Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Waives Sanctions On Saudi Arabia  
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

Bush Waives Saudi Trafficking Sanctions

Wed Sep 21, 9:40 PM ET

WASHINGTON -
President Bush decided Wednesday to waive any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism, for failing to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced laborers.

In June, the State Department listed 14 countries as failing to adequately address trafficking problems, subjecting them all to possible sanctions if they did not crack down.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush_human_trafficking

***

Just a year ago...

***

Human trafficking is one of the worst offenses against human dignity. Our nation is determined to fight that crime abroad and at home.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/07/20040716-10.html

***

I don't like the relationship our government has with Saudi Arabia, period. Considering that 15 out of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi nationals, this is pretty screwy.


NO URLS in signature
55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
is pretty screwy.

I'd say "is pretty FUCKED UP"

Oh P.S.. once again 'our' "Christian values" President hard at work.. what an ASSHOLE!!


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1634 times:

Not good. If anyone has the ability to disrupt our way of life now, it's the Saud family. And they can do it the smart way: by pretending to be our ally.


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1626 times:

It just seems so strange to me, that we're fighting this war in Iraq to spread democracy (apparently) and human rights. So why go easy on Saudi Arabia? My first reaction would be oil. Could it also be business connections? I don't know.

I think our representatives, both Republican and Democrat alike should oppose this. Those who support the war in Iraq on the basis of democracy and human rights should oppose this decision.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17359 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
President Bush decided Wednesday to waive any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia...for failing to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced laborers.

This doesn't make sense....sanctions were waived because the sanctioned failed to do something?



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1619 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 3):
both Republican and Democrat alike should oppose this

ABSOLUTELY!!!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 4):
This doesn't make sense....sanctions were waived because the sanctioned failed to do something?

Just like in Cuba eh Maverick?


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1611 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 4):
This doesn't make sense....sanctions were waived because the sanctioned failed to do something?

Uhhh, you edited that somehow so it wouldn't make sense. The article says that in June sanctions were threatened against 14 countries guilty of the stated. Saudi Arabia got a free pass and never got pressed with sanctions.

From the article:

"In addition to Saudi Arabia, Ecuador and Kuwait another U.S. ally in the Middle East were given a complete pass on any sanctions, Jordan said. Despite periodic differences, oil-rich Saudi Arabia and the United States have a tight alliance built on economic and military cooperation."

[Edited 2005-09-23 22:44:35]


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1594 times:

My Congressman tries to end funding of Saudi Arabia every year by inserting amendments in foreign aid bills, but to no avail. He is one of the biggest critics of Saudi Arabia on the Hill...

User currently offlineRsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1590 times:

Isnt it time for the Neo-Con segment of this community to chime in??

I was going to post this last night.

Yep bush has great Christian Values if he consulted with his bible on this decession.

If this doesnt wake up people to how tight we are bound to SA nothing will.



Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1584 times:

Isnt it time for the Neo-Con segment of this community to chime in??

"Neocons" are major, major critics of Saudi Arabia...But it's always nice to see your ignorance.


User currently offlineNUair From Malaysia, joined Jun 2000, 1181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1584 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 3):
Could it also be business connections

But what sets Carlyle apart is the way it has exploited its political contacts. When Carlucci arrived there in 1989, he brought with him a phalanx of former subordinates from the CIA and the Pentagon, and an awareness of the scale of business a company like Carlyle could do in the corridors and steak-houses of Washington. In a decade and a half, the firm has been able to realise a 34% rate of return on its investments, and now claims to be the largest private equity firm in the world. Success brought more investors, including the international financier George Soros and, in 1995, the wealthy Saudi Binladin family, who insist they long ago severed all links with their notorious relative. The first president Bush is understood to have visited the Binladins in Saudi Arabia twice on the firm's behalf.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,583869,00.html

In the wake of Judicial Watch and other criticism of its ties to the bin Laden family business, the Carlyle Group reportedly no longer does business with the bin Laden conglomerate. Yet the Group, among other conflicts of interest, reportedly has a major business relationship with the Saudi Arabian government, which many have criticized for its lack of cooperation in America’s war on terrorism and its financial and other support for terrorist attacks on Israel and U.S. interests.


http://www.judicialwatch.org/1685.shtml

It's hard to make it any more transparent. OF course we have interest in Saudi Arabia! What does your car run on?



"How Many Assholes we got on this ship?" - Lord Helmet
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17359 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1568 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 6):
Uhhh, you edited that somehow so it wouldn't make sense.

No, read it again:

"President Bush decided Wednesday to waive any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism, for failing to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced laborers."

All I did was remove "Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism" so that what remained was "Bush waives sanctions on Saudi Arabia for failing to do enough to stop slave trade".



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1937 posts, RR: 32
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1561 times:

Saudi Arabia is one of the worst human rights abusers in the world.

Whether one believes that the Iraq war was directly about oil or not, one must admit that our policy in the middle east (and central Asia) is largely driven by oil and oil money.

The hypocrisy makes me choke when this administration claims that our policy is about spreading human rights, since we support some of the worlds scariest and worst dictators (Turkmenistan anyone?), oppressive regimes such as Mubarrak's in Egypt, and, of course, the house of Saud.

Historically, countries have pursued foreign policies that suit their own interests. But when we are the world's only superpower, I personally believe we have some extra responsibility. Certainly, we shouldn't wonder why we are distrusted when we bully the rest of the world, start wars under false pretenses, then justify them under much falser pretenses once we are there. And we wonder why we are not seen as an honest broker in that part of the world?



It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineB744F From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1550 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism

Do they mean, closet, as in the people behind the terrorism in the first place? Gotta love the administration, they will stop at nothing to help their business allies.


User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5018 posts, RR: 44
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1551 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
All I did was remove "Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism" so that what remained was "Bush waives sanctions on Saudi Arabia for failing to do enough to stop slave trade".

And what exactly is confusing about that? The reason for the sanctions would have been that Saudi Arabia is failing to do enough to stop slave trade...

Quite frankly I can't say I'm surprised. Wondeful message the US is spreading with this! Great way to win more hearts and souls for the "War On Terror"  Yeah sure

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 9):
"Neocons" are major, major critics of Saudi Arabia...

Then why aren't the ones in the White House implementing these sanctions? Why are the neocons in the White House SUCKING UP to Saudi Arabia so much, if they are such 'major critics'?


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1543 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 14):
Then why aren't the ones in the White House implementing these sanctions? Why are the neocons in the White House SUCKING UP to Saudi Arabia so much, if they are such 'major critics'?

Indeed. I expect to hear UNILATERAL outrage over this.



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineN229NW From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 1937 posts, RR: 32
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1534 times:

Quoting we're nuts, reply=15:
Indeed. I expect to hear UNILATERAL outrage over this.

You can hope, but "expect"? Don't hold your breath...

PS: Are you aware that the quote button still doesn't work from your posts? I had to cut and paste...



It's people like you what cause unrest!
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17359 posts, RR: 46
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1531 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 14):
And what exactly is confusing about that?

The official reason that Bush is waiving sanctions is because Saudi Arabia has human rights issues? That makes no sense.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12394 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1524 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hmm, let me see if I've got this right.

Saudi Arabia has oil.
US needs oil.
Saudi Arabia is generally not nice to people.
US imposes sanctions.
Saudi Arabia stops exporting oil to US.
No wait, that's not good. Er, lets think about this.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17359 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1518 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 18):
US imposes sanctions.
Saudi Arabia stops exporting oil to US.

That I can understand...but to say that Bush ended sanctions because Saudi Arabia failed to end human rights abuses does not make sense. I'm [kinda not really] surprised that more people didn't question the headline.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1515 times:

I guess it means that it doesn't matter to our government that they have failed to stop this problem. Our business is more important the human rights? Seems that way.


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1502 times:

Not that it's right, but the U.S. isn't entirely guilt-free from heinous human rights crimes. Our flying suspects around the world to torture-friendly countries out of the reach of habeas corpus is just one famous example.

We can ballyhoo all we want about what others are doing, but as long as all we're doing is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic when it comes to human rights, it's not going to go very far. One leads by example.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1482 times:

Quoting N229NW (Reply 16):
PS: Are you aware that the quote button still doesn't work from your posts? I had to cut and paste...

Yeah, I know, there isn't a whole lot I can do about it. If you select my text and hit "quote" from someone else's post, it will paste the text in their name, then you can just type in "We're Nuts".



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1479 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 20):
Our business is more important the human rights?

Yep.. you shouldn't act so surprised..it's only been policy for what? The last 40+ years?

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
One leads by example.

Yes, and we don't USUALLY torture our prisoner, and we certainly do NOT sumarily dismember or execute them. Sure THIS administration has set us back DECADES with AbuGhraib, but on average we are a LOT better.


User currently offlineSearpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4343 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1465 times:

Other than once again showing that current US diplomacy and politics is the art of the convenient, I'm not sure why anybody is surprised or even dissapointed. To be either implies that you have an expectation of something else, and no realistic observer of our current administration would have expected anything other than exactly what they did.

But not to let former administrations off the hook, for far longer that I care to think about, we've been giving the Saudi's a complete pass on matters that we claim to hold dear. Even during the oil embargo and our emerging focus on human rights, I'm not aware that we ever really focused on the well known and documented abuses by the royal family.



"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"
25 Post contains images FriendlySkies : Hey, he told us we were going to Iraq because Saddam had WMDs...what's wrong with this?
26 Post contains images CORULEZ05 : Funny enough the majority of anet Bush supporters have avoided this thread like the plague......interesting....
27 Post contains images AeroWesty : This surprises you?
28 ANCFlyer : I've never thought of Saudi as our friend . . . I don't know how and why we have been snookered by them for so long, but we have. Remember, most of th
29 SATX : Can you supply some sources or examples that show this is anything but lip service? Um, I think you're confused because you think Bush ended some for
30 Post contains images ANCFlyer : We read it differently, in that what I read is the Financial sanctions - certain types of foreign aid - will now be allowed to proceed to 6 of the 14
31 Searpqx : I don't think there is any 'snookering' involved - successive administrations, dating back to at least Kennedy have simply chosen to ignore the abuse
32 Falcon84 : Waived it for one reason folks-and this is a card I don't use often: OIL!!!!
33 B744F : WHAT??? actual smaller government conservatives are major major critics of Saudi Arabia. neocons have been in bed with the Saudis for decades and loo
34 AvObserver : No surprise here! Just like when the bin Laden family was allowed to jet out of America after 9/11 when all other aircraft were grounded. They should
35 Post contains images We're Nuts : "mostly"?? Don't you think that implies some small degree of the threat was not manufactured? Perhaps you should consider revising that sentence!
36 Scbriml : Er, because they have a lot of what you need - oil?
37 Doona : I'm the kind of guy who just thinks we should all be friends. But it ain't gonna happen. But when it comes to the war against terrorism, is a country
38 Post contains images We're Nuts : They say diplomacy is just the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a big enough rock. Who knows, maybe in three years we'll be calling it "B
39 AvObserver : "Perhaps you should consider revising that sentence!" Only to the extent that I concede to a possibility but not probability that Saddam had some smal
40 Cfalk : I find it funny that the same people that say that we should stay out of people's affairs, and not try to impose our culture on them, are the same one
41 Post contains images Cfalk : Oops, too late to edit... I meant, "I find it funny that the same people that say that we should stay out of people's affairs, and not try to impose
42 B744F : no those same people are just wondering why we are kissing up and calling these animals our allies. our government and all governments dependent on o
43 Searpqx : Gotta agree with that - up until they realized they were signing their own death warrants, many key members of the house of Saud were supporting OBL
44 ME AVN FAN : the 15 were AGAINST the Saudi-Dynasty, so that THIS is another reason for the Bush-dynasty ... sorry I mean Bush-administration to support the Saudi-
45 B744F : If they were against the Saudi Dynasty, why were they funded by top officials in said dynasty?
46 DLKAPA : The Carlyle group, which Bush Sr. Serves as Public Relations director and members of the Bin Laden family preside on the board of directors. Well the
47 Post contains images MaverickM11 : WEAK. That's the dumbest response I've seen on here yet. Try again.
48 ANCFlyer : A very broad brush used here Westy - we don't condone (as a general population) nor do we accept wholesale torture of anyone - wholesale torture of w
49 Post contains images AeroWesty : Excellent counterpoint, to which I agree. LOL! Stunning visual there. I'm not sure even how to respond to this one, but I do see your point that base
50 DLKAPA : How So? We had sanctions agains Iraq and when they didn't work we invaded, so when sanctions fail against saudi arabia we just lift them? My original
51 ANCFlyer : Remember that city councilman in Texas, perhaps New Mexico - I forget . . . Red to Positive and Black to Ground . . . Agreed. Having met Powell and m
52 AeroWesty : I don't think so either, which is why it is such a shock to our system when it is revealed, and to our collective credit we don't brush it off with a
53 ANCFlyer : AbuGhraib and Gitmo . . . and the appropriate assholes have been punished. Interesting perspective . . . I'm not sure it's true. What I think is that
54 ME AVN FAN : they were NOT funded by the TOP officials of that dynasty but by the second level of that dynasty who would love to get to the top --- intrigues are
55 ME AVN FAN : He was NOT seen at family events for more than 10 years. He however has met some of his brothers occasionally and he always was in touch with his mot
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Cuba, Saudi Arabia, China On UN On Rights Council posted Wed May 10 2006 08:02:43 by 11Bravo
Show About Saudi Arabia On CNN Tonight posted Mon Nov 8 2004 01:47:16 by BA
Lebanon's True Friend: Saudi Arabia posted Thu Jul 27 2006 09:14:27 by OD720
Saudi Arabia Warns Of Middle East War posted Wed Jul 26 2006 00:48:11 by BA
More Oil In Alberta Than Saudi Arabia! posted Wed Jul 5 2006 22:12:55 by Emirates773ER
House Jabs Saudi Arabia In Foreign Aid Bill posted Sun Jun 11 2006 22:30:12 by RJpieces
Human Rights Violations In Saudi Arabia. posted Thu Jun 8 2006 09:38:38 by Himmat01
Bush Warns Iran On Israel Again posted Mon Mar 20 2006 22:01:14 by RJpieces
Al Gore Running His Mouth In Saudi Arabia posted Mon Feb 13 2006 08:06:58 by Checkraiser
Saudi Arabia Wants To Draw Tourists...Riiiiiiight posted Wed Dec 21 2005 18:16:50 by MaverickM11