America's Dirty War on Islam - by Stephen Lendman
America's dirty war, in fact, targets Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, political activists, and Muslims for their faith, ethnicity, and at times prominence and charity, exploiting them as "war on terror" scapegoats.
On July 9, a Press TV US prison system racket interview highlighted the problem and urgency to address it, accessed through the following link:
America's media ignore how unjustly it harms millions of disadvantaged people. Instead, they regurgitate spurious high-profile case accusations, always when Muslims are affected. Most often they're men, occasionally women, bogusly charged with terrorism or conspiracy to commit it, when, in fact, they're guilty only of being targets of choice and/or being in America at the wrong time.
Why Muslims when, in fact, Islam teaches love, not hate; peace, not violence; charity, not selfishness; and tolerance, not terrorism; or that Islam, Christianity and Judaism have common roots.
Who'd know though in today's climate of hate and fear at a time America wages global wars on Islam, including at home.
Ahmed Abdulkadir Warsame is America's latest high-profile target, illegally captured, interrogated (and likely tortured) at sea for over two months, based on spurious allegations of Islamic terrorist ties.
Post-9/11, the same pattern repeated ruthlessly against hundreds of innocent victims. Pronounced guilty by accusation, America's media shamelessly regurgitate fabricated hate charges, not legitimate honest accounts, doing what good journalists should - their job.
On July 5, New York Times writers Charlie Savage and Eric Schmitt headlined, "US to Prosecute Somali Suspect in Civilian Court," saying:
Obama's Justice Department will "prosecute (Warsame) in civilian court," likely "reignit(ing) debate about (whether) to bring newly captured detainees to" Guantanamo, try them before military commissions, or do it "in civilian court."
While admitting Warsame plotted no attack, and that administration officials gave contradictory accounts of his importance, the article presumed guilt by accusation.
It failed to question whether or not charges are legitimate, let alone his illegal capture, detention, interrogation, and likely torture at sea secretly for over two months.
A same day Karen DeYoung, Greg Miller, Greg Jaffe Washington Post article headlined, "US indicts Somali on terrorism charges," was just as one-sided, presuming guilt because administration officials say so.
Quoting "human rights attorney" John Sifton, his best shot was saying, "It is not exactly satisfactory, from a legal point of view," adding "that the Justice Department is better suited to prosecute" than a military tribunal, instead of explaining what authority gives either the right.
In addition, he didn't question the core guilt or innocence issue or whether Warsame can get due process and judicial fairness in any court, given the circumstances of his capture, charges with no evidence, and America media's acting as judge, jury and executioner.