Pulitzer Prize Winner David K. Shipler Hawks the “Protocols of the Elders of the Anti-Islam Movement” in The New Yorker

PJ Media, by Patrick Poole, May 13, 2015:

A document entered into court evidence by Justice Department prosecutors in the largest terrorism financing trial in American history, and later cited affirmatively by the federal judge in the case and cleared by the federal appeals court, would seem an unlikely target for a former journalist to try to spin a conspiratorial tale around, namely slandering others of hawking a racist/’Islamphobic’ “Protocols of the Elders of Islam.”

And yet that is what David K. Shipler, a former New York Times reporter and winner of the 1987 Pulitzer Prize, is now trying to do.

512R2aJ0iLLClearly upset that so-called “Islamophobes” have been successful using the document – again, discovered by the FBI, submitted into the evidence by federal prosecutors and approved as genuine by the federal court – to expose the Muslim Brotherhood roots of some of America’s largest Islamic organizations, Shipler wields his “Islamophobia” harpoon like Ahab at his “anti-Islam industry” Moby Dick.

He makes his dubious case in a new book out this week, entitled “Freedom of Speech: Mightier Than the Sword” (Alfred A. Knopf), which includes an entire chapter on the subject, and summarizes it in an article published on Tuesday in The New Yorker, “Pamela Geller and the Anti-Islam Movement.” The book received a very lukewarm review in the New York Times this past Sunday.

In the New Yorker article, Shipler claims:

Virtually all the alarm over the coming Islamic takeover and the spread of Sharia law can be traced back to an old document of questionable authority and relevance, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” Dated May 22, 1991, it was found in 2004 by the F.B.I., buried in one of a large number of boxes uncovered during a search of a house in northern Virginia. (I reported on the discovery and the use of the document for my book “Freedom of Speech: Mightier than the Sword.”) It is cited on numerous Web sites, and in articles, videos, and training materials, which quote one another in circular arguments. Its illusion of importance was enhanced by federal prosecutors, who included it in a trove of documents introduced into evidence in the 2007 trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a charitable organization ultimately convicted of sending money to Hamas.

The memo, however, is far from probative. It was never subjected to an adversarial test of its authenticity or significance. Examined closely, it does not stand up as an authoritative prescription for action. Rather, it appears to have been written as a plea to the Muslim Brotherhood leadership for action, by an author we know little about, Mohamed Akram. He is listed elsewhere as a secretary in the Brotherhood, but he writes in the tone of an underling. Islam watchers do not quote his appeal that the recipients “not rush to throw these papers away due to your many occupations and worries. All that I’m asking of you is to read them and to comment on them.” These lines reveal the memo as a mere proposal, now twenty-four years old. No other copies have come to light.

Two features of the memo are highlighted by the Islam watchers: first, its assertion that “the Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within,” and, second, “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” [emphasis added]

What’s remarkable about Shipler’s treatment of the Explanatory Memorandum in his article and in his book is how much he is willing to quickly dismiss facts that completely undo his case, and pays no attention to the glaring contradictions he ends up wrapping himself trying to debunk the document. At major points he contradicts himself. He breezes over the mountain of evidence that he has to overcome, but that means he can’t plead ignorance of it. One is only left with the conclusion that he’s being intentionally mendacious.

I beg the reader’s indulgence, for I will quote lengthy passages and on occasions paste screenshots from the court documents themselves so you know I’m not engaged in anything dodgy. Tellingly, most of these quotes never appear in Shipler’s book, and if so, only selectively edited form.

So let’s start with the evidence.

The document he is trying to cast doubts on is known generally as the “Explanatory Memorandum,” but it’s actual title is, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group in North America.” The document is dated May 22, 1991 and was entered into evidence as “Elbarasse Search – 3″ by federal prosecutors in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial in 2008.

Helpfully, the federal court overseeing the case in an unusual move posted the trial evidence on their own website. The Explanatory Memorandum and the FBI translation of the document can be found here.

At this point, we can turn to what the Justice Department said in federal court about the Explanatory Memorandum. In one court filing, available on the ACLU’s website, federal prosecutors state (p. 12):

The evidence introduced at trial, for example, established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood.8 Govt. Exh. 3-64 (seized from the home of HAMAS leader Ismail Elbarasse); Govt. Exh. 3-3 (Muslim Brotherhood document noting that ISNA was founded by the US-Muslim Brotherhood) ; Govt. Exh. 3-85 (1991 memorandum authored by U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council member Mohamed Akram Adlouni, recognizing ISNA and NAIT as Muslim Brotherhood organizations.) Government’s Exhibit 3-85, entitled An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group, described the Brotherhood’s strategic goal as a kind of “grand Jihad”:

The Ikhwan must understand that their role in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western Civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious…. [emphasis added]

So the Justice Department states that:

1) Two Islamic organizations – the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) – were created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood (based on other trial evidence as well as the Explanatory Memorandum);

2) The Explanatory Memorandum was authored by U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council member Mohamed Akram Adlouni;

3) That the memo describes the Brotherhood’s strategic goal as “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western Civilization from within.”

Now please note that these claims were not made by “Pamela Geller and the Anti-Islam Movement” but the Justice Department in a federal court filing. He can tilt at all of the “anti-Islam” windmills he wants, but fundamentally he still has to explain away the court evidence.

And as stated earlier, much to the consternation of Shipler, the federal court agreed in a published opinion with the Justice Department’s analysis of the document when Judge Jorge Solis ruled on motions from three separate organizations named as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial – ISNA, NAIT, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – asking to be removed from the Justice Department’s co-conspirator list. The judge’s ruling against removing the groups from the unindicted co-conspirator list was unsealed in 2010.

In that ruling, Judge Solis states (p. 15):

Government Exhibit 3-85 is titled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” authored by Mohamed Akram of the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood and dated May 22, 1991. (Gov’t Ex. 3-85 (Elbarasse 3) at 21.) The “Explanatory Memorandum” includes a section titled “Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America,” which states that the work of the Ikhwan in the United States is “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” (Id.)Also contained in that document is a list of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “organizations and the organizations of our friends,” which includes ISNA, NAIT, the Occupied Land Fund (“OLF”) (HLF’s former name), and the United Association for Studies and Research (“UASR”). (Id. at 32.)

So Judge Solis found that:

1) The Explanatory Memorandum was authored by Mohamed Akram of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council;

2) That the document describes the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western Civilization from within”;

3) That the document lists the Muslim Brotherhood’s “organizations and the organizations of our friends,” including ISNA and NAIT.

At this point Shipler laughably believes he has room to maneuver. In the New Yorker article and in his book, he makes three general claims:

1) That the judge blindly accepted the Justice Department’s argument about the origins and importance of the memo and never allowed adversarial challenges to its provenance;

2) That the Explanatory Memorandum was admitted as hearsay, meaning that the groups named in the memo were never allowed to challenge in court;

3) That the judge failed to distinguish between the memo’s list of “our organizations” and “the organizations of our friends.”

Let’s take these in order.

1) Judge Solis accepted the Justice Department’s description of the Explanatory Memorandum unquestioningly and never allowed adversarial challenges.

In discussing the order by Judge Solis in response to the motions of the three Islamic organizations, Shipler states in his book (p. 190):

CAIR and two other groups moved to have themselves removed from the list of unindicted co-conspirators, but the effort backfired and gave Islam watchers more ammunition. Not only was their motion denied by Judge Jorge Solis, who presided over the retrial, conviction, and sentencing of the five Holy Land Foundation defendants (the first trial had ended in a hung jury). He also accepted the government’s assertions by citing the seized Elbarasse documents, including the Explanatory Memorandum, without testing their accuracy in an adversarial proceeding. He did not distinguish between the memo’s list of “our organizations” and “the organizations of our friends.” He ruled, “The Government had produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA [Islamic Society of North America], and NAIT [North American Islamic Trust] with HLF [Holy Land Foundation], the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.” [emphasis added]

Remarkably, Shipler contradicts himself just a few pages later, quoting a defense attorney for the Holy Land Foundation defendants who said that the Elbarasse documents had, in fact, been challenged by the defense team (p. 198):

The defense team lodged vigorous objections to the introduction of this and the other documents from the Elbarasse search, and two attorneys on the defense team, Nancy Hollander and Marlo Cadeddu, scoffed at Guandolo’s statement. “There was no such stipulation by the defense,” said Cadeddu. “Nor would we ever have stipulated to any such thing. Any claims to the contrary are simply untrue.” Indeed, after the five Holy Land officials and fund-raisers were convicted, their lawyers argued specifically, in an unsuccessful appeal to the Fifth Circuit, that the trial judge had erred in admitting the documents, which the attorneys branded hearsay, irrelevant to the charge that the defendants had funneled money to Hamas. [emphasis added]

At this point, observant readers are no doubt confused. By Shipler’s own admission, the Elbarasse documents, including the Explanatory Memorandum, were subject to challenges on both the trial court and appellate levels. Both sides briefed the court, and judge and the appeals court panel ruled on the merits of their arguments. These are what as generally known as “adversarial proceedings,” much as Shipler claims never occurred. It’s not clear exactly then what Shipler was expecting. An entirely separate trial over the Explanatory Memorandum? With his own damning acknowledgement of these defense team challenges, we can only conclude that he’s being duplicitous, or really, really thick.

But that’s not all. During the trial one of the investigators in the Holy Land case, FBI Special Agent Lara Burns, twice mentioned the Explanatory Memorandum (trial transcript 09/28/2008 at p. 21, 10/07/2008 at p. 71).

Read more at PJ Media

Also see:

ADAMS Center in Sterling, VA: Jihad Central

UTT, by John Guandolo, March 9, 2015:

One of Northern Virginia’s most prominent Islamic organizations, the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center was created by jihadis, and continues today to be a center of the Islamic Jihadi Movement in the Washington, D.C. area and beyond.

Despite this, ADAMS continues to be the primary “go-to” Islamic organization for churches, synagogues, and eventhe FBI in the D.C. metropolitan area.

122106-Holocaust2-500

Imam Mohamed Magid speaking at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum

 

The face of ADAMS continues to be Imam Mohamed Magid, the Executive Director of ADAMS and the previous leader of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), identified by the U.S. government as a financial support entity for Hamas – a designated terrorist organization – and the “nucleus” for the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Movement in North America.

Besides this obvious link between ADAMS and ISNA, ADAMS identifies itself as an affiliate of ISNA on its website (see image below).

Screen-Shot-2015-03-09-at-10.37.30-AM

In the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), Dallas 2008), the U.S. government specifically states:

“During the trial. the Court entcrcd Into evidence a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking ISNA and NAIT to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic Association for Palestine and its principals; the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and its Palestine Committee headed by HAMAS official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater HAMAS-affiliated conspiracy described in the Government’s case-in-chief.” (GOVERNMENT’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS ISLAMIC SOClETY OF NORTH AMERICA AND NORTH AMERICAN ISLAMIC TRUST’S MOTION FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF p7)

It should be noted the U.S. Palestine Committee is Hamas in the America, created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood on orders from the International Muslim Brotherhood headquarters in Egypt.  HLF and IAP were two of the four Hamas entities created in the U.S.  The other two were the UASR and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

“ISNA and NAIT. in fact, shared more with HLF than just a parent organization. They were intimately connected with the HLF and its assigned task of providing financial support to HAMAS. Shortly after HAMAS was founded in 1987, as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood, Govt. Exh. 21-61, the International Muslim Brotherhood ordered the Muslim Brotherhood chapters throughout the world to create Palestine Committees, whose job it was to support HAMAS with “media, money and men.” Govt. Exh. 3-15. The U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations.” (Ibid, p13)

In his order signed in 2009 and unsealed in 2010, Federal Judge Jorge Solis ruled, “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF, the Islamic Association for Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”  The appellate panel ruled unanimously to keep ISNA’s name on the “Unindicted Co-Conspirator” list for the HLF case.

Imam Mohamed Magid, the Executive Director for the ADAMS Center, was the President of ISNA at the time of this ruling and was the Vice President of ISNA prior to that.

The massive amount of evidence produced in the HLF case also revealed that money was sent directly from ISNA and NAIT bank accounts to Hamas leaders and Hamas organizations overseas.  The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) is the bank for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America.  Hamas is a designated terrorist organization.

The founding Chairman of the Board for the ADAMS Center is Ahmad Totonji, one of the original Muslim Brotherhood (MB) leaders in the United States who founded some of the largest MB organizations in North America.  Totonji resides in Northern Virginia and has been identified by the U.S government as the co-founder of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and the Safa Trust.  These organizations are/were headquartered in Herndon, Virginia, and provided financial and material support to designated terrorist organizations Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Hamas.

According to the government affidavit, the Safa Trust was raided by the federal government after 9/11 because the organizations and leaders “in the Safa Group maintained a financial and ideological relationship with persons and entities with known affiliations to the designated terrorist Groups PIJ and HAMAS.”

One of those Safa organizations was the Sterling Charitable Gift Fund whose six (6) primary advisors are prominent Muslim Brotherhood leaders in America including:  Dr. Taha J. Al-Alwani (former Director of IIIT and the MB’s Fiqh Council of North America), Dr. Jamal Barzinji (one of the leading MB leaders in America), Dr. Ilyas BaYunus,  Sheikh Mohamed Hanooti (unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing and the HLF case), Dr. Iqbal Unus (senior MB leader in America), and Imam Mohamed Magid.

The Safa Trust affidavit featured ADAMS founder/Chairman of the board Ahmad Totonji:  “Ahmad Totonji is a corporate officer of several Safa Group organizations, including Safa Trust, Inc., and was referenced in Al-Alwani’s 1991 letter expressing solidarity with Al- Arian. Totonji is also referenced in another seized letter from Al-Arian to Al-Alwani. In this letter, Al-Arian solicited more funding and referred to a meeting he had with Totonji where Totonji promised him another $20,000. As recently as November 1, 2001, Totonji signed a check for $10,000 to Al-Arian through Al-Arian’s organization known as the Tampa Bay Coalition for Justice and Peace, drafted on the account of Safa Group charity IIIT.” (Affidavit, p79)

Sami Al-Arian is the convicted leader of the designated terrorist organization PIJ.

When the government conducted numerous raids in conjunction with the Safa Trust investigation, the homes of Omar and Muhammed Ashraf were also raided. Omar Ashraf is a member of the ADAMS Project Committee and Executive Vice President of Sterling Management Group.  Muhammed Ashraf is the ADAMS Legal Advisor and was also an attorney for Abdurahman Alamoudi, the convicted Al Qaeda financier.

The Vice President of the Board of Trustees and an ADAMS Laws Committee member, who was mentioned above as an Advisor for the Sterling Charitable Gift fund is Iqbal Unus.  Unus was also Dean of Students at the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS) in Leesburg, Virginia, another Muslim Brotherhood organization. GSISS was also raided during the Safa Trust investigation, as was the home of Unus.   The homes GSISS President Taha al-Alwani and Yaqub Mizra, President of the Sterling Management Group, were also raided.

A check written by Yaqub Mirza from the account of SAAR Foundation to ADAMS in the amount of $250,000, was deposited into a Safa Trust account on December 15, 1997.  On SAFA’s 1997 Form 990, however, this amount is not reflected as a contribution received from either ADAMS or SAAR.  Moreover, Safa’s 1997 Form 990 does not reflect any other transactional relationship with ADAMS or SAAR that would explain the transaction.

The relationship with the Safa Trust terrorist support network is clear.

In a 2014 letter to ISIS leader Al Baghdadi, Imam Mohamed Magid was signatory #82.  In this letter, the signatories make clear their support for Sharia, Jihad, and the Hadud punishments under Sharia, which include stonings, beheadings, and crucifixions.  This is the face of ADAMS.

The ADAMS Center was created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and operates as a part of the jihadi network in the United States as a hostile entity to accomplish the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated mission here – to wage “civilization jihad” to destroy America.

When considering conducting any “outreach” to the ADAMS Center, organizations should decide whether they want to work with this jihadi organization which seeks their destruction.

Decades Of UNINDICTED Muslim Co-Conspirators Is MAJOR REASON Why America In Such A Mess

By Ben Barrack, Jan. 15, 2015:

In the wake of the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, the Clinton administration sowed the seeds of destruction when it treated the attack as a crime instead of what it was – an act of war. The good news is that the bombing helped federal officials uncover the infamous landmarks “day of terror” plot before it was launched. Ten individuals – including the “Blind Sheikh” were prosecuted and convicted.

The bad news is that there were 172 unindicted co-conspirators, to include Osama bin Laden (#95) and Ali Mohamed (#109), a figure Shoebat.com has identified as perhaps the most EMBARRASSING Muslim spy in U.S. history.

Bin_Laden_Ali_mohamed

While neither bin Laden nor Ali Mohamed are roaming free today, many of the other 172 named co-conspirators are, to include Siraj Wahhaj, whose Brooklyn mosque was frequented by the “Blind Sheikh” several times and Mohammed Al Hanooti, who would later become the Imam at the notorious Dar al-Hijrah mosque where Anwar al-Awlaki served as an Imam there. Today, Al Hanooti serves as a Mufti at Dar al-Hijrah, as Shoebat.com has reported. Wahhajj has also delivered sermons at Dar al-Hijrah:

Wahhaj speaks at Dar al-Hijrah in 2013.

Wahhaj speaks at Dar al-Hijrah in 2013.

It was Shoebat.com that also revealed Bill Clinton’s dealings with Hanooti’s boss at Dar al-Hijrah, Bassam Estwani, who hired Hanooti in 1995, the same year he was identified as a co-conspirator in the “Landmarks” plot. That was also the same year that Bill Clinton began welcoming Estwani into the White House on a near annual basis.

Today, much is being made about the “Stand with the Prophet” conference being held in Garland, TX. The rally is supposed to show solidarity in opposition to the Paris terror attacks. There’s a small problem. Wahhaj is one of the speakers. The producer of the conference Imam Malik Mujahid recently appeared on the O’Reilly Factor and was asked about his decision to allow Wahhaj to speak. Note his response. Mujahid champions the fact that Wahhaj was an UNindicted co-conspirator, clearly mocking the intent behind listing Wahhaj as one of the 172, in some ways, rightfully so:

Imam Malik Mujahid

The George W. Bush administration continued the practice of prosecuting terrorists and letting so many more go. Take a look at the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing trial in the history of the United States. Eight Defendants were found guilty on all counts (more than 100). That’s the good news. Again, the bad news was that there were 306 UNindicted co-conspirators (some named more than once). Unbelievably, Mohamed Al Hanooti was among them. Yes, the same Al-Hanooti who today serves as the Mufti at Dar al-Hijrah and who was an unindicted co-conspirator in the “Landmarks” trial, was again identified as an accomplice.

…and he led a house of worship.

Mohammed al-Hanooti preaching at Dar al-Hijrah in 2013.

Mohammed al-Hanooti preaching at Dar al-Hijrah in 2013.

Those two trials represent 18 convictions and 478 co-conspirators who never faced indictment, illustrating perfectly why treating Islamic terrorism as criminal activity is a fatally flawed formula.

Read more at Shoebat.com

CAIR, Recognized Terrorist Org., Exposed in TV Debate

Cair-Nihad-Awad-Ibrahim-Hooper-HP_11Clarion Project, BY RYAN MAURO, November 20, 2014:

A senior official of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Nezar Hamze, repeatedly denied the existence of Department of Justice documents tying CAIR to the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamze made the remarks during a televised debate with Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro on NewsmaxTV’s “MidPoint with Ed Berliner.”

The topic of the debate was the designation of CAIR as a terrorist organization by the Muslim government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Hamze, Regional Operations Director of CAIR-Florida, argued that there’s no evidence that CAIR is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas and is a moderate organization. Yet he failed to answer the charge of CAIR being a terrorist organization.

Mauro argued that documents provided by the Justice Department establish a firm connection between CAIR and the internationally designated terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood and brought forward those documents as proof.

You can watch the debate below:

 

CAIR Denies Existence of Publicly-Available Evidence

The most remarkable feature of the discussion was that Hamze repeatedly denied the existence of quotes by federal prosecutors about the CAIR-Brotherhood connection, even after those quotes were read aloud and the documents were shown to the audience. All of these documents are publicly available online.

Mauro opened the discussion by reading an exact quote from federal prosecutors in a court filing that states:

From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists…the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.

Hamze’s response was that the quote does not exist. He said, “No U.S. government or U.S. prosecutor has ever said that CAIR has any ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

When Mauro referenced U.S. government documents, Hamze again said this evidence does not exist.

He accused CAIR’s critics of making things up out of thin air. He claimed, “Their evidence is very well-documented by themselves. They create it; they regurgitate it; they put it out on the Internet and it’s fantastical… In reality, it’s just a bunch of propaganda.”

Mauro pointed out that the Justice Department’s list of unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial explicitly lists CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. He even showed the document to the audience. CAIR is listed in the third section of the document on page 5 (line 11).

Hamze — yet again — said no such documentation exists. He rebutted, “It doesn’t say anything like that.”

CAIR Dismisses Muslim Brotherhood Documents

Mauro also showed a 1994 Muslim Brotherhood document discussing how to “develop [the] work of” CAIR, mentioning it by name.

Hamze’s rebuttal was, “We have nothing to do with the production of that document and Ryan knows that.”

He was responding to an accusation that was never made. The argument was that the Muslim Brotherhood wrote the document and it proves a link to CAIR; not that CAIR produced it.

CAIR Denies Prosecution of Its Officials

Hamze said, “No CAIR leader, no CAIR organization, no CAIR chapter, has ever been charged with a crime.”

This is patently false. There are at least four convicted CAIR officials:

  • Ghassan Elashi, founding board member of CAIR-Texas (sentenced to 65 years in prison for terror-related charges in Holy Land Foundation trial)
  • Randall (Ismail) Royer, a CAIR communications specialist (sentenced to 20 years for aiding and abetting other terrorists in gaining access to a training camp in Pakistan)
  • Bassem Khafagi, CAIR director of community relations (sentenced to 10 months in prison for bank and visa fraud).
  • Muthanna Al-Hanooti, CAIR-Michigan executive director (sentenced to 1 year in prison for attempting to buy oil from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq while it was under sanctions)

In 2011, it was reported that CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad was nearly indicted. Serious questions are also being asked about foreign donations to CAIR and possible money laundering. This list does not include fundraisers who have been indicted or deported, such as Mohammad El-Mezain who raised over $100,000 for CAIR-NY.

Keep in mind, the core issue isn’t illegal activity. It is CAIR’s legal activity in support of the Islamist ideological cause.

The evidence introduced in the Holy Land Foundation suggests CAIR was established to support the Islamist agenda through influencing the media, governmental officials and public policy. It may not be a revenue stream for Hamas, as one of the purposes of the Holy Land Foundation was, but CAIR is still part of the Muslim Brotherhood network.

CAIR Claims Unindicted Co-Conspirator Listing Means Nothing

Hamze dismissed the list of unindicted co-conspirators as being just a “list of names” and “just a blatant list of things.” Being listed by the Department of Justice as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terror financing trial doesn’t happen to just anyone. The designations happen for a reason.

An unindicted co-conspirator is defined as a “person who is identified by a law enforcement officer to have engaged in a conspiracy, but who is not charged in the indictment charging that person’s fellow conspirators.”

CAIR was included because of its involvement in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy to support Hamas, which one main component – the Holy Land Foundation – was successfully prosecuted for.

What CAIR Didn’t Tell You About the Judge’s Ruling in 2009

Hamze correctly states that a federal judge ruled in 2009 that the Justice Department should not have made the list of unindicted co-conspirators public. What he chose not to mention is that the judge upheld the designation, ruling that the government provided “ample evidence” to justify it.

He also claimed that CAIR was not given an opportunity to challenge the designation. This was true of the Holy Land Foundation, hence the 2009 ruling. However, CAIR was given the opportunity to defend itself to Judge Solis and it failed.

CAIR Says It Shouldn’t Be Held Responsible for CAIR’s Actions

Hamze distanced himself from CAIR’s national leadership and other chapter leaders by describing it as a “federation of chapters” and saying he does not report to the Executive-Director.

CAIR chapters register independently, but Hamze’s organization wouldn’t be called CAIR-FL if it wasn’t a part of CAIR. If his chapter doesn’t reflect CAIR, then it wouldn’t have been honored with the2013 CAIR Chapter of the Year Award.

The deceptive registering of independent front groups was discussed by CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad during a 1993 Brotherhood/Hamas meeting that was wiretapped by the FBI. He was recorded saying, “Registering an organization is easy. I can register 100 organizations in 100 cities in one day.”

And even if CAIR-FL were independent, it has its own radical history. For example, in June, CAIR-Tampa leader Hassan Shibly said, “Nationalism was pumped into Muslim communities to divide us to weaken Islam which united us.” You can read more about his history here.

It is ludicrous to suggest that the actions of senior CAIR officials do not reflect the entire organization. If a senior CAIR official like Hamze genuinely objects to CAIR’s conduct, he can leave.

Throughout the debate Hamze was unable to answer the charges levied against his organization, namely that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a designated terrorist organization listed alongside Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic State by the United Arab Emirates (UAE). He could not refute that it forms part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of affiliated organizations dedicated to furthering to cause of the international Muslim Brotherhood’s totalitarian Islamist goals.

***

Poole tweet

 

PPoole tweet

 

Also see:

Who let CAIR off the hook in the first place?

CAIRdiorama32 (1)WND, By ERIK RUSH:

As was widely reported this week, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society were recently designated as terrorist organizations by the United Arab Emirates. The two American groups were named alongside ISIS, al-Qaida and Muslim Brotherhood branches in a list numbering 83 Islamist groups.

CAIR, which claims to be a mainstream “religious community service organization,” is widely known to be a terror sponsor and a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood – itself the wellspring from which all global Sunni Muslim terror organizations flow. They were named by federal prosecutors in 2007 as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a Hamas funding case connected with the Holy Land Foundation trial. Hamas has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. government since 2007.

If you’re thinking that the Muslim UAE’s designation of CAIR as a terrorist organization speaks volumes vis-à-vis the group’s geopolitical toxicity, you’re quite right. CAIR was also one of the organizations that sponsored the first Muslim prayer service held at the Washington National Cathedral last Friday, by the way.

Earlier this week, it was also revealed that CAIR is spearheading efforts to exacerbate racial tensions in Ferguson, Missouri, by using social media to advance the claim that Michael Brown (the black teenager who was shot and killed by a police officer in August) and Luqman Ameen Abdullah (a Muslim activist shot during an FBI raid in 2009) were victims of racist police targeting blacks. According to federal prosecutors, Abdullah was a radical Islamist intent upon overthrowing the U.S. government.

In July of 2009, U.S. District Judge Jorge A. Solis supported CAIR’s request to strike its name from documents listing it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case. While Solis is often portrayed as having been critical of CAIR (sometimes even being credited with publicly outing the CAIR-Hamas connection), the fact that he essentially acted on the organization’s behalf is evident in his order.

Then, in October of 2010, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the Justice Department had violated the Fifth Amendment rights of CAIR and another Muslim advocacy organization by including them on the publicly filed co-conspirator list in the case.

The pressing question here is how the government got from the firm belief in CAIR as a terror supporter to practically being an advocate for their so-called civil rights.

I believe it is high time we expose the irresponsibility, incompetence and/or corruption in such instances – no matter where the trail leads. It isn’t enough for Americans to be outraged time and again at the fact that our courts and government officials pay inordinate deference to malignant, subversive organizations and let it go at that.

Judges are, of course, quite adept at crafting their rulings, opinions and orders to appear legally iron clad and rhetorically cogent, even if their premises are dramatically flawed. In the interest of expedience, we won’t attempt to unravel those right now.

In the interest of accountability and future reference, however, we can look at the justices involved in this case.

Jorge Solis of the 5th Circuit Court is a George H.W. Bush appointee. Appeals Court Judges Emilio Garza, Fortunato Benavides and Marcia Crone entered the 2010 opinion. Garza, who wrote the opinion, is also a George H.W. Bush appointee. Justice Benavides was appointed to the court by Bill Clinton, and Crone by George W. Bush.

These things considered, while the DOJ may be accused of letting cases against terror facilitators unravel under the Obama administration, it is difficult to make the accusation of the justices engaging in the sort of left-wing, sympathist activism we have seen on the part of federal judges in recent years.

On the other hand, it would not be the first time that even mainstream government officials (including judges, who have political allegiances even though they’re not supposed to) insisted upon treating suspect individuals, governments, or organizations as legitimate, law-abiding contemporaries. This, of course, lends credence to the argument (some claim “conspiracy theory”) that militant Islamic organizations are being deftly manipulated by globalists against America in their own bid for supremacy.

Whatever the case, Americans need to realize that Islam is bad news, and it has been for 1,400 years. There are fewer examples more illustrative of this right now than CAIR. You don’t negotiate, let alone fraternize, with someone whose stated goal is your utter subjugation, and you certainly don’t take their words at face value when lying is actually enshrined as part of their creed.

We need a revival of nationalism in America – not a poisonous “My country, right or wrong” nationalism, but one wherein there is a resurgence of the common belief that there’s nothing wrong with placing our interests first. It is those who advance the notion – subliminally or otherwise – that “America sucks” who need to be driven from the arena of public debate.

First Amendment protections have never superseded national survival; thus First Amendment arguments ought not shield the subversives among us now, whether individuals or organizations.

To this end, we cannot afford to countenance the effete, would-be princes of global governance within the ranks of our government officials or captains of industry, those who are willing to empower primitive, misogynistic pedophiles, regardless of the supposed political or economic advantages. Neither can we afford dunderheads on the federal judiciary who are either corrupt or too short-sighted to know they are being played by the aforementioned parties. Federal judges can be impeached.

Neither globalists nor Islamists would have any sway whatsoever over the American people or our political process if we merely held our public officials accountable and adhered to the Constitution. If a substantial number of Americans decide not to participate in these civic duties, the rest of us can take up the slack.

Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact media@wnd.com.

Also see:

In a written statement, CAIR correctly noted the ruling concluded that the U.S. government violated the rights of Muslim Americans when it made its list of un-indicted co-conspirators public. The list, in addition to containing CAIR’s name, also included the Islamist Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

However, CAIR failed to mention that the court declined “to strike CAIR, ISNA and NAIT’s names from those documents.” “Maintaining the names of the entities on the List is appropriate in light of the evidence proffered by the Government,” ruled U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis.

Solis affirmed that “the government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, NAIT, with NAIT, the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.”

As an example of evidence that established these ties, the ruling cited a 1994 Palestine Committee memo naming CAIR and other groups as “working organizations for the Palestine Committee.” According to internal documents submitted as evidence in the 2008 terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation, the Muslim Brotherhood created the Palestine Committee with a “designed purpose to support HAMAS” politically and financially.

FBI Evidence: CAIR Leaders are HAMAS USA

 

Published on Oct 28, 2014 by theunitedwest

Tom Trento presents FBI “smoking gun” evidence that the Palestine Committee which oversaw and ran the Holy Land Foundation (convicted on 36 counts of providing material support to terrorism, money laundering, conspiracy and tax fraud) was founded by a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) and HAMAS Leader Mousa abu Marzook along with Senior Executives Nihad Awad and Senior officer Omar Ahmad who both Co-Founded the largest Muslim advocacy group in the United States CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) for the purpose of raising money for the HAMAS and to support a media, public relations, and political campaign to ultimately destroy Israel.

CAIR’s Attack on Zuhdi Jasser’s Funders Raises the Questions: Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Money Come From?

John-G600x338ACT! for America, By John Guandolo:

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), served for eleven years as a medical officer in the United States Navy where he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal. Dr. Jasser is a Past-President of the Arizona Medical Association, and currently has a private practice in Phoenix specializing in internal medicine and nuclear cardiology.
Dr. Jasser, as many are aware, is an outspoken critic of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States, and is harshly critical of those seeking to impose sharia (Islamic Law) in America. He strongly supports the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

Zuhdi Jasser is a patriot, an American hero, and a Muslim – which is why Hamas (doing business as CAIR) is attacking him.

Last week, Hamas (dba CAIR) launched yet another assault on Dr. Jasser. In 2012, CAIR unsuccessfully tried to block his appointment to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), where he currently serves. CAIR is calling on the USCIRF to investigate the sources of funding for Dr. Jasser’s organization AIFD.

The fact that a Hamas organization like CAIR could operate so openly in the U.S. without disruption from the current administration is, in and of itself, astonishing. CAIR’s brazenness in attacking an honorable American like Dr. Jasser begs questions that must be answered – Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Funding Come From?

Let us together take a walk through the place CAIR never wants us to go – into the land of facts and evidence.

CAIR was incorporated in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. All three of these men were leaders of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), a now-defunct Hamas organization in the U.S. Musa Abu Marzook, the Deputy Political Chief for Hamas and the Leader of Hamas in the United States (Chairman of the U.S. Palestine Committee), was a member of the IAP Board of Directors. FYI, Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government.

In 1993 and 1994, Omar Ahmad served as the National President for IAP, and from 1994-2005 was the Chairman of the Board for CAIR. Omar Ahmad was also on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas). Rafeeq Jaber served as the National President of IAP from 1996-98 and 1999-2005.

U.S. government prosecutors and the Department of Justice identify CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the United States.

In 1993, the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) met in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The meeting was covered by the FBI via physical surveillance, microphones in meeting rooms, and wiretaps on phones. An “Action Memo” from FBI’s Assistant Director for Counterterrorism Dale Watson declared this was a “Meeting among senior leaders of Hamas, the HLFRD, and the IAP.” FBI analysis of the Philadelphia meeting, which was entered into evidence at the US v Holy Land Foundation (hereafter “HLF”) trial reveals “All attendees of this meeting are Hamas members.” Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad were present at this meeting.

Recorded conversations of this meeting captured Awad and Ahmad discussing the creation of a new public relations organization for Hamas which investigators testified was CAIR, created in summer of 1994, less than a year after the Philadelphia meeting.

The HLF Indictment (2004) states: “The purpose of this (1993 Philadelphia) meeting was to determine their course of action in support of Hamas’ opposition to the peace plan and to decide how to conceal their activities from the scrutiny of the United States government.”

In a 2004 FBI raid at the Annandale, Virginia residence of Ismail Elbarasse, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) operative, the archives of the U.S. MB were discovered. One of the documents found lists the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) – the names of CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (alias Omar Yeheya) are on that list.

Because of the overwhelming evidence that CAIR is a Hamas entity, U.S. prosecutors list CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee (Hamas) and as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial – the largest Hamas and terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history.

In the government filing requesting a denial of CAIR’s motion to have its name removed from the Unindicted Co-Conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors state, “The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations…the mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support Hamas.”

In his ruling, the federal Judge in this case, Jorge Solis, stated: “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”

The question of why the President of ISNA sits on the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Committee, works directly with the Secretary of State, briefs National Security staffs, moderates panel discussions at CIA Headquarters, and has been given awards by the FBI will have to be addressed at a later date.

Is anyone else wondering how CAIR and its leaders are allowed to operate freely and unimpeded in America, with their headquarters only a block from the U.S. Capitol?

More evidence…

In the December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal, the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.” So, CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood organization which supports terrorists. It would appear federal law is being violated here.

This would explain why CAIR has a long record of defending jihadis and jihadi organizations, while publicly condemning the counterterrorism efforts of the U.S. government and local law enforcement. Noteworthy is CAIR’s vigorous defense of Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook after his arrest, and their criticism of our government for its investigation and indictment of the Holy Land Foundation – another Hamas entity.

What do senior government officials who have seen the evidence have to say about CAIR?

Former FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomeranz stated: “By masquerading as a mainstream public affairs organization, CAIR has taken the lead in trying to mislead the public about the terrorist underpinnings of militant Islamic movements, in particular, Hamas.”

In a 2003 Senate Sub-Committee hearing on radical Islam, Senator Charles Schumer stated, “To make matters worse, the prominent members of the Council’s (CAIR’s) current leadership who you Mr. Chairman invited to the hearings today – they declined to testify – also have intimate connections with Hamas.”

In June 2009, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Frank Wolf (VA) gave a lengthy speech in which he laid out a great deal of the evidence against CAIR and its ties to Hamas. The transcript of this speech can be found at http://wolf.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/wolf-gives-major-floor-speech-on-fbis-cooperation-with-cair

In a letter dated April 28, 2009 from the FBI’s Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, to U.S. Senator John Kyl (AZ), the FBI leader details why the FBI cut off all formal ties to CAIR and identifies it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial because of its relationship with Hamas.

In a letter dated February 12, 2010 to U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich, Mr. Weich wrote “Enclosed (is)…evidence that was introduced in that trial (US v HLF) which demonstrated the relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and Hamas.”

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For those of you who forgot Junior High School math, please allow me to review: If A=B and B=C, then A=C. There is a relationship between CAIR and the U.S. Palestine Committee. There is a relationship between the U.S. Palestine Committee and Hamas. Therefore, there is a relationship between CAIR and Hamas. As was previously stated, on the order from the International Muslim Brotherhood, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee to raise “media, money, men and all that” for Hamas. The U.S. Palestine Committee created four organizations to support Hamas with propaganda, money, and recruits: The Occupied Land Fund (which became the HLF), the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), and CAIR.

In the sporting world we call this a slam dunk. But what about the money CAIR receives. Certainly if they are attacking Dr. Jasser and his organization for improprieties in his sources of funding, CAIR must be squeaky clean, yes?

No, actually.

Actually, the Hamas front called the Holy Land Foundation provided CAIR with $5,000 of seed money shortly after CAIR was founded, and, in return, CAIR raised money for HLF. Is there another violation of U.S. law here?

CAIR has also received funds from overseas organizations like WAMY (World Association of Muslim Youth) and IIRO (International Islamic Relief Organization). Both WAMY and IIRO are Saudi-funded groups whose U.S. offices were raided by the government because of their possible ties to Hamas and Al Qaeda.

Most notably, In 1999, CAIR received $250,000 from a Saudi-based bank headed by the former Director of the Muslim World League (MWL). Osama bin Laden identified MWL as a primary source of funds for Al Qaeda. Federal investigators raided MWL’s U.S. offices. It is not a far reach to see that CAIR received money from a source the leader of Al Qaeda recognized was a “primary” source of funding for AQ.

It should be noted the information in this article is a small amount of the massive evidence revealing the Council on American Islamic Relations is a Hamas entity whose role in the greater Islamic Movement here is to “support terrorists” as the U.S. Department of Justice has stated. They do this in a variety of ways. As a matter of fact, CAIR’s website acknowledges that all money donated to it via zakat goes to jihad fisabillillah – the seventh category under Islamic Law – but maybe we should save that discussion for another article.

As CAIR launches its attacks against honorable Americans like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser who are standing firm on the truth about a real and present threat to the American people and our nation, another question must be asked…

Where are the U.S. agencies charged with protecting and defending Americans like Dr. Jasser, and why are they not shutting CAIR down, arresting its leaders, and seizing all of its assets? Maybe they haven’t seen the facts.

John Guandolo is the founder of UnderstandingtheThreat.com and the author of the book Raising a Jihadi Generation, detailing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States. He works closely with ACT! for America and helped with the creation of ACT’s Thin Blue Line Project which educates law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals about the threat from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement, and gives them investigative tools and strategies for addressing this threat. Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, a former active duty combat Marine Infantry and Reconnaissance Officer, and a former Special Agent with the FBI. For more information, please go to www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com.

 

DOJ: HLF’s Bid To Vacate Trial Outcome “Strains Credulity”

Judge Ends Imam’s Lawsuit Triggered by IPT Report

IPT News,
June 25, 2013:

Shhhh, Don’t Tell Anyone: Hamas Won

hamas33-450x297By Andrew McCarthy:

(Excerpt)

With Obama on the phone egging him on, Netanyahu abased himself. Not only did he apologize to Turkey, he further capitulated to Erdogan’s demand that Israel pay compensation to the Mavi Marmara “victims.” After the apology, Erdogan briefed his Hamas confederates and announcedhe would be visiting them in Gaza next month. Predictably, he has since announced that Netanyahu’s humiliating act of contrition will not be sufficient to restore diplomatic relations between the two nations. Just as predictably, other Islamic states are now preparing demands for apologies and compensation for sundry exercises of Israeli self-defense against jihadist terror.

There has been no shortage of speculation about why Israel caved. Perhaps it was anxiety over Iranian nukes and Syrian tumult — the hope that rapprochement with Turkey would give Washington more maneuvering room to protect Israel’s interests. Perhaps there were financial considerations, including billions potentially to be made in the exportation of natural gas. None of these explanations is very satisfying. But that is beside the point. For Americans, what matters is not what this episode says about shifts in Israeli policy. It is the sea-change in U.S. counterterrorism that most concerns us.

We now know that Hamas has won.

In 2011, Erdogan made a startling pronouncement on Charlie Rose’s PBS program:

Let me give you a very clear message. I don’t see Hamas as a terror organization. Hamas is a political party. And it is an organization. It is a resistance movement trying to protect its country under occupation. So we should not mix terrorist organizations with such an organization.

Really? Is this what we now mean by regular politics: In the 1987 charter by which it proclaimed its existence, Hamas explained that it formed in order to “join its hands with those of all jihad fighters for the purpose of liberating Palestine.” Clarifying that Hamas is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers . . . the Muslim Brotherhood Movement … the largest Islamic movement in the modern era,” the charter elaborates:

Our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.

Invoking Islamic scripture, the charter further asserts:

Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! [Citing authoritative hadiths.]

In its 25 years, Hamas has made good on its promise to kill. Yet Erdogan has been telling Obama since early 2009 that the United States must “redefine” what it means by “terror and terrorist organizations.” It is increasingly obvious that portraying Hamas as a “political party” and a “resistance movement,” rather than a terrorist organization, is one among the “wide range of issues” on which the president finds himself in agreement with the Turkish prime minister.

Yes, nominally, it is still a crime in the United States to provide material support to Hamas. But these days you have a better chance of being prosecuted under those immigration statutes the administration declines to enforce.

Hamas prosecutions went out with the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial. Since then, the investigation of outfits proved by the Bush Justice Department to be cogs in the Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy to fund and otherwise encourage Hamas’s jihad against Israel have been dropped. Worse, some of those outfits, such as the Islamic Society of North America, are regular guests at the Obama White House. They are consulted in the formulation of Obama foreign policy, which — lo and behold — just happens to favor lavish financial and military support for the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt. As for Obama national-security policy, Islamic-supremacists have been invited to censor the materials used to train our law-enforcement and intelligence agents.

Realistically, how could anyone expect the Obama Justice Department to prosecute the financial support of Hamas when the Obama administration is actively engaged in the financial support of Hamas — sluicing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Gaza, fully aware that it is under Hamas’s totalitarian control. In this, too, Obama is in concord with Erdogan, whose regime has similarly backed Hamas with hundreds of millions of dollars — news that comes to us courtesy of Turkey’s grateful friends at the Union of Good.

Until 2009, U.S. policy was straightforward: Hamas was a terrorist organization and America would not deal with it unless and until it acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and convincingly renounced violence. All that has changed, though. Under Obama’s governance, Islamic-supremacists are bankrolled even as they act on their pledge to destroy Israel. Israel, in turn, is expected to apologize.

Our military’s killing of Osama bin Laden, complemented by the controversial drone campaign, has given President Obama cover. The occasional terrorist is taken out, the administration beats its chest, and few notice that al-Qaeda is resurgent, that the administration spends far more time appeasing Islamists than killing terrorists, and that Hamas has won.

Welcome to the next four years.

Read it all at Front Page

White House Partners with Muslim Brotherhood Front

20110426_ISNAlogoBy Ryan Mauro:

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial, recently toured the White House and met with multiple officials. According to the group, Paul Monteiro, Associate Director of the Office of Public Engagement, “cited ISNA as his primary means of outreach to the American Muslim community.”

The Obama administration’s close relationship with ISNA is about more than photo ops and press releases. It is about policy formulation. The input of ISNA is so treasured that the officials coached the organization on how to engage the White House.

On March 8, ISNA President Mohamed Magid joined 10 other religious leaders in a 90-minute conversation with President Obama about immigration reform. Also present was senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett, who spoke at ISNA’s 2009 convention. Three days later, Magid took part in a meeting with President Obama where he got “recommendations” in preparation for his Middle East trip, including some from groups with a history of defending Hezbollah.

“Over the past two years, I-along with my White House colleagues-have benefited from the advice of many of your [Magid’s] organizations through our Office of Public Engagement,” said Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough on March 6, 2011 during a speech at the mosque that Magid leads.

ISNA’s White House tour included spending time with George Selim, the White House Director for Community Partnerships, who is an annual speaker at ISNA’s conventions. Selim previously admitted that “hundreds” of meetings have taken place between government officials and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, another group with Brotherhood origins that was designated an unindicted co-conspirator.

The U.S. government stated that ISNA is a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity when it designated it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. A federal judge upheld  the designation in 2009 because of “ample” evidence linking ISNA to Hamas. A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo lists ISNA and several of its components among “our organizations and the organizations of our friends,” and a 1988 document says it is part of the Brotherhood “apparatus.”

Read more at Front Page

If you are asking yourself why the Holy land Foundation trial’s findings have been ignored by everyone all you need to do is note the timing of the conclusion of the trial….2008,  just as the Obama administration came into power with Eric Holder at the helm of the DOJ. Since then Obama has been partnering with and empowering the Muslim Brotherhood in every way he can while the various MB front groups work feverishly to undermine the legitimacy of the HLF trial. And 80 file boxes worth of evidence submitted during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial including “The Project” documents, are being withheld from the American public by the Department of Justice

Watch The Project to get the whole story:

Related articles

Media Unable to Discern Fact from Fiction Regarding John Brennan

mbBy John Guandolo:

In the aftermath of my interview on the Tom Trento show last week, some in the media seem unable or unwilling to grasp some basic facts about the threat environment in America these days.  In response to numerous omissions in the dozens of stories covering my interview stating that John Brennan is “Unfit” to be the next Director of Central Intelligence, please allow me to share facts and evidence with you about our threat landscape.

The largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history was U.S. v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), which was adjudicated in 2008 in Dallas, Texas.  HLF and its leadership were found guilty of funneling over $12 million directly to Hamas.  At the time it was indicted, HLF was the largest Islamic charity in America.  A great deal of evidence entered into the HLF trial came from material uncovered during an FBI raid in Annandale, VA in 2004 where the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America were discovered.  These strategic documents, financial documents, audio/video tapes, photos and the like revealed the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategies, plans, tactics, organizations, and leadership in America.  Evidence revealed the very first Islamic organization formed in America – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – was formed in 1963 by the Muslim Brotherhood.  Today, there are over 600 MSA chapters across the U.S.  From the MSA, the largest and most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. were created by the Muslim Brotherhood including the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and others.  NAIT holds the title/deeds to many of the Islamic Centers in America today.  Hamas is a Muslim Brotherhood (MB) organization, and wherever the MB exists, like in the U.S., the Special Section is always present.  The Special Section is the unit within the MB which conducts military operations – what we call “terrorism.”

Read more at Understanding The Threat

Why It Should Always Be Called ‘Hamas-CAIR’

By Pamela Geller:

Last Monday, the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from the Holy Land Five: five former officials of what was once the largest Islamic charity in the United States, the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), who were convicted of funneling millions in charitable donations to the jihad terror group Hamas.  That effectively ends the story of the Holy Land Foundation, but since many of its co-conspirators are still active, notably the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the case is worth revisiting.

In 2008, the U.S. government filed a memorandum in opposition to the request from two of the groups linked to the HLF, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), that the “unindicted co-conspirator” designation they received during the HLF trial be removed (it wasn’t).  The memorandum is a useful and illuminating summary of what some of the most prominent Islamic groups in the U.S. have been involved with.

It noted that some of HLF’s top officials, including Shukri Abu Baker, its secretary and chief executive officer; Mohammed El-Mezain, its director of endowments; and Ghassan Elashi, its chairman of the board, were charged with “providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization,” as well as with “engaging in prohibited financial transactions with a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, money laundering, filing false tax returns, and several conspiracy charges, including: conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization…conspiracy to provide funds, goods and services to Specially Designated Global Terrorist … and conspiracy to commit money laundering[.]”

And the HLF officials “were not acting alone.”  Rather, they were “operating in concert with a host of individuals and organizations dedicated to sustaining and furthering the Hamas movement. … The object of the conspiracy was to support Hamas. The support will be shown to have take several forms, including raising money, propaganda, proselytizing, recruiting, as well as many other types of actions intended to continue to promote and move forward Hamas’s agenda of the destruction of the State of Israel and establishment of an Islamic state in its place.”

ISNA and NAIT were among the groups listed as “members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.”  During the trial, the government introduced evidence “expressly linking ISNA and NAIT to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic Association for Palestine and its principals; the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and its Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater Hamas-affiliated conspiracy described in the Government’s case-in-chief.”  The Islamic Association for Palestine, since shut down as a Hamas front, is CAIR’s parent organization.

The evidence introduced at the trial “established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood.”  They were listed as among those organizations dedicated to the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated goal, according to a captured internal document made public during the HLF trial, of “eliminating and destroying the Western Civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over other religions.”

Read more at American Thinker

Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of the WND Books title Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.

Another Important Victory: The Holy Land Foundation Trial Redux

Shariah Finance Watch:

Observers who follow such things know how important the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial has been in uncovering the spread of both violent and civilizational jihad in the USA.

For those who may not be familiar with the Holy Land Foundation trial, here is a very brief synopsis:

The Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic charity in the United States. It was headquartered in Richardson, Texas, a suburb of Dallas. In 2007, federal prosecutors brought charges against the organization for funding Hamas and other Islamic terrorist organizations. The Holy Land Foundation’s assets were frozen by the European Union and U.S., and the charity was shut down by the U.S. government following the discovery that it was funding Hamas. The 2008 trial of the charity leaders was the largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history. In 2009, the founders of the organization were given life sentences for funneling $12 million to Hamas.

Much was uncovered during the investigation associated with the prosecution, including the extent to which the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated America and controlled all of the major Muslim organizations in America, to include the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Several such organizations and individuals were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the trial and it was the reported intention of the Dallas US attorney’s office to prosecute at least some of those co-conspirators before Barack Obama ascended to the presidency and Eric Holder became attorney general and shut the whole operation down.

Nevertheless, Holder was too late to save the Holy Land Foundation and the folks who started it.

Not surprisingly, however, the convicted defendants appealed their convictions and became somewhat of a cause celebre among the hard Left in America and the Islamic community, many of whom are members of the organizations listed as unindicted co-conspirators in the first place:

http://electronicintifada.net/content/holy-land-5-appeal-begins-palestinians-gaza-praise-charity-closed-bush/11807

It seems the Islamists wanted us to believe that all the Holy Land Foundation was involved in was good works and sending poor Palestinian Muslims to school. They went to great lengths to highlight these activities.

The problem of course is that this is simply a smokescreen and just because a charity does some “good” work doesn’t mean it doesn’t also take part in nefarious activity as well. Think of the Mafia as another example. Mafia run districts were usually very clean and free of petty crime, but that came at a brutal price.

In terms of Islamic charities, we have proof positive in Shariah that they are instructed to support a variety of activities with money. The money comes from zakat donations, the form of tithing that we have posted about so often on SFW. There are 8 destinations for zakat under Shariah. Seven of them are benign for the most part.

But number 7, as we have pointed out so often, is downright hostile and violent: “those fighting in the way of allah,” defined as those engaged in Islamic military operations who are not part of an army roster. Sounds an awful lot like irregular combatants doesn’t it? That’s because that is exactly what it is.

And that’s why the Holy Land Foundation sent at least $12 million to HAMAS and other Jihadist organizations–they were following Islamic law. As a result, the charity was shut down and its leaders deposited in jail for life.

Anyway, the appeal has gotten all the way up to the Supreme Court level. In the process, a US government bureaucrat testified on behalf of the Holy Land Foundation, with the rather disturbing revelation that one of our US government funded programs was probably guilty of the same offense as the Holy Land Foundation, since it funneled money to organizations that have been deemed to be tied to HAMAS. Of course that disgraceful government employee, Edward Abington, provided that testimony as a means of justifying the Holy Land Foundation’s activity.

We rather think that Abington’s testimony should produce an invasive, hostile audit of just where our tax dollars are going. Clearly we do not benefit from creeps like Abington directing those dollars.

http://vinienco.com/2012/10/29/holy-land-foundation-trial-continues/

In closing we are pleased to report that the Supreme Court has in fact refused the Holy Land Foundation appeal.

Chalk one up for the good guys.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=%2Fdocketfiles%2F11-1390.htm

End of the Line for HLF

IPT News:

The United States Supreme Court has decided not to accept appeals from the five Holy Land Foundation officials convicted of illegally funneling more than $12 million to Hamas, essentially concluding the case.

The court had no comment in declining to hear the case Monday.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected similar arguments last year in upholding the convictions against Ghassan Elashi, Shukri Abu-Baker, Mohammad El-Mezain, Mufid Abdulqader and Abdulrahman Odeh. They were convicted on a total of 108 counts in 2008 and are serving sentences ranging from 15 years to 65 years in prison.

The defendants wanted the Supreme Court to overturn the Fifth Circuit ruling by rejecting the prosecution’s use of Israeli security officials whose identities were never disclosed. That, defense attorneys argued, hampered their ability to cross-examine the witnesses and violated the defendants’ rights to confront their accusers.

But other testimony and evidence was consistent with the Israelis’ testimony, the Fifth Circuit found. And there is precedent – especially in drug prosecutions – for courts balancing witness safety against the defendants’ confrontation rights. “[T]here was a serious and clear need to protect the true identities of [the Israeli witnesses] because of concerns for their safety,” the Fifth Circuit ruling said.

In addition, prosecutors did provide sufficient information for defense attorneys to cross examine aggressively. The “defense was therefore well-armed with information upon which to confront and cross-examine both,” the appellate court found.

The defense and its supporters continue to cast the Holy Land Foundation as a victim of overzealous post-9/11 prosecutions. The group merely raised money for needy Palestinians, they argue, and was never connected to any violence.

But evidence and testimony in the trial showed the HLF sent money to Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas. “The purpose of creating the Holy Land Foundation was as a fundraising arm for Hamas,” U.S. District Judge Jorge Solis said at the 2009 sentencing hearing.

HLF had been one of the nation’s largest Muslim charities before being shut down in 2001. Other disclosures in the case tied several prominent American Islamist groups – especially the Council on American-Islamic Relations – to a Muslim Brotherhood network in the United States created to provide Hamas with political and financial support.

Beyond The Line For HLF:

While Monday’s refusal by the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal by defendants in the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) prosecution effectively closes the case for the defense, it could open options for the government.

In addition to the five defendants, HLF as an organization also was convicted in the case. As we reported in December 2008, there are potential enforcement ramifications stemming from the HLF case beyond the five convicted defendants. This is particularly true now the appellate process has been exhausted in favor of the prosecution.

Since HLF has now been legally determined to have been an organization involved in terrorism support, foreign nationals who worked for HLF or otherwise assisted it may be subject to immigration enforcement action in the form of removal (deportation) proceedings.

In fact, even naturalized U.S. citizens who may have been involved in HLF activities before they naturalized may be subject to either criminal fraud prosecution and/or revocation of their citizenship status if they misrepresented their involvement with HLF or the nature of HLF activities while they were affiliated with the organization.

The Supreme Court decision finalizing the HLF appeals process firmly strengthens the position for law enforcement agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and their ability to aggressively investigate and prosecute additional suspects who may have been involved with this organization.