Posted on 08/07/2006 7:30:30 AM PDT by Mel Gibson
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is acclaimed for her detailed and investigative reporting on complex financial networks that support drug trafficking and terrorism. She was one of the first investigative journalists to draw attention to the controversial political and global activities of George Soros, the billionaire who took advantage of a loophole in U.S. campaign-finance law and spent $23 million last year to try to defeat President Bush for re-election.
Ehrenfeld, the Director of the New York-based American Center for Democracy, has been a research scholar at the New York University School of Law, a visiting scholar at the Columbia University Institute of War and Peace Studies, and a fellow at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. She has also served as a government and law enforcement consultant, having most recently advised the U.S. Defense Department's Threat Reduction Agency.
However, Ehrenfeld's work, as well as that of other authors, is now at risk because of a lawsuit filed in London, the world capital for what's now called "libel tourism." At stake is nothing less than freedom of the press here in the United States and the First Amendment right of journalists to cover matters affecting U.S. national security and survival. This case involves another billionaire, Khalid Salim a Bin Mahfouz of Saudi Arabia.
The Bin Mahfouz family describes itself as "a major participant in Saudi Arabian business affairs for many years" and "one of the country's major investors both at home and abroad." The family also funds humanitarian activities abroad. But Bin Mahfouz and his lawyers have been busy going after writers and authors who claim to have documented that some of these humanitarian activities have turned out to be terrorist-related.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
See National Review, "Sources of Saudi Terrorist Funding"www.nationalreview.com/document/document-un122002.pdf
Soros ping
But Bin Mahfouz and his lawyers have been busy going after writers and authors who claim to have documented that some of these humanitarian activities have turned out to be terrorist-related.
-----
Shocking! A total surprise! But, the Saudis are our friends, how can this be? Just ask the State Department!!!
Know your enemy Bump.
BTTT
BTTT for good measure.
Follow - the - money.
Soros...spent 23MM....BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....just what did you get for that Georgie? I know it's chump change for that bozo...but still...it's nice when bad things happen to bad people.
Indeed....
The Bin Mahfouz family was up to its ears in the Bank of Credit and Commerce International scandal. It had to pay a large fine for that one. It supported Osama Bin Laden with financial support. It financed the Muwafaq, a terrorism-supporting charity. It is ironic that should the Bin Mahfouz choose to take on Ehrenfeld in the United States they would be laughed out of court. In Britain, however, the libel laws favor the entrenched oligarchy (which does not like to be pilloried) and the very wealthy (who can drag out a libel and slander case forever and a day).
In sum, the Bin Mahfouz are Arabotrash.
If muslims use mosques, schools, ambulances and hospitals for military purposes, why is it surprising that they would use charities to fund such military operations?(rhetorical)
"Just ask the State Department!!!"
I would merely ask them to dissolve : )
bttt!
Then why is he still alive?
Main individual Saudi sponsors of al-Qaida
Khalid bin Mahfouz, banker
Saleh Abdullah Kamel, banker
Abdullah Suleiman al Rajhi, banker
Adel Abdul Jalil Batterjee, businessman
Mohammed Hussein al Amoudi, businessman
Wa’el Hamza Julaidan, businessman
Yasin al Qadi, businessman
He doesn't really care since it was your(and mine) money.
For the legal ignoramous - me - what exactly happens if the Arabtrash wins?
"is one of the seven"
Why aren't they having "accidents"?
The last case similar to this a Bin Mahfouz crony and principle in its operation and others of the same ilk filed a libel suit against Africa Confidential, I believe in 1998. AC had reported correctly that the Bin Mahfouz helped finance the Muwafaq Foundation, which it called (correctly) a charity with alliances to terrorists. The case dragged on for about six years. The veddy-veddy proper British court found in favor of the plaintiffs and AC had to pay damages (which, though not much, were a strain on the small publication's budget). The aim was, of course, to put AC, a highly respected British publication, out of business. Just as tort lawyers use a Mississippi county to file their class-action lawsuits, the Muslim miscreants use Britain to file their complaints. Rachel E. is a great and truthful investigator, but if history is a guide she will lose the ca in Britain.
The last case similar to this a Bin Mahfouz crony and principle in its operation and others of the same ilk filed a libel suit against Africa Confidential, I believe in 1998. AC had reported correctly that the Bin Mahfouz helped finance the Muwafaq Foundation, which it called (correctly) a charity with alliances to terrorists. The case dragged on for about six years. The veddy-veddy proper British court found in favor of the plaintiffs and AC had to pay damages (which, though not much, were a strain on the small publication's budget). The aim was, of course, to put AC, a highly respected British publication, out of business. Just as tort lawyers use a Mississippi county to file their class-action lawsuits, the Muslim miscreants use Britain to file their complaints. Rachel E. is a great and truthful investigator, but if history is a guide she will lose the case in Britain.
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.