Investigative Project on Terrorism: 16 March 2010: A House Homeland Security subcommittee meets Wednesday to discuss “Working with Communities to Disrupt Terror Plots.” It’s a great idea, and the kind of study the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment should undertake. Looking at the witness list, however, shows that the committee is seeking input from a narrow viewpoint – one that is sympathetic to Islamist extremist organizations here in America.
Like any religious and ethnic group, American Muslims hold a wide range of viewpoints about their faith, the role it should play in secular society, and ways to strike a comfortable balance. Nearly all the witnesses share a history of interaction with national Islamist groups – those that seek to infuse a religious ideology into the political debate – while contrary points of view are not given a seat at the table.
Even the law enforcement and research oriented witnesses have a history of working closely with groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America, each of which have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. . . . Here’s a rundown of most of the hearing witnesses and their histories: . . .
Christian Science Monitor, 10 March 2010: Militant groups can radicalize individuals and train them to carry out terrorist acts much more quickly today, in part thanks to the Internet, according to military and counter terrorism experts testifying on Capitol Hill Wednesday.
Militant groups and some individuals have “maximized” the use of technologies such as the Internet. Government officials say the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who allegedly attempted to blow up an American airliner in Detroit on Christmas Day, points to just how fast groups can radicalize an individual. Mr. Abdulmutallab was identified, contacted, recruited, and trained all within six weeks, according to a Pentagon counterterrorism official.
That’s much faster than the two and a half years it took for Osama bin Laden to hatch the plan to attack the US nine years ago. While the two plans vary widely in scope, the faster time frame indicates how adaptive radicalized groups and individuals have become, say experts. . . .
Testimony on U.S. Government efforts to counter violent extremism
Ambassador Daniel Benjamin
Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Department of State
Garry Reid
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Combating Terrorism
Lieutenant General Francis H. Kearney III, USA
Deputy Commander U.S. Special Operations Command
Douglas M. Stone
President and Chairman, Transportation Networks International
Scott Atran
Professor of Anthropology and Psychology, University of Michigan and John Jay College of Criminal Justice
James J. F. Forest*
Director of Terrorism Studies and Associate Professor of Political Science, United States Military Academy
US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, 10 March 2010:
•Russell E. Travers [view testimony]
Deputy Director, Information Sharing and Knowledge Development
National Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of National Intelligence
•Timothy J. Healy [view testimony]
Director, Terrorist Screening Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation
U.S. Department of Justice
•Gale D. Rossides [view testimony]
Acting Administrator, Transportation Security Administration
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
•David V. Aguilar [view testimony]
Acting Deputy Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington Post, 19 Nov 09: A Senate committee on Thursday morning launched the first public hearing into the Fort Hood shooting attack with a focus on the perils of homegrown extremism and “political correctness” and with partial cooperation from the Obama administration.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hopes to probe what the government knew about shooting suspect Army Maj. Nidal Hasan and whether federal agencies either missed key warning signs or failed to communicate with each other before the attack. The panel heard from five experts on terrorism and homeland security.
Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) started the hearing by calling the investigation “as serious as any this committee has even undertaken.”
“The purpose of our investigation is to determine whether that attack could have been prevented, whether the federal agencies and employees involved missed signals or failed to connect the dots in a way that enabled Hasan to carry out his deadly plan,” he said. “If we find such negligence we will make recommendations to guarantee, as best we can, that they never occur again.” . . . . .
. . . . . . “I worry about a sense of political correctness … in a post-9/11 world,” said Frances Fragos Townsend, the White House homeland security advisor during the Bush administration.
Retired Gen. John Keane recalled instances during his Army career when possible over-sensitivity to issues of ethnicity and religion made military leaders blind to potential threats.
“This is not about Muslims and their religion … nor is it about the 10,000 Muslims in the military who are, quite frankly, not seen as Muslims but as soldiers, sailors and airmen,” Keane said. “This is fundamentally about jihadist extremism, which is at odds with the values of America.”
US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 19 Nov 09:
Thursday, November 19, 2009
10:00 AM
Dirksen Senate Office Building, room 342
Witnesses
Panel 1
- General John M. Keane, USA, Retired
Former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army - Mitchell D. Silber [view testimony]
Director of Intelligence Analysis
New York City Police Department - Frances Fragos Townsend
Former Assistant to President George W. Bush for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism - The Honorable Juan Carlos Zarate [view testimony]
Senior Advisor, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Former Deputy National Security Advisor for Combating Terrorism - Brian Michael Jenkins [view testimony]
Senior Advisor
RAND Corporation
