Evidence against Muslim charity
appears fabricated
An official summary of an FBI-wiretapped
conversation contains anti-Semitic slurs that do not appear in the
actual transcript.
By Greg Krikorian
Times Staff Writer
February 25, 2007
When the Bush administration shut down the nation's largest Muslim
charity five years ago, officials of the Dallas-based foundation denied
allegations it was linked to terrorists and insisted that a number of
accusations were fabricated by the government.
Now,
attorneys for the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development say
the government's own documents provide evidence of that claim.
In
recent court filings, defense lawyers disclosed striking discrepancies
between an official summary and the verbatim transcripts of an
FBI-wiretapped conversation in 1996 involving Holy Land officials.
The
summary attributes inflammatory, anti-Semitic comments to Holy Land
officials that are not found in a 13-page transcript of the recorded
conversation. It recently was turned over to the defense by the
government in an exchange of evidence.
Citing the unexplained
discrepancies, defense lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge A. Joe
Fish in Dallas to declassify thousands of hours of FBI surveillance
recordings, so that full transcripts would replace government summaries
as evidence.
The demand could force government prosecutors to
either declassify evidence it has fought to keep secret or risk losing
a critical portion of evidence in its case.
In December, the
judge denied a defense request to declassify the documents so they
could be examined by defendants in the case. Seven former foundation
officials, six of them U.S. citizens, have been charged with funneling
money to overseas charities controlled by Hamas, which the U.S. has
designated as a foreign terrorist organization. The defendants have
denied the charges.
Though defense attorneys already have
government clearances that allow them to review the material, under the
federal Classified Information Procedures Act they have been prohibited
from sharing it with their clients. And unless the act's rules are
declared unconstitutional in the case, defense attorneys argue, the
defendants will have no way of proving that the statements attributed
to them were misconstrued or never made.
The recently
declassified summary of surveillance on April 15, 1996, asserts that
during a conversation wiretapped by the FBI, Holy Land's former
executive director Shukri Abu Baker told two associates there was no
need to worry about the foundation being unfairly targeted because U.S.
courts were not under the control of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee or its sponsor, "the government of the demons of Israel."
The
summary portrays Baker as raging against "the Jews of the world" and as
claiming that Jews have no allegiance to anything but "their pockets
and to preserving the illegal Zionist state of Israel."
Additional
anti-Semitic comments the FBI summary attributed to Baker or Ghassan
Elashi, Holy Land's former board chairman, included:
• "Their
[Jews'] only purpose here in the U.S. is to purchase as many
politicians as possible and to warp the way the American Christians
feel and think not just about the Christian religion but mainly about
the Palestinian people … and to rob as much money as possible from
American taxpayers for the illegitimate excuse of protecting and
preserving the chosen people of God."
• "Even Jesus Christ had called the Jews and their high priests …
the sons of snakes and scorpions."
• "I am confident that in the end justice, and not the Jews, will
prevail. I believe that there is still justice in America."
None
of those quotes was contained in a 13-page transcript of the
conversation, defense lawyers said in their motion to expand access to
classified evidence.
"Throughout the run-up to trial, the
government has insisted that the defendants can learn what is contained
in the [surveillance] intercepts by reading the so-called 'summaries'
of those intercepts," defense attorneys said in their papers.
But
the recently disclosed transcript, attorneys said, shows that "not only
are the summaries so inaccurate and misleading as to be useless," but
that the "author of the attached summary has cynically and maliciously
attributed to the defendants racist invective and inculpatory remarks
the defendants never uttered."
"It is appalling that such
summaries even exist, much less that the government represented that
this is all our clients need to know in order to defend themselves."
Defense
lawyers declined to comment about their motion. A federal prosecutor
said the government would respond with its own filings to the court.
How
the summary and transcript could be so different was unclear, though
experts in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act arena theorized
that its top-secret nature may have led some analysts to believe that
the work product would never be publicly disclosed, much less entered
into evidence in a trial.
Because the court records are heavily redacted, it could not be
determined who provided the summaries of the FBI wiretaps.
Other
alleged discrepancies also have dogged the case. Holy Land lawyers
challenged the accuracy of an FBI memo, for example, that quoted a
foundation office manager as telling Israeli authorities that
charitable funds were "channeled to Hamas."
But defense lawyers
told the court the translation from Arabic to Hebrew to English
distorted the official's original statement, and that he should have
been quoted as saying, "We have no connection to Hamas."
The
Holy Land Foundation was closed weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist
attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The action followed years of
efforts by Israel and many pro-Israeli groups in the U.S. to close the
foundation on the grounds that it was a fundraising front for Hamas.
The
former Holy Land officials facing trial are charged with conspiracy to
provide material support to terrorists by sending money, goods and
services to Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas, a
U.S.-designated terrorist group since 1995.
Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times