When it comes to homeland security, President Obama’s first year in office was a nightmare. In September, Nidal Malik Hasan, a radicalized Army major, murdered 13 defense department employees at Ft. Hood, Texas. Shortly thereafter, Najibullah Zazi was arrested before he and compatriots were able to carry out an al Qaeda-inspired plot to conduct suicide bombings on the New York subway system. Then, on Christmas Day, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, at the direction of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, attempted to kill himself and the 278 passengers aboard a transatlantic flight as it approached Detroit. And to top things off, by the year's end, nearly four dozen Muslim-Americans had been indicted or arrested in connection with terrorist plots originating in the United States or aimed at targets in the U.S.
If there is any good news for the administration, a recent report by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security has this last number dropping by more than half, to 20, in 2010, and with the number of Muslim-Americans attempting to carry out attacks at home dropping from 18 in 2009 to 10 in 2010.
However, these numbers should provide cold comfort for those whose job it is to worry about homeland security. For one thing, the fact that there were ten Muslim-Americans involved in plots against domestic targets in 2010 is still almost double the number on average for the years 2002-2008. Moreover, some of the plots, if they had been carried out successfully, would have resulted in a large number of deaths and casualties, with the planned attack on the Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland and the attempted car-bombing in Times Square being the most notable examples.
No less disturbing was the release last week of a report by Senators Joseph Lieberman and Susan Collins, chairman and ranking member, respectively, of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, on why the government failed to prevent the deadly attack at Fort Hood. It's a virtual compendium of the still-existing fissures and flaws that mar the domestic counterterrorism effort, which, coming up on the tenth anniversary of 9/11 attacks, is a pointed reminder that there is still work to be done.
First off, the report makes it clear that there was no excuse for the Army to have not dealt with Major Hasan well before he went on his killing spree. Peers and superiors alike recognized his inability to disassociate his own views from those of Islamists and his obsession with issues such as whether Islam forbade American Muslim soldiers from taking part in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. His scholarship was seen for what it was: ideologically driven, with little or no professional content. He was, as an instructor and colleague noted, a “ticking time bomb.” But none of that prevented his superiors from giving him laudatory officer evaluations. As the Senate report pointedly puts it, “these evaluations bore no resemblance to the real Hasan.”
It is difficult not to conclude that various forms of “political correctness” were at work here. Pseudo-academic freedom, combined with worries by Hasan's superiors and advisors about being seen as insensitive to Islam, created a dynamic that led the Army to keep passing Hasan along, indeed even promoting him. Unfortunately, as the report pointedly notes, it's not clear in the aftermath of the shootings that this has been corrected. Neither the Pentagon's review nor Secretary Gates's subsequent directives implementing the recommendations of the review directly address the issue of Hasan's own Islamist views or the threat posed by Islamist radicalism more generally. “DoD's failure to address violent Islamist extremism by its name,” the senators suggest, means that the subject remains “taboo.”
No less worrisome is the report's account of the FBI's handling of the Hasan case. Here was an Muslim-American in the U.S. military who was in direct email contact with Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki—someone well known in counterterrorism circles as being the intellectual godfather of previous domestic terrorism plots—but given only the most cursory of reviews by the FBI. How and why that happened is the meat of the senators' report.
CNN reports that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the man who allegedly tried to blow up an airplane bound for Detroit last Christmas, has pleaded not guilty today to two new charges:
A Nigerian man accused of attempting to detonate an explosive device in his underwear aboard a flight to Detroit last Christmas pleaded not guilty Thursday to new charges, according to a law enforcement official.
One of the problems that Britain has faced in trying to wage a liberal intellectual campaign against radical Islam is that the British catechism of multiculturalism makes doing so all but impossible.
Last Thursday, July 22, 20-year-old Zachary A. Chesser of Fairfax County, Va., was arrested for providing material support to, and attempting to join, the Somali Islamist militia affiliated with al Qaeda, al-Shabab. Chesser has been ordered to remain in jail until his trial.
Let us give Barack Obama credit, on those all too rare occasions, when credit is due. The sacking of Dennis Blair is one of his finer moves in national security. It stands in stark contrast to one of George W. Bush’s most consequential lapses.
Al Qaeda cleric Anwar al Awlaki described both the Fort Hood Shooter and the Christmas Day bomber as his “students” in a tape released this weekend, according to pressreports. This is not surprising – the evidence tying Awlaki to both terrorists has continued to mount. But Awlaki’s comments highlight, once again, the U.S. Intelligence Community’s many failures in investigating the al Qaeda cleric.
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has released an unclassified summary of its investigation into the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day 2009. The committee’s bottom line is that the system did not work.
On Sunday, the New York Timespublished what Power Line’s Scott Johnson rightly calls a hagiographic profile of Attorney General Eric Holder in the context of his decision to bring 9/11 co-conspirators to New York to stand trial.
MSNBC White House correspondents Savannah Guthrie and Chuck Todd asked White House press secretary Robert Gibbs some hard-hitting questions today.
Hinting that intelligence is perishable, Guthrie asks Gibbs, "Did you lose an opportunity to interrogate by Mirandizing too soon? This was not a product of reflection that went all the way to the top."
Yesterday on Meet the Press, Obama's counterterrorism adviser John Brennan claimed that Republicans should have known, based on his Christmas Day conversation with them, that terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab would be Mirandized:
The Obama administration says that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (UFA), the failed Christmas Day bomber, is now cooperating with investigators after weeks of silence. Assuming that’s true, then authorities should be able to get answers to the following questions:
--Pressreports indicate that UFA met with Anwar al Awlaki, a notorious al Qaeda cleric, while in Yemen. Awlaki was a “spiritual adviser” to at least two of the 9/11 hijackers, had ties to other 9/11 hijackers, and also advised Major Nidal Malik Hasan prior to the Fort Hood Shootings. What is the relationship between UFA and Awlaki? How did UFA get in touch with Awlaki in the first place? Al Qaeda maintains strict security protocols and not just anyone can meet with an influential ideologue like Awlaki. Someone within the terror network probably vouched for UFA prior to his meeting with Awlaki. If so, then who vouched for UFA?
Earlier today at the Heritage Foundation, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered a speech on the many flawed policies of the Obama administration’s approach to terrorism, paramount among them, “that terrorism should be treated as a law-enforcement matter.”
McConnell then pointed out that the administration’s failure with respect to the Christmas Day bomber—from not acting on intelligence it received from the boy’s father to mirandizing him immediately after he attempted to blow up an airliner over U.S. soil—should not have shocked anyone. This is, McConnell concluded, merely the logical conclusion, the “practical consequences,” of a pre-9/11 mentality that considers terrorism a crime, not an act of war.