Uncategorized

ANN ARBOR, MI – In a motion for summary judgment filed this week, Federal District Court Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff was asked to enter a judgment against U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Federal Reserve Board over the federal government’s bailout of AIG.  The basis for the motion is that over a billion dollars of the bailout went to fund Islamic religious activities in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor Michigan, and attorney David Yerushalmi filed the lawsuit in December 2008, challenging the AIG bailout on behalf of Kevin Murray, a former Marine who had served in Iraq.  As a taxpayer, Murray objected to being forced to support the propagation of the Islamic jihad which he fought against as a U.S. Marine.

Robert Muise, Senior Trial Lawyer with the Law Center, and David Yerushalmi prepared the motion for summary judgment.  The motion is based on depositions of Treasury officials, affidavits of AIG officials (sealed per court order), answers to interrogatories, and the sworn declarations of two of the nation’s notable experts on Islamic law and terrorism, Stephen C. Coughlin and Robert Spencer.  [Click here to read Summary Judgment motion]

Coughlin, a lawyer and a decorated Army Reserve officer in Military Intelligence, is often cited as the Pentagon’s leading expert on the nexus between Islamic law and jihad.  He concluded that by engaging in Sharia-compliant financing, AIG and the federal government, which now owns 79.9 percent of AIG, are engaging in the religious practice of Islam.

According to Coughlin, Islam inculcates hostility and discrimination against Jews, Christians, and all others who do not accept the Koran as the “word of Allah.”  It is the same law that motivated the 9/11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans.  [Click here to read Stephen Coughlin’s Declaration]

Robert Spencer has studied Islamic theology and history for thirty years.  He is the Director of Jihad Watch and the author of ten books dealing with Islam.  He has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. Command and General Staff College, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. intelligence community.

According to Spencer, by engaging in its Sharia-compliant financing and business practices,  AIG is engaging in religious behavior that inculcates hatred and discrimination against Jews, Christians, and all other non-Muslims.

Spencer states that in abetting the spread of Sharia-compliant financing, AIG and the federal government are abetting the same legal system that  motivated the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11.  [Click here to read Robert Spencer’s Declaration]

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “It’s outrageous that the federal government is the owner of a corporation engaged in a business with interests adverse to the United States.  We filed this lawsuit not only to defend constitutional principles, but also to defend our national security.  It’s clear we can’t leave the job of protecting America to the Washington politicians.”

The federal lawsuit challenged that portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (EESA) that appropriated billions in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the federal government’s majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Jewish.

According to the lawsuit, AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Sharia-compliant financing which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion.  This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.  AIG itself describes “Sharia” as “Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed].”

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

Judge Zatkoff, in an earlier decision, denied the request by the Obama administration’s Department of Justice to dismiss the lawsuit.  In his ruling, the judge held that the lawsuit sufficiently alleged a federal constitutional challenge to the use of taxpayer money to fund AIG’s Islamic religious activities.  The court noted:

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

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

According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority “is to review our operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and our investments.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Additional links:

/sites/default/files/SpencerDeclaration.pdf

/sites/default/files/CoughlinDeclaration.pdf

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national, public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a reply brief this past Friday in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction against President Obama’s health care legislation. [Click here to read  brief].

The reply brief was drafted by Robert Muise, TMLC Senior Trial Counsel, and David Yerushalmi, an associated private attorney with law offices in New York, Washington D.C., and Arizona.  The brief was filed in support of TMLC’s previously filed motion for a preliminary injunction, in which TMLC is requesting the court to immediately enjoin the enforcement of the individual mandate provision of the health care law.

Muise commented: “Our lengthy and detailed reply to the government’s defense of the Health Care Reform Act demonstrates the weakness of the government’s superficial arguments.  As evidenced in our brief, we certainly like our chances that the court will strike down this unconstitutional act of Congress.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Listen and Watch Tim McGraw’s tribute to America’s Fallen Heroes…”If You’re Reading This.”

Dear TMLC Friends and Supporters:

From Lexington and Valley Forge, to Normandy, Korea, and Vietnam and now to Iraq and Afghanistan, America’s military forces have bravely fought for Freedom and in defense of our Nation.  Memorial Day is a time to remember our brave fighting men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation with their very lives.

 “So to the indifferent inquirer who asks why Memorial Day is still kept up we may answer, it celebrates and solemnly reaffirms from year to year a national act of enthusiasm and faith. It embodies in the most impressive form our belief that to act with enthusiasm and faith is the condition of acting greatly. To fight out a war, you must believe something and want something with all your might. So must you do to carry anything else to an end worth reaching.” [Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. at an address delivered for Memorial Day, May 30, 1884, at Keene, NH]

 

Let us not only take the time to remember the heroic sacrifices of our military throughout our nation’s history, but also to remember the heroic sacrifices our combat men and women are making in Iraq and Afghanistan today.

Let us take this time to pray for our troops who have died in battle, and for their loved ones who still mourn their great loss.

Let us also pray for our troops who are in harms way today.  This Memorial Day I close with a poem which reminds us of the true price of freedom.

Freedom Is Not Free

I watched the flag pass by one day.
It fluttered in the breeze.
A young Marine saluted it,
And then he stood at ease.
I looked at him in uniform
So young, so tall, so proud,
He’d stand out in a crowd.
I thought how many men like him
had fallen through the years.
How many had died on foreign soil?
How many mothers’ tears?
How many pilots’ planes shot down?
How many died at sea?
How many foxholes were soldiers’ graves?
No, freedom is not free.

I heard the sound of Taps one night,
when everything was still
I listened to the bugler play
And felt a sudden chill.
I wondered just how many times
That Taps had meant “Amen”
When a flag had draped a coffin
Of brother or a friend.
I thought of all the children,
Of mothers and the wives,
Of fathers, sons and husbands
with interrupted lives.

I thought about a graveyard
At the bottom of the sea
Of unmarked graves in Arlington…
No, freedom is not free.

Author Unknown

May God continue to bless America.

Sincerely yours,

Richard Thompson
President and Chief Counsel
Thomas More Law Center

ANN ARBOR, MI – A federal lawsuit was filed this afternoon over the refusal of a Detroit-area transportation authority to display an anti-Jihad advertisement on its buses.  The ad stated, “Fatwa on your head?  Is your family or community threatening you?  Leaving Islam?  Got questions?  Get Answers!”

The “Leaving Islam” ad was sponsored by the Freedom Defense Initiative (FDI), founded by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer.

The Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and the Law Offices of David Yerushalmi, P.C. filed the lawsuit in a Detroit federal district court against the Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) on behalf of the ad’s sponsors.  [Read Complaint].  The lawsuit alleges violations of Free Speech and the Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), commented, “Muslim apologists rely on the fact that most Americans are ill-informed about Islam.  So they easily get away with portraying Islam as a religion of peace.  Americans have a right to know the truth—Islam is a religion of intolerance and violence.  Traditional Islamic law prescribes the penalty of death if a Muslim leaves his or her religion.  A recent case in point is the story of Rifqa Barry, the seventeen year old Ohio girl, who fearing for her life, ran away from home after her parents discovered she had converted to Christianity.”

Continued Thompson, “Christians, Jews and other non-Muslim minorities are persecuted in every country where Islam dominates.”

According to its website, FDI’s “objective is to go on the offensive when legal, academic, legislative, cultural, sociological, and political actions are taken to dismantle our basic freedoms and values.”

In the past, SMART had no problem running an anti-religion ad sponsored by an atheist organization that stated, “Don’t Believe in God? You are not alone.”
TMLC Senior Trial Counsel handling the case, Robert Muise, commented, “In Detroit, government officials grant atheists the right to express a view that God does not exist, not worrying about offending Christians.  Yet, these same politically correct officials censor speech that might offend Muslims.  Such blatant discrimination is offensive, and it violates our Constitution.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

YOU Must Act Today – Stop Repeal of the Ban on Gays Openly Serving in the Military

Time is running out!

Tomorrow,  May 27th, both the Senate and the House plan to vote on whether to repeal the long-standing statutory ban on homosexuals openly serving in the military. As a result of  the increased  pressure on the White House and Congress by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocacy groups, the vote is scheduled without first obtaining the planned Pentagon report due later in the year.

According to reports, Congressmen are being deluged with phone calls and mail to pressure them to repeal the ban.

Now it’s up to YOU.  Please contact (phone or e-mail) the key senators listed below by tomorrow, May 27th. Let them know that you oppose repeal of the long-standing ban on gays openly serving in the military. Ask your family and friends to do the same.

Robert C. Byrd (D-West Virginia)            202-224-3924
http://byrd.senate.gov//contacts/index.cfm?ID=54

Bill Nelson (Florida)                                 202-224-5274
http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Evan Bayh (D-Indiana)                             202-224-5623
http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/

Jim Webb (D-Virginia)                             202-224-4024
http://webb.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)              202-224-4543
http://scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactme

Susan M. Collins (R-Maine)                      202-224-2523
http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCollins.email

All you have to say or write is:

“Please oppose any attempt to repeal or place a moratorium on the longstanding ban on gays openly serving in the military. The purpose of our military is to prepare for and prevail in combat.  It is not a place to experiment with social engineering.”

BACKGROUND

The Center for Military Readiness has developed an excellent one-page outline setting forth Ten Reasons to Oppose the Law.  You may read it by clicking here.

The Supreme Court has long recognized the difference between military and civilian life, and has given great deference to the requirements of our military.   There is no constitutional right to serve in our armed forces, and homosexual groups should not be allowed to foist their political and social agendas at the expense of national security, and the destruction of unit cohesion, which is so essential to the combat effectiveness of our armed forces.

Repeal of the ban on homosexuals serving in the military would sacrifice the best military force in the world as a political payoff to homosexual advocacy groups for their campaign support.

Over 1,150 distinguished retired Flag and General Officers of the military, including 51 four-star generals and admirals, strongly urge that the existing ban be maintained.  In a statement released in 2009, they expressed their great concern about the impact a repeal of the ban would have on “morale, discipline, unit cohesion, and overall readiness.”

If the ban is repealed, LGBT operatives will infiltrate the military, and backed by a brigade of ACLU lawyers, will push the homosexual agenda to the point of paralyzing the primary purpose of the military—winning wars.

The 1993 federal statute at issue, (often mislabeled as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) states that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military.  The law was passed overwhelmingly by bipartisan, veto-proof majorities in both houses, after extensive hearings and debate.  The legislation was prompted by overwhelming public opposition to President’s Clinton’s attempt to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military as a political favor to the homosexual groups which supported his election bid.

In its findings leading to the 1993 law, Congress affirmed:  that there is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces; military life is fundamentally different from civilian life; the prohibition against homosexual conduct is a long-standing element of military law; and the presence of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.

Most military commanders oppose repeal of the ban on homosexuals serving in the military:

• Over 1,150 distinguished retired admirals and generals.
• The current Commandant of the Marine Corps, General James T. Conway, told the Congress that his advice to the President and the Congress was to keep the ban on homosexuals as it is.
• The Army Chief of Staff, General George W. Casey, Jr., told Congress he had serious concerns about the impact of a repeal of the ban on the military currently engaged in two wars.

Some points why the ban should be maintained:

• As stated in current law, there is no constitutional right to serve in the military.
• The military is historically selective about who can join, based on age, weight, physical fitness, health, drug usage and more.
• Open homosexuality would destroy unit cohesion, good order and discipline.
• Military life is drastically different from civilian life.  Troops are on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week, sharing sleeping quarters, showers, and other living areas in conditions the law describes as “forced intimacy.”
• According to one poll, 10% of military personnel say they will quit if homosexuals are allowed to serve openly.
• Accepting homosexual men in the military will expose service members to higher risks of health problems, including AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.
• Young enlisted personnel will be potentially compromised by inappropriate conduct, including sexual advances by higher ranking homosexuals.
• As most serving in the military are Christians, the ban will cause them and their Christian Chaplains religious conflicts as their faith considers homosexual conduct a sin.

Military men and women, our sons and daughters, should not be subjected to an involuntary social experiment, and our nation should not have to pay compromise its national security in order to allow satisfy promises made to LGBT groups.