@logicisforsquares said:

Yet another reason to move to renewables.

@logicisforsquares said:

When we don't have to relie on Akmed and friends for our energy, it will be a great day.

Ikr

@calfoxwc said:

no. Your own article explains the acts were in response to violence

and oppression.

The British were arrogantly ruthless, and terrorist acts by the arabic terror groups

attacked the Brits and the Jews, too.

Dang. read your own article.

You know who also claims they do shit becausr they're suppressed right?

@westside-steve said:

Give it time. Either we will find our own local supply or convert to something new. As soon as that happens, the Saudis will be back to living like nomads again.

@logicisforsquares said:

If the Saudis didn't have oil, we would treat them like any other shit box in the Middle East. Wahhabis are some of the biggest donors to terrorism but we allow for it.

When we don't have to relie on Akmed and friends for our energy, it will be a great day.

Sure. And that will happen eventually.

If New York and Europe had all the cotton they wanted we'd have never had a civil war.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

The United States has a symbiotic relationship with the royal family in Saudi Arabia.

Sure they could crack down on the Islamic extremists and within a year the revolution would put an Ayatollah in charge.

WSS

If the Saudis didn't have oil, we would treat them like any other shit box in the Middle East. Wahhabis are some of the biggest donors to terrorism but we allow for it.

When we don't have to relie on Akmed and friends for our energy, it will be a great day.

Sure they could crack down on the Islamic extremists and within a year the revolution would put an Ayatollah in charge.

WSS

Better vote for Hillary then, they know better than us.

yeah, she's bought and paid for, the nasty, corrupt wench.

http://constitution.com/important-reminder-hillary-respecting-isis-beheadings-video/

and oppression.

The British were arrogantly ruthless, and terrorist acts by the arabic terror groups

attacked the Brits and the Jews, too.

Dang. read your own article.

@calfoxwc said:

So do you. Pre ww2 the Zionists were the terrorists in the region.

There's that difference.

You need to read history a bit...

If I was god the Middle East would have been swallowed in a giant sinkhole probably 500 years already

@calfoxwc said:

You are changing subjects again. Jewish Americans in AMERICA? really?

Come on, stop changing subjects.

Besides, Jewish Americans don't live much in Israel - they can afford to

be critical of Israel.

The point is, Dems have favored the "Palestinians" in peace talks. Israel

kept giving, and giving, and giving, and the "Palestinians", who never really existed in

the first place.. would refuse the peace deal. Even Bill Clinton finally admitted he killed himself

to get a deal, and the leaders of the "palestinians" rejected it. And they weren't giving up anything

besides recognitiion of Israel and war. and they refused to even do that.

Hillary Clinton's History: Muslim Connections Stem Back To 1990s ...

www.breitbart.com/.../hillarys-history-dangerous...

Breitbart News Network

Jan 22, 2016 - Hillary Clinton's History: Muslim Connections Stem Back To 1990s. ... While Croatia is not part of the Schengen area a 26 country zone of the ...

Hillary Clinton Is No Friend of Israel - Haaretz - Israel News Haaretz.com

www.haaretz.com Opinion

Haaretz

Nov 8, 2015 - Hillary Clinton's election as U.S. president would ensure Israel's continued decline and degeneration. And so she is not a friend, but an enemy.

and hillary gets mega millions...85 of them...from the Saudis.

See the point now? Come on, open your eyes.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

Jewish people are the chosen ones.

I'm the only chosen one. Understand?

@diehardbrownsfan said:

That is the myth I would make up too if I was Jewish.

Come on, stop changing subjects.

Besides, Jewish Americans don't live much in Israel - they can afford to

be critical of Israel.

The point is, Dems have favored the "Palestinians" in peace talks. Israel

kept giving, and giving, and giving, and the "Palestinians", who never really existed in

the first place.. would refuse the peace deal. Even Bill Clinton finally admitted he killed himself

to get a deal, and the leaders of the "palestinians" rejected it. And they weren't giving up anything

besides recognitiion of Israel and war. and they refused to even do that.

That is the clinton way, etc.

B. The Bush family dealings with the Saudis stinks. But they never were

antagonistic to Israel over it.

C. I raised the subject of the dirty clinton foundation getting $$$$$$$$$$$, and being

very antagonistic to Israel. You come back with dirt on the Bush family, etc etc etc,

that doesn't reflect any kind of selling our Israel at all. With Carter, there sure as hell\

was that antagonism. With the Clintons, there sure as hell is. With Obamao, sure the hell is.

With the Bushes, there most certainly was not.

D. So, I'm still waiting on a lib response about the subject at hand. Selling out Israel over huge millions

to the Clintons. You are defending the Clintons, by attacking the Bush family on another subject.

Mega-lib emotional knee-jerk.

Even netanyahu's defense minister from his own party has had enough of him

@calfoxwc said:

furthermore, the subject is the antagonism towards Israel.

The Bush's were NEVER antagonistic towards Israel.

You, you libs just knee-jerked so quicly, you missed the point.

You know theres a "very" significant liberal voting bloc made up of jews right? You know jon stewarts a joo right? And he's been very critical of israel for very legit reasons.

http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm