Bombs discovered on U.S. bound cargo planes - AQAP to blame?

With the discovery of several packages containing explosives on U.S. bound cargo planes, counterterror officials internationally are blaming Al-Qaida on the Arabian Peninsula for the attack. Yemeni officials said today that a woman was being held for mailing the packages, and that more arrests were planned. AQAP is determined to strike at the U.S., utilizing its ability to recruit and train Western youths, as seen in the attempted downing of a U.S.-bound passenger plane last Christmas.


Al-Qaida's ability to strike at targets within the U.S. is limited, and its offshoots such as AQAP and Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), certainly are restricted in their abilities to execute large-scale terror attacks like 9/11. However, their strength is in the ability to use simple devices and innovative ideas to bypass loopholes, making strikes like the attempted bombing of Northwest 253 last year or this one relatively easy given the ability to find lax areas of airline security.


This week's development of targeting cargo carriers is someone that was simply waiting to happen, however the method of attack and the details suggest that this was a feeble attempt to impact the U.S. economy more than inflict casualties or impact the upcoming elections. The addressed targets of the packages suggests nothing more than to address a package destined for the U.S. carrying contents, specifically finding a traditional Al-Qaida target such as Jewish organizations.


The intended target of the attack lies in recent bin Laden recordings, where he has suggested that Muslims find methods to impact the dollar rather than claim lives. By impacting something like holiday business, the attempted attack most surely would have claimed significant casualties in the everyday trading if cargo carriers were not deemed capable of carrying the hundreds of millions of dollars in business done over the Christmas season. With tighter guidelines on cargo carriers and probably a greater level of screening on employees (specifically temporary workers for the holiday season) there is a great deal of risk allowed in the industry that makes it a vulnerable target for terrorists. This holiday season faces a great deal of threats with methods similar to Mumbai and the assault tactics that could impact shopping at malls nationwide, as well as the airlines that assist in the significant business volume over the holiday season. There is no doubt that law enforcement is taking this development seriously, but that can only go so far before impeding business.

Bin Laden's battle for relevance

This weekend saw the emergence of Al-Qaida figurehead Osama bin Laden and the continued redefinition of Al-Qaida's jihad against the U.S. amid reports of a growing threat faced in Europe. The normally reclusive leader, who releases a handful of audio tapes usually annually, released two tapes this weekend in a ploy to rally support among Muslims. The consecutive releases of tapes raise several concerns, specifically with the recent revelation that OBL was connected to the recent plot thwarted in Europe.


Al-Qaida's resources are dwindling, and the necessities to implement a large-scale plot like 9/11 does not exist. However, the ability to take individuals (such as Faisal Shahzad and Najibullah Zazi) who actively pursue training abroad and then commit to executing terrorist attacks remains the most relevant and difficult threat to counter. The operational war against terrorism is the easiest fight, but the ideological aspect remains difficult to address by law enforcement and intelligence agencies.


Bin Laden's latest tapes went back to an issue released in a recording from January this year - climate change. This issue perhaps gained insertion due to the floods that devastated Pakistan a couple months ago. Bin Laden faulted Arab governments, lending credit to the UN for its response and accusing the regimes around the Middle East for closing their eyes to the suffering. The plight of the Palestinian people is no longer an opportunity for recruitment apparently, as the focus has shifted and the tapes no longer mention the continued stalemate among Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, bin Laden again makes a subtle cry for Muslims to avoid the U.S. economy (perhaps to attempt to gain more finances for his group's diminishing finances) and identifies the significance of each Muslim's role in his battle with the West.


This latest tape continues the normal message of blaming Arab governments for turning a blind eye to the suffering of Muslims. The reality is bin Laden is struggling in the battle to remain relevant. The surge Al-Qaida experienced as the superpower of jihadist groups for 9/11 has diminished, replaced by groups seeking to instigate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict even more. Hizbullah's global dominance and established assets present the clearest threat to Israel and its allies, however the group understands the necessity of maintaining a covert threat. Bin Laden has constantly lost the recruiting power he once held, with his franchises operating in other groups like AQIM, AQAP, and now al-Shabaab. Recruits now are forced to independently travel abroad, in hopes of being considered trustworthy by al-Qaida and Taliban contacts inside Pakistan. Otherwise, they must travel to Yemen or Somalia with the same goal, but the ability to recruit from within the U.S. solely relies on the individual's radical leanings.


OBL now must utilize whatever global development he can, playing the role of the Muslim father trying to protect his suffering Muslim brothers and sisters. However, Sheikh Nasrallah has continuously been considered in poll after poll among Muslim nations that he and his group take up the Muslim fight best. Hizbullah's recruiting has not dwindled, nor its assets, unlike bin Laden. The desperation for OBL to continue to pursue his fight against the U.S. has made the group seem almost uninterested in the Israeli-Palestinian saga that seems almost too easy to utilize if Al-Qaida was interested in establishing legitimacy among Muslims. The dependence on individual's willing to pursue suicide or creating bombs will be the only thing that carries on the jihad when Al-Qaida is no more, with or without bin Laden. It is only when this is adequately addressed by Muslim nations, as well as Western nations, that the struggle to confront terrorism and its roots can begin.

Mumbai in London? Assessing AQ target selection

Al-Qaida is making its push to remain relevant, and news reports today suggest that the group was seeking to conduct an operation similar to the attacks in Mumbai in November 2008. The success of that operation, which killed 166 people and made the crowded city almost paralyzed in fear, clearly had an impact on Al-Qaida's leadership which is now battling a constant jihad for its own relevancy.


The 9/11 terror attacks were the most effective form of terrorism contrived by any group. The reality that our transportation system could be penetrated and literally hijacked against us as a missile shocked the entire world. However, the ability to conduct such a plot remains extremely difficult currently. Despite vulnerabilities remaining in the aviation industry, so much effort and time has been put into insuring that a hijacked plane will not occur or be used again in the same form.


However, the vulnerability of soft targets remains. Al-Qaida knows that it is not capable of another 9/11, placing casualties in the thousands is a difficult feat without CBRN weapons. However, the ability to conduct operations similar to those used in Madrid, London, Mumbai, and in Moscow since 9/11 remains a legitimate concern. In my opinion, the ability to produce any chemical or biological agents is a feat that is difficult now that U.S. airstrikes are conducted routinely in regions that house Al-Qaida experts.


This latest piece of news suggesting that the siege/assault tactics used in Mumbai would be utilized again should be of no surprise. For those two days, the news was controlled by the standoff that developed following the takeover by Lashkar-e-Taiba gunmen. Mumbai was shut down. The inadequacy and the outdated tactics of Indian anti-terror police contributed significantly to the success, but could such an operation be conducted in a Western metropolitan city like London.


Al-Qaida promoted Mohamad Ilyas Kashmiri, the mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, as its operations chief. With experience fighting in the mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan as well as being a former member of Pakistan's military, serving in special operations, Kashmiri brings a unique perspective encouraging direct assault and engagement. In 2009, Kashmiri said that he believed that more Mumbais would emerge,

"..I am not a traditional jihadi cleric who is involved in sloganeering. As a military commander, I would say every target has a specific time and reasons, and the responses will be forthcoming accordingly."

My concern rests in the fact that soft target defense is extremely inadequate. Most people here in the U.S. do not recall Beslan, where 777 schoolchildren were taken hostage at a school. 300 people were killed, many of them children. Law enforcement here has never had to engage in such a situation, but if it were to happen are we ready? Kashmiri has made it clear he plans on bringing military expertise, separating himself from the ideological concerns of previous Al-Qaida leadership. He is a formidable foe, making Khalid Sheikh Mohammed seem amateur in his experience. It is without a doubt that Kashmiri will seek to find a vulnerability and utilize it to his gain. The question is where and when he will emerge and demonstrate his capabilities.

9/11: Reviving U.S.-Muslim Relations with a new perspective

September 11, 2001, is a date that everyone will remember. The pain and anger that resulted from that day was felt by many worldwide, changing the dynamics of the United States-Muslim relationship. This week, everyone watched as Pastor Terry Jones announced plans to burn the Qu'ran as a demonstration against radical Islam, inciting a flash wave of anger amongst Muslims worldwide. This abuse of freedom of speech, driven by a narcissistic leader of a small congregation, sabotaged a day filled with remembrance for victims. Jones acknowledged he did not know the victims of 9/11, had not read the Qu'ran, and then attempted to state that this was a protest of radical Islam. The fact of the matter is by burning and desecrating a religious text used by followers of any faith, it is not targeting the problem-makers, but rather is offensive to all.


The complexity of the Muslim world is something that has baffled the experts at all levels of government, and accomplished virtually nothing when it comes to official policy. The fact of the matter is the organizations linked to the government - whether it be Department of Justice, the Pentagon, or even in the White House - all are questionable.

-The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the notorious Holy Land Foundation trial. The reality of the matter is the group has held links to terror-financing operations since 1994. This excerpt from a Fox News report by David Lee Miller with CAIR Legislative Affairs Director Corey Saylor was featured in an assessment on CAIR by the Investigative Project on Terrorism:


Miller: Can you sit here now and in just one sentence tell me - CAIR condemns Hamas and CAIR condemns Hezbollah?

Saylor: I'm telling you in a very clear fashion - CAIR condemns terrorist acts, whoever commits them, wherever they commit them, whenever they commit them.

Miller: That's not the same thing as saying you condemn Hamas and you condemn Hezbollah.

Saylor: Well I recognize that you don't like my answer to the question, but that's the answer to the question.

Miller: It's not no. It's not whether I like or dislike it. I was asking you if you can sit here now and say - CAIR condemns Hamas or Hezbollah. If you don't want to, just say that. If that is a position your group doesn't take, I certainly accept that. I just want to understand what your answer is.

Saylor: The position that my group takes is that we condemn terrorism on a consistent, persistent basis, wherever it happens, whenever it happens.

Video here.


In summary, a blanket rejection of the tactic, but not the groups that use it. Perhaps it's CAIR's links dating back to 1994 to Hamas fundraising that makes it so difficult in denying a group whose founding charter "commits the group to the destruction of Israel." Or the group's claim that suicide bombings are the equivalent to an F-16 fighter jet. Why did this organization ever even receive the time of day with government officials?


Perhaps the biggest embarrassment to attempting to moderate with the Muslim community lies somewhere in Yemen. The new face of terrorism, viewed more dangerous than Osama bin Laden by some, is Anwar al-Awlaki. A former U.S. citizen, Awlaki spoke at the U.S. Capitol just weeks before the 2001 attacks that would evacuate that same building. How did someone with such radical beliefs receive an invitation to become an ambassador for Islam on Capitol Hill?


The list goes on and on of instances where the government outreach to the Muslim community has backfired. The problem is not with Muslims, but rather the sheer incompetence of the government to understand that there is a liability with those that empathize with Hamas and Hezbollah. So long as the groups use terrorism, and the United States designates them as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, there should be a firm stance to disregard any individuals affiliated with any groups on that list. Islam is not an organization, but a religion practiced by a fifth of the world. The strength lies in the outreach and ability to communicate with the people, not an organization.

Are we really even fighting a war anymore?

The War on Terror was designed with the intent to disrupt the leadership network of Al-Qaida that was instrumental behind the attacks of September 11, 2001. Since operations began a month after the attacks in 2001, the U.S. has eliminated numerous senior figures and seasoned veterans of the mujahideen that made up Al-Qaida Central. The leadership of Al-Qaida has been replaced now by a movement made up of collective pockets of fighters distributed among the globe, all seeking to develop the momentum that Al-Qaida once enjoyed.


The attacks in Uganda during the World Cup evidence this, showing that as many experts have suggested for some time that the general trend of terrorist groups turning from promoting their agenda in a local, regional based setting into a global movement applies now to the Shabaab of Somalia. The twin bombings exercised the group's intent to disrupt a global event with violence in order to attract the attention of the viewing public. It is more than likely that the group did not have the resources and capabilities to penetrate the security apparatus surrounding Cape Town.


Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula gained recognition upon the failed bombing of Northwest 253 on Christmas Day last year. The group previously was responsible primarily for Al-Qaida operations inside Saudi Arabia, using the lacking government of President Saleh of Yemen in order to gain refuge across the border. Anwar al-Awlaki was able to use his charm in order to benefit the group by obtaining Westernized recruits who already spoke English and had no tell-tale red flags.


Al-Qaida Central, based in Pakistan, is largely disrupted in my analysis. Figureheads like Osama bin Laden control the public front of the group, but hold no true value outside of their immediate location. The recordings simply are a ploy for credibility in the Muslim world, utilizing the once strong persona that bin Laden and his leaders once held when they were capable of attacks such as the Embassy bombings of 1998. The destruction that Al-Qaida was able to claim actually was linked to bin Laden's direct leadership, rather than a network of regional leaders who operated freely and independent of the group's chain of command.


The U.S. has failed at providing any real results in the War on Terror, opting to ignore developing threats until innocent lives have been claimed. The days of assigning any associates to Al-Qaida on the blacklists has been replaced by simply waiting until those associates have blood on their hands to place them under any sanctions. Intelligence is an invaluable asset in any war, especially a war where the enemy is everywhere. The ability to produce HUMINT in this war has proven extremely difficult. The only able way is to put eyes and ears everywhere, providing assistance in the local tribes that make up the many regions where Al-Qaida's partners find haven.


A grassroots-up strategy would provide the most assistance to those impacted most by an unstable country, especially in Afghanistan and Yemen. The defining problem in most situations is that the local tribes have no reason to believe in a corrupt national government that exists inside the bubble of the capital. By providing aid to those who experience the insurgency violence on a day-to-day basis and standing beside them, there is hope in gaining assets that can prove effective in designing larger counter terrorism strategies. Fighting a war is hard work, but it is something that takes time, patience, and a collective effort in order to achieve success.

Fighting a war for the right reasons

Afghanistan is failing. As the U.S. has been in the country since 2001, there has been very little return or signs of progress, the fight still continues. The country is caught in a complicated crisis where leadership has failed. It's as though everyone has forgotten about how life was prior to the U.S. invasion that ousted the Taliban, where a barbaric state of ancient law killed those suspected of petty crimes. While the U.S. entered the country, President George W. Bush spoke of how in Afghanistan, we would seek to make it a beacon for the region where the Taliban would be removed and the country would be in the hands of the people. Here we are in 2010, where the empty promises have been lost in the political system.


President Hamid Karzai seems like the choice if there was one to select a leader, bearing substantial ties throughout his family's lineage to Afghanistan's politics. Karzai himself fled the country from Taliban rule, his wife was a doctor at Afghan refugee camps in Pakistan - making it safe to assume that at some point, he was aware and was a witness to the Afghanistan he liberated. However, the debate over Afghanistan's future could place the group he once fought in a position where not only would they be recognized, but would have a say in the government.


Not enough has been done to engage the Afghan population on the tribal level. The ability to create a strong, centralized national government is not remotely possible without the commitment and allegiance of all the tribes. This simply can not be done without promising these people deliverance from the subversive shadow governments set up by the Taliban in order to act as a replacement to the failed reform that Karzai once promised. Without offering an alternative, the options on the table for these tribes simply all point back to the Taliban.


What has come out of Karzai's rule has been a gradual evolution of a man who sought to bring about change, but has been burdened with a task that travels through complicated tribal ties to figures who have undermined his role. It is said that after last summer's election, where the international community suggested that the vote for Karzai was illegitimate, accusing the U.S. of "stealing his legitimacy." It seems as though the future of Afghanistan rests on one man's personal dilemma, is he willing to set aside his ego?


There is no doubt the Afghan military and police forces are incompetent and juvenile at best. The fledgling ranks are easily infiltrated and once again, burdened by complicated alliances. However, this is a situation made by Karzai's micromanagement of coalition forces inside his country. His criticism of coalition forces when civilians are caught in the crossfire directly undermines NATO support amongst the populations he is dependent on. If there was ever more of a time to allow action and reform, it is now. As we look to a situation that is becoming increasingly desperate, the opportunity is now for President Karzai to prove he is a capable and competent leader. It is not the U.S. undermining him, it is the very people he has held meetings with to propose their integration into the "new" Afghanistan - the Taliban.


The Taliban massacres of innocent civilians is something that can not be endorsed by the international community. Have we honestly reached a society where we will face outcry over "enhanced interrogations" but will ignore a system where a 7-year old boy was killed for alleged spying or women for adultery or pursuing an education? Those offenses were constantly denounced by the international community, but now they seem to be forgotten. The alternative in Afghanistan simply can not be with the Taliban holding any power, there is too much at stake.

Car Bomb found in Times Square: a synopsis

At 6:30 pm, New York City Police responded to a call made of a vehicle emitting smoke while parked in Times Square. Upon investigating, police called the bomb squad for assistance and discovered what can best be described as being an amateur and crude attempt to make an explosive device. Police were able to collect three propane tanks, two five-gallon tanks of gasoline, and consumer-grade fireworks. Also found were two clocks with batteries. Reports indicated that a "gun locker" was found inside the vehicle and taken to the NYPD firing range for destruction. Initial investigation into the incident suggests that the car does not match the license plates on it, which were taken from a junkyard in Connecticut. As of yet, there is no indication that an individual has been linked to the vehicle as pieces continue to be pieced together.


It is important to emphasize that this incident strikes many similarities to the "lone wolf" attempt that occurred at Glasgow Intl. Airport in 2007 and to an attempted nightclub bombing in London the same year. The devices in both cases, similar to yesterday's incident, used similar construction methods. What is interesting however is the "gun locker" inside the vehicle which its contents have not been made public. Considering the placement of the vehicle, close to the one of the busiest areas of the country - Times Square - it raises a question of whether or not this attack could have been a two-stage attack using a car bomb first and potentially another method afterwards to create even more chaos. What is also curious is if the individual was aware that the device failed and fled the scene before reaching its intended target.


This is a very important wake-up call that our biggest threat are the clerics like Anwar al-Aulaqi and those individuals who broadcast not only their messages of hate as well as terrorist propaganda that enables individuals from within every society, including America and just as in the UK, to self-indoctrinate themselves to the violence that they used to have to go abroad to receive training on. These people do not give hints as to their intentions and are silent when it comes to the terror chatter that helped the feds in the Najibullah Zazi case. We are not capable of protecting ourselves adequately without the help of vigilant people such as the T-shirt vendor who called for assistance after identifying the suspicious vehicle. Perhaps the most important thing that anyone can take were his parting words as he left the scene, the NYPD awareness program's motto "See something, Say something."

Tackling terrorism..in theory. Why the Nuclear Summit failed.

During the Cold War, many who were alive can recall the "Duck and Cover" videos that cautioned preparedness for a nuclear attack. The fear that the United States would fall victim to a nuclear attack was something that was ever present in the minds of that generation that witnessed missiles sitting just off the coast of the Southern U.S. during the Cuban Missile Crisis. This week, President Obama hosted the Nuclear Summit in Washington D.C., requesting all participating countries to take initiatives to deter against nuclear terrorism. To many in the mainstream media, this is a step that is significant in the public relations front of the War on Terror. However, as with many PR-oriented conferences on terrorism, they play to the public perception and continue to miss the mark on the issues that must be addressed in the constant struggle against those seeking to attack and kill innocent lives.


Since the 9/11 attacks, there has been the question of when will the U.S. suffer another attack? Since that day in 2001, we have been attacked by radical jihadist sympathizers, but have yet to see the face of any actual members of radical groups like Al-Qaida. In fact, Al-Qaida has suffered immense financial losses due to Treasury Dept. initiatives targeting their revenue lines. This fact leads to the point that in order to look for the next attack, the risk of an independent terrorist organization being able to piece together a nuclear missile on their own, or hijack a nuclear plant, is at an extremely low probability. Experts have said for years now that the cost/success potential for such a costly operation is drastically low due to the safeguards installed after 2001, even if Al-Qaida, the number one enemy of the U.S. had the funds to coordinate such an operation.


This puts into play the real concern that should be addressed, especially as President Obama was able to get over 40 countries into Washington at one time. Terrorist groups operate freely and gain license from state-sponsors in many countries. The finances of a group are provided by states and/or charity sponsors who may or may not have the knowledge of where their funds are going. Without countries making an effort to halt the flow of money into terrorist hands, many groups would face a difficult fight while trying to recruit and train future militants, as well as fund operations. Hezbollah is a group that still has opportunity to fund raise inside many European countries, who have chosen to turn a blind eye to the group's activities simply because Hezbollah has not targeted them in any attacks. Do we really want to live in a society that turns a blind eye to the atrocities abroad and only wish to respond when we fall victim?


State-sponsors of terror such as Syria, which has sought to pull the Obama State Dept. to them while providing little in return (especially when pertaining to issues regarding Iran) should be what the 40 some countries present this week should be talking about. As the U.S. and other EU countries continue to discuss sanctions, I can't help but remember what I heard one Treasury Dept. official say at a meeting - "Sanctions are not meant to fix the problem, they are meant to bring someone to the table to talk about fixing the problem. If they aren't working, they aren't gonna work unless you can and are willing to target the target's essentials."


The threat of nuclear terrorism is something that would not be addressed at this time if it wasn't for Iran's continued defiance of international cooperation in regulating their program. So long as Iran remains the most active state-sponsor for global terrorism, the international community should not play games and massage a country that has gone rogue to international relations. We haven't seen a nuclear attack by a terrorist group, and there isn't one on the way. Nuclear terrorism is something that makes a great episode of 24, but the real battle against terrorism comes down to those who perpetrate and organize it. Whether its airplanes being used as missiles into buildings or a gunman on the streets, that is the form of terrorism that will continue to thrive. Targeting a method of terrorism is only missing the mark in what should be a clear shot at those who perpetrate it.

The risk of making terrorism a criminal matter

We are a nation at war. The near bombing of Northwest 253 on Christmas day serves as a stark reminder that this is not some foreign conflict, but rather one that essentially contains many fronts that all arrive on our streets eventually. It is the men and women in law enforcement and the intelligence community that are tasked with a difficult duty of allowing no margin for error. As witnessed in the Christmas day incident, it took just one lapse in the system to jeopardize the lives of nearly 300 people aboard that plane.


We face an enemy that is by all standards, an anomaly. Without an Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaida will still live on. Without Al-Qaida, the war against jihadists will still remain. There is no domino effect in this to eliminate the motivations of this enemy.


While the intelligence community is under scrutiny for its shortcomings with the Christmas day plot, there is a much greater vulnerability in our system that is inadequate at handling terrorism cases. With the Obama administration's move to put terrorists like Abdulmutallab or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in American courtrooms, the natural pattern will be that they will end up in American jails eventually. This ultimately may benefit the spread of the jihadists and will most certainly place severe strains on the corrections system.


One does not need to look far to see the impacts of housing jihadists among general population prisons. In the UK, a study by the Quilliam Foundation found severe lapses inside jails that housed radical Islamists. Among those listed:

"Prominent pro Al-Qaida ideologues such as Abu Qatada have been able to smuggle messages out of prison to their supporters"

"In 2008 and 2009, two of the most prominent Arab jihadists imprisoned in the UK released pro-jihadist propaganda and fatwas from within Long Lartin prison"

"..a leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, produced written pro-jihadist tracts from within prison aiming to refute criticism of Al-Qaida, while Abu Qatada issued fatwas from within prison which legitimised jihadist attacks worldwide"


In 2006, Belmarsh jail in the UK was reportedly "taken over" by a Muslim gang called "The Muslim Boys." The group reportedly attacked those who failed to convert to Islam with everything from hot water to razor blades attached to brushes. Guards also fell victim to attacks during the group's weekly "religious meetings." At the services being held, guards sat idly by not understanding a word said by Al-Qaida members housed in the jail. There was significant concern that the group may have been capable of using such a time to discuss plots. One official stated,

"We can't even tape the service and get it translated because it is against human rights. It's frightening."

At a separate prison, Whitemoor, a similar report in May 2008 found almost identical concerns amongst staff who reported that the nearly 200 Muslim prisoners had become "more of a gang than a religious group." Both reports addressed fears that jihadists housed inside the facilities were actively recruiting members from within the prison population.


The simple fact is that prisons are made up of a diverse community that are all commonly linked by their criminality. The potential to exploit anger of a common criminal towards the American justice system by a jihadist remains. If these people enter back on the streets after being indoctrinated with a hatred for a government that put them in a jail and a belief that Islam calls for them to wage jihad on America, we are adding to the enemy rather than containing it. This is not a question of denying people rights, but rather doing what is best to stop the spread of radical Islam. By treating jihadists as separate militants and isolating them from a general population, we are eliminating their potential to breed more militants. Without containment the jobs of all those involved in the fight on terrorism expands even greater, allowing the potential for more Abdulmutallabs to slip through the cracks.