Holy Land Foundation snafu

Mistrials are always bad news for prosecutors, tantamount to acquittals. Most experienced federal litigators will tell you that realistically the case is dead, even if the US Attorney's press releases solemnly promise to re-try the case.

You must be so disappointed, Rod. All your righteous scorn and condescension couldn't get the HLF convicted. Maybe this mistrial will get the illegal occuption of Palestine back in the headlines where it belongs.

"You must be so disappointed, Rod. All your righteous scorn and condescension couldn't get the HLF convicted. Maybe this mistrial will get the illegal occuption of Palestine back in the headlines where it belongs."

Tell me, Will (you're not that odious Star Trek spinoff actor, are you?)

How exactly is the prosecution of people who gave money to Hamas a scheme to keep the the Palestinian cause off the front pages, when the Holy Land Foundation trial was barely in the headlines at all?

Is there anything done by or for terrorist organizations that does not, in your informed opinion, relate to Jews living in Judea and Samaria?

Is it your opinion that the Holy Land Foundation trial was some sort of Zionist attempt to obscure the plight of the Palestinians? Is Rod (an Orthodox) part of this conspiracy?

Couldn't the Holy Land Foundation be guilty independent of what happens to the disputed territory that once belonged to JORDON and WAS LOST WHEN JORDON ATTEMPTED TO WIPE OUT ISRAEL?

Talk about scorn and condescension.

Is Rod the only one disturbed by the "Shoot the Jew" skit?

I wonder - was this done before or after the JCC in Seattle was shot up by that animal and an innocent mother was killed?

Or are the deaths of American Jews - citizens - less important than the deaths of Arab terrorists?

Was there some reason why the gov't. couldn't try each defendant separately?

A shame because, for the moment, this will allow the defendants to protest that they are victims of Islamophobia instead of direct supporters of terrorism.

The greater shame is that you will continue to ignore the illegal occupation of Palestine and the role it plays in this sordid mess.

"Admittedly, they probably weren't people who sit around bloviating about Wendell Berry's musings, but this is how our system works."

I thought you hate our system as it is and would not mind to replace it with much more enlightned system of Sharia.

Please advise what is your actual view.

It is a good thing this trial ended as it did. The silver lining in this black cloud is that there is still an opening to re-try these guys. It will help if the media starts educating the public--just like I'm seeing that Rod Dreher is doing in many places. The jury pool has to be brought up to speed--which has not been happening. Maybe this trial was a wake up call and a turning point. If we make it so, it can be.

Oh, and "Palestine" was conquered in a legitimate war of defense. Nothing illegal about it. Happens all the time.

Who should we give Puerto Rico to?

Guam?

Texas?

California?

But wait - those were actually from wars of aggression. Seems to me you should be concentrating on those before you start meddling in the affairs of a foreign country.

"With no evidence for this at all, I wonder if the defendants had someone visit the jurors."

Actually, the changes jurors appeared to have changed their mind on acquital which would support a theory--following your train of thought-- that over the weekend they were visited by the Feds.

I don't know the HLF from Adam, but I do know that Rod and most the U.S. media is biased to the core for Israel and against the Palestinian people (which includes fellow Christians.)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Those palestinian christians (along with every other non-muslim demographic) appear to be a vanishing breed throughout much of palestine and the middle east . . . (vanishing also, not so coincidentally, in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sudan, etc., etc. . . . )

Maybe events like this have a little something to do with it:

'New Hamas rule means real changes,' missionaries to be 'dealt with harshly'

"I expect our Christian neighbors to understand the new Hamas rule means real changes. They must be ready for Islamic rule if they want to live in peace in Gaza," said Sheik Abu Saqer, leader of Jihadia Salafiya, an Islamic outreach movement that recently announced the opening of a "military wing" to enforce Muslim law in Gaza. . . .
"Jihadia Salafiya and other Islamic movements will ensure Christian schools and institutions show publicly what they are teaching to be sure they are not carrying out missionary activity. No more alcohol on the streets. All women, including non-Muslims, need to understand they must be covered at all times while in public," Abu Asqer told WND.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56241

(Other documented attacks on christian book stores, monasteries, churches, schools, a YMCA, etc. etc.):

http://arabracismislamofascism.wordpress.com/2007/08/16/palestinians-islamic-hamas-war-on-christians/

In accordance with Islamic Shariah, those non-muslims who openly proselityze are executed:

http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&length=long&lang=en&idelement=5066

Although more subtle in nature, similar tactics are routinely directed at christians in Bethlehem and in many other cities and countries across the middle east. The problem isn't the Palestinians. The problem is ISLAM, and it's religiously sanctioned, habitual mistreatment of non-muslims as perpetual second-class citizens:

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Mansur_Salim/2007/10/20/4590878.php

"Good thinking , lets educate the jury before the trial via the mass media. Actually why even bother with a trial , they must be guilty.

Posted by: Peter | October 23, 2007 4:32 AM"

Hahaha! Exactly!

"Rod, why in tarnation d'we need all these darn jurors if'n they's not gonna vote the way they's a-sposed to?!"

Fear Muslims?

Fear your good Christian blog-juror neighbors more. That live-in kiddy-porn-owning boyfriend HAD to have been the one who raped and hung poor little Hanna Mack (read the archives here), right?

Good thing he had some good solid DNA evidence on his side and never had to face the denizens of this blog, hahaha!

Will and fbc, the quote below is from the article posted on yesterday's Beliefnet website:

"Holy Land was founded in California in the late 1980s and moved to the Dallas area in 1992. FBI surveillance of the group's leaders dates to at least 1993, when agents eavesdropped on a Philadelphia meeting in which participants talked of supporting Hamas' goal of derailing a peace agreement between Israel and Palestinians."

I'm sure the FBI were lying and the Holy Land Foundation wasn't really interested in derailing a peace process that could lead to an ending to the "occupation."

We all know that Islamic extremism only exists because of U.S. Policy and Israel (sarcasm definitely intended).

No, I don't. I think the agreement that Arafat rejected before launching the Second Intifada, which shot the peace process to Hell, had serious flaws. The right thing to do would have been to stay engaged in the process, not hope that by launching a new campaign of suicide terror that the Palestinians would make further negotiations unnecessary because they would "get the whole store".

I'm for a two state solution, Will. But if you follow the logic of the Holy Land Foundation and Hamas, the only acceptable peace is the peace of the grave, for everyone. Hamas is made up of some practical people, but it's ideology is pure religious extremisism - rejecting compromise and rejecting the real world because of some imagined utopia where there are no "Infidels" and all is cleansed (ethnically or otherwise) for their "pure" version of Islam.

My earlier comment has gone AWOL, but this guy makes some good points:

Salim Mansur of the Toronto Sun:

"But the truth of the matter is that there is nothing to broker when one party, the Palestinians and their Arab-Muslim financiers and supporters, remains committed to the destruction of the other party, the Israelis. . .

Another Arab state squeezed on American insistence between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean -- its population hostile to the West and readily embracing every passing totalitarian ideology in its declared aim of harming Jews and destroying Israel -- instead of being a recipe for any final settlement, will be the source of unremitting conflict in the region and terrorism beyond.

Moreover, Palestinians killing each other while continuing to be supportive of terrorism -- in addition to the appalling record of Arab-Muslim regimes disregarding human rights and respect for minorities -- make them undeserving of the amount of attention provided by American administrations in contrast to the level of American support extended to the equal, if not more deserving, claims of the people suffering in Darfur, Burma, Tibet and Zimbabwe.

Diplomacy not infrequently is trading politely in falsehood.
It is time for Americans to politely tell the truth and end the charade of demanding Israeli concessions for Arab-Muslim doublespeak where "peace" means, as Arafat explained to his people, temporary truce in the war for "liberating" all of Palestine which includes Israel."

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Mansur_Salim/2007/10/20/4590878.php

I'm sure the FBI were lying and the Holy Land Foundation wasn't really interested in derailing a peace process that could lead to an ending to the "occupation."

Good grief. I'd trust the Holy Land Foundation (whoever the hell they are) before I'd trust the lying U.S. Government, or the FBI any day.

I have very little idea who the HLF are -- I know exactly who the FBI is, and what they do.

Christopher Hitchens also had the bad taste to attack Princess Diana's taste of companions shortly after her tragic death. He is certainly an arrogant man. Just because he's controversial (as I said) doesn't mean he's never right.

I think it is dangerous, fbc, to automatically trust or distrust any group, whether it is the U.S. government or the Holy Land Foundation. Everyone, but everyone, has an agenda. You may choose to dismiss whatever Hitchens says if you like, I choose to read him and decide by thinking about it whether I agree or disagree.

Actually, I disagree with his use of the term "Islamofacism" but not with the existence of the thing to which it refers. I prefer the term "clerical facism." Since Islam doesn't have a pope, I think calling clerical facism by Muslim clerics wherever it occurs "Islamofacist" tars the Muslims who aren't facists with the same brush.

9/11? Jews.

Global warming? Jews.

Britney is a bad driver, mom, cat owner? Jews.

Only nuclear power in the Middle East?
Star witnesses at the HLF trial?
Illegally occupying Palestine? You get the picture.

Why are your sources anonymous?

Thanks, Will. I don't want to revisit the entire history of the occupation or of the Arab-Israeli crisis, but there is plenty of blame to go around on all sides, including blaming the Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia, that used the Palestinian cause for their own political benefit and that funded and glorified suicide bombing.

For the record, I think Jonathan Pollard should never be released. He betrayed America, and I don't give a fig if it was in Israel's interest.

I think it might be advisable, though I recognize it would be very costly in political and human terms, for Israel to dismantle all it's settlements in the occupied territory.

I think Israel should come down hard on its own Zionist extremists if they are caught breaking the law. I'm against the bulldozing of the homes of suicide bombers, much as I understand the temptation to resort to vengeance in response to the despicable act of deliberately murdering civilians.I'm for a two state solution.

I'm also sick to death of what I view, from my limited perspective, of people (usually good liberals like fellow parishioners at my church) jumping on the anti-Israel bandwagon, comparing the Israelis to Nazis, etc. Muslims in the U.S. have every right to object to Israeli policies. It's when they give money to terrorist groups that they cross the line. We should be unequivocal in our condemnation of terrorism.