THE CASE AGAINST YOUR BROTHER FAHAD

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem
In The Name of Allah The Most Gracious The Most Merciful

Who is Fahad?
Syed Mehmood Ahmed Hashmi was born in Karachi, Pakistan in 1980, the second of two sons born to Syed Anwar Hashmi. Upon birth he was also given the name Fahad and that is how most people know him. Fahad immigrated with his family to America at a very early age (3 yrs old). His family settled in Flushing, New York where Fahad was raised and attended school. Fahad is part of a large family that has well established roots in the tri-state area. Fahad was a vibrant member of the Muslim community in New York. Fahad graduated from Robert F Wagner High School in 1998 and then attended SUNY Stony Brook University. He eventually transferred to Brooklyn College where he earned a bachelor’s degree in political science in 2003. A devout Muslim, through the years Fahad has established a reputation as an activist and advocate of the Islamic cause. In 2003 Fahad enrolled in London Metropolitan University in London, UK to pursue a master’s degree in international relations which he received in 2006. On June 6, 2006 Fahad was jumped and manhandled by UK police in London Heathrow airport and then arrested. He was subsequently held in Belmarsh Prison as a Category A prisoner. He was arrested based on an indictment from America that amounted to charges of aiding terrorism.

The Charges
The US government has charged Fahad with providing material support to al Qaeda, but a close look at the evidence shows how ludicrous the charges are. Fahad is NOT charged with providing any money or resources to any terrorists or being a member of al Qaeda. Instead, the US government has charged Fahad with allowing an old acquaintance — Junaid Babar — to stay in Fahad’s London apartment for about two weeks in 2005. During that two week period, Junaid Babar is alleged to have kept some raincoats, ponchos, and waterproof socks in luggage that Babar temporarily stored in Fahad’s apartment. The US government then alleges that at some point Babar gave the socks and ponchos to a high ranking member of al Qaeda. There is no allegation that Fahad is a member of al Qaeda or that he ever personally gave or helped to give anything to any member of al Qaeda. The case around Fahad boils down to an overzealous prosecution and testimony to be provided by Junaid Babar.

Who is Junaid Babar?
Junaid Babar is a paid government cooperator who has been used to testify against Muslims around the world. Nicknamed “Supergrass” by the British media, Babar was used by the UK government to testify against Omar Khyam and several other Muslim men in the so-called Fertilizer Case. During that trial, which by some accounts was the most expensive and lengthy trial in British history, it came to light that Junaid Babar met with FBI agents in 2004 and agreed to become a government cooperator. Babar had also been used in the Candadian prosecution of Momin Khwaja. Totally beholden to the US government because of plea agreement in which he can receive years of imprisonment if he does not provide “substantial assistance,” Babar simply is not a credible witness. In fact, —— was acquitted of participating in the Fertilizer plot even though Babar testified to the contrary, demonstrating Babar’s lack of believability.

Fahad continues to be subjected to inhumane prison conditions
Fahad was housed as a Category A prisoner in Britain’s most notorious jail — Belmarsh Prison. Category A is reserved for the most severe cases in the British penal system, in the past a common designation for IRA members. Now the ranks of Category A are for Muslim prisoners such as Fahad facing accusations revolving around a plot based on socks and rain ponchos. Fahad fought extradition requests of the US as the charges against him showed an obvious contempt and were baseless. Fahad’s lawyer challenged the validity of his case, however the British courts simply caved in to the demand of the American government and ordered Fahad’s extradition.

Shortly after being extradicted to the US, Fahad had a bail hearing in front of Judge Loretta Preska, who had just finished the trial in which Dr. Rafiq Sabir was convicted. Preska, an appointee of the first President Bush, is a close personal friend of the Bush Family. Before Fahad’ proceeding, she entertained the sentencing of a former drug dealer who had testified against his father in-law who ran a drug ring. She praised his cooperation and took special note in how he had bettered himself while in custody, taking special care to point out that he went to Bible study while in detention. She agreed to the prearranged plea bargain for him.

Fahad’s bail hearing followed immediately. During the hearing there was a packed courtroom of family and friends. Friends offered to put up $500,000 in bail money for Fahad. Fahad’s lawyer presented the courtroom with the statements of the cooperating witness Junaid Babar that served to support Fahad’s innocence. The prosecution team had no answers for this. The prosecution claimed “we cannot give him bail because he doesn’t respect American law (a non-violent academic, with no history of violence or drugs) he (Fahad) believes Allah’s law is superior, and does not respect American law.” In essence Fahad was denied bail on the basis of being a strong proponent of Islam and excercising his simple right to disagree. The U.S government used Fahad’s beliefs as a reason to deny him bail. During the hearing the judge said to a crowd full of his family and friends that his ties to the community were weak, that she has to take his beliefs into consideration and deny him bail. It was noticed by everyone that she was positively gleaming at the convicted drug dealer’s turn to the Bible however used Islam as a criticism against Fahad.

Although Fahad is supposed to be presumed innocent, the US government has been permitted to imprison Fahad in solitary confinement in the Special Housing Unit of Metropolitan Correction Center in Manhattan. In October 2007 the US Attorney General leveled SAMS (Special Administrative Measures) on Fahad. These are draconian conditions designed to cut Fahad off from any contact with members of his community and to break Fahad emotionally, spriritually, and physically. The SAMS mandate that Fahad be kept under virtually 24 hour lock down, isolated from all human contact. Fahad is barred from even speaking through his cell door to other imprisoned men. Visitation is severly restricted – only attorneys and immediate family that have been pre-cleared by the government. Fahad is also barred from participating in any group prayer.

The reason for these harsh measures is to ensure they break Fahad. We cannot idly sit by and allow this to happen. The SAMS measures were the techniques used to ensnare Lynn Stewart in the Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman case. The justification accepted by the judge was Fahad’s alleged violent reaction during his arrest one and a half years ago in Heathrow airport. The judge refused to consider that Fahad has NEVER been accused of any act of violence and that Fahad has never been accused of trying to communicate with any terrorists during his year and a half of pre-trial confinement. SAMS are supposedly reserved for only the most dangerous prisoners. SAMS had been exacted on the head of the Latin Kings criminal organization to stifle criminal operations. Fahad has yet to be convicted of any crime and in essence is accused of what simply boils down to socks, ponchos and a raincoat and a belief in Islam. The authorities have exercised every style of inhumanity that they could find a way to justify. The judge rubber stamped Fahad’s treatment and the imposition of the SAMS.

The Upcoming Trial
Fahad will be subjected to a public trial where the prosecution is expected to present accusations from Junaid Babar as well as any recorded (telephone calls, email, etc) communications they might have obtained. Due to the lack of evidence the prosecution will attempt to exaggerate whatever evidence they will present, and interpret unrelated material to tie it to the case. They will rely on their ability to depict Fahad as a dangerous Islamic radical. The prosecution will continue its attempt to demonize Fahad in the public, taking advantage of any media outlets as well as the atmosphere of “fear” that exists in our society to do so.