NYPD designates mosques as terrorism organizations

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Contrariusester mid-state, TN
    Aug. 29, 2013 3:43 p.m.

    @SCfan --

    "How are the police supposed to get evidence without surveillance?"

    That's the argument used by the NSA.

    Unfortunately for them, we have this thing called the US Constitution. And the Bill of Rights specifically guards us against unreasonable searches and seizures, and stipulates that government forces MUST have probable cause before instituting their searches.

    "It is only smart police work to watch places that have been known in the past as places where terriorists may be meeting"

    The problem is that the mosques being targeted have NOT been known as places where terrorists have met. There is NO EVIDENCE that these mosques are involved in anything illegal.

    There is no probable cause here. And that makes the surveillance unconstitutional.

    It's worth pointing out that Bloomberg is the same guy who tried to ban 44 oz soft drinks. He firmly believes in the nanny state.

    He himself has said: "our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.."

    IOW, he couldn't care much less what the Constitution says.

    I do care. And you should, too.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Aug. 29, 2013 12:01 p.m.


    How are the police supposed to get evidence without surveillance? This is really just the profile thing all over again. It is only smart police work to watch places that have been known in the past as places where terriorists may be meeting. Remember the wall of seperation under Clinton/Reno? One agency like the CIA can't know what some other agency like the FBI knows due to privacy or some such thing. So when some person reports suspicious activity to the FBI, the CIA cannot help connecting the dots. Had that not been the policy, then maybe 911 could have been stopped. And with these special judges that sign off on warrents, the NYPD could and should use them when they get a tip and or have reasonable suspicion of bad activity at mosques. If they get reasonable suspicion of come Christian church doing something then they should surveil that too. Just good pre-emptive police work.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 29, 2013 11:07 a.m.

    "Yet Muslims have been involved in a very high percentage of terrorist related attacks in America and overseas on Americans"

    First off, overseas they're more like 20% of the world population. Secondly, we're at war in at least one (some say half a dozen due to drones) predominantly Muslim nation (one tends to disproportionately face blowback from people you're bombing). Thirdly, what's a terrorist attack? How does that differ from the other 10,000 murders we have in the US each year? I consider the people threatening abortion clinics to be terrorists but others disagree with that. If we define terrorist attack in such a way that you basically limit it to only attacks by Muslims... then you're going to get a disproportionate percentage of them as attacks by Muslims. The shootings in Aurora and Newtown, those weren't considered terrorist attacks. Would they have been if it weren't some white guy doing it?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 29, 2013 11:03 a.m.

    @Tyler D
    "No doubt the answers will require us straddle the fence between liberty and safety"

    I thought we were outraged about the NSA and TSA... oh right, this involves brown people being surveyed, not white people. I forgot that it's okay if it's not "us" having our liberty violated.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 29, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    @DN Subscriber 2
    "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all the terrorists killing Americans are Muslims."

    Terrorists have killed 4 people in America this year (the victims of the Bostom bombing and the cop who died in the subsequent shootout with them a few days later). Guns as a whole are on pace to be used to kill over 10,000 Americans this year.

  • Contrariusester mid-state, TN
    Aug. 29, 2013 10:54 a.m.

    @SCfan --

    "Any organization, religious or not, that was known to support, organize, fund, and or act as terriorists would be put under the same scrutiny."

    The problem is that these mosques have been designated as terrorist organizations even WITHOUT any evidence.

    From the article:

    "often without specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing."


    "even though the NYPD has never criminally charged a mosque or Islamic organization with operating as a terrorism enterprise."

    If the NYPD actually had probable cause, I'd say more power to them.

    But they don't.

    And that makes their surveillance unconstitutional.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Aug. 29, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    Freedom of religion GZE, not freedom to do terriorism. Any organization, religious or not, that was known to support, organize, fund, and or act as terriorists would be put under the same scrutiny.

  • Contrariusester mid-state, TN
    Aug. 28, 2013 5:24 p.m.

    @podunk utah --

    "Contrarius, you can keep adding to your list but it will never match the blood soaked record of Islam."

    How short the memories are around here.

    Christian forces have killed **millions** over the centuries. No religion is innocent.

    Yes, there are worrisome things about Islam. But there are worrisome things about every religion.

    In the meantime, we can either choose to defend our Constitution or abandon it. And defending it means protecting EVERYONE equally, whether we happen to like them or not.

    If NYPD identifies a specific group of Muslims that presents probable cause for investigation, then by all means investigate them. But declaring whole mosques as terrorist organizations based on flimsy or no evidence is blatantly unconstitutional -- and I hope NYPD gets taken to the cleaners for it.

    Remember Ben Franklin -- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 4:15 p.m.

    I guess terrorists of all kinds are succeeding, based on the fear expressed by some on this board who would gladly give up an entire religious group's Constitutional rights to feel somewhat safer. And just because the focus is on Islam doesn't mean similar methods won't (or aren't) being used on other groups. It's tough for the Constitution to compete with an ends-justifies-the-means policy and once government fully embraces said approach it is the end of our personal freedoms. Maybe it's useful to have an "enemy" now that the Cold War has been over for years and years. Doing so keeps the Security business and National Defense fully funded and in a power position.

    Let us all pray for peace...and in New York they will be able to listen in on the Muslims as they do so.

  • sg newhall, CA
    Aug. 28, 2013 3:49 p.m.

    Islam is NOT a religion. It is a political system that promotes the destruction of all that are not followers of Islam. Islam is a cancer. Mosques are terrorists organizations where those bent on destroying our country foster hatred and violence against everything that is American. Islam and muslims should all be deported. Look at what is happening in Dearborn, Michigan? It will become another France and UK. Sharia law has no business existing in America. It will NEVER supersede The Constitution. Islam is anti-free will, anti-free agency. It is a danger to all of us who live in America.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Aug. 28, 2013 3:48 p.m.

    There would be someone designated as "enemies" by the military/industrial/political/religious complex even if Islam had never existed. Someone will always point the finger at someone else "worthy" of hate.

  • podunk utah DRAPER, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 3:37 p.m.

    Contrarius, you can keep adding to your list but it will never match the blood soaked record of Islam.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 3:27 p.m.

    what do you expect but an attack on religion from the secularists in charge in DC and NYC?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Aug. 28, 2013 3:21 p.m.

    @Contrarius – “These attacks were all carried out by Christian terrorists. Where is the scrutiny of Christian churches?”

    The difference is one of degree, and in this case a large degree (i.e., a few wacko religious fanatics vs. a mindset that believes it is “God’s will” to do horrible things to sinners & infidels).

    Every religion has the capacity to produce fanaticism, some more than others. And far be it from me to defend the sacred books of Christianity – the OT is a mess of barbarism and moral relativism that often reads like a biography of an all-powerful psychopath – but in the case of Christianity, almost no one takes the book literally anymore (thank God!).

    Do you know any devout believers who kill their children for talking back, stone their neighbors if they mow on Sunday or kill those who pray to graven images (e.g., Hindus)?

    With Islam there are millions who still take it all that literally – the Taliban is pretty much a government built on a literal interpretation of OT and Koranic commands and values.

  • USAlover Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 2:47 p.m.

    Can you imagine how peaceful this planet would be without Islam?

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    Aug. 28, 2013 2:37 p.m.

    @There You Go Again --

    "The Westboro Baptist Church and its members are labeled with a similar designation?"


    They are annoying, and their members have broken multiple laws over the years, but so far as I know they have never physically harmed anyone.

    They are labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti Defamation League, but they are not designated as a "terrorism organization" by any group I know of.

    Aug. 28, 2013 1:22 p.m.

    So much for freedom of religion.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    The Westboro Baptist Church and its members are labeled with a similar designation?

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    If the goal is to stop terrorism, doesn't it make slightly more sense to listen to whats' going on in mosques than to wiretap EVERY phone/computer in America and spend billions of dollars listening to inane conversations?

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Aug. 28, 2013 12:39 p.m.


    Christian Rightist Jim David Adkisson walked into the church and shot nine people. His excuse was that he hated "liberals, Democrats, blacks, and gays". He considered neocon Bernard Goldberg’s book, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America, his political manifesto.

    5. Dr. Barnett Slepian 1998. Killed by a radical Christian terrorist. Another abortion provider murdered.

    6. The Centennial Olympic Park bombing 1996. Eric Rudolph -- also praised by the Army of God -- serving life without parole for a long list of terrorist attacks committed in the name of Christianity, including the Olympic Park bombing, which wounded more than 100 people, as well as the bombings of two abortion clinics and a lesbian bar.

    7. Oklahoma City bombing 1995. 168 people were killed and more than 600 were injured.

    8. Dr. John Britton 1994. Paul Jennings Hill, associated with The Army of God -- Christian radicals -- killed Britton (an abortion provider) and his bodyguard. The Army of God has a long history of terrorist attacks on abortion providers.

    9. Planned Parenthood bombing, Brookline, Massachusetts, 1994. Another Army of God member.

    @Mayfair and @paintandestory --

    These attacks were all carried out by Christian terrorists. Where is the scrutiny of Christian churches?

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Aug. 28, 2013 12:25 p.m.

    U.S. News and World Report: "Of the more than 300 American deaths from political violence and mass shootings since 9/11, only 33 have come at the hands of Muslim-Americans..."

    Wired:" Since 9/11, ...33 Americans have died as a result of terrorism launched by their Muslim neighbors. During that period, 180,000 Americans were murdered for reasons unrelated to terrorism. In just the past year, the mass shootings that have captivated America’s attention killed 66 Americans, 'twice as many fatalities as from Muslim-American terrorism in all 11 years since 9/11...'"

    A few examples of non-Muslim terrorism in the US over the last 20 years --

    1. Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre 2012. White supremacist Wade Michael Page killed 6 Sikhs.

    2. Suicide attack on IRS building in Austin 2010. Stack, the pilot, left a suicide note attacking the IRS, health insurance companies, and bank bailouts.

    3. Dr. George Tiller 2009. Shot and killed by anti-abortion terrorist Scott Roeder, after years of repeated attacks and violence by Christian extremists.

    4. Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting 2008.

    I was living in Knoxville at the time this one happened.


  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Aug. 28, 2013 12:23 p.m.

    I understand the obvious links. But Muslim terrorism appears to come from a specific, radicalized strain. I can understand a mosque that teaches such radical views being targeted but not all mosques. From my (admittedly brief) search online, this does appear to be all mosques in the city.

    I find this chilling.

  • Mayfair City, Ut
    Aug. 28, 2013 11:59 a.m.

    If members of my religion caused the events in NYC on 9/11, 1 would more than expect this scrutiny (and more) from the NYPD.

  • paintandestroy Richmond/Cache, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 11:30 a.m.


    They're free to exercise their religion within the law, not sure how this has changed that. If a Christian, jewish, Hindu, or some other denomination had been responsible for the 9-11 attacks I'm sure it would have caught law enforements attention as well.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 11:24 a.m.

    @ Contrarius:

    Your ongoing political bias, combined with your untactful sarcasm are not nearly as appealing or appreciated as you obviously wish them to be.

    The record speaks for itself. There are less than 2% Muslims in America. Yet Muslims have been involved in a very high percentage of terrorist related attacks in America and overseas on Americans. With those facts well known, how can any Muslim not expect a higher degree of scrutiny by law enforcement officials?

    Safety is important to Americans... just like it is to others around the world. The secret is in trying to find the right balance of personal freedom and personal safety. Under most conditions, it's pretty much impossible to have a completeness of both.

    It seems evident that the reporter of this article has a political ax to grind and didn't give the NYPD a sufficient opportunity to respond to his allegations. Perhaps he's just trying to win a Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting without regard to the consequences of his actions. It's difficult to determine. But readers should keep in mind that crime rates have come way down in NYC in the past decade.

  • OlderGreg USA, CA
    Aug. 28, 2013 11:21 a.m.

    OK, I'll try again without the link ( to get the posting approved).

    How about adding some confusion to the issue with facts --- less than 10% of terrorist attacks in the US have been by Muslim extremists according to this (which has links to the FBI stats --- including a list of the specific incidents)

    The real issue is not Muslims being investigated: it is the abusive (and illegal IMHO) use of the terrorist label to dodge constitutional procedures.

  • OlderGreg USA, CA
    Aug. 28, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    Go to the wrong church (your guess as to which ones), wear the wrong clothes, say the wrong things, have the wrong household stuff in your kitchen/garage/ storage shed, join the wrong clubs, be a veteran --- and you too can be the secret target of warrantless searches/ surveillance/ incarceration, etc.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Aug. 28, 2013 10:49 a.m.

    @GZE --

    "I expect to see outrage from those who regularly post about the sanctity of freedom of religion on these pages."

    Nah. "Freedom of religion" only applies to Christians.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 10:35 a.m.

    This is a good decision by the NYPD.

    Our safety is more important than ensuring some Muslims aren't offended.

    How many terrorists have to scream "In the name of Allah" while killing innocent men women and children before we admit there is a relationship between those who follow Allah and terrorism?

    They themselves admit there is a relationship.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Aug. 28, 2013 10:26 a.m.

    We wouldn’t tolerate this if the police were targeting a church or synagogue. If a terrorist suspect or suspects are known to frequent a certain house of worship, that shouldn’t make everyone who worships there a suspect. I agree that police must follow tips to wherever the trail of evidence leads but they mustn’t designate an entire religious congregation as a terrorist cell or organization without hard evidence. What in blue blazes is going on here?

    This policy sounds like an open season hunting license for cops. In a case like this, the mosques being so designated could have its legal counsel ask for an immediate Federal court injunction instructing the police counter-terrorism unit to show cause.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Aug. 28, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    This is a real problem that I fear we sweep under the rug of political correctness (i.e., civil liberties) at our peril.

    The problem is this is a religion whose two most important scared books (Quran and Hadith) contain many passages that implore and even command believers to subjugate and kill non-believers.

    I believe the vast majority of Muslims are just like anyone else – decent, law abiding, love their families, etc. But if there was ever a potential for otherwise good people to be deranged by a religion, Islam is it. And polling data seems to bear this out – look at responses by Muslims to questions like “is it OK to kill in defense of the faith?” The percentages who agree with this mindset, even in relatively moderate countries like Turkey, should trouble us deeply.

    No doubt the answers will require us straddle the fence between liberty and safety, but there is no question that, prior to 9-11, had the Hamburg police been doing at least some of what the NYPD has done the World Trade Center Towers would likely still be standing.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Aug. 28, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    Bravo, NYPD!

    Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all the terrorists killing Americans are Muslims.

    The "tolerance and diversity" crowd will be outraged at this "attack on religious freedom."

    But, Islamist radicals have been at war with the west for many years now, and to deny or ignore that puts us all at risk. The murders at Fort Hood and the Boston marathon are only the most memorable examples. Jihad does not involve declarations of war by nation states, nor uniformed armies as is customary among civilized nations and the laws of war.

    To blindly ignore the reality of those who are killing us puts us all at risk. Identifying the seething hotbeds of covert activity against us is the first step to protecting us from those who mean us harm.

    Than you NYPD. Now, who believes that the only Mosques harboring radicals are in New York City?

    Again, not all Muslims are terrorists, and the peaceful ones are free to practice their faith. But we must stop those who are intent on killing us, and our culture and our Constitution and thereby extinguish all religions except Islam.

    Aug. 28, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    I expect to see outrage from those who regularly post about the sanctity of freedom of religion on these pages.