<html>
<body>
<h1><font size=4 color="#FF0000"><b>2 Articles Follow<br><br>
</i></font>Tarek Mehanna: From suburban teenager to convicted
terrorist</b></h1><font size=3>
<a href="http://www.latitudenews.com/story/tarek-mehanna-suburban-teenager-accused-terrorist/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.latitudenews.com/story/tarek-mehanna-suburban-teenager-accused-terrorist/<br>
<br>
</a>by <a href="http://www.latitudenews.com/author/michael-may/">Michael
May</a> on December 19, 2011<br><br>
UPDATE 12/20 11:30: The jury found Tarek Mehanna guilty on all counts
after deliberating for ten hours.<br><br>
It’s unusual for an accused terrorist to have an American fan base. But
that’s the situation with Tarek Mehanna, a second-generation Egyptian
American on trial in federal district court in Boston for providing
material support to terrorism and other crimes. Mehanna’s supporters
crowd the courtroom nearly every day of the eight-week trial – more than
a hundred showed up for the closing arguments. The chasm between the
competing portrayals of Tarek Mehanna is deep. His supporters say he was
a loving teacher and a role model to local Muslim youths, and are
convinced the government is pursuing him just for expressing his anger at
U.S. foreign policy. The government says he’s the type of guy who would
consider killing Americans at a mall in cold blood.<br><br>
So, who is the real Tarek Mehanna? The Mehannas live in the bedroom
community of Sudbury, Massachusetts. His father teaches at the
Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and both Tarek and his brother also
graduated from there. His brother, Tamer Mehanna, told me that
Tarek grew up a typical American kid. He went through various phases as a
teenager in the 1990s. Comic books. Drawing. Grunge music. He was the
resident Nirvana expert among their friends. “You go into my brother’s
room,” Tamer said, “and he had binders of histories of the band,
discographies, rare LPs. My brother always wanted to know everything
about what he was interested in. And that carried into Islam as
well.”<br><br>
<a href="http://www.theworld.org/2011/12/tarek-mehanna/">Listen to
Michael May’s story on Tarek Mehanna for PRI’s </a><i>The
World</i><a href="http://www.theworld.org/2011/12/tarek-mehanna/">.</a>
<br><br>
</font><h3><b>Inspired by an unlikely source</b></h3><font size=3>But
Fundamentalist Islam was more than a phase. The transformation happened
in 2000, during Tarek’s senior year in high school. And it was sparked by
an unlikely source: Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of The United
States. His anthropology teacher assigned the book. Zinn’s radical take
on U.S. history inspired Tarek to learn more about his faith. “Because
before that, we were kids, we didn’t think about the world,” says Tamer.
“And neither of us had given much thought to our identity as Muslims here
in America.” Soon, Tarek grew his beard and began hanging out with a
close-knit group of devout Muslim men.<br><br>
Tarek lived with his parents in a plush suburban home until he was taken
into custody two years ago. His room, in contrast, is austere and just
how he left it. Nothing but a bed. Some weights. And a wall of
floor-to-ceiling bookshelves, filled with leather-bound texts covered in
gilded Arabic script. Tarek’s passion was translating the particulars of
Islamic law from Arabic and putting them on his blog for other
English-speaking Muslims. His friend Mohamed Bahe, a radiology student,
got to know Tarek online. He went to his blog to read ancient texts that
he otherwise wouldn’t have had access to. “And he had hundreds and
hundreds of translations on marriage, prayer, dealing with fellow
kinsman, friends, how to be a good Muslim,” says Bahe. “His blog dealt
with all aspects of life, which is what I really liked about
it.”<br><br>
<b>The War Comes Home<br><br>
</b>Tarek’s spiritual awakening happened at a difficult time for American
Muslims. First there was 9/11. Then the U.S. retaliated by invading
Afghanistan and Iraq. Tarek viewed the wars as an attack on Muslims. And
Tarek felt Muslims had the right to defend themselves by any means
necessary. Tarek began to post on a listserve called At-Tibyan
Publications where English-speaking Muslims praised Al Queda. Bahe also
frequented the site. “He would always tell me, who am I, living in this
comfortable house, to judge those people? One man’s terrorist is another
man’s hero,” says Bahe.<br><br>
Tarek took the grim news from Iraq very personally. His mother, Sawat
Mehanna, remembers the day she came home to find Tarek crying. He told
her that U.S. soldiers had raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killed her
family. “And Tarek hardly cried,” she said. “It was very difficult for
him. I can’t forget that day, his dad even talked to him, to try to calm
him down.”<br><br>
This incident was also discussed in court. Afterwards, Tarek and his
friends passed around an Al Queda video showing the bodies of U.S.
soldiers who’d been dragged behind a truck and then set on fire in
retaliation. During an online chat intercepted by the FBI, Tarek cheered
the insurgents’ bloody response: “Texas BBQ is the way to go,” he
wrote.<br><br>
</font><h3><b>“This is America, we can say
anything”</b></h3>
<a href="http://www.latitudenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Tarek-at-Ground-Zero.jpg">
<img src="http://www.latitudenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Tarek-at-Ground-Zero-300x214.jpg" width=300 height=214 alt="[]">
</a></b></h3><font size=3> <br><br>
The government found this photo on Tarek Mehanna's computer, and used it
as evidence in his trial. Mehanna (on the right) and two of his friends,
both of whom testified for the prosecution, strike a pose at Ground
Zero.<br><br>
Much of the prosecutor’s evidence against Tarek came from chats with his
friends. Over the years, he supplied prosecutors with a wealth of crude
comments. In public forums, he was considerably more delicate, although
he was not shy about sharing his controversial views. He gave a fiery
speech at a Massachusetts mosque. Afterwards someone approached his
father and said, “If I didn’t know he was your son, I’d think he was an
extremist.” Tarek’s parents warned him to tone it down. “He was
stubborn,” says Sawat Mehanna. “He would say, ‘I am not doing anything
wrong, so you don’t have to worry about anything. This is America, we can
say anything.’”<br><br>
But according to US prosecutors, Tarek did more than just talk. He and
two close friends made a trip to Yemen in 2004 and prosecutors say they
intended to train with a terrorist group and then go kill Americans in
Iraq. Whatever the case, Tarek came home after a couple weeks and went
back to school.<br><br>
But prosecutors say that failure did not dissuade him. They say he turned
his attention to translating documents for Al Queda. According to the
government’s argument, the act of translating in this context is a crime:
material support of terrorism. Tarek’s lawyer says hi has the right to
freedom of speech like any other American.<br><br>
<b>The FBI Visits<br><br>
</b>His mother never suspected he was in serious trouble until two FBI
agents knocked on their door in 2008. “They said, ‘we met your son, and
we asked to him to cooperate with us and he refused,’” says Sawat
Mehanna. “They said, ‘we have a tape with a false statement, he can be
charged with serious crime, and your life is going to be hell.’ I felt
like they wanted to scare us, so we have to do what they want.”<br><br>
Tarek had told the FBI that his friend Daniel Maldanado was in Egypt, but
the FBI had secretly recorded a phone call where Daniel had told Tarek
that he was in Somalia. Shortly afterwards, they arrested Tarek for lying
to the feds and then released him on bail. Eight months later they
arrested him again, with new charges. The government announced that Tarek
and his friends had planned to go on a shooting spree in a local mall.
That allegation was dropped from the indictment before trial, presumably
because there was not enough evidence.<br><br>
While Tarek refused to cooperate, six of his friends agreed to work with
the government. One of them, Kareem Abu-zahra, who is protected under
full immunity, wore a wire for the FBI. On the stand, Abu-zahra admitted
to paying for Tarek’s trip to Yemen and coming up with a plot to attack
Hanscom Air Force Base. He also said he tried to acquire guns for the
attack on the mall. He’s currently living with his family and doing IT
work at UMass Lowell. His employers were so concerned about the content
of his testimony that he was suspended from work and one of the school’s
top executives called prosecutors to discuss whether he was a
danger.<br><br>
Meanwhile, Tarek Mahenna’s been in solitary confinement for two years.
And there’s quite a bit of evidence that he actually softened his views
considerably by 2005. He posted online that Islamic law prohibited
killing civilians and using suicide bombers, in direct contrast to the
views of Al Queda. Bahe says that the administrators of At-Tibyan
Publications finally banned Tarek from the site. “He would bring up
arguments against them,” says Bahe. “Like the invasion of Iraq. He would
say, ‘most of the protests that happened were not in Muslim countries.
They were in western nations in Boston, New York. How are these people
your enemies?’ And people on the forum started changing their minds,
saying, ‘that is a legitimate point.’ And when the admins saw that, they
just banned him from the group. And that’s when I left as well.”<br><br>
<b>A Community Watches<br><br>
</b>Mohamed isn’t the only person who says Tarek was a positive
influence. At the Worcester Islamic Center, where Tarek taught, his
students are watching the trial closely. Kareem Abdel-Kader, 17, learned
Islamic studies, math and science with Tarek. If the kids finished their
studies, he’d let them go play in the gym. “Everyone loved him. Everyone
who had him said he was their favorite teacher,” says
Abdel-Kader.<br><br>
I spoke to several administrators at the Center, who told me that, in the
time they knew Tarek, they saw no evidence that he was an extremist. They
told me that the Mosque has had official meetings with law enforcement in
the past and worry that Tarek’s prosecution could dissuade Muslims from
sharing information with authorities.<br>
******************************************<br>
</font><h1><font size=4><b>
<a href="http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/1620/targeted-and-entrapped_manufacturing-the-homegrown">
Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the "Homegrown Threat" in
the United
States</a></b></font></h1><font size=3>
<a href="http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/1620/targeted-and-entrapped_manufacturing-the-homegrown" eudora="autourl">
http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/1620/targeted-and-entrapped_manufacturing-the-homegrown<br>
<br>
</a>[The following report was issued by The Center for Human Rights and
Global Justice (CHRGJ) at New York University School of Law.]<br><br>
<b>Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the "Homegrown Threat"
in the United States<br><br>
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY<br><br>
</b>Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has targeted Muslims in
the United States by sending paid, untrained informants into mosques and
Muslim communities. This practice has led to the prosecution of more than
200 individuals in terrorism-related cases. The government has touted
these cases as successes in the so-called war against terrorism. However,
in recent years, former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents,
local lawmakers, the media, the public, and community-based groups have
begun questioning the legitimacy and efficacy of this practice, alleging
thatin many instancesthis type of policing, and the resulting
prosecutions, constitute entrapment.<br><br>
This Report examines three high-profile terrorism prosecutions in which
government informants played a critical role in instigating and
constructing the plots that were then prosecuted. In all three cases, the
FBI or New York City Police Department (NYPD) sent paid informants into
Muslim communities or families without any particularized suspicion of
criminal activity. Informants pose a particular set of problems given
they work on behalf of law enforcement but are not trained as law
enforcement. Moreover, they often work for a government-conferred
benefitsay, a reduction in a preexisting criminal sentence or a change
in immigration statusin addition to fees for providing useful
information to law enforcement, creating a dangerous incentive
structure.<br><br>
In the cases this Report examines, the government’s informants held
themselves out as Muslims and looked in particular to incite other
Muslims to commit acts of violence. The government’s informants
introduced and aggressively pushed ideas about violent jihad and,
moreover, actually encouraged the defendants to believe it was their duty
to take action against the United States. In two of the three cases, the
government relied on the defendants’ vulnerabilitiespoverty and youth,
for examplein its inducement methods. In all three cases, the government
selected or encouraged the proposed locations that the defendants would
later be accused of targeting. In all three cases, the government also
provided the defendants with, or encouraged the defendants to acquire,
material evidence, such as weaponry or violent videos, which would later
be used to convict them.<br><br>
The government played a significant role in instigating and devising the
three plots featured in this Reportplots the government then “foiled”
and charged the defendants with. The defendants in these cases were all
convicted and are facing prison sentences of 25 years to life. These
prosecutionsand others that similarly rely on the abusive use of
informantsare central to the government’s claim that the country faces a
“homegrown threat” of terrorism. Serious questions have been raised about
the government’s role in each of these cases, as well as around the set
of laws that have facilitated these practices. They also raise
fundamental human rights concerns.<br><br>
Part I.A. of this Report considers four trends that have enabled the
aggressive and widespread use of informants in Muslim communities: (1)
the conflation of Muslims with terrorism and terrorists; (2) the U.S.
government’s adoption of unsupported theories about “radicalization” and
“homegrown terrorism” in American Muslim11 communities; (3) a shift
toward a preventative model of policing and prosecuting terrorism, which
seeks to intervene prior to any plan to commit a particular crime; and
(4) the lack of accountability and transparency of law enforcement
activities. Part I.B. assesses the domestic legal framework governing the
use of informants in undercover investigations, including the entrapment
defense. Drawing on media accounts, court documents, and interviews, Part
II then examines three high-profile terrorism prosecutions, looking
closely at the government’s practices in instigating and constructing the
plot through informants, and the impacts the prosecutions have had on the
families of the defendants. Part III evaluates the human rights impacts
of the practices and policies detailed herein and the corresponding
obligations of the U.S. government to respect, protect, and fulfill these
human rights. Part Iv concludes with policy recommendations.<br><br>
This Report is grounded in consideration of the government’s prosecutions
against the “Newburgh Four” with a focus on defendant David Williams; the
“Fort Dix Five” with a focus on defendants Eljvir, Dritan, and Shain
Duka; and the case of Shahawar Matin Siraj. Family members of David,
Eljvir, Dritan, Shain, and Shahawar were interviewed for this Report,
which builds on the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice’s (CHRGJ)
longstanding work documenting the impact of U.S. counterterrorism
policies on Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern, and South Asian communities. We
also interviewed and consulted with experts, journalists, and community
leaders studying these issues, <br>
and drew on court documents and media accounts.<br><br>
The experiences of the families who were interviewed for this Report
demonstrate the profound toll government policies are taking on Muslim
communities and families. Counterterrorism law-enforcement policies and
practices are undermining U.S. human rights obligations to guarantee the
rights to nondiscrimination; a fair trial; freedom of religion expression
and opinion; as well as the right to an effective remedy when rights
violations take place.<br><br>
The families have been outspoken about the injustice of these tactics and
the prosecutions that they have spawned. A growing chorus of
commentators, community members, scholars, and policy experts, is
beginning to challenge the legitimacy of the government’s practices, and
the notions that these prosecutions substantiate a “homegrown threat” or
provide any security- enhancing benefits.<br><br>
The cases highlighted in this Report do not stand alone. A number of
cases around the country have been met with similar concerns, which
further suggests that the practices highlighted here are illustrative of
similar law enforcement activities targeting Muslim communities around
the country. As this Report argues, the U.S. government must put an end
to criminalizing Muslim communities. Not only do these practices fail to
enhance public safety goals, but they pose intolerable threats to basic
human rights across the country.<br><br>
To abide by these international human rights obligations, CHRGJ urges the
U.S. government to act immediately to implement the following
recommendations with respect to law enforcement and counterterrorism
investigations, particularly those that involve the use of extensive
surveillance and paid informants without particularized suspicion of
criminal activity: <br><br>
The U.S. government should reject “radicalization” theories that threaten
the rights to freedom of religion, opinion, and expression, and should
put an end to the preventative policing and prosecution methods that rely
on such theories.<br><br>
Congress should hold hearings on the impact of counterterrorism policies
on Muslim, Arab, South Asian, and Middle Eastern communities in the
United States. These hearings should include consideration of current
intelligence-gathering tactics and the use of informants in
counterterrorism investigations. <br><br>
Congress should pass the End Racial Profiling Act, proposed federal
legislation to ban racial profiling by law enforcement.an end to
criminalizing Muslim communities. Not only do these practices fail to
enhance public safety goals, but they pose intolerable threats to basic
human rights across the <br>
country. <br><br>
The Department of Justice (DOJ) should revise its own June 2003 Federal
Guidance on Racial Profiling to eliminate the border and national
security loophole, to include a ban on profiling based on religion and
ethnic origin, and to ensure that the guidance is enforceable. <br><br>
The DOJ should open an investigation into all terrorism-related cases
involving the use of an informant since September 11, 2001, with a view
towards examining oversight and actions of informants, the circumstances
under which they are deployed, the types of information they gather, and
their role in instigating terrorist plots. <br><br>
Attorney General Holder should issue new guidelines to replace the
Mukasey Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations (2008), the 2006 Gonzales
Guidelines on Confidential Human Sources, and the 2002 Ashcroft
Guidelines on FBI Undercover Operations. These new guidelines should
eliminate authorization for the pre-investigation “assessment” stage.
Further, the new guidelines should ensure that: <br><br>
The FBI and other law enforcement agencies do not open investigations,
including by using informants, against individuals absent particularized
<br>
suspicion of wrongdoing.<br><br>
The FBI and other law enforcement agencies are not allowed to target
individuals and communities through surveillance, informants, or other
information-gathering techniques based on race, religion, or national
origin, or political and religious statements or beliefs. <br><br>
The FBI is explicitly and consistently prohibited from using informants
to engage in entrapment or inducement to commit crimes. <br><br>
The NYPD should revise its guidelines to only allow for investigations
when there is an articulable and reasonable suspicion of criminal
activity. <br><br>
[Click
<a href="http://www.chrgj.org/projects/docs/targetedandentrapped.pdf">
here</a> to download the full report as a PDF document.]<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>