An American Muslim Journal

ACT! for America...She must be stopped...Brigette Gabriel is a Loon!

 

This is not something to be dismissed lightly.  People were reportedly passing out the above referenced flyer at the Schaumburg Township Public Library today.  This is a wake up call to decent people in the northwest and westerns suburbs of Chicago.  Agents of hate are in our midst.  I'm very saddened to see this day come to pass in our part of the state.

DETAILS OF THE COMING HATE SPEECH

According to this flyer a local group of Islamophobes is organizing a meeting to promote the notorious Islamophobe extraordinaire Brigette Gabriel and her self-promoting, bigotry-based profit machine ACT! for America group.  Here are the details:

Date: Saturday, November 14, 2009

Time: 1pm to 3pm

Place: St. Charles Public Library, 1 South 6th Avenue, St. Charles, Illinois (Huntley Room)

Topic: "Islamic Radicalism" Discussion

We know the "discussion" is going to be Islamophobic because the local organizers are promoting a prominent purveyor of Islamophobia - Brigette Gabriel.  Brigette Gabriel is a hatemonger.  Why do I think this to be the case?  According to Clark Hoyt, Public Editor of The New York Times, Gabriel's beliefs include the following:

Every practicing Muslim is a radical Muslim.

Although the Australian Jewish News has taken the interview down, we are fortunate that Sheila Musaji of the The American Muslim (TAM) quotes from that interview on her blog as follows:

When asked whether Americans should “resist Muslims who want to seek political office in this nation,” Gabriel said:

“Absolutely. If a Muslim who has—who is—a practicing Muslim who believes the word of the Koran to be the word of Allah, who abides by Islam, who goes to mosque and prays every Friday, who prays five times a day—this practicing Muslim, who believes in the teachings of the Koran, cannot be a loyal citizen to the United States of America.”

LOONWATCH.COM has a very interesting take on Gabriel.  The writers at LOONWATCH.COM describe Gabriel as

a notorious apologist for the fascist Phalange group, Kataeb, and the terrorist group, the South Lebanon Army (SLA), who were responsible for the Sabra and Shatila massacres that slaughtered 1700 to 2000 Palestinians (mostly women and chidren).

WHAT CAN BE/SHOULD BE DONE?

I do not know who the local organizers are, but one sure way to find out is to go to this meeting on Saturday!  Of course, it does no one any good to go to something like this ill-prepared or with anger in their hearts.  No, the better approach is to organize more speech to counter the hate speech sponsored by these local organizers.

A group of Americans from various different faith communities should go to the St. Charles Library to peacefully provide counter-points to the hate this local group is promoting.  Certainly we can gather a small group of Muslims, Christians, Jews and other faithful people to bear witness to the lies that this local group is promoting.

Safaa Zarzour, chairman of the board at the Council on American-Islamic Relations Chicago, sent leaders of the Chicagoland community an email message this evening saying that his organization is working on a strategy to counter this this group and this meeting.  This is a good development.  The Islamic Society of Northwest Suburbs, a mosque on whose board I sit, is also taking note of this ugly development and is cooperating with CAIR-Chicago and others to help devise and execute a thoughtful response to this local group's hatemongering.

This evening I sent Ms. Diana Brown, Director of the St. Charles Public Library, an email message conveying some of my concerns:

Dear Ms. Brown:

Good evening.  I am writing to find out about a meeting that is taking place at the St. Charles Public Library this Saturday.  It is purportedly begin held in the Huntley Room from 1pm to 3pm on 11/14 to discuss "Islamic Radicalism".

I am a board member of the Islamic Society of Northwest Suburbs and the former executive director of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago.  I also sit on the board of the Muslim Bar Association.  Flyers for this meeting were being passed out at the Schaumburg Township Public Library this week so the organizers are looking to bring people from beyond the St. Charles community to this event.

There are several questions I wish to ask of you.  First, given that this meeting is being promoted to the public, do the organizers have the right to exclude people from it on the basis of religion?  Second, can you share with me the identities of the residents who reserved this room for the meeting?  Third, do you have space in the library where I or others may provide additional corrective information that seeks to balance the hate speech that I believe will be promoted within this meeting in the Huntley Room?

I am an ardent supporter of free speech.  While I would rather not have hate speech in my community, I believe that the best way to confront hate speech is to challenge it with truthful and accurate information and open and public debate.  I would like to work with you in making arrangements so that we can do just this at the St. Charles Public Library this Saturday.

Please feel free to reach out to me.  You can reach me at xxxxxxx@xxxx.com  or by calling me at xxx-xxx-xxxx.  I hope to hear back from you very soon.

Sincerely,
Junaid M. Afeef, Esq.

CENSORSHIP IS NOT THE ANSWER

As I told Ms. Brown of the St. Charles Public Library, I would prefer that we did not have hatemongering going on in our community.  Now that the hatemongering has arrived, however, I am not in favor of trying to chill or censor it.

I would actually like to know who all are behind this effort so that I can talk with them.  I grew up in this region and I have met all kinds of folks from the northwest and western suburbs.  I went to college with them and I work with them now.  We share so many of the same values.  We share so many of the same hopes and dreams and interests.  I would like to talk to the local organizers because frankly I do not believe they have met many Muslims and that is why they are susceptible to being duped by the likes of reputed radical Islamophobe Brigette Gabriel.

Islam, in its authentic form as practiced by over 1.4 billion people across the world, is a religion of peace and justice.  I am not afraid to put up my beliefs and my personal values as guided by my Islamic faith as a counter-balance to the hatemongering that is promoted by Brigette Gabriel.  I am also certain that there will be good people from other faith communities who would be willing to stand with me to bear witness to the tolerance, understanding and friendship that is possible between people of different faiths when good people come together.

That is why I hope St. Charles Public Library will afford us the space within the library to provide a forum that provides additional, corrective information to that which I suspect will be spewed by the local organizers for Brigette Gabriel.

Islamophobic response: Maligning legitimate civic action in the wake of Luqman Ameen Abdullah shooting

It was bound to happen sooner or later.  The Islamophobes are out in force maligning the legitimate efforts of American Muslims to engage in civic action that seeks to bring about an independent investigation into the shooting death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah by the FBI on Wednesday, October 28, 2009 in Dearborn, Michigan.

The reliable Islamophobes of Jihad Watch (a biased an hateful blog that is proudly Islamophobic) unfairly (surprise surprise) twisted the legitimate calls for justice at Abdullah's funeral last week by describing them this way:

They're trying to shift attention away from the jihadist violence allegedly being plotted at the Masjid al-Haqq, and onto the supposed excess of the FBI reaction.

Jihad Watch is also suggesting that because American Muslims called for justice at the funeral this means that the shooting of Abdullah was unjust.  No, that is not what it implies.  A person was shot and killed.  What were the circumstances surrounding the shooting?  Was the shooting necessary?  Did the FBI act properly before, during and after the shooting?  A call for justice is a call to have these legitimate questions answered.

The tactic is well known but too many honest people who are looking for a better understanding of Muslims and Islam fall for this tactic because these bigoted people are adept at creating an echo chamber of anti-Muslim hysteria that unfortunately gets passed off as legitimate information.  The tactic is to impute a negative intent on otherwise benign words and then repeat the false charge over and over again until it "appears" that this is the popular and correct assumption.

In this case Jihad Watch and Steve Emerson and Robert Spencer and others are trying to argue that anything short of uncritical support for the FBI in its handling of the attempted arrest of Abdullah is a support for the alleged views and actions of Abdullah as recorded in the indictment and affidavit that predicated the arrest warrant.  This is not the case at all.  The allegations about Abdullah as set forth in the Leone affidavit are repugnant.  But the allegations, not matter how heinous they may be, do not justify an unlawful shooting. 

Unfortunately, it appears that the Islamophobes can notch this case up (at least thus far) as a success.  Although major American Muslim organizations have called for an investigation (see here), there has been very little done at the grassroots level in places like Chicago to call for an independent investigation.  This is possibly the result of fear.  American Muslim leaders are afraid of speaking up because they are worried that their calls for justice will be perceived as support for the alleged actions and views of Abdullah.

What a shame.  It is a shame that leaders of the American Muslim community have not taken a more vigorous stand on this issue.  This is a time when American Muslim leaders can show that they understand how civic engagement works by effectively organizing and mobilizing people into constructive civic action that brings about a fair, full and independent investigation into the shooting death of Abdullah.

Locally in Illinois the largest (at least based on self-professed reach and scope and capacity) Muslim organization - the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago - is silent on the shooting death of Abdullah.  One of the past chairs of CIOGC sent an emotional email to the community's leaders (it had its various shortcomings too) calling them to stand up and act for justice in the wake of the Abdullah shooting.  Nothing came of it, and so far as public information discloses, nothing more is forthcoming from that past chair or anyone else.

The current chair, Zaher Sahloul, is surprisingly mum on the issue.  That is very odd since he speaks of CIOGC as an institution that brings American Muslims together and works for justice and the common good.  Today Sahloul said in an editorial that

CIOGC has been working relentlessly toward this goal of a justly balanced community, where Muslim Americans can play a role in bearing witness to their fellow Americans by defending justice, promoting common good and fighting evil.

I will concur that CIOGC has done some very good work in working for justice and promoting the common good.  But where is it now?  What is CIOGC doing vis-a-vis this issue?  Sahloul invokes Imam Siraj Wahaj in the editorial this way:

According to Imam Siraj Wahhaj, chair of the Muslim Alliance in North America, the Council is one of the few organizations in the nation that is doing real work in the field to integrate the indigenous Muslim communities and the immigrant Muslims through its Mosque-pairing initiative and Intrafaith action.

What better way to show CIOGC's efforts to bridge the gap between the immigrant Muslims and African American Muslims in our community then by taking a stance on the shooting death of an African American Muslim?  Interestingly, Sahloul's editorial is entitled "the power of unity".  There certainly is power in unity, but is unity something that can be embraced when it is convenient and not at other times?  Is that really unity?

Just talking the talk is not enough.  It is (or it should be) unacceptable to let this important issue (the call for an independent investigation into the shooting death of Abdullah) fester while attention is focused on the community's elite rubbing elbows with Governor Quinn and complimenting one another on what greatly leaders we are at Saturday's annual community dinner.

There is still time to do the right thing.  Sahloul can use the annual dinner as an opportunity to place the spotlight on the Abdullah shooting.  Sahloul has some incredible people on the professional staff.  He and his board can work with the professional staff to put together petitions for the dinner's attendees to sign.  These petitions can be addressed to the Illinois congressional delegation asking them to support the call for an independent investigation into the shooting death of Abdullah by the FBI.  Sahloul can raise tough questions during the dinner as members of the FBI will be there as guests as well.  The question is, do our leaders have the will to speak out for justice when it may be uncomfortable or even inconvenient for them to do so?

Let's hope the maligning rhetoric of Islamophobes does not stop our leaders in Illinois from taking up another cause for justice.

Luqman Ameen Abdullah: FBI's "Shooting Incident Review" Team may investigate

The Detroit Free Press is reporting that the FBI may be looking into the shooting death by the FBI of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah.  Abdullah was shot dead in a warehouse last Wednesday (10/28) when the FBI attempted to arrest him and several others pursuant to an arrest warrant in Detroit/Dearborn area.  The facts surrounding the shooting are in dispute.

The Wayne County News is reporting that

The FBI said Monday that it has dispatched a Shooting Incident Review Team to Detroit to investigate the incident, which is done when agents are involved in a shooting.

Interestingly, the Detroit Free Press is now beginning to report the shooting a bit differently.  As you may recall, initially the media reported the FBI version of events - that Abdullah was shot after firing on the FBI special agents.  Here's how the Detroit Free Press described the shooting in today's story:

Abdullah was shot dead by FBI agents on Wednesday during a raid on a warehouse in Dearborn after he allegedly fired at a police dog, killing it.

This is what family and friends of Abdullah contended as early as Friday of last week.  In case you do not see the distinction I will spell it out - the FBI is alleged to have shot Abdullah in response to his shooting the dog and not for firing on the agents themselves.

It is good that the "Shooting Incident Review Team" from the FBI is looking into the shooting.  I do not know much about the protocols employed by this review team and whether this part of the FBI is able to exercise enough autonomy in its investigation to be able to render a critical assessment if it turns out that mistakes were made by the special agents who shot and killed Abdullah.

At this juncture I am a bit skeptical of the impartiality of this review team.  I'm not saying they cannot be fair.  I will wait and see, but in the mean time, I think it is important for there to be a push for an independent investigation.

It has been a full week since the shooting and as of this evening the major local Muslim organization, the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, has still been silent vis-a-vis the shooting.  This is not right.

Perhaps the community should look to CAIR-Chicago to take a leadership role in organizing and mobilizing the community over this issue.  I do think the job falls squarely within the responsibilities of CIOGC but if it is unwilling or unable to discharge this obligation then someone else needs to step up.

According to Dawud Walid's personal blog (Dawud is the Executive Director of CAIR-Michigan), there will be a community town hall meeting this Friday to discuss the shooting and to educate the public about their rights and to learn some of the history behind the FBI and its domestic spying (i.e., COINTELPRO).  This is important because there is a dearth of knowledge among American Muslims even still about the sordid history of the FBI vis-a-vis civil rights organizations and other counter-culture movements.

Stay tuned for more as it comes in...

Luqman Ameen Abdullah: National Lawyers Guild Calls for Assassination Investigation

Today the National Lawyers Guild called for an investigation into the FBI shooting of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah.  What is most interesting is the language the NLG chose in describing the shooting - they called it an assassination.  The title of their press release is National Lawyers Guild Calls for Immediate and Independent Investigation into Assassination of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah by FBI Agents in Dearborn .

Some people within the American Muslim community are going to get excited when they see this language being employed to describe the shooting death of Abdullah at the hands of the FBI.  I am disappointed with this particular choice of words.  The body of the press release does not refer to the shooting of Abdullah as an assassination so it seems the word was used to draw attention to the press release.

That's fine as a publicity tactic.  My concern is that American Muslims are going to pick up on this word and start using it.  I am worried that the NLG's strongly worded press release is going to lull American Muslims into complacency.  As it stands right now there are very few people even talking about the need to push for an investigation.

Alternatively, the NLG's framing of the situation (as an assassination) may encourage others to adopt equally conclusory  language in their calls for an investigation.  This is not the way to  build a coalition of Americans from across the political spectrum.  Instead, it pushes the cause far to the Left.

I welcome the support of the NLG and of good people on the Left but this situation needs Americans in the Middle and the Right of the political spectrum as well.  Whether the shooting death of Abdullah is an assassination is a determination to be made through a full, fair and independent investigation.  To say that it is an assassination at this juncture is premature, and it will alienate many Americans who might otherwise join a coalition based on principles such as promoting accountability of law enforcement, justice and equal protection under law.

And for reasons that I cannot understand, the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC) is utterly silent on this issue.  I did not find anything about Abdullah's shooting death at the hands of the FBI on the CAIR-Michigan website either.  The Council of Islamic Organizations of Michigan has, according to its website, met with the FBI in Detroit but there is not much additional information on their website either.  The personal blog of Dawud Walid has some good information.  Dawud Walid is the executive director of CAIR-Michigan.

I know that some big national organizations have called for an investigation.  However, I also know that these major national organizations generally do not have the ability to organize and mobilize people at the grassroots.  That is something organizations like CIOGC can do if they are inclined to do so.  That is why I am looking for more grassroots groups to begin working on this issue.

At this juncture it may become necessary for individuals to fill the leadership void and begin organizing and mobilizing American Muslims and their friends, family, neighbors and classmates of other faiths to get behind a push for an investigation into Abdullah's shooting death by the FBI.

CIOGC - Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago silent over Luqman Ameen Abdullah shooting death

The Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC) has nothing to say after the FBI shot to death a prominent Imam in Detroit?  That is unacceptable.

As of this evening - 11:05pm on Sunday, November 1, 2009 - the CIOGC website's press release center  has no statement on Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah's death.

How is this possible?  There is a press release from CIOGC relating to the arrest of two Pakistani American Muslims in Chicago last week.  That press release went to great lengths to remind the public that those two men are to be presumed innocent until they are proven guilty.  What is different about the case in Detroit, Michigan?

This is a situation that demands leadership from CIOGC to organize and mobilize the American Muslim community to hold the FBI accountable.  I know that CIOGC has a good relationship with the local FBI office and the local FBI office has been very open with the American Muslim community in northern Illinois.  That is important.  It is a valuable relationship.  Kudos to CIOGC for creating and nurturing that relationship.  It is almost a given that both local community liaisons and the agent in charge will be at the CIOGC annual community dinner on 11/7/09 at Monty's in Bensenville, Illinois.  But if this relationship makes the local leadership gun shy about speaking out against possible FBI mistakes, then I'm not sure of the value of that relationship.

Frankly, I think it is acceptable and legitimate for CIOGC to organze and mobilize the mosques to get the American Muslim community to push for an independent investigation into Luqman Ameen Abdullah's shooting death.  This will not jeopardize the relationship that exists between American Muslim leaders and the FBI in northern Illinois.

What has to happen now in order to get CIOGC to assume the leadership role that is really its responsibility?

Luqman Ameen Abdullah, over 1000 mourners, calls for independent investigation into FBI shooting

Did the FBI special agents in Detroit, Michigan really shoot Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah last week because he shot a dog?

Did they unleash a dog to subdue Abdullah because he would not get down on the ground as had the other targets of the arrest warrant?

Did the FBI special agents shoot Abdullah 18 times?

Did the FBI special agents handcuff Abdullah after he had been shot 18 times?

Did the FBI special agents airlift the FBI dog for immediate medical care while Abdullah lay handcuffed and bleeding with 18 bullet wounds?

And is it true that Abdullah did not shoot at FBI agents but only at the dog that was unleashed upon Abdullah?

Is it true that, prior to two years ago (prior to the confidential informants being planted), Abdullah and his followers were not planning crimes?

Is it true that the FBI headquarters in Detroit are very close in proximity to Abdullah's mosque and that the FBI has no evidence of any planned attacks on the facility and or a member of the agency?

With regard to the alleged plot to attack the super bowl a few years ago (as reported by the newspapers), is it true that Abdullah is recorded or reported as having said that he did not want to attack and or harm innocent people?

Is the location of the shooting being preserved so that evidence of the shots fired from Abdullah firearm can be analyzed vis-a-vis his location and the location of the special agents on the operation in order to assess (probably rather than precisely - since only Abdullah could have told us what his intent was) what he was aiming at and attempting to shoot?

What is the FBI's policy on use of deadly force and for shooting to kill?

These are the kinds of questions people are asking, and these are the kinds of questions that need to be answered in order to address allegations that the shooting of Abdullah was unlawful.

The leaders who spoke at Abdullah's funeral prayers called upon the government to conduct an independent investigation and I suspect that these are some of the questions they want answered by an unbaised and independent investigation.  Honestly, as much as I want to give the FBI the benefit of the doubt, the more I hear about some of the circumstances surrounding the investigation and the shooting, the less I think an independent investigation is just a good public relations effort and the more I think it is a necessary step in holding the FBI accountable for its actions.

Others believe it is a good idea to conduct an independent investigation.  Jeff Gerritt of the Detroit Free Press writes that an independent investigation into Abdullah's shooting is a good idea too.  Gerritt writes on his blog that

no one should assume government wrongdoing or impropriety — nor has anyone I’ve talked to in Detroit. Still, there is growing skepticism about what happened during the Wednesday raid, and how the government uses informants to infiltrate Muslim groups. The account now widely held in the community is that Abdullah was shot repeatedly by agents, after he shot an unleashed police dog, despite official reports that Abdullah fired on agents. Because Abdullah was both African American and Muslim, his death has racial and religious overtones, especially among a people who have faced excessive police force throughout their history.

This is a reasonable position and outlook.  Gerritt pragmatically points out that the shooting death of Abdullah can become a source of tension between us and the Muslim world abroad.  While we cannot stop others from thinking what they will, we certain can do our part in not giving our detractors with more "evidence" of America's bias against Muslims and Islam.

Imam Johari Abdul Malik wrote the following on his blog:

This tragic shouting raises deep concerns regarding the use of lethal force by law enforcement agents.

This troubling issue did not begin with the shooting death of Abdullah. African Americans have long suffered from bona fide cases of excessive force by law enforcement.  For now local and national African American leaders have been relatively quiet on the shooting death of Abdullah but that may be because they are working out the dynamics between themselves and the American Muslim community since Abdullah was a member of both.

We can already see the skepticism with which American Muslims who knew Abdullah are receiving the news of his shooting death and the allegations surrounding the indictment that predicated the arrest warrant.  People who knew Abdullah are shocked by allegations that he advocated an "offensive jihad" and that he was advocating a "separatist Islamic state" within America.

What individuals like Ihsan Bagby and Imam Johari Abdul Malik and members of Abdullah's family are saying is that the allegations and claims are wholly out of character with the Abdullah they knew.  This is not a matter of excusing illegal actions. 

Clearly those who knew him, and who are themselves are law-abiding and upstanding citizens themselves, are shocked at the allegations.  It is completely understandable for those closest to Abdullah to be skeptical of the allegations and downright suspicious of the circumstances surrounding his shooting death at the hands of the FBI.

The best way to bring closure to this tragic story is to conduct a full, fair and independent investigation of the FBI shooting and if it is found that there was a deviation from the FBI's policies and procedures (or that the policies and procedures themselves are flawed and warrant revision) or that the investigation itself was in any way illegal or unjustified, then those holding positions of accountability should required to account for these shortcomings and or failures.

But how can the FBI be made to conduct such an investigation?  People are going to have to organize and act in concert in order to make the authorities with the power to act follow through.  Masjid al-Haqq and the shooting are in Representative John Conyers district.  Rep. Conyers has always appeared to be a man of conscience and a person inclined to do the right thing.  However, in a case such as this, with many hot-button allegations in the mix, it is up to the people who care about seeing justice done to organize the civic actions and advocacy that "forces" the hands of Rep. Conyers to act.  Press releases and statements and so forth on one dimensional.  The effort, if it is going to work, needs to include a wide range of voices from across the country.  This is not just an American Muslim issue.  It is not just an African American issue either.

Assuming that the justice community is succesful and there is an investigation and it is full, fair and independent, then all parties in interest must be prepared to live with its results.  If a full, fair and independent investigation exonerates the FBI then we will all breathe a bit easier.  That kind of a finding might be the basis for a more meaningful dialogue between the FBI and American Muslim leaders going forward.  This is in everyone's best interests.

If the investigation discloses that the FBI acted improperly or illegally, then we are all in trouble.  We cannot afford for our primary domestic anti-terrorism agency to even appear to be carrying out seemingly extrajudicial killings.  This is not in anyone's interest.

But in the end, regardless of what the outcome of an investigation is, the fact remains that Abdullah will not be able to tell us what he meant by his words or whether he even uttered them, and we will not be able to see our justice system at work in affording Abdullah due process.  I believe that all law enforcement officers would agree that this would have been the ideal outcome.

AmericanMuslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT) Calls for Probe Into FBI Shooting Death of Luqman Ameen Abdullah

A coalition of local and national organizations which includes the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), MAS-Freedom, Muslim Students Association - National (MSA-N), Muslim Ummah of North America (MUNA), and United Muslims of America (UMA) issued a statement and press release earlier today calling for a probe of the shooting death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah.

In the press release AMT states:

It is imperative that an independent investigation of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah's death make public the exact circumstances in which he died.

Locally, in the Chicagoland region at least one prominent American Muslim leader from the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago consultative body is urging the community's leaders to also make some noise in order to bring about an independent investigation of the shooting death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah.  The crux of this leader's argument seems to be that since there is a presumption of innocence and Imam Luqman had not yet been proven guilty, the FBI shot and killed an innocent man.

In an email exhorting other Chicagoland leaders to step up in calling for an investigation into Imam Luqman's shooting this leader ridiculed the notion that Imam Luqman was anything but a peaceful man who fed the hungry, sheltered the homeless and worked for the community.  If Imam Luqman was looking to wage a war on America why hadn't he done it yet asked the local leader rhetorically?  Clearly Imam Luqman has at least one very passionate supporter in the Chicagoland leadership.

Others who were perhaps more close to Imam Luqman did not sanitize Imam Luqman's beliefs quite as much.  Dr. Ihsan Bagby, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky and a board member of the Muslim Alliance in North America (a national African American Muslim institution on whose board Imam Luqman sat), reportedly told the Detroit News that Imam Luqman's organization - Ummah - is anti-government but does not advocate violence.

Many American Muslim leaders seem to want an independent investigation into th shooting death of Imam Luqman.  The facts surrounding this shooting support the call for an independent investigation.  Furthermore and under the circumstances, an independent investigation is an absolute must if the FBI is to regain/retain credibility with the American Muslim community.

The 43 page affidavit by FBI Special Agent Leone notes in multiple places, based on transcripts of audio recordings of conversations with Imam Luqman (purportedly recorded by undercover informants and without Imam Luqman's knowledge) that he was frequently armed, sometimes wore a bulletproof vest and spoke of dying in a shoot out rather than being arrested if he were ever confronted by law enforcement.  Regardless of whether or not these claims by Imam Luqman were true, clearly the FBI was on notice that this man may very well put up  a deadly struggle.  As such, why didn't they attempt to arrest Imam Luqman in a setting that would have lessened the chances of deadly shootout taking place?

One cannot help but think of the recent "raid" on a slaughterhouse in Kinsman, Illinois (this raid was in connection with the then sealed indictment against Tahawwur H. Rana on charges of providing material support to a terrorism conspiracy).  Unlike the move on Imam Luqman in Detroit which was based on an arrest warrat, the action on the slaughterhouse in downstate Illinois was based on a search warrant.  According to local news reports including eye witness accounts the FBI had a used a massive show of force including nearly 100 agents and even a helicopter.

It may be reasonable to assume that the FBI used a large team of agents and resources as a deterrent for anyone at the Kinsman, Illinois slaughterhouse who may want to resist the execution of the search warrant.  To a lay person this strategy of overwhelming force in order to protect law enforcement agents might make sense.  Furthermore, this strategy, whether it is so intended or not, has the benefit of protecting the lives of individuals upon whom the search warrant is served by deterring them for even trying to resist.

So, if a search warrant merits a small army of federal agents, then why would an arrest warrant (which seems to be a far more serious matter than a search warrant) not merit similar or even greater precautions and deterrence measures?  What did the attempted execution of the warrant on Imam Luqman and the others named in the arrest warrant look like?  Why has this not been discussed by the media thus far?

Also, given that the FBI believed, based on what they purportedly heard from two years worth of audio recordings and informant statements, that Imam Luqman is armed and is likely to resist arrest with deadly force, why did the FBI not attempt to arrest Imam Luqman in a setting where there was a greater element of surprise and where he had fewer options to flee?

Lastly, there remains the question of whether or not deadly force was necessary.  The news reports are not clear as to what exactly Imam Luqman did or did not do.  It is known that an FBI dog was shot and killed.  Reportedly the dog was killed by Imam Luqman.  Did the FBI agents kill Imam Luqman in a moment of retaliation in an already tense and deadly situation?

These and other and better questions need to be answered in a independent investigation of the shooting death of Imam Luqman.  American Muslim leaders have a responsibility to mobilize a grassroots civil action campaign to pressure the FBI into conducting an independent investigation. 

The credibility of the FBI within sectors of the American Muslim community is abysmally low as a result of its policy and program of conducting "assessments" of potential threats by "proactively" pursuing leads that take undercover FBI informants into otherwise legitimate, lawful and constitutionally protected gatherings (this policy was revealed with Muslim Advocates and other civil liberties groups recently successfully sued to get the FBI to turnover some of it surveillence policies).  The shooting death of Imam Luqman has the potential of escalating skepticism of the FBI's motives to the kind of deep-seeded distrust and even contempt or hate of the FBI as Imam Luqman was portrayed as having in the affidavit of Special Agent Leone.

This is not acceptable.  It is not acceptable for the FBI and the American Muslim community to be at odds with one another.  Like it or not, there are real threats out there.  There are people who wish to bomb and kill and terrorize Americans in America for political gain.  We know very well that the people who are responsible for this wanton violence are indiscriminate in their attacks and have no qualms about killing Muslims.  That means American Muslims are at as great a risk of being victims of future terrorist attacks as anyone.

At the same time, if the terrorists wish to use American Muslim institutions and resources and try to recruit within the American Muslim community, then it is imperative that there be a strong relationship between law enforcement and the American Muslim community based on mutual trust and respect.  American Muslims cannot possibly know what to look for and how to detect clues to extremist operations without the help and support of law enforcement (including the FBI).

An independent investigation into the shooting death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah is a must for all of the foregoing reasons.  It is the right thing to do and it is the pragmatic thing to do as well.

Where are the majority of Congresspersons?

Today the Asian Pacific American Caucus, the Black Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus came together in support of American Muslims' right to actively and freely and openly participate in public life through civic and political engagement.

Led by Reps. Michael Honda (D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) these three congressional organizations issued a strong joint statement condemning the un-American behavior of Reps. John Shadegg (R-AZ), Paul Broun (R-GA), Trent Franks (R-AZ) and Sue Myrick (R-NC).  As you may recall, these four members of Congress, whom I call the Freaky Foursome, tried to chill American Muslim participation on the Hill and in civic life by making outrageous assertions that American Muslims serving on Capitol Hill is tantamount to spying.

Bravo to the members of the Asian Pacific American, Black and Hispanic caucuses, numbering a total of 87 members, for speaking out against this grossly un-American behavior by the Freaky Foursome and their ilk.

As an American Muslim I am grateful for the support of these three minority caucuses.  I value their support.  But without taking anything away from their effort I cannot help but wonder - where is everyone else?

In Illinois, my home state, I thank Reps. Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Luis Gutierrez and Danny Davis (all members of the supporting caucuses referenced above) for their support.  But honestly, in Illinois I expect to have the full support of the entire Illinois Congressional delegation for American Muslims. 

I know there are lots of important things going on in Washington, DC and in our nation as whole, but certainly speaking out against the McCarthy-like behavior of the Freaky Foursome is worth a few minutes to issue a formal statement that, if not condemning the stance of the Freaky Foursome, at least re-affirms the right and value of American Muslims in the civic and political arena.

American Muslims are a vital part of nearly every part of Illinois so it is reasonable to expect every Congressperson from John Shimkus to Donald Manzullo to Mark Kirk and all the others to clearly and unequivocally say that they support American Muslim participation and that their congressional offices are open to American Muslim candidates for paid and volunteer staff positions in their DC and district offices.

This is the joint statement released today by the Asian Pacific American, Black and Hispanic Caucuses:

Four of our colleagues, Reps. John Shadegg (AZ), Paul Broun (GA), Trent Franks (AZ) and Sue Myrick (NC) recently requested that the House Sergeant at Arms to launch an investigation of the civil rights group CAIR, or Council on American-Islamic Relations, to determine whether it was placing staff and interns in key Congressional offices who they fear are acting as “spies.”

This proposed investigation coincides with the launch of a book by Dave Gaubatz, an anti-Islamic activist and author of the book “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America.” It features an introduction by Rep. Myrick, and was written after Gaubatz posed as an intern at CAIR in an effort to “infiltrate” the group.

These charges smack of an America of sixty years ago where lists of “un-American” agitators were identified. We should be affirming the importance of diversity and tolerance for all interns and staff who serve in Congress without suspicion of being identified as “spies.”

The idea that we should investigate Muslim interns as spies is a blow to the very principle of religious freedom that our founding fathers cherished so dearly. If anything, we should be encouraging all Americans to engage in the U.S. political process; to take part in, and to contribute to, the great democratic experiment that is America.

We all have experienced the sting of discrimination and we know that there will be challenges ahead. But our message should be firm that the America we believe in welcomes people of all backgrounds to the U.S. Congress.

We ask these charges be disavowed and we issue a hearty welcome to interns and staff of all creeds, color, ethnicities and sexual orientation.

Maybe the thing to do is for all Americans in Illinois, regardless of religious affiliation, to contact their respective representative, share with him or her the joint caucuses statement above and ask him or her to adopt the statement as well.

Here is Illinois' congressional delegation list:

Bean, Melissa L., Illinois, 8th

Biggert, Judy, Illinois, 13th

Costello, Jerry, Illinois, 12th

Davis, Danny K., Illinois, 7th (Black Caucus member)

Gutierrez, Luis, Illinois, 4th (Hispanic Caucus member)

Foster, Bill, Illinois, 14th

Hare, Phil, Illinois, 17th

Halvorson, Deborah "Debbie", Illinois, 11th

Jackson Jr., Jesse L., Illinois, 2nd (Black Caucus member)

Johnson, Timothy V., Illinois, 15th

Kirk, Mark, Illinois, 10th

Lipinski, Daniel, Illinois, 3rd

Manzullo, Donald, Illinois, 16th

Quigley, Mike, Illinois, 5th

Roskam, Peter J., Illinois, 6th

Rush, Bobby L., Illinois, 1st (Black Caucus member)

Schakowsky, Jan, Illinois, 9th

Schock, Aaron, Illinois, 18th

Shimkus, John, Illinois, 19th

Send a note or call each member of the Illinois delegation.  Convey your thanks and gratitude to the members of the Black and Hispanic caucuses in Illinois for supporting fairness and freedom in American public life.  For the rest, politely ask them to speak out in favor of equal protection of all people in America and for the time-honored values of freedom and equality.  Ask them to adopt the joint statement of the minority caucuses!

Tarek Mehanna alleged to have plotted domestic terrorism

A very disturbing story broke during the day today about a would-be terrorist in Boston who is Muslim.  His name is Tarek Mehanna.  He was born and raised in the U.S., and among other allegations Mehanna supposedly conspired to kill civilians with assault rifles in malls.

How should I react?

First, I’m going to imagine that he is not a Muslim.  Next, I’m going to pretend that he planned to attack and kill Muslims in the U.S.  I’m going to imagine that he was caught before he could carry out his plans and that law enforcement found Islamophobic literature on his personal computer and informant testimony implicates him in a plan to secure assault rifles to carry out an indiscriminate attack on a mosque or a Muslim elementary school.

How do I feel about this Islamophobic would-be mass murderer whom the authorities have apprehended?

My initial reaction would be horror and fear.  How could someone try to do something this evil?  How could someone target defenseless children?  This hits home.

I would also be very angry.  Frankly, I’d be thinking of ways to make sure prosecutors knew that the American Muslim community was watching this prosecution very closely and that the American Muslim community wanted this man prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

And yes, the lawyer in me would expect, buried deep underneath the fear, anger and disgust, that he receive a fair trial and be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Are these legitimate reactions to this fictional scenario?  I think so.  So then would it be fair to react this same way knowing that Tarek Mehanna is an American Muslim and that he is alleged to have been targeting fellow American civilians for a murderous shooting spree and that he may have been motivated by a perverted understanding of Islam?

Yes, it certain is.  There is absolutely no reason for me to feel any differently.

I am concerned about the blowback that comes every time a Muslim is alleged to have been involved in some form of domestic terrorism.  I am definitely concerned about the increase in Islamophobic reactions by bigots who not-so-secretly harbor venomous hate for Islam and Muslims.  And I worry about the message it sends to my neighbors and co-workers who don’t really know much about Islam because Mehanna’s actions certainly poison the well and create huge hurdles between them and an accurate understanding of the authentic Islam.

Also, I’m not naïve about the questionable track record of the FBI and federal prosecutors when it comes to domestic terrorism cases involving American Muslims.  I know about and worry about the encroachment of American Muslim civil liberties by the FBI and the exaggerations of federal prosecutors vis-à-vis terrorism cases against American Muslims in the past.  These are serious and legitimate concerns.

None of this should make me any less angry or outraged by the allegations.  I don’t know Mehanna.  I do not believe that there is a grand conspiracy by the Feds to suppress American Muslims.  I do know federal law enforcement officials personally and I respect the work they do.

Going forward I expect American Muslim leaders to speak out quickly and unequivocally on this latest news.  American Muslims in leadership positions will say unequivocally that any plans or plots to kill civilians is morally and religiously despicable and cannot be supported or justified by Islam.  I also expect American Muslim leaders to call for restraint and patience from our fellow Americans of all faiths so that we do not hastily impute the ugly ideologies and twisted aspirations allegedly espoused by Mehanna upon all Muslims.

I also expect American Muslim leaders to reach out to the interfaith community to speak with one voice on this issue.  American Muslims work with Christians, Jews and other religious communities to build tolerance first and then understanding and then friendship.  These are the times when these relationships can be used for the common good of our community.

American Muslims are guilty...of civic engagement

Salam Al-Marayati has a great op-ed in today's (10/19) Huffington Post.  Salam put's the fiasco of last week's McCarthy-esque episode into perspective. 

Salam says what we've all been thinking these past few days: we're all guilty... of civic engagement.  In the Huffington Post article Salam writes:

I confess. I've met with Presidents Clinton, Bush and advised them on counter-terrorism strategy. I've met with the FBI Director and discussed what helps partnerships with Muslim communities and what hurts. I've spoken before the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security and at the Secretary of State's Open Forum. I am guilty of civic engagement.

The nefarious strategy that got a bunch of freaky U.S. representatives all work up was a Muslim civil rights group promoting public service on Capitol Hill by American Muslims.  Salam goes on:

What's next? Muslims trying to infiltrate the Congress by scheduling lobby days, or by simply meeting with their members of Congress? It's a testament to how far some right-wing conspiracy theories have come that even the normal behavior of any advocacy group can be used as so-called evidence of a dangerous, seditious and destructive "plot".

The behavior of these U.S. representatives is un-American.  These four individuals - Sue Myrick [R-NC], John Shadegg [R-AZ], Paul Broun [R-GA] and Trent Franks [R-AZ] - seem to be telling us Americans that some Americans should be treated as second class citizens.  Is this how low and how desparate the right-wing fanatics of American politics have become?

Thankfully there have been some noteworthy statements of support for American Muslims and clear condemnation of the Freaky Foursome from within the U.S. Congress.

Have we heard anything from the Illinois Congressional delegation?  What efforts have American Muslim institutional leaders taken in Illinois since last Friday?  Sadly, it appears that here in Illinois our institutional leaders are not saying much.

As of this writing the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC) has no public statement condemning the Freaky Foursome.  There is no news of any outreach to the Illinois Congressional Delegation seeking their support of American Muslim civic engagement.  Too bad.  This was a critical issue that demanded institutional leadership.  It was a key opportunity to be relevant.  It is an opportunity lost.

So, locally, who is going to represent us when these issues come up?  These are times when the American Muslim community should come together and just say no to this blatant fearmongering.  This is the time for us to reach out to our interfaith partners and ask them to step up and speak out in support of American Muslims being involved in civic life without being second guessed by the Freaky Foursome and their ilk.

What we need in Illinois is for American Muslims who are committed to working in interfaith collaboration on issues of the common good to come together.  We can't wait any longer for the "powers that be" to act.  It's obvious that they can't.  Unfortunately, its equally obvious that there are people like the Freaky Foursome who are keen to marginalize American Muslims.