The prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) stands as a pivotal moment in the post-9/11 era, highlighting the delicate balance between national security and civil liberties. As the largest Muslim charity in the United States at the time, HLF was accused of funneling millions of dollars to Hamas, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. The case raised significant concerns about the erosion of civil liberties, the use of unindicted co-conspirators, and the broader implications for American Muslims.
Here is the case summary:
James Comey has been indicted for lying:
And General Flynn says it is really bad for Comey:
BACK TO HOW COMMUNITY ORGANIZING HAS CHANGED OUR LANDSCAPE-HERE IS A QUESTION:
Did James Comey intentionally set in motion a chain of events that strengthened organizations like CAIR? Or was it sheer incompetence that left civil liberties hanging in the balance? The answer remains murky—but the consequences are undeniable.
During Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, his outreach to Muslim communities was multifaceted, aiming to foster inclusivity and counteract misinformation. Here’s an overview of key initiatives and resources from that period:
Campaign Messaging and Outreach
- Countering Rumors: In early 2008, Obama’s campaign addressed persistent rumors about his religious identity by launching a “Fact Check Action Center.” This initiative included a YouTube video and encouraged supporters to disseminate accurate information, aiming to dispel false claims about his faith. WIRED
- Engagement with Muslim Leaders: The campaign sought to engage with Muslim American leaders, though some felt the outreach was insufficient. For instance, a July 2008 article from CAIR-Chicago noted that while Obama was expected to garner support from U.S. Muslims, the campaign had not yet visited a mosque, which some community members viewed as a missed opportunity. CAIR-Chicago
Public Statements and Policy Positions
- Addressing Misconceptions: In response to the “Obama is a Muslim” rumors, the campaign distributed materials emphasizing his Christian faith. However, some critics argued that these materials inadvertently reinforced negative stereotypes about Muslims. Beliefnet
- Faith-Based Initiatives: Obama’s platform included commitments to engage with faith-based communities. The 2008 Democratic Party Platform highlighted the intention to work with religious organizations to address social issues, though specific strategies for Muslim communities were not detailed. PBS
Educational Resources and Community Engagement
While there were no widely circulated pamphlets specifically targeting Muslim communities during the 2008 campaign, the following resources were developed in the subsequent years to support Muslim American engagement:
- “Muslim and American: Voices from the White House” (2016): This publication from the Obama White House highlighted the contributions of Muslim Americans and aimed to foster understanding and inclusivity. Medium
- “A New Beginning” Speech (2009): Although delivered after the 2008 campaign, Obama’s speech in Cairo aimed to reset relations with the Muslim world and included discussions on mutual respect and shared values. whitehouse.gov
Electoral Dynamics
- Muslim American Voter Engagement: In the 2008 election, Muslim Americans were a minority group, and their support for Obama was influenced by various factors, including his policies and the political climate. SoundVision.com
The post-9/11 era reshaped American law enforcement, especially in counterterrorism, often at the expense of civil liberties. Two central figures—James Comey and Eric Holder—were at the center of these battles, particularly in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) case, a defining episode in the clash between national security and constitutional rights.
HLF, once the largest Muslim charity in the United States, was accused of funneling millions of dollars to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization. Comey, then Deputy Attorney General (2003–2005), oversaw early investigations, including the 2004 indictment of HLF leaders. Under his watch, scrutiny of the foundation intensified, and in 2007, organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) were labeled unindicted co-conspirators—a move designed to cast suspicion without charges.
The decision sparked controversy. Critics pointed to the reputational damage, concerns about due process, and the broader erosion of civil liberties. The trial relied on secret evidence and extensive surveillance, which raised alarm among civil rights advocates. Meanwhile, Eric Holder, later Attorney General (2009–2015), compounded the problem by refusing to act on court findings that could have eased the burden on defendants or clarified legal boundaries, reinforcing a perception that civil liberties were sidelined in favor of counterterrorism optics.
Ironically—or perhaps strategically—Comey’s actions bolstered CAIR instead of weakening it. The publicity surrounding its unindicted co-conspirator status generated sympathy and attention, allowing the organization to expand its legal defenses, advocacy campaigns, and public education efforts. CAIR’s enhanced visibility and credibility positioned it as a leading voice for civil rights among Muslim Americans.
Whether Comey fully grasped the consequences or not, his moves civilized CAIR, creating a platform for community organizing, nonprofit mobilization, and grassroots outreach. As described in Groundbreakers: How a Community Organizer Became President, the left excels at leveraging crises to build infrastructure and messaging platforms. CAIR’s growth fits that pattern perfectly—turning government targeting into long-term organizational and political power, eventually contributing to broader left-leaning networks and campaigns.
The question remains: did Comey orchestrate this outcome deliberately, or was it a case of catastrophic miscalculation? While there’s no smoking gun, Comey’s later indictment on September 25, 2025, for allegedly lying to Congress in unrelated matters adds fuel to the skepticism. If Comey is capable of deceit under oath in one context, it invites scrutiny of whether ulterior motives or selective enforcement shaped decisions during high-stakes cases like HLF.
The broader implications are clear. The HLF case fostered heightened surveillance, distrust, and chilling effects on speech and religious expression within American Muslim communities. It illustrates a pivotal moment when national security often trumped constitutional protections and highlights how mismanaged prosecutions can accidentally—or intentionally—empower the very groups they aim to suppress.
Looking back, the HLF saga serves as a cautionary tale. In the pursuit of security, overreach can undermine the freedoms it claims to protect, while misjudged actions by top officials like Comey can reshape the political landscape in ways no one anticipated—or perhaps some hoped for.
We are still asking questions about why CAIR is off the hook: