Joel Mowbray

Why the feds have waited until this year to act is a question that Congress should have been exploring?if only Arab Bank had remained the focus of the hearing.  Osen learned of Arab Bank?s alleged terror financing not through a well-placed source or covert whistleblower, but on the Internet.  Documents captured by the Israeli Defense Forces during targeted raids of terror outfits yielded a massive cache of evidence tying Arab Bank to funding of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and families of suicide bombers?and the IDF posted much of it on the net.

Though Arab Bank denies it was ever knowingly involved in terror financing, the public record appears to contradict such assertions.  Various jihadist web sites openly raising funds informed prospective donors to direct contributions to numbered accounts at Arab Bank. 

But even more openly than that, advertisements in prominent Palestinian newspapers told families of ?martyrs??suicide bombers?to collect money from Arab Bank.  One February 2002 ad listed names entitled to receive $5,316.06 from the ?Saudi Committee.?

The ?Saudi Committee? referenced is likely at least part of the reason that the feds are hustling to shield Arab Bank, despite the wealth of evidence that led to the partial shuttering of the institution?s New York branch.

The Saudi Committee for the Support of the Intifada al Quds, which was established shortly after the start of the current intifada, attained international notoriety when its 2002 telethon netted over $100 million.  Part of its ability to raise such funds was its open embrace of ?martyrdom.?  The Saudi Committee?s stated purpose is to fund ?all suffering families?the families of the martyrs and the injured Palestinians and the disabled.?

Aside from ostensible Saudi pressure, both Jordan and the Palestinian Authority have been lobbying the U.S. government to go easy on Arab Bank.  The largest private bank in both economies, Arab Bank faces little risk that the U.S. would allow it to become insolvent outright. 

But given its $32 billion in assets, it would likely take more than a handful of lawsuits to sink Arab Bank.  Regardless, State and Treasury Department officials did not want to appear at a hearing featuring terror victims?and then they also insisted that Arab Bank no longer be the hearing?s focus.

To her credit, Rep. Kelly started out with a question on Arab Bank, and didn?t let the government witnesses off easy.  The tenacious New York Republican will also be holding another hearing featuring terror victims, but the powerful combination of evidence tied to its devastating consequences will be lost.

If Arab Bank and its influential allies have their way, the public will never learn most of the contents of the OCC and OFAC reports.  For those hoping Congress might fulfill its duty to inform the public, the tale of last week?s hearing is anything but encouraging.

Joel Mowbray

Joel Mowbray, who got his start with, is an award-winning investigative journalist, nationally-syndicated columnist and author of Dangerous Diplomacy: How the State Department Threatens America's Security.

Be the first to read Joel Mowbray's column. Sign up today and receive delivered each morning to your inbox.