Thread FULL!!!__AMERICA AT WAR!__Use New Thread!

» JenL_2 - Re: Indonesian Front

a more detailed report on Indonesia - U.S. military relations that shows what a tightrope we're walking.... from 4/27 Asia Times.....

---

US, Indonesia marching out of step

By Alan Boyd

Indonesia and the United States have made their first tentative moves toward normalizing defense ties after a series of low-key meetings that showed just how little has changed since Jakarta was cut adrift 30 months ago.

US negotiators could hardly have been buoyed by the news that reform of the armed forces had again been subverted by political patronage; that valiant efforts to instill a human-rights ethnic had failed to check ethnic and sectarian strife in the provinces; and that the archipelago was letting religious sensitivities get in the way of its moral obligations to support the global offensive against terrorism.

But then, neither side set an especially high goal for the opening exchanges, which were dominated by the sort of handy catchphrases that diplomats like to trot out when the real issues are too hot to handle. The prime achievement so far, according to chief Indonesian negotiator Major-General Sudrajat, has been to "increase confidence and mutual understanding in the defense and security ties between the two countries".

In other words, Washington has let it be known that the arms tap will not be turned back on until its strategists have found someone they are prepared to deal with in Jakarta's Byzantine military establishment. Known by their Bahasa Indonesia acronym TNI, the Indonesian armed forces have undergone a subtle transformation since relations were first downgraded in 1998 in response to human rights abuses by special forces units. That censure was limited to a suspension of joint training exercises. But most remaining contacts were severed a year later when Jakarta failed to heed Washington's demands for Indonesian troops to stop harassing civilians in newly liberated East Timor.

Washington also let it be known that arms shipments and training programs would not be reactivated until political authority had been exercised over the freewheeling TNI. This meant greater accountability within the army and a more responsible leadership.

Much has changed in the interim, with President Megawati Sukarnoputri initiating Indonesia's first human-rights trial on the Timor debacle and quietly retiring some senior officers who resisted the march toward a more professional force. The trial, dripping with evidence of a high-level TNI conspiracy to set army-backed militias on the Timorese population, has been a revelation. Sitting in the dock are former East Timor governor Abilio Jose Osorio Soares and the province's ex-police chief, Timbul Silaen, who had both been seen as untouchable before Megawati's intervention.

Yet it will take more than an occasional liberal wind in government and vague US threats to alter the mindset of sociopolitical patronage that lies at the heart of Indonesian institutional power. The newest leadership reshuffle, seemingly timed for the arrival of the US defense team in Jakarta, nominated air force and naval chiefs of staff from the current power clique who are both close to retirement. Slated to be filled in a pending reshuffle are the posts of army chief of staff, army commander and deputy commander; frontrunners for all three are also identified with the same former military college classes that hold sway in the TNI.

In rewarding officers with pre-retirement packages for their personal ties, the TNI has reinforced the impression that it is window-dressing on reforms and has no real intention of allowing in a new generation of leaders. Obviously this does not bode well for the wider democratization process that would underpin any renewal of Washington's ruptured dialogue with Jakarta, as it suggests that the TNI will remain at least a background force in government.

Standing in the way is a 1997 congressional edict that specifically prohibits the US administration from providing any military assistance to units of foreign armed military forces "that violate human rights with impunity". Commonly known as the Leahy Law after its main sponsor, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, the legislation was originally tacked on to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act as a lever against countries that failed to suppress trafficking in narcotics. However, it was broadened in 1998 to encompass all security assistance programs funded through the Foreign Operations Act, and again in the following year to include military training programs funded through appropriations.

The law states that aid cannot be provided to any unit of a foreign security service "if the secretary of state has credible evidence that such unit has committed gross violations of human rights, unless the secretary determines ... that the government of such country is taking effective measures to bring the responsible members of the security forces unit to justice".

As there are effectively two versions of the law based on the different appropriations and operations jurisdictions, some scope is offered for Secretary of State Colin Powell to overlook Indonesia's spotted rights record if a strong case can be made for restoring aid on strategic grounds. According to the appropriations law, Powell can cite "extraordinary circumstances" for a waiver, including evidence that corrective steps have been taken to improve a military unit's respect for individual rights.

Ambiguity over the interpretation of the term "corrective measures" offers a potential let-out. One interpretation is that aid could be restored purely be transferring an offending officer from his unit for the duration of a training exercise. Similarity, the law is unclear on the legal definition of a "unit". Based on precedents in Latin America, notably weapons cessations for anti-narcotics forces in Colombia, the law can be narrowly applied only to individual officers or particular commands. This frames a situation where aid might be denied to Indonesia's notorious Kopassus special forces for its central role in atrocities in Timor and West Papua, but allowed to other active units that were less involved.

A positive outcome in the Timor trial might provide sufficient grounds for a review of the Indonesian embargo, even if the government fails to pursue the four or five other ringleaders who have so far been permitted to remain at large. But it would be difficult to convince a skeptical US Congress that the hearings were anything more than a token and cynical gesture of accountability, while atrocities continue unabated in Papua, Aceh and Malacca.

On the other hand, Powell could easily find a persuasive security argument to justify the restoration of full military ties in the light of recent global events. It is a reasonable assumption that the events of September 11 in the US, coupled with a more unrational fear of Islamic fundamentalism, have convinced Powell that Washington needs to get on better terms with the world's biggest Muslim state.

One apparent trigger was the discovery shortly after the New York and Washington airplane bombings of a crude map of the US Embassy compound in Jakarta in the possession of suspected al-Qaeda extremists. Another was the existence of a reported terrorism training camp in Sulawesi that involved as many as 100 Middle Eastern and European operatives. Indonesia raided the remote house but found no conclusive evidence.

Diplomats say that US security services were rebuked by Washington for the poor intelligence availability on al-Qaeda in Indonesia, which was a legacy of the military downgrade as well as a misallocation of resources. Information flows have in fact been maintained at a high level between the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency and their Indonesian equivalents since the breach in 1999, shifting more recently to shared data on laundered assets of extremists.

But for the greater part, the US agencies have simply been looking in the wrong direction. Rather than tracking isolated extremist factions, the preoccupation has been with internal political events and the strategic implications of a spreading secessionist movement on the regional economy and international shipping routes. This is hardly a surprise, given that about 50 percent of global commerce on a value basis passes through Indonesian waters on its way from the Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean.

There is nothing to stop the US from stepping up its information gathering without re-establishing formal military links. However, normalized relations would rebuild personal contacts and enable Washington to influence Indonesia's terrorism response, which has been curbed by religious sensitivities. The US has no desire to adopt a Philippines form of direct military intervention, as the passive Indonesian situation has little in common with the over-heated climate of kidnappings and bombings in Mindinao. But diplomats say it can ill-afford to be in the outer circle with a country that could become a valued ally in the widely anticipated struggle between the US and China for economic and political leadership in Southeast Asia.

Others also see the importance of this axis. Singapore and Malaysia, worried that an influx of extremists could destabilize their giant neighbor, have been plying political pressure for months; Singapore is even proposing a free-trade alliance that would lock in Washington and Jakarta. And then there is the fundamentalist threat, which has only shallow roots in Indonesia but may nonetheless provide enough motivation for Jakarta to put its house in order.

Megawati has privately told foreign diplomats that she views the growth of radical Islamic groups as a deeply worrying trend, though she has yet to find a way to reconcile this danger with the risks that a crackdown could spark social unrest.

Ultimately Powell will have to choose between domestic ambivalence at the behavior of Indonesia's armed forces and wider US economic interests. It won't happen overnight, but the short bets are on the strategic option.

---

....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» JenL_2 - Re: 3 killed in Khost explosion early Thurs, Day 194

Update on Coalition forces Operation on Afghan-Pak border from 4/30 MSNBC:

---

U.S.-led troops in al-Qaida firefights

Up to 4 suspected al-Qaida fighters die in eastern Afghanistan

NBC, MSNBC AND NEWS SERVICES

U.S.-led coalition forces engaged suspected al-Qaida fighters in two gunbattles near the eastern border with Pakistan, killing up to four of them, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan said Tuesday. The location of the fighting added weight to reports that many Taliban and al-Qaida followers had fled to Pakistan border areas.

NO COALITION casualties were reported in the firefights, which broke a 10-day lull in enemy contacts.

Maj. Gen. Franklin L. Hagenbeck said the clashes occurred Monday and early Tuesday near the eastern Afghan city of Khost.

Two suspected al-Qaida gunmen were shot Monday by Australian special forces, NBC News has learned, but their bodies were dragged away by fellow fighters. Two others were killed Tuesday at 4:30 a.m. local time in a follow-up operation.

“We knew how they would react once the sun went down last night. So we were ready for that and we killed two ... as they were coming back through the area,” Hagenbeck told reporters at Bagram air base, north of Kabul.

The Australian military confirmed that a patrol of its troops were the ones fired on by small arms and rocket-propelled grenades in the mission. Upon contact with the opposition fighters, the troops called in U.S. airstrikes, officials told NBC.

UNDER SURVEILLANCE

The group had been under surveillance for several days, U.S. military spokesman Maj. Bryan Hilferty said.

“We had a special forces reconnaissance team, they were compromised, I mean people found them, and those people foolishly fired on them and the special forces fired back much more accurately, shooting and possibly killing two of them,” Hilferty told reporters.

Hilferty said a 200-man quick reaction force — two infantry companies from the 101st Airborne Division — were dispatched two hours after first contact to sweep seven buildings and nearby caves.

“They found and searched several caves and building complexes, discovering mortars, grenades and machine-gun ammunition,” Hilferty said.

He did not know the size of the original group of fighters and said some of them escaped.

“We’re not perfect. We would love to be but we’re not,” Hilferty said.

“It’s impossible to seal a country the size of Texas and to surveil every single person,” he said. “We can’t even make sure we have every criminal in Boston.”

ATTENTION ON BORDER AREAS

U.S. forces have been concentrating their hunt for groups of al-Qaida fugitives in the area around Khost and other parts of mountainous eastern Afghanistan — thought to be one of the most active areas for Osama bin Laden’s network. Just across the border in Pakistan, U.S. forces are conducting raids of suspected al-Qaida and Taliban hide-outs in joint operations with the Pakistan military.

At the same time, fighting between rival warlords has been heating up in the nearby parts of eastern Afghanistan, threatening to undermine support for the interim national government in Kabul and complicating the job of the coalition forces.

The clashes occurred the same eastern region where the last major battles against the Taliban and al-Qaida were fought in March during Operation Anaconda — the largest U.S.-led ground offensive in Afghanistan.

Hilferty conceded that the security situation in eastern Afghanistan had deteriorated, but that wasn’t stopping coalition troops from conducting operations.

“Certainly over the last couple weeks it’s gotten a little worse in the Khost and Gardez area, but still we are free to move around,” Hilferty said.

Last week, U.S. troops swept into the village of Talak, just outside of Khost, and captured a large Taliban arms cache with three truckloads of weapons and ammunition. The Taliban had hidden the arms there in September. A former Taliban commander, Alef Khan, notified U.S. forces of their existence after two rival warlords in the area each demanded Khan give him the cache.

“He thought, ‘If I give to one, the other will be angry.’ So instead he called the Americans to come and take it away,” said Mohammed Attiq, a resident of the village.

Factional fighting continued Tuesday nearby in the eastern city of Gardez. Hezat Ullah, a local official, said from Gardez that rockets were fired into the city on Monday, killing three civilians and injuring three more.

Up to 28 people have been killed in fighting there between soldiers loyal to warlord Bacha Khan Zardran and forces of Gardez Gov. Taj Mohammed Wardak.

TURKEY AGREES TO PEACEKEEPING DUTIES

On Monday, Turkey officially agreed to take charge of the Kabul-based peacekeeping mission for six months after Britain ends its turn.

The United States had strongly encouraged overwhelmingly Muslim but secular Turkey to head the force. Turkey is a member of NATO and its command of the mission will buttress the U.S. argument that the fight in Afghanistan is not between Islam and the West.

Following a Cabinet meeting, the government said Turkey will take charge of the force at a date still to be worked out with the United Nations and other countries involved in the mission.

Earlier this month, British officials said they did not think a handover would happen before June.

Britain has led the 4,500-member, 18-nation security force since the U.N. Security Council established it in late December, limiting its movements to the capital, Kabul, and surrounding areas.

Afghan leaders have been pushing for a larger force that patrols other areas of the country that are under control of regional warlords. But Turkey has objected for fear the force would become entangled in local disputes.

The Turkish announcement said that the area of responsibility for the force will not change.

Currently there are 267 Turkish soldiers in the force, a number expected to increase to about 1,000 after Turkey assumes command.

NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski at the Pentagon, The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

---

....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Dave_K - FBI links head of Illinois-based charity to bin Laden

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Federal agents Tuesday arrested the director of an Illinois-based charity whom they accuse of direct links to Osama bin Laden, and charged him with lying about links to international terrorism.

Federal officials in Washington said Enaam Arnaout, executive director of Benevolence International Foundation (BIF), was taken into custody and charged with perjury.

Arnaout is also known as "Abu Mahmoud" and "Abdel Samia," officials said.

Arnaout, 39, is a Syrian-born naturalized U.S. citizen. He is scheduled to appear before a federal magistrate Tuesday afternoon in Chicago.

Justice Department and FBI officials have scheduled a news conference at 4 p.m. EDT to announce the charges.

Charges stem from documents in lawsuit
The charges allege that Arnaout made false statements under oath in documents filed during the past month in a civil lawsuit his organization has filed against various government officials.

A 35-page affidavit supporting the charges was released by the Justice Department on Tuesday.

The documents say that Arnaout has a relationship with Osama bin Landen and many of his key associates dating back more than a decade.

The document cites a cooperating witness who declared BIF was used by al Qaeda for logistical support, including the movement of money to fund its operations. Bin Laden's al Qaeda is a loosely knit collection of organizations united by a fundamentalist creed and philosophy.

-- posted by Dave_K

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» JenL_2 - Re: FBI links head of Illinois-based charity to bin Laden

In response to message posted by Dave_K:

Hmmm - a related article on doner-advised funds in 1/24/02 Acumen Fund website.....we see some very famililar fund family names, like Fidelity, Schwab & Vanguard, possibly unwittingly implicated in funneling funds to these charities that are infact fronts for terrorist organizations.....oh what a tangled web!

---

Donor-Advised Funds Can Be Terrorism Tools

By Norman I. Silber
1/24/2002

Terrorists and their sympathizers may be using one of America's greatest strengths -- its tradition of philanthropy -- to undermine peace and security.

The weapons are not airplanes or shoe bombs, but charitable dollars. The methods appear to involve exploitation of nonprofit laws and abuse of the permissive rules governing commercially related donor-advised funds -- charities associated with brokerage houses that allow people to make deposits into special charitable accounts, get an immediate tax deduction on the gifts, and then recommend which nonprofit groups should receive grants from the accounts.

The problem has come to light in the wake of the September 11 attacks, as the Bush administration has declared that it suspects several Muslim nonprofit groups operating in the United States, including the Benevolence International Foundation, Global Relief Foundation, and Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, of being fronts for terrorists.

Those allegations, if proved true, raise serious questions about the way the government oversees charitable organizations. If the groups in question are indeed terrorist organizations masquerading as charities, how did they manage to get charters, tax exemptions, and, in at least one case, a church designation from the Internal Revenue Service? Did the IRS simply take at face value the groups' descriptions of themselves as legitimate charities? If so, post-September 11 realities may require that we think differently about the way we charter nonprofit groups and exempt them from taxation.

A related issue is whether the donor-advised funds run by investment houses have done a good job of checking out nonprofit organizations that receive grants from their contributors. As charities, donor-advised funds are not subject to the stricter reporting requirements and other regulatory controls that apply to private foundations, and therein lies the funds' vulnerability.

One reason the issue is so important is that donors use these funds to funnel billions of dollars to charities each year, often anonymously. Fidelity's Charitable Gift Fund, with $2.6-billion in assets in 2001, now raises more in private funds than any group other than the Salvation Army, according to The Chronicle's annual Philanthropy 400 ranking. It distributed $574-million in grants to charities in 2000.

The size and clout of the commercially associated donor-advised funds have put them under the national media spotlight in the wake of the September attacks and the administration's subsequent scrutiny of Islamic charities.

Fidelity announced that it would not distribute grants to organizations that the government identifies as suspect. Fidelity's move was no surprise, considering that the brokerage company lists some of the suspect charities, including the Global Relief Foundation and Benevolence International Foundation, as grant recipients.

Nothing malicious has gone on, as far as the funds themselves are concerned. With tens of thousands of donors and a vast number of recommended charities, Fidelity's Charitable Gift Fund, Schwab's Fund for Charitable Giving, Vanguard's Charitable Endowment Program, and other such funds would face an enormous challenge if they tried to verify the legitimacy of every charity favored by donors. Certainly the investment houses could not have been expected to screen charities against government lists of suspected terrorist fronts before the lists themselves were issued.

Still, the vulnerability of donor-advised funds to potential abuse is significant. The funds have provided only modest direction to donors regarding available information about recommended grant recipients. They haven't followed up thoroughly on the uses made of their charitable grants. Nor have they offered much aid to unwitting supporters of alleged terrorist groups by helping them identify inappropriate grant recipients.

In explaining their operating style, the commercially run donor-advised funds have always emphasized the virtues of promoting the free flow of charitable dollars. But such freedom can come at the expense of thorough monitoring.

The fact that Fidelity had to develop a post hoc policy regarding the suspected terrorist fronts is consistent with that approach. For instance, the Justice Department froze assets of the Quranic Literacy Institute in 1998 following a very public allegation that the group was connected to the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Yet two years later, in 2000, Fidelity listed the group as one of its grant recipients.

Despite assertions to the contrary, it does not unfairly limit donors' freedom of choice to argue that the funds should take greater responsibility for their giving and exercise more control over disbursing the gifts they receive. Donors who want to avoid a fund's scrutinizing actions should donate directly to the tax-exempt organization of their choice -- and incur the risk that the IRS may withdraw the tax deductibility of their gift if the recipient turns out to be a terrorist group.

The fact that groups like Fidelity have begun monitoring government lists of suspected terrorist organizations is a positive development. But using these lists alone could turn out to be unfair to nonprofit groups that are subsequently cleared of wrongdoing. And the lists would not reflect the fact that information about misconduct by groups often becomes available before formal government action is appropriate.

Indeed, relying exclusively on the government watch lists is not a substitute for exercising precautionary diligence.

Outside the context of terrorism, observers have expressed fears that the funds' failure to monitor the use of grants may have allowed some donors to subvert the law by directing gifts to groups that benefited them personally, including their own private foundations.

While it is unreasonable to assume that funds affiliated with brokerage houses can prevent every instance of wrongdoing by donors or grant recipients, the funds could -- and should -- be doing more to prevent abuses.

They should routinely provide research findings to donors about the integrity and financial efficiency of the organizations they are supporting.

In addition, they should more aggressively assess donors' recommendations, using the best possible information on charities' operations. They should discourage donors from giving anonymously. And, to the extent they have not already done so, the funds should make the names of their donors available to law-enforcement officials.

Many have argued that brokerage-affiliated donor-advised funds serve their commercial self-interest better than they serve charities, donors, or the public interest. As long as the problem seemed limited to self-dealing by some donors and mismanagement by some funds at the fringes of the nonprofit world, it was not a matter of extraordinary concern.

Now that the problem of terrorist-front organizations has arisen, the stakes are higher.

Norman I. Silber teaches nonprofit law at Hofstra Law School. He is the author of A Corporate Form of Freedom: The Emergence of the Nonprofit Sector.

Reprinted with permission of The Chronicle of Philanthropy, http://philanthropy.com From the issue dated January 24, 2002.

---

....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» JenL_2 - Re: FBI links head of Illinois-based charity to bin Laden

In response to message posted by Dave_K:

more from 4/30 MSNBC.com....love it when they catch 'em red-handed like this.....but then realizing that the BIF operated here for years as a legit charity - getting US tax breads - and even receiving contributions through major US mutual funds....DAMNIT!!

---

<img src="http://a799.ms.akamai.net/3/799/388/f0c4..." width=131 height=180 align="left">Enaam Arnaout

Islamic charity charged with perjury

Government says group’s
director lied about terror links

MSNBC STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS

An Islamic charity and its executive director were charged with perjury Tuesday for denying in a lawsuit against the federal government that they have supported groups engaged in terrorism.

AN AFFIDAVIT filed with the complaint said that Benevolence International Foundation’s executive director, Enaam Arnaout, has had a relationship with terrorist leader Osama bin Laden “and many of his key associates dating back more than a decade.”

“The complaint alleges Benevolence International Foundation was supporting violence secretly,” U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said.

A March 19 raid on a Benevolence International office in Bosnia turned up photos of bin Laden in Afghanistan as well photos of Arnaout holding several weapons, the U.S. government said.

DETAILS IN COMPLAINT

The affidavit signed by FBI Agent Robert Walker said that the organization was founded by a wealthy Saudi sheik, Adil Abdul Galil Betargy, who is an associate of bin Laden, according to documents seized in Bosnia.

The 40-page complaint added that informants had said that:

- The organization was used in the early 1990s by bin Laden to transfer money to bank accounts of relief organizations that also supplied funds to terrorists.

- Arnaout, while in Pakistan in 1989, was entrusted with taking care of one of bin Laden’s wives — something he would not have been asked to do unless he was a close bin Laden associate, the U.S. government suggested.

- The charity had contact with persons “trying to obtain chemical and nuclear weapons on behalf of al-Qaida.”

- The foundation “has had direct dealing” with Muslim rebels in Chechnya “as well as Hezb-e-Islami, a military group operating at various times in Afghanistan and Azerbaijan. ... (The Foundation) made efforts to provide the Chechen mujahedeen with money, an X-ray machine and anti-mine boots, among other things.”

DECEMBER RAID

The foundation, based in the Chicago suburb of Palos Hills, was first raided by federal agents on Dec. 14 and its assets were frozen. Federal officials at the time said it was suspected of involvement with terrorist groups.

The organization then sued the government, saying it has nothing to do with terrorism and demanding the release of its assets.

At a press conference Tuesday afternoon, Fitzgerald enumerated more of the evidence against the organization and Arnaout, including the discovery in Bosnia of documents dating to the 1980s showing a link between Benevolence and Osama bin Laden. Correspondence between bin Laden and Arnaout was found. And a 2001 examination of trash there unearthed a Seattle newspaper article discussing smallpox and the inability of the U.S. government to deal with a possible outbreak; the article was highlighted, Fitzgerald said.

Fitzgerald also said that a Web site supporting the mujahedeen said that a charity would be designated through which those hoping to support the mujahedeen activities could contribute. The charity posted later on the Web site was Benevolence, Fitzgerald said.

Fitzgerald pointed out that in most cases, donors to the organization believed they were giving money for a legitimate relief organization to help the poor and needy of the world, and that donors were not being investigated.

‘WE WISH TO SUPPORT’

“We wish to support and assist the government’s efforts to combat terrorism and to bring to justice the murderers of September 11,” Arnaout, a Syrian-born U.S. citizen, said in a statement on Jan. 30. “But the government’s actions towards BIF are inexplicable and wrong. We have been forced to file this suit to protect the lives and safety of the thousands of unfortunates who rely on our charity, and to protect our good name and those of our donors.”

Arnaout, 39, was arrested Tuesday morning at his suburban Chicago home on charges that he and Benevolence made false statements in their lawsuit against the government.

Among other statements, the group said it “does not engage in or fund terrorist activity.”

The foundation says it has 170 employees worldwide and offices in Pakistan, Bosnia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Yemen, Bangladesh, Turkey, Georgia and China. It also operates a Web site at http://www.benevolence.org

Fitzgerald said the investigation was continuing.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

---

....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» JenL_2 - Re: FBI links head of Illinois-based charity to bin Laden

More on Muslim Charities funding Terrorism :

from the article above:

The affidavit signed by FBI Agent Robert Walker said that the organization was founded by a wealthy Saudi sheik, Adil Abdul Galil Betargy, who is an associate of bin Laden, according to documents seized in Bosnia.

more on the Saudi connection from 3/11 The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. This article kind of explains why the Bush admin sometimes seems to be looking the other way, or using kid gloves when dealing with the Saudis:

---

POLICYWATCH

Number 609 March 11, 2002

TACKLING THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM IN SAUDI ARABIA

By Matthew Levitt

While publicly stressing Saudi Arabia's cooperation and shared concern regarding terrorist financing, U.S. treasury secretary Paul O'Neill held private consultations this past week in Riyadh with Saudi officials and businessmen regarding specific Saudi organizations and individuals suspected of financing terrorist activities. Promising to find clear-cut cases, O'Neill reassured his hosts that the United States is both fine-tuning the procedure of targeting charitable institutions and fast-tracking the processing of individuals and institutions already placed on terrorism lists and subject to financial blocking orders.

Funding Terror through Charity

Last October, NATO forces raided the Saudi High Commission for Aid to Bosnia, founded by Prince Selman bin Abdul-Aziz and supported by King Fahd. Among the items found at the Saudi charity were before-and-after photographs of the World Trade Center, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the USS Cole; maps of government buildings in Washington; materials for forging U.S. State Department badges; files on the use of crop duster aircraft; and anti-Semitic and anti-American material geared toward children. Six Algerians are now incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay's Camp X-Ray for plotting an attack on the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo, including an employee of the Saudi High Commission for Aid to Bosnia and another cell member who was in telephone contact with Osama bin Laden aid and al-Qaeda operational commander Abu Zubayda. Authorities are now trying to track down $41 million of the commission's missing operating funds. While there is no information suggesting the involvement or knowledge of senior Saudi officials, this is not the only Saudi charity linked to terrorist activity.

Saudi-sponsored humanitarian organizations such as the Mercy International Relief Organization (Mercy) played central roles in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings. At the New York trial of four men convicted of involvement in the embassy attacks, a former al-Qaeda member named several charities as fronts for the terrorist group, including Mercy. Documents presented at the trial demonstrated that Mercy smuggled weapons from Somalia into Kenya, and Abdullah Mohammad, one of the Nairobi bombers, delivered eight boxes of convicted al-Qaeda operative Wadi el-Hage's belongings -- including false documents and passports -- to Mercy's Kenya office.

Along with Mercy, the Kenyan government also banned the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) after the embassy bombings. From 1986 to 1994, bin Laden's brother-in-law, Muhammad Jamal Khalifa, headed the IIRO's Philippine office, through which he channeled funds to terrorist groups affiliated with al-Qaeda, including Abu Sayyaf. In January 1999, Indian police foiled a plot to bomb the U.S. consulates in Calcutta and Madras. The mastermind behind the plot was Sayed Abu Nasir, an IIRO employee who received terrorist training in Afghanistan. In 2001, Canadian authorities detained Mahmoud Jaballah based on an Interpol warrant charging him with being an Egyptian Islamic Jihad terrorist. In 1999, Canadian officials attempted to deport Jaballah based on his work for IIRO and what they described as IIRO's involvement in terrorism and fraud. Finally, September 11 hijacker Fayez Ahmed reportedly told his father he was going abroad to work for IIRO when he left for the suicide mission.

Like many other Saudi humanitarian organizations, IIRO is part of the Muslim World League, which is funded and supported by the Saudi government (in fact, the Muslim World League and IIRO share offices in many locations worldwide). The Treasury Department has frozen the assets of other Muslim World League member organizations suspected of funding terrorism, including the Rabita Trust. A senior League official in Pakistan, Wael Hamza al-Jlaidan, is listed on the Treasury's terrorist financial blocking order list.

Another key Saudi charity linked to terrorist financing is the al-Wafa Humanitarian Organization. U.S. officials have described al-Wafa as a key component of bin Laden's organization. One official was quoted as saying that al-Wafa and other groups listed "do a small amount of legitimate humanitarian work and raise a lot of money for equipment and weapons."

In December, U.S. authorities raided the Chicago offices of a Saudi-based charity, Benevolence International Foundation. The foundation's videos and literature glorify martyrdom, and, according to the charity's newsletter, seven of its officers were killed in battle last year in Chechnya and Bosnia. U.S. officials suspect the foundation of financing terrorist activity, and at least one former employee has been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury.

Other charities, such as the World Assembly of Muslim Youth and al-Haramain, are also of particular interest to the United States, but so are a growing number of Saudi individuals. Mustafa Ahmed al-Hasnawi, a Saudi national and bin Laden money man, sent the September 11 hijackers operational funds and received at least $15,000 in unspent funds before leaving the UAE for Pakistan on September 11. According to U.S. officials, Yasin al-Qadi, a prominent Jedda businessman and the head of the Muwafaq Foundation, has supported a variety of terrorist groups from al-Qaeda to Hamas. According to U.S. court documents, in 1992 al-Qadi provided $27,000 to U.S.-based Hamas leader Muhammad Saleh and lent $820,000 to a Hamas front organization in Chicago, the Quranic Literacy Institute (QLI). Based on their connection to Hamas, the U.S. government has frozen the assets of both Saleh and QLI. Similarly, U.S. officials maintain that the Muwafaq Foundation is a front organization through which wealthy Saudis forward millions of dollars to al-Qaeda.

O'Neill's Saudi interlocutors warned that continued escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would likely result in increased Arab funding for Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Asked in Saudi Arabia why the United States classifies these groups as terrorists, O'Neill answered, "You can tell a terrorist by the acts they commit -- . . . innocent people being killed on the street." O'Neill reaffirmed that "knowingly giving money to terrorists . . . is a terrorist act." In fact, Palestinian terrorist groups receive significant funding from Saudis. For example, in December Israeli authorities arrested a Hamas operative crossing into Egypt en route to Saudi Arabia. His mission -- the second of its kind -- was to brief unidentified persons on the development of Qassam rockets and obtain further funding for the project.

Gaining Saudi Support

Saudi officials have at minimum a clear pattern of looking the other way when funds are known to support extremist purposes. According to former State Department official Jonathan Winer, "a number of Saudi charities either provided funds to terrorists or failed to prevent their funds from being diverted to terrorist use." Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, acknowledged the problem of tracking the money trail in a New York Times/Frontline interview. Bandar stated that Saudi officials "found money leaves Saudi Arabia, goes to Europe and we can follow it, goes to the United States, America, and we lose contact with it."

The Saudis have taken steps to battle money laundering and freeze accounts related to the September 11 conspirators, and recently passed new regulations governing private fundraising. Saudis are now encouraged to donate funds in fulfillment of their zakat obligations only through established groups operating under the direct patronage of a member of the royal family. However, as the recent case in Bosnia attests, many of these groups are themselves suspected of financing terrorism.

Although the decision to freeze an organization's funds is not taken lightly, the current U.S. tactic of quietly broaching concerns regarding specific humanitarian organizations with Saudi officials before putting them on U.S. terrorist lists fits the mold of traditional U.S.-Saudi diplomacy. It may prove more fruitful than a heavy-handed, unilateral approach, but only if at the end of the day U.S. and Saudi authorities have the fortitude to freeze the accounts of organizations and individuals found to be financing terror -- wherever the buck stops.

Matthew Levitt is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute.

---

.....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Kirk - The Gathering Storm (2002) on HBO

I watched this excellent movie last week. It was about pre WW2 England and Winston Churchill's "voice in the wildnerness" warning about Nazi Germany to an England that wanted nothing to do with another war. The period covered is up 9 months before he was made the UK's Prime Minister.

I've been thinking about it for days and it reminded me of my own reluctance to have the US wage war againt the Arab terrorists as I do prefer peace.

Perhaps some of us, like me, are just so turned off from Conservative Fundamental Christian politics that we are missing their cry of wolf now that there is a real wolf in the form of Saddam Husain in Iraq?

Something to think about.

History does repeat itself and we might have our Conservative Fundamental Christian and Jewish friends to thank for warning us as England had Churchill.

---

Home Box Office (Pacific) Apr 30 09:00pm Add to My Calendar
Movies, 100 Mins.
(Rated NR) (Y)

Winston Churchill wages a battle against Nazi tyranny while facing obstacles in his marriage to Clementine. Adult Situations.

Cast: Albert Finney, Vanessa Redgrave, Jim Broadbent, Linus Roache, Lena Headey, Tom Wilkinson, Derek Jacobi, Ronnie Barker, Anthony Brophy, Tom Hiddleston , Celia Imrie, Edward Hardwicke, Dolly Wells, Diana Hoddinott, John Standing, Danielle King , Gottfried John, Joanna McCallum, Lyndsey Marshal , Hugh Bonneville. Director(s): Richard Loncraine. Producer(s): Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Julie Payne, Frank Doelger, David M. Thompson. Writer(s): Hugh Whitemore, Larry Ramin . Distribution: Miramax

Future Airings:
The Gathering Storm (2002), HBOP Apr 30 09:00pm
The Gathering Storm (2002), HBOP May 05 02:00pm
The Gathering Storm (2002), HBOP May 05 11:40pm
The Gathering Storm (2002), HBOP May 09 04:15pm
The Gathering Storm (2002), HBOP May 10 12:00am

-- posted by Kirk

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Sinewave - Re: The Gathering Storm (2002) on HBO

In response to message posted by Kirk:

Kirk,

We all want peace. No one want's this war. I'm not sure what you need to know to be convinced how serious things are.......What do you need to know?
This war is and will take place on many different levels also.

-- posted by Sinewave

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Sinewave - Re: Re: The Gathering Storm (2002) on HBO

In response to message posted by Sinewave2001:

LOL....sorry for all the typos folks.

-- posted by Sinewave

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions

» JenL_2 - Re: FBI links head of Illinois-based charity to bin Laden

More on Arnaout & BIF

from the article above...

At a press conference Tuesday afternoon, Fitzgerald enumerated more of the evidence against the organization and Arnaout, including the discovery in Bosnia of documents dating to the 1980s showing a link between Benevolence and Osama bin Laden. Correspondence between bin Laden and Arnaout was found. And a 2001 examination of trash there unearthed a Seattle newspaper article discussing smallpox and the inability of the U.S. government to deal with a possible outbreak; the article was highlighted, Fitzgerald said.

more about the raid of the Bosnia BIF office from 3/20 Balkan Times:

---

Security Concerns Force US Embassy in Bosnia to Close Again

The US embassy in Sarajevo closed to the public Wednesday (20 March) for security reasons. A similar situation last October prompted both the US and British diplomatic missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) to suspend operations for several days. Wednesday’s closure follows police raids on Islamic charity offices in the country.

A short statement issued Wednesday night said ''In response to continued concerns over an unverified threat report, the US embassy has decided to close its offices to the general public and reduce operations until further notice.'' From Washington, US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said security officers on the ground would determine when it would be prudent for the embassy to resume normal operations.

The embassy said earlier that it had stepped up security measures on Monday in line with the State Department alert following Sunday's attack on a church in Islamabad, which left several US citizens dead. "The US government continues to receive credible reports that extremist individuals are planning additional terrorist actions against US interests," the embassy said.

Though US diplomats do not link the two events, the temporary suspension of operations was announced a day after Bosnian police forces raided offices of the Islamic charity Benevolentia International Foundation (BIF), which is believed to be linked to terrorist organisations, including Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network. In addition to searching facilities in Sarajevo and Zenica, police have questioned several BIF employees and searched six apartments.

The Federation of BiH's Interior Ministry said the raid was part of ongoing efforts to crack down on Islamic charities suspected of funnelling funds to extremist organisations. The UN Mission in Bosnia monitored the operation, in which police seized BIF documents.

Washington froze the assets of Benevolentia's US office last December under the anti-terrorism law.

Police authorities said that BIF had withdrawn hundreds of thousands of dollars from its accounts, leaving no documents explaining where the money had gone. They believed that the head of Benevolentia's US operations, Enaam Mahmoud Arnaout, removed all records during a recent visit to Bosnia.

Last October, both the US and British embassies in Sarajevo remained closed for several days citing security threats. Later the same month, police arrested five Algerians and a Yemeni suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. US officials said one of the suspects was bin Laden's chief lieutenant in Europe.

---

....Jen

-- posted by JenL_2

Permalink Print Discussion Join the latest discussions