CAIR concedes it doesn't legally exist

By Art Moore

The Council on American-Islamic Relations' latest legal brief in its "Muslim Mafia" lawsuit provides no evidence it suffered damages and effectively concedes it filed the complaint under a false name, concludes a lawyer defending a father-and-son team that conducted an undercover probe to document the Muslim group's ties to terrorism.

CAIR's reply to a motion to dismiss its lawsuit against former Air Force special agent P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris, who served a six-month CAIR internship posing as a young Muslim convert, "concedes that they don't have any legal damages, but they hope they'll find some," said attorney Daniel Horowitz, who filed the motion to dismiss in December.

CAIR alleges the Gaubatzes obtained access to the Muslim group's property under false pretenses, removed internal documents and made recordings of officials and employees "without any consent or authorization and in violation of his contractual, fiduciary and other legal obligations to CAIR."

However, asserted Horowitz, CAIR is on a "fishing expedition," filing a lawsuit with the hope that "after the expenditure of unknown amounts of money and time, it might find some damages."

"If CAIR is conceding that they have no interests that prevent the materials from being disclosed, what is their excuse for trying to suppress the book?" Horowitz asked. "It's about time the American public put an end to these legal abuses by CAIR."

In his motion to dismiss, Horowitz argued that CAIR is unable to demonstrate it suffered harm and, furthermore, has no claim because the group does not legally exist. Horowitz explains that CAIR changed its name to the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network almost immediately after it was named by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history.

As WND reported yesterday, the Gaubatzes' legal counsel, in compliance with a subpoena served by the FBI, turned over to federal authorities 12,000 of pages of internal CAIR documents obtained in the undercover probe that allegedly confirm the D.C.-based Muslim group's role as a front for terrorist groups that seek Islam's domination over the U.S.

The documents provided key material for the book "Muslim Mafia," co-authored by David Gaubatz and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry. The authors assert CAIR is acting as a front for a conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood – the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas – to infiltrate the U.S. and establish Saudi-style Islamic law.

Horowitz contends CAIR's reply does not address his allegation that the group used a non-existent entity to file the lawsuit, "dismissing the use of the wrong name by calling it a 'misnomer.'"

"This is not like confusing the name 'Dan' with 'Don' or 'Tim' with 'Tom'," Horowitz said.

"CAIR forms groups, dissolves them, takes credit for them or disclaims them as it sees fit," he said.

The legal name change in May 2007 to Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network, for example, came just two weeks after the Justice Department's designation of CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation. The Texas-based group was convicted of channeling funds to the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.

Horowitz points out that when he defended Michael Savage in CAIR's case against the radio talk host, CAIR's own attorneys appeared separately for CAIR and for CAIR Action Network, or CAIR-AN.

"CAIR and CAIR-AN are two distinct corporate entities," he said, "and while CAIR-AN may be a successor to CAIR, the name problem goes far deeper than mistakenly using a predecessor corporation."

'Negative light'

In its legal reply to Horowitz, CAIR concedes it cannot sue over First Amendment-protected activities such as publishing information about the organization.

But Horowitz argues that CAIR, nevertheless, focuses its entire complaint "on the attacks on its self-proclaimed character as a civil rights organization."

CAIR, he points out, says Chris Gaubatz' mission was both to collect and to "misappropriate information" that was "to later be disclosed publicly and used to cast CAIR in a negative light."

Those actions, CAIR claims, "caused CAIR and its officials and employees to suffer unwarranted harassment up to and including threats of violence."

But Horowitz argues that in CAIR's legal briefs, "no specific threats are alleged and no attempt is made to show that the alleged wrongful conduct had any relation to the alleged threats."

He also points out CAIR's original pleading does not make it clear that the documents taken from CAIR were consigned to the shredder.

CAIR says in its reply brief that much of "Muslim Mafia" is "devoted to critiquing CAIR" and, contrary to the defendants' claims, is "a decidedly unserious book that only warrants CAIR's attention due to the criminal and tortious conduct which it admits Defendants perpetrated upon CAIR."

Horowitz calls that statement another concession by CAIR that it suffered no damages.

"If all that warrants 'CAIR's attention' is the alleged 'criminal and tortious conduct,' there is simply no federal jurisdiction," he contends.

Horowitz calls CAIR's complaint "an impermissible end run around First Amendment protections."

"The fact that 'CAIR' is upset or that members may have been threatened does not weaken the First Amendment protections," Horowitz argues.

CAIR's claim of breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract is based on its allegation thath Chris Gaubatz signed a confidentiality agreement when he began his internship. But CAIR has not been able to produce evidence any agreement was ever signed, and Horowitz says that even if signed, "this document would have been signed between a non-existent corporate entity and Chris Gaubatz. There need to be two parties to a contract."

WND

Muslims sue CAIR for fraud

Two civil lawsuits filed by Muslims alleging criminal fraud were served today against the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a self-described Muslim civil-rights group that has been named an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator by the Justice Department.

The cases filed in federal court in the nation's capital assert the D.C.-based CAIR was aware that its "resident attorney" and "manager for civil rights" at its now-defunct Maryland-Virginia chapter, Morris Days, was not an attorney and failed to provide legal services for Muslims who came to CAIR for help.

The complaint alleges CAIR purposefully conspired with Days to keep the clients from discovering that their legal matters were being mishandled or not handled at all, according to attorney David Yerushalmi, who is representing the five plaintiffs, three of whom are Muslims.

"CAIR has engaged in a massive criminal fraud in which literally hundreds of CAIR clients have been victimized, and because of the CAIR cover-up, they still don't realize it," Yerushalmi said. "The fact that CAIR has victimized Muslims and non-Muslims alike demonstrates that CAIR is only looking out for CAIR and its ongoing effort to bilk donors out of millions of dollars of charitable donations thinking they are supporting a legitimate organization."

Meanwhile, CAIR is engaged in a lawsuit it filed against a father and son who carried out a six-month undercover investigation of the Muslim group's terrorist ties. CAIR is suing P. David Gaubatz and his son, Chris Gaubatz, who posed as a Muslim in an internship with CAIR's national office in Washington.

During that period, the younger Gaubatz made audio and video recordings and took some 12,000 pages of documents destined for a shredder in an attempt, he said, to expose the group's ties to Islamic jihad and terrorism. Key evidence has been published in the book "Muslim Mafia," published by WND Books. His father is a former Air Force special agent with extensive Middle East experience who researches the spread of radical Islam in the U.S. and its threat to national security.

The two new lawsuits follow a previous suit centered on Days that alleged CAIR's fraudulent conduct amounted to racketeering, under federal RICO statutes. A court dismissed the RICO counts, concluding CAIR's conduct as alleged was fraudulent but not a technical violation of RICO. The plaintiffs in that case have appealed and are awaiting the circuit court's briefing schedule, Yerushalmi said.

The two new federal civil complaints were filed Jan. 6 in the federal district court for the District of Columbia.

The complaints say that according to CAIR internal documents, there were hundreds of victims of the fraud scheme.

The suits contend CAIR knew or should have known Days was not a lawyer when it hired him. Further, when CAIR officials were confronted with evidence of Days' fraudulent conduct, the complaints say, they conspired to conceal the fraud.

CAIR, the complaints assert, suggested Days was never actually employed by CAIR and concealed the fact CAIR had fired him once some of the victims began threatening to sue.

More at WND

CAIR loses round in attempt to quash book exposing its ties to jihad

CAIR is at war with the authors of Muslim Mafia, because they tell the truth about the organization. "Judge rules against CAIR: D.C.-based Islamic group trying to quash book exposing terror ties," by Art Moore for WorldNetDaily, January 9

A federal judge ruled against the Council on American-Islamic Relations today in its lawsuit against a father and son who carried out a six-month undercover investigation of the D.C.-based Muslim group, denying a request to conduct discovery - an examination of its opponent's witnesses, facts and documents - prior to hearing a motion to dismiss the case.

CAIR is suing P. David Gaubatz and his son, Chris Gaubatz, for allegedly stealing sensitive internal documents and making recordings of officials without consent.

Chris Gaubatz, who posed as a Muslim in an internship with CAIR's national office in Washington, took some 12,000 pages of documents destined for a shredder in an attempt, he said, to expose the group's ties to Islamic jihad and terrorism. His father is a former Air Force special agent with extensive Middle East experience who researches the spread of radical Islam in the U.S. and its threat to national security.

In her ruling today, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., canceled a court hearing scheduled for Tuesday and gave CAIR until Jan. 15 to reply to the Gaubatz's motion to dismiss the case.

The motion filed last month by Gaubatz lawyer Daniel Horowitz asserts CAIR has no claim because it does not legally exist.

Horowitz explains that just two weeks after CAIR was named by the Justice Department in May 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist finance case in U.S. history, the organization changed its name to the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action Network.

"CAIR is not a valid entity and even if it were, the exposure of its inner workings is part of the price it pays for being a controversial group in a hotly contested arena," Horowitz declares in his reply to CAIR's lawsuit.

The FBI produced evidence at the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation in 2008 that CAIR was established as a front for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.

The material obtained by the Gaubatzes is featured in the book "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," published by WND Books, an affiliate of WorldNetDaily.com.

The book asserts CAIR is acting as a front for a conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood - the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas - to infiltrate the U.S. and help pave the way for Saudi-style Islamic law to rule the nation.

Horowitz said CAIR had hoped to draw WND Books into the legal battle so it could pull the book off the shelves. But the federal judge's ruling today prevents the group from any legal investigation of the Gabautzes or WND Books under the court's authority before the motion to dismiss the case is heard....

Read it all.

With thanks to JihadWatch

Iraq 'to appeal Blackwater verdict'

The Iraqi government will push to appeal a US court ruling dismissing charges of murder against five security guards of the private Blackwater firm, an official has told Al Jazeera.

Saad al-Muttalibi, an adviser to the Iraqi council of ministers, said on Friday that if the guards did not receive a just sentence for the killing of 14 Iraqis in 2007, the issue would complicate relations between Iraq and the United States.

"This matter will be appealed in the American court and if not resolved correctly, this will definitely add another strain on the relationship between Iraq and the United States," he said.

"The legality or the procedures of the court case should not stop the criminals from facing justice and receiving a just sentence.

"This is very bad ... for the overall look of the United States outside its borders. It's very important for the Americans to realise that this will work against their interests in Iraq and other places."

Ali al-Dabbagh, the Iraqi government spokesman, said in a statement: "The Iraqi government will follow up on this issue in strength and resolution to bring those murderers of Blackwater to accountability in order to return the rights of iraqi people who are the victims of this crime."

He said "the investigations carried out by the specialised Iraqi authorities confirmed with no doubt that the guards of Blackwater company have committed a criminal murder act and they have violated the combat environment rule to use force while there was no threat against them".

Ricardo Urbina, a district judge, dismissed the charges against the five men on Thursday, saying US justice department prosecutors improperly built their case on sworn statements that had been given under a promise of immunity.

Urbina said the government's explanations were "contradictory, unbelievable and lacking in credibility".

The September 2007 shooting in Baghdad's busy Nisour Square left at least 14 Iraqis dead and inflamed anti-American sentiment abroad.

The Iraqi government wanted the guards to stand trial in Iraq and officials there said they would closely watch how the US judicial system handled the case.

Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the US justice department, said the department was "obviously disappointed by the decision".

Prosecutors can appeal the 90-page ruling and Boyd said the department was "still in the process of reviewing the opinion and considering our options".

Al Jazeera's Rosiland Jordan explained that the judge did say that the case can be brought back to court without prejudice but it was going to be difficult for the justice department to build the case from scratch without using the defendants' statements.

Blackwater Worldwide, which had been hired to guard US diplomats in Iraq at the time, has since changed its management and name to Xe Services.

Despite a string of investigations following the deadly shooting and in spite of an Iraqi government ban on the company, the US state department extended a contract with a subsidiary of the firm in September to continue providing security to US diplomats in the country.

The five guards, Donald Ball, Dustin Heard, Evan Liberty, Nick Slatten and Paul Slough, all formerly in the US military, had been charged with manslaughter and weapons charges, which carried mandatory 30-year prison terms.

More at Al Jazeera

CAIR: Fort Hood Co-Conspirator – by Paul Sperry

With the FBI cutting off ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations and now subpoenaing some 12,000 internal CAIR documents under temporary restraining order as part of the bureau’s ongoing criminal investigation of CAIR, the terrorist front group is suddenly cooperating with the FBI — or at least making a show of it.

Suddenly CAIR, an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator, is acting like a good citizen.

Suddenly it’s concerned about young Muslim-American men going on jihad. Suddenly it’s concerned about “certain” passages of the Quran inspiring jihadists.

It’s all too little, too late.

Thanks to CAIR, 42 brave American soldiers were gunned down by an Islamic nut in Texas. That’s right, thanks to CAIR.

How so? For starters, it was the intimidating and ruthless CAIR that almost single-handedly created a climate of fear of reporting any suspicious anti-American behavior on the part of Muslim soldiers like Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, accused of the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.

The CAIR-induced mass silence led to mass murder.

Fear in the military of being seen as anti-Muslim also blocked intellectually honest discussion of violent Islamic ideology in the ranks.

Thanks to CAIR, the military along with everyone else in government is terrified of associating terrorism with Islam. No one dares utter the M word, lest they be sued for discrimination or branded an “anti-Muslim bigot” or “Islamophobe” by CAIR’s smear merchants.

“There were definitely clear indications that Hasan’s loyalties were not with America,” said Lt. Col. Val Finnell, one of the Army doctors who served with Hasan. But nobody said anything because “there’s a political correctness climate in the military,” and everybody’s “afraid of an equal opportunity lawsuit.”

CAIR’s lawyers have filed thousands of EEOC complaints and lawsuits since 9/11. They’ve even gone after John Doe citizens who alerted airline crew to Muslim men behaving as menacingly and suspiciously as the 9/11 hijackers. CAIR’s “Flying While Muslim” anti-profiling campaign has had a chilling effect throughout the aviation security industry.

CAIR gulled non-Muslims into the kind of see-no-evil dhimmitude that allowed Hasan to carry out his alleged terror. Had anyone dared officially protest Hasan’s extremist views, they would have not only risked their military careers but potentially faced a lawsuit sponsored by CAIR.

Hasan was treated with kid gloves because CAIR demanded it.

Thanks to CAIR, a dozen soldiers lay dead, along with 29 wounded, some so severely they’ll never be deployed in the war on terror again, which is just fine by CAIR.

Since 9/11, the Saudi-funded front group has consistently and vehemently protested the war, even in Afghanistan, while defending the Taliban and other terrorists.

More at FPM

Turning the Tables on Hamas and Anti Zionists

Newspapers in Belgium are reporting that a number of Israeli Belgians have filed charges against Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus, Syria. The fifteen dual citizenship holders were either wounded themselves, sustained material damage, or lost relatives in attacks that triggered Operation Cast Lead a year ago.

The suits follow several attempts by anti-Zionists in Europe, who sought the arrest of Israeli political and military leaders for authorizing the counter terrorist operation.

It is in effect, turning the tables on them. An official of the Israeli organization that helped launch the suits said that the group hopes "to shatter the myth that draws a parallel between Israel and terror organizations such as Hamas." Indeed, false moral equivalence is rife.

All plaintiffs live in the south of Israel. They are the victims of rocket barrages coming down on the area from Gaza between June 2008 and January 2009. Two were wounded. All are suffering emotional and psychological trauma.

The suit names ten Hamas leaders in all: political chief Khaled Mashaal residing in Damascus, 'Premier' Ismaail Haniyah in Gaza, former 'Foreign Minister' Mahmud Zahar, and leaders of the 'military' division, Ahmed Jabri and Mohammed Def.

The cases took six months to prepare. So far six requests for their arrest have been issued, all based on clear evidence that Hamas leaders are linked to the terror attacks.

Arutz Sheva report attorney Mordechai Tzivin, representing the plaintiffs, told the French news agency AFP: "This is a first step in a broad offensive across Europe that will include Spain, Britain, Italy and other countries".

One of the Belgian attorneys involved, Roel Coveliers explains that indiscriminate attacks on civilians may constitute war crimes. "But that's up to the Judge to decide. We don't know if we will be successful in prosecuting the case in Belgium and get a conviction, but it's important to get an investigative Judge to take on the matter".

Filing the suit is only an initial step. A federal Judge will see if the complaints have standing. In the affirmative, an investigative Judge will be appointed.

Although ranging well within Israeli territory, Hamas' home made rockets are not particularly effective. Between 2005 and 2007 Hamas militants fired some 2,700 of the home made rockets on southern Israel. Towns like Sderot have come under constant barrages of fire which crippled the daily lives of the inhabitants, causing material and psychological trauma.

On December 27 Israel finally launched counter terrorist Operation Cast Lead.

In the days before the maneuvers some eighty Qassam rockets landed in the area. It still happens, albeit less frequently, but effectively not much has changed. A recent article by blogger/journalist Caroline Glick explains why little was accomplished. Even top IDF commanders acknowledged this week that the army will be forced to return to Gaza in due course.

Belgian attorney Coveliers does not think the Court will reject the request. Thus far he's received six of the fifteen dossiers from Israel.

Ironically the suits charge ten Hamas leaders of war crimes on the basis of the UN Human Rights Commission's report authored by Judge Richard Goldstone, who accused Israel of war crimes but mentioned, almost in passing, that Hamas rocket attacks on civilians also constitute violations of international law.

With thanks to Politeia

Muslim group asks Obama for protection

By Art Moore

WND investigation seen as example of 'alarming level of anti-Islam hate'

Citing the impact of the WND Books expose "Muslim Mafia" as an example of rampant "anti-Islam hate in our nation," the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on President Obama yesterday to address what it calls an "alarming" problem.

CAIR – which has filed suit against "Muslim Mafia" co-author P. David Gaubatz and his son for an undercover investigation of the group's terrorist ties – distributed a list of "anti-Islam incidents" that included "a call by far-right members of the U.S. House of Representatives to investigate Muslim interns on Capitol Hill as 'spies.'"

"President Obama is in the best position to address the alarming level of anti-Islam hate in our nation and to urge religious and political leaders to speak out in support of tolerance and mutual understanding," said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad.

As WND reported, Reps. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., John Shadegg, R-Ariz., Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Paul Broun, R-Ga., formally asked the House sergeant at arms in October to investigate evidence from "Muslim Mafia" that CAIR is conspiring to plant "spies" inside Congress targeting sensitive security-related committees. In another letter, to Attorney General Eric Holder, the House members ask the Justice Department to reveal to Congress members why CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history.

Last month, the four lawmakers were joined by Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., in a letter urging the Internal Revenue Service to investigate CAIR to determine whether the Muslim group's lobbying activities on Capitol Hill violate its nonprofit status.

"Muslim Mafia" uncovered confidential CAIR memos revealing that in one year alone, CAIR officials made 72 separate trips to Congress to lobby against the Patriot Act. The same year Congress met fewer than 150 days.

U.S. prosecutors believe CAIR, while claiming to be a civil-rights group, is actually a front group for Hamas and other terrorists. The Justice Department stated in September 2007 during its prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation in Dallas that CAIR "has been identified by the government at trial as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew."

CAIR said its annual national report on the status of American Muslim civil rights, released this month, showed an increase in bias-related incidents in 2008.

CAIR has claimed since the 9/11 terrorist attacks that Muslims in the U.S. have suffered a sharp rise in anti-Islamic abuse.

The group's 2005 abuse report, blamed a purported increase in anti-Muslim harassment, violence and discriminatory treatment on the Internet and talk radio.

But FBI data actually has shown the number of incidents is dramatically shrinking.

The 2006 total of 156, for example, was a 68 percent drop from 2001.

Moreover, incidents against Muslims were just a fraction of overall hate crimes. In 2006, 66 percent of religiously motivated attacks targeted Jews, while just 11 percent were against Muslims, even though the Jewish and Muslim populations are similar in size.

In its letter to Obama, CAIR cited recent incidents in Florida in which a cross with the message "Christian nation, Christian community" was planted at the site of a planned mosque and an anti-Islam Christmas display was set up by a local church.

Other incidents listed were "a spate of vandalism incidents at mosques nationwide" and "anti-Islam remarks by Christian evangelist Franklin Graham."

CAIR's director Awad said Obama himself has been "targeted by anti-Muslim hate despite the fact that he is Christian," noting a Colorado car dealer recently put up a billboard depicting the president as a "turban-wearing militant."

Awad pointed to recent remarks made to a Muslim and Arab-American gathering in Michigan by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in which he said the Justice Department will return to its "traditional" role of ensuring civil rights. The president has signed a spending measure that will give the Justice Department's civil rights division 102 new staff members, many of whom will be assigned to hate-crimes investigations.

CAIR said it began airing a new public service announcement called "I am Muslim, I am American" yesterday on the CBS Super Screen in New York City's Times Square.

FBI steps in

CAIR's suit against the Gaubatzes claims they stole sensitive material from the group's Washington office under false pretenses. But lawyers for the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case this week that contends CAIR has no claim because it does not legally exist.

A federal judge in Washington issued a restraining order Nov. 3 barring the Gaubtazes from further use or publication of the material – 12,000 pages of documents along with audio and video recordings – and demanding that they return it to the Muslim group's lawyers. But the FBI stepped into the case Nov. 23 with a warrant to examine the papers and recordings, apparently as part of its concern about CAIR and its terrorist links to Hamas. The bureau cut off ties to CAIR after the Islamic group was named an unindicted terror co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case.

"Muslim Mafia," by David Gaubatz and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry, asserts CAIR is acting as a front for a conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood – the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas – to infiltrate the U.S. and help pave the way for Saudi-style Islamic law to rule the nation.

WND

Murder by Lawfare - How Liberal Lawsuits are Taking American Lives

by Daniel Greenfield

The thirteen US soldiers murdered at Fort Hood were killed by the bullets fired by Malik Nidal Hassan, but there were those who helped Nassan fire his bullets, who did everything but hold his gun and pull the trigger for him.

The initial FBI review has found that the Justice Department guidelines for opening a criminal investigation were too high, in turn investigators have said that it now requires a very high standard of evidence in order to convict a terrorist plotter.

Pursuing charges before all the evidence is in hand can backfire – suspects have sued authorities before, claiming they were falsely imprisoned victims of witch hunts… Five Muslim immigrants were convicted last year of conspiring to kill U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix in New Jersey, but they were acquitted of attempted murder after prosecutors acknowledged they were probably months away from acting.
...

In January 2006, agents watched as a young man suspected of links to terrorists walked out of an Atlanta Home Depot with materials that could be used to make a bomb.

They knew Syed Haris Ahmed had researched bombmaking techniques online and shaved his head, as some jihadis have done before an attack.

However, they decided to wait to arrest him and keep building a stronger case – and risk a potential terror attack.

Not being able to stop a terrorist before he strikes. Not being able to remove Muslims who are engaging in threatening behavior on a plane. Not able to take action against a terrorist plot for fear that the terrorists will be allowed to walk free. That is what the domestic version of the War on Terror looks like today.

Those are the wages of Lawfare, the legal campaign on behalf of terrorists waged by well known liberal legal advocacy groups such as the ACLU, and the much wider base of liberal organizations and newspapers who lobbied on behalf of captured terrorists and republished every single one of their claims of torture… to the extent that the Al Queda manual made it a default for captured terrorists to cry abuse once on trial.

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard and driver, who was captured together with Al Queda operatives, became a cause celebre for liberals and liberal groups from Amnesty International to People for the American Way to the American Jewish Committee to George Clooney who was interested in making a movie about him and starring as his lawyer.

They turned Salim Hamdan into a martyr and breathlessly repeated every single one of his statements. And they won. They won with Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld. And they won again at trial. Hamdan was freed a few months after sentencing to return to Yemen.

The liberal establishment had fought its hardest for Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard… and they won. America lost. That wasn’t the only time they won.

From day one every terrorist in Gitmo, every terrorist plotter seized on American soil plotting to murder Americans had the liberal establishment in their corner and fighting on their behalf.

From trial lawyers queuing up to defend them to the editorial pages of every liberal newspaper in America clamoring that they had been victimized, that the charges against them were worthless and that America had besmirched itself by not bowing to the wishes of the aforementioned trial lawyers. And they won.

From Abu Ghraib to Gitmo, from Hamdan to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, they won. They successfully smeared US soldiers and interrogators and CIA agents as monsters, torturers and kidnappers.

They successfully portrayed Al Queda terrorists as sensitive victims and martyrs of a latter day Gulag.

The same press that wouldn’t report on any of Castro’s atrocities a few miles south of Guantanamo Bay if you put a gun to their heads, put on their novelist hats and transformed butchers into loving fathers, and dedicated fanatics into misunderstood patriots. And they won.

More at CFP

Israeli leaders 'harassed' on Gaza records

John Lyons, Middle East Correspondent

ISRAEL claims political and military leaders are being "harassed" by anti-Israeli groups who are using the international legal system to seek arrest warrants for war crimes over the Gaza conflict.

The latest incident came yesterday after a court in London reportedly issued an arrest warrant against Israel's foreign minister during the Gaza war, Tzipi Livni, now opposition leader.

Ms Livni's office denied her planned trip to London was cancelled because of any legal threat, citing her inability to secure a meeting with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown because of his schedule. But it appears the court issued the warrant believing she would be in Britain for the trip.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor told The Australian there had been a great deal of confusion whether the arrest warrant had been issued.

He said the Israeli embassy in London confirmed reports that one had been issued. The details of the warrant were unclear.

"But it appears that anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian groups are filing suits in a number of countries in order to harass Israeli political and military leaders," Mr Palmor said. "These suits never materialise into anything, and for good reason, but they're very annoying.

"What the law allows, the law allows. But if it allows for people to harass foreign leaders, then there is a problem, and they should be able to find a way to stop this."

The British Foreign Office issued a statement saying: "The UK is determined to do all it can to promote peace in the Middle East and to be a strategic partner of Israel.

"To do this, Israel's leaders need to be able to come to the UK for talks with the British government. We are looking urgently at the implications of this case."

British reports said it was the second time in months that lawyers had gone to a magistrates court in London after a warrant for the arrest of an Israeli politician.

The Guardian reported yesterday that in September the court was asked to issue a warrant for the arrest of Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak under the 1988 Criminal Justice Act, which gives courts in England and Wales universal jurisdiction in war crimes cases.

It said Mr Barak, attending a meeting at the British Labour Party conference in Brighton at the time, avoided arrest when the Foreign Office told the court he was a serving minister who would be meeting his British counterparts, which gave him immunity.

Ministers hoping for private visits to Britain now asked the Israeli embassy in London to arrange meetings with British officials to ensure legal protection. But the newspaper said Ms Livni, no longer a minister, could not enjoy such immunity nor could Ehud Olmert, then prime minister and now a private citizen.

Israeli media said the legal situation may deter Israeli politicians from travelling to Britain.

Ms Livni's office said she was "proud" of the decisions she made during the Gaza war and would "continue presenting her view everywhere around the world".

The Australian

TiZA swings and misses

One might say that the Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy K-8 charter school in suburban St. Paul is an Islamic school in all but name, except that that even its name is Islamic.

Among other things, the school's principal is an imam and almost all of its students are Muslim. It is housed in a building that was owned originally by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota (I'm not sure who owns it now).

The school has in any event had a mutually beneficial relationship with MAS Minnesota since the school's inception. The study of Arabic is required at the school. The Arabic comes in handy for the Koranic studies that follow the regular school day.

The ACLU Minnesota has brought a lawsuit challenging the legality of the school's operation on public funds; the lawsuit is pending in federal court in Minnesota. Discussing the lawsuit, ACLU Minnesota executive director Chuck Samuelson observed: "The issue with TiZA, frankly, was the incredible commingling of church and state. It's a theocratic school. It is as plain as the substantial nose on my face."

As a result of Samuelson's statement of the ACLU Minnesota's position in the lawsuit, TiZA alleged that Samuelson and the ACLU had defamed it, asserting several counterclaims against the ACLU Minnesota for amounts in excess of $100,000 (i.e., an unlimited amount).

The ACLU Minnesota's lawsuit against TiZA is predicated on the establishment clause of the First Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court. I was quite sure that there was another clause of the First Amendment that applied to TiZA's counterclaims against the ACLU Minnesota, but even the common law of defamation provides that truth is a defense.

As I I anticipated, Minnesota federal district Judge Donovan Frank has now summarily dismissed TiZA's counterclaims. In an order issued yesterday afternoon Judge Frank held that, as a public school, TiZA could not assert a claim for defamation.

As to the merits of TiZA's defamation and defamation-related claims, Judge Frank held that "the allegedly defamatory statements all reflect Plaintiff's belief [that TiZA is illegally operating as a religious school] and TiZA has alleged no facts that would demonstrate that Plaintiff entertains any doubts as to the truth of its statements."

TiZA therefore had "wholly failed" to allege facts making out the actual malice constitutionally required to support a claim of defamation by a public official or, Judge Frank holds, a public school.

In asserting its defamation and defamation-related counterclaims against Samuelson and the ACLU Minnesota, TiZA was taking a leaf from the old Islamist playbook written by CAIR. The irony in this case is that TiZA pretends to be a nonsectarian institution; it is this pretense that goes to the heart of the pending lawsuit.

I spoke briefly with Chuck Samuelson about Judge Frank's order last night. He expressed the "hope that this counterclaim is really dead and that we can move this case along. These are issues that need to be aired and we await a speedy judgment."

Power Line

You Decide: Bruno Terrorist Interview Reprise

Palestinian sues Baron Cohen over terrorist claim in film

A shopkeeper from Bethlehem who was branded a terrorist in Sacha Baron Cohen's film Bruno is seeking $110m (£67.5m) in damages.

Ayman Abu Aita is suing Baron Cohen, US talk show host David Letterman and others for libel and slander according to a lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia federal court last week.

The actor and comic Baron Cohen plays a gay Austrian fashion journalist in the film, which was released in the UK in July. Keen to become what he calls "the most famous Austrian since Hitler," Bruno travels to the middle east, and in a short interview with Abu Aita, asks to be kidnapped in an attempt to become famous.

A caption labels Abu Aita as a member of the militant al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, the armed wing of the Fatah movement. He is a member of the board of the Holy Land trust, a non-profit organisation that works on Palestinian community-building.

Cohen was interviewed on David Letterman's talkshow in the US, and said finding a "terrorist" to interview for the movie took several months and some help from a CIA contact.

He said he had feared for his safety during the interview with Abu Aita, which he claimed took place at a secret location.

According to the lawsuit, however, the interview with Abu Aita took place at a hotel chosen by Cohen in a part of the West Bank that was under Israeli military control. The film's distributor, NBC Universal, and the director, Larry Charles, are also named in the proceedings.

Abu Aita case is that before the film he "enjoyed a good reputation for honesty and a peaceable nature" in his community. His lawyers write that any accusations or insinuations that Abu Aita is or ever was associated with the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, or any other terrorist activity, is "utterly false and untrue."

His US lawyer, Joseph Peter Drennan, said Abu Aita was never offered a release to sign to appear in the film. "This is an important lawsuit because it is about the dignity of a specific person. It is about his reputation, about his standing in the community." Drennan said he expects a hearing in late January.

Hatem Abu Ahmad, Abu Aita's Arab-Israeli lawyer, said Baron Cohen made millions "on the back of my client."

His 2006 film Borat also attracted lawsuits, including one for $30m from two residents of the Romanian hamlet where Borat's "home town" scenes were filmed. Most of the cases were thrown out.

Guardian

Grand Jury Seeks CAIR Records

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) appears to be the subject of a federal criminal investigation. Although no formal statement to that effect has been made by law enforcement, FBI agents reportedly issued a grand jury subpoena last week seeking internal CAIR documents that are the subject of an ongoing civil lawsuit.

CAIR sued P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris Gaubatz in federal court last month, claiming it was the victim of theft and trespassing.

In the book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America, the Gaubatzes acknowledge that Chris adopted a pseudonym and posed as a Muslim convert to secure an internship at CAIR in 2008.

He used his access to take thousands of pages of internal CAIR documents and to make surreptitious recordings of CAIR officials. Citing those records, the book claims that CAIR is part of a conspiracy among groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood "to support violent jihad and undermine law enforcement."

Among the book's specific allegations, CAIR officials grossly exaggerate their membership rolls and the depth of their domestic financial support. In addition, they actively thwart law enforcement counter-terror investigations. Following the release of the book, four congressional Republicans sought an investigation into the book's claims that CAIR seeks to place interns on committees dealing with the judiciary and homeland security.

Thus far, CAIR has minimized and ridiculed the book's findings, but has not alleged any of it is false.

CAIR won a temporary restraining order requiring that the Gaubatzes return 12,000 pages of documents.

WorldNetDaily, publisher of Muslim Mafia, posted a story Nov. 24 claiming that FBI agents served a grand jury subpoena on the Gaubatzes' attorney. The move came as the attorneys were about to comply with the judge's order and give the documents back to CAIR. WND publisher Joseph Farah is quoted saying they weren't sure "Which takes precedence - a federal court order or an FBI warrant?"

More at IPT

More at IPT

CAIR Dirtier than that

They are terrorist infiltrators. Sedition. CAIR's Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad were then leaders of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a Hamas front that exhibits in the HLF case show was an original component in the Muslim Brotherhood's "Palestine Committee," which was created to support Hamas in the United States.

And they were the go-to guys (yes, even at FOX news) post Fort Hood. We have been colonized, drowning in enemy propaganda.

On September 17, 2001, six days after the worst Islamic terror attacks ever on US soil, President Bush stood next to CAIR’s Nihad Awad at the Islamic Center of Washington DC, and pronounced ‘Islam is Peace’. Is it any wonder we blew it after 911?

GRAND JURY SEEKS CAIR Documents IPT hat tip Armaros

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) appears to be the subject of a federal criminal investigation. Although no formal statement to that effect has been made by law enforcement, FBI agents reportedly issued a grand jury subpoena last week seeking internal CAIR documents that are the subject of an ongoing civil lawsuit.

CAIR sued P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris Gaubatz in federal court last month, claiming it was the victim of theft and trespassing. In the book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America, the Gaubatzes acknowledge that Chris adopted a pseudonym and posed as a Muslim convert to secure an internship at CAIR in 2008.

He used his access to take thousands of pages of internal CAIR documents and to make surreptitious recordings of CAIR officials. Citing those records, the book claims that CAIR is part of a conspiracy among groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood "to support violent jihad and undermine law enforcement."

Among the book's specific allegations, CAIR officials grossly exaggerate their membership rolls and the depth of their domestic financial support. In addition, they actively thwart law enforcement counter-terror investigations.

Following the release of the book, four congressional Republicans sought an investigation into the book's claims that CAIR seeks to place interns on committees dealing with the judiciary and homeland security.

Thus far, CAIR has minimized and ridiculed the book's findings, but has not alleged any of it is false.

CAIR won a temporary restraining order requiring that the Gaubatzes return 12,000 pages of documents. WorldNetDaily, publisher of Muslim Mafia, posted a story Nov. 24 claiming that FBI agents served a grand jury subpoena on the Gaubatzes' attorney.

The move came as the attorneys were about to comply with the judge's order and give the documents back to CAIR. WND publisher Joseph Farah is quoted saying they weren't sure "Which takes precedence - a federal court order or an FBI warrant?"

Farah declined to comment Tuesday on what has happened since then. Josh Gerstein at Politico notes that the government filed a sealed motion in the case Friday.

According to the docket in the Gaubatz/CAIR suit, Lynn Haaland, an attorney in the Department of Justice's National Security Division, is listed as an "interested party" in the lawsuit. It's possible the grand jury's target is more narrow – on a CAIR official or officials, but the presence of a national security prosecutor indicates the grand jury's interest is not on the Gaubatzes behavior.

Last year, the FBI cut off communication with CAIR on outreach and other general informational contacts. That move was based on evidence from the successful Hamas-support prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) linking the organization and its founders to Hamas.

CAIR co-founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (a.k.a. Omar Yehya) were included in a telephone list of a U.S.-based Hamas-support network and the two participated in a secret 1993 gathering of Hamas-members and supporters aimed at undermining the U.S.-brokered Oslo Accords which created the secular Palestinian Authority.

Awad and Ahmad were then leaders of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a Hamas-front that exhibits in the HLF case show was an original component in the Muslim Brotherhood's "Palestine Committee" which was created to support Hamas in the United States.

In that weekend-long gathering, FBI recordings show the group discussed creating a new Islamist lobbying arm. CAIR was created the following summer and immediately was added to the Palestine Committee's agenda.

In explaining why it cut off CAIR's access, an FBI official expressed in writing the bureau's concern "whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and HAMAS.

With thanks to Atlas

FBI swoops in to halt return of 'Muslim Mafia' documents

New subpoena in conflict with judge's order on papers captured in undercover investigation

WASHINGTON – While attorneys representing the co-author of "Muslim Mafia" were preparing late today to honor a federal court order to return documents obtained from the Council on American-Islamic Relations in an independent undercover operation, FBI agents served a warrant on a Washington, D.C., law office for the same documents.

The FBI agents entered the capital law offices of Cozen O'Connor tonight and issued a warrant for thousands of pages of documents as well as audio and video recordings gathered by P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris in a daring and lengthy undercover penetration of CAIR in which the younger Gaubatz served as an unpaid intern for the group that was labeled an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator in last year's Holy Land Foundation trial.

CAIR claimed in a lawsuit that Gaubatz removed its papers and made recordings of employees "without any consent or authorization and in violation of his contractual fiduciary and other legal obligations."

A federal judge in Washington issued a restraining order Nov. 3 barring the Gaubatzes from further use or publication of the material – 12,000 pages of documents along with audio and video recordings – and demanding that they return it to the Muslim group's lawyers.

However, last night the FBI stepped in with a warrant, suggesting the agency wants to see the papers and examine the recordings as part of its interest in CAIR and its Muslim Brotherhood links.

Joseph Farah, chief executive officer of WND and its subsidiary, WND Books, who has been raising money for the defense of his author and son, welcomed the FBI's interest in the papers.

"Obviously, we were prepared to honor the court order from Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly," he said.

Kollar-Kotelly – who as head of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court made several controversial decisions against the Bush administration's counterterrorism policies – was criticized recently by many security experts for ruling against the military's designation of a Guantanamo detainee as an enemy combatant, allowing the Obama administration to send him home.

"Now," said Farah, "we will have to confer with the attorneys to determine what happens next. Which takes precedence – a federal court order or an FBI warrant? I trust this will be sorted out in the days to come.

Personally, I would like to see these papers in the hands of trained FBI investigators. The revelations raised about CAIR in 'Muslim Mafia' have clearly piqued the agency's interest."

In fact, adds Farah, "I would say the nature of this warrant and the way it was served strongly suggests the FBI doesn't want these documents returned to CAIR – where they were destined to be destroyed in the first place. We have always believed, as the Gaubatzes did, that there is valuable evidence here vital to the nation's security."

The FBI's grand-jury subpoena is intended to preserve the status quo and not intended to require the Gaubatzes' legal counsel to turn over the documents immediately – or before notifying Judge Kollar-Kotelly.

CAIR contends the documents were stolen. David Gaubatz insists the research described in his book, including securing the documents, "was conducted professionally and legally" in cooperation with law enforcement officials. Much of the relevant material is already in the hands of the FBI, he said.

The Gaubatzes are being represented by high-profile First Amendment specialist Martin Garbus, most famous for representing Daniel Ellsberg in the Pentagon Papers case.

Garbus is teamed with Bernard Grimm of Cozen O'Connor in Washington and Daniel Horowitz in the San Francisco Bay area. Horowitz, a frequent TV legal analyst, represented talk-radio host Michael Savage in his lawsuit against CAIR.

Grimm also is a regular commentator on the Fox News Channel, CNN and Court TV.

More at WND

Look who's defending 'Muslim Mafia'

By Art Moore

Pentagon Papers attorney takes case brought by CAIR

Widely regarded as a "legendary" First Amendment advocate who has represented the likes of Ronald Reagan, Nelson Mandela and Andrei Sakharov, New York lawyer Martin Garbus has agreed to defend the co-author of "Muslim Mafia" and his son in a lawsuit brought by the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Garbus, who has appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court along with trial and appellate courts in more than 100 cases, told WND he's defending co-author P. David Gaubatz because his case is a "continuation of a struggle being carried out throughout the world" to guard freedom of speech.

"I think a book has a right to be out there, and any attempt to stop the book, I think, would be violating the First Amendment," he said.

Garbus has been in the thick of numerous groundbreaking and highly controversial First Amendment cases over the past five decades, from Daniel Ellsberg's battle over the Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War and Lenny Bruce's famous obscenity charges to radio host Don Imus' lawsuit against CBS after he was fired for his remarks about the Rutgers women's basketball team.

Other clients have included activist Cesar Chavez, actor Robert Redford, actor Al Pacino, director Spike Lee, writer Samuel Beckett and Czech playwright Vaclav Havel. Later, when Havel became president of the Czech Republic, Garbus was invited to help write the nation's constitution.

One of his many seminal cases was Ashton v. Kentucky, in which the Supreme Court ruled in 1966 that libel could no longer be criminally prosecuted.

As WND reported, CAIR alleges Gaubatz's son, Chris Gaubatz, who served as an unpaid volunteer for CAIR in a daring undercover operation, obtained access to the D.C.-based Muslim group's property under false pretenses, removed internal documents and made recordings of officials and employees "without any consent or authorization and in violation of his contractual, fiduciary and other legal obligations to CAIR."

A federal judge in Washington issued a restraining order Nov. 3 barring the Gaubtazes from further use or publication of the material – 12,000 pages of documents along with audio and video recordings – and demanding that they return it to the Muslim group's lawyers.

Garbus told WND the material will be returned, and a proposed order filed Thursday indicates both sides have agreed.

Read more at WND

Obama won't close Guantanamo prison by January

President Barack Obama said he won't set a new deadline for closing the Guantanamo Bay military prison, but does expect the facility to shut down sometime next year.

The administration no longer feels it can meet the January 2010 deadline Obama set for its closure soon after taking office. Obama says he isn't disappointed about missing the deadline, but has realized that things move slower in Washington than he expected.

Obama said the timeline for closing Guantanamo will depend on cooperation from Congress.

About 220 detainees remain at the prison, and the administration must decide how to prosecute some in US courts and turn others over to other countries.

Obama spoke in an interview with Fox News Channel.

Also on Wednesday, A British judge ruled that British spies can keep some evidence secret from former Guantanamo prisoners who are suing the government for alleged complicity in their detention, the first volley in a legal battle to expose what role Britain played in the men's imprisonment.

Seven ex-Guantanamo inmates allege they were tortured or abused at the US prison camp and elsewhere - and that the British government contributed to their torment.

Their civil suit seeking damages from the spy agencies MI5 and MI6 and other government bodies has yet to come to trial, but the government won a preliminary victory by securing the right to keep selected pieces of information from the men and their lawyers.

Justice Stephen Silber warned that his ruling was a "stark question of law, not related to the facts of the case." He said lawyers would still have to work with any future trial judge to decide which evidence, if any, could be kept under wraps.

More at JPost