This article titled “Alleged Iran plot could have been trigger for war in Middle East” was written by Julian Borger, for The Guardian on Tuesday 11th October 2011 22.55 UTC

Whoever was behind the Washington plot was ready to start a war in the Middle East. The region is already on the brink of conflict over Iran’s nuclear programme, with Israel increasingly twitchy over the progress Tehran is making towards a capacity to make nuclear weapons.

Leaked US State Department cables also make clear that the Saudi king, Abdullah, has repeatedly urged the US to “cut off the head of the snake” and attack Iran.

Against that backdrop, the assassination of the Saudi ambassador in Washington, with mass American casualties and perhaps an attack on the Israeli embassy too, would have ensured that the region went up in flames.

The US accuses the Quds Force (QF), the external operations wing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, of being behind the plot. Given the hierarchy of the Iranian regime, such a huge undertaking would have required a direct order from the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who personally controls the QF.

Khamenei’s involvement would be surprising, to say the least. Throughout his tenure – since the death of the Islamic republic’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomenei in 1989 – he has shown himself to be highly cautious and devoted to entrenching the power of the clerical regime.

Meir Javendafar, an Iranian-Israeli, said: “Khamenei’s first priority is regime stability, and then a distant second, safeguarding the nuclear programme.”

One speculative explanation circulating on Tuesday night was that Khamenei feels so threatened by internal opposition that he would provoke a foreign attack to allow himself to strengthen his grip on the country. But the opposition Green movement is currently in abeyance, and the nuclear programme is advancing steadily with little threat of concerted international action, or much global support for an Israeli strike.

The plot is also out of character for the QF. The unit is well-funded and has considerable freedom of action abroad. It is suspected of involvement in the bombing of a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires in 1994, the funding and arming of Hezbollah in Lebanon, of Shia militias in Iraq, and even the Taliban in Afghanistan. In 2008, the head of the QF, Kassim Suleimani sent the US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus a message in which he said, according to Petraeus, that he controlled Iranian foreign policy in the region.

However, to extend those operations to US territory would represent a significant leap in scope and ambitions. The way the plot was conducted would also suggest that the ruthlessly efficiently QF had lost its touch, being clumsy enough to transfer money from accounts under its control directly to US bank accounts.

Robert Baer, a former CIA agent with long experience of observing the QF, said: “This stinks to holy hell. The Quds Force are very good. They don’t sit down with people they don’t know and make a plot. They use proxies and they are professional about it. If Kassim Suleimani was coming after you or me, we would be dead. This is totally uncharacteristic of them.”

Another possibility is that this is a rogue operation, perhaps organised by a faction inside the QF, without the Supreme Leader’s blessing. There is an argument that it suited the purposes of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who recently lost a bloodless power struggle with Khamenei.

If the attack succeeded, it would set in train events dramatic enough to turn the rigid, dusty hierarchy of the clerical republic on its head, giving Ahmadinejad the chance to seize the advantage.

Or the plotters could be fanatics inside the military establishment, bent on bringing the Revolutionary Guard to the top of the regime pyramid, beginning an open race to develop a nuclear weapon and confronting Israel directly.

“If this is a bunch of crazies, then anything is possible,” Baer said.

All such possibilities are speculative. They would fundamentally reshape the Islamic Republic, and yet – for Iran experts – they are scarcely any more far-fetched that the idea that the Iranian establishment was behind a plot as brazen and reckless as this.

The thwarting of the plot almost certainly averted a conflict, but regional tension will escalate nevertheless. Any remote hope of resumed nuclear talks is dead for now. More sanctions and UN Security Council resolutions will be on the table instead.

Conceivably, that could break Khamenei’s will to press on with the nuclear programme, and produce a compromise deal that defuses the threat of conflict.

Or it could just as plausibly convince him to accelerate the programme, persuaded that the regime’s enemies are closing in. In that case, this extraordinary plot could yet succeed in sparking a new conflict in a very fragile region.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “US told: support Palestinian UN bid or risk ‘toxic’ reputation in Arab world” was written by Chris McGreal in Washington, for guardian.co.uk on Monday 12th September 2011 16.15 UTC

A former head of Saudi Arabian intelligence and ex-ambassador to Washington, Turki al-Faisal, has warned that an American veto of Palestinian membership of the United Nations would end the “special relationship” between the two countries, and make the US “toxic” in the Arab world.

The warning comes as Washington is scrambling to avoid a scenario where it alone casts a veto in the UN security council against the Palestinian bid for recognition of statehood, which is expected to be formally requested next week. The US is putting considerable pressure on the Palestinians not to submit the request, and on Britain – the only other permanent member of the security council that has not publicly supported the Palestinian request – to also exercise its veto if necessary.

Al-Faisal says in an article in the New York Times that the US will jeopardise its close ties with Saudi Arabia and further undermine its position in a changing Arab world if it again sides with Israel.

“The United States must support the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations this month or risk losing the little credibility it has in the Arab world. If it does not, American influence will decline further, Israeli security will be undermined and Iran will be empowered, increasing the chances of another war in the region,” al-Faisal says.

“Moreover, Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to co-operate with America in the same way it historically has. With most of the Arab world in upheaval, the “special relationship” between Saudi Arabia and the United States would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims, who demand justice for the Palestinian people.”

He adds: “Saudi leaders would be forced by domestic and regional pressures to adopt a far more independent and assertive foreign policy.”

Al-Faisal, a vigorous advocate of Palestinian statehood who has previously accused the US of bias toward Israel, said that the two-decade long Oslo peace process has not yielded results and should be replaced with “a new paradigm based on state-to-state negotiations”.

This is a view shared by some European nations, including France, which regard the Oslo process as a trap that has failed to deliver statehood for the Palestinians and is unlikely to do so in the near future.

“American support for Palestinian statehood is therefore crucial, and a veto will have profound negative consequences. In addition to causing substantial damage to American-Saudi relations and provoking uproar among Muslims worldwide, the United States would further undermine its relations with the Muslim world, empower Iran and threaten regional stability,” al-Faisal writes.

The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has said he will submit a request to the security council for full membership of the United Nations when he is in New York for the opening of the general assembly next week. If that is vetoed by the US, the request will move to the general assembly, which has the power only to grant enhanced observer status, but where Israel concedes the Palestinians are all but certain to win.

The prospect has alarmed the Americans and the Israelis, who say the move would undermine peace efforts and lead to further violence. The Palestinians say there is no peace process to speak of.

But the diplomatic fallout is of principal concern to the US. It will be hard for Washington, and for Britain, if it backs the American position, to explain to newly liberated parts of the Arab world why they are prepared to go to war against Muammar Gaddafi in Libya and agitate against Bashar al-Assad in Syria but not support the Palestinian bid for statehood in the face of an intransigent Israel.

For Israel, the UN move comes as it is grappling with the collapse in relations with Turkey over the Israeli assault on the Gaza flotilla last year, in which Israeli forces killed nine Turks, and rising hostility in Egypt, which saw the Israeli embassy in Cairo ransacked last week.

Israel also looks to many as increasingly out of step with a changing region, in maintaining the occupation, expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank and thwarting Palestinian independence in the near future.

The US has been pressuring the Palestinian leadership not to make the request, with promises to get peace negotiations going again. But Abbas said that the Americans came with no concrete proposals and the Palestinians have little confidence that the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is seriously interested in ending the occupation.

George Mitchell, until recently Barack Obama’s Middle East envoy, said last week that he sees little chance of the US persuading the Palestinians not to submit the request.

The US Congress is also pressuring the Palestinians to withdraw the request by threatening to cut off funding. The House of Representatives is holding hearings this week on whether to continue financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. Its principal witnesses are among the PA’s strongest critics, including Elliot Abrams, a former assistant secretary of state and former deputy national security advisor.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Three killed as Bahrain’s king declares martial law” was written by Martin Chulov, for The Guardian on Tuesday 15th March 2011 20.48 UTC

The sectarian standoff between Bahrain’s Shia majority and its Sunni elite deteriorated further on Tuesday when the king declared martial law and security forces clashed violently with protesters throughout the capital, Manama.

At least three people were killed in fighting between the civilian protesters and government-backed security forces that included Saudi soldiers invited into the kingdom on Sunday.

Hospitals were again teeming with wounded demonstrators in scenes reminiscent of earlier clashes in February, that severely tested the legitimacy of the US-backed government. A hospital source said two men, one Bahraini and the other Bangladeshi, were killed in clashes. State television said a Bahraini policeman was also killed, denying media reports that a Saudi soldier had been shot dead.

Soldiers were active in numerous areas that had been flashpoints in past clashes. Doctors and medical staff reported that troops had taken over a medical centre in the Sitra area and, in some cases, prevented them from tending to casualties. Doctors in the medical centre claimed they were being prevented from leaving by troops stationed outside.

“They are shooting at us, they are shooting,” one doctor told the Guardian. “Get help, get the international community to help.”

Up to 200 people were reported to have been treated at some point during the day, which is being seen as the start of a new phase in the increasingly bitter clashes that are steadily gaining a regional dimension in the Gulf. Bahrain withdrew its ambassador to Tehran in protest at a warning from the Iranian foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, to the kingdom not to harm demonstrators, almost all of whom are Shias. Meanwhile, the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia said they felt obliged to intervene, claiming that continuing unrest in Bahrain could threaten them.

In a further sign of the crisis’s broader reach, Hezbollah in Lebanon said that military intervention against a popular uprising would complicate Bahrain’s already fragile social dynamic. Saudi Arabia’s restive Shia minority was also thought to be angered by the intervention, as is the Shia majority government in Iraq.

Villages throughout Manama stationed militiamen at entrances and crossroads in attempts to keep security forces away. However, they were unarmed, outnumbered and unable to stop soldiers taking over neighbourhoods to search for demonstrators.

Earlier, Bahrain’s monarch, King Hamad bin Issa al-Khalifa, had declared a state of emergency for three months and given the military broad powers to quell the uprising, which has been steadily eroding the authority of the 200-year-old monarchy.

“The commander-in-chief of the Bahrain defence force has been mandated to take the measures and procedures necessary to preserve the safety of the nation and its people,” the government statement said. It added that “other forces” may also be invited to Bahrain.

The economic toll on the kingdom has been rapidly mounting as demonstrators have occupied a landmark in central Manama, Pearl roundabout, and marched on government buildings demanding changes. This year’s Formula One grand prix in Bahrain has been postponed and is unlikely to be rescheduled as the tiny state’s reputation as a safe financial hub and a haven for tourism has taken a heavy hit.

The UK has closed its embassy in Manama, while the EU and the US have said there is “no military solution” to the crisis. The US maintains its Fifth Fleet in Manama’s port and has significant intelligence interests in the kingdom.

The foreign secretary, William Hague, said: “We’re extremely concerned about the escalation of the situation in Bahrain, in particular the decision by the government of Bahrain to declare a state of emergency.”

The US claims the intervention of Gulf nations’ soldiers is not an invasion. However, it appears to be caught between its recent advocacy of democracy over stability in the Middle East, and the reality that its own strategic interests in the region could unwind if it continues to push for change.

“The Americans were with us last month and now they’re not,” said Dr Ala’a from the Salmaniya medical centre, which treated scores of wounded during the day. “What does that say about them? Democracy is fine when it suits their interests, but when it’s not they will happily subject us to the savagery of people like this.” Ala’a said several of the injured treated had gunshot wounds. The two men killed in the clashes had also been shot, she said.

Photographs and videos of dead and injured circulating supported her claims.

“With our blood and our souls we will fight the mercenaries,” a crowd chanted in the car park of the hospital, which has been a rallying point for the uprising for the past two months.

A key issue of the demonstrators is that many members of the Bahrain security forces are from Gulf – Sunni – states in the region and they have been given nationality by the regime. Bahrain’s Shias make up 70% of the country, but do not have access to many establishment roles, such as senior positions in the army or police.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Saudi expectations high before Friday’s ‘day of rage’ protests” was written by Ian Black, Middle East editor, for The Guardian on Thursday 10th March 2011 06.00 UTC

Al-Qatif in Saudi Arabia’s eastern province has a harsh climate: summer temperatures often reach the mid-40s, though the winter is pleasantly mild. But it is not the weather that is exercising locals and the government in these days of political turbulence across the Middle East.

Residents say all seems calm, and see no sign that security has been reinforced. But there is a mood of expectation about Friday’s Saudi “day of rage” and whether the “Arab spring” will spread to the conservative kingdom.

The city lies in the heartland of the country’s oil-producing area, home to a restive Shia minority that has long complained of poverty and discrimination.

Tensions mounted last month when the neighbouring island state of Bahrain saw an unprecedented uprising that left seven dead and set nerves jangling in a region already deeply unsettled by the turmoil in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen.

Demonstrations are rare in Saudi Arabia – a country with no legal political parties or mass movements – and even committed reformists admit they are anxious about taking to the streets. “There is no history of public protests, even in support of the government,” said Jaafar al-Shayeb, a city councillor and businessman in al-Qatif. The Facebook organisers of Friday’s event are breaking new ground. “No one knows who is behind the protests,” said Waleed Abu al-Khair, a human rights activist in Jeddah. Some fear a ploy by the secret police to entrap protesters.

Last week the security forces came out to forestall trouble after Friday prayers. A young Sunni teacher named Muhammad al-Wad’ani, arrested in Riyadh after a video of him calling for change was posted on YouTube, remains in detention.

But government strategy so far appears largely pre-emptive. An interior ministry ban on demonstrations was backed by the Council of Senior Clerics, who warned of violating Islamic law – a classic Saudi combination of state and religious power.

“Every citizen should co-operate with the authorities to maintain security and stability throughout the kingdom,” warned the appointed shura council chairman, Abdullah Al-Asheikh.

Saud al-Faisal, the veteran foreign minister, weighed in: “Reform does not come via protests and [the clerics] have forbidden protests since they violate the Qur’an and the way of the prophet.”

Still, official nervousness has produced some positive gestures too. Twenty-five protesters were released in al-Qatif on Tuesday. Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amer, a Shia cleric who was detained after calling for a constitutional monarchy, was also freed.

Saudi Arabia shares many problems common to the Arab world – a youth “bulge,” lack of opportunities for graduates, precious few political freedoms, plus an absence of transparency and accountability by an absolute monarchy that includes 8,000 princes. Restrictions on women – who are not allowed to drive and cannot travel abroad without the permission of a male relative – are another big negative. The notorious religious police are another. Torture is frequently used on detainees. Unemployment between the ages of 14 and 24 is 40% – in a country where almost 70% of the population is under 20.

Demands for change are relatively modest. Of three reform petitions circulating on the internet, one has gathered signatures from 1,500 prominent liberal and Islamist Saudis calling for a constitutional monarchy, an elected parliament and an accountable executive. Entitled Towards a Country with Rights and Institutions, it is couched in polite and formal language and starts by wishing the king good health. It is a far cry from the slogans heard in Tunis, Cairo and Tripoli. But online access was still quickly blocked.

A “youth petition” signed by 60 journalists and cyber-activists calls for political liberalisation and lowering the average age of ministers to 40 and of shura council members to 45. “There is a new generation of people who are more liberal,” says a senior Saudi journalist, “but they still respect the old red lines.”

Many Saudi liberals insist the king is a well-intentioned reformist, if one limited by his age and experience. Khaled al-Maeena, editor of the Jeddah-based Arab News, is one of them. “People are adamant that the day of rage will not be about throwing stones and shouting slogans, so there shouldn’t be an over-reaction.”

With national income three times the level of Egypt’s and control of 20% of the world’s oil reserves, the government’s instinct is to throw money at problems. Last month the king returned from a long convalescence in the US and Morocco and announced a bn package to boost salaries, tackle unemployment and provide affordable housing. Abdullah’s generosity was hailed in the media but a princess who castigated people for their ingratitude at royal largesse angered many.

“The king has given a financial answer,” said Abu Khair, “but not a political one. People need more than money.”

Riyadh is rife with rumours about a possible cabinet reshuffle, sacking under-performing officials or promoting younger princes to positions occupied by their ageing fathers. Another possibility is electing half the shura council. But will such measures be enough to satisfy the critics?

“There is anger everywhere,” said al-Maeena. “We have had years of lethargy and inaction. We need to change the mindset. The king is loved. His personality is something people look up to and the House of Saud is a pillar of this kingdom. But they have to realise that times have changed and people have changed.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Saudi Arabia king accused of misjudged bribery in attempt to avoid unrest” was written by Jack Shenker, for The Guardian on Thursday 24th February 2011 21.04 UTC

Leading intellectuals in Saudi Arabia have warned that grand financial gestures are no substitute for meaningful political reform, after King Abdullah unveiled a bn (£22bn) social welfare package in advance of planned anti-government protests next month.

In a statement released on Thursday, a group of Saudi scholars called on the royal family to learn from recent uprisings in the Gulf and North Africa and to start listening to the voices of the kingdom’s disenfranchised young people, some of whom are planning a “day of rage” on 11 March. Several Islamic thinkers, as well as a female academic and a poet, are among those adding their names to the declaration.

“The Saudi regime is learning all the wrong lessons from Egypt and Tunisia,” said Shadi Hamid, director of research at the Brookings Doha Centre. “The unrest in the region is not fundamentally economic, it’s fundamentally about politics. Economics plays a role but what the events of the past few months have shown us is that Arabs are looking for freedom, dignity and democracy – and if the Saudi leadership can’t see that, then they’re in trouble.”

Saudi Arabia’s 86-year-old monarch returned home this week from three months in hospital abroad, and immediately announced a vast package of welfare measures including new education and housing subsidies, the creation of 1,200 jobs and a 15% pay rise for all government employees.

But analysts believe the king – who promised far-reaching political reform when he ascended to the throne in 2005, only to make little effort in tackling the political status quo – has misjudged the grievances of his population.

The kingdom remains an absolute monarchy with few outlets for dissent, with public policy-making concentrated almost entirely in the hands of the ruling family.

“We’re seeing a lack of vision on the part of Saudi leaders right now,” said Hamid. “They’re trying to bribe people into quietude. It’s cynical, predictable, and it’s not necessarily going to work, at least in the long run – I don’t believe anyone thinks Saudi Arabia is going to fall tomorrow, but it’s not immune from unrest. It’s actually quite surprising that King Abdullah hasn’t taken this opportunity to move faster on political reform.”

Despite its oil wealth, Saudi Arabia features many of the underlying demographics that have helped spark rebellions in other Arab nations. Almost half the population is under the age of 18 and, unlike in other Gulf states, some of which boast close to full employment, 40% of 20- to 24-year-old Saudis are out of work.

Many young people are turning to online social media sites to exchange information and ideas.”The level to which young people in Saudi Arabia are connected to the rest of the world, and particularly the Arab world, is staggering,” Mai Yamani, a prominent Saudi author, told the Guardian.

“The flow of ideas being shared amongst this generation has no borders. The same anguish and demands being voiced by Arab youth elsewhere is inspiring youth in Saudi Arabia as well. In this climate, the days of using oil money to secure the subservience of citizens is over.”

So far the announcement on Facebook of a day of protest next month has been met with little open enthusiasm; in contrast to similar calls in Egypt and Tunisia which garnered tens of thousands of supporters, the Saudi web page is followed by only a few hundred supporters.

But in a kingdom where the current laws and social mores work predominantly to the benefit of ethnically Saudi males following the Sunni branch of Islam, some analysts have estimated that up to 20 million of the kingdom’s 27 million people – including women, Shia Muslims and some 7.5 million guest workers from Asia – feel dangerously detached from the state, amounting to a potentially potent groundswell of opposition.

“Saudi Arabia has had an undercurrent of unrest and anger towards the regime for decades now, it’s always been there bubbling underneath the surface,” claimed Hamid. “The question is when it’s going to explode.”

But he added that calls for a complete overhaul of the monarchy remained unlikely. “We have two regional models of change: one is the Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan model of overthrowing the regime, and the other is the Moroccan and Jordanian model of shifting from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy, and that applies to Saudi Arabia as well. I don’t think there’s a hunger for a complete break in the system.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Iranian nuclear scientist ‘tortured on suspicion of revealing state secrets’” was written by Julian Borger and Saeed Kamali Dehghan, for The Guardian on Tuesday 4th January 2011 17.26 UTC

An Iranian nuclear scientist who claimed to have been abducted by the CIA and who returned to a hero’s welcome in Tehran in July has been imprisoned and tortured on suspicion of giving away state secrets, according to an opposition website.

Iranbriefing.net – run by a US-based group that normally reports on political prisoners and the activities of Iran’s revolutionary guard – said the scientist, Shahram Amiri, had been interrogated intensively for three months in Tehran before spending two months in solitary confinement, where his treatment left him hospitalised for a week.

The Tehran authorities would not confirm or deny the account. Asked to comment, a spokesman for Iran’s judiciary said: “I haven’t heard anything about this [his arrest] and I don’t have any information regarding this matter.”

Amiri has not been seen in public in the six months since his much-publicised homecoming from America, where he claimed to have been held against his will. State media portrayed him at the time as a daring patriot who had escaped from his alleged CIA captors with critical information about US covert operations against Iran.

US officials, surprised by Amiri’s unexpected return to Iran, insisted he had gone to the US willingly. However, there was concern in US intelligence circles that his original “defection” in Saudi Arabia in 2009 could have been a trap to embarrass the CIA and trick its officials into revealing how much the US knows about the Iranian nuclear programme.

The evidence is contradictory. During his time in the US, Amiri appeared to have made three videos – one saying he had decided to continue his studies in the US, another saying he was being held captive and a third claiming to be on the run from the CIA. He then presented himself to the Iranian interest section at the Pakistani embassy in Washington, asking to go home.

Independent but unverified reports from inside Iran said Amiri’s family had been stripped of their passports and placed under close scrutiny after the scientist went missing on his pilgrimage to Mecca.

Western observers said his disappearance from public view since last summer strengthened their view that he had been forced to return by threats to his relatives. It is not yet clear whether a planned Iranian television drama based on the official version of his story will be aired as scheduled this year.

Amid the conflicting reports, it is clear that the struggle over Amiri is just one more battle in an increasingly ferocious secret war over Iran’s nuclear programme that has seen two other Iranian scientists assassinated and a third injured in bomb attacks last year.

Iran has blamed western and Israeli intelligence for the attacks, and for a computer worm, known as Stuxnet, that caused centrifuges to malfunction at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz.

Tehran also claimed last week that General Ali Reza Asgari, a former revolutionary guard commander and deputy defence minister who disappeared in Istanbul just over four years ago, was being held in an Israeli prison. Mohammad Raouf Sheybani, a deputy foreign minister, called for an international inquiry into Asgari’s fate.

Covert operations against Iran’s nuclear programme appear to have had some success in slowing it down. The main enrichment plant in Natanz stopped processing uranium altogether for a few days in November. But diplomatic efforts to persuade Tehran to suspend its programme in return for foreign technical and financial assistance have so far failed.

Talks in December between Iran and six major powers in Geneva led only to an agreement to meet again, in Turkey later this month. Tehran has invited selected foreign diplomats to tour some of its nuclear facilities ahead of the meeting. But the US, which is not invited, has dismissed the invitation as a propaganda ploy.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

Those of us against the proposed mosque at Ground Zero have been called racists and bigots. We’ve been told that asking for the mosque to be built further away from Ground Zero is hateful.

But it looks like we might not be as bigoted as initially thought. It turns out Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal doesn’t think the mosque should be built there either.

Prince Alwaleed’s Kingdom Foundation has contributed to the group run by New York’s Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, but said he has given no funds to the planned center.
Prince Alwaleed urged the backers of the proposed Islamic center not to “agitate the wound by saying, ’We need to put the mosque next to the 9/11 site.’”

“Those people behind the mosque have to respect, have to appreciate and have to defer to the people of New York,” the prince was quoted as saying by the magazine, which said the full interview will be published Sunday. “The wound is still there. Just because the wound is healing you can’t say, ’Let’s just go back to where we were pre-9/11.’”

That racist SOB! That Muslim hating bigot! Damn him! Oh wait, he’s a Saudi Prince. He’s a Muslim.

Let me read between the lines here. Price Alwaleed is a big time funder of Islamic causes in America. He’s extremely influential. If he doesn’t think building a mosque at Ground Zero is a good idea — there will be no mosque at Ground Zero. Period.

From Inquirer.net:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia – Saudi police raided a secret Catholic mass in Riyadh last week and arrested a dozen Filipinos and a Catholic priest, charging them with prosyletising, a local daily reported on Wednesday.

Hey, I thought we were all practicing “tolerance” now. What happened? We’re constantly being lectured to by sanctimonious and hypocritical Imams about the need for America to be more tolerant.

But since practicing any other religion besides Islam is a crime in The Kingdom, I’m going to go out on a limb and say it’s Saudi Arabia that needs to practice a little tolerance.

Take a gander at this video of Prince Saud Abdulaziz bin Nasser beating the hell out of his man servant in an elevator in London. This took place inside the Landmark Hotel in London on Feb 15. The servant was later found beaten and strangled to death in the hotel room they shared.

Hmmm, I wonder who did it?

(hat tip Breitbart TV)

I know, you’re shocked.