Saudi Arabia's rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London

[Red Ketchup]

Geez, and those are the US/UK's friends???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008.../bae.armstrade


BAE: secret papers reveal threats from Saudi prince

Spectre of 'another 7/7' led Tony Blair to block bribes inquiry, high court told

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"

[Kärnfysikern]

Just another reason why the western world should put money into developing solid alternatives to oil.

[Flagg]

Just another reason why the western world should put money into developing solid alternatives to oil.

Agreed. Once all the oil is gone in this world, no1 will give a shit about the Middle East.

[Prada]

The wests relationship with Saudi Arabia is one of the most hypocritical ones.

[Logan13]

The wests relationship with Saudi Arabia is one of the most hypocritical ones.

it is a very troubling relationship, to say the least.

[Kärnfysikern]

Agreed. Once all the oil is gone in this world, no1 will give a shit about the Middle East.

No doubt, to bad that no politician anywhere in the west is ready to take the though descisions needed to get rid of oil once and for all. It would not win him/her any elections that is for sure.

Aslong as we are stuck with assholes that can only think 4 years into the future we are ****ed.

It would be quite "simple".

Just put into law that after 2015 every new car has to be a hybrid.
After 2030 cars older than 20 year has to be put out of use or modified with batteries and a electric engine.
By 2035 gas consumption will be lower to a small fraction of what it is today since most daily driving isnt long enough to run the batteries dry. Going by how fast battery tech is progressing soon the cars can be pure electric without the need for a conventional engine and still have all the performance of todays cars, just look at the tesla roadster.

At the same time electrify all railways, diesel engines in train is incredibly stupid and wastefull.

Invest in high speed trains betwen all major US cities, that would take out a big chunk of air traffic over shorter distances since its ALOT easier to take a high speed train than to go through all the hazzle with airports.

Ban use of oil for heating. There are plenty of better options like high efficent modern wood pellets stoves.

[kfrost06]

Just another reason why the western world should put money into developing solid alternatives to oil.

One of many many reasons. Too bad it's not going to happen, only a very drastic or a series of drastic events will ever lead to an alternative to oil as energy.

[Kärnfysikern]

One of many many reasons. Too bad it's not going to happen, only a very drastic or a series of drastic events will ever lead to an alternative to oil as energy.

When oil hits 200-300 usd/barrel maby someone will wake up. Hopefully it wont be to late by then to make a transition without runing the economy.

[Pooks]

the world is awash in oil.. Prices will go up thought due to inflation.

It really has nothing to do with supply/demand except a bit when it comes to gasolines because of refinery shortages. For Plastics and other stuff there is plenty of Oil for it.

[Kärnfysikern]

Well even the most optimistic geologists think we are only about 20 years from the peak, the most pessimistic think we have passed the peak. Doesnt matter much who is right because it still means we have a very slim window of transitioning from oil before it starts to effect the economy.

[Pooks]

Yah the faster the better.

At some point it won't be cost-effective to use Oil..and when that happens the transition to other elements or techniques will naturally occur.

[Kärnfysikern]

I realy hope so, but that is assuming the price will climb slow enough for market forces to adapt. Im not sure this is the case considering that oil is the number one energy source in just about every country in the world.

The worst thing that could happen is if as a panic effort countries start to produce liquid fuels out of the vast coal supplies, that is seriously dirty buisness but it is quite cheap.

[Prada]

No doubt, to bad that no politician anywhere in the west is ready to take the though descisions needed to get rid of oil once and for all. It would not win him/her any elections that is for sure.

Aslong as we are stuck with assholes that can only think 4 years into the future we are ****ed.

It would be quite "simple".

Just put into law that after 2015 every new car has to be a hybrid.
After 2030 cars older than 20 year has to be put out of use or modified with batteries and a electric engine.
By 2035 gas consumption will be lower to a small fraction of what it is today since most daily driving isnt long enough to run the batteries dry. Going by how fast battery tech is progressing soon the cars can be pure electric without the need for a conventional engine and still have all the performance of todays cars, just look at the tesla roadster.

At the same time electrify all railways, diesel engines in train is incredibly stupid and wastefull.

Invest in high speed trains betwen all major US cities, that would take out a big chunk of air traffic over shorter distances since its ALOT easier to take a high speed train than to go through all the hazzle with airports.

Ban use of oil for heating. There are plenty of better options like high efficent modern wood pellets stoves.

I don't know J, high speed trains in NA have always been somewhat ignored due to the heavy infrastructure costs. Remember the US and Canada are vast lands where many areas are uninhabited or less populated. However as you stated, there are serious talks of expanding speed rail due to high energy costs and as you stated the hassle of air travel since 911.

Hybrid cars for one aren't "sexy" and for two, unlike the EU, gasoline is still affordable here, for the moment. As far as demand and supply, well at current prices the demand for high performance cars will remain high and naturally so will supply. What there does have to be J, IMO, is incentives for consumers. I've read tax cuts for Hybrids and "Luxury" taxes for gas guzzlers but obviously there must be more, Hybrids are still as expensive if not more then conventional cars. Also reliabilty has to still be determined in Hybrids. For the moment I just don't envision Amercains trading in there F-150s, Escalades and Navigators for Toyota Priuses.

BTW: You are quite the radical extremist .....ban this ban that.

[Flagg]

ALl very interesting posts and yes, the sooner oil is gone the better, PROVIDING alternatives are well in place by then and wide spread. Oil really is quite a political tool now and it also pisses me off that politicians don't look beyond their term in office.

[Prada]

it is a very troubling relationship, to say the least.

Id really like us to start playing hardball with SA. They need to do much more on the war on terror and they also have to look into being more democratic and western.

[Kärnfysikern]

I don't know J, high speed trains in NA have always been somewhat ignored due to the heavy infrastructure costs. Remember the US and Canada are vast lands where many areas are uninhabited or less populated. However as you stated, there are serious talks of expanding speed rail due to high energy costs and as you stated the hassle of air travel since 911.

Hybrid cars for one aren't "sexy" and for two, unlike the EU, gasoline is still affordable here, for the moment. As far as demand and supply, well at current prices the demand for high performance cars will remain high and naturally so will supply. What there does have to be J, IMO, is incentives for consumers. I've read tax cuts for Hybrids and "Luxury" taxes for gas guzzlers but obviously there must be more, Hybrids are still as expensive if not more then conventional cars. Also reliabilty has to still be determined in Hybrids. For the moment I just don't envision Amercains trading in there F-150s, Escalades and Navigators for Toyota Priuses.

BTW: You are quite the radical extremist .....ban this ban that.

Yeah I dont think trains will ever be a competitive option coast to coast. But betwen cities where traveltime wont be more than say 4-5 hours I think trains can easily catch the market currently held by airlines.

Hybrid cars can easily become sexy, the PRIUS abomination is horrible, but look at the tesla roadster, that is a pretty damn sexy car
http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-20...r-1024x768.jpg

I had a nice chat with the head of research for a company involved with just about everything electric. He described just how easy it is to put a electric motor(they are extremely small and still powerfull) into any car. The batteries take up more space offcourse, but it can be installed under the trunk. To cut down fuel consumption considerably the batteries just have to be able to run the car for say 80 kilometers or so because the avarage driving distance is less than that.

Car companies need to show that hybrids can be sexy and powerfull!

Im not usualy ban guy But the ban for leaded gasolin is a good example of a good ban, a complete ban on gas is another ban I would support if it is implemented in the right way.

[Pooks]

what do u do for trips over 80kmph or miles whatever?

how fast can the battery be charged?

I travel 80km's just to get to work one way probbably,, like 20miles...

maybe less than 80km's ...

but most people in the States, travel 20-30miles to get to work one way.

[Kärnfysikern]

For tips over that distance the regular gas or diesel engine kicks in. In a idealistic world the diesel would be biodiesel or methanol or something but thats a stretch

I dont know what the recharge time is to be honest, its mostly a issue for pure electric cars while the hybrids can always run om the combustion engine if there is no time to recharge.