‘US, UK support Al Khalifa regime killing machine’
24 October, 2013 – Interview Ali Al Fayez – PressTV

In an interview with Press TV, Ali Al Fayez, a Bahraini activist in London, shares his thoughts regarding the ongoing crackdown by Bahraini regime forces against protesters.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Ali Al Fayez, the United States in particular has been criticized for the past at least few years for not doing enough for the case of the opposition in Bahrain but at the same time, we see the US along with some other Western countries like the UK who are known to sell arms most recently the US to these Persian Gulf countries. Isn’t that in a way emphasizing indirectly their support for these regimes such as the one in Bahrain?

Al Fayez: Thank you for inviting me. I think it is not indirect; it is a direct support and coverage for the Al Khalifa regime in Bahrain. The United States and United Kingdom are not only supplying weapons and supplying security know-how to the government of Al Khalifa and the regime of Al Khalifa.

But they are providing them with the political coverage everywhere and they are stopping the Bahraini people to put any kind of cases in, for instance, the International Court or in Geneva. Today, Bahraini regime is standing and still continuing this killing machine because it is enjoying the support from particularly the United States and United Kingdom.

Press TV: If you were to look at the US’ importance of this country, this Persian Gulf country Bahrain, the fingers are pointing at their Fifth Fleet. How much of the factor does the Fifth Fleet play in terms of the US looking the other way when it comes to Bahrain?

Al Fayez: I think the Fifth Fleet is one of the factors that play a big role in supporting the Al Khalifa regime but that is not the only factor. Americans have built up their allies in the [Persian] Gulf based on their problem with the Iranian revolution after it became real on the ground in 1979-1980 and that is why they established the [P]GCC, ([Persian] Gulf Cooperation Council,) to counterpart the Iranian revolution for a change.

Americans have built up their allies based on that and not based on the people and what the people want in the [Persian] Gulf states and that is why today they are kind of reviewing their policy and that is why they want to open up a dialogue with the Iranians.

Saudi Arabia is not happy with that but the Americans have only part for their… to continue their existence and to protect their interests is to have a dialogue with the Iranians. We believe these allies are not allies but rather the [stuff] to deliver what is needed to be done by the Americans and the United Kingdom government. …source

Saudi Arabia Continues Tantrum Over Syria
By: DSWright – 23 October, 2013

After throwing a literally royal tantrum at the United Nations, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has put the United States on notice that there will be further consequences for not following orders and bombing the Assad government in Syria. The Sunni-based Saudis wanted US assistance in helping them dominate the Middle East over their sectarian rivals the Shiite-based Iranians. The US public was disinterested as was a sizable portion of the the US military industrial complex.

Now the Saudis are retaliating by telling anyone who will listen that they are through with the US.

“Upset at President Barack Obama’s policies on Iran and Syria, members of Saudi Arabia’s ruling family are threatening a rift with the United States that could take the alliance between Washington and the kingdom to its lowest point in years.

Saudi Arabia’s intelligence chief is vowing that the kingdom will make a ‘major shift’ in relations with the United States to protest perceived American inaction over Syria’s civil war as well as recent U.S. overtures to Iran, a source close to Saudi policy said on Tuesday.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, often called “Bandar Bush”, is hopping mad and went on a tirade against the US to a group of European diplomats.

“Prince Bandar bin Sultan told European diplomats that the United States had failed to act effectively against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, was growing closer to Tehran, and had failed to back Saudi support for Bahrain when it crushed an anti-government revolt in 2011, the source said.

Failed to back Saudi support for Bahrain? That’s odd, because I can’t recall President Obama or any US official saying anything when the Saudi backed Sunni government of Bahrain gunned down protesters from the Shiite-majority population. Not a peep.

I, for one, welcome any Saudi commitments to stay clear of US politics, if for no other reason than that special relationship led to 9/11 – an attack carried out by a majority of Saudi nationals and organized by one of the elite of Saudi society, Osama Bin Laden.

The US-relationship with Saudi Arabia is predicated on the American interest in securing oil sources and markets for arms shipments – both of which the Saudi royal family was happy to oblige the US with. Now America produces immense energy domestically and has no good reason to even have such a large arms industry let alone exchange arms for favors with the gulf states.

Keep your friendship Prince Bandar.

…source

Saudi prince: Lebanon on brink of civil war because of Hezbollah’s role in Syria
24 October, 2013 ⋅ YaLiban

Turki al-Faisal saudi princePrince Turki Al-Faisal Al-Saud, chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies and former director-general of the Kingdom’s General Intelligence Directorate has warned that “Lebanon is on the brink of civil war as Hezbollah continues to implement its own agenda without giving any consideration to law and order.”

The party “is willing to risk the foundations on which the entire Lebanese political system was built in order to prevent the collapse of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime and impede the work of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon that is probing the assassination of former premier Rafik Hariri,” al-Faisal said during a lecture he delivered at the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations in Washington, DC on October 22.

“Saudi Arabia believes that the law needs to be imposed in Lebanon and it supports all efforts aimed at putting an end to Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria and bringing its leaders who are suspected of being involved in the Hariri murder to court,” he added.

Asked about the pressure for Turkey to crack down on Islamists on its Syrian border, and what it means for Saudi Arabia’s approach to Syria, Prince Turki said that he understands the goal is “a unified opposition that can represent all of the Syrian community, and that these countries will coordinate with each other on helping that organization defend itself against the onslaught of the Assad killing machine.

Commenting on Iran, Prince Turki said, “It is up to the Iranians to show that their sweet and sensible talk is going to be translated into action, “ adding, “when and if that happens then there is a chance for the situation between, not just the Kingdom and Iran, but also between Iran and the rest of the world to improve.” Al Monitor reported

Prince Turki added that the kingdom has been direct in its dealings with Iran about the issues of tension between the two countries, telling its officials, “You can’t have it both ways. You can’t deal with us and then go and support somebody who wants to overturn us. And this is what they’ve been doing in Lebanon, this is what they’ve been doing in Syria, this is what they’re doing in Bahrain, and what they’re doing in Iraq etc., so this is how we deal with Iran.” The former Saudi ambassador to the US said. …source

MI6 Getting Ready to run $100bn Afghan drug (Heroin) industry’
24 October, 2013 – JNN

Washington : A US political commentator says Britain’s foreign intelligence agency is planning to send more spies to Afghanistan to manage a $100-billion drug (Heroin) industry.

Gordon Duff, a senior editor at Veterans Today, made the remarks during an interview with Press TV on Tuesday, two days after The Telegraph revealed in a report that the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), also known as MI6, appealed for extra staff from other intelligence agencies for Afghanistan after British troops leave in 2014.

Duff said “I think they are going to Afghanistan to help manage the 100-billion-dollar-a year drug industry, moving heroin through Afghanistan, managing the banking for the heroin industry through London banks. I cannot think of anything else they would do there.”

He added “There is no history of terrorism involving Afghanistan and Britain or Afghanistan and the United States that was long disproven, this debunked over a decade ago.”

The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan on October 7, 2001 as part of Washington’s so-called war on terror. The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but after more than 12 years, the foreign troops have still not been able to establish security in the country.

There are currently over 100,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan. The US has announced plans to pull out all foreign combat troops by the end of 2014.

Opium cultivation in Afghanistan has been on the rise since the US-led war began, with the Central Asian country producing about 90 percent of the world’s opium.

Several reports by the United Nations affirm that Afghan opium is having a devastating impact on the world, killing thousands in consumer countries.

Commenting on the long involvement of US and UK intelligence agencies in drug trade, Duff said, “The CIA, MI6 and other intelligence agencies have been running drug trafficking in the world, certainly, since [the] Vietnam” war.

“The British intelligence services were running world drug trafficking in the 1840s at the time of the Opium Wars,” he said, referring to the Anglo-Chinese Wars (1839-1860) over opium trade between China and Great Britain.

“They have always managed the world’s opium and heroin trafficking. It is something the British Empire is known for. The British began heroin, certainly opium production, in Afghanistan. It is their industry. They have been doing it for well over a hundred years and it is extremely profitable. It funds all of their other activities and there is no reason for them to want to leave it.” …source

Iranian MPs Condemn US Top Negotiator’s Insulting Remarks
23 October, 2013 – FARS

TEHRAN (FNA)- Members of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission lashed out at US Undersecretary of State and top negotiator Wendy Sherman for her insulting remarks against the Iranian people.

Commission Rapporteur Seyed Hossein Naqavi Hosseini said the condemnation was expressed at the Tuesday meeting of the Commission.

“Repetition of such rhetoric by the US officials will lead to the Iranian nation and government’s distrust of the US,” he pointed out.

Wendy Sherman, the State Department’s third-ranking official, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that officials were looking for ways Iran could “build confidence” and provide time for diplomacy to work. “We know that deception is part of the DNA” in Iran, she claimed.

In relevant comments on Monday, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araqchi also asked the US not to put hurdles on the path of the Iran-powers talks.

..source

How serious is the ‘rift’ in US-Saudi relations?
By Frank Gardner – BBC – 24 October, 2013

John Kerry and Prince Saud al-Faisal in Jeddah (25 June 2013) The United States and Saudi Arabia have been allies since
The Saudis are upset with Washington. But just how upset? Enough to break off co-operation over Syria, as has been suggested this week?

With conflicting messages coming from senior princes, it is hard to tell.

But the signs are that Washington’s most important strategic Arab partnership is now suffering the biggest strains since it emerged that 15 of the 19 suicide hijackers who had attacked the US on 9/11 were Saudis.
‘Major shift’

First came the shock announcement on 18 October that Saudi Arabia was turning down its two-year non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council in protest at the international body’s apparent inability to resolve either the Syrian or Palestinian situations.

Then on Tuesday it was widely reported that the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, had told European diplomats his country would be making “a major shift” in its relations with the US.

Largely in protest over Washington’s reluctance to get involved militarily in Syria, the prince reportedly said Saudi Arabia would be scaling back its co-operation with the CIA over arming and training Syria’s Sunni rebels.
Prince Saud al-Faisal (left) and John Kerry (right) at a meeting of the Friends of Syria in London (22 October 2013) There was no apparent rift between Prince Saud and John Kerry in London

On the same day, another senior Saudi royal, Prince Turki al-Faisal – the former intelligence chief and ex-ambassador to the US and UK – gave a speech in Washington damning President Barack Obama’s policies on Syria as “lamentable”.

He dismissed the US-Russian deal to dispose of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile as a trick to excuse Mr Obama from having to order military action there.

Yet at the very same time, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, was sitting comfortably next to his US counterpart, John Kerry, first in Paris on Friday and then on Tuesday in London as they worked on finding a political solution to the Syrian conflict.

US diplomats say they have received no formal notification of a change in relations and that US-Saudi co-operation is solid and will continue. So what is really going on?
List of complaints

Firstly, Prince Bandar has a reputation of being somewhat at the megaphone end of Saudi communications.

Despite spending 22 years as Riyadh’s ambassador in Washington, he has a penchant for making overly dramatic gestures and statements that in the past have led to his exclusion from the inner circle of Saudi policy making. …more

HM King Hamad Affirms Judicial Independence
21 October, 2013 – BNA

Manama-Oct-21(BNA) His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa today received at Al-Sakhir Palace newly-appointed Head of the Constitutional Court Shaikh Khalifa bin Rashid bin Abdulla Al-Khalifa and the President of the Court of Cassation and the Supreme Judicial Council Salim bin Mohammed Salim Al-Kawari, who took their oath.

HM the King congratulated them on their appointment and lauded their competence, experience and contribution to the judiciary system in Bahrain, wishing them every success in performing their duties to promote justice, the rule of the law and respect of the constitution.

HM the King affirmed keenness on bolstering the independence of the judiciary for reform steps and modernization to continue unabated and yield further national progress and prosperity.

He credited the judicial system in Bahrain for its long-standing probity, fairness and impartiality in advocating citizens’ issues, preserving their rights and protecting society from any detrimental phenomena.

He emphasized the crucial role of the Constitutional Court, stressing its efforts to ensure the constitutionality of laws and achieve justice.

He also underscored the importance of full cooperation between the three branches of government to achieve the desired goals, in the state of law and constitutional institutions, so as to serve the nation, protect citizens’ rights and maintain security and stability.

HM the King reiterated Bahrain’s firm resolve to continue developing state institutions and support them with national cadres and competences which proved their credentials in all fields.

…source

Marzouq charged with inciting terrorism, abusing position to promote acts of terror

Bahrain court releases Al Wefaq leader Khalil Marzouq
By Habib Toumi – gulfnews.com – 24 October, 2013

Manama: A Bahrain court on Thursday released Khalil Marzouq, the deputy secretary-general of Al Wefaq National Islamic Society, after adjourning his trial to November 18.

Marzouq is facing charges of “inciting terrorism and promoting acts that constitute crimes of terrorism.”

First Attorney-General Abdul Rahman Al Sayed earlier this month said that the charges levelled after the Public Prosecution completed its investigations of the case also included “using a position within a legally formed political association to call for committing crimes that constitute acts of terrorism punishable under the Community Protection Law.”

Marzouq told the court hearing on Thursday that he rejects violence but stands by his calls for peaceful anti-government protests to force reforms in the country.

He told the three-judge panel that he supports peaceful efforts to force political concessions from the government. But he denied any support for bombings and other attacks, which have been on the rise.

The former lawmaker, who was arrested on September 17 pending the investigation, was also charged with “advocating support for perpetrators of criminal activities and justifying their crimes, calling for the continued planting of explosives and for acts of violence, supporting the criminal activities by persons accused of committing terrorist acts, advocating their crimes as well as pushing for disobeying laws.” …more

Paranoid Saudis fear US treachery
24 October, 2013 – PressTV – Finan Cunningham

The Saudis are sulking big time with Washington. This is not just due to a temper-tantrum by the kingdom’s spymaster, Prince Bandar. The entire House of Saud is in ructions over what the rulers perceive as “American treachery”.

When Prince Bandar bin Sultan briefed anonymous Western diplomats at his Jeddah majlis last weekend about a “strategic shift” by Saudi Arabia away from its long-time ally, there was speculation that the Saudi intelligence chief was perhaps speaking out in a personal capacity.

That is unlikely; subsequent furious comments by former ministry of interior chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal, about Washington’s “farcical policies”, and a testy meeting in Paris between US top diplomat John Kerry and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal earlier this week confirm that the kingdom’s inner circle is up in arms with its American patron.

Bandar’s frustration is symptomatic of paranoia in the House of Saud. When he churlishly “threatens” a “strategic shift” it is not actually on the Saudis mulling such a move away from its historic sponsor in Washington, but rather it betrays a distrust among the Saudi rulers that it is the Americans who are the ones stealthily shifting.

But what the Saudi monarchs are confusing in their reactionary mindset is the difference between American tactics and strategy in the Middle East.

Bandar, who was Saudi ambassador to Washington for 22 years, is a senior member of the House of Saud. He was appointed personally by the Saudi king to oversee the funding, arming and logistics of the Saudi contribution to the West’s covert terror war in Syria.

Known as “Bandar Bush” because of strong personal connections to not only the former US president but to the Washington establishment generally, his appointment for running Syria operations was based precisely because of his direct line to US government.

In that regard, Bandar is both the Saudi terror master and the point man for American collusion in the regime change campaign against Syria.

It is thus a safe bet that Bandar’s pique with US policy in the Middle East is shared among the inner circle of Saudi rulers, all the way up to aging King Abdullah.

That means there is a potential fracture in the historic alliance between the two countries – an alliance that goes back to the foundation of Saudi Arabia as a state in 1932.

One former member of the US National Security Council, Michael Doran, told the Daily Telegraph that he had “never seen relations so low” as they are now.

Doran is quoted as saying: “Iran is the number one issue – the only issue for Saudi policy makers.”

Recall that diplomatic cables between Riyadh and Washington leaked in 2010 cited King Abdullah as urging the Americans to “cut off the head of the snake” – meaning Iran.

Tensions between the Saudis and the Americans have been rumbling over the past year. These tensions have expressed Saudi frustration over what they claim as Washington not doing enough to arm the militants fighting in Syria to topple the government of Bashar al-Assad – a close ally of Iran.

The deadly chemical incident near the Syrian capital, Damascus, on 21 August, which implicates the involvement of Saudi intelligence, led by Prince Bandar, can be seen as an attempt by the Saudis to push US President Barack Obama into all-out military attack on Syria.

That gambit failed, from the Saudi viewpoint, for various reasons, including the mobilization of anti-war protests in the West and a timely diplomatic intervention by Russia to secure a chemical weapons decommissioning deal.

Although the Syrian army was not the culprit for the use of chemical weapons, as Western governments and media were claiming, nevertheless President Assad turned diplomatic tables on his enemies by signing up to the decommissioning plan.

The veering away from war plans against Syria by the Obama administration must have been a stinging blow to Prince Bandar and the House of Saud. Saudi Arabia wants to destroy Syria as an independent Arab state for several geopolitical reasons. Chief among these reasons is to curb any move towards democracy in the Middle East. Syria under Assad represents a relatively progressive, pluralist state, and therefore from the Saudi view, must be subverted.

Another reason is the deep pathological hatred from the Wahhabi House of Saud towards Syria’s Shia-affiliated alliance with Iran. Cutting off the head in Syria is Saudi Arabia’s method of trying to decapitate Iran. …more

Saudi-US Row: Prince Bandar bin ‘Sulking’ Tries Old Bribe and Threat Trick Again
Finian Cunningham – 24 October, 2013 – Strategic Culture

Historic allies, the United States and Saudi Arabia, are in the midst of a full-blown row, after the kingdom’s spy chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan threatened that their strategic liaison was on the rocks.

The sulking sultan is no stranger to maverick mood swings. But there is good reason to believe that the senior Saudi is not merely acting alone, and that this is the obscurantist kingdom’s way of expressing strategic frustrations…

Rumbling tensions over various geopolitical issues have now erupted into full public glare when Prince Bandar briefed invited unnamed Western diplomats to his majlis at the Red Sea city of Jeddah last weekend. The purpose was for the Saudi royal to vent his anger over recent «disappointments» caused by Washington’s policies in the Middle East.

«This message is for the US», said Bandar, who was formerly Saudi ambassador in Washington.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Saudi intelligence chief told diplomats that the kingdom was now seeking other strategic allies, without specifying just who these new partners might be. Whether a full break with Washington will come to pass is moot, but the fact that the more than eight decades of staunch alliance between the US and Saudi Arabia is being dangled in the wind shows that there are deep misgivings and high stakes over recent geopolitical developments.

Arm-twisting tactics by Prince Bandar are nothing new. Earlier this summer the Saudi spymaster tried to cajole Russian President Vladimir Putin to ditch Moscow’s historic alliance with Syria. Bandar, who is also known as «Bandar Bush» owing to close ties to the Washington establishment, attempted to inveigle Putin then with a mixture of bribes and threats.

During the private meeting with the Russian leader Bandar reportedly offered Russia lucrative oil and gas contracts in the Middle East and hinted that he could ensure security for the forthcoming Sochi Winter Olympic Games by exerting his influence on Al-Qaeda-linked terror groups. To his credit, the Russian president gave his Saudi guest short shrift over the unseemly proposal.

The recent weekend confab in Jeddah between Prince Bandar and Western diplomats followed the extraordinary move by Saudi Arabia to reject a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council. That seat had been much coveted by the Saudis and had been offered after lobbying from Washington. The Saudi snap rejection was therefore a calculated snub to Washington.

Officially, the Saudis endeavored to cloak that decision with high-minded principle, claiming that it was a protest over the Security Council’s inability to defend the rights of Palestinians, create a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, and failure to sanction the «Damascus regime» of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

Nobody is buying that self-righteous, stilted rhetoric. Saudi Arabia has shown little interest in defending the historic rights of the Palestinians under relentless Israeli expansionism, and the kingdom is one of the main purveyors of (non-nuclear) weapons of mass destruction in the Mid-East, if not the entire world.

The real reason for the Saudi chagrin with its American patron is the latter’s failure to launch an all-out military assault on Syria last month, when Russian diplomacy secured a chemical weapons decommissioning deal to avert American aggression. The other major related factor for the Saudi spat with Washington is the latter’s new diplomatic overture to Iran in their ongoing nuclear dispute. …more