October 7 Victims Sue Students for Justice In Palestine and American Muslims for Palestine
“They intend to dismantle our domestic institutions. The Palestinian cause is just a warmup.”
As we have been relentlessly documenting, American college campuses are under direct assault by forces loyal to, aligned with, and seemingly maybe even a part of, Hamas:
- Professional Agitator Lisa Fithian Caught on Tape at Columbia With Pro-Hamas Mob
- UCLA Pro-Hamas Mob Issue List of Demands, Including Zip Ties and Gas Masks
- Pro-Hamas Mobs on Campus: Brown Considers Divesting From Israel, Police Breakdown Camps at Wisconsin
- UCLA Pro-Israel Demonstrators Counterattack After Pro-Hamas Mob Beat Jewish Protester Unconscious
When I say campuses are under direct assault, I mean it, as the four above posts were just from May 1st. There have been hundreds of others like them going back to October 7th, when Hamas butchered over 1,200 Israeli and American citizens, and others took 240 people hostage and injured over 6,000 people.
One question I have wondered about is how all of these campus “protests” are organized, who is funding them, who is in charge, and why do they all look and seem so similar?
Well, a new federal court lawsuit promises to provide answers and to hold those responsible accountable.
The lawsuit, filed by seven American and two Israeli citizens with the help of some major legal powerhouses, was filed May 1st in the federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. Lead law firm Greenberg Traurig issued a press release describing the legal action:
Representing a group of victims of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attack on Israel, global law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP, the National Jewish Advocacy Center, the Schoen Law Firm, and the Holtzman Vogel law firm have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern Division of Virginia, Alexandria Division, against AJP Educational Foundation Inc. a/k/a American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP).
The lawsuit, which seeks compensatory damages for nine American and Israeli victims of the attack in which Hamas killed 1,200 people and took 240 people hostage, alleges that AMP and NSJP work in the United States as collaborators and propagandists for Hamas. Hamas is a United States designated Foreign Terrorist Organization. The suit also notes that AMP and NSJP are merely the current version of several prior entities that were already determined by the U.S. government to be supporters of Hamas.
The federal court Complaint kicking the lawsuit off can be reviewed here, and takes advantage of the federal anti-terrorism statute, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 113B § 2331 et seq.
This statute allows that “[a]ny national of the United States injured…by reason of an act of international terrorism…may sue therefor in any appropriate [federal] district court of the United States and shall recover threefold the damages he or she sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney’s fees.”
The statute also states that “liability may be asserted as to any person who aids and abets, by knowingly providing substantial assistance, or who conspires with the person who committed such an act of international terrorism.”
The lawsuit asserts over 100 numbered paragraphs explaining exactly how AMP and NSJP aid and abet Hamas by providing moral and propaganda support for their actions and extending Hamas’ actions to the continental United States. In fact, one of the interesting angles the Complaint takes is that it alleges that AMP and NSJP are so joined at the hip with Hamas, and they coordinate each others’ activities so completely, that AMP and NSJP are effectively U.S. wings or branches of Hamas, conspiring with Hamas to continue terrorist acts: Hamas in Gaza, and AMP and NSJP in the U.S. The lawsuit claims that as a result, the U.S. plaintiffs can hold AMP and NSJP responsible for the damages the U.S. Plaintiffs suffered, even if those damages were caused directly by Hamas in Israel/Gaza.
Interestingly, the lawsuit also takes advantage of the federal Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, which states that “[t]he [federal] district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” The lawsuit alleges that the Israeli plaintiffs can take advantage of this statute because “Hamas committed acts prohibited by the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, which recognizes aiding and abetting liability, and Defendants participated in those acts as accomplices.”
So what exactly happened to the Plaintiffs that they are seeking damages for? Read on, from the Complaint:
- Plaintiff Maya Parizer (“Ms. Parizer”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, Ms. Parizer and her boyfriend survived Hamas’s terrorist attack at the Nova Festival, fleeing by car and dodging Hamas gunfire as they weaved through dead bodies on the roads. Consequently, Ms. Parizer suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to her attackers.
- Plaintiff Adin Gess (“Mr. Gess”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, his home on Kibbutz Holit was attacked. While Mr. Gess was not home, through a communal WhatsApp group chat, he witnessed his friends and community members brutally murdered after pleading for their lives. Mr. Gess was forced to evacuate his property and, because of Hamas’s ongoing targeting of Israeli civilians, has been unable to return home. Consequently, Mr. Gess lost his home, belongings, community, and way of life. He also suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering, made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to his attackers.
- Plaintiff Noach Newman (“Mr. Newman”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, Mr. Newman’s brother, David Yair Shalom Newman, also a U.S. citizen, was murdered when Hamas terrorists stormed the Nova Festival, indiscriminately butchering civilians. Consequently, Mr. Newman and his family suffered, and continue to suffer, unbearable trauma, mental anguish, and pain and suffering made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to his attackers.
- Plaintiff Natalie Sanandaji (“Ms. Sanandaji”) is a United States citizen and resident. On October 7, Ms. Sanandaji survived Hamas’s attacks at the Nova Festival and, after fleeing by car and on foot through Hamas gunfire for several hours, miraculously survived. Consequently, Ms. Sanandaji suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering, made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to her attackers.
- Plaintiff Yoni Diller (“Mr. Diller”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, Mr. Diller survived Hamas’s terrorist attack at the Nova Festival but witnessed the massacre of countless festival goers, including four of his close friends. Consequently, Mr. Diller suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering, made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to the very attackers who killed his friends.
- Plaintiff David Bromberg (“Mr. Bromberg”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, Mr. Bromberg survived Hamas’s terrorist attack at the Nova Festival, fleeing and subsequently hiding in the bushes outside Kibbutz Be’eri for more than twelve hours until he was rescued. Mr. Bromberg’s friends were murdered, and one is held hostage by Hamas. Consequently, Mr. Bromberg suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to his attackers.
- Plaintiff Lior Bar Or (“Mr. Bar Or”) is a United States citizen. On October 7, Mr. Bar Or survived Hamas’s terrorist attack at the Nova Festival, evading gunfire and hand grenades and escaping after Hamas set fire to the shelter he was hiding inside. Four of Mr. Bar Or’s friends were murdered. Consequently, Mr. Bar Or suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to his attackers.
- Plaintiff Ariel Ein-Gal (“Mr. Ein-Gal”) is an Israeli citizen. On October 7, Mr. Ein-Gal and his friends were asleep on Zikim Beach when they were awoken by Hamas terrorists infiltrating the Israeli coast. Mr. Ein-Gal was forced to flee under Hamas gunfire and hide for four hours. When he tried to escape, Hamas terrorists fired dozens of rounds at him, but he narrowly survived. Consequently, Mr. Ein-Gal suffered mental anguish and pain and suffering, made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to his attackers.
- Plaintiff Hagar Almog (“Ms. Almog”) is an Israeli citizen. On October 7, her home on Kibbutz Holit was attacked. While Ms. Almog and her family were not home, through a communal WhatsApp group chat, they witnessed their friends and community members brutally murdered after pleading for their lives. Ms. Almog was forced to evacuate her property and, because of Hamas’s ongoing targeting of Israeli civilians, has been unable to return home. Consequently, Ms. Almog has lost her home, belongings, community, and way of life. She also suffered, and continues to suffer, mental anguish and pain and suffering, made worse by Defendants’ provision of material support to her attackers.
The Complaint also goes into great detail about the alleged coordination between Hamas, AMP, and NSJP that occurred even before October 7, 2023, and allegedly continues to this day:
- Defendants provide ongoing, continuous, systematic, and material support for Hamas and its affiliates…by operating and managing Hamas’s mouthpiece for North America, dedicated to sanitizing Hamas’s atrocities and normalizing its terrorism.
- AMP’s message to college campuses through NSJP is unambiguous: violent attacks are a justified response to Zionism as an idea, to Israel as an entity, and to Zionists as people. The purpose of this messaging is not only to justify the terrorism of Hamas and its affiliates in Gaza within Western academia and society at large but also to establish an environment where violence against Jews and anyone else associated with Israel could be construed as acceptable, justified, or even heroic.
- Within hours of Hamas’s October 7 attack, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh called for Hamas’s “resistance abroad” to “join this battle any way they can.” He also stated, “[l]et us be partners in creating this great victory, inshallah.” Three days later, Mr. Mashal—the leader of
Hamas’s diaspora office…—called on Hamas’s global supporters to be “part of this battle.” - Within hours of the attack, the language of the Hamas-authored disinformation campaign appeared in NSJP propaganda across social media and on college campuses. Exactly as AMP intended, NSJP acted as Hamas’s loyal foot soldiers for Hamas’s propaganda battle on university campuses across the United States. The next day, NSJP released its Day of Resistance Toolkit (“NSJP Toolkit”) across more than 300 American college campuses and on the internet.
- The NSJP Toolkit…compels Defendants, their members, and their allies to provide “real” support to Hamas not only through their arguments and rhetoric, but also through “confrontation” that includes, among other things, “armed struggle” and violence.
- NSJP [has] confirmed it was “PART of this movement, not in solidarity with this movement.”…There is no ambiguity: Defendants identify themselves as not just aligned with Hamas’s terrorist activities, but “PART of” them.
- The NSJP Toolkit is not a rhetorical tool. It is an instruction manual.
- The NSJP Toolkit directed Defendants’ members and allies “to engage in meaningful actions that go beyond symbolism and rhetoric” to include all potential forms of resistance, including “armed struggle” and violence.
- In short, Defendants act as Hamas’s public relations division and recruit domestic foot soldiers not only to disseminate Hamas’s propaganda but also to foment violence, chaos, and fear across the United States to intimidate citizens and coerce change in American policy. This is all in support Hamas’s short and long-term goals for its international terrorist activities.
Scary stuff, indeed.
Let’s hope Plaintiffs prevail in this civil case and AMP and NSJP are found liable for the damages Plaintiffs have undoubtedly suffered.
Jonathan Turley has a great X thread explaining how this works:
What is notable is that the students and others at UCLA wanted to be arrested. They were given repeated opportunities (including just before the arrests) to walk away. Threatening their graduation is not a deterrent. This is their graduation after years of activist education…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 2, 2024
…I have supported the right to free speech of pro-Palestinian groups, but that right ends where the criminal code begins. One only needs to look at the damage to these buildings to see who has control of these campuses…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 2, 2024
…These students did not suddenly conclude that they could control these spaces. They have spent years being educated by faculty on such activisms, including by UCLA "activists-in-residence." https://t.co/mNhj3Ndibm
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 2, 2024
More insightful commentary:
Listen to who is funding the protests against America and Israel that are shutting down the education and interfering with graduation of students.
Soros' foundation gave $700K, others gave $500K. There is a lot of "dark money" funding this.pic.twitter.com/lmsR3VgR4e
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) May 2, 2024
And as Laura Powell states below: “One of the spokespeople for the UCLA protesters explains their end goal is for ‘more than divestment.’ She says, ‘Given that the University of California is founded on colonialism, it’s inherently a violent institution.’ She argues the UC system is linked to both foreign wars and domestic police brutality and demands this be addressed.
She’s saying the quiet part out loud. They intend to dismantle our domestic institutions. The Palestinian cause is just a warmup.”
One of the spokespeople for the UCLA protesters explains their end goal is for “more than divestment.” She says, “Given that the University of California is founded on colonialism, it’s inherently a violent institution.” She argues the UC system is linked to both foreign wars and… pic.twitter.com/bFw0IX7oHp
— Laura Powell (@LauraPowellEsq) May 2, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Wonder where some of the money comes from?
During the 2018 CAMP fire and evacuation I did volunteer work at the unofficial Walmart parking lot refugee camp.
The political-organizing arm of Antifa showed up with their core Bay Area social justice crew (non-violent). Another antifa group from Oregon were also present (enforcer crew).
Long story short, they held large public meetings on the college campus and eventually co-opted the college socialist student’s official charity group named “North Valley Mutual Aid”. They also co-opted/recruited a local leftist boomer group.
I talked to the BA leader a number of times. He freely admitted untraceable money came straight from wealthy Silicon Valley types. He was very intelligent and charismatic – his purposefully facile rhetoric easily captivated young minds.
The reason this backstory matters; I noticed a flyer/poster at the Columbia encampment and it was produced by a “Mutual Aid” group. I should’ve taken a screenshot, but didn’t.
This is the co-opted socialist group website. The original website was wholly dedicated to the CAMP wildfire. Scroll to the bottom and it’s all Gaza agitprop.
https://mutualaiddisasterrelief.org/we-are-rooted-here-north-valley-mutual-aid/
Robert Conquest’s second law of politics:
“The behavior of any organization can best be understood by assuming that it is controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies.”
This is a great start, but there are .many more Muslim fronts, all with the same goals.
Also, all those with nonprofit status must be decertified, followed by being categorized as terrorist organizations.
Last, as we have seen in Israel, Mosques are used for far more than worship, they will need to be closely monitored for inappropriate activity.
If they’re domestic they can’t be “categorized as terrorist organizations” because there is no such category. But if they are proven to have given a designated foreign terrorist organization material support (rather than merely moral support) then they can be prosecuted. That’s what happened to the Holy Land Foundation.
“if they are proven to have given a designated foreign terrorist organization material support (rather than merely moral support) then they can be prosecuted.”
That’s useful to know.
“If they’re domestic they can’t be “categorized as terrorist organizations””
For some value of “categorized” by some particular authorities. Others seem a bit more flexible.
I recall both news reports and some in-Congress crowing testimony about declaring domestic wrongthink groups “terrorists.” Some unkind things have been said about traditional Catholics, using the t-word, and I do believe the Catholic church counts as an organization.
It would be useful to know under which law, what authorities are limited to what kind of categorizing of domestic organizations as “terrorist” only for material support to designated (By who on that, too.) foreign terrorist organizations. Then there’s everybody else.
It was twaddle. There is no such designation in law.
Not quite. There was an FBI investigation of an individual suspected of terrorist acts, who happened to be a sedevecantist or some such thing, so the FBI reached out to members of his church to ask about him; then some bright spark at the FBI wrote a memo suggesting that while they were about it they should look into such groups to see if there are any more terrorists among them, and that memo was leaked and was quickly squashed.
The point is that “designated foreign terrorist organization” is not just a bad name, it’s an actual legal term. There is a statute authorizing the Secretary of State to designate foreign organizations as such, and once he does so it becomes a crime to give them material support. And yes, Hamas is one such organization.
But “foreign” is part of the definition in the statute. There is no corresponding statute for domestic organizations, so legally there is no such thing as a domestic terrorist organization. A person can commit terrorist acts, and be prosecuted for them. And conspiracy to commit such acts is a crime just as is conspiracy to commit any other crime. But there is no concept that an organization can be categorized as terrorist, and it becomes illegal to give it material support. You can legally donate money to Earth First, even knowing that its members commit terrorist acts, so long as you don’t say something stupid like “Here’s some cash; go spike some more trees for me”.
“It was twaddle. There is no such designation in law.”
Who cares?
Whenever Garland hangs the label of “domestic terrorist” on somebody, the mere lack of a law doesn’t seem to deter the subsequent FBI harassment of them and their families.
“I recall both news reports and some in-Congress crowing testimony about declaring domestic wrongthink groups “terrorists.”
It was twaddle. There is no such designation in law.”
You mean “in law” say that. Maybe which law, executed by whom.
See, you do know exactly the point, or you wouldn’t say “in law.” There’s plenty of “categorization” as “terrorists” and “terrorist organizations”, including by aspects of the government and including consequences.
Meanwhile $5 will get you $10 I can find a quote of at least one of our federal law enforcement officials talking about “designating” — that’s another term for placing in a category — some domestic group as “terrorist.” Finding that would be easy, so I only want $5.
“Not quite. There was an FBI investigation of an individual suspected of terrorist acts…”
Not quite how you
white washeddescribed it.“…then some bright spark at the FBI wrote a memo”
What was the guy’s title again? The signature it went out over? I don’t recall the diminutive “bright spark.” And they did a bit more than “wrote” — it was distributed widely within the FBI, as a form of guidance. Spin harder.
“…suggesting…”
A bit more active than “suggesting.” You read the thing, right? Meanwhile, in monitoring-world, the fact of a group being called out for attention, becomes later an indication that they are deserving of additional attention. But, you know that.
“…that memo was leaked and was quickly squashed.”
You left out “under congressional pressure, when they found out.” The only inside the lines thing the FBI did on this was someone leaked that memo when they saw it.
The law cares. The courts care. If there is no such designation then it can’t be made a crime to give such a group material support. Which is the entire purpose and only function of that designation in the first place.
The entire concept exists only in law. If there is no such designation in the law, then there is no such designation at all. A designation as a “foreign terrorist organization” is not a bad name, it is a legal category, and has a legal definition. If something doesn’t fit the definition, then it isn’t one and nobody can make it one.
You may find such a quote; there were certainly Republicans demanding such a thing. But as I said, it was pure twaddle. There is no such designation, therefore nobody can make one, and anyone who said they would, or called on someone else to, was talking through their hat.
Yes, exactly as I described it.
What are you talking about? There was no signature. The memo was written by some junior person in the Richmond office, and circulated to other FBI offices. They had caught an actual terrorist who had attended a Society of St Pius X church, and the author wondered whether there might be more terrorists lurking in or around such organizations, and suggested reaching out to the organizations to help find them. That’s all.
It was not distributed “as a form of guidance”; it was distributed as possibly useful information.
Yes, I did. Did you? Suggesting is all it did. Suggesting and speculating.
It was squashed when it was brought to leadership’s attention. They could hardly have acted before becoming aware of it. Would the same thing have happened without congressional pressure? It’s impossible to know.
“But if they are proven to have given a designated foreign terrorist organization material support (rather than merely moral support) then they can be prosecuted.”
I do so look forward to the FBI scanning transactions from everyone in the neighborhood of these protests, looking for money headed to Hamas Hamas remains “designated” a “foreign terrorist organization” per the US State Department, last I knew.
Yes, it is. Giving it anything, including services, is a crime, and people do go to prison for it. The court have said even if those services are made up of speech it’s still a crime, e.g. acting as an official spokesman for Hamas, which is something people normally get paid for, counts as providing it with a service. But deciding on your own to parrot Hamas propaganda is protected speech.
Well, see, we do agree occasionally.
So, looking forward to those prosecutions in 3… 2… 1…
The prosecutions will happen as soon as evidence is found that someone has done so. This is something the current DOJ does prosecute with full diligence, whenever it can make a case. So if these plaintiffs manage to prove their case, not only will they be entitled to damages, they can forward the evidence to DOJ, which will bring charges. The problem is finding the evidence in the first place.
For instance 20 years ago the DOJ proved its case against the Holy Land Foundation and got a conviction, but could not prove CAIR was doing the same thing, which is why it is still going strong.
One of the UC Santa Cruz organizers *admitted* that SJP is being run from Palestine:
“‘Our SJP local is answering a call which came down from the SJP National, which came down from organizers in Palestine and in the Palestinian Youth Movement,’ said Dax, a participant and media representative for the encampment.”
https://cityonahillpress.com/2024/05/02/ucsc-sjp-launches-gaza-solidarity-encampment-in-quarry/
If anything else, the discovery process in this should prove most interesting. However, given the absolute moral corruption, filth and pollution that our media represents today, I would doubt that any of it sees the light of day.
This lawsuit won’t make a damn bit of difference: every single American institution and agency has been corrupted and there’s no chance of ever bringing the financiers to justice.
It all stops when those who financed, fomented, and participated in this destruction are given the “Augusto Pinochet helicopter ride.”
The situation we now face is indeed that dire.
I agree our situation is precarious, but that we must carry on to the bitter end, one way or another.
The plaintiffs have a tough job ahead of them. They have to overcome the first amendment’s absolute protection of all “mere advocacy”, no matter what the cause is.
In order to succeed it’s not enough to show that what the protesters are doing encourages Hamas and helps it spread its message. They have to prove that the protests are actually being coordinated with Hamas itself.
The fact that Hamas urged people around the world to express their support, and the protesters responded, is not enough.
Nor is the fact that ‘NSJP [has] confirmed it was “PART of this movement”‘. That alone is merely a statement of moral identification. I can say that I am part of the movement to support Israel, but that doesn’t make me actually part of the Israeli government, or liable for anything the Israeli government may do.
“‘Our SJP local is answering a call which came down from the SJP National, which came down from organizers in Palestine and in the Palestinian Youth Movement,’
This doesn’t prove anything either. The fact that the organizers are located in “Palestine” is irrelevant; the plaintiffs must show that they are literally acting for and on behalf of Hamas. Not just with its blessing, but at its direct and personal direction.
I hope they succeed in proving all this. But unfortunately the odds are very much against them.
By now the docket clerk has assigned this case to a specific UD District Court Judge.
We will know a lot when we find out who that is. A lot.
Typo. “US” not “UD”. I know there are folks who read this blog that are nit-pickers.
Leave a Comment