HAVE THE SAUDIS HAD IT WITH BUSH? OR IS IT ALL A LOT OF HOT AIR BETWEEN CROOKS?

The Bush family and the families of their retainers are close business partners with the al-Saud family and the families of the elites that rule Saudi Arabia. It virtually impossible for an outside to penetrate the meaning of the public fandango between these two groups, united in their arrogance, perfidy and their contemptuous and reactionary outlook on everything and everyone outside of their narrowest of worlds. Together they are the 21st Century version of the French aristocracy circa 1785.

In response to some rumblings from Riyadh-- including a peremptorily canceled dinner party the Bushes wanted to throw for King Abdullah-- today's Washington Post has taken a stab at deciphering the state of affairs between the two tribes-- and therefore, bizarrely, our two nations. The poor reporter, Faiza Saleh Ambah, was given just one column. How to explain Saudi Arabia to American readers in one column...

First of all, this is playing out in the context of the Arab League Summit in Riyadh, which the Post curiously forgot to mention. The kings and emirs and military dictators of the 21 Arab states meeting there offered an act-now-or-forever-face-the-consequences deal to Israel: trade the Palestinian land seized in 1967 in return for diplomatic recognition and "permanent peace." The Israeli's, diplomatically, said they weren't interested in an ultimatum but would like to sit and talk about it. That isn't what Abdullah told Bush he wanted the Israelis to reply.

Both the NY Times piece about the summit and the Post piece about the intricacies of the hideous Bush/al-Saud relationship are at the links. Read them but don't expect enlightenment. If you want that, let me suggest starting with Michael Scheuer's book Imperial Hubris: Why The West Is Losing The War on Terror which is, basically, about America's response to the Muslim world. Scheuer worked for the CIA for 22 years. In the preface Scheuer says his book is "overwhelmingly focused on how the last several American presidents have been very ill-served by the senior leaders of the Intelligence Community. Indeed, I resigned from an Agency I love in order to publicly damn the feckless 9/11 Commission, which failed to find any personal failure or negligence among Intelligence Community leaders even though dozens of serving officers provided the commissioners with clear documentary evidence of that failure." His book is also pretty damning of our political elite and our general officer class. It is, more than anything else a massive damning of the handling of U.S. Middle East policies by an utterly clueless and contemptible Bush Regime which, he feels, has put our country in the gravest of dangers. An old Slate from Bastille Day, 2004 has an excellent synopsis if you don't have the time to read the whole book.


So what was Abdullah's outburst all about? Who knows? It's too uncomfortable to appear as close to the Bushes as his family is? Surely. He realizes how lame and what complete losers the Bushes are and wants to distance himself from them now to get ready for what most people see as the inevitability of Hillary-- or whatever comes after this disastrous and incompetent crew? Likely. He wants to act the big shot in front of his primitive buddies and his big shindig? For sure. He's fed up with Bush's dawdling and bungling in Iraq and Israel/Palestine? No doubt. He's trying to figure out a way for his avaricious family business-- the governing of Saudi Arabia-- will not meet the fate that the Bourbons? Probably.