Khazak Teens Arraigned for Tossing Fireworks in Boston Case

On May 1, 2013, Dias Kadyrbayev, 19, and Azamat Tazhayakov, 19, were charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice and obstructing justice with the intent to impede the Boston Marathon bombing investigation. The two college friends of the surviving bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, are nationals of Kazakhstan who were residing in New Bedford, Massachusetts on student visas. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant US Attorneys Stephanie Siegmann and John Capin under Carmen Ortiz.

The Muslim Observer (i.e. yours truly) was at the Moakley Federal Courthouse for the arraignment on August 13. The boys were brought into the courtroom handcuffed. US Marshalls removed their handcuffs for the hearing. They turned around briefly to meet eyes with family and supporters. The thin young Asians, who are being kept in 24 hour isolation, looked nervous but hopeful in their orange jumpsuits. They confirmed that they understood the charges and said “Not Guilty” in response to both counts. Azamat Tazhayakob's parents and siblings were in the front row. 

Judge Marianne Bowler interrupted US Attorney Siegmann while she was talking, in order to tell the Tazhayakoub family that they can't let the baby crawl all over the courtroom. It seemed unnecessarily abrupt, since she was not making any noise. An older sister took the baby outside. The judge then asked Siegmann to repeat the charges, as they exchanged chummy smiles. Siegmann maintained a light, breezy demeanor as she informed the two teens that they face 25 years in prison plus a $250,000 fine and deportation if found guilty. 

They are accused of throwing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s backpack containing fireworks and a jar of Vasoline into a dumpster and taking his laptop after receiving a text suggesting they go to Tsarnaev’s room to “take what’s there,” around the time his face appeared on TV as a wanted suspect. The FBI claims to have found this backpack, conveniently identified by a UMass Dartmouth homework assignment, in a landfill.

Siegmann announced that government prosecutors have 15-20 witnesses, and that the trial is likely to take 2 weeks. The next court date is an "initial status hearing" on Sept. 26. 

Azamat's mother was crying inconsolably on the way out. An Asian woman who observed the hearing told Azamat's father, "Your son is very strong." Azamat's family doesn't speak English well and was not responding to questions. Diaz Kadyrbayev's father was talking through a Russian translator. Both fathers were very well dressed.  

Azamat’s father, Amir Ismagulov owns oil fields in Kazakhstan. Azamat came to the US to study oil engineering so he could work in the family business. Ismagulov insists his son had no knowledge of Tsarnaev’s alleged role in the bombing.

“The entire family feels that the government is scapegoating them because they are Muslims and foreign students,” Tazhayakov’s attorney, Arkady Bukh told reporters. “He is absolutely not guilty. If he wanted to assist in terrorism, he would have hid the computer."

Kadyrbayev's attorney Robert Stahl described his client as "a law-abiding college student whose only crime was befriending a fellow student who spoke his more comfortable native language."

"We look forward to the evidence eventually proving that Dias did not obstruct justice, nor knowingly or intentionally take evidence from Dzohkhar Tsarnaev's dorm room. The FBI recovered all of the items because of Dias' complete cooperation with their investigation," Stahl said. "Dias Kadyrbayev and his family also grieve for the victims' families and want justice for the victims." 

Yet - even if the defendants did remove fireworks from Tsarnaev’s apartment, what does that prove? Since fireworks are illegal in Massachusetts, it would be reasonable to want them to be gone, if you knew the police was likely to stop by. There has been no evidence or federal agency report citing that the fireworks were used in the bombing but rather, were simply found in the suspect’s room. 

“The fireworks devices allegedly found during the investigation... contain limited quantities of explosive or combustible chemical composition designed to deflagrate (burn) rather than detonate like dynamite, TNT or military explosives,” said Julie Heckman, Executive Director of the American Pyrotechnics Association.

"We believe it is virtually impossible to create the level of destruction and devastation caused in Boston with legitimate consumer fireworks and suspect that the investigation will ultimately point toward other materials being responsible for the creation of the deadly pressure cooker bombs," she concluded.

The two former UMass Dartmouth students were originally detained for immigration violations. They were then questioned for 12 hours over two days by the FBI without a lawyer present. Another friend, Robel Phillipos, who is being tried separately, was charged with lying to the FBI. Phillipos could face up to eight years in jail and a $250,000 fine. 

The original criminal complaint against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is based entirely on an unsubstantiated claim made by an FBI agent - which is why his friends are so important to the prosecution. If government prosecutors can get Tsarnaev’s friends to “cooperate,” they no longer need to present any convincing evidence. When the defendants are Muslims accused of Terrorism, very few juries ever question government claims.

Attorney Carmen Ortiz with the same Judge Bowler convicted Tarek Mehanna based on inflammatory rhetoric. To get around the lack of evidence, the government threatened Mehanna’s friends into becoming cooperating witnesses.

She also prosecuted Rezwan Ferdaus, a US citizen who was entrapped by the FBI and sentenced to 17 years. Because Ortiz intimidated him into accepting a plea bargain, there was no trial and therefore no public evidence to support the charges against him.

Ortiz’s usual gameplay links the accused with a vague global Islamic Conspiracy. Court proceedings are conducted in a racist, demeaning way, with expert witnesses giving false testimony. Evan Kohlmann, who narrated Ortiz’s prosecution of Mehanna and Yassin Aref has already testified to Congress regarding the Boston bombing’s link to “al Qaeda.”

The politically ambitious lead US prosecutor was investigated by Congress for “blatant prosecutorial intimidation” when computer hacker Aaron Swartz committed suicide after Ortiz threatened him with 50+ years in prison and a $4 million fine. Judges have reprimanded her for “overkill” using federal charges. Glenn Greenwald contrasted her predatory prosecution of the young and powerless with the “incredible leniency given by Ortiz's office to large companies and executives accused of serious crimes.” 

Attorney Harlan Protass writes in Slate, “Given the heinous nature of the marathon bombing and the international spotlight on the attack, Ortiz must be under enormous pressure to go after Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov with everything she’s got. The Boston community and local law enforcement are probably encouraging her to do so.”

NY Students Prevail

Students who organize Palestine Solidarity events on US campuses have come to expect pro-Israel groups to bully and threaten the university administration in an effort to cancel their student activities, whether they are educational workshops or poetry readings.

But pro-Israel advocates crossed a line this month when they pressured Brooklyn College to cancel an event co-sponsored by Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP). The crusade against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (BDS), led by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) along with torture advocate Alan Dershowitz, was so heavy handed that it provoked an international discussion on academic freedom in America.

Perhaps due to the worldwide attention, the college has (so far) refused to cancel the event scheduled for February 7, in which leading Palestinian rights activist Omar Barghouti and Jewish scholar Judith Butler are to discuss Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS). 

“As with many similar events, the Brooklyn College event is under attack, based on completely unfounded allegations of anti-Semitism. The truth is, boycott, divestment and sanctions are non-violent tools with a long history of being used by civil society to make social change, notably in the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa and the civil rights movement here in the United States. In no way can it be construed as anti-Semitic,” reads a statement by Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP). 

Glenn Greenwald writes in the Guardian UK that “the ugly lynch mob now assembled against Brooklyn College and its academic event is all too familiar in the US when it comes to criticism of and activism against Israeli government policy… But this controversy has now significantly escalated in seriousness because numerous New York City elected officials have insinuated themselves into this debate by trying to dictate to the school’s professors what type of events they are and are not permitted to hold.” 

Al-Awda New York reports: “At first, the demand from Dershowitz and a handful of city politicians urged the Brooklyn College political science department to rescind its co-sponsorship. Now, Lewis Fidler, Assistant Majority Leader of the NYC Council, and several other members of the City Council are threatening to pull Brooklyn College’s funding unless the school cancels or condemns the event.”

“Imagine being elected to public office and then deciding to use your time and influence to interfere in the decisions of academics about the types of campus events they want to sponsor. Does anyone have trouble seeing how inappropriate it is – how dangerous it is – to have politicians demanding that professors only sponsor events that are politically palatable to those officials? If you decide to pursue political power, you have no business trying to use your authority to pressure, cajole or manipulate college professors regarding what speakers they can invite to speak on campus,” writes Greenwald.

According to Al-Awda, students all along the West Coast currently face similar censorship attempts. “Students for Justice in Palestine and Muslim Student Association chapters in the large University of California system are being subjected to systematic silencing and intimidation at the local, statewide, and national level. Lobbying by well-funded pro-Israel groups has led to biased “campus climate” reports, a  California State assembly bill, and spurious federal complaints (leading to prolonged investigations); all deliberately and falsely conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with anti-Jewishness.”

According to their website, the US Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security is “charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act of 1979. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain Moslem countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott.” 

“Conduct that may be penalized include agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies, and agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies… The penalties imposed for each “knowing” violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 or five times the value of the exports involved, whichever is greater, and imprisonment of up to five years. During periods when the EAR are continued in effect by an Executive Order issued pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the criminal penalties for each “willful” violation can be a fine of up to $50,000 and imprisonment for up to ten years.”

It certainly would seem to change the game, however, if a US company is being urged to boycott Israel by fellow Americans, not just by the Arab League. It may be time to change the law. At this point, however, the controversy is just about the right to discuss boycotting Israel! 

Ambassador Chas Freeman in his remarks to the December 2012 Jubilee Conference of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy talked about Israeli Hasbara and the control of narrative as an element of strategy. Freeman stated that manipulation of information is an essential element of modern warfare:

“In politics, perception is reality. Narratives legitimize some perceptions and delegitimize others. Narratives can be drawn upon to reinforce stereotypes by imposing favorable or pejorative labels on information and its sources. Such labels predispose recipients of information to accept some things as credible, to disbelieve others, and to regard still others as so tainted or implausible that they can and should be ruled out of order and ignored.” This approach “seeks actively to inculcate canons of political correctness in domestic and foreign media and audiences that will promote self-censorship by them.”

What we are seeing now is that pro-Israel Hasbara has lost its effect on people. It used to be that even just meekly asking why Jews support Israel would result in the cruel and sudden loss of childhood friends, but these techniques are no longer working. Students no longer feel ashamed or afraid of discussing Israel’s brutality against the Palestinian population. It still happens that people who advocate for Palestine are attacked, verbally or otherwise. But now, they are instantly embraced by a warm group of supporters who urge them to continue speaking. 

“We pledge to continue our organizing on campus, to highlight the Israeli oppression of Palestinians, and to support and elevate the voices of Palestinian organizers and liberation movements. We will continue to educate, engage students, and mount campaigns using the non-violent tactic of boycott, divestment and sanctions. Despite the threats of powerful figures, we vow to continue to demand justice for Palestine,” pledged the National Students for Justice in Palestine.

As court martial approaches, support for Bradley Manning grows

In 2010, 22-year-old Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning was charged with leaking classified information to Wikileaks, which was widely seen as a catalyst for the Arab Spring that began in December 2010.

Asia Times reported that the documents revealed “US war crimes, including the video of US soldiers in a helicopter gunship enjoying themselves murdering civilians walking along the street as if the soldiers were playing a video game.”

“According to the US Military Code, US soldiers are required to make war crimes known. However, the law on the books provided no protection to Bradley Manning,”  wrote Paul Craig Roberts.

Last week, Bradley Manning’s defense faced off with military prosecutors in Ft. Meade, Maryland to argue that all charges be dismissed because of “unlawful pretrial punishment.” This hearing was second in importance only to the court martial.

Manning testified about his treatment at a military prison in Quantico, Virginia. He can only see natural light as a reflected gleam from a window down the hall when he holds his head to the door of his cell and looks through the crack. His 6ft by 8ft  cell contains a toilet that is in full vision of the guards. When he needs toilet paper, he told the court, he has to stand to attention and shout: "Lance Corporal Detainee Manning requests toilet paper!" Held in solitary confinement and prohibited from exercising, Manning testified that he is “authorized to have 20 minutes sunshine, in chains, every 24 hours.” Expert witnesses stated that these harsh restrictions are worse than Guantanamo Bay or even death row.

Military judge Colonel Denise Lind announced that Manning's court martial, which had been set to begin in February, would now be delayed until March 16 at the earliest, due to the debate over his unlawful confinement.

Under the most severe of the 22 counts he faces – "aiding the enemy" – Manning could be detained in military custody for the rest of his life. In a proposed plea bargain, Manning would admit to leaking a battlefield video file, classified memos, Iraq war logs, Afghanistan war logs and other classified materials. He would also plead guilty to wrongfully storing classified information, in hopes of a lighter sentence.

Meanwhile, peace activists around the world are pushing for dismissal of all charges. Protests at Fort Meade, recruiting centers, and US embassies demanded fair treatment for Bradley, considered by many to be the most important whistleblower of our time.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Maguire and Adolfo Pérez Esquivel published a letter of support in The Nation on December 3, 2012, which stated:

“We Nobel Peace Prize laureates condemn the persecution Bradley Manning has suffered, including imprisonment in conditions declared “cruel, inhuman and degrading” by the United Nations, and call upon Americans to stand up in support of this whistleblower who defended their democratic rights...

If Bradley Manning released the documents, as the prosecution contends, we should express to him our gratitude for his efforts toward accountability in government, informed democracy and peace.”
Ray McGovern, a high-ranking retired C.I.A. analyst, called Manning “our friend” and “a hero.”

Bradley Manning Support Network is asking all people to submit photos of themselves holding a sign that reads “I am Bradley Manning,” to show the world that people from all walks of life believe the public deserves to know the truth. Their website, iam.bradleymanning.org states:

“Whistle-blowers play an important role in a democracy, and by revealing evidence of unpunished war crimes, as well as secret corporate influence on U.S. foreign policy, Bradley Manning acted in the interest of American citizens.”

Commentator Glenn Greenwald wrote, “Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America’s Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything.” 

David House, a 23-year-old MIT researcher who befriended Manning after his detention (and then had his laptops, camera and cellphone seized by Homeland Security) is one of the few people to have visited Manning several times at Quantico. He describes worrying changes in Manning’s physical appearance and behavior just over the course of a few months.

President Obama's state department spokesman, retired air force colonel PJ Crowley, resigned after publicly condemning Manning's treatment.

According to chat logs released by Wired Magazine, Manning clearly believed that he was a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives.

Manning told hacker Adrian Lamo that the leaks were intended to create “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.”

Manning described to Lamo the incident which first made him seriously question the US government. He was instructed to work on the case of Iraqi “insurgents” who had been detained for distributing so-called “insurgent” literature which, when Manning had it translated, turned out to be nothing more than “a scholarly critique against PM Maliki.”

“I had an interpreter read it for me… and when i found out that it was a benign political critique titled “Where did the money go?” and following the corruption trail within the PM’s cabinet… i immediately took that information and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going on… he didn’t want to hear any of it… he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding *MORE* detainees… i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth… but that was a point where i was a *part* of something… i was actively involved in something that i was completely against…” wrote Manning.

Lamo reported Manning to US authorities.

“The government's radical theory is that, although Manning had no intent to do so, the leaked information could have helped al-Qaida, a theory that essentially equates any disclosure of classified information – by any whistleblower, or a newspaper – with treason,” writes Greenwald.

79-year-old former military analyst Daniel Ellsberg, who is often praised for his 1971 leak of the Pentagon's secret history of the Vietnam War, said that Wikileaks' disclosure of government secrets on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and thousands of diplomatic cables was “exactly the right thing” to do. Ellsberg once faced criminal charges over his leak, but they were thrown out by a judge.

But military law experts told The Huffington Post that the odds are low that his charges will simply be dismissed.