonymous said...

Michael Moore is not a reliable reference for anything. I saw him interviewed after "Fahrenheit 911" when he was questioned about the veracity of the story as he presented it. As he was pressed, he admitted that parts of his movie did not line up with the facts and he would not guarantee the veracity of any of it. He takes film clips and edits them together to make the story he wants to present. The MSM calls them documentaries, and thereby implies truth and historical accuracy. Disgusting.

Regards,

Coal Guy

bureaucrat said...

Carbon, life itself is not a perfect story. All movies, for instance, can be seen for the "constructed life" they portray, because real life isn't all that linear or interesting. I can tell a "based on real story" movie after I see it versus a "created movie."

I don't doubt Moore said that his presentations aren't perfect. Nothing is. We can't even be sure what people are saying right there on camera are saying truthful things. :)

But in the aggregate, his films (documentaries?) do push a "preponderance of the evidence). It is also not too hard to believe a wonderful friendship occurred between two very wealthy families (Bush/Saud) who "understood each other."

By the way, everything that is written/created is supposed to push a point .. an opinion. Most writing is not just one fact after another. BBOORRRIINNGG!!!! :) You have to answer the question "what is the point" when you write.