He now admits he was a jihadist here.

The Obama administration is hushing it up.  But the American people realize they are less secure under Obama with his disastrous policies toward terrorism.

“There appears to be an increase in [terrorist] activity in the U.S.,”
warns Jenkins, who calculates that there have been 32 terror-related
“events” on these shores since 9/11, and that 12 of those occurred in
2009. (See the top 10 inept terrorist plots.)

Some of the more noteworthy “events” of 2009:

• In January, Bryant Neal Vinas, a Long Island convert to Islam, plead
guilty to helping al-Qaeda in a plot to blow up a train in Penn Station.

• Late in 2008, Shirwa Ahmed, a Somali-American college student from
Minneapolis, became the first American suicide bomber on record when
he killed 29 people in an attack in Somalia. Earlier in the year, the
FBI had revealed that at least 20 Somali-Americans from the
Minneapolis area had traveled to Somalia to join al-Shabaab, a radical
militia tied to al-Qaeda. Five Somali-Americans are believed to have
died in fighting there this year, and Somali officials say at least
one more unnamed American citizen has become a suicide bomber on
behalf of al-Shabab. (See pictures of a Jihadist’s journey.)

• In June, Abdulhakim Muhammed, an Arkansas convert to Islam, was
accused of killing one soldier and wounding another in an attack at a
military recruitment center in Little Rock.

• In September, an Illinois man, Michael Finton, who converted to
Islam in prison, was accused of trying to blow up a Federal building
in Springfield.

• In October, David Coleman Headley, a Chicago businessman, was
arrested for allegedly plotting a terrorist attack on a Danish
newspaper that had published controversial cartoons mocking the
Prophet Muhammed. (Tahawwur Rana, a Pakistani-Canadian resident of
Chicago was also arrested in connection with the same plot.) Headley
was later additionally charged with abetting the Mumbai terrorist
attack of November 2008. (Read “The Chicago Suspect: Are Pakistani
Jihadis Going Global?.”)

• In November, Maj. Nidal Hasan, the son of Palestinian immigrants who
had grown up in the U.S., was accused of going on a shooting spree at
Fort Hood, killing 13 and wounding 30. (Read “The FBI Probe: What Went
Wrong at Fort Hood?.”)

• Also in November, eight Somali-American men from Minnesota were
charged with terrorism-related counts involving al-Shabaab. Six other
had been charged previously. Most of the men were charged in absentia
because they remain in Somalia, along with dozens of Somali-Americans
who are believed to have joined the Qaeda-linked militia.

• And earlier this month, five men from the Washington, D.C., area
were detained in Pakistan, where local officials say they had been
trying to join the fight against U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Ramy
Zamzam, said to be the leader of the group, is a Howard University
dental student; two others are sons of businessmen.

• Some other cases involve legal residents who are not U.S. citizens,
such as Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan suspect arrested in Denver and
charged with a plot to bomb targets in New York, and Jordanian Hosam
Smadi, arrested in Dallas, accused of trying blow up a skyscraper.
(Read “Three Key Questions About Zazi and Terrorism.”)

Terrorism experts and Muslim community leaders caution that the spurt
in such events doesn’t necessarily add up to a trend. For one thing,
the cases are unconnected. “Each case has its own special
circumstances,” says Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on
American-Islamic Relations.

Nor is there likely to be wide-scale extremism in the American Muslim
community. Jenkins points out that that there’s “no underground
network, and no deep reservoir of resentment.” Hooper notes that the
problem “is not coming from rhetoric within the community; it’s not
the case that young men are being radicalized in American mosques.”

Indeed, one of the lessons of 2009 is that the Internet can suffice as
a recruitment tool for extremists. From Smadi to the Virginia Five,
many of the men accused of terrorist-related activities in the past
year first made contact with jihadist groups online, officials say.
“More and more people are going online to find inspiration,” says
Danny Coulson, a former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI.

Jihadist recruiters have grown increasingly sophisticated in their use
of the Internet, and many of them specifically target American
audiences. Extremist e-preachers such as Anwar al-Awlaki, an American
living in Yemen who exchanged e-mails with Maj. Hasan, communicate in
English, which makes them more accessible to American Muslims.
Pakistani authorities believe the Virginia Five were recruited by a
man known as Saifullah, who communicated mainly through e-mails.

Not all jihadi recruiters want their American recruits to travel
abroad for training or to join existing groups. “They’ve figured out
that people who travel to Pakistan or Afghanistan or Somalia are
probably being watched by the authorities,” says Coulson. “So they’ll
just encourage you to act independently, without direct affiliation
with any group. That makes it harder for law enforcement.”

The good news: If recruiters can use the Internet, so too can U.S.
intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Terrorism experts say U.S.
authorities have become much better at finding plotters online, and
putting them under surveillance. Smadi, for instance, was first
spotted on a jihadi website.

 

It is long past time for Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano to resign.  Obama should too.  Counting down the days until we can vote against Obama and his minions.  If there is not a successful attack, in a few weeks, the enhanced “security measures” will be muted.  People will forget about the threat, and the politically correct push to close Gitmo, and avoid “racial profiling” will be back in force.  The Left does not want to fight the war on terror, since it cuts against the Leftist agenda.  The Left does so only when it is forced to do so, temporarily, by al Qaeda.

The terrorists are not going to stop, and they will become ever-more innovative as they exploit the seems in air security.
 

John Leonard at Americanthinker.com provides a chronology of terrorist dry-runs and suspicious acts since 1999.

Chronology of Pattern Behavior

Once the point had been reached where additional information is no
longer forthcoming about these two flights in the foreseeable future,
I didn’t know where to look for more information. An experienced
reporter working on these stories suggested I turn my attention
backwards to seeing whether any dots could be connected to incidents
on past flights.

America West Flight 90 — Nov 19, 1999. In this pre-September 11th
incident, two passengers speaking Arabic roamed the plane without
permission and attempted to enter the cockpit in what has been
described by the 9/11 commission in their report as a dry run.
“Students” Muhammed al-Qudhaieen and Hamdan al-Shalawi were placed in
custody and removed from the flight. Bomb-sniffing dogs were brought
to search the plane. The airline was sued for discrimination, but the
case was dismissed.

Northwest Flight 327 — Jun 29, 2004. Described by flight marshals as
a terrorist dry run, thirteen men of Syrian descent changed seats,
congregated in the aisles, used the bathrooms excessively, appeared
nervous, and behaved in a strange manner long enough to draw attention
and concern from fellow passengers. Air marshals on the plane
instructed the flight crew to radio ahead for law enforcement to meet
the plane when it landed in Los Angeles.

US Airways Flight 300 — November 20, 2006. The infamous case of the
flying imams, who allegedly changed seats in order to take control of
every entry and exit route from the plane, ignored their assigned
seats, requested unnecessary seat belt extensions, and disrupted the
flight. The unused seat belt extenders were left lying on the airplane
floor. Hmmm. Webbed strap belts with metal heads attached — why would
anyone be concerned about that? Who worries about customers acting
strangely who make obviously unnecessary and unusual special requests?

The imams were removed from the plane but cried discrimination after
the fact. They sued the airline and received an undisclosed
settlement. CAIR and the imams declared victory.

AirTran Flight 175 — Jan 1, 2009. According to an article published
by the Atlanta Business Chronicle, nine Muslims traveling to an
Islamic conference were removed from the plane after two members of
the group allegedly engaged in a debate about the safest location to
sit in the event of a bombing on the plane. The conversation alarmed
other passengers, who alerted the flight crew and caused the plane to
be diverted. According to Doug Hagmann in the Canada Free Press:

[N]one of the remaining 95 passengers made it to their ultimate
destinations on time, AirTran refunded some tickets and made other
booking arrangements due to the incident, which cost the airline
dearly in time, money, and passenger goodwill.

A press release from AirTran found at EuroInvestor.co.ukincredibly
reported that AirTran actually rewarded the nine Muslims who disrupted
the flight, saying:

The airline has refunded the air fares of the nine passengers detained
for questioning, has agreed to reimburse the passengers for expenses
incurred by taking another airline and has also offered to transport
the passengers home to Washington, DC, free of charge.

So let me get this straight: the nine Muslims who caused the flight
delay and scared other passengers profited from their misconduct?
Their airfare was refunded and they got a free flight home? Sounds
like a pretty good deal to me…is this a great country, or what?

United flight 22 — September 28, 2009. According to the KTLA.com, two
men of apparent Middle Eastern descentwere removed from a flight at
LAX, and the flight was delayed while the bomb squad searched the
plane. An article in the LA Times reported the incident as follows:
A law enforcement source said at least one of the men ran into a
restroom on the plane and appeared to hide while the New York-bound
jet was taxiing on the runway, according to the source, who spoke on
the condition of anonymity because the case was ongoing.
AirTran 297 — Nov 17, 2009. A group of ethnic passengers used
electronic devices on tarmac preparing for takeoff, changed seats,
moved around, ignored flight attendants’ instructions, and caused
flight delay as the plane returned to terminal.

UA 227 — Dec 9, 2009. A group of passengers believed to be of Middle
Eastern descent changed seats and allegedly moved other passengers’
luggage at the gate while the plane prepared for departure, prompting
their removal from the flight and bomb-sniffing dogs to check the
baggage.

Two possibilities that come immediately to mind are either that these
incidents are orchestrated as a ploy to create a scenario to litigate
for profit like the imams from US Airways Flight 300 — or something
more sinister is in the works. In the aftermath of Fort Hood, can we
afford to ignore warning signs of abnormal or pattern behavior any
longer?

It is clear that CAIR, the threat of lawsuits, and political correctness united to make us less safe. We were fortunate this time.

We call on the Obama administration to declare a new policy, not just protecting but praising, those who speak up when they witness Muslims or others behaving in a suspicious manner.

That is a new development and one that is, of course, worrisome.

Bad news for travelers:  From now on, we should expect to have our luggage  searched when checking into hotels.

Seven years ago, America was under attack. America’s first responders, law enforcement, and emergency specialists responded to that attack. Our preparedness specialists provided guidance on the types of terrorist threats that we might be facing in the weeks that followed. Preparedness details about how to respond to potential Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) terrorist threats were distributed. America created a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other agencies to address the need for homeland security. Counterterrorism groups were created or expanded in the federal government and law enforcement; specialists in tactical areas were identified and recruited. From a military perspective, our National Guard patrolled major American airports and transportation hubs. On September 2001, Congress authorized the use of military force against those responsible the 9/11 attacks and nations that harbored such terrorists. A year later, Congress again authorized the use of military force, this time to address perceived threats by Iraq. America’s Homeland Security Department assessed potential terrorist targets and offered recommendations as to appropriate areas and types of threats that were the most likely and most vulnerable for “targeted” use homeland security funding and resources.
These resources were focused on tactical and targeted efforts to protect Americans and prevent terrorism. Such efforts were a reaction to the 9/11 attacks and the realization of the vulnerability of the American homeland to such attacks. Such reactive preparedness was and continues to be a priority for America. But we also need to reflect and gain a strategic awareness of the threat by asking who and what are we fighting, and why are they attacking us. We need to do more than just react, we need to plan, we need to think, and we need a real national strategy on the enemy.

Such strategic awareness and analysis is a part of any major endeavor. For our first responders today in an emergency circumstance, they try to think strategically. They will ask questions to triage an attack – is it an explosion, a fire, a chemical attack, a radiological attack? They will recommend actions, especially in an emergency situation, based on an understanding of the threat. Such strategic awareness and definition of the threat is imperative for effective actions by emergency responders.

Why isn’t such strategic awareness an imperative for America’s government leadership on the larger, ideological threat that is the basis for Jihadist terror attacks like 9/11?

Seven years after 9/11, most of our resources continue to remain focused exclusively on tactical measures and operations.

Seven years after 9/11, America’s governmental leadership still has no strategic definition of the enemy or its ideology.

Seven years after 9/11, America’s governmental leadership can’t even agree if they should use the word “Jihad.”

This exceptional commentary continues:

By our very identity as Americans, we have the obligation and the duty to confront those ideologies that are against equality and liberty, such as Islamic supremacism. We must mobilize our elected representatives and the American people in every area of life to take on this war of ideas. We must reveal those Islamic supremacist groups that seek to infiltrate America for what they are. We must not allow those who lack the courage or knowledge of what it means to be an American to represent us here in this country or to represent us to people around the world. We must demand that our government leaders acknowledge the ideological threat of Islamic supremacism to America. We must not tolerate leadership that continues to be in denial of this threat and that continues to refuse to develop a comprehensive, multi-faceted strategy against this threat.

In America, every life is precious. Unlike our enemy, we do not “love death.” Our respect for human life is another one of the human, inalienable rights that we defend as Americans. We respect and admire the sacrifices made by our law enforcement, our emergency rescue teams, our armed forces. We mourn every loss of life. We respect those who sacrifice their lives for our national cause.

Our brave men and women deserve the same type of courage that they give, and they deserve the same type of sacrifice that they make. This is why we must never tolerate a war without a strategic direction, without a defined enemy, and without a defined enemy ideology. Their sacrifices must never, never be made in vain. Those who have lost their lives and those who have dedicated their lives in such struggles must never be taken for granted. That would be inherently un-American.

The courage that we show in confronting this Islamic supremacist enemy is not only our personal sacrifice, it is also the courage of our convictions. It is our public demonstration and commitment to the inalienable human rights of equality and liberty. The world is watching America to see whether it truly believes in equality and liberty enough to confront the ideology of Islamic supremacism.