Doc's Talk: George Galloway Returns to the U.S. Amid Allegations of Terrorism Support

Tuesday, February 09, 2010

George Galloway Returns to the U.S. Amid Allegations of Terrorism Support

George Galloway Returns to the U.S. Amid Allegations of Terrorism Support

IPT News
February 8, 2010

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1783/george-galloway-returns-to-the-us-amid
Send Comment RSS

British MP George Galloway made a surprising visit to the United States last week to raise money for a planned fourth Viva Palestina (VP) convoy. Galloway's group claims to "break the crippling siege of Gaza and deliver humanitarian aid" to Palestinians, but statements and actions on past trips show it also seeks to support the terrorist organization Hamas materially and politically.Galloway made his first public appearance in U.S. since last summer on January 30th at a fundraising event in New Jersey hosted by American Muslims for Palestine (AMP). Introduced by the emcee as "our hero," Galloway urged the audience to "give more" than they already had donated, and said, "I encourage you, go into debt. You're in debt already anyways."

Organizers claim the event raised more than $130,000.

The next day, Galloway spoke in Brooklyn at an event hosted by Al-Awda NY:The Palestine Right to Return Coalition. Then, on Monday he spoke at the Palestinian Cultural Center for Peace. Galloway used these engagements to raise money and advocate his political agenda.

He repeatedly slammed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for its "tin pot tyranny" and declared, "Shame on the regime of Hosni Mubarak." Galloway was deported by Egypt on January 8th and declared "persona non grata" by the Egyptian foreign ministry, barring him from entering the country again. This came after clashes arose at the El-Arish port between Viva Palestina 3 convoy members and the Egyptian police after members ripped off one of the gates of the port, resulting in the arrest of seven VP members and the death of an Egyptian soldier shot by Hamas militants.

During his speeches, Galloway expressed his adoration for Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, whose media organ recently said a secret U.S. weapon caused the devastating earthquake in Haiti, while Chavez himself accused America of wanting to be "occupying Haiti undercover."

Galloway didn't reference those theories, choosing instead to boast that Chavez planned to lead the next Viva Palestina convoy before Egypt's ban: "And for some reason…Hosni Mubarak didn't fancy Hugo Chavez being in Egypt. Who knows what would have happened? The people may have risen up and installed Chavez as the president of the Arab Republic of Egypt."

Egypt's decision means "there's no more land convoys," Galloway said, so the next Viva Palestina effort will be a "sea convoy," in which ships leaving from the Turkish port of Mersin will "be led by and endorsed by and supported by and diplomatically, politically and I hope if necessary militarily protected by the government of Tayyip Erdogan, the hero Prime Minister of Turkey, because the government of Turkey is now a major player in this great issue."

Galloway also repeatedly praised the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), a Turkish charity which Viva Palestina partnered with during the last convoy. IHH has been banned by Israel in 2008 for its affiliation with Hamas; it already has its own office in Gaza, praised by Hamas officials during its inauguration ceremony.

Galloway and Viva Palestina's Duplicity

For all his bluster, Galloway seemed defensive during last week's fund raisers. He referred to "the FBI man in the room" declaring that "We're not involved in terrorist funding," and "I have never been a supporter of Hamas." The Investigative Project on Terrorism has previously documented evidence to the contrary, showing that Galloway and Viva Palestina have raised money for Hamas and supported the organization in its rhetoric.

In addition, the Voice of Palestine, a news agency run by Fatah (the governing Palestinian body in the West Bank), reported last month that Hamas leaders were fighting for control over $1 million Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh received from Viva Palestina. The article, "al Ja'abri Bursts Into Haniyeh's Office and Steals Documents and Files Concerning Huge Amounts of Money," describes how Ahmad al Ja'abari, the head of the Hamas military wing – "removed $600,000" of the money from Haniyeh's office while leaving the rest for Haniyeh.

Previously, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called the VP convoy a "propaganda tool" for Hamas.

The first Viva Palestina convoy, a UK initiative which arrived in Gaza in March 2009, directly gave £1 million (approximately $1.4 million U.S.) to Ziad al Zaza, the Economy Minister of the Hamas government, as well as thousands of British pounds of aid and tens of vehicles to the Hamas.

In Gaza, Galloway stated "I personally am about to break the sanctions on the elected government of Palestine…" because, "[We] are giving three cars and £25,000 cash to Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. Here is the money. This is not charity. This is politics. The government of Palestine is the best people where this money is needed. We are giving this money now to the government of Palestine."

During the second convoy, which arrived in Gaza in July 2009, Galloway and approximately 200 Americans met with Haniyeh, who praised the U.S. convoy as "proof that the American people is not entirely a people of occupation and is not entirely on the side of the criminal Zionist regime."

The third Viva Palestina convoy, which left London on December 6 and arrived in Gaza in January, received significant support from Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood officials during its journey to Gaza.

Tracking the Money

Since VP-USA has no corporate status, it raised money for the last two convoys through online donations, with all funds handled by IFCO, a 501(c)(3) entity that serves as a conduit for contributions.

VP-USA had more than 20 fund raisers throughout the country between April and June 2009 to fund the second convoy, a U.S. endeavor, which left New York on July 4. Galloway spoke at most of the events.

VP-USA claimed that funds raised for the second convoy were given to an NGO in Gaza called Expertise in Consulting and Development (CODE), an organization which receives significant funding from the Union of the Good, designated by the U.S. Department of Treasury in 2008 as "an organization created by Hamas leadership to transfer funds to the terrorist organization."

Galloway's latest trip to Gaza with Viva Palestina was not his last contact with leaders of terrorist groups. Following Viva Palestina Convoy 3, Galloway spent time in Beirut, where he participated in a conference titled "Arab International Forum for the Support of the Resistance," held January 15-17, 2010. Galloway spoke alongside Islamists, including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, who stated "his total support for the resistance, and thanked Iran for the support it has been giving."

Speaking at the conference, Layla Khaled of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, expressed the need for more suicide bombing attacks in Israel: "'This world needs a bomb explosion so the people could listen', she added, referring to the operations done by the Palestinian resistance confronting the Zionist enemy, which says that the Resistance are the terrorists, which in reality, "Israel" is terrorism its self."

At a banquet held in Amman in late January, Muslim Brotherhood leader Hamam Saeed "praised participants in the Lifeline 3 convoy, describing them as 'Mujahideen.'"

Questions about Viva Palestina's Hamas support have grown throughout the past year, making it somewhat surprising that Galloway was allowed to return to the United States to raise more money for Viva Palestina. The Canadian government banned Galloway from entering the country last March, citing his actions in supporting Hamas, a decision he is fighting in court.

Galloway and Viva Palestina's actions have generated attention among members of the United States Congress and University of California officials. Last fall, the University of California,- Irvine (UCI) forwarded a complaint to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about a Viva Palestina fundraising event sponsored by UCI's Muslim Student Union in May 2009, because of university officials' concerns that funds raised on campus were transferred to a terrorist organization.

U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) urged the Justice Department, the IRS and the Secretary of State to investigate whether Viva Palestina is raising money for Hamas in December, 2009. In January, 2010, in a letter sent to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Congresswoman Sue Myrick (R-NC) stated that the U.S. Treasury Department should designate Viva Palestina under Executive Order 13224 for providing "material support" to Hamas.

Despite the calls for investigations, the convoys' open support for Hamas and reports that Hamas officials are fighting over the money he left behind, Galloway and Viva Palestina defiantly plan a fourth convoy to arrive in Gaza in spring.

So far, the governments of the United States and Great Britain have done nothing to slow Galloway and his organization down.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk