Homegrown Terrorism: Truth or Consequences
       August 20, 2007
      What are we to make of the police department’s much ballyhooed
        report on “homegrown” terrorism? 
      Your Humble Servant has read all 90 pages of “The Homegrown Threat” [excluding
        its 143 footnotes]. Its conclusions — that homegrown terrorists
        pose a greater threat than Al Qaeda overseas — may not be new.
        But the painstaking detail the report presents in its selected case histories
        leaves this reporter shaking his head in admiration. 
      Having provided an unaccustomed kudos to the department, this reporter,
        nonetheless, sees a giant red flag. 
      Buried deep inside the report [so naturally ignored by the media] is
        a disturbing paragraph. If true, it indicates how truly vulnerable we
        in New York City are. For the first time, the police department seems
        to place the blame for homegrown terrorism squarely on the city’s
        Muslim communities. 
      “Unfortunately,” the report reads, “the city’s
        Muslim communities have been permeated by extremists who have and continue
        to sow the seeds of radicalization. …Radicalization is indiscriminate
        and those attracted to it include New York City citizens from all walks
        of life.”
       Admittedly, the 9/11 attackers, as well as nearly all of subsequent
        plotters, have been Muslims. Still, the department seems to be painting
        with a pretty wide brush, which blankets an entire community. 
       If what the department says is true, we can only hope, and suspect,
        that the NYPD has infiltrated every mosque, book store, internet café and
        hookah parlor on Atlantic Avenue. 
       Presumably, such infiltration is legal under the U.S. Constitution
        and the Handschu guidelines, which supposedly govern the conduct of the
        NYPD [and which, in the case of Handschu, demands a criminal predicate — i.e.,
        the belief that a crime has, or is about to, take place before the department
        can legally begin an investigation.] 
       We say supposedly because the Handschu guidelines keep shifting, due
        to the peregrinations of federal judge Charles Haight, who like most
        of us, can’t seem to decide how much leeway the police department
        should be allowed and how much it should be monitored. 
      In fact, under the police department’s greater transparency promised
        by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly than existed
        under Rudy Giuliani [That’s a joke, folks] we don’t even
        know if the Handschu Authority still functions or even whom the mayor
        has appointed as its civilian member. Or even if he has made the appointment.
      But since Kelly released the Homegrown Threat report, the editorial
        writers at the Post are already pounding it out in support of no restrictions
        whatsoever on the police. As the Post said of the report: “[I]t
        underscores the relentless efforts by civil libertarians and leftist
        groups — with the New York Times in the lead of the line  — to
        thwart counter-terrorism efforts.”