General Alexander is quite right, and it’s even worse than he thinks. He talks here about al Qaeda, but the threat is much larger than al Qaeda. The threat, in fact, involves adherents of a belief system that U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officials are forbidden to study, because it is the official dogma of the regime that that belief system is harmless and peaceful, and thus the fact that the perpetrators of terror attacks are simply wrong when they point to it as their motivation and inspiration, and their words can be disregarded.
This official idiocy makes it difficult, if not impossible, for those whose job it is to protect us to study the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us. And that makes it easier for the enemy, as no one can defeat an enemy he does not understand. As I show in my book Arab Winter Comes to America (order here; Kindle edition here), this politically correct willful ignorance led directly to the Boston Marathon jihad bombing and the Fort Hood jihad massacre, both of which could have, should have, and would have been prevented were not our law enforcement and intelligence agencies trapped in a politically correct straitjacket.
“‘A lot more terror attacks coming our way:’ former NSA chief,” by Adam Edelman, New York Daily News, May 18, 2014:
A former top U.S. security official fears the nation could be attacked again by terrorists.
Gen. Keith Alexander, who retired in March as director of the National Security Agency after eight years on the job, said the probability of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil is increasing.
“The number of attacks that are coming, the probability, it’s growing,” Alexander said in a New Yorker magazine interview published over the weekend. “What I saw at N.S.A. is that there is a lot more coming our way.”
“We’re at greater risk,” Alexander said. “Look at the way Al Qaeda networks. From Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb, and now in Syria, the al-Nusra front.”
“Look at the number of jihadists going into Syria and what they want to do. When put all that together, you can say those are distant countries, but a lot of these groups are looking to attack the United States. I take that threat very seriously”, Alexander added, stressing the need to use controversial spying tactics to help combat terrorism.
Alexander claimed that such tactics — including the agency’s bulk-metadata collection program (which many lawmakers have claimed is unconstitutional) — have contributed to the disruption to at least 54 terrorist plots.
The program, along with another NSA strategy called “reasonable articulable suspicion,” may have even prevented the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, Alexander said.
“We know we didn’t stop 9/11. People were trying, but they didn’t have the tools,” he said. “This tool, we believed, would help them.”
mortimer says
Only one who is UNACQUAINTED with Islam’s source texts could say that JIHAD IS NOT ISLAMIC.
Jihad is the ‘highest deed’ in Islam and any Muslim who gives money to jihad is considered equal in merit to the jihadist. Halal meat and all proceeds from Muslim businesses, contribute the zakat tax of 2.5% to jihad. Sometimes the entire 2.5% amount goes entirely to jihad.
Zakat is never given to the dirty kufars and never benefits them.
Ernie Banks says
Perhaps so. But Alexander has no credibility. His claim of 54 plots broken up by massive spying has been proved false. He lied to Congress about what the NSA was doing. We can all be grateful that he is no longer involved.
BlueRaven says
What else is there to Islam than Jihad, plotting Jihad, concocting conspiracy, theories, preaching hate and terror, raping young girls? He doesn’t need NSA instrument to figure there is lots and lots of Jihad on the way. If anything he has underestimated the threat. He hasn’t even started to count the stealth Jihad within the US – so called inner struggle in the Quran. We have thousands of terror attacks on the way, because more we succeed to thaw terror attacks the more they will devise a new method to circumvent any hurdle. Remember what Bin Laden said “we have time on our side”. We are continuously letting more and more potential terrorist in. The threat can only increase proportionally, it can not diminish. Pure and simple logic.
David says
That’s true Ernie Banks, seems once you get to a certain level in the U.S. now it doesn’t matter what you do, you are immune from prosecution. Alexander blatantly lied to Congress about the spying of the NSA, seems he is going to get away with it too.
Jaladhi says
As long as our dumb officials don’t admit and proclaim boldly that jihad terror attacks have a direct connection with Islam, and quran instructs Muslims to carry jihad against us, they will not get anywhere. They will just keep looking in dark vacuum to find the cause of these jihad attacks – and Muslims will be laughing at us all the way to their paradise!!!
mark says
This is going to be politically incorrect, so hang on. What you have to do (though we are too sissified to do it) when you catch a terrorist is execute him in a very public, painful way in the country that he did, or orchestrated, his dastardly deed in. You start doing this to those who are behind the terrorism, and you will put such fear into these people that acts of terror will diminish exceedingly.
richard Sherman says
Then you chop up the body and feed it to pigs on the White House lawn on world wide television…..it worked for Gen Pershing…it will work if we do it now
tpellow says
And, of course, this global Islamic jihad is a real threat, and afflicts the U.K now:-
“British Father Guilty Of Syria Terror Plan.
“Mashudur Choudhury plotted to join the rebel uprising with a group he called the ‘Britani brigade Bangladeshi bad boys’.”
http://news.sky.com/story/1265456/british-father-guilty-of-syria-terror-plan
PJG says
National self-defence is controversial. The very idea of it is controversial. Some think it’s racist to think about protecting Western citizens in their own countries because our “enemies” are “foreign” and (yes, these words need quotation marks now as we don’t have enemies; they are only people presently in other countries who don’t live here yet.)
I’ve seen virtually all my old friends become bonkers with PC. One by one I’ve seen them all swallow the lot and retire from the realm of reason.
dumbledoresarmy says
Try using a bit of psycho-babble back at them.
One of the things psychologists say about abused children and other victims of abuse is that they don’t have any sense of boundaries.
And what do abusers do? – they don’t respect boundaries, they don’t accept that boundaries exist.
A rapist doesn’t respect the right of his victim to say NO, to refuse sex. He doesn’t accept that there’s a boundary he ought not to cross.
And no sane person accuses a woman of being “selfish” if she says NO to a creepy guy who gloms onto her and demands sex; who grabs her backside or her bosom when they’re in the train or walking down the street. And no sane person accuses the woman of assault if she *slaps* said creepy guy or sprays him with mace, to make him go away.
Run those examples past them and then ask why families, communities, nations shouldn’t have at least the same right to be defined by some kind of boundary, to cross which, permission should be asked; and NO should normally be accepted as NO. And ask why someone entering a household or family should not be required to live by the “house rules”, and tossed out, if they refuse; if they grant that, then why should not a nation – a network of families and households that shares a common set of “house rules” – do the same?
Or try this thought experiment.
Two people come running to your door. One is the abused wife, bruised and screaming. The other is her murderous ex-husband, waving an axe. Do you let them *both* in?
Now, “scale up”. Two kinds of people want to come to Australia. There are Coptic Christians, from Egypt, who are being horribly abused by Muslims, in Egypt (and have been, for 1200 years). *And* there are …Egyptian Muslims, the very same group who have been busily persecuting Christians for 1200 years. Same deal with Christians from Syria and Iraq, as opposed to Muslims from Syria and Iraq.
Do we *really* have no right to discriminate between those two sets of “candidates” for admission? Why let in the persecutors as well as the persecuted? (In the case of *Muslims* from a Muslim country who claim they are being persecuted [by other Muslims, whether the more-Islamic or less-Islamic or other-sect kind]…the awful truth is that they probably are, but that they still belong to a group that, all over the world, is persecuting *others*, and are likely to attack *us*, once they get the chance).
Weren’t we horribly embarrassed when we discovered that, after WWII, we had let in *not only* Jewish survivors of the Shoah, but….among the *other* Displaced Persons…persons who turned out to have been unrepentant Nazis? A bit of due diligence back in the day would have saved worlds of embarrassment.
Here’s another “thought experiment”.
Ask people whether they think our Homeland Security situation would be NO different from what it presently is, IF instead of 600 000 Muslims in Australia, we had NO Muslims and, instead, 600 000 more Buddhists, or 600 000 more Jews, or Hindus, or Coptic or Assyrian Christians.
Ask them point blank: if they had a choice between a mosque for 1000 people being built across the road from their house, OR *any* one of the following – a Buddhist monastery, a Hindu temple, a Christian church, a Jewish Synagogue – would it make *no* difference to them? NO difference at all?
PJG says
“No difference at all”, they would say, looking at me squarely in the eye. Believe me, they would!
dumbledoresarmy says
Have you tried them with that particular hypothetical?
And, moreover, asked them whether they’d still be okay if the muezzin was broadcasting the azan at multiple decibels from a dozen high-powered loudspeakers, five times a day, including at 4 am in the morning?
kikorikid says
Well don’t go with them!
Here we have the confluence of
Shariah Compliance and Political
Correctness. Combined they are
a Suicide Pill. But this is what the
Muslim Brotherhood and our President
desire. There are numerous Muslim Brotherhood
operatives in the Obama Administration. Why
is there One(1) Muslim Brotherhood operative
in any Presidents Administration?
Salah says
“This official idiocy makes it difficult, if not impossible, for those whose job it is to protect us to study the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us.”
Those who have vowed to destroy us are actually RULING US.
Bezelel says
Open minded and tolerant to the extreme.I was told not to be soooo open minded that my brains fall out and don’t be so tolerant that you are complicit with wrong doing. The current gov. admin. is committing an act of criminal endangerment. Add to that the attempts to infringe on the second amendment and free speech, bypassing assimilation goals of the immigration process, wrecking the economy and the US is definitely less safe while our means to defend ourselves are under attack. Arizona is still being attacked by the Fed for trying to defend their own borders. How much less do they care for individuals safety?