On March 6, 2013 Zaytuna College hosted the former United States Attorney General, Ramsey Clark. Clark, now 86 years old, brings a wealth of experience from both inside and outside of government to his presentations, which was one of the reasons for his invitation. Oftentimes, we are tempted to limit our exposure to those who currently or have always shared our views and approaches to the burning issues that define our lives or times. While such an approach may make us comfortable, it will not make us wise. Ramsey Clark is a wise man and we are thankful that he was willing to share some of the wisdom he has gained over the decades with us.

It was hoped that Clark would have talked more about his experience inside of government, serving as he did at the height of both the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War. Certainly, he has much insight into some of the untold stories related to two of the most defining events in recent American history. Clark, however, focused more on his strident opposition to the current excesses and abuses arising from American foreign policy, militarism and what many see as the slow erection of a velvet-gloved police state. In this regard, Clark has been in the forefront of denouncing the US wars and occupations in Iraq (beginning with the first Iraq War in 1991), the crippling sanctions imposed on that nation, the ongoing war in Afghanistan, the use of depleted uranium weapons, the in-discriminant use of weaponized drones, the CIA rendition program, the barbarity of torture centers such as Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and Baghram prisons, and the erection of the US surveillance state in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy.

Perhaps, his current stand against war, militarism, and his strident advocacy for the rule of law, are ways of reconciling himself with some of the painful decisions he made during his time in government, decisions which may have led to the kind of outcomes he currently denounces. Whether that is true or not, Clark can certainly point to laudable achievements while he served in the justice department, compared to others who have held the offices he occupied. During his lecture, in one of the few remarks he made referring to that period, Clark mentioned that his removal was one of the issues Richard Nixon campaigned on in 1968, hinting at the possibility of him not being a “team” player in a Justice Department that was dominated by the infamous J. Edgar Hoover.

The event was not without controversy. The moderator, Dr. Hatem Bazian, perhaps sensing the discomfort felt by many Muslims in the audience towards Clark, who has provided legal counsel to Saddam Hussein and Slobadan Milosevic, both of whom have the blood of massive numbers of innocent Muslims on their hands, asked Clark how he justified his decision to defend such individuals. The issue would resurface during the question and answer session when an attendee read a statement denouncing Clark for this and other past actions, and Zaytuna College for hosting him.

Clark’s answer was that he was defending the rule of law as much as he was defending two heinous criminals. In his words, “Everyone, no matter how hated deserves a credible defense.” It should be noted, especially for Muslims who would be quick to point a condemning finger at Clark in this context, he also provided legal counsel for Umar Abdur Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh,” who was implicated in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and he is currently working on the cases of both Imam Jamil El-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown, and Aafia Siddiqui, two controversial individuals who have been largely abandoned by the Muslim community.

In another question involving the rule of law, Clark ably responded to a question about his condemnation of the US involvement in the bombing campaign and covert operations leading to the overthrow and eventual brutal assassination of Muammar Qaddafi in Libya. This is another emotional flashpoint for many Muslims. Clark mentioned that he was not against the use of force against Qaddafi in principle, but such a use of force was the role of the United Nations not the United States, a self-serving superpower. In his view, one shared by many, the US operation in Libya establishes a dangerous precedence in international relations, namely, the ability of any nation to unilaterally attack any regime that it does not approve of.

Clark made an interesting analogy in addressing this issue. He mentioned that here in the United States, we have almost three million incarcerated individuals. Many of them are victims of unjust and inherently racist practices such as New York’s Stop and Frisk program, which overwhelmingly targets African American and Hispanic youth. If a foreign nation were to decide that the US penal system is abominable and that they were going to bomb or invade the United States to liberate those prisoners, what moral argument could the United States make against them in light of the precedence she herself has set in Libya and elsewhere?

These are the kinds of questions we should be wrestling with at our academic institutions and throughout our society. By bringing them up, Ramsey Clark has helped us to initiate, advance and think about some of the most serious issues of our time. We appreciate that and wish him well during the twilight of his life. Hopefully, we can all find something positive in his words and example that we can build on.