Thursday, July 26, 2007
The Texas trial for the HLF is underway and Counterterrorism expert Matthew Levitt testified yesterday: Counterterrorism Blog Expert, Matthew Levitt, Takes the Stand in Dallas HAMAS Trial. Thought this bit about the MAS was very interesting and worth a highlight:
In an extensive Chicago Tribune story on the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S [free registration required], "the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members. Some wanted the Brotherhood to remain underground, while others thought a more public face would make the group more influential… When the leaders voted, it was decided that Brotherhood members would call themselves the Muslim American Society, or MAS, according to documents and interviews. An undated internal memo instructed MAS leaders on how to deal with inquiries about the new organization. If asked, "Are you the Muslim Brothers?" leaders should respond that they are an independent group called the Muslim American Society. "It is a self-explanatory name that does not need further explanation. And if the topic of terrorism were raised, leaders were told to say that they were against terrorism but that jihad was among a Muslim's ‘divine legal rights’ to be used to defend himself and his people and to spread Islam.â€
It should also be noted that the 1993 Articles of Incorporation for MAS, states that "Upon dissolution of the Society, and after paying or making provisions for payment of all liabilities of the Society, and in furtherance of the purposes of the Society, all assets should be distributed to the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), a non-for-profit, charitable, and religious federally tax exempt organization under section 503 (c) (3)..."
NAIT was named by the HLF prosecutors as a Muslim Brotherhood group and as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the case...
You did an lengthy excellent summation of the Islamic Society of Boston mosque saga. Somewhere I believe I read that the land under the mosque in Roxbury was in fact transferred to the North American Islamic Trust, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation prosecution. Perhaps you can confirm is this is so. If indeed the land is owned by the NAIT, shouldn't the Boston Redevelopment
Authority demand that the ownership be transferred back to the ISB? I'm sure the BRA didn't want to be selling land to an entity linked to an organization charged with funding HAMAS, which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Indeed it's shocking that this transfer,if it did in fact take place, was allowed in the first place.
Should the ISB default in its obligations to the BRA or the Roxbury College or violate its obligations as a good citizen, how does the BRA enforce its rights since it can't get its land back or place a levy on it?