PDA

View Full Version : Charity or Terror?


lily
07-30-2007, 10:44 PM
Sounds like an interesting case. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19983977/site/newsweek/?rf=nwnewsletter)

Charity or Terror?
The government says a Texas-based Islamic charity was actually funneling
funds to terrorists. But some Muslim Americans claim the case is about
marginalizing their voices.


WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Gretel C. Kovach
Newsweek
Updated: 6:46 p.m. ET July 26, 2007
July 26, 2007 - Noor Elashi wants to "shatter stereotypes" about Muslims and
Arabs. It's one of the reasons she pursued a career in journalism. A
Palestinian-American cub reporter at the Fort Worth (Texas) Star-Telegram,
Elashi, 21, bristles at the seemingly endless questions she gets about
Muslims’ views on terrorism and suicide bombing. “It’s really frustrating,”
she says. “We are totally against anything to do with violence or terror.
Just like most people in this world, we’re very peaceful people.”



Elashi may be getting those questions more often than a typical Muslim
American. Her father, Ghassan Elashi, stands accused of supporting the
Palestinian militant group Hamas. Along with other fellow officers of the
Richardson, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation—which was once the nation’s
largest Islamic charity—Elashi faces charges of funneling $12.4 million to
the Palestinian group since the U.S. government declared it a terrorist
organization in 1995. As the defendants’ trial got underway in Dallas this
week, rhetoric on both sides grew heated. While the federal government calls
the case the biggest terrorism-financing case in U.S. history, the
defendants, as well as many Muslim organizations, decry it as a politically
motivated witch hunt and the latest outbreak of post-9/11 “Islamophobia.”

Before federal authorities shuttered the Holy Land Foundation in 2001
(shortly after 9/11), the charity was an effective fund-raiser. After its
founding in 1988, it solicited more than $57 million—all of which went for
humanitarian aid, the group says. Among the beneficiaries of such donations,
according to the foundation: Palestinian medical and dental clinics,
orphanages, schools, refugee camps and community centers.

But the U.S. government contends that such charity work was merely a cover.
“In fact,” the 2004 indictment states, “the donations were distributed to
individuals associated with, and organizations controlled by, Hamas.” Some
of the money, according to the indictment, was directed to the families of
suicide bombers. In his opening statements Tuesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney
James Jacks alleged that the foundation’s leaders lied about their
activities because “to tell the truth is to reveal what they were all
about—the destruction of the state of Israel and replacing it with a
Palestinian Islamic state.”

Defense lawyers vigorously dispute this. The Holy Land Foundation was a
legitimate charity, they say, one that also gave to victims of Texas
tornadoes, the Oklahoma City bombing and the Turkish earthquakes. The
attorneys say the group used zakat (charity) committees licensed by the
Israeli government to distribute aid to the Palestinian people. “Its focus
was on children in need,” said Nancy Hollander, attorney for Holy Land CEO
Shukri Abu Baker, during court proceedings this week.



Moreover, the defense has pointed to a number of irregularities in the
evidence that has surfaced so far. According to a 2004 complaint filed by
Holy Land’s attorneys, the FBI flagged the Holy Land Foundation for
contributing to a Hamas-affiliated hospital in the Palestinian territories
without mentioning that the U.S. Agency for International Development had
helped the same hospital. Plus, before the case went to trial, it was
revealed that a government translation of supposed comments by Holy Land
Foundation officers—that “even Jesus Christ had called the Jews and their
high priests ... the sons of snakes and scorpions”—was wrong; the original
unabridged statement contained no such language, defense lawyers say. The
government is investigating the error but has not yet explained the
discrepancy.




Each of the five defendants has pleaded not guilty. While Elashi insists
that he does not support violence, he was previously convicted of shipping
computer equipment to Libya and Syria (illegal under federal law) through a
company he ran with his brothers and of wiring money to Hamas’s deputy
political bureau chief in Syria. The Elashi family says that money was
actually an annuity payment to the Hamas official’s wife, who is a cousin.
Elashi began serving a six-and-a-half-year prison sentence in April. Another
defendant, Abdulrahman Odeh, the foundation’s New Jersey representative, has
allegedly described, according to prosecutors, Hamas suicide bombings as
“beautiful operations,” and his Holy Land office was allegedly papered with
violent anti-Israel propaganda. “If it were a crime to want bad things to
happen to Israel, we’d be dead in the water,” Odeh’s attorney, Greg
Westfall, told the court. But Westfall said he aims to help jurors
understand the pain of decades of Israeli occupation and Palestinian exile.
The others indicted in the case are CEO Abu Baker, director of endowments
Mohammed El-Mezain and top fund-raiser Mufid Abdulqater. Two others, Haitham
Maghawri and Akram Mishal, fled the country and are considered fugitives,
according to authorities.

Federal prosecutors face a difficult task. They must prove that the
defendants knew that the money they gave to third-party organizations would
be passed on to Hamas. In similar cases brought by the Feds in Illinois and
Florida, the government failed to “connect the dots,” as one judge put it.
The current case, which is expected to last several months, will require
jurors to sift through a decade’s worth of evidence, countless wiretapped
conversations and the testimony of Israeli intelligence agents.

NortheastCynic
07-30-2007, 10:51 PM
A very interesting case. Keep us posted, Lily, I'd love to see all of the evidence the Feds have against this group. If it can be proven that the group's cash found it's way to Hamas or Hamas controlled group, then it certainly appears to have funded terrorism.

-NC

CheesyMuslim
07-30-2007, 11:09 PM
Sorry bout that,

1. More proof all the time.
2. I need more reporters to help report all the evils.
3. You got my back on this story, nice going lily.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Alonzo
07-30-2007, 11:12 PM
If it can be proven that the group's cash found it's way to Hamas or Hamas controlled group, then it certainly appears to have funded terrorism.

Hamas operates hospitals, orphanages, soup kitchens etc. Funding Hamas does not mean you directly funded terrorism, or were aware you were funding terrorism.

If, for example, someone could guarantee that money they sent to Hamas was going solely to fund a Hamas run hospital, is that funding terrorism in your mind? You can make an indirect connection (funding the social services that give the organization public support), but the actual funding of terrorism?

NortheastCynic
07-31-2007, 01:32 AM
I fully understand that, Zo; and that is why I used the word "if" to qualify my statement. If the money funded terror activities [if that is possible to determine], then punishment is necessary.

-NC

Mayberry
07-31-2007, 01:40 AM
So if hamas operates hospitals, then it is hunky dory to give them money? I don't think so. Terrorists are terrorists, whether they're running "humanitarian" fronts or not. Blow the lot off the map says I.

lily
07-31-2007, 04:21 AM
A very interesting case. Keep us posted, Lily, I'd love to see all of the evidence the Feds have against this group. If it can be proven that the group's cash found it's way to Hamas or Hamas controlled group, then it certainly appears to have funded terrorism.

-NC


I thought it was interesting too. I didn't even know about it, I've heard nothing on the news.

Isn't this the same reason that they refused entry to Cat Stevens?[hr]
So if hamas operates hospitals, then it is hunky dory to give them money? I don't think so. Terrorists are terrorists, whether they're running "humanitarian" fronts or not. Blow the lot off the map says I.


Yes, if Hamas is using it for humanitarian reasons, I don't think they would have a case. People are allowed to give to charity.

jafar00
07-31-2007, 08:25 AM
Is Hamas not allowed to do humanitarian work? They were Democratically elected into government were they not? It's their job to look after Palestinian people.

Alonzo
07-31-2007, 03:32 PM
Yes, if Hamas is using it for humanitarian reasons, I don't think they would have a case. People are allowed to give to charity.

I think it's still illegal in the u.s. to do so, even though it should be legal.

lawless168
07-31-2007, 05:36 PM
Uh huh, Hamas are your friends, and all around wonderful bunch....LOL

I want some of that shit you guys are smoken, you non-sharing mofo's!

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z199/lawless168/hamas.jpg

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z199/lawless168/untitled.jpghttp://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z199/lawless168/_42845317_hamas203.jpg

Gotta teach'em young!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi-c6lbFGC4

Truth_and_Power
07-31-2007, 07:09 PM
Gotta teach'em young!


http://www.hasbro.com/common/images/products/83370205d45_main200.jpg

Mayberry
07-31-2007, 07:20 PM
Sure. Toy soldiers create bloodthirsty killers. I played with GI Joes, and I've never killed anyone. Give me a break.

lily
08-01-2007, 12:29 AM
Yes, if Hamas is using it for humanitarian reasons, I don't think they would have a case. People are allowed to give to charity.

I think it's still illegal in the u.s. to do so, even though it should be legal.


Thanks Zo. I didn't know that.

Mayberry
08-01-2007, 12:43 AM
So you are certain that every dollar you give Hamas will go to charity? Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

lily
08-01-2007, 12:44 AM
Mayberry.........I'm not certain that every dollar I give to any charity goes to that charity, but it doesn't stop me from giving.

Alonzo
08-01-2007, 12:46 AM
President Clinton's recent order freezing the assets of Middle Eastern groups and individuals whom the administration has deemed terrorist is sending ripples of alarm through Islamic communities and raising questions among constitutional law experts.

The groups fear that contributions to charities linked to some of those groups will lead to surveillance and prosecution. Critics of Clinton's order say it stigmatizes Muslims and violates their constitutional rights.

Among the 12 well-known groups named in the Jan. 24 order are the Palestinian groups Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, PFLP, and the Lebanese group Hezbollah.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n15_v31/ai_16674939[hr]
So you are certain that every dollar you give Hamas will go to charity? Yeah, right. :rolleyes:


The point is that if they gave money to the organization for charitable purposes, and there isn't evidence showing that they knew it went to militant activities, then they shouldn't be persecuted.

If you want to fund charities in the Palestinian territories, particularly Gaza, it's difficult not to have that money flow through the hands of any militant group in the process. Whether or not all of it goes to charitable works once in their hands is beyond your control.

lily
08-01-2007, 12:47 AM
President Clinton's recent order freezing the assets of Middle Eastern groups and individuals whom the administration has deemed terrorist is sending ripples of alarm through Islamic communities and raising questions among constitutional law experts.

The groups fear that contributions to charities linked to some of those groups will lead to surveillance and prosecution. Critics of Clinton's order say it stigmatizes Muslims and violates their constitutional rights.

Among the 12 well-known groups named in the Jan. 24 order are the Palestinian groups Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, PFLP, and the Lebanese group Hezbollah.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n15_v31/ai_16674939


Zo.......I read that, then came back and said whoa......that order was written before Hamas was elected. Wouldn't that void it?

Alonzo
08-01-2007, 12:53 AM
Not really, they're still on the list of terrorist organization. The article that would really spell out what the order said is on the NYT website, but they charge a fee to access it.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60615FC3C580C758EDDA80894DD494D 81&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fT% 2fTerrorism

If anyone has a subscription to the times it would be nice if you'd post the article.

Mayberry
08-01-2007, 01:07 AM
If you want to fund charities in the Palestinian territories, particularly Gaza, it's difficult not to have that money flow through the hands of any militant group in the process. Whether or not all of it goes to charitable works once in their hands is beyond your control.
So why the hell would you want to give money to them then?

Alonzo
08-01-2007, 01:11 AM
I think the part about "funding charities in the Palestinian territories" may be your answer.

Mayberry
08-01-2007, 01:20 AM
I think the part about "funding charities in the Palestinian territories" may be your answer.

But you don't know if you're funding charities or car bombs. That's my point.

Alonzo
08-01-2007, 01:31 AM
You take your chances. A lot more funds are needed to maintain social services than are needed to be a suicide bomber. Not sending funds will likely do more to harm the former than it will do to slow the latter.

Mayberry
08-01-2007, 01:33 AM
You take your chances. A lot more funds are needed to maintain social services than are needed to be a suicide bomber. Not sending funds will likely do more to harm the former than it will do to slow the latter.

Well, that is a chance that I would be unwilling to take.