Friday, May 29, 2009

Trouble brewing for AIG, Federal Govt










homelearnactlocal chaptersContact Congress








Dear Solstice,

You may
recall that late last year we helped expose AIG’s promotion of a
shariah-compliant insurance product, and many of you contacted AIG to
express your disapproval. At the same time, our friends David Yerushalmi
and the Thomas More Law Center filed a suit against the Treasury Secretary
and the Federal Reserve Board, arguing that since AIG was being bailed out
with massive amounts of tax dollars, promotion of a shariah-compliant
product amounted to an unlawful tax-funded promotion of Islam and shariah
law.

As expected, the Obama administration’s Department of Justice
tried to have the suit dismissed – a request that was denied by Federal
District Court Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff.

The Thomas More Law
Center has boldly taken on numerous cases in the arena of radical Islam
and terrorism. In appreciation for the Center’s efforts, ACT! for America
President Brigitte Gabriel appeared as the keynote speaker at the Center’s
annual fundraiser last year. David Yerushalmi is the author of an
important
research
memorandum
on the legal risks associated with shariah-compliant
finance.

The implications for the AIG-related lawsuit are
enormous. Stay tuned.








Trouble Brewing for
AIG and Federal Government; Challenge of AIG Bailout Allowed to
Proceed


May 27, 2009

http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=19


ANN ARBOR, MI – Proclaiming that times of crisis do not justify
departure from the Constitution, Federal District Court Judge Lawrence P.
Zatkoff allowed the lawsuit against Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner
and the Federal Reserve Board challenging the AIG bailout to proceed. The
lawsuit was filed last December by the Thomas More Law Center, a national
public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and attorney David
Yerushalmi, an expert in security transactions and Shariah-compliant
financing.

In his well-written and detailed analysis issued
yesterday, Judge Zatkoff denied the request by the Obama administration’s
Department of Justice to dismiss the lawsuit. The request was filed on
behalf of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Federal Reserve
Board – the named defendants in the case. In his
ruling,
the judge held that the lawsuit sufficiently alleged a federal
constitutional challenge to the use of taxpayer money to fund AIG’s
Islamic religious activities.

Richard Thompson, President and
Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “It is outrageous
that AIG has been using taxpayer money to promote Islam and Shariah law,
which potentially provides support for terrorist activities aimed at
killing Americans. Shariah law is the same law championed by Osama Bin
Laden and the Taliban. It is the same law that prompted the 9/11 terrorist
attacks on our soil that killed thousands of innocent Americans. We won
this skirmish. But the war to stop the federal government from funding
Islam and Shariah-compliant financing is far from over.”

In its
request to dismiss the lawsuit, the DOJ argued that the plaintiff in the
case, Kevin Murray, who is a former Marine and a federal taxpayer, lacked
standing to bring the action. And even if he did have standing, DOJ argued
that the use of the bailout money to fund AIG’s operations did not violate
the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The court disagreed,
noting, in relevant part, the following:

In this case, the fact
that AIG is largely a secular entity is not dispositive: The question in
an as-applied challenge is not whether the entity is of a religious
character, but how it spends its grant. The circumstances of this case are
historic, and the pressure upon the government to navigate this financial
crisis is unfathomable. Times of crisis, however, do not justify departure
from the Constitution. In this case, the United States government has a
majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all
funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities,
including Sharia-compliant financing. Pursuant to the EESA, the government
has injected AIG with tens of billions of dollars, without restricting or
tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent. At least two of
AIG’s subsidiary companies practice Sharia-compliant financing, one of
which was unveiled after the influx of government cash. After using the
$40 billion from the government to pay down the $85 billion credit
facility, the credit facility retained $60 billion in available credit,
suggesting that AIG did not use all $40 billion consistent with its press
release. Finally, after the government acquired a majority interest in AIG
and contributed substantial funds to AIG for operational purposes, the
government co-sponsored a forum entitled “Islamic Finance 101.” These
facts, taken together, raise a question of whether the government’s
involvement with AIG has created the effect of promoting religion and
sufficiently raise Plaintiff’s claim beyond the speculative level,
warranting dismissal inappropriate at this stage in the proceedings.


Click here to read Judge Zatkoff’s entire ruling.

The lawsuit, which
was filed in December of last year in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Michigan, is a constitutional challenge to that
portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (EESA) that
appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support
the federal government’s majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages
in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-American,
anti-Christian, anti-Jewish.

According to the lawsuit, “The use of
these taxpayer funds to approve, promote, endorse, support, and fund these
Shariah-based Islamic religious activities violates the Establishment
Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”


The lawsuit was brought on behalf of Murray, a former Marine who
served honorably in harm’s way in Iraq to defend our country against
Islamic terrorists. Murray objects to being forced as a taxpayer to
contribute to the propagation of Islamic beliefs and practices predicated
upon Shariah law, which is hostile to his Christian religion. He is being
represented by Thomas More Law Center Trial Counsel Robert Muise and by
David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who is an expert in Shariah law
and Shariah-compliant financing, as well as general counsel to the Center
for Security Policy.

According to the lawsuit, through the use of
taxpayer funds, the federal government acquired a majority ownership
interest (nearly 80%) in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress
appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to
fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which
is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing
which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the
dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically
includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial
activities. AIG itself describes “Sharia” as “Islamic law based on the
Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed].”

With
the aid of taxpayer funds provided by Congress, AIG employs a “Shariah
Supervisory Committee,” which is comprised of the following members:
Sheikh Nizam Yaquby from Bahrain, Dr. Mohammed Ali Elgari from Saudi
Arabia, and Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani from Pakistan. Dr. Usmani is
the son, student, and dedicated disciple of Mufti Taqi Usmani, who is the
leading Shariah authority for Shariah-compliant finance in the world and
the author of a book translated into English in 1999 that includes an
entire chapter dedicated to explaining why a Western Muslim must engage in
violent jihad against his own country or government. According to
AIG, the role of its Shariah authority “is to review our operations,
supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah
compliance of these products and our investments.”

An important
element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable
contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting
those that “struggle [jihad] for Allah.” The amount of this tax is
between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The
zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic
“charities,” some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are
hostile to the United States and all other “infidels,” which includes
Christians and Jews.

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and
Development, an example of an Islamic “charity” that qualifies for receipt
of the zakat, was recently convicted by a federal jury for
providing millions of dollars to Islamic terrorist organizations. As a
direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to
purchase and financially support AIG, the federal government is now the
owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious
taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews,
and all other “infidels” under Islamic law.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


ACT for
America

P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591

www.actforamerica.org


ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated
to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots
citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to
informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies
that promote America’s national security and the defense of American
democratic values against the assault of radical Islam.
We are only as strong
as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential
to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more
secure.







HOW CAN I TELL OTHERS ABOUT YOUR ORGANIZATION?
Send a personalized version of this message to your friends.




HOW CAN I SUPPORT YOUR ORGANIZATION?
Click here to give an online donation.

No comments:

Post a Comment