Civil liberties activist Katherine Hughes discusses her article “Anatomy of a ‘Terrorism’ Prosecution: Dr. Rafil Dhafir and the Help the Needy Muslim Charity Case;” the 22-year prison sentence Dr. Dhafir received for defying the Iraq sanctions and sending food and medical aid to malnourished Iraqi civilians; shutting down Muslim charities as part of the War on Terror; and the growing gap between law and justice in America.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio.
Our next guest is Catherine Hughes.
She's an activist who and writer for truth out.
That's truth out.org.
She attended the 14-week trial of Dr.
Raphael Doffer and she's written this piece at truth out called anatomy of a terrorism prosecution.
She also keeps the blog doffier trial.net.
That's DH AFIR DH AFIR trial.net.
Welcome to the show.
How are you doing Catherine?
I'm doing well.
Thanks for having me.
Well, I'm very happy to have you here.
And this is a very compelling piece of journalism that you have here telling the story of the terrorism prosecution of dr.
Raphael Doffer, I guess very complicated story and I admit that going in I knew nothing about it.
So, you know, I don't want to be, you know, too persuaded right off the bat here, you know that in America now it's unfair but when it comes to being a Muslim you are pretty much guilty until proven innocent.
And so if the government says that this guy was a real bad guy, even if as you write they had to settle for just white collar crime charges rather than terrorism charges.
He really must have done something wrong, right?
Well, you know, you hit the nail on the head.
That's exactly what the government wants people to believe and then I actually sat through the 14-week trial and that was almost eight years ago and having witnessed what they did to this man, you know, apart from like trashing him in the press and then sentencing him to 22 years.
I just, I haven't been able to leave it.
I wasn't a journalist before this case, but for the last eight years, I've been writing articles regularly trying to let people know about this case and the article that you mentioned that was recently published on Truthout just before Dr.
Dafir came back to the court for resentencing and that's the article that I have been wanting to write for years and I didn't know how to approach it and you know, because it really documents exactly how the government went about prosecuting this case and you know, the years they spent investigating him.
I mean, he came across at trial as a man of the utmost integrity and compassion and it's been very hard for me to see what the government was able to do to him and how people believe the government and even though there was 12 other court watchers like me and you know, people believe the government in the newspapers and they, you know, want as much proof as they can, which I think they deserve and that's really why, you know, I feel that my article did a good job of setting out, you know, this prosecution, you know, the government investigated him for years and they couldn't find anything and you know, the trial at times was surreal because the government had, although they, you know, held him without bail, had a big high-profile arrest, said he was a terrorist, no terrorism charges were ever brought and not only that, but the government got a motion from the judge pre-trial so that that couldn't be part of the trial so that Dr. Duffy's lawyers couldn't challenge the government's real purpose in prosecution and I just think it's not an acceptable way to prosecute someone.
Dr. Duffy didn't get a fair hearing and you know, that was all that I've always really wanted.
I mean, he was held without bail for 19 months without trial.
That meant he didn't have access to his own records.
He had to see his lawyers through glass because he wouldn't submit to a strip search because of religious reasons, which meant, you know, only two of his lawyers could be in the booth with him at the one time and there was only one phone and they had to hold documents up to the glass and I just think, you know, people should be able to defend themselves and you know, I was brought up with a really strong sense of fairness and justice and I'm still outraged eight years later at what I witnessed and it's also pretty terrifying to have witnessed it because until I attended this trial, I felt completely secure in my own civil liberties and now I don't at all and Dr. Duffy is a pillar of the local Muslim community here as well as, you know, being well known all across this country and in other countries because for 13 years he fundraised for his charity Help the Needy to send aid to starving civilians and the message that this prosecution sends to the Muslim community is, I mean, I just can't emphasize what a terrifying message it is.
Okay.
Well, a lot said there and a lot to follow up.
It's Catherine Hughes.
She's got this very important piece at truthout.org called anatomy of a terrorism prosecution.
Of course, ironic quotes around terrorism there.
Dr.
Rafael Duffy and the Help the Needy Muslim charity case and it's a guy basically whose organization raised money for a charity donated to Iraqis during the 1990s the era of the Invisible War as Joy Gordon called it and from your article it seems that his lawyers made the case.
You seem to be making the case that it's pretty clear that he tried to do everything within the letter of the law that there wasn't a as you say they drop they didn't pursue any terrorism charges against him, but they basically during the arrest and all of that as you say the attempt to deny and bail everything else they tried to make this seem really as part of it sounds like Iraq war propaganda February 2003 this guy he apparently sent some money to Iraq and they're trying to make the case that Iraq is tied to terrorism.
So you charge him with terrorism is just one more thing to parade across the TV screen and indoctrinate the American people a little bit more into the confusion between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden as they wanted it, you know at that time, although sorry, I guess that's just speculation.
I'm throwing in there.
But in any case, so the case is this guy who as our guest says apparently was a pillar of the community held this charity and some kind of medical practice or something like that in New York and basically they've nailed this guy to the wall originally they made a big deal saying that you know as governor Pataki called it money laundering to help terrorist organizations to commit horrible terrorist acts against people.
They held his trial inside the federal building instead of at the courthouse and had guards everywhere and and basically created a whole show about what a dangerous terrible terrorist this guy was and they got away with it.
Apparently the jury went ahead and got railroaded hopped on board the train for this thing and when we get back I'll give our guest Catherine Hughes from truthout.org and our fear trial.net chance to describe a little bit more about the details of this railroading.
All right, y'all welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio.
I'm Scott Horton and I'm talking with Catherine Hughes.
She keeps the website DAR fear trial.net.
That's d h a f i r d h a f i r trial.net and it's all about the story of the trial of this dr.
Dar fear from New York back in 2003 and what is described in her piece at truthout.org anatomy of a terrorism prosecution as a grave injustice.
And now I wanted to get back to the question Catherine of whether in fact, dr.
Dar fear did do everything he could to stay within the letter of the law whether everything really was on the up and up because I believe you do say at the end of the article here that he did violate the Iraq sanctions and I wonder whether he did so accidentally or whether he did so as a matter of civil disobedience who it was that if he did in fact break the law who was benefiting from him breaking the law.
Can you get to the nitty-gritty please?
Absolutely just before I answer that question.
I just want to correct you here in Syracuse.
The court is in the federal building.
So that wasn't they didn't arrange that specially and that's where the court is here.
Yeah.
Oh, I see.
Yeah, and he asked he did to be in he did break the sanctions, but he didn't break it and the way that people from the you know voices in the wilderness who are very defiant confronting the government.
I mean his arch was a religious and humanitarian arch and and he didn't have a license for his charity because you couldn't get a license to send food to Iraq and one of the big mistakes he made was using a number of another charity so that he could tell donors that their donation was tax-free and that's something that's not uncommon among charities and the ACLU person here says normally if there's a problem the government comes in shuts the charity down and then as soon as it's sorted out it's up and running and another of the really disturbing things was that you know after 9-11 doctored a fear and help the needy tried to sort all that out.
They had put in an application for a 5013C status and which would have given them the the status of tax-free and it would have been retroactive but the government actually put a hold on that application moving forward and you know voices in the wilderness people are aware of the consequences of their actions.
I really think Dr. Duffy did not think for a minute that anything like this could happen to him.
And in fact at the trial there was a note in the waste basket of his house.
He had been writing to someone and he said I can't believe that the US government wouldn't want to feed children.
And if you know if that's true then what and so he was that part of the trial his motive or that I guess you say they really dropped any charges about anything nefarious other than just they charge him with fraud that kind of thing.
Was he guilty of those things?
What do you mean?
Did he steal any money?
Yeah, absolutely.
No, I mean he donated 1.4 million of his own money and he's convicted of misusing 600,000 for him and his friends.
I mean the government said they say he gave half his income to charity every year as a cancer patient.
He as a cancer doctor.
He was also really concerned about depleted uranium and it causing cancer.
There was a person in Jordan who had been a student here in Syracuse years ago.
He sent the organized for the aid to go to overland and see to Iraq and I mean at one point Dr.
Dafir had sent chemotherapy medicine and at the border because they didn't have the right papers.
They wouldn't accept it.
So they help the needy representative just had to say, you know, take this and give it to someone.
They also sent money to Dr.
Dafir's brother in Baghdad and he would buy animals.
I mean hundreds of animals at the market, they would be ritually slaughtered and given to the needy people, especially during holidays.
And that was one of the few times people got protein.
I would just really urge your readers to have a look at my website.
The case was made very complicated by the government by design and that's why it's taken me eight years to be able to write the article I did because it's very hard to cut through.
Initially when Dr.
Dafir was arrested, he was only charged with 14 counts to do with the sanctions.
When he refused to accept a plea bargain, the government just started piling on charges and he ended up with 25 Medicaid charges and I actually thought the government had shot themselves in the foot when they started in on the Medicare because it was just absolutely ludicrous and they did things like have a bar graph comparing how much he spent with other doctors and his bar was big and the other doctors were small, the bars, but the woman who was answering the questions didn't know if they were other oncologists using expensive chemotherapy or if they were primary care physicians in a underserved area.
I mean, this is a man whose life was about service.
He located his practice in an area that wasn't served.
He was the only private practitioner on oncology in Rome, New York.
He treated people with bad insurance without taking any more money.
He treated people for free.
If somebody didn't turn up for their chemotherapy, his office phoned.
If it was anything to do with the cost, they stopped sending him the person bills and people who felt beholden to him really wanted to pay back to help them save face.
His office would set up a payment scheme of, you know, five dollars a month.
I mean, having witnessed this man being absolutely trashed and knowing that that could be done to me or anyone else is really stunning.
All right.
Now we're talking with Catherine Hughes.
She's got this piece at truthout.org.
You really got to look at it.
It's called Anatomy of a Terrorism Prosecution.
Dr.
Rafael Darfur and the help the needy Muslim charity case and she makes a very persuasive argument here that here the federal police were looking at this guy for years and years and years and they had nothing on him.
They finally busted him in this, you know, giant publicity stunt cops with guns and vests and helicopters and you know made for TV drama and then they ended up just piling on as she just was describing a bunch of nothing charges, but more of them than anyone can defend themselves from and ended up nailing them to the wall this doctor who basically was just giving charity to Iraqis during the era of the invisible war the era of the blockade before the invasion in 2003 and it's the height of unfairness and pretty symptomatic pretty typical I guess of the domestic prosecutions and the war on terror era there and I wonder if just in the last minute or so you could tell us real quickly about the resentencing was he resentenced to the exact same sentence again 22 years did I get that right?
Yes, he was and actually if you don't mind what I'd like to say to your listeners is that Muslim charity has been one of the biggest targets of the government and it's war on terror and and you know, your previous speaker was talking about anonymity and smear tactics the same kind of thing is happening in these cases and it's very very disconcerting and Dr.
Dafeer has developed a lot of them, you know health problems since he's been in jail and if he doesn't get released soon and you know, he'll probably die there.
So the next stage for him.
We're hoping that we'll be able to appeal it.
We feel very confident because his lawyers arguments and in you know, in support of a sentence around the 10-year mark is are very strong, but the you know, the judge is angry that Dr.
Dafeer is not repentant for following the Nuremberg principle number four as all Americans should have at that time and sent aid to starving civilians.
I mean the numbers Dennis Halliday who resigned from the UN because of the genocidal policy people who wrote to the judge on Dr.
Dafeer's behalf include Dennis Halliday and Hans von Spahnik who resigned from the UN, Nobel Laureate Marriott Maguire and Bill Quigley from the Center for Constitutional Rights.
In fact after I emailed Bill Quigley and told him the result in his email.
He said that he has the email response said the difference between law and justice is growing all the time and that is exactly right and that is why we have to stand up because it's not going to stop with the Muslims.
It's already started in with the and you know that Dr.
Dafeer was held in a special unit it for you know, communications management unit the other terrorists and that's in quotation and there are animal rights activists who didn't kill anybody they damaged property and you know, and now the government's going to after anti-war activists.
The next thing could be the you know, the Wall Street protesters.
We have to stand up for this and especially people of who are not Muslim and Arab who are not as vulnerable have to stand up a hundred and fifty Muslim families were interrogated the morning of Dafeer's arrest because they had donated to the charity which is actually an obligation for Muslims.
You know, they don't have a choice about it and you know, and all these Muslim charities are getting shot and there's only one family out of that hundred and fifty that will speak out about what happened because they are terrified and they're terrified with the reason and we all should be terrified.
All right.
Now I just one quick question.
We're already way over time, but I just wanted to ask you real quick.
Does Dr.
Darfur have access to the ACLU or does he have that level of representation on his side at all?
Do they have a position on his case?
Well, actually it was a response to the ACLU that took me to the trial.
They were looking for court watchers because you know, they were concerned about selective prosecution, the fact that he didn't have access to his record and that he was, you know, they were saying in the press that he had was guilty of much more than they were charging him with.
I mean they have a concern but the problem is the ACLU and Syracuse is one person, you know, and there's a lot of other people who need help and that's the problem over and over again.
Well, you know what?
I'm glad that you brought that up too because and you know, even though we're over time might as well go for it because that's such an important part of your article.
I think is that really in violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendment protections, I guess it would be the Fifth Amendment Protection.
He was not allowed to confront all the accusations against him.
Really there was a terrorism innuendo there.
I thought of when I read your article.
I thought of the old refrain that well, they got Al Capone on tax evasion because well, that's okay, right?
If the government has to resort to prosecuting you for one thing when we all know you're really guilty of something else then that's fair game.
And so that's what they brought into the courtroom was this idea that this guy was some kind of dangerous Muslim Salafist jihadist like Osama bin Laden or whatever kind of thing but then they never did prove that they never did accuse him of that really but that's what he was convicted of in essence and that is a big deal.
That's the kind of thing that well, it's it's very explicit in the Bill of Rights for a reason that that kind of thing, you know, you don't they don't get to just smear you with things that you're not actually accused of in the courtroom.
Well, it's an amazing piece of work.
I really appreciate your effort on it.
We ran it over the weekend.
I think it was at anti-war.com in our viewpoint section here.
It's a very important piece anatomy of a terrorism prosecution Dr.
Raphael Darfur and the help the needy Muslim charity case and it's by Catherine Hughes.
Her website is Dhafir trial.net.
That's D-H-A-F-I-R trial.net.
Thank you very much for your time on the show Catherine.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you Scott.
Bye.
