How RICO Can Be Used To Bring Down Our Two Greatest Enemies; the Left and the Islamofascists

First, let's look at how the corporation Sodexo is using RICO to fight back against the Service Employees International Union:

In a press release issued Thursday, Sodexo USA announced that the company has filed a civil lawsuit against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act., accusing the union of engaging in an “illegal campaign of extortion.”  The lawsuit representing Sodexo is Hunton & Williams – the same firm SEIU and its allies have accused of launching a “dirty tricks” campaign against them in retaliation for their anti-Chamber of Commerce campaigns.

One of the largest food services and facilities management companies in the world, Sodexo is the provider of choice for most schools, universities, companies, hotels, prisons and other facilities that outsource their cafeteria and food catering operations, and for those that outsource industrial cleaning services.  SEIU has been incessantly battering Sodexo since 2007, in its desire to unionize some of its nearly 400,000 employees, many of them hotel and food service workers.  Exacerbating the tensions was a longstanding turf war between SEIU and UNITE HERE over hotel and casino workers, which often spilled over into SEIU’s antics prior to the settlement the warring unions reached this past summer.
Sodexo USA has filed the lawsuit in an attempt to halt the over-the-top harassment from SEIU, alleging that many of the acts are very serious and outside of the normal realm of union tactics, including acts of ” SEIU blackmail, vandalism, trespass, harassment, and lobbying law violations designed to steer business away from Sodexo USA and harm the company.” [emphasis added]
Aside from some of its usual corporate smear campaign tactics, certain organizers in the SEIU subscribed to some especially nasty, and frankly repulsive, tactics:

The complaint alleges that the SEIU, in face to face meetings, threatened Sodexo USA’s executives that it would harm Sodexo USA’s business unless they gave in to the union, and then carried out its threats through egregious behavior, including:

• throwing plastic roaches onto food being served by Sodexo USA at a high profile event;
• scaring hospital patients by insinuating that Sodexo USA food contained bugs, rat droppings, mold and flies;
• lying to interfere with Sodexo USA business and sneaking into elementary schools to avoid security;
• violating lobbying laws to steer business away from Sodexo USA, even at the risk of costing Sodexo USA employees their jobs; and
• harassing Sodexo USA employees by threatening to accuse them of wrongdoing.

 So, what precisely is RICO?

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO Act or RICO) is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.

There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." The plaintiff must prove the existence of a "criminal enterprise." The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court.[5]

Both the federal and civil components allow for the recovery of treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

Although its primary intent was to deal with organized crime, Blakey said that Congress never intended it to merely apply to the Mob. He once told Time, "We don't want one set of rules for people whose collars are blue or whose names end in vowels, and another set for those whose collars are white and have Ivy League diplomas."[4]

Under the law, racketeering activity means:

* Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
* Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
* Embezzlement of union funds;
* Bankruptcy fraud or securities fraud;
* Drug trafficking; long-term and elaborate drug networks can also be prosecuted using the Continuing Criminal Enterprise Statute;
* Money laundering and related offenses;
* Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
* Acts of terrorism.

In the case of Sodexo, it seems the specific charges giving rise to the use of the RICO Statute would be Extortion and Fraud (having made Fraudulent claims against Sodexo's business.

This is all great.

But, I am even more interested in seeing Prosecuting Attorneys use RICO to bring down whole swaths of Mosques in the United States. If my sources are correct, nearly 80% of the Mosques in the United States are funded, at least in part, by Saudi Arabia. (Here's some information on the Saudi-funding of Wahabbist education and Mosques in the United States.)

So, what's the point? Why do I bring up the Saudi-funding of Mosques? What does this have to do with using RICO to prosecute Radical Islamists?

Simply this, I believe it is possible that one could show Criminal Conspiracy involving whole groups of Saudi-funded Mosques. Once again, this depends on whether one can prove that Imams and Directors of Mosques knowingly accept money gained from Organized Criminal Activity as Zakat. It would also help if one could prove that some of that Zakat was then used to promote terrorist organizations (such as the Holy Land Foundation), or for aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country.

Does that sound far-fetched? Perhaps. Imams knowingly involved in Criminal Activity?

What do you think?

Have we not seen examples already, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here?

And, most of all, what about THIS?


TODAY, WE HAVE GREAT NEWS. PROOF THAT OUR ISLAMOFASCIST ENEMIES ARE WILLING TO CONSPIRE, AS A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION, TO PROMOTE ISLAM.

The proof comes from Islam Online, where a distinction is made between stolen money and money which is gotten through "unlawful means" such as gambling:

Question: Respected scholars, as-salamu `alaykum.

Our mosque was severely damaged by fire, and we needed to collect money to rebuild it. Many people have donated. The problem is that some substantial donations were received from people who are known to be drug dealers. Now, what should we do with that money?

Answer:
Dear questioner, thanks for your question. We earnestly implore Allah to guide us all to the best way.

It should be stated first of all that Islam forbids all kinds of unlawful means of gaining wealth. It urges people to work and be active and get money through lawful ways. As for the ill-gotten wealth, the ruling on it depends on it source.

... stolen wealth should not be used to build a mosque. If the people who are building the mosque know that the source of the wealth is stolen money, then they should not accept the wealth. Likewise, the misappropriated land should not be used to build a mosque. If the people building the mosque are given a piece of land, which they are sure about its being extorted from its right owners, they should not build the mosque upon that land.
As for the second kind of unlawful wealth (i.e., wealth that was earned through unlawful means, like the sale of pork, interest earnings, or gambling) this money is only unlawful to the person who actually earned it through unlawful means. It is lawful to other parties who later come to receive it.

In other words, if the money is outright stolen, then it is not to be used. But, if it is acquired in unlawful ways, such as gambling, then it is permitted for a Mosque to accept such funds as Zakat (Islamic Charity). Islam Online does not answer the question directly. But, because the questioner asked if it was ok to use money from drug dealers, then the implication is that, indeed, it is ok to use money from Drug Dealing to build Mosques.

We know that Mosques have been caught preaching Jihad.

If a Mosque is built with drug money, and it preaches Jihad, and it receives a large portion of it's initial funding from Saudi Arabia, then it could be shown that it is part of a ring of Mosques, tied together through Saudi-funding, which constitute an Organized Criminal Enterprise.

UPDATE: There is precedence for Western governments going after religions as, essentially, Racketeering Organizations. Check out this article on how France is handling Scientology:

The German domestic intelligence service keeps the Church of Scientology under surveillance as a potential threat to democracy. Belgian prosecutors have been building a blackmail case against it for 11 years.

Now the French have taken a more forceful step.

In a decision that could reverberate across Europe, a court in Paris Tuesday convicted the French branch of the church of “organized fraud” and said it had systematically tricked recruits out of their savings.
The two flagship Scientology outposts in Paris, a bookstore and an information centre, were ordered to pay €600,000 in fines. The head of the church in France was given a two-year suspended sentence for fraud and fined €30,000.
However, the court allowed the church to keep operating in France. In May, when the trial began, prosecutors asked that it be shut down as a criminal enterprise, only to discover that the law that might have allowed its banishment had just been deleted as part of an overhaul of the penal code.
The judges said they did not order the church offices closed because they did not want to drive Scientologists underground, where they could not be monitored.
They also said a paid notice of the church's conviction would be published in Time magazine and the International Herald Tribune so that news of the church's conviction would spread beyond France.
“The court told the Scientologists, in essence, to be very, very careful, because if you continue to use the same methods of harassment, you won't escape next time,” said Olivier Morice, the lawyer for the civil plaintiffs in the case.