Fwd: [bangla-vision] Rep. Peter King's Prison Radicalization Hearing in Perspective

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <peacethrujustice@aol.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:26 AM
Subject: [bangla-vision] Rep. Peter King's Prison Radicalization Hearing in Perspective

 

  THE PEACE THRU JUSTICE FOUNDATION

11006 Veirs Mill Rd, STE L-15, PMB 298

Silver Spring, MD. 20902

 

RAJAB 1432 A.H.

(June 15, 2011)

 

Rep. Peter King's Prison Radicalization Hearing

in Perspective

 

Assalaamu Alaikum (Greetings of Peace):

 

This afternoon I responded to a request for an interview (to be aired later tonight) with Press TV, on today's "Radicalization in Prisons" hearing on Capitol Hill.

 

Last night I was forwarded a copy of Imam Talib Abdur-Rashid's excellent response to one of the hearing's witnesses, Patrick Dunleavy, and I requested permission to read this well formulated rebuttal in its entirety before the interview began. Thankfully I was granted permission to do so; and I'm pretty certain that it helped to clarify some questions on the mind of my interviewer, while also generating a few others.

 

What follows is Imam Talib's rebuttal, followed by a summary of my own perspective on the topic at hand.

 

MS

 

--------------------------------

 

THE THREAT OF MUSLIM-AMERICAN RADICALIZATION IN U.S. PRISONS

Written Testimony presented To the U.S. House of Representatives

Committee on Homeland Security

June 15, 2011

REBUTTAL OF PATRICK DUNLEAVY'S TESTIMONY BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE

Imam Al-Hajj Talib 'Abdur-Rashid

Vice-President of the Muslim Alliance in North America, President of the Islamic Leadership Council of NY,  imam of The Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood, and a volunteer, then employed Muslim Chaplain in New York prisons, since 1977

Honorable Congresspersons – This committee has chosen, as have others bodies before it, to examine the validity of claims of radicalization of Muslims in American prisons. Most expert testimony in similar hearings has identified rare examples of these phenomena – usually associated with street gangs – as in the classic case of Jam'iyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheed (the Assembly of Authentic Islam) or JIS, in New Folsom Prison. The same experts have cited no evidence of patterns of such criminal behavior cloaked in Islamic garb in the prisons, but all have warned of the possibility of it without certain precautions.

As you all know, the stated purpose of Congressional investigative hearings is the collection and analysis of information, particularly in the early stages of legislative policymaking. Such hearings rely upon expert testimony to aid the process of investigation. However since 9-11 well-meaning, and some not so well-meaning individuals and organizations have brought before the public, in various venues, individuals claiming expert knowledge of Islam and Muslims at home and abroad, whose assertions belie the authenticity of their claimed expertise.

 A case in point is Mr. Patrick Dunleavy, who has offered testimony during this hearing. Mr. Dunleavy is currently the object of a law suit for "libel and libel by implication," filed by two NY Muslim Chaplains whom he has maligned in his sensationalist articles for the tabloid New York Post. For someone who was once Deputy Inspector General of the New York State Department of Correctional Services' Criminal Intelligence Unit, Mr. Dunleavy's testimony today before this body is full of inaccuracies – just like his newspaper articles.

His claim to awareness of  "individuals and groups that subscribe to radical, and sometimes violent, ideology that have made sustained efforts over several decades to target inmates for indoctrination," and post-release radicalization programs, is both self-serving and self aggrandizing, as will be proven later.

With regards to his testimonial inaccuracies, Dunleavy began his exposition on the Darul-Islam Movement by referring to "a little known mosque in Brooklyn, New York, called Dawood" as home of the movement. The name of the mosque he meant to reference is Yasin Mosque – not Masjid Dawud or the Islamic Mission of America. By the time of the birth of the Dar Ul Islam Movement in 1962, Masjid Dawud was hardly "little known." It is the oldest mosque in New York City. The origins of the Darul-Islam Movement in Yasin Mosque have been well written about, and Mr. Dunleavy's error in this most basic fact is telling.

Continuing, Mr. Dunleavy refers to former Supervising Muslim Chaplain and Ministerial Program Coordinator Imam Warith Deen Umar, as one of ... "two of the first converts to Dar-Ul Islam who later became the head of Ministerial Services for the New York State." This is totally inaccurate. Imam Umar's background is a matter of public record, and he has never been a member of the Darul-Islam Movement.

The other Imam whom Dunleavy refers to as one "…of the first converts to Dar-Ul Islam," is Jamil Al Amin (the former H. Rap Brown). This too is inaccurate. The Darul-Islam movement and other Sunni Muslim organizations and congregations like The Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood, had been doing prison ministry work for years before Al-Amin came to learn about Islam. Undoubtedly, Dunleavy's mention of Imam Al-Amin as being hailed by El-Qaida is intended to bring shock value to his testimony.

One of the known tactics used by El-Qaida, a bonafide terrorist organization, is to use the name of African American activists and freedom fighters as a means for establishing a spurious solidarity with African American Muslims – who are the largest single group of indigenous Americans who have accepted Islam. A couple of years ago they did the same thing by invoking the name of Malcolm X, and their transparent tactics were roundly criticized and rejected throughout the nation by Muslims themselves.

Mr. Dunleavy conflates Muslim belief according to the Sunni order of Islamic orthodoxy with Salafi interpretations of the same in his use of the term "Sunni/Salafist ideology," identifying it as "…the dominant force in the prison mosques."  This conflagration misrepresents the nature of Islam as a religion and body of law and derived interpretations of Islamic doctrine.

As noted by the Pew Research Center, "An overwhelming majority of Muslims are Sunnis…" Thus it is only logical and natural that the majority of Muslim prisoners in America would share belief and practice with the mainstream global body of Muslims.

 

In her April 5 , 2007, testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment,  Janice Fedarcyk, the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's  Counterterrorism Division, Los Angeles Field Office, stated with regards to "Islamic Radicalization" – " Ideologies that radicalized inmates appear most often to embrace the Salafi form of Sunni Islam (including revisionist versions commonly known as 'prison Islam') and an extremist view of Shia Islam similar to that of the Government of Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah." While her characterizations are in need of elucidation, it is clear that a "form" of a faith is not the mainstream expression of it

 

Mr. Dunleavy's description of Muslims of Middle Eastern background, arrested for crimes of fraud and violence and incarcerated in New York prisons as, "…inspiring deference from the

Muslim inmates and the Muslim chaplains" is presented without evidence. This writer was the Muslim Chaplain at Sing-Sing prison from 1986 -1997 and this certainly was not the case there.

 

Dunleavy describes these prisoners as having access to the telephones of Muslim Chaplains for whom some of them worked (hinting that convicted Muslim criminals working for Muslim Chaplains is suspicious, even though he wouldn't say that about Christians or Jews), and claims this gave them "…the ability to call anywhere in the world without the call being subject to monitoring by prison security personnel."

 

Where did Investigator Dunleavy get this ridiculous information from? Prison telephones in Chaplain's offices are not wired for direct dialing. They go through a switch board where operators monitor all calls, who is making them, and to where, and calls cannot be made out of state, much less out of the country. One would think that Mr. Dunleavy would know that. Then again he worked in an office in Albany, NY – not in a prison.

 

Mr. Dunleavy does cite his source of information for his claim that, "In 1999, two years prior to 9/11, several law enforcement agencies received information regarding radical Islamist activity in the prison system," as informants -who are not always a reliable source of information, in prison or out.

 

He does mention the men convicted in the 2009 Riverdale Synagogue Bombing plot – those dubbed "the Newburgh Four"; James Cromitie, Laguerre Payen, David Williams, and Onta Williams. Contrary to Dunleavy's claim that the men were radicalized in prison, trial testimony cited no evidence of prison radicalization of them as Muslims.  The Former New York State Dept. of Corrections employee states correctly that the four men apparently did not know each other while they were incarcerated, and that they met each other after their release. His assertion however that they "…met while attending a local mosque connected to a prison ministry" is false.

 

As reported extensively in the media, the men met because they all lived in the poor Black section of Newburgh, and had engaged in petty crimes. Imam Salahuddin Muhammad - the Imam of the mosque mentioned by Mr. Dunleavy, has attested to the fact that while one of the men (Cromite, the alleged recruiter of the others) had occasionally attended the mosque, that he was not a regular worshipper there, and that the others scarcely worshiped there – if at all. The Imam has a law suit in against Mr. Dunleavy for the careless, sensationalist reporting that he has displayed here today.

 

Dunleavy mentions controversial statements attributed to Imam Warith Deen Umar, the former head of Ministerial Services for the New York State Department of Correctional Services. He mentions that the comments were made to a Wall Street Journal reporter. He does not mention that the comments were made after Umar had retired from correctional service, and that in his 25 year career no such inflammatory statements were made by him in the prison setting where he worked and trained others in ministerial work.  He retired with recognition for the excellence of his work.

 

Dunleavy's claim that "…to date, no Islamic organization has been appointed to fulfill the role of a verifiable ecclesiastical body that would certify Islamic clergy in the prisons of New York prior to hiring," and that "nor has there been any formal determination as to how a vetting process would take place, or what the standards of vetting would be" are less than truthful.

 

He mentions The Majlis Ash-Shura (Islamic Leadership Council) of New York as one such certifying body. However he seems to question the judgment of a body that would certify formerly incarcerated persons like Zulqarnain Abdu Shahid, who began working for the city of New York as a Muslim Chaplain in 1997 - a decade after his release from prison and demonstrated productivity in society. Does Mr. Dunleavy know that Imam Abdu Shahid earned a double Master's degree after his release from prison, and worked as a counselor for former addicts and homeless men? When convicted men and women dedicate themselves to God and use their faith as an anchor for reformation of their souls and their lives, they often return to prison as volunteers and sometimes Chaplains, to help others? Does Mr. Dunleavy believe in redemption? He only seems interested in Abdu Shahid's criminal past.

 

The "expert" has related in his testimony a sensationalist tabloid account of Abdu Shahid's 2010 arrest at his place of employment, the Manhattan House of Detention, in New York City, where he was Senior Chaplain and performed his duties in excellent fashion. Abdu Shahid, as Dunleavy relates, was arrested one day for allegedly "…attempting to smuggle dangerous contraband" (which were not box cutters by the way) into the facility.

 

Yet, Representative King's hand-picked "expert" does not mention that on two separate occasions a subsequently convened New York Grand Jury refused to indict Imam Abdu Shahid, and that the case was eventually thrown out of court. This is why the former Muslim Chaplain applied for reinstatement, and even now is in arbitration. How is it that Mr. Dunleavy, an investigative expert witness, is unaware of these facts?  

 

Mr. Dunleavy's description of the Islamic Leadership Council of New York as consisting of "…several Islamic clergymen with mosques in the greater New York area" is correct, as is his depiction of some of them as leaders of the Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA). This writer is one of them. Somehow though he  implies that the controversial shooting in Detroit, Michigan of MANA member Imam Luqman Abdullah, and the organization's continued support of Imam Jamil Al-Amin, render the Muslim Alliance in North America, and by extension The Islamic Leadership Council of New York, unsuitable as a source of  ecclesiastic endorsement.

 

This logic of guilt by association is problematic at best. In America there are all manner of political beliefs and perspectives, and people are entitled to them. Within the context of Correctional systems, what matters is whether or not those beliefs are propagated within prison walls. The record of both MANA and the Majlis Ash-Shura of NY is spotless in that regard, and the honorable efforts of MANA across the country, and of the Majlis in New York, towards advocacy for the poor, social upliftment, human reclamation and social justice, are noteworthy for their excellent contributions to American society. This is known by some members of Congress, perhaps even some present here today –even as it is unfortunately completely unknown to others.

 

Mr. Dunleavy's claim that "there is certainly no vetting of volunteers who provide religious instruction, and who, although not paid, wield considerable influence in the prison Muslim communities" is again, false.  The New York State Department of Corrections not only screens prison correspondence. Its Muslim Chaplains, who are themselves screened and vetted as are all religious workers and volunteers, monitor the inmate ranks for all instances of extremism- religious, political, or otherwise. They also preach against all forms of criminality – not just terrorism, and with good results.

Several months ago, when mail of an extremist nature directed towards Muslim inmates slipped into an upstate prison from the outside, the prisoners themselves brought the literature to the Muslim Chaplain, who promptly reported it to officials.

Mr. Dunleavy's final recommendations for initiatives for the prevention of the radicalization of Muslim inmates are not in and of themselves unusual, and they should be examined within the context of other such recommendations made throughout the years by different groups and authentic experts. The problem is not Mr. Dunleavy's recommendations, it is the inaccuracy of his facts and analysis, which do not help those sincerely concerned committee members to understand the problem, and make informed decisions about its solutions.

 

Yes, there are, in various parts of the country, Muslim criminals who have recruited  other Muslims in prison and out, for the continuation of criminal careers or activity, by any name. That should come as a surprise to no one because it is what criminals do. Recidivism is a reality within the American prison system, regardless of faith or none. However no religion is to be blamed for those who fail to save their souls through reformation of their character and lives. Muslim prisoners commit crimes in spite of Islam, not because of it.

 

A congressional investigation should inquire of prison officials, or experienced Muslim Chaplains, or the thousands of formerly incarcerated Muslim persons who have been truly reformed as a result of their embrace of an authentic world religion. Better still – why not ask their families and neighbors? This would give a more accurate picture of the problem and its solution, than political theatrics.

 

--------------------------------------

 

Well done, Imam Talib!

 

After reading the imam's statement in its entirety, I informed my interviewer that I was in full agreement with what he had to say, with only two small exceptions. While there are, no doubt, some "honorable" men and women in the U.S. Congress - in my humble opinion the majority are not! (And that's one of the reasons why this country is in such a sad, sad state.)

 

Secondly, I am compelled by conscience to disagree with the "El-Qaida, a bona fide terrorist organization" reference. I sincerely believe that we should avoid the blanket condemnations of other Muslims, and Muslim organizations (real or imagined). 

 

While there are without question men who go under the label "al-Qaeda" who have exceeded the Islamically imposed "limits" in warfare and are deserving of the badge "terrorist," ALL are no more deserving of this badge of dishonor than the entire U.S. Military. (And people around the world are well aware of some of the well documented and deliberate acts of terrorism committed by U.S. soldiers in different theaters of combat.)

 

The reality is that in today's world, any Muslim (individual or group) that resists U.S. foreign policy abroad is stamped with the label "Al-Qaeda." (For example, Sheikh Anwar Al-Awlaki has been branded as part of Al-Qaeda in Yemen - and he, an American-born citizen - has now been marked for an extra-judicial execution, as was Osama bin Laden.)

 

With that said, everything else the imam had to say was right on point! (in my humble opinion.)

 

I noted in the interview that today's hearing was nothing more than a continuation of a process of cultivating and manipulating fear in the America psyche (the Israelization of America). It is also an attempt to justify the horrific and unconstitutional conditions under which Muslim prisoners are being held in (and outside of) America.

 

I referenced the confinement conditions of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, Imam Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, Fahad Hashmi, the Duka brothers (from the Ft. Dix 5 case), and Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman (the blind, diabetic hafiz of Qur'an), as examples of the travesty being committed against Muslim political prisoners across the land. I also referenced the plight of Lynne Stewart (former attorney for Sheikh Omar) - and how I believed the punishment of this highly respected former New York-based human rights-oriented defense attorney (and grandmother) was designed to send a warning to other human rights oriented lawyers in America.

 

This was the substance of this afternoon's interview in a nutshell. We pray that ALLAH Almighty purifies and accepts our efforts in the cause of truth and justice, and in defense of the better of the two Americas!

 

In the struggle for peace thru justice,

 

El-Hajj Mauri' Saalakhan

__._,_.___

--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/