Saturday, August 30, 2014

Huge Sentences for non-Violent association with Boston Bombing Suspect

Dias Kadyrbayev Offers Plea: Helpless Muslims with poor Legal Support
http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1564.htm


Shocked by his best friend, Azamat Tazhayakov's trial outcome, and with a September 8 trial date fast approaching, Dias Kadyrbayev, who is being held in solitary confinement, has decided to accept a plea bargain, acknowledging that "Boston has already decided on guilt."

David Frank reported in Mass Lawyers Weekly, "Kadyrbayev's New Jersey lawyer, Robert Stahl, confirms that his client will indeed change his plea. Although Stahl declined to comment on the particulars of the deal until after the hearing, it is likely that the parties have signed some type of written agreement laying out the terms of the plea. The agreement will then be submitted to Woodlock for his approval."

The UMass-Dartmouth classmate of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev pled guilty on August 21 to conspiracy and obstruction of justice, the sentence for which is 25 years. According to the plea deal, Dias will serve not more than 7 years for disposing of some fireworks that had no connection to the bombing. US Attorney Stephanie Siegmann is asking for all seven years.

"You understand that you're pleading guilty to two charges... those are serious federal charges," Woodlock said, adding that Dias is giving up any and all rights to a full trial.

Dias said, "Yes sir" to the judge that he's giving up his right to challenge the evidence against him.

In agreeing to the plea deal, Dias agreed to be deported after time served. The judge did not make an immediate decision regarding accepting or rejecting the plea bargain.

Dias decided to admit to hiding both Jahar's laptop and backpack. Azamat was found not guilty regarding bringing home the laptop. He was however found guilty of throwing away the backpack despite claims that Dias was the one who tossed it.

"So, today he formally accepted full responsibility for his actions and sincerely apologizes," said defense Attorney Stahl. "Dias now understands he never should have gone to the dorm room... never should have taken any items from that room."

Azamat is to be sentenced Oct. 16. Dias is set to be sentenced Nov. 18.

Dias' father, Murat Kadyrbayav as well as his brother Ablaikhan Ismagulov are in town for the proceedings

Dias Kadyrbayev Agrees to Deportation: Judge Orders Govt to Reveal Expert Witness Positions: Tamerlan’s Widow Living in NJ with Jahar’s Sisters

 


130427034620_boston4
The UMass-



Dartmouth classmate of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev pled guilty on August 21, 2014 to conspiracy and obstruction of justice, the sentence for which is 25 years. In a proposed plea bargain, which the judge has not yet ruled on, Dias will serve not more than 7 years for disposing of some fireworks that had no connection to the bombing. US Attorney Stephanie Siegmann is asking for all seven years. Dias, a foreign student from Khazakstan, agreed to be deported after time served. Dias decided to admit to hiding both Jahar’s laptop and backpack.
“You understand that you’re pleading guilty to two charges… those are serious federal charges,” Judge Woodlock said, adding that Dias is giving up any and all rights to a full trial.
Dias said, “Yes sir” to the judge that he’s giving up his right to challenge the evidence against him.
On July 21, 2014, Dias’ former roommate and former cellmate, Azamat Tazhayakov, who pled “Not Guilty” to both counts, was found not guilty by the jury regarding bringing home Jahar’s laptop. He was however found guilty of conspiring to throw away the backpack containing fireworks, despite witness claims that Dias was the one who tossed it. Therefore Dias, who had been pleading innocent based on the argument that he didn’t understand his Miranda rights, realized he was unlikely to get a more favorable outcome to his trial. Dias and Azamat are both being held in solitary confinement.
Azamat, who also faces 25 years, is awaiting sentencing on October 16.
“So, today he formally accepted full responsibility for his actions and sincerely apologizes,” said defense Attorney Stahl in a press conference after the hearing. 

“Dias now understands he never should have gone to the dorm room… never should have taken any items from that room.” Dias is scheduled to be sentenced Nov. 18. 

David Frank reported in Mass Lawyers Weekly, “Although Stahl declined to comment on the particulars of the deal until after the hearing, it is likely that the parties have signed some type of written agreement laying out the terms of the plea. The agreement will then be submitted to Woodlock for his approval.”
“It looks like no guarantees and everything is up in the air!” observed Asel, a Canadian supporter from Kyrgyzstan.
Dias’ father, Murat Kadyrbayav as well as Azamat’s younger brother Ablaikhan Ismagulov are in town to attend the ongoing court proceedings. They do not speak English, so they are navigating Boston using an electronic translation device.
Meanwhile the legal proceedings for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are going forward towards his November trial date. On August 18, 2014 Judge George O’Toole ruled at least partially in favor of the defense, ordering that:
“The government made disclosure of affirmative expert discovery summaries pertaining to ballistics, fingerprint, blood, and DNA evidence on June 30, 2014. The defendant complains that the disclosure does not adequately identify what expert testimony the government “intends to use . . . during its case-in-chief at trial,” as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(a)(1)(G). After review of the index and summaries produced by the government, I agree and the motion (dkt. no. 440) is GRANTED to the extent that the government must identify the expert witnesses it presently intends to call during its case-in-chief at trial and provide summaries of their testimonies. Such summaries must meet the requirements set forth in Rule 16(a)(1)(G). To the extent the motion seeks further relief beyond this, the motion is DENIED.”
Until this point, the US had argued that explaining their case to the defense would deny them the right to surprise. They handed over millions of documents but did not clearly state how they came to the conclusion that Tsarnaev committed the bombing based on this evidence. So far the public is relying on the say-so of the FBI regarding guilt.
The defense continues to press the court to shift the trial to DC instead of Boston.
In another development, Katherine Russell, widow of Tamerlan Tsarnaev and their daughter have been spotted by local media living with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s sisters, Aliana and Bella in North Bergen, NJ. All three women are observing hijab. Katherine reportedly stated that she wants her daughter to grow up in a Muslim home. Katherine probably decided to move out of her parents’ home in Rhode Island due to the constant hounding by paparazzi. The three ladies seem to be living a quiet life, WCVB reports.
Katherine’s legal team says they don’t know if she is currently under investigation. The US attorney’s office won’t comment on that. One of her attorneys, Amato DeLuca says her parents and sisters testified before a grand jury investigating the bombings last year, but Katherine was not called. The fact that she was not called to testify could mean that she is still being considered as a possible target of prosecution for not going to the police when her husband’s face came on TV.
Katherine gave no comment to reporters who asked if she tipped off Tamerlan or had contact with him once the FBI pictures were made public. Her lawyer says when Russell saw the suspects’ pictures released by the FBI, she didn’t know who they were initially.
Ailina faces a trial in Boston next month on charges of misleading police in counterfeit money investigation in 2010. Bella was charged in New Jersey with marijuana possession and intent to distribute marijuana. Prosecutors say the charges will be dismissed if she completes a first time offender program.

Friday, August 22, 2014

Tsarnaev Proceedings: Judge Passive While Government Plays Games

 


Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s legal proceedings are “at a standstill” because Judge O’Toole refuses to compel the government to play fair.

The defense filed several motions regarding the government’s leaks to the media, which unfairly present the young man as guilty before he’s even gone to trial; the FBI presence during prison visits between family and attorneys, which violates attorney-client privacy privileges; a request for further discovery regarding the alleged confession of Ibrahim Todashev; disputes over disclosure of expert witnesses; defense requests for a searchable index of the millions of pages of “evidence” supplied by the government; and the change of venue request.

Most disturbing is the use of “secret evidence” supplied by the government to the judge, which the defense has no knowledge of. Shortly before they killed him, the FBI claims that Todashev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev had committed a triple murder in Waltham, Massachusetts. This unsubstantiated claim was added as if it were fact into the Dzhokhar Tsarnaev court filings in order to make him appear guilty by association. The judge said he had reviewed the classified government document “in camera” and he saw no reason to compel further discovery in order to allow the defense to question it. Not only is the FBI above the law when it comes to murdering potential witnesses, but their word is considered golden when it comes to clearing themselves of wrongdoing.
The defense made it clear that they would not be ready for trial by November 3, which is the current date that is set. The amount of evidence given to us from the government is “massive and disorganized!” stated the defense. They said it would take months if not years to sort through the millions of pages of documents supplied by the prosecution, if the government would not clearly state their argument. The defense had stated that the only way they even know the government’s story is from the media leaks, which the judge does not seem inclined to put a stop to. He simply advised that a letter be sent out to staff members as well as public officials, to stop commenting to news reporters.
“It’s not our job to make things easy for the defense,” argued US attorney William Weinreb. However, Weinreb seems to believe it is the defense’s job to make things easy for the prosecution.
“Federal criminal trials should not be waged by surprise,” Weinreb ironically stated, while demanding that the defense hand over all of their information regarding witnesses that might testify during the penalty phase of the trial, even though the defense argued that this is not the normal procedure, and that the normal procedure is to focus on proving guilt/innocence first.
Defense attorney Bruck argued that turning over information to the prosecution like mental health analyses would undermine Tsarnaev’s 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. US attorney Weinreb replied that requiring the defense to turn over documents they will eventually disclose anyway does not violate the 5th amendment.
If he is declared guilty, the defense would discuss Tsarnaev’s emotional past but they don’t want to turn that over now while they fight for his innocence. O’Toole asked if there was any non-personal, non-mental health stuff they could turn over.
“This is not an easy line to draw, and that’s why the courts don’t go there,” Bruck said, trying to main normal government procedure despite the judge’s crumpling.
Bruck insisted that the government has all the information about Tsarnaev while the defense only has whatever information the government has chosen to give them, and that was given to them in a totally unusable format.
“I think we need to put into perspective this claim of fairness, that the government is in the dark,” Bruck said.
Defense attorney Tim Watkins said the government has enormous volumes of documents. Months into this case the defense is still begging the government for a searchable index and some kind of context for these millions of disorganized documents because not only do they need to be reviewed, but the defense needs to determine if these claims regarding fingerprint matches and crime scene data are “reliable.”
“We have an obligation, where the stakes couldn’t be higher” to review the narrative of government’s data and test it, Watkins said. “Otherwise, mistakes are made at trial.”
The judge is not overtly siding with the prosecution but is also making zero effort to control them. He gives the impression that he just wants to get this over with. He wishes both sides would just make clear arguments instead of dancing around the issues. However, he does not use a firm tone of voice against the government, ever. He seems to be going through the motions of the appearance of a trial, but like it’s a formality.
So basically, nothing new to report regarding the Tsarnaev proceedings because nothing can go forward until the judge gets tough. The defense is still desperately explaining that under the current situation there is no way they can be ready for trial and therefore, there is no way that Tsarnaev can get a fair trial.
Judge George A. O’Toole Jr. said that he will give lawyers more time to submit arguments over whether the trial should be relocated to Washington, DC. However, this move seems unlikely since O’Toole declared mid-September as the target for jury summons.

Monday, August 18, 2014

Tsarnaev Defense Thwarted

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1563.htm

“In this type of case it should be cut and dry. Why the dance?” read a tweet commenting on ongoing arguments between government prosecutors and the defense attorneys representing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev during the latest status hearing for Tsarnaev on Thursday, August 14.

The first item under discussion was leaks to the media, which unfairly present the defendant as guilty before trial. This has been an ongoing problem, which the defense has repeatedly asked the judge to do something about. Once again, Judge O’Toole claimed that “this concern is taken to heart” but denied the Tsarnaev motion to seek relief, other than advising government officials not to talk to the media. He once again refused to create consequences.

Next, the “firewall” issue came up. An FBI agent is monitoring all conversations during prison visits between Tsarnaev, his sisters, and his attorneys. The defense has repeatedly stated that they cannot speak freely in front of the FBI, given that the FBI is part of the prosecution team and this violates client-attorney privilege. However, the judge felt “there is prudence in monitoring some way.” He ordered the government to keep a log of communications but not content, for example, “spoke to warden.” He saw no reason for further relief.

Regarding the defense request for further discovery regarding the murder of Ibrahim Todashev,” whose alleged confession that he and Tamerlan Tsarnaev had committed a triple murder of some drug dealers in Waltham, Massachusetts, was written into the legal case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as if it were fact, the judge said he had reviewed the classified government document this claim was based on “in camera” and he saw no reason to compel further discovery in order to allow the defense to question it. Once again we are seeing the use of secret evidence that the defense cannot see, in a prosecution of a Muslim.

Next, the defense complained that the government is demanding to know who the defense will call as witnesses during the penalty phase of the trial. They said revealing their arguments against the death penalty before their client has even gone to trial would “chill the defense.” They complained that although the prosecution handed over a 108 page list of expert witnesses they might call on during the trial along with their biographies, the defense feels entitled to more specific information on what the government’s case against Tsarnaev will be. They are still completely “in the dark” about the government’s position, they said, beyond the media leaks they have come across on TV. Tsarnaev’s defense is asking the judge to compel the government to deliver "more complete disclosure."

“We are ‘mystified’ as to what evidence the defense is looking for,” claimed US attorney Weinreb most cynically. “We've given them everything we have!”

At the same time the government is claiming that the defense has not handed over any information to them. The defense retorted, “We don’t have any information other than what the government gave us!” Tsarnaev’s attorneys complained that the government has access to a worldwide network of investigators while the defense has nothing to work with other than the 6-7 terabytes of data that the government handed over: thousands of hours of audio and video recordings, tens of thousands of photographs, every email Tsarnaev ever sent, as well as forensic evidence such as fingerprints, DNA, bullet casings, test results, witness injuries and the like. However this information is neither labeled nor indexed in any way that the information can be searched easily, nor matched with each other; for example photos are not in the same file as the description of what expert witnesseses plan to say about the photos. So the defense has no idea what point the government is trying to make, and would have to click on literally millions of links trying to piece together this information. 

The amount of evidence given to us from the government is "massive and disorganized... breath taking!” stated the defense. They want more time to sort through all this madness. Similar tactics of overwhelming the court with huge amounts of irrelevant information have been used against many other Muslim defendants: for example if they ever watched a video of a beheading online, this video would be used as “evidence” against them, even though realistically, who knows what their opinion of the video actually was?

The government accused the defense of “trial by ambush” and insisted that the defense lay down all their cards on the table regarding their anti-death penalty arguments.  “We will have no opportunity to prepare our witnesses. The result will be that the jury will only be hearing one side of this case.” The defense responded, “It is a weightier discussion to take a life than to spare it. We have more rights to discovery than the government.” The judge will consider the matter.

“The fact that they threw in the bathtub and the bathwater doesn’t excuse not disclosing their expert witness opinion summaries.” It will take months, if not years, even if all three defense lawyers work to figure out which files are interesting. “It’s too important to put a secretary on it.”

The defense complained that in the past, the FBI has mismatched fingerprints and photographic evidence. They need more information about how the evidence was collected, before trial, to determine if the evidence is “reliable.” The defense wants the government to “contextualize” the data, saying “it’s almost a random process.” 

O’Toole refused to rule on this issue immediately. The change of venue request is to be addressed orally next week, while mid-September is the target for jury summons. 

In short, Tsarnaev’s legal proceedings are “at a standstill” since O’Toole refuses to compel the government to play fair.

Women’s Liberation: Beyond Feminism

 

gavel-and-coin-jar
Recently, I posted a status update on Facebook that read, “Men are supposed to pay for women not vice versa in terms of marriage living expenses. Women income is the nest egg, u can’t touch it. Never buy a big house dependent on two incomes. It’s haram.”
I was actually quite surprised by the vitriol that ensued against me, peppered with insults against Islam. Minus the last two words, my statement isn’t even remotely religious and could be practiced by anyone, regardless of religion. The above statement is just logical financial advice. Most women have no idea that they have a right to ask for maintenance as a condition for marriage, and could even write it into a legally binding contract. Such an agreement would be a tremendous blessing not only for the woman but for the financial stability of the family. When a couple’s lifestyle is dependent on two incomes, if one person loses their job or they get divorced, they lose the house. It simply makes sense to live simply. How does that make me “ridiculous”?
I was told by several people that Islamic law is outdated and Muslims need to come into the modern century and stop viewing women as baby making machines. This attitude did not shift even after I explained that Islam allows birth control. I could understand this reaction if I had stated that Americans should return to last century’s America, where a woman had to get her husband’s permission to open a bank account, and her property automatically became his property upon marriage. Obviously, a jobless housewife of any religion will have limited freedoms. But a woman with her own income and a separate bank account, whose husband pays all her bills, has unlimited options! Why are people so frightened by a woman with unlimited options?
I knew a Pakistani woman who was a fashion designer in New York, whose husband would not allow her to pay for any household expenses. She told me all her female co-workers were jealous of her because whenever they got paid, they had to hand over their paychecks to their husbands. The happy couple delayed parenthood for some years. When they decided to have children it was a good situation for them because the woman had plenty of self confidence about her ability to exist in the world as an independent person, plus they had good savings which enabled her to stay home with her children.
Contrast with a memory seared into my mind where a Christian woman relative of mine was getting chest pains and stomach aches because she dreaded her job so much, where she was treated abusively. She was sobbing and crying at length, saying she wanted to quit her job but her husband said nothing. I asked him, “Why don’t you sell this house and get an apartment so she doesn’t have to be trapped in such stress?” He brushed me off, saying, “Oh she just likes to complain!” How is this not female slavery?
Nowadays a woman who financially supports her husband is considered a “good wife,” while a woman whose husband supports her is treated with derision by society, which views the only choice of female importance as the abortion option. The “power couple” with the big house and no children might throw great parties, but when a wife is obligated to earn her keep in a relationship, full-time motherhood is not a choice.
Ironically, one woman who was bashing Islam mentioned that while she was happy to have a good career, and she was willing to use her money to support a family, she was having trouble finding any man even willing to get her pregnant, a problem which worried her greatly due to being over 40. Many men just don’t want the responsibility of a family anymore, when it’s so common to live with a woman like roommates.
For the classic liberal feminist, career gives a woman status, and without status, a woman isn’t worthy of respect. These men speak of “partnership” but there is no choice for the woman if she wants to work or not. The woman who chooses to stay home is spoken down to with mockery and derision, not by her husband, but by society. Feminism so interpreted is just a more modern way to treat women as chattel. Since children are now regarded as a burden and not valued by society, women are now only valued as financial assets of the man, as someone to pay half his bills.
At the end of the day, only women with money have legal rights. Women have to choose between having legal rights or having children nowadays – unless they follow the Islamic model. What is ironic is that those who angrily cling to the concept of the “power couple”  as if it was the “correct” way to live are the over-40 set.
Among young people, the Asian influence in the public school system is resulting in more family oriented thinking US high schools, even among non-Muslims. Not that it is the norm, just that is a norm. Young ladies now have a choice. This was unheard of in previous decades when having a boyfriend defined a girl’s social status. Young people now have a more clear idea of what they could gain if they stay away from boys and concentrate on their studies. This new generation of women, entering professional jobs with their virginity intact, has a lot more negotiating power than any other generation has had in history. It is wise to learn what a woman can ask for in a marriage contract, including the right to expect her husband to support her, regardless of her income. How she uses her money is her choice. Now that’s feminine progress!

Saturday, August 9, 2014

TV is for Old People!

  


2014-08-06T220010Z_433087993_GM1EA870GLP01_RTRMADP_3_MIDEAST-GAZA-TOWN (1)
A Palestinian boy stands next to the remains of a mosque in Khuzaa town, which witnesses said was heavily hit by Israeli shelling and air strikes during Israeli aggression, in the east of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip August 6, 2014. With its spacious villas and palm-lined streets, the town of Khuzaa in southern Gaza gave Palestinians a rare place to spend their free time before it was bombed and shelled to rubble last month. Largely free of the local tensions and feuds found in other neighbourhoods, Khuzaa’s green spaces were one of just a few destinations for daytrips in the crowded Gaza Strip, where 1.8 million people live in just 360 sq km (140 sq miles). Around 500 metres from the Israeli border, Khuzaa is now only accessible via cratered roads strewn with debris. Nearly all of its homes have been flattened and its nine mosques lie in pieces. Picture taken August 6, 2014. REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

Reuters is reporting that young people, outraged over Gaza, are rejecting Washington’s “reflexive support” of Israel. A recent opinion poll released on July 28, 2014 by the Pew Research Center demonstrated clearly that it is getting more difficult for corporations, lobbyists and governments to influence the beliefs of young people because young people don’t watch television news. They are more likely to get their news from Facebook, twitter, instagram, buzzfeed and other alternative sources of direct information. They are looking at live coverage of world events directly from the people who are there, and asking for more information from knowledgeable people online rather than relying on mass media or government statements.
“While all age groups north of 30 years old clearly blame Hamas more than Israel for the current violence, young adults buck the trend in a big way. Among 18 to 29-year olds, 29 percent blame Israel more for the current wave of violence, while 21 percent blame Hamas,” reports Aaron Blake in the Washington Post.
“Latest Gallup poll shows young Americans overwhelmingly support Palestine,” concludes the latest Gallop poll also,” reports mondoweiss.net. “Most support for Israel comes from ages 50 and up.”
Women who say “Israeli actions are unjustified” outnumber the pro-Israel female by 44 to 33 percent. Nonwhite, by 49 to 25 percent. That’s two-to-one, reflecting the attitudes of the young, reports mondoweiss. 18 to 29-year-olds regard Israel’s actions as “unjustified” by 51 to 25 percent. Among 30-49 year olds, 43 compared to 36 percent view Israel’s attacks as unjustified.
The Pew study reveals that most Americans have absorbed the Israeli narrative or else are just confused about the situation. Even so, when asked who is to blame for the violence in Gaza, far more young people blame Israel than Hamas for the violence. Why? Because Israel is the entity causing the violence. How do the youth know more than their parents? Because they saw the photos of Palestinian babies with their brains oozing out of their cracked skulls circulating on the internet – they are fully aware of who is bombing whom. By contrast, Americans over the age of 65 think that Hamas is at fault for the current violence by 53 vs 15 percent. Since 2006, the number of people who “don’t know” if Israel has gone too far has increased from 14 to 25 percent while those who think Israel has acted rightly has decreased from 44 to 35 percent.
David Palumbo-Liu, the Louise Hewlett Nixon Professor at Stanford University on salon.com also notes that the American understanding of history is shifting:
“International support for Israel is ebbing because the Holocaust narrative can no longer offer an omnipotent shield against a critique of the second narrative regarding the founding of the state of Israel. Israel is in fact risking losing the narrative war altogether, as more and more of the global public is asking questions that probe into that history, prompted by the evidence of Israeli’s current efforts to continue and expand Israeli power and land, efforts that are now increasingly regarded not as survival tactics but as violent colonial ones. In sum, there is now a widening band of light in between the heretofore seamless merger of the Holocaust and founding narratives, resulting in a weakening of the former in its capacity to act as an alibi for the latter.  Again, this is especially important with regard to the U.S., which has been the world’s most generous supporter of Israel. More and more younger Americans, growing up well past the postwar era, find the Holocaust narrative to be less than absolutely and unquestionably a good reason to support the horrible killings in Gaza.  And as they learn more, their support will wane further.”
So far, a petition entitled “Israel-Palestine: This is how it ends” on avaaz.org has gathered almost 2 million signatures.
Basically, a growing minority of Americans are starting to be willing to educate themselves about history and current events regarding Palestine, in particular, Liberal Democrats, but this change is too slow for it to impact anything on the ground. What is perhaps more likely to change facts on the ground is the fact that Americans are running out of money.
Despite unanimous resolutions passed in the Senate offering Israel emotional support regarding its “survival,” according to Burgess Everett on politico.com, “a last-ditch effort to deliver aid to Israel during its war with Hamas died on the Senate floor on July 27, as Republicans blocked the proposal over concerns that it would increase the debt,” all because they couldn’t agree on fighting wildfires vs helping stranded children vs helping Israel.
“I want to fund Israel,” replied Coburn. “I also want to make sure our children have a future.”
However, by Saturday, August 2, the bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent. Dailykos.com reports:
“The House, however, took a vote on it. It passed easily but not unanimously: 395 to 8.  Only 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans voted against it.”
The four Democrats were Keith Ellison (MN-05), Zoe Lofgren (CA-19), Jim Moran (VA-08, and Beto O’Rourke (TX-16). The four Republicans are Justin Amash (MI-03), Walter Jones (NC-03), Tom Massie (KY-04), and Mark Sanford (SC-01).
Keith Ellison is reportedly the only member of Congress who has been calling for an end to Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

Enaam Arnout Facing America's Justice System

Enaam Arnout Facing America's Justice System: He helped Oppressed Muslims.
Steve Emerson's Zionist hand at play. 

New Trend Magazine
http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1561.htm


Just this year, Enaam Arnaout, 51, was reunited with his children for the first time in over 14 years. They went through a lot of hardship to escape the war in Syria and come to the US for high school. Arnaout is a Syrian American who did immeasurable charity work overseas with Benevolence International Foundation (BIF), for which he served 10 years in prison, including 2 1/2 years in isolation and 3 1/2 years at CMU Terre Haute.

Arnaout just finished his supervised release. Now that he's finally a free man, settled with his kids, the US government is trying to revoke his citizenship. It's very odd because the CIA and FBI already decided he's not a threat. He is not even on the no-fly list. The US government gave him permission in 2011 and 2012 to travel abroad to see his elderly, ill mother. This is obviously pure harassment.

Arnaout entered a plea agreement in 2003 to avoid the risk of spending the rest of his life in prison as other Islamic charity founders are doing. On this basis, the government is now claiming that he lied on his citizenship application, which stated that he had never committed a crime for which he had not been arrested. Arnaout became a citizen in 1993 through marriage to an American woman, Nancy Catherine Noyes in 1989.

Arnaout told New Trend that when he was in college in Pakistan, he met a lot of people at the local community gatherings when he was doing relief work, but that was the extent of association. The accusation reads:

"Memberships and organizations," instructs the applicant to, "list your present and past membership in or affiliation with every organization, association, fund, foundation, party, club, society, or similar group in the United States or in any other place." In response to the instruction in Part 9 of his INS Form N-400, Defendant stated, "None."

The government is claiming that from January 1989 until June 1990, less than one year, Arnaout was an employee of Lajnat Al-Birr Al-Islamiah ("LBI"), also known as the Islamic Benevolence Committee, to raise funds in Saudi Arabia to provide support to the mujahideen, Osama bin Laden and Gulbuddin Hekmatyer.

"Defendant provided mujahedeen fighters in Afghanistan with supplies and logistical support. By providing the mujahedeen with support and or money, Defendant knowingly affiliated himself with various organizations and associations that claimed to repel the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. Accordingly, Defendant's statement in Part 9 of his INS Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, filed on April 8, 1993, that he had no present or past membership in or affiliation with any organization or association was false."

The United States Department of Treasury designated Hekmatyer as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist in 2003, while bin Laden and al Qaeda were blamed for the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, although the FBI does not officially consider bin Laden to be a suspect.

The government's complaint goes on to smear BIF. This is particularly low, since BIF was aiding Bosnians, Kosovar Albanians, Chechens and others who were being targeted for genocide in the post-USSR era. As in Afghanistan, the US was also supporting these groups militarily so there was no crime involved in helping them at the time.

"Beginning in May 1993, BIF, through its employees, solicited donations from

the public by purporting that BIF and its related overseas offices were a charitable organization involved solely in humanitarian work for the benefit of civilian populations. In fact, the objectives of the BIF were to support the activities of mujahedeen fighters in various areas of the world by raising funds and providing support to mujahedeen and others engaged in violence and armed confrontation. This included providing support to al-Qa'ida and Hezb-e-Islami," claims the government.

This might sound plausible, except that the US then completely undermines its own case by overdoing its case, venturing into the territory of "guilt by association." For the next several paragraphs the complaint goes on and on about various terrorist attacks against US interests in various countries that were blamed on al Qaeda in later years, but that BIF was not at all involved with.

While the government uses a lot of inflammatory statements and spurious claims regarding association with terrorists, who may or may not even be guilty of what they are accused of, in order to make Arnaout sound scary. However, their case is actually quite mundane and does not even clearly accuse Arnaout to have been a member of any of these organizations.

"Defendant lacked the good moral character necessary for naturalization because he provided false testimony to obtain an immigration benefit... Because Defendant admitted to committing and was convicted for an aggravated felony, he was statutorily ineligible to naturalize for lack of good moral character," the government concludes.

This list of associations and accusations is so ridiculous that it is obvious that the government is relying on Zionist "intelligence" coming from Steve Emerson, who is known for compiling such pseudo-information in order to commit treason against the US for Israel by engaging in conspiracy against rights of Muslims in America.

Young Americans increasingly support Palestine. The Older Ones still support Israel

New Trend Magazine
http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1562.htm


On August 2, 2014 the House of Representatives voted to approve $225 million in "emergency aid" for Israel on account of their feeling "attacked." The Senate had just passed the bill unanimously, but in the House, it only passed 395 to 8.Four Democrats and four Republicans voted against it.

Four Democrats and four Republicans voted against it. At least we can say our patriots are bipartisan. The four Democrats were Keith Ellison (MN-05), Zoe Lofgren (CA-19), Jim Moran (VA-08), and Beto O'Rourke (TX-16). The four Republicans are Justin Amash (MI-03), Walter Jones (NC-03), Tom Massie (KY-04), and Mark Sanford (SC-01).

Keith Ellison has been calling for an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza but nobody else in Congress has backed him up on that one. He penned a letter to President Obama and Secretary Kerry urging a cease-fire agreement between Israel and Palestine on July 18, 2014 that was also signed by Reps. Jim Moran (D-VA), John Conyers (D-MI), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Alan Lowenthal (D-CA).

John Conyers, who has a long track record of always doing the right thing, astonished many, to approve funding for Israelis to commit genocide. He was the guy who got Rosa Park a job after she was blacklisted. When Detroit held a town meeting at the Unitarian Church to talk about the sanctions on Iraq, he quoted his voters verbatim. So if he voted for Israel it means nobody contacted him to say anything about Palestine but a lot of people called to say they support Israel. I know he listens to his constituents.

Israel has a GDP of over $300 billion however, and, at the end of last year, experienced its highest ever GDP per capita. It is a developed country with a booming tech sector. Israel has the ability to pay for its defense system itself. Israel does not need us. Which is good, since Americans are losing emotional interest in funding them.

David Palumbo-Liu, the Louise Hewlett Nixon Professor at Stanford University writes for salon.com that "international support for Israel is ebbing because the Holocaust narrative can no longer offer an omnipotent shield against a critique of the second [Palestinian] narrative regarding the founding of the state of Israel... In sum, there is now a widening band of light in between the heretofore seamless merger of the Holocaust and founding narratives, resulting in a weakening of the former in its capacity to act as an alibi for the latter."

Younger Americans do not accept the Holocaust narrative as a good reason to support the horrible killings in Gaza. As they learn more, their support will wane further. Israel is in fact risking losing the narrative war altogether. Israel's actions are now increasingly regarded not as survival tactics but as violent colonial tendencies, reports Liu.

Women who say "Israeli actions are unjustified" outnumber the pro-Israel American female by 44 to 33 percent. Nonwhite, by 49 to 25 percent. "That's two-to-one, reflecting the attitudes of the young," reports mondoweiss. 18 to 29-year-olds regard Israel's actions as "unjustified" by 51 to 25 percent. Among 30-49 year olds, a similar attitude: 43 to 36 percent. Since 2006, the number of people who "don't know" if Israel has gone too far has increased from 14 to 25 percent while those who think Israel has acted rightly has decreased from 44 to 35 percent, reports the Pew Center.

"While all age groups north of 30 years old clearly blame Hamas more than Israel for the current violence, young adults buck the trend in a big way. Among 18 to 29-year olds, 29 percent blame Israel more for the current wave of violence, while 21 percent blame Hamas," reports Aaron Blake in the Washington Post.

"Latest Gallup poll shows young Americans overwhelmingly support Palestine," reports mondoweiss.net. Most support for Israel comes from ages 50 and up."

Americans over the age of 65 are most likely to think that Hamas is at fault for the death toll in Gaza by 53 vs 15 percent.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) officially stated on July 31: "Any person who thinks that the Iron Dome is unnecessary needs to go to the floor and tell us why, why we don't need to help Israel right now."

It sounds like a dare for us to talk to our Senators and Representatives. They may just need us to give them the words.