The 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 “˜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.”
That’s from “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America,” a 1991 presentation by Muslim Brotherhood operative Mohamed Akram.
The Brotherhood memorandum concludes with “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” Among these organizations are the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), the groups that the ACLU is here characterizing as “mainstream Muslim organizations.” I have no doubt that they are mainstream. But I would hope that the relevant authorities do not rule on this case without discussing the Brotherhood memorandum in some detail.
“ACLU Challenges Government’s Stigmatizing Of Mainstream Muslim Groups In Holy Land Case: Group Asks Court To Clear Names Of Two Organizations Unconstitutionally Labeled ‘Unindicted Co-Conspirators,'” from the ACLU, June 18 (thanks to Christine):
DALLAS – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Texas filed a legal challenge today to clear the names of two mainstream Muslim organizations labeled by the government as “unindicted co-conspirators” in its criminal case against the Holy Land Foundation (HLF). Government attorneys publicly identified the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) as co-conspirators before the HLF trial, even though neither organization was the subject of a criminal investigation or charged with any crimes.
“By publicly branding these groups as criminals without providing a forum for them to defend themselves or clear their names, the government has acted with blatant disregard for their constitutional rights,” said Hina Shamsi, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “The government’s action is especially shameful because the charge it makes is so inflammatory – it has caused each organization’s reputation and good name to be dragged through the mud. The government has a constitutional obligation to correct the record and clear the names of ISNA and NAIT.”
In a pre-trial brief in the HLF case – which ended in a mistrial last fall and is scheduled for a retrial in September – government lawyers broke with Department of Justice policy and settled law when they publicly labeled ISNA and NAIT as unindicted co-conspirators in a prosecution alleging that the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim charity, provided material support for Hamas. The government conceded, however, that it had absolutely no evidence proving that either ISNA or NAIT had engaged in a criminal conspiracy. The lead prosecutor in the case told lawyers for the two organizations “that ISNA and NAIT were not subjects or targets in the HLF prosecution or in any other pending investigation.” The prosecutor also acknowledged that the public labeling was simply a “legal tactic” intended to allow the government to introduce hearsay evidence against HLF later at trial.
Both ISNA and NAIT are mainstream charitable organizations that provide valuable services to the Muslim community and beyond. ISNA supports American Muslim communities, develops educational, social and outreach programs and fosters good relations with other religious communities as well as civic and service organizations. NAIT holds in trust titles to mosques, Islamic centers, schools and other real estate belonging to Muslim communities across the U.S., enabling these communities to safeguard and pool their assets in accordance with U.S. law and Islamic principles….
In that order?