PDA

View Full Version : 6 men charged in plot to attack Fort Dix



Kiko
8th May 07, 05:00 PM
Six foreign-born Muslims were arrested and accused Tuesday of plotting to attack the Army's Fort Dix and massacre scores of U.S. soldiers — a plot the FBI says was foiled when the men took a video of themselves firing assault weapons to a store to have the footage put onto a DVD.

The defendants, all men in their 20s from the former Yugoslavia and the Middle East, include a pizza deliveryman suspected of using his job to scout out the military base.

Their goal was "to kill as many American soldiers as possible" in attacks with mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and guns, prosecutors said.

"Today we dodged a bullet. In fact, when you look at the type of weapons that this group was trying to purchase, we may have dodged a lot of bullets," said FBI agent J.P. Weiss.

"We had a group that was forming a platoon to take on an army. They identified their target, they did their reconnaissance. They had maps. And they were in the process of buying weapons. Luckily, we were able to stop that."

Authorities said there was no direct evidence connecting the men to any international terror organizations such as al-Qaida. But several of them said they were ready to kill and die "in the name of Allah," according to court papers.

Investigators said they infiltrated the group with an informant well over a year ago and bided their time while they secretly recorded the defendants, five of whom lived in Cherry Hill, a Philadelphia suburb about 20 miles from Fort Dix.

"This is what law enforcement is supposed to do in the post-9/11 era — stay one step ahead of those who are attempting to cause harm to innocent American citizens," U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie said.

Weiss saluted the unidentified New Jersey store clerk who noticed the suspicious video as the "unsung hero" of the case. "That's why we're here today — because of the courage and heroism of that individual," the FBI agent said.

In addition to plotting the attack on Fort Dix, the defendants spoke of attacking a Navy installation in Philadelphia during the annual Army-Navy football game and conducted surveillance at other military installations in the region, prosecutors said.

One defendant, Eljvir Duka, was recorded as saying: "In the end, when it comes to defending your religion, when someone ... attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad."

The six were arrested Monday night trying to buy AK-47 assault weapons, M-16s and other weapons from an FBI informant, authorities said.

They appeared in federal court Tuesday in Camden and were ordered held without bail for a hearing Friday. Five were charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. military personnel; the sixth was charged with aiding and abetting illegal immigrants in obtaining weapons.

Four of the men were born in the former Yugoslavia, one was born in Jordan and one came from Turkey, authorities said. All had lived in the United States for years. Three were in the United States illegally; two had green cards allowing them to stay in this country permanently; and the sixth is a U.S. citizen.

One defendant, Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer, spoke of using rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons to kill at least 100 soldiers, according to court documents.

"My intent is to hit a heavy concentration of soldiers," he was quoted as saying. "You hit four, five or six Humvees and light the whole place (up) and retreat completely without any losses."

"It doesn't matter to me whether I get locked up, arrested or get taken away," another defendant, Serdar Tatar, was alleged to have said. "Or I die, it doesn't matter. I'm doing it in the name of Allah."

The men trained by playing paintball in the woods in New Jersey and taking target practice at a firing range in Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains, where they had rented a house, authorities said.

They often watched terror training videos, clips featuring Osama bin Laden, a tape containing the last will and testament of some of the Sept. 11 hijackers, and tapes of armed attacks on U.S. military personnel, erupting in laughter when one plotter noted that a Marine's arm was blown off in an ambush, authorities said.

Asked if those arrested had any links to al-Qaida, White House spokesman Tony Snow said it appears "there is no direct evidence of a foreign terrorist tie."

The FBI's Weiss said the U.S. is seeing a "brand-new form of terrorism," involving smaller, more loosely defined groups that may not be connected to al-Qaida but are inspired by its ideology.

"These homegrown terrorists can prove to be as dangerous as any known group, if not more so. They operate under the radar," Weiss said.

In court documents, prosecutors said the suspects came to the attention of authorities in January 2006 when a Mount Laurel, N.J., shopkeeper alerted the FBI about a "disturbing" video he had been asked to copy onto a DVD.

The video showed 10 young men in their early 20s "shooting assault weapons at a firing range ... while calling for jihad and shouting in Arabic 'Allah Akbar' (God is great)," the complaint said. The 10 included six of those arrested, authorities said.

By March 2006, the group had been infiltrated by an informant who developed a relationship with Shnewer, and the informant secretly recorded meetings last August, according to court documents.

One of the suspects, Tatar, worked at his father's pizzeria and made deliveries to the base, using the opportunity to scout out Fort Dix for an attack, authorities said.

"Clearly, one of the guys had an intimate knowledge of the base from having been there delivering pizzas," Christie said.

The men also allegedly conducted surveillance at other area military installations, including Fort Monmouth in New Jersey, Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, and a Philadelphia Coast Guard station.

Besides Shnewer, Tatar and Duka, the other three men were identified in court papers as Dritan Duka, Shain Duka and Agron Abdullahu.

Fort Dix is used to train soldiers, particularly reservists. It also housed refugees from Kosovo in 1999.

The description of the suspects as "Islamic militants" caused renewed worry among New Jersey's Muslim community. Hundreds of Muslim men from New Jersey were rounded up and detained in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, but none were connected to that plot.

"If these people did something, then they deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law," said Sohail Mohammed, a lawyer who represented scores of detainees after the 2001 attacks. "But when the government says `Islamic militants,' it sends a message to the public that Islam and militancy are synonymous."

"Don't equate actions with religion," he said.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070508/ap_on_re_us/fort_dix_plot;_ylt=A0WTcUQy7kBGpJ8AMAPMWM0F)

Truculent Sheep
8th May 07, 06:56 PM
Idiots! If they had tried to pull it off, we could all have had a good laugh as they were splattered over the state before they could take aim...

(Note the irony that four of the wannabes were from the Balkans, yet they were attacking a base that provided a refuge for... Kosovan Muslims!)

Stick
8th May 07, 11:25 PM
OK, granted the only people on base who acutally walk around armed are MPs and often enough they don't even have ammo on them, but I can't see these twits pulling off an attack with guns, mortars, and RPGS and being able to get away alive. I mean, honestly, they assumed they could get 100 casualties and get away scott free.

Truly delusional.

These guys were not the sharpest tools in the shed. Seriously..... they wanted their training video converted to DVD so they took it to a shop >_< Morons.

Perhaps one of the greatest tidbits to come out of this story; check out the attached affidavit. (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0508071ftdix1.html)

The first line.


I, John J. Ryan, am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

That's right ladies and gentlemen, this terrorist plot has been foiled by none other than Jack Ryan.

DerAuslander108
8th May 07, 11:46 PM
We're lucky they were stupid.

Cormoran
9th May 07, 12:04 AM
You'd think that if you were gonna tape yourself shooting guns in preparation for jihad you could, for atleast the time your recording, lay off the whole screaming "allah akbar!" thing. Or, if you absolutely must do that, maybe copy and encode the video at home.


The description of the suspects as "Islamic militants" caused renewed worry among New Jersey's Muslim community. Hundreds of Muslim men from New Jersey were rounded up and detained in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, but none were connected to that plot.

"If these people did something, then they deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law," said Sohail Mohammed, a lawyer who represented scores of detainees after the 2001 attacks. "But when the government says `Islamic militants,' it sends a message to the public that Islam and militancy are synonymous."

"Don't equate actions with religion," he said.

Whilst "fucking idiots" might be a more apt description, it was them which equated their actions with their religion, not the people reporting it.

Yiktin Voxbane
9th May 07, 12:46 AM
That's right ladies and gentlemen, this terrorist plot has been foiled by none other than Jack Ryan.

Pfffft

Jack Bauer > Chuck Norris > Jack Ryan

True story ...

DerAuslander108
9th May 07, 01:08 AM
These guys are beneath Jack Bauer.

Stick
9th May 07, 03:54 AM
Hey, Jack Ryan is the fucking man!

Matsufubu
9th May 07, 04:36 AM
I was going to say that it's pretty ballsey to attack a military base, but then I realised that they were delusional idiots.

I personally think that they would have been owned, but at least they didn't get the chance to cause even a single casualty.

Oh yes, and LOL @ terrorists training by playing paintball.

ergo
9th May 07, 09:04 AM
"If these people did something, then they deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law," said Sohail Mohammed, a lawyer who represented scores of detainees after the 2001 attacks. "But when the government says `Islamic militants,' it sends a message to the public that Islam and militancy are synonymous."

"Don't equate actions with religion," he said.
Fine, but don't equate actions with ideology, philosophy or personal feelings either. Don't equate them with anything. Actions have no cause or reason, they just happen. Therefore, not even the Iraq occupation has any reason, so why are Muslims so upset about it? It just happened. Nobody is responsible and nobody is at fault.

The only reason why people might equate Islam with violence is because Islam produces so much of it. Maybe the Overwhelming Majority of Peaceful Muslims should do something about that, instead of just covering their asses after something has already happened.


(Note the irony that four of the wannabes were from the Balkans, yet they were attacking a base that provided a refuge for... Kosovan Muslims!)
Someone noticed (http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=37).

Shawarma
9th May 07, 09:39 AM
This is frustrating. Can't these people do ANYTHING right?

ironlurker
9th May 07, 11:49 AM
One of the interesting things this case points out is the importance of social networking, especially on old familial and geographical origin ties, to nominally Muslim terrorists.
The stereotype of Mosques being terrorist havens or headquarters is generally incorrect. Terrorists will usually, like these guys, work through face to face contact and family/work relationships, the good ol' days in Albania, etc.

This page has some great links to essays and studies on social network theory and terrorism:
http://www.orgnet.com/hijackers.html

Shawarma
9th May 07, 12:12 PM
Wouldn't it be more correct to say that there ARE certain mosques that are little else but terror factories, even if mosques in general are fairly harmless?

ergo
9th May 07, 12:14 PM
The stereotype of Mosques being terrorist havens or headquarters is generally incorrect.
I don't know how much mosques are directly involved with terrorism, but many of them preach Jihadist rhetoric, and therefore turn a blind eye to extremists.

Thinkchair
9th May 07, 01:34 PM
One of the interesting things this case points out is the importance of social networking, especially on old familial and geographical origin ties, to nominally Muslim terrorists.
The stereotype of Mosques being terrorist havens or headquarters is generally incorrect. Terrorists will usually, like these guys, work through face to face contact and family/work relationships, the good ol' days in Albania, etc.

This page has some great links to essays and studies on social network theory and terrorism:
http://www.orgnet.com/hijackers.html

I have not heard that much about this guy, Valdis Krebs, and his theory seems a little peculiar. Might be something to it I suppose. It really is just stating the obvious. Of course social networking is going help shape terror cells. But since they are religiously guided, it seems like you cannot just take the mosque out of the equation. Keep in mind that a mosque, like a church, is where a great deal of social networking takes place. The internet is also a place where people network. A mosque remains a likely place for terrorists to meet and recruit. That does not mean all mosques are breeding terrorists, and even when a mosque is involved, it may not play a direct role; being only a meeting ground.

DerAuslander108
9th May 07, 01:44 PM
Jack Ryan got pimp slapped with a Glock by Willem DeFoe.

Jack Bauer gets pimp slapped by no man, especially not a gay FBI agent.

ironlurker
9th May 07, 04:31 PM
That does not mean all mosques are breeding terrorists, and even when a mosque is involved, it may not play a direct role; being only a meeting ground.
This is what I am getting at. IMHO this operation that uncovered the plot against Fort Dix shows the most effective way to carry out counter-terrorism, using pre-established social networks and informants with regional/familial/geographic origin ties.

Yes, a mosque is a meeting place, quite more so then a church or a synagogue is. This is what makes the approach of viewing Muslims via mosques problematic, especially so in cases of terrorism.

For example, a Muslim may pray at one mosque during the week while he's a work, due to proximity and convenience, another one for the Friday prayer near his home with his family, and another one during holidays with his extended family some distance away. There is no sense of "membership" in the way that a Catholic belongs to a particular parish or a Jewish family might be enrolled in a synagogue. Congregational churches literally demand references when you move and want to join another one.

A mosque is in many ways a town square (it's actually not a "sacred place" as the retardedly misleading national media says). In larger mosques access is basically not controled with the exception of highly inappropriate conduct/attire. If you walk in off the street and act like you know what you're doing you will not be asked who you are, why you're there, etc. Exceptions to this would be small mosques in very ethnically bounded communities, i.e. all bengali etc.
There's not a lot of control, if any, exerted over who's there and who goes in and out- especially, as I said, if they do not attract attention to themselves.

So, the first reason it's ineffective to hunt down terrorists via mosques qua mosques is this whole lack of membership/transient population factor.
If you decide "this mosque is a terrorist nexus" you'll have to sort and shift through tons of guys like the one I described above who are there to pray on their lunch break, and really have no idea/could care less about what the other people are doing.

The second fact is the fact that even if they "meet", literally, in the mosque, and you say "well I'll just hang around until they start terroristing", you're going to need specialized knowledge and connections.

For example, after prayers in a mosque, you can see people standing around and speaking Egyptian Arabic, Urdu, French, Pashtun, Somalian, etc. You'll have no idea whats going on unless you speak the language of whichever particular group you're interested in. Note how Khalid Sheikh Mohammed wrote his letters in Baluchistani- no terrorist is going to speak english in a public situation for your benefit. My guess would be that the FBI doesn't have hundreds of agents who speak Pashtun, Albanian, or Baluchistani, that can sit around in mosques for hours on the off-chance of picking up a plot.
The answer = use informants through the established networks. It's not about "muslism r t3h good" or "muslims r t3h bad" it's simply a matter of efficiency.

Stick
9th May 07, 04:42 PM
Jack Ryan got pimp slapped with a Glock by Willem DeFoe.

Jack Bauer gets pimp slapped by no man, especially not a gay FBI agent.

Pffffft, John Clarke would fucking eat Jack Bauer.

Thinkchair
9th May 07, 04:46 PM
The second fact is the fact that even if they "meet", literally, in the mosque, and you say "well I'll just hang around until they start terroristing", you're going to need specialized knowledge and connections.

For example, after prayers in a mosque, you can see people standing around and speaking Egyptian Arabic, Urdu, French, Pashtun, Somalian, etc. You'll have no idea whats going on unless you speak the language of whichever particular group you're interested in. Note how Khalid Sheikh Mohammed wrote his letters in Baluchistani- no terrorist is going to speak english in a public situation for your benefit. My guess would be that the FBI doesn't have hundreds of agents who speak Pashtun, Albanian, or Baluchistani, that can sit around in mosques for hours on the off-chance of picking up a plot.
The answer = use informants through the established networks. It's not about "muslism r t3h good" or "muslims r t3h bad" it's simply a matter of efficiency.

This is why the counter terrorist operatives need to know a number of languages, not just Arabic. Unfortunately, you are correct, the FBI needs to get more people who speak Obscure South Asian, and Middle Eastern Languages. Countrary to what you say, there are mosques that have attracted followers with extreme views, and been the center of terrorist plots. Infiltrating mosques is still a good starting point for investigations. This might not actually mean sending agents into mosques, but deceloping contacts within them who can act as informants. Also, while membership at a mosque is not the same as it is in a church, people do tend to go to the same mosque over time. Followers tend to be attracted to mosques because of the messages they encounter at them.

ironlurker
9th May 07, 05:16 PM
Infiltrating mosques is still a good starting point for investigations.
Thinkchair you, yourself, can go and "infiltrate" a mosque tonight. Let me give you a tip: walk in through the door. If you think you're going to find crowds of people mixing ammonum nitrate and discussing ciruit boards, you're retarded. Any terrorists who are there will be a) speaking a language you don't understand (and by that I mean regional dialect or obscure language, I think you said before you knew Arabic) and/or b) ZOMG they'll go someplace -else- to make their plans in privacy where people they don't know -always possible if not probable at a mosque- aren't present to overhear.

"Infiltrating" doesn't make much sense because mosques are not like the old Eddie Murphy skit about what white people do when black people aren't around. It's pretty much the same old, same old.

Now, I'll give a counter example to what I've been saying, the mosque involved with both WTC attacks:

The Masjid Al-Salam, an unadorned storefront mosque on top of a Chinese takeout and a jewellery store, has a note tacked up inside with a stern warning: Those who do not belong to this Muslim community will be prosecuted for trespassing. [emphasis added]
Leaving behind the gritty rows of Dollar Stores and pizzerias on Kennedy Boulevard, a main thoroughfare in this gateway to New Jersey . . .

This mosque, after all, gave a platform to Omar Abdel-Rahman, the blind cleric believed to be the spiritual leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, who is serving a life sentence for conspiring to blow up the United Nations building.
Two of the more than 1,000 people arrested in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks lived in an apartment building around the corner from the Mosque of Peace, and are said to have worshipped here.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/islamic/islamic38.html

This is probably the closest you can get to an example of mosque=terrorist nerve center. Notice -it's a little hole in the wall, and they likely know everyone inside by sight. It's going to be very, very tough for anyone with no connections or relationships with its members to become fully accepted. This is the exception that proves the rule -any would-be terrorists in an average mosque will keep quietly to themselves and will be very hard to pick out, especially on the spur of the moment, people in obviously controversial places like this are going to be heavily guarded in their interactions with outsiders.
So, if you just say "sweep the mosques" in general you're going to burn off the exact people you'll need for operations like the one in this thread.

Thinkchair
9th May 07, 05:36 PM
Thinkchair you, yourself, can go and "infiltrate" a mosque tonight. Let me give you a tip: walk in through the door. If you think you're going to find crowds of people mixing ammonum nitrate and discussing ciruit boards, you're retarded. Any terrorists who are there will be a) speaking a language you don't understand (and by that I mean regional dialect or obscure language, I think you said before you knew Arabic) and/or b) ZOMG they'll go someplace -else- to make their plans in privacy where people they don't know -always possible if not probable at a mosque- aren't present to overhear.

"Infiltrating" doesn't make much sense because mosques are not like the old Eddie Murphy skit about what white people do when black people aren't around. It's pretty much the same old, same old.

Now, I'll give a counter example to what I've been saying, the mosque involved with both WTC attacks:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/islamic/islamic38.html

This is probably the closest you can get to an example of mosque=terrorist nerve center. Notice -it's a little hole in the wall, and they likely know everyone inside by sight. It's going to be very, very tough for anyone with no connections or relationships with its members to become fully accepted. This is the exception that proves the rule -any would-be terrorists in an average mosque will keep quietly to themselves and will be very hard to pick out, especially on the spur of the moment, people in obviously controversial places like this are going to be heavily guarded in their interactions with outsiders.
So, if you just say "sweep the mosques" in general you're going to burn off the exact people you'll need for operations like the one in this thread.

You are missing the point. First to even work in counter terrorism for the FBI you cannot just speak classical or modern standard arabic, you have to speak a number of dialects as well. The FBI does have people who are fluent arabic speakers and can speak a number of dialects. Second, I am not saying you are going to go in and see people planning terrorist attacks in the open. But the mosque is a good way to work agents into the different muslim communities in America. Of course it is not going to be easy, but it is not easy to infiltrate drug rings either. It is one avenue, and certainly not the only avenue to gain entry into muslim communities where there might be terrorist cells. If only because, there is likely to be a large number of muslims inside a mosque. You would not have agents there to overhear plans like in a bad spy movie. They would be there to network. Ideally the agents pose as impressionable and even angry muslim men, making themselves good candidates for recrtuitment by people invovled in terrorism.

Yes I do know Arabic, but not nearly enough to be a counter terrorist agent. I know modern standard, classical and some of the Palestinian dialect. I was not suggesting that I be the person to infiltrate mosques. However there are people who are more than qualified to do so working for the government, many of them middle east natives.

DerAuslander108
10th May 07, 12:16 AM
Pffffft, John Clarke would fucking eat Jack Bauer.

I might give you that...but not Jack Ryan.

ergo
10th May 07, 08:23 AM
You are missing the point. First to even work in counter terrorism for the FBI you cannot just speak classical or modern standard arabic, you have to speak a number of dialects as well.
Well that's pretty odd considering that only an insignificantly tiny microscopic minority of Muslims even hypothetically contemplate the thought of possible terrorism, so clearly there is little need for counter-terrorism agents who are fluent in Middle-Eastern languages and dialects. They should concentrate on Christian and Jewish terrorists because they're the biggest threat.

Stick
10th May 07, 09:05 AM
Well that's pretty odd considering that only an insignificantly tiny microscopic minority of Muslims even hypothetically contemplate the thought of possible terrorism, so clearly there is little need for counter-terrorism agents who are fluent in Middle-Eastern languages and dialects. They should concentrate on Christian and Jewish terrorists because they're the biggest threat.

This made me giggle.

Thinkchair
10th May 07, 09:26 AM
Well that's pretty odd considering that only an insignificantly tiny microscopic minority of Muslims even hypothetically contemplate the thought of possible terrorism, so clearly there is little need for counter-terrorism agents who are fluent in Middle-Eastern languages and dialects. They should concentrate on Christian and Jewish terrorists because they're the biggest threat.

This is an astute observation. I would like to add that in our pursuit of Christian and Jewish Terrorists, we should not attempt to infiltrate them through Churches and Synagogues. We would only be confused by the richness of their culture, and the dizzying array of dialects. Which raises another point. English and Hebrew should in no be part of our counter terrorism program for these groups. The majority of Christians world wide speak languages like Spanish. But there are so many linguistic variations here, we don't even need to bother. Jewish terrorists will probably not conduct their plans in Hebrew, but Arabic (to throw us off), so Jews who talk about terrorism in Hebrew should not be paid any attention to. Clearly our only hope of success lies in learning the intricacies of New Zealand culture, and developing a top notch Maori Language program. But those New Zealanders are crafty and will probably conduct their operations in an obscure dialect of Bislama and other pidgin tongues.

Yiktin Voxbane
10th May 07, 09:33 AM
MacGuyver can build a plane from a paper-clip an a discarded tissue, but Jack Bauer can kill Mac and fly dat bad boy outta there ...

ironlurker
10th May 07, 10:25 AM
But those New Zealanders are crafty and will probably conduct their operations in an obscure dialect of Bislama and other pidgin tongues.
As usual, you begin with an endpoint and then work backwards to justify it, totally oversimplifying things along the way.

My argument: study and research on social networks based on familial, geographical, and social ties is incredibly more efficient than the simplistic mindset of "infiltrating" mosques.

Thinkchair, I'd love for just once for you to produce any evidence.


Sageman refutes all these notions, showing that, for the vast majority of the mujahedin, social bonds predated ideological commitment, and it was these social networks that inspired alienated young Muslims to join the jihad. These men, isolated from the rest of society, were transformed into fanatics yearning for martyrdom and eager to kill. The tight bonds of family and friendship, paradoxically enhanced by the tenuous links between the cell groups (making it difficult for authorities to trace connections), contributed to the jihad movement's flexibility and longevity. And although Sageman's systematic analysis highlights the crucial role the networks played in the terrorists' success, he states unequivocally that the level of commitment and choice to embrace violence were entirely their own. http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/14036.html


What social network analysis contributes to counter-terrorism is the ability to map the invisible dynamics inside a terrorist community. The methodology draws upon graphical representation in exploring and presenting the patterns displayed by structuraldata.
In 2000, the Central Intelligence Agency identified al-Qaeda suspects Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar attending a meeting in Malaysia. The mapping of the links between the terrorists involved in the WTC attacks shows that all 19 hijackers were within two degrees from these original suspects, while they also had multiple ties back into the network,
Another logical inference is that measurable differences in cohesiveness shouldhave predictive consequences for social groups and their members across many differentsocial contexts.
In terms of counter-terrorism, this is a clear, predictive model which canbe utilized for the optimization of effort and resources. It’s not merely a case of getting the most “bang for the buck”, but it is an ideal mid-range solution for empiricallyvalidated scientific research to provide a typology which allows groups to becharacterized in such a way that when resources are directed at preventing the group from
executing terrorist attacks, the resources are used in an operationally efficient fashion
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:nICnhFzhexQJ:www.psych.lse.ac.uk/complexity/Conference/FellmanWright.pdf+terrorism+social+networking&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20&gl=us


People in Zutphen may have been surprised, but terrorism suspects from atypical backgrounds are becoming increasingly common in Western Europe. With new plots surfacing every month, police across Europe are arresting significant numbers of women, teenagers, white-skinned suspects and people baptized as Christians -- groups that in the past were considered among the least likely to embrace Islamic radicalism.
The demographics of those being arrested are so diverse that many European counterterrorism officials and analysts say they have given up trying to predict what sorts of people are most likely to become terrorists. Age, sex, ethnicity, education and economic status have become more and more irrelevant . . .
[note- yes, most terrorists are still Muslims, but from a million different regions and backgrounds that makes profiling incredibly inefficient]

In London, eight male al-Qaeda suspects are currently on trial for an alleged plot to blow up unspecified targets in Britain with bombs made of ammonium nitrate, a common ingredient in fertilizers. According to testimony at the trial, which began in March 2006, the defendants persuaded a Canadian woman, whom they had met on the Internet, to wire money on their behalf because she was less likely to attract suspicion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/11/AR2007031101618_3.html

Efficiency is what they mean by "bang for the buck."
Finding full-time people with the appropriate language skills and having them sit in mosques waiting to hear about plans is not efficient.

Specific mosques, such as the example I gave of Masjid as-Salam, may be worthy of targeting- but these mosques have a very restrictive, small congregration that will be difficult to "infiltrate", and no matter how much you deny it, terrorists do not sit around in front of people they don't know talking about their plans. <- Note, this is called a "disconfirming observation", when you're writing on a social science subject and you actually want to sound credible, it's good to point out possible exceptions.

If you've read any of the articles on this planned attack on Fort-Dix, these guys went "occaisionally" to "rarely" to the mosque.
They were brothers from the same town in Albania = social network.

This is the exact type of terrorist attempts we are going to see more often, and -despite your objections- the government handled this exactly the way they should have- by using informants with pre-established social/regional/family ties.
If the American government wants to get a steady supply of such cooperation, mass sweeps, detention, and clumsy, blatantly obvious surveillance of all mosque-goers is counter-productive.

I'm glad, though, that you try humor now instead of "fuck you" when you're called on blatantly oversimplfying an issue. Next you can evolve a flagellum and an eyespot and make some attampt to swim towards the light.

Thinkchair
10th May 07, 10:39 AM
As usual, you begin with an endpoint and then work backwards to justify it, totally oversimplifying things along the way.

My argument: study and research on social networks based on familial, geographical, and social ties is incredibly more efficient than the simplistic mindset of "infiltrating" mosques.

Thinkchair, I'd love for just once for you to produce any evidence.

http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/14036.html

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:nICnhFzhexQJ:www.psych.lse.ac.uk/complexity/Conference/FellmanWright.pdf+terrorism+social+networking&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20&gl=us

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/11/AR2007031101618_3.html

Efficiency is what they mean by "bang for the buck."
Finding full-time people with the appropriate language skills and having them sit in mosques waiting to hear about plans is not efficient.

Specific mosques, such as the example I gave of Masjid as-Salam, may be worthy of targeting- but these mosques have a very restrictive, small congregration that will be difficult to "infiltrate", and no matter how much you deny it, terrorists do not sit around in front of people they don't know talking about their plans. <- Note, this is called a "disconfirming observation", when you're writing on a social science subject and you actually want to sound credible, it's good to point out possible exceptions.

If you've read any of the articles on this planned attack on Fort-Dix, these guys went "occaisionally" to "rarely" to the mosque.
They were brothers from the same town in Albania = social network.

This is the exact type of terrorist attempts we are going to see more often, and -despite your objections- the government handled this exactly the way they should have- by using informants with pre-established social/regional/family ties.
If the American government wants to get a steady supply of such cooperation, mass sweeps, detention, and clumsy, blatantly obvious surveillance of all mosque-goers is counter-productive.

I'm glad, though, that you try humor now instead of "fuck you" when you're called on blatantly oversimplfying an issue. Next you can evolve a flagellum and an eyespot and make some attampt to swim towards the light.

All I am saying is that Mosques are part of social networking and a worthy target of investigation, if only to learn what the "muslim street" in America is saying. As for informants, I was advocating the use of informants in prior posts. You are confusing infiltration with surveillance, which are two different things entirely. There should be agents or informants in every mosque deemed important by the feds. You are advocating placing all our eggs in one basket, which is simply foolish. The best approach to fighting terrorism, would be a multi pronged approach. You are presenting an either or scenario, which it is not. It is not a choice between infiltrating mosques, and the social networking approach. We must do both. It seems to me, that social networking captures part of the realities of terrorism, but there is also the fact that many Jihadi are inspired at the mosque, and not by their peer group. In fact most muslim terrorists at least seek out a cleric's stamp of approval on their operations, which they are likely to find at a mosque (Bruce Hoffman writes about this in "Inside Terrorism". So I just think it would be foolish to ignore the roles mosques often play as a place where potential terrorists connect with one another, and as a driving force of terrorism as well.

But just so you don't think I am ignoring your argument, I should let you know I ordered Sageman's book after I saw your post.

Are you in a mid east studies program for your grad work?

You are right, I should provide more evidence on my posts, but I am far too lazy to go to my shelf and cite my sources.

Shawarma
10th May 07, 10:45 AM
"Infiltrating" mosques is a good idea if you have the feeling that something not nice is being planned among the people worshipping there. Would be easier said than done, though. Better to count on the mosque-goers who don't agree with terrorist attacks to rat out the ones who do. That works here, a bunch of guys currently stand trial for planning terrorism because somebody ratted them out.

Thinkchair
10th May 07, 11:51 AM
"Infiltrating" mosques is a good idea if you have the feeling that something not nice is being planned among the people worshipping there. Would be easier said than done, though. Better to count on the mosque-goers who don't agree with terrorist attacks to rat out the ones who do. That works here, a bunch of guys currently stand trial for planning terrorism because somebody ratted them out.

Which is why we it is important to develope a network of informants.

Sun Wukong
10th May 07, 01:59 PM
I don't know how much mosques are directly involved with terrorism, but many of them preach Jihadist rhetoric, and therefore turn a blind eye to extremists.

So... what exactly qualifies as Jihadist rhetoric as preached from the typical mosque pulpit?

Edit: ... and how often do you attend subversive mosque pro-islamofacist terror services, you dirty towelhead?

ironlurker
10th May 07, 02:04 PM
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l43/whackula/oie_eyup-cemetary-cat-nc-helen-bett.jpg

Thinkchair
10th May 07, 02:08 PM
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l43/whackula/oie_eyup-cemetary-cat-nc-helen-bett.jpg

At least the cat agrees with me.

elipson
10th May 07, 02:39 PM
Maybe the Overwhelming Majority of Peaceful Muslims should do something about that, instead of just covering their asses after something has already happened.

The majority of muslims are exactly the same as the majority of any other religious group; apathetic. Islam is the most popular religion in the world. Be thankful that the vast majority of them don't actually care enough to do anything about it.

Why don't the majority of Christians do something about the KKK, instead of just saying "they don't speak for us"?

ironlurker
10th May 07, 02:58 PM
So... what exactly qualifies as Jihadist rhetoric as preached from the typical mosque pulpit?

You have to take a number of factors into account when evaluating this. Again, I'm not saying this to be politically correct, but it's not logistically feasible, desirability aside, to throw everyone who criticizes the US etc. into jail.
The issue then becomes seperating people out along the spectrum from the culturally naive, to loudmouths, to the real instigators.

By naive I refer to many other countries and cultures in the world where political, social, and religious discourse are expressed in quite different terms. For example, compare the Taiwanese parliament (fistfights), to the British parliament (catcalls and boos), to the US congress. I
n our contemporary culture, the mainstream frowns upon judgemental statements. "AIDS is a punishment from God for a decadent culture"- I can show you Islamic books that say this, and I can show you Christian Evangelical books that say this. We might think this is a shitty thing to say, but does it actually incite violence? Most mainstream religious services in the US are, basically, boring and lame, so an outsider has to take into effect that in other cultures people still expect fire and brimstone. Compare the attitude of African Episcopals to American Episcopals.

Then we have the people who do, actually, propagandize in what might be called deliberate incitement. Imams in large US mosques are actually very weak, in terms of the power of their role, much weaker than a priest or rabbi. If the trustees think he's too conservative, or too liberal, there he goes out the door.
No one wants to have their software company or dental practice audited and their assets frozen because the Imam at "their" mosque says crazy shit.
Larger mosques with trustees who are doctors, dentists, professors, etc. are as bourgeois as other American religious institutions.
Therefore, the more radical types will find small, often ignorant -recent converts, prisoners, or uneducated immigrants- congregations to influence. These are the hole-in-the-wall places I mentioned earlier, and yes, these would be the places to look after- however, not that it shouldn't be done, but you run into the "easier said then done" factor given their small size.
Even then, consider the example of the Wesboro Baptist Church: total assholes, but never conclusively linked to violence. Should the FBI stake them out every day because of the aweful shit they say? They deserve whatever they get, but people who are truly capable of planning violence are usually smart enough not to attract rampant attention to themselves. Again- doesn't mean we should ignore them, but limited resources demand prioritization

In terms of what I've seen, the most worrisome instigators are on the int3rw3bz. No physical congregation to maintain, not having a life= more time to work online, no context for people to see you're an anti-social weirdo, network solutions web hosting, anonymity, no public relations accountability for anything they say, the ability to maintain monologic control over conversations and eliminate debate- all this combined with the US's admitted "losing" the propaganda/info war online. I know of converts, especially, who have been brainwashed by people over the int3rw3bz. (I'm not talking about themartialist.com either )

Sun Wukong
11th May 07, 07:45 PM
A little note of curiousity: I met my first really sincere anti-semite a couple days ago. Pretty much the picture of nazi and islamic anti-semitism all wrapped up in a guy selling quite tasty falafel and shawerma.

To say that it took me off guard was an understatement. I was laughing at this little picture he put up out of time magazine that had GWB's and quite a few other people painted up like the devil (red skin, horns, etc) while I was waiting for my order and he starts going in to why GWB is a product of Satan.

Normally, my gut instinct is to like someone just for saying something like that, but somewhere between US soldiers being trained to rape women and the Moussad secretly controlling the US gov't and Jew's being the offspring of Dogs and Pigs mating I started to get a bit incredulous. He also told me that Saddam Houssein was a good man who was innocent of all wrong doing and any evidence to the contrary is nothing but fabricated lies.

Rather than argue with him, I decided to get the insane muslim fundamentalist take on politics in the middle east. So, I asked him why the Kurds, Sunni's and Shia's are fighting amongst themselves.

He told me that the Sunni's are killing the Shia's for helping the infidel american's control the country. He also said that they had every right to do so because their land was invaded illegally ( remember this phrase, "greeted as LIBERATORS".

Both Sunni's and Shia's hate the US for supporting Israel, and will likely hate us until the end of time. Even without religous reasons enough of them are angry with us over lost loved ones and percieved harm done to their country after the invasion they will likely keep attacking the US forever.

The kurds ironically enough are actually a muslim minority and have a Sunni cross-section in them. Both mainstream Sunni's and Shia's don't like them because Kurds are ethnically different and are largely separtists who want their own nation of Kurdistan back (even though they would be hated almost as much as israel throughout the middle east and stand no chance in hell of survival without ALOT of help).

I could tell that this guy would simply never listen to reason and never see the error of solving political and social problems with violence. Sound familiar?

http://www.president-bush.com/gwb-obl.jpg

Stick
11th May 07, 09:02 PM
No, actually it doesn't.

Bush is a twit, but even his Axis of Evil schtick isn't the sort cartoonish parody of evil and gross hyperbole that you finally met face to face.

We don't train anyone to rape anyone.

Take a look at your double standards.

frumpleswift
11th May 07, 09:17 PM
I'm glad we are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here.

Shawarma
11th May 07, 09:20 PM
Nah, that's all very inconvenient. Why should the Americans go to the trouble of hauling all their military hardware and personnel all the way across the globe to some sandy shithole? Very unfair. It's high time the terrorists get off their asses and make the trek themselves. Then the GIs can go home to the wife and kids after a long day of slaying Jihadis, and the Jihadis would most likely forget all that Allah crap when faced with non-ugly females and Burger King. Win-Win situation for everyone.

Question!
11th May 07, 09:30 PM
WHAT? SO THE JEWS ARE ACTUALLY CONTROLLING THE GOVERNMENT?! I KNEW IT!

frumpleswift
11th May 07, 09:42 PM
Jews...Burger King...you know I convinced a friend I had in college to leave her Orthodox Community and live a normal life.

It worked quite well, except she developed a hankerin for bacon and put on quite a bit of weight.


It's high time the terrorists get off their asses and make the trek themselves.

Why do you think they were learning to fly plans? They are just trying to find a way to fly the troops in,

ironlurker
12th May 07, 12:10 AM
We don't train anyone to rape anyone.

Ever heard of the School of the Americas?


On September 20, 1996, the Pentagon released seven training manuals prepared by the U.S. military and used between 1987 and 1991 for intelligence training courses in Latin America and at the U.S. Army School of the Americas (SOA). According to the Third World Traveler, these manuals show how U.S. agents taught repressive techniques and promoted the violation of human rights throughout Latin America and around the globe. [6] Amnesty International describes the contents of the document to contain instructions in motivation by fear, bounties for enemy dead, false imprisonment, torture, execution, and kidnapping a target's family members.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_the_Americas


Augusto Pinochet is not a graduate of the School of the Americas; yet
his influence is held in high esteem. in 1991, visitors could view a
note from Pinochet, and a ceremonial sword donated by him, on display in
the office of the Commandant (Charles Call, MH, 8/9/93)

Graduates of the School of the Americas have also comprised 1 out of every 7 members of the command staff of DINA, the notorious Chilean intelligence agency responsible for many of the worst human rights atrocities during the Pinochet years. SOA grads who were members of the DINA command staff include: Luis Alberto Medina Aldea, Jorge Aro Peigneguy, Eugenio Videla, Rene Riveros, and Guillermo Salinas, as well as other officials mentioned below.
http://www.soaw.org/article.php?id=234\ (http://www.soaw.org/article.php?id=234)

The specialty of the Chilean security forces was the use of dogs trained to rape prisoners.



H. R. 611, introduced by Congressman Kennedy Feb 5, 1997, which calls for the closure of the School of the Americas, cites "some of the worst human rights abusers in our hemisphere, including: El Salvador death squad leader Roberto D'Abuisson
Panamanian dictator and drug dealer Manual Noriega
Haitian coup leader Raoul Cedras
19 Salvadoran soldiers linked to the 1989 murder of six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her daughter
Col. Julio Roberto Alpirez, Guatemalan officer linked in the death of an American innkeeper
Hector Gramajo, former Guatemalan defense minister found liabile in United States court for abduction, rape, and torture of Sister Dianna Ortiz, a United States citizen.
Argentinian dictator Leopoldo Galtieri, leader of the "dirty little war: responsible for the deaths of 30 civilians
Two of the three killers of Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador
Ten of the twelve officers responsible for the murder of 900 civilians in the El Salvadoran village of El Mozote.
Three of the five officers involved in the 1980 rape and murder of four United States churchwomen in El Salvador.
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/soaclose.htm (http://www.geocities.com/%7Evirtualtruth/soaclose.htm)

No, this is not America= bad.
This is about people in power deliberately oversimplifying things -we need to stop the Communists/Muslims/Aliens or whatever comes next at any costs- so that they are given even more power to achieve whatever they desire.

Yes we need to stop terrorism, yes we need to stop Islamic terrorists, but we should be careful of being painted into a corner by by all-or-nothing, black and white, Manichean dichotomies.

Also, just as was the case during the cold war -on the part of both sides- much of what passes for "terrorism/uprising/riot/insurgency" is in fact a proxy war.


United Airlines Flight 175: Marwan al-Shehhi (from the United Arab Emirates), Fayez Banihammad (from the United Arab Emirates), Mohand al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Hamza al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian), Ahmed al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian). They were the only people with Arabic names on the flight.
American Airlines Flight 11: Mohamed Atta al Sayed (Egyptian), Waleed al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Wail al-Shehri (Saudi Arabian), Abdulaziz al-Omari (Saudi Arabian), Satam al-Suqami (Saudi Arabian). There was only one other passenger with an Arabic name who was ruled out as having any role.
United Airlines Flight 93: Ziad Jarrah (Lebanese), Ahmed al-Haznawi (Saudi Arabian), Ahmed al-Nami (Saudi Arabian), Saeed al-Ghamdi (Saudi Arabian). They were the only people with Arabic names on the flight.
American Airlines Flight 77: Hani Hanjour (Saudi Arabian), Khalid al-Mihdhar (Saudi Arabian), Majed Moqed (Saudi Arabian), Nawaf al-Hazmi (Saudi Arabian), Salem al-Hazmi (Saudi Arabian). There was one other passenger with an Arabic name who was ruled out as having any role.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizers_of_the_September_11,_2001_attacks

Did we invade Saudi Arabia*, when it has a retrograde authoritarian regime, filled with human rights abuses, spreads extremist doctrines that declare other Muslims to be unbelievers, publish open anti-Semitic rants (no Israel on SA school maps) and had the majority of hijackers and the mastermind of the worst terrorist attack by Islamic radicals ever on American soil?
No.
Then, maybe, we need to question, not to be PC, not to be naive sandal-wearing hippies, but just to make sure that we aren't duped.

*Yes the Taliban were real assholes and it was good that we got rid of them- but guess what? They walk in and out of Pakistan every day and have their movements supported and directed by Pakistani intelligence. The Taliban movement began in part in Pakistan. Bin Laden could well be in Swat Pakistan.
Hmmm.

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 12:16 AM
About the whole 'lets infiltrate mosques' thing:

Depends on what country. In the what was once known as Arabia and pakistan infilitrating would be easy: Everyone probably speaks the same language.

In north america/europe, most mosque go-ers are immigrants, and a sigificant number are non-arab speaking muslim immigrants.


Churches and synagogues often are filled with people born and raised in north america and europe, the native population. Usually the people are of the same country and nationality and speak the same language.

SO walk into a church to moniter them: Not very hard to listen in and understand what the fuck is going on.


Now if this church happened to be in the middle of kuwait or Iraq, maybe....just maybe the church would have the same damn problems.

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 12:24 AM
Ever heard of the School of the Americas?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_the_Americas


http://www.soaw.org/article.php?id=234\ (http://www.soaw.org/article.php?id=234)

The specialty of the Chilean security forces was the use of dogs trained to rape prisoners.

http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/soaclose.htm (http://www.geocities.com/%7Evirtualtruth/soaclose.htm)

No, this is not America= bad.
This is about people in power deliberately oversimplifying things -we need to stop the Communists/Muslims/Aliens or whatever comes next at any costs- so that they are given even more power to achieve whatever they desire.

Yes we need to stop terrorism, yes we need to stop Islamic terrorists, but we should be careful of being painted into a corner by by all-or-nothing, black and white, Manichean dichotomies.

Also, just as was the case during the cold war -on the part of both sides- much of what passes for "terrorism/uprising/riot/insurgency" is in fact a proxy war.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizers_of_the_September_11,_2001_attacks

Did we invade Saudi Arabia*, when it has a retrograde authoritarian regime, filled with human rights abuses, spreads extremist doctrines that declare other Muslims to be unbelievers, publish open anti-Semitic rants (no Israel on SA school maps) and had the majority of hijackers and the mastermind of the worst terrorist attack by Islamic radicals ever on American soil?
No.
Then, maybe, we need to question, not to be PC, not to be naive sandal-wearing hippies, but just to make sure that we aren't duped.

*Yes the Taliban were real assholes and it was good that we got rid of them- but guess what? They walk in and out of Pakistan every day and have their movements supported and directed by Pakistani intelligence. The Taliban movement began in part in Pakistan. Bin Laden could well be in Swat Pakistan.
Hmmm.

How the hell do you know where to look for all this stuff? You pull out facts during discussions pretty quick.

I swear, you know more about Islam then me, and your not even muslim.

ironlurker
12th May 07, 12:53 AM
How the hell do you know where to look for all this stuff? http://www.djspyhunter.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/tinfoil_hat.jpg

Question!
12th May 07, 12:53 AM
He's not called ironlurker for nothing.

Sun Wukong
12th May 07, 01:07 AM
No, actually it doesn't.

Bush is a twit, but even his Axis of Evil schtick isn't the sort cartoonish parody of evil and gross hyperbole that you finally met face to face.


Sure it is. Bush's administration has done nothing but present highly inaccurate oversimplifications of very complicated problems; often with little or no demonstrated understanding of the problems they are throwing the weight of our extremely powerful military behind.

What's the big difference between the way GW's admin does business and the way the Taliban does? Even their supporters are both similarly ignorant.

I'm more afraid of the republican party as it is today, than any terrorist group ever. Even all of them combined couldn't have done as much damage to the world as GW has and still somehow has a 35% approval rating? I'm sorry, I seemed to have missed the roofie in my drink that was supposed to make me forget the last 6 years happened.



We don't train anyone to rape anyone.

Take a look at your double standards.

I'm sorry, what double standard are you speaking of? I'm condemning both GWB and terrorists in general equally. See, terrorists often don't directly hate the people they are killing so much as they are trying to use their deaths as a way of sending a political message. GW's crew has pretty much done just the same thing with both amercian soldiers, foreign soldiers and the now terrified Iraqi people.

I fail to see a double standard. Sure, GW may have felt like he was doing the right thing, but so are those dudes strapping bombs to their chests; with much the same results too.

It's the results that piss me off so much, not the intentions.

ironlurker
12th May 07, 01:24 AM
so are those dudes strapping bombs to their chests; with much the same results too.

On a side note, for a lighter subject, with explosive vests the bomber's head tends to literally pop right off.

Spoiler contains heads blowd off.


http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/eng_n/img/sister.jpg

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/islamicterrorism3.21.jpg

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 01:46 AM
On a side note, for a lighter subject, with explosive vests the bomber's head tends to literally pop right off.

Spoiler contains heads blowd off.


http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/eng_n/img/sister.jpg

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/islamicterrorism3.21.jpg





I wonder why they think it's so glamorous, WTF?

Question!
12th May 07, 02:42 AM
It's not like they're gonna see their own heads being blown off anyway.

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 02:45 AM
Yeah, but when people look at thier bodies, thier not going to say.

"wow! How glamorous!"

They'll say:

"Holy fuck! That camel jockey got his head blown off!"

Shawarma
12th May 07, 03:19 AM
Or perhaps: "What a good little Jihadist he was! He'll be porkin' them 72 virgins something fierce by now."

Kiko
12th May 07, 07:07 AM
Or perhaps: "What a good little Jihadist he was! He'll be porkin' them 72 virgins something fierce by now."

Psst! Ix-nay on the ork-pay!

Shawarma
12th May 07, 07:36 AM
DOH!

Gezere
12th May 07, 08:39 AM
OK, granted the only people on base who acutally walk around armed are MPs and often enough they don't even have ammo on them, but I can't see these twits pulling off an attack with guns, mortars, and RPGS and being able to get away alive. I mean, honestly, they assumed they could get 100 casualties and get away scott free.

MPs are always armed and have ammo just like any other cop.

What pisses me off about this is that I went to both Albania and Kosovo to help these bastards and help some of the refugees get to the US. However during my time down there I felt we were helping the wrong side. In a sense we were helping the wrong side or shouldn't have got involved at all. (my personal feelings mind you)

Shawarma
12th May 07, 09:10 AM
I've heard this sentiment mirrored by other people who were down there, that they were merely helping one band of thugs against another band of thugs rather than protecting the victims of a genocide. That fit with your view of it, having been there?

ironlurker
12th May 07, 10:14 AM
MPs are always armed and have ammo just like any other cop.

What pisses me off about this is that I went to both Albania and Kosovo to help these bastards and help some of the refugees get to the US. However during my time down there I felt we were helping the wrong side. In a sense we were helping the wrong side or shouldn't have got involved at all. (my personal feelings mind you)

Most Muslims in Albania and the surrounding areas were traditionally Bektashi, the followers of a particular Sufi order. Before and during the time the "war" was going on over there, Bin Laden and his buddies began to deluge the area with "t3h r34l Islam" to try and overcome the local sect, generate more militant followers, and seize influence for themselves.


BIN LADEN AND THE US – TOGETHER AT LAST IN ALBANIA


The fact that the CIA armed Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, with the help of Pakistan and the Afghan drug trade, is old news, and makes for especially bitter reading now. For years, the Albanian operations of Bin Laden and other radical Muslim terrorists have also been widely reported. In this article I attempt to trace some of the major points in this huge and still widely unknown movement, from the events of today back as far as 1992, when the Islamic reawakening in Albania enhanced conditions for widespread terrorism . . .

On 4 May 1999, theWashington Times reported, citing new reports from US intelligence and Jane’s Defense Review, that the town of Tropoje, Albania was a"common staging area" for Bin Laden’s and the KLA’s forces, and thus "a center for Islamic terrorists." US intelligence also acknowledged that Bin Ladin’s al-Qaeda had "both trained and financially supported" the Albanians, and that the Kosovo border had been infiltrated by Bosnian, Chechen and Afghan mujaheedin, in "…crossings (which) originated in neighboring Albania and, according to the reports, included parties of up to 50 men." The Jane’s report added that "…documents found last year on the body of a KLA member showed that he had escorted several volunteers into Kosovo, including more than a dozen Saudi Arabians. Each volunteer carried a passport identifying him as a Macedonian Albanian."
A combination of chaos and poverty in Albania paved the way for Bin Laden to move in. The Times of London quoted Fatos Klosi, the head of the Albanian intelligence service, who said that bin Laden sent terrorists to Kosovo. Using the front of funding a "humanitarian agency," bin Laden muscled into Albania as far back as 1994.
The Times report gets even better:
"Klosi said he believed terrorists had already infiltrated other parts of Europe from bases in Albania. Interpol believes more than 100,000 blank Albanian passports were stolen in riots last year, providing ample opportunity for terrorists to acquire false papers."
A short time before this, a French national on trial for murder in Albania claimed to have been a member of bin Laden’s Albania cell, and had come "to recruit and arm fighters for Kosovo."
The general anarchy and upheaval in Albania over the past decade has made it an easy target for wealthy Islamic terrorists: weapons can be acquired with ease; high unemployment makes for high recruitment; and all assistance, whether economic, military or "humanitarian," is gladly accepted.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deliso5.html

Thinkchair
12th May 07, 01:20 PM
Most Muslims in Albania and the surrounding areas were traditionally Bektashi, the followers of a particular Sufi order. Before and during the time the "war" was going on over there, Bin Laden and his buddies began to deluge the area with "t3h r34l Islam" to try and overcome the local sect, generate more militant followers, and seize influence for themselves.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deliso5.html


antiwar.com is not the best source for unbiased information.

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 04:33 PM
Ive heard Bosnia has (or had) al-quada headquarters.

Rand
12th May 07, 07:52 PM
Jack Ryan got pimp slapped with a Glock by Willem DeFoe.

Jack Bauer gets pimp slapped by no man, especially not a gay FBI agent.


Yeah but Willem Defoe plays John Clark, and John Clark is a badass because he is the leader of Rainbow, the most hardcore of non government funded counter terrorist organizations.

ironlurker
12th May 07, 08:23 PM
antiwar.com is not the best source for unbiased information.
I used it because on this case they're 100% correct.

Nice try, though.



BIN LADEN BASE CITED IN ALBANIA
Published on November 30, 1998
(AP)

LONDON -- The man accused of orchestrating the US embassy bombings in Africa operates a terrorist network out of Albania that has infiltrated other parts of Europe, The Sunday Times reported. The newspaper quoted Fatos Klosi, the head of the Albanian intelligence service, as saying a network run by Saudi exile Osama Bin Laden sent units to fight in the Serbian province of Kosovo. Bin Laden is believed to have established an Albanian operation in 1994 after telling the government he headed . . . http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=BG&p_theme=bg&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EADDD6B4EAF79DD&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM


KLA rebels train in terrorist camps: Bin Laden offers financing, too.

From: The Washington Times | Date: May 4, 1999 | Author: Seper, Jerry

Some members of the Kosovo Liberation Army, which has financed its war effort through the sale of heroin, were trained in terrorist camps run by international fugitive Osama bin Laden - who is wanted in the 1998 bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 224 persons, including 12 Americans.
The KLA members, embraced by the Clinton administration in NATO's 41-day bombing campaign to bring Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic to the bargaining table, were trained in secret camps in Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina and elsewhere, according to newly obtained ...
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-56769247.html


Troops probe Kosovo offices with suspected connections to 2 Illinois Muslim groups


Philip Shenon, New York Times
Tuesday, December 18, 2001


sfgate_get_fprefs(); (12-18) 04:00 PDT Washington -- NATO troops have raided the offices of a U.S. charity in Kosovo as part of an investigation that, according to the Bush administration, links at least two large Muslim charities based in Illinois to fund raising for Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network.
NATO said in a statement posted yesterday on its Web site that members of its peacekeeping force had carried out raids Friday on two offices of the Global Relief Foundation, which is based outside Chicago and raises millions of dollars each year for Muslim nations and territories. The beneficiaries include war-ravaged Kosovo.
The statement said the soldiers acted "after receiving credible intelligence information that individuals working for this organization may have been directly involved in supporting worldwide international terrorist activities."
The Global Relief organization, the statement added, "is allegedly involved in planning attacks against targets in the USA and Europe."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2001/12/18/MN21834.DTL


U.S. analyst testifies on Bosnian war as a Milosevic defense witness

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — A former U.S. policy analyst, testifying for the defense at Slobodan Milosevic's war crimes trial Wednesday, said part of the groundwork for what became the al-Qaeda terrorist network was laid during the Bosnian war in the 1990s break-up of Yugoslavia.
The testimony of analyst James Jatras appeared directed at showing the U.S. government likely knew that Islamic fundamentalists were fighting in Bosnia during the 1992-95 war and in the Serbian province of Kosovo in the 1990s.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-08-milosevic-trial_x.htm

AAAhmed46
12th May 07, 10:42 PM
Yeah but Willem Defoe plays John Clark, and John Clark is a badass because he is the leader of Rainbow, the most hardcore of non government funded counter terrorist organizations.


Rainbow....couldn't they have come up with a better name?

Question!
13th May 07, 12:03 AM
RAINBOW SIX BITCH!

AAAhmed46
13th May 07, 12:06 AM
Well the games are good.

Stick
13th May 07, 12:25 AM
I read Rainbow 6.... while I did in fact get the impression that Rainbow will fucking kill you if you step out of line, and are the baddest bad asses ever assembled in realistic fiction...... Tom Clancy fucking hates environmentalists.

AAAhmed46
13th May 07, 12:26 AM
I read Rainbow 6.... while I did in fact get the impression that Rainbow will fucking kill you if you step out of line, and are the baddest bad asses ever assembled in realistic fiction...... Tom Clancy fucking hates environmentalists.


got the same impression from the game.

Shawarma
13th May 07, 01:43 AM
I read Rainbow 6.... while I did in fact get the impression that Rainbow will fucking kill you if you step out of line, and are the baddest bad asses ever assembled in realistic fiction...... Tom Clancy fucking hates environmentalists.
Really? I thought Michael Crichton was the anti-environmentalist fnargmaster around here.

Neildo
13th May 07, 02:01 AM
I read Rainbow 6.... while I did in fact get the impression that Rainbow will fucking kill you if you step out of line, and are the baddest bad asses ever assembled in realistic fiction...... Tom Clancy fucking hates environmentalists.

Have you read 'Without Remorse'? That and R6 are the only Clancy books i really enjoyed.

AAAhmed46
13th May 07, 02:08 AM
Did he write a splinter cell book?

Thinkchair
13th May 07, 09:10 AM
I used it because on this case they're 100% correct.

Nice try, though.

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=BG&p_theme=bg&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EADDD6B4EAF79DD&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-56769247.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2001/12/18/MN21834.DTL

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-08-milosevic-trial_x.htm

enough with the citations dude. My point was not that they were correct or incorrect in this instance. My point was that you should no tbe going there for your information. In this case you happened to check his sources (probably after my post) and everything was fine. But sites like that are notoriously unreliable. And even when there basic data is correct, there interpretation is often very flawed. In this case, if you were already familiar with the guys sources, you could have just posted those.

ironlurker
13th May 07, 01:18 PM
enough with the citations dude, I really don't like to take the time to find them, even though I'm always right. My point was not that they were correct or incorrect in this instance, because I couldn't tell anyway, not that it matters. My point was that you should not be going there for your information, but if it was a url with more than three syllables I wouldn't have recognized it. In this case you happened to check his sources (probably after my post, so dauntingly filled with facts and evidence) and everything was fine- there was no way in fucking hell you could have known about the KLA and al-qaeda. Why? Because I don't. But sites like that are notoriously unreliable, compare them to the ones I use. And even when there basic data is correct, there interpretation is often very flawed. Just to make it clear, when I am wrong, I'm still right. In this case, if you were already familiar with the guys sources, you could have just posted those, instead of trolling me by using something you knew I couldn't resist
I hear you dude

Thinkchair
13th May 07, 01:51 PM
I hear you dude

I get that you are very proud you are in grad school and know how to do research.

Just take it easy on the citations. I do enough research for work, when I debate online with people, I just present the information I have synthesized. Besides, it is very easy to support virtually any position doing a few moments of research online. You just end up looking like a boolean smart ass more than anything else.

P.S. what are you studying in grad school?

AAAhmed46
13th May 07, 02:41 PM
I dunno ThinkChair: Though the genocide was really damn fucked up, lots of pricks running around on the Bosnian side of the fence.

ironlurker
13th May 07, 03:57 PM
You just end up looking like a boolean smart ass more than anything else. Hmmm.


In this case you happened to check his sources (probably after my post) and everything was fine.
Okay, you say this, then . . .


I get that you are very proud you are in grad school and know how to do research.

Huh. But then this . . .


It is very easy to support virtually any position doing a few moments of research online
O rly? Then this . . .


if you were already familiar with the guys sources, you could have just posted those.
Hmm, sounds good, but then


Just take it easy on the citations.

^I can't sum up your style any better then this. Someone says A, you say B, they say not B, you say "well, it's C or D, which is still really B".
I'd love to know when this developed, you love this strategy so much I'm guessing it's served you faithfully for a long time.

I could guess, but instead I'll post a picture of a fanatic Muslim suicide bomber.

http://cache.bordom.net/images/6a7ed7377dada2cc06a1bdf9a9dbed33.gif

ironlurker
13th May 07, 04:08 PM
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l43/whackula/corsets.jpg

Thinkchair
13th May 07, 04:11 PM
Hmmm.


Okay, you say this, then . . .



Huh. But then this . . .


O rly? Then this . . .


Hmm, sounds good, but then



^I can't sum up your style any better then this. Someone says A, you say B, they say not B, you say "well, it's C or D, which is still really B".
I'd love to know when this developed, you love this strategy so much I'm guessing it's served you faithfully for a long time.

I could guess, but instead I'll post a picture of a fanatic Muslim suicide bomber.

http://cache.bordom.net/images/6a7ed7377dada2cc06a1bdf9a9dbed33.gif

Not really. I never disputed your factual claims in the post, just your source. I would be lying though if I didn't admit my posts have been partially motivated by a dislike of you. What I was saying is this. Your overuse of citations is annoying. The fact that you relied on a heavily biased source, and said nothing about their bias in your quote I find even more annoying. I was then impying that you accepted everything your source said as fact, until I mentioned it was a bad source. So you went back and checked his sources to show he was a good source. Its really not as confusing as you make it out to be.

I am still interested in what it is you are studying.

As for my style. When I am dealing with people professionally I am always very clear and to the point. However, sociocide is what I do between actual work, so I am just trying to have fun and not strain myself here.

ironlurker
13th May 07, 04:28 PM
my posts have been partially motivated by a dislike of you.
LOL admitting is the first step to accepting. And Sishupal did get sayujya-mukti in the end. :rolleyes:

Thinkchair
13th May 07, 04:32 PM
. And Sishupal did get sayujya-mukti in the end. :rolleyes:

Are you studying religion then?

Rand
14th May 07, 10:02 PM
Have you read 'Without Remorse'? That and R6 are the only Clancy books i really enjoyed.

I still have yet to figure out why he picked Rainbow as their name.

The original game for pc, the last level was basically massacreing Eco-terroists, or environmentalists.

I read most of Rainbow Six when I was 11, I also have read Clear and Present Danger, which I loved a lot more than the movie though the movie was good.

I love Military fiction and non fiction

Gezere
18th May 07, 09:50 AM
I've heard this sentiment mirrored by other people who were down there, that they were merely helping one band of thugs against another band of thugs rather than protecting the victims of a genocide. That fit with your view of it, having been there?
Thats about the size of it.