Don’t Forget to join the Verdict Rapid Response Team!

See below for details.

PROSECUTION (GOVERNMENT) CLOSING SUMMARY:

See below for the defense ( Holy Land Foundation) Closing Summary.

.

• HAMAS (aka the Islamic Resistance Movement) was founded in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Palestine .
• HAMAS' charter states that the purpose of HAMAS is to create an Islamic Palestinian state throughout Israel by eliminating the State of Israel through violent jihad (via Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades).
• Article 21 of the HAMAS charter calls for social welfare in order to provide aid to everyone who is in need of it, be it material or spiritual or collective cooperation to complete some works. HAMAS is to take part in people’s happiness and grief and work to strengthen their cooperation, deepen their love, and sustain their resistance to the enemy ( Israel ).
• The government argued that their expert witness, Mathew Levitt, described the organizational structure of HAMAS as three units. He said HAMAS has a political bureau wing, a military wing, and a social wing. He argued the three wings of HAMAS as a pyramid divided into three sections. The top section of the pyramid he called the political wing, the middle section he called the military wing, and the base (and largest) wing of HAMAS was the social wing.
• Mr. Levitt testified that although these three components have separate responsibilities, the organization operates seamlessly, with each component working to achieve the overall objectives of HAMAS.
• HAMAS, said Levitt, supports religious and academic institutions that facilitate the teachings of HAMAS and introduce its fundamentalist ideology at the earliest stages of spiritual and educational development. This social engineering is critical to winning the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people and to creating a military and operational recruitment pool for HAMAS. Additionally, HAMAS rewards past terrorist acts, and provides incentive for future acts. They financially subsidize family members of HAMAS operatives who are killed, injured or imprisoned, and ensure that the families are revered in the community.
• On January 25, 1995, HAMAS was designated as a Specially Designated Terrorist by the President in the Annex to Executive Order 12947.
• On August 29, 1995, former HAMAS Political Bureau Chief and current Deputy Chief Mousa Abu Marzook was designated as a Specially Designated Terrorist.
• On August 22, 2003, current HAMAS Political Bureau Chief Khalid Mishal was designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.
• The defendant Mohammad El-Mezain was the original Chairman of the Board of HLF until in or about 1999, when he became Director of Endowments for the HLF. The defendant Mohammad El-Mezain is a cousin of HAMAS Deputy Political Chief and Specially Designated Terrorist Mousa Abu Marzook.
• The defendant Ghassan Elashi was the original Treasurer and became the Chairman of the Board of the HLF in 1999. The defendant Ghassan Elashi is related by marriage to HAMAS Deputy Political Bureau Chief and Specially Designated Terrorist Mousa Abu Marzook.
• The defendant Mufid Abdulqader was a top fundraiser for the HLF. The defendant Mufid Abdulqader is the half-brother of HAMAS Political Bureau Chief and Specially Designated Global Terrorist Khalid Mishal.
• Shortly after the beginning of the Intifada, in 1988-89, the MB begins to open Palestinian Committees (PC) all over the world, including the USA , to serve the Palestinian cause and the Movement. The Palestinian Movement is assumed to be HAMAS.
• Through a search warrant, the U.S. government finds several documents at the home of Ismail Elbarrasse (member of the PC in the USA ) that describes the PC as the oversight committee for three other organizations. The Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), the Occupied Land Fund (OLF) later to be known as the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), and the United Association for Studies & Research (UASR).
• These documents suggest that the IAP handles the education, publications and media front. HLF handles the fundraising department. UASR is a think tank for the strategic planning department. All three organizations report to the PC, which is the oversight committee.
• Therefore, the government argued, the PC was a HAMAS committee from its inception. And that the IAP, OLF, HLF, & UASR were specialized organizations formed from their inception as HAMAS committees. And that the entire apparatus is a HAMAS organization operating in the USA .
• The chairman or president of the PC in the USA was Mousa Abu Marzook in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.
• Other documents found at Ismail Elbarrasse’s home: A copy of the HAMAS charter that was reprinted and distributed by the IAP. A history of the MB complete with the MB charter. PC charter and by-laws. One hand-written, undated, unsigned document titled “The Occupied Land Fund Report”.
• Another document found at Mr. Elbarrasse’s home became a center piece to the government’s case. This document was a letter dated July 14, 1991 addressed to one of the defendants discussing Zakat committees and the endorsed charitable organizations whose services reach a large segment of the children of Palestine .
• This document discusses about 20 charities in Palestine , including the ones listed in the HLF indictment, with comments about what percentage of the charity is “ours”. Some are listed as “all of it is ours”. Some are listed as “guaranteed ours”. Some are listed as “we have nobody in it”. Some are listed as “we have one or two in it” etc….
• The government demonstrates several financial transactions between, the PC and HLF, and the IAP and HLF, in the late 80’s and early 90’s. They show $210,000 being donated by Mr. Marzook to the HLF.
• The government shows HLF providing assistance to the Islamic Center of Gaza which was established by HAMAS spiritual leader and founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin.
• The government demonstrates that members of the PC, IAP, HLF and UASR attended Palestinian conventions, seminars and rallies together in the late 80’s and early 90’s.
• At these festivals many songs, plays, and skits praised HAMAS and vilified Israeli Zionists. Mousa Abu Marzook, Jamil Hammami (later to become a HAMAS spokesperson), and Mahmoud Zahar (current HAMAS leader as of 2006) all attended at least one of these festivals as shown on a video tape in the late 1980’s.
• The government demonstrated that officers of the PC, IAP, HLF, and UASR had each others phone numbers. And that they sent faxes, letters, news articles and reports to each other. They shared phone calls, sought each others advice and shared information together. The government summarized this as an incestual relationship.
• In 1992, when Israel deported over 400 Palestinian activists and leaders to Lebanon , HLF offered their support. HLF sent blankets and other necessities to them.
• HLF possessed a video of the detainees living conditions while in Lebanon . On the video, some of these activists and leaders identified themselves as members of HAMAS.
• The government argued that some of the identified HAMAS members in the 1992 deportation video were later identified to be board members on some of zakat committees that HLF sent money to. Additionally, deceased HAMAS leader Sheik Abdel Rantisi was one of the deportees whose family received financial assistance from the HLF.
• In October 1993, in response to a United States-sponsored Middle East peace initiative between the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, known as the Oslo Accords, and other significant events, the principals of the PC, IAP and HLF called for a meeting in Philadelphia , PA (in which HLF paid for most of the travel expenses).
• The purpose of the meeting was to determine their course of action in opposition to the Oslo Accords or the so-called peace plan and how to derail the process. They also discussed how to conceal their activities from the scrutiny of the United States government. They discussed helping the Islamists and our Brothers in Palestine . They used a code word “SAMAH” instead of HAMAS in many conversations. They discussed the zakat committees that HLF was sending money to in terms of being “ours” or “guaranteed ours.”
• An unidentified Israeli security officer, who testified under the alias name of Mr. Avi as an expert witness for the government, identified all of the zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment as HAMAS-controlled committees.
• Mr. Avi testified that he was an expert on HAMAS and that he was certain that each and every one of the Zakat committees in the HLF trial were influenced and under the control of HAMAS. He said it was a fact and was well-known public knowledge.
• During his testimony, Mr. Avi identified several individuals at each zakat committee as being members, leaders, or activists of HAMAS. And that the individuals he identified as HAMAS at each zakat committee were the dominant figures, or controlling figures, for that committee.
• Mr. Avi testified that Khalid Mishal gave an interview to the media in 2003 naming many of the same individuals as HAMAS members. Mr. Mishal said in the interview that HAMAS asked supporters to do jihad with their sons and their money. He said to give your money to someone you trust and HAMAS will get the money. He asked supporters to focus on martyrs, prisoners, and orphans.
• The government argued that when HLF arranged conventions, seminars and rallies, radical Islamic sheiks and HAMAS officials, members and/or activists were flown to the United States from overseas to energize the audience and enhance fundraising. HLF paid for the travel of several of the sheiks and HAMAS members, including current HAMAS leader Mahmoud Zahar and former HAMAS spokesperson Jamil Hammami.
• The government highlighted the fact that HLF gave over 1.5 million dollars to the Islamic Relief Committee in Palestine from 1988 till 1996. Then they demonstrated that this relief committee is now considered by most to be a HAMAS controlled committee. Even Mr. Abington (the defenses witness) agreed that this committee is thought to be controlled by HAMAS. (Note: This committee is NOT listed in the HLF indictment, and the donations are not part of the indictment-listed dates of 1997 until 2001. In fact, NONE of the details mentioned in the government’s closing arguments occurred during the required dates.).
• Starting in 2002 and continuing until 2006, Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) periodically raided the Zakat committees listed in the HLF case. During these raids, the IDF secured many posters and calendars of HAMAS leaders and suicide bombers. They secured key chains with pictures of HAMAS leaders and suicide bombers. They secured video tapes of children performing plays celebrating HAMAS and HAMAS leaders.
• The government claimed inaccurate or misleading statements were made by the defendants in depositions, media interviews, and phone conversations, and that these statements were an attempt to hide their true intentions to support HAMAS.
• The government argued that HLF possessed a security document instructing them on how to run a covert organization in hostile environments. And that HLF hired a security company to check for ‘bugs’ in the HLF office. The government asked the jurors “is this what you would expect to find at a charity?”
• The government argued that HLF sponsored orphans and needy families in the West Bank and Gaza . According to the prosecution, while the program was mantled with a benevolent appearance, HLF specifically sought orphans and families whose relatives had died or were jailed as a result of their involvement with HAMAS, including suicide bombers (seventeen orphans allegedly fitting this description were listed in the HLF indictment). This support was critical to HAMAS' efforts to win the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people, they said, and to create an infrastructure solidifying HAMAS' presence.
• Two of the orphans sponsored by HLF were the sons of Yahia Ayyash (aka the Engineer of the suicide belt used in suicide bombings) after his assassination by Israeli Security Forces in 1996.
• In closing, they summarized the process of HAMAS’ social wing as having effective influence from the cradle to the grave. Do not let the defendants deceive you, they said. You must consider only the evidence we have provided and use your common sense, said the prosecution.

To sign up for the Verdict Rapid Response team, please email h4jusa@gmail.com with your name and the most reliable number to reach you at. This list WILL NOT be shared with any third party AT ALL.

DEFENSE (HOLY LAND FOUNDATION) CLOSING SUMMARY:

See below for details on how to join the Verdict Rapid Response Team.

• The HLF case is about a real charity providing real aid to needy families. And the defendants are proud of their work and the relief they provided.
• HLF provided relief based on “need” not “creed” and they never looked at political affiliations when deciding whom to help. They certified the need and provided the aid.
• The defense showed that over 145,000 Palestinians are in need of humanitarian aid. HLF was one of only four other organizations who were providing this absolutely critical aid to roughly 25% of the Palestinian population. And, that after HLF was shut down in 2001, a large void was created and many Palestinians have suffered.
• The defense argued that the Israeli Occupation of Palestine is a brutal one and that Israel is not living up to the 4^th Geneva Convention in providing the necessary aid to lands that it occupies in Palestine .
• They demonstrated that Israel does not provide even the least minimum of services and many of the families live in abject poverty due to the absence of a dependable provider.
• They demonstrated collective punishment policies, which are practiced in a barbaric and savage manner through home demolitions, home bombing or closure of parts of them, dismissal from work or prevention from leaving a village or a camp, then the cases of tree-cutting, forfeiture of land or prevention from travel, all of which represents a heavy burden, not to mention the detention of thousands of men and youths, along with thousands of victims and wounded who are in need of food, medicine or health and social care.
• The defense showed the number of illegal Israeli settlements currently in the West Bank . They argued that Israel builds illegal settlements on the best water reserves.
• The illegal settlements in the West Bank caused many roads and highways to be built north, south, east and west which severely restrict Palestinian movement and daily life. This affects all Palestinians and their economy, as they are banned from using the Israeli-built roads.
• The West Bank and Gaza had over 475 Israeli military check points it uses to control the Palestinians.
• The defense argued that Israel demolished Palestinian homes without warning or compensation to the Palestinian families living in them, leaving Palestinians homeless refugees in their own land.
• The defense argued that HLF had nothing to hide. HLF was a transparent open book charity for all to see. HLF kept detailed records of every transaction on every project they funded. All financial transactions were recorded and detailed reports kept for every penny. Receipts, documents, pictures, and videos were kept on each project. HLF kept all employees’ weekly reports and documented all employee quarterly meetings. From receiving donations to delivering the humanitarian aid, HLF recorded, reported, and documented everything. HLF followed the law at all times.
• HLF did not try to hide Mousa Abu Marzook’s donations to them in the late 80’s and early 90’s. They reported the donation to the IRS and kept all receipts and records. Mr. Marzook was a US Citizen. Mr. Marzook was not designated as a terrorist at that time. There was absolutely nothing illegal about the transaction.
• In 1997-98, HLF even hired a prominent lawyer and 14-year elected official of the U.S. House of Representatives, John Bryant, to seek advice from the US-based Israeli Consulate, the US State Department, and the FBI on matters that were confusing to them. They wanted any advice or guidance on how they were operating, and to whom they could give money and to whom they could not. They always have and always intended to follow the law. They wanted to know if the government had any concerns regarding their organization.
• However, none of these government agencies gave HLF and/or their attorney any advice regarding any of their questions. Mr. Bryant also attempted to schedule a meeting with the then-U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno and then-U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright, but was unsuccessful, as they never responded to his request for a meeting.
• The defense argued that HLF was a stand alone organization that did not report to the PC or for that matter to any other organization. HLF made all of its decisions independently and without oversight.
• The defense argued that the evidence that the government is relying on (from Ismail Elbarrasse’s home) are documents seized from outside of HLF and its employees and that these documents were unsigned (some hand-written), undated, without providence and completely unreliable. There was no evidence that anyone at HLF every saw these documents. There was no evidence that anyone at HLF ever used these documents, followed their contents, or acted upon them in any manner.
• The defense argued that the defendants supported Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) but not HAMAS. They demonstrated that not all Islamist are HAMAS. The word Islamist is a very broad term. Islamists are devout, pious Muslims, according to defense witness Mr. Edward Abington.
• They demonstrated that not all members of the MB are HAMAS. The government’s attempt to say otherwise is a selective interpretation, ignoring the greater context and meanings of these words.
• The defense highlighted the fact that the letter addressed to the defendants discussing each Zakat committee and what percentage is “ours” was hand-written, unsigned, and could not be shown to have ever been seen or read by the defendants. And, that this document does not refer to HAMAS anywhere in it. “Ours” could mean Islamists or MB or many other things.
• The defense argued that the defendants wanted to help the Palestinian people, to alleviate their suffering and to make a difference in their lives. Never did HLF give credit to HAMAS, work with HAMAS, or try to benefit HAMAS.
• All the conversations, meetings, transactions, phone calls, phone numbers, conventions, seminars, plays, skits and rallies were all 100% legal protected 1^st Amendment Rights. Freedom of speech. Freedom of religion. Freedom of assembly. And absolutely nothing was illegal about any of them. All events were held in an open public forum.
• HLF sponsored thousands of orphans. All of them received approximately $25 to $75 per month. Every orphan of martyrs and prisoners received the exact same monthly sponsorship as all of the others. HLF showed neither preference to which orphans they sponsored nor any bias. HLF provided aid to needy orphans regardless of who the parents were or what they did or did not do. They established the need. They provided the aid. Equally.
• HLF provided humanitarian aid all over the world. They gave to the needy in Kosovo , Egypt , Turkey , Pakistan , India , Jordan , Lebanon , and the USA . They delivered tons of flour, bread, rice, oil and salt. They delivered medical and educational supplies.
• The defense established that the United States of America provided aid through USAID to the same Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment during the same time period of the indictment 1997 thru 2001.
• The defense demonstrated that, according to congressional record, several of the Zakat committees have been suspected of being HAMAS committees over the years but have been vetted (exonerated) by U.S. investigations in the past.
• According to congressional record, USAID said that it uses the Department of Treasury’s list of designated organizations when determining whether or not to provide aid to them.
• The defense established that the United Nations, CARE, and many other international organizations provided humanitarian aid to the same Zakat committees during the same time period.
• From 1995, when the U.S. Treasury Department 1^st issued a list of Specially Designated Terrorists, until 2007, not one of the Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment has ever been designated.
• The defense established the fact that the Palestinian National Authorities (PA) are controlled politically by the FATAH party. And that the FATAH party is at war with HAMAS party in Palestine . The two parties are bitter enemies who hate each other.
• All Zakat committees operating on the West Bank and Gaza must be licensed by the PA every two years. All Zakat committees are quasi-government entities. The PA appoints BoD members to the Zakat committees. The PA can open, close, inspect, and control the Zakat committees whenever they wish.
• All Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment have current licenses from the Palestinian National Authorities (PA). All Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment are still open and operating business as usual until today.
• According to the defenses expert witness on Palestinian civil societies, Dr. Brown, all Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment are known by Palestinians as neutral regarding politics and agendas. They are non-partisan. They are efficient. They are trusted. They only help facilitate getting Muslims Zakat to the needy families.
• Dr. Brown testified that HAMAS never received any credit from anyone or any media or any organization for any of the work performed by the Zakat committees. The defense argued that it would be impossible to “win the hearts and minds” of the Palestinians without ever getting credit for the work.
• The defense argued that the government did not bring ONE witness to testify that HAMAS received credit for any Zakat committees work.
• Dr. Brown testified that in a deeply divided society, the Zakat committees must give aid blindly, regardless of politics to all needy Palestinians. Being associated or controlled by any political party would damage their effectiveness and ability to serve the entire community.
• The defense also demonstrated that Israel, Jordan and Egypt have been the controlling authorities over these same Zakat committees at different times, from the 1970’s until today, and that they always issued and renewed these Zakat committees licenses to operate in Palestine. They were never closed or accused of being HAMAS-controlled organizations.
• Israeli official documents even contradicted the government’s expert witness, Mr. Avi, when he testified that one of the Zakat committees was determined by Israel to be a HAMAS controlled organization in 1991. Without a doubt, he said. However, in 1993, when Israel was the controlling authority over this Zakat committee, it actually approved the expansion of the hospital which at that time was their largest and most aggressive project to date.
• According to the defenses expert witness, Mr. Edward Abington, a former U.S. Consul General in Jerusalem from 1993 till 1997 and then the 2^nd highest ranking intelligence official in the U.S. State Department from 1997 till 1999, NONE of the Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment were ever considered under the control of HAMAS or operating on behalf of HAMAS.
• Mr. Abington testified that he was under direct orders from the US State Department and the President of the United States NOT to meet with or establish any relationship or dialogue with HAMAS or HAMAS representatives during his tenure as Consul General in Jerusalem .
• Mr. Abington testified that he met DAILY with the CIA and US State Department intelligence agencies (who had daily access to Israeli intelligence) and that they never mentioned any of the Zakat committees as being part of or controlled by HAMAS.
• Mr. Abington testified that he personally visited each and every one of the Zakat committees listed in the HLF indictment, and that he had no reason to suspect that they were operating on behalf of HAMAS.
• Mr. Abington testified that the United States does not always rely on Israeli intelligence, because they have found Israeli intelligence to be misleading, political and sometimes agenda-driven.
• The defense argued that out of the 20 or 30 speakers alleged by the government to have HAMAS ties, only three of them have ever been identified as Specially Designated Terrorists by the United States Treasury Department, and that was after the fact. Also, Mr. Jamil Hammami, a former HAMAS activist, was also sponsored by the U.S. government for a U.S. speaking tour.
• The three that are identified, Mr. Marzook, Mr. Zahar, and Mr. Hammami, were never used, contacted or relied upon after the designation.
• The defense also discussed that the level of proof necessary to get any individual or any organization listed on the Dept of Treasury’s Specially Designated Terrorist List is extremely low.
• All that is required is to show “just cause” which is the lowest bar or burden of proof required in our judicial system.
• However, what the jury is being asked to do in this trial is to find all of the Zakat committees to be controlled by HAMAS “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is the highest bar or burden of proof required in our judicial system.
• The defense asks the jury to find the defendants NOT guilty on each and every count in the HLF indictment.

What will happen – Verdict Rapid Response Team: