Religious Freedom Center this is just over an hour and a half. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. A good meal. I will take a nap to 3 30. I am excited about this afternoon. More so about this afternoon because this is my area of focus. But you know, we have scholars here. We have real scholars. Isnt that interesting . They are muslim. Amazing. I thank god for the opportunity. Just for me being here. Housekeeping notes, you will have some q a cards on the table and we ask as we move along through the panel that you pose your question and write a sentence, not a paragraph but a sentence. The card will be collected. Hand it to me. I will then read the question on the statement and referred to the panelists. Does that work . Okay. I have been in the criminal justice business for 47 years, spent most of my time in corrections. My first introduction to islam was a case called forward versus clemmer. How many of you know about this case . Had to do with the former Police Chiefs brother who was incarcerated. The issue was the right to practice his religion which was islam. The Supreme Court as i indicated earlier ruled in his favor and in the balls started to roll. It has been my experience that muslims who are in prison have been historically the most disciplined, motivated and keepers of the piece. Not only that but they have always been at the forefront of prison and jail reform inside jails and prisons and outside jails and prisons. I think there has been such a lack of information about what goes on that people have a false notion that they are at war inside the prisons. That is an untruth. Muslims were the most progressive inmates that i ever worked with. I have always been honored and proud to work with them. That population is normally traumatized, undereducated, uneducated, angry, looking for a cause. As a result, that cause, prisons become like territory. For recruiters for terrorist activities. Just think about that. To really happen. I really report the other day that corrections director had written, i wont call the system but he talked about how they were having meetings, okay . With a disruptive element in the Muslim Community. Those who were involved were not being disruptive. They were educating the total population about what islam was all about. They are really peaceloving people but we have listened and read all of this unfortunate information that comes out of certain houses. Were really considering taking all this stuff on the road to show the country whats really going on with the muslim family. I guess im the only nonmuslim up here, huh . [laughter] and i feel so comfortable. [laughter] i really do. But gods good. So having said all of that from my notes as karim did earlier, i want to stay on target and on time. We have dr. Abdul baker, dr. Baker, thats my english friend from london, okay . [laughter] dr. Ken ingram the second who says hes not there yet with the doctoral. You got it now, honorary. [laughter] and then my good friend joe from houston, texas, all right . And i told him, they dont dress like that in texas, man. [laughter] you got the wrong stuff on, joe. Wear your boots. [laughter] your hat. But on a serious note, i ask that you tune in, listen and become educated. Become educated. So having said that, dr. Baker dr. Baker believe ill be starting . Ill volunteer joe. You volunteer joe . He volunteered me a lot in the last one [laughter] joe, majority rules. All right. Well, first of all, id like to thank all of you for attending today and to thank the organizers, to thank the tam group for putting this together and to thank the museum for hosting the event. And, of course, thank my good friend here, mr. Ridley, for what do we call it . Beats me. Proctoring [laughter] thats the english term. Hang it around him. Moderator. Moderating, yes. Youve been americanized. Yes. So what i wanted to talk to you today today were supposed to be talking about radicalization in the prison system, or the prison system is it a hotbed for radicalization or for reform. What is the role that islam can play in preventing radicalization and reforming people that may be incarcerated or may be prone to recidivism or along those lines. What i would like to speak to you today about are three main issues. Number one is how legitimate is the charge that radicalization is rampant in the u. S. Prison system. Number two, what challenges does government involvement pose to the process of deradicalization. And number three, how can muslim beliefs become an effective tool for change and positive reform of prisoners and prisons . Now, when were talking and discussing about the issue of prison radicalization, its very important, first, to challenge the notion of its existence. And im asking as a nonspecialist in that area, i dont have the Empirical Data, but is there sufficient Empirical Data that is being provided by those who are making claims that radicalization is happening at a rampant rate in the u. S. Prison system. As dr. Ridley said, yes, there is susceptibility, but is it actually happening. Thats a question we have to ask, and we cannot just answer in the affirmative based upon biases that we carry about people who are incarcerated, about muslims or the nature of islam or any other minority faith group in the United States. To further claim like this is to malign a community and is not only bad character, but its bad policy. It also cannot go without saying that assumptions about radicalization play heavily into prevailing prejudices in the american psyche. Whether those be racebased prejudices as members of an ethnicity being predisposed to criminal intent and action or religionbased prejudice functioning the same way. Many times these two prejudices are intertwined. Islam is seen as the reason for extremism amongst many minority groups, and minority groups are seen as sympathetic to what is labeledded as extremism in the minds of majoritarian members of society. In essence, this line of thought i. E. , racebased or religionbased prejudice attempts to pin the causes of extremism and radicalization on something outside of and foreign to the american cultural psyche. Namely seen as judeochristian, civilized and of european background. The racializedded tones of many of the discussions on this issue lend credence to this. However, my comments here today will not focus on the Empirical Data, and instead for had that been the case, i would be speaking to you not in my role as a member of the american Muslim Community, nor in my role as a thought leader in that community, but instead as a member of one demographic that data have shown is most predisposed to violent extremism and home grown terror, namely middleaged White American males. What do i want what i do want to talk to to you today about and what my comments will focus on are the challenges of those who have to straddle what seem to be competing value systems. The values of freedom of religion, speech and expression, the value of reasonable accommodation for those who are incarcerated. On one side we have these values, on the other side we have religious affiliations and ideologies and beliefs that may be opposed or seem to be opposed at times to the systems that seek to protect it. And let me give you an example. If i as an american and this is not my belief, but if i were to say that i believe it is wrong for any american to have access to a firearm regard he is of what type it is, i believe that all firearms should be banned, this is a belief which goes against a core constitutionallyprotected right. However, my adopting this belief does not forfeit my right to be protected by all of those other Constitutional Rights that are afforded to me. My, the question then becomes is protecting beliefs and values that are not normative or not popular, if we do so, are we in some sense going against our own values in favor of another value system . Those who we see as conservative or extreme, when we protect their rights to hold those beliefs and to practice those beliefs within the confines of american law, does that mean we are enabling illicit practices or endangering the American Public . Additionally, is it appropriate for us to label those we see as conservative, austere or beyond our own scope of practice as something which is extreme or veers off towards the path of radicalization. When such labeling becomes a matter of policy, this is where the problem grows. So theres an obvious danger from the government exceeding its boundaries and going beyond mere religious accommodation to religious dictation, dictating to any individual or any group the belief and or beliefs and practices that are considered legitimate or a legitimate form of that faith. If viewed solely through lens of National Security, it would seem to make sense to challenge the ideas that lead to radicalization, and i think we can agree that those do not to be challenged. But when the assumption is radicalization, especially when the assumption is radicalization effectively counters terrorism and protects the American Public. So why shouldnt government officials try to marginalize what they view as theology cited by violent extremists, one that poses a danger not only to individuals, but to society at large . The problem is that when governments attempt to dictate to anyone their religious beliefs, they create a myriad of legal and strategyingic tensions. Strategic tensions. For the practitioner of that religion that is targeted by that government, this governmentsponsored religion appears to be a faith which is foreign to their own and one that they do not recognize. And in the context of the broader Muslim Community, it appears that the government is playing favorites and rereading their religion through National Security contexts, dictating to them what is and is not acceptabling. This would contravene the basic rights enshrine in the constitution that everyone, regardless of faith, expects to be afforded to them under the law. And this is exacerbated when the target populations that make up the majority of muslim communities come from backgrounds where the expectation from government is that they intervene to the detriment of the individual. Whether it be the historical memories of programs or the security apparatuses of foreign governments persecuting even the most basic performance of faith such as prayer in the mosque has happens in many muslimmajority countries, u. S. Government programs that seek to dictate to muslims what their beliefs are or should be will naturally cause mistrust and inadvertently push people away and towards radicalism, not away from it. Even indirect influence into the communitys thought process can be seen as suspect and many times is. Programs that seek to coop leadership in the Muslim Community such as prevent or cve for the purpose of combating radicalization will often times have the opposite effect. When the individuals that represent religious authority in the community are seen as puppets or compromised, then we cannot expect those who would lean towards radical beliefs to confide in them and to reform their ideas. We certainly cant expect them to stay away as they will consistently try to mend the rift created from what they see as a compromised religious ideal. And by expecting a breach of confidentiality from pastors, imams, chaplains and those who work in religious functions in muslim communities, we compromise the effectiveness of religious authority to be a positive, a positive force in deradicalization. The solution, in my humble opinion, lies in not just creating institutions and initiatives that are grounded in faith, socially relevant and legally viable, but in reevaluating what it means to have religious leadership. Who really is an imam . Who really is a chaplain . What authority do they have, and who speaks for islam . What sort of faith do we have many our text and what sort of trust do we have in those we trust to interpret it . If we cant answer this question as a Muslim Community and instead allow ourselves to intercept it, then how our our 3er7b8 interpretations or the interpretations of a government more authoritative or valid than those of others . Say, radicals . Here i feel its important to mention as well that muslim communities themselves cannot only denounce radical beliefs, but they must see themselves as partners and be seen as partners by organizations and government authorities that want to work with them to combat the coopting of their beliefs for any purpose whether that be for National Security assumptions or to promote extreme acts that will damage society. As a whole, at home or abroad. So the question then is how can muslim beliefs be used for positive change and reform of people prone who radicalization . With regards to the National Security interests, government policies, the policies of correctional institutions, what is needed is an open door policy for religiouslyaffiliated of qualified individuals to be able to counsel, teach and advise incarcerated individuals that may be susceptible to radicalization. With regards to chaplains and those working in the rehabilitation of prisoners, its absolutely imperative that a theology of personal choice and a theology of personal responsibility be inculcated in them and all those that are under their supervision. Speaking from a muslim theological perspective, this means that the basic beliefs of islam are taught to those individuals in a fashion that does not play into the tropes of anyone, radicallist or extreme group. Chaplains and other individuals as well as lay people themselves may subscribe to a more conservative or liberal point of view about their own faith. But we have to recognize that it is not one individual perspective of religion whether that be islam or any other religion that is susceptible to being coopted by radicals or extremists. Indeed, weve seen in the past two years how versions of sunni islam, of shia islam and even of sufi islam in the events that occurred in turkey have shown us that regardless of religious orientation, each of these groups may be, may be coopted for political purposes. One of the hallmarks of radicallist belief is their tendency to engage in group think, negating from the individual their personal autonomy and their ability to make their own decisions. And instead, demanding from them dogmatic, rote application of the groups ideals. Its imperative for any chaplain or teacher of those susceptible to radicalization to present the general precepts of islam and how, first and foremost, every individual believer be held accountable for their actions and their beliefs. And several verses of the quran this idea of personal responsibility is reiterated. Every soul shall be accountable for what it earns, says one verse. And another, no soul shall bear the burden of another. And yet another, every soul shall be concerned with itself on the day of judgment. In one prophetic tradition, a man came out of the desert and asked the Prophet Muhammad if he only prayed his prayers and fasted his fast would he enter the paradie, and the prophet said emphatically yes. When he left the prophet said to friends, if he is true to his word, he will, indeed, enter paradice. The believer is the one who the people are secure from, and the immigrant or the emigrant is the one who migrated away from sinfulness. In another tradition he says whoever kills a person whom they are in covenant with they have a social contract with then they will not smell the scent of paradise even though its scent can be smelled from a distance of 70 autumns. A bit offal gory there in the words used. Offal gory there. So points of consensus in early muslim scholarship is important as a well so that those who are susceptible to radicalization can see that the ideas of being civic or having civic duty and personal responsibility have primacy not only in islamic text, but have been upheld as ideals from the earliest muslim generations. The key here is inculcating in people the ability to make informed religious choices. And that their religiouslymotivated practices be made consciously by themselves. Those who are susceptible to the nuances and must be taught that the ultimate responsibility of each and every one of them falls upon themselves to insure both their personal and public safety. Teaching the muslim individual, whether incarcerated or not, that they have a civic duty towards their fellow man and a personal responsibility in front of god to fulfill that duty is paramount. It will only be through the teaching of islamic beliefs in the broadest sent that will create a sense of identity in the religiouslypracticing individual that they will be protected from possible radicalization. What this does is it creates in the mind of the practicing believer that their personal, private practice does not and should not dictate the minimums of public religiousity. So while i as an individual may be more conservative or more austere in my approach and practice of religion, i am not expected nor should i force that upon the public. In fact, what im expected to do as a religious practitioner is to guarantee for the public their personal safety from myself and from anyone who would want to do them harm. So by encouraging those susceptible to take personal responsibility for their actions and pairing those actions with being held accountable by god himself without any help or assistance from those close to them along with prophetic traditions that we mentioned, those working in the service and education of incarcerated individuals can be the preventive cure the any lapses in to any lapses in judgment and possible engagement with radicalized groups. And to sum up, charges that radicalization is a problem and specifically charges that radicalization to islamic extremism is a problem need to be substantiated with hard numbers so theyre not used as a tool for propaganda seeking to marginalize muslims both in and outside of prisons. When government officials tend to dictate religious beliefs, they effectively contravene both American Values and jeopardize and or reverse the desired effects of deradicalization. And this pitfall can be avoided by governmental agencies partnering with muslims with the requisite expertise necessary for positive change and reform of prisoners and those that are inclined to radicalization. Muslim chaplains, imams, experts and Community Leaders can affect positive change through encouraging theologicallygrounded concepts of personal responsibility, civic duty and accountability to