Thwarting Terrorists or Encouraging Knuckleheads?

While I take some comfort from the fact that there hasn't been a terrorist attack in the US since 9/11/01, today's arrest of a guy who was entertaining the notion of attacking a Rockford, IL mall before Christmas does not make me feel appreciably safer. The devil it seems is in the details. The case only became public today so all the details are not yet available, but intriguing facts lurk behind the SUPERCALIFRAGILISTIC HEADLINES. Two other "thwarted" domestic terrorist plots similarly, upon closer inspection, may not represent the grave threat to Americans that was initially claimed.

Before exploring the details I think the "fault" sits with a variety of players. Firstly, the FBI, stung by its well-documented failures in following up on information that may have resulted in stopping the 9/11 attacks, has rabidly investigated any and all potential threats. Secondly, the desire to play up the fruits of the substantial resources dedicated to the anti-terrorism effort virtually ensure that any and all arrests are announced with grave seriousness and unflinching sincerity. Finally, there is the press that absolutely loves to front reports of foiled terrorist plots. The reports are framed grandly and seldom address the bald reality behind the grandiose headlines.

The Rockford arrest and the Miami case share at least one significant element, a confidential informant that penetrated the plot. Closer reflection in the Miami case reveals the terrorist plotters as extreme slackers, it was the confidential informant who forcefully lambasted the group for its in transience, going so far as to threatening to quit if they didn't blow something up soon. The public was also informed that the group considered both the FBI HQ in Miami and
the Sears Tower in Chicago. Closer scrutiny reveals that the informer bought the digital camera and encouraged group members to take pictures of the FBI HQ. The Sears Tower threat was even more attenuated, the only apparent connection was that one of the group used to work or make deliveries to the Sears Tower. These guys weren't zealots, they were a running joke in the neighborhood they were based in. Unfortunately for these unclever lads they are screwed. Not admittedly, these guys aren't model citizens and weren't likely to making significant contributions to society - but those things were not crimes serious enough to land these jokers in super-max jails for most if not all of their remaining lives.

In the Rockford the government informer reportedly encouraged this naer-do-well to focus his efforts on waging jihad upon shoppers at a local mall. He likely encouraged the two recent trips to the mall ostensibly to case the target. The informer then set up a meeting where the perp was to exchange audio speakers for hand grenades. Is that normal operating procedures for weapon merchants, I mean really did the guy first try to offer his Pez holder collection for the grenades. We have also been informed that the terrorism plotter only weapon during this time was a pocket knife.

I'm not trying to be excessively glib, but I admit to becoming a bit circumspect when I see reports exhorting another grave threat thwarted. The charges brought against the former Chicago gang member initially accused of planning to explode a nuclear "dirty" bomb are perplexing. He faces charges that have nothing to do with the supposed plot that was strewn across the front pages of newspapers just prior to the 2002 congressional midterm elections. These facts garner precious little attention today because the press has moved on. Similarities also exist with regard to the London plot to blow up airlines. Again the reality behind the splashy headlines raises numerous questions regarding the extent of the threat. A number of people initially detained have been released. Many of those detained hadn't even applied for a passport and enabling the explosive that was proposed was an incredibly difficult and delicate job.

I am not suggesting that the FBI or Scotland Yard be any less vigilant in tracking potential threats, but citizens should better understand the reality behind the headlines. There is a line where the benefits of added security are outweighed by the cost - liberty. I believe there is a balance, I do expect and desire security for my person and my loved ones, but risk is a fact of life.

I think these issues are worthy of a vigorous and open debate and that reasonable people will differ on where the lines should be drawn. My concern is that the issues are not being actively debated. Moreover, dampening or extinguishing discussion by dismissing advocates of personal liberties and constitutional protections as weak or unpatriotic is disingenuous and does our republic a great disservice.