Bandar
Saudi Arabia threatened the United Kingdom that it would make it easier for terrorist attacks to occur in London if Britain continued an investigation into bribes that allegedly were paid in an arms deal with the kingdom.
That allegation is being made in a story in the British paper the Guardian. According to the paper, Prince Bandar, the son of the crown prince and the head of Saudi intelligence, personally made the threat. And then-Prime Minister Tony Blair capitulated and halted the probe.
Whatever happened to the British stiff upper lip? An elderly British woman living in the United States recently told me how it was during the Nazi bombings of London. When there were attacks while attending theater, someone would come out on stage holding up a sign that read "Air Raid." Giving all an opportunity to seek shelter. She says no one in the audience and no one on stage scrambled for safety. And the show went on.
The Saudis, according to the paper, said there would be attacks in and blood on the streets of London if the Brits continued their investigation.
As we've discussed here previously, the KSA plays both sides of the fence. A partner in the war on terror when convenient. A purveyor of terrorism when that meets its purposes.
And yet, we in the West, continue to allow the Saudis to heavily invest in our countries. That's fine. But shouldn't there be some conditions? Shouldn’t the royal family be told they have to be consistent and true powers in the war on terror?
That allegation is being made in a story in the British paper the Guardian. According to the paper, Prince Bandar, the son of the crown prince and the head of Saudi intelligence, personally made the threat. And then-Prime Minister Tony Blair capitulated and halted the probe.
Whatever happened to the British stiff upper lip? An elderly British woman living in the United States recently told me how it was during the Nazi bombings of London. When there were attacks while attending theater, someone would come out on stage holding up a sign that read "Air Raid." Giving all an opportunity to seek shelter. She says no one in the audience and no one on stage scrambled for safety. And the show went on.
The Saudis, according to the paper, said there would be attacks in and blood on the streets of London if the Brits continued their investigation.
As we've discussed here previously, the KSA plays both sides of the fence. A partner in the war on terror when convenient. A purveyor of terrorism when that meets its purposes.
And yet, we in the West, continue to allow the Saudis to heavily invest in our countries. That's fine. But shouldn't there be some conditions? Shouldn’t the royal family be told they have to be consistent and true powers in the war on terror?
2 comments:
It was interesting that Tony Blair was the one who halted the investigation of the alleged fraud, yet it was Parliament that was calling for an investigation. Of course we have to appreciate that this all happened after Blair had accepted the job as Middle Eastern envoy ......... so maybe there was a degree of self interest? ( I do say this tongue in cheek!) Whenever people talk about corruption in Government I have to think back to this incident and ask myself..... isn't this a sign of corruption? This is the same Tony Blair who now wants to put himself forward as the President of the European Union - maybe he can practice even greater veto there!
On the up side I do believe that there has been a renewed call for the investigation of this alleged fraud - so maybe democracy will get a chance.
I can't believe that we are so concerned about the KSA when we are only too well aware of the funding they do throughout the western world to promulgate their own brand of radical Islam. Is the West for sale... and if so at what price?
"Saudi Arabia threatened the United Kingdom that it would make it easier for terrorist attacks to occur in London if Britain continued an investigation into bribes that allegedly were paid in an arms deal with the kingdom."
Why don't our leaders just bend over, stick our butts up in the air, and yell "allah is great" and get it over with?
They may as well! Dhimmitude, the act of submitting to Islamic leadership, is accomplished through many means. One is negotiation. The other is threat.
The response could have easily been: "Fine, you turd birds. We'll just send all of you- every single Muslim in the UK- to Saudi Arabia on a slow boat. Threaten us? HAH!"
I don't think the Muslims in the UK would support deportation in the name of Saudi threats, do you?
Post a Comment