Sunday, October 21, 2012

Finding Plots Where No Plots Exist: The Fort Dix 5

After 9/11, U.S. government authorities recognized the public relations importance of being able to show the public that they had their hands on "terrorists" who had an intention to commit illegal acts -- before those acts actually occurred. As a result, they have employed agents provocateur to try to convince Muslim men to do or say things that can be characterized as part of a "plot" to engage in terrorism.

A quintessential example of this type of case is the Fort Dix 5. Today, two of the defendants in that case are in Marion or Terre Haute.

"Victims of America's Dirty Wars" explains this phenomenon further:
The government has made extensive use of agents provocateur to create contrived crimes with which to entrap innocent or unaware Muslims who have no interest in terrorism. Sometimes these agents provocateur have targeted certain individuals for preemptive prosecution because of information obtained by the government on a tip or through secret surveillance. On other occasions, these agents have simply hung around mosques, offering money and friendship to anyone who would join them in jihad. The cases below illustrate both kinds of tactics.

Agents provocateur are trained to manipulate people, find their weak spots, and offer large sums of money to manufacture crimes. They pursue their targets for years, sometimes posing as friends––sometimes even moving into their homes––in order to secretly tape-record enough information to manufacture cases of material support for terrorism. Hundreds of people, mostly Muslims, who had no interest or involvement in terrorism have been convicted of thought crimes or contrived charges manufactured by the FBI and given sentences of many decades or life in prison.8 Significantly, in none of these cases was anyone killed or injured, nor was any property damaged or money stolen. The FBI claims it anticipated and prevented these crimes before they happened, but it is unlikely that most of the crimes would have occurred, and in any event anticipation of criminal activity is not a valid basis to prosecute someone. Many defendants are now serving long prison terms essentially for exercising rights guaranteed to other Americans under the Constitution.
More more information on this type of case, see Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the “Homegrown Threat” in the U.S., a May 2011 report of the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice of New York University School of Law, which focuses on three agent provocateur cases: the Newburgh 4, the Fort Dix 5, and the case of Matin Siraj.


THE FORT DIX 5 CASE

As further explained in "Victims of America's Dirty Wars":
In January 2006, a store clerk in South Jersey, New Jersey gave the FBI a videotape of some young men riding horseback, having a pillow fight, shooting guns at a firing range, and shouting Islamic phrases. The men––brothers Eljvir, Dritan, and Shain Duka, along with Mohammed Shnewer and Serdar Tatar––had given the videotape of their family vacation together in the Pocono Mountains to the clerk to duplicate.

The FBI decided that the group looked suspicious and sent in two agents provocateur to try to entrap the young men in criminal activity. The agents showered attention on the young men and used money and manipulation to try to create an interest in jihad. They asked the young men to download jihadist videos, taunted them for their lack of resolve to take action, and followed them around with hidden tape recorders to record every word spoken. When the other youths were not present, one agent talked in general terms with one of the targets, Mohammed Shnewer, about how someone could theoretically attack the Fort Dix army base. In response to the agent’s repeated demands, another defendant, Serdar Tatar, gave the agent a map of the Fort Dix base, which his father used to deliver pizza there. (Tatar thought that the agent was suspicious and reported him to the local police, who told him not to worry about it.) The other agent then persuaded the Duka brothers to buy some guns, supposedly for target shooting in the Poconos.

At this point, the whole group was arrested and charged with conspiracy to attack Fort Dix, even though no plans had been made to attack anything and most of the defendants had never had any conversation about any plan to attack Fort Dix. The government claimed that the men had formed a conspiracy to commit jihad, and so under the law each member of the conspiracy was responsible for the acts of every other member, even if he knew nothing about the acts. The Dukas were responsible for Shnewer’s conversations with the agent about how to theoretically attack Fort Dix, although they knew nothing about it; Shnewer was responsible for the Dukas buying guns, even though he knew nothing about it. And both the Dukas and Shnewers were responsible for the map of Fort Dix that Tatar had obtained from his father. This illustrates a typical government strategy, which is to try and divide defendants by using them differently, in the hope they will attack each other at trial. Since no one person knows the whole “plot,” anything bad becomes “foreseeable” and is therefore attributable to all members. Thus the “plot” becomes a “conspiracy” and ramps up the charges against all of them. The five men were eventually convicted and sentenced to life plus thirty years (i.e., their sentences will expire thirty years after they have died.)

The young men who became the Fort Dix 5 were foreign-born, but they had grown up American. Three of them ran a roofing business together. All of the defendants are vouched for by a community of supporters who know the character of the defendants, know that they are not terrorists, and know that they had no intention of hurting anyone. They are men with families, people who love America, people who support their communities. They had everything to lose and little, if anything, to gain by becoming involved in the FBI plot.
More information on the Fort Dix 5 can be found on the Project SALAM website: Fort Dix 5 - Five Innocent Men May be Sentenced to Life+ in Prison for the "Crime" of Being Muslim Men.

INCARCERATION AT MARION AND TERRE HAUTE

Currently, two of the Fort Dix 5 prisoners are held at either Marion and Terre Haute.

Marion

Mohammed Ibrahim Shnewer was sentenced to life in prison and is being held in the CMU at Marion.

Terre Haute

Eljvir Duka was sentenced to life in prison and is being held at the Terre Haute FCI.

(The three other defendants in the case are being held elsewhere: Florence, CO, Admax USP (Dritan Duka - life sentence, Shain Duka - life plus) and Tuscon USP (Serdar Tatar - 33 yrs).


WHAT YOU CAN DO

Write to the two Fort Dix 5 prisoners being held at Marion and Terre Haute:

Mohammed Ibrahim Shnewer
61283-066
U.S. Penitentiary
P.O. Box 1000
Marion IL, 62959

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.






Eljvir Duka
61282-066
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.

SALAM Illinois Outreach Coordinator: Joe Scarry




More information at:
Read letters written by members of the Duka family about their sons and the others in the Fort Dix 5 on the Project SALAM website.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

A Case in Point: The Holy Land Foundation Case

The post-9/11 persecution of Muslims is exemplified by the Holy Land Foundation Case, and today four of the defendants in that case are in Marion or Terre Haute.

The Holy Land Foundation Case belongs to a category of charity financing cases. As explained in "Victims of America's Dirty Wars":
Immediately after 9/11, the U.S. government moved to close down virtually all Muslim charities and both freeze and seize their assets, supposedly to prevent money raised in the U.S. from being used to finance terrorism abroad. The U.S. also preemptively charged the directors of several charities with financing terrorism, even when no money actually went to finance terror.

When charities tried to challenge the claim that they were financing terror, they were often met with a claim by the government that the information upon which the seizure was based was classified. According to the government, the charities were entitled to a due process hearing about the basis of the evidence for the seizure, but since the evidence was classified and the charity was not allow to see it, there would be no point in actually holding such a hearing.


THE HOLY LAND FOUNDATION CASE

As further explained in "Victims of America's Dirty Wars":
The Holy Land Foundation, formed in 1989 to provide relief to the Palestinian people impoverished by the repression of the Israeli government, eventually became the largest Muslim charity in the U.S. In 2007, the Bush Administration brought criminal charges against six of the directors of the Holy Land Foundation for essentially sending money (between 1995 and 2001) to zakat (charitable) committees in Palestine that were supposedly controlled by Hamas, after Hamas was declared to be a terrorist organization. The first trial resulted in one defendant being acquitted and a hung jury for the remaining five defendants. A second trial resulted in those five defendants being convicted of providing material support for Hamas.

The five defendants were given very harsh sentences. Shukri Abu-Baker and Ghassan Elashi each received sixty-five years in prison; [Mohammad] El-Mazain received fifteen years. Two brothers, Mufid Abdulqader and Abdulrahman Odeh, received twenty and fifteen years respectively. All have families who are devastated by this criminalization of men who devoted their lives to relieving the suffering of the Palestinians.

During the trial, it was conceded by the government that the defendants had not encouraged or engaged in any violence, and that the money sent by the Holy Land Foundation had been used only to provide basic needs and services, such as building schools and hospitals for truly impoverished people. None of the money went to finance terrorism directly. But the government argued that since some Holy Land money went to zakat committees controlled by Hamas, the charity’s money had helped enhance the prestige of Hamas and allowed it to divert money from its charitable and social activities into promoting terrorism.

The defendants argued that the zakat committees were the only practical way to get money to people who needed it. Other organizations, including UN agencies and USAID, used the same zakat committees for the same reasons. If Hamas controlled some of the zakat committees, it was because Hamas was, in effect, the government of Palestine at that time, as shown by Hamas’s victory in the elections of 2006. The government’s successful prosecution of the Holy Land defendants meant that in effect, almost any support for the Palestinian people, no matter how compassionate the motive, could be prosecuted as support for terrorism as long as Hamas was the government.
More information on the Holy Land Foundation Case can be found on the website: Free the Holy Land Five: Restore Our Freedom to Give.

Ghassan Elashi wrote from prison about the case:
The Foundation was the largest Muslim charity in the U.S.  Just prior to its closing on December 4, 2001, by President Bush it had an annual budget of $13,000,000.  Meanwhile there are tens of charities in the U.S. providing support to illegal Israeli settlement built on stolen Palestinian lands. The closure and prosecution of the HLF and its offices, including me, is a reflection of the biased U.S. policy against the Palestinians and the unconditional support for Israel.

INCARCERATION AT MARION AND TERRE HAUTE

Currently, four of the five Holy Land Foundation Case prisoners are held at either Marion and Terre Haute.
Marion

Ghassan Elashi is currently held in the CMU at Marion. His release date is 10/28/2069.

Terre Haute

Mufid Abdel Abdulqader is held in the Terre Haute CMU; he received a twenty year sentence, and his release date is set for 4/29/2026.

Mohammad El-Mezain and Shukri Abu-Baker are brothers, and are also in Terre Haute, though they are no longer in the CMU. (See "Brothers Mohammed Elmezain & Shukri Abubaker to Leave CMU for General Population".)
> Mohammad El-Mezain received a fifteen year sentence.

> Shukri Abu-Baker had the same sentence as Ghassan Elashi, hence release date is also 2069.
(One other defendant in the case was Abdulrahman Odeh, who also received a fifteen year sentence. He is held at Victorville MED II FCI.)


WHAT YOU CAN DO

Write to the Holy Land Foundation Case prisoners:

Ghassan Elashi
29687-177
U.S. Penitentiary
P.O. Box 1000
Marion IL, 62959

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.

SALAM Illinois Outreach Coordinator: Joe Scarry


Mohammad El-Mezain
(number TBA)
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808
See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.

More information at:
Mohammad El-Mezain on the Freedom to Give website
Read the extensive statement by Mohammad El-Mezain at his sentencing, which provides a window into his charitable activities.


Shukri Abu-Baker
32589-177
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808


Mufid Abdel Abdulqader
32590-177
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808




Drawings: Details of artwork by Shukri Abu-Baker

Friday, October 19, 2012

John Walker Lindh and the Fog of War

John Walker Lindh was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and now he's a prisoner in Terre Haute.

Most of us can remember where we were when the news networks started to report the sensational news that U.S. forces, in the course of their sweep into Afghanistan shortly after the 9/11 attacks, had caught up an American in the fog of war.

John Walker Lindh went to Afghanistan at a time when the United States was not at war with Afghanistan, and he went to help forces that the United States was helping at the time. However, during the post-9/11 hysteria, it was far more important to the U.S. government to have someone that they could make an example out of, than to act with integrity.

As the Free John Walker Lindh website points out,
Lindh was given 20 years in federal prison simply for participating in another country's civil war. Ironically, Americans have a long history of doing just that. Thousands joined the Lincoln Brigade during the Spanish civil war. Thousands have fought in Israel's army and continue to do so. Others fought for Bosnia's Muslim-led government against Serb forces. Some fought with the Contras in Nicaragua. Others have joined the French Foreign Legion.

THE ODYSSEY OF JOHN WALKER LINDH

Lindh was caught up in the fighting when the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance fought the Taliban unit he of which he was a member in November, 2001, and then again during a prisoner-of-war camp uprising shortly thereafter.

Based on the description provided in the Wikipedia article on Lindh, it is clear that the body of John Walker Lindh made a perfect object upon which the U.S. state could demonstrate its dominance at a moment when it was desperately searching for the means to rebuild its image after 9/11:
Sometime during the initial uprising Lindh was shot in the right upper thigh and found refuge in a basement, hiding with a group of Saudi, Uzbek, and Pakistani detainees. On the second day, the Red Cross sent in workers to collect the bodies. As soon as they entered they were shot by those inside, one died. The basement was bombarded with repeated RPG and grenade attacks, as well as fuel being poured into the basement and set alight. Lindh was found seven days later on December 2, 2001, when Northern Alliance forces diverted an irrigation stream into the middle of the camp in an attempt to flush the remaining prisoners out of their underground shelters, drowning many in the process. Lindh and about 80 survivors from the original 300 were forced out of hiding and recaptured, with the Northern Alliance captors then tightly binding Lindh's elbows behind his back.

Shortly after his recapture, Lindh was noticed and interviewed by [Embedded CNN reporter Robert Young] Pelton. . . . Pelton knew Lindh was receiving his first medical treatment since being shot in the leg more than a week prior and had been given morphine by a medic prior to Pelton's interview. Lindh's parents maintain that Pelton acquired footage that was prejudicial and manipulative, and that Pelton contributed to the poor image of their son by sharing the footage with the world community without context.


Upon his capture, Lindh was given basic first aid and then questioned for a week at Mazār-e Sharīf, before being taken to Camp Rhino on December 7, 2001, the bullet still within his thigh. When Lindh arrived at Camp Rhino he was stripped and he was restrained to a stretcher, blindfolded and placed in a metal shipping container, which was procedure for dealing with a potentially dangerous detainee associated with a terrorist organization. While bound to the stretcher his picture was taken by American military personnel. At Camp Rhino he was given oxycodone/paracetamol for pain and Valium.

. . . [O]n December 14, 2001 with other wounded detainees, where his wound was operated on and he received further care.[30]
Readers are encouraged to read the extensive profile of John Walker Lindh published in Esquire magazine, the title of which says it all: 'Innocent".


WHAT YOU CAN DO

Write to John Walker Lindh at Terre Haute:

John Walker Lindh
45426-083
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.

More information at:
Free John Walker Lindh

Tarek Mehanna: A High-Profile Free Speech Case

Most people will remember the high-profile case that was in the news in late 2011, involving a trial in Boston. Glenn Greenwald has called the case of Tarek Mehanna -- who is currently in prison in Terre Haute -- "one of the most egregious violations of the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech seen in quite some time."

Greenwald's article, "The real criminals in the Tarek Mehanna case: An American Muslim punished for his political views delivers an extraordinary statement in court", provides Tarek Mehanna's own explanation at sentencing:
So, this trial was not about my position on Muslims killing American civilians. It was about my position on Americans killing Muslim civilians, which is that Muslims should defend their lands from foreign invaders – Soviets, Americans, or Martians. This is what I believe. It’s what I’ve always believed, and what I will always believe. This is not terrorism, and it’s not extremism. It’s what the arrows on that seal above your head represent: defense of the homeland. So, I disagree with my lawyers when they say that you don’t have to agree with my beliefs – no. Anyone with commonsense and humanity has no choice but to agree with me. If someone breaks into your home to rob you and harm your family, logic dictates that you do whatever it takes to expel that invader from your home.
You are encouraged to read Tarek Mehanna's entire statement to the court.

The ACLU of Massachusetts made a statement in the case -- Mehanna Verdict Compromises First Amendment, Undermines National Security -- in which it stated, in part, "Under the government's theory of the case, ordinary people--including writers and journalists, academic researchers, translators, and even ordinary web surfers--could be prosecuted for researching or translating controversial and unpopular ideas. If the verdict is not overturned on appeal, the First Amendment will be seriously compromised."


THE TAREK MEHANNA CASE

The outlines of the Tarek Mehanna case are provided on the Free Tarek website:
Tarek’s trial began on October 27th, 2011 and went on for 2 months. For weeks the government argued its case by calling government agent after government agent to read emails, instant messages, forum postings and documents, many of which Tarek did not write or that did not pertain to Tarek at all. It displayed countless videos and images, including dozens of Osama bin Laden and the NYC World Trade Centers, in an attempt to prove Tarek’s “state of mind” and intimidate the jury.

The defense argued firmly throughout the trial that Tarek had strong religious and political beliefs, such as the right of Muslims to defend themselves when being oppressed, and that he had a right to these beliefs. The defense argued on the grounds that all of Tarek’s activities were protected under the First Amendment. The government also claimed that a 2-week trip that Tarek took to Yemen in 2004 was for the purpose of seeking military training. The defense maintained that Tarek went to Yemen in search of schools to study pure, classical Arabic and Islamic law, two subjects that Yemen is world-renowned for, and that the government had not proven otherwise.
Perhaps what was more important than what happened at the trial was Tarek Mehanna's previous refusal to act as an FBI imformant:
For several years Tarek was victim to FBI surveillance and harassment. He was targeted for being a politically conscious, outspoken Muslim leader. The FBI began to approach Tarek in an effort to recruit him as an informant. The FBI recognized in Tarek an individual who is influential, beloved and trusted by many in the local Islamic community. Their objective was to put an end to Tarek’s influence, and to secure him as a tool to corroborate any FBI claims or accusations against members of the community that might arise, at the discretion of the FBI. A man of integrity, Tarek refused to be an informant against his Muslim brothers and sisters.

The FBI then proceeded to approach Tarek repeatedly over the coming months, each time pressuring him more and more to collaborate with them. This pressure most often came in the form of threats; Tarek was told that unless he cooperated with the FBI, they would deprive him of a sense of security and make his life a “living hell”. He was told outright by interrogators that they knew he was innocent, but that they would not be satisfied with his refusal to cooperate and he would face criminal charges if he did not change his decision.
More information on the case can be found on the website: Free Tarek: Nothing to Hide.


WHAT YOU CAN DO

Write to Tarek Mehanna at Terre Haute:

Tarek Mehanna
05315-748
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.


More information at:
Free Tarek: Nothing to Hide

The Farooque Ahmed Case: How Did This Happen?

Farooque Ahmed is currently serving a term in Terre Haute connected to terrorism charges.

Muslim Justice Initiative raises the question of whether this case fits the pattern of U.S. government agent provocateur-instigated terrorist charges against Muslims:
With Ahmed’s arrest and case, arises the conversation about whether Ahmed might have initiated a plot or whether law enforcement officials had proposed the idea to him, as has been suspected in other FBI sting operations involving agent provocateurs and informants. Questions arise: Was Ahmed ever really a threat? Why was he targeted and surveyed by the government in the first place? Did he ever act upon or commit any crime to initially be targeted by the US government?

As Ahmed serves his current prison sentence of 23 years, his wife is left without a husband and his two-year old son is left to be raised without his father.
Specifically, as always happens in these cases, the question arises how the whole chain of activity began. According to the affadavit by FBI agent Charles A. Dayoub, on which the original search warrant was issued:
In January 2010, the FBI learned that AHMED and an associate were inquiring about making contact with a terrorist organization in order to participate in jihad by traveling overseas to fight coalition forces in Afghanistan and/or Pakistan. I have seen an e-mail received by AHMED and his associate in April 2010, that notified AHMED that he could meet an individual that AHMED believed to be a representative of a terrorist organization at a hotel near the Washington-Dulles International Airport on April 18, 2010.

On April 18,2010, FBI agents observed AHMED receive a Koran from another individual in the lobby of a hotel near the Washington-Dulles International Airport. Before AHMED received the Koran, I saw that it contained documents providing code words for locations to be used for future meetings. I saw e-mail messages that indicated, in code, that AHMED planned to meet an individual that AHMED believed to be a representative of a terrorist organization on May 15,2010, at a hotel in Northern Virginia.
Does this mean agents of the U.S. government wrote the emails to call for the original meeting? And/or provided the "representative" at the first meeting? And/or provided "documents providing code words for locations to be used for future meetings"? And/or called for subsequent meetings via email? Will we ever know how this whole chain of events was instigated? And how much of it was propelled by FBI encouragement and persuasion?

THE FAROOQUE AHMED CASE

As further explained on the Muslim Justice Initiative website:
Farooque Ahmed, age 35 and a US citizen, was born in Lahore, Pakistan in 1976. He lived in the United States since 1993. He is the son of two living parents, the oldest of his siblings, and is a husband and a father. His father was a successful banker in Pakistan and was the vice president of his bank and was transferred to the New York branch in 1993. Ahmed’s father brought his family with him where they settled in Staten Island; Farooque Ahmed was a teenager at the time.

Ahmed’s parents highly stressed education and he received his bachelor's degree in Computer Science from City University of New York in 2003. Ahmed moved from Staten Island, New York to Ashburn, Virginia, outside Washington, D.C in 2004 for employment. There he worked for Ericsson, a telecommunications company. At Aspen University, he was also pursuing a masters degree in risk management and data security. In Ashburn Virginia, he resided with his wife from Birmingham, England and his two-year old son.

According to the government’s indictment, from on or about April 18, 2010, and continuing through at least on or about October 25, 2010, Ahmed attempted to assist others (undercover FBI agents) whom he believed to be members of al-Qaeda in planning multiple bombings to cause mass casualties at Metrorail stations. It was stated that Ahmed, participated in surveillance and recorded video images of Metrorail stations in Virginia on four occasions, drew diagrams. It is important to note that Ahmed was under the surveillance of US authorities prior this mock operation.

During the morning hours of October 27, 2010, Ahmed was arrested by the FBI in Herndon at 9:40 a.m. Wednesday after he was told to come to a meeting where he would discuss his surveillance activities, officials said. He later appeared in U.S. District Court in Alexandria on terrorism charges. Ahmed’s monies and assets in his bank account were also seized by the government. He was to be held in jail without bail.

In the US Indictment, Ahmed was charged with three counts: Count 1: Attempting to Provide Material Support to a Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization; Count 2: Collecting Information to Assist in Planning a Terrorist Attack on a Transit Facility; and Count 3: Attempting to Provide Material Support to Terrorists.

On October 28, 2010, a “Notice of Intent to Use Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Information” by the US government. The United States intended to offer into evidence, or otherwise use or disclose in proceedings information obtained and derived from electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (“FISA”).

On November 5, 2010 Ahmed’s Defense counsel submitted that a total of approximately five months from arraignment to trial is necessary to effectively prepare for trial. The defense counsel and the counsel for the U.S. agree to set the trial on or about April 12, 2011, under the Speedy Trial Act; the trial was originally supposed to commence by on or about January 5, 2011.

On November 9, 2010, Ahmed pled not guilty in federal court.

On April 11, 2011 a plea hearing was held. Farooque Ahmed entered a guilty plea where the third count of the three charges was dropped, thus reducing the potential years he faced in prison. In a plea agreement, the defense and government jointly recommended a prison sentence of 23 years in prison for his role in providing material support to a planned terrorist attack and for assisting in planning an attack on several DC-area metro stations.

Following the acceptance of the guilty plea, Judge Lee immediately sentenced Ahmed to the agreed-upon term of imprisonment of 23 years followed by an imposed 50-year term of supervised release, with which after his release, must maintain gainful employment, must check in with his parole officer monthly, must receive permission to travel internationally, must not associate with anyone who is associated with an FTO (foreign terrorist organization), his home or place of business can be searched at any time under the discretion of his parole officer and if he chose to have a computer, it must have software that monitors his keyboard strokes. Additionally, Ahmed’s vehicle and assets were forfeited to the US government as a condition of his plea.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Write to Farooque Ahmed at Terre Haute:

Farooque Ahmed
77315-083
TERRE HAUTE FCI
P.O. BOX 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

See SALAM Illinois Guidelines for Writing to Prisoners.