Article

2004-07-14 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-07-14 9:53:51 AM|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 mullahs, afraid of being next target, hoping to get Saudis to lobby for them as quid pro quo?

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-07-14 10:13:52 AM|| 2004-07-14 10:13:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 They only dumped him after the amnesty offer was announced and as you can tell from the description of where he was being "held" al-Harbi was living far from what might otherwise be considered an incarcerated existence.

I think somebody nailed it down fairly aptly the other day. Right now, the princes are trying to work out a deal with Louis Attiyat Allah and Co through their holy men to go back to the way things were pre-May 2003 and this appears to be fairly amicable as far as the core leadership of al-Qaeda is concerned. However, the problem is that once these guys go off the reservation it's a real pain in the ass to get them back on it again. As we keep being reminded, this is a decentralized network and there's a lot of power in the hands of the local commanders. Al-Harbi is one of the few Salafi ideologues who has also spent time in the trenches (in contrast to al-Hawali) with the common hard boyz and therefore can't be accused of selling out to the princes. The Saudis are bringing al-Harbi back home as an ace-in-the-hole in case the current reconciliation efforts fail and they need someone other than Louis to rein in the krazed killer korps.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-07-14 10:29:54 AM|| [http://www.regnumcrucis.blogspot.com] 2004-07-14 10:29:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 but wasnt the May 2003 offensive by AQ instigated by Saudi cooperation, such as it was with US efforts, especially cracking down on financing. Seems for a deal AQ has to accept that at least relatively overt financing and other activities in KSA cant happen anymore. In other words, AQ's lost, but KSA will limit the loss for peace with AQ. Alternatively, if KSA goes back to pre 9/11 status quo, with AQ able to act freely as long they dont directly attack KSA interests, KSA has US pressure back on - as in immediate post 9/11 environment.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-07-14 10:44:48 AM|| 2004-07-14 10:44:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The May 2003 offensive was set up by Saif al-Adel with the intention of massacring a good number of princes and seizing power in the Kingdom - or at the very least forcing it into a protracted civil war that he hoped would imperil Western economic interests. The bulk of al-Adel's offensive was thwarted (I'll get the link if you want it) but the Riyadh bombings were still carried out, which led to the death of Yousef al-Ayyeri and Co.

As it now stands, the Saudi crackdown is incomplete. Al-Qaeda can't operate overtly in the KSA anymore, but their holy men and financiers can, including an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 WTC bombing (Hawali) and the bankroller behind the proto-9/11 Oplan Bojinka (Khalifa). The reason as to why the crackdown is incomplete is because of our good pal Nayef who controls the security forces and appears to be more or less tacitly allied with bin Laden, if not tactically then certainly ideologically. He's the driving force behind working out another deal amongst the princes with the holy men.

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-07-14 11:17:05 AM|| [http://www.regnumcrucis.blogspot.com] 2004-07-14 11:17:05 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 I think somebody nailed it down fairly aptly the other day.

(jumping up and down) That was me, me, me!

"Maybe he came back to Saudi to take over as Senior Homeland al-Qaeda Director. You know, smooth over those misunderstanding about over throwing the Royal family, set the young lads straight about killing the goose that hands over the golden eggs. As one of Binny's closest aides, they might listen."

The more I read today, the more I believe I'm right. The US doesn't seem too interested in him:
US officials said that Harby had had little effectiveness lately and that his former value was as an extremist speaker and "sounding board".
"It's easy to overstate his importance," a US official said. "It's clear that a lot of bad guys have been caught, but there remain a lot of bad guys out there. This isn't going to be the critical blow" to the terrorists' organisation.
Analysts at the CIA and other intelligence agencies do not see Harby as a likely source of valuable information on bin Laden's whereabouts or al-Qaeda's operational activities. "I'd be cautious in terms of characterising him in terms of a significant al-Qaeda figure," another US official said.
That makes him a perfect fit for the al-Q saudi job, he was close to Binny, crippled in Afghanistan, called for overthrow of Saudi princes, foregiven and comes home.

Posted by Steve 2004-07-14 11:41:56 AM|| 2004-07-14 11:41:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 The May 2003 offensive was set up by Saif al-Adel with the intention of massacring a good number of princes and seizing power in the Kingdom - or at the very least forcing it into a protracted civil war that he hoped would imperil Western economic interests. The bulk of al-Adel's offensive was thwarted (I'll get the link if you want it) but the Riyadh bombings were still carried out, which led to the death of Yousef al-Ayyeri and Co.

So are you saying Saif el Adels move was purely offensive, and had nothing to do with Saudi actions between 9/11/2001 and May 2003?

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-07-14 11:47:08 AM|| 2004-07-14 11:47:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Between 9/11 and May 2003, the Saudi al-Qaeda contingent could kill whoever they wanted and operate with impunity, with the government covering it up as the work of alcohol smugglers. The Saudis made some tentative effort at making their connections to terrorism less overt, but it was more or less window-dressing with little if any substance behind it until the Riyadh bombings started.

Understand, in May 2003 al-Qaeda was trying to cover its losses from the war in Iraq. The US killed thousands of its hard boyz in OIF, hard boyz who were in many cases veterans who were not easily replaced. And on top of that the loss of KSM, Tawfiq Attash Khallad, Ammar al-Baluchi, and Yasser al-Jaziri hit the network pretty hard. So the surviving leadership wanted to up the ante by starting trouble in Saudi Arabia, with al-Adel believing that with the Saudis already seething over the war in Iraq that it was a prime environment to push for a coup. It was a pretty good plan and came damn near close to succeeding or at least pushing the Kingdom into civil war, but the plot to target the princes failed and the Iran leadership has been trying to salvage the situation ever sense, as al-Adel is well aware that should the Saudi leadership ever actively move against their financing that al-Qaeda would be seriously hit in the pocketbook. Fortunately, they have Nayef on their side ...

Posted by Dan Darling 2004-07-14 11:56:24 AM|| [http://www.regnumcrucis.blogspot.com] 2004-07-14 11:56:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Hey Dan, can you and your AEI buddies put together a program guide to the players? I'm lost. Better yet, do up some playing cards with terror bios on the back.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2004-07-14 11:07:13 PM|| 2004-07-14 11:07:13 PM|| Front Page Top

17:52 trailing wife
17:52 trailing wife
17:51 trailing wife
17:51 trailing wife
11:41 Antiwar
14:45 Antiwar
12:49 Antiwar
14:45 Antiwar
11:20 Antiwar
22:52 Antiwar
22:29 Antiwar
03:52 Serb
08:00 ed
02:21 Lucky
02:06 Zenster
00:59 FlameBait93268
00:37 Lucky
00:12 ex-lib
00:10 therien
00:06 Mark Espinola
23:57 Bomb-a-rama
23:54 Seafarious
23:54 Bomb-a-rama
23:53 ex-lib