XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, soc.culture.indian
XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.politics.trump, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: alt.politics, alt.politics.conservative, alt.politics.republican
XPost: alt.politics.republicans, talk.environment, alt.politics.economics XPost: talk.politics.misc

Rightists are in league with our fundamentalist Islamic
terrorist enemies by standing against the continued development
of high tech alternatives to their shamless addiction to muslim
oil. It is the so-called Libertarians and socialist
Conservatives who are the biggest threat because they kow tow
and pander to their oil conglomerate masters, they are slaves.
Oil Man deposed despot George W. Bush held hands while on long
romantic walks with Saudi King Abdullah, allowing them free
passage from the USA on 9/11, despite how the attackers that
day were Saudis. Radical rightist Republican Senator James
Inhofe has received over $1 million in "donations" from the oil
industry in return for his support of Muslim terrorism and the
subsequent death of American soldiers caused by AGW denial and
support of Islamic oil. The right is against choice and
freedom, demanding that we continue on the course of
unsustainable oil gluttony; mainly because they are fat and
shiftless, with tiny brains and low I. Q.s.

Fueling Terror

"...the hijackers, 15 hijackers who are Saudis, they studied
this thinking --
destructive thinking -- in Saudi Arabia. They spent a few
months in Afghanistan. But they lived their life, they studied
this in government mosques. [..] Government curriculum inspired
what happened in New York." - PBS interview with Ali Al-Ahmed,
executive director of the Saudi Institute
Much has been reported about the complex system of terrorist
financing
and the money trail facilitating the September 11 terror
attacks. Individuals and charities from the Persian
Gulf--mainly from Saudi Arabia--appear to be the most important
source of funding for terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda.
According to an October 2002 Council on Foreign Relations
report of an Independent Task Force on Terrorist Financing,
Osama bin Laden and his men have been able to accumulate
millions of dollars using legitimate businesses such as
charities, nongovernmental organizations, mosques, banks and
other financial institutions to help raise and move their
funds.

How does it work? Take Saudi Arabia for example. This Gulf
monarchy is a rentier state in which no taxes are imposed on
the population. Instead, Saudis have a religious tax, the
zakat, requiring all Muslims to give at least 2.5 percent of
their income to charities. Many of the charities are truly
dedicated to good causes, but others merely serve as money
laundering and terrorist financing apparatuses. While many
Saudis contribute to those charities in good faith believing
their money goes toward good causes, others know full well the
terrorist purposes to which their money will be funneled.

What makes penetration and control of money transactions in the
Arab world especially difficult is the Hawala system--the
unofficial method of transferring money and one of the key
elements in the financing of global terrorism. The system has
been going for generations and is deeply embedded in the Arab
culture. Hawala transactions are based on trust; they are
carried out verbally leaving no paper trail.

The Saudi regime has been complicit in its people's actions and
has turned a blind eye to the phenomenon of wealthy citizens
sending money to charities that in turn route it to terror
organizations. Furthermore, Saudi government money funneled
into madrassas where radical anti-Americanism is propagated has
been instrumental in creating an ideological climate which
generates terrorism. Former CIA director James Woolsey
described the Saudi-sponsored Wahhabism and Islamist extremism
as "the soil in which Al-Qaeda and its sister terrorist
organizations are flourishing."

Barrels and bombs
It is no coincidence that so much of the cash filling
terrorists' coffers come from the oil monarchies in the Persian
Gulf. It is also no coincidence that those countries holding
the world's largest oil reserves and those generating most of
their income from oil exports, are also those with the
strongest support for radical Islam. In fact, oil and terrorism
are entangled. If not for the West's oil money, most Gulf
states would not have had the wealth that allowed them to
invest so much in arms procurement and sponsor terrorists
organizations.

Consider Saudi Arabia. Oil revenues make up around 90-95% of
total Saudi export earnings, 70%-80% of state revenues, and
around 40% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). In
2002 alone, Saudi Arabia earned nearly $55 billion in crude oil
export revenues. Most wealthy Saudis who sponsor charities and
educational foundations that preach religious intolerance and
hate toward the Western values have made their money from the
petroleum industry or its subsidiaries. Osama bin Laden's
wealth comes from the family's construction company that made
its fortune from government contracts financed by oil money. It
is also oil money that enables Saudi Arabia to invest
approximately 40% of its income on weapons procurement. In July
2005 undersecretary of the Treasury Stuart Levey testifying in
the Senate noted ?Wealthy Saudi financiers and charities have
funded terrorist organizations and causes that support
terrorism and the ideology that fuels the terrorists' agenda.
Even today, we believe that Saudi donors may still be a
significant source of terrorist financing, including for the
insurgency in Iraq."

If Saudi Arabia is the financial engine of radical Sunni Islam,
its neighbor Iran is the powerhouse behind the proliferation of
radical Shiite Islam. Iran, OPEC?s second largest oil producer,
is holder of 10 percent of the world?s proven oil reserves and
has the world?s second largest natural gas reserve. With oil
and gas revenues constituting over 80 percent of its total
export earning and 50 percent of its gross domestic product,
Iran is heavily dependent on petrodollars. It is a hotbed of
Islamic fundamentalism and supporter of some of the world?s
most radical Islamic movements such as the Lebanese Hizballah.
Iran?s mullahs are fully aware of the power of their oil. Its
supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned in 2002: ?If the
West did not receive oil, their factories would grind to a
halt. This will shake the world!? As the world?s demand for oil
increases, Iran grows richer --Iran?s oil revenues have jumped
25 percent in 2005?and more than able to snub the U.S. and its
allies in their efforts to prevent Tehran from developing
nuclear weapons.

The line between the barrel and the bomb is clear. It is oil
wealth that enables dictatorial regimes to sustain themselves,
resisting openness, progress and power sharing. Some
semi-feudal royal families in the Gulf buy their legitimacy
from the Muslim religious establishment. This establishment
uses oil money to globally propagate hostility to the West,
modernity, non-Muslims, and women. This trend is likely to
continue. Both the International Energy Agency and the Energy
Information Agency of the U.S. Department of Energy currently
project a steady increase in world demand for oil through at
least 2020. This means further enrichment of the oil-producing
countries and continued access of terrorist groups to a viable
financial network which allow then remain a lethal threat to
the U.S. and its allies.

Drying the swamp
There are many strategies proposed by counter-terrorism experts
to obstruct terrorist financing. Many of them are effective
and, indeed, some of the steps that have been taken since
September 11, such as freezing bank accounts and improving the
scrutiny over international monetary transfers, contributed to
a reduction in Al-Qaeda's financial maneuverability. But the
only way to deal with the problem strategically is to reduce
the disposable income and wealth generation capacity of
terrorist supporters.

Hence, America's best weapon against terrorism is to decrease
its dependency on foreign oil by increasing its fuel efficiency
and introducing next-generation fuels. If the U.S. bought less
oil, the global oil market would shrink and price per-barrel
would decline. This would invalidate the social contract
between the leaders and their people and stem the flow of
resources to the religious establishment. It will likely
increase popular pressure for political participation,
modernity and reformed political and social institutions.

Reducing demand for Middle East oil would force the
petroleum-rich regimes to invest their funds domestically, seek
ways to diversify their economies and rethink their support for
America's enemies. Only then financial support for terrorism
could radically diminish.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)