There was an article on Rollingstone.com, which has since disappeared - here is the quote:
(bolding mine) Donatinng to Hamas would get you on the dirt-list, I would think…
Way to pull one sentence out of context. All of the things that I posted as a whole, plus what others have supplied, could be enough to get one on The List. Any thing else I have to say on the subject is outside of the bounds of GQ.
Haj
If he did donate to Hamas, then I’d agree wholeheartedly. However, we only have the Israeli government’s word for that, and I’d hardly call them a reliable source of information.
First off, back when he was Stevens his first two albums ('67 & '68 I believe) were awesome, and I’m always amazed that he gets referred to as a “70s songwriter.” True, the big hits were early 70s, but he was established with multiple albums before then… and has unfortunately continued releasing material in subsequent decades like most 60s/70s acts long after most of us stopped listening.
Surely there are all sorts of people from various backgrounds (we could start with Israeli-Americans, Cuban-Americans and Armenian-Americans) who both advocate violence and donate to violent groups in far more nefarious ways than Yusef Islam. I don’t recall Meir Kahane getting on any lists, and there are in fact 5 Cubans in American prison right now for trying to stop the terrorist activity of a violent anti-Castro Cuban-American group we harbor winkingly in Florida.
The fact of the matter is we have an out of control security apparatus which is super-focused on Muslims at the moment; combined with the repetitious Muslim names and you end up with this sort of idiocy, which would not have made the news if a celebrity weren’t involved.
Very disappointing as an American to see my fellow Americans negating the value of our rights while people in the British Isles (who have had far more terrorist activity to deal with over the decades than us) defend them. 
“Donating to Hamas” is easier than it might seem. Hamas run many Islamic charities. Many muslims donate to these charities. Some are unaware that they are connected to Hamas, some are aware they are connected but donate in spite of the Hamas connection, and some donate because of the Hamas connection.
These charities do all the usual charitable things charities do, albeit with an Islamicist bent. They also provide funding for Hamas, sometimes openly, sometimes secretly, sometimes because Hamas members have the opportunity to embezzle the funds with a wink and a nod from the people running the charity.
I have no particular knowledge of what happened in this case, but what I would assume is that Cat Stevens donated the money to a Hamas connected charity, not to Hamas directly. But since these charities are known to be a source of funding for Hamas, Israel considers that equivalent to donating to Hamas.
Kahane was a US citizen so this analogy is not appropriate. I fail to see what the rights granted to US citizens has to do with guests who choose to visit here. I am no fan of the Patriot Act but I see a clear distinction between what a citizen of the US can say and what a non-citizen can say and still be expected to be allowed to live or visit here.
Haj
I didn’t realize the 1st Amendment had a seperate clause for foreigners! You’ll have to show me that one sometime. And of course denying the ability of a non-American to say something unpopular also denies American citizens the right to hear it.
Section 349 (a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides for the loss of American citizenship when an individual applies to become a foreign national. Kahane was not only an Israeli citizen but a member of the Knesset, and one who advocated a generalized violence against Arabs. Owing to the technicality of Israel not requiring ‘application’ for Jews via the right of return, the law simply didn’t apply to Kahane. I think he makes an excellent example of our hypocrisy on this sort of issue.
Actually I just did an internet search and Kahane ‘renounced’ his US citizenship in 1988 in order to comply with Israeli law regarding sitting in the Knesset.
From the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Stevens):
Latest from CNN:
They can write a book and have it sold here. The can post it on the internet. They can buy TV time. It’s easy to get the word out. I have no problem with the US denying entry to or deporting guests who support groups who want to overthrow our government. I do have a problem with the government persecuting citizens or permanent residents who have those views.
I wasn’t aware of that and that does put a different spin on things. I hate to be in the position of defending Kahane but although he did support some nasty people, they were not anti-American groups and that is the crux of the issue.
It is clear that Moslems are an overly tagerted group these days but the GQ as to why Cat specifically was targeted has been answered. He has made well documented statements in the past that support groups that want to take the US down by violence. That is reason enough for me.
Haj
These are from a Yahoo news story posted today on Stevens/Islam:
In a statement on his Web site, he wrote, “Crimes against innocent bystanders taken hostage in any circumstance have no foundation whatsoever in the life of Islam and the model example of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.”
After the Sept. 11 attacks, Islam issued a statement saying: “No right thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action: The Quran equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity.”
Can anyone out there find a single quote from Stevens/Islam advocating the use of force to overthrow the US government? :rolleyes:
So now as a citizen of the UK he gets deported there… where the Islamic school he founded in the 1980s gets funding from the UK government! Clearly Britain, which is in this same ‘coalition of the willing’ thingy as the US, doesn’t have this sort of security problem with him. He appears to have been targeted because he says things about the war(s) in the Middle East that the US government doesn’t want us hearing. If UK authorities don’t take him into custody - and for that matter, if the evidence of funding global anti-American terrorism against him is that cut and dry, why didn’t we? - I think there are some serious flaws in this deportation.
This seems to be the same reason Bernadette Devlin (now +McAliskey) was turned away in 2003.
The GQ has not been answered as the US government have not yet given any reason why he is on the security list.
Complex Conjugate, see post #30.
An unamed official, has said this, but no word from the US government.
Did I say that this alone, out of context, was sufficient? I asked; why is protesting against US policy in Iraq a valid reason in determining any “whole”? Many people have done this, are they one strike down to getting on The List? Or is it, in security terms, irrelevant?
New York Times:
So Yusuf Islam can’t travel by plane because he advocates his religious beliefs, he’s spoken out in favor of the death penalty, and he’s had some financial dealings with questionable groups in the Middle East.
I wonder if George Bush is on the same list?
You are correct --at least as regards the initial incident. (A week after "T. Kennedy was removed from the list, after two weeks of requests by Kennedy directly to the Tom Ridge, who certainly wouldn’t take our calls, if we’d been stopped)
What I find shocking is that since the name on Kennedy’s passport, Senate ID, credit cards – his legal name-- was “Edward M. Kennedy” – without a “T” in sight. That label could only be slapped on him if some Federal or airline agent knew exactly who he is: "I know your passport says “Edward”, but don’t people call you by the nickname, ‘Ted’. "
Why is this relevant to this thread? Because “Yusuf Islam” wasn’t on the list, “Usuf Islam” was. Just having a name that’s close (in the opinion of an airline employee with no official standing) is enough to get you banned from a flight. I know that a lot of people are going to say “Usuf” is close enough" because it’s an unfamiliar name to them, but Senator Edward M. “Ted” Kennedy’s case (or Rep. John Lewis, [D, Georgia]) proves that it isn’t just applied to foreign names, and that no one is expected to use common sense. Based on all the reports I’ve read, the CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System) “list” looks pretty much like a typical American phone book, NOT a foreign one.
Why was “T. Kennedy” on the list? The reasons are always secret, but the article linked above cites buying a one-way ticket, a last minute ticket, or paying in cash as among the better known criteria that can get you into the CAPPS database. Kennedy himself reports having later been tagged for those reasons. A senator, like many Americans, may change his travel plans at the last moment.
Better hope that no one with a name vaguely similar to yours doesn’t do any of those heinous things. I know someone who was kept off a flight because of a match that (they learned, through personal contacts, after months of official inquiries) consisted of a different first name, a different last name, and a couple of consonants that the agent couldn’t be bothered with. You can’t get off a list when you’re not on it in the first place – and no one will even tell you the supposedly similar name that is.
Maybe I’m just nervous, because I have to take crucial overseas flight soon, and no one will (of course) tell me if my (or any suitably similar) name is on any list. The fact that my passport renewal has already run much longer than promised doesn’t help. [There’s no reason it should be, in case you’re wondering]
Oops. I never finished my first paragraph, did I? I meant to complete the thought by saying that after “T. Kennedy” was removed from the list, after direct appeal to Tom Ridge, Kennedy was stopped once again, because “Edward Kennedy” was now on the list. Why? Well, it is of course confidential, but one article suggested that it was because of the number of high-level security inquiries associated with getting “T. Kennedy” off the list – a Catch-22!