After the 1998 embassy bombings, the U.S. government tried to develop a clearer picture of Bin Laden's finances. A U.S. interagency group traveled to Saudi Arabia twice, in 1999 and 2000, to get information from the Saudis about their understanding of those finances. The group eventually concluded that the oft-repeated assertion that Bin Laden was funding al Qaeda from his personal fortune was in fact not true. The officials developed a new theory: al Qaeda was getting its money elsewhere, and the United States needed to focus on other sources of funding, such as charities, wealthy donors, and financial facilitators. Ultimately, although the intelligence community devoted more resources to the issue and produced somewhat more intelligence, it remained difficult to distinguish al Qaeda's financial transactions among the vast sums moving in the international financial system. The CIA was not able to find or disrupt al Qaeda's money flows. The NSC staff thought that one possible solution to these weaknesses in the intelligence community was to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center. Clarke pushed for the funding of such a center at Treasury, but neither Treasury nor the CIA was willing to commit the resources. Within the United States, various FBI field offices gathered intelligence on organizations suspected of raising funds for al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. By 9/11, FBI agents understood that there were extremist organizations operating within the United States supporting a global jihadist movement and with substantial connections to al Qaeda. The FBI operated a web of informants, conducted electronic surveillance, and had opened significant investigations in a number of field offices, including New York, Chicago, Detroit, San Diego, and Minneapolis. On a national level, however, the FBI never used the information to gain a systematic or strategic understanding of the nature and extent of al Qaeda fundraising. Treasury regulators, as well as U.S. financial institutions, were generally focused on finding and deterring or disrupting the vast flows of U.S. currency generated by drug trafficking and high-level international fraud. Large-scale scandals, such as the use of the Bank of New York by Russian money launderers to move millions of dollars out of Russia, captured the attention of the Department of the Treasury and of Congress. Before 9/11, Treasury did not consider terrorist financing important enough to mention in its national strategy for money laundering.

Who were on opposite sides of the idea to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center?

Even though electronic espionage may cost U.S. firms billions of dollars a year, most aren't yet taking precautions, the experts said. By contrast, European firms will spend $150 million this year on electronic security, and are expected to spend $1 billion by 1992. Already many foreign firms, especially banks, have their own cryptographers, conference speakers reported. Still, encrypting corporate communications is only a partial remedy. One expert, whose job is so politically sensitive that he spoke on condition that he wouldn't be named or quoted, said the expected influx of East European refugees over the next few years will greatly increase the chances of computer-maintenance workers, for example, doubling as foreign spies. Moreover, he said, technology now exists for stealing corporate secrets after they've been "erased" from a computer's memory. He said that Oliver North of Iran-Contra notoriety thought he had erased his computer but that the information was later retrieved for congressional committees to read. No personal computer, not even the one on a chief executive's desk, is safe, this speaker noted. W. Mark Goode, president of Micronyx Inc., a Richardson, Texas, firm that makes computer-security products, provided a new definition for Mikhail Gorbachev's campaign for greater openness, known commonly as glasnost. Under Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Goode said, the Soviets are openly stealing Western corporate communications. He cited the case of a Swiss oil trader who recently put out bids via telex for an oil tanker to pick up a cargo of crude in the Middle East. Among the responses the Swiss trader got was one from the Soviet national shipping company, which hadn't been invited to submit a bid. The Soviets' eavesdropping paid off, however, because they got the contract.

What is the full name of the man who claimed that the Soviets are openly stealing Western corporate communications?

Living things need non-living matter as well as energy. What do you think matter is used for? One thing is to build bodies. They also need it to carry out the processes of life. Any non-living matter that living things need is called a nutrient. Carbon and nitrogen are examples of nutrients. Unlike energy, matter is recycled in ecosystems. You can see how in Figure 3.11. Decomposers release nutrients when they break down dead organisms. The nutrients are taken up by plants through their roots. The nutrients pass to primary consumers when they eat the plants. The nutrients pass to higher level consumers when they eat lower level consumers. When living things die, the cycle repeats.
Are carbon and nitrogen considered living or non-living?