You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Feds finally try Oregon activist on money laundering charges
2010-08-22
On Aug. 30, Pete Seda, labeled by one witness as "the smiling salesman for radical Islam", will go on trial for money laundering and tax fraud in Eugene, OR. He's charged with making clandestine efforts to funnel cash illegally through his Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation charity to terrorists in Chechnya.

Seda, 52, was indicted on the federal charges more than five years ago while he was hiding out in Syria and other countries with whom we have no extradition treaty. He returned as a fugitive in 2007 to fight the charges.

Seda's been free under federal supervision ever since, recently living in Portland, as prosecutors and defense lawyers fought for years over what jurors could hear.

The accusations against Seda were published in an affidavit written by a IRS Special Agent used to obtain a warrant to search Seda's residence in February 2004. It reads like a somewhat routine money-laundering case.
Nothing's routine about money-laundering when it involves an Islamic charity ...
Accoding to the affidavit, an Egyptian doctor in England wired $150,000 to Seda's foundation's bank account in Ashland in February 2000. In March, Al-Buthi flew from Saudi Arabia to Ashland, where the pair transferred the money into a $21,000 cashier's check and 130 $1,000 traveler's checks that Al-Buthi carried back to Saudi Arabia in violation of financial-reporting laws. Seda failed to report the donation properly on the foundation's 2000 tax return.
Buying that number of travelers checks is in and of itself suspicious, as it is done precisely to circumvent the reporting laws on money transfers.
Seda's defunct charity and Al-Buthi, who remains in Saudi Arabia and is not extraditable for trial, have been designated supporters of terrorism by the government. Seda hasn't.

In an Aug. 10 evidentiary ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Hogan outlined what evidence will enter into the trial and how prosecutors will use it. Hogan hinted that prosecutors likely will assert that the pair intentionally smuggled money to aid Chechen rebels and that the false tax statement was done to hide the money flow and was not an accounting mistake.

Hogan wrote that Seda's defense will attempt to rebuff this theory of nefarious intent by arguing that Seda's motives were peaceful and the financial irregularities not willful.
And that his trip to Syria was to help out fluffy kittens who've been tortured by Zionists.
Hogan also hinted at a possible defense theory that Seda's sympathy for Chechen terrorists rebels was fueled not by Islamism but by Russian brutality against Chechens.
Can't the latter fuel the former?
Jurors will hear that Seda believed he was under surveillance after 9/11 and that he initiated contact with local FBI agents, condemning the attacks and Osama bin Laden during the same time frame his false tax return was allegedly being prepared.
Coincidentally.
Jurors might also hear some evidence that Al-Buthi was under watch through the government's Terrorist Surveillance Program, which was part of a recent federal ruling rendering warrantless wiretaps involving this case illegal.
Posted by:ryuge

#5  "I'd settle for an unbiased, non-agenda pushing, non-partisan, truthful media"

GFL on that one, John. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2010-08-22 23:59  

#4  Maybe the statement is a little over the top. I'd settle for an unbiased, non-agenda pushing, non-partisan, truthful media but then maybe that's asking too much. I realize that most articles, when written put forth some bias. I get tired of the MSM pushing things under the carpet, looking the other way, in some instances simply making up a story, and unabashedly pushing a particular candidate. It is the difference between news and propaganda such as Joseph Goebbels advanced.
Posted by: JohnQC   2010-08-22 22:07  

#3  "The feds ought to be charging him with being a child-molesting pedophile bomb-making terrorist."

And what makes you think that would make a difference in what the terrorist-asskissing-media calls him?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2010-08-22 18:16  

#2  Activist is what the media is calling this sorts. That sounds awfully benign. The feds ought to be charging him with being a child-molesting pedophile bomb-making terrorist.
Posted by: JohnQC   2010-08-22 17:57  

#1  "Al-Buthi, who remains in Saudi Arabia and is not extraditable for trial..."

And why isn't Al-Buthi extraditable?
Posted by: American Delight   2010-08-22 14:15  

00:00