Was it really al-qaeda who bombed in Saudi Arabia?

[loudnclear]

Or is it an operation to discredit al-qaeda in the eyes of other Arabs?
Something does not seem right about this whole thing. Warnings from "alleged intercepted" intelligence and yet nothing to prevent it from happening. Has al-qaeda taken responsibility? Would they do this during Ramadan? Smells like the UN bombing. Would al-qaeda go through so much to NOT kill Americans but to kill Palestinians and Lebanese (news reporitn that it was mostly Palestinians and Lebanese in the complex that was bombed. This is getting more an more fishy. If we couldn't stop the Iraqis from aiding and abetting insurgents, what better way to get them to stop than to perform actions that would turn the people against the insurgents/al-qaeda?

Convince me that I am wrong here. Once again...who has the most to gain from this horrendous act?

[Old and In the Way]

1. Who benefits?

From my perspective, the Bush Republican Party and the Al-Qaeda are the 2 prime beneficiaries of terrorism. Almost a mutually enabling co-dependency....one couldn't exist without the other.

That reminds me...anyone know what's up with Grover Norquist?

[KoKo]

16. Norquist story seems dead on the vine. If it's the big one lots of us

posted about on DU last week......I think it's just gone off where all the "breakthrough" stories about these Evil folks go. Connections to the Saudi's don't get much airing in US Media for long.

[Tinoire]

2. Who? The only two

who had anything to gain from the Iraq war. Make that 3 if you want to count our little Poodle though I just see us and the UK as one entity... All of it really just a continuation of the Anglo-Saxon quest for world dominance.

[candy331]

3. I too wondered why

since the US embassy was closed. Seemed fishy to me too, really skeptical of this one.

[9215]

32. What is this? A genetic causality for being bad?

Put a little work into it, huh. :eyes:

[0007]

42. A genetic causality?

Cause and effect is always genuine. Staged affairs are of the genetic type commonly encountered from ones that have a need for the cause, 'eh?

:eyes:

[9215]

46. Your point?

please

[Yupster]

4. One of Osama's goals

is to get rid of the Royal Saudi government that is defiling itself with western ways and western friends. They have been in open warfare for the last year at least with shoorouts and arrests routine.

This makes perfect sense to me. They're trying to destabilize the royal government so it can be replaced with an Islamic government.

[Old and In the Way]

5. But, then you look at UBL and realize that his family is in

tight with the House of Saud.....and were also board members of the Carlyle Group. So is UBL a renegade? Does he want to bring down the family (and his father's honor) along with the princes of the Kingdom?

He wanted the US out of SA and the ME.....but does he also want the financial benefactors of Wahhibism and the bin Laden Group done away with too?

Destabilizing SA is also part of the PNAC plan....and maybe this will also redirect Al-Qaeda's interests from Iraq?

[_Jumper_]

8. His family has disowned him

n/t

[KoKo]

19. No, there was just a story this week from one of his brother's wives that

said the BinLaden family doesn't disown anyone, really. It's very close and she said that Osama was still part of it, even if they don't approve of what he does. Do any of us ever really disown a family member no matter how bad the crime? I don't know. But their situation is much closer for religious reasons than we would be here in the America of today.

[Yupster]

23. Osama's family is so large

that I'm sure there is every opinion of him possible represented within it.

It would be a good thesis paper.

One person could prove Osama's family supports him, and another could prove they hate him, and they could each have a dozen primary sources.

[Clark Can WIN]

35. Do any of us ever really disown a family member no matter how bad the crim

Yes definately. My Uncle was disowned for stealing from my grandparents. He was banished completely. My nephew has been banned from the family for allowing his wife to beat his two oldest children and then abandoning them. He can go to hell too.

Somebody in my family masterminds the death of 3000 human beings then HELL YEAH we disown them.

[Yupster]

17. Two points

1. His family disowned him years ago.

2. UBL has about 70 siblings. His family is hundreds of people. It is not a family like a typical American family with a husband, wife and two kids. UVBL's dad had many wives, and they each had many kids, and many of them either never met each other or met each other once a year at a feast.

[Aidoneus]

24. the al-Saud ruling family is "al-Qai'dah" enemy #1

They're decadent hypocrites who long since sold themselves out as puppets to the "west".
That doesn't explain this particular event, taking things at face value it appears as very bizarre..perhaps it was an assassination attempt on the/some royals in the area that did not get close enough. :shrug:

I get that idea from--
'Saudi bombing strikes near royals’ homes'
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6A70C791-B34B-4910-A517-7AC73F4680B2.htm

Even considering the make "al-Qai'dah" look bad theory, I don't see why the zionists or Americans would have this done. Contrary to all of the shrill barking out of state propaganda sectors, the al-Saud dictatorship is one of the key methods that the US gov't/economy forces itself into controlling the region and international economies. The meticulously cultivated ties would be silly to sabotage at a whim.

I'll lean towards botched assassination attempt if anything right now, as the Interior Minister Prince Nayaf's houses were nearby..

[Darranar]

29. They bribe and appease terrorists to survive...

though they are Al Qaeda's enemy.

As for your second point, I agree.

[9215]

33. So they are cutting off the hand that feeds them?

Not likely.

What we know about OBL's true feelings toward the Saudi's is filtered through the media and probably Bullshit.

What we do know is that Saudi Arabia is financing Al Qaeda and has gone to great lenghts to make the world community think otherwise. Why would they finance an org that is trying to do them in?

Answer: they wouldn't.

[lumpy]

40. We'd like to kmow where you get the

information that Al Qaeda is being financed by the Saudi government

[9215]

43. Here you go

There are alot of other links. The bombers in Bali had their finances traced by the Aussie intelligence community back to Saudi's.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=24095&forum=DCForumID61

Legal Counterattack (Saudis vs 9-11 lawsuit)
April 16 - After months of working below the radar, a huge U.S. legal team hired by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has sprung into action and begun a major counteroffensive against a landmark lawsuit seeking $1 trillion in damages on behalf of the victims of the September 11 terror attacks.
THE OPENING DEFENSE SALVO in what promises to be a bruising legal battle was fired last week when a trio of lawyers from Baker & Botts, a prestigious Dallas-based law firm, filed a motion on behalf of Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, the Saudi defense minister. The motion attacked the 9-11 lawsuit as a “broadside indictment of Saudi government, religion and culture.” It also argued that, as the third-ranking official of a foreign government, their client is immune from any U.S. legal action and that he should therefore be dismissed from the case altogether.
But in laying out their arguments, Sultan’s U.S. lawyers also presented highly detailed new evidence of the Saudi government’s role in funneling millions of dollars to a web of Islamic charities that are widely suspected by U.S. officials of covertly financing the operations of Al Qaeda and other international terrorist groups.
more....
<http://www.msnbc.com/news/901320.asp?cp1=1>

[9215]

44. here is another one

Saudi Princes linked to terror funds....Bali bombing: http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=16977&forum=DCForumID61
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/04/1046540187386.html

Saudi princes linked to terror funds
March 5 2003
By Mark Forbes
Canberra
The Australian Federal Police is investigating allegations that European organisations helped fund the Bali bombing operations.
The revelation follows a report on the ABC's Foreign Correspondent program detailing claims that Saudi Arabian funds, funnelled through Europe, were used by the Bali bombers.
Washington-based lawyer Allan Gerson told the program he had evidence that Saudi Arabians gave money to terrorists in Europe who visited Bali.
An AFP spokeswoman confirmed that inquiries were being made. "It is possible there could have been a link between the European groups mentioned by Mr Gerson and those involved in the Bali bombings," she said.
She declined to comment on the claimed links to Saudi Arabia......
Dr Gerson, leading a bid on behalf of September 11 victims to sue Saudi Arabian banks, charities and royal family members, said it was likely the European cells funded by Saudis helped fund the Bali attack.
He could not reveal too many details because his evidence had been uncovered through judicial co-operation with European nations. He said the money from Saudi Arabia went to terrorists connected with that country.
Former FBI analyst Matt Levitt, now with the Washington Institute, told the program that one of Saudi Arabia's largest charities, Al Haramain, was set up to fund terrorism and was now a front for terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda.
Confessions of al-Qaeda members revealed that wealthy Saudis had funded Jemaah Islamiah through the Al Haramain foundation, Mr Levitt said. JI is allegedly responsible for the Bali bombings.
Many Saudi charities were directly linked to terrorist activities and several of these had strong links to the Government and the royal family, he said.
The Indonesian and Singaporean governments are expected to resist any efforts by lawyers, acting for September 11 victims, to surrender intelligence material that might assist their civil damages case. A lawyer representing families of 600 people killed in the September 11 attacks said that confidential court documents show a link between Saudi Arabian financial organisations and suspects in the Bali bombings.
The lawsuit has been filed in the US District Court and names as defendants three Saudi princes, seven banks and several international Muslim charities that allegedly gave funds to al-Qaeda.
Diplomatic sources in Washington said there was concern the lawyers may try to use the Bali link to pressure the governments of Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia to disclose intelligence material.
- with Marian Wilkinson
US Treasury Sectretary issues Paul O'Neil issues warning about charities like Al Hamain being used for terror. Notice how he has been "marginalized by the Bushies. This also shows the link to Balkans. Need to corroborate with Michel Chossudovsky's work on Balkan terrorist orgs in file "Balkan Bribes". Also Google Halliburton muscle org. Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) +Hamain. They are connected. http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2002/03/dot031102fact.html
....The branch offices of Al Haramain in Somalia and Bosnia are clearly linked to terrorist financing. The Somalia office of Al-Haramain is linked to Usama bin Laden's al-Qaida network and Al-Itihaad al-Islamiya (AIAI), a Somali terrorist group. Al-Haramain Somalia employed AIAI members and provided them with salaries through Al-Barakaat Bank, which was designated on November 7, 2001 under E.O. 13224 because of its activities as a principal source of funding, intelligence and money transfers for Usama bin Laden....

[alcuno]

6. They'll think it was either the US or Israel.

10 bucks says that's how the "Arab Street" will see it. It was most likely Al Qaeda, but that won't matter.

[_Jumper_]

9. Initially they will...

...but after they see the Saudis state that it was Al-Qaeda most of them will change their minds.

[maha]

7. It might very well be al Qaeda.

Remember, al Qaeda's first goal all along has been to get the ruling Saudi family out of power. Their dislike of the U.S. is peripheral to that.

[Silverhair]

10. Another CT.

If you can, get a copy, or better yet watch, if you can find it, Jeane Kirkpatrick's 1984 Rep Convention speech: "Blame America First". She roasted the left for having the knee jerk response to blame America for anything that happened, anywhere in the world at any time. That is what you are doing here, and it plays directly into the RWs hands. You give them a little bit more ammunition.

Your conspiracy theory has no evidence to support it at all. You begin with the assumption that America is evil, and proceed from there.

[maggrwaggr]

12. well you're proceeding with the assumption that it's "Al Queda"

no?

We have been lied to in a very big way.

How can we trust any official stories?

Whatever they tell is just as likely a lie as not. We have no way of knowing.

I beg you look at this picture (that you've probably already seen). The last image is from the official C.I.A. tape that was "found" in Afghanistan. The man is obviously not the Saddam bin Laden of all the other photos (and every other photo of the guy that we've seen).

[Old and In the Way]

20. Maybe Usama had one of those "extreme makeovers"

nt

[Old and In the Way]

18. Not America....Bush

Big difference....you shouldn't confuse the 2. Bush is not America.

And only the really shitty that's been done in America's name has been the RW Republican Party. Iran-COntra, South American Death Squads, the arming of Saddam. So I could give a shit what the RWs think...they are the ones that are enabling the unelected criminals who are destroying America's international reputation and goodwill.

[KoKo]

21. America isn't evil, but we've done some very evil things. As any large

government does, but in our case we always have preached to ourselves that we are more noble than other countries. That we are special. What's special about a doctrine of "pre-emption?" A doctrine now of "Occupation," of a country who didn't attack us or threaten to attack us?

[maggrwaggr]

11. unfortunately we'll never know

but I, too, would look at the motivation.

Who's been dwindling in popularity lately?

Who needs to remind the world that terrorists do horrible things that don't make any sense?

Who's political life depends on reminding people that there's a "war on terror"?

Of course, the "Official Saddam Bin Laden Mythical Figure" would also have motivation if he indeed wants to foment rebellion against his own people and presumably family.

[_Jumper_]

13. If Bush and co. did it

Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden's home turf, would be the last place they'd choose. They'd execute an attack in a Western nation to A) remind Americans of the threat B) make people in other Western nations believe that Al-Qaeda threatens them too, with would help them build coalitions of the willing in the future.

[maggrwaggr]

14. you make an excellent point.

hell, they'd probably pick France.

[Yupster]

36. But it must be Bush, because

Bush does everything, therefore it was Bush.

Simple logic.

[maggrwaggr]

50. oh no! You've got it wrong! It's Rove who is omnipotent!

How long have you been on DU? You should know that by now!

:)

[loudnclear]

48. Not now. They really need the Iraqis and other Arabs to turn against

al-qaeda. This is a perfect way to achieve that goal. They couldn't get their support any other way. And this still may not work!

[KoKo]

15. It smells to high heaven to me also! Something just isn't adding up that

a compound with Saudi's and a few foreign nationals (mostly families according to early reports) would be targeted for a suicide bombing.

Being sort of a :tinfoilhat: speculator, I was thinking CIA did it! But, I decided that was really too far over the top. Then there were the reports of increased Air Force traffic from the Scottish Peace Groups Website, and some other things which had some of us speculating that we were going to attack somewhere in the ME. Then some others said Bush would like "regime change" in Saudi Arabia and that Poppy/Cheney met with Prince Bandar (is that his name) recently and that meant something was up.

Who knows. We live in a Spy Novel it seems, since Chimp came into power. But, having something happen in Saudi Arabia would be good for whom? Certainly not those innocent folks who were injured or died. But, it's hard to see what makes any sense in this.

[maggrwaggr]

22. the last thing Bush wants is regime change in Saudi Arabia

who would pay him then?

They are so in bed with the Saudi royal family that ......

well gosh, Saudis can attack our country and we don't even do anything about it!

[T Bone]

45. There are factions in SA and the Saudi ruling family as well

That country is such a maze of loyalties and factions we can't rule out that maybe it was one faction of the Saudi royal family trying to do in some other members of the royal family. Royal Succession being what it is and all. Why wouldn't some faction of the Suadi royal family do that against another and blame it on al-Qaeda. I don't think it can be ruled out. Funny this blast comes right after *Junior* blabbering around last week that several ME nations need to 'democratize'. Any chance the victims were more 'democratically' inclined than the ruling Saudis in power now?

[ComerPerro]

25. Tough call

I was under the impression that Osama bin Laden (oh, yeah, that guy, the guy we said we were going to capture two years ago) wasn't very happy with the Saudi's. So it very well could have been Al Qaeda.

However, Baker and Botts is representing the Saudis in a case against the American families of 9/11 victims. Nothing proves that Saudi's don't have links to terrorism like a terrorist attack against them...

So...

Who knows. We never will, that's for sure.

[economic justice]

26. I Agree

Doesn't sound like the Al-Qaeda modus operandi we've been told about at all. The rush to lay the blame also is bizarre. Considering who was hit, why would anybody assume it was them? Doesn't make sense.

[_Jumper_]

27. It makes sense

Bin Laden's primary goal is to overthrow the Saudi regime and rule it himself.

[Walt Starr]

28. I've got a better question

Was it really al-Queda who hijacked airplanes and flew them into buildings on 9/11/01?

I still haven't seen any evidence to support THAT conspiracy theory.

On this one, I believe it was Israel and wil continue to do so until I see some real evidence to the contrary.

[Yupster]

37. It must have been Bush

who was behind the hijackings, because Bush does everything.

[Solomon]

30. I don't even think al-qaeda bombed the world trade centers.

What else is new?

[leftofthedial]

31. the most successful "terrists" on the planet

are the Bush GOPNAC Cabal.

political assassination of Clinton
destruction of the California economy
destruction of democracy in Murka (2000 Coup, Patriot Act)
9-11
anthrax attacks
near destruction of the US economy
Afghanistan invasion for pipeline
Iraq invasion for oil, military presence in ME
UN bombing in Baghdad
Plame outing
2 Riyadh bombings

etc.

[in_cog_ni_to]

34. I believe it was an operation

orchestrated by the Bush cabal. I also think the same was true in the last attack in Saudi Arabia. We had agents in the area right before the last attack. They were probably there again, right before this one. JMCPO.

[The Magistrate]

38. There Is No Particular Reason To Doubt This Was Done By Al Queda

From the inside, the Islamic world is no un-differentiated monolith. A thing like this is no more out of the ordinary than a killing conflict between, say, Catholics and Baptists.

To the thoroughgoing radical Islamic fundamentalist, the sort of well to do Westernized persons attacked in Riyahd are munafiqun, those who outwardly profess to be believers in Islam, but who inwardly reject Islam, and for whom the hottest part of the Fire is reserved after Judgement. Such are viewed as greater enemies than whole-hearted unbelievers, and scouring the community of believers free from such is a principal purpose of the fundamentalist radical's activities.

[rman]

52. sure, Al Queda has a history of targetting Arabs

not

[0007]

39. The WWF couldn't have made it any phonier!

Nice try Rove!

[9215]

41. But who controls Al Qaeda?

This is a question that must be answered and the place to start looking is who finances them.

[loudnclear]

47. Good and most relevant question.

Good points, all.

[9215]

51. a link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=683003

[TeeYiYi]

49. Probably not . . .

http://www.wwviews.com/articles/101103/riyadh.html

TYY

[9215]

53. Kick

:kick: