Saudi Arabia appeared to threaten Canada with a 9/11-style attack - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14938631
Wow. Saudi's being weird about this.

Saudi Arabia 'allergic to criticism', making example out of Canada, analysts say
Saudi Arabia's diplomatic retaliation against Canada is likely the result of a combination of factors, analysts say, including Riyadh's thin skin, its frustration with Ottawa, and its Crown prince's penchant for a muscle-flexing foreign policy that seeks to make one thing clear: Criticism won't be tolerated.

In fact, the latter is why one analyst who spoke with CBC News says a "grovelling" public apology from Canada is likely the only way to resolve the dispute.

The political dust-up began Friday after Canada's Foreign Affairs Department sent out a tweet saying it was "gravely concerned" about the arrest of political activists in Saudi Arabia and urging Riyadh to immediately release women's rights activist Samar Badawi and others.

Saudi Arabia responded with what foreign policy analyst Daniel Drezner of Tufts University in Massachusetts​ called "the oddest sanctions effort" he's seen in a long time. It includes:

- The expulsion of Canada's ambassador.
- A freeze on "all new trade and investment transactions" between the two countries.
- The suspension of all Saudi flights to and from Toronto.
- An order for Saudi students to leave Canadian schools.
- Plans to transfer all Saudi nationals receiving medical treatment in Canada to hospitals outside the country.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saudi- ... _Post_News
#14938636
Beren wrote:I wonder whether the Saudis would have reacted the same way if they had only been criticised, the real problem is that the Canadians asked them to immediately release civil society and women's rights activists, which is interfering rather than criticism actually.

QFT.
There is a certain arrogance present in many Western people that whatever they believe is just is also just in an absolute way for the whole world.As I mentioned earlier, the West's stand on homosexuality, abortion, monogamy and so on are not shared by a majority of other countries.
I believe this dispute sets an example for other countries not to interfere with internal matters of Saudi Arabia. Or else forget about doing business with them.
#14938643
Modern western countries do have superiority complex. It is contradictory as well, because one one hand they claim to support diversity and expression of different cultures; yet on the other they think it is okay to intervene in other peoples' affairs, attempt to change social norms of a different society and culture.

In fact they are intolerant of diffirent cultures and want to impose their own "superior" culture and way of life. Which is "multicultural".

Basically it is all bs.

When you have her as your foreign minister things are bound to get shtupid.
Image
#14938695
Rancid wrote:Cultural warfare!!!

The difference between Canada and Saudi Arabia, as well as their advocates, must be only cultural indeed, that's why there's such a misunderstanding regarding the message in the OP. Some people just don't know Saudi culture good enough to get it right. :lol:

Rancid wrote:Seriously though, why aren't we talking about how the US is to blame?

You really shouldn't be such attention whores, let Canada shine a bit too!
#14938700
Ter wrote:QFT.
There is a certain arrogance present in many Western people that whatever they believe is just is also just in an absolute way for the whole world.As I mentioned earlier, the West's stand on homosexuality, abortion, monogamy and so on are not shared by a majority of other countries.
I believe this dispute sets an example for other countries not to interfere with internal matters of Saudi Arabia. Or else forget about doing business with them.


That's how justice works. If it isn't applied universally and equally, then it isn't justice.
#14938714
@Saeko

That is how morality works, not a legal system. People have different systems of morality so it is beneficial to just let people who want to follow a legal system that accommodates their sense of morality do so. This is the basis of polycentric law. You cannot expect everyone to be fine with one particular form of justice since even people who align with a particular system of morality have different conceptions of this. It is proper to have varying legal systems which can accommodate each person's conscience.
#14938719
Rancid wrote:Anyway, I don't believe Saudi Arabia supported Al-Qaida on the 9/11 attacks.


:knife: Well the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the co-chair of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 definitely believes it. :lol:

#14938733
Albert wrote:USA and Saudi relations are one of paradox, I honestly do not understand how they are in good relations til this day.


The Saudis sponsor terror which gives the US a pretext to invade countries and topple governments. It's pretty simple.

Moussaoui Calls Saudi Princes Patrons of Al Qaeda

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/04/us/z ... qaeda.html

There has long been evidence that wealthy Saudis provided support for bin Laden, the son of a Saudi construction magnate, and Al Qaeda before the 2001 attacks. Saudi Arabia had worked closely with the United States to finance Islamic militants fighting the Soviet Army in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and Al Qaeda drew its members from those militant fighters.


Moussaoui said in the prison deposition that he was directed in 1998 or 1999 by Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan to create a digital database of donors to the group. Among those he said he recalled listing in the database were Prince Turki al-Faisal, then the Saudi intelligence chief; Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the longtime Saudi ambassador to the United States; Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, a prominent billionaire investor; and many of the country’s leading clerics.

“Sheikh Osama wanted to keep a record who give money,” he said in imperfect English — “who is to be listened to or who contributed to the jihad.”

Mr. Moussaoui said he acted as a courier for Bin Laden, carrying personal messages to prominent Saudi princes and clerics. And he described his training in Qaeda camps in Afghanistan.

[...]

Also filed on Monday in the survivors’ lawsuit were affidavits from former Senators Bob Graham of Florida and Bob Kerrey of Nebraska and the former Navy secretary John Lehman, arguing that more investigation was needed into Saudi ties to the 9/11 plot. Mr. Graham was co-chairman of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into the attacks, and Mr. Kerrey and Mr. Lehman served on the 9/11 Commission.

“I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia,” wrote Mr. Graham, who has long demanded the release of 28 pages of the congressional report on the attacks that explore Saudi connections and remain classified.
#14938736
@Beren

If certain people want to live in a place with a specific legal system, let them. Such a legal system only applies to themselves and not anyone else. By preventing communities and people from belonging to a legal system which accommodates them, you are encouraging them to force their value system on others. In this system, people who have a specific system of morality can have a legal system which accommodates them without encouraging them to force their system of morality unto others.

There should be limits of course, but as long as they are hurting no one and as long as their legal system doesn't force people within it to stay in it, then it is fine regardless of how disagreeable their values are.
#14938739
Oxymandias wrote:If certain people want to live in a place with a specific legal system, let them. Such a legal system only applies to themselves and not anyone else. By preventing communities and people from belonging to a legal system which accommodates them, you are encouraging them to force their value system on others. In this system, people who have a specific system of morality can have a legal system which accommodates them without encouraging them to force their system of morality unto others.

There should be limits of course, but as long as they are hurting no one and as long as their legal system doesn't force people within it to stay in it, then it is fine regardless of how disagreeable their values are.

Besides that this is getting more and more unrealistic, I wouldn't be willing to tolerate the Germans reestablishing a Nazi legal system for themselves to accommodate their precious conscience with it.
#14938745
Oxymandias wrote:@Saeko

That is how morality works, not a legal system. People have different systems of morality so it is beneficial to just let people who want to follow a legal system that accommodates their sense of morality do so. This is the basis of polycentric law. You cannot expect everyone to be fine with one particular form of justice since even people who align with a particular system of morality have different conceptions of this. It is proper to have varying legal systems which can accommodate each person's conscience.


What legal system do you appeal to when two persons under separate legal systems come into conflict?
#14938752
Sivad wrote:
:knife: Well the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the co-chair of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 definitely believes it. :lol:



At worst, the Saudi's where negligent in trying to crack down on terrorist type activity. I simply just isn't in the interest of the Saudi's to hurt great business relations with the US.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

necessarily inferred 'Necessarily', my arse! […]

@Sivad You clearly don’t know what it means t[…]

I don't think regressing to child labor, longer w[…]

https://twitter.com/rosemcgowan/status/1031535197[…]