The difference between an FBI plot and a real threat

The difference between an FBI plot and a real threat

Najibullah Zazi has appeared in court in New York to plead not guilty to conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction. He is accused of being part of what is generally considered to be the most serious terrorism case inside the US since 9/11.

Authorities say it bears many similarities to the 7/7 London attacks, and could have resulted in significant loss of life if the plot hadn’t been disrupted.

Zazi had actually bought chemicals he needed to make a bomb. He had attended an al-Qaida training camp in Pakistan, and he had stored on his laptop nine pages of instructions for making bombs from the chemicals he had bought.

The fact that Zazi posed a real danger makes this story very different from dozens of other American terrorism cases in which the arrests are announced with great fanfare but on closer examination seem to contain almost no legitimate threats.

All too often it seems like it’s the FBI undercover agents who do most of the plotting and provide most of the materials.

Even the New York Times says: “In recent years, foiled plots announced with fanfare in Washington have sometimes involved unsophisticated people who seemed hardly capable of organizing a major attack.”
There were two other terror arrests in the US last week, unrelated to the Zazi case, and both seemed to orchestrated by undercover agents

A 19-year-old Jordanian immigrant was arrested in Texas on Thursday for plotting to blow up a 60-storey office building in Dallas. But he never posed any real threat.

There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that he had any plans to attack Americans before he was befriended by an FBI agent posing as a senior member of an al-Qaida sleeper cell. He met with agents several times over the next few months to discuss possible targets.

When the time came to carry out the attack, it was the FBI who gave him an SUV with a fake bomb inside it. They gave him a mobile phone and the number he was to dial to supposedly detonate the explosives.

After they failed to explode (obviously), he was arrested for trying to use weapons of mass destruction. And the FBI can claim to have foiled a major terror plot – albeit one that would never have existed unless they had dreamt it up.

On the same day as the Dallas arrest, another man was detained in Springfield, Illinois, and charged with plotting to blow up the federal building. Michael Finton is a red-haired Caucasian US citizen, but he called himself Talib Islam and claimed to hate America.

But it does not seem like he planned to do anything about that hatred until he was approached by FBI agents once again posing as al-Qaida. And yet again, they supplied him with a vehicle he thought was packed with explosives and arrested him after he tried to set off the bomb with an FBI cell phone.

Karen J Greenberg, from the Centre on Law and Security at New York University law school, has studied all the prosecutions of terrorism-related crimes since 2001, and she is quoted as saying many had turned out to be “fantasy terrorism cases” where the threat seemed modest or even nonexistent.

But there is nothing modest about the way the FBI trumpet their supposed success in the cases.

A few years ago they would also have led to the terror threat level being increased, heavily armed police and roadblocks throughout major cities, and the general level of fear being ramped up too.

At least the Obama administration doesn’t seem to pay very much attention to these “fantasy cases”.


Devotion cheapen to clothing

Today, the New York Times has a story discussing background information of suspected extremist Najibullah Zazi.

As always, I chuckle at such media and in some cases the public’s simplistic generalizations relating to what it mean to be a devoted Muslims.

Today’s story relating to Zazi states:

Over time, Mr. Zazi’s appearance shifted, customers noted, to that of a devout Muslim. He grew his beard long, started carrying prayer beads and occasionally wore tunics instead of his Western-style outfits, friends and customers said.

Hmm, so a long beard means that one is more devoted to Islam than one with a shorter beard or no beard at all?!  Prayer beads & tunics too?!  (BTW – many Muslims including Salafis or so-called “Wahhabis” consider prayer beads to be a reprehensible religious innovation that is sinful).

This is ridiculous!  And if someone is planning a terrorist attack, are they going to draw attention to themselves by looking like the stereotypical devoted Muslim, which falsely translates into extremist?!

I don’t have a clue as to the innocence or guilt of Zazi; however, I do know that measuring someone’s devotion to Islam according to beard length or connoting that devotion to it equals extremism is illogical.

Seeking ‘good hair’ could actually be da bomb?


The New York Post today has an article titled “Beauty shops’ ugly ingredients” based upon FBI allegations that Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan immigrant who appears not to be a US citizen, planned to make bombs out of primarily Black female hair care products for the purposes of terrorism.

To this day, many Black people call straight hair “Good Hair,” which implies that kinky hair is bad hair, an obvious psychological holdover from the days of slavery. 

We’ve always known that these Black hair care products are toxic and poisonous.  Now, we have a clue that these products are so potent and dangerous that they can potentially make BOMBS!