9/11 Commission said little to no significance into 9/11 financing?

[RKOwens4]

In a recorded chat with Luke Rudowski on 9/11/08, I asked him to give me his best piece of evidence and he brought up the alleged ISI-Atta $100,000 claim. In his long response he says that the 9/11 Commission said there was little to no significance into the financing of the hijackers. I seemed to recall the 9/11 Commission Report going extinsively into Osama bin Laden's inheritence money, the KSM source of income, and so on but wasn't 100% definitive on the financing issue so I focused instead on pointing out how his "evidence" of any ISI involvement is based on sketchy, unconfirmed articles and asked him how connecting someone in the ISI to the hijackers would prove U.S. government involvement.

But does anyone know how true his statement about the 9/11 Commission is? I suspect this may be a half-truth, though the statement may be taken out of context. Did the 9/11 Commission ever say there was little to no significance into the financing of the hijackers? I'm editing my debates with him and Jason Bermas (and others) into a half-hour video called "9/11: Facts versus Truth" debunking the many claims we hear every day, so any insight into this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[T.A.M.]

I believe the Commission said something (paraphrasing) to the effect of...

The sources of funding for the 9/11 hijackers was diverse, and widespread. As a result, tracing any one source would be of little value.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch5.htm
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch7.htm

TAM

Here is the quote that seems to get a lot of attention, from Chapter 5,

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance. Al Qaeda had many avenues of funding. If a particular funding source had dried up, al Qaeda could have easily tapped a different source or diverted funds from another project to fund an operation that cost $400,000-$500,000 over nearly two years.

 

[T.A.M.]

In addition, the truthers are at odds with this statement (also from Ch. 5),

Our investigation has uncovered no credible evidence that any person in the United States gave the hijackers substantial financial assistance. Similarly, we have seen no evidence that any foreign government-or foreign government official-supplied any funding.131

As it contradicts reports that the head of Pakistan Intelligence was helping to fund the attacks. Of course, the only source for this alleged involvement is a Times of India article, that was later quoted by several american journals/papers, quoting ANONYMOUS SOURCES.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Just for clarification sake, and in case any truther or agnostic wants to question, or prove wrong, an element of it, here is the point form listing of what the 9/11 commission said about the funding for 9/11...

The text below is directly from the report, but I have put it in point form for clarity.

1. The 9/11 plotters eventually spent somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 to plan and conduct their attack.

2. KSM provided his operatives with nearly all the money they needed to travel to the United States, train, and live. The available evidence indicates that the 19 operatives were funded by al Qaeda, either through wire transfers or cash provided by KSM, which they carried into the United States or deposited in foreign accounts and accessed from this country. Our investigation has uncovered no credible evidence that any person in the United States gave the hijackers substantial financial assistance. Similarly, we have seen no evidence that any foreign government-or foreign government official-supplied any funding.

3. The origin of the funds remains unknown, although we have a general idea of how al Qaeda financed itself during the period leading up to 9/11.

4. Bin Ladin did not fund al Qaeda through a personal fortune and a network of businesses in Sudan. Instead, al Qaeda relied primarily on a fund-raising network developed over time.

5. Al Qaeda appears to have relied on a core group of financial facilitators who raised money from a variety of donors and other fund-raisers, primarily in the Gulf countries and particularly in Saudi Arabia.

6. Al Qaeda and its friends took advantage of Islam's strong calls for charitable giving, zakat. These financial facilitators also appeared to rely heavily on certain imams at mosques who were willing to divert zakat donations to al Qaeda's cause.

7. Al Qaeda also collected money from employees of corrupt charities. Charities were a source of money and also provided significant cover, which enabled operatives to travel undetected under the guise of working for a humanitarian organization.

8. It does not appear that any government other than the Taliban financially supported al Qaeda before 9/11, although some governments may have contained al Qaeda sympathizers who turned a blind eye to al Qaeda's fundraising activities.

9. Al Qaeda frequently moved the money it raised by hawala, an informal and ancient trust-based system for transferring funds. Bin Ladin relied on the established hawala networks operating in Pakistan, in Dubai, and throughout the Middle East to transfer funds efficiently.

10. There is no reliable evidence that Bin Ladin was involved in or made his money through drug trafficking. Similarly, we have seen no persuasive evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds.

11. To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance. Al Qaeda had many avenues of funding. If a particular funding source had dried up, al Qaeda could have easily tapped a different source or diverted funds from another project to fund an operation that cost $400,000-$500,000 over nearly two years.

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch5.htm

TAM

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

Thanks Tam.

The 9/11 commission stated that...

The origin of the funds remains unknown...

and...

Bin Ladin did not fund al Qaeda through a personal fortune and a network of businesses in Sudan.

and...

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks.

and...

Ultimately the question is of little practical significance.

Now go make a YouTube video about that RKO and let EVERYONE comment on it.

 

[adversity1]

Now go make a YouTube video about that RKO and let EVERYONE comment on it.

Off topic, but your sig really exposes yourself as the apologist for fundamentalist terrorism that you are.

 

[T.A.M.]

The following document provides details into the FBI investigation on "Conflict Diamonds" as a source of funding for Al Qaeda prior to 9/11. In a nutshell, no significant evidence to point to it as a source...as the commission concluded.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/911COMM-Chapter-5-Al-Qaeda-Aims-At-The-American-Homeland-07.PDF

TAM