The above articles contain two separate terrorist plots with local ties that were recently uncovered thanks to the work of law enforcement and a civilian tip that potentially saved the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians. The two individuals, Gregory Weiller II and Adel Daoud, come from completely different backgrounds, had different reasons for carrying out their crimes, but both were part of extremist religious groups. The interesting thing about the articles are the way in which the plots were discovered. In the first article, the Islamic teenager was arrested after plotting an attack for months with informants whom he actually thought were other extremists and the other was a Christian extremist who was discovered after authorities were notified by a worker at a motel who came across some suspicious items. How was one terrorist's activities able to be monitored by authorities and the other was discovered merely by luck? Public Intellectual's like Deepan Kumar would say because of the fact that the individual was outspoken about Islam he was already considered a suspect and was being monitored by authorities for fear of violence. But given the outcome of the investigation, was this a bad thing? It could be a bad thing if our nation is focusing too much of its attention on a certain group(s) rather than being aware of all threats.
In her book Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire Deepan Kumar summarizes the US approach to obtaining intelligence and averting future terrorist attacks as "preemptive prosecution" and states that it focuses mainly on "islamic terrorists" especially after 9/11. Kumar refers to the tactics used as entrapment, where individuals are enticed to act in ways they otherwise wouldn't have. In my opinion, the "entrapment" argument is a weak one because these individuals are not being forced to do something they don't want to do, and are we supposed to think that if the informants were actually extremists plotting a terror attack, that the individual would not have made the same choice? The fact that these individuals would actually carry out such violent crimes whether influenced or not justifies the fact that they should not be on the streets. While I think the entrapment arguement is a weak one, I can't disagree with the notion that the US has focused their attention and stereotyped certain groups with who they have constructed as terrorists.
The truth of the matter is that terrorists come in all shapes and sizes and we need to be aware that in this day and age, any individual with access to the right information or weapons can pose a terrorist threat. Unfortunately there isn't a blood test that can be issued to determine whether someone will commit a terrorist act so those agencies responsible for our security must utilize all resources possible including surveillance and undercover operations. While I do condone taking appropriate efforts to stop violent attacks and ensure our nation's safety, those efforts should not be isolated to only individual groups that our leaders tell us are the enemy. Below is a picture authorities collected of Gregory Weiller II from his computer following his arrest for planning to firebomb 48 churches in Oklahoma, this is certainly not an image of an individual we would suspect of being a terrorist. Sadly though we wouldn't say the same thing if this image contained an individual with darker skin, a beard, and a turbin.
No comments:
Post a Comment