local actions

TARRANT COUNTY GREEN PARTY RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE HOLY LAND FOUNDATION AND RELIEF FUND
Whereas the Bush Administration and other administration officials:
1. Have specifically targeted The Holy Land Foundation in North Texas with allegations of criminal activities and persecution of members of this organization for activities protected by the U.S. Constitution; and,
2. Have singled out, in the name of “paradigm of prevention,” thousands of Arab and Muslim immigrants, essentially on the basis of their ethnicity or religion, for special treatment, including mandatory registration, FBI interviews and preventive detention. Businesses have been served with more than 100,000 “national Security letters”, which permit the FBI to demand records on customers without a court order or individualized basis for suspicion. They have been subjected to unprecedented secrecy about what elected officials are doing in their name while simultaneously suffering unprecedented official intrusion into their private lives by increased video surveillance, warrantless wiretapping and data-mining. The government’s “preventive” immigration initiatives have come up even more empty-handed. After 9/11 the Bush Administration called in 80,000 foreign nationals for fingerprinting, photographing and “special registration” simply because they came from predominantly Arab or Muslim countries; sought out another 8,000 young men from the same countries for FBI interviews; and placed more than 5,000 foreign nationals here in preventive detention. Yet as of September 2007, not one of these people stands convicted of a terrorist crime. The government’s record, in what is surely the largest campaign of ethnic profiling since the Japanese internment of World War II, is 0 for 93,000; and,
3. Have collected a list of over three hundred individuals and organizations that the government alleges co-conspired to support terrorism, including the Holy Land Foundation. This list was publicly filed in apparent violation of the Department of Justice’s own policies. The list of over three hundred alleged co-conspirators is so overly broad that it targets people and entities without any allegations of specific intent to engage in terrorism as defined in 18 U.S.C. & 92 (2w2) or 18 U.S.C. && 2339A & DB. effectively creating a public smear of these individuals and organizations; and,
4. Approved at least two different illegal electronic surveillance programs of American citizens without a warrant in violation of the fourth amendment and in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, and the American people were repeatedly lied to by U.S. government statements that no surveillance was taking place without a court order. The first program includes intercepting phone and email conversations without warrants and was exposed by the NY Times on December 16, 2005 http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/CPC/NYT_15cnd-program.html. After that program was exposed Bush said the program was carefully targeted to just include international calls and suspected members of Al Qaeda. Then, USA Today exposed the second program on May 11, 2006. It provides a wholesale attack on the fourth amendment by recording call identification information of tens of millions of purely domestic calls as well as international calls
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm; and,
5. Attacked basic human rights protections in the constitution, including habeas corpus, Fifth Amendment freedom from loss of life, liberty and property without due process of law, eighth amendment freedom from cruel and unusual punishment and fourth amendment freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. The first program includes intercepting phone and email conversations without warrants and was exposed by the NY Times on December 16, 2005: http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/CPC/NYT_15cnd-program.html. After that program was exposed Bush said the program was carefully targeted to just include international calls and suspected members of Al Qaeda. Then, USA Today exposed the second program on May 11, 2006. It provides a wholesale attack on the fourth amendment by recording call identification information of tens of millions of purely domestic calls as well as international calls
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm; and,
Be It Resolved that the Tarrant County Green Party strongly supports the Holy Land Foundation and demands that human rights be respected under the U.S. Constitution, including their right to pursue their mission of charitable and educational contributions all over the world.
Be It Further Resolved that the Tarrant County Green party demands due process of law for this humanitarian organization and that the Holy Land Foundation be given the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Be It Further Resolved that the Tarrant County Green Party strongly encourages that court cases currently scheduled to begin September 15th, 2008, against members of the Holy Foundation be dismissed. The first trial in April 2007, ended in a mistrial because jurors could not come to a unanimous decision. The Department of Justice’s attempt to hold a second trial is in violation of the double jeopardy standards established to protect American citizens against heavy-handed, zealous prosecutions using weak, unsubstantiated, politically driven theories.
Background Information:

U.S. District Judge Jorge Solis, the new judge in the Holy Land Foundation case has set the trial for September 15th, after the first trial ended in a hung jury. This is a Land Mark case in which the government states that the Holy Land Foundation Relief and Development organization is a charity organization that gave money to charities that were controlled by HAMAS. After 19 days of deliberations, juries in 2007 were unable to come to a definitive conclusion and the case ended in a mistrial. The government wants to try the case yet again. Not one of the defendants is accused of committing or directly sponsoring any violent acts. There were no accusations that HLF was causing any harm in any way (violent or non-violent) to anyone on American soil. The government has already spent over hundreds of millions of dollars on the prosecution of this case. " The whole case was based on assumptions that were based on suspicions," said juror Scroggins, who added: "If they had been a Christian or Jewish group, I don't think [prosecutors] would have brought charges against them." Experts found the jury's inability to come to a definitive conclusion evidence of weakness in the government's ability to provide clear enough evidence against the charity.
This treatment of the HLF and similar organizations raises troubling questions for all charities. Will any organization be subject to the same treatment if the government claims links to terrorism? How broadly will terrorism be defined, and what level of proof or connection will result in an organization being shut down? What about eco-terrorism, or domestic disruptions such as the protests organized against global trade and financial institutions? If a major U.S. philanthropic institution is discovered to have made a grant to an organization that the government claims is linked to terrorism, will it be subject to the same seize and shut-down treatment? The implications for Muslim charities are already being felt and are disturbing. No list of ‘clean’ organizations—those organizations not under government investigation—exists, creating a chilling effect on donations to all Muslim organizations, especially those that work overseas. Millions of dollars in contributions intended for legitimate charitable purposes have been frozen by the Treasury Department, and the work for which the funds were intended remains undone.
On December 1, 2001, Hamas orchestrated two suicide bombings in Israel that left 25 people dead. The following day, Prime Minister Sharon asked President Bush to act against Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLFRD), a California corporation headquartered in Texas which, according to its annual report, distributed approximately $6 million per year to refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, and Israel. 553 (It also raised money for non-Islamic causes, such as the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing and, in 2001, the attacks on the World Trade Center.) By December 4, 2001, the United States had frozen the organization’s assets and raided its offices in Texas, California, New Jersey, and Illinois.
President Bush said the money went to Hamas to “support schools and indoctrinate children to grow up into suicide bombers. (Ironically, one supposedly Hamas-controlled institution financed by HLFRD, the al Razi hospital in the West Bank, also received support from the U.S. Agency for International Development and the UAE Red Crescent.)
On March 7, 2002, The Holy Land Foundation Relief and Development Fund sued the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the Department of the Treasury. The organization claimed a violation of its First Amendment right to religious freedom, Fourth Amendment right to freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, and Fifth Amendment right to due process. Court documents revealed that the decision to freeze the organization’s assets came from a November 5, 2001, 49-page memo written by Dale L. Watson, assistant director of the counterterrorist division of the FBI, claiming that HLFRD was the “primary fund-raising entity for Hamas.” The complaint noted that the group conducted extensive charitable and humanitarian work with the International Committee of the Red Cross/Red Crescent, NATO, the UNHCR, Turkey, the UN World Food Program, UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, and the UN International Children’s Emergency Fund.
The state never brought criminal charges against HLFRD. Nor, as was earlier noted, did it manage to prosecute BFI, or a host of other charities whose assets it froze, for terrorist contributions. The United States’ failure to substantiate such claims, the introduction of measures that allowed for freezing assets on the basis of mere association, and the state’s disproportionate focus on Muslim charities created an environment hostile to legitimate Islamic businesses and charities. Admittedly, the alienation of Arabs and Muslims is also the product of other official policies, such as indefinite detention, and informal practices, such as planning commissions’ reluctance to approve the building of mosques in the aftermath of September 11. But the cumulative impact is borne in the economic affect on families, as well as a larger strain on social services. At a broader level, minority groups may develop a lack of confidence in the political process, preventing social cohesion and political participation.
References:
Chronicle of Philanthropy 10/17/2002, Vol. 15 Issue 1
“A Shocking Silence on Muslim Charities.”
Richard L. Moyers, executive director of the Ohio Association of Nonprofit Organizations.
OMB Watch:
http://www.ombwatch.org/article/blogs/entry/2586/36
The Challenge of Being a Muslim Charity: http://www.ombwatch.org/npa/TheChallengeofbeingaMuslimCharity.The USA Patriot Act and its Impact on Non-Profit Organizations:
http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/1803
William & Mary Law Review (March 2004) 45 Wm and Mary L. Rev.
“High Alert: The Government's War on the Financing of Terrorism and its Implications for Donors, Domestic Charitable Organizations, and Global Philanthropy.”
by NINA J. CRIMM – Professor of Law, St. John's University School of Law; LL.M. in Taxation, Georgetown University (1982); J.D. and M.B.A., Tulane University (1979); A.B., Washington University (1972).
Michigan Journal of International Law vol. 27, 4 (2006)
“Anti-Terrorist Finance In The United Kingdom And United States”
by LAURA K. DONOHUE — Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation
The Tarrant County Green Party joins the Hungry for Justice Coalition, supporting the Holy Land Foundation defendants and demanding that the court cases against them be dismissed. The Hungry for Justice Coalition adheres to non-violent principles and affirms the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Members of the coalition include civil rights and civil liberties organizations and activists:
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)
The Dallas Peace Center
Muslim American Society
American Muslim Alliance
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Crawford Peace House
American Muslim Task Force Tarrant County Green Party
URBAN GAS DRILLING IN FORT WORTH
The Tarrant County Green Party supports and works in coalition with the "Fort Worth Citizens Against Neighborhood Drilling Ordinance" (FwCanDo).
FwCanDo was formed by a small group of concerned citizens in September 2005 in response to natural gas drilling activities encroaching on our neighborhoods. We believe that gas drilling and related activities are a threat to people, property and wildlife.
We are concerned, among other things, with the following:
? Property values
? Neighborhood depreciation
? Air pollution
? Water pollution
? Soil contamination
? Noise and light pollution
? Health and safety
? Increased crime and traffic congestion
? Wildlife mortality
? Loss of green space
? Aesthetic impacts
? Catastrophic accidents
? Lack of evacuation plans
? Fort Worth's image as a livable city
For more information and education regarding this very crucial issue, go to: www.fwcando.org
Citizens are appearing before the Fort Worth City Council every Tuesday to demand a moratorium on all urban gas drilling. Please join us for support. The City Council meets every Tuesday, in the mornings at 10:00 A.M. the first two Tuesdays of the month and at 7:00 P.M., the remaining Tuesdays of the month. Fort Worth City Hall, 1000 Throckmorton.
ANIMAL RIGHTS
The concept of animal rights is based on the premise that sentient individuals of species other than our own deserve to be treated with fairness, justice, and respect. This assertion is founded on a commonality in basic anatomy and physiology among beings of the earth (at least, among those with central nervous systems) and a recognition of feeling, thinking beings as having an awareness of physical and emotional suffering. As it is empirically evident that individuals other than ourselves (humans) experience pleasure, love, grief and other mental states, it follows that there is no logical justification for denying importance to other beings who possess those states.
If we accord importance to our own thoughts, feelings, and lives, it is logically inconsistent to deny a similar importance to beings who may look different but who possess a similar awareness. On a moral level, other animals should thus receive similar consideration of their particular interests; and it follows that those interests deserve to be protected by law.
Animal rights is ultimately a social justice issue, a matter of recognizing our kindred nature with other beings, of empathy with their suffering and of demanding the respect due any thinking, feeling individual, regardless of species.
For more information, or to become active for the animals, contact Animal Connection of Texas (ACT) at
animalconnectiontx@yahoogroups.com or visit www.animalconnectiontx.org. Meetings are generally held on the second Saturday of every month in Dallas, TX. The Tarrant County Green Party supports and works in coalition with regional and local animal rights organizations and individuals