Even compounded, they wouldn’t represent much more than a nuisance.

For major donors, tax penalties, perhaps even a multiple of the amount donated, might be persuasive.

For smaller donors, fines and jail sentences might work. (That’d definitely work for major donors, too, of course.)

I no longer support the death penalty under any circumstances, by any means, so that option is out by my standards.

Have the IRS (Old joke: the difference between the IRA and the IRS? Not much.) define the donation reciepients as not qualifying as charitable organizations and tax the person sending the donations. Tax, as in going back in years and relevant fines and interest for non-payment. When going back in years, tax the interest and the principal.

I’d be happy to see that

Actually, by supporters of terrorism, I mean the people who run the organizations. While I would be happy to see all of the merchants in NYC who have collection boxes out for Hamas thrown in jail, it would make more sense to target the organization (Hamas, the Holy Land Foundation) itself.

Do you agree that the organizations that support terrorism (ie, NORAID) should be punished by arrest, prosecution and/or death?

If you believe that the funding and support of terrorism is reprehensible, do you agree that the supporters of terrorism should be punished by arrest, prosecution and/or death?

I also had the task of covering N. Ireland as part of my assignment as Information Officer at the Embassy in London. In Belfast, I met with Sinn Fein and IRA leadership.

Now that the IRA lacks the millions it got from its US supporters of terror, it has indeed turned into thugs and drug dealers-and not just the Real IRA. RIRA are still the most dedicated of the terrorists, but the “normal” IRA thugs are still out there kneecapping their ways in petty gang wars.

Certainly, the goals of the IRA were restricted to Ireland. Their activities and fund raising were not, witness the bombings across the UK.

Their goal was not to chase the British from London, but it was certainly to “cleanse” N. Ireland of its Protestant, Britith population. Only when that proved impossible did they lower their sights to a more achievable call for justice in employment opportunities, housing, etc.

They certainly had a legitimate beef. Their methodology was that of terror, however. Whether or not it was solely inspired by religion is rather beside the point.

You don’t think the IRA’s sending politicians around the Irish diaspora world to raise consciousness and funds is equivalent to the religious missions of the Saudis? I recall even Eamon de Valera’s–then the former Irish PM– visits to my hometown in MA where he stoked the fires. Saoirse and An Phoblacht may not be quite as radical as some of the imams, but that’s a difference in degree, not kind.

I see no difference whatsoever between the funding of the PIRA by private American citizens through NORAID and the funding of Hamas by private Saudi citizens. They are equally reprehensible. The level of funding is immaterial.

That particular struggle to reclaim occupied territory went on for only 400 years. But it seems, finally, to be reaching a resolution. I hope the Palestinian issue doesn’t take nearly as long.

As the granddaughter of a soldier who fought with the IRA (they wore uniforms in those days) in the War of Independence (1922), and as the granddaughter of 4 Irish immigrants, I think I know something about the IRA (or the Provisional IRA, formed in the late 60’s, now the real IRA)

The original IRA was a military organization that successfully won independence for the South of Ireland in the early ‘20’s. The terrorist group, the Provisional, Marxist inspired IRA, was formed in 1970. They hoped to achieve independence for Northern Ireland.

Unlike Saudi-funded Hamas’ goal of chasing the Jews into the sea, the IRA had no desire to take over London and chase the British into the sea. The PIRA was funded, partially, by Noraid, which had some American-non-state contributors. It was not state supported. The only Irish paramilitary group that may have been state supported were the Loyalist groups.

Unlike the worldwide system of Jihad Madrassas, NORAID did not fund schools worldwide that raised children to be paramilitaries to fight in foreign wars.

http://www.worldandi.com/public/2001/December/jihad.html

The goals and the terrorists that made up the provisional (Marxist/terrorist) IRA were entirely indigenous. Due to a current lack of Irish and American support, the wealthy terrorist-thugs of the ‘70’s are now the useless, poor drug-dealing thugs of the ‘real IRA’

Compared to the many millions of dollars that Saudis have invested, and are still investing in terrorism worldwide, comparing the current Islamist jihad to Noraid is still like comparing Microsoft to a lemonade stand.

That said, despite the fact that I believe in Irish independence, I believe that the Irish did not do enough to decimate the Provisional IRA members within their ranks. I wish that every last member of that terrorist/Marxist organization had been either captured or killed, and that every member of NORAID had suffered the same fate.

Can you say the same thing about the current Saudi supporters of terror?

Your calling the IRA a “small indigenous group” is pretty silly. It was a multi-million dollar terror organization which raised vast sums to support its activities from terror to charities. In the US and around the world. All from people who bought into its political message and viewpoint. Did the Americans who supported it believe they were only building churches and schools? Doubtful.

Indigenous? Is that why the IRA was involved in the Hizbollah camps in the Beqaa Valley of Lebanon; in the camps in Tripoli, Libya; in the camps in Yemen; in Central and South America?

Banks are held responsible–at least in part–for the activities of their clients, but only if they do not follow banking laws and regulations. Anti-terror banking laws are not applied uniformly around the world. Those with bad intentions go where they laws are loosely applied or not at all. Because Saudi Arabia does have generally effective banking laws, Saudi banks are not seen as major violators of banking laws. The Al-Taqwa bank, which operates out of Switzerland, is liable to Swiss laws and those international laws the Swiss choose to apply. Anti-terror banking laws are not among them, for the most part. Your beef here is with the Swiss.

Are there Saudis funding Al-Qaeda and UBL? I’m sure there are. That is a question being investigated (as Zarate from Treasury explains in the Congressional testimony you linked in an earlier comment). To date, Saudi government involvement has not been demonstrated.

The problem that Treasury notes as particularly difficult is that money is actually moving as cash, not through banks until the final stages of terrorist acts. Mohammad Atta had perfectly legitimate bank accounts and credit cards through American banks. He was the terrorist, not the American banks he dealt with.

If you want to talk about white collar war profiteers, why confine yourself to the US? Kofi Annan and the Oil For Food program makes Halliburton look like small change.

Another good example of war/terror profiteering is Swiss Banker Ahmed Huber, radical Islamist and (not coincidentally) a big fan of Hitler. He’s also a good friend of many Gulf State Royals. From Salon Magazine:

http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/03/15/al_taqwa/

According to an unpublished list obtained by Salon, the Al Taqwa bank, part of a network of financial companies named by the Bush administration as a major source and distributor of funds for Osama bin Laden’s terrorist operations, has shareholders that include prominent Arab figures from numerous countries in the Middle East. Among the shareholders are the grand mufti of the United Arab Emirates and prominent families in the UAE and Kuwait. Two sisters of Osama bin Laden are also on the list, undermining the bin Laden family’s claim that it separated itself from his terrorist pursuits after he was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1994.
Ahmed Huber, a Swiss director of the bank who is a radical Islamist and Hitler admirer, acknowledged in 1995 that wealthy Saudi Arabians were large contributors to the Al Taqwa bank. The just-revealed list of shareholders demonstrates further connections between important individuals in moderate Middle Eastern countries and a financial network allegedly vital to bin Laden. ..

The FBI may have known who the shareholders were for as long as four years. There is also evidence that Swiss authorities have since the mid-1990s refused to cooperate with international intelligence inquiries into the bank’s activities. Swiss officials have said they were aware of reports that Al Taqwa was connected to terrorist groups, but there was never sufficient evidence to merit a search warrant…