Unit 5

Criminal Justice (general)

The Lackawanna Six

The case study of the Lackawanna Six, a group of young Yemeni-American men accused of terrorism, highlights how the issue of racial profiling by law enforcement has become even more highly charged in the contemporary, post-9/11 environment. On one hand, individual rights must be preserved. Profiling of individuals of Arab origin who profess the Muslim faith is not justified. Discrimination is against the law, and no American can be denied due process, based on guilt-by-association. Such profiling is also often ineffective. After all, terrorists have come from non-Middle Eastern nations and many Arabs and individuals of Middle Eastern ancestry and appearance are not even Muslims. On the other hand, government agencies entrusted with protecting the public must fulfill their missions. There is no clear ethical right or wrong: rather, it depends on the position one takes: a utilitarian might state that the greatest good for the greatest number of people results from stringent prosecution and apprehension of suspected terrorists; a deontological view stresses that rights must be preserved, regardless of the historical situation (Bluhm & Heineman 2006: 126).

The Lackawanna Six were a group of young Arab-Americans, arrested in 2001 who had trained at an al-Qaeda camp. Although they returned to the U.S. shortly before 9/11, there was no evidence they had been plotting a terrorist-related crime in an active fashion. According to Dina Temple-Raston, none of the Six "had signed the true jihadist's pledge of loyalty to bin Laden. And none of them seemed eager to put what they had learned at the training camp to use" (Temple-Raston 2007:1). After the Six were found guilty, five of them expressed profound remorse for their journey, and apologized to America (Bluhm & Heineman 2006: 124).

The evidence suggests that the Yemenis had been recruited because of their disaffection with their economic status in the United States, but quickly returned after pretending to be injured because of their fears of what they saw in the camp (Temple-Raston 2007:1). Five of them had children and established lives in the U.S. (Bluhm & Heineman 2006: 124). As a result of surveillance activities carried out under the U.S. Patriot Act, they were apprehended, although other than a vague email there was no evidence of any planned attack (Bluhm & Heineman 2006: 124). They were originally accused of knowing about the 9/11 terror plot (Temple-Raston 2007:2).

According to Temple-Raston, "many people ask me why the United States hasn't been hit again. The FBI would tell you that its vigilance has prevented additional attacks; the Department of Homeland Security would add that our borders are better protected and that terrorists are better tracked. To some extent, that's true. But it's also important to note that the relationship between U.S. law enforcement and the American Muslim community has improved significantly. They increasingly share information, which lets law enforcement get leads on homegrown terrorism suspects early on and stop plots before they get beyond the talking stage" (Temple-Raston 2007:1).

Events like the questionable prosecution of the Lackawanna Six simply create more divisiveness between American Muslims and law enforcement. Although some might argue that it is 'better to be safe than sorry' and justify running roughshod over individual liberties to vigorously prosecute terrorists, to do so can be counter-productive and simply foster silence amongst Muslim leaders about terror plots or actually encourage radicalism amongst alienated young Muslims.