Shvitz Search
Contribute
Featured Book
Featured Album
DAILY SHVITZ
| Partying With 40,000 Unindicted Co-Conspirators | |
 by Ali Eteraz, September 12, 2007
|
|
Almost every American-Muslim youth has been to the Islamic Society of North America's annual convention in Chicago which takes place on Labor Day weekend. The organization is one of the oldest Muslim groups in the US and its evolution affects the Muslims of this country. At one point in the early 1980's it was a battleground for religious conservatives from Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Over the next few decades it underwent a slow change so that today it is headed by a white-convert woman named Ingrid, has placed numerous African-American Muslims in positions of power, and this year welcomed Howard Dean and Congressman Keith Ellison to its convention in Chicago.
Dean made quite an impression with Muslims at ISNA, and it marks the first time that a major political leader has made outreach to the convention, which usually brings together somewhere between 30 – 50,000 Muslims from around the country, most of them of voting age.
In a wonderful blog post by a Chicago blogger, the evolution of American Islam – the difference between older Muslims who were largely apathetic towards politics and the young "ISNA Deaniacs" – is made clearly manifest. Samaha writes:
It was quite interesting watching these fidgety late teens and twenty-something year olds turning their heads, looking towards the door anxiously awaiting Howard Dean. This was it - this right here, this vibrant young enthusiasm was what differentiated my generation from theirs. Not because they are Deaniacs, mind you, but because within these wide eyes you can see hope. You can see the innocence and yes the good naivety that none of us should ever have lost. You can see in their eyes the hidden solutions that they all carry to all of the problems of the world. You can see the simplicity of it all but somehow, somehow you just can't see far enough to be able to touch it or grasp it, to feel it again.
She goes on to describe the panel that ISNA had set up.
I should make note that ISNA itself insists that it is non-partisan and had invited republicans to this event but had no takers on the republican invitees - so the panel before us consisted of democrats. ~Way to go republicans~
She is right, in 2000, Muslims bloc-voted for Bush on his promise that he would repeal the Secret Evidence Act. Since then not only have Republicans badly burned Muslims in most areas of legislation, but they have also failed to do outreach – something Howard Dean's obviously picked up on. Dean then delivered his message:
What we needed was a party that looked like all of America he insisted. "This country was built on immigrants." "There are very few native Americans; everyone else is an immigrant." "Engaging all Americans is what Democrats try to do" and "it is no coincidence that Keith Ellison is a Democrat." Now, these were the words I thought we needed to hear.
Please feel free to read the entire post, which contains further analysis and insights.
There is a reason that Republicans do not outreach to ISNA. In a case involving a charity with alleged links to Hamas currently going on in Dallas, the complaint listed ISNA (along with 300 other Muslim figures and organizations) as "unindicted co-conspirators." Conservatives use ISNA's appearance on such a list to smear it as an enemy to America.
Reality is that the unindicted co-conspirator category has been part of American law for a very long time – Richard Nixon was named as one, so was L. Ron Hubbard, and it was used in the Whitewater case. Not only that, but it is really a legal fiction, a way to get around traditional rules of evidence, and has no bearing on anyone's innocence or culpability. When asked to define an unindicted co-conspirator, a PBS legal expert replied as follows:
STUART TAYLOR, The American Lawyer: The prosecutor is saying in essence in court--and they haven't said it yet by the way--but they apparently will--that we believe this man was part of the criminal conspiracy, along with the people who are on trial. We haven't indicted him but the relevance of that for the purposes of the trial is that lets them get in more evidence about the unindicted co-conspirator's or the alleged unindicted co-conspirator's out-of-court statements than they otherwise could. It's a way around the hearsay rule.
MS. WARNER: Explain that just a little more. What do you mean?
MR. TAYLOR: For example, if they want to--somebody, one of their witnesses, to talk about what Bruce Lindsey said to him, ordinarily that would be barred by the so-called hearsay rule. You can't talk --you can't testify in a trial about what somebody else said out of court. That rule has a lot of exceptions. One of the exceptions is if the person who you're trying to quote, here Bruce Lindsey, is named by the prosecution as an unindicted co-conspirator, then you can talk about what he said out of court.
ISNA, with help from the National Association of Muslim Lawyers, has asked the Department of Justice to remove it from the list of co-conspirators.
There is really no reason for ISNA to be on this list. The fact of the matter is that the Department of Justice actually had a booth at the ISNA convention this year. So did the Department of Homeland Security – in fact, in an amusing twist, see this picture where they sat right next to an organization which stupidly but peacefully agitates for an international caliphate. A DOJ official calls ISNA "the big tent event of the year for the American Muslim community." The Washington Times, meanwhile, said that the DOJ was a co-sponsor of the ISNA convention. Does that mean that the DOJ should be an unindicted co-co-conspirator?
At the current time our legal system provides no way to take oneself off the unindicted co-conspirator list. And the National Association of Muslim Lawyers will be taking on a case of first impression.
Ultimately, ISNA will go on year after year, unindicted or not, showcasing the evolution of American-Islam. As an AltMuslim editorial describes it:
Conference attendees took the negative attention in stride, preferring to be inspired (perennial favorites Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Imam Zaid Shakir from the Zaytuna Institute drew standing-room-only crowds) or commercially satiated by the convention's 300+ bazaar vendors. Entertainment ranged from the ISNA-sanctioned show MC'ed by video blogger Baba Ali and featuring artists such as Kareem Salama and Dawud Wharnsby, to off-site (and non-endorsed) events such as the IMAN Community Café in southside Chicago with its "turntable dhikr" (remembrance of God) and hip-hop Muslim poetry, and the Muslim punk "Taqwapalooza" concert, held in a sweaty downtown residence complete with mosh pit. Hardly the Islamo-fascism some would have you expect.
With a hand in US government policy-making, an embrace of commercialism, and a nod to a still-developing American Muslim culture (and even counter-culture), ISNA is stretching hard to broaden its influence - and largely succeeding. Unlike many Muslim gatherings around the world, the ISNA conference, as with the group itself, has grown to become a relatively non-judgemental affair. Only time will tell if the organization gets the same from its critics in return.
Muslims around the country thank Howard Dean for showing up.
Update: I wanted to illustrate how ISNA has undergone change (and has ways to go). At one point in the 90's, Hamza Yusuf, who is the star at ISNA, used to tell people not so nice things about the US to Muslims. He recanted most of that after 9/11, and now even came to Tikkun to decry Muslim anti-Semitism. I am not an expert in Yusuf, nor a dogmatic defender of ISNA, in fact my writings about the two of them get me in trouble with Muslims. My point, however, is that to think that organizations do not change and grow -- and to simply overlook the evidence of ISNA's actual evolution -- is unfair. ISNA is improving day by day.
 |
Ali Eteraz, 27, is a columnist for Jewcy, a politics and culture magazine. He also contributes regularly to the More... |
Why Barack Obama’s sex ed policy makes sense
The Iranian president wrote a letter to "the noble American people."...
How to do the low-carb holiday in a post-Heston world
How the jewelry industry convinced us true love costs $4,000
What the pin-up ‘victim’ of global warming can teach us about...
| Dev Blog | Privacy | Submissions | Contact | |  | | Comment Policy | About Us | FAQ | Masthead |
| Hosting provided by Tilted Planet | ||
shimshon123
now for some facts
my original post was tagged as spam so let me try again....
first let me say that i have enjoyed your post so far, but this piece is problematic. The ISNA has real ties to some violent, and not so moderate organizations i.e. hamas and the muslim brotherhood. see: http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/08/isna_and_jihad.php
Ali Eteraz
yes i know
im well aware that isna was founded by the brotherhood. i acknowledged that in my opening paragraph.
"At one point in the early 1980's it was a battleground for religious conservatives from Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Over the next few decades it underwent a slow change so that today it is headed by a white-convert woman named Ingrid, has placed numerous African-American Muslims in positions of power, and this year welcomed Howard Dean and Congressman Keith Ellison to its convention in Chicago."
The history of the Saudi v. Ikhwan fight in ISNA was documented as early as 1988 by those bleeding heart liberals at ivy league schools.
Question is, do you or do you not accept the possibility that organizations change, re-direct, and go in a different direction?
For example, the link you have provided, links to a man named Zaid Shakir. In the late 1990's, at ISNA, he would tell Muslims not to become involved in American civic affairs or even vote, etc. 9/11 radically transformed him, and his peer, Hamza Yusuf. Now they lead Civic Engagement among Muslims. Yusuf went on Tikkun Magazine and decried Muslim anti-Semitism. Evidence of ISNA's growth is that it now brings the DOJ and DHS into its bazar. I also recall that Rabbi Yoffe was at ISNA this year. That would have been impossible ten years ago.
Finally, people need to straighten out their allegation towards ISNA. Pipes says they are Wahhabi. Other commentators on this site are saying they are Brotherhood. The two are not one and the same, ask the editors of this site or any intelligent counter-terrorism pundit. If the punditocracy can't even figure that much out, I'd say, at the least, more humility should be shown.
Mary
Peacefully agitating for a caliphate
Ali, you said There is really no reason for ISNA to be on this list. The fact of the matter is that the Department of Justice actually had a booth at the ISNA convention this year. So did the Department of Homeland Security – in fact, in an amusing twist, see this picture where they sat right next to an organization which stupidly but peacefully agitates for an international caliphate.
The organization which "stupidly but peacefully agitates for an international caliphate" is called Hizb ut Tahrir.
What can you tell us about Hizb ut Tahrir and their relationship with ISNA, Ali?
Ali Eteraz
hizb
all i know about the hizb is that they paid to have a booth at isna, just like doj and dhs. in the us, the hizb is not illegal, nor i believe, are they illegal in the uk. the hizb has never gotten any backing or support from isna from what i know of isna.
most muslim kids in the us consider hizb a joke. when i went to isna i had a nice argument with the hizb guy, and that was about it. in the uk the hizb was a bigger problem.
uk's comment is free deals a lot with the hizb, giving its ex-members ed hussain, shiraz maher and maajid something a lot of room to play.
shimshon123
when did the change take place?
you only point out the oldest of connections with some not so non-violent ideology and then suggest that things have changed. but these connections have continued. the link i provided also deals with the key note speakers at the last conference.
Ken McCracken
The Co-conspirator Hearsay Exemption
Well the ISNA probably won't be able to get itself off the list - because the reason it got itself on the list in the first place is because they met the elements for the co-conspirator exemption from the hearsay rule - which is basically proof of any act or declaration (1) by a co-conspirator or defendant (2) committed in furtherance of the conspiracy (3) during its pendency (4) provided that a foundation for its reception is laid by independent proof of the conspiracy.
It's not really an exception to the hearsay rule, it is an exemption from the hearsay rule -
"this difference is due to the structure of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Excepted statements are admissible because they have indicia of trustworthiness. Co-Conspirator statements on the other hand are exempted both because of the their trustworthy nature and because of the ‘agency fiction’ of conspiracies. This agency fiction states:
"When men enter into an agreement for an unlawful end, they become ad hoc agents for one another, and have made a ‘partnership in crime’. What one does pursuant to the common purpose, all do, and, as declarations may be such acts, they are competent against all." Bourjaily v. U.S., 483 U.S. 171, 190 (1987), quoting Van Riper v. U.S., 13 F.2d 961, 967 (2d Cir.) cert. denied sub nom Ackerson v. U.S., 273 U.S. 702 (1926)."
Sorry Ali I am not really trying to bust your chops here, it is just that I am something of an expert on the subject, and I rarely get to bring it up!
Ali Eteraz
ken, question
ken, thanks for showing me that article i've saved it, and god does it bring bad memories of the evidence section of the bar.
however, you weren't dealing with the UN-indicted co-conspirator situation. were you? i know that co-conspirator statements came in via 801 d 2 e, but where -- am i just missing it -- is the exemption for un-indicted?
i submit to you that the un-indicted co-conspirator whatever it is, is completely illogical. in fact, the very existence of 801 d 2 e of the federal rules demonstrates that if the prosecutor has enough tools to extract information from an isna...in which case, it should indict and rope them in.
now as crim def lawyer you have to figure that they didn't have enough even to get them before a grand jury, so they smeared them (at least that's what it looks like to the millions of american muslims).
Ali Eteraz
shimshon
if u become a regular reader of my blog (eteraz.wordpress.com) you'll see that i'll eventually talk about the keynote speakers and such. over the past year or more i've criticized almost all of them on various issues. given that there is no imminent danger to anyone's lives, i hope that we can file this issue away for another day. im not evading the issue b/c i would myself like to talk about it.
AdmiralAdama
And now
a defense of the Muslim Brotherhood groups from Ali. Could we expect any less?
CAIR, ISNA, the Muslim Brotherhood -- all terror-linked groups defended by Ali Eteraz, who is now flooding Jewcy with the most puerile type of disingenuous Jihad apologism.
CAIR and ISNA unindicted co-conspirators in terror trial
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/2951
For ISNA's many links to radical Islam
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/425
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/96
excerpt "....ISNA's many ties to radical Islam, including to Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, Rashid Ghanushi, the International Institute of Islamic Thought, and the Islamic Universal Heritage Foundation. She cites a November 2003 report on WTHR-TV, the NBC affiliate in Indianapolis (near Plainfield, Indiana, where ISNA's headquarters is located), that found "a dozen charities, organizations or individuals under federal scrutiny for possible ties to terrorism that are linked in some way to ISNA." ISNA is also under Senate scrutiny for links to terrorist groups."
CAIR unmasked
http://www.meforum.org/article/916
excerpt:
CAIR's personnel are normally tight-lipped about the organization's agenda but sometimes let their ambitions slip out. CAIR's long-serving chairman, Omar Ahmad, reportedly told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."[103] Five years later, Ahmad denied having said this and issued a press release saying he was seeking a retraction.[104] But the reporter stood behind her story, and the newspaper that reported Ahmad's remarks told WorldNetDaily it had "not been contacted by CAIR."[105]
Danial
Put a sock in it,
Put a sock in it, AdmiralTardling.
Anonymous
Ali Claims he "acknowledged"
that the ISNA was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood in the first paragraph, but of course there is no mention of the group there. I'm not sure how he defines "acknowledge" but if it's as slippery as the rest of his thinking, it might suffice.
Today's article in the Dallas Morning News lays out the Jihadist project of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Excerpt from the MB's own strategic memo:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/rdrehe...
The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.
Matthew Longacre
I was at the ISNA convention.
Personally, I would find it difficult to believe that anybody who WASN'T at the ISNA convention can really speak about the issue properly. It's as if you are demanding a Jihadi agenda from a place that really had no Jihadi presence.
Actually, while I was at ISNA, I was almost worried I would see some group advocating terrorism or some "Jihadist" agenda, and that they would get international spotlight in a conference of some 60,000 generically peace-loving Muslim Americans. However, no matter how hard I combed those booths, I couldn't seem to find the Jihadists, their literature, or even a proclamation for violence.
Although ISNA was founded by the MB, you couldn't find a trace of MB activity there. ISNA's "connections" to alleged terrorist organizations (as unindicted co-conspirators, mind you, which means they were "friends or friends of friends of the guys who may or may not have engaged in terrorist acts") are just as tenable to any Missionaries connections to Haitian militias, any government official's connections to despotic dictators, and so forth. It's difficult not to have "connections to Hamas" if you know anybody in Palestine. I've got friends who know Hamas members that pop their collar and wear pink tees.
read the quotes. Not only can they not pin anything on ISNA, they can hardly even pin anything on these "dozens of groups" attached to them. These groups are "under scrutiny." And may one ask WHY they are under scrutiny? Am I a terrorist because some men in suits came and questioned my Imam for 4 hours? Wouldn't that make my Mosque "under scrutiny?" I've not had a terrorist thought in my life, and I am in fact appalled by the very idea. One of my teachers is an "unindicted co-conspirator" and the man has to be the nicest individual I've ever met.
Stop treating things that are not serious businesses as more than they are. Doing that results in bad things happening, like the CIA abducting an innocent man from Canada because he met with a guy they were once watching. Poor bloke was tortured for 10 months only to get a personal apology from the Canadian govt and to be denied a human right's award because the US wouldn't take him off the no-fly list and admit their mistake.
Post new comment