The New York Times warns readers of the possible implications of the trial that has begun involving the largest Muslim charity in the country. The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) case has been going on for many years and is extremely complex. In 2001 President Bush announced that HLF was being closed, accusing the charity of funding Hamas. The charity's designation has been challenged, along with the secret evidence used in the case, and many years worth of wiretaps. In February, defense attorneys found that summaries of government wiretap transcripts detailing Holy Land officials' conversations falsely attributed anti-Jewish comments to HLF leaders. A fundamental part of this case will be whether indirect ties can bring criminal prosecution, and if so, non-governmental international funders may decrease grants to troubled areas. The prosecution says the money was channeled through zakat (Arabic for charity) committees, yet none of the zakat committees have been designated. The case is being closely watched by a large number of charitable organizations, as well as Muslim-Americans, because its outcome might well help determine the line separating legitimate giving from the financing of banned organizations." The article references Chip Poncy's congressional testimony on May 11 which we have been critical of. Poncy noted that all 44 charities the government has designated as supporting terrorism were engaged in some legitimate charity work, and of those 44 six are either closed or under investigation in the U.S., though not one American charity itself has been convicted of supporting terrorism since the practice started in 2001. HLF says that about $5 million of its assets and charitable donations have been frozen by the Treasury Department. Kay Guinane of OMB Watch was quoted in the article; The Treasury Department has this 'complete taint' theory, said Kay Guinane of OMB Watch, a Washington group that advocates government transparency. If anyone in a charity is suspected of aiding a terrorist organization, Ms. Guinane said, the entire charity is deemed guilty. Other countries, like Britain, have managed to allow charities under suspicion to continue to deliver aid to the poor, she said, whereas the Treasury Department "disagrees with any approach that says you can separate the real charitable work from the alleged terrorist activity.