04-18-2018 10:16:00 AM -0700
04-16-2018 01:32:51 PM -0700
04-16-2018 09:59:36 AM -0700
04-12-2018 09:53:41 AM -0700
04-10-2018 11:19:03 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

California Lawsuit Alleges FBI Violation of Muslim Rights

In addition, in a search warrant affidavit from March 2009, FBI Special Agent Thomas J. Ropel stated that:

[S]earching agents seized numerous documents from the subject (Niazi) premises reflecting multiple cash transfers … to Pakistan and Afghanistan through the use of a hawala, an unlicensed money transfer system.

He further stated that the hawala system is used because many transfers go undetected. He also reported that  these transfers were traced to someone convicted of money laundering in connection with narcotics, and that he found approximately $10,900 in hundred dollar bills located in a small box locked in an armoire at Niazi’s house. Although Niazi was indicted, the case was dismissed.

When asked about this, the former agents agreed with Richard Marquise, the lead investigator of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing, that the case may have been dismissed "to make a stronger case."

Think of it like a football game. We punt right now so when we get the ball back we will be in better field position. I would like to hope that somebody is still keeping tabs on him which can make him less valuable to the possible terrorists.

The lawsuit seems to base all its evidence on the aggressive tactics of FBI informant Craig Monteilh.

The question is: who is credible? In the past, many terrorists, including the Oregon Christmas Day bomber and the Maryland subway bomber ,were arrested because the government prevailed and went undercover to thwart these plots. A former FBI agent pointed out that FBI Director Mueller testified earlier this month that the FBI no longer has a formal relationship with CAIR because of concerns that the national leadership might be linked to terrorist groups such as Hamas. Mueller also defended undercover operations in mosques to thwart the domestic lone wolf terrorist.

In the Irvine mosque investigation, Monteilh turned and is now a cooperating witness for the plaintiffs. Dotlo feels that:

[S]ome informants fail to perform as instructed and occasionally operate beyond the boundaries imposed by the Government, despite close supervision.  Is Monteilh trying to discredit law enforcement for his own gain?  Are innocent and dedicated FBI agents being unfairly subjected to this needless ordeal?

The stated objective of the plaintiffs is to point out how the FBI is singling out Muslims. They point out in the filing that 500,000 Muslims live in Southern California with 120,000 living in Orange County. Bob Hamer, a former Los Angeles FBI agent and author, responded to their accusations by stating that:

[T]here are an awful lot of mosques in the Southern California area. If we were targeting Muslims we would be pretty busy. If there was a white supremist plot to blow up a mosque, would you hear any complaints about an informant being placed to tell us about their activities? I believe the FBI was not targeting the mosque. They were not targeting the religion. They were targeting individuals who happened to be Muslim.

A former agent who knows the Los Angeles office well speculated that:

Things are not as they appear. This is a one sided story and when the facts are presented it will show the FBI did nothing wrong since there is so much evidence. My faith is that the FBI had probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

By overburdening the FBI with these ridiculous lawsuits those American Muslims are hindering the Bureau from carrying out its responsibilities to protect Americans.