Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Owner of UAE port company went falcon hunting with bin Laden!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:40 PM
Original message
Owner of UAE port company went falcon hunting with bin Laden!
Edited on Sun Feb-26-06 08:42 PM by paulthompson
This is important. Please read the whole thing. As Wikipedia points out:

Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum is currently the Prime Minister and Vice President of the United Arab Emirates, as well as the leader of Dubai.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_bin_Rashid_Al_Maktoum

In fact, he just became ruler of the emirate of Dubai a month ago.

As I pointed out in one of my 9/11 Timeline entries, this same al Maktoum liked to go falcon hunting with bin Laden in Afghanistan:

"For years, Persian Gulf state elites hunted rare birds of prey, houbara bustards, in the bleak hills surrounding Kandahar. In the late 1990s, according to former U.S. and Afghan officials, a number of prominent Persian Gulf state officials and businessmen flew into Kandahar on state and private jets for secret hunting expeditions.

"For days at a time, the hunters would roam the hills, releasing falcons trained to catch the bustards. Some satisfied hunters heaped donations on their Taliban hosts, officials said--and on Al Qaeda leaders who occasionally joined them.

"Among the reported visitors were high-ranking UAE and Saudi government ministers. According to U.S. and former Afghan civil air officials, the hunters included Prince Turki al Faisal, son of the late Saudi King Faisal. He headed that nation's intelligence service until late August, maintaining close ties with Bin Laden and the Taliban. Another visitor, officials said, was Sheik Mohammed ibn Rashid al Maktum, the Dubai crown prince and Emirates defense minister."

(I made a slight error in my timeline entry, the source is the Los Angeles Times instead of MSNBC)
http://web.archive.org/web/20030618094400/http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-111801osamair,0,7388562.story

As a recent Washington Post article points out, the emirate of Dubai owns Dubai Ports World, the company in the center of this controversy, which means that al Maktum, as the royal ruler of the emirate, is the owner of the company. The article even has a picture of him with Kofi Annan:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/23/AR2006022301898.html

It turns out that in early 1999, after the August 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Africa that made bin Laden the most well known and wanted terrorist in the world, UAE royals were still falcon hunting with bin Laden. Here's my timeline entry on the matter:

February 1999: Bin Laden Missile Strike Called Off for Fear of Hitting Persian Gulf Royalty

Intelligence reports foresee the presence of bin Laden at a desert hunting camp in Afghanistan for about a week. Information on his presence appears reliable, so preparations are made to target his location with cruise missiles. However, intelligence also puts an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and members of the royal family from that country in the same location. Bin Laden is hunting with the Emirati royals, as he did with leaders from the UAE and Saudi Arabia on other occasions (see 1995-2001). Policy makers are concerned that a strike might kill a prince or other senior officials, so the strike never happens. A top UAE official at the time denies that high-level officials are there, but evidence subsequently confirms their presence. (9/11 Commission Report, 3/24/04 (B))

CIA Director George Tenet later said this in explaining why the US did not go through with the missile strike:

"The third complicating factor here is you might have wiped out half the royal family in the UAE in the process, which I'm sure entered into everybody's calculation in all this."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20349-2004Mar24.html

In the book Ghost Wars on page 448, there is a similar quote: "In the American military, recalled one person involved, 'Nobody wanted to say, "Well, you blew up a camp full of U.A.E. princes and half of the royal family of the U.A.E.'s dead - and you guys didn't get him."'"

So, while the exact names of the UAE royals who were with bin Laden on this occasion have not been publicly released, it is highly likely al Maktum and his friends and family continued to personally associate with bin Laden after the embassy bombings (not the mention the early 1998 fatwa where bin Laden gave his blessings to any attack on US civilians anywhere in the world).

It has been claimed in recent days that the Dubai royal family has no connections with the port company except owning it, which sounds a bit strange on its face. In any case, according to this recent New York Times article, the chairman of the port company works directly for al Maktoum:

"We're pleased by this development and remain encouraged by the P&O board's unanimous recommendation to its shareholders of our offer," said the DP World chairman, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, who works directly for the crown prince of Dubai, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum. "It would be inappropriate for us to say anything more ahead of the shareholder vote."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/10/business/port.php

For those who search my timeline for other entries on the UAE and read other articles, such as this one:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/051205/5terror.b1.htm

the past connection between al Maktoum and bin Laden is just one of many reasons why this port deal should be of great concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. Republican view of hunting buddies
Cheney goes hunting with Scalia while the Supreme Court is considering the release of Cheney's Energy Commission papers. Nothing to see here - move along.

Prime Minister of UAE hunts with Bin Laden. Nothing to see here - move along.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. They all seem to do a lot of business on hunting trips
It makes me wonder ... was Harry an accident or a deal gone bad? :tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Yes, lots of business
Personally, I suspect that the falcon hunting trips served several purposes at once. For instance, in addition to enjoying the falcon hunting, there have been a few reports of drug smuggling. It makes sense: as royals and diplomats, some Persian Gulf elites could move from country to country without having any of their possessions inspected for drugs. There are huge profits to be made in getting the heroin and opium out of Afghanistan to the West, and if you ideologically hate the West, such smuggling can be given ideological justification to undercut Western society. It would be easy money, and almost risk free. This is more my hunch than definitely proved, but there have been some cases in the news, including a Saudi prince who was caught trying to smuggle drugs into Florida on his personal plane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. Was he clawed in the face?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. It certainly has a nice ring to it, but is it spin?
Not that it matters. It's a soundbite: Dubai Ports is government controlled, and a member of the royal family tipped off bin-laden.

What have we been telling ya? It will be impossible to keep secrets once they take control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. if true worse than i thought; i was under the impression that peripheral
members of the UAE ruling family had gone camping with OBL. The leader? Fuck, and they are going to acquire operational access to our ports? Unfucking real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sattahipdeep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. Where is the little turd
Edited on Sun Feb-26-06 09:05 PM by sattahipdeep
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2131836



QUESTION: Was the State Department involved in discussions over the UAE taking over
management of six ports -- six U.S. ports?

MR. MCCORMACK: The State Department is part of an interagency process which is led
by the Department of Treasury. We did participate in it. This interagency process did a
thorough review of all aspects of this proposed sale. And the bottom line finding was that
there was no basis on -- no national security basis on which to block the sale going
forward.

:hi:

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=February&x=20060217172404xjsnommis0.3468439&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nuxvomica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. Certainly of far greater concern than the Saddam-Al Qaeda link
That one was flimsy and tenuous at best yet it was used to support the disastrous and illegal invasion of another country. How nice that we have the opportunity to make a stand in the so-called "war on terror" simply by breaking a business deal rather than by killing thousands of people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. All TV,so called Reporters are still saying 6 Ports.
We now know it is 21. RW Corp. Mis-Info Campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
9. Another attendee of the 1999 bin Laden visit: head of the UAE military
According to the 9/11 Commission final report, page 486:

"General Shelton also told us that his UAE counterpart said he had been hunting at a desert camp in Afghanistan at about this time." (meaning, the Feb. 1999 visit of UAE royals with bin Laden and the Taliban)

Since Shelton was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, his UAE counterpart at the time would be Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan, Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces. He also happens to be the son of the president and king of the UAE at the time. That king died in 2004, so I believe he is now brother of the current king. Since that king died, he has also been made Crown Prince of the emirate of Dubai.

http://www.infoplease.com/country/profiles/united-arab-emirates.html

We're not talking marginal members of the UAE royal family who liked to hang out with bin Laden, we're talking some of the highest members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. Did Osama shoot him? btw, there are lots of bin laden/ladins. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. question
What's your point on there being lots of bin Ladens?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
23. Sorry, I was not very clear
Osama is generally called Osama in most places, to distinguish him from all the other bin Ladens, also as a cultural thing. Names are used differently in different countries. In the USA we have personal name first, family name second. In China it is opposite. Here we refer to people by last name, in (Arabic? Near/middle eastern? Can't quite come up with the proper pc term here, sorry) it is common to refer to people by their personal name (eg Saddam, Osama). I have read a couple articles by other bin Ladens, of which there are many, that they are upset that their family name is taken so negatively due to 1 member's actions.

Thank you for the articles, by the way. I am glad that people continue to come up with this stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. I get your point
But actually, the more research I do, the more I see Osama being supported in his terrorism by his family. Now, his family is huge. He had over 50 brothers and sisters, and the number of cousins, nephews, uncles, aunts, etc etc is probably in the thousands. Many or most of those have probably genuinely disassociated from him. But many have not. And most importantly, many key players connected to the family business, the Saudi Binladin group, have not. There's a big investigation into the company in Europe, and while a judge recently removed some defendants from the lawsuit the 9/11 victims' relatives are filing against Saudis supporting al-Qaeda, he noted that there was enough evidence of ties between that company and Osama to keep them as one of the targets of the suit.

Just thought I'd point that out. Again, its a lot like the situation with the UAE and this al Maktum guy. Some governments, people, and/or companies seem willing to do deals and work with the Bush administration and have obvious ties to terrorism at the same time, and the Bush administration doesn't seem to have a problem with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 03:50 AM
Response to Original message
13. Look who's been doing business with the same guy - Neil Bush
This recently comes from Salon. The President's brother makes business with the same guy who was falcon hunting with bin Laden before 9/11:

In October 2001, only a month after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, Neil Bush showed up in Dubai to attend a technology trade fair -- and to meet with Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. While peddling the products of Ignite!, his educational software company, Bush was feted as the guest of honor at a gala dinner for a charitable foundation, also hosted by the crown prince. (Former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore, who had been scheduled to travel to the Emirates around the same time, both canceled their attendance at those events.) According to the UAE's official news agency, Bush's discussions with Sheikh Mohammed and with Information Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan focused on "the world economy in light of recent events." During that visit Bush also met with the UAE's finance industry minister.

Exactly how much money Neil Bush raised in the Emirates as CEO of Ignite! isn't clear, but he managed to acquire a local partner, known as Trans-Data Systems, which is required for doing business there. He returned to Dubai in January 2002 to deliver a lecture on educational reform to a "select" audience of 200 government and education officials from the seven emirates that comprise the UAE. The signs of state patronage could not have been more plain. The Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry sponsored his seminar, and the official news agency made sure to note that "the younger brother of U.S. President George W. Bush ... agrees with the vision of General Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Crown Prince of Dubai and UAE Defense Minister, about adopting new ideas into the existing education system."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/02/24/ports_controversy/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 05:05 AM
Response to Original message
14. I am reminded of a story.
The story goes that the Mongol warlords were sitting around the campfire one night, discussing what things pleased them the most. One of the entourage suggested that falconing made him happiest. Ghenghis Khan had a different opinion.

"The greatest happiness," said Khan, "is to scatter your enemy, to drive him before you, to see his cities reduced to ashes, to see those who love him shrouded in tears, and to gather into your bosom his wives and daughters.”

More recently, the quote was paraphrased by a future prominent Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
24. Didn't Rove also paraphrase this? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. All I could find was this.
"I had an uncle, a favorite uncle of mine, who did several tours of duty in Vietnam, and I've never been able to think of Colonel Verhigh (ph) as somebody who would have raped and pillaged in a manner reminiscent of Genghis Khan."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137853,00.html

That was Rove swatting a Chris Wallace softball. He was of course denigrating the fact that John Kerry actually served our country in wartime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
15. we only have 45 days to make sure EVERYONE knows this..
We can't let the admin use this 45 day "explanation" delay muddy the water.

They are going to throw so much crap around that the skies will be brown & stinky for a year....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
16. This turns it up a notch! K and R
:popcorn:



:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
17. Wasn't either a video or still photograph of the hunting party shown
by the media? I seem to recall that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slaveplanet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
18. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
19. Let's not forget the UAE Royal Family was with OBL in 2003...
And that prevented the CIA from bombing that location, because it would have killed so many members of the Royal Family.

The more you dig, the stinkier this thing gets. We need to make sure MSM covers this - our national security is at stake!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. I believe that was in 1998 or 1999
Unless there are two separate instances of this happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FearofFutility Donating Member (764 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
20. Boiled down....
Saddam and Osama hate each other. Osama was involved in 9/11. Saddam was not. Bush spins it, makes it sound like they were best buddies, and invades Iraq overthrowing Saddam.

Maktoum and Osama are buddies and have gone hunting on several occasions. Bush gives Maktoum control of 21 U.S. ports.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
21. Yeah, but now they are a key ally to our war on terror
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David K. Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
25. Prince Turki al Faisal
Keep in mind that this Osama hunting buddy is presently Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Comforting to know.
See: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4700589.stm>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
27. Would this not be fairly big news?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #27
31. That's what I would think!
I started this thread because I thought this would be more than just a little bit relevant to the whole port debate. In a world with a more independent press, wouldn't this be on the front pages?!?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
agincourt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
29. About a month after 9/11,
I got the cold feeling this is not a real presidency in any way. Real presidents would not have politicized the tragedy or foisted a diversionary agenda on us because of it. Bush/Cheney/Rove and the "conservative" republicans really are aligned with the terrorists to destroy democracy. One wants a caliphant, the other a xtian caliphant and they are in collusion together. How stupid can Americans be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-27-06 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. You will also notice they pay no heed to the electorate or polls anymore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slaveplanet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
32. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jun 04th 2024, 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC