When it emerged that most of the 19 were Saudis, the argument against attacking Saudi Arabia was that they were criminals acting independent of -- and contrary to -- the will of their nation. That made sense . . . until I learned that the ideology which motivated their mass murder was the Islam created and sustained in Arabia, the "religion" which fuels and funds the jihad against us.
What kind of "ally" supports murdering and maiming its friends? Could it be that President Bush should have spent less time holding hands with the house of Saud and more time studying Qur'an and Sunnah? Perhaps President Obama should stop bowing and start telling the truth about the Islam of his youth, the Qur'an he studied, the source of the "prettiest sound on Earth at sunset."
As long as our "leadership" continues to obfuscate -- intentionally in Obama's case -- for jihad and shari'a and demonize those who tell the truth about them, we'll continue bleeding.
Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba – but the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money, according to Hillary Clinton.
"More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups," says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state. Her memo urged US diplomats to redouble their efforts to stop Gulf money reaching extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
"Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide," she said.
Three other Arab countries are listed as sources of militant money: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.
The cables highlight an often ignored factor in the Pakistani and Afghan conflicts: that the violence is partly bankrolled by rich, conservative donors across the Arabian Sea whose governments do little to stop them.
The problem is particularly acute in Saudi Arabia, where militants soliciting funds slip into the country disguised as holy pilgrims, set up front companies to launder funds and receive money from government-sanctioned charities.That's the problem, isn't it? Those "militants" aren't "disguised" as "holy pilgrims" at all. Rather, under Islam -- in obedience to Allah and in accord with Muhammad's example -- "militants" and "holy pilgrims" are one and the same.
One cable details how the Pakistani militant outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba, which carried out the 2008 Mumbai attacks, used a Saudi-based front company to fund its activities in 2005.But they do "treat terrorist funds emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority." That's why they're not stopping it.
Meanwhile officials with the LeT's charity wing, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, travelled to Saudi Arabia seeking donations for new schools at vastly inflated costs – then siphoned off the excess money to fund militant operations.
Militants seeking donations often come during the hajj pilgrimage – "a major security loophole since pilgrims often travel with large amounts of cash and the Saudis cannot refuse them entry into Saudi Arabia". Even a small donation can go far: LeT operates on a budget of just $5.25m (£3.25m) a year, according to American estimates.
Saudi officials are often painted as reluctant partners. Clinton complained of the "ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist funds emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority".