THE AMERICANS SHOULD OFFER A COMMENT

May 22, 2011 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Two things stand out about the recent arrest in Guyana of an American cleric, who is said to be associated with the Nation of Islam. The first of these is that the Americans have not yet denied, or for that matter confirmed, speculation that the Guyanese authorities were acting on a complaint from them.
It was originally reported in the media that the sources within the Guyana Police Force had indicated that the local law enforcement authorities were acting on intelligence received.
If this is true, it would not have been the first time that such intelligence has been shared or that the government of Guyana has cooperated with foreign intelligence agencies.
A few years back, an American rabble rouser had claimed on national television and in a letter within the media that he had the support of the Department of State of the United States. The American Embassy was quick to issue a statement disavowing any links with the individual concerned, or with any of the plans which he had indicated were in motion.
In the case this week, the United States has made no comments about whether there was any truth to the allegation that it had supplied a complaint to the local authorities. The local police force also has not confirmed that the actions against the Islamic cleric were in any way connected with a complaint from the US authorities.
It therefore leaves open to further speculation just what was the basis for the arrest of the cleric. Were the local law enforcement authorities acting independently or was the arrest part of an international cooperation mission? Was it intelligence-led, and if so, what was the source of the intelligence?
It is a well-known fact, which some people pretend not to know, that the government of Guyana was cooperative with the United States government in the arrest of Shaheed Roger Khan, who has since been sentenced to a prison term in the United States under a plea-bargaining arrangement.
During the hunt for Khan, it was public knowledge, reported within the media, that foreign operatives, most likely security experts from the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) were involved along with local security forces in the search of homes of persons suspected to be involved in certain activities. A photograph was published in the local media showing a foreign operative being part of an operation within the local security forces.
The government of Guyana was at all times cooperating with the foreign agencies that had an interest in Khan, but many persons chose for political reasons to ignore this cooperation.
In the case of the Islamic cleric, he has indicated to the media that two Caucasian persons were part of the team that entered his hotel room at the Princess Hotel. And he was told by the local police officers effecting his arrest that they had information from the Central Intelligence Agency that he was involved in certain activities. So who were these alleged foreigners that were part of the police operation? They may well be part of the hotel management team, but then again they may be not. So was this arrest of the American cleric, part of a joint Guyana-US intelligence operation?
This question comes against the background of the failure of the United States Embassy to unequivocally issue any statement regarding the speculation within the media that it was their government which had filed a complaint or was in someway connected with the police action.
It is well-known that American security agencies are on high alert around the world because of the killing of Osama Bin Laden. The Americans anticipate retaliation and therefore are on high alert.
However, it is important also that the reputations of innocent persons are not tarnished in the need to ensure security at this time. And there is no definitive confirmation or denial as to whether the United States was in any way connected with the arrest of the cleric.
It is for both the American Embassy and the Guyana Government to offer an explanation of just what took place, because the arrest has implications for the freedom of Guyanese. If this was not a case of international cooperating, and if the local police had no credible evidence against the gentleman, then it is possible that the actions could be construed as political harassment.
It would be unacceptable if the movements of the cleric were restricted because of fears that his work may have been deemed political by the authorities. The cleric did indicate that he was never questioned about terrorism or drugs, but instead, about which political leaders he had met.
Unless this clarification is made, it will be difficult to determine whether the arrest of the Islamic cleric was a case of political harassment or simply as a result of the sharing of intelligence which was poorly garnered.

---

---