Terrorism Financing Blog

Terror-Free Oil

2006-05-05T21:25:00.000-04:00

By Joe Kaufman
Front Page Magazine

"We as American citizens can actually boycott Mid East oil. And the way you do that is you go to a gas station whose company doesn't import the oil."

- Bob Bevelacqua, former Green Beret
    August 23, 2005, Fox News Channel

In December of 2001, an e-mail was widely distributed across the internet calling for a boycott of all gas stations that purchase crude oil from the Middle East*. While the e-mail consisted of much emotionally charged language - understandably so, given the proximity to 9/11 - and while some of the information provided was faulty, the point that was being made was a valid one and should be revisited.

The e-mail began: "Nothing is more frustrating to me than the feeling that every time I fill-up the tank, I am sending my money to people who are trying to kill me, my family, and my friends. It turns out that some oil companies import a lot of middle eastern oil and others do not import any. I thought it might be interesting for Americans to know which oil companies are the best to buy their gas from."

The piece then proceeded to list major gasoline companies that import Middle Eastern oil and those that do not or "do not import much." Included on the list of importers were Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Marathon. As stated in the e-mail, for the period of September 1, 2000 through August 31, 2001, the companies ranged from importing just under 118,000,000 barrels to just under 206,000,000.

Included on the list of non-importers were Citgo, Sunoco, Conoco, Sinclair and Phillips (which merged with Conoco in 2002). BP Amoco made the bottom of the list (as a "not much") with just over 62,000,000 barrels. [In later versions of the e-mail, further companies would be listed.]

According to the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA), in its 'Crude Oil Imports From Persian Gulf** 2001' report, Middle Eastern oil was indeed purchased by all of the companies listed in the e-mail as importers. However, many of the "non-importers" were listed as importers, as well. In fact, the only two that did not make the official government list for 2001 were Sunoco and Sinclair. And Chevron, which was listed on the e-mail as "not much," made the top three!

But that was then. With the advent of the War on Terrorism, surely the gasoline companies, especially American-based ones, would begin to recognize and work to rectify this all too important matter. Surely something would be done to curb the amount of Mid East oil these companies import. That's only common sense, but that never happened.

Nearly five years after the tragedy of September 11 th, little has changed. The companies that were importing Middle Eastern oil still are, and the companies that weren't still are not. This is according to the latest information
available from the EIA. And it should be noted that, of the companies that are, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Marathon and Shell get crude straight from Saudi Arabia - the same Saudi Arabia that produced 15 of the 19 hijackers - the same Saudi Arabia which gives millions to Hamas - the same Saudi Arabia that actively spreads its radical jihadist/Wahhabist ideology throughout the world, including the United States.

Besides Saudi Arabia, a number of other Middle Eastern nations, where oil is imported from, have dubious track records. Information derived from the U.S. State Department's '22 nd annual Report to the Congress on Voting Practices at the United Nations,'
underscores the antipathy towards the United States these nations harbor. The following are facts found within the report:

    • Algeria (where Citgo and Shell get crude oil from), in 2004, out of 79 possible U.N. votes, voted against the United States 63 times.

    • Iraq (BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Marathon and Shell) voted against the U.S. 51 times [and that was even after liberation].

    • Kuwait (ExxonMobil and Marathon) voted against the U.S. 63 times.

    • Libya (Shell) voted against the U.S. 65 times.

    • Oman (BP and ConocoPhillips) voted against the U.S. 64 times.

    • Tunisia (Shell) voted against the U.S. 63 times.

On average these countries voted against the United States, in the year 2004, nearly 78 percent of the time. In the case of Saudi Arabia, it was 81 percent against.

The countries that have been discussed here are more in line ideologically with Iran, which shouts "Death to America," than they are with the United States. In fact, five of the countries mentioned, along with Iran, make up the majority of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which sets the price of crude for the rest of the world, which tells us how much more money we have to spend on gas any given day.

In October of 1973, our dependence on Mid East oil brought us an embargo from the Arab world. The Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC), which, at the time, consisted of the Arab members of OPEC plus Bahrain, Egypt and Syria, called for an oil embargo against the West to coincide with the war they were preparing for Israel. This had a devastating effect on the economy, as America was held hostage to the whim of our "friends." Why wait for a repeat performance, embargo or otherwise?

Of course, this money, at least in part, goes to fund our terrorist enemies, as well, both locally and abroad. It is this never-ending cycle - gasoline for money, money for terrorism - that could ultimately lead to our undoing, if nothing is done to stop it. And this problem is multiplied every second of the day, as we sink more and more of our hard earned dollars into our gas tanks. The question we all have to ask ourselves, when we go to the pumps, is are we willing to fund our own demise? And if we're not, then we have to ask ourselves are we willing to work towards a solution to the problem.

Terror-Free Oil Initiative

The American Center for Democracy (ACD) has developed a new program called the Terror-Free Oil Initiative (TFOI). The
purpose of the program is twofold:
   1. to cut off the flow of money that goes to terrorists and
   2. to decrease America 's dependency on foreign oil.
As stated on the ACD website, "This project is dedicated to encouraging Americans to buy only gasoline that originated from countries that do not export or finance terrorism."

While gasoline companies won't shift their loyalties from Mid East oil overnight, Americans have to start somewhere. Americans must, once and for all, take a stand and support companies like Sunoco and Sinclair that don't get their crude from 'the crude.'

So which gas station will you fill up at?

Notes:

* Middle East, as used in this article, includes Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

** Persian Gulf, as used in this article, includes Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.

Joe Kaufman is the Chairman of Americans Against Hate and the host of The Politics of Terrorism radio show.

American Center for Democracy Launches Terror-Free Oil Initiative

2006-05-04T21:13:00.000-04:00

Project Objective

This project is dedicated to encouraging Americans to buy only gasoline that originated from countries that do not export or finance terrorism.

We educate the public by promoting those companies that acquire their crude oil supply from nations outside the Middle East and by exposing those companies that do not.

http://www.public-integrity.org/projects/tfoi/

EU Not Concerned Money Goes to Palestinian Terrorism

2006-04-22T16:56:00.000-04:00

Former European Union MP Ilka Schroeder gives us an insider's view on the EU's support for Palestinian terrorism: Georgetown visiting prof starting center on anti-Semitism in Germany. (Hat tip: Moi Aussi.)

In the ensuing months, after published reports revealed that the P.A. was directing E.U. financial aid toward the financing of terrorism, she pushed the E.U. Parliament to open an investigation into the matter. She said the only way she could get fellow legislators interested in the matter was to emphasize the P.A.'s corruption, since not many were particularly concerned about the diversion of the money for violent acts.

Eventually, she said the Parliament did convene a "working group" on the matter - on which she was not included - but that no investigation was launched because it could not be proven that the E.U.'s money went directly from their pocket to paying for suicide bombs, which Schroeder found ridiculous.

"They were asking for something impossible" to prove, she said.
Since Hamas took over the Palestinian government, the E.U. has suspended its $600 million in aid to the Palestinians, but Schroeder is not optimistic that the freeze will continue indefinitely. She believes that the eventual E.U. goal is to "challenge the U.S. position [of pre-eminent power] in the Middle East" and across the globe, and funding the Palestinians is one way to do that. ...

Schroeder estimates that as many as one-third of Europeans might believe that Israel was behind a conspiracy to commit the Sept. 11 attacks. And she says that displaying sympathy for Israel has led to accusations from fellow legislators that she is being "paid by the Mossad."

For many, their anti-Israel and anti-Semitic views fit into their anti-globalization ideology, which states that the "financial sphere" dictates how the world operates and that Jews are influential in that sphere, Schroeder said.

LGF

http://searchlight-germany.blogspot.com/2006/04/eu-not-concerned-money-goes-to.html

Dollars For Terror

2006-04-21T10:43:00.000-04:00

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and Alyssa A. Lappen
FrontPageMagazine.com

Humanitarian aid is universally understood to provide "assistance to victims of natural disasters, war situations or other catastrophic events." However, now this definition is expanding to include aiding a terrorist regime. Under the guise of "humanitarian aid," money is beginning to flow to the HAMAS government.

To date, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Qatar have given the HAMAS led Palestinian Authority $192 million; the Saudis gave $92 million, and Qatar and Iran $50 each. Russia gave another $10 million, bringing total aid to the new PA administration to just over $200 million. The U.S. says it has authorized of $245 million for "Basic humanitarian assistance -- including health, food and education."

In addition, the U.S. "will also provide $42 million to strengthen civil society and independent institutions." UNRWA will distribute most of this aid. Since when do "education" and "strengthen[ing] civil society and independent institutions" qualify as "Humanitarian aid"?

HAMAS clearly has a different view of education and civil society: Culture minister 'Atallah Abu Sabah announced, on April 8, the HAMAS government would "work to reinforce the culture of resistance [i.e., violence and terrorism directed against Israel] and to instill it in the hearts of our boys and girls so that they may continue down the same path to the liberation of the Palestinian lands." Surely, this is not the kind of education that the Administration, or the American public should aid.

Moreover, according to Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies (C.S.S) the daily international Al-Sharq Al-Awsat newspaper, reported on April 7, "the movement intended to continue operating its social, educational and charity institutions (the da'wah )." The da'wah, the most effective tool in inculcating and indoctrinating its worldview among the Palestinian people – is first and foremost, hate propaganda and incitement.

Despite the very clear HAMAS statements about its agenda, aid money continues to flow. It seems the international donor community learned from HAMAS how to speak out of both sides of its mouth. While saying they refrain from funding the "terrorist" regime, they funnel money through alternative routes to HAMAS, but call it "humanitarian aid." But as Gertrude Stein said: "Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose."

Indeed, the terrorist organization Hamas, would not have won the election if, in the first place, the world community had refused to allow it to run. However, HAMAS was able to run because it addopted the name "List of Change and Reform," just for the election. That was enough for the international community to allow HAMAS to run and to delude itself. Clearly they continue to do so.

The EU declared earlier this month that although $600 million of funds earmarked for the PA would be cut now that HAMAS has assumed control, some of that money "would now be channeled via humanitarian aid organisations." French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, said on April 19, 2006, "It is absolutely out of the question ... to cut off humanitarian aid to the Palestinian Territories," And the French President Jacques Chirac declared that he supports "pursuing the aid on humanitarian grounds."

Yet, the money, according to the Palestinian Minister for Detainees Affairs Wasfi Qabha, will be used not to feed the Palestinian people, but first to pay the salaries of the Palestinian terrorists in Israeli prisons. Many were sentenced to life for murdering Israeli civilians and organizing suicide attacks on Israel.

On April 19, 2006, Qabha announced plans for his office to transfer PA funds, first, directly to Palestinian prisoners. Moreover, he said that the salaries for all prisoners will be raised to the level of the highest-paid among them.

Further, Detainee Minister Qabha criticized PA treasury officials who, during the transition following the January PA election, transferred salaries to the Authority's civilian workers before paying the prisoners. In addition, he declared that the new PA government is investigating means of raising international demands to liberate Palestinian prisoners.

Yet the ranks of those governments willing to delude themselves and fund the HAMAS-led PA continues to grow. The latest to step forward is Britain. As British foreign secretary Jack Straw put it in on April 19, "we would like to have normal relations with them." He further stated that the U.K. is "looking for ways to ensure that all of Britain's £56 million (over $100 million) contribution continued to reach Palestinians."

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is author of Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It, Director of American Center for Democracy and a member of the Committee on the Present Danger. Alyssa A. Lappen is a Senior Fellow at the American Center for Democracy.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22143

Anti-money laundering web seminar 9 May

2006-04-21T00:05:00.000-04:00

Under Part 7 of the draft Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Bill 2005 reporting entities must develop, maintain and comply with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing programs.

In this 60 minute live web seminar David Jacobson will discuss guidelines for developing an action plan to compy with the new laws.

Our web seminar will be on Tuesday 9 May 2006 at 11am Australian Eastern Time (NSW, Vic, ACT,Tasmania, Queensland), 10.30am SA, 9am WA.

The seminar will discuss integrating the new rules in your existing compliance program and how the new requirements affect your Privacy Policy, your relationship with third party providers, and how you recruit staff.

http://www.djacobson.com/australian_regulatory_rev/2006/04/antimoney_laund.html

Fulbright's Terror Supporter

2006-04-20T10:58:00.000-04:00

By Olivier Guitta and Ilan Weinglass
FrontPageMagazine.com

A Moroccan Islamist and apparent terrorism supporter has been getting treatment in Washington D.C. that most graduate students can only dream of. Mustafa Khalfi, editor-in-chief of the Moroccan newspaper At-Tajdid (Renewal), is the recipient of a prestigious Fulbright/American Political Science Association (APSA) Congressional Fellowship. This honor has afforded him the honor of working for Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA), taking a course at Johns Hopkins University, and receiving a visiting scholarship at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

At-Tajdid's connection to terrorism:

At-Tajdid's website has a permanent link to the Union of Good, an umbrella organization of Hamas-funding charities. Five of these organizations have been listed by the U.S. Treasury Department as Specially Designated Global Terrorist entities (SDGTs):

• The Al-Aqsa Foundation, Belgium and Holland Branches
Interpal
• Comité de Benfaisance et de Secours aux Palestiniens (CBSP)
• Sanabil al-Aqsa
• The Palestinian Relief Society, Switzerland

In addition, two more groups, The World Association of Muslim Youth (WAMY), and the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), have been accused in a lawsuit filed by families of the 9/11 victims[1] of being "connected to Osama bin Laden and two of his top operatives."

The Union of Good was established in October 2000 and is presided over by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi and run by Essam Yussuf, a prominent figure in Interpal, a British Hamas front organization. Even the Palestinian Authority considers the Union of Good as a body supporting Hamas.

Clicking on the link to the Union of Good on the At-Tajdid website gives the reader a choice of English or Arabic. The English site takes the reader to the donations page of Interpal, a British-based charity that is designated by the U.S. as an SDGT. According to U.S. law, this is an indication that Khalfi himself should be designated a SGDT. A check of archived At-Tajdid websites shows this link to be a permanent feature since at least February 2003.

In August 2003, when the U.S. Treasury Department designated Interpal and several other Union of Good charities as SDGTs, it determined that "they provide support to Hamas and form part of its funding network in Europe." In other words, Mustapha Khalfi is the editor of a newspaper that knowingly solicited funds for a SDGT.

Executive order 13224 is very clear about the criteria that the Secretary of the Treasury may use to designate an entity as a SDGT. Anyone determined to "act for or on behalf" of a listed entity or to "provide financial ... support for, or financial services to or in support of ... entities designated in or under the Order" or "[t]o be otherwise associated with certain individuals or entities designated in or under the Order" may be designated a SDGT. In other words, soliciting funds or even being associated with an SDGT is enough to get someone designated an SDGT.

Given the facts, it strains credulity to assert that Khalfi did not knowingly support funding Interpal or that he was not associated with the Union of Good. There is at least a prima facie case to designate Khalfi as a SDGT. The only possible recourse for a defender of Khalfi is try to exonerate him on a technicality. Khalfi certainly violated the spirit of executive order 13224 if not the letter, and the U.S. Treasury department is currently reviewing a dossier of our findings.

Also, At Tajdid is the official paper of an association called Al Islah Wa Attawhid, also known by its French acronym MUR (Mouvement de l'Unicité et de la Réforme) which is closely linked to the same SDGTs. The MUR is a constituent organization of the Union of Good, which we described above. In addition, Dr. Abd Ziyad Al-Mughrabi al-Idrisi, who sits on the consultative council of the MUR and the secretariat of the PJD (Parti de la Justice et du Dévelopement), the main Moroccan Islamist party, is also a trustee of the Union of Good.

At-Tajdid and the MUR Islamist propaganda

At-Tajdid was among the first papers in the world to explain last year's horrific tsunami by pointing out that the affected Asian countries were corrupt and that the tsunami was a punishment from God. Later in the piece, At-Tajdid implied that the same punishment might be in the works for Morocco because of the lack of respect Moroccan society shows Islam. When pressed about this line of analysis, Khalfi answered, "Regarding the tsunami, only God knows the truth."

A Palestinian journalist, who often writes for At-Tajdid, declared that Hurricane Katrina was a "gift from Heaven." He added, "If the neocons were to see your enthusiasm and determination, they would realize that they will never win against our Ummah."

After Hamas victory in the Palestinians elections on January 25, At Tajdid wrote: "The victory of Hamas is the result of God's will" and "is the beginning of the Palestinian people's salvation."

The noted researcher and Islamogist Said Elakhal explained to the daily Aujourd'hui Le Maroc that Hamas and the PJD have the exact same ideology. This should not come as a surprise since they both are branches of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The MUR website is hosting a who's who of extremists. It displays permanent links to:

• Yusuf Qaradawi's website. Qaradawi has been called the "spiritual leader" of the Muslim Brotherhood,[2] and has issued fatwas supporting suicide bombings, wife-beating, and calls for the Muslim conquest of Europe.

• www.Islamonline.net – which publishes Qaradawi's fatwas.

• www.daawa.net: Apparently a site of the Muslim Brotherhood, with a picture of brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna displayed on every page.

• www.islamweb.net, which contains a presentation praising Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin.

Recently, the MUR website published a statement calling for a world day of protest" of the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Significantly, the statement had a list of signatories, or "supporters" including:

• Five individuals openly identified as Muslim Brotherhood leaders
• Khaled Mashal of Hamas
• Mohammed al-Hamadawi, president of the MUR
• Saadine Othmani, general secretary of the PJD, who will visit Washington next month to meet US Congressmen.

Indeed, both the MUR and At-Tajdid websites recently displayed prominent links to the website of "Yassin Day," an internet site dedicated to the loving memory of the work of Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin.

At Tajdid and the "Zionists"

The MUR website is replete with statements referring to "the Zionist entity," "glorious Hamas," and complaints about laws prohibiting Holocaust denial.

As the mouthpiece of a Hamas-supporting Islamist group, At-Tajdid takes a hard line against Jews. For instance, on December 15, 2004 Khalfi wrote an editorial entitled "The Israeli blackmail on France is still going on strong" on the French decision to ban Al Manar, i.e. Hezbollah TV, just recently designated a SDGT by U.S. Treasury thanks to the hard work of the Foundation of the Defense of Democracies.

Here is a chosen excerpt:

This decision is a sign of the increasing influence of the Zionist lobby in French domestic policy, as well as an increased French submission to Israeli pressure. This occurred while at the same time France adopts a more balanced foreign policy towards the Arab and Muslim world.(...)

France has been taken hostage by the Zionist lobby. The same can be said of the American democracy, hostage of the Christian far right working for Zionist interests. As De Gaulle did when he started the war of liberation of France, the free French must wonder whether it is not time to undertake a similar battle to liberate France from the Zionist blackmail, this new form of Nazism.

(...) This lobby exerts all kinds of pressure and blackmail on France's political, cultural and media decision-making centers. Let me remind you for instance the defamation campaign conducted against the French intellectual Roger Garaudy, who had revealed the reality of the founding myths of Zionism.

We note that Garaudy is a French convert to Islam who is one of the most notorious Holocaust deniers in the world.

At Tajdid also usually speaks of the "Zionist entity" or puts the word "Israel" in scare quotes, indicating that it does not accept Israel's legitimacy as a nation. After the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, At-Tajdid's editorial read:

"Congratulations to the Palestinian resistance for this great victory which announces an even greater victory that of the recovery of Al Quds and all stolen Palestinian territories." In light of this one should not be surprised that At-Tajdid and Khalfi were opposed to any kind of peace process in the between the Israelis and the Palestinians--and even the normalization of relations between Morocco and Israel. In 1999, during a period of relative quiet between Israelis and Palestinians, the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram ran an article quoting Khalfi: "Mustafa Khalfi, a writer who opposes Arab-Israeli normalization, criticizes this group's (Moroccan Jews) economic power because it "aims to influence decision-making [in Morocco]. As another example, during the recent Danish cartoon controversy, At Tajdid blamed "a Zionist provocation aimed at reviving the conflict between the West and the Muslim nation."

The March 14, 2006 edition reproduces verbatim an entry published on "The Al-Aqsa Organization" website claiming that Israeli President Moshe Katsav declared war against the Al-Aqsa mosque.

At Tajdid and terrorism

On May 16, 2005, the second anniversary of the 2003 terror attacks on Western and Jewish targets in Casablanca, the whole of the Moroccan press--except At-Tajdid--commemorated the day. Instead, At-Tajdid went as far as to claim that the attacks were "a conspiracy against the Islamist movement." At-Tajdid has even expressed doubts about the existence of the Salafiya Jihadia, one of the main terrorist organizations behind the 2003 bombings in Morocco, referring to the group cryptically as "what some call the Salafiya Jihadia."

Mohamed Brini, the editor of the daily Al Ahdath Al Maghribia and an expert on At-Tajdid, says that At-Tajdid has never fully condemned a terrorist act, and instead often attempts to downplay terrorist incidents while making excuses for the perpetrators.

In fact, after the May 2003 terrorist attacks, there was a large consensus to ban the PJD, including Morocco's king Mohammed VI, but the US through its Ambassador pressured him successfully to give up this idea.

At Tajdid and the USA

Mustafa Khalfi isn't wild about the United States, either. After President Bush's reelection, in an editorial dated November 5, 2004, Khalfi wrote that the Arab and Muslim world was in for another four years of instability, insecurity, and increasing dominance of the "Zionist Right." He added: "The Arab and Islamic world must prepare for a very difficult stage which demands the strengthening of a common action and the reconciliation between the regimes and their peoples."

After the assassination of Lebanon's Rafiq Al Hariri, Khalfi saw another conspiracy in America's "arrogant colonial project." He wrote:

"Despite the difficulty of identifying those who were behind the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, reactions have demonstrated that the assassination is part of a project that began with the mapping out of Iraqi election results, with the resumption of normalization with the Zionist Entity, the partial European support for the U.S. position vis-à-vis Iran and the threats of NATO military intervention in the Sudan. The assassination has come amidst mounting international pressure against the Syrian presence in Lebanon, thus tightening the noose of arrogant colonial aims in the Middle East."

And for this and other views, Khalfi gets the ear of a Democratic Congressman and one of America's most prestigious scholarships.

[1] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/burnettba112202acmp.pdf

[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,1257458,00.html

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22126

UN panel urges S.E. Asia to choke terrorist funds

2006-04-20T03:34:00.000-04:00

MACTAN Island, Philippines (Reuters) - Southeast Asian states, facing threats from terrorist groups, must crack down on international funding of such groups, said the head of the U.N. Security Council counter-terrorism panel on Thursday.

Ellen Margarethe Loj also urged governments in the region to respect human rights in the fight against terrorism as experts from 60 countries gathered in the central Philippines to formulate fresh approaches to tackling terrorist threats.

"One of the key challenges in this area will be responding to the ways in which terrorist organizations find new, unregulated ways of channeling funds," said Loj.

The Danish diplomat said al-Qaeda-linked militant networks in the region, such as Jemaah Islamiah and Abu Sayyaf Group, have been taking advantage of the informal remittance system.

She said funds for terrorist groups were being channeled through religious, charitable and relief organizations.

The U.N. Security Council has been worried over the slow progress in criminalizing the financing of terrorism in southeast Asia, with more than half of countries in the region yet to enact such laws.

Nearly half of the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) have yet to ratify the international convention concerning the financing of terrorism.

Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, in a speech read by her executive secretary, Eduardo Ermita, said the counter-terrorism experts forum would lay a "realistic middle ground to counter terrorism."

Jose Ramos-Horta, East Timor's foreign minister, said one of the dilemmas in the fight against terrorism was striking a balance between measures to defeat the threats and the protection of civil liberties and human rights.

"We must not become monsters ourselves in order to defeat the monster, states must not sanction state terror to allegedly fight terror," he told the forum.

"The superior morality of the rule of law, democratic and transparent government and respect for diversity are the most powerful weapons against extremism and intolerance."

http://www.political-news.org/breaking/25324/un-
panel-urges-se-asia-to-choke-terrorist-funds.html

Senate report on Exposure Draft of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Bill 2005

2006-04-20T00:03:00.000-04:00

On 9 February 2006, the Senate referred the Exposure Draft of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Bill 2005 to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 13 April 2006 (separate from the Attorney General/AUSTRAC process).

The Senate committee report has now been released.

Chapter 3 deals with concerns raised in submissions and the Department's response.

Chapter 4 sets out privacy issues.

The report concludes:

4.72 Despite expressing optimism in the previous chapter that the majority of outstanding issues will be resolved before finalisation of the regime, the committee does remain concerned about the apparent lack of formal consultation with privacy, civil rights and consumer representative groups in the development of the regime to this point. The committee is of the view that this may have resulted in some fundamental privacy, consumer and civil rights issues being overlooked. Nevertheless, the committee is also hopeful that these issues will be addressed through the parallel discussion groups established by the Department.

4.73 The committee notes the OPC's suggestion that an independent PIA would be useful in relation to the Exposure Bill. The committee agrees with this view and believes that a PIA would be beneficial in achieving a more balanced approach to the AML/CTF regime. This is particularly important given the complexity of the Exposure Bill, the vast number of reporting entities and transactions covered by the Exposure Bill's operation, the amount and type of information to be collected, and the ability of various agencies to access that information. The committee therefore strongly suggests that such an assessment be conducted.

4.74 The committee also notes that the Federal Government intends to address the issue of the small business exemption to the NPPs in relation to reporting entities. However, the committee believes that the concerns raised in submissions and evidence highlight a larger problem in relation to the privacy obligations of reporting entities. The committee's view is that any PIA should include a review as to whether the privacy protections set out in the NPPs are sufficient for the purposes of the information being collected and handled by reporting entities.

http://www.djacobson.com/australian_regulatory_rev/2006/04/senate_report_o.html

When in Rome ...

2006-04-19T11:24:00.000-04:00

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld
The New York Sun

Tariq Ramadan, who is barred from the U.S., is invited to speak at a conference on May 4-5, 2006, sponsored by the American Embassy in Rome, on "Immigration and Integration: Islam in Europe and Islam in the U.S." The conference is organized by the Centro Studi Americani in Rome, which according to the Web site of its affiliate, John Cabot University, is "one of the major American institutions in Europe." The American Ambassador, Ronald P. Spogli, is scheduled to open the conference.

Ramadan, a Swiss citizen and grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hasan al-Banna, had his visa revoked by the Department of Homeland Security on July 28,2004.The visa was revoked under the Immigration and Nationality Act, amid press speculation that the revocation stemmed from the section barring entry to persons with a "position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity," or who have "potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States."

While no specifics were detailed for this revocation, apparently his activities, lectures and writings in support of the Islamist agenda were the cause for this decision. According to a Spanish judge, Balatasar Garzon, Ramadan had "routine contacts" with Ahmed Brahim, an Algerian believed to be the financial chief of Al Qaeda and the financier of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.

In 1995, during a series of terrorist attacks in Paris perpetrated by the Algerian Armed Islamist Movement, or AIM, the French interior minister, Jean Louis Debre, forbade Ramadan to enter France because of his connections to that terrorist group.

Moreover, according to the French daily newspaper Le Monde, Ramadan is also believed to have organized a 1991 meeting between Al Qaeda's second-in-charge, Ayman al Zawahiri, and Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, which killed six people and injured more than 1,000.

Interviewed by the Italian magazine Panorama, on September 23, 2004, about "The art of 'explaining' the killing of Jews," Ramadan's answer to the question of "whether it is right to kill children and Israeli civilians because they are considered soldiers," was that it is "contextually explicable."

Indeed, Ramadan has given enough public speeches in mosques all over Europe, inciting his Muslim listeners against the West, that the founder of Doctors Without Borders, Bernard Kouchner, describes him as a "most dangerous man."

The Muslim Brotherhood and Ramadan usually refrain from publicly advocating violence. However, as stated on the Muslim Brotherhood charter and its Web site, it seeks to install an Islamic totalitarian empire, a worldwide caliphate, through stages designed to Islamize targeted nations by whatever means available. This should not be a message promoted by the U.S. embassy in Rome.

If Ramadan's invitation was not deliberate, it is a case of gross negligence on the embassy's part. When the Department of Homeland Security ruled that he was denied entry to the U.S., presumably for endorsing and espousing terrorist activity, it was a signal that he posed a danger to U.S. interests.

Nothing that Tariq Ramadan has done since his visa was revoked in 2004 has given any reason to doubt the judgment of the Department of Homeland Security. Inviting Ramadan to a U.S.-sponsored event sends the message that his views are worth hearing out and are a valid part of the debate, even if we disagree with them.

The cultural affairs officer of the embassy, Mark Smith, gave the following response to our inquiry: "Mr. Ramadan was invited by the Centro.... The embassy is not providing any funding or other support for Mr. Ramadan's participation in the conference." This is an inadequate and worrisome response. The fact that the Centro Studi Americani and not the embassy invited Ramadan is irrelevant. By supporting and sponsoring the conference and using the Great Seal of the United States on the conference invitation, the embassy is conferring the prestige and approval of America upon a hearing of Ramadan's despicable views - which the Department of Homeland Security deemed sufficiently dangerous to bar him from the country.

If America is to win the war on terrorism, we must not provide legitimacy to Islamist extremists deemed too dangerous to enter the U.S. If the American Embassy does not withdraw its sponsorship of this conference, it is likely the harbinger of a tilt in U.S. policy toward dialogue with those who wish to destroy us, or at least an indication that the State Department has a very different view of what poses a threat to this country.

Dr. Ehrenfeld is the director of American Center for Democracy and a board member of the Committee on the Present Danger.

http://www.nysun.com/article/31210

Americans suing banks for financing Palestinian terrorism

2006-04-16T00:52:00.000-04:00

Washington, April 16 (DPA) Around 50 Americans who were injured or lost family members in Palestinian terrorist bombings are seeking millions of dollars in damages through cases filed in Brooklyn's federal court against three international banks.

The Arab Bank, NatWest and Credit Lyonnais are charged with channelling money to Hamas, the militant Palestinian organisation blamed for a number of terrorist attacks aimed at Israel, The New York Times reported Saturday.

The victims of the bombings were Americans visiting Israel who were caught up in the attacks.

The suits represent a relatively unusual approach in the field of justice, as international banks have not been sued in this way before. A judge is allowing the Arab Bank suit to go forward, but has not yet ruled on the other two banks.

The Jordan-based Arab Bank is charged with moving millions of dollars from a private charity in Saudi Arabia - the Saudi Committee in Support of the Intifada al Quds - to Hamas front organisations. Hundreds of documents filed by the claimants purport to show that the Arab Bank worked closely with the Saudi group to open accounts and pay insurance benefits to families of Hamas suicide bombers, the Times reported.

The Arab Bank has insisted it only made routine electronic transfers to its Palestinian branches.

The report appeared as the international community steps up pressure on the new Hamas-controlled Palestinian government to renounce terrorism, recognise Israel's right to exist and work toward peace.

The US and EU are suspending the flow of money to the Palestinian Authority (PA) for government expenses such as roads, sewers and police. Arab countries, except for Iran, have also rebuffed Hamas' search for financial support.

In recent days, the US Treasury Department ruled that US citizens may have no financial dealings with the PA because Hamas - declared a terrorist group by the US in 1997 - has a 'property interest' in the PA's transactions.

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, in Tehran Saturday declared that the new Palestinian ruling party would never recognise Israel.

Hamas, which has spearheaded the 'intifada' (uprising) against Israel since 2000, won January elections, ousting the Fatah party of the late Yasser Arafat.

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/17719.php/Americans_suing_banks_for_financing_Palestinian_terrorism

Funding Terror

2006-04-07T23:59:00.000-04:00

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld
FrontPageMagazine.com

Some $125 million of "humanitarian aid" made the U.S. the single largest contributor to the Taliban in May of 2001. Soon after, following 9/11, the U.S. declared war on this terrorist regime. Today, the U.S. is also the largest donor of "humanitarian aid" to the Palestinians, despite their democratic choice of a terrorist HAMAS regime.

President George W. Bush ordered the severance of diplomatic relations with the PA at the end of March 2006, saying: "We support the election process, we support democracy, but that doesn't mean we have to support governments that get elected as a result of democracy." Earlier, Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice declared: "The principle is very clear. We're not going to fund a Hamas-led government."

On the other hand, a statement made by the Quartet - the U.S. the U.N. the U.K and Russia - on March 30, 2006, "encouraged continued humanitarian assistance to meet the basic needs of the Palestinian people." This encouragement seems to contradict the statements of the President and the Secretary of State.

To confuse matters further, State Department Deputy spokesman Adam Ereli seemed to agree with the Quartet. He said that the U.S. will only work with "individuals and organizations that: a) are not affiliated with Hamas, b) are not part of the cabinet or ministries that come under the authority of Hamas." He concluded, "That leaves room to talk to a lot of people."

Who are these people? HAMAS won the mandate of the majority of the Palestinian electorate based on its uncompromising determination to destroy Israel, and its Cabinet is made of nineteen HAMAS activists with five other supporters. The Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of HAMAS, reacted to its triumph as "a victory of the Islamic nation in its entirety."

There is literally no authority within the PA with whom the U.S. can speak. Claiming that Mahmoud Abbas, the titular leader of the PA, represents the more "moderate" Palestinians is meaningless: He allowed this terrorist group to participate in the election "in the name of democracy," then "permitted HAMAS to form the new government," and agreed to preside over it. U.S. citizens concerned with a sensible foreign policy and accounting for their tax dollars should demand that the U.S. stop all direct and indirect funding to the PA.

The PA's new Planning Minister Samir Abu Eisha, argued that the results of the Palestinian elections should be recognized: "The Europeans and others supported holding elections," he said. "So, ethically, they should accept and respect the choice of the Palestinian people." Indeed, we should recognize them for what they are – a terrorist regime- and treat them accordingly.

Instead, the U.S. is the biggest contributor to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East). Of nearly $925 million UNRWA gave to the Palestinians since the October 2000 start of the Intifada, the U.S. donations accounted for 33.25%, or $172,285,212. And the U.S. continues to give money to UNRWA even now.

As for the Abu Eisha's argument that "aid cutbacks would have dire consequences for the Palestinian people, putting pressure on education, health and social services," we should ask whether to support people who choose terrorism and death as a way of life. The international donors gave $1 billion aid in 2005 alone. This did little to inspire democracy. Instead, it encouraged the Palestinians to vote for a terrorist regime that teaches children "the moral desirability of being a suicide terrorist," and whose Cabinet members swore "Death for the sake of Allah is our most lofty aspiration."

Meanwhile the new HAMAS government cries poverty, and claims it is bankrupt. This, in spite of $77.5 million check to the PA from the EU days before the HAMAS government was installed. The HAMAS run PA was promised another $72.7 million, to pay salaries to its 140,000 employees, including the new HAMAS government officials. While handing over the check after the Quartet decision, EU external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner, declared that HAMAS would not receive this money until it "fall[s] into line with the international community." Actually, her action demonstrates that the international community fell in line with HAMAS.

What did HAMAS do with the $77.5 million given to the PA? Apparently, it is using the money to increase the attacks on Israel. In the last 4 days alone (April 2-April 6) 40 Qassam rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip on Israeli targets.

The fact is, HAMAS constitutes the PA. Giving money to the PA is funding HAMAS – which helps establish and strengthen a terrorist, Taliban-like state in the Middle East. HAMAS political chief, Khaled Meshaal declared on March 30th: "Hamas will continue its armed struggle against Israel while in power!" This is indeed a far cry from the president’s vision. Indeed, as with the Taliban, the U.S. should sever all diplomatic relations with the HAMAS-run PA; that should include closing all PA offices in the U.S. and cutting all aid, until a reliable accounting and monitoring system can assure that no money goes to HAMAS.

President Bush strives to bring democracy to the Middle East. On February 4, 2004, he declared: "True democratic reform must come from within." But, in the case of the Palestinian people, Islamo-Facism, not democracy, came from within.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21944

Agencies Can Improve Efforts to Deliver Counter-Terrorism-Financing Training and Technical Assistance Abroad

2006-04-06T10:00:00.000-04:00

United States Government Accountability Office

Testimony Before the Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, House of Representatives

Statement of the Honorable David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06632t.pdf?source=ra - .pdf file

Bush Failing to Block Terrorism Financing, GAO Says

2005-11-29T16:54:00.000-05:00

By Jeff Bliss

Nov. 29 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. President George W. Bush's administration hasn't developed a plan to help two dozen countries with cells of Islamic radicals counter schemes for financing terrorism, according to a government report.

The Treasury and State departments are fighting over which agency is in charge of coordinating training and technical assistance for two dozen countries, according to a Government Accountability Office report. It also said the Bush administration doesn't have any reliable method for measuring the success of its efforts.

"The U.S. government lacks an integrated strategy," the report said. The administration "lacks a system for measuring performance and incorporating results into its planning efforts."

Terrorist organizations use social and religious groups to raise money for their activities, such as attracting, training and equipping new recruits, according to the State Department. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. and the United Nations have tried to cut off the terrorists' pipeline of money.

"We have dried up millions and millions of dollars in potential terrorist financing," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters in Washington earlier today. "Of course we're going to take a look at how we might do better."

Treasury Department spokeswoman Molly Millerwise said the U.S. and its allies had been successful in their initial efforts to break up terrorist-financing networks.

"Analyses like the GAO report can provide useful insight and suggestions for improving coordination with our partner agencies," she said.

Agency Rivalry

The Treasury Department doesn't agree that the State Department is supposed to lead an interagency group on training and assistance to countries, according to the report.

The GAO report said an unnamed Treasury official has said the effort "is broken and State creates obstacles rather than coordinates efforts."

In the report, State Department officials blamed the Treasury Department for not accepting its authority.

The GAO issued another report today criticizing the administration's initiative to use air marshals to stop hijackings. The Homeland Security Department hasn't developed procedures instructing air marshals on what to do when they encounter problems. ``We concur with the conclusions in the report and we concur with the recommendations,'' said Dave Adams, a spokesman for the Reston, Virginia-based Federal Air Marshal Service.

The service last month instituted a program to make it easier for marshals to report criminal and non-criminal incidents, he said.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Jeff Bliss in Washington at jbliss@bloomberg.net.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=abZhJ9n28HYw

Training - An Important Tool for Disrupting Terrorist Financing

2005-08-24T13:17:00.000-04:00

By Dennis Lormel
The Counterterrorism Blog

In the United States, there are three distinct areas where training offers the potential to facilitate the disruption of terrorist financing. These areas include training in the government sector, providing training to other governments developing Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and terrorist financing regimes, and training in the financial sector. For the most part, training in the government sector is adequate. In the international arena, the State Department, Department of Justice, FBI, IRS and Treasury Department have done an outstanding job of coordinating training for countries in need. In addition, consultants provide selective training to certain countries. The question is...has the financial sector done an adequate job of providing terrorist financing training to its employees? Unfortunately, the answer is…the industry has not provided terrorist financing specific training to the level or threshold that it might make a difference.

The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) requires financial institutions to establish and maintain AML Programs. One of the core required elements of an AML Program is to provide ongoing employee training. Financial institutions and industry organizations should ensure that their AML training programs include a comprehensive terrorist financing component. Financial institutions and industry associations do a credible job of providing AML training; however, the terrorist financing training is seldom more then an overview. Terrorist financing presents distinct differences which warrant specific attention for training purposes.

The USA PATRIOT Act amended and strengthened certain BSA provisions. For example, the definition of financial institution was expanded to include a number of companies not previously covered by BSA reporting requirements. In addition to banks, included were securities dealers, insurance companies, credit card companies, automobile, boat and airplane dealers, casinos and money services businesses, including money transmitters and check cashers. It was mandated that all financial institutions establish AML Programs.

Under BSA regulations, an AML Program must include:

• Internal policies, procedures, and controls designed to detect and report any suspected money laundering activities;
• Designation of a Compliance Officer;
• An ongoing employee training program;
• Performing independent audit functions to test programs;

A sound Know Your Customer (KYC) Program is critical to money laundering and terrorist financing prevention. There has been a proliferation in the use of false and/or stolen identification by terrorist elements, particularly in Europe. This can be an area of vulnerability both to a financial institution and to terrorists and terrorist sympathizers themselves. The more that is known about inherent risk factors and systemic vulnerability, the better money laundering risks and vulnerabilities can be identified and prevented. The same can be said about the challenge of addressing terrorist financing. The risk assessment process is one of the most important steps in creating a vibrant AML and terrorist financing compliance program. This is one area where terrorist financing specific training can be extremely important. Finance is one of the major areas of vulnerability for terrorists. The use of false or stolen identification places a terrorist at greater risk of detection.

With specific respect to the training element of an AML Program, companies should ensure they include a robust terrorist financing component. Although there are certain similarities between AML and terrorist financing methodologies, there are also distinct differences. The most fundamental being criminals are motivated by profit whereas terrorists are motivated by ideology. Criminals derive their funds through criminal activities. Terrorist funds are derived through legal and illegal means, generally more through legal means, such as donations. Criminals tend to favor the formal financial system while terrorists are more likely to favor informal mechanisms, such as cash couriers or hawalas. The money flow in a criminal money laundering scheme will usually be circular. The criminal follows the traditional money laundering steps of placement, layering, and integration. In that process, funds cycle back to the criminal having been cleaned through the three step process. The funding flow of terrorists will generally be linear because the funds are intended to fund a terrorist activity and not come back to or benefit the launderer. Criminals and terrorists use similar methods to move their money, such as structuring deposits to avoid reporting requirements.

It is also important to promote a greater sense of awareness to the broad spectrum of the dimensions of terrorist financing. This includes circumstances where legal and illegal funding methodologies are used by terrorist elements. There are fundraising mechanisms, operational and administrative support mechanisms, and other considerations, which require use of the formal and informal financial systems. This variance is exacerbated by the range of positions and responsibilities individual terrorists and terrorist supporters assume to include leaders, fundraisers, donors, financiers, facilitators, operatives and suicide bombers. Financial requirements and flows for the full gamut of terrorists and terrorist supporters vary according to factors to include their role, location and affiliations. In this context, financial institution employees receiving training should be encouraged to consider what type of individual they would most likely deal with in their area of responsibility and in what capacity. For example, are they involved in retail or private banking and would they be more likely to deal with a street operative or wealthy financier. This is an important consideration because it breaks down the broad generalization of terrorist financing and begins to create a more specific identifiable image of a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer and how they likely use the banking system. Such dealings actually take place in daily life. Financial institution employees must realize that it is possible that they could encounter terrorists or their supporters during their daily work functions

The terrorist financing component of AML Training should also stress the critical importance of Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR). In view of current and emerging data mining capabilities of government agencies to include FinCEN and the FBI, information reported in the narrative section, as well as information in descriptor sections of SARs must be thoroughly completed. Such qualitative information will enhance the possibility of linking SARs to terrorist activities. The importance of properly filed SARs can not be emphasized enough. The FBI has integrated BSA information, to include SARs and Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs), into its Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW). Multiple databases are then accessed in a single query. According to testimony before the House Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 26, 2005, the FBI reviewed approximately 71 million BSA documents through the IDW process for there relevance to counterterrorism investigations and intelligence matters. The review identified 88,000 SARs and CTRs that bore some relationship to subjects of terrorism investigations. It is important that training not only touch upon the importance of filling out SARs completely but that SAR information can identify possible links to terrorism. Quite frankly, this type of training very seldom takes place. Terrorist financing SAR related training should also discuss the importance of not filing defensive SARs.

There are numerous written reports, studies and reference documents pertaining to terrorist financing that are excellent resources for training purposes. Sources to include FinCEN, FATF, FBI, OCC, SEC and the 9/11 Commission Report offer meaningful perspectives. Training experts should be compiling such material for inclusion in training forums. Most recently, the five federal agencies responsible for BSA examinations of financial institutions issued a new Examination Manual. This manual is an example of a document that contains countless training tips.

The most compelling reason to conduct terrorist financing specific training is to stress to financial institution employees that, in fact, they are on the front lines in the war on terrorist financing and thereby the war on terrorism. They need to be cognizant that: SARs they file can make a difference. Truly understanding that on any given day they might interact with a terrorist can make a difference. Better KYC practices can make a difference. A different mind set and a more consistent level of vigilance is critical and will make a difference.

http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counter
terrorism_blog/2005/08/training_an_imp.html

No Mullah Left Behind

2005-02-13T23:51:00.000-05:00

By Thomas L. Friedman
The New York Times

The Wall Street Journal ran a very, very alarming article from Iran on its front page last Tuesday. The article explained how the mullahs in Tehran - who are now swimming in cash thanks to soaring oil prices - rather than begging foreign investors to come into Iran, are now shunning some of them. The article related how a Turkish mobile-phone operator, which had signed a deal with the Iranian government to launch Iran's first privately owned cellphone network, had the contract frozen by the mullahs in the Iranian Parliament because they were worried it might help the Turks and their foreign partners spy on Iran.

The Journal quoted Ali Ansari, an Iran specialist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, as saying that for 10 years analysts had been writing about Iran's need for economic reform. "In actual fact, the scenario is worse now," said Mr. Ansari. "They have all this money with the high oil price, and they don't need to do anything about reforming the economy." Indeed, The Journal added, the conservative mullahs are feeling even more emboldened to argue that with high oil prices, Iran doesn't need Western investment capital and should feel "free to pursue its nuclear power program without interference."

This is a perfect example of the Bush energy policy at work, and the Bush energy policy is: "No Mullah Left Behind."

By adamantly refusing to do anything to improve energy conservation in America, or to phase in a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax on American drivers, or to demand increased mileage from Detroit's automakers, or to develop a crash program for renewable sources of energy, the Bush team is - as others have noted - financing both sides of the war on terrorism. We are financing the U.S. armed forces with our tax dollars, and, through our profligate use of energy, we are generating huge windfall profits for Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan, where the cash is used to insulate the regimes from any pressure to open up their economies, liberate their women or modernize their schools, and where it ends up instead financing madrassas, mosques and militants fundamentally opposed to the progressive, pluralistic agenda America is trying to promote. Now how smart is that?

The neocon strategy may have been necessary to trigger reform in Iraq and the wider Arab world, but it will not be sufficient unless it is followed up by what I call a "geo-green" strategy.

As a geo-green, I believe that combining environmentalism and geopolitics is the most moral and realistic strategy the U.S. could pursue today. Imagine if President Bush used his bully pulpit and political capital to focus the nation on sharply lowering energy consumption and embracing a gasoline tax.

What would that buy? It would buy reform in some of the worst regimes in the world, from Tehran to Moscow. It would reduce the chances that the U.S. and China are going to have a global struggle over oil - which is where we are heading. It would help us to strengthen the dollar and reduce the current account deficit by importing less crude. It would reduce climate change more than anything in Kyoto. It would significantly improve America's standing in the world by making us good global citizens. It would shrink the budget deficit. It would reduce our dependence on the Saudis so we could tell them the truth. (Addicts never tell the truth to their pushers.) And it would pull China away from its drift into supporting some of the worst governments in the world, like Sudan's, because it needs their oil. Most important, making energy independence our generation's moon shot could help inspire more young people to go into science and engineering, which we desperately need.

Sadly, the Bush team won't even consider this. It prefers cruise missiles to cruise controls. We need a grass-roots movement. Where are college kids these days? I would like to see every campus in America demand that its board of trustees disinvest from every U.S. auto company until they improve their mileage standards. Every college town needs to declare itself a "Hummer-free zone." You want to drive a gas-guzzling Humvee? Go to Iraq, not our campus. And an idea from my wife, Ann: free parking anywhere in America for anyone driving a hybrid car.

But no, President Bush has a better project: borrowing another trillion dollars, which will make us that much more dependent on countries like China and Saudi Arabia that hold our debt - so that you might, if you do everything right and live long enough, get a few more bucks out of your Social Security account.

The president's priorities are totally nuts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/opinion/13friedman.html?
ex=1266037200&%2338;en=4befe6472bb26145&%2338;ei=5088&

America needs terror-free oil

2003-01-06T00:28:00.000-05:00

By Deroy Murdock
Human Events

"Why are we importing oil from countries that are exporting lethal terrorism by groups who hate our freedoms and despise our way of life?" Sen. Conrad Burns asks. At a December 6 energy summit in Moscow, the Montana Republican bluntly discussed the dangers of U.S. dependence on "rogue oil."

Saddam Hussein has "stockpiled $6.6 billion in black market oil money to fund his evil regime," Bums complains. Filling American gas tanks unwittingly helps Saudi-government charities pay $5,300 each to families of Palestinian homicide bombers.

How can America begin to halt this flow of blood money to those who kill us and our friends?

Step one: Increase domestic petroleum production. Step two: Help develop overseas oil resources outside the Middle East. Ample resources exist in places that are not engaged in anti-American jihad. Abutting Russia and Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea boasts proven reserves of 33 billion barrels of oil.

Russian oil deposits may be even more generous. Roughly 49 billion barrels rest below that country's vast land mass. With minimal outside investment, Russia already pumps 6.9 million barrels daily (almost matching Saudi Arabia's typical production of 7.4 million barrels-- per-day). Jeffrey E. Garten of Yale's School of Management believes Russia could lift its output to at least 10.35 million barrels.

The Gulf of Guinea also could help satisfy U.S. oil demand. The largely offshore oil fields between the Ivory Coast and Angola yield low-sulfur petroleum. This is perfect for developing gasoline at U.S. refineries and is easily transportable across the open Atlantic. By 2006, Sub-Saharan Africa could supply 8 million barrels daily, up from 4 million today.

Step three: Alberta, Canada's oil sands could offer a nearby, friendly and long-term petroleum resource. By liberating a fraction of the 300 billion barrels of oil that adhere to these sands, Syncrude last year produced 223,000 barrels daily. It hopes to generate 360,000 barrels by 2005. Through two new developments called Voyageur and Firebag, Suncor plans to deliver 550,000 barrels-per-day by 2012.

As America wages the War on Terror, we immediately should adopt a strategy to slash or end our dependence on rogue oil. We should follow the advice Winston Churchill offered as World War II loomed: "Safety and certainty in oil lie in variety and variety alone."

New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a senior fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Va. This article is excerpted from a column in the November 2002 issue of Chief Executive magazine.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200301/ai_n9186871

Sen. Burns' interview on "Your World with Neil Cavuto"

2002-09-18T01:27:00.000-04:00

NEIL CAVUTO, HOST: Terrorism -- one of the biggest questions out there is where did these guys get the funding they needed to operate? Could it have been from the sale of oil? My next guest says that the U.S. needs to focus on buying terror-free oil, and stop relying on the Middle East. Senator Conrad Burns joins me now from the Capitol.

Senator, good to have you.

SEN. CONRAD BURNS, R-MONT.: Good to have you, how are you?

CAVUTO: I'm fine, sir. But where can I find terror-free oil?

BURNS: Well, I'll tell you what, I go back to the old Churchill analysis before World War II, a variety of sources is our best security. We don't have to buy rogue oil. I am confident in that. The Caspian Basin, which is starting to develop very rapidly now, Russia who is going through judicial reform and also banking reform so that they can develop their reserves. They're also building the infrastructure to deep water ports where we can - and we can kill two birds with one stone. We can start rebuilding the middle class in Russia and the Caspian Basin states like Kazakhstan. And start them on some sort of an economic path and reform the countries to build a strong middle class, thus ensures freedom for everybody.

CAVUTO: But Senator, we're getting as much oil as we possibly for the time being out of Russia; right? If we lose some of the Middle Eastern countries with whom we're doing business, for whatever reasons, very meritorious I think on your part. We've got to pick up the slack somewhere, right? or does the market just suck it up?

BURNS: Well, no. I'll tell you what, we've got to know where our reserves are. And if we get to them, we put everything on hold in this country for silly reasons most of the time. Because it is emotional and becomes a political thing. And I think we should survey and know where our reserves are.

CAVUTO: We couldn't do this tomorrow or the next week, right? This is a multi-year type of.

BURNS: No, no. And we're not going to. But Neil, on the other hand, the Middle East is always going to be a player in the oil business because they have got the infrastructure and the reserves to turn it up or turn it down as far as price or production is concerned. So they will always be a player in the world market.

CAVUTO: Does it bother you that now versus the '70s oil crisis we now rely on Middle East oil more than we ever did?

BURNS: Well, 25 percent of it comes from Iraq and Saudi Arabia. And that concerns me. And I just say that we've got to start now. We have got to raise the awareness of it and dedicate ourselves to find other sources. And the other sources are around the world. And I mentioned two of them. And I think the prospects there are very good.

CAVUTO: So you are of the opinion that a lot of money that we pay to get this oil is being channeled back into terror efforts shepherded by these very countries?

BURNS: Where else are they going to get it? That's the only commodity that these two countries have to sell.

CAVUTO: All right, so you're saying shut down the commodity or our dependence on it…

BURNS: You bet. And see some reforms in their own country. You know, everybody in Saudi Arabia and Iraq both are third class citizens. I mean, it is terrible thing, and the peoples are not provided any new services or improving their quality of life just because we buy oil from them. And then they black market 100,000 barrels a day to Syria. And I say we just don't need that.

CAVUTO: OK. Senator, thank you very much. Always good seeing you.

BURNS: Thank you.

CAVUTO: Senator Conrad Burns joining us from Capitol Hill.

Content and Programming Copyright 2002 Fox News Network, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2002 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, Inc.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,63599,00.html

SENATOR BURNS CALLS ON AMERICA TO CUT MIDEAST OIL IN NATIONAL PRESS CLUB ADDRESS

2002-09-12T01:20:00.000-04:00

SENATOR BURNS: Thank you Mr. Aubothon, members of the National Press Club, Ambassadors, Congressman Weldon and fellow Americans:

One year ago today, America awoke to a nightmare of death and destruction unseen in our Nation's history. Today, while the architects of that evil have been vanquished or are on the run, America remains confronted by a dependency on rogue oil.

We have seen this threat in the payoffs to suicide bombers from Saddam Hussein, a man who has violated the terms of a cease-fire from a war he lost almost 10 years ago.

We have seen this threat in countries that would wield a natural resource as a weapon, to cause harm to our economy.

We have seen the radicals amid the mainstream, celebrating in the streets the day our great Nation was attacked.

We should see the danger that lies in buying up to a quarter of our imported oil from Saudi Arabia and Iraq. But we do not.

We should see the dangers of paying billions of dollars to a man committed to amassing weapons of mass destruction. But we do not.

We should see and understand that every time America buys a barrel of rogue oil we are in part funding unseen radicals. But we do not.

And we should see that our national security is at risk, our foreign policy is shackled, and our diplomatic credibility in the Middle East undermined, so long as we buy from regimes that deny democracy and freedom.

America should not allow these regimes to maintain such a strong influence over our economy. But we do.

We allow Syria to smuggle over 100,000 barrels of oil per day from Saddam Hussein.

We allow ourselves to believe that the world cannot diminish its dependence on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, convinced this country holds the copyright on a commodity. But make no mistake - it does not.

Our unique place in the world demands we demonstrate our leadership.

How can we stop inadvertently financing global terrorism?

Can we use our domestic resources more wisely?

Can we diversify our energy sources to increase national security?

Yes, we can.

What has America done?

America has shut down exploration on millions of acres of American land rich in oil and gas. And Congress has banished development in a frozen corner of Alaska that holds the equivalent of 55 years worth of Iraqi imports.

What has America done?

Last year we sent $4 billion to Saddam Hussein in oil money. Some of our allies call it Oil-for-Food. But I say we call it what it is: Oil-for-Terror.

Our Nation has come to a crossroads. We are confronted by Action and Inaction. Will we stay the course or remake our destiny?

So today I ask a this question, one that should dictate American energy policy for the 21st century: Why are we importing oil from countries that are exporting lethal terrorism by groups who hate our freedoms and despise our way of life?

The United States has indeed changed. We have felt the embrace of our friends in our time of need. And we have felt anger when a jihad was declared on our soil, our institutions, our economy, and our very daily bread - freedom itself.

We have seen religion perverted by extremists whose designs for the world end only in annihilation. Islam was also a victim of September 11. Fanatics, spewing evil and hatred, hijacked a religion of peace. Good nations saw the bad within. Allies of America in the Middle East have uncovered some of these fanatics and brought them to justice.

There is no one birthplace for terrorism, but there are places where extreme ideologies flourish. In Saudi Arabia, the Wahhabi clerics have a strangle-hold on freedom.

The institutions of Church and State are one entity.

Women live as third-class citizens.

Textbooks teach hatred and disdain for the United States.

Young men genuflect to jihad as they are indoctrinated into a bastardized religion of terror.

The result is the absence of democracy. The result is that 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

But this is a place where America does big business.

It is time we seek out new partnerships.

It is time we find new sources of production.

It is time we turn America's imagination, technology, and ingenuity loose.

America, it is time we turn off the spigots of terrorist oil.

This requires bold leadership to redefine the National priority.

We can redefine this National priority two ways: new overseas production and new domestic production.

These are ambitious goals, but not impossible. Consider the contributions of my home State of Montana. Fuel cell research is underway at our universities. This will yield new ways to power our homes and cars. New technologies can turn Montana's abundant agricultural crops into alternative fuels.

With the power of people and ideas there is the power to change. Montana possesses the Nation's largest supply of clean coal. We possess vast reserves of petroleum and natural gas.

It is critical we know where our reserves are located. If Montana has so much potential, think about our potential as a Nation.

The Bush Administration has granted more federal research for transportation fuel cells. The auto industry has started to turn out hybrid cars and cars powered by fuel cells.

America has taken great strides towards conservation in the last 25 years. America's consumption of oil has remained steady since 1973, at roughly 19 million barrels per day. But during that same time GDP doubled. Regrettably, our Nation has allowed our foreign oil imports to double as well.

Imagine what new technology will accomplish in the future. No doubt, these new technologies will one day take us beyond fossil fuels, but that day is not tomorrow. We must continue to push ahead with more research dollars for science and technology. In the meantime, America must tap new sources of imports if we are to wean this Nation off rogue oil.

America is blessed with a wealth of natural resources. But we have declared much of those resources off limits. In the land of plenitude, we have turned excess into scarcity.

For example: There is a moratorium on new offshore oil and gas development along the entire east coast of the United States, while America purchases Canadian gas pulled from wells off the coast Nova Scotia.

That makes no sense.

America must find ways to meet energy production and demand in responsible ways - not to limit it for limitation's sake.

Present policies tell us to ban domestic exploration, allowing domestic production to further decline.

Present policies tell us to maintain the status quo in the Middle East.

And some might question why we should pursue new ventures with old enemies.

Indeed, this axis of inaction is our greatest enemy. It is inaction itself we must resolve to defeat today. We cannot simply sit back and send billions to Saddam Hussein and billions more to countries that preach hatred at their pulpits.

America must act now to harness its true energy potential. Our economic growth did not spawn from inaction. Technology made the 21st century the American century and energy fueled that progress, from steamboats, to railroads to rockets in space.

Yet the decline in domestic energy production and the consequences from buying it from jihad cartels may be the undoing of those titanic achievements and imperil America's security.

I ask the question again: Can we diversify our energy sources to increase national security?

There is good news for Americans who believe we can dismantle the myth that America is forever dependent on Middle East oil. In the Caspian Sea, a body of water surrounded by former Soviet Republics, oil reserves of up to 33 billion barrels have been found, a supply greater than our own reserves and double that of the North Sea. And estimates say another 233 billion barrels of reserves could be lurking undiscovered somewhere in that sea. Such a massive amount of oil would constitute 20%-25% of the world's proven reserves.

Russia boasts even higher reserves.

Yet, America buys virtually no oil from Russia and the Caspian states. Russia and the Caspian states present the biggest opportunity in oil exploration and production for America, and it is a challenge to which America must commit.

To those who say it cannot be done, I point to the strong friendship between President Bush and President Putin. This friendship and trust affords America an historic opportunity share new technologies and modern management with our Russian ally.

In May, President Bush and President Putin launched the US-Russia energy dialogue. That discussion concluded that the future for Russian energy development depends upon lasting financial reforms. Russia knows corporate governance is its best hope at luring the capitol needed to build a lasting middle class.

Already, Russia has taken great steps in that direction under President Putin. Land reform, tax reform, and economic reforms have all been hallmarks of his administration.

As a result, American private investment is flowing increasingly into Russia. American investment in Russia, according to the US-Russia Business Council, is staying put. Are we stepping out of the twilight of the robber baron period of the 1990's?

In the months ahead, I believe American companies will welcome more, lasting reforms in Russia and in the Caspian states.

Capitalism is not a hat we wear to do business, Capitalism travels on paper:

Investment in the civic infrastructure of these nations is as important as any amount of money invested in transportation infrastructure.

Russia and Caspian states must fight organized crime and put an end to endemic corruption.

Russia must finalize banking reforms while improving investment laws and regulations.

Judges must not be subjected to pressure by the executive branch.

And transparent and impartial courts backed by the national government must enforce laws and contracts.

The steady, unabating stream of American capitol needed in these nations will never come until all financial commitments are secured by the Rule of Law.

Some of Caspian states have established oil funds managed by Western private investments companies. Russian might consider similar steps.

These lasting reforms will be engine of change that gives these nations a strong middle class.

America welcomes these changes and America welcomes Russian and Caspian oil.

America welcomes the construction of Caspian pipelines, which can unleash millions of barrels of landlocked oil.

America welcomes the idea of a second pipeline in the region.

It is not just a pipeline bringing oil to the West. For America it is a bridge to diversification. For the Caspian states, it is a bridge to modernity.

The bridge of reform in Russia could pave the way for expanded gas and oil production in Eastern Siberia, the Russian Far East, and offshore areas.

The bridge of reform could lead to the modernization of Russia's port and transportation infrastructures.

I believe these lasting reforms will be achieved. I believe these countries are committed to their future. Next month, U.S. and Russian officials will meet at the Houston energy summit. I look forward to hearing the proposals of reform from the Russian side.

We can indeed do more, and inaction should never be our pose.

But in all our actions, America should be guided the words spoken by Winston Churchill on the eve of World War II. Churchill said, "On no one quality, on no one process, on no one country, on no one route and on no one field must we be dependent. Safety and certainty in oil lie in variety and variety alone."

It is my hope that in the months and years ahead, we will act to diminish our dependency on rouge oil and terminate our Nation's financial connections to nations that sponsor terrorism.

We will act to seek variety by extending our partnerships with Russia and the Caspian States.

We will act to seek variety by expanding partnerships with allies such as Mexico and nations throughout South America.

We will act to seek variety by seeking out new opportunities in West Africa and Middle Eastern nations committed to democracy.

And most importantly, we will achieve variety by tapping the resources our great Nation was blessed with.

Great opportunities lie ahead and so do great dangers. No matter the dangers, America must not lose sight of the prospect of a new, democratic regime in Baghdad and the hope for a new producer of terror-free oil.

The future for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is unclear. GDP in that country has been in decline for two decades. A culture in decline breeds unrest, and we have seen that unrest breeds terrorism. My hope is that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will soon decide to become democratic, to separate Church from State.

But when the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia continues to abuse its vast reserves to intimidate other countries from hiking production, America must take pause.

We need to counter by shielding our economy from the whims of one single country.

We need to inject a new psyche into the market that says we no longer need to kowtow to fanatics and anti-American regimes.

A great Nation assumes the challenges that accompany a great cause. America has never shied from the leadership of challenge. In the arsenal of the American spirit is the American ability to overcome great barriers. We must act now to fasten that spirit to our backs and move ahead.

This new psyche can empower America. This new psyche can embolden our allies to action.

Action and inaction, challenge and ease have always been the two paths of mankind. Fellow citizens, we will choose the paths of action and challenge with boldness and determination, convinced by the rightness of our convictions and hopeful of the changes to come. In all that must be done, I know that America is ready and able to conquer this challenge.

Thank you and may God Bless America.

burns.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=745&Month=9&Year=2002

Attack on America

2001-09-11T08:46:00.000-04:00

codebase="http://active.macromedia.com/flash2/cabs/swflash.cab#version=4,0,0,0"
ID=attack WIDTH=554 HEIGHT=461>

WIDTH=554 HEIGHT=461 TYPE="application/x-shockwave-flash"
PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash">