- NOVEMBER 20, 2009
-
A Web of Lone Wolves
Fort Hood shows us that Internet jihad is not a myth.
BY EVAN KOHLMANN | NOVEMBER 13, 2009
Upon learning of the reported "missed" link between the alleged culprit responsible for the massacre at Ft. Hood -- Maj. Malik Nidal Hasan -- and Anwar al Awlaki, my heart sank for a multitude of reasons. Al Awlaki is an infamous character in the halls of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and he has been for several years at least. The cleric's recurring presence again in the Ft. Hood case seems to be powerful and disturbing evidence of how fringe extremists -- who otherwise might remain in obscurity with no real means of living out their private jihadi fantasies -- are quite literally being equipped for battle by so-called "theological" advisors known only to them through the Internet. In short, it is a reminder of how real online terrorism networks have become.
COMMENTS (4)
More...
In mid-2008, I was invited by the FBI to look at the voluminous evidence they had gathered against a group of defendants who were caught plotting to attack various military installations on the East Coast, including Fort Dix in New Jersey. At first, I was a skeptic. Most of the men under scrutiny were Westernized Albanian Muslims who spoke little to no Arabic, were into hip-hop music, and were working as pizza delivery boys and taxi drivers. They didn't have any obvious connection to al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden, they had never visited a real terrorist training camp, and they cut a pretty kooky appearance. They certainly didn't seem to fit the classical terrorist stereotype.
But to my surprise, this motley crew of would-be homegrown killers turned out to be much more sophisticated than I had initially given them credit for. Aside from having an unsettling interest in acquiring assault rifles, these young men had separately downloaded hundreds of megabytes of hardcore terror propaganda videos from the web, including the wills of Sept. 11 hijackers and the July 7 London suicide bombers, and instructional materials on how to build improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and carry out sniper attacks -- and they knew all about radical Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and his online lecture series "Constants on the Path of Jihad."
In "Constants," al Awlaki argues, "Jihad does not depend on any particular land. It is global. ... No borders or barriers stop it." He continues, "If a particular people or nation is classified as ... ‘the people of war' in the Shariah, that classification applies to them all over the earth. Islam cannot be customized to suit the conditions where you are, for instance Europe."
Al-Awlaki's fanatical "lone wolf" approach to jihad -- broadcast virally over the Internet -- was adopted with terrific gusto by, among others, the Fort Dix plotters, who were caught by the FBI in early 2007 discussing the extent of their devotion to al-Awlaki. In a conversation taped by the FBI in 2007, one said, "[T]his brother locked up in Yemen, Anwar al Awlaki the Imam in Washington D.C., they kicked him out of the U.S. and now they locked him up in Yemen. He was talking about jihad, the truth, no holds barred, straight how it is! ... In his own country they locked him up for speaking like this."
AFP/Getty Images
Evan Kohlmann is senior investigator for the NEFA Foundation and works as a private consultant and expert witness on behalf of the FBI, Scotland Yard, and other law enforcement agencies in cases involving suspected homegrown terrorists.
The threat of emergence among self-starter cells and lone wolves has been talked about off and on for a few years (for instance, the case of irhabi007 in the UK). Certainly, the ability to spread not only ideological inspiration, but also practical operational information is a threat.
However, note how few attacks have been carried out in the US by such self-starter elements. For all the power of the internet to disseminate calls-to-war and how-to guides on terrorism, only a handful of people have thus far acted upon that information.
I think it would be wise for our intelligence community to exploit the situation using the same techniques used against computer crimes such as child pornography. However, I am absolutely against banning distasteful, hateful, speech, no matter how rancid, unless it specifically facilitates actual attacks.
If a person preaches that Muslims have a duty to carry out violent jihad against the infidels, I wouldn't touch that. However, if a person is disseminating intelligence for operational planning (such as information collected about security procedures at a facility), or technical information (how to make a homemade explosive like TATP), then yes - banning THAT discussion I could more readily accept.
It is not necessary to ban communication by violent Islamists in order to exploit it, though. A skillful working group should be able to make use of the internet jihadis' online activity to support targeting dangerous individuals and interdicting their real-world, criminal activities.
I fear that if we start banning the discussion of ugly ideas, that politicians will very quickly and enthusiastically expand that breach of free speech rights to ban speech that opposes their agenda. From the Sedition Act to the Fairness Doctrine to the BCRA, we have seen the contempt in which freedom of speech is held by politicians and I strongly oppose giving them any room to further attack it. Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security.
Don't tell the bad guys, but the upside is, now we have a way to find them. These web sites are like a 'honey pot', where papa bear can snag them as they come in or out the door. There is not an action on the internet that is not logged on some server or router, somewhere. The problem is the voluminous amount of information. Analysts will have enhanced tools to extract the relevant players and track them. The key is information sharing across agencies, especially to the local level, for onsite assistance. That was the breakdown at Ft. Hood.
Maj. Hasan has worked as a psychiatrist in the Army for several years. Was his role limited to counseling returning soldiers from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Has he ever been involved directly or indirectly in psychiatric evaluations of recruits for highly sensitive military installations?
Why are people creating Facebook profiles for Holocaust victims?
BY EVGENY MOROZOV
North Africa's escalating soccer war
BY JOSHUA KEATING
How the Chinese media covered Obama's visit
BY WILLIAM MOSS
The U.S. and Pakistan are heading for a bad breakup
BY ROBERT HADDICK
What would George Marshall think of today's generals?
BY THOMAS E. RICKS
What does containing North Korea actually mean?
BY JAMIE FLY
How the Chinese government censored Obama's visit
BY JOSH ROGIN
November/December 2009
-
Feature
-
Feature
-
Opening Gambit
About FP: Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Corporate Programs | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services: Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Subscribe to FP | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | RSS Feeds | Contact Us
1899 L Street NW, Suite 550 | Washington, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Slate Group, a division of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC
All contents ©2009 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC. All rights reserved.
(4)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE