Islamists in U.S. prisons pose threat, report says

[E-Nice]

Islamists in U.S. prisons pose threat, report says

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
September 20, 2006


Islamic extremists in U.S. prisons have taken advantage of a lack of religious monitoring to embrace violent interpretations of the Koran, posing a threat of "unknown magnitude" to national security, a report said yesterday.

"Prisons have long been places where extremist ideology and calls to violence could find a willing ear, and conditions are often conducive to radicalization," according to a study by George Washington University and the University of Virginia.

"With the world's largest prison population and highest incarceration rate, America faces what could be an enormous challenge -- every radicalized prisoner becomes a potential terrorist recruit," said the study, which was conducted for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

An estimated 2 million people are imprisoned in the United States, and 6 percent of them are Muslim, according to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.
Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, the committee's ranking Democrat, said homegrown terrorism is a "grave enough concern" that Congress needs to consider whether to focus more attention and resources on it.

"What controls can we put into place to curtail such conversions? Unfortunately, the number of qualified Islamic chaplains, or imams, is insufficient," Mr. Lieberman said, noting that although more than 80 percent of religious conversions in prison are to some form of Islam, only 10 of the 200 chaplains in the federal system are devoted to Islam.

The study said that just as young people may become radicalized by "cut-and-paste" versions of the Koran via the Internet, "new inmates may gain the same distorted understanding of the faith from gang leaders or other influential inmates."

Although radicalization is neither unique to Islam nor a recent phenomenon, an inadequate number of Muslim religious services providers increases the risk, the study said.

Additionally, it said, the inability to track inmates after their release and a lack of social support to reintegrate them into the community give rise to a "vulnerable moment" in which they may be recruited by radical groups posing as social support organizations.

The study said "Jailhouse Islam" incorporates violent prison culture into religious practice; a lack of manpower and resources hinder efforts to combat prisoner radicalization; and information collection and sharing among federal, state and local prison systems to track radical behavior and religious services providers is "difficult to assess."

The study said that no one profession was equipped to analyze and recommend change and that a multidisciplinary approach of religion, criminal justice, intelligence, law and behavioral sciences was necessary for "proactive analysis of the phenomenon." It also called on Congress to establish a commission to investigate the issue.

According to the study, prison gangs may adopt a form of Islam that incorporates values of gang loyalty and violence, and several imams characterized the phenomenon as a significant threat to security in prisons.

The study noted several connections between former prisoners and terrorism, including:

• Jeff Fort, a Chicago gang leader who converted to Islam while incarcerated in 1965. Fort founded a street gang known as El Rukn, which later brokered a deal with Libya to carry out attacks on U.S. police stations, government facilities, military bases and airplanes in exchange for $2.5 million and asylum in Tripoli.

• Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, the radical Egyptian cleric who plotted to bomb New York City landmarks in 1993. Sentenced to a life term, he issued a decree from federal prison ordering Muslims to kill Americans "wherever you find them." Terror mastermind Osama bin Laden later said that edict gave religious authority for the September 11 attacks.

• Richard C. Reid, who is thought to have converted to radical Islam while incarcerated in Great Britain. He was later apprehended while attempting to detonate a bomb on a U.S. commercial flight in December 2001.

[alvin]

It's interesting how a "link" between Islam and "terrorism" is automatically assumed. What about the "link" between the Mafia and the Vatican??? Or the Nazi's & the Vatican for that matter.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by alvin

It's interesting how a "link" between Islam and "terrorism" is automatically assumed. What about the "link" between the Mafia and the Vatican??? Or the Nazi's & the Vatican for that matter.

I don't recall the mob or a buch of catholics blowing up the WTC or Pentagon.

[kalamu]

a muslim friend of mine punched me today after i told her a joke about her boyfriend. it was funny though.

that is muslim violence dammit

[Hey Bubu]

So being a muslim now is like being a commie back in the day? I wonder who will play McArthur this time around?

[Hey Bubu]

Originally Posted by xian

I don't recall the mob or a buch of catholics blowing up the WTC or Pentagon.

The Mob and the government did kill Kennedy...

[alvin]

Originally Posted by xian

I don't recall the mob or a buch of catholics blowing up the WTC or Pentagon.

Oh. I forgot...a group of 'terrorists'(many of whom were Saudi nationals...not Iraqi or Afghani) did it. Which brought us to war with Afghanistan(opium) & Iraq(oil) who had to come under U.S. control(both countries producing "weapons of mass destruction"...ie opium and oil...which the U.S. are prime CONSUMERS of)...eliminate the competition and have access to UNLIMITED PROFITS!!!!

[madbreaker]

eh i jusy fuck it buy a gun if shit pops off here then we have a problem.

which is why i agree 300% with the right to bare arms

[E-Nice]

Originally Posted by Porkchop Avenger

So being a muslim now is like being a commie back in the day? I wonder who will play McArthur this time around?

McCarthy.

[zerojunkie]

Originally Posted by E-Nice

McCarthy.

oops, I lol'd on myself.

[johnny861]

Originally Posted by alvin

Or the Nazi's & the Vatican for that matter.

ODESSA

[PETA]

Originally Posted by alvin

Oh. I forgot...a group of 'terrorists'(many of whom were Saudi nationals...not Iraqi or Afghani) did it. Which brought us to war with Afghanistan(opium) & Iraq(oil) who had to come under U.S. control(both countries producing "weapons of mass destruction"...ie opium and oil...which the U.S. are prime CONSUMERS of)...eliminate the competition and have access to UNLIMITED PROFITS!!!!

So let me get this straight.

We went to war in Iraq and Afganistan (presumably after "the system" pulled off the 9/11 attacks) in order to control Iraqi oil and Afagani opiuim? News flash, it was cheaper to buy Iraqi oil before the war and Afganistan under the Taliban had nearly erradicated opium production. So, we wanted to pay more for oil and restart Afgani opium production - which is now at a level that can produce more opium that can be refined into more heroin than the world's junkies consume (which drives prices down alvin) in order to make money exactly how?

Are you just fucking with me or do you have some other explanation as to how more expensive oil costs and cheaper heroin makes "the sysetm" any money?

[alvin]

Originally Posted by xian

So let me get this straight.

We went to war in Iraq and Afganistan (presumably after "the system" pulled off the 9/11 attacks) in order to control Iraqi oil and Afagani opiuim? News flash, it was cheaper to buy Iraqi oil before the war and Afganistan under the Taliban had nearly erradicated opium production. So, we wanted to pay more for oil and restart Afgani opium production - which is now at a level that can produce more opium that can be refined into more heroin than the world's junkies consume (which drives prices down alvin) in order to make money exactly how?

Are you just fucking with me or do you have some other explanation as to how more expensive oil costs and cheaper heroin makes "the sysetm" any money?

"We" didn't go to war. A man calling himself a president is calling it that. "We"(the American people I presume you are referring) aren't profiting from this "war against terror"...it's a small elite minority...defense contractors,oil companies, etc. If you would read my words I said "control"(you can set your own prices and whoever need your product will be forced to pay ).

Afganistan under the Taliban had nearly erradicated opium production.


Which is one of the reasons "We" had to invade Afghanistan(since the U.K isn't the military power it once was)...to make sure there would be an uninterupted supply of heroin.

Before the US invaded Afghanistan

Afghanistan, Opium and the Taliban

Where we stand today

Opium Threats in Afghanistan, Iran - Council on Foreign Relations

CNN.com - Afghan opium production soars to new high - Sep 2, 2006

Also read where the article says that money from opium production funds terror. Let's put it this way, if there are no funds to support the 'terrorists'...many people would be out of a job since "terror" is THE growth industry in this "new (world) economy".

"Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban's supreme leader, banned poppy growing before the November planting season and augmented it with a religious edict making it contrary to the tenets of Islam"

Taken from the first article it states plainly Mullah Omar's intentions to ban poppy growing before the November 2001 planting season. When did the U.S. invade Afghanistan...October 2001. Invade Afghanistan and problem solved. Maybe this is why Taliban leaders met with US officials in Houston five months before 9-11.

And just WHERE will the majority of this heroin end up...on the streets of America(already mass traumatized by fear and an uncertain future...for those seeking an easy escape).

And let me repeat my mantra yet again...DON'T BELIEVE ME...LOOK IT UP YOURSELVES!!!

[Krash]

Originally Posted by xian

I don't recall the mob or a buch of catholics blowing up the WTC or Pentagon.

I can list hundreds of attacks on British targets if you like, for the catholics...

And hundreds more where the mob has bombed Italian judicial figures....

[Krash]

Originally Posted by alvin

Afganistan under the Taliban had nearly erradicated opium production.

Errr, not they hadn't. They had certainly reduced the output, yes, but that was to put prices up, not out of some "kind" notion of anti-drug enforcement.