Potential Padilla jurors questioned

The toughest questions were about Islam.

Did potential jurors view it as a violent religion? Did they think Muslims were more prone to commit crimes? Could potential jurors distinguish between religious devotion and support for terrorism?

U.S. District Judge Marcia G. Cooke’s probing questions came on the first day of jury selection in the trial of accused Al Qaeda operative Jose Padilla. They were meant to ensure that jurors reach a verdict based on evidence, not biases or stereotypes.

Padilla, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi face charges of taking part in a conspiracy to “murder, kidnap and maim” people overseas. Prosecutors say the defendants sent money, supplies and recruits to support radical Islamic groups waging holy war. The men, all Muslim, have pleaded not guilty.

The hearing gave a glimpse into the candid views of Americans on religion and terrorism in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and during the Iraq war.

“I do think, for their god, they would give their lives,” said one man.

Another said he believed only an extremist element of the Islamic faith advocates violence.

“I respect the good Muslim as much as I do the good Christian or good Jew,” he said.

By day’s end, Cooke had screened 17 possible jurors, whose identities remained under wraps by court order. Eight were dismissed because of biases or scheduling conflicts.

The painstaking process is expected to last more than two weeks.

Altaf Ali, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Florida, called it a “travesty” that a defendant’s religion would take center stage in the courtroom.

“When you put someone on trial, it’s not their religion on trial,” Ali said.

None of those interviewed for the jury were Muslim, though two said they had Muslim relatives.