ABC News, 21 Dec 09: One of the signs of increasing al-Qaeda strength in Yemen, where U.S. cruise missiles hit al-Qaeda strongholds last week, was a Sept. 2008 attack on the U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen’s capital. al-Qaeda affiliated terrorists detonated car bombs and stormed the embassy grounds in an assault that claimed 19 lives, including one American.
But the Yemen embassy raid was only among the most recent in a series of attacks on U.S. diplomatic installations in Africa and the Middle East, areas of the globe where working for the U.S. government carries significant personal risk. ABC News has aired exclusive surveillance video of several of those attacks. . . .
WATCH EXCLUSIVE VIDEO OF THE 2004 ASSAULT ON THE U.S. CONSULATE IN SAUDI ARABIA HERE
ABC News, 22 Dec 09: The Department of Energy, which is responsible for the nation’s nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, may jeopardize the security of its technology and lose millions of dollars if it does not improve its cyber security, according to a recent Inspector General’s report.
Delays by the DOE’s Office of Science in enhancing cyber security and standardizing its computer protocols may leave the agency’s sensitive information vulnerable, and cost taxpayers upwards of $3 million. DOE has been embarrassed by security lapses in the past, like Wen Ho Lee’s illegal download of classified information at the Los Alamos nuclear lab, the use of unauthorized laptops at the Oak Ridge lab, and successful cyberattacks that may have orginated in China. . . . .
The Tribune, 22 Dec 09: . . . . I had feelers out everywhere, and eventually got a call from somebody who said he represented something called the Soviet Copyright Agency.
We met in a bar and he told me that an interview was “not impossible” to arrange, subject to a few rules. First, the interview, once written, would need to be approved by the authorities, but solely on the grounds of security; and, second, there would have to be a nominal payment to his agency because everything that “Colonel Philby” said for publication was their copyright, and they would want a share of the money if the interview was syndicated – as it surely would be, worldwide.
It all sounded very positive. I said I thought I could live with that.
Fine, said my new contact. It would take some time to set up, but in the meantime was I allowed by my employers to write freelance articles? His agency would very much like somebody in a position like mine to write for it, chiefly about the political attitudes of the British press, and probably also about the relationships between politicians and Fleet Street.
To avoid any potential embarrassment when depositing Russian cheques in my bank account he could, he said, pay in cash at whatever was the Fleet Street rate, which he would expect me to advise him on.
I said I thought I could live with that, too.
But, back in the office, when I told the Sunday Mirror’s political editor Victor Knight about this interesting offer to enlighten a hungry and uninformed Russian readership and explain the British press and politics to them, his reaction was swift.
“Don’t do it,” he said. “Of course they will pay you in cash, but you’ll obviously have to sign a receipt. Once they have your signature on a document accepting payment for information they can wave it at you for the rest of your life. They can ask for more sensitive information that you might not want to give. For God’s sake, the next Soviet defector could name you to the British authorities as a source!” . . . .
FrontPage/Robert Spencer, 22 Dec 09: Ali Eteraz is a liberal Muslim writer who, like Barack Obama, has not waited until he was old to write his memoirs: his book Children of Dust, according to the book website, is a “coming-of-age story” in which Eteraz “captures not merely pain, but also the love, laughter, and pathos of Muslim life.” It is not surprising that such a writer would grapple with issues related to Islamic jihad violence. What is surprising is how he has done so, and what the implications of his stances are for those who are betting everything on peaceful Muslims combating Islamic jihadists within Muslim communities.
Eteraz once stated feebly that peaceful Muslims should remain silent in the face of jihadist violence and supremacism, claiming that Martin Luther King, Jr., stayed silent in the face of racist oppression. That was preposterous enough, but now Eteraz has made an even more preposterous move, going from supine passivity to defiance:
During the salat, or prayer, Muslims raise their index finger to bear witness to the oneness of God. In America today, with all the calls for Muslims to condemn every little act of violence committed in the name of their religion, Muslims should start raising up the other finger. The middle one.
There is no need for one Muslim to condemn the crimes of another. Collective responsibility cannot, and should not, be accepted. Where one accepts collective responsibility one opens the door to collective punishment. Are Muslims individuals? Or are they one singular marionette that pirouettes each time its string is pulled?
The core assumption Eteraz makes here is that it is an exercise in collective responsibility that diminishes Muslims’ individuality if they are asked to condemn Islamic terrorist attacks. . . . .
. . . . The point, in other words, is not collective responsibility at all. To blame all Muslims for the actions of jihadists would be asinine. But to take note of how those jihadists use Islam — its texts and core teachings — to justify violence and supremacism and warfare against unbelievers — and to ask peaceful Muslims what they’re doing to combat such teachings within the Muslim community is not asinine at all.
And it is not blaming anyone for anything he didn’t do. It is simply to ask someone like Eteraz this: “The jihadis say that they’re following the authentic path of Islam. If they’re correct, the implications of this would be many and ominous, for it would suggest that all Muslims, if they decided to follow the authentic path of Islam, would become jihadis — working either by violent or peaceful means to impose Sharia upon non-Muslims. You say you’re living out an authentic expression of Islam, and reject all that. Good. What case are you making against the jihadist understanding of Islam within the Muslim community? How are you combating it?”
I don’t think these are unreasonable questions. For if Muslims who profess to reject the jihadist understanding of Islam don’t fight against it, who will? And if they profess to reject the jihadist understanding of Islam but don’t do anything to stop its spread, of what ultimate value is their rejection of it? They may not be responsible for it, but since they profess Islam, shouldn’t they feel any responsibility to combat the jihadist claim to represent authentic Islam? . . . . .
FrontPage, 22 Dec 09: If a major homegrown terrorist attack happens on U.S. soil in the coming years, 2009 will be looked at as the year when the warning signs were missed. According to the Rand Corporation, the U.S. has experienced 30 homegrown terrorism plots since 9/11. One-third of these occurred in 2009; a frightening spike that warrants more attention than it is currently being given by public officials.
The Obama Administration began its term by refusing to include terms like “radical Islam” as part of its lexicon. The Global War on Terrorism was alternatively called an “overseas contingency operation” or “a campaign against extremists who wish to do us harm.”
The Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, described terrorism as a “man-caused disaster. When asked about not even mentioning the word “terrorism” in her first address to Congress, she said, “That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear towards a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.”
The homegrown terrorist activity this year has startled the Obama Administration, which now is forced to privately conclude that the radicalization of American-Muslims is increasing.
In today’s 30-second news culture, shocking incidents such as these quickly fade away as the topic of coverage as other news develops. A summary of some of the biggest incidents this year is needed for the American people to understand how much activity took place:
* In May, authorities broke up a plot by four prison converts to bomb two synagogues in the Bronx and fire Stinger missiles at aircraft flying around the Air National Guard base in Newburgh, New York.
* On June 1, a Muslim convert shot up a military recruiting center in Arkansas, killing one soldier and wounding another. The attacker, Abdulhakim Muhammad, was previously jailed in Yemen for traveling on a fraudulent Somali passport. Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org reported that a “well-placed source” informed him that he had gone to Yemen to try to study under a radical cleric named Yahya Hajoori.
* In July, seven Muslims were arrested in North Carolina for training with high-powered weapons in preparation to join a jihad overseas. The leader of the group, Daniel Patrick Boyd, had previously trained in guerilla camps in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion and enlisted his two sons in his plans.
* In September, FBI and local law enforcement raided two apartments owned by Afghans in New York after the occupants were visited by Najibullah Zazi, a suspected terrorist who had traveled to an Al-Qaeda training camp last year. Nine backpacks and cell phones were confiscated, and Zazi was found to have purchased chemicals similar to those used in the 2005 London subway bombings, causing concern that the suspects were planning an attack styled after that operation.
* Also in September, FBI sting operations led to the arrest of two desiring to carry out acts of terror. A Jordanian named Michael Finton, an admirer of the “American Taliban” John Walker Lindh, was arrested for planning to set off car bombs outside of a courthouse in Illinois and a skyscraper in Texas. Hosam Maher Husein Smadi was arrested in Texas after trying to detonate a decoy car bomb underneath an office tower.
* In October, the FBI tried to arrest a radical imam in Detroit connected to a range of criminal activity. When they arrived at a warehouse to get Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, he responded with gunfire, killing one of the FBI’s dogs before he was shot and killed. Six of his associates were arrested. In the same month, Tarek Mehanna was arrested in Boston for planning to attack a shopping mall and assassinate two public officials.
* The next month, Nidal Malik Hassan carried out the horrific shooting at Fort Hood, killing 13 people. He is now known to have previously expressed his support for suicide bombers and to have communicated with Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical imam in Yemen who has acted as a recruiter for Al-Qaeda and praised Hassan’s shooting. To this day, President Obama and senior officials have not publicly described the incident as terrorism.
* Most recently, five Americans were arrested in Pakistan on their way to link up with the Al-Qaeda and Taliban. They were arrested at the home of a member of the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist group, who is the uncle to one of the suspects.
These are only some of the major incidents related to radical Islamic activity in the U.S. that occurred this year. A total of 14 Somali-Americans from Minnesota have been indicted for helping to recruit fellow members of their community to join the Al-Shabaab terrorist group fighting for control of Somalia. The case of Rifqa Bary received considerable attention, as did the honor killing in Arizona of a daughter by her father for being “too Westernized.” . . . .
