Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mike Hawash in New York Times
Warblogging.com ^ | April 4, 2003 | George Paine

Posted on 04/12/2003 9:15:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Four days ago Warblogging reported on the story of Maher (Mike) Hawash. Mr. Hawash's problems have now been the subject of an article in the New York Times. Mr. Hawash is a programmer, working at Intel, who was detained by the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force as a material witness. He has so far spent just about two weeks in jail without being charged with a crime and without being questioned or told why he is detained. He is being kept in solitary confinement.

Mr. Hawash was detained by FBI agents wearing helments, body armor and carrying assault rifles in an Intel Corporation parking lot as he arrived to work on Thursday, March 20. FBI agents and police officers carrying assault rifles and wearing body armor simultaneously raided his home, waking his wife and their three young children. The search warrant used to search the home and the material witness warrant used to detain Mr. Hawash are both sealed — no one knows what evidence was used to attain them, and they have yet to be challenged in court.

Mr. Hawash was born in the Palestinian Territories but gained his American citizenship more than fifteen years ago. He married an American woman and has three American children. He himself is an American.

"Our friend has fallen into some kind of `Alice in Wonderland' meets Franz Kafka," Steven McGeady, a former Intel VP and webmaster of Free Mike Hawash told the New York Times.

The fact is that the government is abusing the material witness statute to hold Mike. The material witness statute is intended to compel people to testify in court and prevent them from fleeing to avoid testimony.

An Associated Press story on Mr. Hawash said this:

Material witness laws were intended only to ensure testimony, not to hold people indefinitely, said Phil Heymann, a Harvard law professor. "It was not meant to be used this way," Heymann said, noting that the number of material witness detentions has increased since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack.

Mike hasn't even been told what he'll be asked to testify about, and there is no indication whatsoever that he would seek to avoid testifying. The New York Times article says:

Civil liberties groups say material witness statutes are being abused by the Bush administration to hold people like Mr. Hawash indefinitely. "The government doesn't have and should not have the power to arrest and detain someone without charging them," said Lucas Guttentag, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants Rights Project. "If this kind of thing is permitted, then any United States citizen can be swept off the street and locked up without being charged."

This is precisely what happened to Mike Hawash. He was literally swept up off the street and locked up without charge. He has been accused of no crime. He has not been told why he is being detained in solitary confinement. His friends, family and coworkers have been left bewildered. The Justice Department refuses to comment on his detention in any way, shape, or form except to say that there is an "ongoing investigation".

He has been in jail for two weeks without charge. He has not been questioned. Every time he leaves his cell for any reason he is strip searched when he returns.

This, my friends, is not American. This is not supposed to happen in this great country of ours. Charge this man with a crime or release him, Mr. Ashcroft.

I urge you to write letters to the editors of your local newspapers. Call your senators, call your congressmen. Call into your local radio talk shows. Make a fuss. Tell everyone who will listen about Mike Hawash. He deserves it, and so does the next one who will be dragged into this Kafka-esque nightmare.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: arlington; beaverton; bilal; bilalmosque; bleedingheartattack; bridgeview; bridgeviewcell; chicagocell; globalrelief; grf; hawash; hillsboro; immigration; ins; intel; islamiccenter; jttf; maherhawash; mahermikehawash; masjedassaber; mcgready; michaelhawash; mikehawash; mohammedzouaydi; oregon; palestinians; portlandcell; portlandgroup; terrorcharities; texas; universityoftexas; visas; zouaydi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last
The Justice Department refuses to comment on his detention in any way, shape, or form except to say that there is an "ongoing investigation".

Wonderful, just wonderful. THIS is what I stood out in the cold in front of "Cheney's House" in 2000 for?

1 posted on 04/12/2003 9:15:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kristinn; tgslTakoma
PING!
2 posted on 04/12/2003 9:15:31 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Hi mom!
3 posted on 04/12/2003 9:16:48 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks; JohnBerger
John Doe 2, Jose Padilla, has received similar treatment.

Is he still alive?
4 posted on 04/12/2003 9:21:53 PM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Mr. Hawash was detained by FBI agents wearing helments, body armor and carrying assault rifles in an Intel Corporation parking lot as he arrived to work on Thursday, March 20.


What's the probem? He was wearing helments (is that like a condom?), body armor and was packing assault rifles in a public place. Seems clear to me ... ;)
5 posted on 04/12/2003 9:24:18 PM PDT by Tunehead54 (Support Our Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Let us hope so. Isn't he an American citizen also?
6 posted on 04/12/2003 9:32:39 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Would it be possible to put "Police State Alert" or some such in parentheses after the title? This is important, IMHO...
7 posted on 04/12/2003 9:34:29 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Everything in the story suggests that the law is being followed to a tee.

Somehow I doubt he is being held for no reason.
8 posted on 04/12/2003 9:42:55 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Ohhh, scary. Where's my "Let's Freak Out" shirt when I need it?
9 posted on 04/12/2003 9:49:13 PM PDT by KingKongCobra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I am curious as to whether a Writ of Habeas Corpus has
been filed? This is an American Citizen, or so it seems.
If it was denied, what were the reasons?

The story quoted did not cite any of the relevant facts.
I am curious, and my next stop will be the website.
10 posted on 04/12/2003 9:52:24 PM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Everything in the story suggests that the law is being followed to a tee.

Jawohl, mein Herr.

11 posted on 04/12/2003 9:55:34 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Whats with you guys?

Do you seriously think our government, in the midst of a war, has time to grab people at random from the streets and detain them for no reason?

Don't you think that in light of all the recient captures of Al Queda assetts and computer hard drives, and the heavy war-time intelegence monitoring of communications, that there may be ample intelegence to hold him?

Do you subscribe to the phone-book prosecution theory; that officials go after someone by randomly selecting their name from the phone book?

Keeping some one incomunicado in times like this may just save several amarican combat deaths or protect other cirtical assets in the war on terror.

Things are not always what they seem. Give it time.
12 posted on 04/12/2003 9:58:36 PM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Jawohl, mein Herr.

Yes? Care to back that up from something in the article, or from my comment, or from other my postings on FR? Or are just jerking your knee?

There is a rule on FR--you must not know about it. The first person to call someone a Nazi loses the debate. Since you went straight to it before there was even any debate, you must enjoy losing quickly, and getting it out of the way.

13 posted on 04/12/2003 10:03:08 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: konaice
If you have information on Mr. Hawash that the blog didn't mention, please post; I have an open mind...
14 posted on 04/12/2003 10:03:17 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: konaice
Nice to hear a reasoned voice.
15 posted on 04/12/2003 10:04:12 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
The story quoted did not cite any of the relevant facts.

Bingo.

Sheesh. We're at war with vicious terrorists. The guy is not being held for no reason.

16 posted on 04/12/2003 10:06:24 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
"If you have information on Mr. Hawash that the blog didn't mention, please post; I have an open mind..."

No I don't have any info, nor was there any info in the original post or any of the articles it linked to. The impression is left by those web sites that this guy was just walking along and the entire federal government decided he was today's target.

Thats not likely in this country, but all to common (up untill reciently) in Iraq.

You can't get a material witness warrent in this country without convincing SOME JUDGE that there is cause. Even if its a "pet judge" there still has to be more to it than "lets pick on this guy for a while".
17 posted on 04/12/2003 10:10:26 PM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
"The fact is that the government is abusing the material witness statute to hold Mike"

And ... the source for that statement is ...?? Why is it whenever a person is arrested who "appears" to be just your ordinary person, everyone automatically suspects the govt of doing something evil? Although it does happen - it is the exception and not the rule!

In case no one noticed ... we are at war! And ... a lot of people have to realize that for years, x42 had the investigative agencies in this country hamstrung to the point that they couldn't do anything about some of the information they had gathered; or they couldn't finish gathering. Now ... we have the ability to finish the info gathering. This is closing up a lot of investigations.

Remember one important thing ... sometimes people are arrested because they have information which is important to a case. Sometimes, if they tell that person why they're arrested, they will give false data. Sometimes it's important just to let the guy sweat a little before they interrogate him. Being in jail for awhile can surely make you want to cooperate a lot sooner. I know it may not sound nice, but there is A WHOLE LOT OF NOT-NICE STUFF GOING ON IN AMERICA and we need to get it cleared up.
18 posted on 04/12/2003 10:11:40 PM PDT by CyberAnt (( America - You Are The Greatest!! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Not a Nazi -- a 'Good German'. Your comment was the reason for my retort; the government is 'following the law', and since we all know the law is never wrong, the government is correct. Right?

I support President Bush and the actions taken in Iraq; I don't support the mindless cheerleading of actions taken in his name by functionaries -- who if the same actions were done under clinton weould have had this entire board in an uproar. This is one of the more egregious.

You were saying ... ...

19 posted on 04/12/2003 10:12:49 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Actually, I was open minded here. I did some reading.

It appears that a Grand Jury is investigating a criminal
matter to which Mike Hawash may have some information
to add to, as a material witness. This does not say that
he is involved, or is criminally liable for anything.

At the least, his testimony should be taken, and he
should be released afterwards, if it is not contradictory
to established facts.

This person is a U.S. Citizen. I don't really care where
he was born, or who his wife is, or how blonde she is.
Or that he works for Intel, or the local Grocery.

This makes me squirm the same way Reno's debacle at
Waco did.
20 posted on 04/12/2003 10:13:34 PM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
War is hell. And terrorists and their supporters are plentiful. It is unfortunate, but necessary that people with certain backgrounds are receiving a closer scrutiny, and yeah, sometimes mistakes are going to be made.

My question is that if he is being kept in solitary confinement, how would anyone know whether he has been questioned or not? Something a little fishy with this report. Perhaps the author is exaggerating just a bit in order to push our buttons so that we cry "Injustice!"

21 posted on 04/12/2003 10:14:14 PM PDT by bjcintennessee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Well, in the Govt.'s defense in the matter I should say
that this is only two weeks old. it takes time for the
legal system to cogitate.

However, I have always thought that witnesses and jurists
should be duly compensated for time lost, lost wages,
and any other damages accruing to sequestration, at least
for secret Grand Jury testimony.
22 posted on 04/12/2003 10:17:00 PM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: brityank
This is one of the more egregious.

You make that assumption, but I don't see any facts to back it up.

23 posted on 04/12/2003 10:23:45 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: JMack
What you said.
25 posted on 04/12/2003 10:27:05 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
At the least, his testimony should be taken, and he should be released afterwards, if it is not contradictory to established facts.

I agree; the problem I have is the held incommunicado, and the length of time involved. Can anyone here consider it would be alright to get locked away for two or more weeks? Those that would say it's OK must not have much of a life, or any responsibilities.

Once arrested, you must be charged. Those charges should be public, else we are just as much a dictatorship as Iraq. War may restrict some freedoms and rights; it does not negate them nor should it allow for unlimited holding of citizens without charges or arrest.

26 posted on 04/12/2003 10:28:15 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Are you an attorney?

Do you know what the law says in cases like this, and why?

Do you, unlike the rest of us, know what this case is even about, exactly?
27 posted on 04/12/2003 10:32:50 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Two weeks is too long to be held without charges. If you think that is OK, you must not have much of a life.

Arrest him, and charge him in court, within a 48 to 72 hour window -- no problem. To hold as a 'material witness' based on a pet judge's whims for however long some bureaucrat wants is egregious.

28 posted on 04/12/2003 10:35:25 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
Me too. If he's guilty of something, indict and try him.

If not, release him. (And keep a damn close eye on him for several months at least.)

This locking people up without charge shit is scary, and I don't care who is doing it.

L

29 posted on 04/12/2003 10:38:24 PM PDT by Lurker ("One man of reason and goodwill is worth more, actually and potentially, than a million fools" AR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JMack
No one has considered that he may be held in isolation to protect him from some of the things he witnessed?
Way to much hysteria without enough facts!!!
It sounds so different when a ME person is seen photographing a water resovoir or suspicious happening, we want em lynched IMMEDIATELY!!!
30 posted on 04/12/2003 10:38:45 PM PDT by oreolady (It's FUN to wave the flag and meet kewl people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: JMack
By no means is this article enough to convice me we have any of those problems here.

Were this the only case, or the NYSlimes the only news org reporting these types of detentions, I would not have responded as I did. Arrest and charge the guy in a reasonable (48-72hrs) timeframe, OK. To hold absent that due process is wrong, period.

31 posted on 04/12/2003 10:39:27 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: brityank
What if he has information that determines whether or not 3000 Americans get killed by Islamic terrorists?

Then would you still scream; even though the judiciary and law enforcement are obviously functioning within the law? Or would you want him released anyway to meet your criteria for what is proper?
32 posted on 04/12/2003 10:40:26 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
You'll just have to lump it, Lumpy. Steven McGeady is not the CIC.
33 posted on 04/12/2003 10:42:41 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Amen. There is a lot of stuff that is going on under the radar around the country. This particular action smells much.

Someone else on this thread mentioned that justice would eventually be done to the man. Well, I'd have to agree that something is being done to him, but it certainly doesn't resemble any justice I've heard of.

They either need to charge him or let him go. Just because we have an (undeclared) war going on doesn't mean that fedgov can just do anything it pleases any time it pleases because it is convienient to do so.

The protections guaranteed by the constitution are not there to make fedgov's job easier. They are there to guarantee they can't just walk all over someone's God-given rights because it is expident to do so.

34 posted on 04/12/2003 10:43:46 PM PDT by zeugma (If you use microsoft products, you are feeding the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Are you an attorney?
No; nor do I play one.
Do you know what the law says in cases like this, and why?
Read my tag-line.
Do you, unlike the rest of us, know what this case is even about, exactly?
Just what is presented on the site, and the support he has garnered from other Citizens who are vouching for him.

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." -- Marbury ~vs~ Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

If this is not repugnant to the Constitution, I don't know what is.

35 posted on 04/12/2003 10:48:14 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
I am curious as to whether a Writ of Habeas Corpus has been filed? This is an American Citizen, or so it seems. If it was denied, what were the reasons?

You do not understand the situation. This US citizen was arrested and jailed in solitary confinement under the material witness statute. Under that statute there is no crime charged, so no Writ of Habeas Corpus will apply.

You or I may be held indefinitely - without being charge with a crime and without ever being brought before a grand jury to hear your testimony. There is no limit to how long you may be held without being brought before a grand jury and without being charged with a crime. You essentially disappear into federal custody and there is not anything you can do about it. I am not even sure if you have the right to attorney, although in this case, the man has hired a private attorney.

36 posted on 04/12/2003 10:50:55 PM PDT by clamboat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Never, ever, get all you information from The New York Times when it comes to something involving a Palestinian

Words to live by. Howell Rains has a massive self loathing complex. Unfortunately that manefests itself to groups rather than himself and his pretentious newspaper. Be patient.

37 posted on 04/12/2003 10:52:44 PM PDT by PeoplesRep_of_LA ("As long as it takes...No. That's the answer to your question. As long as it takes." GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Are you an attorney? No; nor do I play one.

One point in your favor. ;-)

Do you know what the law says in cases like this, and why? Read my tag-line.

I'm glad you're a student. But that doesn't mean you know more than the judges or the U.S. Attorneys who are on this case. The fact is, you know very little about this case, no matter how extensive your knowledge of the Constitution is.

Do you, unlike the rest of us, know what this case is even about, exactly? Just what is presented on the site, and the support he has garnered from other Citizens who are vouching for him.

Damn little real information is presented on the site, or in this article...simply because it is not available.

38 posted on 04/12/2003 10:54:59 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Deep sleeper agents use that cover; citizenship, family roots, appearing law abiding. Maybe one of the guys in Gitmo gave him up, or falsly accused him in revenge for some tribal feud from 20 years ago.

These investigations typically don't see the light of day until everything has been followed up.

39 posted on 04/12/2003 11:00:14 PM PDT by JimRed (Disinformation is the leftist's and enemy's friend; consider the source before believing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Those that would say it's OK must not have much of a life, or any responsibilities.

Well, we all appreciate how important you must think you are. Imagine not being around at all.

Two weeks?

Have you ever served on Grand Jury duty?

Well, I have two kids and live paycheck to paycheck. My wife and I juggle many-a-myriad-tasks. All of which would suffer if I was sequestered.

But...

I'd do it. Of course, my opinion might be colored by the fact that my last job was 1 block south of the World Trade Center South. It's also colored by the fact that this sort of thing is part and parcel of your citizenship.

Oh, and by the way, I did not take any unemployment benefits, or aid, because I found it repugnant to do so. There are more who are deserving. I did not die. (Obviously)
40 posted on 04/12/2003 11:15:52 PM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: clamboat
Uh, No.

In Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1166 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1778 (1992), the court observed that the Supreme Court has "recognized the fact that`[t]he writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.' Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91 (1969). " Therefore, the writ must be "administered with the initiative and flexibility essential to insure that miscarriages of justice within its reach are surfaced and corrected." Harris, 394 U.S. at 291.

So, Bill Clinton decides that all people who so ever witnessed his being sucked off by a sleazy blonde (say, for example, all of his security detail) are to be silenced.

Now, here's some scary monsters. Let's say [GOD FORBID] that Hillary Clinton is elected dictator in 2008. She decides to begin a reign of terror using these new statutes. How safe will you feel?

Think ahead, and look not to the enemies without, than to the enemies within, when you make the rules.

Think Sun Tzu.

Perhaps I am being obtuse. I'll be direct:

Are you a U.S Citizen?

If you piss off Hillary Clinton, who, say, was elected the President of the US in 2008 (again, God Forbid):

Did you read about the White House Travel Scandal?

Do you have any f-ing doubt that this power will be abused at some point in the future? Bush won't, but do you really
think a Clinton won't?

41 posted on 04/12/2003 11:36:58 PM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
You made my points; I am worth as much as this chair I'm sitting on, and can be bounced for any reason once I'm no longer of use.

I am a single parent, with no local family; so my kid and bills would be SOL because the feds decide that it's OK to move me out of existance. No, it's just not reasonable nor legal, no matter what the 'law' says.

I've served on three juries, one for three weeks and got sequestered for four days (and we found him guilty); but everyone knew where I was, and why.

Citizens have Rights; the government has Privileges. Don't get them confused, as Privileges should never overide Rights, absent a valid, constitutional restriction to those Rights.

42 posted on 04/12/2003 11:42:04 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ISawIt
In Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1166 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1778 (1992), the court observed that the Supreme Court has "recognized the fact that`[t]he writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.' Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91 (1969). " Therefore, the writ must be "administered with the initiative and flexibility essential to insure that miscarriages of justice within its reach are surfaced and corrected." Harris, 394 U.S. at 291.

Thanks for the cite; validates what some of us seem to agree is an unconstitutional holding by the Feds and the Court in this case.

Got to leave; work calls. Be back later.

43 posted on 04/12/2003 11:51:02 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
This gentleman (Maher Mofeid Hawash, or Mike Hawash) is associated in some way with the Portland Cell... a group of people who went to Afghanistan to fight US troops and who are charged with levying war against the United States. This group has ties to an extremist Islamic mosque, the Black Panthers, Al Qaeda, Hamas, and one member has some curious links to China which is why the group traveled via China to go to war against US troops. Some members of this group have a direct face-to-face relationship with Wadih el-Hage, bin Laden's personal secretary.

This particular individual, Hawash, has made substantial donations to the terrorist charity Global Relief Foundation, which he says is a legit organization. (At least he may have thought so.) According to an early report "FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Force Search Home in Hillsboro" in The Oregonian, documents were found attached to Global Relief Foundation's federal tax return for the year 2000 listing about 120 donations of $5,000 or more, including two from Hawash. The first was a $5,165 donation from "Mike & Lisa Hawash" listing their Hillsboro address. The second was a $5,050 donation by "Maher Hawash" listing the same address. The dates of the donations weren't listed. The paper says these donations are unrelated to the case but does not say why it came to that conclusion.

(See also this snippet : )
Initially, speculation among Hawash's friends was that his detention was related to two donations totaling about $10,000 that he made to the Global Relief Foundation, an Islamic charity whose assets were frozen last year after federal authorities alleged it was connected to terrorism. - "Engineer Held as Part of Portland Probe, " by Elaine Harden, Washington Post Staff Writer, Saturday, April 5, 2003

Given his occupation there is likely much more of interest than just his donations, but the FBI does seem to have focused on his computer and his financial records. He also sends money to relatives in the West Bank, including his mother, according to friends, who insist the family there "is not involved in politics." (Well, that's nice. I'm glad to know they never participate in those parades for suicide bombers or celebrate the collapse of the WTC.)

As a sidenote, Hawash is a member of the Bilal Mosque in Beaverton, Oregon, which is the same mosque also attended by the Saudi brothers Mohammed Ibrahim Bilal and Ahmed Ibrahim Bilal, both charged with providing material support to al Qaeda. He has also attended the Islamic Center of/in Portland. This latter Center was once headed up by a gentleman who is charged with social security fraud. The Center is considered extremist. I don't have any reason to believe the Bilal Mosque is extremist at his time; its leader seems to be cooperative.

Prosecutors have until April 25, 2003 to take testimony from Hawash as a material witness or present him to a grand jury. A closed hearing is scheduled for April 29. More information on the case will be provided in May by officials. Hawash does have access to attorneys and can be visited by his wife and children. He hasn't been held very long.

44 posted on 04/13/2003 12:06:08 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
You made my points; I am worth as much as this chair I'm sitting on, and can be bounced for any reason once I'm no longer of use.

So? Then why abuse me?

I'm a single parent, with no local family; so my kid and bills would be SOL because the feds decide that it's OK to move me out of existance. No, it's just not reasonable nor legal, no matter what the 'law' says.

No one told ME to have to kids, and no one told YOU to have a kid. And? The difference is that we are a single breadwinner household and our income was bombed out from under us by an organization whose operandi is to elude law enforcement (DUH?). What's your point?
45 posted on 04/13/2003 12:09:29 AM PDT by ISawIt (Is it just me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: brityank
According to the Judge he has access to both attorneys and his wife and children.

That's hardly "incommunicado."

46 posted on 04/13/2003 12:11:36 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Thanks for the clarification...
47 posted on 04/13/2003 12:14:27 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tunehead54
What's the probem? He was wearing helments (is that like a condom?), body armor and was packing assault rifles in a public place. Seems clear to me ... ;)

Wha's wrong wi' that? :-)

48 posted on 04/13/2003 12:18:09 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Show me who controls the land, the guns, and the money, and I'll show you who's in charge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
You're welcome... the Islamic Center in/of Portland is also known as "Masjed As-Saber"

I also found this- he was interviewed by The Oregonian back in November 2002:

NOVEMBER 2002 : (PORTLAND CELL : HAWASH : OREGONIAN INTERVIEWS HAWASH ABOUT GLOBAL RELIEF FOUNDATION) The Oregonian interviewed Hawash by phone last November about his donations to the Global Relief Foundation. He said he made the donations after someone from Global Relief came to town to make a presentation at either the Bilal Mosque or Islamic Center of Portland. He said he couldn't recall the name of the GRF speaker. "The organization is legit," he said. "We believed that they are doing good work. It's a well-known organization." He said at the time that no investigators had questioned him about the foundation. - "FBI, Joint Terrorism agents search home in Hillsboro," by MARK LARABEE and LES ZAITZ, The Oregonian, 03/21/03

49 posted on 04/13/2003 1:00:50 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks; Lion's Cub; Cindy
This is interesting:

? (PORTLAND CELL : HAWASH VISITS NABLUS, HAS TROUBLE GETTING BACK INTO THE US UNTIL INTEL INTERVENES ON HIS BEHALF) Mr. McGeady, [Maher Mofeid Hawash's] boss there [at Intel], said Mr. Hawash went back to Nablus to visit his family several years ago and had trouble returning to the United States until Intel officials intervened.- "Terrorism Task Force Detains an American Without Charges" NY Times, Posted by Gary on April 05, 2003 at 09:40:54: . http://www.ecolivingcenter.com/board/main/messages/1074.html

50 posted on 04/13/2003 1:12:53 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson