Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation 

was a charity foundation, based in

Saudi Arabia, alleged by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in a
September 2004 press release to have "direct links" with Osama bin
Laden. Although all charges were dropped by a federal judge, it
is now banned worldwide by United Nations Security
Council Committee 1267 (Al-Qaeda and Taliban
Sanctions Committee )
Al-Haramain Islamic
Foundation -- based in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and
with branches around the
world -- purports to be an
innocuous charity which
collects funds to help
Muslims in poor countries.
But this façade is a cover for
its real purpose: to spread
extremist Wahhabi doctrine
internationally, to provide
funding for Al Qaeda, and
to finance specific terror
plots. 
 Afganistan
USA Albania

Tanzania Bangladesh

Somalia Bosnia

Al
Haramain
Pakistan Comoros

Nigeria Ethiopia

Netherlands Indonesia
Kenya
The United Nations, The United States, Great
Britain as well as several other countries have
all designated Al-Haramain as a terrorist entity;
frozen and seized its funds where possible; and
banned it from conducting business. Even so,
Al-Haramain continues to operate in third-
world countries and almost certainly continues
to fund and promote radical Islamic
PROVES :
1998’s embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya (which killed 223 people and
injured over 4,000) were financed with Al-Haramain funds; and that it was well-
known to Western governments that funds donated to Al-Haramain sometimes
found their way to Al Qaeda, and had been used to finance several terror plots. 

 Al-Haramain funded the Bali bombers in 2002 -- one of the most devastating
post-9/11 terror attacks, in which 202 people were killed. 

 The Albanian branch of Al-Haramain funded jihad and had a connection to

Osama bin Laden himself. 
 Sanctions :
The United Nations itself
maintains a list of
organizations that provide
support for Al Qaeda,
and the various international
branches of Al-Haramain are
featured prominently on the
list. Al-Haramain is
now banned globally by the
U.N. 

On May 6, 2004, The U.S. Treasury

Department desginated the Bosnian
branch of Al-Haramain as a terrorist
entity. 
ASHLAND , OREGON
There was one branch of the foundation in the United States, located at Ashland,
Oregon. The Ashland chapter assisted the Islamic Society of Springfield, Missouri, in the
purchase of a prayer house, but the Springfield organization shares no common
directors and is not and never was under the control of the Al-Haramain organization.

Shaker Aamer

Fahd Muhammed Abdullah Al Fouzan

Zaid Muhamamd Sa'id Al Husayn

Sami Mohy El Din Muhammed Al Hajj

Abdul Al Salam Al Hilal

Abdul Rahman Owaid Mohammad Al

Juaid

Abdel Hadi Mohammed Badan Al Sebaii

Sebaii

Mohammed Asad

Jamal Muhammad Alawi Mar'i

The United States has held several suspects in
Laid Saidi
the War on Terrorism who are alleged to have
Wazim worked for or volunteered for the Al-Haramain
Foundation .
Khalid Mahomoud Abdul Wahab Al Asmr
 AL-HARAMAIN
VS
US GOVERNMENT
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. was the Ashland, Oregon-based American branch
of Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a huge international Islamic charity founded and
headquartered in Saudi Arabia, with subsidiaries in countries around the world. After
9/11, several governments (including the U.S., the U.K., and even the United Nations)
began investigating the terror funding network, and found evidence that money from
Al-Haramain was used not just for charity projects but also to finance Al Qaeda and
specific terrorist plots. Various foreign branches of Al-Haramain were broken up or shut
down, but it was not apparently until 2004 that the U.S. branch of Al-Haramain came
under intense investigation. 
 AL-HARAMAIN Unexpectedly, Al-Haramain
fought back. They contacted
VS lawyers and sued to have the
"terrorist" designation revoked.
US GOVERNMENT During what is called "discovery"
(a legal term in which each side
In early 2004, government intelligence services in a civil case must reveal its
supposedly (or has been alleged) began electronic evidence to the other side), an
surveillance of phone calls connected to the employee of the U.S. government
Ashland Al-Haramain office. It is not known if accidentally included in a stack
warrants were obtained, or if the calls were of documents given to Al-
domestic or international. Partly based on Haramain a Top Secret record of
intelligence gathered during this surveillance, the surveillance logs. 
The U.S. government declared the Oregon branch
of Al-Haramain a "specially designated global
terrorist." In particular, the government learned
that the directors of Al-Haramain had withdrawn
$150,000 from their U.S. bank account, converted
it into traveler's checks, and then smuggled it out
of the country to terror groups in Chechnya --
without filling out the proper tax forms regarding
financial transactions, which is a criminal
offense. 
 Both sides were put into
completely impossible positions:
The government had to suppress a
document which revealed Top
Secret surveillance without actually
admitting that it had conducted
any surveillance; whereas Al-
Haramain sought to revoke its
designation as a terrorist
organization by citing the very
evidence (the information gathered
during the surveillance) that
suggested it was a terrorist
organization. 

VS
 THE BIG QUESTION :

Does the United States Government

have the right
to conduct secret surveillance of terrorism
suspects on American soil?
 CONCLUSION
In US vs Al-Haramain

After 9 circuits of Court of appeals , the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that
the lawsuit by Al-Haramain would be
allowed to continue (which their lawyers
optimistically construed as a victory), but
that they would not be allowed to refer to
the leaked surveillance records in the
lawsuit, nor could they describe them
from memory -- which is exactly what the
Bush administration lawyers had
requested. So Al-Haramain was allowed
to proceed with their suit, but were
denied use of their only significant piece
of evidence, thereby dooming the case to
almost certain defeat. 
CONCLUSION
The leaked surveillance document
was not allowed as evidence in the
lawsuit; 
• The Al-Haramain case in particular
was then dismissed and is no longer
pending; 
• A judge ruled that the government
had indeed violated the law if it did
conduct wiretaps without a warrant; 
• All of these facts may have been
overwhelmed and rendered moot by
the subsequent passage of the 2008
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, which seems to retroactively
protect the government from
lawsuits regarding purportedly
illegal surveillance.