Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (20431)	12/5/2002 7:04:28 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27666

Saudi Split Personality Leaves Diplomacy Wanting Thursday, December 05, 2002 URL:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,72122,00.html WASHINGTON — Some key senators have expressed skepticism about Saudi Arabia's claim it is redoubling its effort to prevent charity funds from ending up in the hands of terrorists, and suggest that the Saudis' latest public relations campaign belies their true feelings about the United States and the war on terror. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., told Fox News on Wednesday that he doubts comments made by Saudi foreign policy adviser Adel Al-Jubeir about Saudi cooperation in the war against terror financing would stand up to the congressional sniff test. "Ask Jubeir if he'd be willing to testify before the Judiciary Committee, which is investigating funds going to terrorists," Specter said. Al-Jubeir said he would not be willing to speak before a committee. "We will not submit to questioning in terms of hearings because of diplomatic privilege we don't do that," he said. But he did offer to have the Saudi diplomats call the senator next Monday after the Ramadan holiday to schedule a meeting in which they can sit down and talk about issues of concern. The verbal exchange over Fox News' airwaves follows a press conference by Al-Jubeir on Tuesday in which he acknowledged that the kingdom has been lax about auditing the funds of Islamic charities, many of whom are accused of financing terrorist groups. "Are all the funds accounted for? I believe in some of the charities they're not. Do we have any evidence that those funds went to terror groups? No, we don't. Does that mean none went? I can't answer that question," Al-Jubeir said. He added that the Saudi government is beginning audits on domestic charities and that charities that donate to international causes will be required to register with the foreign ministry. He said a newly-organized commission will track donations to and from charities. Money laundering experts say these steps are important, but will be exposed as a public relations sham unless the Saudi royal family enforces them. "What's critical in a money laundering regime is enforcement mechanisms; you can write all the law you want but if you don't enforce those laws, then you have done nothing but write law," said former Justice Department official Michael Zeldin. The Saudis are concerned that the whole terror financing issue has driven a wedge between the United States and Saudi Arabia, which have other issues on the agenda, including a possible war with Iraq and stable oil supplies. They say that destabilizing the relationship plays right into the hands of the Al Qaeda terror network. But lawmakers say the Saudis are destabilizing the relationship through their own actions and words, including those by influential Saudi Interior Minister Prince Naif Ibn Abd Al-Aziz, who was quoted last week blaming Jews for the attacks on Sept. 11. "Who committed the events of Sept. 11? . . . I think [the Zionists] are behind these events," Prince Naif was quoted in a Nov. 29 interview by Kuwait's Al Siyasa newspaper. "It is impossible that 19 youths, including 15 Saudis, carried out the operation of Sept. 11," Naif said, according to a translation distributed by the Middle East Media Research Institute. The transcription also revealed that Naif accused the "Zionist-controlled media" in the United States of manipulating the terror war to create a backlash against Muslims. Click here to read MEMRI's dispatch of Naif's interview. Naif is one of the defendants in a lawsuit brought by families of Sept. 11 victims charging the Saudi royal family with funneling dollars through charities to terrorist leader Usama bin Laden in an effort to keep his Al Qaeda network out of the Saudi nation. Al-Jubeir, 40, said that the 15 Saudis chosen for the Sept. 11 attack were deliberately chosen by bin Laden to "give the operation a Saudi face and drive a wedge between our two countries." "In a way he almost succeeded," Al-Jubeir said. The White House has repeatedly said that the Saudis have been "good partners" in the war on terrorism. On Tuesday, Secretary of State Colin Powell praised Al-Jubeir for making a "serious effort" to address U.S. concerns about terror financing. "I have always said the Saudis have done a lot," Powell said. "They have done a number of things that were responsible. Could they do more? Yes. Now they have responded in what seems like a forthright way." But lawmakers say the White House is deflecting criticism that is rightly directed toward the Saudis. "The Bush administration and the Saudis have done a masterful job of turning attention away from ... the trail that leads to the possibility that a foreign government provided support to some of the Sept. 11 hijackers," said Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. U.S.-Saudi relations are also diminishing over issues unrelated to the war on terror. Capitol Hill has turned a cold shoulder toward the Saudis because of alleged kidnapping of American children to Saudi Arabia. The House Government Reform Committee is discussing how Saudi lobbyists have refused to provide them with subpoenaed records regarding the abduction of American children, mostly by their Saudi fathers, who have taken the kids back to Saudi Arabia in defiance of custody agreements. Two mothers of kidnapped children were testifying on Wednesday about their missing children and the committee was discussing its failure to serve subpoenas to three lobbying firms — Qorvis Communications, Patton Boggs and the Gallagher Group. "When the U.S. Marshals went to serve the subpoenas they were not at their homes, they were not at their offices, they were nowhere to be found," said committee Chairman Dan Burton, R-Ind. "They've been hiding. I think that says a lot about the Saudi government and their openness." Burton suggested that the lobbying firm representatives may have been kept overnight within the Saudi embassy so they could not be subpoenaed. The lobbyists claimed that because they work for the government, their documents qualify under protections stated in the Vienna Convention and they cannot be subpoenaed by the U.S. government. Before the hearing, Al-Jubeir defended the Saudi effort to resolve international child custody cases and suggested Burton was "engaging in a publicity stunt." Fox News' Collins Spencer and Major Garrett and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

To: calgal who wrote (20431)	12/5/2002 7:31:07 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 27666

U.S. set to cite Iraq for breach By Bill Gertz URL:http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20021205-94437619.htm THE WASHINGTON TIMES The Bush administration is set to declare Iraq in violation of the U.N. resolution requiring Baghdad to give up weapons of mass destruction, The Washington Times has learned. Top Stories • Bush scoffs at U.N. over 'cooperation' • INS lacks proper checks on aliens • U.N. team sets trap in Baghdad • Religion linked to positive outlook in teenagers • Failure of radios disrupts firefighters • No calm before storm for the weathermen "It is going to be 'material breach,' not as a casus belli [cause for war] but as a basis to begin hammering Unmovic to do more," said an administration official familiar with the internal debate. Unmovic, or the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, is the arms-inspection group for Iraq. Administration officials said a material-breach declaration will depend on whether Iraq fails to mention in its U.N. report some banned weapons programs identified in U.S. intelligence reports. Iraq's report detailing everything it possesses related to weapons of mass destruction, which is due by Sunday, is required under a U.N. Security Council resolution passed Nov. 8. A meeting of the White House National Security Council (NSC) is scheduled for today, and the Iraqi arms declaration will be the key topic. The president will not attend the gathering of senior officials of national security agencies, known as the principals committee. U.S. officials said the administration has been withholding detailed intelligence on hidden Iraqi arms programs from U.N. inspectors. The information deals mostly with Iraq's covert chemical and biological arms. "We do not want to tip our hand," the official said. One piece of intelligence includes details on a cache of more than 1,800 gallons of anthrax spores, the officials said. Even tiny amounts of anthrax can be lethal. Less detailed intelligence has been gathered on Iraq's efforts to build nuclear weapons, the officials said. The intelligence on the hidden weapons is said to be reliable and will be used to verify whether information presented by Iraq in its declaration is accurate. An Iraqi general told the Associated Press yesterday that Baghdad will hand over the list of chemical, biological and nuclear programs Saturday, a day ahead of the U.N. deadline. Gen. Hossam Mohammed Amin said the report will not disclose any banned weapons, "because, really, we have no weapons of mass destruction." The U.S. position on how to respond to the Iraqi weapons list is being debated because of Baghdad's history of using deception to hide its arms programs, the officials said. A U.S. policy of material breach, however, will be a key step toward the use of military force to oust the regime of Saddam Hussein, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The issue of declaring a material breach was discussed earlier this week at the NSC principals committee meeting, which, one official said, ended in "chaos" over disagreements on how to respond to the Iraqi declaration. The administration expects Baghdad to turn over documents related to civilian programs that could be used to make chemical or biological arms, but nothing about covert weapons programs, the officials said. President Bush said Tuesday that "any act of delay, deception or defiance will prove that Saddam Hussein has not adopted the path of compliance and has rejected the path of peace." State Department and Pentagon spokesmen had no comment on the internal debate. A White House National Security Council spokesman also declined to comment. Today's principals meeting will include Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who missed the first meeting because he was in South America. U.N. weapons inspectors so far have not uncovered any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs or any illegal missile-development work. Those in the administration who want to oust Saddam favor issuing a material-breach declaration soon after Iraq presents the list. These officials include representatives of the Defense Department, including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, along with Vice President Richard B. Cheney and his key national security aides. Officials from the State Department, including Mr. Powell and Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage, oppose that view and favor slowing the timetable for military action. These officials want to study the documents provided by Iraq and then continue U.N. arms inspections as a way to hold off military action. Officials said Mr. Powell and Mr. Armitage are the leading opponents of using military force to oust Saddam. Both favor using the threat of force to compel Iraq to disarm, however. According to the officials, Mr. Powell disagrees with administration officials who view Iraq, as Mr. Bush put it in an October speech, as a unique and "grave threat" to the United States. Mr. Powell also does not share the view of Mr. Bush's senior advisers who say Saddam is likely to use weapons of mass destruction or share them with terrorists, the officials said. "Powell favors endless inspections," one official said. Mr. Powell is the main advocate of the argument that if Iraq gives up all its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs it would be tantamount to "regime change," even if Saddam remains in power. Other officials say the secretary of state's position undermines efforts within the administration and among American allies for removing Saddam and setting up a democratic government in Baghdad.