Saudi Prince promises 32 BILLION for the Islamization of America!

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: nwtrucker

LMAO. Trump wins again.

Did you fail at math? Trump bought it for 400 million then sold it for 325 million. Losing 75 million is far from a win.

I wasn't referring to the money......

a reply to: Xcathdra

Just as many as there are churches being built in Mecca.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Right off the top, I qualify this as potential hype. I pose this thread under the assumption it is not hype and at the least a potential in the future or indicative of over-all Islamic intention.

www.nowtheendbegins.com...

Again, assuming it's accurate or potentially so, I pose these concepts to you.

Trump is spot on?

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?

One could never really separate religion from culture no matter the attempts by the secular humanists?

Time to address Saudi Arabia? (With a new president...

) Be that addressing economic/military. Also despite the inevitable protestations of the oil addicted EU?

Thoughts?

Heck, if we can spend $500,000,000 for 5 Syrian rebel fighters, that Saudi prince is going to have to spend some more money !!

a reply to: earthling42

My point is the Vatican is its own country, like Saudi Arabia, with its own diplomatic relations via papal nuncios (Ambassadors). Expecting churches to be built in a country whose state religion is Islam is like expecting mosques to be built in the Vatican whose state religion is Catholicism.

The US has freedom of religion built into our constitution and expecting other countries to behave as if that same constitution applies to them is wrong.

Secondly I question the intent of the article considering the sources are questionable and the wikileaks article used doesnt say anything about the US.

originally posted by: NowWhat
I think we should send him the invoice.
We can all say we're muslim now.
If we split the cash evenly between all Americans, we each get a check for $106.62.

I say we do it and cash in!

Problem is after the government hit you up for taxes we may get enough for McDonalds.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: nwtrucker

LMAO. Trump wins again.

Did you fail at math? Trump bought it for 400 million then sold it for 325 million. Losing 75 million is far from a win.

I wasn't referring to the money......

You mean the ignorant comment about buying politicians with daddy's money? Seeing how he inherited hundreds of millions from his daddy does he have any room to talk?

a reply to: nwtrucker

originally posted by: nwtrucker
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....

If the EU was all that saved the Saudis from being liberated by the US... then why is it that when German politicians call out SA, the next thing that happens is Berlin getting a call from your guys?

I (as many over here) have to agree with you though. About time to address Saudi Arabia.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: SPECULUM

There a lot of mosques being built in the Vatican is there?

Is there? Who cares?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Invading Saudi Arabia... LOL.

You do know they are not like Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Pakistan/Yemen/Syria... not even Iran?
Invading SA would be a serious war. And SA holds Mekka by the way.
Piss on that and you might actually get your cultural/religious war.

Also, for your Nation it's not really about the oil - ever since 1973 it's about the currency OPEC sells their oil in.
So, if you want to cleanse your foreign politics of SA's influence, you have to change your monetary system first.

Good luck with that.

originally posted by: ColCurious
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Invading Saudi Arabia... LOL.

You do know they are not like Iraq/Afghanistan/Lybia/Pakistan/Yemen/Syria... not even Iran?
Invading SA would be a serious war. And SA holds Mekka by the way.
Piss on that and you might actually get your cultural/religious war.

Also, for your Nation it's not really about the oil - ever since 1973 it's about the currency OPEC sells their oil in.
So, if you want to cleanse your foreign politics of SA's influence, you have to change your monetary system first.

Good luck with that.

Carpet Bombing Mecca will be the best thing for the world. Should have happened during ww2 and every time they attempt to rebuild it

a reply to: SPECULUM

originally posted by: SPECULUM
Carpet Bombing Mecca will be the best thing for the world. Should have happened during ww2 and every time they attempt to rebuild it

Usually I wouldn't disagree.
If it was for me, all those pompous religious sanctuaries would have been razed to the ground long ago.
Religious tensions and stupidity reached a new alltime high though... pouring oil on all the zealots' holy fires right now might be even more stupid.

originally posted by: ColCurious
a reply to: nwtrucker

originally posted by: nwtrucker
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....

If the EU was all that saved the Saudis from being liberated by the US... then why is it that when German politicians call out SA, the next thing that happens is Berlin getting a call from your guys?

I (as many over here) have to agree with you though. About time to address Saudi Arabia.

It's been a while since 9/11 to Germany finally calling out SA, as you say. It's just a guess on my part, admittedly. Part of the answer?

Any stop in oil to the EU likely would have caused a world-wide economic disaster as well.

It IS interesting that oil production is almost a 'no-no' on any targeting list by the 'coalition'. All I know is the U.S. really isn't tied to ME oil any more. The EU still is. It HAS to be a factor in all this. Your guess is as good as mine....

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: nwtrucker

Meh... I'd bet you don't know the whole story ....

After Donald duck remarks about Banning Muslims entering the country, The Saudi prince tweeted this:

twitter.com...

Then the backlash:

twitter.com...

Really Mr Trump? Didn't he (the prince) bailed you out by purchasing your New York City's Plaza Hotel valued $325 million & more? You should've thanked him for saving your bankruptcy as*s!

Alwaleed and the Trump "bailout": Alwaleed, a Riyadh-based investor whose net worth Forbes estimates at $24.8 billion, is no stranger to Trump. As the International Business Times pointed out this week, investors tied to a firm controlled by Alwaleed purchased New York City's Plaza Hotel from Trump in 1995, in what the website called "a bailout valued at $325 million."

The New York Times noted at the time of the sale that Trump had bought the posh hotel for $400 million in 1988. Trump remained a minority partner in the hotel after the sale, the paper reported, but assumed "a substantially reduced role" in its operations.

"Mr. Trump bought the Plaza during the real estate boom of the 1980s, using borrowed money," the paper reported. "Additional debt was piled on the property over the next couple of years as he leveraged the landmark to buy the Eastern Airlines shuttle and to help pay the construction cost of his Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City."

Trump sold the hotel to CDL Hotels International Ltd., which partnered with Alwaleed's investment firm, according to the Times report.

The Plaza isn't the only old Trump property Alwaleed has purchased: As BuzzFeed notes, a debt-ridden Trump sold his yacht, "The Trump Princess," to creditors in 1991; Alwaleed then bought the boat.

mic.com...

So, prince was using daddies money huh? What a F****** hypocrite!

Hmmm, he's gonna come back with 'I don't allow personal relationships interfere with policy decisions. Then, I was a CEO and operated for the best of the company. Now, as a candidate for president, I cannot allow past relationships alter what's best for the nation over-all".

He'll be right and unlike the other candidates of both parties, will gain even more traction.....

a reply to: nwtrucker

originally posted by: nwtrucker
All I know is the U.S. really isn't tied to ME oil any more.

Not true.
Every nation that wants to buy oil from OPEC, HAS to buy USD first, ever since Nixon made his deal with King Saud in 1973, hence the term "Petro-Dollar".

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Any stop in oil to the EU likely would have caused a world-wide economic disaster as well.

True.
About time to change that. I' not a hippy, I'm just being pragmatic.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
It HAS to be a factor in all this. Your guess is as good as mine....

It is.
There is not a single nation in our "coalition" that is free from the influence of Big Oil/MIC/BIS.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: earthling42

My point is the Vatican is its own country, like Saudi Arabia, with its own diplomatic relations via papal nuncios (Ambassadors). Expecting churches to be built in a country whose state religion is Islam is like expecting mosques to be built in the Vatican whose state religion is Catholicism.

The US has freedom of religion built into our constitution and expecting other countries to behave as if that same constitution applies to them is wrong.

Secondly I question the intent of the article considering the sources are questionable and the wikileaks article used doesnt say anything about the US.

Saudi Arabia is a major, if not the major, source of radical Islam. Yes? No? Or are you going to obfuscate that one as well?

As I said in the OP, not sure if hype or not. Yet, that intention is visible.

I couldn't care any less about the Vatican than I do for Saudi Arabia. I care very much about the U.S..

The Constitution applies to the U.S. and it's citizens. It does not apply to other countries whatsoever. Therefore we can-and do- treat them as we see fit.

If you feel our culture and traditions aren't worth defending and protecting, sobeit. Just stand aside, other will....

a reply to: nwtrucker

You are exactly what's wrong with ATS these days.

originally posted by: Willtell
The Saudi version of Islam Wahhabi/Salafi will never take hold in America…Thank God

Agreed. Imagine the Japanese and Germans, allied during the second world war, merging their religions.

There are no allies in the board game of Risk, just 'Frenemies'.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The Constitution applies to the U.S. and it's citizens. It does not apply to other countries whatsoever. Therefore we can-and do- treat them as we see fit.

All are created equal, that applies to individuals as well as states, including foreign states.

If anything the Framers reject meddling or influencing other nations internal affairs, preferring to isolate interaction to free trade and good relations over getting entangled with their problems.

Thats why people left Europe and came here in the first place and defended the colonies form the English Crown, the French and the Spanish. All they did was war with each other and the world, causing misery, death and destruction the world over.

The very things they warned against are what the US government is doing today.

Thats the problem with the world,

Deutschland Ubbe Alles! (Germany For All, Nazi propaganda slogan)

a reply to: infolurker
yes they want to build call these mosques and have all these call to prayer speakers to remind everyone suckit bitches we here now and there is nothing you can do about it its the same as planting your country flag on a territory you annex. and as france recently found out mosques are great places to have clandestine meetings and to hide arsenals of illegal weapons why because in most countries gov officials would never think to search them because they are religious buildings

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker

The Constitution applies to the U.S. and it's citizens. It does not apply to other countries whatsoever. Therefore we can-and do- treat them as we see fit.

All are created equal, that applies to individuals as well as states, including foreign states.

If anything the Framers reject meddling or influencing other nations internal affairs, preferring to isolate interaction to free trade and good relations over getting entangled with their problems.

Thats why people left Europe and came here in the first place and defended the colonies form the English Crown, the French and the Spanish. All they did was war with each other and the world, causing misery, death and destruction the world over.

The very things they warned against are what the US government is doing today.

Thats the problem with the world,

Deutschland Ubbe Alles! (Germany For All, Nazi propaganda slogan)

Sorry, as a theoretical, equality is fine. In reality there is no such thing as equal outside arithmetical concepts.

Nowhere in the Constitution does even the concept of 'equality' amongst nations exist. In fact, it specifically provides for a Federal gov't to wage war. A war Department. Not an equality concept is it?

The first foreign war the U.S. was involved with was against Muslim pirates. A money issue, not a religious issue...

If the Constitution 'applied' to 'all' ,America and other nations, Americans and all citizens everywhere, we would already be at war. Against the Saudis, Iran, pretty much all the Muslim nations. After all. executing people for Apostasy, beheading those of different faiths, the oppression of women....all would be 'violations' of the Constitution and, therefore actionable.

One cannot, with ANY logic cite the Constitution regarding religious acts outside the nation without also citing it for other violations as well. It flat out doesn't work.

Implying anyone who sees the U.S. culture and traditions as worth of defending as NAZIs well... it's probably best we aren't face to face.

That positioning is an insult, disingenuous, and completely wrong. In fact, there is more similarity in the Extremist Muslim camp to Nazis than anywhere else. Slavery abounds, the eradication of any 'pagan' who doesn't convert, executions, forced prostitution...these and others is what Isis offers. To a lesser degree, Islamic nations as well.

You want to protect that via the Constitution? Not wage war against it? Call us Nazis?