Sherman’s interpretation of 1996 Anti-Terrorism Act seems to defy true intent of the law, while attacking US Constitutional Rights to appease a foreig

Anisa Abd el Fattah


When the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 was passed following the Oklahoma City bombing, many Muslim and Arab Americans charged that the Act is unconstitutional, and that it was unfairly aimed at Muslims and Arabs, even though it was proven that Muslims and Arabs had nothing to do with the Oklahoma City Bombing. Of course the Department of Justice and other US law enforcement officials countered such charges, saying that the Act was not intended for anything except to effectively fight terrorism, no matter the race, religion, ethnicity or nationality of an individual perpetrator, group or foreign country.

Listening to California Congressman Brad Sherman, who is one of the many Zionist and Jewish politicians who found it politically expedient to congratulate Israel for its May 2010 massacre of 9 unarmed humanitarian aide activists on a Turkish ship bound for Gaza, one would think that Muslim and Arab suspicions were true. According to Sherman, the Act says it is “illegal for US citizens to give food, money, school supplies, paper clips, concrete or weapons to Hamas and Gaza’s civilian population.” As it turns out, this is merely Sherman’s interpretation of the Act. The Act never mentions, Gaza, or Hamas and is aimed exclusively at foreign terrorists and foreign governments that support or commit acts of terrorism. The aim of the Act is to prevent US citizens from fundraising and providing material support to terrorist organizations, states, and individuals that commit acts of terrorism and that provide material support for terrorism. Taking into consideration that Israel is accused of committing war crimes and crimes of aggression as well as crimes against humanity in an illegal assault on Gaza that left 1500 Palestinians, mostly woman and children dead, the Act could very easily be interpreted to also include Israel, the Israeli army and the illegal Jewish settlers among those targeted for prosecution by the Act.

Of course Sherman did not mention that fact. His objective was to use the law exactly in the way that US Muslims and Arabs had said it would be used, namely to target Muslims and Arabs. It appears that Sherman had hoped to create a novel interpretation of the Act that would be used to chill Muslim and Arab Constitutional rights to free speech and also dissent, and that would reinforce the wrong idea that Hamas is a terrorist organization and is therefore subject to the Act, along with any US citizen that would fundraise or send money to Gaza in an attempt to provide humanitarian aide to a people suffering, what the UN has designated a humanitarian crisis. In fact, following Israel’s flotilla massacre, the Obama administration pledged 400 million dollars to Gaza in humanitarian aide. Sherman did not call for the arrest of President Obama, nor of secretary of State Hilary Clinton.

In Sherman’s highly politicized interpretation of the Act, Sherman failed to mention the fact that the US Constitution protects the rights of US Citizens to protest and also to use our speech, which the Supreme Court has said includes our money and fundraising, to support our political positions and also to oppose and dissent from our government’s official positions. Along with that, Article 6 of the US Constitution says, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding” which means that provisions within the Act must be reconciled with the Geneva Conventions, to which the US is a signor. According to both the Bush and Obama administrations, the US stands by and abides by the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions protects, rather than criminalizes the Palestinian resistance militias and the resistance movement.

According to the Joint Publication 1-02, the United States Department of Defense defines a resistance movement as "an organized effort by some portion of the civil population of a country to resist the legally established government or an occupying power and to disrupt civil order and stability". It says: “In strict military terminology, a resistance movement is simply that; it seeks to resist (change) the policies of a government or occupying power. This may be accomplished though violent or non-violent means. A resistance movement is specifically limited to changing the nature of current power, not to overthrow it.” The correct military term for removing or overthrowing a government is an insurgency. Also, Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions defines legal combatants as:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.


In its 49th session, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights as recently as 1993, adopted resolution E/CN.4/ RES/1993/2 (A & B), recognizing and affirming the right of the Palestinian people to resistance against the illegal occupation by all means.” It states the following:

The Commission on Human Rights,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as by the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

Guided also by the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

2. Affirms the right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation by all means, in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions, consistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as has been expressed by the Palestinian people in their brave intifada since December 1987, in legitimate resistance against the Israeli military occupation;


Israel’s bogus claim that Gaza is no longer under military occupation is undermined by Israel’s simultaneous claim to a right to control Gaza’s borders, airspace and waterways. Its routine invasions, detainments of Gazans and other acts intended to maintain illegal control and authority over Gaza, further undermines Israel’s erroneous claim that Gaza is not under Israeli military occupation.

Article 6 of the US Constitutions says clearly that our treaties are the Supreme law of the land, and our military code recognizes by definition that the Palestinian resistance fighters are lawful combatants. Since statutory law overrides Executive orders , Bill Clinton’s attempt to criminalize the Palestinian resistance is merely a political ploy that was designed to create a legal context for Israel’s brutal violence in Gaza and the West Bank, and its illegal targeted assassinations of resistance leaders and activists. Clinton’s executive order which attempts to reduce the Palestinian resistance to mere terrorism is the pretext within which many of the worst criminal acts carried out by Israel against the people of Palestine have claimed legality. It is also the legal framework within which Sherman is emboldened to call for the arrests of US citizens for attempting to travel to Gaza, and to deliver humanitarian aide.

While seemingly anxious to please his AIPAC cronies and Zionist financial backers, Sherman seems to have lost sight of the fact that according to the Act, there may be some arrests to be made within his own circle of pro-Israel Zionists. He said in his highly publicized press release that he “will be asking the Attorney General to prosecute any American involved in what is clearly an effort to give items of value to terrorists.” That might include the California branch of the JDL that have been linked to the US State Department designated terrorist organization known as Kahane Chai, whose members were convicted of attempting to carry out terrorists attacks here in the US against an elected official. It might also include leaders of an entire network of synagogues, churches and Christian and Jewish charitable organizations that routinely raise money and transfer funds to Israel in support of the radical extremist settlers, many of whom are US citizens, and who routinely shoot, kill, harass and illegally confiscate the property of Palestinian citizens. Most of these illegal settlers are self confessed members of the Kahane movement, which is linked to Kahane Chai in ideology if not by card carrying memberships. In a New York Times article written by Neil Lewis, he states that Kahane Chai “advocates the restoration of the Biblical state of Israel and the expulsion of Arabs from Israel.” This is also the mantra of nearly every illegal Jewish settler in Palestine.

Among the list of US Jews arrested for acts of terrorism against Palestinians in Palestine are the confessed terrorists Jack Teity who murdered two Palestinians and wounded at least three. His murder victims included a 57 year old Palestinian shepherd murdered simply because he was not Jewish. Teity traveled between the US and Israel for 12 years carrying out his terrorist acts without ever being stopped and questioned or arrested. Teity, in his confession, stated that he smuggled the sub machine gun used in his killings, past a British airline’s security. Another US Jew who carried out an act of terrorism against Palestinians inside Palestine is Barak Goldstein who slaughtered 20 Palestinians in Hebron mosque. He is called a Jewish martyr, even though he shot his unarmed victims from behind with a fully automatic machine gun as they prostrated in prayer.

In the article, “Israel arrests settlers it says tried to bomb Palestinians” by New York Times columnist John Kifner, Kifner wrote: “Shin Bet uncovered a suspected Jewish network that apparently planned to bomb two or more Palestinian schools.” According to Kifner, “Israeli police confiscated sub machine guns, and Israeli military issued explosives.” He said the bombs were set to go off at 7:35 am, the time when most Palestinian students would arrive at the schools.” Kifner identified the leader of the network as Noam Federman, a leader of the Kach movement.

There is another interpretation of the Act, contrary to Sherman’s which suggests that Sherman himself could possibly be designated a supporter of international terrorism, since it appears that he might be abusing the power of his office and US taxpayer money in an attempt to provide political and legal cover for Israel’s terrorist act of piracy and murder of 9 human rights activists, carried out in international waters, and without provocation. A Congressional Research Service summary of the Act states that:

“Title I of the Act ‘enlarges proscriptions against assisting in the commission of acts of terrorism. It adjusts the Foreign Assistance Act to help isolate countries who support terrorists. “

Ironically the activists targeted by Sherman’s threats of arrest for exercising their Constitutional rights might actually be assisted against Israel by the Act which, according to the same summary, “expands the circumstances under which foreign governments that support terrorism may be sued for resulting injuries, and increases the assistance and compensation available to victims of terrorism.” The family of the US citizen killed by Israel on one of the flotilla boats with 4 shots through his brain and one through his heart might also look into the provisions of the Act seeking legal relief.

Why Congressman Brad Sherman felt compelled to attack the US members of the flotilla with an Anti-Terrorism statute is anyone’s guess. What we can be sure of is that US law is aimed at protecting the rights of citizens, their property and their persons, and not foreign governments. In his haste to arrest these citizens he obviously forgot the spirit, or intent of the Act, and depended too heavily upon his own misguided and highly politicized interpretation.





1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance_movement
2.http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/genevacon/blart-4.htm
3. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/EF7E1F52C06A9CB885256AD2004B1194
4. Cited in the article “Rep. Sherman” Prosecute US Citizens involved with Freedom Flotilla” Modoweiss.com
5. http://www.answers.com/topic/executive-order-1
6. Summary of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Charles Doyle, Senior Specialist, American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service
www.fas.org/irp/crs/96-499
7. Appeals Court Upholds Terrorist Label for a Jewish Group, New York Times, 10/06.
8. Israel Arrests Settlers It says Tried to Bomb Palestinians” New York Times, 5/19/2002
FBI Raided a Brooklyn Community Center led by Member of Kahane Chai, New York Times,

The Third Player

Everyone is asking why the Democrats refuse to say that racism is what is driving the far right wing’s hatred of Obama. People are asking why the right wing hates Obama so much and why the hate seems to increase rather than decrease as time goes on. In a representative Republic that is as old as the United States, after more than half a year, we should be getting used to having a Black man in the White House, rather than getting angrier by the day.

The obvious answer is exactly what everyone is saying, that it’s better to ignore the race baiting right wing, because they are trying to incite a revolution that would drive the Democrats out of power, and put the Republicans back into power. The not so obvious answer is that the people on the right that are driving the hatred of Obama, and who are actually hoping to create an environment of hatred and polarization that might lead to civil war and/or Obama’s assassination, are likely the same group, with operatives on the left, who are misguiding Democrats to remain silent, allowing the hate speech and the incitement to continue unchallenged, perhaps in hope of the same tragic outcomes.

The right claims that they want revolution, and the left claims that it wants change, which is another word for revolution depending upon the amount of change and the method one chooses to bring that change about. Both are lying. It is clear to many people that what they both seem to want, is to pit American against American and to throw this country into chaos through a civil war. While the right wing screams about fighting socialism, the left screams about the rise of the south through the Republican Party, painting the south as a threat to the union and the cause of homosexual killings, the reason for no health care reform and an increase in racism against immigrants and minorities.

Zionists in this country are perhaps seeking to recreate the hatreds between the north and south that once turned brother against brother in this country, and that filled America’s fields and meadows with American blood, and the eyes of our people with tears.

Strange isn’t it that it’s the neoconservatives who run the Republican Party and the Zionists who run the Democrats who are absent from the political stage at this critical time in our country. We know why the neoconservative leadership is silent; they have the far right wing Christian Zionist fanatics to do their dirty work. These fanatics are more than willing to call Obama Hitler, and to claim that they are fighting socialism, as they hurl not so subtle racial slurs at the White House, because they believe they are serving God’s chosen people, the Jews. They don’t understand the difference between Judaism and Zionism.

The Zionist Democrats are also strangely silent, but possibly for a different reason. They don’t want to interfere with the good work of their Zionist brothers on the right. If the Democrat’s were to take up former President Jimmy Carter’s challenge to the country, to confront our racial fears and prejudices, it might lead to national reconciliation, which is not the goal. The goal is civil war, and the few of us who have not fallen under the spell of hatred and intolerance that was cast over our country after 9/11, have an obligation to make sure that it doesn’t happen.

Edmund Burke, one of the founders of the true conservative movement, in his critique of the French Revolution brought some important observations to our attention that might be relevant to our situation in the US today. One of those observations was that the antagonists, who were busy inciting hatred against the monarchy in France that led to the revolution, did so from the pulpits of the protestant churches in England, even though they were not Englishmen and were in fact strangers in the communities. Burke also observed that these preachers of intolerance and protestant religious fanaticism were not Frenchmen, and referred to them as the Old Jewry. Burke wrote:

It appears to me as if I were in a great crisis, not of the affairs of France alone, but of all Europe, perhaps of more than Europe. All circumstances taken together, the French revolution is the most astonishing that has hitherto happened in the world. The most wonderful things are brought about, in many instances by means the most absurd and ridiculous, in the most ridiculous modes, and apparently by the most contemptible instruments. Everything seems out of nature in this strange chaos of levity and ferocity, and of all sorts of crimes jumbled together with all sorts of follies. In viewing this monstrous tragicomic scene, the most opposite passions necessarily succeed and sometimes mix with each other in the mind: alternate contempt and indignation, alternate laughter and tears, alternate scorn and horror.

It cannot, however, be denied that to some this strange scene appeared in quite another point of view. Into them it inspired no other sentiments than those of exultation and rapture. They saw nothing in what has been done in France but a firm and temperate exertion of freedom, so consistent, on the whole, with morals and with piety as to make it deserving not only of the secular applause of dashing Machiavellian politicians, but to render it a fit theme for all the devout effusions of sacred eloquence.

On the forenoon of the fourth of November last, Doctor Richard Price, a non-conforming minister of eminence, preached, at the dissenting meeting house of the Old Jewry, to his club or society, a very extraordinary miscellaneous sermon, in which there are some good moral and religious sentiments, and not ill expressed, mixed up in a sort of porridge of various political opinions and reflections; but the Revolution in France is the grand ingredient in the cauldron. I consider the address transmitted by the Revolution Society to the National Assembly, through Earl Stanhope, as originating in the principles of the sermon and as a corollary from them. It was moved by the preacher of that discourse. It was passed by those who came reeking from the effect of the sermon without any censure or qualification, expressed or implied. If, however, any of the gentlemen concerned shall wish to separate the sermon from the resolution, they know how to acknowledge the one and to disavow the other. They may do it: I cannot.

For my part, I looked on that sermon as the public declaration of a man much connected with literary caballers and intriguing philosophers, with political theologians and theological politicians both at home and abroad. I know they set him up as a sort of oracle, because, with the best intentions in the world, he naturally philippizes and chants his prophetic song in exact unison with their designs.

That sermon is in a strain which I believe has not been heard in this kingdom, in any of the pulpits which are tolerated or encouraged in it, since the year 1648, when a predecessor of Dr. Price, the Rev. Hugh Peters, made the vault of the king's own chapel at St. James's ring with the honor and privilege of the saints, who, with the "high praises of God in their mouths, and a two-edged sword in their hands, were to execute judgment on the heathen, and punishments upon the people; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron".[1] Few harangues from the pulpit, except in the days of your league in France or in the days of our Solemn League and Covenant in England, have ever breathed less of the spirit of moderation than this lecture in the Old Jewry. Supposing, however, that something like moderation were visible in this political sermon, yet politics and the pulpit are terms that have little agreement. No sound ought to be heard in the church but the healing voice of Christian charity. The cause of civil liberty and civil government gains as little as that of religion by this confusion of duties. Those who quit their proper character to assume what does not belong to them are, for the greater part, ignorant both of the character they leave and of the character they assume. Wholly unacquainted with the world in which they are so fond of meddling, and inexperienced in all its affairs on which they pronounce with so much confidence, they have nothing of politics but the passions they excite. Surely the church is a place where one day's truce ought to be allowed to the dissensions and animosities of mankind.

Burke called these dissenters a Third Estate that was inciting the people of France against the French monarchy. Frenchmen, fighting against Frenchmen caused France to fall to Zionism. It was Edmund Burke who said to us that when two parties are drawn into conflict and there is a third party, the power of the two in conflict will fall to the third party. The French monarchy was the only barrier to Zionist rule because it was based upon blood lineage and not a popular vote. After the French revolution and the murder and exile of the royals, who claimed blood lineage to Jesus Christ, France was left to the Zionists who bought France with the power of the purse. In the United States today, Zionism is that same third party. Burke talked about the affects of Zionist rule in France saying:

They have found their punishment in their success: laws overturned; tribunals subverted; industry without vigor; commerce expiring; the revenue unpaid, yet the people impoverished; a church pillaged, and a state not relieved; civil and military anarchy made the constitution of the kingdom; everything human and divine sacrificed to the idol of public credit, and national bankruptcy the consequence; and, to crown all, the paper securities of new, precarious, tottering power, the discredited paper securities of impoverished fraud and beggared rapine, held out as a currency for the support of an empire in lieu of the two great recognized species that represent the lasting, conventional credit of mankind, which disappeared and hid themselves in the earth from whence they came, when the principle of property, whose creatures and representatives they are, was systematically subverted. Zionism is also the third party in the US today, and we are also feeling and witnessing these same effects.

It is interesting that the hatred of Obama, and the anti Obama rhetoric and gun toting symbolism and threats of violence and revolution, seem to grow in proportion to US calls for Israel to end illegal settlement building in Palestine and a reinvigorated peace process that would see Israel make concessions to the Palestinians that Israel does not intend to make, and also calls for an audit of the Federal Reserve.

It is also interesting that this is exactly how the assassination of former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin took place. First right wing Zionists began the seemingly harmless verbal insults, calling Rabin a self hating Jew, etc. When Rabin refused to challenge the rhetoric, it got worse, until they were carrying signs in the street calling Rabin Hitler, and even went so far as to burn him in effigy. Soon after a few cries from the left went out for the rhetoric to tone down, Rabin was gunned down by a right wing Zionist settler.

Of course to some people,suggesting that Zionists are pushing the United States into a civil war, or even a revolution if that is the case, seems as crazy as calling Obama Hitler, and also as difficult to believe as the silence of the Democrats. The difference is that suggesting that Zionists are pushing the United States into civil war and chaos could save this country, if given serious consideration, and if the necessary steps are taken to stop the momentum that is pushing us in that direction. Neither Republican incitement, nor the Democrat’s silence can, or will do that.

http://www.constitution.org/eb/rev_fran.htm

How Judeo/Christian jurisprudence failed the world, and why Islamic law might be our last chance for justice

Without doubt the jurisprudence of the Western world was inspired by the religions Christianity and Judaism. Secularists and atheists in the West have spent years trying to disprove the fact that indeed the laws of their lands were inspired by what is commonly accepted today as the Ten Commandments, other laws of the Old Testament and to a lesser degree the teachings of Jesus Christ.

As the laws of the West were being promulgated, it seems that Western lawmakers took the meaning of the law from the Old Testament, and their ideas of redemption and rehabilitation somewhat from the teachings of Jesus who preached love of enemies, mercy and redemption through God’s grace for all of mankind. Unfortunately in Western jurisprudence, Jesus’ ideas don’t come into play until the Old Testament laws have placed a person in prison where now as a convict, it is believed that the teachings of Jesus should have more bearing on his destiny than the judgment of the Pharisees.

There are those who believe that the term Judeo/Christian reflects the timing of the various periods of rule of these faith’s ideas, Judaism having preceded Christianity. In reality, it is quite possible that the juxtaposition of the terms reflects their position in respect to which commands the greatest amount of influence in our contemporary law and its interpretation. Even today, we find that our supposedly secular legislature in the United States looks quite a bit to the Old Testament for guidance, or at least inspiration in respect to its approaches to war, peace, justice and also punishments. There is practically nothing, either in federal or state laws that give the impression that we , as a country are any longer interested in rehabilitating or redeeming the soul of man except through the evangelicalism of the protestant church which focuses its zeal mainly on the Arab and Muslim world, and of course Africa.

The US Church has seemingly lost interest in saving its domestic flock, except when it’s time to vote. In both the Church’s and the Synagogue’s domestic politics, we find a lot of Caiaphas and very little Jesus in their attitudes on abortion, capital punishment, marriage, homosexuality and entitlement and the legislation passed by our Congress that regulate these customs. Even in respect to law enforcement, we find increasingly that the idea of a constabulary whose aim is to serve and protect the citizen, is giving way to a system where the police officer is seen as an agent of the government whose purpose is to protect the property and interest of the government authority from the citizen who is no longer innocent until proven guilty, but is rather guilty until proven innocent, which is straight out of the Judaism of Pharisees. This seems the case, in spite of the fact that the government owns nothing and has no interest that is not also the citizen’s property and interest.

Prisoners who languish in US prisons, a disproportionate number of which are minorities, African Americans and Hispanics, have been excluded from our American evangelicalism, except when it comes to competing with Islam for converts. Christian converts are given privileges and special treatments in prisons that other prisoners who convert to religions like Islam, or Buddhism are not. There have also been attempts to impose difficult requirements upon Muslim preachers and Imams who which to work in the prisons, and also their Muslim followers. The Church and Synagogue went so far in their attempts to chase Muslim preachers away from the prisons that they launched false and absurd charges that Muslim preachers were radicalizing prisoners against the government, and recruiting them to be domestic terrorists. Even though it has neither been said nor proven, it is my opinion that prisoners like Imam Jamil Al Amin who is being kept in solitary confinement in a super max prison for a crime that he very obviously did not commit, are denied Qur’ans, and the right to pray in congregational prayers because of such lies that were whispered into the ears of legislators, and subsequently the DOJ and Prison Wardens, by evangelicals in competition with Islam.

Of course the case of one man is not enough to support my argument that Judeo/Christian jurisprudence, once touted as the most fair, impartial and independent judicial philosophy and system in the world has failed. Not only has it failed, but it has fallen to the extent that its core principles, stated values and cause are barely visible anymore to the public’s eye, and it is the public’s eye by which any system of justice should be viewed, and not through the eyes of professional jurists, theorists and judges.

Perhaps the most glaring example of the failure of the Judeo/Christian judicial system is the United State’s complicity in Israel’s genocide in Palestine. We need go no further to mention the backlash against Muslims and Arabs following 9/11. The rounding up of innocents who were placed in secret prisons where they were tortured, not to get information to protect civilization from the violence of religious extremists, but rather to coerce false confessions from innocent people, hoping to provide testimony to support the war on terrorism initiated by Israel prior to 9/11, is also a sign of moral and legal failure.

Following 9/11 our government, with the knowledge and assistance of Europe, rounded up young men, denied them their freedom because of their race and religion, tortured them and killed them because these governments were looking for false confessions about fake Muslim plots to carry out fictional acts of terrorism. This is not to mention that bodies of jurisprudence, like the Omnibus Anti-Terrorism Law, Secret Evidence Act, and the Patriot Act which were adopted by our government, and similar laws adopted by government’s throughout the world who followed our lead as we enacted laws that stripped citizens of freedom, sought to deny people the right to self defense, that authorized illegal wiretapping and denied citizens the presumption of innocence and due process, all under the false guise of fighting terrorism.

The most persuasive sign of systemic failure is when a system fails to, or is incapable of responding to a crisis in a way that is consistent with its own self confessed values, principles and objectives. Judeo/Christian jurisprudence was not only incapable of rising to the challenge of blood lust and desire for revenge that permeated our society after the false flag attacks of 9/11, political appointees within our government were allowed to re-interpret and in some cases actually to rewrite laws to facilitate government lawlessness. US Prosecutors were dispatched with the command to round up Muslims and Arabs right here in the US to be deported, or arrested and tried sometimes twice or three times on the same charge until the prosecutor could find a jury that would convict people for acts carried out before laws were passed that criminalized past behavior.

The US judiciary became the primary battleground for the war on Islam being waged through our government by the Church and Synagogue, as war on terrorism, which is why our media never covered a single terrorism trial, except the trial of a French citizen named Mossaoui who shouted very negative and ridiculous claims about Islam to the jury during his testimony. He is a supposed Al Qadea operative that shared an e-mail with a US citizen of Jewish faith, who was killed in Iraq. It was reported upon the Jewish-American’s death, that his personal belongings included a Qur’an and anti-US propaganda that was littered with Qur’anic references, possibly to be left strategically at false flag crime scenes where Islam would be scapegoated as the usual suspect.

Instead of focusing on the crash of the US judicial system taking place before our very eyes, the media kept their lens focused on the illegal wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. These wars kept American blood boiling and our fear level high enough to convince us that any challenge to our government’s errant behavior and the destruction of our judiciary was unpatriotic, undermining the troops, and making the US vulnerable to more attacks. Not until recently has the American public began to realize that the war on terrorism is a monumental hoax that has cost us billions in dollars, a priceless value in the lives of our young men and women who gave their lives in these crusades, and also those who have been injured and disabled for life. It also cost us our moral authority and our prestige and good standing in the world. Where were the judges, the lawyers, the great legal theorists and law professors? Why did they sit silently and not challenge those who were clearly undermining our judiciary and in fact our country?

The genocide in Palestine by contrast to Iraq and Afghanistan is a much more plain and convincing sign of the failure of the Judeo/Christian judicial theory and system of the West in my view. Through this conflict we have learned that Judeo/Christian law is not blind and equal if you are not Christian or Jewish, non white and rich. We also learned that there is no moral obligation either stated or implied towards those who are not Christian, Jewish European, or rich and famous. Keep in mind that the Ashkenazi Jews that rule Israel are white and European, and that it is their Talmud, even more than the Orthodox Jew’s and the Zionist Christian’s Old Testament that is undermining the world in respect to the rule of law and moral justice.

The fact that Israel has been allowed to implant itself through ethnic cleansing in the Muslim world based upon a fictional right supported by a suspect interpretation of their Old Testament historicism, should be enough to cause any jurist of any legal philosophy to cry foul. That this ethnic cleansing has been allowed to take place over 60 years, in violation of every law known to God and man is another proof that Judeo/Christian justice is not available to non Jews and non Christians, or Christians of the wrong race or culture. In fact Judeo/Christian law has proven incapable of recognizing the equal value of all human life and the equal potential for good of every human soul.

The most ironic and also the most disheartening fact in respect to the systemic failure of Judeo/Christian jurisprudence in respect to the colonization of Palestine by the European Ashkenazim, and the subsequent 9/11 failures, is that this is not the first time that it has failed so dramatically and destructively. It’s first historic failure of this magnitude was during the human slave trade of Africans to the West’s “New World” and the second was arguably the genocide against the Native Americans and then the periods of European colonization when neither the Church, or the European colonial governments were able to see or understand the evil of their project, even though their own judicial philosophy should have suggested to them that what was taking place in India, Africa and Latin America was not only a moral crime, but it was also the failure of Judeo/Christian jurisprudence to judge accurately and fairly the actions of its own society and leaders, and to hold them accountable.

It is important that we not only recognize this systemic civilizational failure in our lifetimes, but it is also important that we address it appropriately. The Judeo/Christian judicial philosophy has inspired and guided the establishment of independent judiciaries throughout the world, including many in the Muslim world. This judicial system of Judeo/Christian laws is arguably the single most significant cause of violence in the entire world, and might also be the cause of much of the world’s poverty, and much of the world’s crime. Its rhetoric fills the hearts and minds of people young and old with delusions of perfect justice that simply does not exist in the Judeo/Christian world and that could never be attained by a system, the very foundation of which is racial and class preference.

Anisa Abd el Fattah is the founder and Chairwoman of the National Association of Muslim American Women. She has a PH.D. in Islamic Jurisprudence from the Islamic College for Advanced Studies in London.

Washington cannot change without change in US policy towards Israel

Talks of US and or Israeli attacks on Iran, along with the Democrat’s presumptive nominee for the presidency, Barak Obama’s remarks at AIPAC, that Jerusalem will remain Israel’s undivided capitol, are signs that nothing much will change in Washington’s foreign policy, no matter who wins the presidency. That’s bad news for the United States. The rest of the world is already preparing for at least 4 more years of US self destruction for the benefit of Israel. It’s only the US taxpayer who will be shocked to learn that the US has lost its hard earned credibility and its prestige over the years to accommodate a ghoulish Israeli penchant for death and destruction as public policy. The American tax payer will also be shocked to learn that our country’s foreign policy is based upon the irreligious and heretical belief that we can force God’s symbolic hand and bring about Armageddon so that a certain click of religious fanatics who wrongly call themselves Christians, can be raptured while the rest of us go to hell. It’s no secret to anyone now, that the US has been taken captive by a Judeo/Christian movement that is pretty much dictating US foreign and domestic policies, and also our country’s march to international isolation, condemnation and Armageddon, which by the way, includes the complete annihilation of Israel, not by Iran, but rather by the Judeo/Christian god who ever that might be, excluding Jesus or Yahweh, a/k/a Allah, a/k/a Jehovah.

The Judeo/Christian lobby, which consists of AIPAC, and also John Hagee’s pro-Israel organization and most of the Jewish American organizations worked successfully to co-opt the US media, and our legislature, and have and continue to use them both to carry out a campaign of defamation and vilification of Islam, Muslims, and Palestinians that makes McCarthyism look like a stroll in the park. Their influence over the executive branch of our government is also well known, which explains how Elliot Abrams, Condoleezza Rice and others at the US Department of State, and NSA can get away with scripting policies that underwrite genocide in Gaza, and nothing is said or done to stop them. The media will not facilitate a debate on the Gaza siege or anything related to US Middle East policy except whether or not we should negotiate with Iran and Hamas, which makes little sense since as the debate is ongoing, so is the genocide in Palestine, and the very real threat that faces Iran. So what’s to talk about, when we will stop killing and threatening, or when they will stop letting us?

Al Ma’an News is reporting from Palestine that PA president Mahmoud Abbas has called for a dialogue with Hamas that should begin immediately and without pre-conditions. According to Al Ma’an, the dialogue is aimed at unifying Palestine, and ending the animosity between Fatah and Hamas. It’s a wonderful idea whose time nearly passed. On the other hand, Fatah negotiator Saed Erakat reportedly said that all pre-conditions for the Fatah/Hamas dialogue still exist and that Hamas has failed in its attempts to administrate affairs in Gaza.

While Abbas is signaling that the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians have reached their natural and predictable conclusion, which is probably more war, Erakat says that Palestinian negotiations with Israel must continue, which explains his conflicting remarks about the tentative Hamas/Fatah reconciliation, which if taken seriously, could hold the reconciliation off until Israeli violence escalates further, which will be too late. Erakat says the negotiations are the way to peace, and that peace and a two state solution are the goals. He obviously has not heard the credible and legitimate voices, East and West, Jewish and Gentile, who have stated, based upon historic evidence, that as far as the US and Israel are concerned, negotiations are the goal…period. Maybe Erakat is posturing to take the place of Abbas who will surely be pushed aside by the Quartet, and disqualified from negotiating with Israel by his desire to unite Palestine, and to end the divide and conquer policy that has only led to more talk, more illegal Israeli settlements, no cease fire and increased Israeli attacks in the West Bank and Gaza. Only a united Palestine can face the future that will be created for them by a Judeo/Christian controlled Washington DC, that will not be changed unless we can find a president who is willing and able to stand up to these forces and demand US independence, and who will reassert the first amendment of the US Constitution that prohibits our country from formulating public policies based upon religious laws or doctrines.

Bush’s willingness to adopt the brutally racist and fatalistic Judeo/Christian ideology that led us into an unnecessary war in Iraq that has bloodied US hands with the lives of over 1 million innocent Iraqis and more than 4000 of our own soldiers and Marines was achieved by isolating the executive branch, and surrounding Bush with Judeo/Christian pastors disguised as Middle East experts and family friends. These same people bribed and bought our Congress through Abramoff, and co-opted the media through suspect FCC regulations that allowed for media monopolies and the corporatization, and corruption of US media. It’s hard to imagine that any US presidential candidate or even a newly elected president will be able to dismantle, or purge this rouge government and its various estates in four years.

Barak Obama, who has opened a can of foreign policy worms with his AIPAC rhetoric, should be advised that he cannot change Washington without changing US policies. He must understand that ending the Iraq war is not merely a matter of withdrawing US troops, but includes US independence from Israel and its Judeo/Christian movement that is dragging the US towards Armageddon at the speed of light. Only international unity, and the cooperation and will to defeat this force will pull the world back from the brinks of World War III. So far, Obama has cried “change,” yet he increasingly sounds more like John McCain, and more of the same, and that does not bode well for the US or the Middle East, or the world for that matter.