by Laura Mansfield
A plot to attack Fort Dix in New Jersey was broken up, and six men were arrested earlier this week, charged with planning to carry out violent Jihad in the US homeland. The intelligence that led to the planned being successfully averted before it reached the operational stages came out of a report from a private citizen, a teenager working at a Circuit City who was tasked with converting a video tape onto a DVD.
According to published reports, when the teen began converting the video, he "freaked out". His reaction, according to a co-worker, was:
"Dude, I just saw some really weird s-. I don't know what to do. Should I call someone or is that being racist?"
If you're law enforcement, that should be the one of the scariest phrases you'll ever hear.
This young man, faced with images of young Muslim men running around, firing automatic weapons, and screaming Allah Akbar, did the right thing and notified law enforcement.
The sheer fact that he had to think about it says a lot about how extreme political correctness has become.
I understand that civil libertarians are concerned about the specter of people spying on one another, turning each other in to authorities. In elementary school, my generation was taught about how kids were being programmed in the Soviet Union to turn in anyone who espoused any beliefs against the Communist State. I certainly don't want to see something like that emerge here.
In addition, there is the ever-present reality that some individuals will turn in others, not for terrorist activity, but as part of a domestic quarrel or personal dispute.
So some balance is clearly necessary.
There is some balance already built into the system. Those who make false allegations and unfounded reports against others should be investigated and prosecuted, as called for under existing law.
No one wants to be considered to be a racist. It's not just politically incorrect, it's just flat out wrong to judge someone based on their race, religion or national origin.
But when the actions of a person or a group of people is clearly suspicious, we don't need to give them a free pass simply because they belong to a minority group.
I would certainly consider a group of men running around firing automatic weapons and shouting Allah Akbar to be more than a bit suspicious.
This isn't the first time that a terrorist plot has been busted up because of a concerned individual who witnessed something suspicious. In August 1997, a plot to blow up a New York City subway train while in a tunnel underneath the river was narrowly averted when a roommate of the two men planning the carnage reported the plot to NYC police.
The man who turned in his two Palestinian roommates was a young Egyptian Muslim man, Abdel Rahman Mosabbah. The two perpetrators, thinking they could count on Mossabah to not turn in a fellow Muslim, showed him the suicide bombs they planned to detonate the following morning.
In his book "Jihad in Brooklyn: The NYPD Raid That Stopped America's First Suicide Bombers", Sam Katz outlines how this informant saved hundreds if not thousands of lives that day.
The bottom line is this: like many terror attacks that have been narrowly averted in the past, the next terror attack that is averted will probably be uncovered through a report from someone close to the individuals planning the strike who becomes suspicious.
Those who have the courage to report these suspicious actions should be protected and rewarded, not penalized.
They shouldn't be called racist.
They should be called "Hero".
Well said, 'John Does' must be protected when honestly reporting suspicious behaviour, any politician who votes against such legislation is despicable garbage...
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
sacrifice security
bow to special interests
political correctness
.
Posted by: USpace | May 19, 2007 at 11:48 AM