Friday, August 31, 2007

Liberal Party of Canada: An Empty Nut

The Liberals act as if they were in power despite lacking ideas and being prone to take rhetoric shortcuts.


The Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) believes that it is not too far from victory in the next federal election. Besides, Michael Ignatieff, one of its MP, wants the puffin - "a noble bird [that] has good family values" and that "work[s] like hell" - to be the symbol of the LPC. If the LPC was depicted like a bottle of wine, it would look like one that has a new label on it. Mind that, the label looks attractive, but the bottle is empty.

What really matters is this: With former academic Stéphane Dion at its helm, the Liberals hasn't displayed any ideas to solve what they like to brand as Canada's problems. Never mind that, the Liberals form the Official Opposition, right? The Liberals act as if they were in power despite lacking ideas and being prone to take rhetoric shortcuts.

The LPC's own pollster Michael Marzolini thinks that Stéphane Dion's troopers can win the next federal election with clear ideas. However, as a former academic, its leader Stéphane Dion is close to be a flash in the pan.

Since he became the leader of the country's so-called "natural governing party", Dion has just been acting like a populist à la Jean Chrétien.

Stéphane Dion is viscerally convinced that unlike Stephen Harper, he champions environment. Speaking about ideologies, this might be true. Nonetheless, Dion's most recent declarations on environment are nothing but terse declarations of principles. Add to these insipid declarations his lack of nuances.

As a matter of fact, we can think about Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez's pathetic - albeit looking noble - Bill C-288. In the bill's preamble, it's said that "scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action" and that "climate change is a global problem that crosses national borders." The question is: How would Stéphane Dion deal with Canada's oil industry?

Well, we're still looking for his answers!

For someone who studied Political Science, Dion certainly forgot that the Kyoto Protocol doesn't take in consideration any given country's own economic and industrial specificity.

Another example of Stéphane Dion's sense of humour, so to speak, lies in his way of dealing with Canada's mission in Afghanistan. The LPC, the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party all stress on the egregiously false fact that the mission in Afghanistan, in general, is now a complete failure.

What Canadian politicians, in general, don't say is that Canadian troops are deployed in a southern Afghan province that is partly controlled by Talibans. Why should Canadian troops be pulled out of Afghanistan after February 2009? Which country will replace Canada after the withdrawal?

These are questions that Liberals should ask themselves.

Instead, what we're seeing right now is just a party that is playing with 30-seconds clips in the news just like Mario Dumont, the leader of the Action Démocratique du Québec. As opposed to Mario Dumont, Stéphane Dion doesn't manage to strike our feelings. The Liberals say that by the time the parliamentary session of fall begins, they will be unveiling their new ideas.

Let's see what the Liberals will be made of next fall. However, my expectations toward the LPC has never been great, since I'm not attracted by their extremely centralist vision of federalism... I forgot that my subscription to a pragmatic vision of federalism is another story.

Blog Day 2007 en français


Saint idéal républicain (au sens français de France du terme)! Laïcité du ciel (formule d'exclamation pour les athées comme moi)! C'est la journée du blogue? Ah, bon, alors certaines personnes m'apprennent quelque chose...

Trêve de plaisanteries. Je vous laisse avec cinq blogues que j'apprécie afin que ce soit une découverte pour vous, mesdames et messieurs. Dernièrement, il n'y a pas d'ordre de préférence.


  1. Le blogue de Mohamed Sifaoui: Blogue tenu par un journaliste originaire de l'Algérie, Musulman, courageux et... laïc. Si vous êtes tannés d'entendre sur les ondes de TVA les prétentions hautaines de l'iman Saïd Jaziri qui pense représenter l'opinion de tous les Musulmans, ce blogue vous fera voir d'autres choses. Plaisir garanti.

  2. Réalité virtuelle (Philippe David): Que vous soyez en accord ou en désaccord avec ces opinions arrêtées, voilà un blogueur qui sait s'appuyer sur de la documentation sérieuse.

  3. La Sphère des Idées J.H. (Jonathan Hamel): Blogue d'un jeune politologue et économiste qui s'affiche très ouvertement à droite (un peu trop, peut-être?) avec des idées qui me laissent souvent glacial. Au moins, il s'agit d'un blogue écrit sans aucune démagogie.

  4. Philippe Giguère (Le p'tit gars de Shawinigan): Voici un excellent blogue qui jette un regard d'initié sur le système juridique canadien en relation avec la politique.

  5. Tetoine's Palace: Blogue d'un étudiant beauceron socialiste très politisé. Même si le blogueur regarde la politique avec un regard très externe, il n'en demeure pas moins qu'il se pose de très bonnes questions. Voici la preuve (pour le feu de paille en colère qui me connaît très mal) que malgré la froideur que je peux exprimer envers certaines idées interventionniste, j'ai tout de même gardé une partie de ma fibre socialiste d'antan.


Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Opium Poppies Are the Talibans' Money

Evidently, opium poppies is the sinews of the Talibans' insurgencies. The fact that both of them are the NATO's targets is not a matter of dispute.

According to statistics published in the latest report from the United Nations' Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), opium poppy cultivation is posing a problem to the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) troops in a post-Medieval country called Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, the UNODC considers Afghanistan as the world's leading drug producer.

However, it's important to know that 13 provinces out of 34 are considered as being drug free. The UNODC's latest report on Afghanistan says that "despite massive poverty, opium cultivation has diminished." Moreover, "the number of opium-free provinces [has] more than doubled, from 6 last year to 13 in 2007."

Opium production per province in Afghanistan.

These 13 drug free provinces are actually part of provinces that are very well-secured while the South West is seen as being "lawless". Nonetheless, in Canada, the mission in Afghanistan leaves some of us with an impression of failure. In many Afghan provinces, opium poppies cultivation happens under the very noses of the NATO's troops.

First of all, the net opium poppy cultivation was at 193,000 ha this year, an increase of 17% in comparison with last year. Secondly, while 448,000 households were involved in this criminal activity in 2006, they're now at 509,000 according to the UNODC's report. Above all, 3.3 million Afghan are cultivating opium poppies.

Frightening is the fact that the Helmand province (where British troops are deployed) "has become the biggest source of illicit drugs in the world", according to the Independent. Moreover, 53% of all the production of opium poppies comes from this province.

Evidently, opium poppies is the sinews of the Talibans' insurgencies. The fact that both of them are the NATO's targets is not a matter of dispute.

As opposed to what a certain cunt believes, drug production mostly happens in the Southern regions of Afghanistan with a production rate of 69%. This happens because Talibans - who are also active along the Pakistani border - have no difficulty to affirm their presence in the provinces of Hilmand, Kandahar, Uruzgan, Day Kundi, Zabul, Farah and Nimroz (154,981 ha). Not only security conditions in some areas of these provinces raise fear, but they're also inaccessible to the UN and non-governmental organizations (NGO).

Notice that from 1996 to 2000, opium poppies (which reached 15,000 tons) was the Talibans' sole source of foreign exchange. However, in July 2000, the Talibans' leader, Mullah Omar, banned the production of opium poppies (not its exportation) by saying that it's against Islam. Now, the Talibans' mood has changed and they're using this drug to suit their interest: buying weapons and paying militia men.

The UNODC's report shows that while many poor provinces abandoned opium poppies production, many wealthy provinces (starting with Hilmand and Kandahar) stay in this illicit activity. In other words, poverty generally has nothing to do with opium poppies production in Afghanistan. The provinces in which these activities take place are mostly in the South and many of them are wealthy.

Changes in opium production in Afghan provinces.

This leads us to one question: was it Chinese military philosopher Sun Tzu, the author of The Art of War, who said that weakening your enemy from inside is a key to win a war?

Of all the ways, we can think about proceeding to a tougher eradication. However, how do you demonstrate to wealthy farmers (who are supposed to collaborate with the NATO's troops, mind you) in the south-west of Afghanistan that other agricultural activities pay off? In short, only 19,047 ha was eradicated.

Secondly, opium is what it takes to make heroin. To make this drug, precursors needed for the conversion of opium are imported from neighbouring countries. So far, many drug markets and heroin laboratories in Afghanistan are just waiting to be destroyed. However, how is it possible to control the border crossing points between Afghanistan and neighbouring countries?

There are so many questions. The objectives of the mission in Afghanistan are clear. In order to guarantee success, the NATO needs to re-check the way to fight its war on two fronts: Talibans themselves and drugs.

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Gérard Bouchard Should Resign

Gérard Bouchard doesn't seem to understand that his job is to listen to people and not to impose his badly nuanced pro-multiculturalism sentiments.

The consultation of the Bouchard-Taylor Study Commission didn't officially begin that one of its heads, Gérard Bouchard, is at the centre of a controversy. In an interview given to the newspaper Le Devoir, Bouchard affirmed that his study commission will surely be about consulting Quebeckers.

After all, the consultation commission's motto in French roughly means: "Exchanging in order to hear each other." However, his belief that philosopher Charles Taylor and him must "reply" to people who are against religious accommodations poses a problem.

In this case, former Quebec premier Lucien Bouchard's brother should resign as one of the heads of the Consultation Commission on Accommodation Practices Related to Cultural Differences. Gérard Bouchard doesn't seem to understand that his job is to neutrally listen to people and not to impose his badly nuanced pro-multiculturalism sentiments.

First of all, religious accommodations (and by extension multiculturalism) seem to complex as a phenomenon for him and secondly, he's not supposed to act like a political commentator.

Badly nuanced thoughts

For Gérard Bouchard, intellectuals must convince people that "diversity [is] culturally good and enriching for Quebec." Moreover, this academic thinks that intellectuals didn't find any arguments in order to convince us, poor brainless citizens, that multiculturalism is the ultimate invention of all eras. Needless to say that Bouchard stresses on the fact that anybody who is opposed to "diversity" (or rather multiculturalism) is definitely opposed to immigration.


Seriously, what kind of "diversity" is this historian talking about?

This man should know that ethnic diversity - which is inextricably linked to immigration in some cases - is an observable social fact. The notion itself implies the presence of people who don't share the same ethnic or racial background with the majority of people. Period.

As for cultural diversity or pluralism (or rather multiculturalism), it is a doctrine invented by American philosopher Horace Kallen in 1915. According to Kallen, all ethnic groups' (especially ethnic minorities) must keep their own culture. Kallen thought that this had to be done so that ethnic minorities' respective culture can equally take part in the elaboration of the USA's national identity alongside with the identity of white American Anglo-Saxons. In short, multiculturalism implies the absence of mainstream culture.

In short, by lamentably failing to clarify his thoughts, Gérard Bouchard has tarnished the credibility of his Consultation Commission. Furthermore, he has implicitly accused many Quebeckers of being bigots who are against immigration. To sort this out, most of us, Quebeckers, understand the benefits of immigration. However, most of us share the belief that all laws must be applied on everybody without any distinction about the ethnic belonging, individual religion and the colour of one's skin.

Neutrality

By saying that Quebeckers must imperatively understand the benefit of multiculturalism, Bouchard is apparently trying to convince people to think like him. Whenever he has been giving his opinions since a few weeks, Gérard Bouchard admitted that he was acting as one of the heads of the Consultation Commission.

This is wrong, because in our parliamentary traditions, a commissioner has a duty to preserve secrecy. The objective of the Consultation Commission doesn't consist in convincing people, but to listen to them without any judgement of values. Therefore, when Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor will write their report, they must only talk about what people said. Finally comes the obligation for Bouchard and Taylor to make recommendations to the Quebecker government not by taking in consideration their opinions, but rather those coming from people who went to the hearings.

After all, the report, which will be published in March 2008, is not a bill! Moreover, our government is in no legislative obligation to follow the recommendations of parliamentary commissioners.

With that said, people go there not to see their opinions being blasted by Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor. In fact, during a hearing, commissioners are supposed to take notes, supervise discussions between citizens and to act as moderators. All in all, Gérard Bouchard's incapacity to understand our parliamentry traditions reveal his visible lack of professionalism.

With his condescending attitude toward many Quebeckers, Gérard Bouchard confirms something that I've always thought about the Consultation Commission: a pure waste of time and money. The right to have an opinion is not measured by the number of years that you spent in your life to burn your ass on a school bench. If Bouchard can't understand that, he should definitely resign and find another forum to spill his opinions out.

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Dumont's Funny Speculations on Immigration

With so much immigrants coming in Montreal, the possibilities to have ghettos are very big. Mario Dumont's own definition of a ghetto is almost a caricature. In fact, any given Montrealers have met at least one person living in a ghetto who knows how to speak French and/or English.


A couple of days ago, Mario Dumont, the leader of the Action Démocratique du Québec (ADQ), said in an interview that Quebec must keep welcoming immigrants, as opposed to what Jean Charest, the leader of the Parti Libéral du Québec (PLQ), has tried to make us believe on Dumont (i.e. accusations of racism). While the PLQ believes that the annual immigration quota should reach at most 60,000, Dumont affirmed that welcoming at most 45,000 immigrants is enough.

Indeed, Mario Dumont believes that the government of Quebec must maintain its current annual immigration quota in order to trust "our capacity of integration" and to avoid the creation of ghettos (things that don't exist in Quebec, according to him). On what kind of information Mario Dumont relies on to say that there's no such thing as a ghetto in Quebec and that "our capacity of integration" is solid?

Mario Dumont clearly said that Jean Charest once cut funds for governmental programs meant to teach French to immigrants. This is so true. However, while talking about immigration, Mario Dumont, just like most French Quebeckers, is just a dreamer who doesn't see Quebec's incapacity to blend immigrants into our mainstream culture.

Statistically speaking, this is what people don't want to say: it's not Quebec, as a province, that welcomes immigrants, but rather the city of Montreal that mainly does it. According to Quebec's Ministry of Immigration, last year, 44,686 newcomers were welcomed. Among them, 32,755 people came to live in Montreal, which means 73.3% of immigrants welcomed in Quebec.

Besides, Laval and the Greater Region of Quebec City follow with respectively 4.5% and 3.9%. With so much immigrants coming in Montreal, the possibilities to have ghettos are very big. Mario Dumont's own definition of a ghetto is almost a caricature. In fact, any given Montrealers have met at least one person living in a ghetto who knows how to speak French and/or English.

For instance, if you live in Montreal, you'll know that in the East of the district of St-Laurent (right by the Montpellier train station), most of its inhabitants are people of Arabic heritage (mostly people born in Lebanon) and they're very easy to recognize because of their accent. Secondly, in the West of this district, there's also a neighbourhood (not too far from the Lauren Hill Academy Junior Campus) mostly inhabited by secular-minded Jews along with a few Orthodox Jews.

There are also many Jews in the district of Côte St-Luc and many Orthodox Jews live in some parts of the district of Outremont. You can also add to that the plethora of people of Haitian heritage who mostly live in North Montreal and St-Michel. Obviously, think about the fact that most people of Italian heritage live in the St-Leonard district. I can also think about the impressive number of people of Greek heritage who live in the district of Parc-Extension.

Whether we like to hear it or not, there are some ghettos in Montreal.

Moreover, Mario Dumont displayed an incredible ignorance by saying that Quebec has avoided the creation of ghettos in its history. Really funny! Did you know that the first ghetto ever created in Montreal is the Chinatown? In fact, its creation (in the beginning of the 20th century) was the result of the Anglo-Saxons' and French Canadians' refusal to live with "Chinks" or "Chink Tok" (as it is pejoratively said in French to designate Chinese people). Still, this shameful episode in Quebec's history belongs to another epoch...

In conclusion, to go back to the main subject of this text, the question that we should all ask ourselves - especially French Quebeckers themselves - is why does the city of Montreal receive the bulk of Quebec's immigrants? As far as we know, the economic development of Quebec is not single-handedly concentrated in Montreal. I'm not saying that immigrants don't have the right to come in Montreal; the other administrative regions need immigrants.

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Made and Poisoined in China

The recall of more than 18 million and 1 million toys for kids (which were made in China) respectively formulated by Mattel and Fisher Price should force us to think about the limits of market economy as Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek conceived it.


As China advances more and more toward impressive economic growth, we are starting to see more and more the dark side of what we like to call the "Chinese Miracle". Indeed, some Chinese products, before and after their exportation in the West, are poisoned. Last month we've heard about Chinese toothpastes and medications that contained antifreeze.

This time, it's about a high-profile recall of more than 18 million toys by Mattel, an American company, and another recall from Fisher Price involving 1 million toys that are not what they seem to be. This had to be done because of fears that the painting on these toys for kids, which were made in China, may contain excessive quantity of lead according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). After all, isn't that true that some kids can put toys in their mouth?

The answer is obviously yes.

What is a little bit intriguing is that a few years ago, American authorities didn't hesitate to block their importation of Canadian meat by saying that it is affected with mad cow disease. Now, can we say that the USA, if not the West in general, has waited for so long to notice that some Chinese products don't meet general quality standards?

Still, there are conclusions that we can draw from this experience. The recall of more than 18 million and 1 million toys for kids (which were made in China) respectively formulated by Mattel and Fisher Price should force us to think about the limits of market economy as Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek conceived it.

As Canadian political scientist André Laliberté pointed it out, the main reason why China's economy is growing so quickly is almost due to the absence of governmental intervention in the economy. As a matter of fact, entrepreneurship is well perceived in this Asian country and add to this situation most Chinese's patent fascination for capitalism. Unfortunately, in China, underground and illegal economic activities do happen a lot.

This doesn't necessarily mean that China, as the world first producer of toys, is not serious. In fact, Chinese authorities forbade two factories from exporting poisoned toys. This probably means that China cares a lot about its economic relations with the whole world.

Besides, let's remember that the Chinese government has at least a dozen of inspection agencies checking nationwide ordinary stuff like appliances, food, medications, toys and you name it. The problem is that some employees of these inspection agencies can get bribed by an entrepreneur who wants to avoid product inspections. Still, Chinese authorities were (literally!) so serious that they has once charged a former inspection agent with death penalty.

Nonetheless, the problem that we have here is that whenever someone blew the whistle, Chinese officials has always taken firm decisions in response to fears expressed by Westerners.

With that said, we can't really start wondering if Chinese inspection norms for products are serious. What we should really wonder is that no matter how serious China is, economically speaking, are there any national inspection norms in this Asian country? The concept of market economy has its share of good aspects. However, what we should all know is that any government must find a balanced way to make economic intervention - just to make sure that things are ok - without posing a barrier to economic growth.

Thursday, August 9, 2007

Science: Religion Betrays Women

When science proves that wearing a Muslim veil is dangerous for a woman’s health, there’s no further need to have a philosophical debate. One can’t support women rights and multiculturalism at the same time.

Many Canadians will uphold that if a Muslim woman wants to wear a hijab, a niqab or even a burka, it is her right. After all, don’t you remember that Canada has an ethnic and religious ghettoization policy called the Canadian Multiculturalism Act? In addition to that, you can also talk about the fact that our Charter of Rights and Freedoms “shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation (sic) and enhancement (sic) of the multicultural heritage (sic) of Canadians (sic)” (article 27).

Since I’m a Canadian secular republican, I am against the display of religious symbols in “public” places (i.e. places used by citizens, regardless of their ethnicity). Obviously, I’m actually thinking about the Muslim veil worn by women, which is definitely a symbol of sexual segregation. All right! To be politically correct, I should mention that some Muslim women wear it because it’s “[their] choice”…


Again, that makes me laugh when I hear this load of funny things.

When science proves that wearing a Muslim veil is dangerous for a woman’s health, there’s no further need to have a philosophical debate. One can’t support women rights and multiculturalism at the same time.

In the French magazine Courrier International’s issue of the 19th to the 25th of July 2007, we can find at the end of the magazine a translated article of the Arabic newspaper Elaph saying what many Muslims just don’t want to hear.

First of all, a woman that has worn a Muslim veil for many years can have a breathing problem. As a matter of fact, a “woman [wearing the Muslim veil] breathes in a bigger quantity of CO2 [than any other women].” While thinking about the pulmonary problems that it creates, wearing a Muslim veil may cause a woman to have asthma.

Secondly, a Muslim veil also affects your sight because of the condensation. Indeed, “we notice that many women [who has worn the Muslim veil] since a long time” are often required to receive medical attention “for pulmonary affectations and ocular problems.”

Thirdly, a Danish medical study (led by none other than a woman) shows us that in the case of women who are entirely covered by that Muslim thingy, “their body’s absence of exposure to the sun […] causes a deficiency of vitamin D.” Besides, for all those angry multiculturalists (who are prone to call you a racist even when you’re not even one!) out there, do I need to remind you that a lack of vitamin D in your body increases your risk to have osteoporosis?

I know that many people will not miss an occasion to uncritically call me a racist. In other words, let's assume that science is racist, especially when it is practiced in the West! With such an amazing scientific argument coming from Denmark, it's about time that Canadian politicians give to this country a secular political regime that strictly separates religions and the state.

I'll leave some of you with one last question: if wearing a hijab is "your choice", is it also "your choice" to be in a bad physical condition?

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

The USA's Misplaced Trust in Saudi Arabia

Why did the American government make a weapon selling deal worth $20 billion with Saudi Arabia? Saying that Saudi Arabia's efforts to fight Islamic terrorism are unconvincing is an understatement.


Yesterday at the Egyptian sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, Robert Gates and Condoleezza Rice, respectively the US secretaries of defence and state, had a meeting with Israeli and Arabic representatives. Rice announced that the American government will conclude a military selling deal worth about $63 billion with Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and 5 other allied Arabic countries from the Persian Gulf.

Secondly, this military deal is also aimed to counter the "negative influence" of Al-Qaeda, the Hezbollah, Iran and Syria. According to the deal, some money will be granted to some countries - that are deemed to be the USA's allies in the war on terrorism - so that their aviation, naval fleet and national army can be reinforced. Why did the American government make a weapon selling deal worth $20 billion with Saudi Arabia? Saying that Saudi Arabia's efforts to fight Islamic terrorism are unconvincing is an understatement.

Above all, what was the point to make a weapon sell deal to countries that have too much difficulty to talk to each other?

As Anthony Weiner, a Democrat at the US House of Representatives, said it, "[the] Saudis have not been an ally of the United States." To make things clear, the USA officially considers Saudi Arabia as its ally. Nonetheless, to make a very vulgar comparison, this Middle Eastern oil monarchy is to the fight against Islamic terrorism what Paris Hilton is to show business.

Saudi Arabia has always been fertile to international Islamic terrorism. According to the CATO Institute, Saudia Arabia joined the USA to fight Islamic terrorism "only in response to intense pressure [...] following the [September 11, 2001] attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon." Despite its joint efforts with the USA to financially pull the rug under the Somalian and Bosnian branch of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, the cooperation of Saudi Arabia is still not impressive.

In fact, Saudi Arabia has fuelled criticism over its laxity to act against terrorist organizations. According to a CRS Report for the Congress (USA) called Saudi Arabia: Terrorist Financing Issues (December 8, 2004), "funds may be flowing from Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries to terrorist groups, largely under the guise of charitable organizations." Furthermore, some of these organizations (mostly funded by some members the Saudi royal family) are "linked to Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda organization or like-minded entities."

Let's think about the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO). Besides the USA, Philippines, Indonesia and Crotia accused the IIRO of being more about politics than about humanitarian aids addressed to Muslim countries for this non-governmental organization turned out to support Islamic terrorism (especially to Al-Qaeda). For instance, Filipino authorities found out in 1994 that Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, bin Laden’s brother-in-law and former director of the IIRO, was financing the construction of training camps under the scrutiny of the Abbu Sayyaf Group, a Muslim separatist movement based in Southern islands of the Philippines.

Moreover, a report from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) written in September 2003 concluded that the Saudi government's legal definition of terrorism "does not conform to the standards as expressed in the [United Nations] Convention on the Suppression of Terrorist Financing." Aside from that, we can really wonder why has Saudi Arabia waited until August 2003 to adopt a law describing money laundering and terrorist financing as criminal offences.

Moreover, it's needless to say that some Saudi citizens also finance the construction of madrassas abroad (i.e. Islamic schools) that encourage racism against Westerners...

All in all, one of the main reason why Saudi Arabia is not effective in fighting Islamic terrorism it's because of the fact that some members of its royal family are financing organizations that are not as clean as they look. To make a hypothesis, either some members of the Saudi royal family are cunts who want to be part of an international problem or they didn't know anything about some of these charitable organizations (that have no difficulty to take roots in Saudi Arabia).

Related Posts with Thumbnails

About This Blog

Lorem Ipsum

Subscriptions

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP