There is a very important — one might even say life-and-death — distinction that should be made in considering U.S. counterterrorism policy. Certainly, U.S. forces have had many successes in stopping intended terrorist attacks against the United States. Yet there have also been a number of failures. How to distinguish what made the difference?
The successes in the post-September 11 era have come when the techniques of police and military work or intelligence-gathering were used against full-time terrorists. Indeed, an observer could sum up the handling of terrorism in the United States in the almost-decade since September 11 by saying there have been no major attacks, and the policy has been successful.
When it comes to organizations planning attacks, this approach works very well. But when the threat involves individuals or small groups being radicalized and perhaps joining or supporting terrorist groups, the record is much worse.
The weakness is in analysis, profiling, decision-making, and understanding the nature of the enemy ideology. As a result, there have been a number of smaller attacks, including some not counted at all by a government that wants to keep its batting average high, and some near-misses that were averted due more to luck than to skill.
In addition, a huge amount of money has been wasted and effort misdirected, as many are coming to see regarding the current methods of airport security.
In understanding these vital issues one can read no better work than Patrick Poole’s 10 Failures of the U.S. Government on the Domestic Islamist Threat. (Patrick Poole is a frequent PJM contributor.)
He provides ten case studies, each of which is hair-raising, and none of which, arguably, has led to major corrective action. At the root of each one is a failure or refusal to comprehend revolutionary Islamism or the bureaucratic fear of taking on the enemy. Moreover, some cases show how the other side has even gained political influence in America.
Consider Abdulrahman Alamoudi, the Muslim leader who most frequently visited the Clinton White House. Poole rightly describes Alamoudi as:
The most prominent Islamic activist leader in America at the time, he had infiltrated the highest levels of political power. … [He was asked] by the Defense Department to establish the military’s Muslim chaplain corps, and appointed by the State Department to serve as a civilian ambassador, taking six taxpayer-funded trips to the Middle East. … Just days after the 9/11 attacks, he appeared with President Bush and other Muslim leaders at a press conference at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. despite his public comments a year earlier at a rally just steps from the White House identifying himself as a supporter of the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist organizations.
In July 2005 the Treasury Department revealed that Alamoudi had been one of al-Qaeda’s top fundraisers ….
Go back and reread the last two paragraphs. Shouldn’t this experience have created great skepticism about proclaiming Muslim leaders to be moderate without critically examining their record? Instead, the opposite has happened.
Then there was Ali Mohamed, a man who trained American soldiers on Arab culture and infiltrated the U.S. Army’s training program for intelligence officers in the Middle East. Simultaneously, he was teaching Islamist militants in the United States — including the cell that carried out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing — how to shoot and blow things up. Later, he became al-Qaeda’s chief military expert.
How might the Army have known to distrust this man? Well, he had been expelled from the Egyptian army because of his terrorist sympathies, and Egypt warned the United States about him.
Read the rest here...
Replies
Read TARGET PATTON to see what the democrats did to us before and after WWII. They have always been communist sympathisers.
I have said before and I say it again POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BE DAMNED
do what needs to be done and then be done with it. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck chances are that it's a duck. if it walks like a maslam and quacks like a maslam chances are that it a terrorist.
Very good article. Three words come to mind when I think of our government, (both sides) Corrupt, Collusion & Complicit.
Another good book with information on this is The Third Terroist, about the OKC bombing and Tim McVeigh. All the 9/11 criminals were walking around freely in OKC before the bombing there. But from everything I've read said that the CIA/FBI supposedly followed these people all over the country and did nothing. Certainly there is a skunk(s) in the chicken coop.
Nothing new. The infiltrations by the communists with the goal to destroy USA capitalisms predate the 2nd.WW and it is still the prime policy of the China, Russia, Korea...you name it. That was enhanced by Muslims predating 9/11 going back before Christ, but it become critical after 9/11. They already achieved infiltration to the highest posts (who the president is and whom he is appointing to the highest positions in the government?). Their goal is not secret. It is to destroy western culture, society and impose own, Sharia law. If nothing is done, in the few years we will be back in the 7 century. Do you think, that people running our country are stupid? No, they know exactly what they are doing. And they are planning century ahead. Not by rain, just by drops to give us the time to dry.
I AM A NON POLITICALLY CORRECT OLD SCHOOL BIKER,
Nothing To Hide
Nothing To Prove
Nothing To Fear
Nothing To Lose
Old school in my lifestyle and beliefs. Treat me the way you want to be treated. "Act like an asshole, get treated like an asshole."
For all that want to play the PC game then you can no longer call me a West Virginia Hillbilly. I will now be known as, and refereed as a "PROUD APPALACHIAN AMERICAN"
Good for you
We need more like you for the coming fight.
On the Front Line
Why is everyone so dumb about being ONLY a "two party system". This is a mantra that was formulated by ????? who knows, that is to perpetuate a two party system.
It's time to think outside the BOX people! If most people had a more righteous choice other than Republican or Democrat, they would choose it! They are so very tired of only one or the other, who are almost virtually the same. Anyone who only wants a two (current)party system is not a good thinker or is a shill for one or the other parties.
You may be right about this,considering the times,but remember what ross perot
did in the 90's.
This is not the 90's anymore,but Alan Keyes was on the ballot here in FL
just the same,and He would have made a GREAT POTUS.
But too many people were on camera saying "o-turd is gonna pay my
mortgage,and fill my gas tank"and the lazies went with it.
Wonder if O'turd is paying their mortgage now?Never mind the gas,which
by the way is going ever higher.
Where's Concord Bridge?
I still say POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BE DAMNED
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next