Homeland Security Watch

News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security

July 28, 2009

Seven indicted for terrorism in North Carolina

Filed under: Legal Issues,Terrorist Threats & Attacks — by Philip J. Palin on July 28, 2009

The US Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina has indicted seven on federal terrorism charges.  According to the News & Observor, “All are charged with conspiring to provide support to terrorists and conspiring to murder, kidnap, maim and injure persons abroad. The charges are related to allegations that they helped raise money and provide training for terrorism operations in Tel Aviv, Israel.”

The seven count indictment filed with the federal court reads, in part, “In the period from 1989-1992, Daniel Patrick Boyd, a/k/a “Saifullah” traveled to Pakistan and Afghanistan where he received military style training in terrorist camps for the purpose of engaging in violent jihad.”  The indictment then sets out how Boyd sought to involve members of his family and others in terrorist actions.

A study of federal terrorism indictments released last week found that of 214 defendents involved in terrorist cases that have been resolved, 91 percent were convicted.  The study, completed by former federal prosecuters for Human Rights First, argues this demonstrates the counterterrorism efficacy of the legal system.

A Saturday frontpage story in the New York Times reported that the Bush administration seriously considered declaring even more US citizens as “enemy combatants” and placing them in military stockades.  According to the Times, “Former officials said the 2002 debate arose partly from Justice Department concerns that there might not be enough evidence to arrest and successfully prosecute the suspects in Lackawanna. Mr. Cheney, the officials said, had argued that the administration would need a lower threshold of evidence to declare them enemy combatants and keep them in military custody.”

The so-called Lackawanna Six were convicted of  terrorism-related charges in May, 2003.

UPDATES

Indepth background piece (07/29) is available from the Washington Post.

More on the Pakistan connection (07/30) is available from the Associated Press.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print

1 Comment »

Comment by William R. Cumming

July 28, 2009 @ 6:36 am

The GWOT was launched on the basis that law enforcement was totally reactive and not proactive enough to prevent further attacks. Has this paradigm been enhanced or otherwise modified based on the almost 9 year passage of time since 9/11? Have there been permanent modifications to the civil liberties of citizens and residents of the US? Many think there have been permanent changes detrimental to civil liberties in the US! I would argue too early yet to know until the judiciary has resolved the cases sent it. What is permanent and has been resolved in the most final way of all is the expenditure of lives of mostly young men and women in Iraq and AF-PAK! Given the existence of non-state actors in the past and probably for the rest of time intent on harming innocents how far along have we come to designing a system that makes the appropriate tradeoffs if tradeoffs were required? This post is a starting point for that review. And hoping the leading academic theorists spend more time on the success or failure analysis of the original paradigm.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>