Tag Archives: bailout

Sharia Law Gains Foothold in US

Last week, Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff, a federal district court judge in Michigan, dismissed a constitutional challenge to the U.S. Government’s bailout of AIG, which used over a hundred million dollars in federal tax money to support Islamic religious indoctrination through the funding and promotion of Sharia-compliant financing (SCF). SCF is financing that follows the dictates of Islamic law.

The challenge was brought by the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and co-counsel David Yerushalmi, on behalf of Kevin Murray, a Marine Corps veteran of the Iraqi War. TMLC filed a notice of appeal immediately after the ruling and will be seeking review of the decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of TMLC, commented: “Judge Zatkoff’s ruling allows for oil–rich Muslim countries to plant the flag of Islam on American soil. His ruling ignored the uncontested opinions of several Sharia experts and AIG’s own website, which trumpeted Sharia-compliant financing as promoting the law of the Prophet Mohammed and as an ‘ethical product, ’ and a ‘new way of life.’ His ruling ignored AIG’s use of a foreign Islamic advisory board to control investing in accordance with Islamic law.”

Continued Thompson: “This astonishing decision allows the federal government as well as AIG and other Wall Street bankers to explicitly promote Sharia law ? the 1200 year old body of Islamic canon law based on the Koran, which demands the destruction of Western Civilization and the United States. This is the same law championed by Osama bin Laden and the Taliban; it is the same law that prompted the 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks; and it is the same law that is responsible for the murder of thousands of Christians throughout the world. The Law Center will do everything it can to stop Sharia law from rearing its ugly head in America.”

The federal lawsuit was filed in 2008 against Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. It challenges that portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (EESA) that appropriated $70 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the federal government’s majority ownership interest in AIG, which is considered the market leader in SCF. 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.”

Through the use of taxpayer funds, the federal government acquired a majority ownership interest (nearly 80%) in AIG; and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated $70 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities, $47.5 billion of which was actually distributed to AIG. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in SCF, 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 publicly describes “Sharia” as “Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet .”

With the aid of taxpayer funds provided by Congress, AIG also employs a “Shariah Supervisory Committee.” According to AIG, the role of its Sharia authority “is to review our operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and our investments.”

Shortly after filing the complaint in 2008, attorneys for the Obama administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit on behalf of the named defendants. In a written opinion issued in May 2009, the judge denied the request, holding that the lawsuit properly alleged a federal constitutional challenge to the use of taxpayer money to fund AIG’s Islamic religious activities.
In its request to dismiss the lawsuit, DOJ argued that the plaintiff, Kevin Murray, who is a federal taxpayer, lacked standing to bring the action. And even if he did have standing, DOJ argued that the use of the bailout money to fund AIG’s operations did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The court disagreed….

Following this favorable ruling, the parties engaged in discovery. During discovery, TMLC took depositions, acquired numerous sworn affidavits from AIG and many of its subsidiaries, and acquired thousands of documents. This voluminous evidence was filed with the court in support of TMLC’s motion for summary judgment—a request that the court enter final judgment in its favor because there is no genuine issue of material fact and TMLC should prevail as a matter of law.

On January 14, 2011, the court reversed its earlier position and ruled against Plaintiff Murray, claiming that there was no evidence presented of religious indoctrination, and if there were such evidence, the indoctrination could not be attributed to the federal government and besides, the amount of federal money that was used to support SCF—$153 million—was “de minimus” (minimal) in light of the large sum of tax money the federal government actually gave to AIG—$47.5 billion.

Robert Muise, Senior Trial Counsel for TMLC, commented: “Based on the incredible amount of evidence presented, much of which DOJ could not refute , and in light of the strength of the court’s prior ruling, we expected the court to ultimately rule in our favor and hold that the federal government violated the U.S. Constitution by using federal tax money to fund Islamic religious activities. As soon as we read the court’s adverse opinion, we filed an immediate appeal.”

In addition to the court’s remarkable claim that $153 million in tax money is “de minimis, ” the court stated the following: “In the absence of evidence showing that AIG’s development and sale of SCF products has resulted in the instruction of religious beliefs for the purpose of instilling those beliefs in others or furthering a religious mission, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that a reasonable observer could conclude that AIG has engaged in religious indoctrination by supplying SCF products.”

In the court filings, however, TMLC presented overwhelming and un-rebutted evidence from experts and AIG itself to demonstrate that AIG, with the direct support of the U.S. Government, was engaging in religious indoctrination. Specifically, in addition to AIG’s own description of its Islamic financing as based upon Sharia and Sharia in turn described as “Islamic law based on Quran and the teachings of the Prophet (PBUH), ” AIG promotes Sharia and SCF as a way to proselytize non-Muslims through an “ethical product” and a “new way of life.” Indeed, in the U.S. Government’s filings in the case, it admitted that SCF involves “a theological proposition.”

Muise concluded: “Apparently, the court does not believe that the federal government violates the U.S. Constitution when it provides $153 million in taxpayer money to support Islamic religious activities. This is certainly more than the ‘one pence’ James Madison warned about when he helped craft the First Amendment, and I am sure this decision is news for all of the Christian and Jewish organizations and businesses that are prevented from receiving a dime of federal tax money to support their religious activities.”

The appeal is expected to take at least a year to complete.

From Thomas More Law Center January 19, 2011 email.

Obama Seeking Another $50 Billion State Bailiout

The Business & Media Institute recently reported Obama is seeking $50 billion state bailout package from Congress. In a June 12 letter, Obama urged both parties to pass a derailed stimulus bill. He claims the bailout would preserve government and private sector jobs. Government jobs Obama is trying to protect include teachers, fire fighters, and police. If memory serves, the last $787 billion stimulus supposedly had already saved those jobs.

CATO Institute Budget Analyst Tad DeHaven criticized Obama’s latest request as a union bailout. Most, if not all, of the above government jobs are indeed union jobs.

Maybe Gov. Strickland’s comrades in the White House are trying trying to help him pay for Xenia’s union jobs too. I’m not sure it would ultimately save Xenia taxpayers any money for in the long run taxpayers will have to pay their portion of the $50 billion anyway. Taxpayers and consumer always pay for more government spending. But it sure would be nice for our local government union employees to get their raises without raising our taxes especially during the on-going Great Recession.

H1N1 : Bailing Out Drug Companies

By Daniel Downs

Writing in the Epoch Times, Ronald Whitmont (M.D) quotes Center of Disease Control statistics showing the current level of deaths related to H1N1 and flu viruses are lower that the previous year.

Here’s what he wrote:

“In the 2007–2008 flu season, the CDC reported that the peak death rate (for pneumonia and influenza) was 9.1 percent. The highest death rate since the novel H1N1 pandemic began in early 2009 has only been 6.0 percent.”

If I’m not mistaken, flu shots for H1N1 were not available at the time of the CDC report, which was September 12, 2009.

Just last week, the mainstream media reported an epidemic number of H1N1 related deaths: 19 in just one week. Fox News reported 1,000 deaths.

Fox News sensational reporting failed to mention the time span during which those 1,000 deaths occurred. Was it 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, or more? It may have been for the past century. Even if the figure represents the number of deaths since the H1N1 outbreak (April 2009), the number of all influenza related deaths is still less than last season.

What Fox News number of death actually represents is anyone’s guess. One question that can be answered is whether the latest CDC statistics shows as drastic an increase in H1N1 deaths as hyped by the media.

The latest CDC report on influenza is for the week ending on October 24. The peak death rate for influenza and pneumonia related deaths was 7 percent. That is a 1 percent increase since the week ending on September 12 and 2 percent less than last season.

According to Whitmont, H1N1 is not only a milder and less lethal form of the flu but also is not transmitted from person to person as easily as other types of influenza. Therefore, most people who contract H1N1 will recover without needing medical attention. Those at risk are people with preconditions like asthma or diabetes.

“Ninety percent of those who suffered complications from H1N1 since early 2009 also had either asthma or a seizure disorder. Those with preexisting or underlying medical conditions (asthma, seizure disorder, diabetes, heart disease, and pregnancy) are at increased risk of suffering complications, which is typical for influenza.”

If H1N1 is a health-risk to those with other medical illnesses, why then are the government and media pushing the H1N1 vaccine as some sort of life-saving miracle drug?

I can think of only one reason: To bailout drug companies.

Since the government’s bailout-drug-companies sales campaign, the fake epidemic has been less deadly than the typical flu season of 2007-2008. It is interesting that the government and their corporate media partners are using a capitalistic approach to bailing out the drug companies.

We are all government-for profit guinea pigs now!

What does Obama’s stimulus plan, outdated infrastructure, and gas taxes have in common

In a January 10 editorial, the New York Times approved Obama’s big spending stimulus plan but complained about his plans to continue the past era of tax cuts. One of part of the approved plan is $500 billion to bolster unemployment benefits, aid to states, and for investment in the nation’s crumbling and outdated infrastructure.

In an article critical of the Times editorial, Don Feder of Accuracy in Media rightly observed that “no matter how much the states get for highway repairs (from the gas tax, general revenue, tolls and federal aid), the infrastructure is still crumbling and outdated.”

The question taxpayers and gasoline consumers should be asking is why that is. The national average tax on gasoline is 47 cents per gallon. That means the amount of gas taxes collected by federal, state and local governments to maintain our roadways is a meager $66.5 billion a year. And the federal government returns to the states 90.5% of its portion of the national gas tax, which is 18.4 percent.

Are states using their part of the tax pie for projects other than maintaining our roadways?

We could probably define Obama’s plan as a pork-barrel bailout stimulating welfare program–what do you think?

Bailout Money, “It is not your (taxpayer) money”

“Joe Knollenberg of Michigan’s 9th District was on Cavuto the other day to show America why voters in his district voted him out this year. This is exactly the reason why rich, out of touch bureaucrats need to be on a leash. “It’s not your money” quote is PRICELESS. Wake up patriots before it’s too late! I hope you can see how “out of touch” these politicians are with everyday citizens trying to support their families.


— Andy Meyer

Don’t Bail Out My State: South Carolina’s Governor Says More Debt Isn’t The Answer

The Wall Street Journal published an article by the above title today. Its author was South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford. Gov. Stanford presents an informed argument against the Congress’ bailout of Wall Street and cash strapped states. He asks and answers a number of questions that are worth considering.

One of his questions is: Who bails out the “bail-outor”? What he means is who will bailout the federal government. His answer is what we already know. The federal government does really have any money. All of the money it plans on using to “stabilize” banks, Wall Street firms, automakers, and states will all be borrowed against every Americans future income. The answer, therefore, is either no one because foreigners and their governments are also experiencing the same deepening economic recession.

Gov. Sanford makes a point all taxpayers must seriously consider. He wrote, “Already, our nation’s unfunded liabilities total $52 trillion — about $450,000 per household. There’s something very strange about issuing debt to solve a problem caused by too much debt.” (Emphasis added.)

All of the talk about balancing the federal budget is nothing but hot elite air. Not only will the feds not be able to balance their budget, but their huge bailout borrowing extravaganza will hurt fiscally responsible community banks and fiscally prudent states, according to Gov. Sanford. As he indicates, the bailout will only benefit the bad boys.

Democrats want to increase the national debt even more by expanding health care costs. Gov. Sanford informs us that Medicaid expenses have been increasing 9.5% a year for the past 10 years, which is unsustainable. Add universal health care costs to the bill and what is already unsustainable becomes a catastrophic economic problem. Who will pay for it? The largest group of taxpayers in America is the middle-income group.

President-elect Obama is being billed as the next FDR. That should cause great concern to all because FDR began the big borrowing-big government programs. FDR helped to prolong the economic crisis of the 1930s. FDR jumped into World War II in order to borrow…borrow…borrow America out of the great depression. WWII was legitimated borrowing huge sums of money to put Americans to work. Does did really work? Only temporarily. What I have been hearing from various economists and money market experts is that each economic crisis has been getting worse since FDR’s big borrowing bailout.

Another important question Gov. Sanford asks is: Isn’t government intervention supposed to be the last resort and come only when it can make a difference? As he notes, Congress committed $2.3 trillion as a first resort solution to improving our economy. Adding another $150 billion is like adding a twinkie to truckloads of sugar already dumped to sweeten a lake. It won’t make much difference except to the taxpayers who will have to repay the insane amount of debt.

Maybe that is why millions of Americans have little savings, no retirement, inadequate health care, and little economic future.

Looking at the issue as a head of state, Gov. Sanford counsels against states accepting a federal bailout of states. Instead of is his solution to states effects by the economic crisis:

[T]here is something Congress can do: free states from federal mandates. South Carolina will spend about $425 million next year meeting federal unfunded mandates. The increase in the minimum wage alone will cost the state $2.6 million and meeting Homeland Security’s REAL ID requirements will cost $8.9 million.

Here is the age-old wisdom of Constitutional government: Limited not only as to its powers but also to its spending, borrowing, and taxing.

Gov. Sanford apparently believes it is not too late for Americans to stop Congress from mortgaging our economic future with unsustainable debt to bailout Wall Street and states. Ohioans also may be able to stop Gov. Strickland and the Ohio legislators from the same.

You can contact Gov. Strickland by E-Mail, by fax at (614) 466-9354, by phone at (614) 466-3555, or by us mail at Governor’s Office, Riffe Center, 30th Floor, 77 South High Street, Columbus, OH 43215-6108.

To contact your elected Ohio legislators, go to the House of Representatives directory and to the Senate directory.

To contact your Congressional representatives, go to the House of Representatives directory and to the Senate directory or call the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 for Representatives and Senators.