Saudi Prince promises 32 BILLION for the Islamization of America!

a reply to: infolurker but refuse to take a single refugee. You've gotta love those Saudis. The biggest propagators of extremist Islam in the world and the USA and UKs closest ally in the Middle East.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: infolurker but refuse to take a single refugee. You've gotta love those Saudis. The biggest propagators of extremist Islam in the world and the USA and UKs closest ally in the Middle East.

Yes,

And it is time people pull their heads out of their asses and recognize this as an ideological war to assimilate other nations to the slavery of Islam.

If this were communism, we would have this contained as we did in the cold war.

What I don't understand is that the leftest actually are defending and encouraging this... It is mind boggling.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: buster2010

Something similar from earlier this year:

Refugee Crisis: Richard Dawkins Slams Saudi Arabia's Offer To Build 200 Mosques In Germany

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...



Qatar and Saudi Arabia gave money to build the tallest mosque in Europe


Thanks for the links and data. Seems to confirm the general Islamic intention is to take the planet. (I'm not talking terrorists here just the general mentality.


Draw you own conclusions, people.....
www.liveleak.com...
Qatar and Saudi Arabia gave so far more than 630.000 € to build Gate of Pešter, that will be one of the tallest mosque in Europe.

As stated, the mosque will have two minarets 99 meters high by four less than 45 meters, and 15 domes, one of which will have a maximum diameter of 12 meters.

Europe: Mosque Building Shifts into High Gear: "In Spain there are signs that Islam will dominate once again." — Hizrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, Spiritual Leader, Ahmadiyya Community, Spain
www.gatestoneinstitute.org...

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

A religious war, read that cultural as much as religious, is occurring and completely valid to be treated as such by our political leaders on both sides of the aisle?

There is no Holy war, religion is a ruse used to cover for the real wars of conquest. Same in Israel, same in the ME, the diversions are religion and culture, because that hits home with people.

Really, its about the freegin oil, other resources and domination by greedy control freaks.

How do we think the Kingdom of Saud waxed so rich?

No argument from me on that score. Where it gets my Battle hymn of the Republic playing is the cultural aspect. My freedom of choice, etc..

Worth fighting for. Whatever the label. Holy War. Religious war. Greed war....whatever.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: nwtrucker

Is the article is true, they Prince should be more concerned with ISIS trying to take the monarchy in Saudi Arabia that is a fact that they are trying to do that in order to take control of Saudi Arabia resources than he trying to pay for the conversion of America, he needs to buy all the security he can with that money.

Yes.

A thought that occurred on this is the Prince may actually making this statement as a form of appeasement to the Isis types. Perhaps even the radicals in his own family....

Covering his ass, so to speak.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: nwtrucker

Good luck that Saudi Prince because he has to deal with the Christian Zealots here

a reply to: BASSPLYR

So saying we should replace the Saudi Royals for a Dictatorship a la Saddam Hussein and Latin American Dictators?

You'd prefer, perhaps, no Christian 'zealots', dropping your pants and bending over instead for these guys?

I will take my zealots over those zealots, thank you very much....

You support those nutcases so of course you would take them. America would be better off with zero religious zealots and their followers.

Perhaps your are correct on that score. The evidence suggests that isn't going to happen. The likelihood being the fence sitters, peace at any cost crowd, etc. are going to be forced to pick a side and support them...lesser of two evils mentality.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: nwtrucker

Is the article is true, they Prince should be more concerned with ISIS trying to take the monarchy in Saudi Arabia that is a fact that they are trying to do that in order to take control of Saudi Arabia resources than he trying to pay for the conversion of America, he needs to buy all the security he can with that money.

Yes.

A thought that occurred on this is the Prince may actually making this statement as a form of appeasement to the Isis types. Perhaps even the radicals in his own family....

Covering his ass, so to speak.

No, it is real. They have spent more than 10 times what the soviets did spreading communism. Estimated 100 Billion Dollars.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.

This appears to be a monumental campaign to bulldoze the more moderate strains of Islam, and replace them with the theo-fascist Saudi variety. Despite being well aware of the issue, Western powers continue to coddle the Saudis or, at most, protest meekly from time to time.

For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." She continues: "More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups." And it's not just the Saudis: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are also implicated in the memo. Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad.


The money goes to constructing and operating mosques and madrassas that preach radical Wahhabism. The money also goes to training imams; media outreach and publishing; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks, and endowments to universities and cultural centers.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: infolurker but refuse to take a single refugee. You've gotta love those Saudis. The biggest propagators of extremist Islam in the world and the USA and UKs closest ally in the Middle East.

Perhaps the U.K.'s biggest ally in the ME. For the U.S.? I think not. Long memories here. 9/11 being first and foremost. We don't need ME oil. Simple.

Israel is the U.S.'s biggest ME ally.

I really believe the U.S.'s inaction on the Saudis is a appeasement of the U.K./EU. I have no evidence to back that suspicion up other than it's the only thing that makes sense....

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: nwtrucker

Is the article is true, they Prince should be more concerned with ISIS trying to take the monarchy in Saudi Arabia that is a fact that they are trying to do that in order to take control of Saudi Arabia resources than he trying to pay for the conversion of America, he needs to buy all the security he can with that money.

Yes.

A thought that occurred on this is the Prince may actually making this statement as a form of appeasement to the Isis types. Perhaps even the radicals in his own family....

Covering his ass, so to speak.

No, it is real. They have spent more than 10 times what the soviets did spreading communism. Estimated 100 Billion Dollars.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.

This appears to be a monumental campaign to bulldoze the more moderate strains of Islam, and replace them with the theo-fascist Saudi variety. Despite being well aware of the issue, Western powers continue to coddle the Saudis or, at most, protest meekly from time to time.

For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." She continues: "More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups." And it's not just the Saudis: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are also implicated in the memo. Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad.


The money goes to constructing and operating mosques and madrassas that preach radical Wahhabism. The money also goes to training imams; media outreach and publishing; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks, and endowments to universities and cultural centers.

I may be wrong on this, but I've held the view that those 3000 plus members of the House of Saud could be broken into three camps. Those that love the lifestyle...cough.cough, and the Western culture. Those that are hard-core Islamists and those that lick their fingers and stick them in the air to see which way the 'wind' is blowing.

In general, I completely agree. On an individual basis, to wit this particular Prince. He may be just covering his personal rear-end.

Still, that's mere semantics. The whole batch needs to go down....collateral damage is inevitable.

a reply to: infolurker

No "leftist" in their right mind defends what Saudi does. What they will do is say Saudi and their ways of running a country don't represent all the people that follow the faith Saudi uses to justify what they do.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: nwtrucker

Good luck that Saudi Prince because he has to deal with the Christian Zealots here

a reply to: BASSPLYR

So saying we should replace the Saudi Royals for a Dictatorship a la Saddam Hussein and Latin American Dictators?

You'd prefer, perhaps, no Christian 'zealots', dropping your pants and bending over instead for these guys?

I will take my zealots over those zealots, thank you very much....

You support those nutcases so of course you would take them. America would be better off with zero religious zealots and their followers.

Perhaps your are correct on that score. The evidence suggests that isn't going to happen. The likelihood being the fence sitters, peace at any cost crowd, etc. are going to be forced to pick a side and support them...lesser of two evils mentality.

And why isn't it going to happen? Because we have something called the Constitution that stops it from happening. It's too bad the Islamophobes like Geller and Spencer and their followers who keep crying Sharia is coming to America doesn't seem to understand the Constitution.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: infolurker

No "leftist" in their right mind defends what Saudi does. What they will do is say Saudi and their ways of running a country don't represent all the people that follow the faith Saudi uses to justify what they do.

But yet daily I see the left pressing for more Islam in Europe while screaming about Christianity. It makes absolutely no sense to me.

Everything the left doesn't like about Christians is intensified x10 with Islam. Women's rights, gay rights, freedom of religion, etc.

Why would they support an ideology that is even more hideous (to them) than Christianity? Seriously?

a reply to: nwtrucker

Perhaps the U.K.'s biggest ally in the ME. For the U.S.? I think not. Long memories here. 9/11 being first and foremost. We don't need ME oil. Simple.

Bush and company swept the Saudis involvement in 9/11 under the rug just like they did Israels involvement in 9/11.

Israel is the U.S.'s biggest ME ally.

Keep telling yourself that maybe one day it will come true. Israel isn't our biggest ME ally they are our biggest ME welfare dependent.

I really believe the U.S.'s inaction on the Saudis is a appeasement of the U.K./EU. I have no evidence to back that suspicion up other than it's the only thing that makes sense....

Actually it's due to treaties we have signed with SA.

a reply to: intrptr

Well if that's the case I think it's about time the saudis "get their freedom"...lol

a reply to: infolurker

That isn't the same thing as supporting Saudi...
They are not pressing for more, just for their right to exist like christianity and as far as the human rights stuff goes, it depends on the country you look at. There are Islamic counties with women heads of state. You should probably not think that only iran and Saudi represent all of Islam. You seem to be lumping lots of people into a group based on little information.
We still have christians in our own nation that thing the gays should all be killed and the wife still needs to the faithful servent to her husband and nothing else and base it off a book.

I say we pony up 32 billion for Christianification of Saudi Arabia.

The world would be a much better and peaceful place.

a reply to: Raggedyman



Kuwaiti official explains why Gulf States cannot accept refugees

In the end, it is not right for us to accept a people that are different from us. We don’t want people that suffer from internal stress and trauma in our country.

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: Raggedyman



Kuwaiti official explains why Gulf States cannot accept refugees

In the end, it is not right for us to accept a people that are different from us. We don’t want people that suffer from internal stress and trauma in our country.

LOL, that is good, I like their other reason in the article:

The Gulf States present another more realistic reason for their reluctance to accept the so called refugees, and that is that they cannot accept the risk of terrorism that such an influx brings.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: nwtrucker

Perhaps the U.K.'s biggest ally in the ME. For the U.S.? I think not. Long memories here. 9/11 being first and foremost. We don't need ME oil. Simple.

Bush and company swept the Saudis involvement in 9/11 under the rug just like they did Israels involvement in 9/11.

Israel is the U.S.'s biggest ME ally.

Keep telling yourself that maybe one day it will come true. Israel isn't our biggest ME ally they are our biggest ME welfare dependent.

I really believe the U.S.'s inaction on the Saudis is a appeasement of the U.K./EU. I have no evidence to back that suspicion up other than it's the only thing that makes sense....

Actually it's due to treaties we have signed with SA.

Sorry, Buster, but your not twisting yet another thread off topic. We know where your loyalties lay. EAST.

Get on topic or butt out....please.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: nwtrucker

Good luck that Saudi Prince because he has to deal with the Christian Zealots here

a reply to: BASSPLYR


Now he plays the "constitution' gambit? it won't take much longer for the obvious to be formalized, IMO. By the next president.
So saying we should replace the Saudi Royals for a Dictatorship a la Saddam Hussein and Latin American Dictators?

You'd prefer, perhaps, no Christian 'zealots', dropping your pants and bending over instead for these guys?

I will take my zealots over those zealots, thank you very much....

You support those nutcases so of course you would take them. America would be better off with zero religious zealots and their followers.

Perhaps your are correct on that score. The evidence suggests that isn't going to happen. The likelihood being the fence sitters, peace at any cost crowd, etc. are going to be forced to pick a side and support them...lesser of two evils mentality.

And why isn't it going to happen? Because we have something called the Constitution that stops it from happening. It's too bad the Islamophobes like Geller and Spencer and their followers who keep crying Sharia is coming to America doesn't seem to understand the Constitution.