Wednesday, July 07, 2004
|
TERRORIST CHARITY
I have just finished a very disturbing read - Terrorist Hunter, by Anonymous. I cannot recommend this book enough. It describes the role that certain Muslim charities have played in funding terrorism. Note that the charities in question are incorporated in the USA, Britain, Germany, and other western nations. These charities serve terrorism the same way the suit maker serves my mythical Columbian Drug Baron (see my last post). Click through to the Amazon.com book site, read the reviews. This book is too important to miss.
Here are some titillating facts - The Muslim Brotherhood is a pan-Islamic organizationn founded in 1928. The MB formed in Egypt and has been tied to the Nazi regime. Specifically, a senior member and president of the groupÂs bank, Bank Al-Taqwa, Youssef Nada has been accused of once being a Abwer, the Nazi CIA, agent. How's that for reach, from the Berlin swaztikas to Riyad swords, this guy gets around.
Second, the both Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad have link to the Muslim Brotherhood via Muslim charities in the US. Would you also believe that Osama Bin Laden's former personal secretary, once sat on the board of directors of some of these charities? That suggests some rather interesting things, now don't it.
I have just finished a very disturbing read - Terrorist Hunter, by Anonymous. I cannot recommend this book enough. It describes the role that certain Muslim charities have played in funding terrorism. Note that the charities in question are incorporated in the USA, Britain, Germany, and other western nations. These charities serve terrorism the same way the suit maker serves my mythical Columbian Drug Baron (see my last post). Click through to the Amazon.com book site, read the reviews. This book is too important to miss.
Here are some titillating facts - The Muslim Brotherhood is a pan-Islamic organizationn founded in 1928. The MB formed in Egypt and has been tied to the Nazi regime. Specifically, a senior member and president of the groupÂs bank, Bank Al-Taqwa, Youssef Nada has been accused of once being a Abwer, the Nazi CIA, agent. How's that for reach, from the Berlin swaztikas to Riyad swords, this guy gets around.
Second, the both Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad have link to the Muslim Brotherhood via Muslim charities in the US. Would you also believe that Osama Bin Laden's former personal secretary, once sat on the board of directors of some of these charities? That suggests some rather interesting things, now don't it.
Friday, July 02, 2004
|
SOME DAYS I THINK I AM IN THE WRONG BUSINESS
OK, check this out – Say you’re a Columbian Drug Baron. I hesitate to call them dealers, lords, or criminals – after all they are stimulating their local economy by providing jobs to cocca growers, smugglers, and local pushers. Besides providing a “stimulating” product for their consumers, they employ accountants, bankers, brokers, lawyers, and politicians to get the cash generated from their sales in the US back to Columbia. OK, sure, getting cash back to Columbia is money laundering. That’s illegal – that’s why it’s interesting. Here’s a little vignette to highlight how a Columbian Drug Baron (CDB) might launder his money.
Imagine the CDB hires a textile maker in Columbia. This textile maker produces suits. With the help of some purchased politicians in Columbia, the textile maker gets an export license to sell $20 million worth of suits to New York. The suit maker then exports $6 million of suits to the Colon Free Trade Center (in Panama), where there are no import or export duties. The suits are repackaged and shipped back to Columbia where they are sold at a discount. Meanwhile, covered by the export license, the manufacturer’s agent picks up $20 million in drug proceeds in New York and returns to Columbia with the cash. Thus, the money is washed clean of its drug roots (a.k.a., laundered). What is really drug money now looks like money generated by the legal sale of suits to New York business people.
I tell you, some days being an accountant just doesn’t seem to cut it. $20 million sure sounds like a nice wage for a day or two worth of work.
Check out the book I got this example from:
The Art & Science of Money Laundering , by Brett F. Woods
OK, check this out – Say you’re a Columbian Drug Baron. I hesitate to call them dealers, lords, or criminals – after all they are stimulating their local economy by providing jobs to cocca growers, smugglers, and local pushers. Besides providing a “stimulating” product for their consumers, they employ accountants, bankers, brokers, lawyers, and politicians to get the cash generated from their sales in the US back to Columbia. OK, sure, getting cash back to Columbia is money laundering. That’s illegal – that’s why it’s interesting. Here’s a little vignette to highlight how a Columbian Drug Baron (CDB) might launder his money.
Imagine the CDB hires a textile maker in Columbia. This textile maker produces suits. With the help of some purchased politicians in Columbia, the textile maker gets an export license to sell $20 million worth of suits to New York. The suit maker then exports $6 million of suits to the Colon Free Trade Center (in Panama), where there are no import or export duties. The suits are repackaged and shipped back to Columbia where they are sold at a discount. Meanwhile, covered by the export license, the manufacturer’s agent picks up $20 million in drug proceeds in New York and returns to Columbia with the cash. Thus, the money is washed clean of its drug roots (a.k.a., laundered). What is really drug money now looks like money generated by the legal sale of suits to New York business people.
I tell you, some days being an accountant just doesn’t seem to cut it. $20 million sure sounds like a nice wage for a day or two worth of work.
Check out the book I got this example from:
Thursday, July 01, 2004
|
Hi folks. I know it has been far to long since I’ve recorded my rantings. To be honest, I’ve not had the will to launch my musings into cyber-space’s ether – cynicism had taken too powerful a hold on me. But, thanks to July’s bright, sunny days, I will leave cynicism aside to again bellow about injustice, stupidity, politics, and …well…anything else that catches my fancy.
I have just read “reader responses” about the up coming American Presidential race on the BBC Online, it left me fuming. I can’t really compliment anyone who posted, polemic shorthand dominated judicious thoroughness. Given that I have no desire to see the current Bush administration elected to another term, my scorn is directed at Jim Hill and Laura Stietz (e.g., the unthinking Republicans). They’re all about the “Politics of Belief”. The essence of “Politics of Belief” is best summed by Our Strong Leader, the Shrub (otherwise know as the current President Bush) when he said that he continues to believe in a connection between Saddam Husein and al-Qaeda because there is a connection between them. (sorry I’m paraphrasing).
Do you the problem here? See why the “Politics of Belief” has a pernicious affect on our political dialog?
Facts and evidence play no role in decision making. Circular logic is sufficient to “prove” a claim (e.g., a connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda).
It’s sad that our President and many of his supporters “believe” in his policies while being unable to articulate what those policies are, why they’re important, or if they have any chance of success. Success is presumed. That is not strong leadership. That is not clear thinking – hell, it’s not even thinking at all.
I have just read “reader responses” about the up coming American Presidential race on the BBC Online, it left me fuming. I can’t really compliment anyone who posted, polemic shorthand dominated judicious thoroughness. Given that I have no desire to see the current Bush administration elected to another term, my scorn is directed at Jim Hill and Laura Stietz (e.g., the unthinking Republicans). They’re all about the “Politics of Belief”. The essence of “Politics of Belief” is best summed by Our Strong Leader, the Shrub (otherwise know as the current President Bush) when he said that he continues to believe in a connection between Saddam Husein and al-Qaeda because there is a connection between them. (sorry I’m paraphrasing).
Do you the problem here? See why the “Politics of Belief” has a pernicious affect on our political dialog?
Facts and evidence play no role in decision making. Circular logic is sufficient to “prove” a claim (e.g., a connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda).
It’s sad that our President and many of his supporters “believe” in his policies while being unable to articulate what those policies are, why they’re important, or if they have any chance of success. Success is presumed. That is not strong leadership. That is not clear thinking – hell, it’s not even thinking at all.
