ISNA, NAIT admit ties to Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas

A very significant update on this story: in trying to get themselves off the uninidicted co-conspirator list in a Hamas funding case, two of the leading Islamic organizations in the U.S. admit that they have been connected with the Muslim Brotherhood — an organization that is waging, in its own words, “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 Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

“ISNA Admits Hamas Ties,” from IPT News, July 25 (thanks to LGF):

In its latest filing before the federal district court in Dallas on behalf of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and its affiliate organization, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) in the Hamas-terrorism financing case, the ACLU has made a noteworthy admission.

Rather than deny that there is copious evidence tying ISNA and NAIT to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, the brief argues that such evidence is merely dated. In a curious footnote on page 7, the reply states:

Assuming the authenticity of documents’ dates, the most recent documents to mention either ISNA or NAIT are dated 1991, Gov. Exhs. 3-3 and 3-85, but the majority of the documents are older. Almost all of the numerous exhibits that purport to show financial transactions and that contain any mention of ISNA or NAIT are dated 1988 and 1989 (there are two dated 1990), almost a decade before the majority of the overt acts the government alleges in support of its conspiracy charges against the HLF defendants.

So ISNA and NAIT are not saying that the documents tying their organizations to Hamas are “inauthentic,” but that the problem with the evidence is just that it is old. Then, even more curiously, the reply goes on to argue something that the government has not even alleged:

Even if the “evidence” provided some basis for alleging criminality against petitioners, the government’s discussion of it shows the government utterly fails to grasp the singular weight and consequence that an official accusation of criminal conduct carries in our criminal justice system and in our society.

But, of course, the government has not charged ISNA or NAIT with criminal conduct, or the two groups would be indicted in their own right, rather than un-indicted co-conspirators who worked with the Holy Land for Relief and Development (HLF), the defendant and alleged Hamas-front. The reply brief then, as Shakespeare might write, “doth protest too much.”

Indeed. Read it all.

FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    So, ISNA and NAIT are trying, ever so subtly, to morph the term “un-indicted co-conspirator” from being a true statement of fact into a politically incorrect term. This follows the “Human Rights” arguments being made in the UN.

    This argument, if won, will embolden the Cult of Mohammed (since I can’t say “jihadis” any more) to chip away even further using lawfare.

  2. says

    I have said repeatedly on this post that any Islamic organization that is ever founded has links with extremist organizations. As a matter of fact, I believe that NO Islamic organization or foundation is free of extremist elements at any point.

    Be it ISNA or the Islamic Association of Lawyers. If it has Islamic in it’s name, then it’s tied to them.