The media has been doing an excellent job in ignoring the
spectacular revelations at the trial against the Holyland
Foundation, once America’s largest Muslim charity organization, now taking
place. Evidence is being revealed that shows a hidden agenda and
widespread conspiracy amongst all the so-called “moderate” major
Muslim groups in America to totally destroy the country, the
culture, Western values. The information below came from
Homeland Security’s own website, followed by an editorial in
Investor’s Business Daily.
I’d like to hear what U.S. presidential candidates have to say
about this. If any of you get a chance, ask them.
The The Holy Land Foundation Case; What you are not hearing in
Submitted by Lan Lamphere on Fri, 2007-08-10 18:59. Podcast
Aug 10, 2007: Yesterday ended the second full week of trial
testimony in the case against The Holy Land Foundation for Relief
& Development, once the largest Muslim charity in the United
States . After a lengthy investigation by U.S. federal
authorities that resulted in the organization’s assets being
frozen in 2001, and the filing of a 42-count criminal indictment
in 2004, prosecutors have been methodically presenting their case
against the organization and seven named defendants in a downtown
Dallas , Texas courtroom.
Trial Watch, a special broadcast of The Homeland Security Report
hosted by Doug Hagmann, brings you important information about
the trial that is not being covered by the mainstream media.
Listen to Doug Hagmann – an investigator with over 20 years of
experience in civil and criminal cases – as he recaps the case
against the Muslim charity as presented by the prosecution,
carefully sorts through the mountain of evidence presented by the
prosecution linking the charity and the defendants to the Islamic
terrorist organization HAMAS. Doug Hagmann describes the
testimony of lead FBI agent Lara Burns in her presentation of
hundreds of documents that link HLF funding directly to HAMAS
terrorist operations in the Middle East . This segment of Trial
Watch identifies members of the Council on American Islamic
Relations (CAIR), including executive director Nihad Awad,
who is purported to have direct knowledge that the giant funding
apparatus known as the Holy Land Foundation was financing
terrorist operations in the Middle East.
Doug Hagmann also details the prosecution’s linkage between a
named defendant in this case to a spiritual advisor to at least
two of the September 11, 2001
hijackers. Also detailed in this broadcast is the 1993 meeting
held in Philadelphia between U.S. based HAMAS members and CAIR’s
executive director. The meeting was held to discuss ways to
improve funding for HAMAS, and derail the Oslo Peace Accords.
A Muslim ‘Mafia’?
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, August 14, 2007
4:30 PM PT
Homeland Security: Forget everything you’ve been told about
“moderate” Muslim groups in America. New evidence that U.S.
prosecutors have revealed at a major terror trial exposes the
Exhibit No. 003-0085 is the most chilling. Translated from Arabic
by federal investigators in the case against the Holy Land
Foundation, an alleged Hamas front, the secret document outlines
a full-blown conspiracy by the major Muslim groups in America –
all of which are considered “mainstream” by the media.
In fact, they are part of the “Ikhwan,” or Muslim Brotherhood,
the parent organization of Hamas, al-Qaida and other major
Islamic terror groups. They have conspired to infiltrate American
society with the purpose of undermining it and turning it into an
Check out this quote from Page 7 of the 1991 document:
“The Ikwhan must understand that all their work in America is a
kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western
civilization from within and sabotaging their miserable house by
the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s
religion is made victorious over all religions.”
Sounds like the latest screed from Osama bin Laden. But it comes
from the Muslim establishment in America.
The secret plan lists several Saudi-backed Muslim groups as
“friends” of the conspiracy.
They include the Islamic Society of North America – the umbrella
organization – and the North American Islamic Trust, which
controls most of the mosques in America and is the forerunner to
the Council on American-Islamic Relations, this country’s most
visible Muslim-rights group.
All three have been cited as unindicted co-conspirators in the
case, with all three sharing membership in the Muslim
Brotherhood. Yet all have claimed, in the wake of 9/11, to be
moderate, even patriotic.
Another exhibit reveals their plan to create innocuous-sounding
“front groups” to hide their radical agenda.
Many in the media and politics have fallen for their deception
and helped bring them into the mainstream.
Now everyone knows the truth.
The Muslim establishment that publicly decries the radical fringe
– represented by Hamas and al-Qaida – may actually be a part of
it. The only difference is that they use words and money instead
of bombs to accomplish their subversive goals.
Over the past two decades they have constructed, with Saudi
money, an elaborate infrastructure of support for the bad guys –
right under our noses.
They even brag about putting “beehives” (Islamic centers) in
every major city.
These exhibits – which so far have been ignored by major media
outside the Dallas area, where the trial is under way –
completely blow the mainstream Muslim NGOs’ cover as pro-American
moderates. Many, if not most, aren’t.
This is their real agenda, spelled out in black and white. It
should help investigators build a RICO case to dismantle the
entire terror-support network in America.
Many have suspected it, but now we have proof that there is a
secret underworld operating inside America under the cover of
fronts with legitimate-sounding names.
It even uses charities to launder money for violent hits on
enemies. It’s highly organized, with its own internal bylaws and
security to avoid monitoring from law enforcement.
Sounds like the Mafia.
But unlike the mob, this syndicate is religious in nature and
protected by political correctness.
More evidence like this should put an end to such nonsense.
The LA tmes links below do not work they have sent the opinions to the archves
From the Los Angeles Times
Misinterpreting the Mideast
Until they get past their mistaken assumptions, foreign envoys can do little
to calm the region.
By Moshe Ya’alon
August 26, 2007
After a few years of benign neglect, Israel is back on the itineraries of
well-meaning foreign emissaries. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair
visited the country last month in his new role as special envoy of the
“quartet” of Middle East peacemakers. Earlier this month, U.S. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice arrived. Each visit was concluded with a news
conference at which promises of progress were made. But before any lasting
on-the-ground movement toward peace can be achieved in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, foreign emissaries, as well as some Israelis,
will have to shake off some long-disproved tenets of the conventional wisdom
about the dispute .
There are four main misconceptions that diplomats bring with them to Israel.
Primary among them is the idea that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
is a prerequisite for stability in the Mideast . The truth is that the
region is riven by clashes that have nothing to do with Israel. For
instance, the Jewish state plays no role in the conflict between Shiites and
Sunnis, between Persians and Arabs or between Arab nationalists and Arab
The second misconception is that Israeli territorial concessions are the key
to progress . The reality is that an ascendant jihadist Islam believes that
it is leading the battle against Israel and the rest of the West. Given this
dynamic, Israeli territorial or other concessions simply fill the jihadists’
sails, reinforcing their belief that Israel and the West are weak and can be
True, a majority of Israelis supported Israel’s unilateral withdrawals from
Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza in 2005 in the belief that meeting Hezbollah
and Palestinian territorial demands would nullify the cause of conflict
between them. We now know the results: The Hezbollah and Palestinian
reactions — concerted terror wars, kidnapped Israeli soldiers, rockets
fired at Israeli cities — made clear that the Mideast’s central conflict is
not territorial but ideological. And ideology cannot be defeated by
Emissaries also still believe that “the Occupation” blocks agreement between
Israelis and Palestinians. In the West, the term usually means the
territories Israel conquered in the Six-Day War in 1967. If the problem
between Israelis and Palestinians were just the 1967 territories, and the
solution were dividing those lands up between the two sides (as proposed,
most recently, in 2000 by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak), the
conflict would have ended long ago.
Instead, the heart of the problem is that many Palestinians — Fatah and
Hamas, in particular — and even some Israeli Arabs use “Occupation” to
refer to all Israel. They do not recognize the Jewish people’s right to an
independent state, a right affirmed again and again in the international
Finally, the well-intentioned visiting diplomats believe that the
Palestinians want — and have the ability — to establish a state that will
live in peace alongside Israel. But they are not being clear-eyed. The late
Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, established a thugocracy that never
improved the basic living conditions of his people. Indeed, Palestinian
unemployment and poverty are worse today than they were before Arafat and
his cronies assumed power in 1994.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas did not take responsibility
for Gazans’ welfare, which in part led to Hamas’ electoral victory in 2006.
Now confined to the West Bank after Hamas kicked his Fatah organization out
of Gaza, Abbas has not moved to create a governmental structure.
A corollary of this fourth misconception is the belief that economic
development can neutralize extreme nationalism and religious fanaticism ,
thus clearing the way toward peace and security. David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s
first prime minister, had a term for such believers: “naive Zionists.” Those
who fit this description should demand that the Palestinians explain what
they did with the $7 billion in international aid they received over the
years . Seven billion reasons for economic progress — and yet, why did
Palestinian mobs destroy the Erez industrial zone, where Palestinians worked
and ran businesses for decades, on the Gaza border? Why do they attack safe
roads linking Gaza and the West Bank? Why is the Palestinian economy in
Shorn of these mistaken assumptions, the picture in the Middle East is
disturbing indeed. No wonder emissaries hold on to them. So what to do?
For starters, Western governments and their emissaries must refrain from
pressuring Israel for territorial or security concessions, which at best
produces only short-term gains and emboldens the Islamist terror groups.
Instead, they should try to persuade the Palestinian leaders to commit to a
long-term strategy premised on educational, political and economic reforms
that would lead to the establishment of a civil society that cherishes life,
not death; values human rights and freedom; and develops a middle class, not
a corrupt, rich elite. At the same time, these governments should set up an
international fund that would offer Palestinian refugee families aid — say
$100,000 to $200,000 a family — for their resettlement on the condition
that their acceptance of the money would signify resolution of their refugee
Under no circumstances should emissaries attempt to open a dialogue with
Hamas. For the sake of Palestinian society, Hamas and its ideology must be
defeated. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not the most significant
today; it’s the battle between jihadist Islam and the West, of which Israel
is merely one theater. To defeat jihadist Islam, the West must overcome the
regimes, organizations and ideologies that support and feed it — and Hamas
is foremost among them.
The emissaries who travel to Israel must draw on their rich diplomatic
experiences, free themselves from misconceptions about the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the petty politics that flows from them —
especially the binds of political correctness — to lead us all toward
freedom, security and peace. Anything else is mere meddling.
Moshe Ya’alon is a fellow at the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at
the Shalem Center. He served as the 17th chief of staff of the Israel