Marathon Bombing Case: They Forgave the killer of 9 in Charleston, but not Dzhokhar.

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015, Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev finally spoke.

"I would like to begin in the name of Allah, the exalted and glorious, the most gracious, the most merciful, "Allah" among the most beautiful names. Any act that does not begin in the name of God is separate from goodness."

The victims, the jury, nobody was expecting this religious sermon.

"He did crack up and pause a few times, it sounded like he was trying to compose himself," stated a courtroom observer.

Before thanking his attorneys, he invoked the name of Muhammed. He thanked those who testified on his behalf, he thanked the jury for their service, and even the Court.

"The Prophet Muhammed, peace and blessings be upon him, said that if you do not show mercy to Allah's creation, then Allah will not have mercy on you, so I'd like to apologize now to the victims, to the survivors. Now, I am sorry for the lives that I've taken, for the suffering that I've caused you, for the damage that I've done. Irreparable damage."

What he said satisfied neither the victims nor those who continue to believe that he was framed.

"Immediately after the bombing, which I am guilty of - if there's any lingering doubt about that, let there be no more. I did do it, along with my brother."

Those who were hoping he would 'do a Tarek Mehanna' political speech got instead a speech on forgiveness that sounded at once sincere yet highly scripted, but answered nobody's questions like why? or how?

"Now, I am a Muslim. My religion is Islam. The God I worship, besides whom there is no other God, is Allah. And I prayed to Allah to bestow his mercy upon the deceased, those affected in the bombing, and their families. Allah says in the Quran that with every hardship is relief. I pray for your relief, for your healing, for your well-being, for your strength. I ask Allah to have mercy upon me and my brother and my family. I ask Allah to bestow his mercy upon those present here today. And Allah knows best those deserving of His mercy."

This convoluted sort of apology left everyone scratching their heads.

Why would he wait until AFTER he was found guilty and sentenced to death to apologize? And why, how, what the heck - and how is it that he is suddenly speaking with a thick Arabian accent? Not a Russian accent. He sounded Middle Eastern, two different observers told New Trend. It really was him, they said, but strangely out of character. He used to talk like "Yo what's up."

The most bizarre part of it is that not only Carmen Ortiz the lead prosecutor, but Judge O'Toole made public statements condemning Jahar's interpretation of his own religion.

"You did it on purpose... It is tragic, for your victims and now for you, surely someone who believes God smiles on and rewards the killing of innocents believes in a cruel god. This is not and cannot be the god of Islam," said the judge right before condemning Jahar to death. So is he being executed for murder or for a politically incorrect interpretation of Islam?

U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz, whose office prosecuted Tsarnaev, said she was "struck more by what he didn't say.

"He didn't renounce terrorism, he didn't renounce violent extremism, and he couched his comments in line with Allah and Allah's view, which gave it a religious tone, and there was nothing...about this crime that was Islam-associated."

Tsarnaev adhered to a radicalized version of Islam was not in line with the faith's "peaceful and loving" roots, Ortiz explained.

"The youth will not stay quiet while America is killing the innocent Muslims. As my sons there will be many many many inshallah! And I will die with my love towards them," texted Jahar's mother to a supporter.

"Your country kills the brothers and sisters and those good hearted and beautiful souls like my sons who love their ummah cannot see the conspiracies of your government towards our ummah and things like that happen! For example if someone kills my brother or my sister I will not blink and destroy whoever killed them - why?? Because I love them...Everything is by Allah's will... Allah knows the intention and the purity of it and what was the intention for!" concluded Jahar's mother.

I am worried that they are going to execute Jahar before we learn the true story. His statement created as many questions as it answered. This is quite a decade, quite a century, already. However, Jahar has been moved to a prison in Florence, Colorado. It is nearby but not the same place where Imam Jamil al-Amin is being held in Supermax.

If Jahar didn't bomb the marathon, who did?

Boston - Accused Marathon bomber, Dzhokhar (Jahar) Tsarnaev’s last pre-trial hearing took place on December 18th. He still resolutely refuses to plead guilty for a crime he claims he did not commit. I watched the proceedings in the overflow room and also participated in a protest outside the courthouse, where I was interviewed by reporters from every news channel.

I explained to them that I want a fair trial for Jahar. The public deserves to know what really happened. We need to make sure we got the right guy. Erroneous media reports based on leaks from anonymous law enforcement officials have been presented to the public in lieu of evidence, and have greatly biased the jury pool against the defendant before he has even gone to trial. As to whether or not I personally think he’s innocent, I would say, based on past prosecutions by US Attorney Carmen Ortiz’s team in front of the same Judge O’Toole, that it is highly probable that the young man is simply a victim of anti-Islamic prejudice.

For example, Tarek Mehanna was sentenced to over 17 years for joking comments he made on the internet, which the government misconstrued as planning to commit terrorist acts. His trial was based on highly inflammatory statements against the Islamic religion, irrelevant evidence such as beheading videos, expert testimony from career neocons, and plea bargains from acquaintances who were facing decades in prison unless they testified against Mehanna. Based on the media reports, during the time of the trial, many people in the Muslim community refused to stand up for their brother and spent energy distancing themselves from him. It was only after sentencing that he was allowed to speak out about his unjust conviction.

In Jahar’s case, he is not just accused of thought crimes but actual explosions that killed and maimed people. If he is innocent, then the real bomber is still at large. In the worst case scenario, Jahar was chosen as a fall guy to cover up for a plot that is much more sinister. So far, there have been no bomb making materials found in either his home nor that of his brother. The government has never once claimed that the fireworks that his friends took out of his dorm room were linked to the bombing. The government prosecuted the friends for lying about throwing away the backpacks, in order to pressure them to testify against their friend.

If there is evidence that Jahar and his brother Tamerlan had something to do with the Boston Marathon bombings, then the public still deserves to know the bigger picture. I have no problem with executing a criminal who committed murder but I have a huge problem with someone being executed in order to silence him. The government has silenced almost every potential defense witness. Jahar’s friends, relatives, friends of friends and even relatives of friends of friends have been deported, imprisoned and even killed by the FBI. The defense complains that they are having trouble getting anyone to talk due to government intimidation.

Furthermore, defense lawyers have complained that the prosecution is being evasive instead of presenting clear arguments as to why they believe he is the bomber. They don’t seem to want to “unravel the mystery.”

I don’t know if the truth will ever come out in this courtroom. It is not being played as a straightforward prosecution. The government is playing chess, not proving their point.

Hearing after hearing, the defense has been begging the prosecution to present their argument. Instead, the government has dumped on them millions of pages of unsearchable computer records without any explanation as to their significance. US Attorney Weinreb has consistently argued, with a smirk on his face, that if the government were to present their case to the defense, the defense would be able to come up with a counter-argument, which would be unfair to prosecutors; therefore they need to keep the element of surprise. Yet at the same time, the government has been illegally feeding news stories to the media. The defense complained that they are learning more about the government’s narrative of this case from the television than they are getting from the other attorneys. The government is not playing fair, which leads to the question of whether it is covering up the truth.

In 95% of cases since 9/11, where Muslims are accused of terrorism related acts, the FBI has been involved. We need to know more about the extent of FBI involvement in the Boston Marathon bombing suspects’ lives. His mother stated to reporters last year that the FBI had been interviewing Tamerlan on a regular basis for two years before the bombing. He had been asked to become an informant. They knew him well. So, the most likely scenario is either that he bombed the marathon as an employee of the FBI, or else that he was framed for a crime he did not commit in retaliation for refusing to become an informant for the FBI.

I don’t want to live in a country where the FBI can just come into your house and murder you because you knew somebody, where they can just accuse you of a bombing and then, instead of presenting evidence in a court of law, make up TV docu-dramas about you without even consulting you for your side of the story. Perhaps it’s not as important to ordinary Americans that their government obey the rule of law, but as someone whose parents came to this country and swore their allegiance to the US Constitution, I see no other course of action possible other than standing up and fighting for what my country stands for.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is an American citizen with rights. He came to this country as a refugee. He loved living here. He had many friends, no criminal record, and absolutely no motive to hurt anyone. If people don’t stand up for his rights, next week it could be your son in shackles.

US Supreme Court Denies Mehanna Appeal

TMO 

Tarek Mehanna’s appeal to the US Supreme Court was rejected on Monday, October 6, 2014. Mehanna of Sudsbury, Massachusetts, is serving a sentence of 17 1/2 years on account of visiting Yemen to study Arabic and later translating Islamic texts for the website At Tibyan, which the government has construed as “supporting terrorism.”

“Where, exactly, does free speech end and unlawful terrorist coordination begin?” commented Mark Joseph Stern in Slate. “Translating, publishing, and praising ideological texts, no matter how morally vile, is generally considered to be a basic free speech activity. Everyone knows that the First Amendment protects translations of Mein Kampf. Why did Mehanna’s translation of jihadist hosannas land him behind bars?”

This question gains weight with the news this week that the Supreme Court also refused to hear appeals from two other Muslim men, who have suffered intolerably for no crime: Ziyad Yaghi, a North Carolina native and Guantanamo inmate Abdul Razak Ali.

“Petitioner raised arguments based solely on issues of undisputed fact: he was arrested in Pakistan, not in Afghanistan, he had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks or terrorism, and he was not engaged in hostilities against the United States or its allies at any time. Petitioner’s “malfeasance” that apparently warrants his life imprisonment without charge was simply an eighteen day stay in the same guesthouse as a man who the government once believed to be affiliated with al-Qaeda, but, as the evidence showed below, is now no longer believed by the government to have been associated with al-Qaeda,” wrote Abdul Razak Alik on August 23, 2014.

“The questions Petitioner asks in his petition are whether he can be held, indefinitely, based simply on the fact that he was staying in the same guesthouse in Pakistan as someone else who happened to once have been accused of being connected with Al-Qaeda, rather than upon actual evidence of Petitioner’s own overt acts hostile to the United States or its allies; and, where, as here, Petitioner was not alleged to have been engaged in an armed conflict against the United States in Afghanistan (or anywhere for that matter) prior to his capture. If the answer to those questions is yes, then Petitioner also asks whether there is any limit to the duration of his detention. It is clear that the government has avoided discussing or answering these questions, because its basis for holding Petitioner is based not on the law, but on its ever-expanding and elastic view of the law.”

As convincing as this argument may seem to loyal Americans, we need to be asking these questions of our government until they listen. This is very frightening, that the Supreme Court’s reaction to an obviously innocent person is to ignore his case because he is Muslim. And this doesn’t even just apply to foreigners.

Tarek Mehanna had no idea his actions were criminal . He possessed the self-confidence and outspoken attitude of a relatively affluent, American born male. His brother gave an interview on WGBH News on September 25, 2014 stating:

“The FBI was approaching my brother since 2004. So, we saw a lead up to something happening. and that kind of peaked in 2007 before we graduated from pharmacy school. He was arrested in 2008, he was let off on bail, and at that point we didn’t know what to expect. So when it happened again in 2009, at that point we didn’t know what to expect… My parents did discourage him from online activities, but his response to them was it’s free speech and it’s protected.”

Mehanna’s lawyers argued that he didn’t give any tangible support to al-Qaida, and his online activities were protected free speech.

However, five years later, Mehanna’s father Ahmed said his family had not even had “one iota of hope” that his son would get a hearing before the high court, in light of the news reports on ISIS.

“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court is affected by such a saga and such media frenzy,” Ahmed Mehanna said. “It is a very, very sad day.”

Mehanna’s prosecutor, US Attorney Carmen Ortiz, is the same one who is pursuing the prosecutions of youths accused in relation to the Boston Marathon bombings. She claims Mehanna was “using the Internet to encourage others to support terrorism.”

“I’m disappointed to see even the highest court still submissive to the executive branch’s fabrication of charges. It’s clearly the First Amendment [at issue], and they refused to even look at it.”

Mehanna was threatened with prosecution after refusing to act as an informant for the FBI. He is accused of support for terrorism, though his support never included picking up a gun or fundraising. The government alleges that Mehanna “intended” to go to Iraq to take up arms against the US, although there is no evidence of this.

Supreme Court Rejects Tarek Mehanna’s appeal

No Justice for Muslim Political Prisoners.
Supreme Court Rejects Tarek Mehanna’s appeal;
Ziyad Yaghi, Abdul Razak Ali also denied appeal
by Sis. Karin Friedemann [Boston]

On Monday, October 6, 2014 the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from Tarek Mehanna, a Massachusetts resident who is serving a 17 1/2 year sentence for translating ancient Arabic texts on jihad for the Islamic website At Tibyan.

Mehanna claims he was threatened with prosecution after refusing to act as an informant for the FBI. He is accused of support for terrorism, though his support never included picking up a gun. The government alleges that Mehanna “intended” to go to Iraq to take up arms against the US, although there is no evidence. Mehanna is guilty of nothing more than saying in passing that Iraqis have a right to defend themselves.

“I’m disappointed to see even the highest court still submissive to the executive branch’s fabrication of charges,” Mehanna’s father, Ahmed Mehanna, 64, said. “It’s clearly the First Amendment [at issue], and they refused to even look at it.”

Mehanna’s prosecutor, US Attorney Carmen Ortiz, is the same one who is pursuing the prosecutions of youths accused in relation to the Boston Marathon bombings. She claims Mehanna was “using the Internet to encourage others to support terrorism.”

Boston FBI Agent Vincent Lisi in charge of framing the case against Mehanna stated, “From his travel to Yemen to receive training to kill American soldiers to his material support for terrorism at home, it was clear Mr. Mehanna trained to be a terrorist.”

Prosecutors say Mehanna traveled with Ahmad Abousamra to Yemen in 2004 to join a terrorist training camp, while Mehanna insists he traveled there to learn Arabic. He had expressed some light-hearted interest to a friend in checking out the famous al Qaeda training camps, but they don’t really exist as tourism adventure spots anymore in this decade now that Reagan is no longer president. Mehanna never did go to any camp to participate in any weapons training, and even if he had, that is not the same thing as signing up for a war against the US. Mehanna’s lawyers said he didn’t give any tangible support to al-Qaida, and his online activities were protected free speech.

“We are disappointed that the Supreme Court declined to hear the case,” a lawyer for Mehanna, P. Sabin Willett told ABC News.

Mehanna’s father said his family had not even had “one iota of hope” that his son would get a hearing before the high court, in light of the news reports on ISIS.

“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court is affected by such a saga and such media frenzy,” Ahmed Mehanna said. “It is a very, very sad day.”

“Everybody agrees that Mehanna supported al-Qaida’s cause; At Tibyan is a fairly popular terrorist forum, and Mehanna translated its content with the clear intention of swaying opinion toward the jihadist cause. But translating, publishing, and praising ideological texts, no matter how morally vile, is generally considered to be a basic free speech activity. Everyone knows that the First Amendment protects translations of Mein Kampf. Why did Mehanna’s translation of jihadist hosannas land him behind bars?” writes Mark Joseph Stern in Slate.

“Where, exactly, does free speech end and unlawful terrorist coordination begin?”

Mehanna had no idea his actions were criminal. He possessed the self-confidence and outspoken attitude of a relatively affluent, American born male.

“A major issue that seems to remain open as a result of the Court’s decision is the extent to which a defendant must “coordinate” his or her activities with the FTO [Foreign Terrorist Organization] in question in order to be convicted under § 2339. The Court had previously held in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. 2705 (2010), that § 2339 “reaches only material support coordinated with or under the direction of a designated foreign terrorist organization” (emphasis added),” writes Alex Ely in lawfareblog.com.

Andy Wang of lawfareblog explains, “The 1996 “material support” provision, 18 U.S.C. § 2339, criminalizes the providing of “material support or resources” to a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). Providing “material support or resources” can mean the providing of “any property... or service” to the FTO... The government succeeded in convicting him under the material support provision, and the First Circuit affirmed the conviction.”

“Mehanna’s petition opens with a statutory argument—that his actions were not criminal under any reasonable definition of the word “coordination.” Noting that he only translated the texts—at his own discretion—and that the translations were not committed, directed, paid for by, performed in concert with, or presented to any FTO, Mehanna argues that he could not possibly have “coordinate[d]” with any FTOs... he merely translated the texts at his own discretion and disseminated them to other users on the internet.”

Mehanna concludes, “If the government’s low bar for what actions and speech constitute “coordination” is allowed to stand, it would impose unconstitutional sanctions for merely talking or associating with people on the internet.”

However, Mehanna’s vacation to Yemen, the government argued, was enough to let the conviction stand, brushing aside the issue of whether translations alone can constitute sufficient coordination and material support.

This week the Supreme Court also denied appeal to Ziyad Yaghi, another American-born Muslim found guilty of suspicious vacationing after he went to Egypt in search of a bride and tried to make a stop in Jerusalem; and Guantanamo inmate Abdul Razak Ali.

Tariq Mehenna: No justice for Muslims

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1568.htm

"Devoted to Peaceful Change Sentenced Beyond Decency. The Suffering of a man of God Bearable owing to his Deep Faith in Allah."


Tariq Mehanna, who was sentenced to 17 1/2 years on bogus terrorism support charges in Boston federal court in 2011, has shown himself to be a model of patience and gratitude to God as he sits in the CMU Marion. In a recent letter to this author, Tariq wrote: "Things are OK, though. I've got peace and quiet, and time to read and think, which is worth more than the world in gold."

Tariq, now 32, was imprisoned for thought crimes, namely the online translation of ancient Arabic texts on jihad, but he believes the charges came in retaliation to his resistance to the FBI's bid to make him an informant.

"No evidence linked him to actual acts of terrorism or suggested that he had conspired with a real-world terrorist organization or provided any terrorist group with property, advice assistance or the like," reported Amna Akbar in the Nation.

Despite this tremendous setback, the young man has chosen to use his time wisely, producing scriptural commentary to be disseminated throughout the internet. His new article, sent out on September 6, 2014, begins:

"You would likely find the prison environment to be boring. The color scheme of the place - an exotic array of grays and off-whites - itself does wonders in dulling the mind. Most people cannot live without entertainment, and entertainment options are limited in here. Prisoners typically opt for TV. Since I don't watch much TV, I thus spend quite a bit of time in my cell reading. My reading is all over the place (history, sociology, astronomy, medicine, and plenty of newspapers), but the field most enjoyable to me is that of Hadith."

He mentions a hadith that has particular significance to the prisoner in isolation: "It is related that the great scholar and Mujahid, 'Abdullah bin al-Mubarak, used to spend a lot of time alone. He was once asked: "Aren't you lonely, sitting by yourself?" He replied: 'How can I be lonely while sitting with the Prophet (peace be upon him), the Sahabah, and the Tabi'in?' He was referring to the books he was surrounded with that contained their life stories and narrated statements. Each time such a book is opened, the reader is indeed reaching back through time, to another part of the Earth, to meet the Prophet and the thousands of people who comprised the best generations of human history, and to learn from their wisdom."

He takes comfort in knowing the the Prophet (pbuh) gave his glad tiding to the Believers that would come later, especially toward the End Time, because they believed in him even having never seen him. Yet Tariq also notes how the Believers are indeed persecuted outcasts in the present day just as they were in the beginning of Islam.

"Were the Sahabah to visit our world, they would be walking into a repeat of this. Just as they saw the Makkans having invented for themselves a religion containing mere remnants of the teachings of Ibrahim, the Sahabah would see the 'Western Islam' the people have invented for themselves today and recognize nothing but remnants of what they were taught by the Prophet in Madinah. Of all things, they would be most saddened to see many claimants to Islam still clueless about what he taught is the very tightest bond of Iman itself: Wala' & Bara' - this despite the untold amount of material that has been authored and translated into every imaginable language on the topic, and despite us living in an era where the enemy has done away with all pretense. The Sahabah would wince at the fact that while the hypocrites they faced in Madinah at least were opportunists who sided with the believers when they had the upper hand, today's hypocrites unconditionally side with the enemy through thick and thin."

Tariq reminds us that Ibn Taymiyyah also wrote that "it has been authentically reported through numerous chains of narration that the Prophet said: "There will always be a group of my ummah that is victoriously upon the truth until the Hour comes, and they will not be harmed by those who abandon or oppose them."

Tariq continues: "Commenting on that same hadith, an-Nawawi wrote: 'It could be said that this group is dispersed between the various categories of believers. Some of them are courageous warriors, some are experts in Fiqh, some are experts in Hadith, some are ascetics, some are those who enjoin what is good and forbid what is wrong, and some are known for other forms of good. And they are not necessarily concentrated in one location. Rather, they could be scattered throughout the Earth.'"

Under the most difficult circumstances our brother reminds us that there is nothing more important than striving in the way of Allah for truth and justice. At the end of this month, the US Supreme Court will decide whether or not to take on his case.

Write to him at: Tarek Mehanna #05315-748, Marion CMU, PO Box 1000, Marion, IL 62959 or look up his support pages on Facebook.

Todashev Relative Offers Home to BMB Suspect

A long bail hearing for Khairullozhon Matanov, friend of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who is facing the death penalty, took place on June 4, 2014. The thin, fragile-looking 23 year old asked Judge Marianne Bowler for "voluntary incarceration" instead of requesting bail because he had nowhere to live, since he lost his job as a taxi driver on account of his arrest. This same Judge Bowler convicted Tarek Mehanna of terrorism support based on inflammatory rhetoric in April of 2010.

Upon hearing this pitiful news, Elena Teyer, the mother of the wife of Ibrahim Todashev, who was murdered by the FBI in his Florida home in May of 2013, immediately contacted Matanov's attorney Edward Hayden to offer the young man a room in her home in Georgia and volunteered to pay for his transportation there. She has never met the Tsarnaevs nor this man before, but since the murder of her son-in-law she feels strongly, "We are all family now."

In August 2013, Teyer's daughter, Todashev's wife, Reniya Manukyan traveled to Dagestan to visit Zubeidat and Anzor Tsarnaev, Jahar and Tamerlan's parents.

"We cried so much there's just no more tears left," Reniya said about the visit.

Teyer wants to testify in the Tsarnaev trial as a witness against the FBI but her letters to Jahar's attorneys go unanswered. This is despite the fact that government prosecutors added to the case against Tsarnaev a clause implicating his brother Tamerlan in a triple homicide based on an alleged confession Todashev "was about to write down" before the FBI shot him seven times.

"I saw the body. I saw the inside of the apartment where he was killed," she says.

Teyer is determined to fight for justice and for the truth to come out about this concerted government attack on Russo-Muslim immigrants to the US.

"I am recently retired from long term active duty in the US Army. I'm not like these kids [Jahar's friends]. I'm not afraid."

Khairullozhon Matanov, originally from Kyrgyzstan, probably has by now realized that he walked into a trap. When the FBI posted photographs of the Tsarnaev brothers on TV and asked the public to identify them, they already knew who the boys were and where they lived. Local police reported that the FBI already had Tamerlan's home in Cambridge under surveillance.

The FBI seems to have cast a dragnet to lure in anyone who might know the Tsarnaevs, so that they could then ensnare them into false testimony or else prosecute them; therefore creating a false public impression that the FBI had heroically disrupted a local "terror cell."

Matanov believed the Tsarnaev brothers would never have committed the bombing and presumably was hoping to clear their names when he contacted the Braintree, Massachusetts police department and offered to give them whatever information he had, which was limited to their names and addresses, because he had no information whatsoever about the brothers being involved in the bombing. A few days after it happened he had even invited them for dinner at a local restaurant, something you don't normally do if you think a person might be a dangerous criminal hiding from authorities. The police contacted the FBI, who contacted Matanov approximately 24 hours later.

Instead of thanking him for the information, the FBI then started an intense investigation on Matanov. They conducted many interviews with him over the next year or so, in addition to both overt and covert surveillance. The most obvious surveillance was reported to the media by neighbors: an unmanned aircraft circling around his home. The only surveillance FBI Agent Timothy McElroy, who was on the witness stand for the majority of Matanov's bail hearing, admitted to was what he called "bumper log surveillance" - following Matanov around in black, unmarked government vehicles, keeping him in sight at all times. Manatov was also contacted via his attorney and told to stay away from Boston's July 4 and Patriots Day celebrations, to which he complied.

The hearing focused on his money transfers overseas and the fact that he had asked a friend to dispose of some cell phones, knowing the FBI would be on their way.

The majority of the money was sent to his family but there were 15 people in 6 countries whom he wired money to that did not share his last name, some of whom he used false aliases to contact, for example he sent an undisclosed amount of money as Ali Hasan to Kamoliodin Niiazaliev. The defense argued that he operated an illegal business selling stolen cell phones overseas, and that these wire transfers had nothing to do with terrorism. The FBI testimony was deliberately vague and allowed court reporters to insinuate that the purpose of the money transfers was related to terrorism in order to create a media buzz.

Attorney Hayden told Elena Teyer that he will try to find out if Matanov could be released to her home or to that of another person in Massachusetts who volunteered their home, as well as the amount of bail. A commissary account is being opened for Matanov's needs in prison by members of the Free Jahar movement. It is hoped that once he understands that he is not alone, Matanov will stand up and fight for his rights instead of bowing his head in fear.

Judge Humiliated During Tsarnaev Hearing

TMO 

On April 16, 2014 TMO attended a status hearing for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 20, who faces a 30-count federal indictment for his alleged role in the Boston marathon bombings. Tsarnaev was not present in the courtroom, nor were his family members. The 1½-hour hearing took place before Judge George O’Toole. The US government was represented by Aloke Chakravarty, Nadine Pellegrini, and William Weinreb while only two of Tsarnaev’s lawyers were present: Miriam Conrad and David Bruck, the death penalty specialist recently appointed to the team. US District Attorney Carmen Ortiz was in the courtroom.

“Judge O’Toole wasted no time announcing his decisions on two of the motions before the court. Without hearing any arguments, he matter-of-factly denied the government’s motion for a protective order barring Tsarnaev from viewing the autopsy photos of the four people killed in the bombing and its aftermath. He also denied, without prejudice, a defense motion to dismiss several counts of the indictment. The defense team had argued that the charges were redundant and duplicative. ‘I think it’s premature,’ Judge O’Toole explained, adding that the motion could be revisited at the time of the trial,” reports Victoria Liberty of the Freedom Bulletin.

The first discussion topic was Tsarnaev’s visitation rights under SAMs (Special Administrative Measures).

Attorney Bruck requested SAMs be vacated. He complained that  Tsarnaev’s legal team is not allowed to speak with him without an FBI officer present, which creates a problem since the FBI is on the prosecution team. This results in “fearful conversation” with family members and denies lawyers the ability to see the “story of the family.”

US Attorney Pelligrini countered that the SAMs have already been modified. There are now 12 people who have permission to visit Tsarnaev, including lawyers, paralegals and investigators. Pelligrini said the defense is “unable to control what the defendant says.”

“What’s quite clear is the defendant felt clear to say whatever he wanted, despite the presence of the FBI investigator.”

Bruck said there is no national security reason to allow an FBI agent to listen in on family conversations. The FBI will spin anything said.

They were both referring to a recent incident when Tsarnaev joked to his sister about the SAMs restrictions, making light of the uncomfortable situation. The FBI leaked to the media that he was making inappropriate statements that demonstrated his lack of remorse for his crime.

“At least we want the FBI agent who’s listening in on these conversations not to pass information to the prosecution,” argued Bruck.

The prosecution argued that Tsarnaev can always talk to lawyers freely, but when his sisters are there it is a social visit that warrants FBI monitoring. This makes very little sense from an investigative standpoint. The FBI presence can only make the Tsarnaevs nervous about talking. If the FBI wanted information they would leave them alone with a recording device.

The government insisted that Tsarnaev will “pass messages” to the public if they let him talk. “Information is being transmitted!” Pelligrini warned.

Tsarnaev had been imprisoned without incident until Attorney General Eric Holder, alarmed by the thousands of letters Tsarnaev received supporting his innocence, called for restrictions on Tsarnaev, claiming there was “substantial risk” that his “communications or contacts with persons could result in death or serious bodily injury” to others, insinuating that he had “followers” that would commit violence at his command.

Judge O’Toole sided with the defense. He said the normal prison visitor screening and security measures were sufficient for public safety. He felt the defense is being limited in their ability to defend their client by the FBI presence during their meetings. He ruled that since family visits are only allowed with a lawyer present, they should be considered legal visits exempt from monitoring and not as social visits, since understanding family dynamics is relevant to the defense.

“If the security interest is higher than the investigative interest, then a party other than the prosecution should be present,” said O’Toole. “The defense team ought to have an opportunity to have a 2 or 3 way conversation among siblings. I don’t think the safety, security issue looms very large.”

The government rather insolently retorted that the Warden is able to restrict visits even without SAMs.

“Is the court ordering the BOP to not impose restrictions?” Weinreb seemed to dare the judge.

Weinreb openly undermined the judge’s authority, telling him if you order this, we will go around you. The prosecution seemed to be talking to the judge like an employee!

Judge O’Toole submitted to government pressure, conceding to allow in a BOP lawyer to argue against reducing prison restrictions before he made a decision in two weeks.

Next, the lawyers moved on to discovery disputes.

Defense Attorney Miriam Conrad stated that “as a result of government failure to meet discovery deadlines, we are now at a disadvantage.”

Conrad said the government is not following normal protocol to respond within two weeks to discovery requests and the defense had not received certain long requested documents until Friday last week.

“We have had no opportunity to submit a response,” she said.

Conrad stated that the defense still does not have the Todashev interview materials, and insisted that they are entitled to know what he said during the FBI interview.

The government says the information should not be public.

“But they have leaked so much to the public already,” Conrad argued.

Weinreb said the government has no legal obligation to produce the requested materials, although they agreed to voluntarily provide some information.

The defense wants information on how Tamerlan “slit the neck of 3 helpless people,” Bruck explained, because, “This case is very much a story about a family and the relationships between them.”
“Todashev implicated himself and Tamerlan in the Waltham murders, not our client. It’s not clear if Dzhokhar knew of the crime,” stated Conrad.

Weinreb said Todashev’s interview is not related to this case and “has no relevance.” This is curious since it was the prosecution that added the alleged confession into the court documents in the first place.

Now he says Tamerlan’s influence on Dzhokhar “relates to what he knew, not what happened.”

In court papers, Dzhokhar’s lawyers argued that Tamerlan “was an all-powerful force who could not be ignored or disobeyed.”

Weinreb responded that there is no indication that Dzhokhar knew of Tamerlan’s murderousness, and that is all that is relevant.

O’Toole had denied the request in November for Todashev documents on the grounds that law enforcement privilege protects disclosure of files in an ongoing investigation. Now that the FBI has issued a report clearing itself of any wrongdoing regarding the killing of a potential witness, O’Toole said he would ponder the defense request for the Todashev statement after viewing it privately, “in camera.”

The ACLU is currently suing the FBI and US District Attorney Carmen Ortiz over the FBI murder of Todashev. The ACLU of Massachusetts is calling for state Attorney General Martha Coakley to conduct her own independent investigation into Massachusetts law enforcement’s involvement in the Todashev shooting in the name of transparency and accountability.

The defense has argued that the FBI had pressured Tamerlan to become an informant. Could Todashev have had damaging information about links between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the FBI? A genuine investigation would reveal information about the FBI that could hurt the case for the prosecution.

“While some of this circle of friends in Florida, like Todashev, faced pressure to confess to participating in or having knowledge of the Waltham crime, others, according to CAIR’s Shibly, have been told that if they want to be left alone and not deported, they need to become informants. He says several of those harassed have opted to return to Russia rather than become spies for the FBI in Florida’s Muslim community,” reports firedoglake.

I have to assume the defense is aware that Tamerlan probably didn’t commit the triple murder in Waltham – one of the victims was his best friend. An investigative journalist for WBUR told TMO she suspects the crime was related to a local drug ring.

However, for the sake of argument involving requesting documents related to Todashev, the defense appears to accept the government story. They’ve also suggested that Tamerlan suffered from mental illness, saying his “paranoia and distress” were fueled by an FBI attempt to recruit him as an informant to report on the Chechen and Muslim communities in Boston.

“We base this on information from our client’s family and other sources that the FBI made more than one visit to talk with (Tamerlan’s parents) and Tamerlan, questioned Tamerlan about his internet searches, and asked him to be an informant,” the defense motion states.

The government denies the allegation.

Defense lawyers want to see FBI documents to confirm their allegation. Naturally, the government is not cooperating.

Next, the defense argued for access to lab reports and other materials. The government is delaying or refusing to provide information about its mental/physical examinations of Tsarnaev and other investigations including computer searches.

“How can prosecutors argue with a straight face that computer or phone searches aren’t material to the Tsarnaev case? I don’t know how a search of a computer and what they revealed is anything other than an examination under rules of discovery!” Conrad argued.

“They thought it was material to search 12 computers. If we have to conduct our own studies of hard drives it will take longer and be very expensive.”

Obviously whoever has Tsarnaev’s debit card, computer and cell phone information can easily figure out where he was and what he was doing before, after and during the marathon.

Aloke Chakravarty, who was the lead prosecutor in the case against Tarek Mehanna, whose trial was also overseen by O’Toole, now argues that evidence from government computer searches isn’t relevant to Tsarnaev. But at Mehanna’s trial he heavily relied on chat messages and computer files to make the case for the prosecution. If the government doesn’t want to reveal computer and chat records now, this would imply that the information obtained from Tsarnaev’s computer/phone might be more useful for the defense than for the prosecution.

When the defense asked for any information obtained under secret surveillance programs, the prosecution said they will not reveal this information, unless they plan to use it at trial.

As she asked for FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) information, such as intelligence that the Russian government had shared about Tamerlan and his radical leanings, Conrad commented, “I have been puzzled all along by the government’s rather opaque responses to our requests for FISA notice, and I continue to be puzzled.”

Conrad argued, mentioning the Patriot Act: “First the government says they do not intend to use FISA obtained evidence, but there are indications of Homeland Security surveillance. Then the government takes the position that we are not entitled to notice their data mining. The defense has a right to challenge how information was obtained and to challenge admissibility.”

The defense may move to suppress evidence gleaned from computer searches on the grounds that the searches exceeded the scope of the warrant. Any such motions are due on May 7th.

Chakravarty stated, “The government doesn’t want to be in a position of foreclosure just because the defense provoked a response. We can put to rest right now whether there is any secret evidence. There isn’t.”

O’Toole said that because the government said it doesn’t plan to use any surveillance material at trial, there is nothing for him to rule on. He denied the defense motion to obtain this information. Prosecutors will have to give proper notice if they plan to use any evidence, and if they don’t, they can’t.

O’Toole says he plans to discuss expert witness disclosures at the next hearing on June 18. He chuckled aloud to himself that this is no ordinary case.

Dzokhar Tsarnaev is scheduled to be tried on November 3.

Conrad expressed doubts that the defense could be ready by that date, given the government stalling to avoid handing over documents.

“I’ll make you a believer,” said O’Toole, who intends to stick to the schedule no matter what.

I sincerely hope this trial will proceed with a fact-based format rather than the tactics that Miriam Ortiz and her employees have previously used, basically overwhelming the jury with irrelevant, unsubstantial, prejudicial, and downright false evidence.

Tarek Mehanna Appeal Hearing

November 27, 2013 by TMO 

Tarek Mahenna in court, artist’s rendering.

Observers at Tarek Mehanna’s appeal hearing heard from a panel of three judges on November 13, 2013. They filled the courthouse and two overflow rooms.

Judge Bruce Selya began the session with a disturbing comment reminiscent of Nazi German descriptions of its Jewish population as a disease: “Terrorism is the modern-day equivalent of the bubonic plague: it is an existential threat.”

Mehanna, a Massachusetts College of Pharmacy graduate and former teacher at Alhuda Academy in Worcester, was convicted in 2012 of conspiring to kill American soldiers and supporting Al Qaeda. Mehanna’s lawyers insist that he gave no tangible support to al-Qaida, and his online activities were protected free speech. This case has drawn widespread interest because of its implications on protected vs. unprotected speech in its connection to terrorism related charges.

In arguments before the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Mehanna’s lawyer, Sabin Willett, said prosecutors repeatedly showed images of the World Trade Center in flames, videos of beheadings, and repeatedly made references to Osama bin Laden in an attempt to prejudice the jury against Mehanna.

‘’The purpose of this evidence was to frighten the jury,’’ Willett said, ‘’and it worked.’’

Judges Howard, Selya and Thompson upheld Mehanna’s conviction and sentence of 17 1/2 years.

Prosecutors said during Mehanna’s trial that he traveled to Yemen in 2004 to for terrorist training with plans to attack American soldiers in Iraq, but that the plan failed.

Mehanna’s lawyers argued that he traveled to Yemen to pursue religious studies.

Prosecutors relied heavily on the well-known fraud “expert witness” Evan Kohlmann.

What is not being discussed is that in the past, especially while the US was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, CIA-run “terror camps” were popular tourist attractions, similar to how nowadays Israel attracts Jewish tourists with the promise of rifle training. Mehanna reportedly expressed disappointment that such training camps no longer exist in Yemen.

Benjamin Wittes comments on Lawfare Blog. “The court of appeals held that the general guilty verdict could be sustained, even assuming for the sake of argument that the evidence of coordination with al Qaeda on Mehanna’s Internet activities had been inadequate to support that verdict–that is to say, even if Mehanna’s translation and advocacy were constitutionally protected… By eliminating Mehanna’s Internet activities altogether from the issues on appeal, the court thereby ensured that Mehanna will not be the important First Amendment precedent that many had thought it might be.”

US Attorney Carmen Ortiz, whose staff prosecuted Mehanna, hailed the ruling.

“We are gratified that the Court of Appeals carefully reviewed the case, found the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was more than sufficient to convict the defendant, and held that it was ‘confident’ that, in the court’s words, [Mehanna] ‘was fairly tried, justly convicted and lawfully sentenced,’ ” Ortiz said,citing the technical legality of the harsh conviction of the non-violent offender. 

Judge Selya wrote in rejection of the appeal that Mehanna’s co-conspirators had “testified that the defendant persistently stated his belief that engaging in jihad was “a duty upon a Muslim if he’s capable of performing it,” and that this duty included committing violence.

Following United States intervention in Iraq, the defendant concluded “that America was at war with Islam,” and saw American “soldiers as being valid targets” by the attacked people. Mehanna took the position that “there was an obligation for Muslims to stand up and fight against invasion of Iraq.

“The fundamental problem with the [appellate] ruling is that it allows the government to prosecute unpopular political speech,” said Alex Abdo, staff attorney at the ACLU’s National Security Project. 

Yet, beyond Mehanna’s religious belief in the concept of Jihad, or Just Warfare, he also claimed adherence to the doctrine of “aman,” which he describes as “a covenant to obey the law within a country that permits practice of the faith.” His adherence to aman would prohibit him personally from targeting American troops.

“The defendant’s position can be stated without much ceremony. He suggests… that although he may have sympathized with al-Qa’ida and spoken glowingly of the virtues of jihad, he nonetheless avoided crossing the line into criminal activity,” admits Selya.

However, Selya insists that: “Even if the government’s translation-as-material-support theory were factually insufficient, we would not reverse.”

Selya emotionally referred to the defendant’s flippant attitude regarding the “Texas BBQ” video — a phrase describing American soldiers being bombed in a widespread online video. Yet, this type of light-hearted style of murderous political commentary is very common among many Americans. One can only conclude that Mehanna is guilty of acting too American; too self-confident as a Muslim American, that he could joke about war.

Judge Selya concludes:

“We do not pretend to understand why the defendant chose to go down such a treacherous path. Nevertheless, the jury found that he knowingly and intentionally made that choice, and that finding is both supported by the clear weight of the evidence and untainted by legal error.”

It is truly unfortunate that an educated person such as Selya cannot even pretend to understand, let alone attempt to understand, why a Muslim American might sympathize with other Muslims globally, who are on the receiving end of drone attacks and worse. The court proceedings drew upon anti-Muslim prejudice not only in regards to the free speech issues but also regarding the question of who is allowed to travel abroad and for what reason.

In a world where armed, violent terrorists are trained by the US government – in Massachusetts – to send into other countries to influence political outcomes; in a world where youngsters go to Israeli terror camps to be trained in genocidal “fun,” I cannot think of anything more alarming than a judge who cannot “pretend to understand” the idea that any Muslim American might strive for freedom and equality – American style. Mehanna acted independently through free speech and free travel, without ever picking up a gun.

“The court’s likening of terrorism to ‘the modern-day equivalent of the bubonic plague’ is an example of the kind of sensational language that ensured a biased trial against Dr. Mehanna in the first place,” stated the Tarek Mehanna Support Committee. “The appeals court decision is outrageous, but we will continue to stand by Dr. Mehanna.”
“Tarek remains strong and unwavering in his iman,” reports Mehanna’s Facebook support page.