The Terror Finance Blog

Joel Mowbray on New Iran Legislation

By Ilan Weinglass

Joel Mowbray points out that the recent round of Iran sanctions have left some serious gaps open. Namely that Iranian firms undertake joint ventures with western firms.  Plus the fact that the paper trail involving far-flung operations of multi-national firms can be very hard to follow - which is where the new Iran Transparency and Accountability Act would come into place:

The Iran Transparency and Accountability Act (ITA), which was introduced in the House last week, would force publicly traded companies to list in their regular filings all business dealings - including the revenues and profits - that their subsidiaries and affiliates have in Iran that could be covered by various sanctions. Already on board as co-sponsors are several top Republicans and Democrats from the Foreign Affairs Committee, but the author is someone in office just three months, Rep. Ted Deutch, Florida Democrat.

Given the complexity of far-flung multinational conglomerates, sometimes the only people who can document various investments are the corporate attorneys who submit Securities and Exchange Commission(SEC) filings. Even then, the paper trail can be murky. But that is why such legislation would greatly advance the ability of government investigators to piece together who owns what and where.

Read the rest at the Washington Times: MOWBRAY: Sanction multipliers

US Court Awards Terror Victims $378 Million Against North Korea

A United States federal court has handed down a historic decision finding  the government of North Korea and its intelligence service, the Cabinet General Intelligence Bureau, liable for an infamous terrorist attack perpetrated in Israel in 1972.  The U.S. District Court in San Juan, Puerto Rico has ordered the defendants to pay $378,000,000 in damages to two families.

The case arises from a lawsuit brought by victims of the 1972 terror attack at the Lod Airport in Israel in which 26 people were killed and 80 injured.  The plaintiffs alleged that the government of  North Korea trained and 

financed the terrorists who carried out this heinous massacre.

The plaintiffs were represented by attorneys Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of Tel-Aviv, Israel,  the Gary Osen Law Group of  New Jersey, Robert Tolchin of New York and Manuel San Juan of Puerto Rico.

In May 1972, terrorists from the Japanese Red Army (JRA), working in league with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), placed automatic weapons, ammunition, and grenades in their check-in luggage on a flight from Italy to Israel. When their bags emerged on the luggage carousel in Tel-Aviv, the terrorists took out the weapons and opened fire in every direction, gunning down passengers, flight crew members and airport workers. They also attempted to blow up airplanes on the ground using hand grenades. Two of the

three attackers were killed, and a third, Kozo Okumoto, was captured, tried, and sentenced to prison in Israel.

Most of the victims were Catholic-American pilgrims from Puerto Rico who had come to visit the Holy Land for the first time. The plaintiffs accused North Korea of being behind the massacre. In the months leading up to the massacre the leaders of the JRA and PFLP organized the attack, along with North Korean officials, who provided funding, intelligence, training, and other material support for the terrorists. The attack was part of the JRA's declared strategy of exporting their anti-Western violence and plans of communist revolution to other parts of 

the world, beginning with Israel  -- a strategy strongly encouraged by the North Korean government and its intelligence agency.

The District Court found North Korea liable for the Lod Aiport Attack and the resulting injuries inflicted on the families.

As the Court wrote in its decision:  "As a matter of its official policy, North Korea provided training, resources, weapons and safe haven to the JRA and the PFLP during the period relevant to this case. Defendants ran roughly 30 terrorist training camps from 1968 to 1988 within North Korea's borders; those camps specialized in terrorist and guerilla warfare training. These camps serviced in excess of 10,000 terrorists, including members of the JRA and PFLP, and provided courses lasting from three to eighteen months."  The Court also found that members of North Korea's military and intelligence agencies served as instructors in the training camps.

This is the first time that North Korea has been held accountable in a U.S.court for its support of terrorism over many decades. The government in Pyongyang has also been responsible for building an enormous underground bunker system for Hezbollah in South Lebanon prior to the 2006 Lebanon War, that dramatically increased the Islamic terrorist group's fighting capacity against  the IDF.

Because of its blatant support for terrorism, the U.S. State Department put North Korea on its official list of states that sponsor terror in 1988, a fact that made it possible for American victims to sue the North Korean government and collect against their assets in the United States.  In late 2008, however, the Bush Administration surprisingly removed North Korea from the State Department's list of terror sponsors to encourage Pyongyang to enter into talks concerning its nuclear policy.  Now the State Department is considering returning North Korea to the list.

For the first time the the terror victims are showing North Korea that there is a cost involved for its blatant support for terrorism.

For a copy of the Court's Decision:

www.israellawcenter.org/images/pdf2/Calderon%20order.pdf

Stop the Mosque

by Peter Gadiel   July 19, 2010    

  Peter Gadiel's 23 year old son, James was killed on the 103rd floor of the WTC on 9/11.

Attack, destroy and erase the prior culture and build, literally and figuratively on the ruins. This is the history of Islam.  The  proposed mosque near the site of the 9/11 mass murder is a continuation of this violent history. 
 
The gullible, like Mayor Bloomberg, swallow the lie that this latest memorial to the concept of "convert or die" is different because...well because its chief promoter, Imam Rauf, says it's different.
           
Rauf.  Who tells U.S. media funds for this atrocity will be raised in the United States, but tells London Arabic newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat, donations will come from Arab and Islamic countries.
 
Perhaps  the same Saudis who financed the 9/11 terrorists and build schools around the world in non-Moslem countries to spread the most violent strain of Islam?  
 
We don't know because this Islamic holy man won't tell us. And Bloomberg doesn't even think we should ask.
 
It's said opposition to the mosque unfairly slanders Moslems who haven't committed terrorist acts.  Tough.  I've seen the mass celebrations in Moslem countries over 9/11 and still await anything more than whispered pro forma denunciations of terrorism by Moslem leaders.
 
Collective guilt was rightfully assigned to the people of Germany and Japan, even though not all were guilty of supporting terrorist governments.   Moslems have given precious little reason to evade the same charge.
 
My German-born parents, Jewish father, Protestant mother, fully endorsed the idea of collective German guilt even though my Protestant relatives opposed and hated Hitler.
 
My father, who recognized the evil in Nazism early on never forgave his sister Lotte,  who refused to acknowledge the facts and who (as reported by her neighbors) waited docilely to be rounded up for shipment to the Auschwitz gas chambers.  All his life, in sadness mixed with anger, he spoke of the millions who refused to see until it was too late. 
 
Bloomberg and the other supporters of this mosque are spiritual heirs of Lotte and those millions of victims, seemingly ready to accept their fate.  Those with a firmer grasp of history will oppose this mosque as a warning of what is to come.
  

Peter Gadiel is president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America and co-creator of   www.illegalimmigrationgame.com 

 
Interestingly, USA Today editors presented Mr. Gadiel's plea as: "Opposing view on religious freedom: Stop the mosque"....R.E.

Editor's note: opinions by guest posters or re-printed letters do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Terror Finance Blog or the contributors or editorial staff. 

Behind the mosque

By ANDREW G. BOSTOM

New York Post | July 23, 2010

Imam Feisal Rauf, the central figure in the coterie planning a huge mosque just off Ground Zero, is a full-throated champion of the very same Muslim theologians and jurists identified in a landmark NYPD report as central to promoting the Islamic religious bigotry that fuels modern jihad terrorism.

This fact alone should compel Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg to withdraw their support for the proposed mosque.

In August 2007, the NYPD released "Radicalization in the West -- The Homegrown Threat." This landmark 90-page report looked at the threat that had become apparent since 9/11, analyzing the roots of recent terror plots in the United States, from Lackawanna, NY, to Portland, Ore., to Fort Dix, NJ.

The report noted that Saudi "Wahhabi" scholars feed the jihadist ideology, legitimizing an "extreme intolerance" toward non-Muslims, especially Jews, Christians and Hindus. In particular, the analysts noted that the "journey" of radicalization that produces homegrown jihadis often begins in a Wahhabi mosque.

The term "Wahhabi" refers to the 18th century founder of this austere Islamic tradition, Muhammad bin Abdul al-Wahhab, who claimed inspiration from 14th century jurist Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah.

At least two of Imam Rauf's books, a 2000 treatise on Islamic law and his 2004 "What's Right with Islam," laud the implementation of sharia -- including within America -- and the "rejuvenating" Islamic religious spirit of Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Wahhab.

He also lionizes as two ostensible "modernists" Jamal al-Dinal-Afghani (d. 1897), and his student Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905). In fact, both defended the Wahhabis, praised the salutary influence of Ibn Taymiyyah and promoted the pretense that sha ria -- despite its permanent advocacy of jihad and dehumanizing injunctions on non-Muslims and women -- was somehow compatible with Western concepts of human rights, as in our own Bill of Rights.

In short, Feisal Rauf's public image as a devotee of the "contemplative" Sufi school of Islam cannot change the fact that his writings directed at Muslims are full of praise for the most noxious and dangerous Muslim thinkers.

Indeed, even the classical Sufi master that Rauf extols, the 12th-century jurist Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali, issued opinions on jihad and the imposition of Islamic law on the vanquished non-Muslim populations that were as bellicose and bigoted as those of Ibn Taymiyyah.

Also relevant is the Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow program run by the American Society for Muslim Advancement, an organization founded by Rauf and now run by his wife. Among the future leaders it has recognized are one of the co-authors of a "denunciation" of the NYPD report, a counter-report endorsed by all major Wahhabi-front organizations in America. Another "future leader" of interest to New Yorkers: Debbie Almontaser, the onetime head of the city's Khalil Gibran Academy.

More revealing is the fact that Rauf himself has refused to sign a straightforward pledge to "repudiate the threat from authoritative sharia to the religious freedom and safety of former Muslims," a pledge issued nine months ago by ex-Muslims under threat for their "apostasy." That refusal is a tacit admission that Rauf believes that sharia trumps such fundamental Western principles as freedom of conscience.

Wahhabism -- whether in the form promoted by Saudi money around the globe, or in the more openly nihilist brand embraced by terrorists -- is a totalitarian ideology comparable to Nazism or, closer still, the "state Shintoism" of imperial Japan. We would never have allowed a Shinto shrine at the site of the Pearl Harbor carnage -- especially one to serve as a recruiting station for Tokyo's militarists while World War II was still on.

For the same reasons, we must say no to a Wahhabi mosque at Ground Zero.

Andrew G. Bostom is the author of "The Legacy of Jihad" and "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism."

"A Victory for Writing"

The New York Times Editorial today: 

It is a rare achievement these days for the Senate to pass anything of real substance by a unanimous vote. But an important bill that protects Americans from the whims of foreign libel judgments was passed earlier this week by unanimous consent. Once it passes the House and is signed into law, it will provide a safeguard to authors and publishers threatened with ruinous foreign judgments.

In the United States, a plaintiff alleging libel must prove that a statement is false and defamatory, and public figures have to show that a writer acted with actual malice in making a false statement. But these protections, rooted in the First Amendment, do not exist in places like Britain, Australia and Singapore, where the burden is often on the author, once accused of libel, to show that a statement is true.

To sidestep American protections, subjects of books have sued publishers and authors in British courts where they have a better chance of winning. The practice, known as libel tourism, counts on a system in which American courts will enforce British fines and penalties.

The bill <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-3518>  passed by the Senate on Monday would prohibit American courts from enforcing foreign defamation judgments if the judgments are inconsistent with First Amendment protections. In other words, if a British court finds that an American author has committed libel but has not conducted the trial with the same legal standards as an American court, the judgment against the author would be void in the United States. Americans who are found overseas to have committed libel can also sue in federal court to have that judgment found to be “repugnant to the Constitution” or American law.

These kinds of cases have come up far too often. One of the best known examples was that of Rachel Ehrenfeld, who wrote a 2003 book called “Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed — and How to Stop It,” that accused a Saudi businessman, Khalid bin Mahfouz, of providing financial support to Al Qaeda before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. After Mr. Mahfouz sued for libel in Britain — a charge that Ms. Ehrenfeld refused to defend — a British judge ordered her to pay £10,000 each to Mr. Mahfouz and his two sons, and more than £100,000 in legal costs, a total equaling about $230,000 at the time. She refused to pay, and the case led the New York State Legislature to pass a bill similar to the Speech Act in 2008.

The House has already passed a similar bill and is expected shortly to support the version approved by the Senate, giving authors in the rest of the country the same protections that exist in New York. The next step is for the new British government to take the hint and follow through on the promise <http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/09/libel-law-review>  it made earlier this month to review and overhaul its libel laws. No one in either country wins if writers cannot express themselves freely.

FSM Exclusive: Ground Zero Mosque Imam’s Radical Connections

Added Clues Suggest MB ties to the Would-be Ground Zero Mosque Chief

By Alyssa A. Lappen

Family Security Matters | Jul. 16, 2010

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan pretend they're “moderate Muslims.” Yet another crack has appeared in their crumbling facade, however. The New York City office of their American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), at 475 Riverside Drive, has for many years sat in the very building, on the very floor, immediately adjacent (pdf) to the suite housing the New York City chapter office of the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the U.S. representative of Hamas.

 

 

 

In 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice declared CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-funding case. In October 2008, the FBI's Oklahoma office canceled plans to appear at a Muslim “outreach” event due to CAIR's participation. In Jan. 2009, FBI offices nationwide were reported to have also severed ties with CAIR. In a Feb. 2009 letter to U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC), the FBI confirmed the reports.

 

By itself, sitting on the same floor, in the next suite to CAIR might not establish ASMA's tight connections to CAIR or the Saudi-based Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), built on Muslim Brotherhood principles. But sharing office buildings, floors and suites is common amongst Islamic terror-funding and supporting organizations. In the most famous example, in the May 2002 federal raid on the Herndon,Va. Safa companies and SAAR Foundation offices at 555 Grove Street, U.S. Treasury Department Operation Green Quest found over a dozen interlinked terror-funding Muslim charities and companies, all subsequently shuttered. They carted off truckloads of evidence. [1]

 

Rauf, more importantly embraces high-placed members of CAIR NY, whom he includes in the ASMA Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow (MLT) subsidiary. Rauf's Cordoba Initiative website also openly promotes Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR efforts and radical ideology. In January, Cordoba posted a news clip from the Muslim Brotherhood website Islam Online, protesting British boxing rules prohibiting players with beards. Cordoba likewise features a duplicitous CAIR press release, seeking funds to “rebuild churches in Malaysia” that were “firebombed by extremists.” It's highly unlikely, however, that an organization charged with terror financing will actually send money raised to Malay Christians whose churches its radical Muslim Brotherhood pals have destroyed.

 

Then there are Rauf's MLT appointees. Brooklyn-based Faiza N. Ali, for example, a self-described “community organizer” and “social justice activist,” serves as Community Affairs Director for CAIR NY, which Rauf and MLT let her deceptively describe as “America’s largest Muslim civil rights advocacy group.” Ali also helps lead several other Muslim Brotherhood groups, including the Muslim American Civil Liberties Coalition (MACLC), an offshoot of the MB's Muslim Consultative Network. Ali's MLT profile boasts as well that she wrote MACLC's “Countert-ERROR-ism” (sic) critique of the New York City Police Department's well-researched and reported 2008 white paper, “Radicalization in the West: the Homegrown Threat.” With a Pace University bachelor's degree in political science, Ali also led CAIR-NY's “campaign” to support her dissimulating piece of nonsense.

 

Rauf hosts other hotshot MB leaders in his MLT subsidiary too, including Dhaba “Debbie” Almontasser, who like Ali worked with the NY chapter of CAIR, Hamas’ U.S. arm, to counter-attack the New York City Police Department. She organized an online discussion group to obtain “input” for CAIR's “Community Statement.”

 

Other U.S.-based MLT radicals include Jihad F. Saleh, a top congressional aid to U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), helping fulfill the legislative goals established by CAIR founder and former chairman Omar Ahmad, who wanted increased Muslim “influence with Congress,” by using Muslims on Capitol Hill “to pressure Congress and the decision makers in America” to shift U.S. foreign policy. (P. David Gaubitz and Paul Sperry, The Muslim Mafia, p. 183) Saleh is not just a Congressional staff point man, though. He has been working closely with national CAIR official and convert Corey Saylor to increase the Muslim Congressional presence through the CAIR-backed Congressional Muslim Staffers Association.

 

Another, genuine al-Qaeda supporter Yasir Qadhi, serves as academic affairs dean at North America's “largest and fastest growing college-level Islamic educational” organization, Al Maghrib Institute. Al Qadhi gives frequent radical lectures on the internet, appearing on pages and blogs such as Halal Tube and Mujahadeen Rider, which both frequently mark videos “private,” presumably since Westerners and non-Muslims would take great offense. Al Qadhi doesn't even need CAIR as his radical middle man.

 

Several U.S. MLT appointees list no surnames or qualifications whatever. Yet another red flag.

 

New Yorkers and Americans who consider Rauf a not-so-secret radical are not alone. The devout Bengali Muslim dissident Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury agrees that efforts to build a giant mosque opposite Ground Zero are an abomination. Its construction will only delight jihadists, whom he wants to disappoint. His Weekly Blitz newspaper has published many objections to Rauf's plan, not least of all since New Yorkers are overwhelmingly opposed, considering it as insensitive, say, as “the German government opening ... a Nazi appreciation museum right outside the Auschwitz death camp.”

 

Choudhury has faced such fights before. Bangladesh authorities imprisoned him many times for his pro-American and pro-Israel sentiments and he still faces trial. Lately, a senior Bangladeshi intelligence official has called him repeatedly threatening “consequences if we continued to publish such [“extremely provocative anti-Islamic”] articles.” His newspaper's required government registration could be revoked. The official merely seeks to appease “Saudis and other anti-American elements,” however, and perhaps even to renew “previous secret affiliations with jihadist groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir.”

 

Choudhury will not rest, however. No one else should either.

 

_________________________________

 

[1] Douglas Farah and John Mintz, “U.S. S. Trails Va. Muslim Money, Ties; Clues Raise Questions About Terror Funding” Washington Post, Oct. 7, 2002, http://ftrsupplemental.blogspot.com/2002/10/us-trails-va-muslim-money-ties.html (viewed 7/15/2010); Erick Stakelback, “Islamic radicals on campus,” Front Page Magazine, Apr. 23, 2003, http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=18601; Department of Justice documents on U.S. raids on Herndon, Va., Safa and SAAR offices, orig. at DOJ, “106-page US Customs Service affidavit,” http://cryptome.org/safaaffid102003.pdf, “3-page Attachment C Safa Group businesses & corporations,” http://cryptome.org/safaattachc102003.pdf, “9-page ATTACHMENT D Safa Group officers & directors & related bus. &organizations,” http://cryptome.org/safaattachd102003.pdf, “9-page Attachment E glossary of terms, individuals, & organizations relevant to this affidavit,” http://cryptome.org/safaattache102003.pdf and http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/FeaturedDocs/SafaAffidavit_AttachmentE.pdf; (all viewed 5/20/2010).

____________________

 

PDF documents:

CAIR tax return for 475 Riverside Drive

ASMA – American Society for Muslim Advancement at same address

ASMA – American Sufi Muslim Association at same address

Building Plan of 475 showing CAIR’s suite number

 

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Alyssa A. Lappen is a U.S.-based investigative journalist focusing on the Middle East and Islam. She is a former Senior Fellow for the American Center for Democracy (2005-2008); former Senior Editor of Institutional Investor (1993-1999), Working Woman (1991-1993) and Corporate Finance (1991).

Kingdom top terror finance fighter

It's been some time since I posted here, but an article in the Saudi Arab News just BEGS to be posted.  Here it is with no further comment.

Kingdom top terror finance fighter

By P.K. ABDUL GHAFOUR | ARAB NEWS

Published: Jul 12, 2010 23:45 Updated: Jul 13, 2010 00:31

JEDDAH: Saudi Arabia has won the first position among Arab countries and 10th among G20 countries in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) report on its compliance with international resolutions on combating money laundering and terror financing.

"We are happy over the international recognition of the Kingdom's efforts in fighting money laundering and terror financing," said a statement issued by the Council of Ministers following its weekly meeting here.

The Cabinet meeting, chaired by Crown Prince Sultan, deputy premier and minister of defense and aviation, emphasized the danger posed by the two types of crimes to national and international financial systems.

The FATF and Middle East and North Africa Financial Action Task Force have endorsed the report citing a high degree of Saudi Arabia's compliance to 40 anti-money laundering (AML) resolutions and nine anti-terror funding resolutions.

"The legal AML framework in Saudi Arabia is composed of Shariah law and the Anti Money Laundering Statute. This framework effectively criminalizes money laundering as required by the FATF recommendations and international conventions," the report said.

"Regarding terrorist financing, it is clear that Saudi Arabia is committed to prosecute terrorist financiers as terrorists," FATF said. The Kingdom's Financial Intelligence Unit is a well-equipped and well-resourced organization that receives and disseminates relatively few suspicious transactions, it added.

There are two agencies that supervise and regulate financial entities in the Kingdom. Both have adequate powers and financial resources to conduct their activities. "While the assessment team welcomes the authorities' efforts in enhancing the current supervisory regime, it also noticed low levels of corrective measures applied by both supervisory agencies," it said.

Monday’s Cabinet meeting denounced terrorist explosions in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia and Uganda, killing hundreds of innocent people. "These terrorist attacks undermine the security and stability of these countries," Culture and Information Minister Abdul Aziz Khoja said quoting the Cabinet.

The Cabinet urged the Iraqis to form a unity government as quickly as possible to reinforce their country's stability.

Second Deputy Premier and Minister of Interior Prince Naif presented a report on the resolutions taken by the Supreme Haj Committee during a recent meeting in Jeddah in order to improve services to the guests of God and ensure their safety and security.

The Cabinet approved an agreement with Egypt on transfer of prisoners to help them serve their sentence terms in their home country. It also endorsed another accord signed with Egypt on combating drugs and narcotics trafficking. Both agreements were signed in Sharm El-Sheikh on Oct. 14, 2009.

The meeting authorized Education Minister Prince Faisal bin Abdullah to hold talks with UNESCO to reach an agreement on establishing a program for the culture of dialogue and peace named after Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah.

The Cabinet allowed clubs to establish sports academies using their own funds on the basis of certain rules and conditions to be set out by the Presidency of Youth Welfare. Revenues from such institutions should be used for the development of clubs. It also agreed to Saudi Arabia joining the International Sugar Agreement (1992) that facilitates the global sugar trade.

Web Site Identifying Foreign Banks as Iranian Correspondents Likely to Raise Compliance Questions

I'm reposting this article, which was originally posted on July 9, 2010, in Money Laundering Alert:

A Web site that purports to list the foreign correspondent relationships of many of Iran’s financial institutions could cause U.S. institutions to rethink their ties to well-known international banks.

The site for the Export Guarantee Fund of Iran – a state-owned export credit insurance company – lists hundreds of international banks with ties to 10 Iranian financial institutions subject to U.S. economic sanctions. Under a measure signed into law July 1, U.S. banks must audit their correspondent financial institutions to be sure they have no relationship with blacklisted Iranians.

The European banks listed on the site are household names, both in the United States and Europe, including ING Bank, Deutsche Bank, HSBC Holdings, PLC, Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi, Banco Santander, Royal Bank of Canada, Dresdner Bank and National Bank of Canada. The insurance company links the banks to Bank Melli, Bank Mellat and Bank Tejarat, among other Iranian companies blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Department.

Neither U.S. banks nor the international banks listed “can ignore this,” according to John Wood, vice president of anti-money laundering intelligence for New York-based consulting firm Iddex Inc.

While it’s unclear whether the Iranian site list is current, it will be “virtually impossible” that the list won’t raise suspicions at U.S. banks, said Wood. Even in cases when foreign banks certify under the new law that they don’t have ties to blacklisted Iranian banks, the claims could ring hollow as long as the Iran site seems to contradict those assertions, he said.

Foreign institutions will need to not only show documentation proving that they don’t process correspondent transactions for certain Iranian institutions, but also contact the Iranian government to be removed from the list, he said. U.S. banks are required to implement the new sanctions checks as soon as next year, after the Treasury Department finalizes regulations.

Calls and e-mails to Banco Santander, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, National Bank of Canada, Nordea Bank and others seeking comment were not immediately returned.   

The site is “totally legitimate” said Muhammad Sahimi, an Iranian-born professor of chemical and petroleum engineering at the Los Angeles-based University of Southern California who regularly writes on Iran. The Web site is likely intended to help Iranian exporters determine which banks they can use to settle international transactions or to promote Iran’s ties for propagandic purposes.

Documents posted to the site that were created in mid-2007, according to document data, state that Bank Tejarat has correspondent relationships with BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and National Bank of Canada, among other banks.

Bank Melli, a financial institution sanctioned by the United States in October 2007, maintains correspondent ties with Banco Santander, Nordea Bank and Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi, among others, according to the site. Bank Mellat, also sanctioned by the Treasury in October 2007, purportedly has correspondent ties to BNP Paribas, HSBC, Commerz Bank and others, according to the company.

Depending on how the Treasury Department regulates under the new sanctions law, U.S. banks may find that they have to audit their foreign correspondents for ties to any Iranian banks, even those not formally blacklisted by the United States, said Wood.

Non-U.S. banks will “not be very happy” if their American correspondents find out about the potential Iranian ties through the company’s Web site, said Clif Burns, a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer at Bryan Cave LLP who maintains the Export Law Blog.

Plotting out so many of the relationships between Iranian and international banks was “not the smartest thing to do” by the Iranian agency, he said. Banks on both sides of the correspondent relationships may consider the information proprietary, he said, adding that, whether it’s true or not, some foreign banks will argue that the data is old and no longer accurate.

THE SPEECH ACT Passed Unanimously by Senate Judiciary Committee

by Rachel Ehrenfeld

As an American citizen who has spent seven years fighting against and promoting awareness of the threat of libel tourism to American free speech rights, I am writing in support of the S 3518, the “Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act,” or the “SPEECH Act,” now before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The SPEECH Act marks a critical step in the defense of American national security and the freedoms of expression that form the cornerstone of our democracy. The Act protects these First Amendment guarantees by guarding authors and publishers from enforcement of frivolous foreign libel judgments from countries that do not have the United States’ strong free speech protections. Such suits, which have been pressed with increasing frequency worldwide over the past several years, have been used as a weapon to silence American researchers, scientists, reporters, bloggers and others.

American writers and media outlets have been sued for libel in England, Ireland, Canada, Australia, Brazil, France, Singapore, and others. They were forced into expensive lawsuits abroad, staining their reputations, discouraging research in their fields, and depriving the American public of vital information.

The SPEECH Act grants “a cause of action for declaratory judgment relief against a party who has brought a successful foreign defamation action whose judgment undermines the First Amendment,” and provides for legal fees in certain situations. It will help diminish the severe chilling effect such suits are having on publishers and authors investigating matters of public interest, such as national security, personal health, and safety.

My experience, which gave rise to the New York State “Libel Terrorism Protection Act” (also known as “Rachel’s Law”), upon which the SPEECH Act is based, demonstrates why this legislation is urgently necessary.

I am a New York-based scholar and have authored three books and hundreds of articles on terror financing, corruption, money laundering and narco-terrorism. In my last book,

Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed – and How to Stop It, I documented how a Saudi billionaire, the late Khalid bin Mahfouz, had funded al-Qaeda, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations. Mahfouz sued me for libel in London, attempting to use the plaintiff-friendly British libel laws to silence me. He had used this tactic to bully more than forty authors, and publishers – including many Americans – into apologies and retractions of similar revelations.

Since I never lived in England and had not published or marketed my book abroad, I refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the British courts. Incredibly, my refusal led the judge – without hearing a case on the merits, and in my absence – to make a declaration of falsity. He then issued a default judgment against me, ordering that I pay a hefty fine, apologize, retract my statements and pay Mahfouz’s substantial legal fees.

I countersued Mahfouz in New York, asking for a declaratory judgment to prevent the enforcement of the English judgment on the grounds that such enforcement would violate American First Amendment protections of free speech.

Soon after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction over Mahfouz, the New York State Legislature enacted the Libel Terrorism Protection Act, enabling New York courts to have jurisdiction over foreign plaintiffs who sue New York State authors and publishers abroad for libel.

Since 2008, six other states have recognized the threat posed by libel tourism and frivolous foreign suits and have passed legislation similar to “Rachel’s law”, to neutralize the chilling effect of extraterritorial libel suits. These states are: Illinois, Florida, California, Maryland, Utah and Tennessee.

But writers and publishers in the vast majority of American states still remain vulnerable to this form of lawfare from abroad. This threat looms larger with the increasing globalization of news and Internet writing.

The SPEECH Act – introduced Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and  Jeff Sessions (R-Ala), and cosponsoredby Senators Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)  and Joesph Lieberman (DI-Conn.) - will help deter libel tourism and secure Americans’ right to speak, write, and publish freely to preserve our safety and the integrity of our democracy. It should pass swiftly.

FSM Exclusive: Peace, Tolerance and Religious Freedom? No Way

Ground Zero mosque wanna-be developers show their true radical colors

by Alyssa A. Lappen
Family Security Matters | Jul. 13, 2010

On October 20, 2009, American Society of Muslim Advancement (ASMA) leader Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan, both received a letter from Former Muslims United (FMU) requesting that they each sign the latter’s Freedom Pledge. Neither has yet signed.

Rauf and Khan both claim to be moderate Muslims. Yet they are determined to rip down a 150-year-old wrought iron building — less than 200 feet from Ground Zero — where a piece of jumbo jet fell through its roof on 9/11 after Saudi suicide bombers flew two loaded passenger planes into each of the World Trade Center towers. The fuselage remains in the building to date. In its place, Rauf and Khan want to build a 13-story mosque.

The Cordoba Initiative, an ASMA subsidiary, claims the building will not be a mosque but a “cultural center” open to all. However, ASMA registered itself as a “church” with the Internal Revenue Service — not a cultural institute open to all, according to Guidestar. The building will indeed be a mosque, and open to all only so as to “invite” non-Muslims to Islam. In Malaysia the title of Rauf’s 2004 book What’s Right With Islam, complete with its introduction from Muslim Brotherhood devotee Karen Armstrong, translates to “The Call from the WTC Rubble.” For decades, Rauf and Khan have operated entirely in sync with global Muslim Brotherhood “flexibility” guidelines, which in North America seek to replace the U.S. Constitution with Islamic law.

Now there is new evidence that ASMA’s purportedly “moderate” leaders do not support basic human rights for former Muslims: They failed to even acknowledge an October 20, 2009 invitation from Former Muslims United to sign its Freedom Pledge.

FMU initially sent the Freedom Pledge, fully named the “Muslim Pledge for Religious Freedom and Safety from Harm for Former Muslims,” to 59 major Muslim leaders at 24 Muslim organizations in time for them to have it on September 25, 2009 — the day on which, 220 years earlier, the U.S. Congress passed the Bill of Rights. The letters to Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan were sent in a second Oct. 20, 2009 round of invitations that went to 51 Muslim leaders at 26 more organizations, including ASMA, which houses the Cordoba Initiative.

In their request that Muslim leaders sign the Freedom Pledge, FMU executive director Nonie Darwish, and her colleagues Ibn Warraq, Mohammed Asghar, Wafa Sultan, and Amil Imani wrote

“we now pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to achieve for former Muslims their unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We claim these rights as the foundation for our right to freedom from Shariah. We urge you to join us.”

The 878-word Freedom Pledge itself outlines the principles of Islamic law under which apostates from Islam are subject to the death penalty. It notes that the four schools of Sunni Islam — Hanafi, Miliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali — “unanimously agree that a former Muslim male, also known as an apostate, must be executed” and that a woman, at best must be “imprisoned or beaten five times a day until she repents or dies” and at worst, like men executed outright. It then goes on to cite 1978 and 1989 religious rulings — from the Fatwa Council at Al Azhar University, the closest Muslim equivalent to the Vatican, and the Mufti of Lebanon, each, respectively consigning a renegade Muslim to death if they “do not repent.” Perhaps “a misunderstanding on his part may have taken place, and there would thus be an opportunity to rectify it,” intones the Mufti. But he must do so within three days, or die.

“Overwhelmingly, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan … do not honor freedom to choose one’s beliefs as guaranteed under our [U.S.] First Amendment,” said Nonie Darwish in response to their dead silence since October 20, 2009. “That is the only conclusion we can draw” by their failure to acknowledge or sign the Freedom Pledge.

Rauf and Khan nevertheless hope to convince Americans that they think exactly the opposite. On July 6, 2010 at the Chautauqua Institute in New York state, Khan said

“The Quran speaks of humankind as one nation under God. We find that in America,…. The Quran speaks of one creator and the founding document says that everyone is endowed by the creator with inalienable rights.”

During the question and answer period that followed, an audience member asked Khan if the proposed Cordoba House mosque 200 feet from Ground Zero could be seen as a victory for Muslim radicals infiltrating America. She replied,

“It is a defeat to the extremists, … because Cordoba House will celebrate the very ideology that the extremists detest, which is the ideology of inclusiveness, pluralism, and coexistence between faiths.”

Khan referred there specifically to Quran Chapter 3, verse 109, which states,

“To God belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth, and unto Him all matters are returned.”

However, she deceptively omits the critical following verse, 3:110, clearly stating that Muslims alone — not other human beings — are acceptable to Allah.

“You are the best nation ever brought forth to men, bidding to honor, and forbidding dishonor, and believing in God. Had the People of the Book believed, it were better for them; some of them are believers, but the most of them are ungodly.”

The point is reiterated, moreover, in the Tafsir (commentary) on the verse by al-Jalalayn:

“You, O community of Muhammad (s), are the best community brought forth, manifested, to men, according to God’s knowledge, enjoining decency, and forbidding indecency, and believing in God. Had the People of the Scripture believed, it, their belief, would have been better for them; some of them are believers, such as ‘Abd Allāh b. Salām, may God be pleased with him and his companions; but most of them, the disbelievers, are wicked.”

The Quran expresses the same revulsion for non-Muslim “disbelievers” in Chapter 98, verse 6:

“The unbelievers of the People of the Book and the idolaters shall be in the Fire of Gehenna, therein dwelling forever; those are the worst of creatures.”

The al-Jalalayn Tafsir on this verse is equally adamant about the evils of unbelievers:

“Truly the disbelievers from among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters shall be in the fire of Hell, to abide therein (khālidīna: an implied circumstantial qualifier, in other words, it will be decreed for them by God, exalted be He, to abide therein) — those are the worst of creatures.”

This is not the stuff of sweetness, love and light. Rather, it reflects Rauf’s genuine feelings, as he has more than once expressed in Arabic. Clearly, Rauf himself reveres sharia law and wants to impose it. On Dec. 9, 2007, Rauf told the popular Arabic newspaper Hadi el-Islam,

“Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more than just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Sharia that are required to govern.

“In the period after the Prophet, peace be upon him, new laws were permitted so long of course as these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad… so they create institutions that assure [that there are] no conflicts with sharia.

“We recommend that in the case of a breakdown in the relationship between state and religious institutions … that the people follow the method of giving peaceful advice to governors and state institutions and use peaceful means [to convert them].

“And also [to] suggest that the rulers and political bodies consult with religious bodies and religious figures … so that [political] decisions reflect the spirit of the [sharia] law.

In March 2010, he even denounced interfaith discussions. The article in another popular Arabic journal, Rights4All, was entitled “The Most Prominent Imam in New York: ‘I Do Not Believe in Religious Dialogue’,” according to former Muslim and native Arabic speaker Walid Shoebat. In it, Rauf spoke against both “religious dialogue” and “interweaving into the mainstream society.”

“This phrase is inaccurate. Religious dialogue as customarily understood is a set of events with discussions in large hotels that result in nothing. Religions do not dialogue and dialogue is not present in the attitudes of the followers, regardless of being Muslim or Christian.”

Given these sentiments, it is no wonder whatever that neither Rauf nor his wife Daisy Khan would sign the FMU Freedom Pledge, promising to

“renounce, repudiate and oppose any physical intimidation, or worldly and corporal punishment, of apostates from Islam, in whatever way that punishment may be determined or carried out by myself or any other Muslim including the family of the apostate, community, Mosque leaders, Shariah court or judge, and Muslim government or regime.”

In fact, only two of the 111 Muslim leaders in 50 U.S. Muslim organizations to whom FMU sent the Freedom Pledge actually signed it. Those two heroes are Zuhdi Jasser (American Islamic Forum for Democracy) and Dr. Ali Alyami (Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia).

The sad facts are these:

The results of the FMU Freedom Pledge — to date sent to 163 American Muslim leaders at 50 organizations — show that less than 1.3% of American Muslim leaders are actually moderate.

Neither Feisal Abdul Rauf nor Daisy Khan fall into that moderate category — despite their massive efforts to pull the wool over public and political eyes. Their silence concerning human rights for former Muslims proves it, although certainly, so do many of their other actions, not least their long history of subterfuge concerning their real intentions.

At Chautauqua on July 6, Daisy Khan should have told the truth: Yes, allowing a mosque to go up in place of an historic building at Ground Zero would be a triumph for extremist Muslims. Moreover, ASMA and the Cordoba Institute are among the heavy weight extremists leading that charge.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Alyssa A. Lappen is a U.S.-based investigative journalist focusing on the Middle East and Islam. She is a former Senior Fellow for the American Center for Democracy (2005-2008); former Senior Editor of Institutional Investor (1993-1999), Working Woman (1991-1993) and Corporate Finance (1991).

Severing the Taliban Lifeline

by Rachel  Ehrenfeld 

General David Petraeus’ new command over the war in Afghanistan should be accompanied by a drastic change in U.S. policies that have turned this failed state into the world’s leading source of opium and Hashish .

Afghans now cultivate more than 92 percent of the world’s heroin-producing poppy crop, which supplies the Taliban with its primary source of revenue.

The U.S. failure to control the narco-terrorist axis in Afghanistan has led to escalating violence, devastating corruption, crime and growing radicalization, which has aided the resurgence of the Taliban and other al-Qaeda linked insurgencies. Under the U.S. watch, Afghanistan’s crop eradication and substitution failed, and opium production has gone from 640 tons in 2001, to 8,200 tons in 2007, reportedly falling to 7,000 tons in 2009. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) reported in 2009, that “Afghanistan [also became] the world’s biggest producer of hashish.”

At the G8 meeting in Trieste, Italy, in June 2009, Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, admitted that, “The Western policies against the opium crop, the poppy crop, have been a failure.” He then announced  that the U.S. changed its Afghan war strategy, shifting from eradication of poppy fields to interdiction.

A Pentagon spokesman explained that the U.S. is targeting “terrorists with links to the drug trade rather than targeting drug traffickers with links to terrorism.” Indeed, March 2010 photographs  from Afghanistan show American soldiers with guns ablaze, chasing insurgents, sprinting across thriving poppy fields – the same poppies that pay for the weapons used by the insurgents to kill American and Coalition forces and bribes to local officials.

The last nine years cost thousands of lives, wounded soldiers, and some $400 billion. We failed to secure Afghanistan, while the Taliban and the insurgencies got richer and stronger. To save lives in Afghanistan and at home, and hundreds of billions in U.S. tax payer money, Petraeus should consider a more effective approach to cutting off the insurgents’ major funding sources – the opium poppy and hashish.

Comprehensive foreign aid programs should be implemented to subsidize alternative crops and industrial development. In addition, the U.S. should use mycoherbicides  – specialized bioherbicide agents designed to inoculate the soil against the growth of certain plants, ensuring that the targeted plants cannot be economically cultivated. Mycoherbicides do not have adverse health or environmental effects, and target only plants they are engineered to affect. To ensure compliance, the U.S. and its allies should enforce severe penalties against poppy and hashish growers until the Afghan government is functioning properly.

Weaning Afghanistan off the poppy and hashish crop cultivation – the lifeblood of the insurgency and the major cause for corruption in Afghanistan  - will not happen overnight. But in the long run, it will give the U.S. and Afghanistan a better chance of winning this war.

* This op-ed was first published by BIGPEACE.COM, on July 9, 2010 

Libel Tourism Threat to End in the U.S.

Rachel Ehrenfeld
June 28th 2010

BP CEO Tony Hayward will likely win his case if he decides to sue American reporters and media outlets for libel in England for exposing his participation in a yacht race off the British Isle of Wight in the midst of the oil spill caused by his company in the Gulf of Mexico. You see, unlike the protections of free expression guaranteed by the American First Amendment, the plaintiff-friendly British libel laws hold the right of privacy of a public figure such as Hayward above transparency and accountability to the public.

The United States has historically led the world in the protection of its citizens' rights to free speech. The introduction of a new bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee last week reinforces this role by protecting all American writers and publishers from the enforcement of foreign libel judgments, such as the British court might award Mr. Hayward.

On June 22nd, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (R-AL) introduced the Securing and Protecting our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, or SPEECH Act. This bipartisan bill is co-sponsored by Senators Arlen Specter (D-PA), Joseph Lieberman (ID-CT), and Charles Schumer (D-NY). It will strengthen the protection of American authors and publishers from the enforcement of judgments ruled against them in frivolous and extortionate libel suits in foreign countries that do not have our protections for freedom of speech.

Such lawsuits have been often used by “libel tourists” in an effort to suppress the rights of American scholars, writers, and journalists to speak, write, and publish freely in print and on the Internet, especially on matters of national security. American writers and media outlets have been sued for libel in England, Ireland, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Australia, France, Singapore, and many other countries.

The SPEECH Act grants “a cause of action for declaratory judgment relief against a party who has brought a successful foreign defamation action whose judgment undermines the first amendment,” and provides for legal fees. These measures will help diminish the severe chilling effect such suits have already had on journalists, researchers, and the general media.

Based on New York State's Libel Terrorism Protection Act (also known as “Rachel's Law”), the SPEECH Act marks the culmination of a national campaign I spearheaded seven years ago following my own experiences as a target of libel tourism

As a researcher and writer on terrorist financing, economic warfare, narco-terrorism, and corruption, I valued and trusted the ability to publish my findings freely in the U.S. That changed with the publication of my third book, Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, in the United States in the fall of 2003. The book, aimed at strengthening the national security of the U.S. and the West, has had a far wider impact than I could ever have imagined.

Funding Evil exposed many funders of radical Muslim organizations, including Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz, the former owner of the biggest bank in the Middle East, the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia (NCB), and banker to the Saudi royal family. Mahfouz, who passed away last summer, had well documented official records, in the U.S. and elsewhere, of transferring some $74 million to at least two front charities for Wahhabi terrorism: the International Islamic Relief Organization, and his Muwafaq—or “blessed relief”—Foundation, which then transferred the funds directly to al Qaeda, Hamas, and other radical Muslim organizations.

Mahfouz, who lived in Jeddah, did not like the expose. He sued me for libel in London, although my book was not published or marketed there. Only 23 copies of Funding Evil were bought in England, most via the Internet, and a chapter from the book was published on the U.S.-based ABC-TV website for a short period.

Since I am an American and wrote the book in Manhattan, where I live, I refused to go to London to be tried under archaic, plaintiff friendly English laws. High Court Justice David Eady ruled against me by default, ordering that I pay Mahfouz $225,900, publish retractions, and pay for apologies dictated by him in major international newspapers.

Mahfouz notoriously exploited Britain's libel laws as a weapon in his strategy to silence his critics. Others have used this strategy, known as lawfare, but no one used it as effectively as Mahfouz. Before he died last summer in Jeddah, the Saudi billionaire used the British libel laws and courts to bully into silence more than 40 publishers and authors—including many Americans—who documented his funding of al Qaeda, Hamas, and other radical Muslim organizations. Unlike those intimidated by Mahfouz's threats or suits, I chose to fight his false claims in the U.S.

I countersued Mahfouz in the Southern District Court of New York for a declaration that Mahfouz's English default judgment was unenforceable in the U.S. because it violated my First Amendment rights. The Court said New York State's law did not allow jurisdiction over Mahfouz; in response, the New York legislature passed the Libel Terrorism Protection Act. The law allows courts to assert jurisdiction over anyone suing a New York State-based author or publisher, and restricts enforcement of judgments to those that uphold “the freedom of speech and press protections guaranteed by both the United States and New York Constitutions.”

Since 2008, Illinois, Florida, California, Utah, Tennessee, and Maryland have enacted their own versions of Rachel's Law.

But authors residing in other states are still at risk of unjustified personal and professional ruin at the hands of libel tourists, or other plaintiffs who sue in countries with low protections for freedom of speech.

Consider the case of book author and New York Times freelance travel writer Joe Sharkey, who survived an airplane crash in Brazil. The five other American passengers aboard Sharkey's executive jet survived; more than 150 Brazilian passengers and crew of the second airplane involved in the crash perished over the Amazon. Sharkey later wrote an expose in which he concluded that errors by Brazilian air traffic control had caused the accident. This conclusion was later corroborated by independent impartial investigations. Sharkey is now being sued in Brazil for defaming the “honor” of the country. The plaintiff is a relative of one of the deceased passengers of the 2006 crash. She has never met Sharkey, but claims that she felt “discriminated against” by his account of the accident. Sharkey may even face criminal charges and be tried in absentia for his accurate and necessary reporting on matters of life and death.

Other American reporters and scientists continue to face frivolous libel suits abroad, and many more refrain from writing about issues vital to our national security and public safety for fear of these kinds of suits.

Current world affairs and rapidly evolving forms of communication underscore the need for a free press. Our freedom to expose our enemies, teach and learn about science, national security, safety, finance, and other matters of public interest depend upon it.

In view of the urgent need to protect against this threat, Senators Leahy, Sessions, Specter, Lieberman and Schumer, and Representatives Steve Cohen (D-TN) and Peter King (R-NY), are to be commended for their efforts to fortify the protections the First Amendment guarantees to our freedom of expression. As this country's Founding Fathers did over 200 years ago, Congress should continue to lead the world in the fight for freedoms of expression, by passing the SPEECH Act right away.

Rachel Ehrenfeld is director of the New York based American Center for Democracy and the author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is financed, and How to Stop It.

The Myth of the Siege of Gaza

By --Jonathan D. Halevi* Since 2007, Israel has maintained a legal maritime blockade around Gaza whose purpose is to keep rockets and other weapons out of the hands of Hamas, while letting food and other humanitarian aid in. Yet there have been a wide variety of officials and commentators who insist that Gaza is starving, setting the stage for the repeated efforts of "humanitarian" ships to break the Gaza blockade. Gaza is not cut off from the outside world. In the last year, the markets of Gaza have been flooded with produce and merchandise. In fact, in 2009, a total of 30,576 truckloads of humanitarian commodities passed from Israel into Gaza. From June 2007 (the date of the Hamas military takeover of Gaza), overall monetary transfers to Gaza have totaled over $5 billion from governmental and extragovernmental sourhttp://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=2&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=443&PID=0&IID=4123ces. The governor of the Central Bank of the Palestinian Authority, Jihad al-Wazir, confirmed that 56 percent of the PA budget is designated for Gaza. Gaza receives additional aid funds directly from Iran and the Arab countries. There is also an established economic system of Palestinian imports from Egypt via hundreds of tunnels operating under the control of a Hamas government that grants approval for operating them and collects taxes from their owners. The tunnel network has increased imports from Egypt to Gaza from $30 million annually during the years 1994-2006 to more than $650 million annually. Given the abundance of supply, the price of diesel fuel and gasoline, delivered to Gaza through pipes from Egypt, is half that of the price in Israel. Farid Zakout, director of the Gaza Construction Association, told the Palestinian newspaper Al-Ayyam that the price of a ton of cement now stands at NIS 800 as opposed to NIS 1,200 two months ago, and over NIS 3,000 more than a year ago. Cement prices fell after some 80 percent of tunnel owners began to import cement. The renewed surge in construction activity has fostered a rise of 25 percent in the number of those employed in the industry. Since 2007, Israel has maintained a legal maritime blockade around Gaza whose purpose is to keep rockets and other weapons out of the hands of Hamas, while letting food and other humanitarian aid in. Yet there have been a wide variety of officials and commentators who insist that Gaza is starving, setting the stage for the repeated efforts of "humanitarian" ships to break the Gaza blockade. For example, John Ging, the director of operations for UNRWA, told the New York Times in early 2009 that Israel's blockade was choking off basic humanitarian supplies like medicine, clothing and blankets, as well as food supplies.1 The UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Occupied Palestinian Territory released a report in August 2009 arguing that "the blockade has ‘locked in' 1.l5 million people."2 The same report asserted that 75 percent of Gaza's population is "food insecure." Recently, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) told Don Imus on the Fox Business Channel that Israel was "preventing food and medicine from going into Gaza." He said there are "people that are starving," and closed with a vile suggestion that the situation of the Gazans was "almost like in concentration camps."3  Are the Gates of Gaza Closed? The truth is far different from these assessments. Indeed, the repeated claims of a hermetic blockade of Gaza are inconsistent with the figures that emerge from Israeli and Palestinian sources alike. Gaza under Hamas control continues to receive supplies of goods via the border crossings with Israel and the network of tunnels with Egypt, which have become an established import channel on a scale of hundreds of millions of dollars per year. The ongoing imports via the tunnel network provide employment to thousands of Palestinians and fill the coffers of the Hamas government through taxes on the operation of the tunnels and the goods that pass through them. The Hamas government also enjoys funding from the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah and from the European Union, in addition to aid from the Arab states. Gaza's gates are open for exit and entry by Palestinian residents, subject to approval by the Israeli and Egyptian authorities and in coordination with them. According to Palestinian figures, Israel and Egypt have approved more than 98 percent of Palestinian requests for medical treatment in their respective countries. The tunnel network is also used by Hamas for military purposes, among them sending fighters for training in Iran and Syria, and for the import of advanced weapons systems (antiaircraft and antitank missiles), explosives, and ammunition. Terminating the Connection between Israel and Gaza In August 2005 Israel dismantled its settlements in Gaza and withdrew all of its forces and civilians to its own territory. The Disengagement Plan transferred full responsibility for administering Gaza to the Palestinian Authority, without any Israel presence, military or civil. Israel reserved the right of freedom of action to abort terror activities from Gaza. The Disengagement Plan, whose major objective was to create "a better security reality," stated that "Israel will supervise and secure the outer envelope of the geographical land mass, will exclusively control the airspace of Gaza, and will continue to carry out military operations in the territorial waters of Gaza," and that "Israel retains the basic right to self-defense, including preemptive steps and response, with the use of force, against threats emanating from Gaza."4 Several months after the implementation of the Disengagement Plan, Israel and the Palestinian Authority signed two agreements - the "Agreement on Movement and Access" and "Agreed Principles for the Rafah Crossing" - which regulated movement and access to and from Gaza. In these agreements, Israel, for the first time since 1967, relinquished its full control of Gaza's outer envelope. According to these agreements, responsibility for the Rafah crossing was transferred to Egypt and the Palestinian Authority under the supervision of a Special Force of the European Union, and Israel agreed to the construction of seaports and an airfield in Gaza based on the model of international supervision at the Rafah crossing.5 The agreement, which was provisional for twelve months, was not renewed after it expired due to the refusal of the Hamas government to act in accordance with the agreement and its demand that the Rafah crossing be administered like a regular international crossing point between Gaza and Egypt. After the military takeover of Gaza by Hamas in June 2007, Israel's Security Cabinet approved a resolution on September 19, 2007, stating that "Hamas is a terrorist organization which took over Gaza and turned it into hostile territory. The organization takes hostile action against the State of Israel and its citizens and is the agent responsible for this activity." In addition, the Security Cabinet approved the request of Defense Minister Ehud Barak for the option of imposing economic sanctions - including the reduction of fuel and of electricity, in accordance with legal counsel that would meet the conditions of the international community. Furthermore, restrictions were authorized on the transfer of goods as well as the movement of people to and from Gaza.6 Human Rights Organizations: Israel Still the "Occupying Power" after Gaza Disengagement International and Israeli human rights organizations believe that the disengagement did not change Israel's status as an "occupying power" in Gaza. In a communiqué published on November 14, 2008, eight human rights organizations in Israel claimed: "Even after the ‘disengagement' from Gaza in 2005, Israel continues to hold significant control over the major aspects of the lives of Palestinians living in Gaza."7 Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch also shared this view, which was confirmed in the Goldstone Commission Report that investigated Israel's Gaza operation (Operation Cast Lead - December 27, 2008-January 18, 2009).8 Human rights organizations and the Goldstone Commission were very clear in their unequivocal declaration that Israel is still considered "an occupying power" in Gaza even after the disengagement, according to their interpretation of international law. Their demands on Israel focus on Israel fulfilling its obligations as these bodies interpret them, namely, to be responsible for the welfare of the residents of Gaza by removing the blockade and strengthening economic ties between Israel and Gaza.9 The Egyptian Position on the Disengagement In an official communiqué on December 19, 2008, Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki explained Egyptian policy toward Gaza:         The unilateral withdrawal by Israel from the Gaza Strip does not mean that Gaza has been liberated from occupation, since the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem together constitute one geographical unity that cannot be discussed in parts; otherwise this will be considered a death blow to their unity.              According to international law and the Geneva Convention, Israel is considered an occupying force and is still obligated to provide for the basic necessities of life, among them electricity, water, fuel, and medicine to the residents living in the territory under its occupation.              Any agreement with the contention that the Gaza Strip is liberated land demonstrates acquiescence with the plan that aspires to impose the responsibility for administering the Gaza Strip on the neighbor close to it, which is Egypt. We must not agree to this because it will be an excellent extrication for Israel from the straits of occupation, while transferring its consequences to Egypt, and this will lead to the eradication of the Palestinian problem.10 Thus, there are two dimensions to the Egyptian position: not letting Israel off the hook and not making Cairo responsible for Gaza in the future. Moreover, Egypt has made a direct connection between the operation of the Rafah crossing and the Hamas government's position on the issue of reconciliation talks with Fatah and with the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas. Through the reconciliation talks that were held with Egyptian pressure and mediation, Cairo has strived and continues to strive to convince the Hamas government to operate the Rafah crossing according to the Crossings Agreement of 2005, which was in effect for one year only as agreed upon by the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority. On the eve of reconciliation talks in October 2009, senior defense officials in Egypt threatened Hamas that they would totally shut down the Rafah crossing if the Hamas government refused to sign the reconciliation agreement.11 The Economic Situation in Gaza: Facts and Figures Is the Israeli and Egyptian blockade of Gaza causing consequences as dire as those described by the human rights organizations? U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in testimony before Congress on April 22, 2009, that the situation in Gaza is different from how it has been described. In response to a question by Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), Clinton said: "Congressman, the crossings are no longer completely closed. There are many items that are being transported through the crossings....We have looked at the lists and a lot of what has been said was not permitted to cross [into Gaza] is just not accurate."12 A survey by Israel's Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories presents the scope of connections between Israel and Gaza in 2009:13 Health: 10,544 patients and their companions left Gaza in 2009 for medical treatment in Israel. 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicines entered Gaza that year in coordination with the Palestinian Authority and international agencies. Israel helped the Palestinian Authority stem the spread of avian (bird) flu in Gaza; 44,500 doses of vaccine were sent to Gaza through the World Health Organization, and three patients left Gaza for medical care in Israel. In addition, two elevators were transferred to hospitals in Gaza, as well as mammogram equipment for breast cancer detection and a computerized CT system. Electricity: Israel continued to supply electricity to Gaza from its power plant in Ashkelon. In addition, 41 truckloads of equipment were transferred for the maintenance of the electrical system in Gaza. Between April and October 2009, Siemens carried out maintenance work on the power system in Gaza, to which more than 100 million liters of diesel fuel were delivered for its operation. Communications: 45 truckloads of communication equipment were sent to Gaza at the request of the Palestinian Authority. Water and sewage: 95 truckloads of equipment for water and sewage systems, as well as 3,720 tons of chloride for water purification, were transferred during 2009. Israel assisted the North Gaza Wastewater Treatment Plant Project by transferring 48 truckloads of equipment for the project. The private sector: 77 percent of the contents of trucks sent into Gaza in 2009 were for the private sector. 257 Palestinian businessmen exited Gaza to Israel, the West Bank, and abroad. 10,871 head of cattle were transferred to Gaza, mainly for the Ramadan and Eid al-Adha holidays. In preparation for winter, 3,607 tons of glass for windows was transferred to Gaza. Money: Over NIS 1.1 billion (approximately $300 million) was transferred to Gaza in 2009 to fund salaries and the activities of international organizations. In addition, NIS 40 million (approximately $10 million) in worn banknotes were replaced. In February 2010, Israel and the Palestinian Authority reached an agreement on the transfer of social security payments and pensions to beneficiaries in Gaza who have worked in Israel. The money is to be transferred to Palestinian banks in the West Bank, and the Palestinian Authority can then deliver the money to beneficiaries in Gaza. Humanitarian aid: 141,390 tons of humanitarian aid were transferred by the international community through Israel, including 115,043 tons of food and 2,990 tons of medicines and medical equipment. Entry of international organizations: 21,200 foreign staff members and over 400 diplomatic delegations entered Gaza in 2009. UNRWA: 3,282,000 liters of fuel and diesel were transferred for use by UNRWA. In addition, special equipment for summer camps, including swimming pools, ice cream machines, musical instruments, and sports equipment were transferred to UNRWA. Agricultural export: The export of flowers and strawberries was approved as part of a joint project with the government of the Netherlands. Since the beginning of the project, more than 7 million flowers and 54 tons of strawberries were exported. Leaving Gaza: As noted, 10,544 patients (and their companions) exited Gaza. 147 students exited Gaza for academic studies abroad, in response to requests made by the international community. 374 Christians exited Gaza to spend Christmas in Israel and Bethlehem, while 100 Christians exited Gaza to participate in the pope's visit to the Holy Land in May 2009. 17 representatives exited Gaza to participate in the Fatah General Convention in Bethlehem, and approval was given for players on the Palestinian soccer team to leave Gaza for training and friendship games in the West Bank and abroad.     According to the report of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, a total of 30,576 truckloads of humanitarian commodities passed from Israel to Gaza in 2009. In addition, the Crossings and Border Authority of Hamas also published a report detailing the traffic through the border crossings for 2009, showing that 63,480 people passed through the Rafah crossing to and from Egypt during the year.14 The Flow of Funds to Gaza under the Hamas Government The governor of the Central Bank of the Palestinian Authority, Jihad al-Wazir, reported that since June 2007 (the date of the Hamas military takeover of Gaza), overall monetary transfers to Gaza have totaled over $5 billion from governmental and extragovernmental sources.15 He was referring to the funds sent to pay the salaries of civil servants in Gaza, international organizations operating in Gaza such as UNRWA, and foreign communication networks that operate in the Strip. Al-Wazir confirmed that 56 percent of the PA budget is designated for Gaza. Mahmoud Abbas told the Saudi newspaper Al-Watan on December 31, 2009, that the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah transfers 58 percent of its budget to the Hamas government to pay its expenses for electricity and water, while the Hamas government collects taxes from the residents for the services that it receives for free. He stated that the import tunnels under the Gaza border provide all the consumer goods required in Gaza, except for iron and cement.16 Gaza receives additional aid funds directly from Iran and the Arab countries. The Hamas government's health minister, Bassam Naim, reported on March 21, 2010, that the Hamas government received a grant of $40 million from the Islamic Development Bank and the Qatar Red Crescent Society to purchase equipment for the hospitals in Gaza.17 In addition, the Hamas government also benefits from aid that is given on the purchase of goods and services for Gaza. Until November 20, 2009, the European Union paid the cost of industrial diesel fuel to operate Gaza's power plant, an amount estimated at NIS 50 million per month (over $13 million), for a total exceeding $156 million per year.18 The Hamas government also receives funds to cover the cost of electricity that is supplied by Israel.19 Smuggling Tunnels or Import Routes from Egypt? "Smuggling" is not the correct word to describe the network of tunnels along Gaza's border with Egypt. Whereas smuggling connotes illegal activity carried out clandestinely, the Palestinian tunnel network is out in the open and extends the whole length of the border. The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC) published an abstract in May 2009 of an investigative article that appeared on the Al Arabiya network which presents the method of operation of the tunnels on the Gaza-Egypt border. The following are the main points as described on the ITIC website:       The reporter for the Al Arabiya network, Waal Issam, toured Egyptian Rafah, in the market where goods sent to Gaza through the tunnels are sold. The report said that the market is the major source of the fuel supply to Gaza. Some 10,000 people work in the "tunnel industry" on a daily basis. The value of the trade via the tunnels is estimated at approximately $200 million annually. Along the border, which is some 13 kilometers long, nearly 800 tunnels have been excavated. According to the report, most of the tunnels that were attacked during Operation Cast Lead have been reconstructed. The smugglers who were interviewed claimed that a tunnel can be built nowadays in 10-15 days. One of the smugglers reported that the tunnels end in buildings, groves, chicken coops, etc.20 According to a report by Palestinian researcher Ghazi al-Surani from December 2008, the tunnel network has brought about an increase in imports from Egypt to Gaza from $30 million annually during the years 1994-2006 to more than $650 million annually.21 Ziad Jarghoun reported in a study of the Gaza tunnels that in December 2008, the Rafah municipality and the security forces stopped the excavation of new tunnels because there were too many. In addition, he said the price of diesel fuel and gasoline, delivered to Gaza through pipes from Egypt, is half that of the price in Israel.22 The Palestinian tunnels also serve as a pipeline for the import of cement and iron - items barred from entering Gaza via Israel. On February 11, 2010, the Palestinian news agency qudsnet.com reported a drop in the price of cement imported via the tunnels. The lower price stems from an increase in the import of cement via the tunnels. One tunnel owner said he is capable of transferring more than 60 tons of cement a day, but that most tunnel owners are no longer bringing in cement, preferring to concentrate on importing iron. Issam Sha'ath, owner of Sha'ath Construction Equipment, explained that cement prices fell after some 80 percent of tunnel owners began to import cement, as compared to 30 percent in the past.23 In February 2010, the Palestinian media reported a drop in the price of construction materials in recent months along with a rise in activity in the building industry. Farid Zakout, director of the Gaza Construction Association, said in an interview with the Palestinian newspaper Al-Ayyam that tunnel owners in Rafah on the Egyptian border have been cutting back on the transfer of consumer goods in light of the volume of merchandise flooding the markets in Gaza, and are looking instead to increase the import of cement and iron. This trend has led, in his view, to a drop in the price of both these items on the local markets. He added that close to one-third of activity in the construction industry - including the manufacture of cinder blocks, floor tiles, and cement - has returned to normal levels during the past two months. Zakout noted further that the price of a ton of cement now stands at NIS 800 as opposed to NIS 1,200 two months ago, and over NIS 3,000 more than a year ago. The renewed surge in construction activity has fostered a rise of 25 percent in the number of those employed in the industry.24 The rise in imports from Egypt via the Rafah tunnels has led to a situation where a number of tunnels have been closed due to the flooding of the Gaza market with imported goods. "Abu Ahmed," who operates a tunnel on the Egyptian border, stated in this vein that tunnel owners are now trying to sell them at low cost since the income from operating them has plummeted from $7,000 per ton of merchandise to only $100. Moreover, he added, the number of tunnels in operation has plunged to just 200 from a peak of 1,200, with the total number of workers in the tunnels declining greatly from 12,000 to only 1,000.25 The Christian Science Monitor, relying on conversations with businessmen in Gaza, reports that the Hamas government is benefiting financially from the "blockade" by virtue of its control of the tunnels on the Egyptian border, through a 14.5 percent value-added tax on goods that pass through the tunnels (with an even higher levy on cigarettes), as well as money changing activities and tax revenues. The vast sums of money flowing into Hamas' treasury are being used for the purchase of land and buildings throughout Gaza.26 In testimony before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee on February 25, 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked: "Much of the material that gets in to Gaza, which still comes through the tunnels - through smuggling - actually is taxed by Hamas, which then provides Hamas with the money that they use to buy arms and other material that is used against Israel."27 In an interview with the French newspaper Le Monde on October 10, 2009, Bassem Khoury, minister of national economy for the Palestinian Authority, offered this description: The shelves of the stores are full, and you can find anything you want if you can pay the price. The cost of real estate has tripled as a result of the tunnel economy. Hamas is benefiting from the situation, since the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah is continuing to pay the salaries of civil servants in Gaza and this is half of our budget. Then these employees buy goods that come in by way of the tunnels, on which Hamas gets paid a tax. The result: the Palestinian Authority's economy is cut off from the VAT revenues that were previously collected [by Israel] for goods imported into Gaza, while Hamas doesn't know what to do with its money. Khoury emphasized that "taxpayers in Europe should know that as a result of this system their money ends up in Hamas' pocket." He questioned the desire of both Israel and Egypt to combat the smuggling, arguing that everything is done to maintain a status quo of sorts, so long as Hamas is not too strong militarily.28 Similar stories could be found elsewhere in the reports of Western newsmen who actually visited Gaza. Thus, on June 3, 2010, Janine Zacharia of the Washington Post wrote: "If you walk down Gaza City's main thoroughfare - Salah al-Din Street - grocery stores are stocked wall-too-wall with everything from fresh Israeli yogurts and hummus to Cocoa  Puffs smuggled in from Egypt. Pharmacies look as well-supplied as a typical Rite Aid in the United States."29 The Palestinian Ma'an News Agency also stated on February 19, 2010, that "Gaza markets are saturated with goods."30 From these accounts, which are corroborated by a wealth of additional material from Palestinian sources on tunnel activity, there appears to be an established economic system of Palestinian imports from Egypt via hundreds of tunnels operating under the control of a Hamas government that grants approval for operating them and collects taxes from their owners. Claims that child labor is rampant in the tunnels are apparently unsubstantiated, however. Based on figures of the Palestinian human rights organization Al Mezan, as of November 2, 2009, 120 Palestinians have been killed in the tunnels and only four of them were under the age of 18.31 The tunnel network on the Gaza border also serves the operational needs of Hamas and other Palestinian terror organizations, including those identified with al-Qaeda. The Israel Security Agency reported in December 2008 that the tunnel network is used for "smuggling in weapons, in particular standard-grade, high-quality weapons such as the Grad rockets that were fired at Ashkelon...; smuggling operatives out for training abroad, primarily in Syria and Iran; bringing in combat experts, trainers, and ‘engineers'; and bringing back to Gaza ‘graduates' of military training, who have completed their instruction abroad."32 The tunnel network also serves such criminal purposes as drug running33 and trafficking in young women. In an article published on December 28, 2009, in the Kuwaiti newspaper Awan, journalist Shima Yusuf reported on the phenomenon of "importing" minor girls from Egypt and selling them into prostitution in Gaza, supposedly for purposes of marriage or domestic work. A report by UNICEF confirmed the selling of young Egyptian girls from impoverished villages to wealthy older men in other Arab states.34 A Double Standard on Human Rights The position of the human rights organizations, which paint an exaggerated picture of the effects of the siege, is marred by a double standard. On the one hand, they argue vehemently that Israel is still an occupying power and must therefore see to the "security and welfare of the residents of Gaza"; yet on the other hand, the welfare and security of Gaza's residents have been severely harmed by the Hamas regime, with its gradual imposition of Islamic law while violently suppressing the opposition. The human rights organizations demand that Israel act according to a higher moral standard than that required of other states. According to their logic, Israel is obligated to help an enemy entity that is attacking it. If this were true, the United States would have a duty to extend assistance to villages in Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban fighters who are attacking coalition forces. While these organizations insist that Israel open its borders to an enemy entity, these same groups refrain from presenting similar demands to Egypt, which borders Gaza but does not define the Hamas government as an enemy entity. Yet Egypt strenuously rejects the demand by Hamas and the Arab states to open its border with Gaza. Egypt's use of restrictions on the passage of goods and people across the border is a form of leverage, intended to push Hamas into accepting Egypt's terms for opening the border on the basis of the 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access. • This article was first published  by The Jerusalem Viewpoints; No. 577   May-June 2010 *     *     * Notes 1. Neil MacFarquhar, "UN's Gaza Refugee Director Criticizes Israel and Hamas," New York Times, February 6, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/world/middleeast/06nationsweb.html 2. "Locked In: The Humanitarian Impact of Two Years of Blockade on the Gaza Strip," UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, August 2009. 3. "Ron Paul: U.S. Shouldn't Support Israel's Gaza Blockade," Fox News, June 3, 2010, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF3w3fAOUWk 4. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFAHeb/MFAArchive/2004/The%20disengagement%20plan180404 5. http://reut-institute.org/he/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=1144 6. http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3451070,00.html 7. http://www.btselem.org/Hebrew/Gaza_Strip/20061116_Gaza_Brief.asp     Israel continues to retain complete and exclusive control over the airspace and territorial water of Gaza. Israel controls the population registry of Gaza and the West Bank; it prevents the movement of people between the two parts of Palestinian territory and prevents the reunification of families. Israel controls traffic to and from Gaza, by dint of its total control over all the crossings between Gaza and Israel, and its ability to cause the closing of the Rafah crossing from Gaza to Egypt whenever it wishes to do so. Israeli military forces frequently take action deep inside Gaza. Israel has almost absolute control over the import and export of goods to and from Gaza. Israel has control of almost all aspects of the taxation system of Gaza. 8. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/UNFFMGC_Report.pdf      Amnesty International calls the disengagement a "misrepresentation," making the following arguments: The removal of Israeli settlements has not released the Gaza Strip from Israel's grip. Israeli forces remain in effective control of the Gaza Strip, controlling all points of entry and exit for people and goods, as well as Gaza's territorial waters and airspace. Israel does not allow the Gaza Strip to have a seaport. It put the airport in Gaza out of use in 2001. It only allows goods to enter or leave Gaza via Israel. The Israeli authorities also declared that they have the right to enter Gaza militarily at any time; they did so within six months of the removal of settlements. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE15/093/2006/en/9dc8177a-d3cf-11dd-8743-d305bea2b2c7/mde150932006en.html      Human Rights Watch makes similar arguments: "Under international humanitarian law (IHL), Gaza remains occupied, and Israel retains its responsibilities for the welfare of Gaza residents. Israel maintains effective control over Gaza by regulating movement in and out of the Strip as well as the airspace, sea space, public utilities and population registry. In addition, Israel declared the right to re-enter Gaza militarily at any time." http://www.hrw.org/en/world-report-2006/israeloccupied-palestinian-territories-opt      In a review in May 2010, Human Rights Watch states that "Occupying powers have a duty to ensure the security and well-being of the civilian population in areas under their control....These obligations also apply to specific Israeli forces wherever in Gaza they exercise effective control." http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0510webwcover_0.pdf 9. The main accusation leveled at Israel in its policy toward Gaza focuses on the ramifications of the "blockade" of the Palestinian residents, their social and economic welfare, their health, and their movement to and from Gaza. A formal communiqué published by B'Tselem on December 27, 2009, described the situation of Gaza: In June 2007, after Hamas took control of Gaza, Israel closed all the crossings between it and Gaza. The Rafah crossing, controlled by Egypt, remains closed most of the time, in part due to indirect pressure by Israel and the United States on Egypt. Since then, Israel has almost totally forbidden the export of goods and has limited imports to what it classifies as "humanitarian goods." The siege has led to economic collapse, isolating one and a half million Gazans from the outside world and reducing most of them to poverty and a life of unemployment, extremism and hopelessness. 80 percent of the population is now living under the poverty line; 1.1 million rely on aid from international organizations to survive. Some 20,000 Gazans are still homeless, their houses having been destroyed or severely damaged during Operation Cast Lead, and they are unable to rebuild them because Israel forbids building materials to enter Gaza, a prohibition that prevents the rehabilitation of the entire Strip. http://www.btselem.org/english/press_releases/20091227.asp      One year after Operation Cast Lead, B'Tselem is today launching a public campaign demanding that Israel lift its siege on Gaza. This is necessary in order to rehabilitate Gaza from the destruction wrought by the hostilities. As part of the campaign, the organization is releasing a new animated short film by Alon Simone. The film shows how goods that are forbidden entry into Gaza from Israel enter from Egypt through tunnels, a process that enriches Hamas, which collects taxes on the goods. Through the film, B'Tselem hopes to demonstrate the absurdity of the Israeli siege policy: while seeking to topple the Hamas government, Israel is gravely harming Gaza's million and a half residents, and is achieving the opposite outcome. A similar description appears in a survey published by Amnesty International in January 2010, entitled, "Suffocating: The Gaza Strip under Israeli Blockade": More than 1.4 million Palestinian men, women, and children are trapped in Gaza. Their daily lives - in an area of land just 40 kilometers long and 9.5 kilometers wide - are marked by power shortages, little or no running water of poor quality and deteriorating health care. Mass unemployment, extreme poverty, and food insecurity are both exacerbated and deepened by the impact of the Israeli blockade.      Since the blockade of Gaza was brought into force in June 2007, the five Israeli-controlled crossings between Gaza and Israel or the West Bank have been kept closed. The one other land crossing at Rafah, on the border between Gaza and Egypt, is controlled by the Egyptian authorities and kept shut most of the time. The closures prevent the movement of Palestinians into and out of Gaza in all but a handful of exceptional humanitarian cases.      The blockade prohibits exports and restricts the entry of basic goods, including food and fuel. Much of the available food is provided by the UN and other aid agencies, or smuggled in through tunnels running under the Egypt-Gaza border and then sold at exorbitantly high prices to Gaza's beleaguered residents. The blockade also often prevents people from receiving necessary, urgent medical care, and from pursuing their livelihoods....The situation is made all the worse by the Egyptian government's continued general closure of the Rafah crossing and, most recently, by its construction of a steel wall along the border at Rafah to disrupt the cross-border smuggling that has become Gaza's lifeline. However, as the occupying power, it is Israel that bears the foremost responsibility for ensuring the welfare of the inhabitants of Gaza. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE15/002/2010/en/c8e6742a-b52a-4c70-b641-986de2db878a/mde150022010en.pdf Human Rights Watch believes that the ramifications of the blockade of Gaza are particularly severe. In a May 2010 survey, Human Rights Watch states that "Israel's continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and other necessities, constitutes a form of collective punishment in violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0510webwcover_0.pdf 10. http://www.ahram.org.eg/Archive/2008/12/20/FRON1.HTM At the end of 2009, Egypt began to build a steel fence along its border with Gaza. In light of criticism from the Hamas government, which demanded that the border with Egypt be opened officially and completely, Dr. Mufid Shihab, the Egyptian minister of legal and parliamentary affairs, explained his government's policy to the People's Council. After detailing the security justifications for building the steel fence - namely, to prevent the smuggling of weapons and terrorists across the border - Shihab addressed the diplomatic aspects that are of supreme importance to the Egyptians. In his words: Egypt wants to pull the rug out from under various Israeli excuses and allegations that the tunnels are used to smuggle weapons and other illegal substances and would like to focus the attention of the international community on important and significant facts that will serve the cause of the Palestinian people. Gaza is occupied territory and the unilateral disengagement by Israel from the Gaza Strip did not result in liberation of the sector from occupation, as some believe or think. That is because the West Bank and Gaza and East Jerusalem are all one single geographic unit and cannot be dealt with in a piecemeal fashion; that would be regarded as a death blow to their unity.       There is no doubt that Israel is striving with all its might to push the population of Gaza into the Sinai toward the eastern border of Egypt so as to be able to evade its legal obligations and international responsibilities for Gaza in accordance with the provisions of international law. As an occupation force, it bears the burden of care and administration of Gaza as well as the responsibility for the life and security of the areas under its occupation and for the people living there. If Israel succeeds in realizing its goals, it would not only be its salvation from the burden of Gaza and its people, but it also would eradicate the Palestinian cause from the roots. http://www6.mashy.com/newsroom/egypt/newslist/---------368 The newspaper Al-Ahram quotes extensively from his statements on January 3, 2010, in which Shihab reveals the strategic and tactical considerations behind Egypt's policy toward Gaza and Israel:           Gaza remains under occupation according to the Hague Convention of 1907, and has not been liberated [by the disengagement]. Israel controls everything on land, crossings and entry and exit traffic. However, those who are seeking to take revenge on their own country [allusion to Hamas], and turn a blind eye to the root of the problem of those who are in control of Gaza [Hamas] and refuse to reconcile with their compatriots [Fatah], they are the real cause [for the blockade]. Because the crossing points were all open even during the Hamas coup against the legitimate authority in July 2007. It is Hamas that is strangling the people of Gaza with the help of Israel. Yet Egypt has not been negligent in its role and has not stopped its aid through the Rafah crossing. The goods pile up in Gaza, both through the crossing and even through the tunnels, while Hamas has imposed taxes and customs duties on everything that is smuggled and takes the money for themselves.                Why hasn't the Rafah crossing been opened throughout the period of the blockade of Gaza? What interest does Egypt have in keeping the crossing closed?                The answers are: The Hamas coup against the Palestinian Authority is the reason behind the closing of all border crossings, including the Rafah crossing. Egypt has adhered to a formal decision not to open the crossing due to the absence of a legitimate governmental authority and out of its obligation to the agreement regulating the crossings from 2005, so as to preserve the unity of the Palestinian territories and to avoid giving Israel a pretext to evade its commitments to Gaza as an occupying power. To put a stop to the Israeli ambitions and plans to separate between Gaza and the rest of the territory of Palestine - the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Rafah crossing is for [the transfer of] people and not for goods. Egypt is pressing for the continued opening of other crossings to Gaza controlled by Israel with which Egypt has no connection, namely: Karam Abu Salem [Kerem Shalom], Kissufim and Erez, Sufa and Karni and Nahal Oz. [Egyptian] aid through the Rafah crossing never stopped, and it provides all facilitation for the relief convoys, which scrupulously abide by the mechanisms and methods determined by Egypt. The goal of the steps taken by Egypt is to ensure our own interests and those of our citizens against dangers, but clearly and necessarily against the interests of Israel, which wishes to push [out] the people of Gaza and to settle them in the Sinai so that they will become refugees like the others who are scattered in a number of Arab countries, and thus the [Palestinian] problem will be ended forever. http://www.ahram.org.eg/33/2010/01/02/25/1893.aspx 11. http://dostor.org/ar/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=34665Itemid=34, Al-Dustur (Jordan), October 11, 2009. 12. http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/111/48841.pdf 13. http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/EDF74042-0151-4DDD-88E3-64C4F19A3B10/0/GazaHumanitarianAssist2009.pps http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2010/Increased_humanitarian_aid_Gaza_after_IDF_operation_Jan_2009 14. The Kerem Shalom crossing: During 2009, 15,531 truckloads entered for the private sector and 3,033 truckloads of aid.      The Erez crossing (Beit Hanun): This crossing was opened continuously by Israel for the movement of people, including the sick, UNRWA officials, and visitors, the entry of prisoners released by Israel, and foreign delegations. 10,500 people exited Gaza and 10,800 entered (total traffic: 21,300). 5,300 patients exited for medical treatment in Israel and 5,055 returned. 710 left to work and 910 returned. 854 exited for studies and 580 returned. 300 exited for the purpose of interviews and 366 returned. Among Israeli Arabs who entered Gaza to visit, 302 entered and 309 exited, and for other purposes, 66 exited and 87 entered. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=28      Omar a-Nassar, director of public relations for the Hamas government's Ministry of Health, reported (January 31, 2010) that in 2009, 11,608 patients were sent to receive medical treatment outside the Health Ministry services in Gaza. He claimed that Israel refused to grant entry to 150 patients that year. http://www.maannews.net/arb/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=258027&MARK=%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B6      The Palestinian Ministry of Health published figures (December 15, 2009) on the number of Palestinian patients who left Gaza for treatment during the period August-November 2009. According to these figures, 3,532 patients were sent for medical treatment, 1,067 to hospitals in Jerusalem, 588 to hospitals elsewhere in Israel, 543 to hospitals in Egypt, 214 to hospitals in Jordan, 584 to hospitals in the West Bank, and 536 were referred for treatment in hospitals in Gaza. The overall cost of medical treatment was NIS 30 million. http://www1.wafa.ps/arabic/index.php?action=detail&id=58807      Regarding the operation of the crossings at Kerem Shalom and Erez, the reports published by the Hamas government's Crossings and Border Authority show that: May 3, 2010      Erez crossing: 171 people left Gaza for Israel, 140 of whom were Gaza residents, 22 foreign residents, and 9 Israeli Arabs. 49 exited for medical treatment, 51 as companions of patients, 19 for work, 2 for personal visits, 7 for meetings, 3 for business, 8 for interviews, and 1 for an extended stay in Israel. 124 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 82 were Gaza residents, 32 foreign residents, and 10 Israeli Arabs. 30 returned from medical treatment, 31 as companions of patients, 6 for work, 3 for personal visits, 2 for meetings, 1 for business, and 1 for studies. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=73      Kerem Shalom crossing: 133 trucks entered, including 21 carrying humanitarian aid from international organizations, 17 truckloads of sugar and engineering equipment for UNRWA, and 4 sent by the United Nations World Food Program. 94 trucks were carrying fruit, milk products, frozen foods, clothes, shoes, water coolers, generators, water pipes, sugar, tehina, olives, nylon, glass, devices against agricultural pests, and cleaning materials. 18 trucks carried fuel, of which 8 transferred 312,384 liters of industrial diesel fuel to the power plant in Gaza and 10 trucks delivered 194,700 tons of cooking gas. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=72 May 2, 2010      Erez crossing: 220 people left Gaza for Israel, 140 of whom were Gaza residents, 64 foreign residents, and 16 Israeli Arabs. 40 exited for medical treatment, 49 as companions of patients, 7 for personal visits, 25 for work, 7 for meetings, 4 for business, 5 for other purposes. 119 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 85 were Gaza residents, 26 foreign residents, and 8 Israeli Arabs. 33 returned from medical treatment, 33 as companions of patients, 7 for work, 4 for personal visits, 1 due to a death, 1 for business, and 6 for other purposes. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=65      Kerem Shalom crossing: 133 trucks entered, including 6 carrying humanitarian aid from international organizations, 3 truckloads of sugar and engineering equipment for UNRWA, and 3 sent by the United Nations World Food Program. The trucks were carrying fruit, milk products, frozen foods, clothes, shoes, water coolers, generators, water pipes, sugar, tehina, olives, nylon, glass, devices against agricultural pests, and cleaning materials. In addition, approximately 477,000 liters of industrial diesel fuel were delivered to the power plant in Gaza and 10 trucks delivered 195,000 tons of cooking gas. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=66 April 30, 2010      30 people left Gaza for Israel, 15 of whom were Gaza residents, 13 foreign residents, and 2 Israeli Arabs. 4 exited for medical treatment, 4 as companions of patients, 5 for work, 1 for a personal visit, and 1 for an extended stay (in Israel or the West Bank). 68 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 46 were Gaza residents, 9 foreign residents, and 13 Israeli Arabs. 17 returned from medical treatment, 15 as companions of patients, 11 for work, 1 for a personal visit, 1 for business, and 1 due to a death. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=59 April 29, 2010      Erez crossing: 174 people left Gaza for Israel, 68 of whom were Gaza residents, 97 foreign residents, and 9 Israeli Arabs. 26 exited for medical treatment, 29 as companions of patients, 6 for work, 3 for personal visits, 3 for interviews, and 2 for business. 176 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 128 were Gaza residents, 42 foreign residents, and 6 Israeli Arabs. 47 returned from medical treatment, 48 as companions of patients, 15 for work, 4 for personal visits, 3 for meetings, 7 for business, 1 for an interview, and 3 prisoners who were released. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=59      Kerem Shalom crossing: 151 trucks entered, including 19 carrying humanitarian aid from international organizations, 17 truckloads of sugar and engineering equipment for UNRWA, and 2 sent by the United Nations World Food Program. 115 trucks were carrying fruit, milk products, frozen foods, clothes, shoes, water coolers, generators, water pipes, sugar, tehina, olives, nylon, glass, devices against agricultural pests, and cleaning materials. In addition, 17 trucks were carrying fuels. 9 trucks delivered 362,044 liters of industrial diesel fuel to the power plant in Gaza and 8 trucks delivered 174,200 tons of cooking gas. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=60 April 28, 2010      Erez crossing: 133 people left Gaza for Israel, 81 of whom were Gaza residents, 43 foreign residents, and 9 Israeli Arabs. 30 exited for medical treatment, 30 as companions of patients, 14 for work, 3 for interviews, and 3 for extended stay (in Israel or the West Bank). 135 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 78 were Gaza residents, 46 foreign residents, and 11 Israeli Arabs. 29 returned from medical treatment, 26 as companions of patients, 14 for work, 3 for personal visits, 3 for business, and 3 for interviews. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=59      Kerem Shalom crossing: 148 trucks entered, including 15 carrying humanitarian aid from international organizations, 13 truckloads of sugar and engineering equipment for UNRWA, 1 truck sent by the Anera relief organization, and 1 sent by the Islamic Relief Worldwide organization. 116 trucks were carrying fruit, milk products, frozen foods, clothes, shoes, water coolers, generators, water pipes, sugar, tehina, olives, nylon, glass, devices against agricultural pests, and cleaning materials. In addition, 17 trucks were carrying fuels. 7 trucks delivered 307,415 liters of industrial diesel fuel to the power plant in Gaza and 10 trucks delivered 199,020 tons of cooking gas. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=60 April 27, 2010      Erez crossing: 179 people left Gaza for Israel, 130 of whom were Gaza residents, 48 foreign residents, and 1 Israeli Arab. 47 exited for medical treatment, 47 as companions of patients, 17 for work, 3 for personal visits, 2 for meetings, and 3 for extended stay (in Israel or the West Bank), 5 for business, and 6 for interviews. 164 people entered Gaza from Israel, of whom 97 were Gaza residents, 60 foreign residents, and 7 Israeli Arabs. 40 returned from medical treatment, 32 as companions of patients, 6 for work, 2 for personal visits, 1 due to a death, 4 for business, 5 for interviews, and 7 prisoners who were released. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=59      Kerem Shalom crossing: 115 trucks entered, including 12 carrying humanitarian aid from international organizations, 9 truckloads of sugar and engineering equipment for UNRWA, 2 sent by the United Nations World Food Program, and 1 sent by the Islamic Relief Worldwide organization. 90 trucks were carrying fruit, milk products, frozen foods, clothes, shoes, water coolers, generators, water pipes, sugar, tehina, olives, nylon, glass, devices against agricultural pests, and cleaning materials. In addition, 13 trucks were carrying fuels. 5 trucks delivered 218,401 liters of industrial diesel fuel to the power plant in Gaza and 8 trucks delivered 175,100 tons of cooking gas. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=60      Another report by the Crossings and Border Authority of the Hamas government details the traffic through the Rafah crossing in 2009, as itemized below: http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=28 http://www.pmo.gov.ps/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=310:2010-01-03-07-49-11 &catid=25:news&Itemid=67      From January 1, 2009, to February 5, 2009, the Rafah crossing was opened to the passage of the wounded during the period of Operation Cast Lead.      From January 1, 2009, to February 4, 2009, aid was transferred from the Egyptian side that included foodstuffs, prefabricated rooms (apparently caravans), medications and medical equipment, ambulances, and oxygen tanks.      From January 1, 2009, to March 15, 2009, the crossing was opened to traffic by medical delegations, journalists, parliamentary delegations, municipal leaders, solidarity missions, and humanitarian aid delegations.      On March 9, 2010, the first Orek Ha-Hayim delegation arrived accompanied by a convoy of aid trucks from Libya.      On May 28, 2009, a delegation of Al-Amal arrived.      On July 15, 2009, the second Orek Ha-Hayim delegation arrived.      On November 11, 2009, the Miles of Smiles delegation arrived.      On December 30, 2009, part of the Freedom Convoy arrived in Gaza.      According to the records of the Hamas government, the Rafah crossing was opened officially by Egyptian authorities 12 times in 2009 - of these, 7 times for 23 days - to allow the residents to exit. 31,431 Palestinian residents of Gaza left through the Rafah crossing and 32,049 entered (total - 63,480). These figures include those who went on pilgrimage to Mecca. It should be noted that the Rafah crossing was opened frequently - more than the 7 official times - for the exit and entry of Hamas government officials, the entry of international delegations, the return of patients from medical treatment abroad, and so on.      A breakdown by month of the passage of people to and from Gaza through the Rafah crossing in 2009 was as follows:      January (the period of Operation Cast Lead) - 3,247; February - 3,589; March - 3,500; April - 3,360; May - 3,385; June - 5,644; July - 1,305; August - 11,910 (including 6,630 on pilgrimage to Mecca); September - 7,812; October - 1,767; November - 8,606 plus 2,191 on pilgrimage to Mecca ("‘Umrah"); December - 6,706. http://www.maannews.net/ARB/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=251183      Following are figures on the passage of people to and from Gaza through the Rafah crossing between 2006-2008: January-June (until the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit) - 38,805 people. July 2006-June 2007 (until the Hamas military takeover of Gaza) - 142,000 people (75,000 exited and 67,000 entered). July 2007-June 2008 (until the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas went into effect) - 5,537 people. July 2008-June 2009 - 31,900 people. Total for 2009 - 63,480 people. http://www.maannews.net/ARB/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=251183      The Government Committee to Break the Blockade, which operates in the name of the Hamas government, reported on January 24, 2010, that during Operation Cast Lead, dozens of international and Arab delegations came to Gaza to deliver food and medical aid. After the military operation, the committee reported, solidarity delegations came to Gaza from the following countries: Britain, Scotland, Greece, Turkey, France, Spain, Malaysia, Italy, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. Medical aid delegations arrived from Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Sudan, Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia, France, Italy, Greece, Scotland, Spain, and Britain. Five convoys that came to Gaza in 2009 brought truckloads of medical equipment and food and entered with 721 foreign and Arab activists. Some of the aid delegations set up field hospitals in various places throughout Gaza. http://www.pmo.gov.ps/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=351:2010-02-15-11-21-28 &catid=49:2009-04-22-11-37-41&Itemid=60      The exiting of Gaza is regulated by coordination between the Hamas authorities and the Egyptian government. Gaza residents who apply to leave Gaza are registered at the Interior Ministry of the Hamas government and wait for approval by the Egyptian authorities and for coordination of their passage across the border, which Egypt consistently defines as "an unofficial opening" of the Rafah border crossing. There is no discrepancy between the number of Gaza residents who apply to exit and the number who actually do exit.      For example, on January 3, 2010, the spokesman for the Hamas government's Interior Ministry, Ihab al-Ghussein, reported that the number of Palestinians who had applied to the ministry to leave Gaza was 6,000, of whom 600 were patients. http://www.pmo.gov.ps/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=310:2010-01-03-07-49-11 &catid=25:news&Itemid=67. The Crossings and Border Authority of the Hamas government reported that on January 3, 2010, the Rafah crossing was opened for four consecutive days, during which 3,356 people exited Gaza (including students and patients) and 1,211 entered. On March 1, 2010, the Rafah crossing was opened for five consecutive days, during which 4,378 people exited Gaza (including students and patients) and 833 returned. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=36. In summary, in January 2010, 6,000 applications to exit Gaza were registered and within two months, 7,734 Palestinians exited Gaza. The delay in their departure stemmed exclusively and solely from considerations relating to Egypt's policy. Israel, as stated, has no influence on the policy of opening the Rafah crossing, which connects Egypt and Gaza, nor on approving those who pass through, and Egypt does not ask for Israeli approval in this matter.      Even during the periods when the Rafah crossing was officially "closed," according to the Hamas government's version, it was opened for two days a week on Wednesdays and Thursdays so that Palestinians could return to Gaza, among them patients after medical treatment. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=84. As for routine activity in the Rafah crossing on the days on which it was officially "closed," one can see from the announcements of the Crossings and Border Authority of the Hamas government that this crossing was opened "intermittently" not only on Wednesdays and Thursdays of every week for the entry and exit of Palestinians, but also on other days of the week:      May 10, 2010: 1 Palestinian exited Gaza for Egypt in coordination with the Egyptian authorities and 3 returned to Gaza. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=84      May 5, 2010: 167 Palestinians returned to Gaza through the Rafah crossing, including patients who had received medical treatment. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=79; http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=76      May 4, 2010: 8 Palestinians exited Gaza through the Rafah crossing after coordination with the Egyptian authorities. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=75      May 3, 2010: 2 Palestinians returned to Gaza through the Rafah crossing. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=74      May 2, 2010: 6 members of a delegation from Kuwait entered Gaza through the Rafah crossing. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=75      April 30, 2010: 20 entered Gaza through the Rafah crossing. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=75      April 29, 2010: 151 Palestinians, including patients who had received medical treatment, returned to Gaza through the Rafah crossing, and 4 exited Gaza through the crossing after coordination with the Egyptian authorities. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=75      April 28, 2010: 145 Palestinians, including patients who had received medical treatment, returned to Gaza through the Rafah crossing. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=75      April 27, 2010: 3 Palestinians returned to Gaza through the Rafah crossing. http://www.bca.gov.ps/newsdetails2.aspx?NID=49 15. http://www.alaahd.com/arabic/?action=detail&id=38998 16. Al-Watan (Saudi Arabia), December 31, 2009. 17. http://www.moh.gov.ps/newsite/ar/index.php?action=view&page=news&id=1397 18. http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2009/04-2010.html 19. Avi Trengo, a researcher of the Palestinian economy, explained on the Ynet website (February 3, 2010) the background to the power struggles between the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah and the Hamas government:                 Two years ago, the World Bank ordered him [PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad] to act not only to cut salaries in the Palestinian Authority (so far, no results) but also to reduce the number-two item on the budget of public expenditure: payments from the Palestinian Authority to cover the electricity and water bills that the PA residents refuse to pay. (The cumulative debt of Gaza residents for electricity has reached $2.7 billion.) This budgetary item, which constitutes about 8% of the PA budget, is being concealed by Fayyad under a clause entitled "net loans."      Fayyad ostensibly charges the local authorities for the electricity supplied by Israel to the residents of every town, but immediately "lends" them the money. In this way, they appear as a debt to the PA Finance Ministry. Two years ago he tried to require the PA citizens to present receipts for the payment of electricity bills when they receive their government pensions. Immediately the PA "civil service sector" began a warning strike, and Fayyad took the hint and refrained from demanding payment of electricity bills.      Several months ago Fayyad came up with an original tactic: since he transfers very large amounts of money as salaries to tens of thousands of security-force workers who have not been functioning since the Hamas takeover of Gaza, he raised their salary by 4 percent - and even received that funding from the European Union - but at the same time he deducted a similar amount from their wages "for electricity bills." Everyone was happy until the Hamas authorities learned of it. They saw it as a financial blow to their government, and in response they stopped transferring to the Palestinian Oil Authority the payments that the Gaza Electric Company collects from the residents who do pay their bills. Hence the current fuel crisis in the Palestinian Authority. http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/1,7340,L-3843817,00.html 20. http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/Hebrew/heb_n/html/ipc_031.htm Ghazi al-Surani, a Palestinian researcher and one of the heads of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, published (on the website Cana'an, issue 1738) a comprehensive study of the tunnel industry on the Gaza-Egypt border. The highlights of the study were: The number of tunnels has risen from 20 in mid-2007 (the date of the Hamas military takeover) to nearly 500 in November 2008.The cost of building a tunnel ranges from $20,000 to $100,000, depending on its length. The tunnels were excavated in a 4-kilometer area between Tel Za'atar and the Al-Brazil and Al-Abor neighborhoods, because of the soft soil in those zones. In operating the tunnels there is cooperation with the Egyptian security forces. Hamas controls most of the tunnels and grants licenses to them through the Rafah municipality. A wide range of commodities flow through the tunnels, including: diesel fuel, gasoline, auto parts, sheep, calves, cigarettes, Viagra tablets, gold, and hundreds of other goods, in addition to the movement of people to and from Gaza. The present situation causes much damage to the local manufacturing sector in Gaza because of, on the one hand, the high cost of the raw materials that are brought in, and on the other, the flooding of the market by commodities sent through the tunnels. The tunnel network has brought about an increase in imports from Egypt to the Gaza Strip, from $30 million annually during the years 1994-2006 to more than $650 million annually, and it provides employment to thousands of Palestinians. The agencies that are connected with operating the tunnels reap huge profits, and they are the ones responsible for the black market and the skyrocketing prices. http://www.ahewar.org/debat/show.art.asp?aid=156356 Ziad Jarghoun, a member of the central committee of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, also published a comprehensive study of the tunnels on the Gaza-Egypt border (December 13, 2008). Its highlights: The tunnels are located on an 8-kilometer stretch along the 13-kilometer border between Gaza and Egypt, extending from the area of Tel Zagreb in the west to the edge of Al-Garadat in the east. The soil in this area is suited to digging tunnels. Some 800 tunnels are either in operation or under construction. The city of Rafah, which is administered by Hamas people, supervises the tunnels along with the national security forces that are deployed along the border. The object of this supervision is to collect taxes. In December 2008 the Rafah municipality and the security forces stopped the excavation of new tunnels because there were too many. Every tunnel has 15-20 workers working in shifts, and every shift has 6-8 workers. The length of a tunnel ranges from 300 to 1,500 meters, and its depth from 8 to 30 meters. There are tunnels that were excavated one above the other at different depths (8 meters, 15 meters, and 20 meters). The cost of building a tunnel is $70-$100,000 and even more. Sometimes a tunnel is run by several partners. The partners sign a contract in a lawyer's office, and the agreement states the number of shares held by each partner and how the shareowners will split the profits. The opening of the tunnel on the Egyptian side is called "the eye of the tunnel" and the supervisor of the opening is called "Amin." He is usually an Egyptian citizen and one of the residents of Egyptian Rafah. He receives half of the profits and his job is to guard the site and unload the goods into the tunnel. The monthly import through the tunnels is estimated at $35-$40 million, and the annual profits to tunnel owners are estimated at $200-$300 million. In early September 2008, the Rafah municipality began to collect a fee from the tunnel owners known as "commercial activity across the border." All tunnel owners pay NIS 10,000 ($2,700). The Rafah municipality imposes sanctions against those who refuse to pay the fee by denying permits to complete construction of a tunnel or closing an open tunnel. The municipality contends that the tax is collected to pay the salaries of municipal officials and employees and to cover the municipality's expenses. The Electric Company collects a subscriber's fee for using "three-phase" electricity in each tunnel, ranging from NIS 1,000 to NIS 3,000 ($800). Egypt destroys some of the tunnels and confiscates goods, but in most cases, Egypt turns a blind eye to the goods being smuggled into Gaza as well as to the tunnels. Most of the tunnels have begun to operate openly but there are still dozens of secret ones. The tunnel owners are young men aged 25-40, either Hamas followers or identified with the movement, activists in other organizations, merchants, and entrepreneurs. 12,000 people work in the tunnels and another 3,000 work in trade, transport, and distribution. Most of them come from Rafah and Khan Yunis. All types of commodities are sent through the tunnels and some of the tunnels are used to deliver weapons. The scale of some of the tunnels has been enlarged to allow the transport of larger electrical equipment. Most of the goods and merchandise are sold at very high prices compared to the situation before the blockade, but there are a number of commodities whose price is close to the preblockade price. Diesel fuel and gasoline are delivered through pipes, and their prices are lower by half than the prices in Israel. The tunnel owners are trying to arrange for the delivery of cooking gas through pipelines and sophisticated equipment. The goods transported through the tunnels are chiefly produced in Egypt and China as well as the Gulf countries, Libya, and Sudan. http://www.malaf.info/?page=show_details&Id=881&CatId=&table=articles 21. See note 20. 22. See note 20. 23. http://www.qudsnet.com/arabic/news.php?maa=View&id=137703 24. http://www.pal-home.net/arabic/?action=detail&id=28407 25. http://www.pal-home.net/arabic/?action=detail&id=28407 26. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2009/0817/p09s01-wome.html 27. http://peacenow.org/entries/apn_legislative_round-up_march_5_2010 28. http://www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/acheter.cgi?offre=ARCHIVES&type_item=ART_ARCH_30J&objet_id=1101748 http://www.lepost.fr/article/2009/10/12/1737165_gaza-le-hamas-ne-sait-plus-quoi-faire-de-son-argent.html 29. Janine Zacharia, "In Gaza, a Complex, Dysfunctional Way of Life," Washington Post, June 3, 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060204687.html 30. "Smuggling Tunnel Business on Severe Decline," Ma'an News Agency, February 19, 2010. 31. http://www.mezan.org/ar/details.php?id=9156&ddname=interior&id_dept=9&p=center 32. http://www.shabak.gov.il/publications/study/pages/gaza-hamas-terror-report.aspx The Egyptian newspaper Al-Youm al-Sabe'a reported on May 12, 2010, that Egyptian security forces in the northern Sinai seized a large cache of weapons and explosives that were slated to be smuggled into Gaza. The weapons stockpile included 61 antiaircraft missiles, 40 antitank mines, 15 standard mines, and 5 machineguns with ammunition. http://www.youm7.com/News.asp?NewsID=226325. On April 1, 2010, the newspaper reported, based on an Egyptian security source, that Egyptian security forces had seized 100 antiaircraft missiles, 45 rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and 40 explosive devices. http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3870513,00.html      The Egyptian government is also concerned by the use of the tunnel network by Palestinian terror organizations, among them Hamas. On December 29, 2009, Dr. Mufid Shihab, Egyptian minister of legal and parliamentary affairs, outlined his country's policy on the tunnel issue and enumerated security incidents uncovered by Egyptian intelligence, including: Capture of two Palestinian activists with explosive belts and weapons in their possession along with instructions from the al-Qaeda arm in Gaza to carry out terror attacks in Sinai (2009). Capture of a Palestinian with equipment used to manufacture explosives for the purpose of carrying out terror attacks in northern Sinai. He was operated by the Islamic Army Organization, which is identified with al-Qaeda (2009). Capture of a Tunisian-born citizen of Belgium after he had infiltrated into Egypt to train terror activists in manufacturing explosive devices, after which he was to travel to Belgium to carry out a suicide bombing in a European country. He too was operated by the Islamic Army Organization (2009). Infiltration by two Palestinian suspects via the tunnels to carry out terror attacks against tourist targets in Egypt as part of a Hizbullah cell. Capture of a Palestinian and an Egyptian, active in the Al-Tawhid W'al-Jihad organization identified with al-Qaeda, with two explosive belts in their possession for purposes of carrying out terror attacks in Egypt (2009). Capture of a Palestinian with an explosive belt for perpetrating a terror attack. Capture of two Palestinian Hamas activists who had infiltrated via the tunnels with the aim of carrying out a terror attack in the Sinai. Exposure of an Islamic Jihad cell, including an Egyptian citizen, which planned to carry out a suicide bombing using an explosive belt. http://www.youm7.com/News.asp?NewsID=171788 33. http://www.masrawy.com/News/Egypt/Politics/2010/april/1/gaza_running.aspx 34. http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/digest7e.pdf The following are excerpts from the article by Shima Yusuf, who conducted an investigation of trafficking in women bound for Gaza via the tunnel network:         There were several accounts of a new type of trade via the [Rafah] tunnels in which minor Egyptian females from extremely poor families were brought to the Gaza Strip...for purposes of marriage, domestic work, or practicing the "world's oldest profession."...One of the passengers [in the same taxi as the reporter] started talking about the "golden era" of the tunnels, saying that it is possible to bring an Egyptian woman in exchange for only $1,000 to be handed over to the middleman at the tunnel's entrance along with a copy of the groom's identification card.              A quick tour of Rafah's tunnels reveals that the story I heard in the taxi is no joke....Abu Assi [40 years old, working in the tunnels] states without hesitation: "I'm married to three women. The first is a Palestinian who lives in my house located in the eastern section of Khan Yunis and raises the children. The second and third are Egyptians and were brought in during my many shuttles between Rafah and Egypt via the tunnels. I persuaded them to marry me because of their extreme poverty.              Later I decided to turn these marriages into a business by purchasing a house in Egyptian Rafah [Rafah is divided between Egypt and Gaza], where my two wives help me to bring young girls from the communities adjacent to Rafah, in particular from the villages of the Al-Sharqia district [of Egypt]. This is done by convincing the families of the destitute young girls to marry their daughters to Palestinian men.      Upon giving his consent to marry off his daughter [to a Palestinian man], the father receives a sum of no more than 1,000 Egyptian pounds [less than $200] and a copy of the groom's ID and phone number. The intended brides then move into my house in Rafah while the right husband is found for them. After finding the husband, from whom I receive $1,000, I send a copy of his ID and phone number to my two wives, who in turn send it to the brides' families. Then the brides are smuggled through the tunnels and handed over to their grooms at the tunnel entrance in Palestinian Rafah."      When asked about the fate of the young girls he brings in [from Egypt to Gaza], Abu Assi responded: "I don't care what happens to them. The most important thing to me is closing the deal, even knowing that some of them will get married, some will be sent to work in rich people's homes in Gaza, and others are destined for the many drug dealers and pimps operating in southeastern Gaza."      I asked Abu Assi about the number of minor girls living in his house [in Egyptian Rafah]. He said: "The number is beyond all expectation, and it only goes to show the professionalism of my two wives and their powers of persuasion - a fact that has led me to rent several houses as a result of the rise in the number of young girls [intended for sale to men in Gaza], which has now reached into the hundreds." http://www.awan.com/pages/world/267716 *     *     * Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is a co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd. and is a former advisor to the Policy Planning Division of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This Jerusalem Viewpoints was published in cooperation with the Legacy Heritage Fund.

Subscribe Your email here  Daily Alert  Jerusalem Issue Brief  Post Holocaust Anti-Semitism  Changing Jewish Communities  Israel Campus Beat  Israel HighWay Read More Top Issue Briefs A Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations: Have We Been Here Before? The Palestinians' Unilateral "Kosovo Strategy": Implications for the PA and Israel Our Fellows' Books New Book La Shoah - Freddy Eytan- Publications List Show Publications By Year By Author Search Articles Keywords Topic All Date Anytime Current Month Last 6 months 2009 2010 Send to a friend Print page

The U.S. Supreme Court bans humanitarian support to terrorist organizations

By Jean-Charles Brisard

In its ruling of June 21, 2010 (Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project), the U.S. Supreme Court further clarified the notion of “material support” to designated foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) and brushed aside so-called “peaceful or humanitarian” support to such organizations.

The “material support” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2339B) adopted in 1996, prohibits the provision of material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization. “Material support or resources” is defined as “any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials”.

The main question was the legality of providing non-violent resources to support the humanitarian and peaceful efforts of terrorist organizations. The Court found that not only there was no distinction between the violent and non-violent wings of terrorist groups, but that terrorist groups benefit from any support given to them, even peaceful or humanitarian.

The Court conceded that FTOs may engage in political and humanitarian activities, but insisted that “Foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity are so tainted by their criminal conduct that any contribution to such an organization facilitates that conduct.”

The Supreme Court therefore confirmed that it was necessary “to prohibit providing material support in the form of training, expert advice, personnel, and services to foreign terrorist groups, even if the supporters meant to promote only the groups’ nonviolent ends”, because this aid would “legitimize” the organization.

Referring to such humanitarian support during the oral arguments, Chief Justice Roberts stated “It's going to make their hospital run better. People are going to like their hospital. So the party, the group, will be legitimized.”

Justice Scalia insisted that “The theory of the legislation is that when you aid any of their enterprises, you're aiding the organization. Hamas, for example, gained support among the Palestinians by activities that are perfectly lawful, perhaps running hospitals, all sorts of things.”

Solicitor General Kagan clearly emphasized that "when you help a terrorist, foreign terrorist organization's legal activities, you're also helping the foreign terrorist organization's illegal activities". "Hezbollah builds bombs. Hezbollah also builds homes. What Congress decided was when you help Hezbollah build homes, your are also helping Hezbollah build bombs."

The Supreme Court held that "Material support meant to 'promote peaceable, lawful conduct' can further terrorism by foreign groups in multiple ways. Material support is a valuable resource by definition. Such support frees up other resources within the organization that may be put to violent ends. It also importantly helps lend legitimacy to foreign terrorist groups—legitimacy that makes it easier for those groups to persist, to recruit members, and to raise funds—all of which facilitate more terrorist attacks."

By its unambiguous ruling the Supreme Court clarifies the debate about “political wings” or “humanitarian wings” of terrorist organizations including the Hamas and Hezbollah, and sends a strong message to those promoting a dialog with so-called “moderate” elements within designated terrorist organizations.

Iran's Post Bank - International Connections and U.S. Relationships

I am posting this article on behalf of Avi Jorisch:

Iran’s Post Bank Designated by U.S. Treasury
Mapping out Connections to International Banks and indirect U.S. Relationships

On Wednesday, June 16, 2010, the U.S. Treasury Department officially designated Post Bank of Iran for “providing financial services to, and acting on behalf of, Bank Sepah”. Both financial institutions are now designated under Executive Order (EO) 13382. Post Bank reportedly facilitated business on behalf of Bank Sepah for Iran's defense industries and overseas beneficiaries. Originally Bank Sepah was designated for providing financial services to Iran's missile industry, including two entities linked to Iran's ballistic missile program. Bank Sepah was also subsequently designated by the United Nations in March 2007 under UNSCR 1747.

Specifically, Post Bank is accused of facilitating millions of dollars between an Iranian-based ‘Hong Kong Electronics’ which provided support to designated North Korean entities, including Tanchon Commerical Bank (designated under EO 13382 and UNSCR 1717) and a weapons proliferator, Korea Mining Development Corporation (designated under EO 13382)

According to the prestigious London headquartered global database Bankers’ Almanac, owned by the Reed business information group, Post Bank reportedly maintains eight correspondent banking relationships. These include banks located in countries that are strong allies of the United States. Correspondent banks provide financial services, such as access to foreign currencies and markets, to other banking institutions when they do not have a physical presence in any given location.

Correspondent Relationships include the following:

1. BANCA UBAE SpA – This bank is located in Italy and offers Post Bank Euros (EUR). Banca UBAE SpA has no U.S. correspondent bank.

2. Bank of Ceylon – This bank is located in Sri Lanka and offers Post Bank British Pound Sterling (GBP). The Bank also does business with Bank Sepah (Asian Clearing Units [ACU] - Swift/BIC: BCEY LK LX 125; Account Number: 1977945). The Bank of Ceylon has seven correspondent banking relationships with American banks, including: 1) Citibank NA; 2) Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; 3) Habib American Bank; 4) HSBC Bank USA NA; 5) JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association; 6) Standard Chartered Bank; 7) Wells Fargo Bank NA Bank NA.

3. Europäisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG – This bank is located in Germany and offers Post Bank Euros (EUR). This bank has correspondent relationships with several designated Iranian banks including: Persia International PLC (EUR - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account Number: 1620630302); Export Development Bank of Iran (EUR - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account Number: 16-21220-302); Bank Mellat (EUR - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account number: 1620050330); Mellat S/B CJSC, located in Armenia (EUR - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account Number: 16.20640.103); and Bank Sepah (US Dollars [USD] - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account Number: 5620110010, EUR - Swift/BIC: EIHB DE HH; Account Number: 1620110023). Europäisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG has been categorized by the U.S. Treasury Department as a “money laundering threat.”

4. Emirates NBD Bank PJSC – This bank is located in Dubai and offers Post Bank United Arab Emirates Dirham (AED). The Bank does business with several designated entities, including: Export Development Bank of Iran (EUR - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261268885102, United Arab Emirates Dirham [AED] - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261268885101, Saudi Riyals [SAR] - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 0004 829921 682); Bank Mellat (AED - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261077726104); Persia International PLC (EUR - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261270982402, AED - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261270982401); and Bank Sepah (AED - Swift/BIC: EBIL AE AD; Account Number: 1261283462901). Emirates NBD Bank has three correspondent banks in the U.S., including: 1) The Bank of New York Mellon; 2) Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; and 3) JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association.

5. Future Bank BSC – This bank is located in Bahrain and offers Post Bank Euros (EUR). It has been designated by the U.S. through Executive Order 13382, for its role in proliferating weapons of mass destruction. It maintains no U.S. correspondent banking relationships.

6. Landesbank Baden-Württemberg – This bank is located in Germany and offers Post Bank Euros (EUR). It does business with one other designated entity, the Export Development Bank of Iran (EUR - Swift/BIC: SOLA DE ST; Account Number: 2800947). Landesbank maintains a U.S. correspondent relationship with The Bank of New York Mellon.

7. United Bank AG – This bank is located in Switzerland and offers Post Bank Swiss Franks (CHF). It also maintains two other correspondent banking relationships with designated Iranian entities: Export Development Bank of Iran (CHF - Swift/BIC: UNIL CH ZZ; Account Number: 875.03.01001); and Bank Melli (CHF - Swift/BIC: UNIL CH ZZ; Account Number: 873.03.01001). While United Bank AG maintains no U.S. correspondent banking relationships in the United States it does get its dollars from UBS AG in Zürich. 

8. Persia International Bank Plc – This bank is located in the United Kingdom and offers Post Bank Euros (EUR) and British Pound Sterling (GBP). Persia International has been designated by the U.S. for its role in the proliferation of weapons of mass destructions. It also maintains a correspondent relationship with one designated Iranian entity Mellat S/B CJSC, located in Armenia (EUR - Swift/BIC: PIBP GB 2L; Account Number: 25QBR04065900, GBP - Swift/BIC: PIBP GB 2L; Account Number: 01QBR04065900).

OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION

• Post Bank is owned 100% by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
• The Bank’s website is http://www.postbank.ir/. 
• Post Bank’s Swift Code is PBIR IR TH.

NOTE FOR EDITORS

• To date, the United Nations has designated four financial institutions in compliance with Security Council Resolutions 1747, 1803 and 1929.
  • Designated entities include Bank Sepah, Bank Melli, Bank Saderat and First East Export Bank.
• The Treasury Department has now designated 17 Iranian banks per EO 13382, charging them with the use of deceptive financial practices to support terrorist groups and the nuclear program.
  • These banks include: Arian Bank (Afghanistan); Banco Internacional de Desarrollo, CA Banco Universal (Venezuela); Bank Melli Iran ZAO (Russia); Europäisch-Iranische Handelsbank AG (Germany); Export Development Bank of Iran (Iran); First East Export Bank (Malaysia); Future Bank (Bahrain); Kargoshaee Bank (Iran); Mellat Bank (Iran); Mellat Bank SB CJSC (Armenia); Bank Melli (Iran); Bank Melli PLC (United Kingdom); Persia International PLC (United Kingdom); Post Bank (Iran); Bank Saderat (Iran); Bank Sepah (Iran); Bank Sepah PLC (United Kingdom).
• There are reportedly 44 international banks providing banking services to the 17 banks designated by the Treasury Department. Most of these banks either have a physical presence in the United States and/or themselves have a correspondent banking relationship with American banks, including but not limited to the U.S. banks listed above.
• The “long arm provision” of the PATRIOT Act provides the U.S. government with the legal has the legal authority to freeze any funds deposited in any foreign financial institution on behalf of designated Iranian banks, as long as the foreign bank in question has U.S. operations or maintains a correspondent relationship with an American bank.

For a complete financial map of Iran’s banking sector and correspondent banking relationships (including account numbers and SWIFT/BIC codes) download Iran’s Dirty Banking: How the Islamic Republic is Skirting International Financial Sanctions

Anti Libel Tourism SPEECH Bill Introcued by Senators Leahy & Sessions

New York, NY - June 22, 2010: Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is financed - and How to Stop It, and founder of the movement against libel tourism, praised Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), its Ranking Member, for introducing the "Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act" or the ''SPEECH Act'' in the United States Senate today. The bill was formally placed before the entire Judiciary Committee. The legislation is cosponsored by Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senator Joe Lieberman (DI-Conn.).

The SPEECH Act will uphold First Amendment protections for American free expression by guarding American authors and publishers from the enforcement of frivolous foreign libel suits filed in countries that do not have our strong free speech protections. Such lawsuits are often used by "libel-tourists" in an effort to suppress the rights of American scholars, writers, and journalists to speak, write and publish freely in print and on the Internet.

The Act grants "a cause of action for declaratory judgment relief against a party who has brought a successful foreign defamation action whose judgment undermines the first amendment," and provides for legal fees. These measures will help diminish the severe chilling effect such suits have already had on journalists, researchers the general media particularly on matters of national security and public safety.  

Based on New York State's "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" (also known as "Rachel's Law"), the SPEECH Act marks the culmination of a national campaign spearheaded by Dr. Ehrenfeld following her own experiences with libel tourism.

In Funding Evil, published in the U.S. in 2003, Dr. Ehrenfeld documented how Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz funded al-Qaeda, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. Mahfouz sued Dr. Ehrenfeld for libel in London, attempting to use the plaintiff-friendly British libel laws to intimidate her into silence. Mahfouz had previously used this tactic to bully more than 40 authors and a publisher into apologies for and retractions of similar revelations.

Dr. Ehrenfeld refused to acknowledge the British court's jurisdiction over her as she did not live in England, nor was her book published or marketed there. The English court ruled against her by default, ordering her to pay a hefty fine, apologize, retract her statements and pay Mahfouz's substantial legal fees.

Represented by her attorney, Daniel Kornstein of Kornstein Veisz Wexler & Pollard, LLP, Dr. Ehrenfeld countersued Mahfouz in New York to prevent the enforcement of the default judgment on the grounds that it did not meet the standard of American First Amendment protections for free speech. When the court dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction over Mahfouz, the New York State Legislature acted quickly, and passed "Rachel's Law," in April 2008, enabling the New York courts to take jurisdiction over foreign libel plaintiffs who sue New York authors and publishers abroad. Since then, six states have passed similar legislation protecting their residents.

In May 2008, Reps. Peter King (R-NY) and Steve Cohen (D-TN), proposed similar bills in the House, and Senators Arlen Specter (D-PA) Joseph Lieberman (DI- CT), and Charles Schumer (D-NY) sponsored the Free Speech Protection Act in the Senate. Dr. Ehrenfeld thanks their initiative and support, which have led to the introduction of the SPEECH Act.

The editorial pages of The New York Times, The Washington Post, New York Post, Los Angeles Times and Miami Herald, as well as organizations such as the Association of American Publishers, American Library Association, the American Society of News Editors, the Independent Book Publishers Association, the American Civil Liberties Union and 9/11 Families for a Secure America, among others, have supported Dr. Ehrenfeld's fight for free speech.

"The SPEECH Act, introduced today by Senators Leahy and Sessions, marks a critical victory in the fight for free speech and the advancement of our national security. Without the SPEECH Act, American writers, publishers, and Internet users, will continue to face an imminent threat of the enforcement of foreign libel suit when reporting on matters of public interest, including science, national security, health and personal safety.

With Congress' action, other nations will no longer have a green light to attempt to silence American critics," said Dr. Ehrenfeld. "We have attracted a broad spectrum of those who are interested in protecting free speech and enabling authors to write about national security and other issues. This is not a partisan cause. This is an American cause, and it's time for Congress to protect its citizens and get the SPEECH Act passed real soon."

Counter-Terrorism and Counter-Lawfare at the US Supreme Court

By Aaron Eitan Meyer

Research Director, The Lawfare Project

 

On June 21, 2010, the US Supreme Court handed down its decision in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, which reaffirmed the constitutionality of a key counter-terrorist statute that prohibits providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations. In this case, plaintiffs asserted that the statute in question, 18 U.S.C. § 2339A, unlawfully prevented them from providing material support to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and Kurdistan Workers' Party (currently known as Kongra-Gel or PKK), both of which remain on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, “Prosecutors favor the material-support charge because it is broad enough to cover a range of activities linked to terrorist organizations, from collecting funds to shouldering a rifle.” In this case, those activities seem to include  lawfare, which is the use of the law as a weapon of war, or more specifically, the abuse of the law and legal systems for strategic political or military ends. In its published Opinion, the Court twice cited a lower court ruling that specified that, “Plaintiffs want to “train members of [the] PKK on how to use humanitarian and international law to peacefully resolve disputes,” and “teach PKK members how to petition various representative bodies such as the United Nations for relief.” 552 F. 3d, at 921, n. 1.”

 

In fact, the majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts obliquely cited two common uses of lawfare, albeit without using the term itself. First, he stated that, “[i]t is wholly foreseeable that the PKK could use the “specific skill[s]” that plaintiffs propose to impart, §2339A(b)(2), as part of a broader strategy to promote terrorism.” As Hezbollah’s recent declaration to sue Israeli officials demonstrates, this type of abuse is not only foreseeable, but lawfare is being implemented in precisely this fashion.

 

Perhaps even more notably, the Chief Justice also hit upon a second area in which providing legal expertise can lead to lawfare. “A foreign terrorist organization introduced to the structures of the international legal system might use the information to threaten, manipulate, and disrupt. This possibility is real, not remote.” With all due respect to the Chief Justice, it is even more than a real possibility – it is a reality.

 

 

IHH: From the war in Bosnia to the Gaza Flotilla

By Jean-Charles Brisard

The main organizer and funder of the Gaza Flotilla, the Turkish NGO Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), is portraying itself as a "Humanitarian Relief Foundation", but it is better known in Bosnia for its connections to terrorism. 

Several documents confirm the nexus between the Turkish IHH and foreign Muslim fighters in Bosnia during the war. 

A Bosnian State Security Service (SDB) Report on “Citizens, Organizations and Institutions from Afro-Asian Countries who Reside and Operate” in Sarajevo, dated November 19, 1995, provided specific details on the NGO’s activities and the involvement of its managers in the Mujahideen Brigade. 

At the time, the IHH Sarajevo office director was Hakan Celik. The report stated that he arrived in Sarajevo in July 1994, from Zenica, which served as headquarter of the Mujahideen Brigade. 

The report provided the details of another IHH official, Hakan Bogoclu, deputy director of the IHH Sarajevo office. It stated that “he was a member of the 7th Muslim Brigade from September 1st, 1992 until July 1st, 1994.” 

Another IHH official, Osman Atalay, was enrolled in the Mujahideen Brigade. According to the report Atalay was “a Turkish citizen, born on August 28, 1963 in Istanbul, temporarily residing in Street Isa Bega Isakovica 8”, who “came to Sarajevo on January 14, 1995 from Zenica where he was a member of the army from September 1st, 1992 until July 1st, 1994.” 

 Interestingly, the same Osman Atalay took part in the Gaza Flotilla for the IHH (as first reported by Bosnian journalist Esad Hecimovic for Intelwire.com). In interviews to various Turkish media following the Israeli interception of the flotilla boats on May 31st, he was quoted saying that “Everybody on the ship was 100 percent [humanitarian] activists, even the crew”! 

Osman Atalay, who is now a board member of the IHH, attended the opening ceremony of an “Istanbul Center for Culture and Education” in Sarajevo, a month before the flotilla incident, along with Emine Erdogan, the wife of Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan. 

At the time of the Bosnian war, the IHH came under scrutiny of NATO forces. In a report on Islamic NGOs in Bosnia dated May 8, 1996, the NATO Allied Counterintelligence Unit stated: “Terrorist groups are now using NGOs for support and operational planning.” The report listed several suspected charities, including the IHH. 

The involvement of IHH employees in the Muslim units combating along the Bosnian army is also reflected in official military records. For example, in a certificate dated October 23, 1995, Nezim Halilovic Muderis, Commander of the 4th Muslim Liberation Unit, confirms that IHH member Engin Huseyin is a member of the unit since July 20, 1995. 

In 1996, a CIA report on Islamic charities in the Balkans stated that the IHH had connections with “Iran and extremist Algerian groups” and that “the Sarajevo office director of the IHH was linked to Iranian operatives”. 

The IHH later appeared in several counter-terrorism investigations for providing shelter, forged documents, arms, and money to terrorists traveling to combat-zones in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, or Iraq. 

 The IHH Bosnian connection was further uncovered during the French investigation on the “Roubaix Gang” (Bosnian and Canadian networks leading to the Millennium terrorist plot against the LA airport in 1999). On October 16, 2000, the final prosecution statement noted that “during searches at the IHH headquarters in Istanbul, arms, explosives, and training manuals were discovered” and that “arrested member of the IHH have been fighting in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya”. 

According to the investigation, the IHH had directly conspired to “recruit veteran soldiers in anticipation of the coming holy war [jihad]. In particular, some men were sent into war zones in Muslim countries in order to acquire combat experience.” 

The French prosecutor also reported that “An examination of the IHH’s phone records in Istanbul showed …two phone calls to the communications center in Zenica of Abu El Maali”, Emir of the Mujahideen battalion in Bosnia. 

In the following judgment of the Paris Tribunal, on Avril 6, 2001 (Public Prosecutor v. Khabou, Bendaoui and others), the court stressed that the IHH “was known for its support to Islamist extremists in Turkey, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Chechnya, and was a contact point for the trafficking of forged IDs”. 

On April 2nd, 2001, French antiterrorist judge Jean-Louis Bruguière, who had investigated the “Roubaix Gang” case, testified during the trial of Millennium plotter Ahmed Ressam, that the “IHH has played an important role” in this operation. He added that “the IHH is a humanitarian organization, but it was kind of a type of cover-up to thwart the Moujadin”. 

More recently, during the trial of Abdulrahlman Muhammad Alamoudi, founder of the American Muslim Council and Secretary of the Success Foundation, it was revealed that the IHH had received funds from the Success Foundation, successor in interest of the North American branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization – IIRO, which was known to provide support to foreign Mujahideen fighters in Bosnia and had funded terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. 

Details of these financials transactions were provided by the U.S. government in a Supplemental Declaration in Support of Detention on October 22, 2003 signed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent. Until January 2001, the IHH had received at least 200,000 $ from the IIRO and Success Foundation for purported humanitarian aid. 

Alamoudi, was sentenced to 23 years in jail in October 2004 for illegal financial transactions and participation to an assassination plot against Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.

The Terror Financing Aspects of the IHH

By Ilan Weinglass

Reportedly, there is a movement in Europe to have the IHH listed a proscribed terrorist organization:

In particular they point to the IHH's affiliation with Hamas, "which is on the EU list of terror organizations, and its membership in The Union of the Good, an Islamic umbrella affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood."

The Union of Good was designated as a terrorist entity by the United States in 2008.

The organization's letter points out that "according to EU guidelines the definition of terrorism means individuals, groups and entities on which there is accurate information proving that they have committed, are attempting to commit or are facilitating the commission of terrorist acts. Terrorist activities include 'directing or participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by funding its activities or supplying material resources.'"

(http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=177838)

While welcome, I simply don't see this happening, as a number of Hamas-linked organizations are not designated by the EU.  There should be a movement in the US for such a designation, as the IHH is a member of the SDGT Union of Good, covered previously on this blog.

For those interested, here is some documentation on links between the IHH and terror groups, and terror financing:

Shooting the Messenger: A Look at the Facts on the Turkish Aid Group IHH by Evan Kohlmann

More Documentation on Gaza Flotilla Charity IHH by Evan Kohlmann

Documentation from the Muhammad Alamoudi case from the NEFA Foundation

Backgrounder on the IHH from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center

Additional Information on the IHH from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center

The Terror Financing Aspects of the Free Gaza Flotilla

By Ilan Weinglass

Jonathan Schanzer has an excellent summary of the terror financing aspects of the (now defunct) convoy to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.  I post it in its entirety:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/terror-finance-flotilla

The Turkish organizers of the Gaza Strip-bound flotilla that was boarded this morning by Israeli commandos knew well in advance that their vessels would never reach Israeli waters. That's because the organizers belong to a nonprofit that was banned by the Israeli government in July 2008 for its ties to terrorism finance.

The Turkish IHH (Islan Haklary Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi in Turkish) was founded in 1992, and reportedly popped up on the CIA's radar in 1996 for its radical Islamist leanings. Like many other Islamist charities, the IHH has a record of providing relief to areas where disaster has struck in the Muslim world.

However, the organization is not a force for good. The Turkish nonprofit belongs to a Saudi-based umbrella organization known to finance terrorism called the Union of Good (Ittilaf al-Kheir in Arabic). Notably, the Union is chaired by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, who is known best for his religious ruling that encourages suicide attacks against Israeli civilians. According to one report, Qardawi personally transferred millions of dollars to the Union in an effort to provide financial support to Hamas.

In 2008, the Israelis banned IHH, along with 35 other Islamist charities worldwide, for its ties to the Union of Good. This was a follow-on designation; Israelis first blocked the Union of Good from operating in the West Bank and Gaza in 2002.

Interestingly, the Union of Good may not only be tied to Hamas. Included in the Israeli list of 36 designees was the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO). In 2006, both the U.S. government and the United Nations designated the IIRO branch offices in Indonesia and the Philippines for financing al Qaeda. French magistrate Jean-Louis Brougiere also testified that IHH had an "important role" in Ahmed Ressam's failed "millennium plot" to bomb the Los Angeles airport in late 1999.

The U.S. government, it should be noted, also views the Union of Good as a terrorist organization. On November 12, 2008, a press release from the U.S. Treasury announced the umbrella group's leaders as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT), stating that the group was "created by Hamas leadership to transfer funds to the terrorist organization."

"Terrorist groups such as Hamas continue to exploit charities to radicalize vulnerable communities and cultivate support for their violent activities," said Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey.

According to Treasury, Hamas's leadership actually created the Union of Good in 2000—just after the launch of the armed campaign against Israel—as a means to transfer funds to Hamas. At the time of designation in 2008, the Treasury believed that the Union of Good was transferring "tens of millions of dollars a year" to Hamas-controlled entities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

As the Treasury release explained, "The Union of Good acts as a broker for Hamas by facilitating financial transfers between a web of charitable organizations—including several organizations previously designated… for providing support to Hamas—and Hamas-controlled organizations in the West Bank and Gaza. The primary purpose of this activity is to strengthen Hamas' political and military position in the West Bank and Gaza."

It gets worse. The Treasury, drawing from declassified documents, stated unequivocally that the Union of Good "compensated Hamas terrorists by providing payments to the families of suicide bombers. One of [the charities], the Al-Salah Society, previously identified as a key support node for Hamas, was designated in August 2007... The Society employed a number of members of the Hamas military wing and supported Hamas-affiliated combatants during the first Intifada."

Then there's the leadership. Apart from the aforementioned Qardawi, Union of Good's top officials include Hamas members, as well as Yemeni national Abd al-Majid al-Zindani, who was designated by the U.S. Treasury as a terrorist in 2004 for providing support to al Qaeda.

Thus, the convoy of ships allegedly trying to bring aid to the Gaza Strip could never be characterized as a "peace flotilla." With ties to Hamas and other dangerous groups, the IHH can only be described as a dangerous organization. Its members only underscored this fact when they attacked Israeli naval personnel with iron bars and knives, ultimately leading to the regrettable deaths this morning on the Mediterranean Sea.

Jonathan Schanzer is a former terrorism finance analyst at the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Note:I would add to this that since the Union of Good is listed as a Specially Designated Terrorist entity, any American citizens in the flotilla should be investigated for providing material aid to the IHH.  I would think this should include Huwaida Arraf, and the International Solidarity Movement, which she co-founded.