OFFLINE

NEW YORK (AP) — An "al-Qaeda sympathizer" accused of plotting to bomb police and post offices in New York City as well as U.S. troops returning home remained in police custody after an arraignment on numerous terrorism-related charges.

Jose Pimentel of Manhattan was described by Mayor Michael Bloomberg at a Sunday news conference announcing Pimentel's arrest as "a 27-year-old al-Qaeda sympathizer" who was motivated by terrorist propaganda and resentment of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said police had to move quickly to arrest Pimentel on Saturday because he was ready to carry out his plan.

Kelly said Sunday that Pimentel was energized and motivated to carry out his plan by the Sept. 30 killing of al-Qaeda's U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

"He was in fact putting this bomb together," Kelly said. "He was drilling holes and it would have been not appropriate for us to let him walk out the door with that bomb."

An unemployed U.S. citizen originally from the Dominican Republic, Pimentel was "plotting to bomb police patrol cars and also postal facilities as well as targeted members of our armed services returning from abroad," Bloomberg said.
<hr>

Ya know, this isnt the first time people in this country have been seduced by Al Quaida material.  I think I heard this guy was frequenting Al Quaida websites.  Didnt the guy who shot up all those troops on an American base...wasnt he also a devote of Anwar al-Awlaki?

Here's my question.

Since terrorism seems to be successfully using the WWW to recruit American citizens to destroy our country, should the US govt step in and block access to these types of websites?  I completely understand the desire for freedom of speech.  However the US govt has the duty to protect the citizens of the US from harm.  Its why we have laws and why we have a police force.  We already regulate other things that might potentially harm US citizens (drugs, weapons, etc).  And we are at war (though sometimes it doesnt seem like it).  

For that matter, should such regulation extend to websites that exploit and harm children...sites like Child **** sites?

OFFLINE

By Gordon Corera Security correspondent, BBC News

A 27--year-old New Yorker, arrested on suspicion of planning a bombing campaign on US soil, was believed to have been influenced by an al-Qaeda magazine called Inspire, say police. So who was behind this publication?

The magazine, which coincidentally shares its name with a Christian magazine of a very different tone, disappeared from the internet earlier this year due to "issues with its content", according to a message on the now defunct website. It aimed to encourage and help Muslims in the West to carry out acts of violence.

Its articles glorified al-Qaeda, provided justifications for the use of violence and practical advice on how to carry out such acts - all presented in an appealing form that, in terms of production values, rivalled anything you would find in a regular magazine found on a news stand.

Awlaki's understanding of modern media made Osama Bin Laden look positively old-fashioned. In the past, al-Qaeda affiliates would have had reach into the West typically through diasporas and personal ties, but Awlaki provided it through the new means of modern communications.

For instance, he gave the Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan advice by email. Meanwhile, his teachings are believed to have influenced Roshonara Choudhry who stabbed Stephen Timms MP in the UK (although here there is less evidence of direct contact).

There has been a debate within western intelligence circles about how best to combat the appeal of Inspire.  Some favoured using cyber techniques to target the magazine's publication and prevent people reading its content.

Britain's eavesdropping and cyber intelligence agency GCHQ is believed to have used such techniques to target the first issue in June 2010, including the article "Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of your Mom".

It has been claimed that GCHQ was responsible for temporarily substituting the original text of the magazine with what looked to be gibberish (although the gibberish supposedly contained code for making cupcakes in a kitchen rather than bombs).
<hr>
So it does appear that this was an online publication that our US govt probably should have blocked access.  I mean...if they can hack in and substitute the message, they ought to be able to block it right?  But people in our country are so PC, they hesitate.  And it might come back to haunt us.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:

Since terrorism seems to be successfully using the WWW to recruit American citizens to destroy our country, should the US govt step in and block access to these types of websites?  I completely understand the desire for freedom of speech.  However the US govt has the duty to protect the citizens of the US from harm.  Its why we have laws and why we have a police force.  We already regulate other things that might potentially harm US citizens (drugs, weapons, etc).  And we are at war (though sometimes it doesnt seem like it).  

For that matter, should such regulation extend to websites that exploit and harm children...sites like Child **** sites?

Ahh, you're making me think!  After the first question I was ready to say no they should not be blocked, however the second part introduced a very good complication.  Good topic!  I'm going to have to meditate on this one a bit and try to reconcile two contradictory opinions!

OFFLINE