Chilling thought. Now, what's the bottom line?

Submitted by J. Goldberg (United States), May 12, 2005 at 11:01

In conclusion, Prof. Pipes writes, "Should [the explosives] exist, Western governments need profoundly to reassess their relationships with the [Saudi] kingdom." This goes without saying.

What is less obvious is whether we should take a harder line against the Saudis -- as I believe Prof. Pipes was previously advocating, given the Saudis' financing of terrorism, exportation of wahaabiism, etc. -- or, given this potential threat, back off.

The only clear conclusion of this chilling article is that our society and country have exposed yet one more Achilles' heel, partially the result of decades of unbridled greed at both the political and consumer levels.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".