The New York Times Absolutely Gets It (at least in this editorial)

The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: The Saudi Syndrome, January 1, 2005, EDITORIAL The Saudi Syndrome

I live in chronic disgust of the whoring the New York Times engages in. It prostitutes itself endlessly, it seems, to the nihilistic left and their political wing, the Democrat Party. Using a subjective epistemology that would make Aristotle barf, the Times operates on the principle: If we print it, it is objective journalism. Seldom can I use their material for anything except for analysis of leftism and the corruption of American academia, journalism, etc. HOWEVER, having said all of that, I now praise the Times for this editorial. How it slipped through, I will never know, but it does show what the Times could be.

The editorial is so good and so right on, that all I can do is select certain passages. They speak for themselves, and they speak eloquent truth (with some glaring exceptions, which will be noted):

The next time you consider the purchase of a family car that matches satisfying heft with infinitesimal mileage per gallon, you might want to think about where some of that gas money will ultimately be going. Part of the price of every extra gallon helps, albeit indirectly, to finance mosques and religious schools all over the world that spread a fanatical variant of Islam that sees legitimacy in terrorist attacks. This financing, amounting to billions of dollars a year, comes from the government and private charities of Saudi Arabia, a country that is now taking in roughly $80 billion a year from oil exports.

Now we get to one of those famous Times brain farts:

The Saudi government, itself under assault from Al Qaeda, is not in the business of directly financing terrorism, and since 9/11 it has responded to American pressure to control the flow of charitable funds to active terrorist groups.

Regaining consciousness, the Times strikes the truth:

But what it still pays for, and what the religious charities its citizens are obliged to contribute to pay for, is a worldwide network of mosques, schools and Islamic centers that proselytize the belligerent and intolerant Wahhabi variant of Islam that is dominant in Saudi Arabia. As a result of this oil-financed largess, the teachings of more tolerant and humane Muslim leaders are losing ground in countries like Indonesia and Pakistan. Wahhabi mosques that glorify armed jihad have also made alarming gains among the Muslim populations of Europe and the United States.

Just think about Saudi perfidy when you read this next paragraph:

For years, Saudi Arabian oil money bankrolled the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and provided financial support to Pakistan's government. It was Saudi aid that allowed Pakistan to defy international sanctions imposed over its nuclear bomb testing. Without Saudi money there is some question whether chronically impoverished Pakistan could have ever afforded to develop nuclear weapons and the crucial bomb-related technologies that its scientists passed on to Iran, Libya, North Korea and perhaps other countries as well.

Now we pause for another brain fart:

There is no sinister Saudi conspiracy at work here.

And this mostly outstanding editorial concludes:

The Saudi syndrome is not the only reason Americans need to get much more serious about energy conservation. But it is a powerfully compelling one.

As we start 2005, we need to reground ourselves about Islam, jihad, and those trouble-making countries we seem obsequious to, such as Saudi Arabia. We need to lean on these Saudis until they get better or get gone.