Guantanamo Bay violates every possible standard laid out for an imprisonment facility; hence the rationale for building it on a naval base in Cuba. It denies prisoners protections guaranteed by the Geneva conventions, holds them indefinitely without laying charges and effectively bars them from having any chances at a fair trial.

Injustice and lies are the foundational pillars that hold up Guntanamo Bay. Prisoners at the facility are subjected to unprecedented forms of torture. This includes solitary confinement, forced feedings, sexual abuse, waterboarding and beatings. Many inmates have tried to commit suicide; six so far have succeeded. Lakhdar Boumedine, who went on a hunger strike and was held for seven years without explanation, recalled: “Twice each day my captors would shove a tube up my nose, down my throat and into my stomach so they could pour food into me”.

Murat Kurnaz of Germany was captured while in Pakstian studying the religious sciences and wrongly detained for five years. He explained: 'There were more beatings, endless solitary confinement, freezing temperatures and extreme heat, days of forced sleeplessness”. An FBI agent once observed that, “on a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more”. What is sickening is that abuse at other U.S. detention facilities, such as Abu Ghraib and Bagram, is far worse.

Many of the 'war combatants' at the facility have been innocent civilians with no evidence of terrorist activities. They were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time and were caught while fleeing the invasion of Afghanistan. The Tipton Three and many others fall in this category. Some were simply handed over to the Americans based on shady evidence in return for thousands of dollars. Kurnaz was an example of this.

Since most of the inmates at the facility are Muslims, religious persecution has been a complaint as well. There have been horror stories of Qurans being defaced and flushed down toilets. Prisoners have been reprimanded for praying in congregation. Some even reported attempts by guards to get them to renounce their religion.

Civil liberty groups rejoiced as Obama came into office, but his efforts to actually shut down Gitmo are laughable. The President has since signed executive orders that formalize the indefinite detention of prisoners at the facility. To top up the Patriot Act, he also added new provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act that codify the indefinite detention of American citizens suspected of terrorism. The NDAA also forbids the government from using money to build a new prison or to bring detainees to the U.S., even to face trial. This virtually ends any possibility of shutting down the prison and effectively builds on the detention scheme laid out by the Bush administration.

This establishment creates a two tiered justice system; one for the bad and one for the worst. The irony is, many times the evidence against the latter is so poor that it is insufficient to lay charges or bring them to trial. Guantanamo Bay is an apparatus that gives Americans satisfaction that the perpetrators of terrorism are being punished and their country is secure. This comes at the high cost of sacrifices in human rights, civil liberties and rule of law, not to mention the millions of tax dollars spent on it.

Once the beacon of freedom, liberty and justice; America is slowly losing her status as the bastion of democracy. Illegal wars, extra judicial killings, arrests of innocent civilians, opportunist and hypocritical foreign policies all add to the abuses going on at Guantanamo Bay. Ten years past 9/11 and after the killing of Osama Bin Laden, there are no signs of an end to this disgraceful institution.

Action Item:
Amnesty Internatinal Petition : End Detention at Gitmo

More information:
Guantanamo: By the Numbers
Notes From a Guantánamo Survivor

Click here to view the embedded video.

Well, they've done it yet again. Niqabi's have somehow managed to make headlines all across Canada. It's amazing how much influence this small group of women have on the national psyche. A few weeks ago I mentioned the niqab rage incident in Mississauga. Then there is the on going case of the woman who was sexually assaulted and wants to testify in court with a niqab. This week, the niqab issue was brought up once again.

This time it was Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenny who sparked the controversy. Effective immediately, he announced on Monday, all niqabs are banned from the oath taking citizenship ceremony. Any Muslim woman wishing to become a Canadian citizen must remove the veil during the ceremony he stated. Kenny said that the niqab 'reflects a certain view about women that we don't accept in Canada'.

Minister Kenny also clarified that this isn't just about the judge being able to see and validate the recital of the oath, “This is not simply a practical measure. It is a matter of deep principle that goes to the heart of our identity and our values of openness and equality”. The niqab obviously violates all that we hold sacred in Canada according to Kenny.

So, what was the last time you heard of a woman refusing to take off the niqab before swearing the citizenship oath? Never. How many women even take the oath wearing a niqab? Probably an insignificant number. Neither Mr. Kenny nor his office could provide any statistics to back up the ban they so forcefully implemented. No one knew about this complaint up till this week. Clearly, this wasn't a problem to begin with.

It is obvious that this ban is yet another sleazy bigoted move by the Conservatives to score political points and gain some short term popularity. And it's worked quite well. At a time when their government is under heavy criticism due to the mess they created in Attawapiskat, playing the Muslim card is the best way out. Prime Minister Stephen Harper used similar tactics in September when he warned us all that the greatest threat to Canada was 'Islamicism' – whatever that is.

Regardless of the motivations behind it, the ban carries many implications. Disallowing the veil at a symbolic event like the citizenship ceremony sends a strong message that the niqab is not welcome in Canada; it certainly flies flat in the face of the tolerant and welcoming society we aim to foster. As the Toronto Star aptly put it, the ban coerces Muslim women to fit into the mainstream – 'behave and look just like us, or pay the price'. So much for the individualism we value so much.

Jason Kenny, like most, believes that he is liberating the niqabi's from the oppression imposed on them by their husbands and fathers. Reality is thathe is restricting their freedom and engagement with society by disallowing them to become citizens. Perhaps – this is just a wild idea – by allowing them to become citizens, we might have a greater chance of integrating these new comers into our social fabric?

This unnecessary ban impacts a few and is largely political and symbolic; much like the Hérouxville ban on the public stoning of women. In and of itself, I don't think many niqabi's would have refused a polite request by the judge to reveal their face in the first place. If validating the oath recital was so important, this requirement could have been easily communicated through a simple memo to the parties concerned.

Making a national spectacle over a non-issue has sparked endless debates on multiculturalism, religious accommodation and Canadian Muslims. It has further helped 'otherize' Muslims and has created an 'us verses them' dichotomy. You can either be a niqabi or a Canadian – that's what the ban represents. It's left some women with the awkward choice between citizenship and religion.

My fear is that measures like these are the stepping stones to full public bans. They help immunize the public to the singling out and marginalization of Muslims. The core arguments used for the niqab could very well be applied to the hijab too – what is to prevent that from being banned next?

Given the unpopularity of niqab within our own community, many Muslims may not feel the need to speak out against this act. But know that these are just the building blocks to greater cuts in our religious freedoms; if we stay silent now, then we're setting ourselves up for disaster. If you don't speak up for the niqabi's, no one will speak up for you.

Debate team champion, Autena Torbati, lives by her words. So the day a 
debate teammate announced to the class he would have “liked Hitler better if 
had he killed all the Muslims, instead of Jews,” Autena's blood ran cold. 
“Remember,” says the Oklahoma high school student, “the Holocaust started 
with words before ending in gas chambers.”

In Autena's case, bullying has been confined to verbal taunts, threatening 
gestures, and an anti-Muslim opinion piece in the school newspaper. But for 
other Muslim students, verbal assaults have escalated into physical abuse, 
as anti-Islamic sentiment sweeps the nation. In Texas, a Muslim student was 
brutally beaten and thrown into a dumpster, while in Minnesota, Muslim girls 
were chased by classmates who shoved raw pork in their faces. Following 
relentless beatings from middle to high school, a Muslim Staten Island teen 
finally resigned from school.

Bullying is an equal-opportunity crisis, affecting students of every age, 
race, and creed. The dimension that makes the bullying of Muslim students 
particularly disturbing centers around the open prejudices and fears of 
adults, giving the green light to non-Muslim children that it's okay — even 
patriotic — to discriminate. Muslim students report that an administrator at 
one school screamed at a 13-year old to remove her hijab (religious head 
scarf) until the girl broke down in tears. A guest speaker at another school 
handed out literature demonizing Islam in a social sciences class. When 
adults, especially educators, join in the bullying, it's not only hurtful, 
say students, it's a betrayal of trust. But educators have found that when 
just one caring adult supports a student, it can make a world of difference, 
creating a positive ripple effect that goes beyond one student and one 
classroom.

A Perfect Storm for Bullying

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reports the number of 
bullying incidents against Muslim students has spiked in the wake of a 
perfect economic and political storm: severe economic distress and 
anti-immigrant sentiments, continued wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the 
conflation of Islam with terrorism, even the misidentification of President 
Obama's own religion. Add to the mix the tragic memory of 9/11 and a 
proposed Islamic center near Manhattan's Ground Zero, and you get children, 
many just babies on September 11, 2001, indicting their classmates as the 
enemy.

How do rising tensions affect the nation's Muslim students, the majority of 
whom attend public schools?  School-related civil rights violations have 
increased by 31 percent in just one year, according to a 2009 CAIR study. 
The study also found that a student's ethnicity/ religion, a 
“Muslim-sounding name,” or the wearing of hijab were some of the primary 
factors triggering discrimination. A separate study by Wayne State 
University in Michigan found that 43 percent of Arab-American teens in the 
study were depressed. 
“Although many Muslim students have good relationships with their non-Muslim 
classmates, almost every child I've spoken to says they've had a hostile 
interaction with someone,” says Ibrahim Ramey, Human and Civil Rights 
Program Director for the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. The 
most common epitaphs Muslim students hear, he says, are “Terrorist,” and “Go 
back where you came from!” The irony is their tormentors are often insulting 
a third-generation American, a scenario painfully familiar to the Omeira 
family.

“I raised my son to be a proud American,” declares Abdul Omeira, whose son, 
Hashem, changed almost overnight from a sunny-natured 12-year-old to a grim 
recluse who stopped eating and socializing and started locking himself in 
his room. What his parents didn't know at the time, says Hashem, a 
native-born Californian, is that after his teacher showed a movie widely 
criticized for its negative portrayal of Islamic culture, his classmates 
started a relentless campaign of abuse — cursing Hashem, his religion, even 
his parents.

Thankfully, Hashem's high school experience is worlds apart from middle 
school. The difference? An enlightened school climate, says Hashem. When one 
of Hashem's teachers heard some students categorizing all Muslims as 
extremists, he launched into a lesson on Muslim Americans, informing the 
class that extremists were a small group who didn't represent the majority 
of Islam's followers.

How Educators Can Lead the Way

“Some teachers do a wonderful job of teaching acceptance to their students,” 
reports Saadia Khan, Civic Outreach Coordinator for the Muslim Public 
Affairs Council (MPAC). Kahn is invited to classrooms about a dozen times a 
year to talk candidly with students about Islamic culture. “I encourage the 
students to ask no-holds-barred questions — whether they're about terrorism 
versus jihad or women's rights under Islam,” says Khan. It helps to dispel 
myths and stereotypes when I can give them accurate information.”

Khan cautions that “misinformation contributes to misconceptions about 
groups, which in turn, can lead to bullying.” To help counter the negative 
narratives, she says, schools should facilitate conversations among 
educators, organizations like MPAC, students, and parents. “We have to teach 
children it's okay to have disagreements as long as you engage in respectful 
discussion, and educators can be responsible facilitators of these 
discussions,” says Khan, who believes that cultural awareness training for 
educators should be required by all school districts. Khan also proposes 
using social media as an educational tool to counter cyberbullying, 
“Students with blogs can tag each other on positive news items and YouTube 
clips. It's a nuanced and cool mechanism for teaching students how to 
exercise free speech responsibly.”

Public school demographics are changing so quickly, say community activists, 
cultural misunderstandings are unavoidable. The harassment of Muslim 
students, for instance, is often fueled by multiple factors: language and 
race, as well as religion, can make students a target. Darker-skinned Somali 
students comprise 10 percent of the student population in St. Cloud, 
Minnesota. Mocked as “sand n-gers” and “camel jockeys,” they reportedly face 
more discrimination there than other Muslim youth. Still other students are 
discriminated against because of their perceived ethnicity or religion: many 
Sikh Americans, though not  Muslim, are targets of anti-Muslim bias.

Taking the extra steps to educate students about other cultures can ease 
cultural tensions and curb bullying, says California teacher Ari Jacobs, 
who's seen the benefits at his own school. (According to one CAIR study, 
California leads the nation in the percentage of anti-Muslim civil rights 
complaints.)  Jacobs designed a World Issues unit for his 11th-grade 
students, examining various aspects of world religions and human behavior, 
and a special unit for his seventh-grade social studies class, who explore 
bullying and Islamaphobia through the lens of “upstanders versus 
bystanders.”

The study of medieval Islam is required curriculum for 7th-grade students, 
says Jacobs,  “but ancient history doesn't allow them to process what they 
see on Fox and CNN,” so Jacobs extends the unit to explore current events, 
drawing modern-day connections between the curriculum and students' lives.

Not long after the school year started, Jacob's class watched news clips of 
Florida pastor Terry Jones threatening to burn Qurans on the anniversary of 
9/11.  A discussion about the role of book burnings and bystanders during 
the Holocaust led to the focal question of the entire lesson. “Are you an 
upstander or a bystander?,” Jacobs challenges his students, whom he's just 
shown a 60 Minutes story about a teenager who peered over a bathroom stall 
while doing nothing to stop his friend from killing a young child. “I tell 
my students at some point in our lives — in a cafeteria line, riding a school 
bus, or on Facebook — we're all peering over that bathroom stall,” with the 
power to say, Stop!”

But the most insightful moment for his astonished students, says Jacobs, was 
absorbing the tale of Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh. A visibly emotional 
Muslim student told her classmates, “This is exactly how we felt about the 
people that brought down those planes on 9/11. They don't represent me or 
Islam, just like Timothy McVeigh doesn't represent all White people or 
Christians.” They got it,” says Jacobs. “You could just see the light go 
on.”

An Eye-Opening Lesson

Jacobs' students say the lessons they've learned have 
made them realize that appreciating other cultures requires work and doesn't 
happen on its own. The combination of frank discussion, role playing, and 
powerful media images is opening students' eyes: parents have sent thank-you 
letters, and students being picked on have told Jacobs their schoolmates are 
no longer silent bystanders.

Yet, most Muslim students, having internalized the message that “Muslims are 
fair game,” suffer in silence, bearing the brunt of anti-Islamic fervor in 
an adult world. Although the overall number of reported anti-Muslim hate 
crimes has decreased in the last year, school-related incidents have soared. 
The recent spate of “bullycides” has focused national attention on the ease 
with which harassment can slide into tragedy, leading a Muslim educator to 
ask, “Do we have to wait for a Muslim-American child to commit suicide or be 
killed by a bully” before we take the bullying of Muslim students to heart?

Many Muslim families still believe in the power of education to change 
attitudes and the potential of public schools to teach tolerance on a 
national scale. The lessons can come from teachers, from students, and 
sometimes from the ones being bullied, say Hashem and Autena, who, having 
been targets themselves, speak from personal experience. They found that 
speaking up — educating other students — brought unexpected consequences.

After Autena took a classmate to task for making obnoxious comments about 
“sand people,” the classmate publicly apologized, telling everyone who had 
heard his remarks, “What I said wasn't cool.” As for Hashem: Not long after 
he started high school, a cocky kid got in his face and told him to go “back 
where he came from.” “I told him I was born in the U.S.A.,” says Hashem. 
“That I have nowhere to go. So here I am.”

Now they're friends.

1. Lowe's pulls advertising from All American Muslim under pressure from right wing nutjobs

From the right wing nutjobs:

Florida Family Association sent out a third email alert on December 6th which reported The Learning Channel's new program called All-American Muslim. All-American Muslim is propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda's clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values. The email alert encouraged supporters to send emails to the companies (including Lowes) that advertised during the December 4th and 5th episodes.

Lowe's response (same link as above):

Thank you for contacting Lowe's. We work hard to listen to our customers and respond to their concerns. Lowe's has strict guidelines that govern the placement of our advertising. Our company advertises primarily in national, network prime-time television programs and on a variety of cable outlets. Lowe's constantly reviews advertising buys to make certain they are consistent with its policy guidelines.

While we continue to advertise on various cable networks, including TLC, there are certain programs that do not meet Lowe's advertising guidelines, including the show you brought to our attention. Lowe's will no longer be advertising on that program.

2. This resulted in an outpouring of outrage via email, phone calls, and social media. Get a glimpse from the Twitter hashtag – #LowesHatesMuslims

Even Russel Simmons got in on it:

plz ask folks 2 call @Lowes at 1.800.445.6937 ask why #loweshatesmuslims …

— Russell Simmons (@UncleRUSH) December 10, 2011

Dear @Lowes, religious hatred is UN-AMERICAN >> bit.ly/vi8KOD — Russell Simmons (@UncleRUSH) December 10, 2011

3. Earlier today Lowe's released a statement on it's Facebook page to respond to complaints

Here's their statement,

It appears that we managed to step into a hotly contested debate with strong views from virtually every angle and perspective – social, political and otherwise – and we've managed to make some people very unhappy. We are sincerely sorry. We have a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion, across our workforce and our customers, and we're proud of that longstanding commitment.

Lowe's has received a significant amount of communication on this program, from every perspective possible. Individuals and groups have strong political and societal views on this topic, and this program became a lighting rod for many of those views. As a result we did pull our advertising on this program. We believe it is best to respectfully defer to communities, individuals and groups to discuss and consider such issues of importance.

We strongly support and respect the right of our customers, the community at large, and our employees to have different views. If we have made anyone question that commitment, we apologize.

Thank you for allowing us to further explain our position.

Umm… What?! 'Managed to make some people unhappy'?? Because this was controversial, they pulled their ads and essentially stand behind it?

This stance means that the initial claims made by the Florida Family Association, in the eye's of Lowe's, has credence – i.e. that a show portraying Muslims as “normal” is really a covert ploy to hide their true 'terroristic tendencies'.

They couldn't even admit clearly who they upset, as if saying the words 'Muslim community' would somehow create more negativity for them. This is evidenced by the fact that many commenters on their Facebook page had no idea what was even going on, as this was such a useless, PR-speak, statement.

Some comments from their Facebook page in response to this statement:

I'm sorry please explain to me how giving in to the fear mongering of a bunch of religious zealots is maintaining a commitment to diversity?

Your statement is a bunch of disingenuous claptrap. If you truly believe what you're saying, you should probably also pull advertising from any show that discusses any religion.

Its only a hotly contested debate if you believe that fearmongering fanatics who think Muslim Americans are undercover terrorists who want to impose clerical sharia law in America have a legitimate argument. Otherwise, its a non issue and you are simply rejecting the very premise of being a Muslim American citizen. Thats why so many people are genuinely upset and will not be comforted by your pathetic excuse. You have taken a side on this issue by withdrawing your ads.

Now bigots can have their very own place to buy plumbing fixtures. That should make it a little easier to avoid them/you. Good work, guys. See you never.

Lowes pulled their ads from a show about the lives of some Christian American citizens on the Discovery Channel because some small fundamentalist Muslim group protested. Outrageous isn't it? Wait a minute. I got that backwards. Still outrageous isn't it?

So, do you plan on pulling all your advertisements from other programs that promote a positive christian view because of crazies like westboro baptist, who represent a minority of a whole but are more well known? Great way to pull away from a show that was helping other understand a culture.

THIS IS RIDICULOUS! Would they pull advertising beacuse an irish show didn't portray drinking, an african-american show didn't portray criminals or a catholic show didn't portray molestation. Why would a show be bad for not portraying stereotypes???

4. “But I don't like All American Muslim, who cares?”

I don't want to debate the merits of the show, but let's be realistic. There's a large segment of the Muslim population that doesn't agree with this show because they feel it misrepresents Muslims, or only highlights Shia's instead of Sunni Islam, and so on.

Here's why that doesn't matter. Right wing groups spreading this propaganda don't differentiate between any of us. Sunni, shia, conservative, or liberal. As far as they're concerned, all of us are just putting on a facade to hide some ulterior terrorist motives. That is why it is important to stand up and say we're not going to put up with this bigotry.

Learn a lesson from the story of The Three Bulls

There once lived three bulls, a white bull, a black bull, and a red bull. Looking for food, a lion watched them graze together and realized he could not contend with all three. So he went to the black and red bull and made a deal with them. He told them that he was very ferocious and powerful and that if they let him eat the white bull, he would leave them in peace. The black and red bull agreed, and the lion murdered and then ate the white bull.

Time passed and the lion became hungry again. He went to the red bull and argued that he was ferocious and powerful and that if he let him eat the black bull he would leave him in peace. The red bull agreed and the lion murdered and then ate the black bull.

As time passed and the lion became hungry, he visited the red bull again. As the red bull saw death in the lions eye, as the teeth dug deep into it's neck, it shouted, “Verily I was eaten the day the white bull was eaten!”

 

Who is Babar Ahmad?

Babar Ahmad is a British Citizen who has been detained in the UK for 7 years without trial fighting extradition to the USA under the controversial no-evidence-required Extradition Act 2003.

He was arrested on unfounded terrorism charges and subsequently released with no evidence to support the claims at all. He was then re-arrested on extradition orders from the USA.

In June 2011, the Houses of Parliament, Joint Committee on Human Rights urged the UK government to change the law so that Babar Ahmad's perpetual threat of extradition is ended without further delay. Since all of the allegations against Babar Ahmad are said to have taken place in the UK, we call upon the British Government to put him on trial in the UK and support British Justice for British Citizens.

A time line chronicling his case can be found here.

Why should I sign it?

This is an official government e-petition (read more about them here): we need 100,000 signatures and the petition will debated in British Parliament. It's not one those flaky e-petitions we've been asked to sign a million times before for countless causes… this one can make a difference, inshā'Allāh, so please do not ignore it!

Further, your signature will not be publicised on search engines – so your boss will never find out (but why that should worry you is another matter entirely).

But I can't help everyone…

…but it will only take two minutes to go online, sign the petition with your email address and click on the confirmation link sent to your email in-box.

What happens if I don't sign it?

If he is extradited to America, Babar will be detained in solitary confinement in a supermax prison…for life.

Secondly, this is our brother in Islam and it is our duty as an Ummah to help him in whatever way we can. This is a very small act which could have a huge impact on his life and on his family.

In a hadith narrated by ibn Umar (radiAllahu 'anha), the Prophet (salallahu 'alayhi wasallam) said “A Muslim is the brother of another Muslim”.

Babar is our brother. If it was your dad, your brother or your son, you would want people to sign the petition for a fair trial…so why not for Babar?

For the non-Brits, unfortunately, only UK citizens can sign, but your prayers are needed, and I am sure you have some British friends and relatives knocking about that you can encourage.

PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE THE PETITION: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/885

You can learn more about Babar Ahmad here.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Well-received by the mainstream media (and predictably denounced by Islamophobe bloggers and right-wing press), it's a much-needed, ground-breaking work. Detailed and comprehensive — though an easy read — it ties together and pinpoints exactly what's being said in the Islamophobe arena, who's being paid to say it, and who's paying them to say it.

But how well does it meet the hopeful expectations placed on it by the Muslim community?

Muslims looking for a quick-fix answer or a magic wand that will make Islamophobia go away will have to look elsewhere. There are no solutions here, but that's a good thing. By purposefully avoiding any bullet-point strategic or tactical recommendations, the report will force Muslim individuals and policy makers to shake their complacency, apply their own creative mental rigour and draw up their own strategies.

That makes it one of the most literally thought-provoking works in the contemporary Islamic discourse in recent years (and a real strength of the report).

Muslim groups in general have a mixed record on rising to meet such challenges — so it remains to be seen how well-leveraged the report will become as a resource tool — but the foundation laid down in the report is immense.

However, it's not an explicit call-to-action piece, and there's a slight down side to the report's approach as well. The hypertight focus of “Fear, Inc.” on the Islamophobia network itself leaves no room to include the Muslim relationship and response to Islamophobia, depriving the report of some potentially useful context and giving it an overtly singular tone. While this almost isolated perspective — deep and thorough as it may be — is what should spur Muslims to find creative solutions for countering Islamophobia, it also allows room for failure: While the report doesn't tell groups how to do it right, by the same token it doesn't document how they've occasionally done it wrong and inadvertently fed the Islamophobia beast. Since the report does highlight some Islamophobia network messaging points and debunks them, it only seems appropriate to examine (or at least mention) any Muslim responsibility or accountability, if applicable, in those points' development or propagation.

Glossing over the Muslim element in any Muslim-Islamophobe analysis also runs the risk of imparting a subtle, subliminal reinforcement of the “victim” mentality, which may not play well to a non-Muslim observer (and altogether a mindset for the Muslim community to avoid).

These drawbacks are minor, however, and don't diminish the report's importance and efficacy. All of it is pertinent, useful and meticulously researched.

But what does it all mean? How do Muslim individuals and organizations begin analyzing and applying this rich infomation? Are Muslims even ready for the task?

To dig a little deeper, I had a couple of very nice e-mail conversations with the tireless Wajahat Ali, lead researcher for the project (among his many diverse activities). We talked about context, racism, internal divisions, what's next for CAP, and his own personal take and observations.

• The Context of the CAP Report
• Audience of Report is mainstream, global audience
• Reaction of Anti-Muslim Bigots
• Muslim Community Response
• Root of Fear Inc. Hatred
• Post-report Scenarios

[Mustafa Stefan Dill]: Can you talk a little bit about why the Muslim community's response to the Islamophobe network wasn't really covered?

[Wajahat Ali]: The report has a tightly focused exposé on the inner-workings of the “Islamophobia network” as we have categorized and identified them. Mainly, we wanted to show how a group of seven funders have empowered a tightly connected, self-reliant and effective network of several individuals and organizations to the tune of $42.6 million over the past 10 years to manufacture fear, hysteria and hate against Muslims.

From the beginning, we realized people will ask us several questions, such as, “How come you didn't mention Europe?” Or, “How come you don't do an academic analysis of Sharia?” and so forth. Of course, the report is not an “end-all-be-all” report on Islamophobia but merely a solid foundational beginning to further explore pertinent issues.

Your question regarding the Muslim community's response to the Network is important and warrants an analysis. However, it was not the focus of this particular report.

I look forward to someone writing it up. I'd very much like to read it.

[MSD]: In the AJE piece, you said it was meant for the general population. Can you expand on that and what you hope the general public will do with this? How would you like to see this best used?

[WA]: I'm not your usual, Washington D.C., “policy wonk.” My background is primarily that of a playwright, attorney, commentator and “accidental” community activist. I told CAP from the beginning that if this report would be one of the millions of reports buried in the cocoon of Washington D.C. under the bureaucratic weight of ineffective, mass produced, policy briefs churned almost weekly by the town, then I don't want to waste my time with it.

Thankfully, CAP agreed and we wrote the report for a mainstream, global audience, with grassroots communities, teachers, students, average Joes and Jibrils in mind. Many times people ignore our fellow citizens, neighbors, co-workers, partners in faith and so forth as simply the “laymen.” But real, effective power in changing minds, thoughts and hearts comes from knowledge and disseminating that knowledge to the people. The report is a fact-based, thoroughly sourced result of a six-month investigation.

We strongly believe it has the ability to expose this divisive network that preys on fear, misinformation and ignorance and convey this knowledge in a clear, easy to understand manner for the mass public to build resilience against such nonsense. So, after reading it, people will say, “We didn't know this 'anti-Sharia' threat was totally manufactured by the Network.” “What? The 'Ground Zero Mosque' was a non-issue that was deliberately hyped by the Network and transformed into an international hysteria which has subsequently threatened our national security?” “These faces I see on Fox News – this is what they've said and written about our fellow Americans who happen to be Muslim, Arab or immigrants? This is vile.”

We are confident the facts in this report will also enlighten several law enforcement officials, politicians, and funders to the true nature, intent and ideology of this Network that has promoted its bias and hate under the guise of allegedly working on national security and counter-radicalization issues.

We hope to end “Islamophobia” because it poisons the communal well of America and advances nothing but division and fear against our fellow citizens, which is utterly un-American and anti-American behavior and completely opposite to our shared values.

We hope this report is a step in steering the national discourse on these important issues towards moderation, civility and common sense.

[MSD]: One of the things I've noticed is that the rhetoric of the professional Islamophobe class gets more and more over the top for fear of profit loss when they get called out or when their arguments get eroded — witness the overall increase in vitriol since the Arab Spring, for example. The response so far to your report seems to bear out this trend. Any take or analysis on their response?

[WA]: Good observation. First and foremost, we can safely say this is a lucrative industry. Islamophobia sells, and it brings home a lot of bacon. Never forget, this is a 24-7, daily job for these people. This is how they earn their daily bread, so they will vigorously defend their dubious occupation, which is quite profitable I might add. I mean, wouldn't you if you were David Horowitz and bringing home $500,000 each year for spreading hate? Or how about the $300,000 that Gaffney pockets. Or, the $200K of Robert Spencer and Brigitte Gabriel.

They simply escalate the “crazy.” The foundation of most their arguments is meritless, so it's easy to expose it as fraudulent and laughable. If there was some shame and honesty here, they would retract their statements and issue corrections. But, an honest, forthright discussion on these important issues is not their priority. They want to continue profiting off this absurd circus they've created, which sadly has gone from fringe to mainstream in the past 10 years and threatens people, communities, families, our national discourse and even our national security.

For example, Gov. Christie of New Jersey recently appointed a thoroughly qualified and well respected attorney, Suhail Mohammad, to Superior Court. Steve Emerson, one of the leaders of the Network, responded by saying Gov. Christie has a tin ear for “radical Islam.” 2012 Presidential hopeful Rick Perry's close ties to the Ishmaeli Muslim community in Texas was revealed. Pam Geller's response? Rick Perry is obviously a pro-Sharia, fifth column president. President Obama and President Bush's administration reached out to Muslim communities – why? Because, obviously, their administration is infiltrated by radical Islam. President Obama's staffmember Valerie Jarrett gave statements at the ISNA conference a few years back, which was enough for the Network to prove that it was coddling “Radical Islam,” since ISNA, a moderate, mainstream Muslim American organization, is obviously a front and incubator for stealth jihad. Surprisingly, the same smears were not made against Evangelical leader Rick Warren, who also spoke at ISNA the same year.

The Conservative Political Action Conference — which is the annual Hall of Fame conservative meet-up featuring all-stars from the right — is accused by Frank Gaffney of being infiltrated by Radical Islam. Why? They invited Muslim American Republican Suhail Khan to speak, as well as Republican, anti-tax reformer, non-Muslim Grover Norquist — who happens to be a married to a Muslim.

So, their strategy is simply to ratchet up the crazy, the paranoia, the smears, the baseless allegations, the character assassinations, and keep feeding their base and funders' “terror” and manufactured “bogeymen” just enough to continue lining up their coffers. Since there is hardly any truth, logic, facts or substance behind their arguments, what do they care if sane, rational people attack it with facts and evidence? Again, they are exploiting fear, uncertainty, ignorance for the sake of promoting their agenda and lucrative career built upon smearing millions of Americans simply due to their faith.

[MSD]: What's been the reaction from Muslim communities to the report so far?

[WA]: The response from all communities has been overwhelmingly positive. It's really rewarding and encouraging to see this report, which is a 130 page policy report released by a think tank, go viral and spread on Facebook, Twitter, the blogosphere, and mailing lists by non-DC folk. I'm talking about students, non-academics, grassroots leaders, community leaders of other faiths and ethnicities, the mass media and so forth.

Many Muslim American communities have said, “Thank you! We've been waiting for someone to do this report for years.” They, of course, are sensitive to these issues because their communities have been attacked by these Islamophobia Network organizations and individuals for years. Now, they have facts, evidence, and the categorization and break down of the Network, along with the money trail, to truly dissect it and understand it. It seems to be an empowering, educational and hopeful report. We are proud of that.

Let's not forget this is simply a remake. Muslims are the current bogeyman. In the past, it was Jews, the Irish Catholics, gays and lesbians, and Japanese-Americans. But, eventually, Americans find their moral compass and wake up eventually smelling something rotten festering in their backyard, and we as a society decide to finally clean house. This is us collectively taking out the garbage that is the Islamophobia network and their ideology of hate.

[MSD]: You're touching on an interesting point. Is the root of the network's hatred based on religious difference or racism? For me, that's the possible elephant in the room. In general, the network seems to not target the African – American Muslim communities, who are a great example of long-standing successful American Islamic acculturation (and IMO need to be more represented in various interfaith and Islamic round tables). The network seems to focus on masaajid or leaders of Middle Eastern or South Asian background, as those racial identifiers subconsciously resonate more with the terrorists that make the news headlines.

On the other hand, hatred is hatred, and on a tactical level, does it even matter to understand their motivation?

[WA]: It's difficult to parse out each of their motivations, but I do believe some possess a deep-seated, vitriolic hate against Muslims as evidenced by their own rhetoric and actions. Brigitte Gabriel's grassroots group ACT! for America exists for no other reason than to combat and marginalize Muslims and Islam, although she accomplished her agenda under the guise of allegedly fighting radical Islam. The Anti-Defamation League reviewed this organization and disagreed, asserting she is in fact advancing an anti-Muslim, conspiratorial agenda. She has also said Arabs and Muslims have no soul. Geller and Spencer also seem to be driven by an exaggerated, irrational fear of Muslims. They have protested the construction of mosques in America, supported racist, neo-Nazi groups such as the English Defense League and notorious Islamophobes Geert Wilders. They seem threatened by any sign of Muslim – American empowerment or mainstream visibility.

Others such as Frank Gaffney and Steve Emerson need a convenient boogeyman to justify their occupation and existence to their funders. Gaffney emerges from the paranoid, Cold War mindset, in which he railed against the Soviet threat during the 80′s. Muslims were the next logical replacement for him beginning in the 90′s and especially after Sept. 11. The Tennessean reported Emerson milks money from his donors by exaggerating the threat posed by Muslims.

For others, such as Rush Limbaugh, I simply think it's good fodder for profit and entertainment. I don't think he has a deep hatred for Muslims.

There is definitely a racial component to this movement. It seems to be heavily interested in marginalizing politically active Arab-Americans. Gaffney, Pipes, Geller, Spencer and others frowned upon President Obama's outreach to Muslim communities and they are deeply against the “Arab Spring,” suggesting that this will bring forth a radical Islamist agenda that they allege has already “infiltrated” America.

However, these Islamophobes, such as David Yerushalmi and David Horowitz, also have a “colorful” history of being racist towards African-Americans. Yerushalmi has written they are a murderous race intent on killing themselves, for example. Congressman West, who is African American, has really rallied around the Islamophobia rhetoric since entering Congress. “Islam is a totalitarian theocratic political ideology, it is not a religion,” said West in August 2010 while running for office. “This radical understanding of Islam has been around since 622 AD. It is totalitarian, it is imperialistic in its designs.”

Then in January 2011, he said in a television interview that Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), an American-born convert to Islam, represents the “antithesis of the principles upon which this country was established.” A surprised Rep. Ellison responded: “Contrary to the views expressed by Congressman West, I work to represent the highest ideals of our great nation—ideals like freedom of worship and respect for all faiths, equal protection under the law as well as a civil and open public discourse.”

So, it seems the network has a lot of hate to spread around, regardless of race.

[MSD]: For me, the detailing of the grassroots strategy by ACT! for America was one of the most illuminating portions of the report. I'll be candid: the Muslim community doesn't seem to have the organizational or cultural will or leadership to mount anything near that scale to implement a counterstrategy. I think there's a number of sociocultural factors for that, but do you think such an effort is possible within the Muslim community? What are the risks?

[WA]: Muslim-Americans are not a monolith. We should not seek “unity” for sake of “unity.” It's a fallacy. It's ineffective, unrealistic and untenable. We are the most diverse religious community in America in terms of race, socio-economic background, religious differences, and so forth.

However, there are enough numbers and money in the community that could easily be invested to create a competent, professional, transparent, grassroots organization that has a clear mission statement and clear objectives that are carried out in a methodical manner by people trained and educated to do just that.

It's not rocket science. ACT! For America used a successful playbook that co-founder Guy Rodgers developed in the 90′s with his work for Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition. Not all Republicans, conservatives or those on the right agree with ACT! For America or are ACT! members, but they have a core following that is aligned by a simple issue –”countering radical Islam” — and they are thoroughly organized at empowering this base and helping them spread the message.

Muslim-American grassroots efforts hopefully will be created to spread positive messages that preach inclusivity, tolerance, respect and selfless conduct for the betterment of all communities. The key is to make sure that organization doesn't hold itself out to be “the representative” of Muslim Americans. It is simply one piece of the giant mosaic. And, again, it needs to simply have competent leadership, vision and execution. It's not impossible – it just needs some thought and careful implementation.

To think otherwise is to play in to the victim mentality.

[MSD]: Care to speculate why hasn't this happened yet? What is it in the American Muslim consciousness that prevents us from reaching out across our own diversity and successfully building those internal coalitions?

[WA]: This is a very important question that really goes to the heart of lingering, deep-seated problems afflicting our communities from within. I think generalizations should be avoided since it's far too reductive and simplistic to use terms such as “immigrant” communities vs. “indigenous/native” communities. This language is used to explain the schism between immigrant South Asian and Arab-American communities and existing African-American communities, as if this is insolvable and inherently doomed to linger for further generations.

I have faith that my generation and specifically the upcoming generation — the post-post 9-11 generation, if you will — shall transcend these differences that have existed due to ignorance, harmful assumptions, classism, lack of communication, and — let's face it — racism, by acknowledging its existence and finding proactive solutions based on mutual respect, understanding and empathy.

The “racial” divide exists. Many Muslim American communities — not all — have made the mistake of living in culturally isolated cocoons, burying our heads in the sand, sealed behind a projected bubble of illusory protection, assuming that if we ignore our problems or simply live in cultural ghettos, we will be “safe.” Obviously, this isolation has escalated problems both within the Muslim American communities and with our fellow neighbors of different faiths.

Mostly, the African-American Muslim community has borne the brunt of other Muslims' ignorance, fear and hypocritical double standards. Imagine a South Asian or Arab-American woman bringing home an African-American Muslim man as a potential husband? Thankfully, it has happening more, but we all know the horror stories that have occurred in the past. I pray we see more biracial Muslim American couples in the 21st century — it's perhaps the most healthy, productive and successful way of healing these divides for our future communities.

We also suffer from this romantic idealization of a “back in the motherland” Muslim utopia that doesn't exist, nor has ever existed. Yet the myth persists, which perpetuates a type of exclusive, exaggerated tribalism. So, we divide ourselves further along ethno-tribal lines: Punjabi Pakistani-American vs. Muhajjar Pakistani-American, or Syrian-American vs. Lebanese-American, and so forth. Again, some communities want to perserve this “identity” by living in a cultural cocoon. This is all fine and dandy, but of course, it only helps to perpetuate the divides, not heal it.

And, good ol' classism, which is prevalent in all ethnic communities, also creates tension. Those who have “achieved” the American dream feel the need to protect it by living behind gated communities. They'll go on the Bay Bridge from the East Bay straight to San Francisco but never bother to stop where “the other people” live in Oakland, which is where we need to invest our talent, resources, money and support to help up-and-coming Muslim American communties who have not tasted professional degrees, privilege or elitism.

Finally, intrafaith problems persist. There are Shia vs. Sunni divides and even multiple divides among those respective religious identities. I am a Deobandi Sunni, but I cannot break bread with you because you are Barelvi, or I am Salafi but you are Sufi, so let's engage in a mutual takfir-off and call each other a heathen and infidel, because, you know, that's the best way to resolve our differences.

I think Muslim American communities can unify on takfiring – we seem to be exceptionally talented at the craft.

There has to be a realization that there has never been nor ever wil be one model “Muslim American identity.” It's a fallacy. A pipe dream resulting from smoking too much pipe. It needs to be abandoned for sake of a more rich, healthy, realistic vision of an America that has existed before our very eyes — one that is vibrant, messy, constantly evolving and representative of the best of both America and Islam's rich diversity.

The tent of Islam in America has to widen to include all communities who claim to be Muslim. You don't have to accept their ideologies, actions or beliefs, but you have to accept their existence and their right to identify as a Muslim. That is key. Instead of closing the tent and excluding some of our best resources –i.e., our fellow Muslims — due to differences in ideology, race, or class, we need to be intelligent, compassionate, strategic and open to seeing how we share similar values and goals, despite our differences.Then we can use that as a foundation in uniting to serve God and our fellow neighbors.

[MSD]: Where does CAP go from here? What do you see as the next piece of research that needs to be done?

[WA]: I cannot speak for CAP. But, the report was intended to create a foundation for further analysis on niche issues. So I see this report as a jumping off point, a stable base which we can use to explore the similarities or differences between Islamophobia in U.S. and Europe. There is definitely a strong trans-Atlantic relationship between both Islamophobia networks and I think that hasn't fully explored in depth and detail.

[MSD]: Any general observations about that relationship, or about Islamophobia in Europe in general, that you can make yet? Any effective counter-responses there that you've noticed?

[WA]: There is a tremendous connection between the Islamophobia network in Europe and the one that has currently risen in the United States. Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass murderer who killed 76 people (mostly youth) in August, was ideologically inspired by the Islamophobia network in America. He left behind a detailed, meticulous 1,500 page manifesto outlining his reasons for his crime and also as a “training manual” to inspire fellow perverse criminals. He mainly opposed what he calls the Islamization of Europe, multiculturalism, and Muslim immigration to Europe. He cites Robert Spencer's blog and writings more than 162 times, and he cites the Islamophobia network players more than 200 times in total. He shares their same worldview when it comes to seeing Muslims as suspects, threats, anti-”Western” and so forth.

Pam Geller and Robert Spencer, the co-founders of the hate group Stop Islamization of America, were inspired by the European group Stop Islamization of Europe, founded by a marginalized, far right, racist and fascist Islamophobe named Anders Gravers. Geller has called Danish politician Geert Wilders, perhaps the world's most notorious and well known Islamophobe, her “hero.” In turn, Wilders refers to Geller as his “hero.” Wilders has called for a ban on Muslim immigration to Europe, a ban on mosques and a ban on the Quran. Congressman Allen West of Florida refers to him as his “comrade,” and David Horowitz and Brigitte Gabriel have also praised and defended him as well. Wilders was recently invited by the grassroots organizations Tennessee Eagle Forum and TN Freedom Coalition to give a hate-filled screed against Islam and Muslims in front of 3,000 people at Cornerstone mega-church. He parroted all the fears, hysteria and misinformation about Muslims, Islam and Sharia that have been spouted by American Islamophobes. The crowd gave him a standing ovation. David Horowitz's blog condensed his speech into talking points and subsequently praised it.

Individuals have written academic pieces and investigative journalism pieces on this, but we should expect more detailed analysis similar to the CAP report exposing this transatlantic network sometime in the next year.

[MSD]: What other areas do you see needing investigation?

[WA]: I also believe a more focused analysis on the effect, or lack thereof, the Islamophobia Network has on foreign policy is warranted. Another would be the effects this type of rhetoric has on our national security.

I would also love a report to trace the similarities if any of the Islamophobia network's “fear-mongering” playbook deployed against Muslims compared to what other minorities in America have suffered in years past. My research shows the tactics to be eerily similar.

The jury has found the 10 Muslim students tried GUILTY on both counts.  The judge has ruled a sentence which includes:  a 3 year informal probation, 56 hours of community service with a non-profit organization for each defendant, and $200 in fines.  The sentence will most likely be suspended if the students complete their community service before January 31st and their probation will most likely be dropped after 1 year.  The judge made these rulings based on the students' clean records, being productive members of the community, and because he believes that the students' actions were political.

Walk the talk! If you REALLY believe in the Irvine-11 and what they are doing for ALL of us, then donate towards their legal fees here: http://www.mlfa.org/irvine-11 (click on DONATE button top left)

Message of support on twitter: Send a msg to @irvine_11 so these brave heroes know how proud we are of them.

Or Email them: support@irvine11.com

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

As we all await the jury verdict in the Irvine 11 case with bated breaths, I wanted to take the opportunity to talk about the “big picture”, especially since the Israel Lobby minions are in full swing to change the narrative of what has become one of the biggest fiascos in the American justice system history.

While the Defense lawyers did an admirable job arguing the specifics of the case, the fact that some people are confused by the technical legal issues in play is exactly why it is important to redouble our efforts to maintain the big picture and the “real” facts. None of what I am about to say is new, but we cannot say it enough in order to counter the misinformation being spread online:

If these were not Muslims, there would be no case

I think this is so obvious that it needs no explanation, but nevertheless needs to headline any story on Irvine-11. Why? Because we have had documented cases of nearly identical situations that have occurred with other student groups and individuals doing the same sort of protesting at events, but none ever facing prosecution. In fact, is there any case in our entire American legal history, where individuals are being prosecuted for sloganeering in a public speech? None! If such a precedent existed, you would have bet that would have been front and center for the prosecution.

Let's refer to two examples to highlight my stated assertion:  One in which a Muslim speaker was nearly shutdown AT the SAME university (UCI), and secondly where non-Muslims (Jewish students) protested an Israeli speaker, Netanyahu. So, these two events cover the entire spectrum of possible scenarios.

HISTORICAL PROOF of SIMILAR PROTESTS (not prosecuted):

(1) College Republicans interrupted Muslim speaker Amir Abdel Malik at UCI. The protest was so overwhelming that the UCI's College Republicans literally shut the speaker down.

• Link to Youtube Video
• Article by John Esposito referring to the incident.

(2) Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) protested Israeli Prime-Minister Netanyahu at NOLA in November 2010

• Tale of two protests (including Youtube video of the JVP protest)

If an Israeli speaker was not on the other side, there would be no case

Mearsheimer and Walt captured the spirit of the Israeli Lobby strength in their book that literally shook the Israeli-firsters in America. Since then, there has been a steady attack on both, each accused of anti-Semitism and every evil in the world. Ironically enough, their speeches have been stopped by the Lobby (one example); so forget about being heckled, they weren't even allowed to make their speech at all.

If the power of the Lobby was in any doubt, then I hope that those doubts were put to rest by the recent clamoring of BOTH Republicans and Democrats, both Congressional and Executive to please the Prime-Minister of Israel, belonging to extremist right-wing Likud party (no different from Hamas on the other side) on the UN Palestine issue. Even the Nobel Peace Prize winner President Obama (the Nobel committee must be highly embarrassed by its strange decision that is being proven wrong daily) is scrambling to declare his love for Israel, and could only describe Israeli suffering in his UN speech, not offering even a single word of solace to the ACTUAL people being occupied and brutalized, Palestinians.

It is one thing though for the Israel-first part of the Lobby to influence America's foreign policies, but it is quite another when it starts affecting the fabric and soul of the American nation, trying to take away the liberty and freedom of expression from those who voice anti-Israel positions. The Israel Lobby realizes that the new generation, including Jewish Americans (as we see with Jewish Voices for Peace), will not necessarily swallow all of Israeli hasbara. More and more Jewish voices are rejecting not only the hawkish explanations for why peace cannot be achieved, but they are proactively pushing for the silenced Palestinian voice in American circles. Thus for the Lobby, with the Congress  firmly in control, The Lobby has been actively targeting American campuses (campuswatch website by Daniel Pipes is just one of the many efforts to silence any anti-Israel dissent). Thus when the Irvine-11 were able to challenge the Lobby's campus strategy, the Lobby saw it as a test, and felt the need to try to use the American justice system to help in their political goals.

Why the Israel Lobby is willing to bet on an American jury to deliver the unfathomable.

While we pray and hope for fair-minded individuals on the jury to deliver the Irvine-11 from this witch-hunt, the Lobby is also likely optimistic, betting that the negative public opinion on Muslims and Arabs will deliver a decision that would be otherwise unfathomable– a guilty verdict. Think about it. The American jury system is all about being tried by one's peers. Whenever there is an imbalance in the jury composition relative to the defendant, we can and have seen lopsided results. That is why African Americans and other minorities, in general, have found it harder to achieve justice. On the flip-side, when the jury is swung enough in favor of the “peer-type”, you can get the OJ Simpson type result as well.

With Muslims representing only a fraction of the American population, and the prosecution ensuring that no Muslim will serve on any jury that is trying Muslims, Muslim defendants are hardly being tried by peers. Consider all the cases against Muslims thus far where their faith was “part of the equation”, number of jury members Muslims = zero. Furthermore, considering the nearly 50% negative opinion of Muslims, is it too hard to imagine that statistically one can expect 50% of any jury will already be biased against a Muslim or Arab defendant, especially when the case highlights religious or ethnic identity? Jury is composed of humans, and if they have a prejudice, regardless of the specifics of the case, they will tend to be moved by arguments that resonate with their biases and reject those that contradict the biases. Rarely will you find a person who is able to shut off the prejudice part to be entirely objective.

Whatever happens today, the Irvine-11 will be victorious

Even though I have no relation to any of the students, have never met one of them, I still feel as if I too am on trial, standing besides them. And I am only one of millions (composed of people from all faith). Each of the Irvine-11 (or 10 now) likely could have accepted some plea bargain to get off for some sort of deal, yet they stuck to their principles because they realized that the fear-mongering and witch-hunt against them by the Israel-firsters was not about them, but about the larger question of freedom of expression in America. And in this case, specifically the freedom and right to support A CAUSE (Palestine in this case), regardless of whether one believes in the cause or not.

So whatever happens today (we pray Allāh frees them), the Irvine-11 individuals will be victorious. And I hope and pray that the community supports them with everything at their disposal (jobs, security, etc.) if the jury falls to its own prejudices and the American justice fails them. And if indeed the Defense wins the case against the odds, then count the Defense team among the heroes!

In conclusion, as Evelyn Beatrice Hall said (often quoted by right-wing but only in talk, not in action), “I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, and that should be the standard for all fair minded Americans. Prayers for Irvine-11 & for America: Acquittal will be victory for BOTH. Conviction will be one of darkest chapters ONLY for USA.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Irvine Eleven trial has now concluded and a verdict is awaited from the jury.  Jury deliberations will continue throughout today, Wednesday, September 21st. As soon as a verdict is made, updates will be announced here. Please keep the Irvine Eleven in your dua'as in this crucial time!

• Mohamed Elibiary is a Dallas-based Texas Muslim community leader and an Advisor to the Homeland Security Enterprise.
• While the recent report by Ackerman on FBI's “Islam training” is troubling, Elibiary provides some contextual insight
• How is the key FBI trainer, Gawthrop, viewed in FBI circles? Who is Coughlin and his relevance?
• Allaying Muslim community concerns & learning from the “Texas model”
• Elibiary's own personal experiences in dealing with the FBI

Insights about the Exposé

Earlier this week, a news story broke and achieved what rarely happens, broad-based scrutiny and indignation towards the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). In Wired Magazine, Spenser Ackerman' s article exposed FBI Counter-Terrorism training at Quantico as unprofessional and inaccurate. The training manuals were filled with information based on anti-Muslim bigotry or Islamophobia. As a liaison between the FBI and the Muslim community, I can attest that there is nothing new in Ackerman's reporting and could add volumes more to it of FBI wrongdoings; nonetheless, it has been disquieting and demoralizing for someone in my position to watch the ripple effects upon our community's psyche.

In response to this FBI anti-Muslim bigotry training story breaking, a dear friend wrote to me lamenting that “this report goes against almost everything we are working as a community to do to reach out to authorities. It's like we moderate orthodox Muslims are left out to dry, and all of our arguments that there is little to no racism and bigotry within the circles of security agencies in America against Muslims are all bogus!”

The sentiments of this influential national community leader were echoed by another community leader who summed up her community's concerns as “OMG, look at what they are doing to us?”; she continued by relating an example of how many millions were possibly spent in her hometown over the years promoting such ideas. I realize that our communities are scared and outraged but I would like to emphasize the following points as we read reports like Mr. Ackerman's:

Who is Gawthrop? - William Gawthrop, the analyst who authored most of the training in the article, is well-known and detested in many FBI circles. The reason we're seeing his work being made public is because there are agents inside the FBI trying to marginalize him and push him out. If one reads between the lines, even the article's author hints at FBI insiders assisting. These forces are trying to make Gawthrop's tactics public, as it's not easy to fire a federal employee because of all the rules involved.

The Coughlin Factor - I would encourage concerned citizens to study the case of Rtd. Major Stephen Coughlin, who gave his inaccurate understanding of Hanafi, Malaki and Shafi Fiqh as true foundations of terrorism to the Joint Military Chiefs of Staff themselves before having his contract retired and pushed out of the Pentagon.

• For full disclosure, I did not play any role at DOD concerning Coughlin, but did fly up to the Freedom and Justice Foundation office years ago with well-known scholars like Dr. Waleed Basyouni to deeply analyze the arguments in Coughlin's Master's thesis on this topic. I shared that research with some FBI and Homeland Security Intelligence Enterprise allies back then.
• What Coughlin and Gawthrop type analysts are essentially arguing to National Security officials is that violent extremism is a product of religious (theological, not identity) “radicalization” and not sociological, psychological or political. People like Robert Spencer on the outside try to perform the role of echo chamber in order to mainstream such analysis and provide it with a base inside the political system.
• I believe as Coughlin's career was ended, so will Gawthrop's and other less infamous full-time analysts inside the National Security enterprise, due to many factors about our country's resilient value system and scientific inquiry appetite that these individuals hardly understand.

What is the solution? - As counter-intuitive as it sounds, the solution on a national level is not top down but requires that we work city by city and state by state to reorient the system. Even with the portions of my bio I elected to share below, someone in my position very infrequently travels to the White House or engages with the National Security Council Staff on these issues. The real work that needs to be done is at the local city and state levels.  Federalism is a powerful concept, and American Muslim advocacy strategies have yet to be leveraged effectively.

The Tipping Point - When a community working with its local law enforcement partners gets relations at a regional FBI field office to the tipping point, then you'll see local FBI officials push back to HQ and the intelligence community on the ideas that Gawthrop and co. promote. You will also see the top FBI official in a city put out clear messaging to local police executives of what is the true relationship with the local Muslim community, contrary to what politicians like Peter King might message on a FOX opinion show. Accurate and beneficial counter-terrorism law enforcement training will replace bigoted, for-profit, alarmist nonsense that undermines local security by disenfranchising American Muslims allied in countering violent extremism.

Look for good FBI agents - Just like there are bridge burners like Gawthrop, I also know of FBI agents who, out of their own pockets, buy proper Islamic books for office libraries, read Bukhari and Muslim, and confer with community-based allies about training materials HQ instructors have taught them at Quantico.

The bottom line is that we live in a democracy, and, just as we have in this country civilian oversight of the military, we also have civilian oversight of Intelligence, Counter Terrorism and Homeland Security systems. The challenge for the Muslim community has always been simply: how do we “step up our game” and become civic leaders of society around these topics? Or as Mahdi Bray used to say in community fundraisers I attended growing up, raising our children to become “headlights” and not just “taillights”.

Muslim Community Concerns

Sitting one day in a government meeting at DHS-HQ last year, I recall in a briefing we were receiving from a national polling agency on the public's attitude towards various law enforcement agencies that American Muslims generally had a 60% confidence level in the FBI. The numbers broke down a little less for African-American Muslims than other segments of the community but that certainly is expected given the well documented historical experiences there. It has been a long time since I've witnessed a media report resonate across so many segments of Muslim communities as this Ackerman report, so we'll have to wait to see if it produces a long-lasting impact upon the Muslim community's confidence in the bureau.

Those of us who, while informed by the past, are constantly looking forward might then wonder, so what next? How does one size the scale of this problem of inaccurate counter terrorism training at the FBI and across the wider law enforcement community? How does this problem get fixed? How much impact on national security policy development do Islamophobia's promoters really have and which forces can one strengthen to counter and marginalize them?

The reality is that a dissertation can be written about each of these questions, but considering the points mentioned above can help distinguish reality from perception. As Muslims, we know, more than any other segment of society, that the public does not get an accurate understanding of Islam and Muslim issues simply through the media and that personal contact is the more accurate conveyor of reality. Similarly, what's good for the goose is good for the gander in this case, and so replacing FBI for Muslim in the preceding sentence is similarly accurate.

One must engage with the FBI across its various enterprise elements (ex. local Agent, support staff, Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), supervisors, Special Agents in Charge (SAC), national security branch Asst. SACs Head Quarters Intelligence Analysts, HQ Section Chiefs, Office of Public Affairs (OPA), CT Division, Directorate of Intelligence, Asst. Directors, Exec. Asst. Directors, the Director, previous Directors, retired FBI personnel, FBI whistle blowers, Overseas FBI Legal Attaché Officers, other elements across the National Security Enterprise that engage with various parts of the FBI, etc.) to get an accurate temperature of the organization's policies, attitudes and “culture”.

Learning from the Texas Model

Several hundred Texas Muslim community leaders from each city across the Lone Star State were present at a conference our foundation organized on Homeland Security inside the Texas State Capitol on September 10, 2004. I told them it simply boils down to “Your Rights as Americans, Your Duties as American Muslims.” Yes, surveys show we're patriotic and the majority of us are supportive of law enforcement, but who amongst us wants to have our kids waiting for the FBI to figure out all the Muslim world's complexities all on its own?

In Texas (Dallas & Houston), our community charted a third way over the past decade, not with the National Security hawks who scrutinize every benign social development amongst Muslims globally and not with the big government types who would forsake civil liberties in pursuit of domestic security. We didn't have to throw national community groups or other law-abiding American Muslim leaders under the bus to solve these problems as sell-out Muslims do, but we also didn't elect to sit behind our keyboards and complain that we have no power to act because that's not our deen either.

In Dallas and Houston, where 90% of the Texas Muslim community lives, there are many strong relationships between local Muslim community leaders across dozens of masajid, Islamic schools and local community groups and multiple FBI Special Agents, Joint Terrorism Task Force Supervisors, and Special Agents in Charge & Asst. SACs

National Muslim groups, like CAIR and Muslim Advocates, have issued their press releases and called upon elements within the Department of Justice and FBI to conduct their investigations, so these groups are already taking care of the top-down solution method our community has been employing since the early 90s. We can, in our various cities, enhance these efforts by expanding the grassroots work happening at the city and state levels that the Texas Muslim community has begun to become recognized for at the national level as the “Third Way” model of building a Centrist Environment. For these are the problems that no President can truly solve on his own.

There are 56 FBI field offices, 16 of which in major American cities have 60-70% of the FBI's counter terrorism personnel, about 400 small town resident agency (RA) offices and a handful of agents in LegAt offices in US Embassies oversees. There are way more of us then there are of them, so let's love them with the self-confidence that our religion teaches us that God doesn't put a burden upon a people who can't carry it. I'm not saying to 'move on, nothing to see here' in Mr. Ackerman's work, but instead let's get to work because there's nothing “new” here to anyone already working extensively on these challenges.

My Personal Experience

On Thursday, September 8^th FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III personally handed me the Louis E. Peters Memorial Service Award for 2011 in front of an audience of over five hundred retired Directors (ie. Judge William Webster who was Director of not just the FBI but also the CIA), a couple of dozen national security and law enforcement VIPs and several hundred retired FBI officials.

The Peters Award is the highest honor awarded annually to a civilian by the FBI whose assistance was invaluable in a major investigation. This year signified the first time it was given to someone working in the Homegrown Violent Extremism sphere that the American Muslim community has been struggling with post 9/11.

It was a closed-door ceremony in a banquet hall without media, a bit like the scene in the movie Charlie Wilson's War where the CIA gives him their highest civilian award for all he did to help remove the Soviets from Afghanistan. Two of the cases, in which I played the unique role of having one hand stretched out to the FBI and the other hand stretched out to local Muslim community leadership across multiple cities, were shared.

In both of these cases, like others, involved my being the trusted diplomat in two worlds who from my vantage point are married at the hip for the foreseeable future. Both the FBI and the American Muslim community are riding in the same boat, and should God forbid another disaster like 9/11 befall our country, neither party will be able to save its skin from the wrath of the American people by throwing the other party under the bus.

In the introduction explaining why I was receiving the award, Lester Davis as the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI stated that “For the past eight years he has been working closely with the FBI and the Muslim community to create a relationship built on trust and respect. Never once has Mr. Elibiary requested any compensation or recognition for his efforts. The work he has undertaken to spot, identify and address radicalization in the United States cannot be understated.”

The FBI continued on their website press release by further stating that “Mr. Elibiary, of Dallas, Texas, was selected as a result of his extraordinary contributions to specific cases in support of the FBI's counterterrorism mission. He has also been a consensus builder between the national Islamic community and the numerous agencies dedicated to the prevention of terrorism.”

One thing I stated in my speech to that audience is that while “the last decades have witnessed a transformation of our FBI into the global intelligence led crown jewel in our nation's security architecture, with such awesome power comes awesome responsibility also of the bureau as the guardian of our civil, democratic fabric.”

In private, I further relayed to the Director that our community is willing and able to help FBI-HQ address homegrown violent extremism challenges more effectively but that in the meantime, we will continue to work at the grassroots level to help build up relationships with field offices. The message was clear and constructive, so as long as we act like empowered citizens and continue then more positive changes are inevitable, God willing.

In every advocacy strategy employed there are foundational assumptions. Though not an activist pre-9/11, nor belonging to a national community organization, I convened a few dozen community leaders at a Dallas hotel about a year after 9/11 to lay out my own foundational assumptions on how “the system” was working and the beginning of a road map for us as Texas Muslims on how we'd address governmental challenges. Over the years, traveling coast-to-coast visiting with all kinds of Muslim community leaders I've learned to appreciate the wisdom behind federalism even more.

As the FBI's own press release highlights, I elected after 9/11 to perform a consensus building role, whether across government security agencies or the national Islamic community. Just like there are good Muslims and bad Muslims, there are good FBI and bad FBI. What the average American Muslim needs to understand is that, while our post 9/11 relationship might have been securitized with our fellow countrymen due to factors beyond our control, if we step up our game and learn how to identify the good FBI, ally with them and stay the course, then it's a simple “we win and they [anti-Muslim Bigots] lose”.

As a father, I asked myself years ago: do I want to pass on these challenges to my kid's generation or do I want them to get a better position in America's bright future? Each one of us has to answer that question for ourselves, get busy working in our cities to engage deeper with the FBI and win this marathon of reorienting America's National Security Enterprise, or we can sit on our hands, complain and hope by some miracle the politicians will fix it for us.

Mohamed Elibiary is a Dallas-based Texas Muslim community leader and an Advisor to the Homeland Security Enterprise. He has served for multiple years on the Training Advisory Board of the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), and was appointed by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) in October 2010 after his earlier service on the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group helping craft the department and broader law enforcement community's framework to addressing Homegrown Violent Extremism (HVE). Mohamed has testified on Homeland Security matters before both the Texas State Legislature and the US Congress (“Working with Communities to Disrupt Terror Plots” – March 2010). He works as a private consultant at Lone Star Intelligence, LLC and speaks often on Homeland Security, Counter Terrorism and Community Partnership matters at law enforcement conferences. Mohamed has assisted multiple offices at the Dept. of Justice to advance Community Oriented Policing methodologies and the Building Communities of Trust (BCOT) Initiative. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) in a report to Congress highlighted how in the previous administration Mohamed assisted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) Program Manager for the Information Sharing Environment (PM-ISE) to crafter landmark civil liberties protecting guidelines for the Nationwide Suspicious Activities Reporting Initiative (NSI). These landmark federal guidelines for Fusion Centers were expanded upon by a broad-based coalition of faith-based civic groups and DPS and passed by the Texas State Legislature in 2011 as Law enacted through the Texas Fusion Center Policy Council (TFCPC).

“We were of the most disgraced of people, and Allāh granted us honor with this Islam.  Now, whenever we seek honor in other than that which Allāh honored us with, Allāh shall disgrace us (once again).”

—'Umar b. al-Khaṭṭāb

“Black people in America can never be Muslim,” he said to me as I stood next to his desk.  I stared at my teacher with an expression that must have conveyed very little of what I felt right then.  I didn't know what to say.  I studied his eyes, slightly enlarged by the thick glasses he wore.  The deep olive of his Arab complexion was nearly the same as my American brown.  We even shared the same hair texture—though my hair was covered right then.

But, even so, to an outsider looking in, he could have easily been my father. And given that he was the only Muslim teacher I had at the high school, I should have at least shared with him the commonality of “brother and sister” in Islam. But that, I knew, was impossible to this man.  He was Arab.  I was American—and “Black” at that.  He wanted to make sure I understood this impossibility.  I did.

I continued standing where I was only because I was waiting for my teacher to mention the reason he had called me to his desk.  The other students were at their seats working, some looking up curiously every now and then, wondering what it was our teacher wanted from me.  Naturally, like most students would, they imagined I'd gotten myself in trouble somehow, and they didn't want to miss the action.  I waited only because I didn't want to miss his point.

The teacher's matter-of-fact expression as he blinked back at me confused me only momentarily.  I hesitated for only a second after the realization, mostly out of respect, and I made an effort not to display disdain for my elder as I excused myself and returned to my seat.  But it was impossible for me to concentrate after that.  I was genuinely perplexed.

…

“In life,” my father told us once, “you'll meet many people who'll say al-salāmu 'alaykum, but they're not really Muslim.”  He shook his head.  “No, I don't mean they're not Muslims to Allāh.  I mean they're not living Islam.  They have no idea what this religion means.”

I thought of my Arab teacher.

“Beauty is in carrying yourself like a Muslim,” my parents would say.  “Beauty is in living Islam.”

…

I stood browsing the shelves of the modest store—“the Sooq”—adjacent to the prayer area of the Islamic center I liked to attend in suburban Washington, D.C.  I did a double take before picking up the small box.  I stared at it a moment longer, realizing my eyes hadn't been mistaken at all.  The skin-bleaching cream—manufactured in a Muslim country—did indeed say what I thought it said.

The solution to pollution.

Next to this tagline was the image of two faces, one brown (incidentally very close to my own skin tone) and the other white—the “before” and “after” of this product.  Disgusted, I returned the box to the shelf and left.

…

“And here we have a black woman,” the Muslim lecturer told the audience, his voice rising to reflect the sincerity of his message as he shared the famous ḥadīth about the black woman afflicted with seizures, a story he hoped would encourage his Muslim sisters to take ḥijāb more seriously,  “a black woman who wanted to guard her modesty.   So she asked the Prophet, ṣallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam, to invoke Allāh so that she wouldn't become uncovered.   Sisters, this was a black woman…”

…

“My father would never let me marry a Black man,” my friend from Trinidad told me as we chatted one day.  She laughed and shook her head.  I couldn't help noticing that her skin was a much richer brown than my own.  “He told me, 'You can marry whoever you want, but don't ever marry a Black man.'”

…

“I must admit,” a sister from Somalia said after meeting me for the first time.  We were at a book event for my novels held at an Islamic convention. “I'm really surprised you're Black.”  As we talked, she apologized for her prejudice:  She had been unable to fathom that such “well-written” books could come from a Black American.  Later at the same convention, a fellow American said something similar—but in different words.  “And she's really intelligent,” he said as he introduced me to his wife.  His voice was between disbelief and awe.  I smiled as I reached out to shake the hand of a woman who studied me with a sense of uncertainty that strangely mirrored her husband's shock at my brain's capacity.  I read the question in her eyes.  Really?  Are you sure?

I could say that these experiences scarred me for life, that I went home in tears, and that these people's bigotry incited within me that horrible inferiority complex due to my “Blackness” and my utter inability to be accepted not only by “White America” but also by the “real” Muslims of the world.

But I won't.  That would be dishonest.  Truth is, I felt sorry for these people.

When I was still in high school, I would come home and recount such stories to my younger sister, and like myself at the time, she would become perplexed.  And to be really honest, we would even laugh at times—not with the quiet, hesitant giggle most appropriate for our “lowly” status, but with the thunderous throw-your-head-back laugh that makes your stomach hurt and tears sting your eyes.  This was how we dealt with much of the bigotry we witnessed in life.

Perhaps I am an exception.  I can't be sure.  But I didn't reach adulthood thinking I was less than anyone else.  I didn't shrink in the face of those deemed above me—whether Muslim or non-Muslim—and demurely accept their “superior” status.  Quite frankly, I didn't know they had one.  Yes, I knew about those suffering from a tragic sense of insecurity, which made it necessary for them to release “statistics” about others' intellectual abilities (or lack thereof) or call a student to their desk to say she couldn't be Muslim.

Or to believe, perhaps, that those who aren't Black are actually inferior.  But, alḥamdulillāh, I didn't go through any of that.

Yes, in childhood, I was mistreated—by non-Muslims mostly due to my Islam and brown skin and by Muslims mostly due to my “lack of Islam” because of my brown skin.  And yes, it hurt.  And yes, I cried from time to time.  And no, I didn't always feel confident in my Muslim headscarf and brown skin.  And, naturally, I didn't reach adulthood without insecurities (if such a thing is possible).

But, by Allāh's mercy, I also didn't reach adulthood insecure. My self-image and self-esteem centered around one thing: my Islam.  So when I picked up a “Muslim” magazine and happened upon the matrimonial section, it didn't even occur to me that I should feel slighted or offended when I read dozens of ads by men looking for “fair” wives.  I had a good laugh.  And my sister did too.

…

“I'm Whiter than You”

I flipped back to the page of Al-Jumuah Magazine I had just seen.  For a moment I just stared at the title.  I couldn't imagine what the article would be about.  If there was a turning point in my youthful naïveté, reading this article was probably it—though I was a wife and mother at the time I came across this piece.

To the author's credit, the article was well-written and reflective.  She was a White American who had accepted Islam and, due to her (apparently) being the recipient of superfluous praise for her appearance, she wished to let us know the downside of having white skin—sunburns and the like.

What was life-changing about this for me was two-fold:  that the author had been inspired to write it in the first place and, what's more, that a reputable Muslim magazine had seen value in printing it.

I sat still for quite some time.  I wasn't hurt.  I wasn't indignant.  I was…confounded.

And concerned.

…

When I was in high school, a local radio show held a citywide essay contest, and contestants were to write about the hero in their lives.  The winning piece would be read live from the Indianapolis radio station and broadcast for all the city to hear.  As I contemplated whom I would write about, many personalities crossed my mind.  Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Rosa Parks…  But in the end, I chose my father.  And, to my surprise, I won.

I stood before the microphone as the radio host looked on, and I shared with the world my honest testimony of what I felt right then—that my father was my hero in life.  It wasn't because he was a well-known community activist or because I'd grown accustomed to seeing his name in the newspaper or his face on television.  It wasn't even because he was the spiritual advisor to the famous boxer Mike Tyson.  It was because, despite the many obstacles he faced in life and despite his being a rather ordinary man, he managed to instill in me, as well as my siblings, a love for the lives that Allāh gave us.  And never once did he make me or my siblings believe that our worth (or beauty) could be measured by—or limited to—our bodies or skin.

In a word, he taught us…truth.  Today, I find it truly heartbreaking that of the more than one billion Muslims in the world, so few of them could say the same of their parents.

…

Unfortunately, in today's world, Muslims—whether “fair” or “dark,” Arab or non-Arab, Black or White—seek honor in lifestyles and values that are far removed from Islam.

“Is it honor you seek among them?  Nay, all honor is with Allāh.”

—Qur'an (Al-Nisā', 4:139)

While in truth, we should seek honor in only one lifestyle:

That of being slaves.

Not to our country, skin color, tribe, or family name.  And not even to our “victim status” as oppressed people of the world.

But to Allāh, our Creator.  Who has given us Islam.

If we don't seek honor through this religion, we will continue to live in humiliation and make utter fools of ourselves.  Not only through revealing our tragic colonial mentality in racist comments, ridiculous matrimonial ads, and bizarre articles in magazines.  But through our sullied souls when we die and meet Allāh.

For to our Creator, there is but one measure of human beauty and worth:  Being Allāh's slaves on earth.  And these superior slaves are not distinguished due to their bodies or skin.  But due to their pure hearts and righteous deeds…

And through having in their breasts not even a grain of pride when they are buried in the dirt from which they were created.

So as we take pride in the color (or lack thereof) of our fleshy dirt,

Tell me, O child of Adam…

Are you amongst these honored slaves?

Umm Zakiyyah is the internationally acclaimed author of the If I Should Speak trilogy and the novels Realities of Submission and Hearts We Lost.  To learn more about the author, visit themuslimauthor.com or join her Facebook page.