Saudi Arabia defends the appointment of Prince Turki as ambassador to London

AFP via Babelfish translation ^ | December 3, 2002

[HAL9000]

Ryad defends the appointment of prince Turki as ambassador in London

Wednesday December 04, 2002 - 0h16 GMT

WASHINGTON, 3 déc (AFP) - Saudi Arabia defended Tuesday the appointment of prince Turki Al-Faiçal Al-Saoud as ambassador of the kingdom at Great Britain, by denying that this measurement was taken to enable him to escape American justice.

"With regard to its nomination as ambassador in England, it is to be put at the credit Saudi Arabia. It is the validation of its competence and of its experiment (...) That has nothing to do with the fact of giving him the diplomatic immunity ", declared at the time of a press conference in Washington the diplomatic adviser of the crown prince saoudien Abdallah, Adel Al-Joubeir.

Former head of the secret service saoudiens, prince Turki was assigned in damages in front of American civil justice by families of victims of the attacks of September 11, 2001 for his role supposed in the financing of terrorist network Al-Qaïda.

According to the text of the complaint, prince Turki agreed into 1998 not to ask for the extradition of Oussama Ben Laden and provided a "generous help" to the talibans, in exchange of the agreement of the head of Al Qaïda not to use Afghanistan as bases operations to destabilize the mode wahabite.

This agreement was sealed at the time of a meeting with Kandahar (Afghanistan), in which took part of the representatives of Ben Laden. After the meeting, 400 vehicles still carrying their number plates saoudienne were delivered to the talibans, affirms the text of the complaint.

The principal lawyer of the families of the victims of September 11, Ron Motley, was not joignable Tuesday.

But, questioned Monday evening on the chain Fox News, it had affirmed to lay out, to prove its statements, of "declarations under oath" of five former persons in charge talibans, attesting that prince Turki "had facilitated the transfer of large sums of money, vehicles and oil" to the talibans and with Al-Qaïda.

It had also indicated that it was going to communicate to the Defence Department accusing evidence found in houses in Afghanistan.

Questioned to know why prince Turki had not contradicted these charges, Mr. Al-Joubeir affirmed Tuesday that "nobody in Saudi Arabia thinks that they have an unspecified merit", by adding that prince Turki would answer it on "a legal level".

"He is member of our royal family. He is the son of fire king Faiçal. He was with the head of our services of information during 27 years. He has already the diplomatic immunity ", he continued.

The lawyer Ron Motley estimated that prince Turki will have "to come to defend itself, defend his honor (...) or to remain in London".

"We will obtain a judgment by default and we will collect its goods", has it says.

Prince Turki was regarded as a true éminence grise of the mode saoudien, before his dismissal on August 31, 2001 by king Fahd of Saudi Arabia.

[swarthyguy]

>>It had also indicated that it was going to communicate to the Defence Department accusing evidence found in houses in Afghanistan.


WOW!

[Solamente]

"Prince Turki?"

Yeah, and I'm the Marquis of Mashed Potatoes....

[tet68]

Another Saudi slap in the face.
We won't forget.

[Angelus Errare]

Now comes the real test of whether or not Turki's supporters will let him hang out to dry. I doubt it, given all of the probable blackmail material he assembled as the head of Saudi intelligence.

[swarthyguy]

YOur observation about Turki professing bayat to Osama has been bouncing around in my head since then.

[Angelus Errare]

Understand though, if Turki's name is on file in some al-Qaeda files (and the CIA took hundreds of gigabytes worth of information from the computers in Abu Zubaydah's Faisalabad safehouse), it's likely under a nom de guerre of some sort or another and will be difficult to prove that it's actually him unless Abd Rahim al-Nashiri, Abu Zubaydah, Abu Zubair al-Haili, Omar al-Farouk, or Ramzi Binalshibh (i.e. all of the top al-Qaeda brass in custody) decide to cough him up.

For example, the US has roughly 200 files on al-Qaeda sleepers that Abu Zubaydah was trying to contact in order to stage a "second wave" offensive against the US when he and his cohorts were apprehended by the FBI and CIA in Faisalabad, but because they are listed under nom de guerres, finding them has proved incredibly difficult. For example, Jose Padilla was known within al-Qaeda as "Abdullah al-Mujahir" (the Traveling Servant of God).

In fact, the only concrete evidence the US has (other than the technical sophistication of his exploding sneakers) linking Richard Reid to al-Qaeda is that in January the Wall Street Journal purchased a computer that was looted from the Kabul research facility used by Abu Yasser (an aide to Abu Khabab, al-Qaeda's top WMD expert) containing a file on a member of the Martyrdom Battalion named "Abdul Rauff."

So while I'm fairly certain that Turki's an al-Qaeda operative (presumably he has some agreement with bin Laden to act as a figurehead ruler once al-Qaeda topples House Saud), knowing it and proving it may be two different things. Also, keep in mind that Britain is a hotbed for al-Qaeda activity (it received the most of bin Laden's satellite phone calls pre-1998), so Turki's appointment there may not be nearly as ceremonial as some are painting it out to be.

[swarthyguy]

>>so Turki's appointment there may not be nearly as ceremonial as some are painting it out to be.

Activating Zubaydah's "Second wave" offensive, perhaps.
Or something more sinister.

Thanks for a most informative post.

[Angelus Errare]

I think that the "Second Wave" or at least part of it, already occurred during September-October, with mixed results.

The consider the following attacks during that time period:

- the Karzai assassination attempt and Kabul car bombing
- the attempted hijacking of a Swedish airliner (Kerim Chatty)
- the attempted bombing of a US base in Germany
- the apparent plot by a Sudanese pilot to fly a personal passenger jet loaded with C-4 into the White House
- the Yemeni tanker bombing
- the US soldier killed in the Philippines
- the wave of Abu Sayyaf bombings in Zamboanga, General Santos, and Manila
- the drive-by attacks on US soldiers in Kuwait
- the Bali bombing
- the Moscow theater seige
- the repeated mass casualty attacks on Hindu temples in Gujarat, Jammu, and Kashmir
- the assassination of a US diplomat to Jordan
- the assassination of an American missionary and virtual civil war that has engulfed the Lebanese Palestinian community
- the attempted cyanide plot in the London subway

To the media, a lot of this is looking like isolated incidents. It took bin Laden's latest message (whether it was from him or not), which was basically a congradulations to the troops along with a warning to Europe, to make the media recognize that all of these explosions around the world weren't all just isolated incidents, but rather the work of an overall strategy aimed at realizing al-Qaeda's immediate (kicking the US out of the Middle East) as well as overall (establishing a global Islamic empire) strategy.

As a result of these attacks, Vice President Hamza Haz in Indonesia is all but certain to receive enough of the Islamist vote in Indonesia to depose President Megawati in the next election. Al-Qaeda's summer fun killing Christians and Pakistan and attacking foreigners ensured big wins for their supporters in Baluchistan and the Northwest Frontier Province (the two places where al-Qaeda is mostly likely to be hiding).

On other fronts, the Bengali government has basically been terrified into submission by what al-Qaeda has done in Pakistan, thereby giving the group another excellent haven in South Asia to hide in. According to Indian intelligence, Bangladesh is such an ideal place to hide that Ayman al-Zawahiri has decided to reside there. The Macedonian government continues to teeter on the brink of collapse, and al-Qaeda has all but won control of the Palestinian Ein al-Hilwah refugee camp from Yasser Arafat's Fatah militias.

I expect that a "Third Wave" will come as soon as the US attacks Iraq. In addition to the rather transparent alliance between Iraq and al-Qaeda (something that was made abundantly clear by bin Laden's recent audio, as well as al-Qaeda's relationship with the Chechen rebels), to al-Qaeda's constituents, an attack on Iraq will be viewed as an assault upon Islam and as such, they'll feel compelled to retaliate.

My own suspicions, as well as the upswings of these mysterious "alcohol bootlegging" bombings against Westerners, the torching of a Riyadh McDonalds, the failed engagement between Saudi security forces and bin Laden's supporters, and the BBC story about thousands of Saudis arming themselves for jihad, would lead me to believe that when the US attacks Iraq, al-Qaeda will carry out a Khomeini-style coup in Saudia Arabia, likely with the help of Turki and Co. In addition to achieving one of al-Qaeda's mission statements (the destruction of the immediate royal family of House Saud), a coup in Saudi Arabia would be immensely beneficial to Saddam because al-Qaeda could attack US positions within the Kingdom (thereby drawing us into a two-front war) and even threaten US access to the eastern oil fields.

Then, with a few dozen suicide attacks in Europe proper, al-Qaeda could try to deliver a psychological knock-out blow to our continental allies and hope to embolden the "peace" movement long enough to try and force the US to call off an attack on Iraq. Which, of course, will be exactly what Saddam needs to buy him enough time to manufacture a working nuclear weapon, thereby using it to threaten his neighbors into compliance, a la North Korea.

While this is just speculation based on public information, it seems to fit al-Qaeda's military mindset and be consistent with their objectives. But it's my take on what the bad guys are planning and I thought you might find it informative.

[sheik yerbouty]

A jive Turki!

[secretagent]

Seems a good working analysis to hang facts on.

...the rather transparent alliance between Iraq and al-Qaeda (something that was made abundantly clear by bin Laden's recent audio, as well as al-Qaeda's relationship with the Chechen rebels)...

I don't know yet the connection between between Iraq and the Chechen rebels, or how al Qaeda and the Chechens means al Qaeda and Iraq.

[swarthyguy]

>>the BBC story about thousands of Saudis arming themselves for jihad

You must remember that incident where a Saudi "drunk" driver crashed into the gate at the US embassy or a consulate. Speculation here was a foiled attack.

Keep those posts coming; you should consider posting them as individual items as events warrant.

[Angelus Errare]

Al-Qaeda's relationship with Iraq is a little bit different from al-Qaeda's relationship with the Chechens. In the case of the latter, the top Chechen field marshals (Amir ibn al-Khattab, Arbi Barayev, and Shamil Basayev) are all members of al-Qaeda and thus receives instructions from Shura Majlis (al-Qaeda's politburo or board of directors) as far as the direction of their jihad goes as well as finances, training, recruits, and weaponry. The court indictment of Zacarias Moussaoui, for example, describes him as an al-Qaeda recruiter in Britain and Ireland for the Chechens, sending in new troops to replace those who have been captured or killed by Russian forces. The CIA has detected satellite phone calls from the Pankisi Gorge in Georgia (which is basically the HQ for the Chechen leadership) to other al-Qaeda leaders worldwide requesting instructions, particularly to Saif al-Adel (the group's military commander) in Iran.

In addition, bin Laden's latest audiotape listed the Moscow Theater seige as being on par with other al-Qaeda attacks in Yemen and Indonesia. The Chechephile Western media has by and large refused to acknowledge that such a connection exists, the evidence speaks otherwise.

But while the Chechens are essentially an al-Qaeda franchise, al-Qaeda's relationship with Baghdad is much more complex and is essentially a partnership agreement. The Iraqi al-Qaeda in Ansar al-Islam keep Saddam's Kurdish enemies at bay, and in exchange al-Qaeda receives WMD expertise and aid from Iraq (such as the reports back in August that al-Qaeda had successfully weaponized ricin in northern Iraq) as well as training facilities (Salman Pak) and weaponry. In return, al-Qaeda attacks the United States and Iraq has plausible deniability on anything they do, right up to nuclear terrorism. After all, if a nuke goes off in the US, al-Qaeda can easily claim that it was stolen from Russia. Al-Qaeda gets a great victory against the US and Saddam gets the mass destabilization of his enemy.

The latest bin Laden audio threatened retaliation against America and its allies if the US attacked Iraq. Now this is highly unusual because al-Qaeda has basically sat in background while Israel basically destroyed the infrastructure of the Palestinian Authority. And, as far too many pundits have pointed out, al-Qaeda has numerous ideological differences with Iraq. So if they aren't working together, why exactly would bin Laden threaten retaliation if they were attacked. You'll notice that al-Qaeda made no similar statements about defending Pakistan during the very real threat of invasion by India over the summer. So why would they make an exception to Iraq? The answer is that General Musharraf is no friend of bin Laden, one of the reasons al-Qaeda has attempted to assassinate him at least twice. Saddam Hussein is, hence bin Laden's warning to the US that he will turn any attack on Iraq into a much broader conflict.

Regarding the bit of "drunk driving" around the US Embassy earlier this summer, I think that the incident was much more likely a "dry run" test than an actual car bombing attempt. Al-Qaeda traditionally tries to keep most of its terrorism in Saudi Arabia (i.e. the Saudi National Guard Building, Khobar Towers, these "alcohol smuggling" car bombs, the pot-shots at a US jetliner, and the recent McDonalds attacks) fairly low-yield so as not to jeopardize bin Laden's enormous popularity among the Saudi citizenry.

[secretagent]

Thanks. I agree with swarthyguy: you have enough info packed in your posts to generate separate threads.

I'd like threads on bullet points to use in talk show call-ins.

[aristeides]

What, if anything, is the significance of the fact that Clinton and Prince Turki were near-contemporary undergraduates at Georgetown (Clinton class of '68, Turki class of '67)?

[aristeides]

I don't know what the connection is between the Chechen terrorists and the two Web sites qoqaz.net and azzam.com. But, when I used to look at those sites, they had lots of info on the Chechen fighting, and they exhibited obvious sympathy, at least, with al Qaeda.

[Angelus Errare]

I'm not quite certain that there is any, given that Georgetown is a fairly big university and I'm not familiar with either individual's class schedule. Still, if Turki did cultivate an association with Clinton it would certainly explain his rather dubious response to the killing of US soldiers in two separate major attacks Saudi Arabia as well as his willingness to overlook the close association between the Kosovo Liberation Army and al-Qaeda.

Qoqaz and Azzam (now running under the name Waaqiah) are both under the jurisdiction of al-Qaeda's media committee headed up by Suleiman Abu Ghaith, just like al-Neda, Jehad Online, al-Muhajiroun, and dozens if not hundreds of other websites that regularly put out propoganda about dozens of American soldiers being killed in Afghanistan that are also circulated in anti-Musharraf Pakistani newspapers like the Baluchistan Post. In addition, the websites also send regular messages from the leadership to cell members and supporters in the West.

The official website of the Chechen jihad, the now-defunct Kavkaz Center, likewise circulated all kinds of anti-Western and al-Qaeda propoganda despite the fact that pre-9/11 liberal academics and politicians in Europe and the US were (and still are) one of the few restraining influences on the Russians. I should also add that Kavkaz carried the same "news" regularly put out by Azzam and as Kavkaz is run by none other than the Chechen Ministry of (Dis)Information, this would tend to validate surface claims of a link between al-Qaeda and Chechnya. The most damning evidence, however, is that both Khattab and Basayev attended al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan in the early 1990s. Graduating from al-Qaeda training camps (or at least the ones that train operatives roughly equivalent to the officer corps in our own army) includes making bayat (swearing unconditional allegiance) to Osama bin Laden.

[Sal]

What, if anything, is the significance of the fact that Clinton and Prince Turki were near-contemporary undergraduates at Georgetown (Clinton class of '68, Turki class of '67)?

Not to mention the significance of the fact that the relatively pro-Western Prince Bandar just resigned as the Ambassador to USA and we now have Prince Turki, the Dane-gelt financier to OBL as his replacement--a replacement with diplomatic immunity... Al Qaeda's man in Washington.

Is something about to go down?