Tuesday, August 21, 2007

NYPD Report Points to Growing Homegrown Jihadist Threat

Last Wednesday (8-15-07) the NYPD made a 90 page report entitled Radicalization in the West (SEE: http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/pdf/dcpi/NYPD_Report-Radicalization_in_the_West.pdf). It highlights the pathway toward radicalization and points to the ease at which a small band of trained operatives could inflict devastating harm on a major city.

In the wake of Adam Gadahn’s (the first American charged with treason in over half a century) openly siding with al Qaeda and Abdullah al-Muhajir/Jose Padilla (BOTH pictured above) being convicted by a federal jury, which found that he conspired to kill people in an overseas
jihad and to fund and support overseas terrorism, the NYPD’s report is extremely relevant.

As the New York Post noted, “Padilla also applied for admission to an al Qaeda training camp - a form filled out by Padilla and recovered from Afghanistan in 2001 bore seven of his fingerprints and other identifying factors.

“His conviction only underscores the very real dangers warned of in the NYPD report: That despite the constant attempts by al Qaeda to infiltrate its killers into this country, the greatest threat, more often than not, can be found where you'd least expect it - living next door.”

The NYPD’s report highlights that most homegrown terrorists are often indoctrinated in local "radicalization incubators" that are "rife with extremist rhetoric."

Instead of mosques, those places were more likely to be "cafes, cab driver hangouts, prisons, student associations, non-governmental organizations, butcher shops and bookstores," the report says.

The Internet also provides "the wandering mind of the conflicted young Muslim or potential convert with direct access to unfiltered radical and extremist ideology."

The threat posed by homegrown extremists — from "eco-terrorist" groups to neo-Nazis — has long been a top concern for federal counter-terror officials.

The NYPD report highlights the fact that most radicals are difficult to detect because they generally don’t have criminal records and often appear as Westernized as Mohammed Atta and the rest of the 9/11 hijackers!

Which brings about the obvious question, “Why not continue the ban on Muslim immigration to the United States?” We had that ban in place after 9/11, why not continue to quarantine that part of the world until their “sickness” is over?

That very idea is being floated in, of all places, Australia, where Senate candidate Pauline Hanson has urged Federal Parliament to hold a moratorium on Muslims entering Australia.

The right-wing former One Nation leader is seeking a political comeback by winning a Queensland senate seat in the upcoming federal election.


gerry rosser said...

Since we have been having snappy repartee over on Mick Brady's blog, I decided to stick my head in here.

I don't know that I'd accept the label "liberal," since it is, in my lexicon, just as useless a tag as "conservative." But, then, if anyone really pays attention to what I say, I'll faint.

So, believe it or not, I agree completely about Muslim immigration. Stop it utterly and completely now (and probably forever). I can't be a racist here because they are not a different race from me. It can't be religious discrimination, I'm not religious. It is performance-based. They are bad actors, and the (mythical maybe?) good guys amongst them are chickenshits.

Hope you don't mind my visit.

JMK said...

I agree (at least to a point) about the meaningless of "Liberal" & "Conservative," most people have views that cross the spectrum - I'm pro-choice on abortion, except maybe on third trimester abortions, though generally socially Conservative or traditionalist in my other views. I usually try to use the terms radical or extreme to delineate those who oppose the domestic WoT, see America as "the world's worst terrorist," etc.

Those are NOT a "Liberal" positions, it's a radical one shared by the ikes of Moore, Soros, some of the Kos kids, the MoveOn folks, etc.

I can disagree with folks who are more socially Liberal in an amiable manner.

No one agrees 100% with anyone else anyway. Besides, it's always interesting to see why people believe what they do.

I think most of us have had many great discussions with people we disagree with, but few with the more radicalized people of either side.

As I've said to Rachel here (who also identifies herself as a Liberal), "You're not what's wrong with America." (A line I stole from the great Barry Farber).

As to Muslim immigraion, considering that so many of the jihadists are well-educated, well-off and outwardly Westernized (the recent terror plotters in England were all physicians), it probably IS prudent to re-think our stance on Muslim immigration for the forseeable future. And I don't say that with any joy.

P.S. I'm happy and honored that you've visited and were kind enough to post and share your views.


American Ideas Click Here!