Muslims claim unfair treatment at border

[Khephra]

BUFFALO, N.Y. -- An Islamic civil rights group Wednesday accused U.S. border agents of religious profiling after dozens of American Muslims were searched, fingerprinted and photographed while returning from a religious conference in Toronto.

Some of those stopped said they were held at the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge for six hours or more with no explanation.

A spokeswoman for Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection said agents stopped anyone who said they attended the three-day convention, titled "Reviving the Islamic Spirit," based on information that such gatherings can be a means for terrorists to promote their cause.

"I asked `If I refuse to give my fingerprints, what will you do?"' said Galeb Rizek, 32, who claimed he arrived at the border around midnight and was held until 6:30 a.m. "(The agent) said, `You can refuse, but you'll be here until you do."'

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--muslimsstopped1229dec29,0,6237696.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. check out the group for yourself

Here's the url to their website: http://www.revivingtheislamicspirit.com/convention/

Personally, I don't plan to cross any international borders or take an airplane, because I fear the hassle. The head of my Sufi order (who leads interfaith conferences and promotes peace)has been stopped and searched, literature on his peace conferences and retreats taken from him. He told us it is a practice in patience and tolerance.

What concerns me is that Homeland Security detained and intimidated all these people without having to show any real proof of any terrorist link. If they can do this with American Muslims, what American group will be next?

[pinerow]

2. And we continue the slide into fascism...

nt

[Just Me]

3. How come there is NO acknowledgement of ANTI-ISLAMISM?

It really bugs me that an anti-semitism and anti-americanism is flagrantly out there.

Yet, even though a seepy form of anti-islamism has been quite pervasive,...there is no acknowledgement of that.

And,...it really bugs me.

[SupplySideLiberal]

4. Seems reasonable to me

If I were an American Muslim, though I'd dislike the inconvenience, I'd welcome such security measures. It's an unfortunate fact that although the vast majority of American Muslims are peaceful, there is a small minority sympathetic to violent jihad. And it is true that religious conferences in the past have attracted these folks.

I don't see the problem. The border agents are trying to screen for those with connections to terrorism. Isn't that a good thing?

[anakie]

5. maybe they should do the same to members of militia

n/t

[SupplySideLiberal]

7. Profile the militias and the Koresh groups, too.

I'm all for it. Also Koresh type radical fundamentalist Christian groups. I see no harm in keeping a watchful eye on groups with connections to violent extremists.

[atreides1]

17. All Fundamentalist Christian Groups

Especially any that want to make the Ten Commandments the law of the land.

In my opinion trying to usurp the US Constitution in any way is treason, and seeing as how most fundie xtian groups want a country based on biblical law, they should be scrutinized much more closely then American Muslims.

[OnlyInAmerica]

18. I believe we did

I distinctly remember increased scrutiny of militias in Montana, Idaho, etc. following the OKC bombing in 1995. There was no outcry of profiling at the time.

[Just Me]

6. Depends upon whether they are selectively screening "terrorists".

Frankly, there are stats which prove that a domestic terrorist act is 23 times more likely to be waged than one by someone outside our country. Hell, our own political-corporate-inspired operatives fall squarely within the definition of "terrorists".

Perhaps, if we "screened" our own government FIRST,...this measure would hold some legitimacy.

[SupplySideLiberal]

8. Domestic vs foreign terrorists

I haven't seen the 23 times statistic before, but it makes sense to me. The folks returning from this conference were not foreigners, though. They were US citizens. I think the point is not just to stop foreign bombers from sneaking in, but to find leads to terrorist groups through US citizens who may be sympathetic and connected to them in some way.

Islamic conferences have attracted jihad sympathizers in the past. I don't know about this group, but I imagine they are a force for good, giving values to youth, etc.. It just seems to me they would understand the need to look for the few bad guys.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anakie]

10. and your old testament is full of compassion

and may I remind you Xtians are responsible for over 100,000 Iraqi deaths.

[SupplySideLiberal]

11. True about Old Testment, but...

You're right about the Old Testament. Ancient Hindu texts have similar passages. Followers of the New Testament have also justified holy wars and terrorism from their interpretation of that book.

Those other groups, though, unlike radical Islamist Muslims, don't currently threaten anyone in any numbers based on their religions. Currently there is a worldwide movement involving millions of people bent on destroying their religious enemies. Why should we ignore them at our borders?

[tx_dem41]

13. Read my post #12.....

and answer the question,if you have time.

[leftynyc]

20. While I see your your point

The US military is not comprised of ONLY Christians and those who are are not using the New Testament as an excuse to "kill infidels". Every time I go to an airport, because of my coloring (dark hair, dark eyes), I get the once over, searched and sometimes searched again (while my blond hair, blue-eyed companion NEVER gets searched). I'm not a Muslim and I make no complaints so it doesn't only happen to Muslims. What do you expect Homeland Security to do?

[tx_dem41]

12. With the cases of Johnny Walker Lindh, Richard Reid....

and possibly Jose Padilla, how does one identify a Muslim. Should it be put on our passport or driver's license? I mean, any smart security system isn't going to just search Arabs when Al Qaeda has already proven that they are capable of recruiting Caucasians, Hispanics, and West Indians.

So how would you identify Muslims?

[SupplySideLiberal]

14. Don't try to screen all Muslims, but in this case...

You make a good point. No way should we put a person's religion on their passport. No one would stand for that, thank goodness.

I don't advocate trying to identify all Muslims entering the US. But in this case, the border agents said they questioned those who identified themselves as conference attendees. I see nothing wrong with that. I see nothing wrong, either, with FBI undercover agents attending mosques with questionable reputations.

[Bridget Burke]

15. Refresh my memory.

Which cultural conferences did Atta & his buddies attend?

The ones held in titty bars don't count.

[SupplySideLiberal]

16. I don't know, but...

I don't know if they attended any. But I remember reading of very violent rhetoric at some of these conferences, and think it's reasonable to assume that you might find people with terrorist group ties at some of these events. Some of the organizations that sponsor and speak at conferences have had fund-raising connections to terrorist groups.

Sorry, I can't cite specific events, I don't remember them. And I'm not saying this group was bad. They may be a great influence. But i don't think it's bigotry for border agents to check out people returning from Islamic conferences.

[Bridget Burke]

21. "Specific" is a really good concept.

If there are specific conferences where violent rhetoric is preached, surely some care must be taken. Surely the programs of the conferences are available to the FBI; shouldn't they focus on the ones worth their time? I mean, YOU know what was preached! (Wouldn't happen to have a link, would you?)

Mistreating all Muslims is rude & stupid.

[SupplySideLiberal]

23. I have to agree.

You convinced me. They should be able to keep track of which are the good events and which are questionable. How many Islamic conferences can there be?

There is a link to this conference in the initial post. The site doesn't give much info other than scheduling, etc..

[Feron]

19. More invasive ,but ultimately worthless security

Searching, fingerprinting ,and photographing these people without any due cause (except for the sin of attending a faith conference) will accomplish exactly nothing to prevent terrorism. The only thing it accomplishes is to allow the goverment to get ever more invasive so the populace can get warm fuzzies that they are doing something. Somebody's religion isn't enough to warrant this kind of treatment. Had these people been carrying passports that were suspect for example, then that would be another matter entirely.

[rainbow4321]

22. Seattle Indymedia: CBP official cites "orders from above"

http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2004/12/243779.shtml

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said the incident was a disturbing example of religious profiling that would have a chilling effect on the constitutional rights of American Muslims, particularly the right to the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and the right to be "secure in their persons…against unreasonable searches."

CBP officials on the scene cited "orders from above" to justify their actions. One CBP official reportedly agreed with a Muslim traveler that "it would not look good" if the news media saw the detention area filled exclusively with Muslims in Islamic attire. CAIR is investigating similar reports of demands for fingerprinting of conference attendees at other border crossings.


When contacted by CAIR, a CBP spokesman in Washington, D.C., initially said fingerprinting of American citizens would be a "violation of policy." He later said fingerprinting would be allowed "if there was a law enforcement reason for doing so," but would not state what that reason might be.