[Senate Hearing 108-921]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-921
TERRORISM: TWO YEARS AFTER
9/11, CONNECTING THE DOTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, TECHNOLOGY
AND HOMELAND SECURITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 10, 2003
__________
Serial No. J-108-39
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
93-083 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JON KYL, Arizona JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Jr., Delaware
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
JOHN CORNYN, Texas JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina
Bruce Artim, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Bruce A. Cohen, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security
JON KYL, Arizona, Chairman
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Jr., Delaware
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina
Stephen Higgins, Majority Chief Counsel
David Hantman, Democratic Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Page
Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, a U.S. Senator from the State of
California..................................................... 4
prepared statement........................................... 119
Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont,
prepared statement............................................. 144
Schumer, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from the State of New
York........................................................... 6
Kyl, Hon. Jon, a U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona.......... 1
prepared statement........................................... 140
WITNESSES
Epstein, Matthew, Assistant Director, The Investigative Project,
Washington, D.C................................................ 12
Henderson, Simon, Saudi Strategies, London, United Kingdom....... 10
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Responses of Simon Henderson to questions submitted by Senator
Feinstein...................................................... 25
Questions submitted by Senator Feinstein to Matthew Epstein
(Note: Responses to these questions were not available at the
time of printing.)
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Mary Rose Oakar,
President, Washington, D.C., statement and attachment.......... 31
Council on American-Islamic Relations, Nihad Awad, Executive
Director, Washington, D.C., letter and attachments............. 37
Epstein, Matthew, Assistant Director, The Investigative Project,
Washington, D.C., statement and attachments.................... 73
Henderson, Simon, Saudi Strategies, London, United Kingdom,
statement...................................................... 125
Levitt, Matthew A., Senior Fellow in Terrorism Studies,
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, statement........... 147
Muslim-American Organization, Washington, D.C., statement........ 157
Muslim Public Affairs Council, Washington, statement and
attachment..................................................... 159
TERRORISM: TWO YEARS AFTER 9/11, CONNECTING THE DOTS
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2003
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland
Security, of the Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:33 a.m., in
room SD-226, Dirksen Office Building, Hon. Jon Kyl, Chairman of
the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Kyl, Feinstein, Schumer, and Durbin.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON KYL, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF ARIZONA
Chairman Kyl. I apologize to those of you who have been
waiting and who will be inconvenienced by our delay. The Senate
is in the middle of six votes. We are in the fifth vote right
now.
I think what I will do is proceed with my opening
statement. I have checked with the ranking member's staff and
that is acceptable to them, and then the Ranking Member will
provide her opening statement when she is able to come back. At
that time, I will also make some unanimous consent requests for
inclusion in the record of various statements.
Tomorrow, of course, marks the second anniversary of the
worst, most cold-blooded attack on the United States since its
founding, and the Subcommittee has set this hearing today to do
its part to ensure that Americans are not attacked again. The
defense of our people and our way of life at home requires that
law enforcement agencies, Members of Congress, and government
at large take an offensive approach to trace the roots of
terror and terrorist financiers overseas and here in the U.S.
homeland.
As this Subcommittee heard in June from one expert witness,
Al-Qaeda, murderous as it is, is but a symptom of an underlying
malignancy which is Islamic extremism. To defeat this threat,
we must improve our ability to connect the dots between
terrorists and their supporters and sympathizers. We must
understand their goals, their resources, their methods, just as
well as they understand our system of freedoms and how to
exploit them for their terrible purposes.
Despite the commendable accomplishments of our law
enforcement community and our intelligence services and the men
and women in our military, our Government still has a great
deal of work to do to secure our country from real and pressing
terrorist threats.
In earlier testimony and again this weekend from the New
York FBI director, we have been told of the presence of active
Al-Qaeda cells in 40 States, from cities like our Capital to
the plains of the heartland. Increasingly, we are told how
worried our officials are about what they continue to learn and
what they have not yet uncovered.
Today's hearing is the second in a series of hearings to
investigate the roots of terrorist ideology, terrorist support
networks and state sponsorship, especially the continued
financial support from Saudi Arabia, estimated at billions of
dollars per year for nearly 40 years, and what the U.S.
Government can do to counter these terrorists and their
supports.
Members of this Subcommittee heard testimony earlier this
summer by David Aufhauser, General Counsel to the Treasury
Department, who called the Saudi regime the epicenter of
terrorist financing. Special Agent John Pistole, Acting
Assistant Director for Counterterrorism for the FBI who
testified before Congress in late July, declared that the jury
was still out on Saudi Arabia's promises to combat terrorist
financing.
Saudi Arabia, of course, has a deep historical and
symbiotic relationship with the radical Islamic ideology of
Wahhabism. The Saudis continue aggressively to export this
intolerant and virulent form of Islam to Muslims across the
globe, and to inculcate it in the major institutions of Islam
worldwide.
The New York Times, the Washington Post and others have
recently reported on Wahhabi influence around the world,
including in Iraq, where terrorists are carrying out ruthless
attacks against U.S. forces attempting to rebuild that country
and killing countless other innocent men and women.
Equally disturbing is the presence of radical Islamist
groups and cells here in the United States that often have the
support financially, ideologically, and even diplomatically of
the Saudi regime. Contrary to popular opinion, the voice of
moderate Muslims is not often heard here in Washington and
across America. Instead, a small group of organizations based
in the U.S. with Saudi backing and support is well advanced in
its four-decade effort to control Islam in America.
From mosques, universities, community, even to our prisons,
and even within our own military, moderate Muslims who love
America and who want to be part of our great country are being
forced out of these institutions. The Wahhabi-backed extremists
then denounce critics of Wahhabism and other forms of Islamist
extremism as being racists and bigots. This will not stand.
Let us be very clear. We are not suggesting that Islam as a
religion or its faithful believers are enemies of the United
States, the West, or modernity. However, a growing body of
accepted evidence and expert research demonstrates that the
Wahhabi ideology that dominates, finances and animates many
groups here in the United States indeed is antithetical to the
values of tolerance, individualism, and freedom as we conceive
these things.
That ideology presents a clear and present danger to our
Constitution and the principles of freedom enshrined by our
Founding Fathers. Hence, it is a threat to the security of
secular, liberal democracies such as the United States, and
indeed is engaged on many levels in a violent struggle against
them, from Manila to Morocco, from India to Iraq, from
Jerusalem to Jakarta.
Today's hearing will bring these and other important issues
facing the United States in the war on terror to light. Our
first witness today is Simon Henderson, a veteran journalist
and respected expert on the Saudi royal family and related
Middle East issues. He is currently with Saudi Strategies, in
London. Mr. Henderson will expose a history of activity in the
kingdom that has culminated in its current role in financing
terror. He will outline a number of Saudi entities, some run by
the government, that are involved in financing terror around
the world.
Next, we will hear from Matthew Epstein, a terrorism expert
and lawyer specializing in terror finance and an assistant
director with The Investigative Project here in Washington. Mr.
Epstein will provide testimony on the network of American
Muslim organizations, the majority of which are recipients of
the very Saudi largess Mr. Henderson will outline. Mr. Epstein
will highlight their long history of sympathy, coordination,
and support for terrorist groups.
As an example, he will focus on a group that we here on the
Hill are very familiar with, namely the Council on American-
Islamic Relations, or CAIR. Members of the Council on American-
Islamic Relations were invited to testify today on this
important anniversary, an important opportunity that this
Subcommittee offered so that the organization could have its
say about the serious allegations concerning its funding,
ideology, leadership, and foreign and domestic networks. CAIR
declined the Subcommittee's invitation. It will submit a
statement for the record and I will ask unanimous consent that
that statement will be received.
I will reintroduce our witnesses when we call upon them to
testify after opening statements by the ranking member, or
allow the Ranking Member or other members of the Committee to
present their statements when they would prefer to do so, and
ask, as I said, for unanimous consent for various matters at
that time.
I think at this moment, what I will do is recess the
Subcommittee and suggest to you that in about 10 or 12 minutes
we should be able to resume and proceed with the conduct of the
hearing. I thank you all again for your indulgence.
[The Subcommittee stood adjourned from 11:40 a.m. to 11:54
a.m.]
Chairman Kyl. The Subcommittee will come back to order.
Let me begin by asking unanimous consent for certain
statements to be included in the record; first of all, a letter
and testimony of Mr. Nihad Awad, the Executive Director of
CAIR; second, the testimony of Matthew Levitt, a senior
terrorism analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East
Policy, and also a former FBI analyst; also, for the record,
some additional materials submitted by the Muslim Public
Affairs Council; and, finally, a statement by Senator Leahy.
Without objection, those items will be included in the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Kyl appears as a
submission for the record.]
Senator Feinstein.
STATEMENT OF HON. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Senator Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman, and to
our witnesses and the people in the audience, let me add my
apologies to yours. What I was saying when I said hello to Mr.
Henderson and Mr. Epstein is one of the things we learn here is
that we can't control our schedules. It has taken me almost 10
years to learn how to relax and just kind of go with the flow
because there is nothing you really can do about it. So our
apologies.
Both Senator Kyl and I have held a number of hearings;
either he was the Chairman of the Subcommittee, as he is now,
and I am ranking, or vice versa. We have seen firsthand how
ill-prepared our Nation was for this kind of asymmetrical
warfare. We had our visa people in, I think, at our first
hearing, where 15 hijackers received visas, and remember the
testimony of the State Department in that regard.
In our Intelligence Committee--and it has subsequently been
released--we have learned a lot about two hijackers that could
have been picked up in Malaysia, but weren't. We have learned
enough to connect the dots to know that 9/11 was no anomaly and
that there are thousands of other terrorists, just like the 19
hijackers, poised to strike at the United States and at
American interests.
The CIA Counterterrorism Center estimates that 70 to
120,000 people trained in Afghanistan terrorist training camps
between 1979 and 2001. Between 15 to 20,000 are believed to
have been trained by Osama bin Laden. These people are now
spread out all over the world and many are in this country now.
The number of terrorist cells in this country is classified, so
I can't share this with you, but if I did, you would be
surprised. There is no question that the danger is real. Unless
we find out who the enemy is and stop them before they strike,
they will cause more suffering and death.
We have passed a number of pieces of legislation--the USA
PATRIOT that was aimed at solving some of the problems that led
to missed opportunities with 9/11; the absence of
interoperability of our databases, which was brought home both
to Senator Kyl and me in our hearings; as well as providing the
law enforcement and intelligence communities with strong
investigative and prosecutorial powers.
The PATRIOT Act is controversial. Certain elements of it
will sunset after 5 years. It was drafted and negotiated
quickly. Only six weeks elapsed between proposal and passage,
and it was passed with the expectation that the executive
branch would limit its new powers to the intended purpose of
fighting terrorism.
Secondly, we learned in this Subcommittee that security
controls for anthrax, smallpox virus, ebola, and 33 other
deadly biological agents were virtually non-existent, and where
they were, they were very lax. No one, not the FBI, nor the
Centers for Disease Control, knew how many people were working
with these deadly agents in our own country. They didn't know
how much they possessed or where these dangerous agents were
being used and stored. Moreover, labs conducted no background
screenings of workers who handled these dangerous agents.
As a result, Senator Kyl and I introduced legislation to
heighten security over and restrict possession of these
pathogens. Ultimately, Congress incorporated many of these
provisions into the comprehensive bioterrorism bill passed in
June of 2002.
Thirdly, Senator Kyl and I also coauthored the Enhanced
Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, which sought
to plug loopholes in our border security. It did many things,
but a month ago two Pakistani nationals at Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport paid cash for one-way tickets to John F.
Kennedy International Airport. The customer agent at the desk
checked a terrorist-related no-fly list and found both men's
names on it. Local police then detained the two men and handed
them over to the FBI.
The new border security law requires the Federal Government
to take concrete steps to restore integrity to the immigration
and visa process. The law also requires all foreign nationals
to be fingerprinted and, when appropriate, submit other
biometric data to the State Department when applying for a
visa.
Finally, the border security law tightened two programs
that were unregulated and ripe for abuse--the visa waiver
program and the foreign student visa program. Additionally, the
Government has decided to take 5,000 Customs agents and put
them aboard commercial airliners, and the transit without visa
program has been suspended. Of the 200,000 people that have
used that program, it is my understanding that 2,000--their
whereabouts are unknown at the present time. In other words,
when they landed in a transit capacity somewhere in the United
States, their ticket was to take them to another country and
they disappeared in our country.
We know that a terrorist could easily put a dirty bomb in a
container. ``ABC Primetime'' on Thursday night will have a
segment announcing that as a test, they shipped a suitcase with
15 pounds of depleted uranium from Jakarta, to Singapore, to
Hong Kong, to mainland China, and then finally into the port of
Los Angeles, all without being detected. The suitcase was in a
20-foot container filled with teak furniture.
To solve this problem, last March Senator Kyl and I
introduced the Antiterrorism and Port Security Act. My
distinguished colleague, Senator Schumer, who is here, is a
cosponsor of this bill and we are grateful for his support. I
won't go into the bill. I will put the rest of my statement in
the record, but I would like to just make a couple of comments.
I have drawn some conclusions from connecting the dots. The
first is that you cannot walk both sides of the street in the
war on terror. The second is you can't fund schools that teach
hate, you can't fund clerics who preach hate, and you can't
support or give money to causes that support the culture or the
individuals involved in terror.
I also have come to the conclusion--and this is just
personal with me--that jihad has taken a very ominous turn not
only of killing any infidel, but with the ultimate goal of
creating a union of fanatic Islamic states, ranging from the
Philippines through Indonesia, through the subcontinent of
Asia, into the Middle East. So I think we are going to be at
this for a very long time indeed.
I am just delighted to also join you, Senator, in welcoming
our two witnesses today and look forward to their remarks.
[The prepared statement of Senator Feinstein appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chairman Kyl. Thank you, Senator Feinstein, and I did note
that other witnesses had been invited, but had declined the
invitation to testify, witnesses from CAIR.
Ordinarily, the Chairman and Ranking Member would give
their opening statements and we would turn to the witness
panel, but there is one member of this panel who has been
extraordinarily involved in all of our efforts. We have
cosponsored legislation together and he has made great
contributions to our effort here, and therefore I want to give
Senator Schumer an opportunity also to make an opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. SCHUMER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF NEW YORK
Senator Schumer. Thank you, Senator Kyl. First, I want to
thank you. I have so much to say here, I will cut it short and
ask unanimous consent that my statement be read into the
record.
Chairman Kyl. It will be, and I might note that I cut my
statement in half.
Senator Schumer. Second, I just want to thank you for your
great leadership on this issue. I think that, in fact, the
three of us here are probably the three Senators who have most
cared about the issue of the spreading Wahhabi danger in the
world and America, the complicity or the--it is not even
complicity--the explicit cooperation of the Saudi regime with
Wahhabi and the--
Chairman Kyl. Excuse me. Could I also add Senator Specter
to that list? He would want to be noted as one of us on this.
Senator Schumer. Great. Let's say the four of us--Senator
Specter is on the floor--and anyone else who wants to be added
to the list. We need as much company as we can get in this
fight. I thank you for your leadership in having this hearing.
Before I begin my statement, I want to make one point
crystal clear, and it can't be reiterated enough. Mainstream
Islam is a peaceful religion that deserves the respect of all
Americans. My family and I visited Spain just a month ago and
we visited some of the mosques and some of the architecture
from the Moorish culture, and it is amazing what a beautiful,
peaceful culture it is, with the fountains and the tranquility
and the place for contemplation. When you think about how a
small group has tried to hijack this religion and make it into
something that propagates terror and war and hatred, it is
really a shame.
Islam has a proud history. Many people who follow its
beliefs here in the United States are hard-working citizens.
But unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, there is mounting evidence
that Saudi-sponsored groups are trying to hijack mainstream
Islam here in the United States and in the world and replace it
with an extremist form of Islam, referred to as Wahhabism.
Wahhabism is known throughout the Muslim world for its
puritanical and severe approach to the teachings of the Muslim
prophet Mohammed. It preaches violence against non-believers or
infidels, and those include not just Christians, Jews, Hindus,
but also Muslims who don't adhere to the strict Wahhabi faith.
It serves as the religious basis for Osama bin Laden and Al-
Qaeda.
Experts agree that Saudi Arabia is the epicenter of
Wahhabist belief and its extreme teachings, and Saudi Arabia
has made every effort to export Wahhabism all over the world.
But unfortunately there is mounting evidence that Saudi-
sponsored groups are doing that here in the United States, as
well, in mosques, in schools, and even in prisons and the
military, to sort of supplant, replace, and elbow aside
mainstream Islam and replace it with an extremist form,
Wahhabism.
As we will hear today, in the 1960's and 1970's the Saudi
royal family made a deal with the devil and offered to sponsor
the teaching of Wahhabist clerics in exchange for their support
of the royal family's rule. Wahhabi teachings include examples
of Allah cursing Jews and Christians and turning some of them
into apes and pigs, and warnings that Muslims must consider
non-Muslims or infidels their enemy.
One of the terms of the dirty deal between the Saudi royal
family and its Wahhabi partners has been the export of
Wahhabist beliefs as part of Saudi foreign policy, and
prominent members of the Saudi royal family, including Prince
Naif, Saudi Arabia's Interior Minister and anti-terror czar,
have set up charities that funnel money toward the Wahhabi
madras schools throughout the Middle East and Pakistan which
teach and export the hate, making these areas hotbeds of anti-
American sentiment and extremism.
Now, just remember, the man in charge of fighting terror in
Saudi Arabia is a man who, number one, funds and exports
Wahhabism in the schools that preach hatred. He said about 9/11
that Zionists were responsible and that Saudi citizens could
not have been involved in the attack, even though we know that
15 of the 19 were Saudi citizens.
After the bombing of Khobar Towers in 1998 that killed 19
Americans, Naif single-handedly prevented the trial of 13
Saudis indicted for the crime. This is the man who is the
Interior Minister. This is not just, you know, some fellow on
the street who might say something. This is the Interior
Minister of Saudi Arabia.
Even as I speak, he appears to be up to his old tricks, as
reports indicate that Saudi officials for months have denied
American agents access to a Saudi with knowledge of extensive
plans to release poison gas into the New York City subway
system.
It is well known among American fighters of terrorism that
once someone is in Saudi Arabia, particularly a Saudi citizen,
you cannot question them. Our law enforcement is blocked. That
is the government of Saudi Arabia, not some citizens who have
gone awry, the government of Saudi Arabia.
I wrote to Saudi Arabian Ambassador Prince Bandar in July
calling for Naif's dismissal. Sadly, I was rudely dismissed.
Earlier this week, I wrote to Secretary Powell asking him to
make Naif's removal part of U.S. policy toward Saudi Arabia,
and I eagerly await the Secretary's response.
He is not the only one involved. There are indications,
less direct proof, that Prince Sultan, the Saudi Defense
Minister, may also be involved in activities similar to Naif's,
since he has said of charities that send money abroad--now, it
is said these are for humanitarian purposes, but in too many
cases the humanitarian purposes are a cloak for terrorism, and
so we have to be careful here.
The money we are talking about, Mr. Chairman, is not small
potatoes. Between 1975 and 1987, Saudi Arabia sent $48 billion
overseas in development aid, second to the United States. And
now what makes this even more alarming, and no doubt
contributed to the events of 9/11, is the most disturbing news
that the Wahhabism--I believe if there was no Wahhabism and no
Saudi government, you could make a very good argument that 9/11
wouldn't have happened. There might not even be an Al-Qaeda.
What is now even more disturbing is that this Wahhabism is
making inroads in the United States. Saudi Arabia boasts of
directly supporting 18 mosques and schools across our country,
including the Islamic Centers in Washington and New York. If
Wahhabism is the state religion of Saudi Arabia and no other
form of Islam is tolerated there, when they fund mosques here
what do we think is going on?
Experts whom we heard from at the previous hearing suggest
the real number is higher, reaching into the hundreds, as
intermediate organizations like the Saudi-sponsored World
Assembly of Muslim Youth provide financial support to American
mosques and schools. In exchange, there is a demand that these
mosques and schools tow the Wahhabi line. Saudi textbooks, the
ones that preach violence against infidels, can be found in
some of these schools.
And that is not all. Grass-roots political organizations
that claim to act as the official voice of the American Muslim
community here in Washington are also recipients of Saudi
money.
You, Mr. Chairman, invited people from the most famous of
these groups, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They
have reportedly received financial support from Saudi
organizations to build their $3.5 million headquarters. They
say that in 2001 they released a survey saying that 69 percent
of Muslims in America say it is, quote, ``absolutely
fundamental or very important to have Wahhabi teachings at
their mosques.''
I don't believe that survey. They don't reflect the true
feeling of the American Muslim community. I am close to many of
the Muslim community in New York, so I can't believe those
statistics, but it shows you what they want people to believe.
So we have a problem here, and to make matters worse the
prominent members of the council's current leadership whom you,
Mr. Chairman, invited to the hearing today and who declined to
testify also have intimate connections with Hamas. That is
another terrorist group that has received funding from Saudi
Arabia and supports in many ways the tenets of Wahhabism. I
would like them to come here and explain. Maybe all of this is
wrong, and we would like to hear their side of the story, but
they said, no, they won't come.
We have talked in previous hearings about how these Wahhabi
groups have been given almost exclusive rights to hire clerics
in the Federal Bureau of Prisons and in the U.S. military to
select imams. I think our last hearing has helped start a
movement against that happening. In the prisons in New York
State where this happened, Muslims who wanted to practice Sunni
or Shiite Muslim were not allowed to get their own preacher and
some of them were actually physically assaulted for not wanting
to be part of Wahhabism. That is not pluralism, that is not the
American way. We should have people in the prisons doing that.
So, Mr. Chairman, we have an important road to go in these
hearings. I know this is not the final hearing. We are going to
keep doing it, and I salute you. We have to do more, and I hope
Secretary Powell and others will make it clear to the Saudi
royal family that if it does not end its awful deal with the
extreme Wahhabi clerics, it is going to end up ending its
relationship with the United States. I pray we all act before
it is too late.
Chairman Kyl. Thank you very much, Senator Schumer.
Senator Feinstein has another item.
Audience Participant. Mr. Chairman--
Chairman Kyl. Excuse me. We will recess the hearing until
the police have restored order.
Audience Participant. I would like to know why the
Judiciary Committee doesn't investigate the judges, why the
judges that Senator Feinstein has appointed--
Chairman Kyl. If you do not take your seat and resume
silence, then you will have to be removed from the room.
Audience Participant. Mr. Chairman, my question is why
don't you investigate the judges in this country, the
corruption, and all around the world the Jewish mafia.
Senator Feinstein. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Kyl. Senator Feinstein.
Senator Feinstein. I would ask unanimous consent to put a
statement in the record submitted by the American-Arab Anti-
Discrimination Committee, which has some concerns about the
written testimony.
Chairman Kyl. Without objection.
Senator Feinstein. I would also like to state that we
invited former Senator and Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Wyche
Fowler, to testify. He couldn't make it, given the short
notice, but I know you would join me in requesting that he
submit any testimony for the record he deems appropriate.
Chairman Kyl. Absolutely. Thank you.
Senator Feinstein. And may I ask that we hold the record
open for one week so we could receive additional testimony?
Chairman Kyl. Without objection.
Well, let us get to our panel. We do have two prominent
witnesses on our panel. Let me reintroduce them.
Simon Henderson lives in London and he gets the prize for
traveling the farthest distance today. I don't know what that
is, but welcome, Mr. Henderson. He is an analyst of Saudi
Arabia, operating through his consultancy, Saudi Strategies.
Mr. Henderson is a former veteran journalist with the London
Financial Times. He covered Tehran, the 1978 Iranian
revolution, and the 1979 U.S. hostage crisis. In 1978, he was a
correspondent for the BBC, in Pakistan, and also covered
Afghanistan.
Mr. Henderson has written a biography of Saddam Hussein,
Instant Empire: Saddam Hussein's Ambition for Iraq. He also has
written a widely-praised study of the Saudi royal family, After
King Fahd: Succession in Saudi Arabia. He remains an associate
of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and he has
recently completed a 3-year term as a member of what we here
would call a prestigious think tank, the Council of Chatham
House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs. He also
served on the executive Committee and the finance Committee of
that organization.
Mr. Matthew Epstein is the Assistant Director of Research
for The Investigative Project, a counterterrorism research
center with one of the largest non-governmental archives on
militant Islamic activity. Mr. Epstein is an attorney and an
expert on the sources and methods of terrorist financing,
including Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
He frequently serves as a terrorism expert for Fox News. Mr.
Epstein last testified in March of 2003 before the House
Committee on Financial Services' Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations on Saudi financial sponsorship of Al-Qaeda via
U.S. banks, corporations, and charities.
Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us.
Mr. Henderson.
STATEMENT OF SIMON HENDERSON, SAUDI STRATEGIES, LONDON, UNITED
KINGDOM
Mr. Henderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, distinguished
members of the Subcommittee.
The United States and other Western countries have usually
looked to Saudi Arabia in terms of its role as an oil supplier.
It has the largest oil reserves in the world and is the largest
oil exporter in the world. Oil also gives the government of
Saudi Arabia incredible wealth. This is important, but it is
only half the story. Saudi Arabia is also a leader of the
Muslim world, perhaps the leader, because of the fact that the
pilgrimage cities of Mecca and Medina lie within its borders.
Saudi Arabia's interests in the Islamic world contradict,
to my mind, its long relationship with the United States. In
order to maintain its leadership in the Islamic world, Saudi
Arabia sends aid and builds mosques that spread its Wahhabi
variant of Islam around the world. The money involved amounts
to billions of dollars each year.
Some of this money goes via official Saudi channels, some
goes via what are claimed to be non-official channels, and some
goes via Islamic charities linked to the Saudi government. Each
of these has in the past been linked to Al-Qaeda and Islamic
terrorism.
In my written testimony, I describe the system. It
stretches from pan-Islamic organizations such as the Islamic
Development Bank, which Saudi Arabia effectively controls, to
Saudi embassies across the world. Other organizations set up by
the Saudi government include the Muslim World League and the
World Association of Muslim Youth, and there are also charities
such as the International Islamic Relief Organization and Al-
Haramain which receive money from individuals, as well as the
Saudi government, supposedly for good works.
Coincidentally, the Wall Street Journal this morning has a
long investigative piece on page 1, column 1, about these
activities telling the story of a Saudi diplomat in Berlin with
links to 9/11 who has since returned home. The Saudi government
denies the activities of this diplomat. The Wall Street Journal
sought comment and was instead called by a PR consultant for
the Saudis working here in Washington. Who knows? The man or
one of his colleagues might be here today, as well.
His comments, carried by the Wall Street Journal, were
given on condition that neither the individual nor the company
he worked for were identified. This type of denial is frankly
unbelievable. The chief spokesman of Saudi Arabia--the chief
denier, to my mind--is Adel al-Jubeir. I attached to the end of
my testimony the transcript of an interview he gave to the BBC
in mid-August.
You might be interested to know, sir, that in this
transcript he refers to the charges against Saudi Arabia as ``a
lot of these is trying to connect the dots that don't exist.''
He had anticipated the name you gave to this hearing today.
What is significant, to my mind, about the interview is
that he even denies that six recently released British
expatriates held on fabricated charges of causing explosions
were tortured. I know they were tortured. British officials
told me a long time ago that they had been tortured. The
British officials also told me the bomb explosions for which
these men had been charged were caused by Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaeda
sympathizers in Saudi Arabia.
Adel al-Jubeir doesn't try in this interview to try to spin
his way out of this problem, but instead just issues a blanket
denial, saying the men were really guilty and were simply
pardoned. Mr. al-Jubeir's comments on these issues are, to my
mind, unbelievable. He is either ignorant or telling lies. This
fatally flaws the protestations of innocence on the other
charges he is asked about--Saudi cooperation with the U.S. and
Saudi funding of terrorism.
While Al-Qaeda also represents a threat to the Saudi royal
family, the Saudi government prefers to use compromise and co-
option to confrontation in dealing with this threat. This has
the effect, perhaps even the intention, of redirecting Islamic
terrorism against the United States and other countries.
The links between the Saudi government and charities and
terror groups were known as long ago as 1996, according to a
CIA-produced intelligence document which the Wall Street
Journal in another report on May 9 this year referred to. I
have also personally written about being told by British
officials that Osama bin Laden was being paid off by senior
Saudi princes from 1995 or 1996 until indeed after 9/11.
In recent days in London, from where I flew for this
hearing, the top police official has recently warned of the
high likelihood of suicide bombers, and rescue squads have
trained to evacuate an underground train--what you would call a
metro--that might have been attacked with biological or
chemical weapons.
As the example of Richard Reed, the shoe bomber, the
British convert to Islam now in a U.S. prison, shows, Al-Qaeda
can plan single attacks as well as the multiple attacks of 9/
11. Richard Reed was also a mercifully failed example of the
shared threat that the U.S., Britain, and other democratic
countries face. But none of us can afford to lower our guard,
nor be blind to continued links between Saudi Arabia and
Islamic terrorism.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Henderson appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chairman Kyl. Thank you, Mr. Henderson.
Mr. Epstein.
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW EPSTEIN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, THE
INVESTIGATIVE PROJECT, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Epstein. Mr. Chairman, Senator Feinstein, Senator
Schumer, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to
testify.
Nearly 2 years to the day from the horrifying attacks of
September 11, we must take a closer look at the organizations
that claim to speak for the Muslim community in America and how
they reached such positions of influence. Despite
administration outreach, large sections of the institutional
Islamic leadership in America do not support U.S.
counterterrorism policy, denouncing virtually every terrorism
indictment, detention, deportation, and investigation as
politically or religiously motivated attacks on Islam.
To give two quick examples, just recently a man named Abdul
Halim Alashkar, who has been identified as a senior Hamas
activist in the United States and is currently in detention for
refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigation into
Hamas, has been put into custody, and this is the second time
he has been put into custody. A press release by CAIR has
described the investigation and detention of Alashkar, the
first time in 1998, as ``politically-motivated investigation
prompted by and in the service of a foreign government.''
As a second example, there was a man arrested in south
Florida, Sami al-Arian, who was identified as a senior
Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader in the United States. A quote
from the CAIR board chairman, Omar Ahmed, in response to the
arrest: ``We are concerned that the government would bring
charges after investigating an individual for many years
without offering any evidence of criminal activity. This action
could leave the impression that al-Arian's arrest is based on
political considerations, not legitimate national security
concerns.'' I would like to note there was a 122-page
indictment for Sami al-Arian detailing the evidence against his
activities.
To be clear, I would like to state that militant Islamic
fundamentalism is not synonymous with Islam the religion. The
overwhelming majority of the world's more than 1 billion
Muslims do not support violence or militancy. The
radicalization of the Islamic political leadership in the
United States has developed parallel to the radicalization of
the Islamic leadership worldwide. This leadership promotes a
conspiratorial view that Muslims in the United States are being
persecuted on the basis of their religion and political beliefs
and an acceptance that violence in the name of Islam is
justified.
While such leaders protest that they have condemned
terrorism, and they have in the abstract, they refuse to
specifically condemn Islamist terrorist groups and leaders by
name or acknowledge responsibility for their acts of terror.
On that brief note, regarding the submission of the
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, I would like to
note that in my testimony I point out that one of their
spokesmen, a man named Hussein Ibish, as I quoted in my
testimony, stated during an interview with Geraldo Rivera--
Geraldo asked, ``How do you stand in Hizbollah and Hamas? Do
you condemn them?'' His response was, ``It is not up to me to
condemn people.'' Geraldo replies, ``But I want to know. How do
you feel about them?'' And the response is, ``No. I think
Hizbollah fought a very good war against the Israelis.''
Noticeably absent is any sort of condemnation against
Hizbollah.
In response to my quoting of Mr. Ibish, the ADC has put out
a statement saying ``Although Mr. Epstein disingenuously frames
the quotation he cites from Ibish's interview with Geraldo in
terms of killing 241 Americans, the subject was, in fact, never
raised in that broadcast.'' Noticeably absent from the ADC's
press release is a condemnation of Hizbollah.
Although the high visibility of such individuals and
organizations suggests broad leadership and significant
followings in the United States, by many accounts they draw
support from far fewer American Muslims than they claim fall
under their leadership.
Unfortunately, however, militant Islamists command a
disproportionate share of media and political attention in the
United States as a result of substantial funding received from
wealthy Persian Gulf benefactors, led by Saudi Arabia and their
Wahhabi brand of Islam.
With deep pocketbooks and religious conviction, the Saudi
Wahhabists have bankrolled a series of Islamic institutions in
the United States that actively seek to undermine U.S.
counterterrorism policy at home and abroad. In the United
States, the Saudi Wahhabis regularly subsidize the
organizations and individuals adhering to military ideology
espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood and its murderous offshoots
Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Al-Qaeda, all
designated terrorist organizations.
As my colleague Matthew Levitt pointed out in his testimony
which was submitted for the record, several of these U.S.-based
organizations have recently been shuttered and many of their
leaders indicted, including the Holy Land Foundation,
Benevolence International Foundation, and the Islamic Concern
Project run by Sami al-Arian.
Saudi largess has similarly been bestowed upon the Council
on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, a U.S.-based
organization purporting to promote a positive image of Islam
and Muslims in America and empower the Muslim community in
America.
However, in supporting claims of religious discrimination,
CAIR and its leadership has managed to disguise its true agenda
of supporting militant Islam and protecting the operations of
radical groups supporting terrorism.
A careful review reveals that CAIR was a creation of the
Hamas group in the United States. CAIR leaders have been heard
expressing their support for Hamas both in public and on FBI
surveillance taps. On that note, I would like to point out that
in 1993 the FBI surveiled Hamas meetings in the United States.
Quoting one of the leaders from the tapes, as the FBI
notes, Omar Ahmed, who is one of the heads of CAIR, stated at
that meeting that was recorded by the FBI, ``We, the Islamic
Association of Palestine, cannot as an American organization
say we represent Samah,'' which is Hamas backwards. ``Can we go
to Congressmen and tell them I am Omar Yayha, Chairman of the
union, Islamic Association of Palestine. Yasser Arafat does not
represent me, but Ahmed Yasin does?'' That is Sheikh Ahmad
Yassin, the head of Hamas, in his own words.
CAIR officers and employees have been recently indicted on
terrorism-related charges across the country. CAIR routinely
questions the motives behind U.S. counterterrorism policy and
law enforcement, as pointed out earlier. CAIR has received
hundreds of thousands of dollars from Saudi individuals and
organizations, including the World Assembly of Muslim Youth;
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal; the International Islamic Relief
Organization, which was based in the United States, a Saudi
organization; and the Islamic Development Bank.
Several other U.S.-based organizations also share CAIR's
militant ideology and Persian Gulf support. Organizations such
as the Islamic Society of North America, the American Muslim
Council, the International Institute of Islamic Thought, and
Mercy International share overlapping agendas and financial
sponsors.
The rise of militant Islamic leadership in the United
States requires particular attention if we are to succeed in
the war on terror. While the attacks of September 11 were
executed by Al-Qaeda, it is the bastians of militant Islam that
provide the recruits for tomorrow's Mohammed Attas and
political cover to conceal their operations.
In this battle, we must distinguish between the militant
Islamic leaders and the vast majority of Muslims in the United
States and around the world who do not support their violent
agenda. In preventing future attacks on American soil, we must
actively drain the pools from which Islamist terrorist
organizations recruit and confront the financial sponsors that
create them.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Epstein appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chairman Kyl. Thank you, Mr. Epstein, for that testimony.
Let me begin by asking each of you a couple of questions
and then we will proceed in turn.
Senator Durbin, if you would like to make any kind of
comments in connection with your questions, feel free to take
the time to do that.
Let me ask you, Mr. Henderson, since you have a great deal
of expertise with respect to Saudi Arabia--and reference has
been made to the walking of both sides of the street, in
effect, by leaders of Saudi Arabia--how would you describe the
tensions in the royal family which hamper cooperation between
the Saudi government and the United States?
Mr. Henderson. Sir, my understanding of that is that the
principal obstacle these days is Prince Naif, the man whom your
colleague referred to in his comments. Prince Naif is the
Interior Minister. He is the chief antiterrorism man. He is in
charge of security. He is a full brother of King Fahd. He is an
immensely powerful man.
Immediately after 9/11, I understand, or I have learned
that the Saudi Arabian monetary agency was prepared to hand
over to the United States authorities financial information
about Saudi individuals, but Naif stopped that. Naif is also, I
suspect, also an obstacle to the agreement which was recently
announced about a joint task force whereby FBI and other U.S.
Federal agents would be able to be in Riyadh to investigate
what was going on there amongst information seized during
recent raids against Al-Qaeda cells.
The trouble with that agreement is that I understand it was
based on a telephone conversation between President Bush and
Crown Prince Abdullah--because of Kind Fahd's ill health, the
de facto leader of Saudi Arabia. Frankly, that agreement isn't
worth anything unless Prince Naif signs into it. The past
record would be that he will sign into it slowly and partially,
at best.
The background to that is that Prince Naif, along with some
of his other full brothers, don't want Crown Prince Abdullah to
become king and are prepared to be obstacles against him
becoming king. So such power games within Saudi Arabia actually
handicap U.S.-Saudi investigations of terrorism.
Chairman Kyl. Can you also provide us with information
about the kind of compromises that the Saudi royal family has
made with Al-Qaeda, if, in fact, such compromises have been
made?
Mr. Henderson. I was at first astonished when I learned
that compromises had been made. I think the first report that I
saw was in U.S. News and World Report here in this country,
which referred to payoffs by senior Saudi princes to Osama bin
Laden following the 1995 bombing in Riyadh of a Saudi national
guard facility in which several American advisors were killed.
I followed that story up in London with British officials
and they confirmed it to me. They confirmed the identify of the
senior Saudi princes involved, and it was pact with the devil
that the Saudis had decided that they would pay off bin Laden
so that he caused trouble elsewhere. The elsewhere was
Tanzania, Kenya, the USS Cole, and finally 9/11, New York City
and Washington.
Chairman Kyl. Mr. Epstein, the Saudi groups that you
identified frequently say that they are anti-terrorist. You
acknowledge that point. Do you know how CAIR and other groups
that you discussed, like the AMC and ISNA, reacted to the
freezing of the Islamic charities here in the United States,
like Holy Land Foundation, Benevolence International, and
Global Relief?
Mr. Epstein. Without exception, the organizations that you
have named have never applauded a single freezing of assets,
including Holy Land Foundation, Benevolence International, or
Global Relief, or afforded any form of legitimacy on the
government action substantiating what the government has put
forth as significant evidence.
For example, CAIR Director Nihad Awad, speaking at an event
at Johns Hopkins recently, spoke about a charity that was shut
down, Benevolence International. The government had put forth
thousands of pages of evidence demonstrating how Benevolence
International was an Al-Qaeda front.
Nihad Awad--his exact statement is in my testimony--likened
it to the American Red Cross, that you can't expect that every
organization will know where every dollar goes, and so on and
so forth. But we have never seen support from these
organizations saying, yes, this organization supports
terrorism; it supports Islamic terrorism, Al-Qaeda, Hamas,
Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad. We either see silence or forms of
questioning saying, you know, it is suspicious, politically-
motivated attacks.
Chairman Kyl. Thank you.
Senator Feinstein.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One question for Mr. Henderson and one for you, Mr.
Epstein. While Al-Qaeda leaders had access to operatives from
more than 80 nationalities in recruiting the 9/11 hijackers,
they chose to recruit 15 Saudis. Yesterday, a New York Times
story offered one explanation and that paper reported that,
according to a Saudi official, Osama bin Laden told a top Al-
Qaeda operative to recruit Saudis for 9/11 in an effort to
further strain relations between the United States and the
kingdom. The Saudi official says he obtained this information
from U.S. intelligence sources.
Under this theory, Osama bin Laden shrewdly sought to
weaken the Saudi-American alliance by deliberately choosing
Saudis to be the foot soldiers of a hijacking operation, even
though their teams were led by an Egyptian, Mohammed Atta, and
other key leaders were from Lebanon and the United Arab
Emirates.
What do you think of this theory?
Mr. Henderson. I think it is just that; I think it is a
theory rather than fact. I read the story in the New York Times
yesterday. As a journalist, I was frankly incredulous that the
Saudi official was not identified in any way, whether he was
senior, junior, resident or non-resident.
I frankly believe the explanation which was given later in
the story that the principal reason that Saudis were chosen by
Osama bin Laden was that it was easier for Saudis to get visas
to the United States. This is a subject which you are already
familiar with, I know, and there have been accounts in the
media of people who weren't able to get visas to the United
States, so didn't have the opportunity of learning to fly and
kill themselves.
I think a second reason was that Osama bin Laden felt more
confident with other Saudis. Al-Qaeda is essentially a Saudi
and Egyptian organization, but led by Osama bin Laden, and I
find it more credible that he went for Saudis because he could
understand Saudis better than other nationalities.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Now, both you and Senator
Schumer have spoken about the Interior Minister for Saudi
Arabia, and there is a lot of open-source information about
him, as you know. The belief is that he is the person that
prevented the trial of the 13 Saudis indicted for killing 19
Americans in the Khobar Towers bombing. He has refused to turn
them over to the United States.
He is also the person last November who told a Saudi
newspaper that Zionists were responsible for the 9/11 attacks,
which to me seems to be a very irresponsible statement. I
gather when the former Director of the FBI went to Saudi
Arabia, according to recent articles, he wouldn't meet with
him, but had a very low-level individual meet with him on the
Khobar Towers bombing.
I am puzzled as to why the Saudi government would keep him
Interior Minister with the record that has been popping all
over a lot of open-source documents and, to the best of my
knowledge, have never really been refuted.
Mr. Henderson. It is a good question, and some of the
information in the public record about Prince Naif is there
because I wrote it. Prince Naif was also the character who was
responsible for arresting the six British expatriates to which
I referred in my testimony to charging them on false charges
that they had caused bomb explosions, and it was his men who
tortured these people. Prince Naif was also the person who
delayed any diplomatic deal on these men so that they could be
released. He is an awkward character.
It is not, though, within the power of Crown Prince
Abdullah to get rid of Prince Naif. Prince Naif is one of the
most important and strong people in Saudi Arabia. The usual
nomenclature for the Saudi elite is that King Fahd is number
one. Unfortunately, he is in bad health, so it is not a really
accurate reflection of his current power. Number two is Crown
Prince Abdullah. Number three is Prince Sultan, the Defense
Minister, and indeed the father of Prince Bandar, the
ambassador here. And number four is Prince Naif.
Prince Naif controls not only the police, but also the
coast guard, the customs officials, the security officials at
the airport. He also controls the mutawah, the religious
police. He has been Interior Minister for many, many years. He
is just too powerful. He cannot be gotten rid of.
Senator Feinstein. Well, I think that is very interesting
because I don't know how you can have a credible interior
minister and have him be allied with a country when they are
making claims as he made about the 9/11 incident.
Mr. Epstein, I would like to ask you about a man, Yassin
Qadi, Q-a-d-i. He is a Saudi citizen who was named a specially
designated global terrorist by the Secretary of the Treasury on
October 12, 2001. He was also a trustee of a charity called
Mufawa.
According to a government statement, accompanying the
designation, Mufawa--and I am quoting--``is an Al-Qaeda front
that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen. Blessed
Relief is the English translation. Saudi businessmen have been
transferring millions of dollars to bin Laden through Blessed
Relief,'' end quote.
Then, according to a New York Times article on October 13,
2001, this same gentleman was said to be a major investor and
director of Global Diamond Resources, a diamond exploration
company based in San Diego. Last September, Valentin
Roschacher, the Attorney General of Switzerland, was reported
as saying that the consensus of officials in all major banking
states was that Al-Qaeda had protected most of its assets by
shifting from cash to diamonds and gold before the September 11
attacks. Roschacher said that this enabled them to still have
enough money to carry out other attacks.
Can you provide any insight into this, whether that has
credibility that assets were transferred, anything about Mr.
Qadi that might be useful?
Mr. Epstein. I can tell you that Mr. Qadi by many accounts
has substantial business and financial holdings in the United
States--the diamond company in San Diego, as you mentioned. A
little under a year ago, there was a software company in Boston
named PTech that was raided by JTTD because Qadi was a major
investor. That was a software company selling software to the
U.S. Government.
Most recently, there was a bank in New Jersey called BMI
which in government documents shows that Qadi was one of the
financiers of this entity. There is actually a hearing tomorrow
here in Virginia for the former president of BMI. His name is
Soliman Biheiri. He has been indicted most recently, and in the
affidavit to the indictment it explains how they are looking at
Qadi and BMI as a major source of funding for Al-Qaeda and
Hamas.
One of the most disturbing elements along the lines of
these hearings today is in other government documents we have
seen that one of the biggest funders for BMI which is currently
under investigation by these documents is the International
Islamic Relief Organization, the Saudi charity based here in
Virginia. We have also seen that large amounts of money, to the
order of at least $400,000 for the International Islamic Relief
Organization, came through the Saudi embassy.
This was an investigation that was started by the FBI in
1997 and continues today. IIRO's offices were raided originally
in 1997 and most recently again in March of 2002, and they are
currently involved in an Al-Qaeda and Hamas investigation here
in the United States.
On the issue of diamonds, Douglas Farah, a Washington Post
report, has an outcoming book on the use of diamonds by Al-
Qaeda, also, and we have seen a lot of evidence that it is the
international diamond trade that has allowed Al-Qaeda to
reconstitute their financial operations.
So although I have not seen any specific information on
this company in San Diego connecting them in any way to
terrorism financing, except for the fact that Qadi, a
designated financier, was one of their investors and owners, I
haven't seen that they were involved in that trade or Al-Qaeda
financing.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Kyl. Senator Schumer.
Senator Schumer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
both of our witnesses for their testimony. I have some specific
questions. The first is to Mr. Henderson.
In your testimony, you point out that the Islamic
Development Bank has given large sums of money to CAIR, which
we know has ties to terrorism. You also say that the IDB even
funded the Al-Noor school in my home borough of Brooklyn, where
students were interviewed after 9/11 and expressed their
support for the fighters of Islam and said they wanted to
follow in their footsteps.
Is the IDB still supporting the Al-Noor school, and do you
have any more information on its activities and support for
Wahhabism or terrorism?
Mr. Henderson. Sir, the information that I put in my
testimony regarding the school in New York City was by virtue
of reading the New York Times. The IDB is a body which is
headquartered in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has the largest
shareholding in it. There are, I believe, 54 Islamic nations
which are all shareholders of it. The Saudi share-holding is
27.33 percent. The next largest share-holding, I believe, is
just over 10 percent. Most of the share-holdings, therefore,
are of trivial amounts of 1 percent and less. It is essentially
a Saudi-controlled organization.
I think the attitude of many of the countries which are
member states of the Islamic Development Bank is that this is a
convenient way of being given aid from Saudi Arabia. Kazahkstan
has recently played host to an IDB meeting and its president
referred to a loan they had just received from the IDB. I
suspect Kazahkstan would make sure that there is no Wahhabi
conditioning to such a loan. I am less certain that smaller
countries with less strong leaders can make the same sort of
conditioning.
Senator Schumer. How about the school?
Mr. Henderson. I have no knowledge whether there is more
money going into the school or any other schools, but I will
look into it.
Senator Schumer. Next question for both Mr. Henderson and
Mr. Epstein: There was a report, in fact, on NBC's ``Today
Show'' just this morning about a gentleman named Gerald Posner,
who has written a book about September 11 called Why America
Slept. Mr. Posner says that Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi
Ambassador to Britain, has given up to $2 billion to Osama bin
Laden to keep him in Afghanistan and from coming to Saudi
Arabia. Posner also indicated that a high-level Al-Qaeda
operative recently interviewed by American agents named several
high-level Saudi officials, not citizens, officials, as
supporters of Al-Qaeda.
What can you tell us about Prince Turki al-Faisal, his
support for bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, and do you have any
knowledge of others whom the high-level Al-Qaeda operative
might be referring to in terms of other high-level Saudi
officials?
Mr. Henderson. Sir, I have seen the report about Mr.
Posner's book. I haven't seen the book itself. I rely on what I
read about it in Time magazine.
Turki al-Faisal, currently the ambassador in Britain, was
previously, until ten days before 9/11, the Saudi intelligence
chief, that is the head of the Foreign Intelligence Service of
Saudi Arabia. He was summarily sacked at the end of August
2001. There are various theories on why he was sacked. There is
no clear information on why he was sacked.
It has always been my working assumption that as a liaison,
as Prince Turki was, between Saudi Arabia and the Taliban in
Afghanistan, his relations with Osama bin Laden were close,
even though the Saudis didn't like Osama bin Laden. I have
always assumed that a money flow was an element of that
relationship. I am told by foreign intelligence officials that
that is the primary function of the Saudi Foreign Intelligence
Service, to pay off problems. Prince Turki al-Faisal, who
incidentally is a brother of the Saudi Foreign Minister, Saud
al-Faisal, denies these allegations.
On the question of other officials, I am aware of the three
princes whom Mr. Posner mentions. They inconveniently for
anybody following this up, all happen to be dead. I had not
previously heard their names in relation to any payoffs of bin
Laden or of Al-Qaeda. The names that I had heard were more
senior. None of these three officials, to my understanding, had
an official government job.
Senator Feinstein. Is he talking about the three that were
killed.
Mr. Henderson. Yes.
Senator Schumer. That were killed?
Mr. Henderson. No, no, no, the three which are dead.
Senator Feinstein. They are dead. Excuse me.
Mr. Henderson. To the best of my knowledge, the way it was
reported one died of a heart attack. The second one died when
he was driving to the funeral of the first because he was
driving too fast. Both of those stories I find credible. The
third story is the prince died of thirst in the desert. In the
Saudi press agency account of it--
Senator Schumer. Put out there with no water, that might
have happened.
Mr. Henderson. No explanation was given, but when you are
dealing with Saudi Arabia, lack of explanation doesn't
necessarily mean mystery. It just might mean that they can't be
bothered to give you more information.
Senator Schumer. Who are the higher-level officials you
referred to?
Mr. Henderson. Well, I understand you are probably
protected as a Senator by all sorts of privilege. I as an
individual based in London am not protected by privilege, and
since I don't have documentary evidence against these
officials, I would prefer not to mention it in public. For your
own purposes, I am prepared to tell you afterwards, sir.
Senator Schumer. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Kyl. I might say that when I pre-interviewed Mr.
Henderson, he was perfectly willing to share the information. I
confess that I wasn't familiar enough with our own libel laws
to know whether witnesses would be protected from libel in that
circumstance, and therefore perhaps it was better that the
names not be mentioned publicly.
Senator Schumer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Kyl. Senator Durbin.
Senator Durbin. Senator Kyl, first, thank you for inviting
me. I am not a formally a member of your Subcommittee, but you
were kind enough to invite me to attend.
Chairman Kyl. And I might say that one reason for that is
the great interest that you had expressed in this subject in
previous situations. Of course, you are always welcome.
Senator Durbin. Allow me to commend you, as well, for
broaching a subject which is controversial involving the Saudis
and terrorism.
I would like to also commend Mr. Epstein because I heard
his remarks. I am sorry, Mr. Henderson, I wasn't here for your
own.
Mr. Epstein, I think you made a very important comment that
I hope is shared by all who follow this record that President
Bush is right. Our war on terrorism is not a war against Islam.
I don't want to mischaracterize your position, but I believe
you have said that the majority of people who follow this
religion are peace-loving people, and I think it is important
for us to keep that front and center in this conversation.
There are others who have said things which I think are
inflammatory, and I think they don't really serve our cause
here. We need to focus on those who are responsible for the
terrorism, regardless of their religious belief. But it is a
very serious mistake for us to generalize about people who are
of the Islamic faith, and thank you for that comment.
You did say in your statement, though--in your written
statement, you said ``The radicalization of the Islamic
political leadership in the United States has developed
parallel to the radicalization of Islamic leadership worldwide.
The institutional Muslim leadership in the U.S. mirroring the
rise of militant Islam has grown increasingly anti-Western and
anti-U.S.''
I would hope that if there is a future hearing involving
this, Mr. Chairman, that other than the CAIR organization,
which apparently from what I have read is unusual in its
extreme rhetoric and its association with groups that are
suspect, there are many mainstream groups of Muslim Americans
who fully support this war against terrorism and I would hope
that they would be invited to speak to their heart-felt beliefs
about this effort so that our characterization is fair across
the board.
Mr. Epstein. I think that would be an important hearing,
too. I agree.
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much.
I am going to ask each of you if you have read the Vanity
Fair piece that recently was published relative to allowing
Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family, to leave the
United States at a time when virtually all air flights had been
shut down after September 11, 2001.
Are either of you familiar with that piece, and could you
comment, Mr. Henderson or Mr. Epstein, on that? I don't know if
you have any personal knowledge as to whether it occurred. It
appears that we can't find anyone to verify within our
Government that permission was given, though there are
eyewitnesses to these planes being loaded with Saudi nationals
and members of the bin Laden family and allowed to leave
without any investigation or interrogation.
Are either of you familiar with this episode?
Mr. Henderson. I am familiar with the Vanity Fair piece,
which I read with great interest. I was aware that Saudis were
leaving the United States and I tackled a friend who is an
official in the administration on how this was able to happen.
He said on actually leaving the United States, if you want to
leave the United States, it is easy enough to leave the United
States, but he shrugged with a mixture of, I think, less
ignorance but more desperation that these planes were able to
fly around the United States, picking up people, and then fly
out of the United States.
I am personally shocked and horrified that there appears to
be no--I am not even sure the people who know or should know
have a list of who was on those planes, and there was no
attempt made as far as I can make out to ask the relatives of
Osama bin Laden ``when did you last hear from your brother,
cousin, or whoever it was?''
Senator Durbin. This article also went into Prince Bandar's
relationship with our Government and the relationship of the
Carlyle Group, which as I understand it represents the Saudi
government on Capitol Hill.
Can either of you comment on the Carlyle Group and what
role they have played involving Saudi relations with our
Government in light of our concern about terrorism?
Mr. Henderson. I think you might be confused between
Carlyle and Corvis. Carlyle is an investment group to which the
bin Ladens were investors before--after 9/11, Carlyle got rid
of its bin Laden investment.
Senator Durbin. No. The Carlyle Group is a firm which
involves many highly-elected former officials of our Government
who are now representing, as I understand it, the Saudis in
many instances involving issues.
Mr. Henderson. I didn't realize they were representing--
Senator Durbin. Are you familiar with this, Mr. Epstein?
Mr. Epstein. I have seen reports. I am not intimately
familiar with the Carlyle Group and its activities. I think in
recent reports I saw, they were also--one troubling thing I
read was the involvement of the bin Mafoos family. I think that
what we have seen and it is hard to distinguish between is
several months ago a letter came out called the Golden Chain,
which was a list of Al-Qaeda's original financiers. On there
was a list of names, such as bin Mafoos and al-Raghi and Kamel,
the largest Saudi families.
It is also those names that have substantial investments
and holdings in the United States, and particularly in
companies that are connected with our Government in one way or
another, indirectly or directly. So the question is where is it
known that terrorism financing is taking place? Is it Halid bin
Mafoos, the head of the family, who is controlling investments,
or is it someone down the chain? How did the name end up on the
Golden Chain letter and other instances of terrorism financing?
Senator Durbin. I won't take any more time of the
Subcommittee other than to say, as I look into this, as the
Subcommittee looks into this, what a strange relationship we
have with Saudi Arabia. Our dependence on their oil has led us
to, I think, reach conclusions in relation to this Nation we
wouldn't reach in relation to any other nation when you look at
the fact that 2 years ago, so many Saudis were involved in this
attack of 9/11.
It is also amazing to me the political power of the Saudis
on Capitol Hill. It is overwhelming in terms of their allies
and what they are able to accomplish. I think many times our
Government has greeted suspicious conduct by the Saudis with a
wink and a nod because of our oil dependence and their strong
political connections on Capitol Hill, and I think that is an
element which we cannot ignore if we are truly seeking to get
to the root causes of terrorism.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Kyl. I would like to comment directly on what
Senator Durbin just said because it is a very profound
statement, I think, and important for us to take into account
as we continue our examination and as our Government continues
to determine how it proceeds in dealing with Saudi Arabia.
Relations with important foreign countries are frequently very
complex. They frequently involve a mix of help and hindrance,
and certainly the Saudi relationship is Exhibit A in that
regard.
We have problems in dealing with powerful countries. Our
old nemesis, Russia, which has been very helpful to us in
certain respects, continues to be somewhat problematic in other
respects. But in many ways, the relationship we have now with
Saudi Arabia is the most perplexing of all.
I have made this comment before and I want to make it
again. Saudi Arabia as a country, as a government, has done
some very important things for and with the United States over
the years. But because of the factors that we have discussed
here today, it has also been very--some of its actions have
been detrimental to our ability to properly fight the war on
terror.
It is difficult for our Government to candidly discuss all
of these things, but I am determined as the Chairman of this
Subcommittee, and have very much appreciated the very
bipartisan way in which other members of the Judiciary
Committee have joined in, to try to, in the same way that we
make it very clear that we are not in any way questioning the
Muslim faith or Islam, unveil problems with the Saudi
government with rich Saudis and problems with some of the
leadership of the Wahhabi sect here in the United States or
people who support the Wahhabi sect and the problems that that
is causing us.
I think what the Senator from Illinois said is very, very
important. We have to be sophisticated enough to be able to
differentiate, to draw these distinctions, to do so fairly, but
to use our powers here to follow the leads where they take us
and try to take the action that we need to in order to get the
most out of the Saudi government in terms of supporting our
effort in the war on terror, and not be afraid to go into these
areas even though there may be powerful people on the other
side and even though some of these distinctions we may have to
draw very, very carefully because they can result in charges of
bigotry or cowboyism or however you might want to describe it.
So I really appreciate the comments the Senator from
Illinois made, and I want Senator Feinstein to respond and also
anybody on the panel.
Senator Feinstein. Mr. Chairman, we called the FBI about
the Vanity Fair story and about some knowledge about flights
leaving this country after 9/11. On an unclassified basis, I
would like to read in the record this statement from the FBI.
``During the early days after September 11, the FBI was
aware that flights containing Saudis were leaving the United
States to return to Saudi Arabia. Further, with the INS, the
FBI took appropriate steps to ascertain the identities of
individuals on the flights that we were aware of,'' end quote.
Any more than that they would like to have in a classified
setting, which hopefully we will have shortly.
Chairman Kyl. Mr. Epstein, you had a comment
Mr. Epstein. I would like to add to your comment that what
is very important to isolate and understand where Saudi Arabia
is funding the extremism in this country and the organizations
that are attempting to undermine our counterterrorism policy.
One of the groups which was discussed in my testimony most
recently has had three of their members and officials arrested
on terrorism or bank fraud-related charges. One of the
individuals, Ismail Royer, had traveled to Pakistan and trained
with a terrorist organization, Lashkar E-Tayyiba, which is
considered a jihad organization that targets Indians, but it is
an Al-Qaeda-associated international jihad organization.
Another one had passed hundreds of thousands of dollars to
Marzook, Hassan Al-Ashi. Marzook is a Hamas leader and also a
designated terrorist.
So in separating out the issues where you have raised that
Saudi Arabia has helped, it is also important to isolate what
is going on in the important, where is this money going, who
are they funding. Are they funding organizations where their
members and officials are engaged in terrorist-related and
terrorist support-related activity?
Chairman Kyl. I also associate myself with the remarks of
Senator Feinstein, who said that people cannot be on both sides
of this issue, paraphrasing what the President said that
countries have to choose which side they are on in this war on
terror.
Mr. Henderson, a final comment?
Mr. Henderson. I would just like to make a clarification
and an addition to some information on Prince Naif just to make
the point of how serious not only the implications of your
question were, but also the answer I gave.
Prince Naif is number four. Without going into the
mechanisms of succession in Saudi Arabia too much, he is
essentially fourth in line to be king. King Fahd is 82 and
already ailing. Crown Prince Abdullah is 80. Prince Sultan,
number three, is 79. Prince Naif is a comparatively youthful
70.
I think the United States should be aware that within a few
years, if nothing else happens, Prince Naif might be king. Not
only will he be king, but he will be king for some time. Given
the difficulties that we are facing today apparently with
Prince Naif, I think that is quite an implication.
Chairman Kyl. I would like to continue this hearing.
Unfortunately, we all have conflicting schedules that are going
to require that we adjourn the hearing, but the record is going
to be kept open for one week. Members will have until 5:00 p.m.
on Wednesday, September 17, to submit questions, and I have two
pages of questions that I am going to submit to both of you.
The first one I will simply tell you and then will appreciate
your answer on the record, since we do have to adjourn the
hearing now.
When the Saudis, including the Saudi princes, make
contributions to Islamic charities, or even paying off bin
Laden, I am curious about whose money they are using. Is it
their own? Is it their family money? Is it government money in
any way? These are the kinds of things that I think we want to
complete our record with and I will be very interested in the
answers that you provide.
First of all, let me thank both of you again. I very much
appreciate your traveling from Great Britain, Mr. Henderson,
and, Mr. Epstein, for your tireless work in this regard. I know
you put in a great deal of work.
I thank Senator Feinstein again for all of the work that
she has provided over the years.
We will have more hearings on this same subject matter, and
I appreciate all of you in the audience for your indulgence
with respect to our schedule here today. Thank you very much.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:12 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Questions and answers and submissions for the record
follow.]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.138
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3083.140