According To Unsealed Court Ruling, Federal Judge Agrees: CAIR Tied To Hamas

November 26, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Steve Emerson writes about the events leading to the unsealing of the court ruling indicating the evidence that CAIR is tied to Hamas.

In the 2008 trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), 5 former HLF officials were convicted of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists. In that trial, CAIR was one of those groups listed-along with Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT)-as being unindicted co-conspirators.

CAIR, ISNA and NAIT wanted claims of their ties to Hamas removed and the record sealed. On July 1, 2009, U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis ruled that while their inclusion on the list of unindicted co-conspirators should not have been made public-but denied their request to have references to the groups removed from the record because of the strength of the evidence.

That ruling by Judge Soltis was under seal until recently.

That is when NAIT asked the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to unseal the order and strike any references tying the organization to Hamas. While the court agreed to unseal the lower court ruling, it refused to strike Judge Solis’ explanation that the groups were tied to Hamas.

So thanks to NAIT, we have access to Judge Soltis’ ruling, including the following:

The Government identifies four portions of the record from the first trial that purportedly establish that CAIR was a “joint venturer and coconspirator”:

(1) a Government exhibit showing the objective of the [U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s] Palestine Committee is to support Hamas;
(2) a Government exhibit showing that CAIR founder Omar Ahmad is part of the
Palestine Committee and [Hamas senior member] Mousa Abu Marzook is its head;
(3) a Government exhibit listing CAIR as part of the Palestine Committee; and
(4) the testimony of Special Agent Lara Burns and accompanying exhibits placing the CAIR founder at the 1993 Philadelphia conference and describing the CAIR founder’s mediation of a dispute between HLF and Ashqar over Hamas fundraising. (Resp. at 12-13.)

The Government does not mention any occasion where it used the 801(d)(2)(E) hearsay exception to introduce a statement of CAIR. The four pieces of evidence the government relies on, as discussed below, do create at least a prima facie case as to CAIR’s involvement in a conspiracy to support Hamas; however, even if the proverbial “cat was let out of the bag” at trial, there is an ongoing injury that will persist as long as the public has ready access to the Government’s list of unindicted co-conspirators.

…Finally, CAIR, NAIT [North American Islamic Trust] and ISNA [Islamic Society of North America] ask the Court to strike their names from any public document filed or issued by the government. (Mot. at 6.) While it is clear from the Briggs line of cases that the Government should have originally filed the unindicted co-conspirators’ names under seal, the Court declines to strike CAIR, ISNA and NAIT’s names from those documents. The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF [Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development], the Islamic Association for Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas. While the Court recognizes that the evidence produced by the Government largely predates the HLF designation date, the evidence is nonetheless sufficient to show the association of these entities with HLF, IAP, and Hamas. See U.S. v. Ladd, 218 F.3d at 704-05 (“the Government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a conspiracy existed”). Thus, maintaining the names of the entities on the List is appropriate in light of the evidence proffered by the Government.

There is of course one point on which Judge Solis has thus far been proven wrong-”there is an ongoing injury that will persist as long as the public has ready access to the Government’s list of unindicted co-conspirators.” On the contrary, CAIR continues to have no problem presenting itself as merely an advocate of Muslim rights.

But we continue to hope that will change.

Here is the complete text of Judge Soltis’s ruling:
Click here for full page view.

Technorati Tag: and and .


Daled Amos

Young Adults (age 18-29) Represented 9-10% of All Voters, According to Preliminary Exit Poll Data. They Were 12% of Voters in 2006

November 10, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Youth Voter Turnout Estimates to be Available From CIRCLE Tomorrow
Experts to Offer Youth Vote Analysis of Midterm Election Results On Press Conference Call Briefing, Wed., 10 am ET

Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service, Medford, MA – Youth represented 9%-10% of all voters, compared to 12% in 2006, according to the National Election Pool exit poll conducted by Edison Mitofsky Research.

At this time we cannot yet determine whether youth turnout rose, stayed the same, or declined in comparison to the 2006 midterm elections.  Youth share of voters is widely reported in the media but is not a good measure of turnout.  The youth share of voters is strongly influenced by how other groups turn out, whereas youth turnout is a measure of youth participation.

CIRCLE will release an estimate of youth turnout tomorrow based on the youth share of voters, vote tallies reported by the media and youth population estimates obtained from the US Census (see below for call details).

“Youth share of the vote appears to be lower than in recent midterm elections, but that could be because of extraordinarily high turnout among older citizens,” said CIRCLE director Peter Levine. “We caution against drawing the conclusion that youth participation was down this year.”

See our new CIRCLE press release for more details about the exit polls and tomorrow’s briefing.

CIRCLE

Young Adults Represented 11% of Voters, According to Final Exit Polls

November 9, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

Young Adults (age 18-29) represented 11% of all voters in the 2010 midterm elections, according to the National Exit Poll conducted by Edison Mitofsky Research. Young adults were 12% of voters in 2006 and 11% in 2002.

The preliminary Exit Poll estimate of youth share was raised after first official reports in the media last night

Experts to offer youth vote analysis of midterm election results on press conference call briefing, Wed., 10 am ET

Please see CIRCLE’s revised Election Night press release for more details about youth share of voters and today’s press call.

Young Adults (age 18-29) Represented 11% of All Voters, According to Exit Poll Data. They Were 12% of Voters in 2006

Preliminary Exit Poll Estimate Was Raised Last Night

Experts to Offer Youth Vote Analysis of Midterm Election Results

On Press Conference Call Briefing, Wed., 10 am ET

CIRCLE

The ‘‘Right” to Vote of Felons and Noncitizens According to Activist Judges

November 1, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

As we head into Election Day tomorrow, we should note that there were two decisions last week in federal courts of appeal that directly impact on the right to a secure and fair election, one good and one bad.

In Johnson v. Tennessee, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the right of the State of Tennessee to condition restoration of the voting rights of convicted felons on payment of restitution and child support obligations.  The decision was two to one and it will probably come as no surprise that the dissenting judge who believed that these felons had an imaginary constitutional right to ignore court orders and restitution requirements was a Clinton appointee.

Three felons had filed suit claiming that Tennessee was violating their constitutional right to vote.  But the Fourteenth Amendment specifically grants states the ability to abridge the right to vote for “participation in rebellion, or other crime.”  Like 48 other states (with the exception of Vermont and Maine), Tennessee bars felons from voting until their voting rights have been restored.  Felons can start voting again in Tennessee as soon as they complete their sentences pursuant to a proper showing that they have paid all of the victim restitution ordered by a court, as well as child support.  As the two federal judges opined in upholding this requirement, Tennessee possesses valid interests in promoting payment of child support, requiring criminals to fulfill their sentences, and encouraging compliance with court orders.  This lawsuit was just another of a long series of suits filed against felon disenfranchisement laws that have, so far unsuccessfully, sought to override states’ constitutional authority in this area through what amount to largely frivolous constitutional and statutory claims.  The dissenting judge in this case even likened requiring payment by felons of restitution and child support to a poll tax in violation of the Twenty Fourth Amendment! id="more-45899">

The bad decision last week was not surprisingly out of the Ninth Circuit, the most overturned federal appeals court in the nation.  In Gonzalez v. Arizona, a three judge panel overturned Arizona’s 2004 law that requires anyone registering to vote to provide proof of citizenship, a common sense requirement that should be adopted by every state.  The court held that this requirement violates the National Voter Registration Act (better known as Motor Voter).

This decision was also two to one, with retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor unfortunately sitting by designation and continuing her largely unbroken string of bad decisions.  However, there was an absolutely stinging dissent written by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski.  As Kozinski cogently pointed out, a prior panel of the Ninth Circuit in this very case had already held that Motor Voter “plainly allow[s] states, at least to some extent, to require their citizens to present evidence of citizenship when registering to vote.”  That makes it the law of the circuit and the law of this case and O’Connor and her fellow activist judge were bound by that prior, published opinion.  As Kozinski said, “The majority refuses to accept the consequences of this reality.”

The claim that Motor Voter prohibits a state like Arizona from requiring proof of citizenship has no basis in the legislation or its history.  Motor Voter does not supersede Arizona’s law and as Kozinski says, “To get its way, the majority invents a broad rule of same-subject matter preemption.”  There is no conflict between Motor Voter and the state law requirement and there is no question that this case was wrongly decided.

It is a pretty good bet that this decision will be overturned on appeal.  Fortunately, now that Justice O’Connor is no longer on the Supreme Court, there are actually higher courts than can overrule her bad judgment and her willingness to ignore the law to achieve the policy outcomes she favors (Ed Whelen href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/251171/more-justice-o-connor-really-still-judge-part-1-ed-whelan"> actually makes a strong argument that “O’Connor has not been a federal judge since Justice Alito’s confirmation in January 2006 and has not been constitutionally eligible to take part in the many federal appellate panels on which she has sat since that time.”).

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

WaPo Promotes the ‘Gospel According to Jimmy,’ But They Find Carter’s a Preachy Know-It-All

October 18, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

The Style section of Monday's Washington Post has an enormous picture of Jimmy Carter with the simple headline "The Book of Jimmy." The Post is jarringly behind Carter's publicity curve for his latest book White House Diary, but reporter Manuel Roig-Franzia began with the usual goo from Carter's church in Plains, Georgia: "On those scattered weekends when Jimmy Carter isn't out enforcing Middle East harmony or slaying Guinea worms or compensating for presidential malaise with ex-presidential vim, the 86-year-old can be found in Sunday school."

Anyone who's paid attention to Carter would know that "enforcing Middle East harmony" is not the right description for someone who compares Israel to apartheid-era South Africa.

Readers who don't want a cavity from all that sugar might move on to the next story, but Roig-Franzia arrived at a sharper point in paragraph nine, after Carter has declared that America is the nation most committed to waging war in the entire world, and that the Iraq invasion was "horribly unnecessary" - the reporter read Carter's book and finds that he's a preachy know-it-all: 

read more

NewsBusters.org - Exposing Liberal Media Bias

According to Sharia, rape is not possible in marriage, says Islamophobe Muslim cleric

October 14, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

He said it. “Rape not possible in marriage: Muslim cleric,” from IANS, October 14 (thanks to all who sent this in):

London, Oct 14 : There cannot be rape within marriage, a Muslim cleric in Britain has ruled. A key Muslim leader in the country promptly denounced the views as ‘misguided’ and ‘inappropriate’.

“In Islamic Sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape,” The Independent quoted cleric Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed as saying.

Men accused of raping their wives should not be prosecuted as “sex is part of marriage”, said Sayeed, president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain.

He made the comments to the blog The Samosa — and reiterated them to the The Independent.

Sayeed told the website: “Clearly there cannot be any rape within the marriage. Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity… Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage.

“Of course, if it happened without her desire, that is no good, that is not desirable.”

British law makes rape within marriage illegal.

Sayeed also suggested that women who claim to have been raped by their husbands should not immediately go to the police.

“Not in the beginning, unless we establish that it really happened. Because in most of the cases, wives… have been advised by their solicitors that one of the four reasons for which a wife can get a divorce is rape, so they are encouraged to say things like this.”

Asked how men found to have raped their wives were to be punished, he said: “He may be disciplined, and he may be made to ask forgiveness. That should be enough.”…

Jihad Watch

Joe Biden Will Be Obama’s Running Mate Again, According to… Joe Biden

October 14, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

**Written by Doug Powers

I wonder if the rest of Team Obama is aware of this:

“I tell you what, there’s real trust, that’s why he’s asked me to run again,” Mr. Biden said Monday, dropping this tidbit at the end of a 40-minute conversation, just before he dashed off to his third fund-raiser of the day. “Look, he said, ‘We’re going to run together, are you going to run?’ I said, ‘Of course, you want me to run with you, I’m happy to run with you.’”

This either means that Joe’s talking out of his rear end again, or Hillary has already said “hell no.”

I’m happy for Joe — he sounds as giddy as someone who was asked to the prom for the second year in a row by the football team’s star quarterback (nine fumbles, 14 picks and negative yardage on the season notwithstanding).

You can hardly blame them for looking past the mid-term and starting to focus on the 2012 campaign already, but I’d suggest that the White Star Line at least wait until the first ship fully goes under before publicizing plans for Titanic II.

(h/t Drudge)

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Michelle Malkin

Stimulus Gets High Marks, According to Report Overseen By (wait for it)… Joe Biden

October 1, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

**Written by Doug Powers

And the Washington Post takes the handoff and runs with it like LaDainian Tomlinson with nothing but daylight in front of him:

Report gives stimulus high marks

The massive economic stimulus package President Obama pushed through Congress last year is coming in on time and under budget - and with strikingly few claims of fraud or abuse - according to a White House report to be released Friday.

Coming barely a month before November’s midterm elections, which will determine whether Democrats retain control of Congress, the report challenges public perceptions of the stimulus aid as slow-moving and wasteful - an image that has fueled voter anger with the dominant party. Even some former skeptics who predicted that the money would lead to rampant abuse now acknowledge that the program could serve as a model for improving efficiency in government.
[...]
The report, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post, is one in a series of assessments prepared by Vice President Biden

I needed that laugh.

Have you noticed how the definition of “success” of the stimulus has shifted from jobs to fraud? “Yeah, maybe the economy lost jobs during a stimulus that was supposed to increase employment, and some projects ended up costing $ 2 million per job, but not nearly as much of it was stolen as we originally thought would be! Yay!”

In other news, I just wrote a report that rates this as the “best blog post ever.” According to the report, even former skeptics who the report doesn’t name believe this blog post will serve as a model for improving the efficiency of posts on other blogs.

To learn more about the subject of the wildly successful, under budget, non-wasteful stimulus, visit your local library, get on one of their computers, and click these links:

Your Porkulus dollars at work: Eco-snitch trash cans

Ohio Democrat debunks White House stimulus lie

Obama’s billion-dollar earmark for shady Illinois energy boondoggle

Millions spent on signs to tell you your money is being spent wisely

Porkulus II: Return of the phony jobs boondoggle

White House flack: It’s “petty” to nail down stimulus numbers

“Green Jobs” = SEIU/Union Jobs

The Stimulus Jobs Inflation Map

Stimulus efficiency success story of the day

3.6 million jobs lost is “quite positive”

Stimulus funds spend to teach African men how to wash their giggle sticks

Obama’s “low cost” electric car batteries, green jobs style

Billion-Dollar Indian Casino Gets Heap Big ‘Stimulus’

The ‘Stimulus is Working’ Update: ‘Weatherization’ Project Costs $ 57,000 Per Home
******

But I’m sure Sheriff Biden does plenty of bragging about all that stuff in his “How Good We Did” report.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Michelle Malkin

Taliban Using Children Soldiers According to U.S. Military

September 12, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

The devaluing of human life — and of childhood — is continuing in the 21st century. And one sign is a disturbing USA Today report that says the Taliban are increasing using children in many ways to fight Americans:

From 3- and 4-year-olds used as human shields or to gather spent cartridges, to teenagers offered motorcycles for planting roadside bombs, children are being used more and more to fight Americans here, U.S. Marines say.

“We’ve seen children actually dropping mortar rounds in the (firing) tubes against us,” says Lt. Col. Michael Manning, commander of the 1st Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment that is rotating home after seven months in this hilly northern district of Helmand Province.

“I’ve never seen a culture that cares so little for human life. They (the Taliban) truly don’t care unless it impacts their own personal family,” says Manning, who has lost 13 Marines and seen 127 wounded since March.

The use of children on the battlefield has been spreading across Helmand, where Marines began an offensive to drive out the Taliban early this year, says Brig. Gen. Joseph Osterman, commander of all Marine ground combat forces here.

Marines have witnessed youngsters dragging away wounded Taliban, planting roadside bombs and collecting dropped weapons.

At a remote firebase east of here, a squad leader, Sgt. John Ellis, says he found children selling heroin dosages wrapped in torn pages of the Koran it the village streets.

The trending in this century is so far troubling. Political dialog is coarsening, the world economy is ailing and kids are being used to kill adults. You can’t say the bars are being lowered on past assumptions about the way the world operates.

Increasingly it’s: where ARE the bars?


The Moderate Voice

67% of NYC Residents Oppose Ground Zero Mosque According to NYT Poll

September 3, 2010 · Posted in The Capitol · Comment 

A new poll released by the New York Times Friday is sure to rock the liberal media’s world: "Two-thirds of New York City residents want a planned Muslim community center and mosque to be relocated to a less controversial site farther away from ground zero in Lower Manhattan."

Another finding likely to particularly upset the shills at MSNBC: 

One-fifth of New Yorkers acknowledged animosity toward Muslims. Thirty-three percent said that compared with other American citizens, Muslims were more sympathetic to terrorists. And nearly 60 percent said people they know had negative feelings toward Muslims because of 9/11.  

Here are more of the surprising details:

Over all, 50 percent of those surveyed oppose building the project two blocks north of the World Trade Center site, even though a majority believe that the developers have the right to do so. Thirty-five percent favor it. [...]

The poll, however, reveals a more complicated portrait of the opposition in New York: 67 percent said that while Muslims had a right to construct the center near ground zero, they should find a different site.

Most strikingly, 38 percent of those who expressed support for the plan to build it in Lower Manhattan said later in a follow-up question that they would prefer it be moved farther away, suggesting that even those who defend the plan question the wisdom of the location.

And this is the point the mosque’s backers in the media - in particular the shills at MSNBC such as Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Ed Schultz - have missed: this issue isn’t about Constitutionality or rights. 

Most people outside the liberal press are intelligent enough to understand that developers have the right to build this mosque if its zoning is approved. They just question the wisdom of doing so.

If an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers can understand the difference between having the right to do something and whether or not it would be appropriate, why can’t media members? 

NewsBusters.org - Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Next Page »

  • Laptop ac adapters, keyboards, batteries, inverters, LCD screens at LaptopZ.com
  • National Business Furniture, Inc
  • Toshiba - Toshibadirect.com
  • Save 10% for Orders Over $129 at GadgetTown.com