Issue 17


A New York Times editorial reports: “With King Fahd ailing, and his brother Crown Prince Abdullah running the show, Saudi Arabia also just announced that it was extending basic Internet service to all major cities ending the practice whereby Saudis who wanted to get on the Web had to make a long-distance call through neighboring Bahrain. This means the Saudi Government control over information just went out the window.” Q147 Not so fast, the New York Times further reports: “Censorship in Saudi Arabia is even more overt. Under a system that took two years to develop, all Internet connections in the country have been routed through a hub outside Riyadh, where high speed Government computers block access to thousands of sites cataloged on a rapidly expanding blacklist. … ‘All access attempts are logged … any attempt to stray beyond what the Saudi Government considers acceptable bounds could have further, unspecified consequences.” Q148 The Saud family will find that attempting to control the minds of the Arabian Gulf citizens they rule get more and more difficult as technology advances.


The Saudi family through the assistance of it’s US private security firm is using the Internet to entrap Saudi dissidents by sending them what seems to the victim as a misdirected email pornographic web page solicitation. Once the victim has been titillated and uses his credit to sign up for any of the sites, he has opened himself up to the invasions of his privacy by the private US security company hired by the Saudi Arabian government. At such time his credit card number may be tracked in the future. By downloading a certain pornographic site, the victim has also allowed the Saudi US security firm the capability of entering his computer. Upon return to Saudi Arabia, the credit card purchase of pornographic sites may be used to compromise the victim at any time.


We have gone to numerous seminars/conferences in Washington regarding Middle East matters. We have talked to those who have participated who, time and time again, mention Saudi Arabian princes as the foremost disruptive force in OPEC. The De Beers subsidiary of Anglo American Corporation of South Africa has been an effective cartel for more than a half a century in propping up the price of diamonds, which are primarily luxury goods adorning women, not as necessary as oil. The New York Times reports: “For more than 65 years, De Beers has had a near monopoly on the world’s supply of rough diamonds. in some years handling upward of 80 percent of the uncut stones sold to dealers and polishers around the world. Formed during the Depression, the cartel – sometimes called the world’s most successful monopoly – controls or influences nearly every step of the diamond production … It routinely stockpiles supplies when prices drop, then restricts their release to help prices recover. De Beers argues that this is a benign monopoly benefiting almost everyone … the cartel system had kept the diamond demand growing and prices continually rising even as most other commodities … have been plagued by fluctuating conditions that undercut prices.” Q149 Why is the OPEC cartel continually ineffective? In any cartel there is one predominant member which holds sway over other members. The Saud family princes control approximately 25% of the known world oil reserves. These princes, in essence, control OPEC policy. It is well known Saudi princes care more about the perpetuation of their power over the area of the Arabian Peninsula they control rather than OPEC or, for that matter, Mecca and Medina. With the Saud family dominance defended by US military ground and air personnel the princes are able to steal Persian Gulf oil reserves. These stolen reserves not only go to princely foreign bank accounts but also to line the pockets of the princely Washington policy making protectors (see Secretary Ron Brown, issue #3). Until this scenario is terminated, OPEC will continue to suffer.


In a commentary for Forbes magazine former Secretary Caspar Weinberger said: “Everyone agrees that the Saudi economy is at its lowest level since the early 1970’s. … And with large fiscal and balance of trade deficits, dim prospects for any deep reductions in government spending, and 3 million people facing the possibility of unemployment for the first time in recent history, it is easy to understand the pessimism. Adding to this, the Saudi Basic Industries Corp. (SABIC had a 56% drop in profits in 1998, with prospects for this year looking even less favorable. … Any serious deficit reduction would also require cuts in the vastly expensive programs established in the 1970’s and 1980’s, when the price of oil was high. But such cuts or tax increases would meet stiff resistance. … Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud is in charge of day-to-day government activities and recognizes the need for major changes. In September he extended an unexpected invitation to U.S. investors to come to the Kingdom.” Q150 The Saudi Arabian Government and it’s princes have a history of expropriating foreign assets within the country. We have case after case where foreign businessmen have had their assets taken from them and/or been thrown in prison without due process. Why doesn’t Prince Abdullah go to the princes and demand repatriation of the billions they have stolen from the Arabian Peninsula oil reserves? Unfortunately, media talk about the sad economic state of Saudi Arabia and how the Saudi Government is having difficulties. We have seen the profligacy of King Fahd, Ambassador Prince Bandar and to a lesser extent Crown Prince Abdullah as examples. Industrial countries like the United States and Britain should be made accountable for their allowing the Saud family a haven for their stolen money as well as a future port of refuge for their family. Weinberger in the same business vein further says: “Preservation of the long-standing U.S. – Saudi friendship is vital; so is the military-to-military relationship-although the latter is frequently strained by Congressional or Executive Branch reluctance to let the Saudis buy the U.S. arms they prefer. Given the uncertainties in the Middle East, it is crucial we safeguard this alliance.” Q151 We have demonstrated in many of our newsletters the willingness of individuals like former Secretary Weinburger to sacrifice US military personnel under the rubric of “vital interest” to protect the Saudi princes controlling much of the Arabian Peninsula.


Youssef M Ibrahim comments in the New York Times: “United States, the leading consumer of oil, which has long been eager to secure a permanent foothold in this huge and accessible supply. Indeed, until recently, optimism had been rising that the Saudis would allow United States oil companies to explore and drill for oil in their country, as they did before nationalization in the 1970’s. Major producers … are pressing for more foreign capital, and have expressed willingness to give foreign oil companies on ownership stake in their resources, the so called upstream end of the business. That may explain why Ali Naimi, the Saudi oil minister, has been careful not to shut the door entirely to American companies. ‘Those who help Saudi Arabia expand its industrial base today will probably be the ones that will be involved when – and if – the upstream is available for investment’ … For the Saudis there is both danger and temptation in courting the American companies. A greater involvement, particularly in ownership, could antagonize domestic political and cultural opponents, who have been outspoken in expressing anti-American sentiments. Yet, the superior technology of the American companies is a powerful inducement to invite them in. The Saudis cannot rest on their vast oil reserves forever. ‘We are not in the utility business; there is not much profit in that, said a senior executive from one of the companies, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. ‘But if the client is Saudi Arabia, how can anyone say no?’ ” Q152 Saudi Arabian Embassy First Secretary Adel Jubair was asked at a Georgetown symposium if there had been any responses to Crown Prince Abdullah’s business solicitations. He said there were many, especially from countries other than the United States. Those making the solicitations have a short memory and may suffer a repeat of history if either the Saud family or their successors nationalize their property again. Perhaps other governments, as the United States is now, would then be allowed to install military personnel within Saudi Arabia to protect the “vital interest” of their businesses.


Washington Post reports: “Former hostage Terry Anderson filed a $100 million lawsuit yesterday against the government of Iran … ‘they have to take responsibility for what they have done. They can’t simply go on denying.’ … Their lawsuits were made possible by legislation Congress passed three years ago that gives Americans who are victims of terrorist acts abroad the right to sue foreign countries in U.S. courts if those countries have been classified by the State Department as sponsors of terrorism.” Q151 The Saudi Arabian Government has probably killed, tortured and kidnapped more US citizens of late than any other country. Washington’s selective treatment of countries regarding human rights abuse exploits the US citizen for money. As we have reported in past issues Ambassador Bandar spreads unaccounted tens of millions around Washington every year. Some of this money goes for deferred payments to State Department, Congressional and White House officials when they retire, never mind the direct payments to lobbyists. It is hypocritically reprehensible to think these Washington men who go to their churches and synagogues each week to pray with their families would during the week negotiate the human rights sale of US military personnel and children to the Saud family.


The Baltimore Sun reports: “Most Americans don’t spend much time thinking about foreign policy, except during crises or war. It’s usually up to the president to make Americans pay attention by speaking directly to them … Traditionally, the president provides the direction and leadership in foreign policy, and Congress plays a supporting — or sometimes, opposing — role.” Q153 This is most probably true of human nature throughout the world. It takes the leader to coax the citizens into foreign policies about which they would be otherwise be indifferent. Is it any wonder that King Fahd , Ambassador Bandar and Crown Prince Abdullah indirectly donate to presidential candidates of choice. Time and time again we see determined foreign governments and their special interest groups find it easy to obtain a US foreign policy agenda they want from the White House. This in turn skews US foreign policy which usually is deleterious to the interests of the United States as a whole. It also makes the US look like a hypocrite to other countries affected by such a distorted policy.


We are continuing a limited investigation of the nonparental abductions of US children by Saudi princes. We have interviewed past Saud family palace domestic slaves who have been assigned to care for child sex slaves primarily kidnapped from the US and Northern Europe. It seems procedurally after being routinely processed by the Saudi Arabian Government upon entry the children are immediately brought to the respective palace where they are indoctrinated through a brainwashing practice. The suborning technique through a system of rewards and punishments includes US child sex slaves being given a Saudi name while their US name and religious beliefs are expunged from their mind. If the children use their US name or religious beliefs at any time thereafter, they are severely reprimanded with further conditioning. In tandem, the US State Department policy is that it refuses to investigate US child sex slaves within Middle East unless they are given the US name of the child. We have seen an example of this US State Department policy in issue #13 (US child sex slave mystery on the Nile).


London Times reports: “Over the space of three months, 25 of their fellow children died in two orphanages, either as a result of criminal neglect or, according to local MP’s killed for their organs in the lucrative trade in human body parts. … The sophistication of Cairo’s ghoulish black market in body parts, particularly kidneys, was revealed in the paper Al Ittihad, which disclosed that the Egyptian Doctors Syndicate is cracking down on members involved in the macabre traffic. … Under Egyptian law transplants are forbidden from Egyptians to non-Egyptains, but to overcome this, one princess from an oil-rich Arab country entered into a mock marriage contract with her donor. … In the name of my god Muhammad, please tell the world that we are trying to do some good by these poor children [Egyptian woman saving the children from the likes of the princess].” Q154 It is well known that many Saud family princes and princess have physical problems due to congenital problems and degenerate lifestyles. Because of the media exposure of the Cairo body part black market, they as well as others suffering from physical maladies, must look elsewhere for black market body parts.

The Saudi Arabian Government newsletter reports: “King Khalid National Guard Hospital in Jeddeh holds a symposium on organ donation in collaboration with the Saudi Organ Transplant Center.” Q155 We do not know officially how the black market in body parts is condoned by the Saudi Government. We do know the harvesting of human body parts is complicated and requires a sophisticated procedure. Each of the voluntary and involuntary donors must have blood, biopsy cultures and other samplings analyzed and recorded for a future recipient. When a donor/recipient compatibility is found, the transplantation of the organ from the donor to, say, the mentioned princess must take place as soon as possible with the most advanced technology available to increase chances of acceptance. The Legislation and Prevention of Discrimination Branch Centre for Human Rights, United Nations, Palais des Nations, Geneva should be able to monitor such a black market since it is difficult to hide such a technologically complicated procedure. We do not wish to comment any further on this subject at this time.

Dear Reader:

We have seen Deputy Prime Minister and Commander of the National Guard Crown Prince Abdullah Ibn Abdul Aziz’s imprint on the Saudi Arabian Government international policies in the past year. Crown Prince Abdullah has moved fast to improve the defects in foreign policy, especially when considering the deleterious effect the economic conditions have had on the middle class Saudi citizen. Recently, one of the speakers at a Saudi Arabian Government anniversary symposium in Washington brought out the fact that belt tightening is needed among all Saudi citizens. He further said that if one group of citizens [Royal family] is not expected to bear the burden at the expense of the majority [commoners], you will have unrest. I personally asked this speaker if there is an effort by Crown Prince Abdullah to repatriate the off-shore money. He not only said he did not know of any intention but that there is no effort to find out how much money is off-shore. If Crown Prince is sincere about turning around the Saudi economy he must win the trust of both the commoners his family control as well as the international business community. He must repatriate the money stolen from the oil reserves by the princes and he must settle the international business disputes his family is responsible for creating.

Herb Mallard
National Press Club member