Top Leaderboard, Site wide
October 31, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


What Would Republicans Do?




The Thirteenth Turn


Truthdig Bazaar
Burr

Burr

By Gore Vidal
$16.00

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Saudi Links to Iraq Insurgency

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 8, 2006
Saudi currency
greatestcities.com

Saudi Arabian currency

Private Saudi Arabians have allegedly donated millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq, according to the Iraq Study Group and Iraqi officials. It’s an open secret that Iran has supported Shiite militants, causing some to worry that Iraq’s sectarian strife could develop into a regional quagmire.


AP:

Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.

Saudi government officials deny that any money from their country is being sent to Iraqis fighting the government and the U.S.-led coalition.

But the U.S. Iraq Study Group report said Saudis are a source of funding for Sunni Arab insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by the Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents.

Two high-ranking Iraqi officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity, told the AP most of the Saudi money comes from private donations, called zaqat, collected for Islamic causes and charities.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By RS Janes, December 31, 2006 at 7:26 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff, I should have been clearer—I didn’t necessarily mean that you supported tyrants, I meant that our government has a history of supporting tyrants.

To Montie Shields USAF RET.:

I think the answer is the obvious close connection between the Bush family and the Saudi royal family. The bin Laden’s also have a very close connection to the ruling Fahd family, so I have no doubt they put a good word in for their friends.

I notice in all of his rhetoric about bringing democracy to the Middle east, Bush pointedly never mentions Saudi Arabia, one of the most miserable and despotic regimes in the region.

Happy new year to you all.

Report this

By Skruff, December 19, 2006 at 10:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Comment #42710 by RS Janes on 12/18 at 3:35 pm implies that I advocate supporting tyrants.

Nope, read my post.  I said sometimes dictators are necessary… I said nothing about “supporting them”

But, I would like to note we in this USA do support dictators. just not all equally.  We are building China (with our money and MFN status supported by both Clinton and Bush)with its repressive government into the next superpower… our children will have to deal with that someday.

No, we don’t support “democracy” (which we don’t have here) nor republicanism.  We support capitalism no matter what form it takes.. Be the bloodiest dictator in the world and we will back you up….IF you are making us money.

Merry Xmas!

Report this

By Montie Shields USAF RET., December 18, 2006 at 8:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Saudi Government deny giving money to the
Insurgents. Here is something to think about.
After 9/11 when all planes were grounded Bush
provided a plane for his royal buddies, and
members of Osama bin Laden’s family to fly
them out of the country. This is a guy that has just murdered thousands, and caused Billions of
dollars in damages, and Bush is flying his fam-
ily to safety. Something else there was an article by Osama’s Ex-Sister-In-Law. In the article she stated the Royal family, and Osama’s
family was still supporting him. How far did
that support go? Did they suggest to Bush that
he not find Osama? When the Military had Osama
bottled up in the Tora Bora Mountains and
Osama’s capture seemed highly possible Bush
had the Military CUT AND RUN to Iraq where
his goal was to get REVENGE on Saddam. WHY?

Report this

By RS Janes, December 18, 2006 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“I know it’s not politically correct, but I must point out that in some cases “dictators” have been necessary.  Marshell Tito held his fifedon together fairly well. Upon his death, the area exploded into a sea of murderous rage as it was before Tito (See “Events leading to WWI”)”

Sorry, Skruff, I think this kind of politically expedient thinking is what has gotten us into trouble in the past. A free and constitutional nation has no business advocating anything less for any other country. Aside from the thundering hypocrisy of supporting tyrants, it’s also not in our best interests pragmatically, as history has proven repeatedly with Iraq, Iran, Vietnam, Cuba, and countries in Central and South America.

You reap what you sow, and blowback—AKA ‘unintended consequences’—is a mutha.

Report this

By Skruff, December 17, 2006 at 10:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Comment #42506 by RS Janes on 12/16 at 5:09 pm says:

“You’d think these dictators would learn to not trust us, but no one said you had to be smart to be a dictator”

I know it’s not politically correct, but I must point out that in some cases “dictators” have been necessary.  Marshell Tito held his fifedon together fairly well. Upon his death, the area exploded into a sea of murderous rage as it was before Tito (See “Events leading to WWI”)

Report this

By RS Janes, December 16, 2006 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff, you wrote:

“Unless Syria wants to be the next Iraq, they will not “get caught” funneling money to overthrow anything… AND dispite western media attempting to depict Syria’s ruler as “weak and incompetant” he is a highly intelligent person. schooled at his father’s court about the fragility of power.”

No, of course they won’t get caught. Syria will deny supplying arms to the Sunnis in Iraq, just as Saudi Arabia denies helping Hamas and Hezbollah. President ‘Daddy’s Boy’ in Syria is diametrically opposed to the enfant terrible we have running our country—he has brains and can speak his native language fluently.

“Second point We did not take in the Shah of Iran.  Jimmy the xtian blocked his enterence when he attempted to get treatment for his cancer in New York.  He entered, and shortly left on visa as a “personal guest” of David Rockefeller.”

You’re right; I stand corrected. Publicly, Carter was against allowing the Shah in the country, but relented later, allowing the cancer-ridden Reza Pahlavi to enter as a ‘guest’ for medical treatment. As I recall, Pahlavi then went to Mexico.

“we treat our enemies and fr5iends the same way when they eventually lose power… Hell, Noriega, and Saddam were our “friends’”

You’d think these dictators would learn to not trust us, but no one said you had to be smart to be a dictator. I’ll refrain from mentioning the obvious current example that instantly came to mind.

Report this

By Skruff, December 15, 2006 at 8:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Comment #42211 by RS Janes on 12/14 at 2:58 pm says:

“Syria will begin funneling money to Saudi insurgents to overthrow the wobbly House of Fahd, meaning we’ll be stuck, ala the Shah of Iran, providing exile to the whole spoiled-rotten Saudi royal family.”

Two points here;

Unless Syria wants to be the next Iraq, they will not “get caught” funneling money to overthrow anything… AND dispite western media attempting to depict Syria’s ruler as “weak and incompetant” he is a highly intelligent person. schooled at his father’s court about the fragility of power.

Second point We did not take in the Shah of Iran.  Jimmy the xtian blocked his enterence when he attempted to get treatment for his cancer in New York.  He entered, and shortly left on visa as a “personal guest” of David Rockefeller.

we treat our enemies and fr5iends the same way when they eventually lose power… Hell, Noriega, and Saddam were our “friends”

Report this

By RS Janes, December 14, 2006 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The twist here is that about the only thing the Sunni and Shia wholeheartedly agree on is the US military vacating Iraq as quickly as possible.

Meanwhile, we are helpfully training them in our strategies and tactics, teaching them how to defeat our forces, as well as providing them with some of their arms.

Of course, Saudi royal money is behind the Iraqi Sunnis, as it has been behind every terrorist group in Asia Minor as the Saudis play both ends against the Middle East. Divide and conquer.

In another ironic twist, once we’ve left Iraq, I think Syria will begin funneling money to Saudi insurgents to overthrow the wobbly House of Fahd, meaning we’ll be stuck, ala the Shah of Iran, providing exile to the whole spoiled-rotten Saudi royal family.

Report this

By Skruff, December 12, 2006 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hum… Saudi’s are funding folks who share their idology, how odd.

Wonder how much private U.S. money went to funding insurgents OOPS sorry, I mean freedom fighters in Nicarauga? How much to Northern Ireland? Did we fund Hungarians attempting to divorce themselves from the former Soviet Union? What about the overthrow of Salvatore Allende? did we fund the opposition there?  Err was that private or public funding… I forget. Panama? Columbia? Venezuela? El Salvator? Lybia? Sudan?

Come to think of it, didn’t we fund Saddam when he was our “friend (old enemy of my enemy thing….sort of like Pakistan now) and the Shah of Iran didn’t we fund him??? give him the third biggest airforce in the world? I sisnerely doubt any Us citizens are funding anti Castro movements.

Hell are not private citizens (like Pat Robertson) calling for the assassination of soverign heads of state? 

Of course Saudi citizens are funding Iraqi Insurgents… Just like I send my money to the “freedon fighters” who share my beliefs.

Report this

By ak, December 9, 2006 at 9:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Anyone who thinks the Saudi’s have not been funding the Iraqi insurgency from the start is very out of touch with middle east geography and politics.  Saudi Arabia is rich Sunni nation and has a great stake in keeping Iraq as a rich Sunni-controlled neighbor.  One has to assume that money for the Iraqi “insurgency” has been flowing from Saudi Arabia from the start, even if, in other “debates”, the Saudi’s are our “good allies in the middle east”.  The greater irony is that the US citizenry is the ultimate source of the funds, every we time we fill our tanks.

Report this

By mite, December 9, 2006 at 11:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Greetings `Rhonda’ #41330 hope family and friends are well. I will not address your request with my individual theory but will provide some research material for you to perceive maybe some facts.

Lets start with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act and IRS as their birthday’s will celebrate 93 years of treason, anti-trust actions and direct violations of our U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Article 1, Sec.8
U.S. Constitution and Amendment’s 1 & 9 Bill of Rights.

http://www.educate-yourself.org ” The Truth About The Federal Reserve Bank ” is a pretty good break down of the Lie’s, look under Title Federal Reserve.

http://www.givemeliberty.org and http://www.originalintent.org


Now let me suggest a chapter from the book by Milton William Cooper `Behold A Pale Horse’-
Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars <www.lawfulpath.com> this web site will direct you to his chapter all about the declared war against the citizens of these United States.
There is a Manual (diagram) to totally destroy our way of life not only in our country but world wide (NWO) it is: An Introduction Programming Manual under the heading- Operations Research Technical Manual TW-SW7905.1

I will leave you now with one other bit of information for your research under the Freedom of Press Amendment , which no longer present in this republic. Check out on the web- library “The Mockingbird Operation”  how our press/media is controlled by the vast intelligence network.

And reference to the middle east which all of the previous is directly connected try to find the books `Spiders Web’ by Alan Friedman 1993,
Confessions of An Economic Hitman by John Perkins

Good Luck: Mite

for people with open minds- http://www.articbeacon.com

Report this

By Rickinsf, December 8, 2006 at 7:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For real?

All this time I thought that WE were funding the Sunni “insurgency.”

Well, I’m glad this is cleared up.

Report this

By DennisD, December 8, 2006 at 4:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Unfortunately this is ancient history and not likely to be a big topic around the next BAR-BE-QUE at the Crawford ranch for George’s buddies in the Saudi royal family. The Saudis have only been our “friends” as a matter of business convenience since oil was discovered on their otherwise useless piece of desert.
I’m much more interested in another piece of ancient history - the meeting Cheney had with Big Oil etc. shortly after Bush & Co. first took office in 01. Although many have asked for the minutes to that meeting, none have ever been produced.
SUBPOENA power should be exercised immediately by the Democrat controlled Congress. I would bet that what was discussed was the blueprint for the war and everything that has followed except for the delusional happy ending. Then again for the business community reaping the profits, it’s always a happy ending no matter who wins. Surely no state secrets were involved were they? Then why the stonewall?

Report this

By NotAmericanGuy, December 8, 2006 at 4:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’ve read some pretty insightfull comments on this article, but one thing you’re not taking into account is that if Saudi millionares are funding the insurgents, it doesn’t mean that Saudi Arabia is funding them. SA is a pretty democratic country (at least for the millionares smile), so the governament doesn’t necessarily have a hand in this. But truth is, that these millionares get their money from oil sold in the US, so your very patriotic government is very visibly selling national interests for good money.

Report this

By HeadlessHessian, December 8, 2006 at 9:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

OH!  There is a big Surrrrprise!  Why that is an incredible surprise!  Quick call 911, I think I’m having a heart attack from that surprise!
Every penny that we spend on gas for our big SUVs is going to Arab countries…which of course do not support any kind of underminding our interests…heavens no..these guys are all angels!  Yessiree Bob…our arab allies.  Can’t live with or without them.
Bush and his (oil leaning) energy policies.  Americans and their love for SUVs.  Gag!

Report this

By GW=MCHammered, December 8, 2006 at 8:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Is this really such a surprise? By now, I would hope not. (following full quotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks)

“Fifteen of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon.”

Osama bin Laden is Saudi. The Bush family has business ties to powerful Saudi. The US indulgence/addiction to Middle East oil keeps them all awash in US Dollars. Want a strong America? End the addiction. Time to end to the war slogan too, ‘The terrorists hate freedom.’

“The overarching motivation for the present al-Qaeda campaign was set out in a 1998 fatwa issued by Osama bin Laden… ...The fatwa lists three ‘crimes and sins’ committed by the Americans:
U.S. support of Israel.
U.S. military occupation of the Arabian Peninsula.
U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people.

The fatwa states that the United States:
Plunders the resources of the Arabian Peninsula.
Dictates policy to the rulers of those countries.
Supports abusive regimes and monarchies in the Middle East, thereby oppressing their people.
Has military bases and installations upon the Arabian Peninsula, which violates the Muslim holy land, in order to threaten neighboring Muslim countries.
Intends thereby to create disunion between Muslim states, thus weakening them as a political force.
Supports Israel, and wishes to divert international attention from (and tacitly maintain) the occupation of Palestine.”

——————————————————

Sometimes, it helps to look back… from August 1986 Penthouse:

SYRIA MUST BE OUR NEXT TARGET: The author asks, “Why does the Reagan administration persist in focusing attention on Libya while completely ignoring Syria’s involvement in terrorism?” Because the State Department firmly believes one must get along with Syria… period. This tale lays out the Reagan administration’s mistake of ignoring Syria’s support of terrorists and their responsibility in the deaths of many more Americans than Libya’s Muammar al-Qaddafi. The Syrians allowed ‘radical Shiites’ past checkpoints then (allegedly) provided explosives that killed 241 US Marines.

Doesn’t this just ring of the Bush Squad striking Iraq instead of centering on Saudi Arabia where most the 9/11 terrorists originated? Or winning like-a-shot in Afghanistan where al-Qaeda resides?

In this light, Iraq radiates as a US-sponsored/Armageddon, Saudi/Sunni and Iran-Syria/Shia Oil-War.

Who has the courage to end the battleground bohemianism? Where have all the leaders gone?

Report this

By john wurl, December 8, 2006 at 8:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Let a war break out worldwide against Christianity, and see where the money pours from. The surprise is peoples responses to the fact that people of all religions stick together! The fight is against a people united to protect there way of life. America is fighting a war against terrorism. The Muslim’s Obviously see it as a direct attack to there way of life. The only course of action is to be the monkey on their back until they run out of money. People are dying,Americans are dying. Our leadership needs to reach out to Muslim`s worldwide. Not with war,Just to ask them to give up the few of them that seriously mean to cause our people harm.

Report this

By Broiler, December 8, 2006 at 8:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Saudis? You’re kidding me right?
You can’t mean Saudis like those
on the 9/11 terrorist list?

You know Dasher and Dancer and Prancer and Vixen.
But what about Saudis like Mohand al-Shehri, Hamza al-Ghamdi,
Ahmed al-Ghamdi, Waleed al-Shehri, Wail al-Shehri, Abdulaziz al-Omari,
Satam al-Suqami, Ahmed al-Haznawi, Ahmed al-Nami,
Saeed al-Ghamdi, Hani Hanjour, Khalid al-Mihdhar,
Majed Moqed, Nawaf al-Hazmi,  and Salem al-Hazmi?

If all these Saudis were to blame (so we’re told),
why the f*** are we in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Yeah, we all know why. Right in front of our noses folks.
If the administration is going to f*** us, at
least be consistent with the lies. The corruption
is bad enough, the incompetence is aggravating.

Report this

By Rhonda, December 8, 2006 at 7:09 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Could someone please explain why American occupation and destruction of towns for the sake of imposing American democracy is okay, but regional countries’ attempts at influence are considered evil meddling that cannot go unpunished?  In 2000 Bush promised “no nation-building.”  Now he’s tossing America into perpetual debt and destruction of the dollar to keep Middle Easterners from having the theocracy of their choice on this real estate that invading Westerners have been arbitratily dividing and recombining for decades.

We need to talk with regional governments and start being a friend to Muslims, instead of merely being a slave to the Israel lobby and big oil.

Report this

By ChicagoGuy, December 8, 2006 at 6:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wouldn’t you have liked to be the fly on the wall during the Cheney meeting with the Saudi Royals? It would not surprise me in the slightest to find out that Cheney is endorsing the Saudi’s quest to arm the Iraqi Sunni’s and helping them, the Sunni’s, to be in position to retake Iraq once the US begins to pull out the military. Why aren’t we, the American public, allowed to know what was said in our names at the Cheney/Saudi Royals meeting? It just seems like more of the same secretive backroom politics as usual which usually ends up as a diaster. Silly me to keep thinking we live in an open democratic society.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook