Originally posted here.
Terror Mosques Seeks to Suppress Radicalization Study
One way the terrorists try to win is by using the institutions of the Western State to suppress information critical of, or likely to reveal, their operational methods. That’s happening right now in New York City. Ongoing suits by “Muslim and civil liberties groups” — basically, pro-terrorist mosques, terrorist-support networks like CAIR (Hamas) and the MAS (MB), and the usual suspects of the well-funded terror bar — is seeking to suppress an NYPD report on the sort of radicalization that produces the so-called lone wolf Mohammedan murderers.
Mayor De Blasio, who likes the terrorists more than the cops to begin with, is eager to settle the suit, and the terror supporters, pressing this advantage, want to see the report erased forever.
The report is hardly news. In fact, Radicalization in the West dates from 2007. For the time being, it’s still on the NYPD website, but its removal, along with an end to all surveillance of the terror enablers and radical mosques, is a prime demand.
The purpose of the report is explained in an introduction by then-commissioner Ray Kelly:
While the threat from overseas remains, many of the terrorist attacks or thwarted plots against cities in Europe, Canada, Australia and the United States have been conceptualized and planned by local residents/citizens who sought to attack their country of residence. The majority of these individuals began as ―unremarkable‖ – they had ―unremarkable‖ jobs, had lived ―unremarkable‖ lives and had little, if any criminal history. The recently thwarted plot by homegrown jihadists, in May 2007, against Fort Dix in New Jersey, only underscores the seriousness of this emerging threat.
Understanding this trend and the radicalization process in the West that drives ―unremarkable‖ people to become terrorists is vital for developing effective counter- strategies. This realization has special importance for the NYPD and the City of New York. As one of the country’s iconic symbols and the target of numerous terrorist plots since the 1990’s, New York City continues to be the one of the top targets of terrorists worldwide. Consequently, the NYPD places a priority on understanding what drives and defines the radicalization process.
The document does not describe such recent terrorists as Zaim Farouk Abdul-Malik, who whacked two NYPD officers with hatchets last October before other NYPD shot him (and also, in a convincing demonstration of what a NY Trigger Glock is best at, one bystander). Abdul-Malik was a recent convert, the sort described in the report as the most radical, whose “need to prove their religious convictions … makes them the most aggressive.” The radicalization template described in the report also fits the recent French terrorist murderers.
Like card-carrying Communists who withdrew from the overt Party to become agents in Comintern days, the report describes how incipient terrorists join extremist mosques, and then leave them, when their own level of extremism exceeds that of the imam. At this point, the imam has done his job; very little time elapses before the terrorist attacks, or tries to. The report suggested, and the NYPD began, monitoring radical mosques for these extremists, and provides a descriptive and analytic framework for understanding radicalization that is broadly applicable. (It can probably be applied, with some substitutions of other radicalizing inputs to the mosques and online sermons of radical Islam, to the less-common non-Islamic extremists, like Lars Breivik or Timothy McVeigh).
A key paragraph describes why such a document is useful in Constitutional and lawful law enforcement:
Where once we would have defined the initial indicator of the threat at the point where a terrorist or group of terrorists would actually plan an attack, we have now shifted our focus to a much earlier point—a point where we believe the potential terrorist or group of terrorists begin and progress through a process of radicalization. The culmination of this process is a terrorist attack.
Not surprisingly, New York Mayor Bill De Blasio, whose initial hostility to the police department has now been amplified by what he sees (understandably, from his perspective) as militant police insubordination, is inclined to meet the terror-supporters’ demands and broom the document.
The sensitive NYPD Zone Assessment Unit (often described in the press by a previous name, the Demographics Unit), was an analytic/collection cell within the Intelligence Unit that studied the human terrain of the New York area, with a view to providing early warning of terrorist plots. The Unit was disbanded by Commissioner Bill Bratton, on De Blasio’s orders, last April, but it’s what’s happened to the officers since then that illustrates the depths of De Blasio’s contempt. Dozens of detectives and plainclothesmen nominally assigned to the NYPD Intelligence Unit have been parceled out to act as personal servants to De Blasio-allied and anti-police politicians. Eight each have been assigned as chauffeurs, bodyguards and laundry-boys for three such pols: Public Advocate Letitia James, City Councillor Melissa Mark-Viverito, and Comptroller Scott Stringer. This served De Blasio’s ends three ways: it let him give a valuable benefit to his freeloading fellow trust-fund friends; it let him humiliate the cops in question; and it undermines police intelligence against terrorists and criminals.
From the radical point of view, the next thing is to make the NYPD back away from pursuing terrorists at all, or even supporting the Feds in their pursuit. That means that Radicalization in the West must go.
If the terrorists and the Mayor get their way, sometime soon, it will no longer be available at this link: http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/NYPD_Report-Radicalization_in_the_West.pdf
So, let them try to eliminate it. It’s here now, too.
If you have a website, host it there. Put it on BitTorrent. Put it on Scribd and DocStoc; stick a copy on public DropBox and Archive.Org. They can’t murder us all, much as they’d like to, and they can’t sue us all, even though, lawyers being lawyers, there’s always one available to do any evil, for a price.