The threat of a so-called enemy within is the most 'severe, emerging threat' facing the US military on home soil, according to Congressman Peter King.
King, who is Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, claimed this week that the threat of radicalized Islamists who are also U.S. soldiers executing attacks on American soil has grown.
King's new report, released on Wednesday and quoted in the Daily Mail, said there were nearly three dozen ‘threats, plots, and strikes’ toward the U.S. military since 9/11 and that another attack by 'militant Islamists' is 'a severe threat.'
23 of the 33 public cases prosecuted or investigated since 9/11 have occurred since mid-2009, King told the press this week, a development he called 'part of the broader surge of homegrown Islamist terrorism.'
____________
Read More:
Congressman Peter King's strange journey from Irish radical to Muslim inquisitor -- I no longer recognize the politician I have known for 25 years
Congressman Peter King slams fellow Republican Newt Gingrich
Why not have Muslim congressman investigate Catholic Church scandals, ala Peter King?
____________
Focusing primarily on the 2009 massacre at Fort Hood in Texas, where Army Major Nidal Hasan allegedly killed 13 people and injured an additional 29, King pointed out that many of those killed were soldiers serving alongside Hasan.
King noted that although the FBI and Defense Department had both investigated Hasan's communications with now-deceased Yemini cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki, the radical Al Qaeda imam, the task force closed their inquiry in 2009.
King's report also included details of several thwarted plans or attacks by other members of the U.S. military.
But King's critics have claimed he is indulging in dangerous profiling.
Rep Mike Honda, a Democrat from California, wrote on the Hill’s Congress Blog on Wednesday that King's report may in fact target Muslim Americans.
Honda said: 'If the hearing’s date (Pearl Harbor’s 70th Anniversary) and its subject matter, the 2009 attack on Fort Hood Texas, are any indication, today’s hearing will go too far by singling out Muslim-American service members as the danger to our military communities.'
Over 6,024 Muslim military members have served in the U.S. armed forces since 9/11, and fourteen of those soldiers are known to have been killed in action fighting for the US.
25 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.CaptainCon | Dec 12, 2011, 01:46 AM EST
What I say is not an attack on the United States and its political system and principles- it is a defence of it. The greatest threat to the US and its constitution is indeed internal- and it is based in the lobbying around Washington DC.
mamaginnty | Dec 11, 2011, 02:05 PM EST
All I can say is that people might give a few minutes to reading what the people, who were down in the basements of both towers, said and swore witness too, seconds before the planes hit on 9/11
mamaginnty | Dec 11, 2011, 10:01 AM EST
Joycean, Nov. 9th, 3.09, why do you even bother engaging these mutants? Without the US, the Irish would need an instruction manual to wipe their backsides.
joycean | Dec 11, 2011, 03:11 AM EST
Captain Con, i used to wonder what a War on Terror is ,too.Fortunately, we are on our way out of Iraq and Afganistan.I'm not really interested in arguing with someone about whether my country or your country is perfect.
CaptainCon | Dec 11, 2011, 01:53 AM EST
An interesting view from Joycean which rests entirely on two fallacies- the United States is not at war beyond the imagination of the fearmongers who cling to a 'war on terror' which is a war that can never be won because 'terror' has no capital city, no definable supply lines to attack and rarely gives its position away on radar. The second of those fallacies being that only the US Supreme Court can define what sedition is- the US Supreme Court is one of those legal bodies which can be stacked and has been stacked by neocon Presidents to favour seeing the US citizen as the enemy. The real enemy within are those 'end-of-days' lunatics attempting create a reverse Cuban missile crisis with Russia or China. There is no 'over there' where intercontinental warheads are concerned. By the way, sedition is not an attempt to undermine the government- it is an attempt to undermine the foundations of the state which includes the US constitution- on your definition any sign of dissent and disagreement would be 'sedition' as it includes any vote against the government of the day in Congress or in the Senate. George Bush used to parrot the phrase 'I'm a wartime President' in order only to subvert the arms of government which properly act as a restraint on the power of the Executive. You can see where that got the United States.
stanJames | Dec 11, 2011, 01:36 AM EST
King, a teabaggger, is spreading fear. Probably hoping so on the edge Muslim feesl himself so threatened that he creates a disaster................So the REbpus can now blame Obama.............. Is there no bottom to the republican tea baggers barrels of hate?
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 07:13 PM EST
Captain Con, The word "sedition' means an attempt to undermine the government, so your argument is backwards. What I was saying is that the US Constitution hasn't been abandoned; your interpretation of it should be; your interpretation doesn't count; only the US Supreme Court's does. As an Irish citizen, I guess you aren't familiar with war. During war time, which has been pretty much constant for us since 1941, special powers are usually invoked. Purpose: to weed out traitors and seditious persons. Why are our troops abroad? Because we prefer not to fight on our own soil. We'd rather bring the war to our enemies. It is a military tactic. Our country is not being torn up; theirs is. "Inalienable rights" are not in the Costitution; that is a line from the Declaration of Independence. the Rights mentioned are "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." They are not legal rights, but rights men receive from our Creator. The rest of the line is that when government fails to provide for those rights, people have the right to overthrow the government. It was our justification for breaking away from England.The difference between the US and 18th Century Ireland is that we were willing to fight the British, and we won. It took IReland more than another century. How are we different from the USSR? WE WON THE COLD WAR; THEY LOST. We won because we fought them for 40 years because we did not want to become a satelite like Eastern European countries. If you think the US is some kind of feel-good Fantasy Land, you are wrong.
CaptainCon | Dec 10, 2011, 05:08 PM EST
What I'm now looking at is an attempt to explain away the abandonment of the US constitution by what I assume are US citizens. Two questions- the first being, to what end or purpose? My second question would be 'how do you explain to US troops fighting abroad what they are supposed to be fighting for?' Freedom or the right to behave like the KGB did inside Soviet Russia? What IS the difference supposed to be between the United States and Soviet era Russia? Coca-Cola instead of photos of Uncle Joe? Maybe thats it- it is just a brand differentiation. I'd hoped for better- and I suspect a lot of Americans would agree with that. Joycean- you speak of 'sedition'. What is more seditious than the usurpation of the supposedly inalienable rights granted under the constitution in order to suppress dissent?
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 03:29 PM EST
Captain Con, Historically. the first use of this kind of suspension of certain rights goes all the way back to 1798, the Alien and Sedition Act, under our second President.
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 03:18 PM EST
Catain Con, Article 1, Sec. 8, give Congress the right to declare wars and "regulate Captures" on land and sea. This may be the appropriate article of the Constitution, but I am not a lawyer. The way it works is that the act would be passed, and the Courts would probably be asked to determine if it conflicts with the Constitution, but it may not. The Right to Free Speech has always had limitations. It has never been an absolute right. Seagreen, My statement was about Active Duty Military, who are not supposed to express political (Democrat, Republican) sides. In other words, they will not campaign for a particular candidate - Obama or whoever, and they will be under the command of whoever is elected. The President, a civilian, is Commander-in Chief, as are all members of the legislature like Rep. King are also civilians. The President may order them to take actions, and the Defense Department may discuss whether a plan is feasible and make suggestions.
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 02:55 PM EST
CaptainCon
seagreen | Dec 10, 2011, 02:54 PM EST
The military is apolitical ? Have you been in a diving bell at the bottom of long Island Sound for the last ten years. The military are the people that over throw governments. The military are the people with the most guns. The military are the people that decide who is right and who is wrong, and who lives and dies. The book Seven Days in May will explain that ! This gasbag King is doing his Joe McCarthy imitation with a few minor revisions, and has taken the can't fail stance politically. Like who is really in favor of terrorists Mr. King. perhaps if we stop killing innocent people around the world we would have a lot less to worry about. It seem that we always knock off the #2 leader of some terrorist branch with the drones. of course #2 has always been herding goats in some inaccessable mountain area without electricity.
CaptainCon | Dec 10, 2011, 02:33 PM EST
With the National Defense Authorisation Act currently being debated the result would be that the US military would detain American Citizens on American soil without legal representation and for an 'indefinite' period. Here's a quiz question- is this in accordance with the US constitution? All it would take is an accusation and the US military would detain someone without charge or ability to defend themselves against that charge. And then we have the SOPA act- or has the US now abandoned any pretence at free speech in the US constitution?
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 01:50 PM EST
What particular part of the US Constitution are you worried about? Members of the military are apolitical. The same military under Obama was under Bush and will be under our next PResident. They do not express political opinions, and our military today is an all-volunteer force. Why do they join? Mainly because we love this country with our hearts and souls.
CaptainCon | Dec 10, 2011, 12:59 PM EST
The greatest risk to the American way of life is the misuse of fear as expressed by overfed scruff like King, Gingrich. None of the fearmongers attempting to manage the average US citizen into suspending the US constitution give a damn about the United States. Or if they do it is a United States unrecognisable in terms of the constitution as envisaged by the country's founding fathers. One wonders what the US army is fighting to uphold when its legislators and various other corporate carpetbaggers are busy attempting to dismantle any recognisable principle framed by the United States behind their backs. What are US soldiers hear they are fighting for now? Truth, justice, and the American Dream? Or for people like Palin, Perry, Romney and Gingricho who have no other interest beside self-enrichment and power over the bodies of their fellow citizens?
CaptainCon | Dec 10, 2011, 12:51 PM EST
hybernia has a point. 9/11 wasn't the result of a number of men waking up one morning and deciding to take out the World Trade Center. It was a response to the US blanket backing of Israel and its apartheid policies in the middle east. If you want to starve terrorism of oxygen stop exporting war and injustice. As for this Peter King he is just jumping on the Fear bandwagon which is used to keep the US population voting for what the military industry and corporations like Halliburton and Blackwater want. It is just McCarthyism writ large.
joycean | Dec 10, 2011, 09:04 AM EST
Bishop Sean, Exactly. I do see a couple of positive signs though. First, while Catholicism has lost support in this country,the US remains a religious country outside is Islam, and with time, Catholicism may regain members. I was particularly inspired by Pope Benedict's visit several years ago. I remember he called America, "God's gift" and visted Ground Zero. Secondly, one reason that the US has managed to foil many attacks since 9/11 has been the willingness of American citizens to get involved, like the passengers on Flight 93, the ones who wrestled the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber, and took action against the Times Square bomber. Americans aren't living in fear; but we do realize any of us may be called to help each other.
BishopSean | Dec 10, 2011, 07:45 AM EST
The dilemma of the U.S.--while the US recognizes the right of all its citizens to practise their own freely chosen religion, whether theistic or atheistic, there is one legally recognized religion, Islam, that does not agree with freedom of conscience and religion. Where muslims are majority, in agreement with the Koran, they give non-muslims three options; convert to Islam, remain as frightened second-class citizens who pay punitive taxes etc., or choose martyrdom. Eastern priests and bishops frequently have to tell their parishoners to "prepare for martyrdom," and then they too must walk their own talk. We can only hope and pray that educated muslims in the West will be able to convince their correligionists to engage in apologetics by words and not by coersion and weapons--but this is still a very long shot.
joycean | Dec 09, 2011, 05:54 PM EST
sirpeter and hybernia, Americans who join our military and swear to protect this country and then decide to injure and kill their fellow soldiers do not do so because the US is bombing their country: America is their country. They were born and educated here. But there are over 300 million Americans and some of them are evil, especially ones like Major Hussan who murdered 13 unarmed soldiers at Ft. Hood. I do think we need to do a better job of weeding them out of the military.
sirpeter | Dec 09, 2011, 05:20 PM EST
hybernia.Did you not know that when Americans bomb another nation and kill a million people that it is anti-American.It's true!! It's in the Patriot Act.As you can see they are frightened of almost everyone now.Even Americans of the Islamic faith in their own country.My oh! my what could Americans have possibly done to have such fear.The land of the free haha..Bend over Sir!!Your anus could be concealing one of those new undetectable WMD's.Yes Sir!! We can do anything under the Patriot Act Sir. Just-a-little-bit-deeper-with-the-probe-and-you-can-get-on-the-plane.All for Freedom!! Sir Freedom!!
joycean | Dec 09, 2011, 03:09 PM EST
hybernia, your comment is the typical anti-American comment I expect from the Irish.
joycean | Dec 09, 2011, 03:07 PM EST
The US has been trying too hard to be politically correct, searching babies and elderly at airports, so that the Muslims in full body veils don't feel they are being targetted, trying to ignore danger signs in the military, as they did with Hussan.
hybernia | Dec 09, 2011, 02:04 PM EST
If America would stop killing and bombing in their countries there would be no terrorists.
merefalow | Dec 09, 2011, 01:18 PM EST
one day people will wake up and see what a deadly threat to everything we believe in,it is to the west,its backward,repressive,misogynist,totalitarian,totally alien to our way of life..it has nothing to recomend it to any one who values personal freedom,theocratic fanatical control freaks,wake up..
Murph46 | Dec 09, 2011, 10:39 AM EST
Soldiers? Islam is the fastest growing religion in the US,there are mosques in virtually every big city with many having radical Imams associated with them.