November 5, 2007 (LPAC)-- Calling the Saudi Kingdom the "Hub of World Terror,'' the Sunday London Times of Nov. 4, ran an "expose'' on the Saudi empire's relation to international terrorism-- but painting it as only a "Saudi-U.S.'' problem. In an accompanying "comment,'' the Times' Bronwen Maddox writes that the U.S. had "urged'' the UK to mediate the relationship (and bring the Saudis to support the current Middle East negotiations).

The Times lists the past and present sins of Saudi Arabia, never once mentioning the multi-billion dollar al-Yamamah swap arrangement and slush fund set up for Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, by which much of this network of terror is financed.

Lyndon LaRouche, who caused political shockwaves on Oct. 10, 2007 when he identified, at his international webcast that 9/11 was an "inside job" about which he could only disclose a fraction of what he knows, commented that the Times piece reflects his "blowing the whistle" on 9/11. The British are still covering up their role in international terrorism, but some circles liked the "sound of the whistle" and are exposing some elements of the network behind 9/11.

The Times says that 55% of the foreign fighters on the ground in Iraq are Saudis, according to NBC News, as are over half of the foreign detainees at Baghdad's Camp Cropper. These detainees have to be isolated because of the poisoning effect they have on others, through preaching their extremist Wahabist form of Islam. Over the years, the Saudis have operated both as a fountain of funds, and as an international sanctuary for al-Qaeda-connected terrorists, including, years ago, Osama himself.

Things started to change at the time of the first Gulf War in 1991. Bin Laden attacked the Saudis for cooperation with the U.S., eventually leading to the revocation of his citizenship. In 1996, al-Qaeda first reached onto domestic territory with the bombing of the Khobar Towers, where among the victims was one Saudi national. And, of course, the Times notes that 15 of the 19 supposed 9/11 attackers were Saudi nationals.

By 2003, the mood was notably different, as the kingdom was the target of a series of major terrorist attacks, causing personal fear among some Royals, and as assassination attempts were made against security officials. In 2004, Khobar was struck again, this time the oil infrastructure. At that point the Saudis "began to cooperate more with the FBI.''

Despite this, the Saudi's still present a mixed picture, says the Times. Although it was announced at the Saudi embassy in Washington, the creation of a domestic anti-terrorist finance "NGO,'' has yet to be realized. The money still flows, albeit now in suitcases, instead of more easily traceable wire transfers. Any domestic arrestees are usually given "consultation,'' instead of jail time. Of those who are jailed, their families receive often assistance, sometimes significant, and even reaching as far as Guantanamo Bay.

The Times ends with the question which is no doubt on the minds of the oligarchy, and which probably sparked the entire article. Rachel Bronson, head of the Council on Foreign Relations' Middle East desk asks, "Do we want to take on the Saudi's at this moment?''