Saudis warned UK about attacks

[cal04]

SAUDI officials alerted Britain several weeks before the deadly July 7 bombings in London that a terror attack was being planned, two Sunday newspapers reported. The Observer quoted a security official in the Saudi capital Riyadh as saying that information was passed to MI5 and MI6, Britain's domestic and foreign intelligence agencies respectively.

The Sunday Telegraph quoted the Saudi ambassador to Britain, Prince Turki al-Faisal, as saying that details of a possible conspiracy to attack London -- apparently extracted from terrorism suspects in Saudi Arabia -- had been given to British intelligence. "There were reports passed on to your authorities several months ago (in April-May) in general terms of a heightened expectancy of attacks on London," said the ambassador, a former chief of Saudi intelligence.
Security sources played down the reports. The Observer quoted one source as "categorically" denying that any specific information had been received that could have averted the July 7 attacks.

The source said they "did not recognise" the details of the Saudi claims, which came to light one month to the day after the attacks. There was no immediate comment from the Foreign Office or the Home Office, but Prime Minister Tony Blair has previously rejected suggestions of an intelligence failure. Fifty-six people were killed, including four apparent suicide bombers, in the July 7 morning rush-hour bombing of three Underground subway trains and a double-decker bus.



Saudi security sources were reported Sunday to be investigating whether two al-Qaeda operatives were in phone contact with a British ringleader of the plotters of the July 7 bombings. Money transfers were thought to have been made from Saudi Arabia to Britain in the first six months of the year through businesses in the two countries, it was reported.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16180624%255E1702,00.html

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050806/wl_mideast_afp/britainattackssaudi_050806232547

[lovuian]

1. Saudis are having to make it look like they are TRYING to

go after those terrible terrorists when in actuality they are funding them!!!

[StrafingMoose]

6. Agreed, but you...

forget to mention that after having Saudi Arabia fund them, they are not stopped by USA or UK when on their soil.

[leesa]

8. Well, of course not! How could they get their war on if they stopped the

planned attacks? The UK and the US are partners with SA.

[wli]

2. probably complaining that Bliar was paying the terrorists himself

[Nexus7]

3. If we had known they were going to fly into the WTC...

Quote:
>>The Observer quoted one source as "categorically" denying that any specific information had been received that could have averted the July 7 attacks. <<

Kinda like no one told Condi that they were going to fly planes into buildings. I mean, if people need to draw a map for these folks to be of any use, then they're not doing their job very well, are they?

For years, the UK allwed hate mongers to operate in the country because they were not the country targeted. Then they pulled their bonehead Iraq move, and now all of a sudden no information is good enough for them.

[catzies]

4. Is this their equivalent of the "Aug. 6 2001 PDB 'Bin Laden Determined to

Oh the irony.

[bemildred]

5. "apparently extracted from terrorism suspects"

Such a sensitive way to phrase it.

There is not much here, I could have told them to watch out for attacks on London, and I don't have anyone to torture the idea out of.

The real problem is that its NOT FEASIBLE to watch everything all the time.

[StrafingMoose]

7. Aswat (mastermind) was alledgedly an MI6 asset...

And if you look closely at all his traveling before and after the bombings WHILE he's on a watchlist, that tells you he's backed by people and not just a snotty hardcore imam.

If he WAS on the MI6 payroll, you don't really need to "to watch everything all the time."

[bemildred]

9. That's a different issue.

The spookiness of his activities supports several explanations.
The used are often users too, in their own way, so these different explanations are not even mutually exclusive, he could be a tool and a double agent, and other things, all at the same time.