Ranking Terrorist Threats: Do Nothing Until You Hear From Me

On the Counterterrorism Blog Madeleine Gruen and Frank Hyland have released their second installment on the homegrown terrorism threat in the U.S.

They are clear on the criteria used for the threats. The terrorist group must have "the presence, the level of intention, and the capability to carry out its threat." Although a number of groups would like to carry out acts they are not able thus they are ranked lower as a result.

Al-Qa’ida (AQ) is on the top of a list such as this and thereafter each threat is ranked from the most likely to least likely.

The Groups:

1. Al-Qa’ida & Al-Qa’ida-Inspired Individuals or Groups:

An unnamed group or individual then is at the top of the list. The authors are playing the numbers. With the size of our population and the relative unhindered legal and illegal access to weapons and explosives, along with out course our continuing unpopular policies here and abroad, "the odds are high that someone will see coverage of an incident abroad - Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel - and react." The exact nature and timing of such a threat is virtually impossible to predict. "The perpetrators are not necessarily members of a network, often do not know each other, and therefore leave no `tracks' to follow from one to the other." The organization of AQ consists of groups, cells, and individuals that act independently.

The two World Trade Center attacks were by people who received training in terrorist camps; currently however, Westerners have attended AQ training camps in Pakistan and/or Afghanistan. Moreover, the UK attacks were "AQ-inspired native-born men who carried out the attacks on London commuters in July 2005."

At a subsequent point the authors promise to consider "US-based groups that have no clear-cut physical ties to AQ, but that abide by the same ideological doctrines as AQ and which are unabashed supporters of AQ, such as As-Sabiqun."

The second rank consists of White Nationalist Groups who have carried out attacks but they have "been relatively disorganized. . . lacked funding, and its adherents have not been as ideologically committed as they have been committed to a social network and cults of personality." For these reasons, I believe this places them at a significantly distant second to AQ.

The authors then rank the Lebanese Hizballah (LH) at number three but they continue to outline the group's major strengths. In this regard, I believe they are in fact more dangerous than the White Nationalist Groups. For example, the authors contend that the group have access to weapons, explosives, have the motivation, and the requisite skills in order to carry out a successful attack here. Hizballah meets all of these criteria. In addition, they maintain that LH has "undoubtedly carried out the pre-attack surveillance necessary not only to carry out at least one attack, but to do it in short order after receiving the `Go' from their masters in Tehran and Beirut. Members of the group have insinuated themselves into many of the major metropolitan areas of the US." They are entreched in criminal activities already such as cigarette smuggling thus they have the tactical and monetary resources for an attack. LH has already hit Buenos Aires.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) places fourth mostly because for decades they have had an infrastructure presence in the U.S. PIJ leader Fathi Shqaqi was assassinated in 1995 when University of South Florida Computer Engineering Professor Ramadan Shallah immediately left Florida, journeyed to the Middle East and assumed the chairmanship of PIJ. They are here.

The fifth place finisher, HAMAS, has been successful elsewhere in politics whereas in the U.S. they have been involved in lengthy legal proceedings against their fund-raising arm--The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development--at one time the leading Islamic charity in the U.S. I have no doubt they could strike but I believe they are significantly less of a threat than the higher ranked groups.

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) is a political Islamist organization that is present in the U.S. HT has not been directly linked to a terrorist attack but its published ideological doctrine and strategy are identical to AQ’s. We have to live with this group I believe, until, or unless they break the law. The group does not even use the HT name in the U.S. so they may be difficult to even identify.

Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is arguably the most influential of all Islamist groups but the authors have not identified the group with violence in the U.S. thus they must simply bear watching.

The eighth and final grouping, the USA General Store, is a catchall for groups such as the Tamil Tigers, or the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) who exploit or extort funds from American contacts.

Most of the analysis seems to hinge on the weaknesses inherent in the security posture of the U.S. In the same way that key Counterterrorism expert Steven Emerson writes, the threat is non-specific, unnamed, and general enough that little can be done except act in defense, or in reaction to a violent act or acts. Given the constitutional constraints on legal action, and the paucity of actual, physical attacks, the groups remain little more than named threats. The threat is very real, lethal, and places Americans in the uncomfortable and unfamiliar role of facing domestic threats. I would predict that little will be done until or unless said groups or individuals actually act. Although our security posture has undoubtedly improved since 9/11 we are by no means safe. Hence, the frustrating position for Americans to watch and wait.

U.S. Let Bin Laden Get Away During Two Administrations

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, right, said his boss, Osama bin Laden, left, was gleeful about killing people on 9/11. Graphic source: Miami Herald

It is a strange world when I have to agree with Islamic insurgents but Bin Laden's driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, is correct on at least one point. The U.S. let the insurgents slip away.

Hamdam told a pair of FBI agents that it was America's fault that the al Qaeda leader is alive.

He stated: ''You had these opportunities, America. You didn't do anything,'' FBI agent George Crouch Jr. testified Friday at Salim Hamdan's war-crimes trial.

The U.S. could have killed bin Laden in Khartoum, Sudan, before he moved to Afghanistan in 1996; we could have killed him after al Qaeda's 1998 U.S. twin bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa; or Bin Laden could have been eliminated after the October 2000 suicide bombing of the USS Cole, in Aden, Yemen, which left 17 U.S. sailors dead.

Hamdam said: ''bin Laden was emboldened.'' So he struck with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. And nearly 3,000 people died.

Hamdam opened up in particular to a Lebanese-born FBI agent named Ali Soufan who was praised as well as an interrogator in Lawrence Wright's, The Looming Tower.

The testimony is chilling and corresponds in rough outline to what key counter-terrorist experts have said in contrast to George Tenet and Louis Freeh's self-serving accounts of fighting al Qaeda.

Pakistanis Steal More Money From Americans: Americans No More Secure Than Before

Graphic source: Sharpshooter-maj.com photo by Stuart Freer

It is one of those mind-boggling stories that is surely designed to upset you if you have been paying attention at all to the Pakistani situation. The U.S. is transferring Pakistani counter-terrorism aid in favor of a fighter jet upgrade. What are they thinking in Washington? As Pakistan has become the latest and best haven for the Islamic insurgency, and therefore desperately need counter-terrorism funding to lock down the insurgents, and the potential of obtaining nuclear material, the Pakistanis are now going to get: a jet upgrade?

The Pakistanis play our politicians to the hilt. Using nuclear weapons as their creed, they extract more from us, make a show of attacking terrorists to demonstrate their commitment against the war on terror, and then Pakistani government officials either look the other way, or know about insurgent safe havens and possess the intelligence that would be invaluable to American efforts to root insurgents out. The Pakistanis have so far stolen $10 billion from us since 9/11. And, yet, the insurgents are in their backyard. Polls taken show that many Pakistanis support the Taliban anyway. Its mind-boggling how blind Americans can be.

Upgrading U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter planes is not going to assist the engaged troops on the ground currently across the border in Afghanistan. Pakistani Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani is visiting next week and he should be grilled on the insurgency. Who cares about Pakistan's aging fleet of F-16 fighter jets? Those upgraded jets will not protect America, or Americans on the ground in the region.

About $230 million in aid money has been approved by Congress for military equipment and training that had been earmarked for law enforcement and counter-terrorism purposes.

The Pakistani explanation is that the F-16s are used against the insurgents. Hows about U.S. fighters take care of that problem?

The other excuses do not make sense either. Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmoud Qureshi visited earlier this month and the administration believes the upgrade is a way to both enhance the Islamabad government's anti-terrorism capabilities, and ease its financial burden in the face of soaring energy and food prices. Huh? It may help Pakistan with its costs, but I believe Americans have problems with rising energy costs as well and the upgraded jets will not improve the security of Americans.

Senate Democrat Patrick Leahy and House Democrat Nita Lowey, both of whom chair key foreign affairs appropriations subcommittees, expressed reservations about the aid shift. They are correct.

President Bush is to meet Prime Minister Gilani at the White House next Monday for talks expected to be dominated by aid and security issues. Why doesn't Bush find out we need to know about the insurgents who are fighting, and killing Americans, and take them out?

The Innovative Educational Outlet Just-In-Time

For today's class, we are going to review all the educational tools available, including the latest Education 2.0 implements. We have text messages, ring tones, songs, chants, poetry, cassettes, the web, pamphlets, magazines, multiple languages, DVDs, and fliers. This is just-in-time education at its best.

What innovative and yet comprehensive American educational facility is this?

The answer is: none.

This is the Taliban undermining the Afghan government. The International Crisis Group, based in Brussels, Belgium, reported that the Islamist insurgency is making a violent comeback and innovatively employs all these tools to defeat the Coalition.

The Taliban's propaganda machine widely exploits collateral damage and civilian killings by Coalition forces. On the other hand, the Afghan government and the Coalition barely mentions the Taliban's atrocities of ruthlessly killing or torturing those who disagree or oppose them. Indeed, in the wake of the sparse interest that the Western, mainstream media has in these event, independent journalists usually can not verify conflicting claims. Journalists often report the Taliban claims.The Taliban gets its message out both to the West; and craftily, the Taliban employs songs, religious chants, and poetry that appeals to Afghan nationalism and Islamic pride. The Taliban wins on both counts for their double-sided message.

The Coalition is getting whupped in the information aspect of the war.

Japanese Sleipnir the New Contender in the Browser Wars

Like most of the new contenders in the browser wars a Japanese software company has an entry in the international market. As Internet Explorer and Firefox have dominated the field the new entry, the Sleipnir browser, has arrived. The difference is said to be in the high level of customization that the browser allows. In particular, the browser contains the selection either the Trident or Gecko layout engines for each Web site visited. Trident was developed by Microsoft Corp. and is used in Internet Explorer while Gecko is used in Mozilla's Firefox. Since web browsers display information differently, in Sleipnir the user can click a small button in the bottom left of the browser and switch between Trident and Gecko, i.e., users can choose the best one for the particular site.

The first time I tried it the browser would not run Gecko and it told me to run Addons and Install. I couldn't find it easily so the first-time around was a bit of a struggle.

Saudis Spew Hatred Through Madrassa Textbooks

In an update to stories about Saudi textbooks, Slate ran an article about current revisions. The story was about a report published by the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom. One example is a question that appears in a recent edition of a Saudi fourth-grade textbook, Monotheism and Jurisprudence, in a section that attempts to teach children to distinguish "true" from "false" belief in god:

"Q. Is belief true in the following instances:
a) A man prays but hates those who are virtuous.
b) A man professes that there is no deity other than God but loves the unbelievers.
c) A man worships God alone, loves the believers, and hates the unbelievers."

The correct answer, of course, is c). According to the Wahhabi imams who wrote this textbook, worship of God includes hating unbelievers too. By the same token, b) is also wrong. Someone who worships god cannot be said to have "true belief" if they love unbelievers.

"Unbelievers" are Christians and Jews.

This question is typical of the new, "revised" Saudi textbooks. Previous versions contained even darker passages and the Saudis agreed to clean up their act, and this is the clean-up, to eliminate the disparaging remarks about other religious groups.

The textbooks in question do not remain in Saudi Arabia, a nation that is no ideological friend to the U.S. The texts are written and produced by the Saudi government and subsequently distributed, free of charge, to Saudi-sponsored schools throughout Africa and South America. Muslim British textbooks contain books that call Muslims to kill all apostates.

The West is charged with cultural imperialism so I will now wait to hear from American academics who will denounce the Saudis as religious and cultural bigots.

Iran Supports Hezbollah: Iraq

As reported on the Long War Journal, Coalition special forces teams, likely the terrorist hunter-killer teams of Task Force 88, have captured a Hezbollah Brigades propaganda specialist during a raid in New Baghdad. The propaganda specialist uploads web sites with imagery and video taken from attacks on Iraqi Security and Coalition forces. The really annoying part of this effort is that then the propaganda is believed hook, line, and sinker but gullible Americans. Since the mainstream media has little presence in Iraq, and is not reporting by and large, the propaganda is then seen as reliable evidence that the insurgents are doing really well.

In this case, the propagandist is a part of the Hezbollah Brigades, or the Kata'ib Hezbollah. Multinational forces Iraq indicates the group receives support from Iran, and is an “offshoot of Iranian-trained Special Groups." US forces captured Ali Mussa Daqduq inside Iraq in early 2007; he is a senior Hezbollah commander tasked with setting up the Mahdi Army Special Groups.

Any dealing with Iran must include the evidence that Iran is actively engaged in killing U.S. troops.

"Pickens" Not So Slim

T. Boone Pickens, oilman and financier, launched a low-key but effective campaign for his “Pickens Plan,” a call for energy independence that includes greater reliance on natural gas and wind power. He has more details on his web site.

What Do You See?

Graphic source: The New York Times

Satire reveals something real through stripping away the veneer. The cover depicts the worse fears of misunderstanding Americans who fear the worse the Obamas have to offer the U.S. It says little about the Obamas themselves but it is a satire of American misunderstandings. I don't think it demeans either Michelle or Barack at all. The laugh is on American ignorance of which there is much.

Japan Backs Out of Supporting Coalition

Japan backed out of an earlier commitment to dispatch its Self-Defence Forces (SDF) to Afghanistan now that the security situation has declined. Nonetheless, Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda's ruling party plans to extend a special law for another year that allows the SDF to continue refueling mission past January in the Indian Ocean to support the Coalition. Japan's war-renouncing constitution limits the SDF's use of arms outside of Japan which is of course a limitation that does not hinder AQAM (al-Qaeda and Allied Movements).

Six Ways to Wage Ideological Warfare on Islamism

Graphic source: Global Security


During a statement that aired in September 2007 Abu Yahya al-Libi, a prominent al-Qaeda recruiter, provided six ways to wage ideological warfare: highlight the views of jihadists who renounce violence; publicise stories about jihadist atrocities against Muslims; enlist Muslim religious leaders to denounce jihadists as heretics; back Islamic movements that emphasize politics over jihad; discredit and neutralize jihadist ideologues; and play up personal or doctrinal disputes among jihadists. This is a beginning. I would like to see any educational leaders in the West begin this path.

NASA Confirms Water Deltas on Mars

This is a color-enhanced image of the Jezero Crater delta on Mars which NASA scientists are saying once held a lake. Researchers contend that ancient rivers ferried clay-like minerals (shown in green) into the lake which formed a delta. Clays tend to trap and preserve organic matter which makes the delta a good place to look for signs of ancient life. Graphic credit: NASA/JPL/JHUAPL/MSSS/Brown University.

Some of the latest, dramatic photos have been released and scientists are confirming that what appeared on Mars for some time, deltas and rivers, are, in fact, deltas and rivers. This is a dramatic development nonetheless and confirms what we had thought about the Red planet. This confirmation has implications about the uniqueness of life on Earth. We may not have always been alone.

Mainstream Media and American Lack of Interest in Pakistani Threat

Despite the serious decline in security along the Pakistani border with Afghanistan I would not think much will come of it. A survey of the leading mainstream news outlets reveals a lack of interest. They simply note more troops may be needed in the area. The war on terrorism and the possibility that rogue elements in these areas seems to have fallen off the list of Washington's interests. No wonder the elephant continues to be attacked.

Petraeus Drawdown Exactly as Planned

Graphic source: September 2007 graph from Gen. Petraeus' testimony before Congress.

The U.S. is not undergoing an accelerated withdrawal as falsely reported by The New York Times. The pace for drawing down troops was publicly available and announced last year by General David Petraeus during his September 2007 testimony before Congress. The graph demonstrates that the current pace is following his plan. The U.S. military planned to draw down to 15 combat brigades by July which has happened and targeted a drawdown to 12 combat brigades by the end of this year. The decision to draw down to 12 brigades will be made sometime in September based on security considerations. In March of 2009, the U.S. will decide to draw down to about 10 combat brigades.

As noted by Bill Roggio, of the Long War Journal:

The reality is that as the media focused on deriding General Petraeus's testimony on the state of the security situation in Iraq, they ignored the military's assessments on the planned posture of U.S. forces in Iraq in 2008 and beyond. Now that the U.S. is moving forward with its plans, their failure to note the timeline last year is characterized as an acceleration.

The drawdown in Iraq is exactly as Petraeus announced it months ago.

Taliban Overrun Pakistani Outpost

With the Taliban developing a massive, coordinated attack which destroyed a Pakistani paramilitary fort in Hangu, I wonder how long the Pakistanis can claim sovereignty in the tribal regions. Afghanistan's President Karzai has virtually declared war against Pakistan in his most recent statement yesterday, critically for Coalition interests is that the Taliban have virtually free reign in the outlying districts. This has got to stop.

Afpak Lack of Sovereignty: Coalition Should Respond Vigorously

As AQ has slithered out of Iraq due to their recent losses the Afpak region has become a hotbed of fighting. In a massive attack insurgents tried to overun a Coalition base but they failed to take it. Although many insurgents were killed the Coalition lost 9 troops as well.

The security situation is grim because Pakistan seems unable to rule the largely lawless tribal regions. At the loss of our own troops, the Coalition can ill afford Pakistan's inability to reign in the Taliban and AQ. Pakistan's sovereignty is not absolute. It obviously must not be absolute or they would not have conceded areas to the insurgents. We can not continue to handicap our troops while they are in harm's way while the lawless attacks persist.

If Afpak can not secure its sovereignty and the training camps and insurgents continue uninhindered we have to act more vigorously. Afpak has abdicated their sovereignty thus these areas should be regarded as they are in other places and instances as under international law. In short, lawless, non-state territories, regarded as havens of piracy and brigandry, need to be dealt with forthwith.

The U.S. acted vigorously in fighting the Berber pirates, or in the intrusion of the U.S. across the border with Mexico to defeat Pancho Villa, and so we should act now.

We should not announce our attacks or ask for permission since we do not intend to occupy territory in Afpak, on the other hand, it might be possible to persuade Pashtun tribal leaders that the insurgents are no good for their areas. As in all precious areas, the locals eventually wise up and call for the removal of the insurgents and AQ. The locals would be better off backing the Coalition.

Special forces should be deployed in the tribal areas, if they are not already, and call on air strikes to defend against Taliban and AQ reprisals. High value targets of opportunity should be hit hard.

I would hope that the vacationing politicians in Washingon are advocating effective and forthright action.

Obama's Forged Birth Certificate and Pious Muslim Schooling

Graphic source: Israel Insider

An anomaly on the published document, and doubts of the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate by Hawaiian state officials, has clouded Obama's candidacy. Obama's published certificate does not contain the offical seal and authenticating marks on the document. An anomaly has been identified by certificate documents experts in regards to Obama's birth certificate, originally posted by Obama advocate Jay Mckinnon, which would indicate that Obama's certificate has been tampered with; and, coupled

Graphic source: Israel Insider

with the fact that Obama's half brother Malik has indicated that his brother was raised as a Muslim and attended a particularly devout Indonesian Muslim school, more serious doubts about Obama's background should be considered. The Fight the Smears website, an official Obama website does not address the issue or offer effective counter evidence. The site simply posts a copy of the tampered document.

Chinese Uyghur Situation a Golden Opportunity for U.S. Diplomacy

Map of the Western (purple) and Eastern (blue) Göktürk khaganates at their height, c. 600 CE. Lighter areas show direct rule; darker areas show spheres of influence. Graphic source: Wikipedia Commons

The Uyghur peoples of China are a Turkic people of Central Asia who live primarily in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (also known by its controversial name East Turkistan or Uyghurstan). In shades of widely dispersed ethnic groups, there are Uyghur diasporic communities in Pakistan, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Germany, Canada, Turkey, and a smaller one in Taoyuan County of Hunan province in south-central China, as well as in major Chinese cities like Beijing and Shanghai.

But that is not all. There is a U.S. connection as well which implies that their fate is somehow connected to the U.S. as well, as there are Uyghur enclaves in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City, and Washington, DC.

In a possible conflict the Uyghurs of China may ally themselves with their co-religionists, Muslims, throughout Asia and the Middle East. This situation presents an excellent opportunity for diplomacy. The Chinese can assist the Coalition, provide greater assets for security in the region, on the one had, yet the U.S. can promote human rights and disabuse China of the notion that it can repress Muslims indiscriminately. China is particularly apt to listen to world opinion currently as host of the Olympic Games. So how is China doing?

According to the Times of India:

Chinese authorities have replaced top police and security officials in the Muslim dominated Xinjiang province, which is the hotbed of separatism and political violence. They have also closed down 41 "illegal" places of worship.

Chinese authorities claimed the houses of worship were used as training grounds for conducting a "holy war." Xinjiang, which borders central Asia and Pakistan, has been tied to a pro-independence movement connected to its co-religionists across the border.

82 "suspected terrorists" have been held in the past six months in view of fears that they might disrupt the Olympic Games.

The re-organization brought one of the three new core commanders to the fore, Hanabati Sabukhaya, an officer from the Kazak race, since Xinjiang borders Kazakisthan and several other countries including Pakistan and Russia, the choices are based on age-old ethnic conflicts. This will no doubt increase the tension, or at least temporarily, quell the political opposition.

The opportunity will likely be lost on U.S. diplomatic efforts. The Islamic world largely is suspicious of U.S. foreign policy and one primary reason is that the U.S. makes little tangible efforts to protect the human rights of Muslims.

Map of the Uyghur Khaganate and areas under its dominion (in yellow) at its height(not correct) see Uyghur Empire, c. 820 CE. Graphic source: Wikipedia Commons

Robert Fisk, The Great War For Civilization: The Conquest of the Middle East

Although the thought of Noam Chomsky is amply represented in Fisk's journalistic tour-de-force in this work, he never acknowledges him and makes no reference to his ideas throughout. A reference to Chomsky does appear in the bibliography though but this is a form of dissembling from an otherwise forthright journalist.

Fisk's work is a fascinating study which waves his personal journalistic odyssey, psychological makeup, and family history into a compelling conquest narrative. "Bill," his war veteran father, gripped the teen age Fisk by trampling upon the hallowed British battlefields of his father's WW I battle memories.

Will Fisk reconcile his liberal, journalist's aversion to the horrors of war with his father's crotchety, war-scarred experience?

We won't know for sure but as readers we are offered a rare glimpse into the mind of a journalist who will be interpreting chaotic Middle Eastern violence through his lense of Chomsky and as a journalist haunted by his father's wartime memory.

Chomsky--Paul Berman tells us in Terror and Liberalism--holds that corporations greedily command the press and governments, and with these institutions at their behest, "drench the world in blood and misery" (p. 146). The freedom instinct though animates the human spirit to resist and the freedom instinct battles the greedy instinct. The battle between the two instincts explain nearly everything we see in world events.

As the Chomskyian view has unfolded and interpreted American foreign policy since the 1960s, Chomsky's analysis does not admit that pathological mass movements exist (Berman, 147). As described by Berman, we are all seduced by the attractive belief that "people are bound to behave in more or less reasonable ways in pursuit of normal and identifiable interests. It was a belief that the world is, by and large, a rational place" (Berman, 153). It is as Berman states: "In this country, we are all Noam Chomsky" (Berman, 153).

On the contrary, pathological mass movements, especially those based on faith, do exist. Blinded by Chomsky, Fisk is oblivious to what "should now be obvious to everyone that Muslims have more than their fair share of the latter," i.e., bad beliefs (Harris, The End of Faith, p. 108). Fisk is left with the lack of explanatory power inherent in many commentators who attribute the roots of Muslim violence on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the collusion of Western powers with corrupt dictatorships, and the endemic poverty and lack of economic opportunity plaguing the Middle East. He usually can not see that he is also dealing with Middle Eastern elites and the `best and the brightest' of Middle Eastern society.

As Harris comments, the usual explanations do not account for the virulent theological hair-splitting that characterizes political Islam. Harris states:
the world is filled with poor, uneducated, and exploited peoples who do not commit acts of terrorism, indeed who wold never commit terrorism of the sort that has become so commonplace among Muslims, and the Muslim world has no shortage of educated and prosperous men and women, suffering little more than their infatuation with Koranic eschatology, who are eager to murder infidels for God's sake (Harris, p. 109).

Not only poor and uneducated are willing Islamic terrorists but the educated Muslim elites are ardent jihadists.

Islam is a religion of struggle and of conquest. If it were not, the bloodshed between the rival claimants to Mohammed's mantle, Shia and Sunni, would have reconciled long ago. But without the equivalent of a Reformation movement, the Koran is seen as a document as if wafted down the clouds from heaven, and all human actions are seen as subject to divine review. The Koran is beyond reproach or is not critically examined.

Indeed, one of the central propositions of Western thought is self-criticism (Paul Cartledge, Thermopylae, p. 205). The West is not beyond reproach but it is a tradition that reflects upon itself, criticizes the tradition, and re-applies and innovates with new ideas. Fisk describes Amira Hass, for example, the Israeli journalist who lives, voluntarily, though some might argue foolishly, in Ramallah in the heart of the Palestinian homeland. There is reflection and self-criticism in this valiant perspective.

Although the conquest, and the failure to grasp the futility of not criticizing received Islamic thought occurs before his eyes, Fisk only sees the conquest characterized by his psychology and his own private battle with inheriting British culture. Fisk sees: The West vs. Middle East, Christian vs. Muslim, Israeli vs. Palestinian, Power vs. conquest--all mediated as his conflict with "Bill," his father.

Fisk writes of "an arrogance of power" (p. xxi) as "the sins of fathers visited upon their children" (p. xxii). Indeed, Fisk is reporting "Bill" vs. Fisk. Fisk reflects that in 1992 he "stood upon the very paving stone"
where "Gavrilo Princep stood as he fired the fatal shot that sent my father to the trenches of the First World War. . . . That was the year in which my father died. This is therefore the story of his generation. And of mine (p. xxii).

Fisk is reporting his personal struggle and conquest of his father.

The parallels continue in Fisk's odyssey. The British descend on Afghanistan resulting in a series of British-Afghan Wars (1838-42, 1878-80, 1919-21) only to leave their dead behind. During the period of British aggression Bill is dispatched to fight in WW I; and while reporting, Fisk surveys early British accounts of Afghanistan characterized by "British heroism" and "Muslim savagery" (p. 35).

This survey will in turn be undone by Westerners such as British soldiers. And, the West will get what it has coming to it as a result.

In an account such as this then, the Ottoman slaughter of Armenians, although related, is not seen as a Middle Eastern atrocity. Fisk describes it as the "First Holocaust." Haven't the Germans flagellated themselves over the Holocaust? Have the Turks?

Fisk does not equate Middle Eastern atrocities as in the same class as Western intrusions in his detailed presentation of material. For example, on 17 May 1987 the USS Stark was hit by Iraqi Mirage missiles in the Persian Gulf where 37 American sailors were incinerated (p. 215). In this tragic mistake no human details are provided about the American sailors. They barely seem to exist. They don't have names and we do not learn anything personal about them. The only voices that are heard belong to impersonal U.S. government officials and statements.

Yet, an almost exact parallel exists in the unfortunate and mistaken shooting of the Iranian Airbus on 3 July 1988 by the U.S. but according to Fisk has an "appalling human dimension" (p. 259). Fisk details the human aspect of the atrocity and describes the families, the horror, and the sickening maiming of limbs and the deaths at American hands.

This is by no means the only human atrocity committed by the Americans. Fisk tells us of Raafat al-Ghossain, who dies at the hands of an American bomb in Libya on 15 April 1986. The eighteen year old artist, on holiday from school in England, and the family, wealthy Palestinian refugees live and work in Libya. Yes, there is the photograph of Raafat taking part in several Palestinian demonstrations in England Fisk tells us, but never mind, we are provided with an insight into her hopes, dreams, laments, and the desire for her to return to the family's Palestinian homeland. In any case, she fell victim to American bombing.

What are we to make of this? In a world where there are no innocents, no one is innocent.

The possibility that Raafat was a more dangerous student radical, or someone simply at the wrong place at the wrong time does not occur to Fisk. The American bombing, or acts brought on at least as much by Libyan leader Khadafi's intransigence, as American hard-line bombing strategy, is not entertained.

Fisk seems to miss that human cruelty and atrocities are the monopoly of no one. There are many losers in the appallingly inhuman atrocities in the clashes of the Middle East. Arafat, the betrayer of Palestine, comes off easily in Fisk's account. Why?

However, the banality of atrocities, and the unflinching Middle Eastern cultural value of death seems to escape Fisk's grasp. He can lament the deaths of ordinary persons of any culture, and I believe rightfully so, but Muslim v. Muslim atrocities, regardless of how outrageous, fail to elicit a response.

Most troubling though is the discussion of post-colonial Algeria. Granted France performed horribly in Algeria but how long can France be held responsible for post-independence civil wars? The tricks of government, according to Fisk, were learned from the French during the colonial era. Its as if the 1990s Islamic internecine struggles were somehow immune from inventing their own diabolical means of destruction (p. 522-585). "The Plot" is Algerian paranoia though which saw the U.S. behind every bush (p. 546). Dialogue with Islamists was thought to be suspect as well. If anything, the U.S. hoped the Islamic conflict could be resolved. Even when the Islamists and the Algerian government commit mutual, despicable horrors, even invoking the Koran's blessing, Fisk fails to criticize (p. 548). Though the U.S. was not present during the horror, according to Fisk though, they can be criticized for arriving with too little, too late, along with the U.N. which should bear responsibility for human rights abuses (p. 585). Its damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of thinking. The section on Algeria is not for the faint of heart. Do not eat before reading this section.

Why do Islamic societies produce such heinous abuses of humanity? I would certainly like to know. If there is no Plot, because we know the U.S. has no designs on backwater places like Algeria or Libya, why are the Islamists so brutal? Why is there so much killing and bloodshed? Fisk does not tell us.

At some level, Westeners, including Fisk, are profoundly motivated to act with integrity, compassion, and reflect seriously on their behavior. I fear Fisk is seduced by the same phantasmal (Michael B. Oren, Power, Faith, and Fantasy, pp. 13-14) force that has clouded so many Western observers. He seems though to have no expectation of somewhat reasonable behavior by his informants, though in at least one instance he himself has to fear for his physical safety while under personal attack in Afghanistan.

I hope Mr. Fisk can resolve his issues of self-flagellation through which he sees the Middle East, or the Other, and in that way overcome how his father never accepted the basic humanity of the Other during his wartime experience. Fisk is filled with outstanding powers of observation, and he is an extremely important source because of his early access and interviews with Bin Laden (Michael Scheuer, Through Our Enemies Eyes, pp. 408-09), his journalistic relationship with Arafat, and his touching descriptions of ordinary Middle Easterners and their experience. His reporting though is tainted by a naivete about his subjects. The Middle East, as anyone will tell you, is a rough neighborhood.

Fisk defines war early on as "about death and the infliction of death" (xviii). Yes, Mr. Fisk, you got that right.

Benjamin Franklin Opposes Surveillance

ACLU Challenges Surveillance Law

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and several other groups filed a lawsuit to counter a law allowing the U.S. government to intercept the phone calls and e-mail messages of people with suspected ties to terrorism.

The ACLU is opposing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act.

As approved by the Senate on Wednesday, the law allows the U.S. National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies to conduct surveillance of a wide range of people "reasonably believed" to be outside the U.S. The law also will likely require a U.S. court to dismiss more than 40 lawsuits that have been filed against telecommunication carriers that allegedly participated in the NSA program before there was court oversight of the surveillance.

The FISA Amendments Act still allows broad, un-targeted surveillance, including spying on U.S. residents who are talking with people overseas, said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security Project.

The law allows the "massive acquisition of U.S. citizens' and residents' international communications," Jaffer added. "It permits the government to conduct intrusive surveillance without ever telling the court who it intends to surveil, what phone lines or e-mail it intends to monitor, where the surveillance targets are located, or why it is conducting the surveillance."

The new law violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, prohibiting the government from unreasonable searches and seizures, the ACLU said.

Author and journalist Chris Hedges, former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times, stated that the FISA Amendments Act will make it difficult for journalists, especially those who report on overseas issues, to do their jobs. The difficulty is in determining whether journalists, since they are reasonably outside the U.S., are subject to surveillance. The new law impacts negatively on the First Amendment because Congress is not to prohibit the freedom of the press.

Hedges raised questions on whether the law will negatively effect the voices of "whistle-blowers, human-rights activists, dissidents, true-tellers and people with a conscience to rise up and speak against the audacity of those in power."

In 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit threw out a similar lawsuit against the surveillance program brought by the ACLU because they didn't have standing to sue the government in that they couldn't demonstrate they were targeted by the secret program.

Amendment IV states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The new law abrogates the citizen's rights to be secure in the person and their papers. Its a bad law that has not been proven to be effective in thwarting terrorism.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -- Benjamin Franklin