posted 09-20-2001 12:55            

Rural county retains charges against pair of Muslims

At the sheriff's urging, the prosecutor overruled an assistant who wanted to drop the case

Thursday, September 20, 2001
Paul Souhrada
Dispatch Staff Reporter

Phones in a rural, eastern Ohio sheriff's office rang frequently yesterday as people offered help to a Muslim trio caught up in the national tension created by last week's terrorist attacks.

"Our phone was ringing off the hook from people who . . . wanted to loan them money to sue us,'' said Belmont County Sheriff Tom McCort.

At the same time, and at the sheriff's urging, the Belmont County prosecutor yesterday overruled an assistant who wanted to drop misdemeanor charges against two of the three people from Maryland jailed on Sept. 11.

The assistant, Helen Yonak, said she is no longer working on the case, now being handled by Prosecutor Frank Pierce. Pierce did not return a phone call seeking comment.

A man, a woman and her 14-year- old son were jailed after someone at a gas station along I-70 near St. Clairsville called 911 to report that the group looked suspicious. The tip came on the same day terrorists, believed to be from the Mideast, launched attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Deputies in the community 110 miles east of Columbus said the Muslims were wearing robes that looked Middle Eastern.

Yusuf Alim, 51, of Baltimore, also known as James Edward Williams, was arrested and charged with misdemeanor counts of falsification, holding an invalid driver's license and failing to wear a seat belt.

He was released on his own recognizance yesterday after spending a week in jail because he could not post bond -- originally set at $1 million and then reduced to $2,000 after FBI agents determined he and companion Jamilah Ali were not connected to the attacks.

Ali was released from jail Tuesday. Her son, who had not been charged but placed in a detention center because there was no one to look after him, also was released.

The three were headed to Baltimore when deputies with guns drawn stopped them. The 911 caller said they were wearing masks. Ali was wearing a veil traditionally worn by Muslim women.

Although Alim and Ali committed no crimes, deputies who stopped the car said the couple became disorderly when questioned. Deputies also reported that Ali claimed to be a "a warrior of Allah'' and that she threatened them. Ali has denied making the statements.

Assistant prosecutor Yonak said she intended to drop the charges against Alim and misdemeanor charges of aggravated menacing and resisting arrest pending against Ali after a county judge on Tuesday tossed out a felony charge of ethnic intimidation, also filed against Ali.

She did not drop the charges at that time, however, and Pierce yesterday decided against it.

Alim and Ali probably should have been released after the FBI questioned them on Sept. 12, Yonak said Tuesday. She said she thought it would be best to drop the charges "in light of the way it appears the judge is going to rule'' at their next court appearance Tuesday.

Judge Harry White of Western Division Court told Public Defender Chris Berhalter that he could resubmit a motion to dismiss the charges on grounds that the deputy sheriffs did not have probable cause to stop the car.

White said he did not have to rule on the motion Tuesday because he had dismissed the underlying charge against Ali.

"It didn't take a legal scholar to read between the lines,'' Yonak said yesterday.

Berhalter agreed with her assessment and said Yonak had told him she intended to drop the charges against his clients.

"Based on the testimony, I do believe we would be successful next week,'' Berhalter said.

McCort saw things differently.

"I told her there was no way I would drop those charges,'' McCort said yesterday, disputing Yonak's contention that he initially agreed with her decision.

McCort said he contacted Pierce late Tuesday after calling Yonak to reinforce his view. He added that it was his suggestion that Alim be released on a recognizance bond.

"That's fine,'' McCort said. "I won't have to feed him.''

posted 09-25-2001 08:14            

Poll: Third of New Yorkers support internment camps for some

By MARC HUMBERT
Associated Press Writer

September 24, 2001

ALBANY, N.Y. -- One third of New Yorkers favor establishing internment camps for "individuals who authorities identify as being sympathetic to terrorist causes," according to a poll from the Siena College Research Institute.

Fifty percent of those surveyed for the statewide poll said they were opposed to that idea while 15 percent had no opinion.

The telephone poll of 610 New York state residents over age 18 was conducted from Sept. 12, the day after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, through Sept. 19. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The poll found 75 percent of respondents felt terrorist attacks would continue and 40 percent said they were very concerned they or family members could become victims.

Forty-six percent said the attacks make it less likely they will use commercial flights even though two-thirds of those surveyed said they believe the airlines can be made safe from terrorism. Ninety percent said undercover, armed security guards should be put on the planes.

Internment camps have been controversial since World War II when the United States ordered thousands of Japanese-Americans into such facilities.

Douglas Lonnstrom, director of the research institute, said that given that World War II experience he found it "startling" that 34 percent of those polled supported the creation of new internment camps.

Lonnstrom said he didn't know if those questioned equated the phrase "sympathetic to terrorist causes" to Arab-Americans.

But James Zogby, president of the Washington-based Arab American Institute, said, "You have to be very careful how you go down this road of defining sympathies. I think it's dangerous."

Zogby said creation of such camps would be unconstitutional, but that he wasn't surprised by the poll's findings.

"In the current context, when you ask that question you're going to get that kind of response," Zogby said. "I would say if you asked people, `Should terrorist sympathizers have their toenails forcibly plucked from their toes?', you would probably get something akin to that."