Report: Donations to Hillary Clinton's campaign from Muslims under investigation for jihad financing

"Mirza, who also has given to other candidates, including Republicans, is said to act on behalf of Saudi millionaire Yassin al-Qadi, who the U.S. Treasury Department in October 2001 blacklisted as an al-Qaida financier"

...terrorists buying political influence from all political parties....nothing new here....now they are buying votes....

Ban Muslim Immigration.

Here's an image of Alamoudi donation to Hillary.

... and here's Alamoudi's donation to Kucinich-- in October 2003.

Not as dramatic as Alamoudi's 9/11/01 donation to Cynthia McKinney (which led to her electoral defeat); but still damaging.

You can query individual donations here.

Re: Report: Donations to Hillary Clinton's campaign from Muslims under investigation for jihad financing

They fear the election of Rudy Giuliani. Though I don't agree with Giuliani's past pronouncements on some social and other issues, he is a typical chameleon politician who will adapt to his environment on most issues. On the issue of Jihad, my hunch is that he knows the truth very well, that if he ever spoke of what he knows in public, the public would become frightened by what the "religion of peace" people desire to do to the Kuffirs in the US and elsewhere. Giuliani also understands the critical role of the gas station in Jihad.

Once again, Saudi money -- the same money that has prevented the American government since 1973 from taxing gasoline and oil so that slow but steady and certain rises could be factored in by those wishing to invest in other forms of energy, without fear of any sudden slide in oil prices. From Fred Dutton, an old Kennedy operative, to James Akins and John C. West (who, even while he was ambassador in Riyadh, was arranging a job for his old friend Crawford Cook to be hired by the Saudis for public relations work -- brushing up their image), to Raymond Close, who brought his career as C.I.A. station chief to a premature end, taking early retirement in 1977 so as to go immediately into business with two Saudis, one of them a Saudi intelligence official. Shall we list all the other gifts from the Al-Saud? When the boy from Hope, Arkansas became President, suddenly it was the turn of the University of Arkansas to have a chair endowed by the Saudis, as they had done elsewhere. And those gifts by the Saudis and other rich Arabs to the "James Baker Institute" (resident apologist and misunderstander of Islam is the former State Department official, and disastrous ambassador to Syria, one Edward Djerijian, who hasn't the faintest about Islam, and consequently, about the Middle East), and to Presidential libraries -- Carter, Clinton, Bush the First (also known as "Bush the Respectable," quite unjustifiably), and so on. And while it was not Saudi money, but a rich Lebanese contractor, who got the ball rolling for John Esposito and his "Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding" it is now Saudi money that now sustains that renamed center for Washington-based Muslim apologetics).

In the entire history of the Soviet Union, seven or eight billion dollars may have been spent on propaganda abroad on behalf of Soviet Communism. The Saudis have sunk about 100 billion, and they have no desire, no inclination, to stop, on behalf of the Al-Saud and Islam. Mosques everywhere in the Western world, treated by the Arab ambassadors (as when the huge mosque in Rome opened) not as religious centers, but as beachheads in a war, staking claims as visibly as 1300 years ago a claim was staked to Jerusalem by the Ummayad caliph in Damascus who decided that the phrase "the farthest mosque" must mean the city holy to Jews and Christians, and that he would locate the place where Muhammad ascended into Heaven, that famous "miraj" or aller-retour to the Seventh Heaven, also known as the Night Journey, smack on top of the Temple Mount, very likely even appropriating a Byzantine martyrium, and renaming it as the Dome of the Rock.

It should not be beyond the capabilities of those who are supposed to be protecting us to read the Al-Saud and the rest of the Saudis the riot act, and to threaten to seize their assets in this country if the flow of Saudi money, intended to spread Islam, and to remove all barriers to that spread -- barriers such as the American Constitution -- continue. What can they do in retaliation? They still need to sell oil. They still need the West, and America, for all of their medical needs, their education, their everything. They still need to keep their investments, especially those in non-liquid assets. They still need to sell their oil. Successive American governments have been full of people convinced that America needs to placate, or to treat with great solicitousness, Saudi Arabia. It isn't true. It is based on a complete misunderstanding of who depends on whom for their security. The Al-Saud have only, in the end, the American military to keep them propped up. And their own domestic enemies, or enemies in the Camp of Islam, can make the life of the Al-Saud very difficult, if not today, then tomorrow. It is not clear that the Americans or other Westerners have a stake in the survival of the Al-Saud. And we certainly should not let the Al-Saud ever again presume as much, or finance, directly or indirectly, that small army of Western hirelings who have behaved so badly, so traitorouysly, though outwardly, they are merely perfectly respectful formwer government officials. They've done more damage to the West then Aldrich Ames ever did.

Let's see if this story just goes away, like the Chinese busboys and dishwashers in New York donating $2000 each to Hillary last month.

While the media reported the previous story, they confined their questions to things like, "were the contributions voluntary?"

I didn't read a single article that speculated on what anyone with half a brain knows...that the money was funneled from one or two affluent donors through these hapless "contributors," in a clear violation of campaign finance regulations.

But like the general public, the media has a short attention span.

It will blow over, the media wants Hillary.

Whaaaaaaat.....? Hillary accepts campaign money from America's enemies.........?

I suppose the next thing I'll hear is that there's NO SANTA CLAUS.

The good news is that within the last three weeks
Boeing announced a solar cell that increased the collection output from 12% to 40%! Try getting that kind of increase on your mutual funds.
Having been personally aquainted with solar engineering that was purchased and shelved in the 70's, I can tell you when it behooves the American corporations to dump the mideast oil they can and will do it.
The government awarded a prize (this spring to a company in Arkansas for a solar collection device in a fabric tape suitable for sewing into tents, greenhouses, etc.
Somewhere in the USA there is a twelve year old who is going to be p**o'd that his parents can't afford something he wants and will go out there and solve that expensive gas problem!
Capitalism will solve problems that no other system can.

The jihadis love the Dems.

.They both claim the same grievances with America

Isn'ty it strange that we have to take on tne lefties in our midst who hate America ?

Sure would be fine if they came on board and helped us defeat this. enemy

Hugh: Your postings are invaluable, compelling, and indisputable, but I differ with you on one score...that of taxing oil even further. There's no need for this, as crude oil is now over $90 a barrel, with no end in sight, due in part to geopolitics and the need for more refineries to process crude to meet growing world demand. There is plenty of oil, and much of it is in non-hostile territory such as Alberta and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. The world, to paraphrase John Stossel, is awash in oil, or in that which can be processed and converted into same. We must be realistic and accept that our dependence on oil will be long-term, and we must continue to find and tap new oilfields, or develop new ways of synthesizing oil (e.g. from organic waste), without relying upon supplies coming from hostile and malevolent regimes, such as those in dar al-Islam. It can be done. It must be done. And we need to build or otherwise seriously expand domestic refinery capacity. Now.

commonsense:
One problem I see with your advice is this. It doesn't recognize that the oil market is a single global market. If we buy even from the friendliest of regimes, we still increase the worldwide demand for oil, and thus put upward pressure on the worldwide price for oil. So it may not matter in the least which regime we buy from. The only way it would matter is if no nation in the world bought from the bad regimes selling oil.

We have heard enough noise about the "Israeli [i.e., 'Jewish'] Lobby--isn't it about time for media publicity and definitive works on "The SAUDI CASH PIPELINE," "The JIHAD CONNECTION," "SUBVERSION: DA'WA IN AMERICA," The WAHABBI LOBBY," "BLINDING AMERICA," and "INFLUENCE: The HOUSE OF SAUD'S HIGH-POWERED AGENTS AND HIDDEN AGENDA"?

In the entire history of the Soviet Union, seven or eight billion dollars may have been spent on propaganda abroad on behalf of Soviet Communism.-Hugh

The America First Committee received large amounts of money to keep the US out of WW2. Both the Nazis and Stalin (up till 6/22/1941) aided them. They were made up of Leftists, Jew-haters, Communists, "peace activists", etc. That alliance has come back in our time re Jihad (including the shout-downs) and once again the funding for it is coming from a foreign source. I now see that the core of this problem is the gas station. Everything else is really manageable without the gas station. "I was blind, but now I see..."

commonsense,

I also agree with you that our dependence on oil is likely to be long term, but I don't agree that long-term dependence on oil is "realistic." I think it's a sign of our lack of realism.

The main obstacles to getting off oil are not technical. They are political and related to current vested interests. A switch from oil would hurt some people's economic interests, no question about it. But that could be ameliorated in numerous ways.

If you are a libertarian, commonsense, then you could consider the elimination of welfare for oil companies: elimination of all the subsidies and special tax breaks they get.

I think there is also something to the argument that oil companies externalize many of their costs on the rest of the world: Islamo-fascism, pollution, etc. If oil companies were required to take responsibility for even the tiniest portion of those externalized costs, it would raise the cost of gas significantly. We are arguably not paying the real price of gasoline, which dirties the environment and funds the most powerful enemies the West has probably ever had.

If you want to avoid any rise in taxes, why not suggest lowering taxes on one part of the economy and raising them on gasoline? You might say that's social engineering and be against it. For myself, I lean libertarian, but I'm not a purist. I think national security and the survival of the West require action as soon as possible to end dependence on oil.

I didn't read a single article that speculated on what anyone with half a brain knows...that the money was funneled from one or two affluent donors through these hapless "contributors," in a clear violation of campaign finance regulations.

But like the general public, the media has a short attention span. - Posted by: Cornelius

Hapless? I wonder. What with the NY state Governor pushing to get 'illegal' immigrants drivers licenses, a document necessary to register to vote, the question is whether these 'hapless' donors are providing more than simple financial laundry services.

Another added pressure in U.S. relations with China, the immigrants who come to this country as stowaways. Many arriving here at west coast ports hidden in container ships. We have a report from Mike James of KCTS- Seattle.

Hillary has another interesting connection in her “traveling chief of staff”, Huma Abedin.

In a quote from an article in The New York Observer (url below), “[Huma] certainly feels a deep responsibility to encourage more mutual understanding between her beliefs and culture and American culture..."

http://www.observer.com/2007/hillary-s-mystery-woman-who-huma?page=0%2C2

"The back story, as it were, begins 32 years ago in Kalamazoo, Mich., where Ms. Abedin, who declined to participate in this article, lived until the age of 2. Her family then relocated to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where she lived until returning to the States for college. She attended George Washington University. Her father, who died when she was 17, was an Islamic and Middle Eastern scholar of Indian decent. He founded his own institute devoted to Western-Eastern and interfaith understanding and reconciliation and published a journal focusing on Muslim minorities living in the diaspora. Her mother, a renowned professor in Saudi Arabia, is Pakistani."

"...Ms. Abedin has indeed become a trusted advisor to Mrs. Clinton, especially on issues pertaining to the Middle East, according to a number of Clinton associates. At meetings on the region, they say, Ms. Abedin’s perspective is always sought out."

Traeh, thank you for your thoughts. I believe, as I stated earlier, that there is no true shortage of oil, and our strategy should be to drastically increase supplies to the extent that non-hostile nations need not buy any from hostile regimes. Let the price of crude fall, and oil revenues to those regimes diminish to the point where they are in economic distress and no longer able to fund jihad and peddle their political influence here and elsewhere in the world. This actually happened - briefly - about fifteen years ago (I forget exactly), when a barrel of crude fell back to $8, and there were fears of deflation. The Saudi economy was hard-hit for a while before demand increased and prices went back up to around $22 a barrel. I understand that there will be problems motivating Big Oil to work toward aggressively increasing supplies so that prices will fall, but maybe (I hate to say it, but in the interest of national security, it may be a good idea) government subsidies and tax breaks to the oil industry should be considered (yes, ugh)to make this feasible.

If Madame Mao wasn't the annointed one of the media this might have killed off her career. But she shall overcome, just like her hubby did. No scandal is bad enough to bring down these cretins.
But I guess she can't be blamed-most politicians would do the same. Islamania seemingly isn't viewed as a threat but as a generous donor. No wonder it makes so many inroads in this country.

commonsense,
It's true that increasing world oil supply and thus lowering the world price of oil would be better than doing nothing. But probably the better way to reduce the world oil price would be to increase the supply of non-oil energy sources, while reducing the demand for oil. We help vicious governments like Iran and Saudi Arabia when we use oil. And we help also oil-producer Venezuela, which seems to be increasingly in bed with Tehran.

Your solution depends on buying from decent governments. But as I mentioned, buying oil only from decent governments is unlikely to reduce the price that vicious regimes can charge for oil -- unless one could create an effective worldwide boycott of the oil produced by vicious regimes. But such a boycott seems very unlikely. Unfortunately there will for a long time to come be major buyers (for example China) readily available to purchase the oil of Islamic dictatorships like Saudi Arabia and Iran, provided those dictatorships are in any way convenient, lower the price at least one penny below the world price, or offer even the slightest deal-sweeteners. The oil market really is a single global market. If we buy oil only from decent regimes, the most that seems likely to do is lead to the appearance of middleman traders and middleman nations, who will buy the oil from the dictators and then resell it to us. That helps little or not at all.

I support boycotts and trade sanctions against dictatorships, but I think it's probably unrealistic to imagine that we'll be able through such measures to lower the price nasty regimes can get for oil, or reduce their oil revenues.

That's why your strategy of increasing world supplies of oil seems flawed to me.

Supply increase, which you propose, is much better for Iran and Saudi Arabia than demand decrease and switching to other energy sources.

I could go with you maybe so far as to agree that in the short term it probably makes sense to do both: increase supplies and reduce demand for oil. But looking beyond a short-term view, we should increase non-oil energy sources and reduce demand for oil as rapidly as possible.

Back to topic from the diversions...
I'm more concerned about far more serious HITlery "donations" from far more nefarious sources, and far greater amounts (using poor people as proxies to launder it)...
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-donors19oct19,0,4231217.story?coll=la-home-center

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10202007/news/nationalnews/hills_cash_eyed_as_chinese_lau.htm

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1679979,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295031,00.html
(hahaha, which "charity"? soros? LOL)

reminiscient of a 1996 re-election campaign where $125,000,000 came about...from the LippoUSA group, via John Houang, Charlie Trie, from the Lippo Group in Indonesia, via the peoples liberation army.
(which is still out because at least one of them is still in office, which in turn is a really big clue, and continuous interference run by that ever-protective "refuse to convict, no matter what" 5th columnist, waxman )...of course, that's another forum entirely.

I would contribute $$$ to Hillary Clinton's ANTI-PRESIDENTIAL campaign, but it doesn't exist. Hillary is dangerous and all wrong for our country, and it's interesting that even terrorists know that she would be good for THEM.

It doesn't?
http://www.stophillary.com/
http://www.hillaryproject.com/
http://www.againsthillary.com/
just do a search "stop hillary" and see what comes up.

I would suggest just an "anybody but" donation, but not so sure about the others at that.
I'd suggest saving it until after the primaries.

Gee Hillary, why do terrorists know that you're on THEIR side? What is it about you that signals your support for them? Hmmmm.......

Hillary Clinton For President -- Vote NO WAY!!!!

The oil price is at an all time high, but this can be a positive.

It gives the west the incentive to
a) look for alternatives
b) to "harvest" oil from other sources that were once considered uneconomical (shale oil).

I can't wait to see those greedy sauds self-destruct!

I am not a US citizen, but I wouldn't vote for Hilary.There have also been rumours around the 'blogs re her relationship with Ms. Abedin.
Who knows?

It's a bit like this down here. The Labor candidate would just about have to commit murder to not be elected right now.

I guess that Hillary's support for illegal immigrants from other cultures is very attractive to islam since she is not opposed to screwing her own in order to get the non-citizen voting blocks.

I guess that Hillary's support for illegal immigrants from other cultures is very attractive to islam since she is not opposed to screwing her own in order to get the non-citizen voting blocks.

ElizaDoolittle, I watched that video of Nick Griffin of the BNP. I see why Robert Spencer repudiates the BNP.

The video talk was pretty good, but then in the question and answer session we find out that Nick Griffin also subscribes to a racial philosophy. Before the Q&A, one could get the impression that he was merely in a fight with totalitarian theocracy and not concerned with race. But in the Q&A, we find out that only white people can join the BNP. Griffin claims that the reason for that is that the BNP wishes to protect human diversity, and that under current trends, the world's 5000 plus ethic groups will within a short number of years be reduced to 800 or so (through intermixing). He goes on to say that his party gets on quite well with Sikhs and Hindus, but considers them "friends, not family." If he's being honest, it's a form of racialism that is not as malignant as Hitler's or the KKK's, but it's still, to my mind, wrong-headed and verging on barbarism to focus in that way on race. When race becomes so important, then biology and its imperatives (nature red in tooth and claw, survival of the fittest, might makes right) become more important than human-spiritual values like liberty, brotherhood, equality.

It was also evident from the talk that Griffin and the BNP are prepared to leave Israel to its fate as far as Iran's nuclear holocaust plans are concerned. That again shows that he feels solidarity not on the basis of the common values of free democracies, but on the basis of a racial category (white Anglo-Saxon). That way lies a graveyard for civilization, in my opinion.

The Q& A session showed that one of Griffin's and the BNP's prime motivations -- maybe the prime motivation, is racial solidarity. He does talk supportively of freedom of speech and Western values, so it's a little hard to know exactly what to make of him. But my sense is that his racialism is what he gives highest priority to.

He more or less equates himself with Geert Wilders, too, but isn't that very inaccurate, at best? Geert Wilders is anti-Islamo-fascist, but is not at all preoccupied with race, as far as I know.

"...Ms. Abedin has indeed become a trusted advisor to Mrs. Clinton, especially on issues pertaining to the Middle East, according to a number of Clinton associates. At meetings on the region, they say, Ms. Abedin’s perspective is always sought out."

Posted by: annakita at November 5, 2007 10:41 AM

There are some provacative rumors circulating about Hillary's relationship with Ms. Abedin; I won't provide any of the sordid details but you can use your imagination. She sounds like a classic Mata Hari to me, planted by the Saudis to inflitrate our government and pass along state secrets. She is rumored to be indispensable to Clinton so she probably has access to sensitive, classified data. Rumor is that she also answers Ms. Clinton's home telephone on weekends and evenings, as if she lived there.

I wonder if Bill has hit on her yet. If the rumors are true, I don't think Hillary will sit still if he goes after this one. Nasty gossip shouldn't be repeated but in Hillary's case, the rules don't apply.

Hillary has a high threshold for pain in her personal life, so will she use that same threshold for pain in her political life?

She should have kicked ole Bill to the curb YEARS ago, so it makes me wonder if she'll be able to kick Iran to the curb at ANY time.

(just one of MANY reasons why she's a "NO" for me)

He hasn't outlived his usefulness to her...yet.
He probably prays that he doesn't either...she road his coattails to power, and she's not where she wants to be yet...the oval office, which she'd kill you, me, the whole world, to get.

If Hilary gets into her dream house(White) is she going to molest some interns too, just to get even with Billy boy.

Nah...she's more like the praying mantis at mating time. Just ask vince foster...ooops, never mind. lol

We in the blogosphere are aware of these connections on Hillary's part.

How do we get the news out to the rest of America? Fox News won't carry it if Prince Alawid puts his foot down. Remember his blackout of the burnings in Paris?

It's already out...and with a negative rating of 50%+, she has no chance anyway.
Fox is busy with far larger amounts from far more nefarious ones than a couple losers from the 'stans,
like the communist occupation forces on mainland china laundered loot...from the peoples liberation army
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Hillary_Clinton_s_Chinese_Laundered_Cash
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10202007/news/nationalnews/hills_cash_eyed_as_chinese_lau.htm
http://raymondpronk.wordpress.com/2007/10/25/clintons-campaign-contributions-chinese-communist-candidate/
http://tailrank.com/3412822/Dishwashers-for-Clinton
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/10/edwards-attacks.html
(pretty sad when a sorosista getting loot from soros is attacking, forcing an entire self-destruction mode of an entire racket, errr I mean organization, from within)
hey...it worked for bill in 1996 through john houang , charlie trie & the lippo group...
like hubby, like...errrrr, never mind...lol
(oh, and I didn't even mention "Rock, Scissors, Paper: The Sandy BergLer Caper)
...and that's just 2 of 1,000 heavyweights they've got going...and that's just the warmup.
;-)