Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/fjix

U.S. Campaign Produces Few Convictions on Terrorism Charges
Statistics Often Count Lesser Crimes

By Dan Eggen and Julie Tate
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, June 12, 2005; A01

On Thursday, President Bush stepped to a lectern at the Ohio State Highway
Patrol Academy in Columbus to urge renewal of the USA Patriot Act and to
boast of the government's success in prosecuting terrorists.

Flanked by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Bush said that "federal
terrorism investigations have resulted in charges against more than 400
suspects, and more than half of those charged have been convicted."

Those statistics have been used repeatedly by Bush and other
administration officials, including Gonzales and his predecessor, John D.
Ashcroft, to characterize the government's efforts against terrorism.

But the numbers are misleading at best.

An analysis of the Justice Department's own list of terrorism prosecutions
by The Washington Post shows that 39 people -- not 200, as officials have
implied -- were convicted of crimes related to terrorism or national
security.

Most of the others were convicted of relatively minor crimes such as
making false statements and violating immigration law -- and had nothing
to do with terrorism, the analysis shows. For the entire list, the median
sentence was just 11 months.

Taken as a whole, the data indicate that the government's effort to
identify terrorists in the United States has been less successful than
authorities have often suggested. The statistics provide little support
for the contention that authorities have discovered and prosecuted
hundreds of terrorists here. Except for a small number of well-known cases
-- such as truck driver Iyman Faris, who sought to take down the Brooklyn
Bridge -- few of those arrested appear to have been involved in active
plots inside the United States.

Among all the people charged as a result of terrorism probes in the three
years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, The Post found no demonstrated
connection to terrorism or terrorist groups for 180 of them.

Just one in nine individuals on the list had an alleged connection to the
al Qaeda terrorist network and only 14 people convicted of
terrorism-related crimes -- including Faris and convicted Sept. 11 plotter
Zacarias Moussaoui -- have clear links to the group. Many more cases
involve Colombian drug cartels, supporters of the Palestinian cause,
Rwandan war criminals or others with no apparent ties to al Qaeda or its
leader, Osama bin Laden.

But a large number of people appear to have been swept into U.S.
counterterrorism investigations by chance -- through anonymous tips,
suspicious circumstances or bad luck -- and have remained classified as
terrorism defendants years after being cleared of connections to extremist
groups.

For example, the prosecution of 20 men, most of them Iraqis, in a
Pennsylvania truck-licensing scam accounts for about 10 percent of
individuals convicted -- even though the entire group was publicly
absolved of ties to terrorism in 2001.

"For so many of these cases, there seems to be much less substance to them
than we first assume or have first been told," said Bruce Hoffman, a
terrorism expert who heads the Washington office of Rand Corp., a think
tank that conducts national security research. "There's an inherent
deterrent effect in cracking down on any illicit activity. But the
challenge is not exaggerating what they were up to -- not portraying them
as super-terrorists when they're really the low end of the food chain."

Justice Department officials say they have not sought to exaggerate the
importance or suspected associations of those prosecuted in connection
with terrorism probes, and they argue that the list provides only a
partial view of their efforts.

Officials said all the individuals were first put on the list because of a
suspected connection or allegation related to terrorism. Last week, they
also said that the department had tightened the requirements for including
a case on the terrorism list.

Barry M. Sabin, chief of the department's counterterrorism section, said
prosecutors frequently turn to lesser charges when they are not confident
they can prove crimes such as committing or supporting terrorism. Many
defendants also have been prosecuted for relatively minor crimes in
exchange for information that is not public but has proved valuable in
other terrorism probes, he said.

"A person could not have been put on this list if there was not a concern
about national security, at least initially," he said. "Are all these
people an ongoing threat presently? Arguably not. . . . We are not trying
to overstate or understate what we're doing. You don't want to put
language or a label on people that is inconsistent with what they have
done."

The Numbers

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Justice Department database has served as
the key source of statistics on the status of terrorism investigations in
the United States and has been cited frequently in official speeches and
testimony to Congress. The list obtained by The Post includes 361 cases
defined as terrorism investigations by the department's criminal division
from Sept. 11, 2001, through late September 2004. Thirty-one entries could
not be evaluated because they were sealed and blacked out. (The list does
not include about 40 cases filed since then that account for Bush's total
of about 400.) The Post sought to update and correct data whenever
possible, including noting convictions or sentences handed down within the
past nine months.

The list of domestic prosecutions does not include terrorism suspects held
at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba or at secret locations
around the world. Nor does it include many of the approximately 50 people
the Justice Department has acknowledged detaining as "material witnesses,"
or three men held in a military prison in South Carolina, one of whom has
been released.

The Post identified 180 cases in which no connection to al Qaeda or
another terrorist group could be found in court records, official
statements, the 9/11 commission report or news accounts. Even some of the
terrorism-related cases featured early allegations of terrorist
connections that were later dropped.

Of the 142 individuals on the list linked to terrorist groups, 39 were
convicted of crimes related to terrorism or national security. More than a
dozen defendants were acquitted or had their charges dismissed, including
three Moroccan men in Detroit whose convictions were tossed out in
September after the Justice Department admitted prosecutorial misconduct.

Not surprisingly, these minor crimes produced modest punishments. The
median sentence for all cases adjudicated, whether or not they were
terrorism-related, was 11 months. About three dozen other defendants were
given probation or were deported. The most common convictions were on
charges of fraud, making false statements, passport violations and
conspiracy.

Two life sentences have been handed down so far: to Richard Reid, the
British drifter who was foiled by passengers in his attempt to blow up an
aircraft over the Atlantic Ocean; and Masoud Khan, a Maryland man
convicted of traveling to Pakistan and seeking to fight with the Taliban
against U.S. forces. Two others convicted of terrorism-related crimes face
life sentences: Ahmed Abdel Sattar, an Egyptian-born postal worker
convicted of conspiring to kill and kidnap in a foreign country; and Ali
Timimi, a Northern Virginia spiritual leader convicted of encouraging
others to attend terrorist camps. (Timimi was indicted in late September
and was not on the list obtained by The Post.)

Only 14 of those convicted of crimes related to terrorism or national
security have clear links to bin Laden's network, most notably Moussaoui
and Reid. Others include Faris, an admitted member of al Qaeda who sought
to sabotage the Brooklyn Bridge, and six Yemeni men from Lackawanna, N.Y.,
convicted of providing material support to terrorists by attending an al
Qaeda training camp before Sept. 11.

In addition, Taliban fighter John Walker Lindh, who is most closely
associated with Afghanistan's deposed government, trained at an al Qaeda
camp.

The patterns discovered by The Post are similar to findings in studies of
Justice Department terrorism cases by New York University and Syracuse
University, each of which examined more limited sets of data.

More than a third of the cases on the list arose from a post-Sept. 11 FBI
dragnet, which resulted in the arrests of hundreds of Muslim immigrants
for minor violations unrelated to the hijackings or terrorism.

"What we're seeing over time is the equivalent of mission creep: Cases
that would not be terrorism cases before Sept. 11 are swept onto the
terrorism docket," said Juliette Kayyem, a former Clinton administration
Justice official who heads the national security program at Harvard
University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. "The problem is that
it's not good to cook the numbers. . . . We have no accurate assessment of
whether the war on terrorism is actually working."

Tracking Al Qaeda

Before the Sept. 11 attacks, many veteran U.S. counterterrorism officials
assumed that al Qaeda sleeper cells were hiding in the country, awaiting
orders to launch attacks. The strikes -- carried out by 19 hijackers who
arrived in the United States and trained here undetected -- prompted an
aggressive campaign by the Justice Department, the FBI and other agencies
to identify al Qaeda operatives on U.S. soil.

The results from the Justice Department database, however, raise the
possibility that the presence of al Qaeda operatives and sympathizers
within the United States is either limited or largely undetected, many
terrorism experts say. "These kind of statistics show that we really don't
know if they exist here in any significant way," said Martha Crenshaw of
Wesleyan University in Connecticut, who has studied terrorism since the
late 1960s. "It's possible that they could have sleepers planted here for
a long time and we could always be very surprised. But I'd say that's less
likely compared with them trying to repeat a 9/11-style infiltration from
the outside."

Other experts and government officials say the relatively small number of
domestic terrorism prosecutions is partly the result of the
administration's strategy to handle some of its most dangerous suspects --
such as Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed -- outside U.S. courts.

As a result, only a limited number of potentially significant cases have
been pursued publicly in U.S. courts.

Viet D. Dinh, a Georgetown law professor who headed the Office of Legal
Policy at Justice before and after the attacks, said the primary strategy
is to use "prosecutorial discretion" to detain suspicious individuals by
charging them with minor crimes.

"You're talking about a violation of law that may or may not rise to the
level of what might usually be called a federal case," Dinh said,
referring to credit-card fraud and other offenses. "But the calculation
does not happen in isolation; you are not just talking about the crime
itself, but the suspicion of terrorism. . . . That skews the calculation
in favor of prosecution."

Bush administration officials have frequently compared the strategy to the
anti-Mafia campaign by former attorney general Robert F. Kennedy, who
vowed to prosecute mobsters for crimes as minor as spitting on a sidewalk.
But many defense lawyers and civil liberties advocates argue that the
Mafia analogy is misplaced.

David Z. Nevin represented Idaho graduate student Sami Omar Al-Hussayen, a
Saudi national who was acquitted of federal terrorism charges in a closely
watched trial last summer but agreed to be deported rather than fight
immigration charges. Nevin said there are key differences between current
counterterrorism cases and the prosecutions of gangsters such as Al
Capone, who was famously convicted of tax evasion to get him off the
street. "Everybody knew that Al Capone was committing murders and was
doing all sorts of things. They just couldn't convict him," Nevin said.

"That's fine if you take it as a given that you have the devil here," he
continued. "The problem is that you end up with people like Sami
Al-Hussayen. . . . Whenever you live in that realm, you're going to make
mistakes and you're going to hurt innocent people."

Using One Case to Build Another

In the end, most cases on the Justice Department list turned out to have
no connection to terrorism at all.

They include Hassan Nasrallah, a Dearborn, Mich., man convicted of
credit-card fraud who has the same name as the leader of Hezbollah, or
Party of God. Abdul Farid of High Point, N.C., was arrested on a false tip
that he was sending money to the Taliban and was deported after admitting
he lied on a loan application. Moeen Islam Butt, a Pakistani jewelry-kiosk
employee in Pennsylvania, spent eight months in jail before being deported
on marriage-fraud and immigration charges.

And there is the case of Francois Guagni, a French national who made the
mistake of illegally crossing the Canadian border on Sept. 14, 2001, with
box cutters in his possession. It turned out that Guagni used the knives
in his job as a drywall installer. He was deported in March 2003 after
pleading guilty to unlawfully entering the country.

"His case had nothing to do with terrorism, as far as I've ever been
told," said Guagni's attorney, Christopher D. Smith.

Some of the cases, however, remain murky. The question of involvement in
terrorism lingers even after formal allegations of such ties have been
dropped.

Consider the case of Enaam Arnaout, director of the Illinois-based
Benevolence International Foundation, who was indicted amid great fanfare
in October 2002 for allegedly helping to funnel money and equipment to al
Qaeda operatives on three continents. The charity was shut down.

Less than a year later, prosecutors dropped six of the seven charges
against Arnaout, and he pleaded guilty to a single count of racketeering
for funding fighters in Bosnia and Chechnya. During a sentencing hearing
in August 2003, U.S. District Judge Suzanne B. Conlon told prosecutors
they had "failed to connect the dots" and said there was no evidence that
Arnaout "identified with or supported" terrorism.

The administration views the case differently. Bush, in a speech Friday at
the National Counterterrorism Center in Northern Virginia, said
investigators had "helped close down a phony charity in Illinois that was
channeling money to al Qaeda."

Sabin, the Justice Department's counterterrorism chief, said he could not
discuss the specifics of most cases. But he said one case in particular
illustrates the government's strategy: the conviction of Abdurahman
Alamoudi, who admitted to taking $1 million from Libya and using it to pay
conspirators in a scheme to kill Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.

Alamoudi, who once worked with senior U.S. officials as head of the
American Muslim Council, has agreed to cooperate with federal
investigators as part of a plea agreement. Sabin said the case is "a
significant success story" that shows how prosecutors can use one case to
help build others.

"We have been successful in obtaining information and fueling our
intelligence gathering efforts with many of these cases," Sabin said.


Research database editor Derek Willis contributed to this report.

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to