Jihad Charity Alert. "Jurors told charity funds warriors," by Lee Hammel for the Worcester Telegram & Gazette (thanks to all who sent this in):
BOSTON— The same mujahedeen that three Muslims on trial in U.S. District Court are accused of funding were considered freedom fighters three decades ago.Some Muslim charities in war-torn areas around the world do a lot more than care for refugees: They help fund the fighters behind the wars.
Those are the geopolitical realities eight men and seven women on the jury were exposed to yesterday when they thought all they had to consider were the tax fraud and false statement charges against a Shrewsbury man and two former Worcester men.
They were given a global tour of figures who have been in the news since terrorism — or freedom fighting — began shaping the headlines in the 1980s, compliments of Evan F. Kohlmann, one of the prosecution’s expert witnesses.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys and lawyers for Muhamed Mubayyid, Emadeddin Z. Muntasser, and Samir Al-Monla, former officials of Care International, have been battling over whether Mr. Kohlmann can testify and what he could say when he did.
The mere mention of his Web site, globalterroralert.com, was enough to set Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV off on one of his frequent warnings to the jury: The case is not about 9-11 or terrorism and they should draw no inferences from the fact the defendants are Middle Eastern and Muslims, he said.
But the two sides forged on, making their points amid a blizzard of objections from the other side, with Judge Saylor at one point cutting off questioning on some of the most sensitive information.
Elizabeth A. Lunt, one of Mr. Muntasser’s lawyers, drew Mr. Kohlmann out at length about the enormity of the human suffering — the genocide, the millions of refugees — among the Muslims in the areas to which Care International sent money: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and elsewhere.
The government says Care collected $1.7 million between 1993 and 2003.
And Ms. Lunt pointed out Care was not the only one sending money: the U.S. government provided billions of dollars to the mujahedeen in the 1980s, when they were considered freedom fighters driving the godless Soviets out of Afghanistan.
But under questioning from Assistant U.S. Attorney Aloke Chakravarty, Mr. Kohlmann pointed out Muslim charities in the areas where Muslim holy warriors are trying to reclaim Muslim land provide money “not just to refugees but to the fighters themselves.”
He said money funneled into mujahedeen staging areas such as Zagreb, Croatia, and Peshawar, Pakistan, comes from charities in North America and Europe.
That prompted the judge to tell jurors there is no charge Care was doing that. The charity officers are charged with failing to tell the Internal Revenue Service it supported holy war and that Care was an outgrowth of another non-tax exempt organization, Al-Kifah Refugee Center, which the defendants deny....
Muslim charity = branch office of Bank of Jihad.
Deep Thoughts.
Since the fighters live and fight among their families, and are directed to dominate their wives, if you feed the wives, you are feeding the fighters.
Jihad Charity Alert. "Jurors told charity funds warriors,
I could have told them that and saved all those court charges, and 'billable hours', by lawyers...
Two weeks ago I put up the posting below. It was about another case, but judging by the behavior of the judge as described, it applies to the case described in the article above as well:
"This shows again the need for special courts, with jurisdiction over all cases about Jihad, for they cannot be understood without a solid grounding in the texts and tenets and attitudes and atmospherics of Islam, and that takes a bit of study, far more study than the average judge will put in, and certainly more than those selected for juries.
These should be based on the Patent and Tax Courts, in which a panel of judges, who have received a solid grounding in Patent Law, aor Tax Law, and have specialized in those matters so that they can understand the issues in order to better decide.
If ordinary judges are not up to the task, juries are even less so. For all it takes, on a jury in a terrorism case, is for one person to have been threatened. Or for one juror to be a Muslim (how could all Muslims be systematically challenged and kept off of such juries, without a Constitutional objection being raised and, alas, likely to be upheld because the real nature of Islam will not be discussed, and not brought to the attention of the Supreme Court in any brief) or a sympathizer with Islam, or someone determined to "settle scores" with (the Bush Administration, Amerikka, "Zionists" you name it).
No, we can't have another of these farces, as with the Holy Land Foundation, where the meticulously gathered evidence was overwhelming, convincing beyond any reasonable doubt to any reasonable person who also understood, grasped the nature of, Jihad and of Islam. And that latter requirement is the Big Problem that our system, and all Infidel systems of justice, will have to learn to deal with.
Special courts, with panels of specially-educated judges, are a part of the answer."
[Posted by: Hugh at November 21, 2007 5:13 PM]
"The mere mention of his Web site, globalterroralert.com, was enough to set Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV off on one of his frequent warnings to the jury: The case is not about 9-11 or terrorism and they should draw no inferences from the fact the defendants are Middle Eastern and Muslims, he said."
The freaking judge sounds like a politically correct libtard dhimmi-wit. Might as well kiss this case goodbye when the judge is going to jump in with comments like this to the jury.
Pez... I like the way you think. I wouldn't like to see anyone go hungry or thirsty...except jihadists and their supporters/sympathizers.
OT - Looks like Ms. Medea of Code Pink got roughed up a bit by her Muslim friends in Pakistan. What an excellent, fortuitous event. What a learning opportunity for all her female friends...first the teddy bear teacher and now code pink arrested at gunpoint in Peshawar...the hits just keep on coming!
"The charity officers are charged with failing to tell the Internal Revenue Service it supported holy war....."
.....Had they reported their activities and reported their income and paid any tax liabilities as required to the IRS , the nimrods at the IRS would have said "thank you" and would not have said anything to the government intelligence agencies (who, as we now know, would ignore any factual evidence presented to them)...
@American Tiger,
Code Pink is a new one on me. From having a glance at their website, it looks as though, even if they are misguided and ill informed, at least they are a womens' organization who is addressing the issues, unlike NOW.
Other posters demand to know where all the feminists have gone, and I don't blame them--I wonder the same thing, myself. Maybe some of them have cast their lot with Code Pink. Thanks for mentioning to the organization, I'm interested in looking into their views and actions.
LOL I've sent email to NOW, about some of the topics addressed by JW, and for my pains got an email invitation to join them in a fight for non-sexist car insurance. Sad. Very sad.
AmericanTiger wrote:
"OT - Looks like Ms. Medea of Code Pink got roughed up a bit by her Muslim friends in Pakistan."
----------
I noticed the story about Ms. Medea of Code Pink, too. I was thinking that she should try the same type of protest in Tehran; I don't know if she would come home in one piece.
She probably chose to protest against Musharraf because he is perceived a US ally. I also wondered if Code Pink was a communist "pinko" organization?
--
CT Yank
When called upon to serve on a jury in the past, I was asked very specific questions that, if answered in a certain way, would have immediately disqualified me for that particular jury. Is it expecting too much for the lawyers who question prospective jurors to ask for their religious preference? If the trial involves religion, particularly aid to Hamas, why should a Muslim act as a juror?
Muslim charities provide money "not just to refugees but to the fighters themselves"
...................................
It is important to note that for many Muslims this is *not* seen as money laundering or a misuse of charity--it in fact *is* considered charity.
This is what makes tracking this sort of thing much more difficult than most charity scams--that it is considered by many Muslims a fully legitimate use of Zakat. Funding jihadists, buying weapons, supporting the families of suicide bombers, as well as building schools or hospitals or aid to the poor.
Of course, not every Muslim charity is funding terrorism. But even a casual reading of the Qu'ran shows that there is no distinction made between these recipients of charity--in fact, funding the "defense" of Islam (Jihad) may in many cases be viewed by donors as a goal superior to aiding disaster victims or allieviating poverty.
No one seems to be asking the honorable Senator who is demanding monetary information about the "Mega-churches" why he is not also doing so for the Mega-Mosques in the USA?