USAID reportedly bankrolled al Qaeda terrorist’s college tuition, unearthed records show

The Revelation of USAID’s Funding of Anwar al-Awlaki

A shocking revelation has emerged linking the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to the funding of Anwar al-Awlaki, a notorious American-born jihadist, during his college years in Colorado. Unearthed documents suggest that USAID provided "full funding" for al-Awlaki’s education at Colorado State University in the early 1990s. Al-Awlaki, who was later killed in a drone strike in Yemen in 2011 during the Obama administration, was a key figure in al-Qaeda and had direct ties to several high-profile terrorist incidents, including the 2009 Fort Hood shooting and the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a Detroit-bound flight. The discovery has sparked outrage and raised questions about the agency’s oversight and funding practices over the years.

The documents, which were uncovered by investigative reporters and shared on social media, reveal that al-Awlaki falsely claimed to be a Yemeni national to qualify for a USAID-funded exchange visa. The form, dated June 1990, lists his birthplace as Sana’a, Yemen, despite the fact that he was born in Las Cruces, New Mexico, in 1971. Al-Awlaki reportedly used this fraudulent information to secure the scholarship, with the document noting that his address was listed under the care of "USAID/Sana’a." This revelation has intensified scrutiny on USAID, which has faced criticism for its involvement in questionable programs over the years, including initiatives like funding an Iraqi version of "Sesame Street" and promoting transgender activism in Guatemala.

The Life and Legacy of Anwar al-Awlaki

Anwar al-Awlaki’s rise from a scholarship recipient to a top al-Qaeda operative is a tale of radicalization and deception. Born in New Mexico to Yemeni parents, al-Awlaki spent his early years in the U.S. and Yemen before returning to America for college. He earned a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from Colorado State University in 1994, thanks in part to the funding he received under false pretenses. After college, al-Awlaki became a Muslim cleric, preaching in cities like Denver, San Diego, and Falls Church, Virginia. His radical ideology began to take shape during this time, and he eventually moved to Yemen in 2004, where he became a central figure in al-Qaeda’s operations.

Al-Awlaki’s ties to terrorism became undeniable in the years following his radicalization. He was linked to several high-profile incidents, including the 2009 Fort Hood shooting, in which Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan killed 13 people. Al-Awlaki had direct contact with Hasan before the attack, and U.S. officials later confirmed that the two had exchanged emails. Additionally, al-Awlaki was connected to Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, two of the 9/11 hijackers, whom he reportedly met while preaching at a mosque in San Diego in 2000. His influence extended beyond these events, as he became a key propagandist for al-Qaeda, using his charisma and knowledge of Western culture to recruit and inspire terrorists worldwide.

The Implications of USAID’s Funding

The revelation that USAID funded al-Awlaki’s education has raised serious questions about the agency’s vetting processes and its role in inadvertently supporting individuals who later became enemies of the United States. Critics argue that this case is a stark example of the kind of waste and mismanagement that has plagued USAID for years. The agency, which is tasked with administering foreign aid and promoting global development, has faced scrutiny for its involvement in questionable projects, many of which have little apparent connection to its stated mission.

The timing of this revelation is particularly significant, as it comes amid broader efforts by the Trump administration to dismantle USAID and reduce government waste. In early February, signage for the agency was removed from its headquarters, and its website was shut down. A federal judge has since temporarily blocked the administration’s plan to place roughly 2,200 USAID employees on leave, delaying the move until at least February 14. The case has become a focal point in the ongoing debate over government efficiency and accountability, with Democrats and government employees accusing the Trump administration of overreach and intimidation.

The Broader Context of USAID’s Controversies

USAID has long been a target of criticism for its handling of taxpayer dollars, and the al-Awlaki funding scandal is just the latest in a series of controversies surrounding the agency. Over the years, USAID has been accused of mismanaging funds, supporting questionable projects, and failing to adequately monitor its programs. For instance, the agency faced backlash for its involvement in creating an Iraqi version of "Sesame Street," a project that was criticized as a misguided attempt at cultural outreach. Similarly, its efforts to promote transgender activism in countries like Guatemala have been labeled as inappropriate and outside the scope of its mission.

These controversies have led to calls for greater oversight and reform within USAID. Republican lawmakers, think tanks, and investigative organizations have all highlighted instances of waste and abuse, arguing that the agency’s operating model is in need of a major overhaul. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, has been at the forefront of these efforts, launching investigations into federal agencies to root out corruption and inefficiency. However, these efforts have not been without controversy, as some have accused DOGE of engaging in a "mafia-like takeover" of USAID and intimidating employees.

The Political and Legal Fallout

The fallout from the al-Awlaki funding scandal has been intense, with political and legal dimensions that continue to unfold. On the political front, the revelation has further polarized debates over government efficiency and the role of agencies like USAID. President Trump has made reducing government waste a central pillar of his administration’s agenda, and the al-Awlaki case has provided ammunition for critics who argue that USAID has become a symbol of bureaucratic excess. In a recent interview with Fox News, Trump emphasized the need to address "fraud, waste, abuse" within the government, singling out USAID as a prime example of these problems.

On the legal front, the controversy has led to a temporary reprieve for USAID employees, as a federal judge blocked the administration’s plan to place thousands of workers on leave. The ruling, which remains in effect until at least February 14, has bought time for opponents of the Trump administration’s actions to regroup and challenge the plan in court. The case has also highlighted the tension between the executive branch and the judiciary over issues of government efficiency and employee rights.

Conclusion: Accountability and Reform

The revelation that USAID funded Anwar al-Awlaki’s education is a stunning example of how government agencies can inadvertently support individuals who later become enemies of the state. While the case is shocking, it also underscores the need for greater accountability and transparency within organizations like USAID. The agency’s history of questionable spending and lack of oversight has led to widespread criticism and calls for reform. Whether through the dismantling of USAID or the implementation of stricter controls, one thing is clear: the time for change is now.

The al-Awlaki scandal serves as a stark reminder of the risks associated with poorly managed foreign aid programs and the importance of ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used responsibly. As the debate over government efficiency and accountability continues to unfold, the legacy of Anwar al-Awlaki will serve as a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of bureaucratic failings. The challenge moving forward will be to strike a balance between necessary reforms and the preservation of programs that truly serve the public good. Only by addressing these issues head-on can the U.S. government hope to restore faith in its ability to manage resources effectively and avoid similar scandals in the future.