Prince Bandar, head of Saudi Arabia’s national security council
Saudi Arabia's rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted, according to court documents revealed yesterday
Previously secret files describe how investigators were told they faced "another 7/7" and the loss of "British lives on British streets" if they pressed on with their inquiries and the Saudis carried out their threat to cut off intelligence
Prince Bandar, the head of the Saudi national security council, and son of the crown prince, was alleged in court to be the man behind the threats to hold back information about suicide bombers and terrorists. He faces accusations that he himself took more than £1bn in secret payments from the arms company BAE
He was accused in yesterday's high court hearings of flying to London in December 2006 and uttering threats which made the prime minister, Tony Blair, force an end to the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery allegations involving Bandar and his family
The threats halted the fraud inquiry, but triggered an international outcry, with allegations that Britain had broken international anti-bribery treaties
Lord Justice Moses, hearing the civil case with Mr Justice Sullivan, said the government appeared to have "rolled over" after the threats. He said one possible view was that it was "just as if a gun had been held to the head" of the government
The SFO investigation began in 2004, when Robert Wardle, its director, studied evidence unearthed by the Guardian. This revealed that massive secret payments were going from BAE to Saudi Arabian princes, to promote arms deals
Yesterday, anti-corruption campaigners began a legal action to overturn the decision to halt the case. They want the original investigation restarted, arguing the government had caved into blackmail
The judge said he was surprised the government had not tried to persuade the Saudis to withdraw their threats. He said: "If that happened in our jurisdiction [the UK], they would have been guilty of a criminal offence". Counsel for the claimants said it would amount to perverting the course of justice
Wardle told the court in a witness statement: "The idea of discontinuing the investigation went against my every instinct as a prosecutor. I wanted to see where the evidence led."
But a paper trail set out in court showed that days after Bandar flew to London to lobby the government, Blair had written to the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, and the SFO was pressed to halt its investigation
The case officer on the inquiry, Matthew Cowie, was described by the judge as "a complete hero" for standing up to pressure from BAE's lawyers, who went behind his back and tried to secretly lobby the attorney general to step in at an early stage and halt the investigations
The campaigners argued yesterday that when BAE failed at its first attempt to stop the case, it changed tactics. Having argued it should not be investigated in order to promote arms sales, it then recruited ministers and their Saudi associates to make the case that "national security" demanded the case be covered up
Moses said that after BAE's commercial arguments failed, "Lo and behold, the next thing there is a threat to national security!" Dinah Rose, counsel for the Corner House and the Campaign against the Arms Trade, said: "Yes, they start to think of a different way of putting it." Moses responded: "That's very unkind!"
Documents seen yesterday also show the SFO warned the attorney general that if he dropped the case, it was likely it would be taken up by the Swiss and the US. These predictions proved accurate
Bandar's payments were published in the Guardian and Switzerland subsequently launched a money-laundering inquiry into the Saudi arms deal. The US department of justice has launched its own investigation under the foreign corrupt practices act into the British money received in the US by Bandar while he was ambassador to Washington
Prince Bandar yesterday did not contest a US court order preventing him from taking the proceeds of property sales out of the country. The order will stay in place until a lawsuit brought by a group of BAE shareholders is decided. The group alleges that BAE made £1bn of "illegal bribe payments" to Bandar while claiming to be a "highly ethical, law-abiding corporation"
The arms company BAE secretly paid Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia more than £1bn in connection with Britain's biggest ever weapons contract, it is alleged today A series of payments from the British firm was allegedly channelled through a US bank in Washington to an account controlled by one of the most colourful members of the Saudi ruling clan, who spent 20 years as their ambassador in the US
It is claimed that payments of £30m were paid to Prince Bandar every quarter for at least 10 years
It is alleged by insider legal sources that the money was paid to Prince Bandar with the knowledge and authorisation of Ministry of Defence officials under the Blair government and its predecessors. For more than 20 years, ministers have claimed they knew nothing of secret commissions, which were outlawed by Britain in 2002
An inquiry by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into the transactions behind the £43bn Al-Yamamah arms deal, which was signed in 1985, is understood to have uncovered details of the payments to Prince Bandar
But the investigation was halted last December by the SFO after a review by the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith
He said it was in Britain's national interest to halt the investigation, and that there was little prospect of achieving convictions
Tony Blair said he took "full responsibility" for the decision
However, according to those familiar with the discussions at the time, Lord Goldsmith had warned colleagues that British "government complicity" was in danger of being revealed unless the SFO's corruption inquiries were stopped
The abandonment of the investigation provoked an outcry from anti-corruption campaigners, and led to the world's official bribery watchdog, the OECD, launching its own investigation
The fresh allegations may also cause BAE problems in America, where corrupt payments to foreign politicians have been outlawed since 1977
The allegations of payments to Prince Bandar is bound to ignite fresh controversy over the original deal and the aborted SFO investigation
The Saudi diplomat is known to have played a key role with Mrs Thatcher in setting up Britain's biggest ever series of weapons deals
For more than 20 years Al-Yamamah, Arabic for "dove", has involved the sale of 120 Tornado aircraft, Hawk warplanes and other military equipment
According to legal sources familiar with the records, BAE Systems made cash transfers to Prince Bandar every three months for 10 years or more
BAE drew the money from a confidential account held at the Bank of England that had been set up to facilitate the Al-Yamamah deal. Up to £2bn a year was deposited in the accounts as part of a complex arrangement allowing Saudi oil to be sold in return for shipments of Tornado aircraft and other arms
Both BAE and the government's arms sales department, the Defence Export Services Organisation (Deso), allegedly had drawing rights on the funds, which were held in a special Ministry of Defence account run by the government banker, the paymaster general
Those close to Deso say regular payments were drawn down by BAE and despatched to Prince Bandar's account at Riggs bank in Washington DC
Under the terms of a previously unknown MoD instruction from the department's permanent secretary, Sir Frank Cooper, the payment deal would have required Deso authorisation
The money was not characterised as commission, but as quasi-official fees for marketing services. The payments are alleged to have continued for at least 10 years and beyond 2002, when Britain outlawed corrupt payments to overseas officials
SFO investigators led by assistant director Helen Garlick first stumbled on the alleged payments, according to legal sources, when they unearthed highly classified documents at the MoD during their three-year investigation
Before the investigation was abandoned, the SFO interviewed Alan Garwood, head of Deso. Sources close to the arms sales unit say that he and Stephen Pollard, the commercial director of the Saudi project, were questioned about the reasons for authorising the payments
Prince Bandar, currently head of the country's national security council, was asked about the alleged payments by the Guardian this week
He did not respond
BAE Systems also would not explain the alleged payments. The company said: "Your approach is in common with that of the least responsible elements of the media - that is to assume BAE Systems' guilt in complete ignorance of the facts."
Its spokesman, John Neilson, added: "We have little doubt that among the reasons the attorney general considered the case was doomed was the fact that we acted in accordance with ... the relevant contracts, with the approval of the government of Saudi Arabia, together with, where relevant, that of the UK MoD."
The attorney general's office would not discuss claims about Lord Goldsmith's concerns of "government complicity" in the payments
A spokesman said the SFO inquiry had been halted because of the "real and serious threat to national security"
"There were major legal difficulties ... given BAE's claim that the payments were made in accordance with the agreed contractual arrangements". The spokesman added: "None of this is altered by the Guardian story."
The MoD, where minister Paul Drayson runs Britain's government arms sales unit, also refused to elaborate
"The MoD is unable to respond to the points made ... since to do so would involve disclosing confidential information about Al-Yamamah, and that would cause the damage that ending the investigation was designed to prevent," a spokesman said
The Liberal Democrat deputy leader, Vince Cable, called for an urgent inquiry into the new disclosures last night
"This is potentially more significant and damaging than anything previously revealed. It is unforgivable if the British government has been actively conniving in under-the-counter payments to a major figure in the Saudi government
"There must be a full parliamentary inquiry into whether the government has deceived the public and undermined the anti-corruption legislation which it itself passed through parliament."
He added: "It increasingly looks as if the motives behind the decision to pull the SFO inquiry were less to do with UK national interests but more to do with the personal interests of one of two powerful Saudi ministers ... Tony Blair's claims that the government has been motivated by national security considerations look increasingly hollow."
Last month, Dr Cable raised the issue of BAE in the Commons and accused Prince Bandar of benefiting personally from the Al-Yamamah deal
The new disclosures may also make BAE's attempted takeover of the US-based Armor Holdings more difficult. The deal requires approval from US regulators
Separately, the state department has protested to the Foreign Office about the ending of the SFO inquiry, saying it undermines global efforts to stamp out corruption by exporters.
Story of a £43bn deal
1985 Al-Yamamah agreement signed by Saudi defence minister Prince Sultan and the then defence secretary Michael Heseltine. Saudis agree to buy 72 Tornado and 30 Hawk warplanes. The deal - "the dove" in Arabic - will in time be worth £43bn to BAE
1989 National Audit Office (NAO) starts inquiry into allegations that members of Saudi royal family and middlemen were secretly paid huge bribes to land Al-Yamamah contract
1992 MPs and auditor general Sir John Bourn suppress NAO report after government claims it would upset Saudis. Report never published
2001 Whistleblower alleges BAE operates "slush fund" to keep sweet the Saudi prince in charge of country's air force, but MoD covers up allegations
2004 Second whistleblower discloses to Guardian further details of slush fund. Serious Fraud Office starts investigation into alleged BAE corruption
2006 Government halts SFO inquiry; investigators were about to gain access to Swiss accounts thought to have been linked to Saudi royal family
2007 OECD, the world's anti-bribery watchdog, rebukes Blair government for terminating SFO investigation, and launches own inquiry
Saudi royal Prince Bandar Bin Sultan's assets frozen
From The Sunday TimesFebruary 10, 2008
PRINCE Bandar Bin Sultan, the former Saudi Arabian ambassador to America, has been hit by a court order in effect freezing some of his US assets, as part of a class-action lawsuit over bribery allegations at British defence giant BAE Systems
A Michigan pension scheme ? the City of Harper Woods Employees’ Retirement System ? has been granted a restraining order, according to documents filed in the US district of Columbia and seen by The Sunday Times
The order, granted last Tuesday, blocks Bandar from transferring out of the country any money he makes from the sale of property in America
Bandar owns one of the world’s most expensive homes, Hala Ranch, in Pitkin County, Aspen, Colorado. The bulk of the estate was put up for sale for $135m (£69m) in July 2006 after Bandar reportedly decided he was spending too much time in Saudi Arabia to take advantage of the lavish property
The 56,000 sq ft main residence is bigger than the White House and has 15 bedrooms, 16 bathrooms, an indoor swimming pool, steam and exercise rooms and includes a private children’s wing with four bedroom suites and a sitting room. The estate spans 95 acres, includes two 15,000 sq ft guest houses, tennis and racquetball courts and equestrian facilities. It even has a dedicated waste-water treatment plant, a car wash and petrol pumps
The latest move comes after the pension scheme launched a class-action suit on behalf of rebel investors last September against the BAE board, as well as former directors and Bandar
The case centres on allegations that bribes worth $2 billion were paid to Saudi officials, including Bandar, as part of BAE’s agreement to supply military aircraft and other equipment to Saudi Arabia
The lawsuit accuses BAE directors of “intentional, reckless and negligent breaches of their fiduciary duty”
BAE has strongly denied making illegal payments, while Bandar has consistently rejected the allegations.
Sources close to the civil action said the pension scheme had become concerned that Bandar could seek to move funds out of America
In what world do these people live? True, there'll be no public executions outside Buckingham Palace when His Royal Highness rides in stately formation down The Mall. We gave up capital punishment about half a century ago. There won't even be a backhander – or will there? – which is the Saudi way of doing business. But for King Abdullah to tell the world, as he did in a BBC interview yesterday, that Britain is not doing enough to counter "terrorism", and that most countries are not taking it as seriously as his country is, is really pushing it. Weren't most of the 11 September 2001 hijackers from – er – Saudi Arabia? Is this the land that is really going to teach us lessons?
The sheer implausibility of the claim that Saudi intelligence could have prevented the London bombings if only the British Government had taken it seriously, seems to have passed the Saudi monarch by. "We have sent information to Great Britain before the terrorist attacks in Britain but unfortunately no action was taken. And it may have been able to maybe avert the tragedy," he told the BBC. This claim is frankly incredible
The sad, awful truth is that we fete these people, we fawn on them, we supply them with fighter jets, whisky and whores. No, of course, there will be no visas for this reporter because Saudi Arabia is no democracy. Yet how many times have we been encouraged to think otherwise about a state that will not even allow its women to drive? Kim Howells, the Foreign Office minister, was telling us again yesterday that we should work more closely with the Saudis, because we "share values" with them. And what values precisely would they be, I might ask?
Saudi Arabia is a state which bankrolled – a definite no-no this for discussion today – Saddam's legions as they invaded Iran in 1980 (with our Western encouragement, let it be added). And which said nothing – a total and natural silence – when Saddam swamped the Iranians with gas. The Iraqi war communiqué made no bones about it. "The waves of insects are attacking the eastern gates of the Arab nation. But we have the pesticides to wipe them out."
Did the Saudi royal family protest? Was there any sympathy for those upon whom the pesticides would be used? No. The then Keeper of the Two Holy Places was perfectly happy to allow gas to be used because he was paying for it – components were supplied, of course, by the US – while the Iranians died in hell. And we Brits are supposed to be not keeping up with our Saudi friends when they are "cracking down on terrorism"
Like the Saudis were so brilliant in cracking down on terror in 1979 when hundreds of gunmen poured into the Great Mosque at Mecca, an event so mishandled by a certain commander of the Saudi National Guard called Prince Abdullah that they had to call in toughs from a French intervention force. And it was a former National Guard officer who led the siege
Saudi Arabia's role in the 9/11 attacks has still not been fully explored. Senior members of the royal family expressed the shock and horror expected of them, but no attempt was made to examine the nature of Wahhabism, the state religion, and its inherent contempt for all representation of human activity or death. It was Saudi Muslim legal iconoclasm which led directly to the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan by the Taliban, Saudi Arabia's friends. And only weeks after Kamal Salibi, a Lebanese history professor, suggested in the late 1990s that once-Jewish villages in what is now Saudi Arabia might have been locations in the Bible, the Saudis sent bulldozers to destroy the ancient buildings there
In the name of Islam, Saudi organisations have destroyed hundreds of historic structures in Mecca and Medina and UN officials have condemned the destruction of Ottoman buildings in Bosnia by a Saudi aid agency, which decided they were "idolatrous". Were the twin towers in New York another piece of architecture which Wahhabis wanted to destroy?
Nine years ago a Saudi student at Harvard produced a remarkable thesis which argued that US forces had suffered casualties in bombing attacks in Saudi Arabia because American intelligence did not understand Wahhabism and had underestimated the extent of hostility to the US presence in the kingdom. Nawaf Obaid even quoted a Saudi National Guard officer as saying "the more visible the Americans became, the darker I saw the future of the country ". The problem is that Wahhabi puritanism meant that Saudi Arabia would always throw up men who believe they had been chosen to "cleanse" their society from corruption, yet Abdul Wahhab also preached that royal rulers should not be overthrown. Thus the Saudis were unable to confront the duality, that protection-and-threat that Wahhabism represented for them
Prince Bandar, formerly Saudi Arabia's ambassador to Washington, once characterised his country's religion as part of a "timeless culture" while a former British ambassador advised Westerners in Saudi Arabia to " adapt" and "to act with the grain of Saudi traditions and culture"
Amnesty International has appealed for hundreds of men – and occasionally women – to be spared the Saudi executioner's blade. They have all been beheaded, often after torture and grossly unfair trials. Women are shot
The ritual of chopping off ######### was graphically described by an Irish witness to a triple execution in Jeddah in 1997. "Standing to the left of the first prisoner, and a little behind him, the executioner focused on his quarry ... I watched as the sword was being drawn back with the right hand. A one-handed back swing of a golf club came to mind ... the down-swing begins ... the blade met the neck and cut through it like ... a heavy cleaver cutting through a melon ... a crisp moist smack. The head fell and rolled a little. The torso slumped neatly. I see now why they tied wrists to feet ... the brain had no time to tell the heart to stop, and the final beat bumped a gush of blood out of the headless torso on to the plinth."
And you can bet they won't be talking about this at Buckingham Palace today
02-15-2008, 07:41 PM
Mohamed Omer Mohamed Omer
تاريخ التسجيل: 11-14-2006
مجموع المشاركات: 2380
Q: But we have talked to intellectuals, doctors, dissidents who are not in the country who say that to do business in Saudi Arabia, you must have a partner in the royal family. You must have an "in," in the country. It's not an open system. It's a corrupt system
A: You know what? I would be offended if I thought we had a monopoly on corruption. I think--
You know the image, though. You know what I'm talking about
Q: Yeah, I know the image. But you don't know your image either in my country, in my world. In other words, the image of the West is not any better. What I'm saying is, if you have house of glass, don't throw stones
A: But the way I answer the corruption charges is this. In the last 30 years, we have implemented a development program that was approximately ... close to $400 billion worth, OK? Now, look at the whole country, where it was, where it is now. And I am confident after you look at it, you could not have done all of that for less than, let's say, $350 billion
If you tell me that building this whole country, and spending $350 billion out of $400 billion, that we misused or got corrupted with $50 billion, I'll tell you, "Yes." But I'll take that any time. There are so many countries in the Third World that have oil that are still 30 years behind. But, more important, more important -- who are you to tell me this? ... What I'm trying to tell you is, so what? We did not invent corruption, nor did those dissidents, who are so genius, discover it. This happened since Adam and Eve. ... I mean, this is human nature. But we are not as bad as you think
02-16-2008, 04:19 AM
Mohamed Omer Mohamed Omer
تاريخ التسجيل: 11-14-2006
مجموع المشاركات: 2380
Britain powerless in face of Saudi threats, court told
· Judges sceptical about efforts to resist pressure · BAE review told ministers entitled to ignore treaty
The Guardian, Saturday February 16 2008
The British government was powerless to resist the Saudi threats that forced it to close down the BAE corruption investigation, its lawyers insisted in the high court yesterday
The claim met with scepticism from Lord Justice Moses, who is trying the case along with Mr Justice Sullivan. He pointed out that the government had apparently made no attempt to resist such "unlawful" Saudi threats or to deter their behaviour
Philip Sales, QC for the crown, said the government could not "magic away" the threats from the Saudi ruling clan
But the judge said: "Every time a hostage is taken or a ransom demanded, the answer by the government is: 'We do not yield to threats'."
The high court has heard unchallenged allegations that it was Prince Bandar, the alleged beneficiary of £1bn in secret payments from the arms giant BAE, who threatened to cut off intelligence on terrorists if the investigation into him and his family was not stopped
Investigators said they were given to understand there would be "another 7/7" and the loss of "British lives on British streets" if they carried on delving into the payments
The government argued yesterday that these threats were so "grave" and put Britain's security in such "imminent" threat that the head of the Serious Fraud Office had no option but to shut down his investigation immediately
On the second day and final day of the judicial review into the decision, which is being brought by anti-corruption campaigners, the judges repeatedly questioned these assertions
Moses said: "What you are saying is that the law is powerless to protect our own sovereignty - the law cannot be deployed as a weapon to protect the sovereignty of this country."
The judge said: "Your answer is, yes, it is powerless. No lawyer or court can protect one of the essential features of sovereignty, which is control over one's own domestic criminal law system."
Asked if that meant nothing could be done to resist this kind of threat "from a powerful foreign state", Sales replied: "Correct - we cannot compel Saudi Arabia to adopt a different stance."
Moses said it was "curious" that ministers were not allowed constitutionally to interfere in criminal investigations, but "there was nothing that could be done" when it was Saudi Arabia.
This meant, he said, that the decision to terminate the inquiry was "out of the control" of the British government
Sales said the government was entitled to ignore an OECD anti-corruption treaty when Britain's security was in jeopardy. Moses responded : "It is no good just waving the flag of national security. If (its use) is so wide, it undermines the treaty." Any government could stop bribery prosecutions on the grounds of national security, Sullivan added. He asked if that "drove a coach and horses through the treaty."
The investigation was stopped after Tony Blair, then prime minister, intervened following sustained lobbying by the Saudis and BAE, who wanted to preserve a lucrative arms contract. In a long, "exceptional" letter to his attorney-general Lord Goldsmith, Blair said he was concerned, among other things, about this contract to sell Typhoon warplanes
Governments signed up to the OECD treaty are forbidden from stopping investigations for commercial reasons
Sullivan intervened to say that Whitehall documents released to the court showed that issues other than purely national security had been considered. He told Sales that the government was making "bland statements" and refusing to admit the reality
Moses expressed concern about ministers apparently abandoning the Shawcross convention, which is supposed to prevent politicians interfering in criminal cases
Under it, the law officers are allowed to consult ministers about the public interest implications of a prosecution decision. But ministers are not allowed to lobby for a particular decision
Campaigners allege that Blair over-stepped the mark when he put "irresistible pressure" on the SFO
The government argued it was permissible for the prime minister to express a forceful view that there was "a very clear case" for ending the investigation
The judges said they would give their ruling as soon as possible
الرسائل والمقالات و الآراء المنشورة في المنتدى بأسماء أصحابها أو بأسماء مستعارة لا تمثل بالضرورة الرأي الرسمي لصاحب الموقع أو سودانيز اون لاين بل تمثل وجهة نظر كاتبها
لا يمكنك نقل أو اقتباس اى مواد أعلامية من هذا الموقع الا بعد الحصول على اذن من الادارة
Mohamed Omer
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست