Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S.: Saudis Still Filling Al Qaeda's Coffers
ABC/IMRA ^ | 9-16-07

Posted on 09/16/2007 6:43:09 AM PDT by SJackson

U.S.: Saudis Still Filling Al Qaeda's Coffers ABC News: The Blotter September 11, 2007 5:40 PM http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/09/us-saudis-still.html Brian Ross Reports:

Despite six years of promises, U.S. officials say Saudi Arabia continues to look the other way at wealthy individuals identified as sending millions of dollars to al Qaeda.

"If I could somehow snap my fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi Arabia," Stuart Levey, the under secretary of the Treasury in charge of tracking terror financing, told ABC News.

Despite some efforts as a U.S. ally in the war on terror, Levey says Saudi Arabia has dropped the ball. Not one person identified by the United States and the United Nations as a terror financier has been prosecuted by the Saudis, Levey says.

"When the evidence is clear that these individuals have funded terrorist organizations, and knowingly done so, then that should be prosecuted and treated as real terrorism because it is," Levey says.

Among those on the donor list, according to U.S. officials, is Yasin al Qadi, a wealthy businessman named on both the U.S. and U.N. lists of al Qaeda financiers one month after the 9/11 attacks.

(Excerpt) Read more at imra.org.il ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; gwot; moneytrail; saudiarabia; wot; yasinalqadi

1 posted on 09/16/2007 6:43:11 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson

....but, but, but..... “The Saudis are our friends”, George Bush told me so.


2 posted on 09/16/2007 6:45:22 AM PDT by taxed2death (A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
this is where real funding comes from


3 posted on 09/16/2007 6:45:24 AM PDT by Flavius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

4 posted on 09/16/2007 6:46:19 AM PDT by SJackson (isolationism never was, never will be acceptable response to[expansionist] tyrannical governments)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Time for black-ops.
5 posted on 09/16/2007 6:50:15 AM PDT by pnh102
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

The US should be exporting oil and not importing it; we simply have more of it than anybody else does. The ONLY way to get there from here as I see it is the same way you stop smoking, i.e. totally ban the importation of oil on a single day and deal with the consequences. If you managed it properly, it would mess us up about as badly as we were during WW-II for about a year or a year and a half. At the end of the year or 1.5 years, we’d be in vastly better shape than we are now and all of the rogue states and terror organizations in the world would be on life support or dead. The Saudis would be back to living in tents and riding camels.


6 posted on 09/16/2007 6:57:33 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

One potentially huge part of the solution would be neighborhood work sites; in any given metro area there cannot likely be more than 20% of anybody which needs to be in one physical work site more than one day a week. The other four days they could be at neighborhood work sites which they walked to and use electrons instead of all the oil and rubber.


7 posted on 09/16/2007 7:00:19 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

Just what I was thinking.When the personal “COST” of giving to terrorists goes way up,the money supply will dry up.Also cuts down on repeat doners.


8 posted on 09/16/2007 7:05:45 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (168 grains of instant conflict resolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

Democrat supporters keep using gasoline, how unethical of them.

The banks that are found to be funneling money to terrorist should be physically eliminated from earths surface.


9 posted on 09/16/2007 7:06:07 AM PDT by Son House ($$Proud Memeber of Vast Right Wing, Out To Lower Your Tax Rates For More Opportunities.$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death

“....but, but, but..... “The Saudis are our friends”, George Bush told me so.”

As did Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, Carter, Nixon.........


10 posted on 09/16/2007 7:06:18 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (When O'Reilly comes out from under his desk, tell him to give me a call. Hunter/Thompson in 08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan
If you managed it properly, it would mess us up about as badly as we were during WW-II for about a year or a year and a half.

You haven’t thought this through very well have you?

Prior to WW II this country was primarily an agricultural nation with maybe 20% of the population living in cities. Most of the population worked at home or walked to work.

Today more than 80% of the population lives in cities and the vast majority of the population commutes to work with the vast majority of the commuters driving their personal car to and from work.

If as you say we were to totally ban the importation of oil on a single day and deal with the consequences This country would go from being the economic power house of the world to being a third world basket case with food riots and people starving in the streets.

I’ll deal with the terrorist thank you very much if your solution is the only other option (which it is not).

11 posted on 09/16/2007 7:22:34 AM PDT by Pontiac (Patriotism is the natural consequence of having a free mind in a free society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“If I could somehow snap my fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi Arabia,” Stuart Levey, the under secretary of the Treasury in charge of tracking terror financing, told ABC News.

________________________________________________________
So level the country, first the oil fields. Freeze their accounts and name them a terror state.


12 posted on 09/16/2007 7:24:43 AM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

we should send in black ops teams to kill them.


13 posted on 09/16/2007 7:26:29 AM PDT by steel_resolve (90 Guns per 100 Americans...You will never take us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

One of the reasons Bush has lost so much popular support for the war is he has not fought it to win - no holds barred - and I think many have sensed that. Here is another test of the Bush doctrine announced after 9/11 and it appears he really didn’t mean it in all cases.


14 posted on 09/16/2007 7:33:10 AM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan

We don’t have more of it than anyone else. Our production peaked decades ago.


15 posted on 09/16/2007 7:34:24 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Saudi Arabia has always been the real problem.


16 posted on 09/16/2007 7:39:06 AM PDT by Tears of a Clown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

It has long since been the time for “plausible deniability” assassinations of such men. “Natural causes” and “accidents” could wipe out a few dozen, and put a major crimp in the financing of al-Qaeda.

Since we have relatively free access to Saudi, this should have been done long ago. And US policy only prohibits the assassination of foreign “leaders”.


17 posted on 09/16/2007 7:54:32 AM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

And these are our trusted allies?


18 posted on 09/16/2007 7:56:01 AM PDT by Minutemen ("It's a Religion of Peace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

And we continue to fill the Saudi coffers.

It shopuld be evident to anyone but a blind man that the Muslims are intent on taking over the world, just as they were back in the 700’s.

We should find our own oil sources and alternative fuels, amd expel every single Muslim in the west back into the waterless wastes of the Saudi Deserts where they belong.


19 posted on 09/16/2007 7:56:11 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush

“One of the reasons Bush has lost so much popular support for the war is he has not fought it to win - no holds barred - and I think many have sensed that.”

I am a conservative.
I am a veteran.
I agree.

My support for the Vietnam war waned when it became apparent to me that the politicos were really not interested in doing what it took to win it—political consequences be damned.

If we choose to fight we must be willing to do whatever it takes to win. If we are not willing to do that we might as well stay home and not waste the lives of our soldiers.

Flame away!


20 posted on 09/16/2007 8:00:02 AM PDT by EEDUDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

And to think of how many people called me a damn fool for suggesting that the U.S. was on the wrong side in the Gulf War . . .


21 posted on 09/16/2007 8:05:24 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death
"....but, but, but..... “The Saudis are our friends”, George Bush told me so."

That line has been used concerning dictator Putin too.

After Damascus & Tehran are dealt with, the Saudis bank-rollers of Wahhabist terrorism should be next.

22 posted on 09/16/2007 8:06:44 AM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Minutemen
And these are our trusted allies?

Ah yes, along with our good buddies in Pakistan.

23 posted on 09/16/2007 8:08:15 AM PDT by Rush4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl
Osama's Road to Riches and Terror

Do a google for "golden chain" (osama or usama) at some point. Our real enemy is the "Golden Chain", the group of wealthy Muslims who bankroll Osama. It is my opinion that Osama was primarily just the liaison between the Golden Chain and the operational people, with the job of making sure the money was spent on actual operations. The Golden Chain is the real Board of Directors of the Global Jihad.

As long as the Golden Chain can continue funding, and are themselves immune from retaliation, we will see an endless succession of new al-Queda leaders

Take away their funding, and you cripple the Global Jihad

24 posted on 09/16/2007 8:09:13 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

If the price of oil goes up high enough, and we don’t put our trust in a bogus solution like ethanol, but let capital flow to practical solutions, they we will be into the next phase. That said, the Saudis continue to fund Al Qaedi in order to keep Iraq in a state of unrest in order the (1) Prevent the establishment of a stable and Shia-dominated alternative and (2) keep the price of oil high. Our biggest failure has been to prevent the return/expansion of Iraqi oil to the market.


25 posted on 09/16/2007 8:12:17 AM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EEDUDE

The same argument could be made —was made— about Korea fifty years ago. This is not the first “long war.” The same result was not achieved in Vietnam because the military had a similar contempt for the South Vietnamese forces. That Abrams succeeded where Westmoreland failed is testimoney to two things: (1) Some generals are better than others and (2) some presidents are better than others. Our political problem is that Hiliary Clinton has many things in common with Richard Nixon but a decent respect for the use of military force is not one of them.


26 posted on 09/16/2007 8:20:41 AM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Don’t read much, do ya?


27 posted on 09/16/2007 8:28:45 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
You haven’t thought this through very well have you?

Better than you have it seems. Neighborhood work sites could be implemented very quickly and they could easily get rid of half or more of the commuting.

In too many parts of America today God could come down out of the sky and give us all the gasoline we need for the rest of our lives for free and it wouldn't fix the problem; there'd still be people spending three to five hours driving to and from work in crawling traffic every day.

Henry Ford said that the car was there to allow the city fellow to go out on picnics on Sundays and the farmer to gt into town to shop on Saturdays. We've come a long and dangerous way from that simple vision to our present misuse of technologies.

Again, we have more untouched oil than the rest of the world put together, particularly offshore of Fla. and Cal. and under the Rockies in Utah and Colorado before you even start to talk about shale, and if anything we should be exporting the stuff and not importing it.

28 posted on 09/16/2007 8:35:29 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death
In any other time in world history - they would have been invaded and destroyed - and their oil taken from them.

But the world is much smarter now. /sarc

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

29 posted on 09/16/2007 8:55:47 AM PDT by expatguy (Support Conservative Blogging - "An American Expat in Southeast Asia")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

we really need the USA to get off dependency on foreign oil. Then we need the rest of the world to do the same thing.


30 posted on 09/16/2007 8:56:19 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
"Our production peaked decades ago."

Pea coil. Pea coil.
I read it on the internet.

Seriously, how much oil is off the coasts, and in the gulf?
Anybody know?

31 posted on 09/16/2007 9:02:37 AM PDT by trickyricky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: trickyricky

I’d say the correct question is; “how much energy can be supplied to the US without financing terrorist supporting countries like Saudi.”


32 posted on 09/16/2007 9:05:14 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan

Every damned day. ‘show I make my living.


33 posted on 09/16/2007 9:06:47 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan
Neighborhood work sites could be implemented very quickly

What you are advocating sounds very Stalinist to me

Are you suggesting that hundreds of millions of people give up there homes and move in to government housing built around manufacturing centers.

You must be because I do not see any other way that your idea could work. I don’t know about you but many married couples that I know both have jobs and their home is as closely located to the equidistance point for them so that at little time is spent driving as possible or that one spouse drives the greater distance and the other works locally.

Being that most manufacturing assets are fixed and located away from housing districts I don’t see how your idea can be realized.

Even in WW II people were not forced to relocate. Even the Manhattan Project scientist and engineers were invited to New Mexico they were not forced.

Forced relocations are very un-American and un-Constitutional.

I won’t argue the point that politics is what is keeping us from exploring for oil in the US because I agree with you. But the neighborhood work sites idea smacks of Roosevelt New Deal make work socialism or worse.

34 posted on 09/16/2007 9:32:58 AM PDT by Pontiac (Patriotism is the natural consequence of having a free mind in a free society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death

Actually Bush said that there was an “Eternal Friendship between the US and Saudi Arabia.”

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&q=Bush+saudi+%22eternal+friendship%22&btnG=Search


35 posted on 09/16/2007 9:37:57 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death

Saudis giving money to Al Quadea is not always voluntary. I knew several who had children being educated in England. They were blackmailed. Al Quadea is a criminal gang.

They were aware that a few others had children murdered or disappear. With Al Quadea having cells world wide, it can present a difficult choice for wealthy Saudis.


36 posted on 09/16/2007 9:40:46 AM PDT by gleneagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
What you are advocating sounds very Stalinist to me

Are you suggesting that hundreds of millions of people give up there homes and move in to government housing built around manufacturing centers?

By no means. Here's what I AM advocating: It is not likely that more than about 20% of the work force in any of our metro areas really need to be at one physical site more than one day a week. Most of the rest of us are not organized enough to be working from home the other four days but we could damned well be working from neighborhood work sites three or four days a week and simply let electrons and electronics replace all the oil and rubber. There's enough surplus commercial real estate in most places you wouldn't even have to build anything new. THAT would take 70% of the traffic straight off our roads and basically empty them and we could tell OPEC and AlQuaeda to screw off.

37 posted on 09/16/2007 10:52:39 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
We don’t have more of it than anyone else. Our production peaked decades ago.

Oil Shale.
Off-shore California.
Tar sands.
Nuclear plants.

Correction.
Our willingness to search for it and to exploit it peaked decades ago.

38 posted on 09/16/2007 11:06:54 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
In Arkansas?
I have a hot flash for ya...

39 posted on 09/16/2007 11:09:00 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Don't forget the 15+ billion BBL in ANWR that would mean jobs and prosperity for Americans instead of sending our dollars to people that hate us.

But oh wait, there's the caribou....

40 posted on 09/16/2007 11:18:09 AM PDT by Species8472 (Democrats Hate America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Some war, eh?


41 posted on 09/16/2007 11:32:28 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan
It is not likely that more than about 20% of the work force in any of our metro areas really need to be at one physical site more than one day a week.

I very much doubt that this is true.

Here in the Heart Land of Ohio it is certainly not true. Not with the people that I know.

The majority of the people that I know have brick and mortar jobs that produce tangible goods or service jobs that require them to go places and do things.

I know a few engineers that may be able to work from home a day or two a week on occasion but those jobs are few and far between here in the real world.

Even where this computer commuting is possible I can see where certain efficiencies would be lost because where I work human (face to face) interaction produces results that would not otherwise occur.

42 posted on 09/16/2007 11:35:05 AM PDT by Pontiac (Patriotism is the natural consequence of having a free mind in a free society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

We fund terrorists every time we fill up. Energy independence now.


43 posted on 09/16/2007 11:36:47 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

The rust belt isn’t the future. In Japan for the last decade or so there have been factories at which the only job for a human was watching monitors for any sign of problems with the robots.


44 posted on 09/16/2007 11:37:32 AM PDT by rickdylan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: rickdylan
In Japan for the last decade or so there have been factories at which the only job for a human was watching monitors for any sign of problems with the robots.

They haven’t built an assembly line yet that repairs itself.

They US has the most modern Automobile assembly lines in the world and they still employ thousands of human workers.

Health care is very labor intensive and large modern hospitals are centrally located in large urban areas away from bedroom communities.

Sorry rick your plan will only work for a small minority of the countries working people. It will work of numbers crunchers like loan officers, architects civil engineers, health insurance claims processors and payroll clerks but the majority of the people in the world still do physical work.

45 posted on 09/16/2007 11:57:20 AM PDT by Pontiac (Patriotism is the natural consequence of having a free mind in a free society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

We were discussing proven reserves of crude.


46 posted on 09/16/2007 2:31:06 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
Missouri.
BTUs are my beat.
47 posted on 09/16/2007 2:31:58 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
"We were discussing proven reserves of crude."

"proven reserves" is a fact.
"we have more of it than anyone else" is an opinion, not based on "proven" anything.

Apples and oranges.

48 posted on 09/18/2007 10:43:13 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson