Replies

No clear reasons are provided for this de-listing—just a statement that the removal was based on the recommendation of an independent ombudsman.

The ombudsman’s recommendation is especially jarring because, just three years ago, the U.N. defended its listing of Yasin al-Qadi for the following reasons:

“Al-Qadi’s acknowledgement of his role as founding trustee and director of the actions of the Muwafaq Foundation, a foundation which historically operated under the umbrella of the Makhtab al-Khidamat, an organization which was the predecessor of Al-Qaida and which was founded by Usama bin Ladin. “Al-Qadi’s decision in 1992 to hire Shafiq ben Mohamed ben Mohamed al-Ayadi as head the European offices of the Muwafaq Foundation. “The 1995 testimony of Talad Fuad Kassem, who said that the Muwafaq Foundation had provided logistical and financial support for a fighters’ battalion in Bosnia and Herzegovina and that the Muwafaq Foundation was involved in providing financial support for terrorist activities of the fighters, as well as arms trafficking from Albania to Bosnia and Herzegovina. “Al-Qadi’s role as a major shareholder in the now closed Sarajevo-based Depositna Banka, where planning sessions for an attack against a United States facility in Saudi Arabia may have taken place. “Al-Qadi’s ownership of several firms in Albania which funneled money to extremists or employed extremists in positions where they controlled the firm’s funds. “Evidence that Bin Laden provided the working capital for up to five of al-Qadi’s companies in Albania.

“Based on these reasons, the U.N. Security Council resolved to continue listing Yasin al-Qadi as a suspected supporter of al-Qaeda terrorists…”

But no more. Yasin’s expensive lobbying effort to convince authorities to white-list him seems to have paid off. One supposes he is now free to travel around, do business with Europeans and Americans, and raise funds for whatever “charitable” foundation he decides to establish next.

http://moneyjihad.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/un-removes-saudi-businessman-from-al-qaeda-list/

Let's toss another hump on this filthy story: http://econwarfare.org/viewarticle.cfm?id=5025 Yasin Al-Qadi EWI EXCLUSIVE [LINK] External Link by J. Millard Burr | 17-Oct-12 In March 2007 co-authors J. Millard Burr (the author of this article) and Robert O. Collins were informed by Cambridge University Press (CUP) that it was being sued for libel in a London court by Mahfouz. The "Sheikh," sometime resident of the U.K. where he could enjoy his homosexual proclivities denied for which he would be severely punished in Saudi Arabia, had taken offense to what the authors had written in Alms for Jihad, a book published by CUP in 2006. Burr and Collins were not personally charged and refused to take part in the settlement when CUP caved in. Cambridge not only refused to fight the action, in addition to the small financial fine, it complied with the judge’s orders to destroy all copies of the book in the UK. It even urged libraries all over the world that had purchased the book earlier to do the same. (Endnote: American libraries do not follow orders well. See articles.) Aided by the British legal system, Mahfouz managed to silence all his critics and intimidate the Western media. All but one. FOR THE RECORD Rachel Ehrenfeld, Ph.D., the ACD/EWI director and author of Funding Evil which examines sponsorship of terror, and as explained in its subtitle, "How Terrorism is Financed And How To Stop It." She was sued for libel by Mahfouz and his two sons (trustees of Muwafaq) who claimed that copies of the books published in the U.S. had been purchased in the United Kingdom. Ehrenfeld's fight ( http://www.acdemocracy.org/ ) against Mahfouz’s attempt to silence her, led to new laws, first in 2008 in New York State (aka "Rachel’s Law"). Mahfouz died in 2009. He did not live to see that seven more U.S. states passed similar laws and the 2010 federal SPEECH Act that protects all American authors and publishers from the enforcement of foreign libel judgments in the U.S. that are at odds with the First Amendment to the Constitution.