Con Games
Dear Prince Bandar
By Michael Conniff, 12-15-05
Your Majesty:
May I call you “Your Majesty�?
We have never met—I have never had the privilege—and we probably never will. But I do know that we are neighbors in this beautiful valley for at least this part of the year. I am told that you fly into Colorado in a jet so big you have to land in Grand Junction, and I have heard all about your spacious home high atop Aspen. I was told that your compound is fortified against all comers, and I know that it is not unusual for those who work the property to sign a non-disclosure agreement. I understand why a Prince in your position, a member of the royal family of Saudi Arabia, must take precautions, even in Aspen. I would do the same were I only royal.
Though we will probably never meet, I know many good things about you. You are said to be generous to local causes and you are considered an important member of our small community. At the Aspen Institute, where the differences of nations are always under discussion, you have given generously enough to have the name “Bandar Center� on one of their most prominent gathering places.
I also know you have recently resigned your post as Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States, and perhaps this will allow you even more time to spend in Aspen. Maybe that means former President Jimmy Carter and his family—even his grandchildren—can come to Aspen more often now that you have more unofficial time on your hands. My guess is you will have a chance see President George W. Bush and his father, President George H.W. Bush, often enough for them to remember your nickname of “Bandar Bush,� as if you’re a member of our family royale. I know you are close to all Presidents but especially the Bushes. I even know the first President Bush became a senior advisor to the Carlyle Group in Washington, and that you actually count on the Carlyle Group to train your country’s military.
I hope you will forgive me now if I talk to you neighbor-to-neighbor. We all need your oil to keep our country going, of course, and as your best customer we want you to feel welcome when you come to Aspen or even Washington, D.C. We’re a friendly people, as you know, and we love to be friendly with our friends, despite any and all differences.
We like to call that “the American way.�
But it’s getting harder to make you feel welcome, Your Majesty. Maybe you can help me figure this out. Osama bin Ladin, our nemesis and the mastermind behind the attacks of 9/11, is a Saudi, and I just read his own father actually re-built Mecca back in the day. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers who destroyed our world on 9/11 were Saudis. In the days after 9/11, a whole planeload of Saudis were flown out of the United States at a time when no one was flying anywhere. Membership in the royal family has its privileges, I suppose, even in the United States.
As you may have heard, even though your bin Ladin is a Saudi, and all those hijackers were Saudis, even so the United States decided to invade Iraq and not Saudi Arabia for reasons we need not concern ourselves with now. The point is this: we need your help. Everything I’ve seen or read about Osama bin Ladin and Islamic jihad traces it back to the Wahhabi religion in Saudi Arabia —your religion. I’ve also been reading that your country and your family, the royal family, have spent tens of billions of dollars exporting Wahhabism to mosques around the world, including those right here in our country.
I don’t mean any offense, Your Majesty, but as your neighbor here in Aspen I have to ask you to please stop doing that. Here’s why: your religion preaches that anyone who doesn’t believe in your religion is an “infidel� and hence deserves to die in the jihad. I, myself, and many other Americans I know would prefer to stay alive so as to breathe the pure air of democracy, liberty, and freedom—the United States of America’s van-choc-straw. We like it here, in America and in Aspen, and we want you to feel welcome, but it’s going to get harder if you don’t stop exporting a religion that literally wants to destroy our men, our women, our children, and what we call our way of life.
If Wahhabism is at the hear of terrorism, and if Wahhabism is at the core of your country and your royal family, then something’s got to give, to use our vernacular. We can’t be your friend if you want to destroy us, no matter how many Presidents come to stay at your home in Aspen. I know you’ve got more money than God, Your Majesty, but some day all of you will have to answer to God, just as we will have to here. You will have to answer for what you’ve done and for what you’re doing to us. Maybe that’s God’s jihad, for all I know.
In the name of God—and you can call Him anything you want—I am asking you as a friend and neighbor to stop supporting terrorism as a matter of state policy. We know you’re doing it and you know you’re doing it, but if you want to keep coming to Aspen with our Presidents then it’s just got to stop. If you want to be our friend, then you need to stop acting like one.
If you’ve got time while you’re in time, feel free to stop by, and by all means be of good cheer.
With best wishes for a glorious holiday season, Michael Conniff!
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
I'll try and do my best to respond to this fountain of bullshit, generalization, exaggeration, and ignorance:
"Osama bin Ladin, our nemesis and the mastermind behind the attacks of 9/11, is a Saudi, and I just read his own father actually re-built Mecca back in the day."
Bin Ladin is Saudi, but his citizenship was revoked by the Saudi Government in 1994. The Bin Ladin family, a sprawling clan (OBL's father reportedly had as many as 54 children) that runs a large and successful construction business, disowned Osama over a decade ago. You can make whatever leaps of faith you want here, but them's the facts.
"Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers who destroyed our world on 9/11 were Saudis."
This is absolutely true. I wouldn't say that this makes the Saudi government complicit in the 9/11 attacks, but you can connect whatever dots you want.
"In the days after 9/11, a whole planeload of Saudis were flown out of the United States at a time when no one was flying anywhere. Membership in the royal family has its privileges, I suppose, even in the United States."
Read the 9/11 Commission's report. This Michael Moore story has been proven false. There is no evidence to support the case that this flight left before civilian airspace was opened, or that it was arranged through the Bush Administration, or that passengers weren't properly screened before they departed.
"As you may have heard, even though your bin Ladin is a Saudi, and all those hijackers were Saudis, even so the United States decided to invade Iraq and not Saudi Arabia for reasons we need not concern ourselves with now."
What are you suggesting? That we should have been attacking Saudi Arabia? Do you really not know the reasons why we decided not to wage war on Saudi Arabia? Amazing.
"Everything I’ve seen or read about Osama bin Ladin and Islamic jihad traces it back to the Wahhabi religion in Saudi Arabia —your religion."
This is less an indictment on Saudi Arabia, and more of an indictment on your scholarship.
"...your religion preaches that anyone who doesn’t believe in your religion is an “infidel� and hence deserves to die in the jihad."
"...we want you to feel welcome, but it’s going to get harder if you don’t stop exporting a religion that literally wants to destroy our men, our women, our children, and what we call our way of life."
If you knew anything about Saudis and their religion, you'd know that these statements are false. Have you ever met a Saudi before? Have you met anyone that's come out of their education system? Do you really think that "Wahhabism" demands that all Westerners be killed in the name of jihad? Where are you getting your information?
Well, that's all I can stomach for now. However, one last suggestion:
Try and represent your American values in a way that isn't condescending. Eviscerating someone's homeland, culture, and religion in a chummy and playful tone doesn't make it easier to swallow. It only makes you look like a self-centered and callous prick.
Best, Michael Conniff
PS The response to the column so far has been OVERWHELMINGLY positive.
Also, I would probably want to start with something that doesn't predetermine results. Like a search for "Saudi Arabia", or "Saudi Arabia" and "terrorism". If I search for "Aspen best skiing in the world", and I find hundreds of articles supporting that, that doesn't mean that Aspen has the best skiing in the world. It means that I wanted to hear that argument, and I got what I asked for.
Also, well-played with the "civil discourse" bit: you don't have to respond to my points because I use naughty language. It's too bad that you won't address some of my criticisms, but maybe this will lead you to learn more about Saudi Arabia, and that's all I can hope for.
Ps. I'm glad that the response has been overwhelmingly positive for you column. I bet that makes you feel really great!
that Wahhabis (or the Sulafi as I read they often prefer) believe in monotheism- one God, no name, with other named Gods and polytheism in general and even variations in Islam around the world being affronts to the one and only God (so saying "In the name of God—and you can call Him anything you want— " seems like an affront unintended or not);
that Wahhabism in its political form is totalitarian (that is, objectively pretty absolutist; not necessarily assigning subjective intrepretation of its policies /record);
that many of these believers have actively supported Jihad against infidels of various stripes including armed campaigns to control countries and terrorism
How much the Saudi royal family has done and knowingly done to support this is the crux of the issue and I am not adequately informed to judge some all the detail and the different sets of facts that folks put out there. Some say Bandar is one of the most opposed to this direction, others note that within the overall royal family there are plenty of Wahhabi jihad supporters or at least have many documented Wahhabi jihad support actions, in part to protect their own political/economic supremacy
I don't buy all the conspiracy arguments but I do think it would pay for more Americans to learn more about the tangle of self-interest and state-interest between the Saudi royal family and the Bush "dynasty" /extended family of economic & political interests.
Is there duality in the actions of Prince Bandar? Probably. Is there duality in the actions of George Bush? On that I know more and have more opinion and my answer is Yes.
The Sulafi are not the only monotheists in the world. Most religions, despite the occasional ecumenical jesture, are essentially monotheist.
Wahhabis would consider Israel and the United States, and Judaism and Christainity, to be guilty of exactly the same thing we accuse them of, not only monotheism, but an elite dominated government willing to use force to advance their interests and beliefs. Some in important political or military posts in those countries can sound that way and seem to act that way and occasional revealing slips about "crusades" and "forced removal" are not without significance and can't be explained away as merely slips of the tongue. The political/military/religious elites in the west claim they are different from Wahhabism because of elections and freedom (and these, I agree, are certainly major, yes even fundamental differences (that Bush was said we are not willing to accept less for others- in Iraq, but we still seem to tolerate inside the Saudi kingdom because "they are working on it" and "they are are vital friends"). But that they view us basically the way we view them should be instructive to look deeper and realize the immensity of ever achieving accomodation, co-existence or true peace. And a call to get to work at greater understanding. Cross-religion / civilization exchanges are vital. They seem unlikely to be of a sufficient scale or have enough support / change impact at the top to alter the pattern of heightened clash we are in, for some time. But I see no other alternative.
If that is true then I have some hope- for the distant future. But those that control the money and are taking the aggressive action now don't realy care what the majority thinks.
There, ... here.
Changing that is tough. Harder there than here. Far more necessary that the Saudi and other Islamic people make gains in influence over their institutions at great risk and sacrifice than it is for us to try to tell people what to do in other countries. We have plenty to do here with our own.
in the sense that Allah = "God" , without other name?
"the word AllÄ?h is an abbreviated title, meaning 'the deity', rather than a name"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
"Muslims believe that the name of Allah had existed before the time of Adam. It is the same God worshipped by Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and other prophets of Islam. In Islam, there is only one God and Muhammed is the last messenger."
That would be the starting point for religious ecumenical understanding, allowing monotheism to be maintained, but perhaps recognizing that humans have understood God differently?
Best wishes for the new year in general (and for work on this cross-cultural set of issues, the decade too, and perhaps century?)
In the last 30 years Saudi Arabia has spent $60 billion in the USA alone building mosques and promoting this fanatical form of Islam.
At some point in time America needs to address this serious issue and stop dancing the statesmanship two-step.