Mosque Aff Case Neg
Solvency
Agencies like NYPD don’t homogenize Muslims- they use technology to find
terrorists within those law-abiding citizens
The Associated Press, 2014
(News and editorial company. “Judge Finds Surveillance of Mosques Was Allowed.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/nyregion/judge-finds-surveillance-of-mosques-was-allowed.html?_r=0. Date Accessed07/13/15. Anshul Nanda.)
The New
York Police Department’s intelligence unit did not discriminate against Muslims in
carrying out far-reaching surveillance meant to identify “budding terrorist conspiracies” at
mosques in Newark and other locations in New Jersey, a federal judge ruled on Thursday.¶ In a written decision filed
in United States District Court in Newark, Judge William J. Martini dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought in 2012 by eight Muslims
who said the New York Police Department’s surveillance programs were unconstitutional because they focused on religion, national
origin and race. The
suit accused the department of spying on ordinary people at several mosques,
restaurants and grade schools in New Jersey since 2002.¶ The plaintiffs, including the former
principal of a grade school for Muslim girls, “have not alleged facts from which it can be
plausibly inferred that they were targeted solely because of their religion,” Judge Martini
wrote. “The more likely explanation for the surveillance was to locate budding terrorist conspiracies.”¶ The judge added, “The
police could not have monitored New Jersey for Muslim terrorist activities without monitoring the Muslim community itself.”¶ “The
motive for the program,” he added, “was
not solely to discriminate against Muslims, but to find Muslim
terrorists hiding among the ordinary law-abiding Muslims.Ӧ The ruling also singled out The Associated
Press, which helped the suit with a series of articles based on confidential police documents that showed how the Police
Department sought to infiltrate dozens of mosques and Muslim student groups and investigated hundreds of people in New York
and elsewhere.¶ “Nowhere in the complaint do the plaintiffs allege that they suffered harm prior to the unauthorized release of
documents by The Associated Press,” the judge wrote. “This confirms that plaintiffs’ alleged injuries flow from The Associated
Press’s unauthorized disclosure of the documents.”¶ He added: “Thus the injury, if any existed, is not fairly traceable to the city.”¶
The Center for Constitutional Rights, which represented the plaintiffs, called the decision troubling.¶ “In addition to willfully ignoring
the harm that our innocent clients suffered from the N.Y.P.D.’s illegal spying program, by upholding the N.Y.P.D.’s blunderbuss
Muslim surveillance practices, the court’s decision gives legal sanction to the targeted discrimination of Muslims anywhere and
everywhere in this country, without limitation, for no other reason than their religion,” said Baher Azmy, the center’s legal director.¶
New York City’s Law Department had no immediate comment on Thursday. Former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Raymond W.
Kelly, the former police commissioner, had been staunch supporters of the surveillance programs, saying they were needed to
protect the city.¶ A similar lawsuit filed in federal court in Brooklyn is pending.
Curtailing surveillance in specific areas will just cause agencies to literally
surveil areas outside/around it- mosque surveillance tactics prove
Goldman et. al, 12
(Adam and Matt are editors for the Associated Press. “NYPD Defends Tactics Over Mosque Spying; Records Reveal New Details On
Muslim Surveillance.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/nypd-defends-tactics-over_n_1298997.html. Date Accessed7/13/15. Anshul Nanda)
NEW YORK -- The New
York Police Department targeted Muslim mosques with tactics normally
reserved for criminal organizations, according to newly obtained police documents that showed police collecting the
license plates of worshippers, monitoring them on surveillance cameras and cataloging sermons
through a network of informants.¶ The documents, obtained by The Associated Press, have come to light as the NYPD fends
off criticism of its monitoring of Muslim student groups and its cataloging of mosques and
Muslim businesses in nearby Newark, N.J.The NYPD's spokesman, Paul Browne, forcefully defended the legality of
those efforts Thursday, telling reporters that its officers may go wherever the public goes and collect intelligence, even outside city
limits.¶ The new documents, prepared for Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, show how the NYPD's roster of paid
informants monitored conversations and sermons inside mosques. The records offer the first
glimpse of what those informants, known informally as "mosque crawlers," gleaned from
inside the houses of worship.¶ For instance, when a Danish newspaper published inflammatory cartoons of Prophet
Muhammad in September 2005, Muslim communities around the world erupted in outrage. Violent
mobs took to the streets in the Middle East. A Somali man even broke into the cartoonist's house in Denmark with
an ax.¶ In New York, thousands of miles away, it was a different story. Muslim leaders preached peace and urged people to protest
lawfully. Write letters to politicians, they said. Some advocated
boycotting Danish products, burning flags and
holding rallies.¶ All of that was permissible under law and protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. All was
reported to the NYPD by its mosque crawlers and made its way into police files for Kelly .¶ "Imam
Shamsi Ali brought up the topic of the cartoon, condemning them. He announced a rally that was to take
place on Sunday (02/05/06) near the United Nations. He asked that everyone to attend if possible and reminded everyone to keep
their poise if they can make it," one report read.¶ At the Muslim Center of New York in Queens, the report said, "Mohammad Tariq
Sherwani led the prayer service and urged those in attendance to participate in a demonstration at the United Nations on Sunday."¶
When one Muslim leader suggested planning a demonstration, one of the people involved in the discussion
about how to get a permit was, in fact, working for the NYPD.¶ "It seems horrible to me that the NYPD is treating
an entire religious community as potential terrorists," said civil rights lawyer Jethro Eisenstein, who reviewed
some of the documents and is involved in a decades-old class-action lawsuit against the police department for spying on protesters
and political dissidents.¶ The lawsuit
is known as the Handschu case, and a court order in that case
governs how the NYPD may collect intelligence.¶ Eisenstein said the documents prove the NYPD has violated
those rules.¶ "This is a flat-out violation," Eisenstein said. "This is a smoking gun."¶ Browne, the NYPD spokesman, did not discuss
specific investigations Thursday but told reporters that, because of the Handschu case, the NYPD operates under stricter rules than
any other department in the country. He said police do not violate those rules.¶ His statements were intended to calm a controversy
over a 2007 operation in which the NYPD mapped and photographed all of Newark's mosques and eavesdropped on Muslim
businesses. Newark Mayor Cory Booker said he was never told about the surveillance, which he said offended him.¶ Booker and his
police director accused the NYPD of misleading them by not revealing exactly what they were doing. Had they known, they said it
never would have been permitted. But Browne said Newark police were told before and after the operation and knew exactly what
it entailed.¶ Kelly, the
police commissioner, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg have been emphatic
that police only follow legitimate leads of criminal activity and do not conduct preventive
surveillance in ethnic communities.¶ Former and current law enforcement officials either involved in or with direct
knowledge of these programs say they did not follow leads. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss the secret programs. But the documents support their claims.¶ The effort highlights one of the most difficult
aspects of policing in the age of terrorism. Solving crimes isn't enough; police are expected to identify would-be terrorists and move
in before they can attack.¶ There are no universally agreed upon warning signs for terrorism. Terrorists have used Internet cafes,
stayed in hostels, worked out at gyms, visited travel agencies, attended student groups and prayed at mosques. So the NYPD
monitored those areas. In doing so, they monitored many innocent people as they went about their daily lives.¶ Using plainclothes
officers from the squad known as the Demographics Unit, police swept Muslim neighborhoods and catalogued the location of
mosques. The ethnic makeup of each congregation was logged as police fanned out across the city and outside their jurisdiction, into
suburban Long Island and areas of New Jersey.¶ "African American, Arab, Pakistani," police wrote beneath the photo of one mosque
in Newark.¶ Investigators looked at mosques as the center of Muslim life. All their connections had to be known.¶ David Cohen, the
NYPD's top intelligence officer, wanted a source inside every mosque within a 250-mile radius
of New York, current and former officials said. Though the officials said they never managed to reach
that goal, documents show the NYPD successfully placed informants or undercovers - sometimes
both - into mosques from Westchester County, N.Y., to New Jersey.¶ The NYPD used these sources to get a sense
of the sentiment of worshippers whenever an event generated headlines. The goal, former officials said, was to alert police to
potential problems before they bubbled up.¶ Even when it was clear there were no links to terrorism, the
mosque informants gave the NYPD the ability to "take the pulse" of the community, as Cohen and
other managers put it.¶ When New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle and his flight instructor were killed on Oct. 11, 2006, when their
small plane crashed into a Manhattan high-rise apartment, fighter planes were scrambled. Within hours the FBI and Homeland
Security Department said it was an accident. Terrorism was ruled out.¶ Yet for days after the event, the NYPD's mosque crawlers
reported to police about what they heard at sermons and among worshippers.¶ (View the PDF documents on Danish cartoons,
mosque targeting and summaries of plane crash.)¶ At the Brooklyn Islamic Center, a confidential informant "noted chatter among
the regulars expressing relief and thanks to God that the crash was only an accident and not an act of terrorism," one report reads.¶
"The worshippers made remarks to the effect that `it better be an accident; we don't need any more heat,'" an undercover officer
reported from the Al-Tawheed Islamic Center in Jersey City, N.J.¶ In some instances, the NYPD
put cameras on light
poles and trained them on mosques, documents show. Because the cameras were in public space,
police didn't need a warrant to conduct the surveillance.¶ Police also wrote down the license
plates of cars in mosque parking lots, documents show. In some instances, police in unmarked cars
outfitted with electronic license plate readers would drive down the street and record the
plates of everyone parked near the mosque, former officials recalled.¶ "They're viewing Muslims like they're crazy.
Multiple ways that agencies can circumvent legislation- specifically the FBI will
continue surveillance regardless of what the plan does
Ackerman, 2015
(Spencer Ackerman is an editor/ reporter for the US News in New York. Full Date: June 1, 2015. “Fears NSA will seek to undermine
surveillance reform; Privacy advocates are wary of covert legal acrobatics from the NSA similar to those deployed post-9/11 to
circumvent congressional authority” http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/. Date Accessed- 7/15/15. Anshul Nanda)
Privacy advocates fear the National
Security Agency will attempt to weaken new restrictions on the bulk
collection of Americans' phone and email records with a barrage of creative legal wrangles, as
the first major reform of US surveillance powers in a generation looked likely to be a foregone conclusion on Monday.¶ Related:
Bush-era surveillance powers expire as US prepares to roll back NSA power¶ The USA Freedom Act, a bill banning the NSA from
collecting US phone data in bulk and compelling disclosure of any novel legal arguments for widespread surveillance before a secret
court, has already been passed by the House of Representatives and on Sunday night the Senate voted 77 to 17 to proceed to
debate on it. Between that bill and a landmark recent ruling from a federal appeals court that rejected a longstanding government
justification for bulk surveillance, civil libertarians think they stand a chance at stopping attempts by intelligence lawyers to
undermine reform in secret.¶ Attorneys for the intelligence agencies react scornfully to the suggestion that they will stretch their
authorities to the breaking point. Yet reformers remember that such legal tactics during the George W Bush administration allowed
the NSA to shoehorn bulk phone records collection into the Patriot Act.¶ Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator and Republican
presidential candidate who was key to allowing sweeping US surveillance powers to lapse on Sunday night, warned that NSA lawyers
would now make mincemeat of the USA Freedom Act's prohibitions on bulk phone records collection by taking an expansive view of
the bill's definitions, thanks to a pliant, secret surveillance court.¶ "My
fear, though, is that the people who
interpret this work at a place known as the rubber stamp factory, the Fisa [court]," Paul said on the
Senate floor on Sunday.¶ Paul's Democratic ally, Senator Ron Wyden, warned the intelligence agencies and the Obama
administration against attempting to unravel NSA reform.¶ "My time on the intelligence committee
has taught me
to always be vigilant for secret interpretations of the law and new surveillance techniques
that Congress doesn't know about," Wyden, a member of the intelligence committee, told the Guardian.¶ "Americans
were rightly outraged when they learned that US intelligence agencies relied on secret law to monitor
millions of law-abiding US citizens. The American people are now on high alert for new secret
interpretations of the law, and intelligence agencies and the Justice Department would do
well to keep that lesson in mind."¶ The USA Freedom Act is supposed to prevent what Wyden calls " secret law ". It
contains a provision requiring congressional notification in the event of a novel legal interpretation presented to the secret Fisa
court overseeing surveillance.¶ Yet in recent memory, the US
government permitted the NSA to circumvent the
Fisa court entirely. Not a single Fisa court judge was aware of Stellar Wind, the NSA's post9/11 constellation of bulk surveillance programs, from 2001 to 2004.¶ Energetic legal tactics followed to fit the
programs under existing legal authorities after internal controversy or outright exposure. When the continuation of a bulk
domestic internet metadata collection program risked the mass resignation of Justice
Department officials in 2004, an internal NSA draft history records that attorneys found a different legal rationale that "
essentially gave NSA the same authority to collect bulk internet metadata that it had ".¶ After a New York Times story in 2005
revealed the existence of the bulk domestic phone records program, attorneys for the US Justice Department and NSA argued, with
the blessing of the Fisa court, that Section 215 of the Patriot Act authorized it all along - precisely the contention that the second
circuit court of appeals rejected in May.¶ Despite that recent history, veteran intelligence attorneys reacted with scorn to the idea
that NSA lawyers will undermine surveillance reform. Robert Litt, the senior lawyer for director of national
intelligence, James Clapper, said during a public appearance last month that creating a banned bulk surveillance program was " not
going to happen ".¶ "The whole notion that NSA is just evilly determined to read the law in a fashion contrary to its intent is bullshit,
of the sort that the Guardian and the left - but I repeat myself - have fallen in love with. The interpretation of 215 that supported the
bulk collection program was creative but not beyond reason, and it was upheld by many judges," said the former NSA general
counsel Stewart Baker, referring
to Section 215 of the Patriot Act.¶ This is the section that permits US
law enforcement and surveillance agencies to collect business records and expired at midnight,
almost two years after the whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the Guardian that the Patriot Act was secretly being used to
justify the collection of phone records from millions of Americans.¶ With one exception, the judges that upheld the interpretation
sat on the non-adversarial Fisa court, a body that approves nearly all government surveillance requests and modifies about a quarter
of them substantially. The exception was reversed by the second circuit court of appeals.¶ Baker, speaking before the Senate voted,
predicted: "I don't think anyone at NSA is going to invest in looking for ways to defy congressional intent if USA Freedom is
adopted."¶ The USA Freedom Act,
a compromise bill, would not have an impact on the vast majority of
NSA surveillance. It would not stop any overseas-focused surveillance program, no matter how
broad in scope, nor would it end the NSA's dragnets of Americans' international
communications authorized by a different law. Other bulk domestic surveillance programs, like the one the
Drug Enforcement Agency operated, would not be impacted.¶ The rise of what activists have come to call
"bulky" surveillance, like the "large collections" of Americans' electronic communications records the FBI gets to collect under the
Patriot Act, continue unabated - or, at least, will, once the USA Freedom Act passes and restores the Patriot Act powers that lapsed
at midnight on Sunday.¶ Related: FBI used Patriot Act to obtain 'large collections' of Americans' data, DoJ finds¶ That collection,
recently confirmed by a largely overlooked Justice Department inspector general's report, points to a slipperiness in shuttering
surveillance programs - one that creates opportunities for clever lawyers.¶ The Guardian revealed in 2013 that Barack Obama had
permitted the NSA to collect domestic internet metadata in bulk until 2011. Yet even as Obama closed down that NSA program, the
Justice Department inspector general confirms that by 2009, the FBI
was already collecting the same "electronic
communications" metadata under a different authority.¶ It is unclear as yet how the FBI transformed
that authority, passed by Congress
for the collection of "business records", into large-scale collection of Americans'
email, text, instant message, internet-protocol and other records. And a similar
power to for the FBI gather
domestic internet metadata, obtained through non-judicial subpoenas called "National
Security Letters", also exists in a different, non-expiring part of the Patriot Act.¶ Jameel Jaffer, the deputy legal director of the
ACLU, expressed confidence that the second circuit court of appeals' decision last month would effectively step into the breach. The
panel found that legal authorities permitting the collection of data "relevant" to an investigation cannot allow the government to
gather data in bulk - setting a potentially prohibitive precedent for other bulk-collection programs.¶ "We don't know what kinds of
bulk-collection programs the government still has in place, but in the past it's used authorities other than Section 215 to conduct
bulk collection of internet metadata, phone records, and financial records. If similar programs
are still in place, the ruling will force the government to reconsider them, and probably to end
them," said Jaffer, whose organization brought the suit that the second circuit considered.¶ Julian Sanchez, a surveillance expert at
the Cato Institute, was more cautious.¶ "The second circuit ruling establishes that a 'relevance' standard is not completely unlimited
- it doesn't cover getting hundreds of millions of people's records, without any concrete connection to a specific inquiry - but doesn't
provide much guidance beyond that as to where the line is," Sanchez said.¶ "I wouldn't be surprised if the government argued, in
secret, that nearly anything short of that scale is still allowed, nor if the same Fisa court that authorized the bulk telephone program,
in defiance of any common sense reading of the statutory language, went along with it."¶
--Tag—
Huus, 12
(Kari she spent three years as a staff writer for the Far Eastern Economic Review and is a reporter for msmbc. “ACLU: FBI 'mosque
outreach' program used to spy on Muslim.” Article Published March 29,2012.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/03/29/10907668-aclu-fbi-mosque-outreach-program-used-to-spy-on-muslims. Date
Accessed -07/20/15. //Anshul)
The FBI in San Francisco used a public relations program billed as "mosque outreach" to collect
information on the religious views and practices of Muslims in Northern California and then shared the
intelligence with other government agencies, according to FBI documents obtained by civil rights groups.¶
The heavily redacted documents, released after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, raise "grave
constitutional concerns," said Hina Shamsi, director of the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.¶ "In San
Francisco, we
have found that community outreach was being run out of the FBI’s intelligence
division and was part of a secret and systematic intelligence gathering program,” conducted without
any apparent evidence of wrongdoing," said Shamsi. "The bureau’s documentation of religious leaders' and congregants' beliefs and
practices violates the Privacy Act, which Congress passed to protect Americans’ First Amendment rights."¶ The Privacy
Act
limits sharing of personal information among government agencies and the length of time it
can be retained. In this case, the information shared included religious beliefs and affiliations, which the ACLU argues is
entirely out of bounds.¶ Kari Huus¶ Follow Kari Huus on Twitter and Facebook.¶ The ACLU is calling for the Department of Justice’s
inspector general to investigate alleged violations of the Privacy Act in the San Francisco Division and determine the scope of such
activity nationwide.¶ The
FBI San Francisco defended its agents' actions, saying the information "was
collected within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity."¶ The ACLU of Northern California
filed the FOIA lawsuit with the Asian Law Caucus and the San Francisco Bay Guardian newspaper, leading to the release of the FBI
The documents indicate that FBI was keeping records of
conversations and activities within mosques and other Muslim organizations from 2004 through 2008,
documents on Tuesday.¶ Meant to foster trust¶
information that was provided by employees engaged in the outreach programs.¶ The announced intention of the FBI outreach
programs is to foster trust between law enforcers and members of the Muslim community so they can work together to fight crime
and avert terrorism.¶ An earlier ACLU report on community outreach
prompted FBI national headquarters to
issue a release stating that its policy requires separate operations and databases for
intelligence gathering and community outreach programs.¶ A large proportion of the information was
labeled "positive intelligence," which indicates that the FBI intends to keep it in its intelligence database, the ACLU report
explained.¶ Many documents were marked "secret," even though they appeared to include only mundane information. Some
documents were marked "disseminated outside," but did not specify the recipients.¶ Among the findings contained in the FBI
documents:¶ A 2005 FBI memorandum from a meeting with a congregant at Islamic Center of Santa Cruz, documented his name and
religious affiliation and detailed other worshipers' financial contributions to the center and community support for Islam. ¶ The
subject of a sermon and congregants' discussions about a property purchase for a new mosque were gathered by FBI agents during
five visits to Seaside Mosque in 2005.¶ Documents based on four "outreach" meetings between FBI personnel and representatives of
the South Bay Islamic Association note discussions about the Hajj pilgrimage and "Islam in general."¶ Documents based on FBI
contacts with representatives of the Bay Area Cultural Connections — formerly the Turkish Center Musalla — describe the group’s
mission and activities, and the ethnicity of its members. A memo indicates the FBI searched for the cell phone number of one
participant in the meeting in the LexisNexis records database and Department of Motor Vehicle records, obtaining detailed
information about him, including his date of birth, Social Security number, address and home telephone number.¶ There is no
indication that the subjects were informed that the information was being collected or shared with other law enforcement agencies,
the ACLU said.¶ The FBI in San Francisco declined a request for an interview, but released a statement by Assistant Director Michael
Kortan. In addition to stating that the information gathering abided by laws and agency rules, it indicated that it had adjusted its
outreach program since the period covered by the documents.¶ "Since that time, the FBI has formalized its community relations
program to emphasize a greater distinction between outreach and operational activities," Kortan said.¶ South Dakota law tackles
'shariah question'¶ Classified documents contradict FBI on post 9-11 probe of Saudis, ex-Senator says¶ US aid worker is home, but
no-fly list grounds him again¶ No-fly Muslim takes case to court of public opinion¶ Outreach to 'generate goodwill'¶ "FBI San
Francisco dedicated a full-time, non-agent employee to community outreach efforts in the fall of 2007," said a second statement
from Stephanie Douglas, FBI special agent in charge. "The community outreach program is designed to generate goodwill and foster
relationships with a wide-range of groups in the communities we serve."¶ But documents still under analysis by the ACLU indicate
FBI San Francisco continued to mingle outreach and intelligence gathering through 2011, according to Shamsi.¶ The documents
undermine trust for genuine outreach programs, said Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates, a San Francisco-based
nonprofit that makes policy recommendations to lawmakers and leaders.¶ "I think the recent documents further underscore how
well-intentioned community leaders who talk with the FBI are instead the targets of this broad, intelligence-gathering effort," she
said. "It’s easy to see then how that community leader who had a conversation with an FBI agent finds himself being harassed when
traveling or crossing borders."¶ "These documents are illustrating the actual experiences of American Muslims that we have been
hearing for a number of years now," she added. ¶ The findings are the latest from an ACLU examination of how the FBI has
conducted surveillance in the wake of 9-11 and a campaign to expose cases that they say threaten civil liberties.¶ In FBI documents
obtained through other Freedom of Information lawsuits, the rights groups has highlighted systematic surveillance of Muslim
student organizations and individuals and what it considers anti-Muslim bias in training materials being used by the FBI —now the
subject of internal FBI investigation, according to published reports.¶ 'Count the mosques'¶ In a separate case, documents
uncovered by The Associated Press revealed that the New York Police Department conducted an extensive surveillance campaign of
the Muslim population there, keeping secret files on individuals, businesses, mosques and organizations. Those
findings
have provoked outrage from many Muslim and civil rights groups, which have called on the Obama
administration to intervene.¶ Greater FBI scrutiny of Muslim communities goes back to shortly after the 9/11 attacks, when then FBI
Director Robert Mueller instructed field offices across the country to "count the mosques" and set up investigative goals accordingly,
according to an article by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff.¶ Rules governing FBI surveillance were relaxed in 2008 to give more
a stage of surveillance that takes place before the opening of a formal
investigation. These more lenient standards, critics say, allow information gathering on individuals without probable cause.¶
leeway to FBI "assessments" —
Rights groups are asking the Department of Justice to restore stricter rules on surveillance and to prohibit racial and religious
profiling in all cases.¶ "What
we need is for the FBI to go back to the standards set after the Hooverera abuses.… guidelines put in place that required the FBI to engage in surveillance only if there’s evidence of wrongdoing,"
said Khera of Muslim Advocates.¶ More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:¶ Record jackpot as Mega Millions hits $500
million¶ Cops: Suspect in Vt. teacher's death wanted to 'get a girl'¶ Passengers tell of pilot's in-flight meltdown¶ Gingrich axes third
of staff, reduces travel¶ Zimmerman accused of domestic violence, fighting with police¶ Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter
and Facebook
Alt cause- NYPD will continue surveillance even if laws pass
Goldman et. al, 2013
(Adam is a analyst for the Associated Press. “NYPD designates mosques as terrorism organizations.”
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/nypd-designates-mosques-terrorism-organizations. Date Accessed- 07/13/15. Anshul Nanda.)
They're terrorists. They all must be fanatics," said Abdul Akbar Mohammed, the imam for the past eight years at the Masjid Imam Ali
K. Muslim in Newark. "That's not right."¶ NEW YORK (AP) — The
New York Police Department has secretly
labeled entire mosques as terrorist organizations, a designation that allows police to use informants to record
sermons and spy on imams, often without specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing.¶ Designating an entire mosque as
a terrorism enterprise means that anyone who attends prayer services there is a potential
subject of an investigation and fair game for surveillance.¶ Since the 9/11 attacks, the NYPD has opened
at least a dozen "terrorism enterprise investigations" into mosques, according to interviews and
confidential police documents. The TEI, as it is known, is a police tool intended to help investigate terrorist cells and the like. ¶ Many
TEIs stretch for years, allowing surveillance to continue even though the NYPD has never criminally charged a mosque or Islamic
organization with operating as a terrorism enterprise.¶ The documents show in detail how, in its hunt
for terrorists, the
NYPD investigated countless innocent New York Muslims and put information about them in
secret police files. As a tactic, opening an enterprise investigation on a mosque is so potentially invasive that while the NYPD
conducted at least a dozen, the FBI never did one, according to interviews with federal law enforcement
officials.¶ The strategy has allowed the NYPD to send undercover officers into mosques and
attempt to plant informants on the boards of mosques and at least one prominent Arab-American group in
Brooklyn, whose executive director has worked with city officials, including Bill de Blasio, a front-runner for mayor.¶ De Blasio said
Wednesday on Twitter that he was "deeply troubled NYPD has labelled entire mosques & Muslim orgs terror groups with seemingly
no leads. Security AND liberty make us strong."¶ The revelations about the NYPD's massive spying operations are in documents
recently obtained by The Associated Press and part of a new book, "Enemies Within: Inside the NYPD's Secret Spying Unit and bin
Laden's Final Plot Against America." The book by AP reporters Matt Apuzzo and Adam Goldman is based on hundreds of previously
unpublished police files and interviews with current and former NYPD, CIA and FBI officials.¶ The disclosures come as the NYPD is
fighting off lawsuits accusing it of engaging in racial profiling while combating crime. Earlier this month, a judge ruled that the
department's use of the stop-and-frisk tactic was unconstitutional.¶ The American Civil Liberties Union and two other groups have
sued, saying the Muslim spying programs are unconstitutional and make Muslims afraid to practice their faith without police
scrutiny.¶ Both Mayor Mike Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly have denied those accusations. Speaking
Wednesday on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Kelly reminded people that his intelligence-gathering programs began in the wake of 9/11.¶
"We follow leads wherever they take us," Kelly said. "We're
not intimidated as to wherever that lead takes
us. And we're doing that to protect the people of New York City."¶ ___¶ The NYPD did not limit
its operations to collecting information on those who attended the mosques or led prayers. The
department sought also to put people on the boards of New York's Islamic institutions to fill intelligence gaps.¶ One confidential
NYPD document shows police wanted to put informants in leadership positions at mosques and other organizations, including the
Arab American Association of New York in Brooklyn, a secular social-service organization.¶ Linda Sarsour, the executive director, said
her group helps new immigrants adjust to life in the U.S. It was not clear whether the department was successful in its plans.¶ The
document, which appears to have been created around 2009, was prepared for Kelly and distributed to the NYPD's debriefing unit,
which helped identify possible informants.¶ Around that time, Kelly was handing out medals to the Arab American Association's
soccer team, Brooklyn United, smiling and congratulating its players for winning the NYPD's soccer league.¶ Sarsour, a Muslim who
has met with Kelly many times, said she felt betrayed.¶ "It
creates mistrust in our organizations," said Sarsour,
who was born and raised in Brooklyn. "It makes one wonder and question who is sitting on the boards of the
institutions where we work and pray."¶ ___¶ Before the NYPD could target mosques as terrorist groups, it had to persuade a federal
judge to rewrite rules governing how police can monitor speech protected by the First Amendment.¶ The rules stemmed from a
1971 lawsuit, dubbed the Handschu case after lead plaintiff Barbara Handschu, over how the NYPD spied on protesters and liberals
during the Vietnam War era.¶ David Cohen, a former CIA executive who became NYPD's deputy commissioner for intelligence in
2002, said the old rules didn't apply to fighting against terrorism.¶ Cohen told the judge that mosques could be used "to shield the
work of terrorists from law enforcement scrutiny by taking advantage of restrictions on the investigation of First Amendment
activity."¶ NYPD lawyers proposed a new tactic, the TEI, that allowed officers to monitor political or religious speech whenever the
"facts or circumstances reasonably indicate" that groups of two or more people were involved in plotting terrorism or other violent
crime.¶ The judge rewrote the Handschu rules in 2003. In the first eight months under the new rules, the NYPD's Intelligence Division
opened at least 15 secret terrorism enterprise investigations, documents show. At least 10 targeted mosques.¶ Doing so allowed
police, in effect, to treat anyone who attends prayer services as a potential suspect.
Sermons, ordinarily protected by
the First Amendment, could be monitored and recorded.¶ Among the mosques targeted as
early as 2003 was the Islamic Society of Bay Ridge.¶ "I have never felt free in the United States. The documents
tell me I am right," Zein Rimawi, one of the Bay Ridge mosque's leaders, said after reviewing an NYPD document describing his
mosque as a terrorist enterprise.¶ Rimawi, 59, came to the U.S. decades ago from the Israeli-occupied West Bank.¶ "Ray Kelly,
shame on him," he said. "I am American."¶ It was not immediately clear whether the NYPD targeted mosques outside of New York
City specifically using TEIs. The AP had previously reported that Masjid Omar in Paterson, N.J., was identified as a target for
surveillance in a 2006 NYPD report.¶ ___¶ The NYPD believed the tactics were necessary to keep the city safe, a view that sometimes
put it at odds with the FBI.¶ In August 2003, Cohen asked the FBI to install eavesdropping equipment inside a mosque called Masjid
al-Farooq, including its prayer room.¶ Al-Farooq had a long history of radical ties. Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian sheik who
was convicted of plotting to blow up New York City landmarks, once preached briefly at Al-Farooq. Invited preachers raged against
Israel, the United States and the Bush administration's war on terror.¶ One of Cohen's informants said an imam from another
mosque had delivered $30,000 to an al-Farooq leader, and the NYPD suspected the money was for terrorism.¶ But Amy Jo Lyons, the
FBI assistant special agent in charge for counterterrorism, refused to bug the mosque. She said the federal law wouldn't permit it. ¶
The NYPD made other arrangements. Cohen's informants began to carry recording devices into mosques under investigation. They
hid microphones in wristwatches and the electronic key fobs used to unlock car doors. ¶ Even under a TEI, a prosecutor and a judge
would have to approve bugging a mosque. But the informant taping was legal because New York law allows any party to record a
conversation, even without consent from the others. Like the Islamic Society of Bay Ridge, the NYPD never demonstrated in court
that al-Farooq was a terrorist enterprise but that didn't stop the police from spying on the mosques for years.¶ And under the new
Handschu guidelines, no one outside the NYPD could question the secret practice. ¶ Martin Stolar, one of the lawyers in the
Handschu case, said it's clear the NYPD used enterprise investigations to justify open-ended surveillance. The NYPD should only tape
conversations about building bombs or plotting attacks, he said.¶ "Every Muslim is a potential terrorist? It is completely
unacceptable," he said. "It really tarnishes all of us and tarnishes our system of values."¶ ___¶ Al-Ansar Center, a windowless Sunni
mosque, opened in Brooklyn several years ago, attracting young Arabs and South Asians. NYPD officers feared the mosque was a
breeding ground for terrorists, so informants kept tabs on it.¶ One NYPD report noted that members were fixing up the basement,
turning it into a gym.¶ "They also want to start Jiujitsu classes," it said.¶ The NYPD was particularly alarmed about Mohammad
Elshinawy, 26, an Islamic teacher at several New York mosques, including Al-Ansar. Elshinawy was a Salafist — a follower of a
puritanical Islamic movement — whose father was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center attacks, according
to NYPD documents.¶ The FBI also investigated whether Elshinawy recruited people to wage violent jihad overseas. But the two
agencies investigated him very differently.¶ The FBI closed the case after many months without any charges. Federal investigators
never infiltrated Al-Ansar.¶ "Nobody had any information the mosque was engaged in terrorism activities," a former federal law
enforcement official recalled, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss the investigation.¶ The
NYPD wasn't convinced. A 2008 surveillance document described Elshinawy as "a young spiritual leader (who) lectures and gives
speeches at dozens of venues" and noted, "He has orchestrated camping trips and paintball trips."¶ The NYPD deemed him a threat
in part because "he is so highly regarded by so many young and impressionable individuals."¶ No part of Elshinawy's life was out of
bounds. His mosque was the target of a TEI. The NYPD conducted surveillance at his wedding. An informant recorded the wedding,
and police videotaped everyone who came and went.¶ "We have nothing on the lucky bride at this time but hopefully will learn
about her at the service," one lieutenant wrote.¶ Four years later, the NYPD was still watching Elshinawy without charging him. He is
now a plaintiff in the ACLU lawsuit, which was also filed by the Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility project at
CUNY School of Law and the New York Civil Liberties Union.¶ "These new NYPD spying disclosures confirm the experiences and worst
fears of New York's Muslims," ACLU lawyer Hina Shamsi said. "From houses of worship to a wedding, there's no area of New York
Muslim religious or personal life that the NYPD has not invaded through its bias-based surveillance policy."¶ ___¶ Online:
Documents¶ TEI Discontinuance: http://apne.ws/146zqF9¶ Informant Profiles: http://apne.ws/1aNfuyH¶ Elshinawy Surveillance:
http://apne.ws/15fau4D¶ Handschu Minutes: http://apne.ws/1cenpD6¶ ___¶ AP's Washington investigative team can be reached at
DCinvestigations@ap.org¶ Follow Goldman and Apuzzo at http://twitter.com/adamgoldmanap¶ and
http://twitter.com/mattapuzzo¶
Advantage 1-Not Disclosed Yet
Advantage 2- Not Disclosed Yet
Neoliberalism Links
Elections Links
Conservatives are hardliners on Muslims- the plan would isolate
their base
Dean Obeidallah, reporter for daily beast , "For Republicans, Muslims Will Be the Gays
of 2016," Daily Beast, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/21/forrepublicans-muslims-will-be-the-gays-of-2016.html)//GV
Bobby Jindal isn’t stupid enough to believe in Muslim no-go zones. He’s working the base, which is more than willing to be worked. Now
that Republicans realize that the fight over gay marriage is over, they’re pivoting
back to the old
reliable: Muslims. It’s true that Muslim-bashing among Republicans is hardly new, but I think that as 2016
approaches we’re going to see even more of it as candidates try to outflank one
another. The latest example was LouisianaGovernor’s Bobby Jindal’s speech on Monday in London. Jindal told the audience that
there are “no-go zones” in Europe where Muslims have in essence carved out Islamic “autonomous” zones that are ruled by Koranic law and
where non-Muslims fear to tread. His point, of course, was to warn Americans that Muslims could try the same thing in the United States.
Now if that concept sounds familiar it’s because last week Fox News served up this same rancid red meat to its viewers. Some Fox News
anchors claimed these so-called “no-go zones” existed in parts of France. And Fox News’ terrorism “expert” Steve Emerson even went as far
as to say that Birmingham, England, the nation’s second biggest city with more than one million people, was a “totally Muslim city where
non-Muslims don’t go in.” The backlash to these comments was swift. Even British Prime Minster David Cameron responded, “When I
Fox
News stirring up fear of Muslims is nothing new. In fact, in my view it’s part of Fox’s business model
heard this, frankly, I choked on my porridge and I thought it must be April Fools Day. This guy is clearly a complete idiot.”
since its viewers hold the most negative views of Muslims of any cable news audience. Fox is simply giving their viewers what they want to
see. But a few days ago, Fox did something truly shocking. They apologized for making the claims about Muslim-controlled “no-go zones” in
Europe. In fact, they apologized not once, but four times, and admitted unequivocally that these “no-go zones” don’t even exist. Yet even
though the Fox retractions occurred days before Jindal delivered his speech, that didn’t stop him from asserting the same baseless claims.
After his speech, Jindal was asked by a CNN reporter for specifics on where exactly these “no-go zones “are located. Jindal, in what looked
almost like a sketch from Saturday Night Live, hemmed and hawed, finally responding: “I think your viewers know.” So
what do
you do if you are a Republican candidate seeking conservative votes?
Simple. Bash Muslims. We are truly an easy target. For those unfamiliar with Jindal, he’s no
Louie Gohmert. He’s an Ivy League graduate and a Rhodes scholar. Jindal’s remarks were not a mistake, but rather part of a
calculated strategy to garner support from more conservative Republicans for an expected2016
presidential run. Now, in the past, candidates trying to garner support from these right
wing voters could use opposition to gay marriage to curry favor. As conservative James
Kirchick noted in an article he penned for The Wall Street Journal in 2008, the Republican Party has a long history of its candidates using
not just opposition to gay marriage, but also anti-gay rhetoric to attract support from the GOP Base. Kirchick went on to urge Republicans
to “kiss gay-bashing goodbye.” But we still saw this bigotry in the 2012 race. For example, Rick Perry ran a campaign commercial that said
you know “there’s something wrong with this country when gays can openly serve in the military.” Polls, however, now show a majority of
Americans support gay marriage. And even the Mike Huckabees of the GOP would have to admit that after the Supreme Court announced
Friday that it is considering the constitutionality of same-sex marriage this term, gay marriage will likely soon be the law of the land.
Bottom line:
voters.
gay marriage will probably be dead as an issue capable of rallying conservative
So what do you do if you are a Republican candidate seeking conservative votes? Simple. Bash Muslims. We are truly an easy
target. First, Muslims
are a small percentage of our nation’s population at
approximately 1 to 2 percent. Second, there are horrible Muslims who do commit terror
in the name of our faith, which does offer cover for anti-Muslim bigotry. Third,
we still don’t have many allies outside of our community that stand with us. Sure, we have
some interfaith supporters. But when ant-gay comments are made, like in the case of “Duck Dynasty’s” Phil Roberson in 2013, the response
by the left was swift and united. But with anti-Muslim bigotry, we don’t see that. We see silence from many on the left, including from most
Democratic elected officials. And worse, we see some outright anti-Muslim fear mongering by so-called liberals like Bill Maher. If I’m right,
what can we expect to see as the 2016 presidential race heats up? More speeches like Jindal’s designed to stir up fear with no factual
support. His remarks were applauded by conservative ++Larry Kudlow in The National Review. Even more comments like the ones recently
made by Oklahoma
State Representative John Bennett that Muslims are a
“cancer” that must be cut of our country and that Muslim-Americans are not
loyal to the United States but to the “constitution of Islam.” Bennett received
a standing ovation from the conservative audience that heard these remarks, and the Oklahoma
GOP Chair even backed him up. And possibly even more comments like the one made by newly sworn in member of Congress Jody Hice
who stated that Islam is not a religion and doesn’t deserve First Amendment protection. Was there any backlash from GOP leaders to this
remarks? Nope, in fact people Red States’ Erick Erickson even spoke at one of his fundraisers and wrote he was “proud to support” Hice.
This is a far cry from the 2008 presidentialrace when John McCain countered anti-Muslim remarks made by a supporter at one of his
campaign rallies. My hope is that I’m wrong. But after seeing close to a thousand people over the weekend protesting a Muslim-American
event in Texas that was ironically organized to counter extremism, I’m not so optimistic. The more conservative parts of the GOP base tend
to vote in higher numbers in the primaries. So don’t’
be surprised when you see Republican
candidates trying to get their attention with this cut of red meat.
A Republican election will cause there to be an increase in Islamophobia
Thomas, 14
(Bradford is a news analyst. “DailyBeast: Republicans A Major Reason Americans Hate Muslims
Republicans, media major reasons for plummeting opinion of Islam.” http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/dailybeast-republicansmajor-reason-americans-hate-muslims. Date accessed- 7/20/15.// Anshul)
In a 9/11 anniversary opinion piece Thursday, the Daily Beast’s Dean Obeidallah argued that one of the major
reasons
Americans dislike Muslims more now than in 2001 is Republican politicians. ¶ In the piece, Obeidallah,
a Muslim, said that he has been pondering for some time why public opinion of Muslims has plummeted over the last decade. In
Oct 2001, 47 percent of Americans held a favorable view of Islam, but today that number has
shrunk to just 27 percent.¶ One of the key reasons, he admits, is the “the horrible acts committed by radical Muslims.”
Another is Americans not seeing moderate Muslims condemning the acts—which Obeidallah blames on the media. ¶ ¶ But, he says,
there’s another factor, something “truly despicable” going on in America: those who “intentionally stoke the flames of hate against
our community.”
Most high-profile of those “despicable” Americans are, of course, Republican
politicians:¶ Some do it because they simply detest/fear anyone who doesn’t pray or look like
them. For some, Muslim bashing is their career. They make a living writing books and giving lectures about how Muslims want to
destroy America.¶ And then there are the politicians, almost exclusively Republicans, who gin up hate of the
“other” for political gain. The anti-sharia law measures passed in states like Florida and North Carolina are a prime
example.¶ The proponents of these laws will demonize Muslims while making the case for these
measures. Yet they publicly admit there are zero instances of Muslims trying to impose Islamic law in
their respective states. For example, Florida State Senator Alan Hays conceded as much but argued the anti-Shaira law
legislation was needed as a “preemptive measure,” similar to when your parents would “have you vaccinated against different
diseases.Ӧ Image source: a Salon article mocking Republicans for fearing the "imagined threat of Islamic law.
--Tag-Obeidallah, 12
(Dean Obeidallah is an analyst for and a special for a CNN. Published on August 29, 2012” The GOP has a Muslim problem.”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/29/opinion/obeidallah-gop-muslim-problem/. Date Accessed- 07/20/15. //Anshul)
Catholic priest, a rabbi, an evangelical minister, a Sikh, a Greek Orthodox archbishop and two Mormon leaders walk into the
Republican National Convention.¶ It sounds like the beginning of a joke. But the Republican
Party's decision to invite
representatives from all of these faiths to speak at this week's convention, but to exclude a
Muslim-American imam, is anything but funny.¶ The Republican Party has a problem with Muslims. Of course,
American Muslims can take some solace in the fact that we are not the only minority group that the Republican Party hardly
welcomes.¶ Let's be honest, if you don't like Muslims, blacks, gays, immigrants or other minorities, which political party would make
you feel most comfortable? Sure, some Republican officials are minorities, but
a recent Galllup survey found that
89% of the Republican Party is white.¶ To be clear, I don't believe that most rank-and-file members of the Republican
Party hate Muslims. The problem is that certain Republican leaders have stoked the flames of hate toward
American Muslims, and other minorities, as a political tool to motivate people to support their cause.¶ Dean Obeidallah¶
Dean Obeidallah¶ For example, recently Rep. Michele Bachmann -- along with four other Republican House members -- asserted that
the Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated the U.S. government. Bachmann, who is in a tough re-election battle in her redrawn
congressional district, even "named names" by claiming that Secretary Hillary Clinton's top aide, Huma Abedin, and Rep. Keith Ellison
were connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.¶ Although Republican Sen. John McCain publicly denounced Bachmann's baseless
allegations, just a few weeks later, Republican Rep. Joe Walsh escalated the fear-mongering. Walsh, who is in
a tight race with Democratic opponent Tammy Duckworth, told constituents at a town hall meeting in the Chicago suburbs that
there are radical Muslims living among them who are plotting to kill them: "One
thing I'm sure of is that there are
people in this country -- there is a radical strain of Islam in this country -- it's not just over
there -- trying to kill Americans every week." Walsh even claimed that this Muslim radical was in his district: "It's in
Elk Grove. It's in Addison. It's in Elgin. It's here."¶ And let's not forget that during this year's Republican
presidential
primaries, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain told voters that American Muslims want to impose
Islamic law in America. It's a truly astounding task when you consider that this would require the 2.6 million Muslims in the
U.S. to overpower the other 300 million Americans and implement an Islamic legal system. Obviously, this assertion is not based on
facts, but to politicians desperate for votes, facts don't matter.¶ This type of rhetoric has yielded two distinct consequences. First, it
can be seen in the attitudes of Republicans who have been poisoned by the anti-Muslim voices in their party. A recent poll found
that 62% of Obama voters view American Muslims favorably, but only 34% of Romney voters shared that positive outlook.¶ Even
more alarming is that fear-mongering by politicians can create an environment that inspires violence against the people being
demonized. It sends a message that these people are "others" and not truly Americans like the rest of us. ¶ For example, within a few
weeks of Bachmann's comments, a suspicious fire destroyed a mosque in Missouri. And days after Walsh's warnings that Muslim
terrorists were living in the Chicago suburbs, a homemade acid bomb was thrown at an Islamic school, pellet gunshots were fired at
a mosque, and Muslim headstones at a cemetery were defaced with anti-Muslim graffiti, all in the Chicago area. It's impossible to
know whether these hateful acts were related to the remarks, but the climate created by fear-mongering does not encourage
tolerance.¶ Getting back to this week's Republican Convention: The Republican Party should be applauded for including so many
faiths, especially the Sikhs, who number about 200,000 Americans and whose community was targeted by a hate-filled gunman who
But excluding Muslims sends a message that American Muslims
are not part of the fabric of this country. That is wrong.¶ Republican National Committee Chairman Reince
killed six people in a place of worship.
Priebus still has time to correct this mistake. He could invite a Muslim-American imam to be a part of this week's convention. That
would send a clear message that the Republican Party is truly welcoming of all major religions practiced in the U.S.¶ It also would
send a message that there is no place for hate in the GOP against any American minority group. It's now up to Preibus to show
whether the Republican Party stands for inclusiveness or division.
Agenda Politics Links