Posted on 08/24/2002 9:56:15 PM PDT by GaryMontana
LONDON - Senior members of the Saudi royal family paid "protection money" totaling at least $300 million to Osama bin-Laden and the Taliban to prevent them from attacking targets in Saudi Arabia, the London Sunday Times reported yesterday.
The revelation, based on extensive investigations, was contained in papers filed in a $3,000 billion US lawsuit by lawyers representing the families of Sept. 11 victims.
According to the documents, the deal was struck after two secret meetings involving members of the Saudi royal family and al-Qaida leaders, including bin-Laden.
The cash enabled al-Qaida to fund training camps in Afghanistan that are said to have been attended by the Sept. 11 bombers.
The court documents reveal that the agreement committed bin- Laden not to use his forces to subvert the Saudi government, while the Saudis agreed to ensure that requests to extradite al- Qaida members and demands to close al-Qaida training camps were not carried out.
In addition, the Saudis agreed to supply oil and financial assistance to both the Taliban and Pakistan which, the documents report, was worth "several hundred millions" of dollars.
The revelations resulting from the investigation are likely to exacerbate already tense relations between the US and Saudi Arabia, which one analyst at the Washington-based Rand think-tank recently described at a Pentagon briefing as the "kernel of evil."
The document names the Saudi royals involved in the deal and provides details about the network of charities and businesses through which bin- Laden raised money.
The documents say the Saudi princes were informed about attacks by Islamic fundamentalists on American servicemen at a US army training facility in Riyadh in November 1995 and at the Khobar Towers barracks in June 1996, in which 19 US airmen died.
The princes decided to strike a deal with bin-Laden because they feared that al-Qaida, which opposed the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, would show its displeasure by attempting to destabilize the kingdom.
The documents say Saudi Arabia's secret service, the Istakhbarat, had decided in late 1995 to fund the Taliban and the initial decision to pay bin-Laden "protection money" was agreed at a meeting of the Saudi princes in 1996.
A further meeting in the Afghan city of Kandahar in July 1998 led to the deal between Saudi Arabia and the Taliban.
According to the documents, those present included Prince Turki al-Faisal al-Saud, then chief of the Istakhbarat, Taliban leaders, senior officers from Pakistan's secret service and bin- Laden.
Turki was said to have known bin-Laden well through family connections and also because he had hand-picked bin-Laden in the early 1980s to organize Arab volunteers who were fighting Soviet troops in Afghanistan.
The lawsuit also alleges that the Saudi royal family supported charities with close ties to bin-Laden, including a $6 million gift from Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan, to the International Islamic Relief Organization, al-Haramain, the Muslim World League and the World Assembly of Muslim Youth.
I suppose it is because at the time it surfaced, we were inundated with news. I really don't know.
I have been attenpting to find it, but no luck yet.
But who is this genie's brain?
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates are the only countries that recognize the Taliban regime. On Octo-ber 29, 1999, Jack Kelley reported in USA Today that "prominent businessmen in Saudi Arabia continue to transfer tens of million of dollars to bank accounts linked to Osama Bin Laden." Citing senior U.S. intelligence officials and a Saudi government document, Kelley said the money transfers had begun five years earlier. Kelley said one of the businessmen under investigation, Mohammad Hussein al-Amoudi, runs the largest bank in Saudi Arabia, as well as the Capitol Trust Bank in New York. Vernon Jordan, one of Bill Clinton's close friends, is his lawyer.
Here is some really old news!
Assets of Saudi princes, charities and banks should be confiscated and redistributed equally to ALL Americans in compensation of damages.
Saudi oil fields should be seized and put under American control as punishment and to prevent further sponsoring of terrorism
"He asked him, "What is your name?" He said to him, "My name is Legion, for we are many"
LOL!
Curiously enough, NASA has a web page on the Star Trek episode "Spock's Brain":
http://ic.arc.nasa.gov/projects/mba/immobots/Spock.html
Yes, this is one possible answer. But there must have been a person, or a small group of people, behind the Fall, 2001, attacks. And they had a strategy in mind, since one doesn't engage in something like that without a follow-up plan.
Undoubtedly, part of the plan is to foment mob turmoil, disorganized and chaotic, outside of anyone's control. But I do not believe that that is the whole story. (To whatever extent a "hive," as you put it, emerges, opportunistic leaders will arise to take advantage of the situation.)
So I still think this is an important question to ask: Who is running the show on the other side? It's almost a year later, and still we have very little in the way of answers.
Right. Better yet, hear the Saudis say - "see we too are VICTIMS of the nasty Jihad and are ready to help you with our oil for the fight." - that will be the way they get out of provoking siezure of their cartel. A narrow escape now that will may buy them a decade before the next big failure.
BLOOMBERG NEW YORK Crude oil fell after a Saudi official said members of OPEC would make up for any supply disruptions should the US attack Iraq.
The official, who asked not to be identified, said top oil exporter Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members have a policy of ensuring adequate supply at all times.
...
They are Mideast con artists, that think they are masters of Mideast intrigue. Telling Bush he can't continue with his War on Terror, or use our base in Saudi, unless and until he personally settles the Israel/Palestinian issue, what a crock. Wipe out Saudi Arabia, and 70% of terrorsim world wide will vanish over night. Not to mention the U.N. chairman having to scrambling to find another sugar daddy to buy his suits.
As you said, this is an old news and doesn't even mention the funding of all the Wahabbi mosques here in the US (which are terrorist strongholds within the US). My guess is that this is an opportunity for certain elements to divert attention from Iraq and convince the public to attack Saudi Arabia instead. (Which we are not ready for, even if Bush weren't so attached.)
We seem to be taking the easiest targets first--which seems like a good strategy to me. As far as the Saudis are concerned, revenge is a dish best served cold--when all of our ducks are in a row.
The Iraqis are more secular and want out from under Hussein's reign of terror. Iran is in similar circumstance. The Saudi people are more radical than the House of Saud and will be a harder nut to crack. I think there are some who would love to see us make the mistake of starting with them right now. Just a guess...
Cansider the press - George W. Bush probably won't order a military attack on Iraq in the near future because Karl Rove is unlikely to let him.
Somewhere there is a recent quote from Rove about the election looking like it will be determined at the last days of the campaign.
New moon: Sept. 6th
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.