I’m sure this will not please the wingnut right – especially Poole and Blumer, who apparently haven’t met a Muslim unworthy of their disdain – but after more than a decade of investigation the government was unable to secure any convictions against any of the defendants in the case. The results have also called into question the use of secret evidence to freeze a charity’s assets:

The decision today is ?a stunning setback for the government, there?s no other way of looking at it,? said Matthew D. Orwig, a partner at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal here who was, until recently, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas.

?This is a message, a two-by-four in the middle of the forehead,? Mr. Orwig said. ?If this doesn?t get their attention, they are just in complete denial,? he said of Justice Department officials.

The story is strange in that a verdict was reached, but somehow became hung on the day of reading. The forewoman was stunned at this:

“When we voted, there was no issue in the vote. No-one spoke up any different. I really don’t understand where it is coming from.”

Hmmm. I wonder where it could be coming from. A severe embarrassment to the DOJ and yet another blow against Muslim witchhunts. I wonder indeed. President Bush personally announced the asset seizure in 2001, declaring it “another step in the war on terrorism”. The much maligned CAIR – maligned by being an “unindicted co-conspirator”, had this to say:

The government “failed in Chicago, it failed in Florida, it failed in Texas,” said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, one of dozens of Muslim groups named as unindicted co-conspirators. “The reason it failed is the government does not have the facts; it has fear.”

I invite our wingnut brothers to chime in below in the comments area with their enduring faith in the legal system and any apologies due to the Muslim community, CAIR, and those indicted. I might point out that had the 1-3 jurors not caused a [cough] convenient [cough] mistrial, the result would have been an overwhelming majority of acquittals in all cases.

The government should drop all charges and move on. They obviously don’t have the goods and continuing with these trumped up charges based on fear should not continue. It appears the case was (or became) that HLF did not fund terrorists, but funded humanitarian needs so that Hamas could put money from other sources to work in terrorist causes. Not the best legal ground to be standing upon is it? It looks like the jury saw through this charade:

“I thought they were not guilty across the board,” said Neal, a 33-year-old art director from Dallas. The case “was strung together with macaroni noodles. There was so little evidence.”

Expect the right to go into full-on attack mode. Heads a spinnin’ type shit. With pea soup flying!

 
  • Not surprisingly, the wingnuts now want to amend our justice system in order to steal away convictions in cases like these (regardless of the evidence):

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015962.php#c375195

    When we reach the point where convictions of Muslim terrorists becomes increasingly difficult regardless of the evidence, that’s when it will be open-season on America.

    THE ANSWER?

    We need to either create special tribunals to hear terrorism cases….or failing that, dispense with the unanimous-jury system. We need a ‘super-majority’ system where only 8 or 9 votes out of 12 are needed for a conviction or acquittal.

  • Well I don’t know about you- but I just can’t trust the opinion of a guy who has a bunch of flags in his living room…

    poole.JPG

  • #2: You America hater!

    PS – If you’re going to be a wingnut jingoist you probably ought to know flag rules and regulations. The U.S. flag should never be to it’s left of another flag behind a speaker – always to it’s right in the most prominent position.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!