Academic

Guardian column criticizing the FBI as "spying on American Muslims"

By Tung Yin

From the Guardian (UK), by an American Muslim attorney:

Time for FBI to stop spying on American Muslims

The opening two paragraphs read:

The recent arrest of the potential Christmas tree bomber is reflective of the FBI's myopic strategy of using glitzy, expensive sting operations and dubious confidential informants to further erode Muslim American relations instead of concentrating on effective partnerships to combat radicalisation. The FBI is promoting the arrest of Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a 19-year-old Somali-born teenager accused of attempting to detonate a car bomb at a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony, as a triumph of effective law enforcement. Instead, the operation reeks of gratuitous self-adulation, requiring 6 months of time and precious expenditures to "uncover" a dummy terrorist plot wholly scripted and concocted by the FBI in the first place.

Although many argue that this was simply entrapment, evidence does indicate that Mohamud became increasingly radicalised and voluntarily continued with the FBI's fake terror plot. Regardless, CAIR attorney Zahra Billo told me, "The FBI seek out troubled people ? nobody is arguing that some of these individuals aren't deeply troubled ? and then enable and facilitate their aspirations. It is the FBI's job to stop operational terrorists. It is not the FBI's job to enable aspirational terrorists."

The column goes on to criticize the use of these sting operations, referencing the Montiehl fiasco, as well as another similar incident in Lodi (though that one resulted in convictions).  In the Lodi case, the author asserts, "[the informant's] taped conversations with Umer Hyatt reveal him badgering and allegedly conning Umer to make incriminating statements."

It should be indisputable that any kind of undercover government operation should not involve badgering targets into incriminating themselves or seeking to provoke targets into agreeing to commit jihad (as Montiehl seems to have attempted).  If the criticism therefore is that the government's past sting operations have been heavyhanded, manipulative, and borderline entrapment (if not over the border), that may be a fair and persuasive point.

But I don't see the end game that the author is proposing here.  He notes the role that Muslim Americans have played in identifying or helping stop terrorist plots:

Thus, a Senegalese Muslim immigrant was the first to witness and report failed jihadist Faisal Shahzad's burning car in Times Square. A Muslim American community in Virginia went to local law enforcements and the FBI after discovering troubling videotapes left by five youths who allegedly went to Pakistan to commit jihad. A convert to Islam tipped off the FBI about the Christian militant group, the Hutarees, who were planning a terrorist attack on American soil. Even the Nigerian underwear bomber's own father warned British authorities that his son was radicalised and could potentially harm himself and others.

In the case of Faisal Shahzad (the Times Square bomber), it's a good thing that someone noticed the burning vehicle, but I don't think I'd want to rely on the happenstance of someone noticing to avoid a successful car bomb plot.  Similarly, with the underwear bomber, yes, the father did warn the British, but he still got on a plane and tried to blow it up.  Even in the Mohamud case, it seems like the father alerted the government.

What exactly is the government supposed to do in such a situation, where it has received some information suggesting that someone may be radicalized?

Undoubtedly, radicalisation and terrorism are real threats, which afflict all US citizens, regardless of race or religion. Perhaps the FBI should now cease treating most Muslim American citizens as potential suspects, whose privacy rights and civil liberties are now curtailed in clumsy ways ? such as faulty GPS tracking devices sloppily attached on their cars. Perhaps the FBI needs to spend its considerable (taxpayer-paid-for) resources to re-engage them as partners and allies ? instead of contributing to the heightened climate of fear and paranoia by employing shady informants with cheesy, comic-book codenames.

Well, I certainly agree that we should not be treating Muslim Americans as potential terrorist suspects based only on their religion, and I also agree that the Muslim American community's assistance in preventing or identifying radicalization is important.  But this says nothing about what the government should do if someone has been identified as potentially radicalized.

Full post as published by The Yin Blog on December 07, 2010 (boomark / email).