IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) CAUSE NO. 3:04-CR-240-P

 (

vs. )

( OCTOBER 15, 2008 

) DALLAS, TEXAS 

HOLY LAND FOUNDATION, ET AL ( 9:00 A.M.

______________________________________________________________

VOLUME 18 OF 37

______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS 

BEFORE THE HONORABLE JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

and a jury

______________________________________________________________

A P P E A R A N C E S

 FOR THE GOVERNMENT: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

 1100 COMMERCE, 3RD FLOOR 

 DALLAS, TEXAS 75242

 BY: MR. JIM JACKS

 MR. BARRY JONAS

 MS. ELIZABETH SHAPIRO

FOR THE DEFENDANT: FREEDMAN, BOYD, HOLLANDER, 

(SHUKRI ABU BAKER) GOLDBERG & IVES, P.A. 

 20 FIRST PLAZA, SUITE 700 

 ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87102 

 BY: MS. NANCY HOLLANDER

 MS. TERESA DUNCAN

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
FOR THE DEFENDANT: LAW OFFICE OF JOSHUA L. DRATEL

(MOHAMMAD EL-MEZAIN) 14 WALL STREET, 28TH FLOOR

 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005

 BY: MR. JOSHUA DRATEL

 MR. AARON J. MYSLIWIEC

FOR THE DEFENDANT: LAW OFFICE OF MARLO P. CADEDDU

(MUFID ABDULQADER) 3232 McKINNEY AVENUE, SUITE 700

 DALLAS, TEXAS 75204

 BY: MS. MARLO P. CADEDDU

FOR THE DEFENDANT: LAW OFFICE OF LINDA MORENO

(GHASSAN ELASHI) P.O. BOX 10985

 TAMPA, FLORIDA 33679

 BY: MS. LINDA MORENO

 JONES DAY

 555 CALIFORNIA ST., 26TH FLOOR

 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104

 BY: MR. JOHN D. CLINE

FOR THE DEFENDANT: WESTFALL, PLATT & CUTRER

(ABDULRAHAM ODEH) ONE SUMMIT AVENUE, SUITE 910

 FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

 BY: MR. GREG WESTFALL

COURT'S LAW CLERK: MS. JENNIFER HELMS

 1100 COMMERCE, RM. 1654

 DALLAS, TEXAS 75242

COURT COORDINATOR: MS. BRENDA WEBB

 1100 COMMERCE, RM. 1654

 DALLAS, TEXAS 75242

 OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER: SHAWN M. McROBERTS, RMR, CRR

 1100 COMMERCE STREET, RM. 1654

 DALLAS, TEXAS 75242

 (214) 753-2349

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
INDEX

EXAMINATION

Witness Name Page

ROBERT MIRANDA

Direct By MR. JACKS............................................. 33

Cross By MR. CLINE.............................................. 98

Cross By MS. HOLLANDER.......................................... 122

Cross By MS. HOLLANDER.......................................... 205

Cross By MR. WESTFALL........................................... 233

STEVEN SIMON

Direct By MS. SHAPIRO........................................... 138

Cross By MR. DRATEL............................................. 153

JOSEPH HUMMEL

Direct By MR. JACKS............................................. 176

Cross By MR. CLINE.............................................. 185

Redirect By MR. JACKS........................................... 188

Recross By MR. CLINE............................................ 189

Government's Exhibits

Government's Exhibits Page

Elbarasse Search No. 35 Admitted into Evidence. 47

HLF Seach No. 91 Admitted into Evidence. 63

InfoCom Search No. 36 Admitted into Evidence. 68

HLF Search No. 89 Admitted into Evidence. 71

HLF Search No. 90 Admitted into Evidence. 80

Demonstrative No. 6 Admitted into Evidence. 84

Demonstrative No. 3 Admitted into Evidence. 89

Demonstrative No. 5 Admitted into Evidence. 90

Demonstrative No. 4 Admitted into Evidence. 92

Defendants' Exhibits

Defendants' Exhibits Page

Demonstrative No. 2 Admitted into Evidence. 220

Defendants' No. 1087 Admitted into Evidence. 254

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

3
 THE COURT: All right. On the issue of Mr. Simon 

regarding the reasons why Hamas was designated, I am going to 

sustain that objection as to the reasons why. 

In reading the McKeever case, what the Court allowed is 

that they were -- that Libya was connected to terrorism, but 

they didn't get into the why they made that determination, 

which as I understand it is where you are intending to go, Ms. 

Shapiro, unless I am misunderstanding or understanding 

improperly. 

MS. SHAPIRO: Well, what we can do, Your Honor, is 

we don't even need to make reference to the law or why the 

executive order came about. I mean, really his testimony goes 

to why the Oslo process and peace in the region is important 

to the United States' interests. So, I mean, we can certainly 

put his testimony on without going behind the law. 

THE COURT: Okay. 

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, I don't see any 

distinction. That is the reason for the law is it is about -- 

The purpose of the executive order is people who are 

potentially interfering with the Middle East peace process is 

what the executive order is about. That is the stated 

purpose. So really without stating it they just want to get 

the same thing in. 

What they want to ask the jury is to convict because this 

is so important to the United States, regardless of what the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
law is. They want to say this is a foreign policy objective 

of the United States that the jury should -- That is why I 

call it reverse jury nullification. So I think all of it is 

really about the same thing, and there is no way to carve it 

out in a way that doesn't do -- what is not relevant according 

to the case law and was is not proper under the case law and 

under -- You know, it is not an element of the offense. 

There is no logical legal relevance of the question of 

U.S. foreign policy even if it were against U.S. foreign 

policy. Even if it were against U.S. foreign policy, it 

wouldn't be relevant. The fact that it is for U.S. foreign 

policy isn't relevant, and that is the whole basis for the 

executive order in the first place. It says so in the order 

itself. So to do that would just be to buttress that and 

really piggyback on it in a way that wouldn't be proper.

THE COURT: Ms. Shapiro, anything else? 

MS. SHAPIRO: No, other than the context of the Oslo 

process and what Hamas was doing to damage that process and 

the interests of the United States in the region is important 

to help the jury put this case into context. We are not 

trying to convict them based on the contextual background, but 

it is important for them to understand that background.

THE COURT: Mr. Cline?

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, just one quick comment. You 

have endeavored throughout this trial to keep politics out of 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
it. I am not convinced that is entirely possible, but I know 

Your Honor has tried to do that. That is all this is. This 

is politics. 

THE COURT: So what your intent is, then, is to 

discuss -- have him discuss the Oslo peace process and then 

the perception that Hamas was undermining that and then the 

designation? 

MS. SHAPIRO: Right. Again, Your Honor, this would 

be a very short witness. He was meant to come earlier in the 

case where this probably fit a little more neatly. But he 

will essentially just give his background. He worked with the 

National Security Council during the mid '90s, and he will say 

what was going on at that time, the efforts that the NSC was 

engaged in to help the peace process along, how Hamas was 

undermining that process, and why it was in the interest of 

the United States to have a peaceful solution to the conflict.

THE COURT: When you say how Hamas was undermining 

that process, what are you intending on getting into? 

MS. SHAPIRO: He will essentially say that there 

were attacks that were going on at the time that were aimed 

at -- they were timed toward certain events in the peace 

process, and they were efforts to undermine that process, and 

that that -- Well, I mean, initially the idea was to then have 

him explain how the executive order was intended to 

essentially buttress that peace process and get at the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
terrorist organizations that were trying to undermine it, but 

I can excise that out, and then he would simply be getting at 

why a solution to the -- why a peaceful solution in the region 

is important to the United States' interests abroad.

MR. DRATEL: And, Your Honor, that is not relevant 

to this case. Doctor Levitt has already put in everything 

that they have said, any factual matter. We are really in 

Al-Moyaad territory here in the context of things that aren't 

relevant, that are designed to prejudice, and really has no 

purpose. 

What she has just said -- What Ms. Shapiro has just said 

is the same thing. Hamas is undermining the peace process; 

therefore, we passed this executive order. The reasons 

underlying the executive order, it is the same path to the 

same -- It is the same destination and just different words 

and different paths, but it is really all the same thing. 

And the ultimate point they are trying to make is one that is 

impermissible. 

THE COURT: And I am not sure that that is 

impermissible. It already is in, to a certain extent. As you 

pointed out, what is in the order is the terrorist activities 

that undermine the peace process. That is already in. I 

think Doctor Levitt testified to that as well. And I don't 

know that that prejudices the Defendants individually. It 

talks about Hamas. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
The issue here is whether these Defendants were 

supporting Hamas. And so I don't know that that in and of 

itself is any prejudice as to these Defendants. It doesn't 

speak to that issue. But it does go to the issue of the 

context that is involved here. 

And some of the Defense counsel made some statements in 

their opening statements that actually touched on that as 

well, which is why I have been struggling with this issue to 

some extent, because normally it wouldn't be something that we 

would go into, but there were statements made during opening 

that touched on those issues.

MS. SHAPIRO: I was just going to say, specifically 

I think Ms. Moreno stood up and said that the government of 

Israel was controlling U.S. foreign policy, and essentially 

telling the jury that they were running this case, which the 

evidence won't show, and I think is impermissible, and I think 

that it leaves putting forth the United States' independent 

interest here is relevant.

THE COURT: I will allow it to the limited extent 

that you have described, then, and excise that other portion 

that you were planning on going into. I think that is 

probably already in the case, and this is a proper witness, 

then, to get it in there. That will be my ruling. 

MR. DRATEL: Thank you, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: All right. And then I just received a 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
letter from Mr. Jacks, I guess it was dated yesterday, about 

the 302s. 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. The letter sets out the 

chronology, and it is our position that those 302s are not 

required to be turned over. And we have tendered them to the 

Court, and gave I think an accurate recitation of Agent Burns' 

testimony on cross and why that does not trigger the necessity 

to produce those 302s. 

Mr. Dratel? 

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, what the letter really 

doesn't address, and what we would ask the Court when it 

reviews these 302s to concentrate on, is the Brady aspect of 

this, and beyond what was disclosed to us in January 2006 with 

respect to Hamami, HLF, his relationship with Hamas, HLF's 

relationship with the organizations, and Hamami's organization 

as well, which is really what the thrust of the direct was. 

And, frankly, there is no doubt that it is a large issue in 

this case, and we feel we should have been advised of that a 

long, long time ago. 

We should have been advised at a time where it would have 

done us some good for preparation of this trial. I realize 

they gave us something in 2006, but we believe based on what 

was said on cross examination and what we think is in those 

302s really goes well beyond that. We ask the Court to read 

it with that in mind. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: All right. I will take a look at those, 

then. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, do you have what was 

provided to us in 2006? 

THE COURT: Did you attach that, Mr. Jacks? I think 

the letter states that you did.

MR. JACKS: Yes.

THE COURT: So apparently I do. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Okay. It is not attached to ours. 

THE COURT: I have got copies here.

MS. HOLLANDER: I just want to make sure it is the 

same thing I have. It is the letter. 

THE COURT: We are still missing two jurors, by the 

way. 

MR. JACKS: The Defense has provided some notice of 

exhibits that they intend to go through in their cross 

examination of Agent Miranda, and I don't know -- I am 

probably going to complete my direct examination this morning, 

and I don't know if you want to discuss those now.

THE COURT: Yes. Let's go ahead and do that since 

our jurors are out. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I just ask Mr. Miranda 

not be in the room when we are discussing the cross 

examination exhibits. 

THE COURT: Okay. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
And then is it those Defense Exhibit 1087 and 1340 and 

1342, those are still the objections you are making? 

MR. JACKS: Yes. Looking at the list that was sent, 

and I don't have that one -- 

MR. JONAS: Yes, Your Honor. Those are the original 

exhibits that the Defense noticed the Government they are 

intending to show through Agent Miranda, and we filed a 

written response objection.

THE COURT: Right. And that is what I was looking 

at is your written responses. I was just wondering if that 

had changed. This is I think from last week.

MR. JACKS: That has not changed.

MR. JONAS: That has not changed. Mr. Westfall has 

notified the Government he intends on showing Agent Miranda 

some additional exhibits, which we object to as well.

MS. DUNCAN: And, Your Honor, we also have 

additional exhibits we have notified the Government. 

THE COURT: You have notified the Government of 

those?

MS. DUNCAN: Yes. I think that we notified them of 

two additional exhibits in addition to the original list we 

provided to Mr. Jacks, and I don't know the Government's 

position as to those.

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks, I will just let you address 

which ones you are objecting to. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. I have received notification 

that they intend to try to admit Defendants' Exhibits 419, 

444, and 721, which are photographs, and our objection is that 

while they may have come from the search of the Holy Land 

premises, they cannot be -- No further foundation can be laid 

to show their admissibility; certainly not through Agent 

Miranda. 

They have noticed Defendants' Exhibits 1179 and 1180, 

which I don't -- They show to be photographs but I can't find 

them on my disk of Defense exhibits, and so I am not really 

sure what they show, but we would have the same objection--no 

foundation. 

There is Defendants' Exhibit 1355, which is a photograph 

downloaded from the internet, and we would object again to the 

lack of foundation for that photograph.

Then there is a notice to Defendants' Exhibit No. 899, 

which I assume is a video and I am not sure what it shows, 

Your Honor, because the exhibit list just says "video" and 

then a number. And I haven't gone to locate that video and 

see what it shows. But again, we would object on the grounds 

of hearsay, and no foundation can be established through Agent 

Miranda.

Mr. Westfall sent me last night three documents which 

appear to be documents, I am assuming that he created them, 

and there is no way that Agent Miranda can authenticate or --

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: What are they? 

MR. JACKS: Yesterday, Your Honor, there were 

some -- the Government admitted some exhibits which were -- I 

think this one was -- Sorry. I don't remember the number. 

Solicitor's analysis report. It had to do with this 

individual Deeb Anees and their records showing his entry and 

dates for '97, '98, '99, and I believe that was it, and just 

dollar amounts and cities and his name next to it. And it 

looks like Mr. Westfall has taken that information and 

reconfigured it or done something with it and put it into 

other forms and other exhibits, and Agent Miranda obviously 

has no idea what those exhibits show or how they were created, 

and I don't believe that that could be provided by 

Mr. Westfall to him.

THE COURT: What are those exhibit numbers? Do you 

have them? 

MR. JACKS: I don't believe they had exhibit numbers 

at the time.

MR. WESTFALL: They do, Your Honor. But there were 

four of them, and I sent them to the Court also. 

MR. JACKS: Four? I got three.

THE COURT: How did you send them to me? 

MR. WESTFALL: To email. 

MR. JACKS: I got three. 

MS. HELMS: I got four. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: Okay. Regardless, Your Honor, these 

documents, while they may be something that some other witness 

could come in and introduce, certainly not Agent Miranda. 

THE COURT: Okay. And the other objections? 

MR. JACKS: I believe that is all that I have been 

notified about, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And the written ones, you objected to 

Defense Exhibit 1087 and 1340 and 1342, the ones you filed 

last week? 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. And I don't have that in 

front of me. We do renew those objections.

THE COURT: No. 1087, you say it has already been 

admitted as your HLF Search No. 23.

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: The Defendants' version reorders the 

information from chronological to alphabetical. The 

Government questions the need for the exhibit to be admitted 

twice due to concern for potential confusion. 

No. 1340 and 1342 are transcripts, I take it, of 

intercepted phone conversations.

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Of Mr. El-Mezain and maybe a family 

member.

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. And those obviously are 

hearsay and are not relevant, is our position. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

14

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: All right. Well, let's start 

with -- That is all of the objections. Let's start with those 

photographs. Who wants to address those? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I can do the photographs, Your 

Honor. 

These photographs Agent Miranda, has been through all of 

the material -- 

THE COURT: What are 419, 444, and 721? What are 

those photographs of? 

MS. HOLLANDER: No. 419, I may not use all of them, 

but No. 419 -- I can show them to you. No. 419, No. 444, they 

are really all similar pictures.

THE COURT: What are they of, counsel? That is what 

I am asking.

MS. HOLLANDER: They are pictures of Holy Land 

employees with families with tents, families living in tents 

and providing them services. 

THE COURT: I am actually looking at what 

Mr. Westfall emailed this morning.

MS. HOLLANDER: Do you want to see these?

THE COURT: Yes. 

MS. HOLLANDER: I am sorry. I thought that is what 

you were looking at. I will tie it into his testimony. I 

just wanted to answer the first question, which is what they 

were. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

15

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Okay. I have seen them. Go ahead. 

MS. HOLLANDER: The Government introduced a 

conference call and played part of the conference call and 

didn't play part of it where the speaker actually talks about 

demolished homes, and that is what this goes to, because 

the -- 

MR. JACKS: Which exhibit are we talking about now? 

MS. HOLLANDER: We are talking about I believe it is 

HLF -- Baker Wiretap No. 23. I am pretty sure it is Baker 

Wiretap No. 23. The Government introduced the entire call but 

only played part of it, and I want him to read another part 

which specifically talks about demolished homes. 

And in his direct examination Agent Miranda said there 

was no talk in the call about anything relating to charity, 

and HLF had a lot of projects involving providing resources 

for people whose homes were being demolished. So that is why 

those photos are relevant. I may not use all of them.

THE COURT: Well, of course, you will have to see if 

he recognizes something about those photos to be able to lay a 

predicate.

MS. HOLLANDER: And I will.

The other photograph, the one off the internet -- 

THE COURT: Do you have that? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Yes, I do.

THE COURT: Let me take a look at that. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: It is a photograph -- Your Honor, it 

is a photograph -- Let me explain. Agent Miranda talked about 

an individual Nihad Awad who worked for CAIR, and he 

specifically mentioned him in his direct, and he mentioned 

that he was at the Philadelphia meeting. 

Nihad Awad was invited to the White House, and the 

photograph, which I will show Your Honor, is a picture of him 

with President Bush at the White House. It goes to 

impeachment. 

What I intend to introduce is -- I want to show you the 

website where I got it, but I only intend to introduce the 

photograph. 

THE COURT: Let me see it. 

MS. HOLLANDER: They were at a mosque, but he was 

invited by President Bush, and the picture comes right off the 

White House -- It is a White House press release where he was 

invited. And you can see what -- I was not planning on 

anything what President Bush says. I have just provided that 

to the Government and the Court to know where the photograph 

came from. But they have talked about him, they have talked 

about his organization being something that came out of the 

Philadelphia meeting, there has been a great deal of mention 

about him, and that is why I think it is relevant to show that 

this same person that Agent Miranda is talking about that has 

come up throughout this case was invited to the White House 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

17

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
and met with President Bush. 

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Judge, I don't believe Agent Miranda 

testified about Nihad Awad.

MS. HOLLANDER: Yes, he did.

MR. JACKS: I don't remember him discussing that. 

Even if he did, this photograph downloaded from the internet, 

that is not a sufficient foundation. All this conversation 

from Ms. Hollander that, you know, he was invited to the White 

House, or they went to a mosque, there is nothing in the 

record about that. Even if it is true, that doesn't make it 

admissible. 

And just that picture in and of itself, there is no 

foundation that can be laid through Agent Miranda to what she 

just -- Unless she intends to try to put it in front of the 

jury in the form of a question, which we would also object to, 

which is the purpose of us having this discussion now outside 

the presence of the jury. 

There is no indication that Agent Miranda is going to be 

able to say when and where and under what circumstances this 

photograph was taken, whether it has been Photoshopped or 

anything else. 

And as I said, the fact that it is downloaded from the 

website, that doesn't make it admissible. The predicate and 

the foundation still has to be laid by some competent witness. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

18

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
And so --

THE COURT: Well, let's lay aside the predicate 

issues. If that were to be laid, do you have an objection -- 

would you have objection to that photograph coming in? 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir, just on relevancy grounds. 

Again, relevancy in the sense that there is no context that 

can be provided to that. There is nobody that is going to be 

able to say this is what was happening, this is when it was 

taken, it is a fair and accurate representation of what -- 

THE COURT: I am saying let's assume that it is 

accurate, that what she has there with her off the internet, 

that is the way it happened. Let's just assume. It mentions 

a meeting with President Bush, has President Bush talking. 

Let's assume that that is accurate and correct. What would be 

your objection, then?

MR. JACKS: It is not relevant.

THE COURT: Not relevant to any issue? 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, Agent Miranda, I mean, I 

somewhat recent the allegation that I may have Photoshopped 

something.

THE COURT: I don't want to get into that. Let's 

lay aside the predicate issues. Let's just lay that aside for 

now. I am getting just to the relevance of it and whether 

that needs to come in or should come in.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: You Know, Agent Miranda didn't 

mention it because Agent Miranda is telling the jury what the 

Government wants the jury to know about this individual and it 

is not complete, and that is what impeachment is for. That is 

why we have cross examination. 

I believe without a doubt that Agent Miranda can identify 

Nihad Awad.

THE COURT: I am getting away from predicate, I am 

saying. You keep wanting to go back to predicate. 

MS. HOLLANDER: And it goes to show that this person 

that the Government is saying is -- you know, these people all 

support Hamas and the Philadelphia meeting was all about 

support of Hamas is someone that the President of the United 

States would invite and meet and stand next to at a mosque. I 

think that that is important for the jury to hear. 

And Mr. Jacks keeps saying when we have tried to redact 

things that we are giving the jury a false state of what the 

actual facts are. This is to provide facts for the jury in 

the form of cross examination and that -- I mean --

THE COURT: I am just trying to understand how that 

is relevant to the issues that jury has to decide, 

though--whether this individual was at the White House or not, 

how that is going to help the jury make a decision on the 

issues before them, the issues that they are going to have to 

decide about these Defendants on trial, how that is helpful to 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

20

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
that. 

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, can I take a swing at it? 

THE COURT: Yes. 

MR. CLINE: The Government, whether it is through 

Agent Burns or Agent Miranda, it might have been Burns, 

offered evidence that CAIR was the Americanized organization 

that came out of the Philadelphia meeting. It was kind of a 

fraud being perpetrated on the American people; the Islamic 

face was hidden. This was the American organization. 

Nihad Awad, who I believe was at the Philadelphia 

meeting, was and is the head of this organization. The 

Government I believe has identified him as a member of the 

Palestine Committee. 

It is highly relevant that in September of 2001, during 

this alleged conspiracy, the President of the United States is 

meeting with this man, inviting him to meet with him in a way 

as a symbol of the good Muslims, the people in the United 

States we want to embrace, particularly at times like right 

after --

THE COURT: And I understand that that that is where 

you would go with that, but I am still trying to understand 

how that is relevant to the issues that the jury has to 

decide.

MR. CLINE: It is relevant, Your Honor, because the 

Government has sought to paint a picture of a kind of a secret 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
and, in a way, fraudulent sort of group of Muslims, of which 

our clients are alleged to be part, that has pretended to be 

friendly to America and peace-loving, but in reality is 

devoted to terrorism and supportive of Hamas. Our clients are 

alleged to be part of that. 

THE COURT: But your clients are alleged to be part 

of that not through CAIR, but through other --

MR. CLINE: But they painted this big picture of all 

of the organizations there that were woven together. There is 

NAIT, there is ISNA, MAYA, CAIR. They are all woven together. 

This is the Government's theory, now.

THE COURT: Right. But what evidence has come in 

after the creation of CAIR that it was involved in any of the 

activities that these Defendants are charged with? 

MR. CLINE: Well, the testimony was, Your Honor, 

that and it was very sort of portentous, let's say, that 

coming out of the Philadelphia meeting the idea was to turn 

away from sort of overt support of Hamas and turn toward a 

covert support for Hamas that was going to be masked in this 

sort of pro-American and pro-peaceful thing. And CAIR was 

specifically identified by Agent Burns as the organization 

that was going to promote this. 

I might add, Your Honor, that CAIR has been identified by 

the Government as an unindicted co-conspirator in this case. 

So, you know, CAIR is woven into this case. And to me I can't 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

22

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
think of anything more sort of forcefully rebuts this picture 

the Government has painted than to have the head of CAIR, a 

supposed member of the Palestine Committee, one of the people 

on the inside of this supposed conspiracy to trick the 

American people and perpetrate this hoax, meeting with the 

President of the United States in September of 2001. What 

could be more probative, what could be more powerful to the 

jury than to see that? 

MR. JACKS: Judge, I am concerned that we are just 

getting away from the rules of evidence, and I just want to 

address -- You know, they talk about that, you know, the 

Government has redacted things or prevented them from putting 

things into evidence. And there is a remedy for a lot of what 

they complain about and that is they can call witnesses, 

assuming the testimony is relevant, and present that. 

My first concern is that we just have skipped over the 

rules of evidence in terms of how this stuff is going to come 

into evidence. And the traditional foundational requirements, 

they are not even talking about those. They immediately go 

to, "Well we need to do this because the Government has said 

this or that," and you know, the question that needs to be 

asked or the statement that needs to be made is, "Well, that 

may be true, but you can do that in your own case; you can do 

that through your own witnesses." 

And I don't think there is, as with so many of these 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

23

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
exhibits, I don't think there is any foundation that has been 

laid from the Defense standpoint, so many of these photographs 

and other things that have come in, that there is no context 

virtually with any of those except what is provided by the 

attorneys through their statements. 

That is my first concern is that they are attempting to 

put on their case without calling any witnesses, and I don't 

believe that under the rules of evidence, as we go through 

these things item by item, that they are able to do that. And 

that is -- Holding them to the rules of evidence is no worse 

than holding us to the rules of evidence. 

And so that is my first concern with, you know, before we 

get to the issue of whether it is relevant and all that kind 

of thing, let's find out, first of all, if it can be properly 

admitted through the witness that is on the stand.

Now, to respond to this idea about CAIR and the fact that 

there is a picture of somebody standing next to the President, 

all this other discussion about that he had him there in 

September of 2001, there is nothing of that in the record. 

Once again, it is them, the lawyers, providing the context to 

the Court, and they are going to try to provide it to the jury 

improperly, because there is nobody that is going to get up 

there and say this was in 2001, this was when he was the 

President, this was when he was the Governor of Texas. 

The fact that it is off the White House website, that may 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

24

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
be true, but if I have got a piece of evidence and the fact 

that it is true doesn't mean I can put it in evidence because 

it is true. That is not the test. The test is has the proper 

foundation been laid. The truth or the reality of the 

exhibit, or whatever it is, that is not the standard to 

determine whether it comes in or not. 

So I would like us to get past, or not just go past that 

and automatically assume, "Okay, it is what you say it is 

because you have given me this article off the internet." But 

the issue with CAIR -- Okay, there is a picture of this 

individual standing with the President. Well, the rest of the 

story, as Paul Harvey says, is that he was criticized for 

that, and there are many reports and stories out there of 

Congressmen who have come out and at one time were supportive 

of CAIR and then as they found out about CAIR have publicly 

criticized and distanced themselves. 

So that notion that a single picture presents this one 

position that the Defendants want to claim is not the whole 

story in context. And if the issue is going to become, you 

know, what all has CAIR done post 1993 or '95 or whatever, we 

are going to be here a long time. And I know that is an issue 

that the Court has tried to stay away from to the extent that 

it is not relevant. And I think this photograph falls right 

in that category. And, you know, if we are going to stay away 

from having CAIR be on trial in this case, then this 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
photograph is not relevant and should not be admitted. 

And again, going back to the notion of, you know, even 

before you even get to that relevance question you have got to 

look at the rules of evidence and whether it can be admitted 

through this witness, or any witness that the Government puts 

on. 

THE COURT: Mr. Cline or Ms. Duncan, you were 

standing up. Did you have anything you wanted to add? 

MS. DUNCAN: Your Honor, I just had an additional 

point to add in terms of the relevance of the photograph. 

The Government attempted -- They used Mr. Abu Baker's 

declaration where he said that the Philadelphia meeting was a 

meeting of the intellectual community leaders, and attempted 

to portray that as a lie; that this was really a dark secret 

meeting of people, and this picture goes to show that Nihad 

Awad, who was one of the members of that meeting, was in fact 

a leader of the Palestinian Committee. It sort of ties what 

Mr. Cline was saying to the evidence that has been introduced 

in this case as an additional point of relevance.

THE COURT: Thank you. 

Mr. Cline? 

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, I don't know if you are 

worried about this foundation issue.

THE COURT: Well, he has raised a point. Even if 

you go -- and I let some of the other pictures in because I 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

26

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
thought the pictures themselves, along with the agent 

identifying either the workers or employees, or somebody, and 

had "Kosovo relief," the picture appeared to be what it 

purported to be, which is the foundation for a picture. 

All you can do with this picture is you can show an 

individual with President Bush. All this other information 

that you are talking about, you know, September after 9/11, 

none of that could come in, obviously. 

MR. CLINE: I think foundation is an important 

requirement, and --

THE COURT: And so at that point when you just have 

a picture, I don't know -- 

MR. CLINE: Foundation issues are ones that we have 

visited often in this trial and will revisit when the 

Government has other exhibits to offer. 

But if it were necessary to subpoena someone from the 

White House, the person in charge of the website, for example, 

to come and authenticate this picture, we can do that. It 

strikes me as an extraordinary waste of time and resources.

THE COURT: And I agree. Generally I agree, which 

is why I was getting to the relevance issue.

MR. CLINE: But if we have to do that, by goodness, 

we will issue that subpoena.

THE COURT: But then we have to deal with the 

relevance issue.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

27

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. CLINE: And on relevance, Your Honor, again what 

the Government wants to do here, and I am not faulting them, 

they are advocates just as we are, they want to open the door 

just enough to get in that little drop of poison, and then 

they want to slam it shut so we can't present any of our 

stuff. As soon as they put in their stuff, understandably, 

then when we want to put in our little bit to counter what 

they put in, they say, "That is too much. It is going to 

create a mess." 

We are not asking to put in a bunch of stuff here. They 

have put in some information about CAIR. They put in Agent 

Burns' opinion that it was the American face going forward in 

'93, that was the new organization that I think Mr. Abu Baker 

was referring to at the end of his summary of what was going 

on in the Philadelphia meeting. They brought up Nihad Awad. 

They have shown exhibits portraying him as a member of the 

Palestine Committee. 

All we want to do is put in one photograph. That is not 

opening the door. It is not prolonging the trial. It is not 

doing anything. It is just one picture. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, they can also subpoena Nihad 

Awad. They don't have to subpoena the web host of --

THE COURT: Yeah, but I still think you are -- I 

agree that without somebody testifying to the context of the 

picture, all you can get a picture. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Clearly the picture on its face is a picture of President 

Bush with some individuals, and if the agent can identify that 

or somebody, that probably is fine in my view, because the 

foundation is does this appear to be what it purports to be, 

somebody that can testify to that. There is not any 

indication that that is in fact a made-up photograph.

MR. JACKS: I understand. 

THE COURT: Because you can say that about any 

photograph that something is made up. 

MR. CLINE: Can I interrupt? I apologize. I agree 

with Mr. Jacks to this extent--that if Agent Miranda cannot 

recognize Nihad Awad in the picture, then we can move on.

THE COURT: Absolutely. I am assuming that he can.

MR. CLINE: I am assuming he can as well.

THE COURT: If he can, then I am past where you are, 

but not as far as they are in the sense that doesn't establish 

2001, doesn't establish he was invited, any of that. That 

doesn't come in. All you have is a photograph.

MR. CLINE: But what it does establish is that at 

sometime between the time President Bush became President -- 

THE COURT: Well, but we don't know that from the 

picture. It doesn't say he is the President, as Mr. Jacks 

pointed out. We just know it is a picture of President Bush 

and some individuals. That is really all you can tell from 

the picture, because we don't have a time frame for it. The 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
agent can't testify when that was taken, like a typical 

sponsoring witness would testify to the time frame for the 

picture. You are not going to have that.

MR. CLINE: I think the jury could reasonably infer 

from the appearance of the man whom we have seen for many 

years that this is during his presidency, which would put it 

during the relevant period. 

Now, again if that is really an issue here, we can bring 

somebody in from the White House to they, "Yes, that is 

President Bush. That is Nihad Awad. This was taken on a 

particular date." But why go through all that when we all 

know what it is about, and the jury is going to know what it 

is about? 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I spent a few bench 

conferences up there having to go through this with my 

exhibits, so the fact that it is one exhibit, it is not one 

exhibit. We are seeing this throughout this case of them 

seeking to introduce exhibits without calling any witnesses 

that really would be able to provide the foundation. So 

admittedly it is one exhibit, but it is one of many that they 

have sought to introduce through this same fashion with the 

same shortcomings, and they want to put that picture out there 

and then they are going to provide the context through their 

statements or questions or inferences, or whatever, and I just 

do not believe that they are able to lay a foundation. I 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

30

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
don't know if Agent Miranda will recognize Nihad Awad or not.

THE COURT: And if he doesn't, the ruling on the 

other photos was if the agent couldn't recognize anybody in 

there, then it doesn't come in. 

I am going to sustain. I don't want to keep the jury 

waiting much longer. I am going to sustain the objection at 

this point, so don't go into that at this time on cross. Let 

me give that some more thought as to both the foundational as 

well as the relevance issue. 

I am a bit concerned, you know, like you said, this is 

about Hamas, but you brought CAIR into the case, and Mr. Cline 

has a valid point that you want to be able to talk about it 

but you don't want them to talk about it. And this is 

relevance, not to foundation. That is why I am saying let's 

get past this. And then you don't think -- You don't want 

them to get into it because then there are other issues, but 

yet you are the one that injected CAIR into the case. 

And I still don't know ultimately how that will help the 

jury. If we got into this big fight over CAIR and whether in 

fact it is what the Government says it is, just the American 

face of the terrorist movement, or it is what CAIR purports to 

be, that that would help the jury resolve the issues before 

them; that that would help them in any way resolve those 

issues that are before this jury. And I am leaning towards 

no. It would get us into a fight over that issue. But I 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

31

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
don't know ultimately how that would help this jury. 

MR. CLINE: Well, Your Honor, I realize you are 

thinking about this issue and haven't made a final 

determination, but if Your Honor comes down there, then we 

would like an instruction, let's say, that nothing that the 

jury has -- And I am just making this up.

THE COURT: I understand you are thinking out loud, 

too.

MR. CLINE: I am thinking out loud. But we want 

some kind of an instruction that the jury is not to consider 

CAIR, draw any inference against the Defendants from CAIR, 

that they are to disregard the testimony about CAIR. I mean, 

if CAIR is not going to be in this case, it has got to be not 

in this case, and not just partly in the case the way the 

Government wants to portray it, which is how it is now.

THE COURT: We will give that some thought.

MR. WESTFALL: Just one other thing, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: One other thing. No more. All right.

MR. WESTFALL: That is all. You know, bias is 

always in play, and the credibility of Agent Miranda is 

something the jury certainly will have to consider, and this 

really goes to that as well.

THE COURT: I disagree that it goes to that as much 

as you are making it out to go to that, but I understand those 

issues. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

32

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
No, no more. We have got the jury waiting. I said we 

are going to stop.

Go ahead and bring in the jury in, and go ahead and get 

Agent Miranda. 

(Whereupon, the jury entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, good 

morning. We are ready to proceed. 

Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Thank you, Your Honor.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Good morning, Agent Miranda.

A. Good morning, sir. 

Q. Yesterday when we broke for the day, I believe the last 

exhibit that we were making reference to was what had been 

referred to as the security document by me, but it is exhibit 

InfoCom Search No. 35. 

MR. JACKS: Mr. Lewis, could you display InfoCom 

Search No. 35 again on the screen?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And Agent Miranda, is that the first page 

of this document that we were going through yesterday 

afternoon when we broke for the day?

MR. JACKS: Mr. Lewis, please go to I believe it is 

page 12, the first page. Thank you.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And this document is entitled "The 

foundations, policies, and guidelines." Correct?

A. Yes, it is.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

33

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And did you find other documents in your examination of 

the evidence in this case that were of a somewhat similar 

nature to this particular document that talks about 

communication and security issues, that type of thing?

A. Yes I did, sir.

Q. Are you familiar with a document that has been identified 

as Ashqar Search No. 15?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And is that a document that was photographed during the 

search of Abdel Haleem Ashqar's house in Oxford, Mississippi 

in December 1993?

A. Correct, sir.

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, we would move the admission 

of Ashqar Search No. 15. 

MR. CLINE: Our previous objections, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. That is overruled. That is 

already in evidence. 

MR. JACKS: All right. Thank you.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, is that the first page of 

the exhibit Ashqar Search No. 15?

A. Yes, it is, sir.

MR. JACKS: Mr. Lewis, would you mind just -- Just 

scroll through the first I believe it is four pages, if you 

would. And you can go back to the first page now.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, just if you would, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
describe this document physically in terms of what it looks 

like and how it is laid out. 

A. Well, it is four pages in Arabic. It is broken up into 

columns and each column has a different category assigned to 

it.

Q. And it was translated from Arabic into English. Is that 

correct?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the fifth page of the 

exhibit, Mr. Lewis? Thank you.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Is this the first page of the English 

translation of the document?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would, would you please just describe how the 

document is structured or organized as shown on this 

particular page?

A. Yes, sir. There are five categories, columns. Starting 

on the left there are the goals, there are the means of 

execution or meeting those goals, a time frame that is set 

out, the party that executed or the execution party, and the 

party that is responsible for following up or the follow-up 

party.

Q. And do those headings continue throughout the document?

A. They do, sir.

Q. And directing your attention to the goal column on the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

35

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
far left, what is the first goal that is shown in that 

particular column?

A. The first goal is "Building a solid communication 

apparatus to facilitate communication between."

Q. And then the sub heading?

A. There is No. 1, "The inside to the inside;" B would be 

"The inside to the outside."

Q. And have we seen that term or those terms the inside and 

the outside earlier in this case, those references, if you 

will?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And insofar as your understanding and the context in 

which they have been used, what does the inside mean and what 

does the outside refer to?

A. The inside is going to refer to the West Bank, to Gaza, 

and to the Israel in terms of how it looked in 1948.

Q. And the outside would be what?

A. Anything outside of those areas.

Q. Does the document itself provide any kind of definition 

or explanation as far as what is considered the inside?

A. Yes. If you go to that section "means of execution."

Q. All right. The second big column, the wide one?

A. Right. And if you look at B, it has a little checkmark 

by it.

MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, can you maybe enlarge that 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

36

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
a little bit, that part? 

A. Right.

Q. And how does that go toward defining what is considered 

the inside?

A. Well, it is still in the section on communications 

between the inside and the inside, and it says there 

"Establishing three other computer centers in the Bank," which 

is the West Bank, "the sector," which is the Gaza Sector or 

the Gaza Strip, "and 48," which is Israel as it existed in 

1948.

Q. If you would, just staying within that "means of 

execution" section as far as to how they are going to achieve 

these goals, just what is the first heading in the "means of 

execution"?

A. The first heading in the "means of execution" section is 

at the computer level.

Q. All right. And that means of execution, A, is what?

A. "Connecting computer machines in the existing centers in 

the Bank and the Sector."

Q. And what time is given for either that to be done or to 

be finished?

A. End of 2/90.

Q. February of '90, for the record?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And who does it show to be the execution party?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

37

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Basman and Bayan.

Q. And have we seen or heard those names before in this 

case?

A. We have, sir.

Q. Who goes by the name Basman that has been mentioned in 

this case?

A. Basman Elashi.

Q. And who goes by the name Bayan that has been mentioned in 

this case?

A. Bayan Elashi.

Q. And are they related to the Defendant Ghassan Elashi?

A. They are his brothers.

Q. And has their name appeared in any documents that are 

part of the Palestine Committee?

A. Basman Elashi has shown up on the Palestine Committee 

list.

Q. All right. On the follow-up party, who is shown in that 

column to be the person responsible for following up on this 

execution?

A. Well, the first name is Abdel Haleem. That is the one 

with the line through it, and the second name is Izzat.

Q. And who in this case is known by the name Abdel Haleem?

A. That would be Ashqar.

Q. And in fact, you said this document was found in his 

house. Is that correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

38

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. His name is marked through and the name Izzat 

is underneath it. Has the name Izzat appeared earlier in this 

case?

A. Yes. That is Izzat Mansour.

Q. And is he the same person that was tasked with doing 

security work at the Holy Land Foundation offices?

A. Yes, sir, the same individual.

Q. Was he on that apparatus chart as the person, the 

chairman of the security committee?

A. That is correct.

Q. Okay. Just to go on down, if you will, just quickly read 

in the other means of execution and who is responsible for 

them?

A. The means of execution, B is "establishing three other 

computer centers in the Bank, the Sector, and 48." The party 

responsible is the inside.

Q. I want to interrupt you because you said the Bank, the 

Sector, and the 48. Given your work on this case, the 48 

would be consistent to refer to what?

A. Israel particularly as it existed in 1948.

Q. All right. Is that the relevance of the term 48?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And then just as far as who is charged with 

those responsibilities, execution and then follow up?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

39

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. The execution in that "means of execution" is the inside, 

and the follow-up is "As above," which is a reference to 

Izzat, because right below it is Abdel Haleem.

Q. All right. And then the other executions of that goal, 

who is supposed to be carrying those out?

A. Well, the "means of execution" is "providing the inside 

with computers suitable for communications," and the execution 

party is supposed to be Izzat Mansour and Abdel Haleem Ashqar, 

and the follow-up party is Abu Omar.

Q. And who in this case has been identified as going by the 

name Abu Omar?

A. The Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook. 

Q. Go ahead and go through these things they are doing or 

planning to do. 

A. Right. At the computer level, again for "building 

communications on the inside to the inside," D is to "purchase 

modem machines from the two brands and providing them to the 

inside (4 machines)." The execution and follow up party are 

the same as in the previous notation, C, which is Izzat 

Mansour Abdel Haleem Ashqar and Mousa Abu Marzook.

Q. Just go through the means of execution, then and we can 

just read who is the follow-up party and the execution party. 

A. Yes, sir. No. 2 at the personal level, "Agreeing on 

individuals to become communication points and others in case 

of an emergency; B, providing the inside with the ink needed 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

40

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
for written correspondence."

Q. And then as far as the goal of building a solid 

communication apparatus, the inside to the outside, what are 

the means of execution?

A. No. 1 is "purchasing 8 fax machines for the inside and 

another one for the outside."

Q. Item No. 2?

A. "Purchasing a fax for the outside."

MR. JACKS: Let's go to the next page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Does the first goal continue on, that 

being "establishing or building a solid communication 

apparatus"?

A. Yes, sir, it does.

Q. And just what are the means of execution that are 

supposed to be carrying out, this goal?

A. Point 6 reads "Purchasing a computer which meets the 

committee's requirements for communication;" point No. 7 is 

"Purchasing a communication program and providing it to the 

inside;" No. 8 is "Sending delegations to the inside at a rate 

of one delegation every two months; and No. 9 is "Receiving 

delegations from the inside once every five months."

Q. And do you see the reference in item No. 6 above there to 

the committee? Is the committee within this document further 

defined or explained within the document?

A. There are references to it, indirect references.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

41

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And in this case, what committee have we heard reference 

to?

A. The Palestine Committee.

Q. Is it also known as the Central Committee or referred to 

as the Central Committee sometimes?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Go ahead and just go through the goals, and just read the 

goals and then the means of execution. 

A. Right. The goals here, which are still under the title 

of "building a solid communication apparatus to facilitate 

communication" is now the outside to the outside, and there is 

three points under that--"committee members," "support 

points," and they reference "Egypt, Jordan, and Britain," and 

the "other committees." The means of execution -- Should I 

continue with that, sir? 

Q. Yes. 

A. The means of execution are now "telephone, fax, mail, 

computer, and personal."

Q. Go ahead. 

A. Yes, sir. "Providing the points with the necessary 

communication devices."

Q. Let me ask you, do you see how in the column for "goal" 

it is listed "committee members" is item A, and then there is 

No. 1 under the means of execution? Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

42

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And then item B, "support points," and if you move to the 

right, it also has that item numbered 1. What does that 

indicate to you about the connection between B, "Support 

points, Egypt, Jordan, and Britain," and then the second No. 1 

in the "means of execution"?

A. Those two appear to be that necessary communication 

devices need to go to points which include Egypt, Jordan, and 

Britain.

Q. All right. And let me -- Over across you see in 

"execution party" for the line for "committee members"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And it has got the name Akram?

A. Right.

Q. All right. And has the name -- Do you recall or have you 

seen the name Akram in the Palestine Committee?

A. There is Mohammad Akram Adluni.

Q. All right. And do you recall if he was the author of any 

other documents that have been in this case?

A. I think he was, but I would have to be shown the 

documents to be certain.

Q. Do you recall the document that talked about the grand 

jihad and self-destruction of the West or inside destruction 

of the West?

A. I am familiar with it, yes.

Q. And do you know if he was the author of that document?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

43

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. I don't know. I would have to look at that, sir.

Q. All right. Go ahead and resume, if you would, just the 

goals and then the means of execution. 

A. Yes. Continuing on under "Means of execution," it says, 

"Personal communication (visits.)" And then under the goal C, 

the "other committees," in the "means of execution" it says 

"committee's secretariat."

Q. And is that title a title we have seen in other documents 

early in this case, earlier in this case?

A. Yes, it is, sir.

Q. All right. With regard to the Palestine Committee?

A. We have seen it in the Palestine Committee, and then 

there is also a reference to the secretariat with reference to 

the security document we have seen yesterday.

Q. What is the second goal that is set forth there on this 

page?

A. The second goal, 2, which is all the way to the bottom 

left is "Developing the communication devices."

Q. And just go to item No. 4 as far as a means of execution. 

A. Item No. 4 says, "Designing communications systems in the 

inside and the outside and developing the systems currently 

used."

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page, please, 

Mr. Lewis?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) What is the third goal that is listed 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

44

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
there on this next page?

A. That is the media aspect.

Q. And in terms of the subparts to that goal, what are they?

A. Subpart A is "Establishing a media company headquartered 

in Jerusalem with an office in Chicago," and sub point B is 

"information exchange between the inside and the outside."

Q. And then as far as means of execution, just read into the 

record what they list as the means of execution for 

information exchange?

A. No. 1 is "via mail (nonurgent and non-serious material.)" 

No. 2 is "Via computer (urgent and serious material.)"

Q. And just who is the execution party on that particular 

item?

A. That would be Izzat Mansour.

Q. All right. And item No. 3?

A. No. 3 is "Via fax (urgent and non-serious material.)"

Q. And do you see the reference to -- Excuse me. Go ahead. 

Go to item C, if you would, the goal in item C.

A. "Providing the inside with the approved bulletin."

Q. What is the fourth goal, according to this document?

A. The fourth goal is "the political aspect."

Q. All right. And what are the subparts of that goal?

A. Subpart A is "exchanging bulletins and magazines with the 

inside." Subpart B is "Making resolutions in regards to 

communications and news from Gaza." Subpart C is "Delivering 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

45

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
political resolutions outside to the inside and vice versa."

MR. JACKS: If you would go to the next page, 

please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) What is the fifth and final goal as set 

forth in this document?

A. It is the financial aspect.

Q. And what is the subpart of that goal or the elaboration 

of that goal?

A. It is "delivering funds from the outside to the inside."

Q. And how is it supposed to be carried out?

A. Point No. 1 for the means of execution for that goal is 

"sending checks to those in charge in the inside."

Q. And the -- Go ahead. 

A. No. 2 is "Establishing commercial companies for 

electronics in the Bank, the Sector, and the 48." No. 3 is 

"strengthening al-Baraq Company."

Q. Do you know what al-Baraq Company refers to?

A. I do not.

Q. Okay. Go ahead. 

A. No. 4 is "Dispatching 25 students from the inside for 

postgraduate studies." 

Q. This No. 4, "Sending 25 students from the inside," that 

is as a means of executing the financial aspect? Is that how 

you read that?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

46

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. 

MR. JACKS: Mr. Lewis, would you mind going back to 

InfoCom Search No. 35? And if you would, go to page 14 of 

that exhibit.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) What is the heading on this exhibit, 

Agent Miranda?

A. "Document safety."

Q. Item No. 3, what is that?

A. Item 3 reads "Classifying documents with every committee 

in four categories: General, limited, private, and very 

private (see appendix.)"

Q. Did you find other evidence or documents that appeared to 

be consistent with these policies or Guidelines?

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I want to direct your attention -- Are you familiar with 

a document that was taken during the search of Ismail 

Elbarasse's house in August of 2004 which when translated bore 

the title "the trust"? 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that document was seized in that search?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Judge, we would move the admission of 

Elbarasse Search No. 35. 

MR. CLINE: We reiterate our previous objections.

THE COURT: And that is admitted. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

47

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, would you mind 

showing -- Thank you.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, I want you to help me 

because one of these documents, the security document, was 

InfoCom Search No. 35 and this document is Elbarasse Search 

No. 35, so if I misspeak please let me know.

With regard to Elbarasse Search No. 35, is that it, the 

first page of it that appears on the screen?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And it is in Arabic. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir. 

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go to the last -- Just 

scroll through the pages, Agent Lewis, if you don't mind.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) That is the fourth page, Agent Miranda?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Stop right there, please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) do you recognize that logo depicted 

there?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What logo is that?

A. That is the symbol for Hamas.

Q. And the symbols that are depicted there, let's go to the 

top of that logo, the shape there between the two banners that 

come up. What does that represent?

A. It is either Israel or Palestine, depending on your 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

48

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
perspective.

Q. And the building or structure there, what does that 

represent?

A. That is the Dome of the Rock.

Q. Which you have testified about earlier?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in color is that the building that has the gold dome?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then what is crossed in front of the Dome of the 

Rock?

A. Two swords.

Q. And I am not going to ask you to translate the Arabic. I 

am sure it is later on. 

MR. JACKS: If you would go to the next page, 

please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is this the first page of the English 

translation?

A. Yes, sir, it is.

Q. And with regard to the upper left -- 

MR. JACKS: If you would, Agent Lewis, can you go 

back to the first page?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Now, on that page is there handwriting on 

the upper left corner?

A. Yes, sir, there is.

Q. Was that there when it was seized?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

49

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, it was.

Q. And that is in Arabic. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, if you will go to page 7.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And what does the translation show that 

handwriting to be?

A. "Documents file for the secretariat general."

Q. And just what are the dates -- This was apparently a 

faxed document?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is the date of the fax?

A. 6/10/92.

Q. And with regard to the title again, just what is the 

title? Read the title into the record. 

A. The title is "the trust."

Q. And then below that, what does it state regarding the 

information about this particular document?

A. "A special non-periodical bulletin." 

MS. HOLLANDER: We need to approach. 

(The following was had outside the hearing of the 

jury.)

MS. MORENO: Excuse me, Your Honor. I have 

Elbarasse Search No. 35 was admitted on September the 25th 

subject to limitations. Do you have that? 

MR. JONAS: Your Honor, the Defense objected saying 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

50

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
it was hearsay within hearsay. I don't think, Your Honor, I 

-- There were certain portions that were hearsay within 

hearsay, but we say it is all part of a co-conspirator 

statement because this is all part of the Muslim Brotherhood 

and the Palestine Committee. We agreed at that moment that I 

was only going to have Agent Burns address certain portions, 

and clearly Agent Miranda's testimony goes beyond those 

certain portions, so I think the issue is still hanging out 

there with regard to their objection as to hearsay within 

hearsay.

THE COURT: Except he offered it and I admitted it 

again, and that was subject to previous objections. Do you 

remember the specific objections? 

MR. JONAS: I think if I recall correctly, and I 

could be wrong on this, I think the ball was left in the 

Defense's court to identify those specific instances of 

hearsay within hearsay.

MR. MYSLIWIEC: I don't think it was left in our 

particular court. There are some parts of this document that 

have quotes from other people, and we argued that the quotes 

from other people certainly should be excluded because that is 

clearly hearsay within hearsay, and these aren't quotes 

alleged to be co-conspirators. They have nothing to do with 

the state of mind of somebody in Hamas or anything like that. 

So I think those were the limitations. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

51

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JONAS: This document is, I think it says on its 

face, is a publication by the international Muslim Brotherhood 

for the various -- for Hamas for the Palestine Committees 

worldwide, and we have established there is a connection in 

this case. And anything in it is a co-conspirator statement. 

If there is a quote by an individual, it is sort of adopted by 

Hamas in creating this newsletter.

MR. MYSLIWIEC: But reporting on what somebody said 

is not adopting what somebody is saying.

MR. JACKS: It is not being offered to show what 

that person said is true. It is being included to show that 

this is what they are spreading to their members. It is 

not -- We are not saying whatever is in quotes is true or not, 

but this is what they are putting in their newsletter or 

periodical, whatever you want to call it, and they are 

distributing it among their members. So whatever those 

persons said, and some of it talks about attacks or whatever, 

you know, that evidence is not intended to prove that is true. 

It is intended to prove this is what they communicated to 

their members. So that part of it is not hearsay. 

MS. MORENO: I think that the Government's position 

on this, Your Honor, it seems that the term co-conspirator 

applies to anybody who says something and that quote appears 

in this particular document. I think it is a rather 

breathtaking argument to make in this regard. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

52

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
And I would like the Court at least to take a look at the 

document and see if some of those portions at least can be 

redacted or Agent Miranda can stay away from those portions 

that we originally objected to within the quotes.

THE COURT: I need to take a look at them. I am not 

going to order them to redact them if I left the objection not 

ruled upon, if it is still open. I haven't sustained anything 

yet. 

MS. MORENO: Apparently not, Your Honor. 

MR. JONAS: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: So it is still outstanding. I have to 

look at them. But I still wanted to see what the quotes are, 

the ones you are objecting to, the hearsay within hearsay, I 

can't make a determination obviously without taking a look of 

that. Has any come up on the screen yet? 

MR. MYSLIWIEC: I don't think so. I have a feeling 

they are not intending to even get into the hearsay within 

hearsay, but I could be wrong. Are you doing any reading 

where it is a reading of what someone told somebody? I 

suspect that they are not.

MR. JACKS: No. 

MR. MYSLIWIEC: Because it is not relevant to why 

they want to put it in anyway. If we can agree to redact 

those portions because they are not even trying to have the 

witness testify about them.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

53

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: I would like to see what it is. I am 

still looking for quotes in here. 

MR. JONAS: I think, Your Honor, for the moment--and 

jump in if I am wrong--we can continue with Agent Miranda's 

questioning, and I think we can deal within the quotes.

THE COURT: If you get to a quote, we can deal with 

it specifically. So far you haven't run into one. 

MR. JACKS: No. 

THE COURT: And then we will have to deal with that 

issue at some point.

MR. JONAS: I think it is best if the Defense could 

identify them since it is their objection.

THE COURT: Identify which particular portions you 

are objecting to, and I will take a look at that. 

MS. MORENO: Thank you. 

(The following was had in the presence and hearing 

of the jury.)

MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, would you please show the 

first page of -- Thank you, sir.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, is this the first page of 

the English translation of this document called "the trust"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I think you were going to read above the 

introduction, that line above the introduction just as far as 

what it states. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

54

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir. It says "A special non-periodical bulletin, 

Issue 1, 1 October, 1992."

Q. And if you would, in the first paragraph would you go 

down to, do you see the sentence that begins "The Movement"?

A. Yes.

Q. Just begin reading those two sentences, if you would?

A. There is two sentences that say "The Movement." The 

first or second? 

Q. Start with the second one.

A. Yes, sir. "The Movement has now a weight that is taken 

into consideration abroad, and it is the one leading the 

powers that are opposed to the peaceful settlement, and it 

amasses all the capabilities for that purpose."

Q. The Movement, what organization does it refer to, that 

term?

A. Hamas.

Q. And how is the Movement -- What is Hamas' full name?

A. The Islamic Resistance Movement.

MR. JACKS: Go to the next paragraph, please, Mr. 

Lewis.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And if you would, beginning where it says 

"Due to all of this," would you begin reading there?

A. "Due to all of this, it was decided to issue a private 

non-periodical bulletin dealing with all the aforementioned 

(the Movement's positions and news, news of the inside, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

55

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
directions...). The first issue of 'The Trust' is between 

your hands, and we ask God to help us and you to fulfill the 

proper duty towards the trust. We find it necessary to make 

some remarks which should be observed precisely."

Q. And just the reference to "the first issue is between 

your hands," what does that indicate to you?

A. We are giving it to you, and you have got to take care of 

it.

Q. You are looking at it?

A. Yeah.

Q. All right. Go ahead. The part about remarks that should 

be observed precisely, would you read those three remarks?

A. Yes, sir. No. 1, "The bulletin is specifically for the 

brothers, the Masuls of (Palestine Committee in every country 

only), and it is the trust in their necks." 

Point 2, "The brothers are to study the bulletin in the 

periodical meeting of the committee, and it is not to be 

photocopied, meaning that the original copy should remain the 

only one." 

Point 3, "The brothers should work on spreading the 

contents of the bulletin and the ideas contained in it among 

the Ikhwans and the collective Islamists."

Q. And these comments about the document being a trust in 

their neck, in that it is not to be photocopied and should 

only -- should be the only copy, is that relating back to the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

56

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
security document and the document security issues that you 

observed in that document?

A. Yes, sir. 

MR. JACKS: If you would, go to the next page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And does this document, then, purport to 

convey the information that it indicated it was intended to 

convey?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. What is heading there on the first page?

A. "News on the inside."

MR. JACKS: If you would, go to the next page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And the first heading there?

A. "Eliminating collaborators."

Q. And would you just read, say, the first half of that 

paragraph?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. I am sorry. Read that whole paragraph. 

A. Yes, sir. "At home, Hamas was distinguished by its 

effective role in killing collaborators. It chooses the most 

dangerous ones among them, interrogates him, takes his 

confessions, records it on tape, and fears God in what it 

does. It has murdered a dangerous collaborator called 

(Ibrahim Salamah) in Gaza. Fatah has claimed a collaborator 

and considered him a martyr holding a very large eulogy for 

him. Hamas then made public the tape of his confessions 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

57

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
during the interrogation and issued a statement clarifying the 

matter in its entirety and severely blaming Fatah for these 

actions. It is strange that the said collaborator had taken 

part with the special Israeli units in killing masked people 

to the point he shot a cousin of his who was masked."

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go to the right hand 

column?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) What is the heading for the right hand 

column?

A. "Prisoners' release."

Q. Just read that paragraph?

A. "Hamas Movement issued a statement at home denouncing the 

size of the unfair releases by the enemy's authorities, as 

most of those released by instructions from Rabin as a good 

faith initiative toward the Palestinian people are from the 

Fatah Movement. It proved that in numbers, as the total 

number of those released in all areas from Fatah are (270) and 

only (17) from Hamas."

MR. JACKS: And go to the next page, Agent Lewis.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Do you see the heading entitled 

"positions"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And just read the first -- the introductory paragraph 

under that heading?

A. Yes, sir. It reads, "The Movement has decided to adopt 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

58

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the following position from the self-rule: Rejecting the 

administrative self-rule, rejecting the elections related to 

it, refusing to take part in them, and calling upon the 

Palestinian people to boycott them. Based on that, the 

Movement has decided to take the following steps."

Q. And then are there a series of numbered items there?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what is item No. 5, if you would read that?

A. Item No. 5 is "Escalating jihad actions against the 

Zionist enemy." 

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page, please, 

Agent Lewis?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is there a heading there in this 

periodical, the topic "meetings"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would, can you see just read the first 

sentence or two under that title "meetings"?

A. "The Movement delegation conducted several meetings and 

made contacts with some Palestinian powers and personalities 

during the past September. The most important topic was the 

self-rule and how to confront it and derail it, working to 

develop the Intifada and to attempt to mobilize the powers of 

our people where they exist."

Q. All right. And do you see beneath that they list 

meetings that took place? Do you see that?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

59

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you see item No. 3 making reference to a meeting 

between Hamas and something called "The Popular, the 

Democratic, and the General Command." Do you know what the 

Popular, the Democratic, and the General Command are?

A. Those are three terrorist groups.

Q. What are they called?

A. The PFLP.

Q. What does that stand for?

A. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Q. All right. 

A. There is the DFLP, the Democratic Front for the 

Liberation of Palestine, and then there is a Popular Front for 

the GC, General Command.

Q. And are those organizations all designated terrorist 

groups? 

A. Yes.

Q. And as far as the discussions or the topics, what were 

the fundamentals that were discussed during that meeting with 

those groups? A and B is what I am asking you to read into 

the record. 

A. Yes. A is "Self-rule and means to derail it, and B is 

"The Intifada, its continuation and development."

Q. If you would, there is a reference -- Do you see item 

No. 6? Go to the next column on the top right. And read the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

60

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
first couple of sentences of item No. 6. 

A. "The Movement delegation met with (9) Palestinian 

factions in Damascus over three days. These factions have 

approved a joint work plan to confront the self-rule, escalate 

jihad and armed resistance against the Zionist enemy, and also 

to call for a general strike on 9/23 in all the areas where 

Palestinians exist inside the occupied territories, Jordan, 

Syria, and Lebanon in order to express the rejection to the 

current settlement draft." Shall I continue, sir? 

Q. No. That is fine. Thank you. 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Let me ask you -- 

MR. JACKS: Go to the last page, before I move from 

that. It will be page 17 of the exhibit, Mr. Lewis.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And at the bottom, would you read, 

please, just the translation at the bottom?

A. Yes, sir. The one in bold? 

Q. Yes. 

A. "A slogan to be adopted in the sixth anniversary for the 

start of the blessed Intifada."

Q. The first Intifada broke out in December of 1987. Is 

that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the sixth anniversary, then would be December of what 

year?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

61

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. '92. 

Q. Or is it '93? I always get, depending on when it 

started, whether it is the start of the sixth year or --

A. Yeah. Right.

Q. Okay. And then the logo is translated, or the terms?

A. "Palestine, the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas."

Q. And that is what is written on the logo on those banners 

that we saw?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Okay. Going back to this security document -- 

MR. JACKS: If you would, Agent Lewis, InfoCom 

Search No. 35, if you could pull that up, please. And if you 

would go to page 20 of the exhibit.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) What is the captioned policy No. 7 at the 

bottom?

A. "Safety of offices and firms."

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page, please?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And do you see there is, like beginning 

No. 3, 4, 5, there are these policies and guidelines that are 

listed. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Go down, please, to item No. 12. And what is the policy 

that is set forth for item No. 12?

A. It is, "Conducting necessary maintenance measures for the 

foundation (individuals, location, equipment) and using 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

62

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
advanced equipment for that."

Q. All right. And it says the word "foundation" in that 

sentence. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. "The foundation." Did you find any evidence indicating 

that the Holy Land Foundation attempted to do anything that 

would be consistent with this policy or guideline?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are you familiar with what has been marked for 

identification purposes as Holy Land Foundation Search No. 91?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And is that a document, a paper document or series of 

pages that was found within the premises or the material taken 

from the Holy Land Foundation?

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Its Dallas office?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Judge, we move the admission of Holy 

Land Foundation Search No. 91. 

MR. CLINE: No objection.

THE COURT: Admitted. 

MR. JACKS: Could you display the first page of 

that?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, do you recognize this as 

the first page of Holy Land Foundation No. 91?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

63

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. And does it appear to be a letter?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And on whose letterhead is this letter created?

A. The Executive Protection Group, Incorporated.

Q. At the top of the letter, is there a statement or saying?

A. Yes, sir, there is.

Q. Just read it into the record, please. 

A. "With Allah's Name, The Merciful Benefactor, The Merciful 

Redeemer."

Q. And who is the letter addressed to?

A. It is addressed to the Defendant Shukri Abu Baker.

Q. And the date?

A. It is dated 29 July, 2000.

Q. And the subject matter according to the reference there 

below the address?

A. "Technical surveillance countermeasures. Basic RF sweep 

results and recommendations."

Q. And RF in your experience and background is an acronym 

for what?

A. Radio frequency.

Q. All right. And if you would, just read the letter, 

please?

A. Yes, sir. "Dear Brother Baker, As-Salaamu-Alaikum. This 

letter is to thank you and your organization for allowing EPG, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

64

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Inc. to provide a Basic RF Counter-Surveillance Sweep of your 

facilities on Wednesday 23 August, 2000. We were pleased to 

provide this service as a 50 percent discount, as a small 

contribution to your on-going work on behalf of the community. 

Al-Hamdulilah! 

"Following please find a Statement of Results for the 

sweep, as well as information regarding Technical Surveillance 

Countermeasures and Recommendations for your specific 

situation."

Q. All right. That is fine. You don't need to read the 

rest of the letter. 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And who signed the letter?

A. An individual by the name of Shihan Dr. F.D. Hale.

Q. What title does he put for himself?

A. President and CEO of EPG and regional director of 

security, Muslim American Society. 

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page, Agent 

Lewis? 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is this the referenced page that 

contains statement of results?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. And would you please read the first two 

paragraphs under that statement of results?

A. It reads, "On Wednesday, 23 August, 2000, after the close 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

65

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
of normal business hours, Executive Protection Group, Inc. 

performed a Technical Surveillance Countermeasures Basic RF 

Sweep of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development 

facility located at 504 International Parkway, Suite 509, 

Richardson, Texas, 75081.

"The Basic RF Counter-Surveillance Sweep determined that 

certain aspects within the facility, and therefore the 

Foundation, have been under technical surveillance by unknown 

entities for an undetermined period of time. At the time of 

the sweep, certain recommendations were made regarding these 

findings, as well as some general suggestions."

Q. And just from your reading of that paragraph, as far as 

the results of this purported examination, is there any 

indication that this individual located any kind of electronic 

surveillance or was saying there was any kind of electronic 

surveillance there?

A. I don't think so, based on what he is saying.

Q. Does he anywhere in this document further elaborate on 

what his opinion was?

A. No.

Q. Okay. 

MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, would you go back to 

InfoCom Search No. 35, page 19?

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) The heading on this page of this security 

document for policy, No. 35, or whatever is what, Agent 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

66

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Miranda?

A. "Travel and transportation safety."

Q. What is the second guideline or policy described there?

A. It is, "Providing a suitable cover for travel (commerce, 

tourism, visiting relatives) and supporting it with documents, 

commercial samples, catalogs, or tourist brochures. Also 

achieving this pretext in the visited country by taking 

tourist tours, making commercial meetings or reaching 

bargains."

Q. All right. Did you find anything in your examination of 

the evidence in this case that indicated that the Holy Land 

Foundation or any of the Defendants did anything that would 

appear to be consistent with this policy?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are you familiar with the document which has been labeled 

for identification purposes as InfoCom Search No. 36?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And is that a document that was seized from the premises 

of InfoCom during its search in September of 2001?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Judge, we move the admission of InfoCom 

Search No. 36 if it has not already been admitted.

MR. CLINE: I am not sure if it has been. We object 

on the grounds stated. 

THE COURT: No. 36 has not been admitted. And that 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

67

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
objection is overruled. That is admitted. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, is InfoCom Search No. 36 

shown on the screen?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that is a one-page document in English?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And does it appear to be a letter?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And to whom is it addressed?

A. To the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, Counselor Section, 

Washington, D.C.

Q. Does it bear a date?

A. It does, sir, dated January 2nd, 1996.

Q. And it is addressed to "Dear Counselor"?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would read the contents of the letter. 

A. It reads, "I would like you to assist Mr. Akram Mishal in 

obtaining a business visa to visit our offices in Saudi 

Arabia. He carries a United States of America passport 

No. 014856775 issued in Washington, D.C. on June 3rd, 1992 and 

valid till June 2nd, 2002. Mr. Mishal represents InfoCom 

Corp. and works as its International Sales Manager. His visit 

to us is very much needed to strengthen the existing relations 

between our companies. United International represents 

several products and services that InfoCom Corp. provides 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

68

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
since 1990."

Q. And Akram Mishal is who?

A. Akram Mishal was an officer at the Holy Land Foundation 

and relative of the Defendant Mufid Abdulqader.

Q. And was Akram Mishal, in any records that you looked at, 

that he was an employee of InfoCom?

A. No, he was never an employee of InfoCom.

Q. In your investigation, did you look at the payroll 

records of InfoCom?

A. I did.

Q. Did you look at records with the Texas Workforce 

Commission to see who should to have earned wages at InfoCom, 

or any company such as that?

A. I did.

Q. Anything to indicate -- Did you find anything to indicate 

that Akram Mishal worked for InfoCom?

A. No, I found nothing.

Q. It represents in this letter that he works for InfoCom 

and works as its international sales manager. Is that true?

A. No.

Q. Who was the international sales manager for InfoCom?

A. The Defendant Ghassan Elashi.

Q. And where was this letter found?

A. In Ghassan Elashi's office at InfoCom.

Q. This letter is signed by -- not signed, but it bears the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

69

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
typed name of what?

A. Mansour Alnaser.

Q. Do you have any idea who that is?

A. I think he was related to the company that is mentioned 

here, United International. It sounds familiar to me.

Q. All right. Was this letter as we see it -- Excuse me. 

This letter was in English when it was found. Correct? 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And so there was no signature on this letter. Is that 

correct?

A. No, sir.

Q. Did you find other examples in your examination of the 

evidence indicating that the Holy Land Foundation or any of 

its employees or the Defendants may have on other occasions 

taken steps to travel under false pretenses?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are you familiar with documents which have been 

identified as HLF Search No. 89?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And are those a series of documents that were seized 

during the search of the Holy Land Foundation Dallas office 

materials?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Judge, we move the admission of Holy 

Land Foundation Search No. 89. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

70

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. CLINE: No objection.

THE COURT: That is admitted. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, on the screen there before 

you, is that the first page of Holy Land Foundation Search 

No. 89?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And does it appear to be a letter?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And on whose letterhead is the letter prepared?

A. It is for a company you can see the name in the upper 

left hand corner Jamjun Advanced Technology.

Q. All right. And below that to whom is the letter 

addressed?

A. It is addressed to the Consular Section of the Saudi 

Embassy. 

Q. And the H.E., the ambassador, and then the custodian of 

the Two Holy Mosques Embassy, is that a reference to Saudi 

Arabia?

A. That is correct.

Q. The Two Holy Mosques being located in Saudi Arabia?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. And the subject matter of this letter, 

according to the letter?

A. The subject matter is "Request for issue a visit visa."

Q. And just the body of the letter, if you would just read 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

71

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
that into the record. 

A. It reads, "Dear Sir, we are in urgent need to have Mr. 

Shukri Ahmad Baker and Mr. Akram Mishal, whose particulars are 

given below, with us in Jeddah for consultation of some 

important business related to our firm."

Q. And then it contains identifiers for Akram Mishal and 

Shukri Ahmad Baker. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the closing paragraph or sentence, read that, please?

A. "We request you to kindly issue a visit visa to above 

gentlemen to enable them to visit us in Jeddah and Riyad as 

soon as possible."

Q. And then it is signed by this Marwad Ahmed Jamjun?

A. There is a signature there, yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Go to the next page, please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And this is an Arabic part of this 

exhibit, Agent Miranda?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. 

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go to the next page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) This page of the exhibit was also 

connected, found with this letter?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what is depicted on its page 3 of the exhibit? What 

is this document?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

72

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. This is a visa application for Saudi Arabia.

Q. Now, I take it you have traveled overseas a fair amount. 

Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And just in layman's terms, what is a visa?

A. A visa is something that has to go in your passport which 

tells you basically how long you are allowed in a country.

Q. And are there certain countries that require a visa and 

certain countries that don't require a visa?

A. Yes. Depending on which country you are from, there are 

visa requirements or those visa requirements are waived.

Q. And are there instances where, depending if you are 

traveling on business as opposed to pleasure, under one 

circumstance you may be required to obtain a visa and under 

another circumstance you may not be required to have a visa?

A. Right. Or official government travel, for instance, also 

applies.

Q. And as far as who decides whether you need a visa or not 

in the policies, is that something that is subject to the 

country that you are visiting?

A. Right. The country you are visiting decides whether or 

not a visa is required of you.

Q. For example, if I wanted to take a trip to the Chech 

Republic, for example, where would I go to find out if I need 

a visa, and if I did where would I go from the United States 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

73

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
to try to obtain a visa?

A. Generally you can go on to the internet to the State 

Department, our State Department's websites, and those 

generally give you good information. But you could also look 

up the Embassy of the country you are going to, in this case 

your example the Chech Republic, and you would see what the 

visa requirement is for somebody that wants to come over for 

business or pleasure or official travel, depending on what 

your circumstances are.

Q. And are visas issued by the government of the country you 

are going to visit?

A. Yes. You generally turn in your passport and they put 

the visa in the passport.

Q. Okay. So if you want a visa and you are going somewhere, 

you have to make contact with some representative of that 

country's government?

A. That is correct.

Q. And it can be done through the embassy or the consular's 

office which may be around the country. Is that right?

A. Generally, yes, sir.

Q. So whose visa application is this?

A. This is the visa application for the defendant Shukri 

Baker.

Q. And if you will, it has various personal identification. 

Is that correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

74

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Agent Lewis, I just want to identify the 

date. If you could go down to about the bottom quarter of the 

page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And do you see a date there, Agent 

Miranda, when this document was signed?

A. Yes, sir, 4/3/01.

Q. And does it appear to be signed by Shukri Baker?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would, continue -- 

MR. JACKS: If you would, go back up, Agent Lewis, 

to the middle of the page.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And where it says "purpose of travel."

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And there are some boxes there that can be checked or 

filled in?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What markings are there?

A. There is two markings. There is a circle and some lines 

for work and then there is a circle around "visit."

Q. Okay. 

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go back down, Agent 

Lewis, to the bottom.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) If you would, is there information 

provided there to be filled in by the applicant?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

75

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what does it say about what is the information filled 

in there?

A. It says, "The name of the applicant is Shukri Ahmad 

Baker. His nationality is USA. Company name is InfoCom 

Corporation."

Q. Is there an address?

A. Yes. That is the address for InfoCom.

Q. That is the address for InfoCom. Correct?

A. Yes, sir, it is.

Q. That we saw on the map yesterday?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. And I will ask you the same question about 

Akram Mishal. Did you find any evidence indicating that 

Shukri Abu Baker worked for InfoCom or was an employee of 

InfoCom?

A. No, he was never an employee or worked for them.

Q. All right. 

MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page? 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Is this simply a duplicate of the letter 

that was shown on the first page of the exhibit?

A. Yes, sir, it appears to be a duplicate.

Q. And this handwriting and that such a thing, was it on 

there when it was seized?

A. Correct.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

76

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: Would you go to the next page, which I 

think is page 35.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is this another visa application, 

Agent Miranda?

A. It is, sir.

Q. And who is this for?

A. This is for the HLF officer Akram Mishal.

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go down to the purpose 

of travel. Let me --

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Do you see where it says business address 

and telephone number?

A. Yes.

Q. What did Akram Mishal put in there?

A. InfoCom Corporation, 630 International Parkway, Suite 

100, Richardson, Texas, and there is a telephone number as 

well.

Q. What did he mark as the purpose of travel?

A. He marked "visit."

Q. And the dates of travel, are those shown there under 

"date of departure"?

A. The date of departure was April 20th, '01; the date of 

arrival is April 15th, '01; and the duration of the stay is 

seven days.

Q. All right. So I don't know if it is in reverse order, I 

guess as far as the country the date you are going to arrive 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

77

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
in you are visiting, and the date you are going to leave?

A. The date of arrival in the country is April 15th, '01 and 

the date of departure is April 20th, '01.

MR. JACKS: And if you would go down and show the 

date this was signed and who signed it.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Do you see that, Agent Miranda?

A. I do, sir.

Q. What date was it signed and by whom?

A. 4/3/01 by Akram Mishal.

Q. And if you go on down to the part completed by the 

applicant, what does he show as his company name?

A. InfoCom Corporation.

Q. And again the same address?

A. Yes, sir. 

MR. JACKS: And if you would, go back to page 3, the 

application for Shukri Abu Baker.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) The part up there about where the 

business address, on that particular application is there 

anything filled in for the business address?

A. No, sir.

Q. All right. At the bottom, though, he does represent that 

he works for InfoCom Corporation. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: If you would just scroll through the 

pages. Go to the next page, please, the next one, and the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

78

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
next one.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is that a photocopy of the inside of 

Akram Mishal's passport?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: And the next page, please, Mr. Lewis.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Does that purport to be a photocopy of 

the first page inside cover of Shukri Abu Baker's passport?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: If you would, go to page 9, please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is this -- Can you see that, Agent 

Miranda?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the date that is translated -- There was an Arabic 

version of this letter in there. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Is this the translation of that Arabic page?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the date that was translated as being the 

corresponding date?

A. 4/21/2001.

Q. All right. And this activity of representing themselves 

as employees of InfoCom, was that something that you noticed 

as it relates to this security document and the policies set 

forth in there?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

79

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Did you ever locate any evidence that might have been 

relevant or explanatory or pertinent to this trip that was 

referenced in this earlier exhibit?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And are you familiar with HLF Search Warrant No. 90?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And was that a document seized from the offices of the 

Holy Land Foundation in Dallas?

A. Yes, sir. 

MR. JACKS: Judge, we move the admission of HLF 

Search Exhibit No. 90. 

MR. CLINE: No objection.

THE COURT: Admitted. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And Agent Miranda, is that the first page 

of this exhibit?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And was it a one-page document in Arabic?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. On the Holy Land Foundation letterhead?

A. Correct.

MR. JACKS: If you would, go to the next page, 

please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) And is this a translation of that 

one-page Arabic document?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

80

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And does it appear to be a letter of some type?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would, it is on Holy Land Foundation 

letterhead?

A. Correct.

Q. What is the date shown on the letter, please?

A. 6/18/2001.

Q. And to whom is it addressed?

A. To the honorable Mr. Ghalib al-Hamad.

Q. And if you would, where it begins "We at your 

Foundation," would you just read those two paragraphs, the 

body of the letter?

A. Yes, sir. It reads, "We at your Foundation, the Holy 

Land Foundation for Relief and Development, are pleased to 

offer our most sincere prayers to God to protect you, care for 

you and to bless your efforts to serve Islam and Muslims' 

issues, and may He accept from us and you the best of deeds. 

"We write this letter to your honorable person hoping to 

visit you during our upcoming visit to The Kingdom of Saudi 

Arabia in the company of the Foundation's General Director, 

Mr. Shukri Abu Baker, during the last week of the current 

month, hoping that you allow us to visit you on the 27th or 

the 28th of the current month in order to introduce the 

achievements of the Foundation during the al-Aqsa Intifada and 

to inform you of the Foundation's goals and projects."

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

81

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And the al-Aqsa Intifada refers to what, Agent Miranda?

A. The second Intifada.

Q. Now, the second Intifada, is that another uprising?

A. It is.

Q. And when did it initiate or begin?

A. 2000 or late 1999.

Q. All right. And who signed this letter?

A. Akram Mishal.

Q. And the same individual that was depicted in the earlier 

visa applications and that you have testified about in this 

case?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And this Ghalib al-Hamad, what organization or entity is 

he associated with?

A. I believe he is associated with the Islamic Development 

Bank.

Q. And is that a bank located in Saudi Arabia or 

headquartered in Saudi Arabia?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I am going to switch topics 

for a second.

THE COURT: Let's take the morning break. Be back 

at five after 11:00. 

(Whereupon, the jury left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: We will be in recess.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

82

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
(Brief Recess.)

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Thank you, Your Honor.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, in the course of your 

investigation, in preparing for your testimony did you -- We 

have already seen one demonstrative exhibit that you have 

assisted in preparing in connection with the utilization of 

Izzat Mansour to conduct a security check at the offices of 

the Holy Land Foundation. 

A. That is right, sir.

Q. And are there other demonstrative exhibits that you 

assisted in preparing that are illustrative of your testimony 

and to pull together certain parts of your testimony to 

demonstrate the subject matter of your testimony?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You testified about the familial relationships between 

the Defendants and other persons at the Holy Land Foundation, 

and members of Hamas. Do you recall that testimony?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And did assist in preparing a demonstrative exhibit that 

summarizes those relationships, as you testified in your 

examination of the evidence, that would be useful in 

illustrating that testimony?

A. Yes, sir. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, the Government at this time 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

83

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
would move the admission of Demonstrative No. 6, which is that 

exhibit, and at the present time we have it in electronic 

version only, but we would move the admission of Demonstrative 

No. 6, which illustrates the familial relationships Agent 

Miranda testified about. 

THE COURT: Counsel?

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, just my prior objection, 

Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. And that is overruled and 

demonstrative No. 6 is admitted. 

MR. JACKS: And I will ask, Agent Lewis, if you can 

post Demonstrative No. 6 on the screen there. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, can you see Demonstrative 

No. 6 on the screen?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And just the heading for the document or the exhibit 

itself is what, if you would read that into the record?

A. "HLF's familial relationships to Hamas leaders overseas."

Q. Okay. And the individuals that are listed, the writing 

beneath their pictures identifies them. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if you would, in some of them are some of them 

represented in same photographs that appear on Demonstrative 

No. 17?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

84

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. The first individual that is shown in the upper 

left hand corner is who?

A. Khalid Mishal.

Q. And he is shown here on the top row far left. Is that 

correct? On Demonstrative No. 17?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what connections are shown to Khalid Mishal with any 

Defendants or individuals with the Holy Land Foundation, if 

you would just walk us through and narrate the connections 

that you testified about?

A. Right. On the screen if you look at Khalid Mishal, there 

is a line going to HLF officer Akram Mishal because they are 

cousins. Then there is a line going to the Defendant Mufid 

Abdulqader because they are half brothers. Then there is a 

line from Khalid Mishal to Mufida Abdulqader, his sister.

Q. All right. And if you would, the second individual to 

the right of Khalid Mishal is Mohammed Siam?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. And that picture is the same as the picture shown here on 

Demonstrative No. 17?

A. It is a portion of it, yes.

Q. Okay. And what are the family connections shown by this 

exhibit, as you testified yesterday?

A. Mohammed Siam's son Mahmoud is married to Mufida 

Abdulqader, the sister of the Defendant Mufid Abdulqader and 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

85

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the sister of the Hamas leader Khalid Mishal. And then 

Mohammed Siam's daughter Raida Siam is married -- you follow 

that line all the way down to Islam Siam, a former employee of 

the Holy Land Foundation and the predecessor company to 

InfoCom.

Q. All right. That photograph of the man with the beard who 

is facing to the right as you look at it, is that a photograph 

of Islam Siam?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. All right. And then the caption where there is not a 

picture, who is represented by that entry in the exhibit?

A. That is Jamal Issa or Jamal Abu Baker.

Q. And he is the brother of the Defendant Shukri Abu Baker?

A. That is correct, sir. 

Q. And I believe you testified he is the Hamas 

representative first in the Sudan and later in Yemen?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And as far as the line that goes down to the graphic 

image there, who is represented where there is not a 

photograph but the name?

A. There is the brother that they share named Ramzi Abu 

Baker.

Q. All right. And then the photograph obviously connected 

between the lines of that -- Between the line from Jamal Issa 

to Shukri Abu Baker, that is a photograph of him. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

86

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Correct.

Q. All right. And then Mousa Abu Marzook is the individual 

on the top row to the far right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that is the same photograph that is used in 

Demonstrative No. 17?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the familial relationships to Mousa Abu Marzook and 

the Defendants, could you just describe those as shown by this 

exhibit?

A. Sure. Mousa Abu Marzook, if you follow the line down, it 

says "cousins," and that is a picture of the Defendant 

Mohammad El-Mezain. And then if you follow the line out to 

the side there where it says "married" from Marzook, that is 

Nadia Elashi his wife, and she has a line that says "cousins," 

and that is connected to Ghassan Elashi.

Q. All right. And that photograph of Nadia Elashi, you have 

seen her and you can testify that that is her photograph?

A. That is an official photograph from her Immigration 

records.

Q. All right. The individual that is shown in the center in 

the line up from the Defendant Mohammad El-Mezain there is not 

a photograph, but the name Ahmad Hamdan, is that the 

individual that you testified about yesterday that Mr. 

El-Mezain acknowledged was a relative of his and was one of 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

87

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the Hamas deportees in?

A. Yes. He acknowledged that to Agent Burns.

Q. And I believe you said with regard to Islam Siam, the man 

at the bottom in the photograph -- 

A. Right.

Q. That he worked for the Holy Land Foundation, but he also 

worked for InfoCom for a period of time?

A. Right.

Q. Okay. 

A. Or InfoCom's predecessor company.

Q. Predecessor?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. In Richardson?

A. It may have been briefly in Richardson. I would have to 

look at the records again.

Q. All right. 

MR. JACKS: Thank you, Mr. Lewis. You can take that 

down, please.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) did you -- You testified yesterday 

regarding the security document that we looked at, and its 

guidelines for meetings, and then you pointed to something in 

the Philadelphia meeting that seemed to illustrate that policy 

or be consistent with that policy. Do you recall that?

A. I do.

Q. And did you prepare a demonstrative exhibit to try to 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

88

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
pull together or to illustrate that circumstance or example 

that you were testifying about?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Let me show you what has been marked for demonstrative 

purposes as Demonstrative No. 3. Is that a poster or 

enlargement of the documents that you utilized in your 

testimony to give this example of following the directives of 

the security manual?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, we would move the admission 

of Demonstrative No. 3. 

MR. CLINE: No objection, other than the ones to the 

underlying documents.

THE COURT: All right. Demonstrative No. 3 is 

admitted. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, let me ask you, if you 

think it is shown on the screen, but also if you would, just 

tell the jury what is represented in Demonstrative No. 3. 

A. To the left here we have got exhibit InfoCom Search No. 

35, which we have been describing as the security document. 

This will be the first page of the translation, the first page 

of the Arabic. And under it the category of "periodical 

meetings" it says point No. 2, "Agreeing on a cover for the 

reason of the meaning which is in harmony for the type of 

relationship." 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

89

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
And then these are two pages from excerpts from the 

Philadelphia meeting. The first one is where the speaker 

says, "This is a meeting of the Palestine Committee," and the 

second one is, I testified yesterday, where the Defendant 

Shukri Abu Baker says, "This is a joint workshop between the 

Holy Land Foundation and the IAP. This is the official form. 

I mean, please, in case some inquire." Which I have lines 

coming back to pertinent parts of the security document.

Q. Okay. And you can just stay there. Did you also prepare 

a demonstrative exhibit that illustrated the point you were 

testifying about today regarding the Holy Land Foundation's 

use of a company for technical surveillance or to detect 

technical surveillance?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. I am going to show you what has been marked for 

identification as Demonstrative No. 5, and is that a poster 

that covers that aspect of your testimony and the exhibits 

that you were referring to in that regard?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. 

MR. JACKS: Judge, move the admission of 

Demonstrative No. 5. 

MR. CLINE: No objection as a demonstrative.

THE COURT: Admitted. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Let me ask you, Agent Miranda, if you 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

90

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
could, just describe what Demonstrative No. 5 shows and the 

reproductions that you have included on there. 

A. Yes, sir. Again, this is the security document that we 

have been discussing, which is InfoCom Search No. 35. That is 

the exhibit number. The page that I believe is pertinent is 

here. This is the Arab translation behind it. And it says, 

"12. Conducting necessary maintenances measures for the 

foundation (individual, location, equipment) and using 

advanced equipment for that." 

And these are the two letters we introduced this morning 

from this Executive Protection Group wherein this individual 

says that they came in and swept for bugs. 

Q. Agent Miranda, did you also prepare a demonstrative or 

assist in the preparation of a demonstrative exhibit that 

would serve to illustrate your testimony regarding the 

procedures and guidelines in the security manual regarding 

travel and the evidence regarding travel by Shukri Abu Baker 

and Akram Mishal on behalf of the Holy Land Foundation?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And let me show you what has been marked for 

identification purposes as Demonstrative No. 4. And is that a 

demonstrative exhibit which contains reproductions of the 

exhibits that you were referring to during your testimony 

regarding this particular activity?

A. Yes, sir. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

91

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: Judge, we move the admission of 

Demonstrative No. 4. 

MR. CLINE: Just our objections to the underlying 

documents, not the demonstrative.

THE COURT: All right. Demonstrative No. 4 is 

admitted as a demonstrative. 

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, would you please just 

explain what is shown On Demonstrative No. 4, the exhibits 

that are reproduced therein and how you have sought to connect 

them or show their relationship?

A. Yes. Again, this is the security document, InfoCom 

Search No. 35, being the exhibit number. This is the page 

that I believe is pertinent with the Arab behind it, the 

Arabic version. And it says, "Providing a suitable cover for 

travel, commerce, tourism, visiting relatives, and supporting 

it with documents, commercial samples, catalogs, and tourist 

brochures. Also achieving this pretext in the visited country 

by taking tourist tours, making commercial meetings, or 

reaching bargains." 

And then I have drawn arrows to the documents we 

discussed after that, including the 1996 letter in which a 

visa is being requested in the name of Akram Mishal under the 

InfoCom Corporation being the business where Akram Mishal is 

allegedly the international sales manager, and then the two 

visa applications to Saudi Arabia dated on the same date for 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

92

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the two individuals Mishal and the Defendant Baker with the 

information related to InfoCom. 

Q. The two reproductions that you have shown from HLF Search 

No. 89, these relate to travel in the year 2001. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And this InfoCom Search No. 36 relates to travel or 

expected travel in 1996 by Akram Mishal. Is that correct?

A. Correct, sir. And the exhibit numbers are on there.

Q. Thank you. You can take the stand. 

A. Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: May I have just a moment, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. 

MR. JACKS: I pass the witness, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Cline? 

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, may we approach for one 

moment?

THE COURT: Sure. Come on up. 

(The following was had outside the hearing of the 

jury.)

MR. CLINE: Now that we have reached the end of 

direct examination, we would ask that the Court to give that 

404(b) limiting instruction to the jury before the cross 

begins.

THE COURT: Okay. Any objections on that? 

MR. JACKS: I haven't seen it in writing yet. I 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

93

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
mean, I don't think I do, Your Honor, but -- 

THE COURT: The only question I still had -- That I 

had was over what it covers. You raised an issue as to the 

pre-designation evidence, the money that came from Marzook to 

InfoCom. 

MR. JACKS: You know, Your Honor, I think I would 

just -- I would not object if the Court included that. But I 

still have not seen the final wording, and I -- 

THE COURT: It is in their motion.

MR. JACKS: I thought they changed it.

THE COURT: No. We only added the language that it 

didn't apply to any of the other Defendants, but that stayed 

in tact as far as the 404(b) limiting instruction language.

MR. JACKS: Is there a chance we can look at it? 

THE COURT: Does anybody have it handy? 

MS. DUNCAN: I have it on my computer.

THE COURT: Congratulations on finishing. I was 

beginning to wonder, only because you said 30 to 45 minutes 

yesterday. It was a long 30 to 45 minutes.

MR. JONAS: And he said one day on direct.

THE COURT: We were talking about that very thing.

MR. JACKS: I accept all of that. 

THE COURT: Yes, in good humor. You covered a lot 

of ground. 

MS. SHAPIRO: We are now -- I mentioned to Jennifer, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

94

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
and we agreed with the Defense that because the timing of 

getting all our witnesses here is so difficult for all of us, 

that we have two very brief witnesses that we would like to 

interrupt the cross examination for, and we will provide them 

the same courtesy.

THE COURT: Sometime today? 

MS. SHAPIRO: After lunch. Mr. Simon needs to 

essentially get on right after lunch, and then Joe Hummel, a 

former FBI agent, who will have a very brief testimony.

THE COURT: Everybody in agreement with that? 

MR. CLINE: We have no objection to the timing out 

of sequence. The only concern that we have, we made our 

objections to Simon's testimony, and I think you have ruled on 

those. 

As to Mr. Hummel, I believe he is going to testify that 

he seized Marzook's phonebook from him at JFK Airport. We are 

not going to have a problem with that testimony, but then I 

think he also wants to say that Marzook initially denied 

having the phonebook, and we will be objecting to that 

testimony about what Marzook said. So I don't know if you 

want to take that up now, but when we get to that moment maybe 

right as he takes the stand we would like to be heard on that. 

THE COURT: Maybe remind me as we break for lunch, 

or come back from lunch before we take up his testimony while 

the jury is not here.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

95

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. CLINE: Right. We will do that. 

MR. JACKS: I have no objection to that instruction. 

THE COURT: Okay. Let me make sure I can find it. 

I have it here somewhere. That is the one, I think. 

MR. CLINE: That is the Government's --

THE COURT: Here it is. 

MR. CLINE: This is the instruction as to Mr. 

Elashi, and then you will add a sentence about the other 

Defendants.

THE COURT: I started it there, but you want it at 

the end? 

MS. DUNCAN: It would make more sense at the end.

THE COURT: They may not consider this evidence for 

any purpose as to any of the other Defendants? 

MS. DUNCAN: Yes, Your Honor. 

(The following was had in the presence and hearing 

of the jury.) 

THE COURT: Members of the jury, before we go to 

cross examination I am going to give you an instruction. 

You may recall that last Wednesday October the 8th you 

heard some evidence from Agent Miranda about some acts of the 

Defendant Ghassan Elashi involving InfoCom, Mousa Abu Marzook, 

and Nadia Elashi. That was the money that was being sent from 

InfoCom to Ms. Elashi and perhaps her son, and that may be 

similar to some of the acts charged in the indictment. Those 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

96

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
acts, though were committed on other occasions. 

The limiting instruction is you may not consider any of 

this evidence in deciding if Mr. Elashi committed the acts 

charged in the indictment. However, you may consider that 

evidence, that particular evidence as to Mr. Elashi only for 

other very limited purposes. If you find beyond a reasonable 

doubt from other evidence in this case that the Defendant Mr. 

Elashi did commit the acts charged in the indictment against 

him, then you may consider this evidence of this money 

exchange allegedly committed on other occasions to determine 

whether Mr. Elashi had the state of mind or intent necessary 

to commit the crimes charged in the indictment. This is a 

limited purpose for which any of that evidence can be 

considered against Mr. Elashi.

Also in that regard, you may not consider that evidence, 

that money going to Ms. Elashi, you may not consider that as 

to any of the other Defendants for any purpose. So that is a 

limited purpose evidence that was admitted. And I will give 

this to you again in the written charge at the end so you 

don't have to memorize it, but have in mind that that is 

admitted for a limited purpose to help you, if it does, to 

help determine the intended state of mind of Mr. Elashi.

Mr. Cline? 

MR. CLINE: Thank you, Your Honor. 

CROSS EXAMINATION

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

97

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
By Mr. Cline: 

Q. Good morning, Agent Miranda. 

A. Good morning, sir.

Q. I want to start by asking you some questions about 

InfoCom Search No. 35, the security document. 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You are familiar with the document I am talking about?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. That document was found in a box at InfoCom. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The HLF documents at InfoCom were generally older 

documents. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. No copy of the security document was found at HLF 

headquarters in Richardson. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And no copy of the security document was found at HLF 

offices in New Jersey or Chicago or San Diego. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. You tried to get fingerprints from the security document. 

Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And you were unable to get any fingerprints that you 

could identify. Correct?

A. Right.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

98

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Now, InfoCom Search No. 35, which is the security 

document, refers to certain committees. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. It refers, for example, to a maintenance committee in 

several places. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I take it that you have not seen any internal HLF 

documents that refer to an HLF maintenance committee. Is that 

correct?

A. Correct.

Q. The security document refers to a sorting committee. 

Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And I take it that you have not seen any internal HLF 

documents that refer to an HLF sorting committee. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. The security document refers to work committees and field 

committees. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, HLF had people out working in the field. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. But in this context, you have not seen any internal HLF 

documents that refer to HLF work committees or field 

committees. Correct?

A. Correct.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

99

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Now, you testified I believe about a document 

classification appendix that is part of the security document. 

Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And the appendix establishes a scale that ranges from 

general to very private. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And general requires the least protection and very 

private requires the most. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, according to that appendix, a limited document is 

designated by the No. 1. Right?

A. I would have to see the appendix again, sir, just to make 

sure.

Q. I am going to put the appendix up on the elmo and ask you 

to take a look at it. Okay?

A. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, I see it.

Q. Do you see it down there at the bottom?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you see that the symbol No. 1 is to be used for 

limited classification?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The symbol No. 2 is to be used for the private 

classification. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

100

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And the symbol No. 3 is to be used for very private 

classification. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And documents that don't have any number at all are in 

the general category. Right?

A. Possibly, sir.

Q. Now, the Government and the Defense have introduced into 

evidence in this case quite a number of documents that were 

seized in the InfoCom search. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And this document here, InfoCom Search No. 35, the 

security document, is one of those. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, InfoCom Search No. 35 has a 2 on it. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Which would suggest that it is the private 

classification. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there any other InfoCom search documents in evidence 

that have one of these classification numbers on it?

A. No, sir.

Q. Now, we have also introduced into evidence a number of 

documents that were seized in the search of HLF. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there any HLF search documents in evidence that have 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

101

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
one of these classification numbers on it?

A. No, sir.

Q. We have introduced into evidence, or the Government has, 

a number of documents that were seized in the search of Mr. 

Elbarasse's home. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Are there any Elbarasse documents in evidence that have 

one of these classification numbers?

A. I thought there was one. I am not certain of that, sir.

Q. All right. So perhaps there is one, but there would only 

be one. Right?

A. Perhaps, sir, yes.

Q. And even the one you are not sure of. Right?

A. Correct.

Q. We may get a break here for lunch at some point. We 

probably are all hoping. Would you mind checking on that over 

lunch to -- 

A. Sure, I can do that.

Q. Very good. Thank you.

I want to go through a couple of the items in the 

security document, and if you don't remember these off the top 

of your head let me know and I will be happy to put it up on 

the elmo for you. Okay?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. On page 2 of the English version, item No. 20, this is 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

102

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
talking about meetings. Okay?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Page 2 item No. 20 says, "Avoiding talking about meetings 

and their times on the phone and fax." Do you recall that?

A. I do.

Q. You do?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Okay. Now, you were here for Agent Burns' testimony. 

Right?

A. Portions of it, yes.

Q. And do you recall that she played some intercepted 

conversations in which Mr. Abu Baker and others talked on the 

phone about arranging the Philadelphia meeting?

A. Yes.

Q. On page 3 item No. 9, we are talking now about document 

safety. That is the heading in the security document. Okay? 

Page 3 item No. 9 says, "Using the computer to send faxes 

between exposed offices, keeping in mind to encrypt the files 

before they are sent." Do you remember that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. We have seen a number of faxes that have been introduced 

into evidence in this case. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Were any of the faxes in evidence in this case encrypted?

A. No.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

103

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. On 8 of the English version of the search of the security 

document, there is an entry for travel and transportation 

safety. Do you recall that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And item No. 6 says, "A traveler is to empty his 

residence totally of any documents or items relating to the 

work, i.e., the Movement, when traveling." Do you recall 

that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, Mr. Ashqar's home was searched on December the 26th 

of '93. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And he was away, I take it, when that happened?

A. I don't know.

Q. Well, his home was searched. FBI agents came in and they 

took photos of a number of documents that they found. 

A. I don't know if he was traveling or just out of the 

house. I thought that was The implication of your question.

Q. I see. You don't know whether he was traveling or not. 

A. I don't know if he was traveling or just out of the house 

for a couple of hours.

Q. I follow you. Okay. In any event, there were a number 

of documents found in Mr. Ashqar's home. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Simply Mr. Elbarasse's home. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

104

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Page 11 of the security document, this is now talking 

about the safety of personal residences, work apartments, 

cars, and possessions. Item No. 4, "Assigning individuals to 

live in offices after formal work hours." Do you recall that?

A. I have read that, yes, sir.

Q. Did you come across anybody that was assigned to live in 

the HLF office after formal work hours?

A. No.

Q. Anybody who was assigned to live in the InfoCom offices 

after formal work hours?

A. No.

Q. Page 12 item No. 5, this has to do with hotel safety. 

Okay?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you remember that? Item No. 5, "In general, hotel 

rooms are not a safe place for conducting meetings." Do you 

recall that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And do you recall that the Philadelphia meeting was 

conducted at a Marriott Courtyard hotel?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, I want to turn to the speakers list for a moment. 

MR. CLINE: May I approach for a second, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

105

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. (BY MR. CLINE) Agent Miranda, I don't know if you can 

see that. You probably can't. 

A. Just a little bit of it.

Q. Do you recognize that as a big version of the overseas 

speakers list?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you testified about this list on direct. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you went through the speakers list with Mr. Jacks, 

and you highlighted names that fell in certain categories. 

Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. For example, you highlighted names of people who appeared 

in Mr. Marzook's phonebook. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You highlighted names of people who appeared in Ashqar 

phone list. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. I think I remember you doing that. I can't tell you that 

for certain. 

A. I think there is some crossover there, so I will answer 

yes.

Q. All right. You identified some of the people on this 

list as Hamas leaders, and you highlighted those names. 

Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

106

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. What I would like to do is to talk about a 

different list and see how this overseas speakers list matches 

up there. On your direct testimony you talked about specially 

designated terrorists. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And just to remind the jury, specially designated 

terrorists are people who have been designated under that 

Executive Order No. 12947. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And there is a process there, and we will go through that 

in a few minutes, but the -- at the end point of that process 

is that a person or an organization is designated by the 

Secretary of State or the Secretary of Treasury, or a 

combination, as a specially designated terrorist. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Sometimes we call that an SDT. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And once someone or an organization is designated as a 

specially designated terrorist, they go on a list that the 

Treasury Department maintains. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that is known as the specially designated nationals 

and blocked persons list. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

107

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And that is maintained on the Treasury Department 

website. You can find it there today. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I don't know if you were here for this, but the 

version of the list that was in effect on June 29th, 2001 was 

placed in evidence as Defense Exhibit No. 963. Do you recall 

that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I don't know if you remember the explanation, but we 

picked that date because it is a few days after the last 

transaction identified in the indictment. Are you with me?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Okay. Now, calling your attention back to this overseas 

speakers list, I would like to go through it from top to 

bottom and have you tell me each name on that list that shows 

up on the Treasury Department specially designated nationals 

and blocked persons list as of June 29th, 2001. And I have 

got the list here if you want to check it. 

A. Right.

Q. Could you tell us, please?

A. There is not anybody on it.

Q. No one, not a single person on this list is on that 

Treasury Department list. Is that right?

A. Correct.

Q. And in fact, if one were to look at that list today on 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

108

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the Treasury Department website, not a single one of these 

names would be on it. Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. You talked a little bit about Jamal Baker or Jamal Issa, 

I think you called his Hamas name. Do you recall that?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Mr. Jamal Baker isn't on the June 29th, 2001 version of 

that Treasury Department list, either in his Baker name or his 

Issa name. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And if you looked at the Treasury Department list today 

and pulled it off the website, you wouldn't find Mr. Baker 

there under either of his names, would you? Right?

A. Correct.

Q. Just this morning you were talking about a document, I 

believe it was Elbarasse Search No. 35, although I confess I 

might have the number wrong, but it was the document about the 

trust. Do you remember that?

A. Yes.

Q. And in that document, it referred to a series of 

organizations, the PTLP -- It was like an alphabet soup but 

you remember what I am talking about. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And I think Mr. Jacks asked you whether those were 

designated terrorist organizations. Do you remember that?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

109

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. And in fact today they are. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. That document was dated 1992. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. In 1992 none of those organizations had been designated 

as a terrorist organization. Right?

A. Correct.

Q. In fact, designations started to occur no earlier than 

January 23rd, 1995. Right?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, I want to take you back for a minute to March of 

2002. All right? Now, just to orient you and the jury in 

time, we are talking about four months after Holy Land closed. 

Okay? Are you with me?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. Now, on March 26th, 2002, you recommended to 

an FBI supervisory special agent named Mike Reznik that 

several people be designated as terrorists. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, Agent Reznik was an agent up at FBI headquarters in 

Washington, D.C. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And you told Agent Reznik, "Dallas" -- And by that you 

meant the Dallas FBI office. Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

110

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. "Dallas believes the designation process will ultimately 

benefit the captioned investigations, one being InfoCom; the 

other being Holy Land." Right?

A. Yes.

Q. "As well as future FBI criminal and intelligence 

investigations." Right?

A. Right.

Q. And you told Agent Reznik that you had selected the 

people that you wanted designated based on their potential 

impact on the captioned cases, their non-U.S. status and 

unlikely return to the United States. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And again, the captioned cases you were referring to 

there were the Holy Land case and the InfoCom case. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, one of the people that you told Agent Reznik you 

wanted designated was Khalid Mishal. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And in fact, on August 21st, 2003, Khalid Mishal was 

designated a specially designated global terrorist. Right?

A. I am not sure of the date, but yes, I understand him to 

be an SDT.

Q. Let me see if I can refresh your recollection on the 

date. I am going to show you, Agent Miranda, on the elmo here 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

111

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Government's Exhibit Designation No. 1, which I believe is in 

evidence. 

A. Right.

Q. I am going to start by showing you the front page of it. 

Do you recognize it?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. And I am going to turn to the fourth page and 

have you look at the top. You see Khalid Mishal?

A. I do, sir.

Q. And this is the document designating him as a specially 

designated global terrorist. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then I am going to turn to the last page so you can 

see the date. Do you see that--8/21/03?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Does that refresh your recollection that in fact Khalid 

Mishal was designated as a specially designated global 

terrorist in August 2003?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. When Mr. Jacks was asking you questions, you mentioned a 

couple of times that Mr. Mishal has been designated as a 

terrorist. Right?

A. Yes, I was aware of it.

Q. It is also in the indictment. It alleges that he was 

designated as a specially designated global terrorist in 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

112

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
August 2003. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, you also recommended to Agent Reznik back in March 

of 2002 that Jamil Hamami be designated as a terrorist. 

Right?

A. That is right.

Q. And you made that recommendation again on March 26th of 

2002. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that is the same Jamil Hamami we have been hearing 

about in this case, who the United States Information Service 

had invited to visit the United States in '98 and '99. 

Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And it is the same Jamil Hamami whom Agent Burns 

testified had been excommunicated by Hamas. Right? Were you 

here for that testimony?

A. Yeah, I was. I was going to -- The answer is yes.

Q. In March of 2002 was Mr. Hamami engaging in terrorist 

activity?

A. No, not according to what he said later in 2004.

Q. And as it turned out, Mr. Hamami was not designated. 

Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. I want to talk with you a little bit about the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

113

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
designation process. We have kind of touched on it here, but 

I want to talk about it in a little bit more detail. Okay? 

This list, this Treasury Department list, the specially 

designated nationals list, that began with an executive order 

that President Clinton issued on January 23rd, 1995. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. That is Executive Order No. 12947?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I think on your direct you pointed out that a copy of 

that executive order was found in Mr. Elashi's office at 

InfoCom. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. I believe it is InfoCom Search No. 37. 

A. I don't recall the exhibit number, sir.

Q. All right. I am just going to stick it up here on the 

elmo to make sure we are on the same page. Can you read down 

there?

A. Yes, I can. It reads InfoCom Search No. 37.

Q. All right. We will talk about this document more here in 

just a second.

And again, people designated under that executive order 

are specially designated terrorists. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And they go on that Treasury Department list that we have 

talked about before. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

114

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, I want to talk to you about how a person or an 

organization comes to be designated as a specially designated 

terrorist, and I am going to refer you to the second page of 

InfoCom Search No. 37, which is the copy of the executive 

order that was found in Mr. Elashi's office. Okay?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I want to focus you in on the portion of the order 

that is at the center of the screen right now, at least the 

center of my screen, under Section 1. Do you see that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And are you able to read it there on the screen?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Okay. Now, a person can become a specially designated 

terrorist in several different ways, and I want to go through 

them with you. The first way is that you could be included in 

the annex to the executive order itself. Correct? Do you see 

that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. A person is listed in the annex to this order?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in fact, there were some people and some entities 

that were listed in the annex to Executive Order No. 12947. 

Correct?

A. I thought it was just organizations.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

115

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Well, there was Hamas, of course. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. But Sheikh Yassin was also included in that list. 

Correct? The individual?

A. On this one, sir? I would have to look at it. I didn't 

think he was.

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, is Designation No. 5 in 

evidence? I believe it is.

THE COURT: I believe it is as well. Let me check. 

Yes, it is in. 

Q. (BY MR. CLINE) All right. Agent Miranda, let me show 

you on the screen Government Designation No. 5. Do you see 

the exhibit sticker down there in the bottom?

A. I do, sir.

Q. Let's go to the first page. It is a special designation 

and blocking memorandum. Do you see that?

A. Yes, sir. I understand what you are saying, but I don't 

think -- I didn't think that was your question. On the 

previous exhibit I thought you were asking about the annex to 

that exhibit, and I said I didn't think there was any 

individuals on it. If you turn to the last page of that 

annex.

Q. All right. 

A. Maybe I misunderstood your question.

Q. Well, let's do it this way. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

116

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Sure.

Q. When that executive order came into effect on January 

23rd, 1995, certain individuals and organizations were 

designated as of that date. Correct?

A. No, I think that is my point. I thought it was only 

organizations as of the date that you are referring to.

Q. All right. And we are getting confused on something that 

doesn't really matter here, but just let me clarify it for 

you. Okay?

A. Sure.

Q. Taking Designation No. 5, let me put up the second page, 

and this page shows Hamas as having been designated. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. Then let me go to page 3, and that begins a 

list of individuals. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And then let me go to the last page, and you see there 

Sheikh Yassin. Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And then you look at the date and it is January 23rd, 

1995. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. So putting aside the question of whether these people 

were included in the annex to the order, all of them as of 

January 23th, 1995, the date of the executive order, were 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

117

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
designated as specially designated terrorists. Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Including Sheikh Yassin?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. Now, let's go back to the executive order. And 

again, I want to go through the different ways that people can 

be designated as terrorists. Okay?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. So the first way is the persons can be listed in the 

annex to this order. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And we can certainly agree, whatever Sheikh Yassin's 

situation is, that Hamas was designated in the annex to the 

order. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. Then the second way that people can be 

designated as specially designated terrorists is in the next 

paragraph down, and it says, "Foreign persons designated by 

the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of 

the Treasury and the Attorney General, because they are 

found:" and then it gives a couple of different possibilities 

there. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The first one is if they are found "to have committed, or 

to pose a significant risk to committing, acts of violence 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

118

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
that have the purpose or effect of disrupting the Middle East 

peace process." Right?

A. Yes, sir. That is what it says.

Q. And the second possibility is, "To assist in sponsor, or 

provide financial material or technological support for or 

services in support of such acts of violence." Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. So those are -- If people or entities are found to have 

done those things by the Secretary of State, in coordination 

with other officials, they can be designated as specially 

designated terrorists. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then the third possibility in Section 1 is, "Persons 

determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination 

with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, to be 

owned or controlled by, or to act for or on behalf of, any of 

the foregoing persons that are in the United States that 

hereafter come within the United States, or that hereafter 

come within the possession or control of United States 

persons." Do you see that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. That last part really refers to the property, but the 

people who are going to be designated are people who are 

determined to be owned or controlled by or to act for or on 

behalf of any of the foregoing persons. Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

119

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. And anyone who is designated under any of 

these three possible ways ends up on that Treasury Department 

specially designated nationals list. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And looking at this third possibility, "People who are 

owned or controlled by, or act for or on behalf of, any of the 

foregoing persons," Mr. Marzook was designated in August of 

'95 under that provision. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And he then went on the specially designated nationals 

list. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where he remains to this day. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And the terrorist organization that Mr. Marzook was found 

to have acted directly or indirectly on behalf of, of course, 

was Hamas. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. A quick aside here. Nadia Elashi you testified about 

somewhat on direct. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. She is Mr. Marzook's wife. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And Mr. Elashi's cousin, you testified?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

120

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. When Mr. Marzook was arrested at JFK Airport in July 

1995, Nadia Elashi was with him. Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And the Government knew at that point at least that she 

was his wife. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Nadia Elashi has never been designated as a terrorist. 

Correct?

A. No.

Q. Her name is not on that Treasury Department list that we 

have been talking about. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, the version of the list in effect in June 2001 is in 

evidence as Defendants' Exhibit No. 963. Correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that list does not include the names of any of these 

zakat committees or societies mentioned in the indictment. 

Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And even today the names of those zakat committees and 

societies are not on that list. Correct?

A. Correct. 

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, those are all my questions 

for now. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

121

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Agent Miranda if you could check on that one point over 

lunch, that being whether any of the Elbarasse documents had 

those classification numbers, I would appreciate it. 

THE WITNESS: I understand. I will do that.

MR. CLINE: If I may reserve that one question for 

after lunch? 

THE COURT: You may do that. 

MR. CLINE: Thank you, sir. 

THE COURT: Who is next? Ms. Hollander? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I am happy to begin and 

we will have -- I won't be able to finish, and then we will 

have to take the other witnesses. 

THE COURT: All right. We will work until about 

12:30. 

CROSS EXAMINATION

By Ms. Hollander: 

Q. Good morning. Oh, it is afternoon. 

A. Good morning, ma'am.

Q. I think we are into afternoon. 

I have several questions, but I wanted to ask you first 

about your Demonstrative No. 3, if we could find it. It is 

hard to do this and stay at the microphone. I have one 

question for you from your Demonstrative No. 3.

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And I will show this to you, but you testified that you 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

122

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
used this demonstrative when you talked about the stated 

purpose of the Philadelphia conference. Do you recall that?

A. The cover? 

Q. What you wrote here "stated purpose"?

A. Yes, right.

Q. And I believe you testified, unless I misunderstood you, 

that the meeting was a meeting of the Palestine Committee. 

Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Okay. I would like you to just, and I will bring this up 

to you, what it says here on Philly Meeting No. 1 page 10 that 

you put into your demonstrative. 

MS. HOLLANDER: May I approach?

THE COURT: Yes. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) If you could just read this sentence 

here. 

A. "This meeting was called for by the Palestine Committee 

in order to have a seminar or a meeting to the brothers 

present here today in order to study the situation in light of 

the latest developments on the Palestinian arena, its effects, 

and impact on our work here in America."

Q. Thank you?

A. You are welcome, ma'am. 

Q. So what the underlying document actually said was this 

was a meeting called for by the Palestine Committee. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

123

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Right.

Q. Now, you have testified a bit about the calls between 

Shukri Abu Baker and his brother Jamal Abu Baker. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And I want to ask you a few questions about those calls. 

Okay?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. The first one I want to ask you about is the one that the 

Government refers to as Baker Wiretap No. 26. Now, these 

calls -- I believe -- Well, let me ask you a preliminary 

question, because I think there is something we need to 

correct. When it says Baker Wiretap, that means that Shukri 

was the target of that FISA. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Okay. And some of those calls were made. In other 

words, his home phone was wiretapped under the FISA. Correct?

A. I think that is correct.

Q. And the Holy Land office phones. 

A. Yes, ma'am. That is correct.

Q. So even though it says Baker Wiretap, we have calls that 

he wasn't actually making or receiving from Holy Land. 

Correct?

A. That is going to be the case in some instances, yes, 

ma'am.

Q. And then later there was actually another FISA for which 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

124

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the Holy Land Foundation was the actual target. Correct?

A. That is correct, ma'am.

Q. And so those, in the documents we have here, are 

identified as HLF wiretaps. 

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Okay. Now, the calls between Shukri and his brother were 

from his home phone, weren't they?

A. I believe that is correct, ma'am.

Q. And I want to ask you first about a few of the 

participants on that call, Baker Wiretap No. 26. Can you see 

that?

A. Yes, ma'am, I can.

Q. I think it is clearer on yours than mine, so I assume you 

can see it.

You have talked just about Shukri and Jamal when you 

played this call, but there were actually a number of people 

on that call. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And they are family members, are they not?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And the one who is described as SM right here, do you see 

that one?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. That is Shukri's mother. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

125

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And you know her name to be Zuhaira Gerizoni Baker. 

Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And the Gerizoni is because she is Brazilian. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And there is another one. Wijdan Abu Baker is Shukri's 

wife. Correct?

A. I don't recall if it is his wife or daughter.

Q. You just don't remember. If I tell you it is his wife, 

will you accept that?

A. I will accept that.

Q. Thank you. Okay. And Nida is one of his daughters. 

Correct?

A. Again, I don't recall all the children's names.

Q. But there are a number of children on this call. 

A. Right.

Q. And nieces and nephews who were his brother's children. 

Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Now, I recall you talking about a part of that 

call where his brother actually gave him his post office box 

address, didn't he?

A. Yes.

Q. You recall that?

A. Yes, I do recall something about a post office box.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

126

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. You didn't play the whole call. Correct? You just 

played parts of it. 

A. That is correct.

Q. Do you see where he says here, Shukri asks him to give 

him his post office box number and he does?

A. Right.

Q. Now, I also want to refer you to the InfoCom Search 

No. 35 document. That is the one that we have been referring 

to as the security document. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And I would like to turn to page 16 of that document, 

which I will put on the elmo here. Can you read the part I 

have highlighted? Do you see where it says "telephonic 

communication"?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Would you read the first one there, No. 1?

A. Sure. No. 1 reads, "Exposed individuals are not to 

contact unexposed individuals or vice versa from home phones, 

but from public phones." No. 5, "Avoiding calls during 

unusual times" -- 

Q. No, I am sorry. Just that one. I just wanted you to 

read No. 1 for now. 

A. Sure.

Q. Thank you. But Shukri was calling from his home phone to 

his brother. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

127

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Or vice versa.

Q. Or vice versa. Right. But the calls were made to home 

phones?

A. Yes.

Q. And the time of that call, what was the time of that 

call?

A. It reads 12:17 and 27 seconds.

Q. And what would that be? Would that be noon or midnight?

A. I don't know if they are using a 24-hour military time on 

this or not. It could be either or.

Q. It could be either or?

A. Sure.

Q. Now, I also would like to point your attention to the 

security document on page 15 where it says "mail 

correspondence." And can you read the last line there, and 

then it goes on to the next page?

A. Yes, ma'am. No. 2, "Avoiding mail correspondence, unless 

other means of communication are not available." 

Q. Thank you. 

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And just so we are clear, this is the document that was 

found at InfoCom that you referred to as a security document 

that I just read from. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And yet he gave him a post office box. That is where one 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

128

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
gets mail. Is that right? At a post office box?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Now, I would like to go to -- I am sorry. There is a lot 

of paper here and I don't want to get lost. I want to ask you 

about another call, and that was Baker Wiretap No. 25. That 

was one of the other calls. Okay?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. I will show you the first page just so you know which one 

I am talking about. This one is at 11:02. Right?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And I think you have actually previously testified that 

that call was made in the middle of the night. Could that be 

possible?

A. That is possible, yes.

Q. And this one, too, there are a number of family members. 

Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And this one also you only read parts of it on direct, 

but I think it scrolled. You actually didn't read it. It 

scrolled?

A. That is correct.

Q. It scrolled. That is what I mean. But in fact this was 

a long call, wasn't it? Do you recall?

A. I don't recall if that one was, but I know there are long 

calls.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

129

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Well, this one, the transcript of Government's Exhibit 

Baker Wiretap No. 25 is actually 27 pages. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor -- Never mind.

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) And again, now, all these people have 

the last name Abu Baker. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Okay. And you said that Jamal, I think he said in one of 

these calls he goes by Baker and then you said he goes by 

Issa. Correct?

A. I think I said his Hamas name is Issa.

Q. But we have seen Abu, the word Abu, A-B-U, used two 

different ways here, and in this case it is part of the last 

name, isn't it?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And then sometimes it means father of. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. So you kind of have to know which way it is being used to 

understand whether somebody is being referred to as a familiar 

name or a last name. Correct?

A. Or maybe from the context.

Q. From the context. Right?

A. Or maybe. I wasn't disputing what you were saying. I 

was saying or maybe, in addition you can determine from the 

context.

Q. But Abu Baker isn't the only name you have seen that uses 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

130

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
the Abu as part of the last name. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Now, on this call, Baker Wiretap No. 25, the grandparents 

actually talk to their grandchildren, don't they?

A. I don't recall if that is on that call, but I don't 

dispute that.

Q. Okay. I would like you to read a little bit of this 

call. I am not going to ask you to read 27 pages, but I would 

like you to read a few of the beginning pages, and identify 

who the people are, and if you -- I think what might make it 

easier for you actually is if I bring you the first page so 

you can identify them, and then I will put this on the elmo. 

Okay?

A. Yes, ma'am.

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I am going to object to 

this. I think Ms. Hollander is mistaken. The entire call is 

not in evidence. We admitted excerpts from the call and audio 

file of the excerpts. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Can I have a second, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Sure. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Can we approach? 

THE COURT: Let's take the lunch break. Be back at 

1:45. 

(Whereupon, the jury left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Be seated.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

131

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Ms. Hollander? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I have HLF trial 

exhibits 10/8/08 delivered to me from the Government. I 

checked again last night because I asked yesterday if this 

entire thing was admitted, and I checked last night and that 

is what is on here. The entire exhibit is on here.

I also, as you recall yesterday, raised an issue about 

another one that they played that they played part that I 

didn't have and that part isn't on here. I mean, I have to go 

by what the Government says. Last week after what happened we 

keep getting new exhibits from the Government, and then we 

have some issues where they were changed later. So we asked 

the Government to provide us a disk of all of their exhibits 

correctly, and what we got was this disk. And we also 

received -- I am not sure I have it. We also received just a 

list of all the exhibits. 

And then after -- At one point I think Mr. Dratel wrote 

to the Government and asked them to tell us which ones had 

changed because we had an issue, and we received -- After we 

got this document, after we got the disk, we received a very 

long list from the Government which has new version, new 

version, new version, new version, new exhibit, so they keep 

internally changing their exhibits. And this is a real 

problem, frankly, because there is no way that we can go back. 

But this is what I have.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

132

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: That is really -- What I want to know is 

what was admitted. I don't know that you need to get into all 

of that.

MS. HOLLANDER: As far as I know, this is what the 

Government provided me.

THE COURT: Do you have the transcript? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I have the transcript. It is 

exactly the same as what is on here. That is what I am using.

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, on many of the intercepted 

calls, as with the video, the Government has taken those calls 

and pulled excerpts from those calls, and there are 

transcripts which reflect only the excerpts, and there are 

also audio files that reflect only the excerpts. And some 

calls are admitted in their entirety, but some calls have been 

redacted by the Government. And we have conveyed that fact to 

the Defendants before trial and told them that we were going 

to do that. 

And we have provided not only the full call but we have 

also provided an audio file of the redacted version, and those 

have been provided so that they can see from listening, if 

they choose to listen to what the full call is and what the 

redacted part is and what will be played, and then the 

transcripts reflect also what has been redacted.

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, that is not true because 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

133

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
what we received from the Government was not just an audio 

file that was complete. You know, we received the redacted 

versions of the transcripts themselves in terms of what the 

Government was going to put in So we get an exhibit marked 

El-Mezain Wiretap No. 4. It is what the Government wants to 

put in we also have the entire transcript. What they put in 

for this conversation with the exhibit number is the entire 

conversation.

MS. HOLLANDER: There are other ones on there.

THE COURT: You say you received a redacted 

transcript? 

MR. DRATEL: No. I am saying when they put in a 

redacted transcript, that is what we receive. We don't 

receive a full transcript and audio file clips. We receive -- 

When they redacted the transcript, we received a redacted 

transcript. In this one we received the entire transcript.

MS. HOLLANDER: I can make it clear. This is the 

Government's disk of all of their exhibits today. It has this 

one complete. It has the other ones which they have redacted 

exactly as they redacted them. So you know, what Mr. Dratel 

is saying is correct. For example, the other one that I 

complained about, it has the redactions the way I thought they 

were going in which was different. 

MS. DUNCAN: May I add something to that? I just 

wanted to address a problem. I mean, this transcript was a 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

134

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
full transcript, and when we are getting ready to put together 

our crosses, we rely on Government's exhibits to determine our 

106 arguments and to come up with our questions. So when we 

are looking, as Ms. Hollander said, sometimes they give us 

their snippets and we can compare those snippets to the full 

conversations. 

THE COURT: So you are getting the full transcript? 

MS. DUNCAN: No, not now. We have had those. In 

the first trial the Government introduced the full 

transcripts. So we compare those to the first trial and see 

what they have redacted. So, you know, we have been relying 

on their exhibits to determine what they are bringing in and 

so for them to stand up now in the middle of cross and say, 

"Oops, we gave you the wrong one," it is just not fair. 

THE COURT: I don't know that he said that. He said 

that they told you which ones they were redacting. I guess 

you need to check into that, Mr. Jacks, and find out.

MS. HOLLANDER: I can give you an example, Your 

Honor. Baker Wiretap No. 26, the one that I referred to the 

first time, what is on this disk is this and it says Baker 

Wiretap No. 26. We printed it off and it is like six or seven 

pages long, seven pages. 

MR. JACKS: May I make a suggestion? 

MS. HOLLANDER: May I finish? 

THE COURT: Let him make a suggestion. This is not 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

135

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
telling me a whole lot, Ms. Hollander. Go ahead, Mr. Jacks. 

MR. JACKS: When Ms. Hollander says this or this, if 

she can talk about what she has got in her hand.

MS. HOLLANDER: I will do that.

THE COURT: Here is what -- No. Here is what I 

want. You to get with Mr. Jacks, the Government, over lunch 

and see what you have. Show them what you have. I don't know 

what -- I haven't seen any of it, so I don't know what you are 

talking about, frankly. And he is correct. When you say, "I 

have this," and they gave me this," it is meaningless to me. 

What I want you to do is get with the Government attorneys and 

then see if this can be worked out. If it can't be worked 

out, obviously I will have to resolve something. He is 

telling me they let you know the redacted ones and you are 

saying, "No, they didn't."

MR. DRATEL: The bottom line is this. For this 

conversation they put in evidence the entire -- 

THE COURT: I understand that, but they are denying 

that, Mr. Dratel, and I don't know.

MR. DRATEL: Look at the disk.

THE COURT: And I don't have it, though.

MR. DRATEL: We will be happy to provide it.

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks said he did something 

different. Get with him and show him what you have, and it 

may be that it can be resolved. If it can't, we will have to 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

136

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
deal with it. 

MR. DRATEL: Thank you, Your Honor.

MS. HOLLANDER: I don't mean to be unclear, Your 

Honor.

THE COURT: Well, you are unclear. It is unclear. 

And I want you to handle it that way before I hear another 15 

minutes of argument that is basically meaningless to me. It 

doesn't help me. I will have to look at this eventually if 

you can't resolve it. Just listening to you, it doesn't tell 

me anything other than I know you are saying different things. 

But see if you can resolve that. If not, we will have to deal 

with it. 

We will be back at 1:45.

(Lunch recess.)

THE COURT: Are you ready? Are we going to your 

witness.

MS. SHAPIRO: Yes. I think we are going to 

interrupt at this point and go out of order. I don't know if 

you wanted to tell the jury that.

THE COURT: We can. I will explain. We have two we 

are going to take up out of order? 

MS. SHAPIRO: Yes.

MR. CLINE: Your Honor, as to Mr. Simon, rather than 

the continuous objecting, may we have a continuing objection 

based on our earlier --

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

137

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Yes, you may have that continuing 

objection. 

(Whereupon, the jury entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we are 

going to take two witnesses out of order. Agent Miranda is 

going to step down from the witness stand. We have two 

witnesses in from out of town, maybe out of state, so we are 

going to take them out of order, and then we will come back to 

finish Agent Miranda's testimony.

Ms. Shapiro? 

MS. SHAPIRO: Thank you, Your Honor. 

The Government calls Steve Simon. 

(Whereupon, the oath was administered by the Court.)

STEVEN SIMON,

Testified on direct examination by Ms. Shapiro as follows:

Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Simon. Could state your name and 

spell it for the record, please?

A. Steven Simon, S-T-E-V-E-N S-I-M-O-N. 

Q. And where do you live, Mr. Simon?

A. I live in, Virginia. 

Q. Okay. And do you have a college degree?

A. I do.

Q. And what is that degree in?

A. It is in classics and near eastern languages.

Q. Okay. And where did you graduate from?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

138

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Columbia University in New York.

Q. Okay. And do you know any near eastern languages?

A. Yes.

Q. We ones?

A. I have studied Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Akkadian, and 

some Ugaritic, and some Syriac, which is kind of like Aramaic 

but a different alphabet.

Q. I won't ask you what all of those are. 

Do you have a post graduate degree? 

A. I have a post graduate degree in religion, religious 

studies, and one in international relations and economics.

Q. And where did you get those degrees from?

A. The religious studies one was from Harvard, and then the 

other one was from Princeton University.

Q. And after you finished -- Is that the end of your 

academic career, or were there additional degrees?

A. I was a university fellow at Brown University involved in 

translating some ancient semitic religious texts, and then I 

was at Oxford for a while.

Q. And what did you do at Oxford?

A. Middle eastern studies, and I at the Oriental Institute 

at Oxford.

Q. Okay. Did you get a degree from Oxford, or was that post 

graduate work?

A. No. I was a fellow, so, you know, it is sort of neither 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

139

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
fish nor foul. You aren't really a student but you aren't 

really a professor either.

Q. And what did you do professionally after you finished 

your graduate work?

A. I had kind of a checkered career. I did various things 

before entering the federal government, including being a 

freelance writer, but also working for New York City 

government and the human resources area, mostly having to do 

with policy on public welfare and medical assistance to the 

indigent, to the poor in New York City. 

But then I switched to the federal government, worked for 

a short time at the Office of Management and Budget on the 

National Security spending plan, the White House spending 

plan, and then I moved to the State Department where I worked 

for about 20 years.

Q. Okay. And while you were at the State Department, did 

you have the opportunity to work for other federal government 

agencies?

A. Yes. I spent about five years, a little more than five 

years at the White House as a detailee. In other words, I was 

sent over by the State Department to work on the White House 

staff.

Q. And what years were you on detail at the White House?

A. '94 through '99. 1994 through 1999.

Q. Okay. And when you say you were on detail, does that 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

140

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
mean that the State Department continued to pay your salary 

while you worked over at the White House?

A. Well, strictly speaking, the State Department paid my 

salary for I think three of those years, and then my last two 

my salary was paid out of the White House travel budget or 

something. There was some, I don't know -- Accounting is way 

beyond me. But in any case, I was getting a federal paycheck.

Q. Okay. And what particular part of the White House did 

you work for?

A. Well, I was on the staff of the National Security 

Council.

Q. Could you explain for us what the National Security 

Council is?

A. Sure. It is a small group of mostly government 

employees, well, all government employees, but some from the 

State Department, some from the Defense department, some from 

the CIA, some from the FBI, from a variety of agencies that 

work to coordinate the President's foreign and defense policy; 

that is, to make sure that U.S. government agencies were doing 

the sorts of things that they needed to be doing to carry out 

the President's policies.

Q. And when you were at the National Security Council, who 

did you report to?

A. I reported in the first term to Anthony Lake, who was the 

national security advisor then, and subsequently to Samuel 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

141

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Berger who was the national security advisor in the second 

term.

Q. Okay. And those people, Mr. Lake and Mr. Berger, they 

then reported directly to the President, or was there another 

person in between?

A. No, they would have reported directly to the President. 

Their title was Assistant to the President for National 

Security Affairs.

Q. Okay. And you said you left the NSC in 1999?

A. In the fall of 1999. 

Q. What did you do after that?

A. I was assigned by the State Department to London where I 

served as the second in command, so-to-speak, of a research 

organization, the International Institute for Strategic 

Studies, and I did that for about three years, whereupon I was 

very close to retirement so I worked at the embassy for a 

while, and then was transferred back to the United States.

Q. And did you go -- What did you do once you got back to 

the United States?

A. I worked for the Rand Corporation.

Q. And what is the Rand Corporation?

A. It is a federally funded research and development 

corporation. It is a non-profit firm that helps the U.S. 

government work through mostly policy problems of a very 

practical nature that U.S. government agencies don't have the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

142

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
personnel to work on.

Q. And how long did you work at Rand?

A. I was there for three years.

Q. Did you focus on any particular area when you were there?

A. Well, some of the work I did was classified, obviously, 

in the national security domain. I wrote or participated in 

some -- on the writing of some books on Middle East politics, 

and I ran, along with a colleague, a large project on building 

a successful Palestinian state; you know, what would be the 

best way to do that.

Q. And after you left Rand what did you do after that?

A. I went to the Council on Foreign Relations, which is 

basically another research organization, and I am the senior 

fellow there for Middle Eastern studies.

Q. And that is where you are currently employed, or is that 

an honorary position?

A. I am also kind of a professor, too, elsewhere, but yes. 

Well, it is not so much an honorary position, the Council on 

Foreign Relations. I just go and work for a living.

Q. And you said you teach. Do you teach at a university?

A. I teach at Princeton University in New Jersey.

Q. Do you teach a course there?

A. Yes.

Q. What course is that?

A. It is a course -- This semester I am teaching 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

143

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
undergraduates, and it is a seminar on political violence. 

Q. Is that an undergraduate course?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And over the course of your career have you 

written books?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell us what those books are that you have 

written and published?

A. I published a book in 2003 called Iraq in the Shadow of 

Regime Change, which was about -- it was a study of Iraqi 

society and the relationship between Iraqi society and the 

Iraqi state in the period preceding the U.S. invasion of 2003. 

Then I did a book called The Age of Sacred Terror, which 

was about the origins of a holy war and how it came to be 

carried out against the United States, but also it was about 

the way in which the United States responded to the emergence 

of this very serious development. 

And afterward I wrote another book with the same 

colleague called The Next Attack, which took the story from 

9/11 through to the present.

Q. Okay. I want to focus your attention on the time that 

you spent at the National Security Council, which I believe 

you said was 1994 through 1999. Is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Okay. What was going on between the Israelis and the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

144

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Palestinians during that period of time?

A. Well, there was a lot going on -- Excuse me. I have a 

bad cough, as you can tell. What was going on at one level 

was actually very favorable. In 1993 the Israelis and 

Palestinians had signed a document called the Declaration of 

Principles, which was -- I am not an historian, but it was 

quite an important event because it entailed the recognition 

by Israel of a Palestinian leadership with political 

authority, and was thought at that time to be the first step 

toward an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians that 

would result in a state for the Palestinian people. At the 

same time there was a lot of fighting.

Q. Were that principle of agreement, was that also known as 

the Oslo Accords?

A. Yes. The Declaration of Principles came out of the Oslo 

Accords.

Q. Okay. And what was the role of the National Security 

Council with respect to the Oslo Accords?

A. Well, it was -- You know, the role was multi-layered. It 

wasn't just one thing. The National Security Council staff 

was involved in helping the Israelis and Palestinians figure 

out how to work through some of the problems, the log jams 

that arose in the process of these negotiations, and in 

particular advising the President of the United States on how 

best to interact with leaders on the Palestinian and on the 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

145

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Israeli side, and also making sure that the State Department 

was doing what it was supposed to do, and the CIA, too, 

because all sides needed information about what was going on 

because it was important in a negotiating process to keep all 

the parties honest. So the National Security Council staff 

was involved in making sure that all these things were 

happening as they should be.

Q. I just want to make clear, since you -- Presumably at the 

National Security Council you had access to classified 

information. Is that right?

A. I did, yes.

Q. But you are not relying on any classified information in 

your testimony today. Correct? 

A. Oh, certainly not, no.

Q. Okay. During the time that you were at the National 

Security Council and these negotiations were going on, was 

there anything happening that tended to impede those 

negotiations?

A. Well, yes. There were things on both sides that were 

problematic, but 1993 was the year in which the Declaration of 

Principles was signed, and that was followed in 1994 by a lot 

of terrorist violence by Palestinian groups that were looking 

to bring the peace process to a halt, if they could.

Q. And was Hamas one of those organizations?

A. Hamas was one of those organizations, yes.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

146

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And was there anything about the timing of those 

terrorist attacks that coincided with events going on in the 

negotiations?

A. Well, you know, the negotiations were at that point 

almost a non-stop process, because the issues were very 

complicated and the differences between the two sides on some 

of them was quite wide, and there was a lot of diplomatic work 

entailed in bridging those differences. So the negotiations 

never really stopped. And certainly there were U.S. diplomats 

going back and forth that whole time trying to keep the train 

on the track, if I can use that expression.

Q. And so how did the terrorist attacks impact that process 

of constant negotiation?

A. Well, the terrorist attacks were, you know, serious 

problems, because the key to a successful agreement, most 

people thought, and I think it is kind of hard to argue with 

this, but the key to a successful agreement was going to be 

trust between the two parties. The two parties had to sign up 

to, you know, a pretty long-term marriage basically in very 

close proximity to one another, so trust was really key. 

And, you know, at the same time as the Palestinian 

leadership that was involved in the negotiations was trying to 

build this sort of trust --

Q. What was that Palestinian leadership, if I can just 

interrupt you a second? What was that called?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

147

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. It was the Palestinian Authority.

Q. And that was -- The Palestinian Authority was created as 

a part of this negotiation process?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. I am sorry. Continue. 

A. And just as the Palestinian Authority was trying to build 

the sort of trust that would move things along, these 

terrorist attacks were undermining that trust by convincing 

the Israeli public that the other side, that the Palestinian 

side couldn't really be trusted, so it was damaging.

Q. And did the United States have an interest in having a 

successful resolution to those negotiations?

A. The U.S. had a strong interest in this, yes.

Q. And can you explain for us what some of the United 

States' interests were in having a negotiated resolution to 

the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians?

A. Well, U.S. interests are closely bound up with Middle 

Eastern politics. 

Q. In what way?

A. Well, you know, to be blunt, oil is extremely important 

to the United States, and the U.S. economy relies very heavily 

on energy that comes out of the Middle East region, which has, 

apart from Russia, the preponderance of oil. They have just 

got most of the oil. And the U.S. has since the Second World 

War maintained close relations with most of the oil producers, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

148

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
just as a matter of a strategic interest, vital strategic 

interest.

Q. And how does the peace or lack of peace affect our 

relationships with oil-producing countries?

A. Well, you know, the links are many, and they combine with 

one another. I will give you a few examples. The U.S. relies 

on the cooperation of Arab states, not just oil producers but 

important Arab states that surround the oil producers, for 

military cooperation as well as economic cooperation, and 

these ties are necessary to protect and advance our national 

interest in maintaining a secure access to the energy supplies 

that we need. 

Well, I think, you know, most of us have a sense that the 

countries out there on whom we rely aren't exactly democracies 

in many cases, but that doesn't mean that public opinion is 

not very important, because even in countries that aren't 

democracies, at least in the Middle East, I don't know about 

other areas, governments need to maintain some kind of 

legitimacy. They need to to satisfy public opinion. And here 

is the rub. Public opinion in those countries cares a lot 

about the fate of the Palestinians and whether or not the 

Palestinians get a state. People just really care.

Q. So how does conflict in that region spill over to the 

United States' interests?

A. Well, to the extent that America is seen as not doing 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

149

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
enough to help the Palestinian cause, then Arab governments 

have to answer to their people, so-to-speak, about why it is 

they are so close to the United States and they are doing the 

U.S. so many favors when the U.S. isn't dealing with a problem 

that the Arab public really care about. "What is going on," 

they will ask.

Q. Would it help the United States' relationship with those 

countries if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were taken off 

the table, so-to-speak?

A. Yes, I think it would. It is not a magic bullet, but I 

think it would help a great deal.

Q. Are there other national security interests of the United 

States that are put at issue through this conflict, this 

ongoing conflict in the Middle East?

A. Yes. I mentioned that, you know, there were a number of 

factors and they were interlocking. And apart from the fact 

that the United States has had a military presence in the 

region for a long time, for which it needs bases and needs 

support, requires security, the fact that the United States 

has a fleet, has actually two fleets in the region, it has a 

fleet in the Mediterranean and a fleet in -- nowadays a fleet 

in the Persian Gulf, and had the makings of a fleet even back 

in the early '90s after the first Gulf War in that area, there 

is a lot of military support that is needed. Then there were 

proliferation concerns.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

150

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. What do you mean by proliferation?

A. Well, what I mean by that is there is at least one 

country in the region, Iran, that is seeking nuclear weapons, 

and which doesn't really like the idea of a very strong 

American presence in their neighborhood. Well, you know, that 

makes the cooperation of the Arab states in that region all 

the more important for the United States. The United States 

needs to keep those countries on its side in this 

long-simmering battle, really, with Iran over who is going to 

have the greater influence in that very important part of the 

world. 

And at the same time, you know, Iran is trying to extend 

its influence to other parts of the region, particularly 

Lebanon, but also Iraq, and this also, in turn, puts a premium 

on the U.S. getting the support of Arab countries in the 

region.

Since the perception that the U.S. is really trying to 

help the Palestinians and Israelis find a solution to their 

problem is important to these countries, then it follows that 

it is important to America's national interests that the 

United States find a way to work productively with Israelis 

and Palestinians to bring that conflict to an end.

Q. Okay. So let me just come full circle. Why is it that 

we in the United States should care about an organization like 

Hamas that is trying to undermine the Middle East peace 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

151

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
process? And I won't limit that just to Hamas, but any 

terrorist organization. 

A. The problem now, and we all know this since 9/11, is not 

just that the U.S. has powerful interests in maintaining a 

secure supply of oil, but we now know that people from there 

who are angry at the United States are motivated and capable 

of coming over here and hurting us quite badly; and if not 

hurting us here badly, hurting us elsewhere badly. The United 

States is a global power. We are all over the place. We are 

very exposed. So, you know, to the extent that the United 

States can remove one cause of resentment against America, we 

reduce the threat against the United States correspondingly. 

It is hard to do, but it is very important work. 

MS. SHAPIRO: May I have a moment, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MS. SHAPIRO) The interests that you were just 

talking about just a moment ago, is it fair to say that that 

applied -- that it was equally true during the time that you 

served in the National Security Council between 1994 and 1999?

A. Yes. There was a good deal of concern at that time about 

the extent of resentment against the United States, and there 

were numerous studies that were being done that crossed my 

desk when I came to the White House in 1994 on this subject. 

And, you know, the Israeli-Palestinian issue we knew had 

been kind of a real irritant, you know, for Arabs for a long 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

152

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
time, for the Arab states for a long time, but we were 

beginning to come under somewhat greater pressure from Arab 

governments to do something about it, because these 

governments wanted to, in fact, they needed to maintain close 

relations with the United States, but they didn't want to 

have, you know, those diplomatic and other relations 

complicated at home by questions about the appropriateness 

from, you know, the perspective of Arab publics of such a 

close relationship between their governments and the United 

States government. 

Q. Thank you. 

MS. SHAPIRO: Pass the witness. 

THE COURT: Mr. Dratel? 

CROSS EXAMINATION

By Mr. Dratel: 

Q. Good afternoon.

Now, you spoke about interlocking factors, a number of 

interlocking factors that go into U.S. national interests in 

the Middle East. Right? And one of the things that you 

talked about also was Arab governments and Arab populations 

and resentment over the failure to resolve the 

PalestinianIsraeli issue. And obviously one of those 

resentment -- Withdrawn. 

Isn't it true that one of the causes of resentment in 

that part of the world, the Arab governments, Arab 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

153

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
populations, was the perception that the U.S. was supporting 

Israel as opposed to the Palestinians? 

A. Yes.

Q. And part of the reason that Arab governments came to the 

United States to do something was the perception that the U.S. 

government could have some influence with Israel in moving 

Israel towards a peaceful solution. 

A. Yes.

Q. And part of the resentment has to do with historical 

factors. Right? In the Arab world?

A. History just gets involved.

Q. And I will be more specific, but I just wanted to preface 

it with -- And these are among the factors, obviously, that go 

into this whole catalog of factors that go into the U.S. 

interests. And one is obviously in 1948 the birth of Israel 

and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. 

Right? You have to answer yes or no. 

A. I am sorry. Yes, indeed.

Q. And created a refugee crisis, essentially. 

A. Yes.

Q. And created an -- And in response to that refugee crisis, 

one of the things that was created was an entire United 

Nations refugee organization that still exists today.

A. The U.N. Relief and Works Agency.

Q. UNWRA we will call it. Right? And that is designed to 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

154

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
try to help this refugee problem get resolved, even though it 

is still sixty years down the road, and still operating to do 

that. 

A. Correct.

Q. And another aspect of this resentment is Israel's 

occupation since 1967 of the West Bank and Gaza. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And that was a military occupation. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And that was as a result of the Six Day War in 1967 where 

Israel essentially captured that territory? 

A. Yes.

Q. And that created more refugee camps. Right? Or at least 

an aggravation of the problem of the existing refugee camps. 

A. Yes.

Q. And Israel not only was a military occupier during this 

period, but also was essentially the administrator of these 

territories, West Bank and Gaza, during that period. 

A. Yes.

Q. And there was no Palestinian government at all during 

that period. 

A. During which period? 

Q. '67 to '94in In the West Bank and Gaza. 

A. '67 and '93, I believe.

Q. '93. Well, the PA was created by the Oslo Accords. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

155

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Right? And it took a year or so to get up and running. Is 

that fair to say?

A. It is still getting up and running.

Q. But the occupation, the military occupation by Israel of 

the West Bank and Gaza created economic problems in those 

territories. Right? For the Palestinians? 

A. Periodically when there were closures following terrorist 

attacks.

Q. But in addition, also, wasn't there also a problem with 

respect to settlement activity by Israel that created --

A. There was a source of serious resentment.

Q. Yes. That the Israelis established settlements in some 

of these occupied territories. 

A. That is correct.

Q. And that was not only among Palestinians, but others as 

well around the world. 

A. Correct.

Q. Not just Palestinians. I am saying, not just 

Palestinians around the world, but others as well. 

A. Correct.

Q. And not just Muslims. 

A. Correct.

Q. And as far as some of these economic problems, the 

confiscation or the taking of land for settlements and other 

purposes by Israel created economic problems for Palestinians 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

156

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
in the territories. 

A. Yes.

Q. And water rights and water diversion is another issue 

with respect to how much water Israel lets flow from the 

Jordan River to the Palestinians for their use, as opposed to 

what Israel takes for its use, is another issue. Right?

A. There is a water issue, but that is not it. But your 

point is correct, there is a water issue.

Q. Okay. And the first Intifada, you are familiar obviously 

with that. And that is the latter part November, December 

1987. And in large part, the first Intifada is an outgrowth 

of these conditions that we are talking about and this 

resentment building up from 1967. 

MS. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, I am just going to object 

as beyond the scope. I kept my direct very focused.

THE COURT: I will overrule it at this point. 

THE WITNESS: I am sorry. Could you repeat? 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) Sure. That the first Intifada is 

essentially an outgrowth of this 20-year period of military 

occupation. 

A. Yes.

Q. Now, I want to focus on Oslo a bit. You talk about the 

Oslo Accords, we will call them, the Declaration of Principles 

that followed. That was part of your direct. And it is one 

of these interlocking factors in terms of United States -- 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

157

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
involvement in United States' national interests.

Now, it is true, isn't it, that there were people, in 

fact many people who opposed the Oslo Accords on both 

sides--on the Palestinian side and on the Israeli side? You 

have to answer. 

A. Sorry. Yes.

Q. And not just extremists, but people who might not be 

characterized as extremists. 

A. Yes.

Q. Are you familiar with Edward Said?

A. Yes.

Q. He was a Columbia professor. Right?

A. Yes, comparative literature.

Q. Yes. Did you actually take any of his classes?

A. No, but I signed his book.

Q. And he was opposed to Oslo. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And he was a spokesperson for Yasser Arafat, who 

resigned, who actually left in protest over Oslo. Right?

A. Who resigned? 

Q. Said. 

A. Yes.

Q. And he called the Oslo Accords, and I am quoting here, 

"the repackaging of the occupation."

A. Yes.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

158

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And as you mentioned, Oslo is really a first step and not 

the end result of -- not a fully packaged peace plan, but a 

first step. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And it did not -- In terms of when we are talking about 

resentment in Arab countries and Arab countries putting 

pressure on the U.S., and even after Oslo, to continue the 

process and the opposition to Oslo among people, let's say 

non-extremists, like Edward Said -- Would you consider him a 

non-extremist?

A. He was not an extremist, not really, no.

Q. Okay. 

A. I don't think he ever strangled anyone with his bare 

hands.

Q. But part of their reasons for opposing Oslo is that it 

did not in fact create a Palestinian state; that they felt 

they didn't go far enough?

THE COURT: Counsel, I don't know why we need to get 

into all the detail about the Oslo Accords.

MR. DRATEL: We are talking about the resentment?

THE COURT: We don't need to get into that kind of 

detail. You established resentment. That is not here before 

the jury. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) And did it also cede too much territory 

to Israeli control? You are familiar with Areas A, B, and C?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

159

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

MR. DRATEL: And if I could put what is already 

marked and is in evidence as Defendants' -- If we can have the 

elmo, please. What is already in evidence as Defendants' 

No. 1013. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) And I am going to show you the bottom 

first -- Can you read what is on the document on the screen?

A. I can, yes.

Q. Okay. So the orange areas is Area A. Right?

MS. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, I am just going to again 

object that this is well beyond the scope of direct and we are 

getting into the specific details of the Oslo Accords.

THE COURT: This map is in evidence. I think it has 

been discussed. Go ahead.

MR. DRATEL: Thank you, Your Honor.

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) So the orange area is Palestinian 

cities?

A. Yes, that is what this says, but I am not familiar with 

this nomenclature. It doesn't correspond to what I recall.

Q. Okay. Well, could you describe A, B, and C?

A. But I can read it, yes.

Q. And B would be Palestinian villages. Right?

A. That is what this says, yes.

Q. And C is Israeli settlement, military areas, and state 

lands. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

160

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. That is what it says, yes.

Q. And just to define it in more simple terms or plain 

terms, Area A is an area that is under the control of the 

Palestinian Authority. Is that right? Would that be?

A. And B is shared, and C is under Israeli control.

Q. When you say shared, what do you mean by shared?

A. Authority is divided along some lines that, to be honest, 

I can no longer remember.

Q. Is it military controlled by the Israelis and 

administrative control by the Palestinians? 

A. I don't remember.

Q. Okay. Oslo itself, the Oslo process was in fact done 

secretly by the Palestinians and the Israelis, the PLO, the 

Fatah, Arafat organization, and the Israelis. Right? The 

U.S. actually didn't participate in those direct negotiations 

that led specifically to the Oslo Accords. 

A. Not initially.

Q. And in fact the U.S. was trying on another front with the 

Madrid Conference to try to promote an agreement separately. 

A. Yes. Well, the United States was doing both. It was 

following the Madrid Conference on the one hand, and when the 

Israelis and Palestinians reached an impasse in the Oslo 

process, the United States intervened and helped the two sides 

broker the deal that resulted in the Declaration of 

Principles.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

161

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. And another aspect if you talk about resentment 

and one of these factors that goes into it, another cause of 

resentment that the U.S. had to address in the context of 

trying to broker something and satisfy its Arab allies were 

Israeli detention policies. Right? I mean, there was concern 

about Israeli security detention, administrative detention 

without trial. 

A. The Israeli government and the military administration 

practices pretrial detention.

Q. And there is also torture of detainees. The Israeli 

Supreme Court found that. 

MS. SHAPIRO: Objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Counsel, sustained. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) Another factor right before you joined 

essentially, or maybe a year, but the 1992 deportation of 

about 400 persons by Israel to Lebanon. Right? That was 

another factor that caused resentment in the Arab world, and 

around the world, in fact. 

A. It got a lot of publicity.

Q. And in fact the U.S. Signed a U.N. resolution condemning 

Israel. Correct? 799?

A. I actually wasn't working on this account in 1993 or 

whenever that was. No, this is the 400 going to --

Q. Yes, Lebanon. 

A. Oh, yeah. I was working on something else then.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

162

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. Now, during the course of your tenure at the 

National Security Council wasn't there also continued 

resentment among people, let's say in the Arab world and 

elsewhere in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian issue, 

about Israel's failure to meet certain post Oslo deadlines; in 

other words, certain deadlines that were set forth in the Oslo 

agreement that Israel failed to meet in terms of surrendering 

territory and other matters?

A. I know the administration in Washington wanted the 

Israelis to move quicker on these things, but I don't know 

about other countries actually.

Q. But weren't there specific deadlines that Israel failed 

to meet in the context of --

A. There were deadlines that both sides had to meet.

THE COURT: Counsel, that is the whole problem about 

getting into the politics of both sides -- 

THE WITNESS: Neither side actually met the 

deadlines.

THE COURT: You asked the question.

MR. DRATEL: I understand, but --

THE COURT: Move on to another area now besides all 

the politics. You are wanting to get further and further into 

that, and that is not involved here.

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor --

THE COURT: Counsel, we discussed this before. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

163

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. DRATEL: May we approach, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: No. We have discussed it before. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) And was another factor that you had to 

address on the National Security Council in terms of U.S. 

interests and factoring all these things into account was 

violence by Israelis or Jews against Palestinians? You have 

to answer --

A. In the time frame we are talking about, I don't think 

that that was a major concern. Are you talking 1994? 

Q. Yes. Baruch Goldstein was in 1994. 

A. That was Baruch Goldstein and the massacre of 29 I guess 

-- I think it was 29 Arab worshippers.

Q. Yes. 

A. -- in Hebron was a serious crisis, but it wasn't repeated 

and it was quite apparently the act of, you know, a deranged 

person.

Q. But there were other plots as well. There was a temple 

mount plot to destroy the temple mount, that was halted. 

Right?

A. That was halted, yes. In fact, it never really got 

anywhere.

Q. And is there an organization in Israel called Gush 

Emunim? 

MS. SHAPIRO: Objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

164

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE WITNESS: Gush Emunim --

THE COURT: You don't need to answer that.

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) These are part of the things that you 

have to factor in the Israeli political -- Don't you have to 

also factor in the Israeli political --

THE COURT: Counsel, he may have but we are not 

going into those here.

MR. DRATEL: But she asked about U.S. factors.

THE COURT: And he discussed certain things, and you 

can discuss those, but now you are expanding the area. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) I am saying, is that a U.S. factor, the 

political situation in Israel. When you were in the political 

situation in Israel a factor that you had to -- something you 

had to factor in in U.S. security interests?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And Gush Emunim was a --

THE COURT: Counsel, I sustained the objection to 

that.

MR. DRATEL: I thought I established a predicate to 

that, Your Honor. 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) And the Likud party was one of the major 

parties in Israel. Right?

A. Correct.

Q. And the Likud party's position was opposed to Oslo and 

surrendering any land for a Palestinian state. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

165

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. No.

Q. That is not their platform?

A. The Likud prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who 

participated in the accords, negotiations, and ratified the 

kinds of concessions of the map that you displayed represent.

Q. Now, did you also have to address as part of these 

factors the Palestinian perception of bias against 

Palestinians in favor of Israel in the U.S. in terms of the 

U.S. government?

A. Yes.

Q. And as part of your job at the National Security Council 

you were involved in preparing other administration officials, 

government officials for appearances in front of what might be 

termed pro-Israel organizations. The American-Jewish 

Committee. Is that fair to say?

A. I might have I just don't remember.

MR. DRATEL: May I approach, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: Is it a follow-up to these last 

questions you are asking? 

MR. DRATEL: Yes.

THE COURT: Do you have an objection to this area of 

questioning?

MS. SHAPIRO: I object to relevance and outside the 

scope.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

166

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, it has to do with his job 

at the NSC. This is part of what he did at the NSC.

THE COURT: But we are getting into areas that are 

just not relevant to this case before this jury, counsel. 

There are a lot of things he did with the NSC but are not 

relevant here.

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) Does it have to do with --

THE COURT: Counsel -- 

Q. (BY MR. DRATEL) Was another factor that had to be 

factored in was the need of the Palestinians and the need to 

continue humanitarian aid to the West Bank and Gaza?

A. If I recall correctly, the issue at that time was 

maintaining economic performance.

Q. But was there need --

A. Because there wasn't a humanitarian crisis.

Q. You don't think there was a humanitarian crisis at that 

point. Okay. 

MR. DRATEL: I have nothing further, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you. 

Who is next? Anybody? 

MR. CLINE: No, Your Honor.

MR. WESTFALL: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Ms. Cadeddu, any questions? 

MS. CADEDDU: NO, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And Ms. Hollander, any questions? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

167

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: No, sir.

THE COURT: Ms. Shapiro, any follow-up? 

MS. SHAPIRO: Just a moment, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: Okay. 

MS. SHAPIRO: No further questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Simon, you may step down. You are 

free to go. Thank you.

Next witness? 

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, may we approach? 

THE COURT: You can come up while we are getting the 

next witness. 

(The following was had outside the hearing of the 

jury.) 

MR. DRATEL: I talked about politics. That is all I 

was getting into. And I was not permitted to go through all 

the factors -- 

THE COURT: You were getting into -- 

MR. DRATEL: I am wanting to --

THE COURT: I am not going to argue with you.

MR. DRATEL: I am not arguing.

THE COURT: Yes, you are.

MR. DRATEL: I am just making a record. 

THE COURT: Go have a seat before you get in 

trouble. 

MR. DRATEL: I am going to --

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

168

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Go have a seat before you get in 

trouble.

MR. DRATEL: I am asking for a mistrial.

THE COURT: You have a seat before you get in 

trouble. 

MR. JACKS: You wanted to talk about this next 

witness. He is an FBI agent, retired FBI agent who found 

Marzook's phonebook in New York. Mr. Cline wanted to raise an 

objection. He is going to get into some of the answers 

Mr. Marzook gave him, and he objected to those as hearsay. 

Our position is they are not for the truth; that it is just to 

show the conversation they had. He was asked, "Where is your 

contact information? Do you have an address book?" He said, 

"No, I don't." So it is not being offered for the truth of 

his answers, but just to show the give and take that he had 

that led to the decision to search them.

MR. CLINE: We have no objection to the testimony 

that he recovered the address book from Marzook. I think that 

is undisputed in the record. We do object to the witness' 

recitation of what Marzook said. 

We object on confrontation clause grounds, hearsay 

grounds, but also on Rule 401 and 403 grounds. This wasn't 

one of the Defendant's books. There is no evidence that the 

Defendants had any idea that Marzook had the phonebook with 

him, that he was going to deny it, that they advised him to 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

169

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
deny it, that they knew he was denying it. It has nothing to 

do with the Defendants. It is being offered to effectively 

impute the Defendants on the scene, on the spot deceptiveness, 

and I think under 401 and 403 it should not come in.

THE COURT: What about his argument that they are 

not offering it for the truth? 

MR. CLINE: That may or may not take care of the 

hearsay and the confrontation issues. I don't believe it 

does. But putting those aside for a minute, there is still a 

relevance and 403 problem, even if it is not hearsay, because 

what does it have to do --

THE COURT: Confrontation -- 

MR. CLINE: But all of that aside for a moment, what 

does it have to do with the Defendants? The only way it could 

be relevant is if somehow Marzook's deceptiveness about the 

phonebook, or whatever it is, the address book, could be 

imputed to the Defendants, and there is no evidence connecting 

that to the Defendants at all. It appears he was arrested, to 

his surprise, at the airport, and on the scene he is 

questioned by agents and he lies to them about the phonebook. 

It has nothing to do with the Defendants.

MR. JACKS: Judge, the relevance doesn't turn on 

whether or not they knew he was carrying it. They knew he was 

coming in. That is not what decides the relevance. If him 

lying about whether he had an address book or not is 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

170

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
prejudice, what about him being the head of the terrorist 

organization? 

I mean, when you put the two side by side and say, "This 

is under 401 him lying about it, it is prejudice to our 

client," but the fact that he is the head of a terrorist 

organization, that is -- I guess I didn't make my point 

clearly. But it is needed to tell the story, to make the 

story flow about the meeting with him, the conversation.

THE COURT: Why do you need that? The point is you 

got this phonebook. You are trying to get in this 

conversation to show he lied.

MR. JACKS: The security document talks about 

concealing, you know, address books and phonebooks. That is 

exactly what he did. It was hidden within his wife's 

undergarments, and it corroborates -- 

THE COURT: Why don't you establish where they found 

it without getting into what he said.

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I mean --

THE COURT: You can establish that.

MR. JACKS: I mean, Mr. Cline is almost conceding 

that it is not hearsay and it is not confrontation.

MR. CLINE: I am not conceding anything.

MR. JACKS: I understand. Statements not offered 

for the truth, they are just contextual and they are just 

statements. It is clear that he lied when he said, "I don't 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

171

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
have an address book," and he did. So we are not trying --

THE COURT: You don't think that imputes anything to 

the Defendants? 

MR. JACKS: It is relevant in the case, but in terms 

-- It is certainly not unfairly prejudicial. You can impute 

to it that a co-conspirator came into the country and was 

hiding his address book, to the extent that that can impute 

something to them, but it certainly doesn't do anything under 

401 and 403 to keep it out. 

MR. CLINE: It is just not relevant to anything the 

Defendants in this case did. The fact that he is a Hamas 

leader, that is clearly relevant in light of the Defendants' 

connections with him and so on. The fact that he went and was 

questioned at the airport about his address book and he lies 

has nothing to do with the Defendants in this case. And of 

course the jury is going to impute that to the Defendants. 

Otherwise they are not -- That is the only reason the jury can 

figure it is in this case is because it has something to do 

with the Defendants, and it doesn't. 

If they want to testify about the agent looking at his 

wife's luggage and finding it, they can do it, but they 

shouldn't be able to get in this statement.

MR. JACKS: He is a co-conspirator as well, so he 

can justify it as a co-conspirator statement, that he is 

making a false statement to keep the conspiracy under wraps, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

172

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
to keep these law enforcement officers from finding his 

address book which has the names and phone numbers of all 

these other people that are on the Palestine Committee. So 

there is two prongs there under which this conversation can 

come in. And as I said, in the -- 

THE COURT: This was in 1995? 

MR. JACKS: 1995, and really in the middle of this 

time frame we are talking about. 

THE COURT: What about the co-conspirator statement? 

Why wouldn't it come in under that? 

MR. CLINE: Putting aside the fact that Your Honor 

has not made any findings at all about the co-conspirators 

yet, and won't until the end of the case, even if one were to 

assume that it was a co-conspirator statement, that doesn't 

overcome the relevance of the 403 issues. The question is 

what is the relevance of this man's on-the-scene lying, 

apparently, to an agent where there is no evidence that it had 

any connection whatsoever to any of the Defendants? It 

doesn't have -- It is --

THE COURT: But you are saying that for a statement 

of a co-conspirator to be admissible it has to have connection 

with all of the rest of the Defendants. That is not true. If 

it is a co-conspirator statement, it seems to me that it would 

come in. 

MR. CLINE: There would have to be a showing to be a 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

173

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
co-conspirator statement that it has to be in furtherance of 

the conspiracy.

THE COURT: That is why I was asking about 

Mr. Jacks' argument. They arrested him. The evidence is that 

he was the head of Hamas. There has been some evidence 

linking HLF with Marzook. Does he have the Defendants' names 

and numbers in the phonebook? 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: There is other evidence -- 

MR. JACKS: He has three of them. 

THE COURT: He links it with some of them, and there 

is other evidence linking Marzook with HLF. So when they ask 

him and he lies, trying to cover it up and hide it, that would 

seem to be in furtherance of trying to keep -- 

There is case law that deception, as long as it is during 

the conspiracy, would appear to be in furtherance, because 

that is the only reason he would have for keeping that 

information from law enforcement officers. So it would be 

appear to be -- It didn't have to be successful, but it would 

appear to be in furtherance of the conspiracy. 

Once you are there, why wouldn't it come in? 

MR. CLINE: Well, I think it would not come in 

because there is nothing to suggest, first of all, that that 

was his reason for lying; second, that the Defendants -- 

THE COURT: But isn't that up to the jury? I think 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

174

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
you can argue whatever, and ultimately that is for the jury to 

decide. But that is an inference and a reason. Ultimately it 

is for the fact-finder. But I still am having trouble why, 

once you are there, that it doesn't come in. And the jury 

will give it whatever weight they choose to give it 

ultimately.

MR. CLINE: To me, if it has any marginal relevance, 

it is a 403 issue, and it is going to be imputed -- Apart from 

hearsay and confrontation, it is going to be imputed to the 

Defendants that this man was somehow lying on their behalf or 

at their behest or some sort of agreement, and there is just 

no evidence of that.

THE COURT: They have statements where Baker is 

talking to somebody about deceiving, and it is just two people 

talking and it still comes in, even though none of the others 

had anything to do with that.

MR. CLINE: Well, we have those --

THE COURT: But I let those in. I think it is 

admissible, frankly. I thought those were admissible. That 

is why I let it in. Once it is a co-conspirator statement, I 

am having trouble -- I mean, if it is not a co-conspirator 

statement I think you would be correct. But I think he has 

laid out the fact that it appears to be a co-conspirator 

statement, and so I think it comes in. Objection overruled. 

(The following was had in the presence and hearing 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

175

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
of the jury.)

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, at this time we would call 

Joe Hummell. 

(Whereupon, the oath was administered by the Court.)

JOE HUMMELL,

Testified on direct examination by Mr. Jacks as follows:

Q. Sir, would you tell us your name, please?

A. Joseph Hummel. 

Q. Would you spell your last name for the record?

A. H-U-M-M-E-L.

Q. And how are you employed, Mr. Hummell? 

A. I am the director of the investigative services for the 

National Football League.

Q. How long have you worked for the National Football 

League?

A. It will be two years this November.

Q. And where do you work? Where is your office?

A. 280 Park Avenue, New York; NFL headquarters.

Q. Prior to going to work for the National Football League, 

how were you employed?

A. I was a special agent with the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation.

Q. How long did you work for the FBI?

A. From 1983 to 2006.

Q. And where were your postings or where were you assigned 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

176

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
during your career with the FBI?

A. I did my first two years in the New Orleans office, '83 

to '86. From '86 to 99 I was assigned to the New York field 

office. From '99 to 2006 I was assigned to the LEGAT office 

in London, England, and I returned to New York and retired out 

of New York.

Q. And for those that might not know, LEGAT is short for 

what?

A. The legal attache's office.

Q. All right. So you represented -- You, among other 

agents, represented the FBI in London in the United Kingdom?

A. Yes, sir. That is correct.

Q. Before you went to London, you said you were stationed in 

New York?

A. Yes, sir. That is correct.

Q. And during that time period what type of work or what 

type of cases were you assigned to work on?

A. I was there, as I said, from '86 on. So initially I was 

assigned to the Foreign Counterintelligence Squad, and 

subsequently went on to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

Q. I want to direct your attention to the summer of 1995. 

And during that particular summer, would that have been the 

time period that you were working counterterrorism cases?

A. Yes, sir. That is correct.

Q. And did you have an occasion in July of 1995 to come into 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

177

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
contact with an individual that you learned or knew to be by 

the name of Mousa Abu Marzook?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. And where did you meet Mousa Abu Marzook?

A. On July 25th, 1995 I met Mr. Marzook at John F. Kennedy 

International Airport as he attempted to reenter the United 

States from the U.K.

Q. And had you been sent to Kennedy Airport with the purpose 

or the expectation of talking or meeting with Marzook?

A. Yes, sir, I had.

Q. Whoever notified you, did you know that he was going to 

be entering or attempting to enter the United States? Prior 

to your being notified to go to the airport, were you aware 

that he was going to be coming into the United States?

A. No, sir, I wasn't.

Q. Where within Kennedy Airport did you come into contact 

with Mousa Abu Marzook?

A. We met Mr. Marzook inside the Immigration Secondary Unit 

at JFK.

Q. And were there any other law enforcement personnel there 

that you met with?

A. Yes, sir, there were. Immigration officers were there, 

and I was accompanied to JFK by my partner from the New York 

field office.

Q. Another special agent?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

178

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. He I was actually an Immigration officer assigned to the 

task force.

Q. That would have been at that time the Immigration and 

Naturalization Service?

A. That is correct.

Q. Did you have a conversation with Mousa Abu Marzook in 

Kennedy Airport?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. And what was the focus of your questions that you were 

asking Mousa Abu Marzook?

A. Well, we had gone out to the airport to interview 

Mr. Marzook, first of all, to confirm that he was identical to 

the Marzook who had previously resided in the United States, 

and also to determine his activities in relation to the Hamas 

organization, his activities while he was out of the United 

States, his movements while he was outside the United States, 

and what his intentions were now that he was attempting to 

reenter the United States.

Q. Before you went to the airport, did you know who Mousa 

Abu Marzook was?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And did you know about his affiliation with Hamas and the 

fact that he had been out of the country?

A. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. And in general, you said that you wanted to ask of him 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

179

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
where he had been while he was out of the country, who he had 

been in contact with?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And what, among other things, what his plans were if he 

were allowed to reenter the United States. Is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. Was anybody with Mr. Marzook that was traveling with him?

A. Yes, sir. He was traveling with his wife and children.

Q. All right. And in response to your questions about where 

he had been, what did he tell you?

A. What Mr. Marzook explained was that in May he had been in 

Jordan, and in early May the Jordanian government informed 

Mr. Marzook that they were revoking his status and he had 30 

days to leave. Mr. Marzook explained that he left -- 

MR. CLINE: I apologize for interrupting, Your 

Honor. Can we have a continuing objection to this? 

THE COURT: Yes, you may have that.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Go ahead. 

A. Mr. Marzook explained beginning in June he departed 

Jordan and between June and when we encountered him on July 

25th he had been moving back and forth between the United Arab 

Emirates and Egypt.

Q. And did you inquire of him about where he had been 

staying in the United Arab Emirates and Egypt and who he had 

been staying with and how you might verify or confirm that?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

180

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir, we did. We asked him for contact details for 

while he was in Jordan, and his explanation was he really 

couldn't explain it because the streets were difficult to 

identify and he stated that he had been -- The family had a 

residence behind an English school, and that is all the could 

information he could provide with respect to his time in 

Jordan. 

As far as his time in the United Arab Emirates, he 

explained at the time he could be contacted through a friend 

Issa Mohammed Abdel Majid, and with respect to his time in 

Egypt he had no contact detail.

Q. Meaning that he didn't have any contact with anybody or 

he couldn't provide you any information about their names and 

phone numbers? 

A. He was unable or unwilling to provide details.

Q. Did you ever ask him if he -- what kind of papers he I 

was bringing into the country?

A. Yes, sir. At the beginning of the interview we asked Mr. 

Marzook to produce all his travel documents or any telephone 

books, address books he had in his possession.

Q. Did he -- What did he indicate about whether or not he 

had any kind of address book or phonebook?

A. He indicated he did not.

Q. That particular question, to ask him if he had an address 

book or a phonebook or anything like that, how many times was 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

181

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
he asked that question?

A. Numerous times throughout the interview, because when we 

asked him about his intentions with respect to entering the 

United States he was also evasive, non-committal as to where 

he was going or to be staying, so we just continually asked 

him for an address book, some way we could verify what he was 

telling us.

Q. At some point in time did this conversation or interview 

with Mousa Abu Marzook come to an end?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And with regard to him and his wife and children, where 

were they after this -- Where were they located after this 

first conversation or this conversation that you have related 

ended?

A. When we finished interviewing Mr. Marzook, he was allowed 

to return to his family in Secondary, and they were together 

in a room.

Q. All right. And is that a part of the airport that is 

controlled by Immigration or Customs, and it is the people in 

there that still have not technically entered the United 

States?

A. That is correct.

Q. All right. What about his luggage and the items that he 

was bringing with him? Were those -- Where were those located 

during this time?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

182

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Prior to the interview beginning, U.S. Immigration and 

Customs asked Mr. Marzook and the family for all their luggage 

so that it could be searched. That luggage was searched, and 

as I recall, that was set off in a corner of that room. That 

is the best of my recollection where that luggage was.

Q. When you say the room, you are talking about the room 

they were allowed to wait in?

A. Yes, sir. That is correct.

Q. All right. Did he bring or have -- Did Mr. Marzook have 

any briefcases or attache cases or cases similar to that?

A. At the conclusion of the interview, as I said, Mr. 

Marzook was allowed to rejoin his family. My partner at the 

time decided he had one more question to ask Mr. Marzook about 

the currency he was traveling with, and my partner entered the 

room and noticed that there were two small briefcases on the 

ground seated next to Mr. Marzook.

Q. And did you or your partner, either by asking Mr. Marzook 

or simply by inspecting, were you able to open and see the 

contents of those briefcases?

A. We spoke with Customs and Immigration and we determined 

they had not been searched in the initial search, and at that 

time Customs and Immigration opened them up.

Q. And what type of documents were in those briefcases?

A. They had financial records, college diplomas, birth 

certificates, I think --

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

183

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Any address book or phonebook?

A. No, sir.

Q. And after the search of the luggage and the search of the 

briefcases or attache cases, or however you want to describe 

them, after the interview of Mousa Abu Marzook, was any 

further decision made about other avenues to determine if 

Mr. Marzook or anybody with him was in fact carrying any 

further documents or papers?

A. Yes, sir. Once the briefcases were opened and we found 

those documents, we determined that Mr. Marzook had not been 

completely forthcoming during the interview when we asked him 

for those types of documents, so the decision was made to have 

all the family members searched by U.S. Immigration officers.

Q. And when you say searched, are you talking about where 

they would have to start removing articles of clothing if need 

be to find out what they might have on their person?

A. That is correct.

Q. And was that done with Mousa Abu Marzook?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was it also done with his wife Nadia Elashi?

A. Yes, sir, it was.

Q. And with regard to Nadia Elashi, who did that?

A. Two female Immigration officers conducted that search.

Q. And was that in another room?

A. Yes, sir, it was.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

184

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And after they went in that room, was there anything that 

one of the Immigration officers brought out with her?

A. Yes, sir; a small telephone address book.

MR. JACKS: May I approach the witness, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Mr. Hummel, let me show you what has been 

admitted as Government Exhibit Marzook Phonebook. And can you 

identify that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And is this the address book that the Immigration officer 

-- Was it Customs or Immigration?

A. It was Immigration, I believe.

Q. That they brought out of the room after searching Nadia 

Elashi?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Does it appear to be in the same condition as you saw it 

on that day, July 25th, 1995?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And did you retain it then and keep it for evidence 

purposes from that point forward?

A. Initially it was in Immigration custody and then turned 

over to the FBI; but yes, sir, we did.

Q. All right, sir. 

MR. JACKS: I pass the witness. 

THE COURT: Any cross examination? Mr. Cline? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

185

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
CROSS EXAMINATION

By Mr. Cline: 

Q. Good afternoon, sir.

A. Good afternoon, sir.

Q. When you went out to the airport that day to JFK in July 

of '95, did you know that you were going to arrest Mr. 

Marzook?

A. No, sir.

Q. So as far as you were concerned, it could be that you 

would arrest him, it could be -- You would certainly interview 

him and then you could let him go?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Answer this next question only if you have personal 

knowledge of it. Did the government of Israel have any input 

into the decision to have you go and have this encounter with 

Mr. Marzook?

A. I won't answer that.

Q. I beg your pardon?

A. On your advice I have no personal knowledge.

Q. No personal knowledge of that. Very well. 

Now, Mr. Marzook arrived on a British airways flight. 

Correct? 

A. That is correct.

Q. And he had with him his wife. Right?

A. That is correct.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

186

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And his wife was named Nadia Elashi? Did you learn that?

A. Yes. That is correct.

Q. Was she arrested as well?

A. No, sir.

Q. And in the course of your discussion with Mr. Marzook, he 

indicated that he was traveling under a valid United States 

Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization Service 

reentry permit?

A. That is correct.

Q. And was that true?

A. That was true.

Q. He did have a valid reentry permit?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. He indicated that he filed U.S. tax returns. Is that 

right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And was that true?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in the course of your discussion with him, he 

provided you with a list of educational institutions that he 

had attended while residing in the U.S. Correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And I am not going to go through the whole list with you, 

but there were a series starting in 1982 and running through 

1992. Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

187

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. That is what he told us, yes, sir.

Q. And did you check that out?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And he had been at those institutions?

A. As I recall, some of those institutions were --

Q. Mail order?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Some were -- he was actually physically present 

and some were mail order?

A. I can't speak -- I don't recall, but I know some were 

mail order.

Q. All right. And then he gave you some biographical 

information--date of birth, when he arrived in the U.S., when 

he became a permanent resident of the U.S., those kinds of 

things. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. 

MR. CLINE: Thank you.

THE COURT: Any other questions? 

MS. HOLLANDER: No, sir.

MR. WESTFALL: No, Your Honor.

MR. DRATEL: No, Your Honor. 

MS. CADEDDU: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Any redirect? 

MR. JACKS: Just a couple of questions, Your Honor. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

188

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
REDIRECT EXAMINATION

By Mr. Jacks: 

Q. Mr. Hummel, when you say mail order college degree, do 

you mean like a diploma mill?

A. Yes. That is correct.

Q. Send them your money and they will send you a degree?

A. Yes. That is correct.

MR. JACKS: That is all?

MR. CLINE: Now, Your Honor, I have to ask a few 

follow-up questions.

THE COURT: Sure. 

RECROSS EXAMINATION

By Mr. Cline: 

Q. I don't want to insult anybody here, but Colorado State 

University, is that a real school?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. George Washington University in Washington, D.C., is that 

a real school? 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You wouldn't call that a diploma mill, would you?

A. No, sir.

Q. Columbia State University in Missouri, is that a diploma 

mill?

A. I don't remember that one.

Q. Okay. You are a football man. Right? Louisiana Tech 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

189

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
University, is that a diploma mill?

A. No, sir.

Q. It is a football power but it is not a diploma mill. 

Right? You agree?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. All right. 

MR. CLINE: Thank you. 

THE COURT: Anything else? 

MR. JACKS: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Hummel, you may step down. You are 

free to go. Thank you.

Are you ready for Agent Miranda? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, may I approach just for 

a scheduling issue? 

THE COURT: Yes. 

And Agent Miranda, you are under that oath that was 

administered before the break. 

(The following was had outside the hearing of the 

jury.)

MS. HOLLANDER: Two things. One, before I start, I 

would like three minutes to go to the restroom. 

THE COURT: We haven't been in here long enough for 

a break.

MS. HOLLANDER: The other thing is we have a few 

issues that need to be resolved and maybe -- I don't know 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

190

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
whether -- We have to deal with the one just before lunch, and 

then there were a couple of other issues.

THE COURT: Did that not get resolved? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Yes and no. We figured out the 

problem, and Mr. Jacks can correct me if I am wrong, but I 

think that what happened is that the Government -- Mr. Jacks 

intended for a document to be redacted, and then -- Mr. Jacks, 

you should listen to this because I want to make sure I get 

this right. I believe that Mr. Jacks thought that the 

document had been redacted, but the document that was actually 

introduced and is on the Court's website and that we got is a 

complete document, so he thought one thing and I thought the 

other. And that is what happened.

THE COURT: And I suspected that is what happened. 

Just from what everybody was saying, you intended one thing 

but something else happened. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Something else happened, so we had 

no way of knowing that. And that is why I was confused 

yesterday. But we would like under -- He wants to replace it 

with what he thought it was supposed to be. And, you know, 

these things happen, so if he wants to replace the admitted 

document, the much smaller one, but that leaves me in a 

different situation, and under Rule 106 -- This was a very 

long conversation, primarily family chitchat with all these 

people talking, and a few pages of them is what the Government 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

191

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
introduced. 

I would like to introduce and have Agent Miranda read 

just a couple of pages of the family conversation, because I 

think in fairness the jury needs to see that that is what this 

was, was a family talking. It is the grandmother, the kids. 

And they are real short, because they are real short questions 

and real short answers, and most of the 27 pages is actually 

the family.

Now, I am content to -- All I was going to ask him to do 

anyway was to just read a couple of pages to give the jury the 

flavor of what the whole thing was, and that is what I would 

like to do. 

MR. JACKS: Judge, it was a mistake, and in terms of 

what -- Each one of the Government's exhibits is an audio file 

and a paper transcript of the conversation. This transcript 

of this conversation was the wrong one. There is a redacted 

transcript. And I am not going to try to explain how the CD 

that they ended up, with the latest version had the full 

27-page page transcript instead of the 7- or 9-page transcript 

that was supposed to be in the file.

If this case dealt with English language recordings, the 

law is clear that the recording is the actual evidence and the 

transcript is an aid. Well, when the conversation is in a 

foreign language which none of the jurors presumably speak, 

then that attaches more significance to the transcript. But 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

192

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
notwithstanding that, the only thing in evidence as far as an 

audio file is the segments, the redacted portion that we 

played, and so the transcript has to stand on the audio file 

that is in evidence. And that is why the fact that this full 

transcript has been mistakenly -- 

And I don't think posting it on the Court's website 

attaches any significance to it. The jury hasn't seen it yet. 

So it is our intention to replace it with the redacted 

transcript, because that is what is supposed to be in that 

file. That is what we propose to do with regard to correcting 

the record.

Now, this other part that Ms. Hollander wants to have 

Agent Miranda read, they are going to have to read it because 

there is no audio file. But she told me -- she showed me, and 

it is about three pages, and it is pages of the kids talking 

to grandma and saying, "I miss you," and "You are so pretty," 

and it is irrelevant and that is why we redacted it in the 

first place. 

As far as 106 explaining or rebutting or clarifying what 

is said in the part already in evidence, this does not do 

that. The only reason that this part is put in there is to 

curry favor with the jury. It is sympathy to show these 

children, they have grandkids, grandmothers, and that is the 

only reason. 

And if she wants to have Agent Miranda say, "There was 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

193

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
more to this conversation, wasn't there?" 

"Sure, there was 15 minutes of children talking," then 

she can bring it out. But to have him actually read the back 

and forth between the grandkids and the grandmother getting on 

the phone and then somebody else gets on the phone, that is 

irrelevant, and there is no legal reason to do that but for to 

show this jury that there is grandkids and grandmothers 

involved in this case, and that is not an issue. 

MS. DUNCAN: Your Honor, It is a very brief portion, 

just three pages, and it is relevant. The Government is 

taking things out of context and suggesting that Mr. Abu Baker 

and his brother are calling for these very specific purposes, 

and that is simply not true. All the phone calls they have 

introduced include these conversations about family, and so 

all that we are seeking to do is to put that into context. 

And in fairness, the jury needs to understand that these 

are family phone calls, and that the snippets the Government 

has chosen to play are just brief portions over what is 

overall a family phone call. 

We just want the jury to -- We think the jury is entitled 

to know under 106 what the nature of these phone calls were, 

and that is what these three pages will do. So it is 

relevant. It is not to drag these kids in, but it is to put 

the Government's own evidence into context.

MS. HOLLANDER: And the Government has the audio 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

194

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
file of the whole thing and so do we. That is not -- I am not 

sure the whole audio file -- I mean, nothing -- It is true 

nothing has gone to the jury, but what was put on the website 

is what was supposedly introduced.

THE COURT: What were the other issues you wanted to 

take up? 

MS. HOLLANDER: You wanted to think about Nihad Awad 

and the photograph with him and Bush, and although it is not 

how I originally intended my cross, I would be willing--and 

this is what I wanted to say at the last thing but you didn't 

let me--I was willing to just show him the picture and just 

show him or ask him, "Can you identify Nihad Awad that you 

talked about," and if he says no, I wouldn't ask anything 

else. If he says yes, then I would show him the picture.

THE COURT: Then any other issues? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I wouldn't ask him anything else.

THE COURT: Any other issues? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I don't have any other, but there is 

one other that the Government raised and that is a video. 

MR. JACKS: Which I still don't -- 

MS. HOLLANDER: This is a video that they have had 

for six years and it has been on our list.

THE COURT: Right. What is it about? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Agent Miranda testified that at 

InfoCom they had this movie set and had a cut-out with little 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

195

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
cut-out children, and this is an infomercial. We have cut it 

down to just a couple of minutes so he can identify the 

cut-out and show -- 

THE COURT: Do I have that? Is that on one of the 

disks? 

MS. DUNCAN: I am not sure that the videos are on 

the disk. I can bring it up on my computer.

THE COURT: But you are objecting to that? 

MR. JACKS: Yes, sir. 

MS. HOLLANDER: The point is, Your Honor, our 

concern is that, again, the way it is now, it leaves a false 

impression with the jury that they really didn't go and do 

this charity, which the Governments keep calling it a 

purported charity that they -- 

THE COURT: What is the video about? 

MS. HOLLANDER: The video, what he said was cut-outs 

of children -- 

THE COURT: I remember that. 

MS. HOLLANDER: The video shows Shukri with the 

cut-out of the children. We can do it without sound. And 

then it shows some real kids. And, I mean, just pictures, 

nothing weird, no Israelis, no shooting, none of that. And it 

shows Holy Land people with Holy Land T-shirts bringing food, 

food packages, Holy Land projects -- 

THE COURT: To the kids or just carrying them? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

196

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: Carrying them and some women taking 

them out. It is really short. I mean, it is three minutes. 

But I think they raised that, and I don't want the jury just 

left with the impression that there weren't any real people in 

Holy Land, and that is the impression that they have now is 

they had cut-outs of children and there weren't real people. 

And, you know, I am sure he can identify what he saw 

because he did the search at InfoCom, and then he can identify 

the Holy Land logo on people just -- 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, we tend to ramble up here, 

but I want to get back to, she wants to ask him, "Can you 

recognize Nihad Awad in this picture?" I object to that, to 

the suggesting of the name of the person.

MS. HOLLANDER: No, no, no. I was going to ask if 

he could identify, before I show him the picture. I am not 

going to do it the way you guys do it. 

MR. JACKS: And this video, I haven't seen it, and 

if the linchpin to bring it in is Agent Miranda is testifying 

about this backdrop that he saw at the InfoCom offices, that 

is, you know, I just don't see -- It is not in dispute. If 

they are going to try to prove -- They are trying to prove it 

exists, so we have put in testimony that it exists, so the 

part about with no sound Shukri Abu Baker standing I guess 

standing in front of a false backdrop, you know, then that 

would be the end of it. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

197

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
But I don't think Agent Miranda can say, "Yes, I can tell 

that this video was shot in that location." There is no way 

that he is going to be able to say that. 

THE COURT: Where did this come from? 

MS. HOLLANDER: It came from the Government. This 

is some of their videos.

THE COURT: One that the Government seized? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Yes, sir.

MR. JACKS: And there were thousands of those, and 

there may be multiple copies at Blockbuster or somewhere. But 

to think we have these memorized somewhere and can get them 

quickly, that is just not the case. 

THE COURT: Well, I am assuming you got it when they 

listed it as an a exhibit.

MR. JACKS: They list it and put a number by it, 

which is a numbering system the FBI used, but they don't give 

a copy back.

MS. HOLLANDER: They gave us a copy, Your Honor. 

They may have to go and look at it just like we have to look 

at their exhibits.

THE COURT: You are raising a foundational problem 

you have been raising all along with all of these, like some 

of the photos, because I thought the photos themselves along 

with the agent testifying she recognized Holy Land people in 

there was sufficient.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

198

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: I think this is really the same 

thing.

THE COURT: It is hard to say without looking at it. 

I had the pictures and looked at them. I think I still need 

to look at the video.

MS. DUNCAN: It is less than three minutes tops.

THE COURT: I can take a look at it at the break. 

How much longer do you think you have on your cross? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I just barely started. I am really 

bad at this but let me say -- 

THE COURT: I am going to start writing down and 

holding you to it.

MS. HOLLANDER: No, that is what I am afraid of. An 

hour and a half. I would say an hour.

THE COURT: We will take a break, then. So if you 

will get me that, I will take a look. 

MR. CLINE: Before you take the break, can I ask 

that one question I had pending over lunch? 

THE COURT: Yes. I will let you do that. Why don't 

you start off at that.

MS. HOLLANDER: And then can we take our break? 

THE COURT: Well, we have been over here a little 

longer than we thought. You guys are just long-winded. It is 

time for a break. We have been in here about an hour and 45 

minutes.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

199

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: And then we can resolve this and get 

through my cross.

THE COURT: Okay. 

(The following was had in the presence and hearing 

of the jury.) 

THE COURT: Sorry for that delay. 

Mr. Cline? 

Q. (BY MR. CLINE) Agent Miranda, I think we had agreed that 

over lunch you were going to look at the Elbarasse documents 

in evidence and see if any of them had that little 

classification number on them. Did you have a chance to do 

that?

A. Yes. There was one document I wanted to double check and 

there was nothing on it.

Q. Okay. So after checking, is it correct that none of the 

Elbarasse documents in evidence had that classification number 

on them?

A. Correct.

Q. All right. Thank you for taking the time to do that. 

A. You are welcome, sir.

THE COURT: Members of the jury, let's take a break. 

We have been in here about an hour and 45 minutes, and I need 

to resolve an issue. So see you back about ten till. 

(Whereupon, the jury left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: All right. We are in recess.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

200

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
(Brief recess.)

THE COURT: Ms. Hollander, I have looked at the 

video, and that doesn't have the information in it like those 

photographs that I let you introduce previously through Agent 

Burns.

MS. HOLLANDER: You didn't see the Holy Land -- 

THE COURT: I saw that, but it doesn't say anything 

about where it is. The others had Kosovo Relief Fund, other 

identifying information, and Agent Burns was able to identify 

that and was aware they had been over there. This doesn't 

have anything like that. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, the witness is here 

while we are talking about it. 

THE COURT: Well, so I am going to sustain the 

objection to that. I think you need to lay a predicate. And 

if you can lay a predicate, then of course like any other 

picture, it may be admissible. 

MS. HOLLANDER: I thought I would have to lay a 

predicate.

THE COURT: So I was letting you do that the last 

time through the agent because of how much the pictures show. 

This just doesn't have that kind of information, so I will 

sustain the objection this time pending laying a predicate.

MS. HOLLANDER: But I can try to lay a predicate?

THE COURT: Yes. With respect to those other 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

201

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
photos, if you can lay a predicate those come in. 

And with respect to the third issue? 

MS. HOLLANDER: It was another photo. Oh, the 

transcript.

MR. JACKS: The transcript --

THE COURT: Yes. There was still one other and that 

was the issue, Mr. Cline, the photograph, George Bush and 

Nihad Awad. I am going to sustain the objection to that, to 

going into CAIR as just not relevant at this time. And if you 

can -- There is a foundational problem as well in terms of all 

we have is the picture. Even if you get the agent to identify 

the individual with George Bush, that is still all we know.

MS. HOLLANDER: At some point, Your Honor, I would 

like to make a proffer.

THE COURT: And I will let you. And I will revisit 

that issue in terms of if you can lay a predicate in terms of 

just the admissibility of that issue. That is the bigger 

issue that I am wrestling with is just the admissibility of 

going into that. I am thinking, and I want to look at it a 

little bit more, but it is really more along the lines of 

trying to -- You are offering it for impeachment, and it is 

impeachment on what I see as a collateral issue.

MR. CLINE: Here is just a question for Your Honor, 

and you may not be prepared to answer this question, but if 

the issue were foundation, what we would probably do is 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

202

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
subpoena somebody from the White House to come in and say, 

"This is our thing. This picture was taken on such and such a 

date." If the issue is relevance we don't want to put 

somebody out.

THE COURT: Right. So don't go there yet, because I 

am still wrestling with that bigger issue. If you will 

remember from this morning, I kept asking Mr. Jacks let's 

forget foundational for now. As I understand it, this came 

from an official website. So the foundational may not be as 

difficult as having to go to that extent.

MR. CLINE: That is kind of what I figured.

THE COURT: But I have just I think a question on 

the broader issue of what I see as perhaps impeachment on a 

collateral issue because of the statements that I was making 

earlier this morning, that it ultimately, other than 

impeachment on a collateral issue it doesn't go to any real 

issue before the jury. And so that is where I am looking. So 

if you want to do some looking on that, you can be doing it as 

well. 

MR. CLINE: All right. That is fine. And maybe 

sometime before the end of the week we can take five minutes 

and just bring this issue to closure one way or the other.

THE COURT: If you remind me. And I will continue 

to be looking at that. So that is out for now. I sustained 

that objection.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

203

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
And the transcript, Ms. Duncan? 

MS. DUNCAN: Your Honor, just to clarify the record, 

for the video, to make it clear, we are not offering it in the 

same way to show what Holy Land did in Oklahoma City or 

Kosovo. We are offering it as an example of the infomercials 

that were made.

THE COURT: That is the problem. We don't know any 

of that. If you can lay a foundation and predicate that is 

one thing, but the video doesn't do that.

MS. DUNCAN: I was clarifying for that when she 

tries to do that.

THE COURT: I think that has come out here, but I 

can't tell from the video. From the pictures we could tell 

what it was, and the agent could. You don't have it from the 

video, and I don't think you are going to get that from the 

agent either, so you will have to find another source for 

predicate, likely. But we will find out. 

And then on the transcript, I think in light of the 

mistake and we can -- Mr. Jacks, you agreed that they could 

ask the rest of the conversation, how many minutes between 

family members, I will let you read those two or three pages 

you were talking about, in light of this mistake that you 

thought the entire exhibit was in evidence. So I will let you 

have that.

Ready for the jury? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

204

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MS. HOLLANDER: Yes, sir. 

THE COURT: Bring the jury in. 

(Whereupon, the jury entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Ms. Hollander? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Thank you, Your Honor. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Now it is afternoon, Agent Miranda. 

And it is the story of my life in this case to stop my crosses 

and start them. But just to remind us where we were, we were 

about to read a portion of what was introduced as Baker 

Wiretap No. 25. It was one of the calls between Shukri and 

his brother. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And just to remind us where we are, this was a 

call with --

A. I am sorry, ma'am. I am not getting a -- I am not seeing 

anything on my screen. I am willing to look at a copy of 

that, if you have one. 

THE COURT: He is checking that. Give him a second. 

You will have to work with a copy, perhaps. 

MS. HOLLANDER: I only have one copy. We will have 

it here in a second, Your Honor. Here is what we are going to 

do. We will be a little ingenious. What I am going to give 

you is the front page of the call with all the people's names 

on it, and then I am going to -- I guess I should give you -- 

Well, I don't know how to do this. Are you thinking he 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

205

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
is going to have the computer? Is that what you are thinking? 

If he has the paper copy then the jury can't see it. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) I am going to give you the computer. 

That is what I am going to do. This is just for a couple of 

pages, and we just have to work it out. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Is that okay, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: Sure, that is fine.

MS. HOLLANDER: Can I approach?

THE COURT: Yes. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) What I am going to ask you to do is I 

am going to give you this page and just say who is talking. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Thank you, Your Honor. Twenty-first 

century courtroom. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) What I would like you to do is read 

the first couple of pages, and I will put them on the elmo so 

the jury can follow along. And just say who is speaking. 

Okay?

A. All right.

Q. And you can start with who is speaking and then, "Hello, 

hello."

A. Yes, ma'am. This is going to be Nida Abu Baker, "Hello, 

hello." 

Jamal Abu Baker says, "Hello. Peace be with you."

Nida says, "And with you." 

Jamal says, "Who are you?" 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

206

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Nida says, "NidaJamal says, "How are you, daughter?" 

Nida says, "Thanks be to God." 

Jamal says, "Do you know who I am?" 

Nida says, "Er." 

Jamal says, "Who am I?" 

Wijdan Abu Baker says, "Uncle JamalJamal says, "You got 

it very good. How are you doing? Are you happy?" 

Nida says, "Thanks be to God." 

Jamal says, "Hello." 

Wijdan says, "Yes. Your voice -- your voice is 

repeating." 

Nida says, "what?" 

Jamal says, "Should I let you speak with a beautiful one 

like you?" 

Nida says, "Yes." 

Jamal says, "Come over here. Talk with one of my girls." 

Asthma says, "Hello." 

Nida says, "Hello." 

Asthma says, "Peace be with you." 

Nida says, "And with you." 

Asthma says, "What is your name?" 

Nida says, "NidaAsthma says, "What grade are you inNida 

says, "What?" 

Asthma says, "What grade are you inAnd Nida says, "Er." 

Asthma says, "How old are you?" 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

207

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Nida says, "five years." 

Asthma says, "Yes, you have not gone to school yet?"

Nida says, "I go to" -- 

Asthma says, "Listen." 

Nida says, "What?" 

Asthma says, "you are as old as my sister Isra the little 

one." 

Asthma says, "Listen, is Uncle Shukri there?" 

Nida says, "What?" 

Asthma says, "Is your dad there? Is your dad there?" 

Nida says, "Yes." 

Asthma says, "Let me talk with him." 

Nida says, "She wants to talk to Dad."

Q. Okay. Thank you. 

Now, Agent Miranda although I am not asking you to read 

the rest of it, you are familiar with this call, aren't you.

A. Portions of it better than others, but yes.

Q. But there was a lot more family talk like that in the 

call, wasn't there?

A. Yes.

Q. And the grandparents talked to the kids, and they went 

back and forth kind of like that. 

A. Yes.

Q. In between the parts that you read. Correct?

A. Yes.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

208

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Now, let me direct your attention back to part of what 

you read, or I should say of what scrolled on your direct 

examination, and if I can direct your attention, I believe it 

is page 13. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Mr. Jacks, I believe I have this 

correct. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) I know you can't see it, but I am 

going to tell you what it is. This was a conversation about 

where they were talking about credit. And do you recall that?

A. Is this about the phone system? 

Q. The phone system?

A. Yes.

Q. You recall that?

A. Yes.

Q. And they talked about making telephone calls, what they 

cost. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And they talked about making calls, what they cost to go 

to Brazil and what they cost to go to Jordan. Do you remember 

that?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, they have family in both those places, don't they? 

In Brazil -- They are from Brazil. Correct?

A. I don't know what the family situation currently is in 

Brazil.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

209

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. But that is where they were from?

A. Originally, yes.

Q. And they have family in Jordan. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And they are talking about setting up a Net2 phone 

account. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And then at one point Jamal says, "I'm talking with you 

free. The free one doesn't work with me every time." Do you 

remember that?

A. Yes.

Q. And they are talking about the programs where you can 

speak over the computer internet, talk over the computer. 

Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. That is what this Net2 is. 

A. Yes.

Q. And it is like Skype. Are you familiar with Skype?

A. Yes.

Q. Or Vonage?

A. Yes.

Q. Any of those?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And he tells them what his name is on the Net2 

account. Right? GIMI. Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

210

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. Now, if you look back at InfoCom Search No. 35, the 

security document, and again you are not going to be able to 

see it but I will read it, and the jury can see it, you recall 

that it talks about telephonic communications?

A. Yes.

Q. If you need to see the actual document, let me know. 

Otherwise we will do it this way. And it says in there No. 5. 

And instead of having you read it, I will read it. It says, 

"Avoiding calls during unusual times such as at night or at 

dawn." Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And you are not sure whether this call was in the middle 

of the night or late at night or in the middle of the day. 

Correct?

A. I don't recall, ma'am.

Q. Okay. Would it refresh your recollection if you 

previously thought that it was 11:00 at night?

A. Yeah. I don't know that I said it was 11:00 or that it 

was --

Q. Very late at night?

A. I think I said I am not sure if it is on a 24-hour clock. 

So it could be 11:00 a.m. or 11:00 p.m. I am not sure.

Q. You previously testified that the call was very late and 

your answer was that it sure was. Is it possible that you 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

211

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
remembered that earlier?

A. How long was the call? Do we know the duration? 

Q. The duration of the call?

A. Was it one lasting over 20 minutes? 

Q. Yes. 

A. It was probably the late one.

Q. And the security document says to avoid calls late at 

night. Correct? That is what the document says--"avoiding 

calls during unusual times such as late at night or at dawn."

A. Correct.

Q. Correct. Okay. Now, you also testified about Shukri and 

Akram's trip to Saudi Arabia. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And you said on that trip that Shukri applied for a visa 

and he listed InfoCom as the company name. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And I am going to put that up again for the jury, 

and I will let -- Now, you will have to let me know if you 

need help remembering this document. But he applied to the 

embassy of Saudi Arabia for his visa. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, he put in his correct home address, didn't he? Do 

you need to see it?

A. No, I can actually see it. I think that is the correct 

address.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

212

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And he put in the correct address for InfoCom. Correct?

A. He did.

Q. But in the middle of the page where it asks for a 

business address and telephone number, he left that blank. 

Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And he paid for it with a check, didn't he? Do 

you see where it shows circles -- Do you remember that it is 

checked "check"?

A. I can see that. That is what it appears to say.

Q. And he used his correct passport number. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And of course his name was correct also. So everything 

matched up from his identification. Correct? His name, his 

home address, his passport number. Correct?

A. That part is correct, yes.

Q. Now, let's look back at the security document once again, 

page 20 of the security document. And I don't know if you can 

see that, but it says there that one of the things not to do, 

and I am going to read it, No. 14, "Not using credit cards or 

tourist checks during travel. Cash money is the most suitable 

during travel." Do you see that?

A. I do.

Q. And No. 17 says that the reservation should be in a name 

that doesn't reveal the manager's known identity. Correct? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

213

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
First and second name. 

A. Yes.

Q. And one of the other things that you pointed out was that 

they -- They met with someone from a bank there. Correct? Or 

you thought that it was someone from a bank. 

A. There was a letter indicating they wanted to see --

Q. They wanted to see someone?

A. I don't know if they met that person or not.

Q. Now, I also want to ask you a few questions about the 

Holy Land overseas speaker list, and that was HLF Search 

No. 87 and your big board. Mousa Abu Marzook's name isn't on 

that list, is it?

A. No, ma'am.

Q. And you have also talked about, while we are on the 

subject of Mr. Marzook, that is another one of those names 

where the last name has an Abu. It is Abu Marzook as part of 

his last name. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Okay. In the phonebook, and I may have to show you this 

if you can't see it, he has a phone number for Abu Ammar. 

Right? Do you know who that is?

A. That is an Abu name used by or was used by Yasser Arafat.

Q. Right. He was the head of Fatah. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. We also refer to him as at one time he was the president 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

214

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
of the Palestinian Authority. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. A rival of Hamas. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. But his numbers are on page 38. And then on page 40 we 

see his name again. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And again on page 42. And actually the numbers on page 

42 are the same as the numbers on page 40. Correct?

A. I have not made that comparison.

Q. Well, there is one at least that is actually, if you look 

at it -- You didn't compare the numbers for Abu Ammar for 

Yasser Arafat?

A. Compare them to each other? 

Q. Right. 

A. No.

Q. You didn't determine whether these all applied to the 

same person?

A. No, I didn't compare the telephones of Abu Ammar to Abu 

Ammar.

Q. If we compare them, we see that at least 824670 are the 

same numbers. Right? Those are the same number, are they 

not?

A. I will take your word for it.

Q. You can't see them, but those are the numbers on 42 and 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

215

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
40, so those two numbers compare.

And he also had in his phonebook somebody whose name is 

Abu Hussein, Abu Mazin's office director. Now, who is that?

A. I have a guess. Do you want me to take a guess? 

Q. Sure. 

A. I am thinking that is the individual who took over for 

Yasser Arafat as the president of the PNA of Arafat died, but 

that is a guess.

Q. Abu Mazin?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you check that phone number?

A. No.

Q. One of the other phone numbers was somebody named Riyad 

al-Zanoun. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And you know who that is. That is the Palestinian 

Minister of Health. Correct?

A. No, I didn't know that.

Q. Well, did you check that phone number?

A. No, I did not.

Q. We previously have seen in this case Defendants' Exhibit 

No. 136. I actually have two copies of that. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Can I approach, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) And that is the same name, isn't it?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

216

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. It appears to be.

Q. And he signed that as the Minister of Health. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. I don't know that we have actually -- I think we have 

already discussed that letter, but I was just trying to remind 

us of who he is.

And Riyad Mansour is also on that page. Correct? And he 

is the current PA, not Hamas, representative to the United 

Nations. Correct?

A. I don't know that.

Q. You didn't check that?

A. When you say check it -- 

Q. You didn't check to see who he was?

A. No. I checked to see whether or not they were on the HLF 

speakers list.

Q. Now, let's stick here with talking about Marzook for a 

little bit. You created a document, a demonstrative called 

the "Marzook Orders Security for OLF," and I could put it up 

there for you. I will put it on the screen, but since there 

is a demonstrative I will get it so you can see it. Tell me 

if you can't see it. Of course now I can't see you. I am 

trying to be creative here. 

Now, the point of creating a demonstrative is just to 

pull together actual documents that are in evidence. Correct? 

A. I guess, yes.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

217

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And the demonstrative is supposed to accurately portray 

what the underlying documents say. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, this demonstrative says -- I want to talk about it 

in kind of one word at a time. First it says "Marzook orders 

security." Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. So the first thing it says is Marzook, and you base that 

on Elbarasse Search No. 15. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Since we have that one up there, I am going to take this 

down for a minute. Elbarasse Search No. 15 wasn't signed by 

Marzook, was it?

A. No, it was not signed by him. I think I pointed that 

out.

Q. It was actually signed -- It was signed, though, wasn't 

it?

A. It was a signature.

Q. Right. But that is an unknown signature. Correct?

A. Unknown to me.

Q. Unknown to you. Okay. So we are going to take this and 

we are going to change it here. And in case you can't read 

it, what I have written, I crossed out "Marzook" and have 

written "unknown person" there. The next thing it says is 

that -- Now, this unknown person ordered security for OLF. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

218

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
That is what it said up there is it ordered security. 

Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And for that you actually also looked at that same 

document on page 2. And the document says, "Brother Izzat 

Mansour is requested to visit the office of the Fund to take 

the necessary measures in regards to maintaining security." 

Do you recall that is what the document says?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. So I am going to change this from "orders" to "requests," 

because that is what the document says, doesn't it?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. Now, you didn't present any evidence that Izzat Mansour 

did actually visit the Holy Land office at that time, did you?

A. No, ma'am.

Q. And your demonstrative also makes reference to a check, 

November 1990 check. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Q. And that is a check that does have Marzook's signature 

that you can identify. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. To Izzat Mansour. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And that was from the big document Marzook Bank Account. 

Correct?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

219

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. And the check is dated November 9th, 1990. Right?

A. Right.

Q. But the request from this unknown person to Mansour was 

made in February of 1991. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And there is nothing written on the memo line of this 

check, is there?

A. No.

Q. And you didn't present any evidence showing what this 

check is for, did you?

A. Right.

Q. So I am going to cross the check out and I am going to 

mark this as Defendants' Demonstrative No. 2. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I move it into evidence 

at this time as a demonstrative. 

THE COURT: Defendants' Demonstrative No. 2. Mr. 

Jacks?

MR. JACKS: We object, Your Honor. It is just -- It 

is her handwriting and we object. 

THE COURT: Well, it was done here in the courtroom. 

I think that is permissible. That is overruled, and 

Defendants' Demonstrative No. 2 is admitted. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Thank you, Your Honor. I am going 

to take this down now since I am too short to see around it. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

220

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Another thing you discussed on direct 

was a video, and it was a video -- It was HLF Search No. 126, 

and it was a video you played, the Government played a brief 

portion showing Yousef Qaradawi speaking. Do you remember 

that?

A. Yes.

Q. You are familiar with that?

A. Yes.

Q. But actually that wasn't a video that Holy Land made, was 

it?

A. They made? 

Q. That Holy Land produced. 

A. I don't know who produced it. What is the search 

warrant? What is the exhibit number, ma'am? 

Q. Well, in fact, it is a video from a MAYA conference in 

1993. Correct?

A. I would have to take a look at the video, please.

MS. HOLLANDER: Can I approach, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. 

THE WITNESS: What was your question now, ma'am? 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) So now that you have looked at this 

tape, let me ask you a few questions about it. Okay?

A. Yes.

MR. JACKS: Judge -- 

MS. HOLLANDER: I am not moving this into evidence. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

221

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. JACKS: All right. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) When Holy Land was searched, a large 

number of videos were seized. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And the Government either kept the original labels 

on them so that you would know what they were or somehow could 

identify them. Correct?

A. We kept the labels on, yes.

Q. So you would know what they were. 

A. Well, it is just not our policy to mess around with the 

evidence.

Q. Right. And also if you take the labels off, you would 

never know where they came from. Right?

A. That is true as well.

Q. That is one of the reasons why you don't mess around with 

the evidence. Right?

A. Right.

Q. Okay. And in fact this tape, which was -- It was Holy 

Land Search No. 126. I think that was the answer to your 

previous question. 

A. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.

Q. I am sorry. I didn't compute that quite right. But it 

is Holy Land Search No. 126, and that tells us it was taken 

from the Holy Land office. Correct?

A. Yes, ma'am.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

222

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. And this was the portion that you played involving 

a speech by Yousef Qaradawi. Right?

A. Right.

Q. But in fact, he was speaking at a MAYA conference in 

1993. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. Okay. And that was before Hamas was designated. 

Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, the tape is two hours long. Correct?

A. I don't know that.

Q. Well, you only played about 18 minutes of it. Correct? 

Will you take my word for that?

A. I will take your word for it.

Q. Actually you only played a minute or two, but he only 

spoke for 18 minutes. 

A. Okay.

Q. You didn't play anything else from this MAYA conference, 

did you?

A. I don't believe we did.

Q. And you didn't in your direct explain that this actually 

was a MAYA conference where he spoke, did you?

A. I don't know if I was asked that question.

Q. You didn't -- You weren't asked that question, were you?

A. I don't recall. I don't think so.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

223

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. You also -- 

MS. HOLLANDER: I may have to read this section, 

Your Honor. I am trying to figure out how to do the next part 

in my head, but let me see if I can do it without the 

overhead. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) You played something called Baker 

Wiretap No. 23. Do you recall what that is? It is a 

conference call. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Can I approach the witness so I can 

show him what it is?

THE COURT: Yes. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Okay?

A. Right.

Q. And just so the jury knows, this is Baker Wiretap No. 23, 

and it is 16 pages. And I assume I have the correct one here. 

A number of people were speaking during that conference call. 

Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And the Government played a small portion of it. 

A. Right.

Q. And the people on this call were emams of the al-Aqsa 

mosque. Correct? That is how they identified themselves. 

Correct? Or the former speaker Dr. Abu Mahmoud, the former 

speaker of al-Aqsa mosque. Do you remember that?

A. That is one reference, yes, ma'am.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

224

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And chairman of the Islamic University is how he was 

described?

A. That is how he described himself. Right.

Q. I was going to ask you to read this. 

MS. HOLLANDER: But I think I am going to have to 

read it, if that is all right with Your Honor. 

THE COURT: Yes. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Okay. Thank you. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) One of the things that -- Now, just 

-- I believe you testified that the al-Aqsa mosque is 

particularly significant for Muslims all over the world. Is 

that correct?

A. Right.

Q. It is like the third holiest place in the whole Muslim 

world. Am I correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And one of the things that he says here is that 

"al-Aqsa mosque is a holy site which concerns Muslims 

generally as it is known to you. Jerusalem is the city of 

holy sites which concerns the entire world. It is not lawful 

to keep these sites away from the hands which are capable of 

protecting them, the hands which protect them from the fooling 

of racism, the fooling of sectarianism, the fooling of grudge, 

the fooling of narcissim" -- 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, can we have a page number or 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

225

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
reference or something? 

MS. HOLLANDER: It is page 8, bottom of 8 and the 

top of 9. I am sorry. Do you need me to show it to you. Can 

I confer with Mr. Jacks for just a moment?

THE COURT: Sure. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) So I was reading that they want to 

protect the al-Aqsa mosque "...from the hands that protect 

them, from the fooling of racism, the fooling of sectarianism, 

the fooling of grudge, the fooling of narcissim which is a 

status today. Today the holy sites in Jerusalem in particular 

and in Palestine in general fall in fooling hands. There must 

be a general global mobilization to save these holy sites, to 

return them to those who guard them with sincerity. If the 

world pretends to be dumb as it does today, ignore or overlook 

the matter under media pressure, racist pressure, or under 

biased pressure so Muslims are supposed to rise, and they are 

numerous, to defend their holy sites, and they are entrusted 

with the holy sites of all the people, whether Christian holy 

sites or Jewish holy sites, and not the Zionist holy sites 

that are far from the true path." 

That was also part of what he said that day. Correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, I want to move on to one of -- Because the jury will 

have all of this, but I just wanted to highlight a little bit 

of it. The next one who is described as Sheikh Bitawi. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

226

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Correct?

A. Hamad Bitawi.

Q. Correct. And he is also described here as an al-Aqsa 

speaker, and also had something to do with the al-Aqsa mosque. 

Correct?

A. I think he did.

Q. One of the things that you said on your direct was that 

one would have to be very creative to find any charity in this 

tape. Do you recall saying that?

A. I do.

Q. Let's read this part. Let me read this part from Sheikh 

Bitawi. "I send you my greeting and greetings of your 

steadfast Palestinian people which still suffers under the 

detested Israeli occupation and its unjust practice of 

confiscating the land of our people to build settlements for 

strangers who have neither a religious nor historical 

connection to Jerusalem, while a day doesn't pass when Israeli 

bulldozers destroy the homes of people under the excuse of 

having no permit." 

Now, it goes on to say, "It is not permissible for its 

nightingales to sing, but permissible for birds of every 

color" -- I am sorry. I didn't read that right. "Is it not 

permissible for its nightingales to sing, but permissible for 

birds of every color. The Israeli occupation still fights the 

daily bread of our people as it besieges them, to humiliate 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

227

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
them, and to bring them down to it knees. The Israeli 

occupation still holds over 5,000 detainees and prisoners 

among the children of people in its prisons. The occupation 

still bars citizens from the West Bank and Gaza, Gaza Sector, 

from entering Jerusalem or passing by it, and entering the 

blessed al-Aqsa mosque to pray in it. The Israeli occupation 

carries out these unjust deeds, even though it signed accords 

and agreements for the Palestinian Authority." 

Now, he mentions there that Israeli bulldozers destroy 

the homes of people under the excuse of having no permit. And 

you are aware that Israel has destroyed homes of people who 

have no permit. Correct?

A. No, I am not actually familiar with that. I am familiar 

with homes being bulldozed, but for reasons related to 

terrorism.

Q. So you haven't really investigated all the other reasons 

that Israel destroys homes to make way for settlements and 

other reasons, have you?

A. I am only familiar with what I just said.

Q. But you do know from dealing with the Holy Land case and 

the search that Holy Land had some projects involving 

demolished homes. Correct?

A. There were references to that, yes.

Q. Okay. 

MS. HOLLANDER: May I approach, Your Honor?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

228

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Yes. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Let me ask one question first. And 

you are familiar with the -- You said you saw Holy Land 

T-shirts when you were at InfoCom?

A. Yeah, I have seen T-shirts before.

Q. And you know what the Holy Land logo looks like?

A. Right. 

MS. HOLLANDER: May I approach?

THE COURT: Yes. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, could we have this on the 

record and not some private conversation.

MS. HOLLANDER: I am sorry. I will repeat that. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Can you identify, without discussing 

the photographs because they are not in evidence, 

identify -- Do you see the bates number from the search?

A. I see the bates label, yes, ma'am.

Q. And do you see the Holy Land logo -- 

MR. JACKS: Could we have an exhibit number, Your 

Honor? 

THE COURT: Counsel, what is the exhibit number? 

MS. HOLLANDER: I was going to get to that. 

THE COURT: You are already getting into what is in 

the photo and you haven't gotten to the exhibit number.

MS. HOLLANDER: Let's do them one at a time. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) Let's start with Defendants' Exhibit 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

229

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
No. 444. Do you see the bates number on that?

A. I do.

Q. And do you see a logo that you can identify on that?

A. Well, right. I need to kind of look at one to see if I 

can make it out on the others. That is pretty small.

Q. It is. 

A. It is probably it.

Q. How about -- Let's go in order. Defendants' Exhibit 

No. 721. Does that come from the Holy Land search? Do you 

see a Holy Land logo on there?

A. Yes, it does.

Q. That one is pretty clear, isn't it, the logo?

A. Yeah.

Q. And would you look at Defendants' No. 1179? Do you see 

the Holy Land -- the bates number on there identifying your 

search?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And do you see a logo on there?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And No. 1180, is that -- Do you see a bates number on 

there that you can identify?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And a logo?

A. Right. 

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I move the admission of 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

230

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Defendants' No. 444, 721, 1179 and 1180 as all pictures that 

the agent identifies as coming from Holy Land, and he 

identifies a Holy Land logo on them. 

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, may I take the witness on 

voir dire?

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. JACKS) Agent Miranda, these photographs, other 

than the fact that they were seized from within the materials 

taken from the Dallas Holy Land foundation office, do you know 

where these photographs were taken, when they were taken, 

under what context they were taken?

A. No.

Q. Do you have any other information you can add other than 

what you said--they appear to have come from the search 

warrant of the Holy Land Foundation?

A. No.

Q. Do you know any of the people shown in there?

A. No. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, we would object on the 

grounds that there is no foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained. 

MS. HOLLANDER: That is fine. Very well. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) The video that you showed that we 

just discussed also discussed settlements. Correct? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

231

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Discussed "the unjust practice of confiscating the land of our 

people for the settlement of strangers."

A. I am sorry. Are we talking about Yousef Qaradawi? 

Q. Bitawi. 

A. In the section you just read? 

Q. Yes. 

A. That was in there I think.

Q. And that wasn't part of the section you read, was it?

A. I don't believe so, ma'am.

Q. I show you what has been previously marked as Defendants' 

Exhibit No. 1110. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, is this in evidence? 

MS. HOLLANDER: Yes, sir; previously admitted as 

Defendants' No. 1110. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) And I don't know if you can see that, 

but are you familiar with the fact that there are settlements 

throughout the West Bank?

A. Yeah, I have heard of that.

Q. Have you ever been to the West Bank?

A. It kind of depends. I think I accidentally crossed into 

it.

Q. Agent Miranda, you understand that it is not a crime to 

listen to a speech, even if it is a speech that supports 

Hamas. Correct?

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I object to that as 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

232

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
argumentative. 

THE COURT: Sustained. I am going to sustain that 

objection. 

Q. (BY MS. HOLLANDER) You discussed the Hamas charter, 

didn't you?

A. Yes.

Q. And you have -- You don't believe it is a crime to own a 

copy of the Hamas charter, do you?

A. No.

Q. In fact, Yale University has published the Hamas charter 

in English, hasn't it?

A. I think that is what Doctor Levitt used.

Q. Right. And expressing political views isn't a crime 

either, is it?

A. Probably not.

MS. HOLLANDER: Your Honor, I will pass the witness. 

THE COURT: Mr. Westfall, are you up?

MR. WESTFALL: I am, Your Honor. 

CROSS EXAMINATION

By Mr. Westfall: 

Q. Hello, Agent Miranda. 

A. Hello, sir.

Q. We are almost done. Now, Abdul Odeh was not in the 

Muslim Brotherhood. Isn't that correct?

A. I don't know that. I have not --

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

233

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Okay. Let me phrase it like this, then. There has been 

no evidence presented in this trial that Abdul Odeh was ever a 

member of the Muslim Brotherhood. 

MR. JACKS: Objection, Your Honor. That is 

argumentative. 

THE COURT: He may ask him based on the evidence 

whether he is aware of the evidence.

THE WITNESS: I am more comfortable with the way you 

just phrased it.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Okay. 

A. No, there has not.

Q. And there has been no evidence in this trial that Abdul 

Odeh was a member of the Palestine Committee. 

A. I don't know if that is correct. I am not sure -- May I 

explain? 

Q. The Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood?

A. Yes. Would you -- Do you want my answer or not? 

Q. You know, what the heck. 

A. I think I have seen Mr. Odeh's name on the Islamic 

Association for Palestine for some documents there, and I 

understand that the Islamic Association for Palestine, the 

IAP, is part of the Palestine Committee, so I am a little 

uncomfortable answering my questions in these black and white 

yes or nos.

Q. Because you haven't been here for some of the trial? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

234

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. No, it is not that, sir. It is that I have seen lots of 

information, and I don't know whether or not the particular 

information that I am aware of is in or whether we have 

discussed it or not.

Q. Then I will ask you the same thing Mr. Cline did.

A. Okay.

Q. Would you do me a favor and look through the documents 

that have been admitted in this trial?

A. Admitted. Right? 

Q. Right. And see if there is anything that --

A. I will be glad to do that.

Q. That will clear that question up. 

A. I will be glad to do that for you, sir.

Q. I appreciate it. 

Abdul Odeh was not at the Philadelphia conference. 

Correct? 

A. Right.

Q. And he was never on the board of directors of the Holy 

Land Foundation. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Or on the IAP?

A. I don't think he was on the board of directors, no.

Q. And his name does not appear in Marzook's phonebook. 

Correct?

A. No.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

235

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And his name does not appear in Ashqar's phonebook. 

Correct?

A. I think that is correct.

Q. And his office in fact was in New Jersey. True?

A. Yes.

Q. And he never officed -- There is no evidence that he ever 

officed in Dallas. In this --

A. You are right.

Q. Okay. Now, I want to talk to you just a little bit about 

these conferences, these conferences where the speakers would 

speak. Are you with me?

A. I am with you.

Q. Okay. There would be a number of different activities of 

these like folk dancing and speaking, and then there would be 

the fundraising. Right?

A. There were a number of activities.

Q. And then from the fundraising there was a number of 

different ways that that could be done. It could be done 

through cash donations. Right?

A. I have seen that.

Q. People would write checks?

A. Right.

Q. Sometimes we see references to women donating jewelry. 

A. Right.

Q. And there also would be pledges. Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

236

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. Where you fill out your form and promise to pay. 

A. Right.

Q. And then there also would be sponsorships of orphans; 

people would volunteer to sponsor an orphan. True?

A. Right.

Q. And then you could also sponsor a family if you wanted 

to. True?

A. Right.

Q. And specifically about the orphan sponsorships, what the 

payment was on that, the prevailing payment was $50 a month. 

Correct?

A. That sounds correct.

Q. And some people would pay that monthly. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And some people would pay that quarterly. 

A. I am more familiar with it as monthly, but I am not 

disputing what you are saying.

Q. And you see them paying annually $600 in one lump sum. 

Right?

A. That is probably correct.

Q. And you could have that done either with a payment or the 

auto debit. You have seen that as well. 

A. I have seen that.

Q. And if you didn't pay, you know, if you made a pledge and 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

237

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
didn't pay, then the Holy Land Foundation had a mechanism for 

sending you mail to remind you. You have seen that in the 600 

boxes. 

A. That sounds right. I can't recall, but it sounds 

familiar.

Q. Right. The family sponsorships were $100 a month. 

Right?

A. I think that is right.

Q. And once again, some people just pay $1200 for the whole 

year. 

A. I think that is correct.

Q. And then the commitment on that was kind of open-ended. 

A. Right.

Q. Which means that you would get a reminder notice or 

whatever and you would pay and you would sponsor this orphan 

for like -- from now on or until you stopped. But it was kind 

of an open-ended commitment. 

MR. JACKS: I object to the form of the question in 

that it is not a question. It is a statement.

THE COURT: Do you want to rephrase? 

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Have you seen in the 600 boxes of the, 

you know, documents and such that were taken from Holy Land, 

evidence that people would sponsor orphans and families for, 

you know, kind of an open-ended period of time, a long period 

of time?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

238

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. And the orphan and family sponsorships would be signed up 

for at the conferences as well as the other forms of donations 

we talked about. 

A. That is one form of signing up for the orphans, yes. One 

method, I should say.

Q. But people did it at the conferences?

A. That is my understanding.

Q. In fact, speakers would encourage people to sponsor an 

orphan or pay $500. I mean, we have seen that. 

A. I think that is correct.

Q. And the Holy Land Foundation kept track of how much money 

some of their speakers brought in, didn't they?

A. Some of them.

Q. And in fact, speakers would get credit for some of these 

orphan applications. 

A. I am not sure about the orphan applications. They get 

credit for money pledged, I guess, in their name.

Q. Right.

A. Or during their fundraising effort.

Q. And they get credit sort of as the pledges rolled in. 

A. I think that is right.

Q. I want to switch gears just a little bit and speak with 

you about Demonstrative No. 16. Is your monitor still not 

working?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

239

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Not working, sir. 

Q. Can you see that over there?

A. Yes, I can, sir.

Q. Now, that may be helpful, too. Now, yesterday I think 

Mr. Jacks' question said that the HLF box right here. Okay?

A. Yes.

Q. The one in New Jersey. 

A. Right.

Q. Was just to indicate that there was an office in New 

Jersey at the time. Is that what you said?

A. I think I said that, yes.

Q. Okay. Now -- Can you see that okay?

A. Yes, I can, sir.

Q. If somebody didn't know better, you could look at this 

and think that these phone calls actually were generated from 

the New Jersey office; that someone who didn't know any 

better, you look at that and that is a conclusion you could 

draw, couldn't it?

A. I think that is why I pointed that out saying those were 

calls related to the Defendant Mohammad El-Mezain, not the HLF 

office. I was trying to be very specific. I wasn't trying to 

implicate Mr. Odeh in those particular phone calls.

Q. Okay. I want to just talk to you just a little bit more 

about that.

MR. WESTFALL: May I approach?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

240

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) I am showing you what is already in 

evidence, and I am doing this because I don't have the 

projector. 

A. Right.

Q. This is already in evidence -- 

MR. WESTFALL: Can you hear me, Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) -- as Secretary of State New Jersey 

No. 1?

A. Right.

Q. Are you familiar with this document?

A. No.

Q. Please just take a look at it for a second. 

A. Sure.

THE COURT: While he is doing that, let's take a 

quick five-minute break. 

(Whereupon, the jury left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: We had a juror that had an emergency so 

we needed to take a quick break. Let's just take about a 

five-minute break.

(Brief Recess.)

THE COURT: Mr. Westfall?

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Okay. Here is the document that I was 

showing you. This is Secretary of State New Jersey No. 1.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

241

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. WESTFALL: May I approach, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Just look at that and familiarize 

yourself with it. 

A. Okay. Go ahead, sir.

Q. Okay. Does that appear to you to be a certificate of 

authority for the Holy Land Foundation to do business in New 

Jersey?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And you see where it says filed June 2nd, 1994?

A. Right.

Q. So we already know that the New Jersey HLF box doesn't 

apply. I just want to try to get some of the reasons behind 

it. Okay? 

MR. JACKS: I will object to the statement.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) June 2nd, 1994 is when these articles 

or this certificate of authority to do business in New Jersey 

were filed, which is when a business begins. True?

A. When business begins legally, yes.

Q. Okay. This call here would have been almost a year prior 

to the New Jersey office being officially opened. True?

A. That is right.

Q. And we also know that that call actually went to the 

residence of Mohammad El-Mezain. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

242

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. No, this is the call that went from Mohammad El-Mezain to 

the residence of Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the Hamas leader in Gaza.

Q. Hence the arrow that goes the opposite way from the 

United States. I am sorry. I got crossed up there. 

A. That is all right.

Q. But nonetheless July 1993, and we officially opened in 

New Jersey June of 1994. True?

A. That is right.

Q. And then this 3/27/94 call to Qanuo, that was also before 

the New Jersey office officially opened. 

A. Right.

Q. And then there was this one call from Jordan. I guess 

that is where Khalid Mishal left a message on Mohammad 

El-Mezain's voicemail. 

A. That is correct.

Q. And this one technically would have been after the 

official opening of the Holy Land office. 

A. That is correct.

Q. But it didn't go to the Holy Land office. 

A. No. These are all phone calls related to the Defendant 

Mohammad El-Mezain Sir, I just said these are all phone calls. 

I meant the three that you had on the screen at the time. I 

don't want to mislead the jury that the other phone calls had 

nothing to do with other Defendants.

Q. I want to talk to you about the speakers list. Okay?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

243

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you know what I am talking about when I say the 

speakers list?

A. Sure.

Q. Let me put it on here. It is the HLF Search No. 87. Are 

we oriented?

A. Yes.

Q. Your Demonstrative, I don't know, No. 1?

A. I believe it is.

Q. This came off of I think you said Akram Mishal's 

computer. 

A. It came off of an HLF computer, and it was -- the file 

was related to Akram Mishal.

Q. Okay. This does not bear an HLDL number?

A. No.

Q. Because it was on the computer at the time, not a hard 

copy.

A. Right.

Q. Right? There wasn't a hard copy of this around, was 

there?

A. No.

Q. So this computer that was linked back to Akram Mishal, 

was it a stand-alone computer or was it on a server?

A. I don't know.

Q. Was it an Apple or was it an IBM?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

244

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. I don't know.

Q. The file name, you know that when something like this is 

on a computer it is called a file and it is going to have a 

name like something dot something?

A. Yes.

Q. What was the file name for this?

A. I don't recall.

Q. What computer program could you use to open it?

A. I don't know that I opened it. I think that was 

something found by the computer experts.

Q. So you don't know?

A. I don't think so.

Q. How many computers were there at Holy Land?

A. I have no idea. The computer people handle all that. 

And to clarify your question, I am not sure whether you mean 

hard drives, hard drives laptops, hard drives laptops, loose 

media.

Q. It just came off a computer. Right?

A. That is my understanding.

Q. Did you actually see it on the computer?

A. There was -- Let me try to explain this. The computer 

experts put materials from the HLF on computers that we could 

view, but we weren't viewing the HLF's computers. Does that 

make sense? They mirror the hard drives, they access the 

information, and then they put it on computers that the FBI 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

245

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
can then use so that agents can't make mistakes and 

intentionally or unintentionally add or delete something from 

a document. Does that make sense? 

Q. Well, sure. That makes sense. But I am trying to find 

out really kind of exactly how it got to HLF and how it got 

here. Can you tell whether it was sent via email or actually 

created in the HLF office?

A. My understanding it was on an HLF computer. Beyond that, 

you know, I am not the computer examiner.

Q. You can't tell us how this thing got created, when it got 

created?

A. There was a creation date associated with it, or I should 

say maybe a last access date. I think I testified already 

about that. July of '99 I believe was the last time.

Q. So the last time it would have been opened was July of 

'99?

A. Or accessed or manipulated or something to that effect.

Q. Or if you download it in July of '99 that would affect 

that, too, possibly? I mean, do you know?

A. If you downloaded it? 

Q. If you, for instance, get it via email and downloaded it. 

A. I couldn't say. I don't know.

Q. We have talked about a number of the names on this 

overseas speakers list. I want to ask you just specifically, 

as we have seen some of these speakers or some of these names 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

246

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
in AMEX records, the AMEX Records No. 1 and AMEX Records No. 

2. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And those are American Express records from Holy Land 

dating back to the '93 to '95 time frame?

A. I think we have seen them maybe '92 up to '95, but 

thereabouts.

Q. Right. Well, this looks like -- This is AMEX No. 2. And 

it looks like this one starts in about 1990. Right?

A. Right.

Q. November of '90?

A. Right. That is right. They go that early because they 

relate to some folks up there.

Q. And it looks like the last date is April of '94. Does 

that sound about right?

A. It sounds about right.

Q. And this is AMEX No. 1, and the first date on there is 

1993. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. There is some '94. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And it looks like '94 is the latest it goes. 

A. Right.

Q. In these -- There was tickets bought, plane tickets 

bought for overseas speakers. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

247

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Right.

Q. And we have seen some of those. And then we saw some 

videos with some of the people that are on this list. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. And then we have -- 

MR. WESTFALL: May I approach, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) This is already in evidence as HLF 

Search No. 23. Do you recognize this?

A. Yes.

Q. And we will talk about it a little bit more here in a 

bit, but this also is something that has the names of speakers 

in it. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, let's talk about the evidence that has been 

admitted. Once again we will narrow it down to make it 

precise. 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. In the evidence that has been admitted in this trial, is 

there any evidence that the Holy Land Foundation used Ziad Abu 

Ghanimeh as an overseas speaker; that he actually spoke?

A. I don't know. Have you looked in the book? 

Q. Yes. 

A. Okay. Then in the evidence that is admitted I don't 

think so. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

248

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Yousef Qaradawi. He is the one that we saw on the video, 

the MAYA video.

A. Right.

Q. Is there any evidence in this trial that the Holy Land 

Foundation used Yousef Qaradawi, actually used Yousef Qaradawi 

as a speaker?

A. I need to double check.

Q. What do you need to double check?

A. I know he was in Kansas City in '89 or '90, and I want to 

make sure whether we have got it in evidence or not.

Q. That is where the MAYA conference was. Right?

A. There was a lot of MAYA conferences, sir. There was one 

MAYA conference, and I am aware that he was at a MAYA 

conference that was an HLF fundraiser, yes.

Q. And that would have been '88, '89?

A. It was Kansas City, it was '90, it was third Intifada 

festival or something to that effect. You are asking me 

whether I recall whether it is in evidence, and I am telling 

you -- I am trying to be up front and telling you I am aware 

he was a speaker. I am not aware whether or not it is in 

evidence.

Q. Or whether it was for HLF. I mean, it was for MAYA. 

A. It was an HLF fundraiser is my understanding.

Q. Let's talk about the fundraisers a little bit, then. 

These fundraisers would be put on by MAYA, actually these 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

249

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
festivals. Right? MAYA put on the festival?

A. Festivals, fundraisers, yeah.

Q. And IAP -- 

A. Right.

Q. -- would put on festivals. They are the ones that did 

the series of Intifada festivals?

A. They did.

Q. And ICNA?

A. ICNA is really more of a Pakistani group. I am not sure 

how much they were involved, is my understanding.

Q. Did you know ICNA put on festivals?

A. I think they did. I don't know of the relationship to 

the HLF.

Q. And ISNA would have festivals?

A. ISNA.

Q. And the way this would work, particularly with the ISNAs 

and the MAYAs and all that, is that there were a number of 

organizations that would apply or come in to raise funds at 

that festival. Right?

A. I don't know about that.

Q. I mean, there would be like, for instance, Palestine 

would have a night potentially, Bosnia would have a night 

potentially, but more than just the HLF would go to these and 

try to raise funds. 

A. No.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

250

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Is that jogging your memory?

A. No. I am going to have to disagree with you, sir. There 

were festivals that to my understanding were pretty strictly 

Palestinian HLF, and then I believe there were other festivals 

which were larger in scope which I think were more 

encompassing of other groups. But to say that they always 

diversified, I don't believe that is accurate.

Q. And I was being a little bit unclear. What I meant to 

say was -- Let's set aside these IAP festivals, you know, 

during the Intifada festival days.

A. Okay.

Q. Because we had those videos that say, you know, "Send 

your contributions to the OLF." Right?

A. Right.

Q. But the ones like the MAYA conferences are the ones that 

have more than just the Holy Land Foundation coming up to 

raise funds. Wouldn't you agree?

A. I think so.

Q. Okay. All right. Yusuf Islam. Now, is that Cat 

Stevens?

A. I think it is.

Q. That is what he changed his name to after he converted to 

Islam?

A. Uh-huh.

Q. Any evidence the Holy Land Foundation used him as a 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

251

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
speaker?

A. I am not aware there is.

Q. Yousef el-Athem, is there any evidence in this trial that 

the Holy Land Foundation used him as a speaker?

A. I am not aware.

Q. Yassin Abdul Aziz. Is there any evidence in this trial 

that the Holy Land Foundation used him as a speaker? 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I am going to have to object 

to the form of the question. The list itself is labeled 

overseas speakers, so it is really misstating the evidence. 

So I object to the question in the sense that it 

mischaracterizes the evidence.

THE COURT: I think you can argue that to the jury, 

counsel. That will be ultimately for the jury to decide. 

I wonder how many you are going to go through, counsel. 

That is a long list. How many names are you going to go 

through? If it is a lot, the answer is no.

MR. WESTFALL: It was characterized as though we had 

used all of these people.

THE COURT: You can ask him how many were or some 

other way to do it. I am not going to let you go name by name 

and ask these questions as to each name. If you want to come 

up with some shorter way of establishing a certain number 

weren't, how many weren't, I will let you do that, but not 

name by name. That is a long list. We are not going to spend 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

252

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
our time doing that.

MR. WESTFALL: Okay.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Clearly there are many names on this 

list that there is no evidence in this trial that the Holy 

Land Foundation ever used. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And also just because these names are highlighted on this 

Demonstrative No. 1 doesn't mean that the Holy Land Foundation 

-- that there is evidence in this case that the Holy Land 

Foundation ever used any of these people. Correct?

A. No. Actually some of them were big fundraisers in fact.

Q. I know. But just because they are highlighted doesn't 

mean that the Holy Land Foundation actually used them as 

speakers. True?

A. Right. I don't think that was the intent.

MR. WESTFALL: May I approach the witness, Your 

Honor? 

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. WESTFALL: Your Honor, may I come back to this 

list?

THE COURT: Sure.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) I am showing you what has been marked 

for identification as Defendants' No. 1087. Just take a look 

at that and tell me, do you recognize that document, Agent 

Miranda?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

253

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. And is that a document that you have actually on an 

earlier occasion relied upon in coming up with amounts and the 

such for speakers?

A. Yes.

Q. And it also is a --

A. Can you repeat your last question? 

Q. That is a document that you relied upon in some testimony 

that you gave in an earlier proceeding. 

A. Right.

Q. And that is also a document that came off of I guess a 

disk that was in the Holy Land office?

A. I don't recall if it was a disk, sir; obviously something 

computer-generated.

Q. But it came from the Dallas office.

A. Right.

Q. Of Holy Land Foundation.

MR. WESTFALL: Your Honor, I move for admission 

Defendants' No. 1087. 

THE COURT: Mr. Jacks? 

MR. JACKS: May we have a moment, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Sure. 

MR. JACKS: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Defendants' Exhibit No. 1087 is 

admitted. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

254

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. WESTFALL: Thank you, Your Honor.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) And the next part -- I am at a 

breaking place. The next part I am going to get into --

THE COURT: Go ahead. We will go forward a little 

longer.

MR. WESTFALL: Okay.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) I am going to put on here what came 

into evidence yesterday as HLF Search No. 178. Okay? And 

that is this solicitors analysis.

A. Right.

Q. Now -- 

MR. WESTFALL: May I approach the witness, Your 

Honor? 

THE COURT: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) It is so small on this screen I just 

want to give you a copy. Does this appear to be the same 

exhibit you talked about yesterday?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Okay. And it didn't copy all that well, but over here on 

this corner those are years. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And this year here is '97?

A. Right.

Q. And then see where Chicago is?

A. Right.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

255

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. And then Chicago here starts '98. 

A. No. I think '98 starts on the next page, sir, doesn't 

it? 

Q. I know there is another '98 up there, but then there is 

'99 where we got Chicago starting again. 

A. It might be on the previous page. I probably need to 

look at the original, sir.

Q. And I don't have it. But you see how there is Chicago in 

'97 and then Chicago and this hole?

A. Right.

Q. And then the next one there is Chicago and then the '99? 

A. Right.

Q. But it doesn't appear the one with the hole is '98?

A. I am going to be guessing, sir. If I could just see the 

original I will give you an answer.

MR. WESTFALL: Do you have the original, HLF Search 

No. 178? 

THE COURT: Mr. Westfall, he is handing it to you.

MR. WESTFALL: Okay. 

THE WITNESS: I don't see anything. See there is 

the '98 where I pointed to, but there is no '98 on the second 

page, sir.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Let's do this, then. Okay. So I just 

want to point out a number here that I think you all might 

have pointed out yesterday, and that is this Anees, Mezain, 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

256

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
and Said. Do you see that there?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And $15,080? 

A. Yes, sir, I do.

Q. And this is 1997.

A. Yes.

Q. And Chicago. 

A. Yes.

Q. Now, this $15,080, you can't really tell from this 

exhibit, the one you all put in yesterday, you can't really 

tell whether that came in one conference or several 

conferences or what it was. Right?

A. You just got to go by the document.

Q. And what does the document say to you?

A. It says $15,080 is associated with Anees, Mezain, and 

Said connected to '97 in Chicago.

Q. Does this document tell you how that $15,080 was raised?

A. No.

Q. I show you the first page of HLF Search No. 23. This 

here -- This is already in evidence. And you recognize this 

document. Right?

A. I recognize that, yes, sir.

Q. And what this is--correct me if I am wrong--is a printout 

from a file that was in Dallas giving the names of people. 

Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

257

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then a date. Correct?

A. Right.

Q. And a city name oftentimes?

A. Right.

Q. Sometimes there is no city name. It says "null." Right?

A. Right.

Q. And then over here on this side there is a dollar amount. 

True?

A. Right.

Q. And this one document is 231 pages long. 

A. Okay.

Q. Do you want to see it?

A. That is okay.

Q. I am just seeing if you remember it. I don't have an 

extra copy for you. 

A. That is okay.

Q. And this one sets the data up chronologically. Now, do 

you know where this came from, what computer this came off of?

A. No.

Q. Do you know what program --

A. Just off the HLF.

Q. Right. Do you have any idea what program this one used?

A. No.

Q. Whether it was Oracle or whatever?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

258

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. No.

Q. Now, it starts in 1989. True?

A. Right. That is the first entry.

Q. And then ends in 2000. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And it is in chronological order the entire way.

A. Right.

Q. Now, No. 1087, what we just put into evidence, is the 

exact same data. True? Meaning the same entries are on it. 

Right?

A. Can you repeat that again? 

Q. This one that we just put in. 

A. Right.

Q. The other thick one right here, Defendants' No. 1087, is 

the exact same data. True? Do you know what I mean when I 

say that?

A. No. Because you are -- I am sorry. You are confusing me 

a little bit. You are comparing apples and oranges. What are 

we talking about, sir? 

Q. It is apples and apples. 

MR. WESTFALL: May I approach to show him the 

documents? It is going to make it easier. 

THE COURT: Yes. 

THE WITNESS: We are not dealing with this at all.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) No, we are not messing with this. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

259

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Right. That is apples and oranges. This document right here, 

which is Defendants' No. 1087 and HLF Search No. 23, this is 

the exact same data. It is just arranged differently. Isn't 

that true?

A. No. One shows a city -- Let me see here. Okay. I am 

with you. Yes.

Q. This one is strictly chronological. This one is 

alphabetical by last name. 

A. I am with you. 

Q. Here is from page 48 of that exhibit and you see this 

Anees, Mezain, and Said. 

A. Right.

Q. And 13 December, '96, Chicago. 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, can he identify which 

exhibit he is referring to?

MR. WESTFALL: Defendants' No. 1087. 

THE COURT: All right.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Now we will look at HLF Search 

No. 178, which is this thing, this solicitor deal. 

A. Right.

Q. And can you see that that is exactly how it is listed on 

here--Anees, Mezain, and Said? 

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see it is Anees plus Mezain plus Said in both 

places?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

260

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Right.

Q. I want to skip over to another document that is in 

evidence that was spoken about yesterday, and this is HLF 

Search No. 177. Do you recognize this?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The HLF general activities. And in this document you 

pointed out in October of 1996, and this came out of Abdul 

Odeh's office. HLNK New Jersey. 

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in October of 1996, there is a lunch apparently 

purchased for Deeb Anees. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in November of 1996 there was a dinner purchased for 

Deeb Anees. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And you looked for other things like this where Deeb 

Anees had been given lunch and dinner, I am sure. 

A. I ran his name, yes.

Q. And this is what we have--1996. Right?

A. I think there was a couple of other documents.

Q. That are in this batch?

A. Maybe not with that batch.

Q. What did you say?

A. I said maybe not with that batch.

Q. Well, this batch is what you put in yesterday. Right?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

261

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yes.

Q. And this is the fall of 1996. 

A. Right.

Q. Now I am showing you page 37 of Defendants No. 1087. 

Okay? And there is two different ways that Deeb Anees turns 

up in this record. One of them is in conjunction with -- 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I am going to object to the 

form of the question. There is no question. 

THE COURT: Well, he is asking. Go ahead and ask 

your question.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) One is Anees, Mezain, and Jabbar. 

Isn't that true?

A. Yes.

Q. And then the other one is that Anees, Mezain, and Said we 

saw before. True?

A. We have seen that, yes.

Q. And here we show in the alphabetical list basically where 

the names start. Right?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see how in 1996 we have amounts like this $3,000? 

Do you see that?

A. I do.

Q. And in November of '96 we got amounts like $4,825.25?

A. Right.

Q. In November of '96 we've got $7,300 in San Diego. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

262

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Your numbers are not on -- 

MR. WESTFALL: I am sorry.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Let me back it up a little bit. 

Anees, Mezain, and Jabbar in November of '96, $3,300 Right?

A. Right.

Q. Here is where we start getting into '97. Do you see 

this? Can you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. As we move into '97, do you see how the amounts become 

much smaller and all seemingly divisible by $50 increments?

A. Yes.

Q. And as we move through 1997, do you see how that 

continues, by and large?

A. Yes.

Q. Here is more of '97. Do you agree that doesn't change? 

Do you accept my representation on that?

A. Through '97? 

Q. Through '97, yes. Do you want to see more?

A. No, I think that is fine.

Q. And I have skipped ahead a couple of years, and now we 

are up in 2000. Do you see how '99 and 2000 are starting to 

get in there?

A. Yes.

Q. And these are still small amounts all divisible by $50. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

263

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Wouldn't you agree?

A. Yes.

Q. Shifting now you Anees, Mezain, and Said, do you see how 

this is 13 December of '96?

A. Yes.

Q. And under this new name can you see we sort of start over 

again on the years, under this new combination we start over 

on the years? We are back to '96. 

A. Yes, kind of. Pardon me.

Q. I am sorry?

A. I said kind of. There is '97 in there, too, but --

Q. Right. It is kind of mixed up that way. But by and 

large it kind of starts in '96 and ends this 2000 with 

some -- But here is November 27, November '96, $650; 25 of 

October '96, $10,000 -- 

THE COURT: Your quantities are still not on the 

screen, counsel.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) $10,565. Right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And here is 19th of November '96, $2000. December '96, 

$1,800. Right?

A. Right.

Q. And as we move through the fall of 1996, here is February 

of '97, Chicago, $1,050. Do you see that?

A. Right.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

264

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. But then after that it kind of does the same thing. As 

we move out of the spring of '97 and into the fall of '97, it 

drops down into these small amounts all divisible by $50. Do 

you see that?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. This here is page 52 out of the same exhibit. Spring of 

'98, all small amounts divisible by $50, isn't it?

A. Right.

Q. This is '99; same thing. Let me show you the whole 

thing. Is that the same thing?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then here is where it ends. Anees, Mezain, and Said, 

the last one looks like 26th of August of 2000 and it is 50 

bucks. Do you see that?

A. Right.

Q. $50. Now, back to HLF Search No. 178, the one you had in 

evidence yesterday. Do you see this 1997 number?

A. Right.

Q. This is page 48 out of HLF Search No. 23. And this is 

the chronological one. Do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. Anees, Mezain, and Said. 

A. Yes, I see that.

Q. And then over here, that highlighting there is $50 and 

$200. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

265

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Correct.

Q. Now, as a time savings measure, if I represented to you 

that I highlighted every transaction from Anees, Mezain, and 

Said in Chicago -- 

MR. JACKS: Your Honor, I will object to this. It 

is his testimony now, and not Agent Miranda's.

THE COURT: Let's ask the question. This time 

savings measure, I am in favor of it.

MR. JACKS: I am, too.

THE COURT: Let's let him ask the question and see 

what he says.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) If I represented to you and went 

through and added up all of the 1997 Chicago Anees, Mezain, 

and Said transactions, that it totaled exactly $15,080, is 

that a representation you would accept?

MR. JACKS: I object, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you want to rephrase the question, 

counsel? Maybe he knows. Let him rephrase.

MR. JACKS: It doesn't matter whether he accepts it 

or not.

THE COURT: I am asking him to rephrase, so let's 

see where he is going.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) I know at one point -- Let me just ask 

you. At one point didn't you add up the amounts that the 

different speakers raised?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

266

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Yeah. At one point I added up various amounts of certain 

speakers, not all speakers. The book is not reflective of all 

money. It does not reflect money raised by Hamas speakers for 

the most part, so I am going to give a caveat on your question 

there.

Q. Right. By it certainly reflects Deeb Anees. Right?

A. Deeb Anees is throughout that. That is correct. I agree 

with that.

Q. And that is one of the ones that you added up. 

A. Yeah, I think I had a figure for him at some point.

MR. WESTFALL: May I ask him to add them up, Your 

Honor? 

THE COURT: Not right now. Do you have some idea 

what that number was? Does that $15,000 sound -- 

THE WITNESS: I added at one point the major 

speakers, and I probably have a figure somewhere. I don't 

have a problem -- 

THE COURT: You can do that after the break. We 

don't need to take the time to do that right now.

MR. WESTFALL: Very well.

Q. (BY MR. WESTFALL) Well, certainly this book here gives 

you the ability to add up what is in this book. True? You 

can take the names like Anees, Mezain, and Said, and you can 

add up all of the numbers that are in here. 

A. Right. You can add up the figures in the book.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

267

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Right. 

A. Right.

Q. And then you can take those figures and see if they match 

what is in your HLF Search No. 178, couldn't you?

A. Sure.

Q. And this document here actually has an HLDL number on it. 

True?

A. That is correct, yes.

Q. So this document came from I guess a different place than 

the totals document. Right?

A. No, not necessarily. This is -- I am sorry. The one you 

have on the screen is HLF Dallas.

Q. Right. 

A. Are we referring now to the Defendants' exhibit or the 

other one? 

Q. Maybe place wasn't the clearest term in the world. I am 

not talking about location. I am talking about this here 

obviously is a hard copy because it has HLDL. 

A. That is correct.

Q. So these don't have HLDL, so they were on some computer 

somewhere in the Dallas office.

A. Right.

Q. Okay. And you can take -- It would be possible to take 

the amounts in the chronological book or in this book and 

separate them by year. Wouldn't it be possible to do that?

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

268

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
A. Right.

Q. And it would also then be possible to see if they 

actually match this other number on a document that was found 

in a different physical location than these. 

A. Sure.

Q. Did you do that?

A. Did I match this with those? 

Q. Yes.

A. No.

Q. To see if it matched. 

A. No.

Q. Now, we have been through the numbers, and we saw this in 

this exhibit here. 

A. I am sorry, sir. Tell me what this exhibit means. What 

are we talking about? The Defendants' -- 

Q. Defendants' No. 1087. 

A. All right.

Q. And HLF Search No. 23. 

A. Okay.

Q. Okay? And we have been through this now for 20 or 30 

minutes going through the amounts. 

A. It seems longer.

Q. Okay. I know. And the later it gets the longer it is 

going to seem. 

A. Yes, sir.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

269

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Q. Would you agree with me that there was a spike in the 

fall of '96 and then it quickly reduced to these small 

amounts?

A. Yes.

Q. And would you agree with me that that is consistent 

now--you used that word yesterday, consistent--is that 

consistent with Deeb Anees being actually in the country of 

fall of '96 when Abdul Odeh was taking him out to lunch?

A. That is possible.

Q. And then after that, the rest of the money that came in 

would be consistent with either pledges or orphan application 

money or family sponsorships coming in. 

A. Probably, yes.

Q. And the phone call where Shukri is telling Odeh, "Don't 

take Deeb Anees' money," that phone call we discussed. 

A. Uh-huh, yes.

Q. Was in December of 1999. True?

A. Right.

Q. And basically the upshot of that phone call is Shukri is 

telling Abdul Odeh, "Don't mess with this guy because he 

speaks for Samah flatly or bluntly."

A. I am going to disagree with you on that. There were 

three or four reasons Mr. Baker gave for not dealing with him. 

Do you want me to run through some of those? 

Q. It seemed like Odeh just wasn't getting it, didn't it? 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

270

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
Let's just look at the conversation, then. There was never 

one time in this conversation where Shukri told Odeh to take 

Deeb Anees' money. Right?

A. To take it? 

Q. Yes. 

A. No, I don't think he said take it.

Q. Okay. He said every time, for whatever reason, do not 

accept the money that this guy is trying -- And basically Deeb 

Anees didn't have the money. Somebody withheld the money and 

was offering to give it to the Holy Land because Deeb Anees 

collected it in the name of Palestine. Right?

A. That is what I understood.

Q. And at no time did Shukri tell Odeh, "Okay. Take the 

money."

A. No, he didn't say that.

Q. And he gave -- I guess he said, "Deeb Anees is dishonest. 

Deeb Anees will hold us up for ransom." But one of the 

reasons was "Deeb Anees speaks flatly and publicly for Samah." 

A. That was one of the reasons, yes.

Q. Okay. So the upshot of this conversation is that Shukri 

is telling Deeb Anees or telling Abdul Odeh, "Do not take Deeb 

Anees' money." True?

A. Right.

MR. WESTFALL: May I have just a moment, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Sure.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

271

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
MR. WESTFALL: Pass the witness, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: All right. Let's go ahead and break 

here for the day. Be back at 9:00 in the morning. 

Please recall the instructions, and we will see you back 

at 9:00. 

(Whereupon, the jury left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: For your planning schedule for this 

week, we will plan on working all day tomorrow. Friday I have 

a commitment at 3:00, so what I am planning on doing is 

working through the noon hour again and breaking at 1:00 and 

we will break for the day. So tomorrow we will plan on 

working a little later again, Ms. Cadeddu, in case you need 

some notice. So that will be the plan.

MR. CLINE: And we will break at 1:00 on Friday? 

THE COURT: Yes. We will work straight through 

until 1:00 and break for the day. 

Anything we need to discuss that we need to be early for? 

MR. JONAS: The only issue are the remaining Defense 

exhibits.

THE COURT: Which ones are those? 

Everybody can be seated by the way.

MR. JONAS: I know there for sure No. 1340 and 1342 

I anticipate Mr. Dratel may try to admit, I am not sure if 

there are any others. 

MR. DRATEL: The witness is in the room. 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

272

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: Yes. 

MR. JONAS: Those are the only two I am aware of.

THE COURT: Those two, 1340 and 1342? 

MR. DRATEL: I think everything else is in evidence 

that I am using.

THE COURT: I think that is all we had left from 

this morning. But are you planning on offering those? 

MR. DRATEL: Probably. 

THE COURT: The objection is hearsay. Correct? I 

think that is what -- 

MR. JONAS: Hearsay and relevance. 

MR. DRATEL: The reason they are offered is twofold. 

One is state of mind, and the other that it is related to as 

well, Mr. Jacks has two specific questions of Agent 

Miranda--"Do you see any evidence that indicates that the 

Defendants' knowledge of the law or designation knowledge of 

the law," and "Are there any telephone conversations about 

that." And my position is that these conversations would show 

that Mr. El-Mezain is adamant about not letting this person 

Abu Nimer, who is his cousin but also a Hamas person, which is 

already in the record already, to get involved in the hospital 

Dar el-Salam that Holy Land is funding in Gaza. 

And so my point is that that is an answer to that 

question that the Government hasn't put in that we would like 

to put in to show that to impeach or show state of mind.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

273

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: And that is one of those conversations? 

MR. DRATEL: They are both. One is with his brother 

and one is with his parents.

THE COURT: But they are discussing that hospital? 

MR. DRATEL: Yes. And I would not be reading the 

entire conversation. There is other stuff -- I would be 

picking out parts. I will be reading because obviously it is 

in Arabic. 

THE COURT: And the part you are primarily 

interested in, if I understand you right, is where they are 

discussing this individual working at the hospital? 

MR. DRATEL: Yes, and the impact that would have on 

Holy Land and that -- 

THE COURT: Anybody want to address that? 

MR. JACKS: Well, Judge, that does not go to 

knowledge of statutes; certainly not to the specificity that 

we did. We presented evidence that they had copies of 

specific statutes, they being Ghassan Elashi. And having a 

discussion with your parents about someone is not -- I don't 

believe it is indicative of knowledge of legislation. 

And secondly, state of mind, as I said earlier, is a very 

specific exception where a Defendant is allowed to put his own 

out-of-court statements into evidence, and I don't believe 

that these conversations are the type of conversations that 

are intended or qualified to show state of mind -- The cases 

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

274

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
that I have examined talk about state of mind at a particular 

point in time, and for that reason I don't believe that they 

would come in for that purpose. 

And also they are not to counter the Government's 

evidence regarding what knowledge the Defendants had of 

legislation. Specifically, the conversations that we have 

admitted dealt with Shukri Abu Baker and Ghassan Elashi, and I 

don't believe there has been a conversation admitted yet that 

deals with Mohammad El-Mezain. 

MR. DRATEL: Your Honor, two things. One is that he 

asked a question about all Defendants. He didn't ask about 

Mr. Abu Baker and Mr. Elashi exclusively. 

But the other thing is what Mr. Jacks is talking about 

goes to weight and not admissibility. I ask the Court to 

review the conversations, see the state of mind, see the 

consciousness, the implications that having someone like that 

be involved with that hospital would have for Holy Land and 

its work in Palestine. And I think, as I said, it goes to 

weight and not admissibility in that regard.

THE COURT: All right. I will review those and then 

we will finish up, Agent Miranda. 

How long do you anticipate your cross? 

MR. DRATEL: I will try to keep it to an hour max. 

Some depends on the give and take and how long it takes. A 

lot of yes answers and it gets moving.

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

275

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
THE COURT: And Ms. Cadeddu, how long? 

MS. CADEDDU: Short, if at all.

THE COURT: Would you expect much redirect? 

MR. JACKS: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. So it looks like we will finish 

him sometime in the morning, then. And then are we still 

planning to getting to Mr. Levitt? 

MR. JONAS: Yes.

THE COURT: And I will need to rule on those 

objections, that motion. You filed a motion on that, so I 

will need to rule on that, then. 

Why don't go ahead and be here at 8:45 and we will try to 

address that issue with Doctor Levitt. 

We will see you in the morning.

(End of day.)

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

276

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A 

CORRECT TRANSCRIPT FROM THE RECORD OF 

PROCEEDINGS IN THE ABOVE-ENTITLED MATTER. 

I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT THE TRANSCRIPT FEES 

FORMAT COMPLY WITH THOSE PRESCRIBED BY THE 

COURT AND THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE 

UNITED STATES.

S/Shawn McRoberts 06/22/2009

__________________________DATE____________

SHAWN McROBERTS, RMR, CRR

FEDERAL OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR

Federal Official Court Reporter

277

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25