J. Michael McConnell's Annual Threat Assessment

J. Michael McConnell, the US Director of National Intelligence has released his Annual Threat Assessment to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. John Bolton wrote in the Wall Street Journal today that McConnell would need to explain the highly politicized National Intelligence Estimate from a few months ago. In fact, Bolton calls on him to repair the damage that NIE caused to the intelligence process let alone Bush's foreign policy.

I'll give the 47-page report a read when I get a spare moment, right now I don't have one.

Update:

Some important quotes:

Al-Qa’ida and its terrorist affiliates continue to pose significant threats to the United States at home and abroad, and al-Qa’ida’s central leadership based in the border area of Pakistan is its most dangerous component.

The summary:

We assess that al-Qa’ida’s Homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent political, economic, and infrastructure targets designed to produce mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the population.

Iran, and the NIE:

We assess in our recent NIE on this subject that warhead design and weaponization were halted, along with covert military uranium conversion- and enrichment-related activities. Declared uranium enrichment efforts, which will enable the production of fissile material, continue. This is the most difficult challenge in nuclear production. Iran’s efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue.

That doesn't seem so rosy to me.

When it comes to our technology infrastructure:

Our information infrastructure—including the internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers in critical industries—increasingly is being targeted for exploitation and potentially for disruption or destruction, by a growing array of state and non-state adversaries. Over the past year, cyber exploitation activity has grown more sophisticated, more targeted, and more serious. The Intelligence Community expects these trends to continue in the coming year.

Energy:

Access to stable and affordably priced energy supplies has long been a critical element of national security. Sustained increases in global demand and the interactive effects of energy with other issues have both magnified and broadened the significance of developments in the global energy system. Oil prices in late 2007 were near record levels and global spare production capacity is below the market’s preferred cushion of 3 to 4 million barrels per day (b/d).

Josh Poulson

Posted in category “Politics, Terrorism” Tuesday, Feb 5 2008 10:06 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

Terrorism and Immigration Can Be Related?

Whether or not you agree with the current policy of letting only a few people a year visit the country or move here permanently, investigating US employees that help members of known terror groups get into the country would seem to be the highest priority of the US Citizenship and Immigration Service. However, as the Washington Times reports, most reports of such incidents are not investigated “due to a lack of resources.”

Reported problems include the following:

Employees are sharing detailed information on internal security measures with people outside the agency.
A Lebanese citizen bribed an immigration officer with airline tickets for visa benefits.
A USCIS officer in Harlington, Texas, sold immigration documents for $10,000 to as many as 20 people.

USCIS does seem to be trying to build an organization to investigate such reports, but it has been slow in coming.

Scary stuff, but it does seem to be a case of broken priorities. There already exists a $2B organization to handle immigration, and incidents like the above should be far more important for it to deal with than other items.

Josh Poulson

Posted in category “Politics, Terrorism” Wednesday, Aug 15 2007 01:35 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

July 17, 2007 National Intelligence Estimate

Already the press is interpreting the National Intelligence Estimate released today, let's look at what's in it. I'll jump straight to the “Key Judgments” section.

We judge the US Homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years. The main threat comes from Islamic terrorist groups and cells, especially al-Qa’ida, driven by their undiminished intent to attack the Homeland and a continued effort by these terrorist groups to adapt and improve their capabilities.

No surprise here. The terrorist threat has not gone away.

We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have constrained the ability of al-Qa’ida to attack the US Homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the Homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.
  • We are concerned, however, that this level of international cooperation may wane as 9/11 becomes a more distant memory and perceptions of the threat diverge.

    This item is not likely to get a lot of press. We have been successful in stopping attacks against the homeland and there is a danger of complacency.

    Al-Qa’ida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the Homeland, as its central leadership continues to plan high-impact plots, while pushing others in extremist Sunni communities to mimic its efforts and to supplement its capabilities. We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al-Qa’ida senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.
    • As a result, we judge that the United States currently is in a heightened threat environment.

    As expected, al-Qa’ida remains our biggest threat and continues to find safe havens in the Middle East. Interesting to see Pakistan called out directly, but not bases in Iran and Saudi Arabian funding.

    We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to enhance its capabilities to attack the Homeland through greater cooperation with regional terrorist groups. Of note, we assess that al-Qa’ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the Homeland. In addition, we assess that its association with AQI helps al-Qa’ida to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks.
    We assess that al-Qa’ida’s Homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent political, economic, and infrastructure targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the US population. The group is proficient with conventional small arms and improvised explosive devices, and is innovative in creating new capabilities and overcoming security obstacles.
    • We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to try to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material in attacks and would not hesitate to use them if it develops what it deems is sufficient capability.

    AQI has become a significant subsidiary unit of AQ. Any presence in the Middle East is always going to be a lightning rod for fanatic elements. Better that we fight them with prepared units than face attacks on unprepared people here, in my opinion. While NBC (nuclear, chemical, biological) threats are listed here, the likelihood of small arms and improvised explosives is greater (far less operational security issues).

    We assess Lebanese Hizballah, which has conducted anti-US attacks outside the United States in the past, may be more likely to consider attacking the Homeland over the next three years if it perceives the United States as posing a direct threat to the group or Iran.

    Hizballah is an emerging threat probably due to the pressure we've been exerting on Iran.

    We assess that the spread of radical—especially Salafi—Internet sites, increasingly aggressive anti-US rhetoric and actions, and the growing number of radical, self-generating cells in Western countries indicate that the radical and violent segment of the West’s Muslim population is expanding, including in the United States. The arrest and prosecution by US law enforcement of a small number of violent Islamic extremists inside the United States—who are becoming more connected ideologically, virtually, and/or in a physical sense to the global extremist movement—points to the possibility that others may become sufficiently radicalized that they will view the use of violence here as legitimate. We assess that this internal Muslim terrorist threat is not likely to be as severe as it is in Europe, however.

    Our first hint of Information Age problems, more below.

    We assess that other, non-Muslim terrorist groups—often referred to as “single-issue” groups by the FBI—probably will conduct attacks over the next three years given their violent histories, but we assess this violence is likely to be on a small scale.

    A little bit of a catch-all indicating that other threats of terrorism are out there, but from smaller groups.

    We assess that globalization trends and recent technological advances will continue to enable even small numbers of alienated people to find and connect with one another, justify and intensify their anger, and mobilize resources to attack—all without requiring a centralized terrorist organization, training camp, or leader.
    • The ability to detect broader and more diverse terrorist plotting in this environment will challenge current US defensive efforts and the tools we use to detect and disrupt plots. It will also require greater understanding of how suspect activities at the local level relate to strategic threat information and how best to identify indicators of terrorist activity in the midst of legitimate interactions.

      We are having problems dealing with the free flow of information on the Internet facilitating the coordination of terrorist activities. This is hardly new. The technology race has always led to problems. Continuous solutions to the asymmetrical warfare problem produce a stream of new of technologies (increased rate of fire, convenient improvised explosives, etc.) beyond simple communications improvements.

      The goal should always be to make choosing the tactic of terrorism so abhorrent that no one would select it. It's clear there are some elements that believe that terrorist is attractive and we must continue to suppress it. My fear is that there are those who believe appeasement is a tactic of anti-terrorism.

      We'll see what the uproar over this intelligent estimate will produce.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Politics, Terrorism” Tuesday, Jul 17 2007 08:11 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Taepo Dong Range Graphic

      When I first saw this image on Michelle Malkin's blog, I first looked for my house.

      korean_missles3.png

      Then I looked for Iraq. If Kim Jong Il really wanted to screw things up he'd “strike a blow to free Iraq.” I really don't like that idea.

      Enough people are afraid North Korea will sell their nukes to the terrorists that they've already imagined the insurgents blowing up something in Iraq, or Hamas/Hezbollah doing something similar in Israel, but “Lil'Kim” is enough of a narcissist to do it himself.

      Or imagine him hitting Iran and blaming it on us or the Israelis. How many would believe we did it instead of him?

      It's been a rough day.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Monday, Oct 9 2006 02:20 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Thailand Coup

      Thai military officials loyal to King Adulyadej have seized power in a coup in Thailand. This is not the first we've heard of trouble in Thailand this year:

      Massive rallies earlier this year forced Thaksin to dissolve Parliament and call an election in April, three years ahead of schedule. The poll was boycotted by opposition parties and later annulled by Thailand's top courts, leaving the country without a working legislature.

      Prime Minister Thaksin is central to the conflagration:

      Opposition to Thaksin gained momentum in January when his family announced it had sold its controlling stake in telecommunications company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion. Critics allege the sale involved insider trading and complain a key national asset is now in foreign hands.
      Thaksin also has been accused of stifling the media and mishandling a Muslim insurgency in southern Thailand that flared under his rule.

      The Muslim unrest in southern Thailand is especially concerning because of long-standing friction between them and the Buddhists, who control the government. Coups and other non-democratic means of government tend to foster civil war. Will there be two Thailands in the world's future? globalsecurity.org is especially dour on conditions in the south:

      Historically, this region, consisting of the provinces of Satun, Songkhla, Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat, has served as a dumping ground for corrupt and/or incompetent civilian and military officials. This has been further aggravated by the population's ethnic make-up, predominantly Thai Muslims, which has produced a major degree of alienation intensified by government misadministration. Additionally, daily life there, particularly in urban areas, is continually plagued by a higher level of common banditry and lawlessness, more so than in the kingdom's other regions, making it very difficult for authorities to differentiate between criminal lawlessness and terrorist acts commissioned by domestic Thai terrorist or Muslim Separatist groups.

      You may ask yourself what else is down there in the southern part of Asia with strong Muslim influences? Next door in Malaysia is Kuala Lampur and Singapore. Also there's the strongly Muslim island nation of Indonesia.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Tuesday, Sep 19 2006 09:53 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      September 11, 2006

      Many are posting retrospectives and memorials about the terrorist attack five years ago. I do not need to rehash what happened, but I may as well indicate how I feel about it all. I wrote the following two years ago, and it still applies to how I feel about 9/11.

      A lot of blogs are remembering 9/11 today. I suppose I should do my part.

      I awoke to a phone call on 9/11/01, a little after 6am. The gal on the phone was telling me that a jet plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. I was still trying to wake up when I heard her exclamations on the phone as the second plane crashed into the south tower. It was an agonizing experience.

      I watched a little of what I could find on the web. I didn't have cable service at home. At that point I had given up television for a couple years already. I wandered into work where I found out about the third crash at the Pentagon.

      It was an eerie time. Internet news sites were slammed and very little information was available. The weird story of the fourth flight took hours to play out. Rumors flew fast and furious.

      However, my most painful moment related to 9/11 was hearing, a lot later, the tape of the stewardess on the second plane talking on her cell phone as they went into the south tower.

      I don't like reality shows where people get hurt. I'm too empathetic. I absolutely hated that tape. I didn't like watching video of people jumping from the towers.

      Two and a half years later I got the 9/11 Commission Report from audible.com and listened to it on the drive to and from work. Even in two-hour-a-day chunks, parts of the report are hard to listen to. Recounting the story of people falling from the building and emergency workers dodging these people as they tried to escape the doomed buildings were particularly hard for me.

      9/11 has been referred to as a day of reverence, or reflection, or anger, or other emotions. For me it is a reminder of the need for proactive, not reactive, measures to handle our own safety.

      In real life I work on building software products. Proactive rather than reactive measures rule the day there as well. Even so, most of the engineers around me support Kerry/Edwards. It appalls me that to them the proactive measure of fighting an enemy before he can effectively deliver his blows is “aggression.”

      To me it is getting inside the enemy's OODA loop.

      This enemy declared war against us a long long time ago. It took nearly three thousand deaths for us to react.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Monday, Sep 11 2006 06:36 AM  |  Permalink  |  2 comments  |  No trackbacks

      Terrorists As Pirates

      According to Douglas R. Burgess Jr. at Legal Affairs, it can be justified that today's terrorists should be treated like yesteryear's pirates:

      Dusty and anachronistic, perhaps, but viable all the same. More than 2,000 years ago, Marcus Tullius Cicero defined pirates in Roman law as hostis humani generis, “enemies of the human race.” From that day until now, pirates have held a unique status in the law as international criminals subject to universal jurisdiction—meaning that they may be captured wherever they are found, by any person who finds them. The ongoing war against pirates is the only known example of state vs. nonstate conflict until the advent of the war on terror, and its history is long and notable.

      An especially relevant parallel is that between state-sponsored piracy (letters of marque and reprisal) and state-sponsored terrorism (such as Hezbollah). This reminds me of the first American president to invade another country—and the nation's first Democrat—Thomas Jefferson.

      Jefferson, facing the lack of British Navy support for American trade in the Mediterranean and looking with some distaste at the tribute paid to the Barbary States (and ransom paid for captured American crewmen), first sought to create an international coalition to fight the pirates (stymied by France), then finally fought an unpopular war in against Tripoli. In yet another interesting parallel, the war was ended by treaty just before forcing regime change in Tripoli, and another war had to be fought ten years later. (source)

      There are still pirates today, but terrorism has replaced it as a source of hostis humani generis. Perhaps the piracy precedent should be applied to them:

      All states were equally obligated to stamp out this menace, whether or not they had been a victim of piracy. This was codified explicitly in the 1856 Declaration of Paris, and it has been reiterated as a guiding principle of piracy law ever since. Ironically, it is the very effectiveness of this criminalization that has marginalized piracy and made it seem an arcane and almost romantic offense. Pirates no longer terrorize the seas because a concerted effort among the European states in the 19th century almost eradicated them. It is just such a concerted effort that all states must now undertake against terrorists, until the crime of terrorism becomes as remote and obsolete as piracy.

      Also:

      If the war on terror becomes akin to war against the pirates, however, the situation would change. First, the crime of terrorism would be defined and proscribed internationally, and terrorists would be properly understood as enemies of all states. This legal status carries significant advantages, chief among them the possibility of universal jurisdiction. Terrorists, as hostis humani generis, could be captured wherever they were found, by anyone who found them. Pirates are currently the only form of criminals subject to this special jurisdiction.
      Second, this definition would deter states from harboring terrorists on the grounds that they are “freedom fighters” by providing an objective distinction in law between legitimate insurgency and outright terrorism. This same objective definition could, conversely, also deter states from cracking down on political dissidents as “terrorists,” as both Russia and China have done against their dissidents.
      …
      Third, and perhaps most important, nations that now balk at assisting the United States in the war on terror might have fewer reservations if terrorism were defined as an international crime that could be prosecuted before the International Criminal Court.

      So, the question remains as to whether the current administration can be influenced to push down this path. We've had inconsistent results gathering coalitions, but defining terrorists as the enemies of all states and requiring by treaty that every member state to enforce their capture and prosecution may have an effect.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Aug 30 2006 07:42 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Weapons of Choice

      The real “weapon of choice” of terrorists is TATP, not so-called Assault Weapons, Saturday Night Specials, or the infamous .50 BMG.

      TATP is a powerful and compact explosive, recently in the news with the terror plot to blow up several planes with liquid explosive in energy drink cans, but also under the feet of shoe bomber Reichard Reid and the Madrid Train Bombers.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Guns, Terrorism” Thursday, Aug 10 2006 03:17 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Incredible Video of Rocket Attack In Haifa

      These guys were videotaping a report of a previous rocket attack in Haifa when another attack starts. It's an amazing video.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Monday, Jul 24 2006 10:46 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Arthur Herman on Why India Was Hit

      In today's Wall Street Journal Arthur Herman speculates as to why India was hit with a terrorist train bombing:

      The real reason India was targeted was because it has transformed itself from a Third World country into a modern economic power, complete with Western-style freedoms. This is precisely what radical Islam most loathes and fears. If the rest of the Third World, especially Muslim countries, learn how to be like India; if they decide to become part of the global order, and learn how to produce wealth on a Western scale and enjoy Western freedoms, including freedom for women, and begin to build pluralist open societies, then the Islamists' dreams of power and domination are dead.

      I can understand the Islamic Fundamentalist feeling of sour grapes. India, despite its recent flirtation with censorship of blogs offending Islamists, has improved by leaps and bounds in terms of freedom and economy, joined the nuclear club, and gets respect from all over the globe.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Jul 20 2006 08:45 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Evacuating Lebanon by Cruise Ship

      The United States has 25,000 citizens in war-torn Lebanon and plans to evacuate them by cruise ship (hat tip to The Washington Note):

      BEIRUT, Lebanon—A cruise ship escorted by a U.S. destroyer will start evacuating some Americans from war-torn Lebanon as early as Tuesday and more military helicopters will be used to fly others directly to Cyprus, a U.S. official said Monday. Israel appeared to be allowing evacuation ships through its blockade of the country.

      Later in the article the Pentagon indicates the Orient Queen, which usually carries 750 passengers, will do the heavy lifting, directly protected by a destroyer and our nearby fleet.

      Being protected by a destroyer and a aircraft carrier notwithstanding, isn't a cruise ship a big juicy target for terrorists? Not anymore than usual, perhaps, and Hezbollah probably doesn't want direct involvement of the United States in Lebanon, but it does give me a bad feeling. Al Quaeda thrives on destabilizing situations, committing acts of mass murder, and hoping any response from the U.S. will turn Islamic opinion against us.

      However, one has to see the point. A cruise ship can carry a lot more people than planes and smaller craft can. 25,000 is a big number.

      July 18 Update: The Pentagon has ordered five US warships into the area for escort duty, but the cruise ship itself was stopped at the Israeli blockade.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Cruising, Politics, Terrorism” Monday, Jul 17 2006 10:07 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Bombay Bombings

      india-flag.png

      A little over a year from the London bombings on 7/7/05 we have seven commuter train bombings in Bombay, India.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Tuesday, Jul 11 2006 08:29 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Zarqawi And Muhammad Die On The Same Day

      Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in a bombing raid north of Bagdad. Plenty of other bloggers and news outlets have said a bunch about this, but I want to point out that I'm sure the Al Qaeda big thinkers will pick up on the fact that he was killed the same day Muhammad died in 632 and claim Super-Duper-Martyr status for this terror leader.

      Apologists for Islamic Terrorism will, of course, question the timing.

      Update: A statement has come from the newest terror leader in Iraq…

      The death of our leaders is life for us. It will only increase our persistence in continuing holy war so that the word of God will be supreme…

      But he didn't pick up on the coincidence, or perhaps the irony, of this statement.

      Update: So Zarqawi died the day before Muhammad did (see the comments). Does this mean he's a day short of being a real prophet?

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Jun 8 2006 07:22 AM  |  Permalink  |  3 comments  |  No trackbacks

      Toronto 17

      We have been watching with some interest the developing story about 17 terrorists rounded up in Toronto.

      Michelle Malkin notes that most of them are young, Muslim males, with two middle-aged ones thrown in for diversity (or, perhaps, leadership). Hot Air is aggregating tons of links here and here. Wizbang has a good round-up as well here.

      The latest avenues of inquiry include the three (Imperial) tons of ammonium nitrate seized, the imminence of the attack, and whether arrests have been made in other countries. Already links have been made to previous arrests and attacks, for example this paragraph from a Washington Post:

      Canadian reports said the raids were the consequence of the arrests by the FBI of two Georgia men in April. At the time, the FBI announced the two men had met with others in Toronto to plan attacks.

      This one is obviously developing.

      Update: So, it was a sting operation where the RCMP delivered the ammonium nitrate themselves. Also, the police determined these folks were a threat based on their phone calls and Internet surfing. Send in the ACLU!

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Sunday, Jun 4 2006 09:32 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      Zacarias Moussaoui Gets Life For Coldly Planning Death

      Zacarias Moussaoui, the supposed “nineteenth hijacker,” was apparently not deadly enough for knowing the plans to kills thousands and not revealing those plans to the FBI when he was arrested for immigration violations. Not enough the jury was convinced that he intended to hide everything of the plot possible, but instead that he was enough of an idiot not to really know what was going on. Therefore he earned life in prison, not death. This is going to cost the US a bundle, but we keep our moral law intact.

      C'est la guerre.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, May 3 2006 01:57 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Mustafa Setmarian Nasar

      Another terror trainer, Mustafa Setmarian Nasar (also known as Abu Musab al-Suri), has been captured in Pakistan. It appears he may have been nabbed and questioned some time ago, so perhaps we didn't do our normal habit of ruining a source of intelligence by releasing the information that we have it. Even so, there's no indication that he has been cooperating.

      Nasaar is a direct link to recent attacks in Europe:

      Media reports have linked Nasar, who holds Spanish citizenship, to the 2004 commuter train bombings in Madrid that killed 191 people, and to the July 7, 2005 attacks in London that left 56 dead, including the four bombers.

      I suspect for Europe Nasar's arrest is very good news indeed. It would be interesting to see if a very public trial of Nasar in Spain would change that country's flight from the global war on terror. Nasar has had some history in Spain. He has Spanish citizenship, and is wanted for Islamic terrorist incidents there going back to 1985.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Tuesday, May 2 2006 07:11 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Gonzales States the Obvious

      US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has submitted a piece titled “America Expects Surveillance” to the Wall Street Journal supporting the use of eavesdropping on suspected Al Quaeda members:

      The president, as commander in chief, has asserted his authority to use sophisticated military drones to search for Osama bin Laden, to deploy our armed forces in combat zones, and to kill or capture al Qaeda operatives around the world. No one would dispute that the AUMF supports the president in each of these actions.
      It is, therefore, inconceivable that the AUMF does not also support the president's efforts to intercept the communications of our enemies. Any future al Qaeda attacks on the homeland are likely to be carried out, like Sept. 11, by operatives hiding among us. The NSA terrorist surveillance program is a military operation designed to detect them quickly. Efforts to identify the terrorists and their plans expeditiously while ensuring faithful adherence to the Constitution and our existing laws is precisely what America expects from the president.

      This is certainly a “Well, duh!” kind of issue, as I've pointed out many times before. It all boils down to this:

      The AUMF is not a blank check for the president to cash at the expense of the rights of citizens. The NSA's terrorist surveillance program is narrowly focused on the international communications of persons believed to be members or agents of al Qaeda or affiliated terrorist organizations.

      If it was all communications of those suspected to be involved with Al Quaeda, I'd be far more worried, but because the communications are to those outside of the country, the use of the NSA facilities and the lack of warrants makes plenty of sense. Can we move on from this now?

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Politics, Terrorism” Monday, Feb 6 2006 06:54 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      Hamas Wins

      Hamas has apparently done well in yesterday's elections in Palestine, winning 76 seats in the 132-member parliament. Hamas has run on a platform of armed conflict, no peace negotiations, and no recognition for the state of Israel.

      Fatah, the old party in power, only won 43 seats. Fatah had supported a cease fire and peace negotiations with Israel.

      Hamas has deep ties with terrorist organizations in Palestine, and the elections results do not bode well for improving stability in the region.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Politics, Terrorism” Thursday, Jan 26 2006 11:40 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      Osama Bin Laden Offers Threats, Truce

      Coming on the heels of an allied attack in Pakistan targeted at Al Quaeda “No. 2” Ayman al-Zawahiri (and possibly successfully killing Mustafa Usman, Khalid Habib, and other high-ranking lieutenants), segments of an audiotape aired on Al Jazeera bring us some bravado and threats from Osama Bin Laden, as reported by Fox News:

      Our people are able to infiltrate through your security measures no matter how strong.

      Any complex system is vulnerable to breaches, and the security measures for entire borders of countries or for delivering small bombs into major metropolitan cities are clearly complex. However, we've caught a lot of people trying, so we are consuming Al Quaeda people and money in the process.

      As for the delay in similar operations in America is not because of your security measures; operations are being prepared and you will see them in your homes.

      It always makes you look better to say you have huge plans afoot than to say you've had a divided focus. This “veiled fist” negotiation technique hasn't exactly worked for him in the past. Even when his attacks are successful, they don't seem to be moving the world to adopting Sharia (Islamic Law) or kicking the allies out of the Middle East.

      Oddly, he also offers a truce:

      We do not mind offering you a long-term truce with fair conditions that we adhere to… We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war. There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America.

      He also demonstrated his abillity to pick up anti-current-strategy talking points from the mainstream media:

      Reality shows that the war on America and its allies is no longer limited to Iraq as he claims, on the contrary Iraq has become a magnetic point for qualified powers and the Mujahideen have been able time after time to breach all the security measures set by coalition countries and the evidence is the bombings you have seen in some major European capitals of this coalition.

      Well, sure, it is very hard to have effective security measures and a free country simultaneously, and our terrorist mastermind understands this. Terrorism is a battle of wills, and he is resolved to break down our willpower with withering, relentless attacks. In this sense he has been losing, as worldwide attacks were clearly not forthcoming, and many attacks have been stopped. It has taken significant resources to effect relentless attacks in Iraq, and those resources cannot be used elsewhere once they are consumed. Other attacks have occured, most notably in London and Barcelona as he points out. The Spanish attack changed a government, a giant victory for Al Quaeda. The English attack did not.

      What worries me about the plan to draw Al Quaeda into (relatively) open warfare in Iraq is that Al Quaeda survivors are learning something and can either train others or do more spectacular displays. While the armed forces are also learning, they are learning in a completely different environment than the US. If similar operations started here, we'd be hard-pressed to mount a similar response. It takes a large sympathetic, or at least cowed, population to operate openly, however, so as long as there are few (if any) that would offer that much aid and comfort to the enemy, we need only have to deeply fear WMDs and must steel ourselves against “demonstrations” like the plane, train, and bus bombings we have seen outside of the Middle East.

      Update: Add Midhat Mursi/Abu Khabab al-Masri and Abdul Rehman al Magrabi to the list of Al Quaeda lieutenants bombed in Pakistan.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Jan 19 2006 09:05 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      Terrorists In Italy Arrested Due To Wiretap Evidence

      NewsMax is carrying a story about 3 Algerian terrorists arrested in Italy who were planning major attacks in the United States. The story highlights the use of wiretap evidence:

      Italian authorities recently announced that they had used wiretaps to uncover the conspiracy to conduct a series of major attacks inside the U.S.

      These attacks were aimed at shipping, railroads, and stadiums. Certainly juicy targets. The NewsMax story indicates that they intended to surpass 9/11 with a series of bombings.

      Italian authorities stepped up their internal surveillance programs after July's terrorist bombings in London. Their domestic wiretaps picked up phone conversations by Algerian Yamine Bouhrama that discussed terrorist attacks in Italy and abroad.
      Italian authorities arrested Bouhrama on November 15 and he remains in prison. Authorities later arrested two other men, Achour Rabah and Tartaq Sami, who are believed to be Bouhrama’s chief aides in planning the attacks.

      They focus on a lack of coverage in the MSM, and allege conspiracy to hide this. A quick look around Google, however, came up with not much media coverage outside of the US either, unless it has already expired off of their radar (these arrests go back to mid-December). There certainly was some coverage, however:

      Could it be that a December 23rd story could disappear from most high volume news sites? The NewsMax article indicates that the Associated Press did have an article, omitting details about the wiretap, but did not include a citation. If anyone has a link to the AP article, please link to it in a comment. I certainly have a low opinion of the AP but I want to see if they really omitted wiretapping from this story or not.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Friday, Jan 6 2006 09:23 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Pallywood

      Mensa Barbie has a great video called “Pallywood” in her article “Media Spoof” about staged violent events and other news manufacturing in Palestine. While it's 35MB and 20 minutes long, it's worth a look.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Dec 29 2005 09:53 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Air Marshal Shoots Claimed Bomber

      A flight arriving from Colombia had a deranged passenger aboard. He claimed to have a bomb in his bag and a Federal Air Marshal shot and subdued him.

      But, deep at the bottom of the Fox News story, was a funny part:

      Homeland Security officials confirmed to FOX News that this is the first time a federal air marshal has discharged his or her weapon since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

      The first time any Air Marshal has discharged his or her weapon in several years? Don't they practice?

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Dec 7 2005 12:47 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Louis Freeh on Able Danger

      From today's Wall Street Journal, Louis Freeh (former director of the FBI), comments on Able Danger:

      The Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is undoubtedly the most relevant fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry. Even the most junior investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it “was not historically significant.” This astounding conclusion—in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings—raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself.

      This is tragic, because I've been advising people to read or listen to the entire 9/11 Commission report for some time now. Whether or not they overlooked this obviously important information, they did put out some information that I hoped was reasonably correct. Instead, it appears to have been a “CYA Commission.”

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Nov 17 2005 12:48 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Able Danger Live-Blogged

      Dr. Sanity live-blogged the Able Danger hearings, and the full transcript is available too.

      Dr. Sanity's later speculation after watching the hearings shows that it's easy to go the full-on “evil senior official” route:

      First, one cannot help but think that the existence of the “Wall” preventing intelligences sharing was a key ingredient in preventing connecting the dots of 9/11. That the main architect of the Wall in both the DoD when she was there; and in the Department of Justice later, on was 9/11 Commission member Jamie Gorelick is pertinent. Was there an attempt on the part of 9/11 Commission members and/or staff to protect one of its members? Were there attempts on the part of members of the Clinton Administration to cover-up this important information (Berger's activities in the National Archives to name one).

      This thing reads like a slow-moving X-Files plot, only in the middle of it all the suspects commit suicide by plowing a four jetliners into 3,000 innocent civilians and then the Department of Defense gets all worried that someone might figure out that they were spying on people that might have been American citizens. Frankly, if the Pentagon was doing a relatively cheap project with public information in order to experiment with applying data mining to terrorism it doesn't really bother me. It' not like they actually appear to have done anything with the information. They never officially shared it with anyone. Some people tried. And, behind the scenes, always in the nexus of information-sharing, looms Jamie Gorelick, being (in a junior lawyerly fashion) far-too-conservative in what is allowed, no matter the value.

      However, if Atta's name came up before 9/11, even if there were a ton of other false positives, I want to know that. I want to understand what restrictions made it impossible for people to openly talk about it in the intelligence community. I want to know that efforts at sharing useful information are easier now. I want to believe we've learned something. I don't want to believe that we are instead covering up efforts that may have been partially useful and would have eventually borne fruit in advance of events.

      Curt Weldon is making a big deal out of this because people don't seem to care. Well, what if only 10 names came up, and Atta and three of his colleagues were in that group? Would that be enough to seriously investigate? Most people would say certainly. What about 100? 1000? At some point it's too expensive to follow-up, and I suspect that was the problem.

      But I still want to know how effective it was.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Sep 21 2005 03:23 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Able Danger: No crucial testimony?

      This morning we find that Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and defense contractor John Smith have been forbidden to testify in today's hearing about Able Danger, the Pentagon data mining operation targeted at discovering terrorists before they strike.

      In his prepared remarks, [attorney Mark] Zaid was ready to say on behalf of Shaffer and contractor John Smith that Able Danger, using data mining techniques, identified four of the terrorists who struck on Sept. 11, 2001—including mastermind Mohamed Atta.

      That is the key testimony, of course. The other important piece is how this information did not get incorporated into the findings of the 9/11 commission. Captain's Quarters indicates that Major (ret.) Eric Klein Smith will be able to testify on that:

      However, Shaffer says that former Major Eric Kleinsmith, now a civilian contractor, will still testify at the panel. Kleinsmith received the orders to destroy the Able Danger database. [Senator Arlen] Specter's insistence that the hearings go forward probably hinges on Kleinsmith's ability to testify to the information that got destroyed, who ordered its destruction, and why. From that point, the committee could unravel an entire command sequence that will uncover how Able Danger got missed by the 9/11 Commission.

      Another potentially illuminating source is Dr. Eileen Pricer, who testified to the Congressional subcommittee on national security. While her testimony has not been released, the Captain did find mention of it in statements by Congressman Christopher Shays:

      Mr. Shays. In a briefing we had yesterday, we had Eileen Pricer, who argues that we don't have the data we need because we don't take all the public data that is available and mix it with the security data. And just taking public data, using, you know, computer systems that are high-speed and able to digest, you know, literally floors' worth of material, she can take relationships that are seven times removed, seven units removed, and when she does that, she ends up with relationships to the bin Laden group where she sees the purchase of chemicals, the sending of students to universities. You wouldn't see it if you isolated it there, but if that unit is connected to that unit, which is connected to that unit, which is connected to that unit, you then see the relationship. So we don't know ultimately the authenticity of how she does it, but when she does it, she comes up with the kind of answer that you have just asked, which is a little unsettling.

      So, apparently she discussed the methods of Able Danger with a congressional subcommittee a month after 9/11. Now we have a trail what “What did they know and when did they know it?” questions to last us a few election cycles.

      Let's go back to more statements from Zaid:

      On three occasions, Able Danger personnel attempted to provide the FBI with information, but Department of Defense attorneys stopped them because of legal concerns about military-run investigations on U.S. soil, Zaid said in his prepared remarks, encouraging the panel to locate a legal memorandum that he said Defense Department attorneys used to justify stopping the meetings.

      It's hard to absolve the 9/11 Commission of incompetence when they missed the chance to examine pre-9/11 intelligence identifying Atta as a terrorist, especially over procedural matters. Atta may have been here in the states, but he was a foreign national with multiple violations of his visa. It's compelling to think we could have stopped 9/11, but I doubt it. There probably were not enough resources to track every person that Able Danger flagged, and certainly the priorities were different then. Even so, the Commission should have taken them seriously, and investigated the impact of not following up on Able Danger.

      I'm looking forward to what testimony we will hear, today. So far we have a data warehousing expert, the person that destroyed the Able Danger information, and the Congressman that outed the entire affair to the press. There's also a Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott that will testify. Sounds like a good start.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Sep 21 2005 07:01 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      National Archives Releases New Version of 9/11 Report

      Yesterday more 9/11 information was declassified. Misty pointed out an obscure article that mentioned it, otherwise it would have escaped my notice.

      A new version of the “Staff Monograph on the `Four Flights and Civil Avation Security'” is available here.

      This newer version contains less redacted information than the first version released on January 28, 2005.

      There is still redacted material, such as columns in some tables, a quote on page 56, another on 57, a paragraph on 63, etc. There doesn't appear to be a summary of what was released. I'll have to poke through both reports and see what we are now allowed to know. Amusing redacted material includes this paragraph:

      To be listed in a security directive, an individual has to pose a “direct” threat to aviation. In other words…

      The rest of the paragraph was redacted, indicating we shouldn't have a clearer definition of what a “direct” threat to aviation is. Much of the information obscured from us concerns CAPPS policy which, I guess, we don't need to know.

      This worries me because security through obscurity only delays but does not prevent a breach. It also delays (and possibly prevents) experts from helping pro bono. What happened to open security? Perhaps that remains too hard or expensive.

      I wonder if systems could be set up a similar way to CERT, which lets software vendors know about security problems a few months before publicizing those problems to the world. They are a trusted clearinghouse for information on breaches, and they force vendors to react by publicizing every breach they receive, after a suitable waiting period to correct the problem. There does not seem to be a similar system for policymakers.

      Update: Looks like there's coverage in the NYT.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Sep 14 2005 10:07 AM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  No trackbacks

      Confronting Terrorism IV

      Cox & Forkum have updated their classic political cartoon:

      05.09.08.ConfrontTerIV-X.png

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Sunday, Sep 11 2005 09:22 AM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      September 11, 2005

      A year ago I wrote a retrospective on 9/11. It still applies today.

      9/11 has been referred to as a day of reverence, or reflection, or anger, or other emotions. For me it is a reminder of the need for proactive, not reactive, measures to handle our own safety.

      On Wizbang today they are posting entries that correspond to the times of certain events, such as the crashes and the towers collapsing. The one event that did not happen on 9/11, but long before, also needs to be remembered:

      This enemy declared war against us a long long time ago. It took nearly three thousand deaths for us to react.

      I worry today that the constant political bickering has slowed our reaction to the discovery of terrorist plots and our effectiveness at containing them. I guess I have had my role in that bickering, and I admit that emotionally it is more satisfying to do something than do nothing. I just hope it doesn't take another monumental event to ensure efforts to secure freedom for ourselves (and I believe it means securing freedom for others as well).

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Sunday, Sep 11 2005 08:44 AM  |  Permalink  |  2 comments  |  No trackbacks

      Able Danger

      I heard about the Defense Department's “Able Danger” project last night on Victoria Taft's radio show and I'm wondering why I don't see much mention of it in the news sites I read. So far, only Fox News seems to be giving it much space, with two articles.

      The gist is that a data mining project in the Defense Department figured out that Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of the 9/11 hijackings, and other hijackers were bad people and here in the country. When this information was brought to the FBI, they refused it and even covered up the picture of Atta under a post-in note because of Jamie Gorelick's interpretation of the needed “wall” between law enforcement and military information sources. Atta was here in the country legally, therefore Gorelick's edict prevented sharing information about him.

      When the Able Danger folks wanted to testify to the 9/11 commission, they were rebuffed. It is a interesting coincidence that Gorelick is also on this commission. As a result, the report of the commission says nothing about Defense's early concerns about Atta.

      Representative Curt Weldon has tried to bring this information to light, only getting attention on it recently:

      In June, Weldon displayed charts on the floor of the U.S. Senate showing that Able Danger identified the suspected terrorists in 1999. The unit repeatedly asked for the information to be forwarded to the FBI but apparently to no avail. Various news outlets picked up on the story this week.
      Weldon told FOX News on Wednesday that staff members of the Sept. 11 commission were briefed at least once by officials on Able Danger, but that he does not believe the message was sent to the panel members themselves. He also said some phone calls made by military officials with Able Danger to the commission staff went unreturned.

      He goes on further:

      According to Weldon, Able Danger identified Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaf al-Hazmi as members of a cell Able Danger code-named “Brooklyn” because of some loose connections to New York City.
      Weldon said that in September 2000, the unit recommended on three separate occasions that its information on the hijackers be given to the FBI “so they could bring that cell in and take out the terrorists.” However, Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the recommendation, arguing that Atta and the others were in the country legally so information on them could not be shared with law enforcement.

      Obviously there is more to investigate here, but it sounds as though we weren't as dumb about terrorism as some thought we were, but we were dmb about how we used our information. As a database person (with a recent foray into open source), it bothers me that we have great tools but poor processes when it comes to dealing with information.

      One again, I strongly recommend reading the entire 9/11 Commission Report. While it may have weaknesses, it is the unanimous opinion of the commission. Other things may be debatable, but I think we can take what they did say to heart.

      I'm sure we'll see more on Able Danger later.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Friday, Aug 12 2005 02:42 PM  |  Permalink  |  2 comments  |  No trackbacks

      Naeem Noor Khan's Laptop, Again

      Naeem Noor Khan's laptop has cropped up again, this time in relation to the London subway/bus bombings.

      The laptop computer of Naeem Noor Khan, a captured al Qaeda leader, contained plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway system, as well as on financial buildings in both New York and Washington.

      So, based on those plans, the British arrested a bunch of troublemakers in Luton, but apparently missed the new growing cell of the four men involved in the bombings, as well as their supplier. Naeem Noor Khan was the original mastermind.

      “There's absolutely no doubt he was part of an al Qaeda operation aimed at not only the United States but Great Britain,” explained Alexis Debat, a former official in the French Defense Ministry who is now a senior terrorism consultant for ABC News.

      But chasing down the lead only cut off the head of the hydra.

      “It is very likely this group was activated last year after the other group was arrested,” Debat said.

      Khan was our double agent inside Al Qaeda that was outed to the New York Times by Pakistani intelligence. Last August I wondered if the New York Times would realize its error in burning such a source. After all, that was a billion times worse than revealing the identity of a CIA desk jockey that sends her husband on politically-motivated trips to subvert the restabilization of the middle east…

      Brings a new definition to the term “Roving Reporter.”

      Update: I'm adding this to the Beltway Traffic Jam.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Jul 14 2005 07:41 PM  |  Permalink  |  No comments  |  1 trackback

      London Bombings

      unionjack.png

      7/7 joins 9/11 and 3/11 in the list of infamous attacks targeting innocent civilians.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Thursday, Jul 7 2005 12:17 PM  |  Permalink  |  1 comment  |  No trackbacks

      Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Laptop

      Looks like we captured Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's laptop. Not as good as getting the terrorist mastermind himself, but let's see what we can find inside.

      U.S. intelligence officials who were briefed on data gleaned from a computer taken after a Feb. 20 U.S. Special Forces ambush in Iraq—in which Zarqawi narrowly escaped—told the [New York] Post that they have discovered shocking new details about the growing threat to U.S. and Western interests posed by Zarqawi, who they say is rapidly eclipsing bin Laden in importance.
      “He's becoming the new bin Laden. He's the man out there carrying out attacks on Americans every day while bin Laden, who is heavily pressured and having difficulty communicating on a regular basis, is in the shadows and becoming more of a symbolic figure,” former CIA counterterrorism director Vincent Cannistraro told the Post.

      That's a little disingenuous. Bin Laden has been more of a CEO for Al Quaeda. He works on getting money. He approves major ops. He was more of an operational person when they were working in Afghanistan. Ther person really being eclipsed by Zarqawi is Ayman al-Zawahiri.

      But a U.S. official told FOX News that while Zarqawi's movement extends beyond Iraq, the official cast doubt on reports such as those in the Post that the terrorist has now eclipsed Usama bin Laden (search) in stature within Al Qaeda.
      This official pointed out that the Zarqawi network has struck in Jordan, for example, where Zarqawi associates were blamed for the 2002 assassination of U.S. Agency for International Development officer Lawrence Foley. But sources point out that as his near capture in February illustrates, Zarqawi has got his hands full already in Iraq. Yes, Zarqawi's organization has gone outside Iraq before but the U.S. official would not characterize Zarqawi as now emerging as Al Qaeda's new leader.

      Golly! Do we have another case of a CIA official talking out of school (this time to the New York Post) only to get smacked down by another official in the US government? How long before Porter Goss has to fire another rogue director in the CIA?

      The data in his computer reveals Zarqawi is directing scores of fanatics from Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states who volunteered for “martyrdom” missions in Iraq and other countries, sources said.
      “The information has given us new insight into the scope of his operations outside of Iraq that we did not know about previously,” a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the analysis told the Post.

      Safe to talk about what we've found on the laptop since Zarqawi knows what we have already. I suspect he's already working hard to protect those assets now exposed by this find. In addition, he will have to change how he operates since so much detail was gleaned from this source. Every time he changes what's worse he has an opportunity to make a mistake.

      We've missed Zarqawi so many times that it's certainly getting frustrating, but I suspect that every time we make sure we learn our lessons. Zarqawi has to keep being more innovative than us at every turn, and we have more people working on it than he does.

      Josh Poulson

      Posted in category “Terrorism” Wednesday, Apr 27 2005 10:03 AM  |  Permalink  |  2 comments  |  No trackbacks

      Ambassador Powell, Pakistan and Matchbooks

      A followup to “US Ambassador Impedes Bin Laden Manhunt.”

      Richard Miniter's story, “How a Lone Diplomat Compromised the Hunt for Bin Laden,” got a reaction out of the State Department. Miniter covers the response in his blog:

      So the State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli decided to fire back at me for my article on the front-page of the New York Sun on Monday. What is interesting is that baseless charges (“untrue and unfair”!) are thrown around so freely. I wonder if he actually read the entire article. Mr. Deputy Spokesman raises a number of objections, as you can see below. All of the points he makes are mentioned in the original story. His complaint amounts to arguing that the State Dept. view is buried too far into the story. I guess he wants to play editor…

      A day later, Miniter gets a reassertion from Representative Kirk:

      The lawmaker at the center of The New York Sun's exclusive yesterday stands by his account. Rep. Mark Kirk, a Republican of Illinois, who sits on the appropriations subcommittee that funds the State Department, faulted Ambassador Nancy Powell's decision to impound wanted posters, matchbooks, and other items translated into local languages.
      Asked for comment yesterday, Mr. Kirk declined to elaborate further, adding that the hunt for Mr. bin Laden has been invigorated by the replacement of Ms. Powell by veteran diplomat Ryan Crocker.

      I suspect this spat will continue. If the program had been discontinued by State before Ms. Powell arrived, well and good, but it was started up again after Crocker was appointed. If Powell didn't kill it, why did Crocker bring it back?

      It seems to be the belief of some that it doesn't work.

      Maybe rewards don't work against current terrorists, but do they deter others from becoming terrorists? Or does it make them bolder, like the Wild West movies where outlaws try for higher rewards?

      I think the rewards involved here are big enough to change someone's life if they bring forward real information.

      Amazon.com links: