Free Headline Alerts     
Worldwide Web WorldTribune.com

  breaking... 


Monday, December 8, 2008

U.S. appeals court upholds ruling against groups that raised funds for Hamas

WASHINGTON — A U.S. court has removed the distinction between the civilian and military wings of an insurgency network.

A U.S. appeals court ruled that support for Hamas's civilian wing did not constitute any less of a liability than relaying money to the organization's military network, Middle East Newsline reported.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals removed the distinction in a decision that upheld a $156 million judgment against two American groups determined to have funded Hamas.

"If you give money to an organization that you know to be engaged in terrorism, the fact that you earmark it for the organization's nonterrorist activities does not get you off the liability hook," Judge Richard Posner wrote for the majority in the Dec. 3 ruling.

The appelate court upheld the damages won by Joyce and Stanley Boim, Americans who live in Israel and whose son, David, was killed by Hamas in 1996. The Boims sued the American Muslim Society and the Quranic Literacy Institute, two U.S. organizations said to have funded Hamas. The two Islamic groups said they sent money to Hamas charities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Also In This Edition


"Anyone who knowingly contributes to the nonviolent wing of an organization that he knows to engage in terrorism is knowingly contributing to the organization's terrorist activities," the majority ruling said. "And that is the only knowledge that can reasonably be required as a premise for liability."

The American Muslim Society was deemed a leading element in the Hamas-aligned network in the United States. The court said the society served as an "alter ego" of the Islamic Association for Palestine, which conducted media campaigns for Hamas in the United States. In 1994, three IAP members founded the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which became a leading Saudi-funded lobby in the United States.

The latest decision — which could be appealed to the Supreme Court -- reversed a ruling by the Seventh Circuit in December 2007 that cleared the two Islamic organizations. In that ruling, judges of the appelate court ruled that the Boims were required to demonstrate a link between the organizations and the killing of their son. The Dec. 3 decision was by the entire court.

"To require proof that the donor intended that his contribution be used for terrorism — to make a benign intent a defense — would as a practical matter eliminate donor liability except in cases in which the donor was foolish enough to admit his true intent," the majority opinion said.

"It would also create a First Amendment Catch-22, as the only basis for inferring intent would in the usual case be a defendant's public declarations of support for the use of violence to achieve political ends."



About Us     l    Contact Us     l    Geostrategy-Direct.com     l    East-Asia-Intel.com
Copyright © 2008    East West Services, Inc.    All rights reserved.