(Analyst's note:  Absolutely must read - and note that this is a citizen's investigation and report.  Please note that a search of this site on "time for this administration" will find the high-lighted Part I to this article.)

Before continuing where I left off in Part I of this article lets take a look at the issue of Yemen and the release of detainees.

First, let it be said that it was the Bush Administration who first released some of these detainees. However, that release was essentially ordered by a federal judge. According to a Duke University national security law professor, "This is a clear warning shot to the government. . . . These are probably not the last detainees to be ordered released."

The current Administration has recently announced that detainees will no longer be released to Yemen (it sounds good, but I'll get to why that doesn't matter a bit later). The reason for the announcement is that it has been discovered and reported sporadically that a good portion of those released are returning to their jihadist ways. Some of those released are now even heading their own terrorist cells, inside and outside of Yemen.

This of course goes back to Part I of this article in which I state that ALL detainees should be held until the close of war, as we have done in the past. The judges ruling makes this somewhat complex to do and we need a new ruling through Congress, which I feel the current Administration is not going to even look at, since they pretty much support these rulings. Further more, the Administration is withholding the release of the still classified Pentagon report most likely because it will increase calls for the reversal on these decisions even more. If this is true, we will continue to see some of that information slowly leak out.

Now, for why it doesn't matter if we no longer release detainees to Yemen. Many of these detainees were intended to be transferred to other countries and held, but were released by the receiving country. Even the United Kingdom has released detainees that were sent to them. Once they are released they are essentially free to go and in turn travel to regions like Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan and others. So it really makes no difference if we release them directly to Yemen or not they will find their way to the territories where their ideologies are embraced.

This also presents a problem for us here in the United States. If you send one of these detainees through our judicial system and if they were found "not Guilty" we are required to release them. Whether or not they release them here in the United States or deport them after the ruling remains to be seen. Napolitano has said that some of these people may be acquitted.

In addition to the catch and release issue, the successful conviction of these detainees presents an interesting issue as well. This would be if they had access to or were allowed contact with other prisoners at the facility. This includes other former detainees as well as those within the regular prison population. Though the Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois is working on transferring the current minimum-security prisoners out of the facility, this may change in the future. It may also allow for other maximum security prisoners to be held among these detainees. Why is this an issue?

Well inside our prison population of those seeking faith an estimated 80 percent turn to Islam, with an estimated 30,000-40,000 converting each year. Of those who turn to Islam within the prison population an unknown number (not currently tracked) have turned to Radical Islam, believing and supporting Jihad against the United States. Consider the former Department of Correctional Services of New York State, Muslim Chaplain, Imam Warith Dean Umar (himself a former convict) who supported radicalism and indoctrinated his clerics with Wahhabism while himself preaching an extreme form of Islam to other convicts. Umar, directly oversaw the hiring of 45 other Muslim clerics within the N.Y. systems as well. Umar also said that he found that U.S. prisons "are a powder keg" and "the perfect recruitment and training ground" for his Wahhabi ideas and radicalism "under the cover of the Islamic Religion." (i)

There is another pervasive problem that we must address and that is the Myth that poverty breeds terrorism. Worse yet, the President and hisAdministration pointed to this as a cause in their recent statements when responding to the Christmas day failed bombing, which is just one more reason to point out they don't get it.

In study after study even those who supported such links have found that there is no such link between poverty and terrorism. (I have included a number of these as references below). Take for instance the 9/11 hijackers, 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia (one of the Wealthiest Countries) and came from middle class families, if not wealthy house holds. Osama Bin Laden, himself a billionaire. The Christmas day terror suspect was himself from a wealthy Nigerian family as well.

This myth has been pointed out numerous times, even as far back as 2002 by Robert J. Barro an economic professor at Harvard, but nearly 8 years later we still hear this myth repeated over and over again by leaders throughout the world (there may be other studies prior to this but I have not yet come across one pre-dating this).

In addition to being from well off families, another myth prevails and that they are uneducated and illiterate, when the data shows the opposite to be true. Most suicide bombers tend to be well educated having at least some college if not higher level degrees, some even doctors and engineers.

This leads me to the next but perhaps one of the more controversial aspects of protecting ourselves from terrorist extremists of ALL types. That topic is profiling. Profiling has become a touchy issue, due in part to the use of the term racial profiling and profiling to mean the same thing. This became even more prevalent after the 1998 case against New Jersey State Police. One thing I am not saying here is that racial profiling does not exist or that it never occurs, but profiling of terrorists is a different set of circumstances and is not based on race.

While some say profiling is about race and that we should target all Muslims and all Arab looking people and  sounding names let me point out some facts for you. Not all Muslims are Arabs, many come from Aisa, Africa, and in case you haven't been paying attention a number of White males and other American converts to radical Islam (John Phillip Walker Lindh, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, Abu Mansoor Al-Amriki, José Padilla, et al) are well known in the terror world. If you wanted to profile only Muslim looking people you would never succeed, because you can't always tell who is a Muslim by looking at them.

So, while you may want to profile Muslim or Arabic sounding names, many of them are Christians and just because they have a name that sounds Muslim, doesn't necessarily make it so. Another point that is important to point out, is that all of the 9/11 hijackers did there best to fit in into their American environments. Breaking the molds and traditions that traditional Muslims follow.

In recent years as we have seen, not all terrorists are even males, some have been young and middle aged woman. One was a young mother who at the age of 24 was planning on conducting a suicide attack while bringing along her infant son with the intent of making him a martyr along with herself.

What a terrorist does, how they act and what they look like is an ever changing dynamic. However, there are key things to look for and most of that is based on behavior and environment. Here are some things to look out for:

• Is the person appropriately dressed for the environment?
• Are they wearing clothes that can be suspicious, such as a long length coat or jacket? Baggy clothes?
• Are they carrying a bag, pushing a stroller, carriage, or cart?
• Are they acting appropriate to the situation?
• Do they seem hyper, agitated, or can't stand still in one place? (a person about to kill themselves, or others tends to be a bit jumpy and sweaty, the adrenaline is flowing, heart rate is up, breathing elevated). 
• Do they have their fists clinched? (often carrying a detonator in hands).
• Do you see any wires? Bulging in clothing?
• Do they have one or more hands in their pockets, in their jackets, or inside a bag?
• Are they walking in an appropriate gait?

The above points should be looked out for by all security personnel in airports and other places where we have security checks. They can be used by citizens to observe the people in their environments as well.

Another fact is that terrorist tactics have changed and will continue to change over time. We must be as adaptable as they are and be willing to change some of our tactics and we should not always wait until a threat presents itself to change these tactics. Being able to change what we are doing is part of the defense and will also keep us on the offense by keeping the terrorists off guard as well.

The terrorists changing their tactics is not exactly new either, the 1993 World Trade bombing was an upping of the ante and part of a new tactic, nor was it a suicide bombing attempt. The October 12, 2000 attack on the USS Cole was also a change in modern terrorist tactics. The 9/11 attack was another change in tactics, as never before had terrorists hijacked planes with the intent of using them as weapons against ground targets. In the past they were usually hijacked to exchange hostages for the release of terrorists in captivity. The Mumbai attacks in India, which attacked multiple civilian targets at night. The move towards female, children, and mothers as suicide bombers. The method for moving away from suicide bombings to IED's which are becoming increasingly complex and hard to detect. This along with the size, frequency, and materials used in the making of the explosives. 

One of the best things we can do to protect ourselves is to educate the public on what they should be looking for and what to do if they find something suspicious or out of place. Citizens should be able and willing to contact their local law enforcement professionals or their local FBI office. One of the best movements that occurred after the September 11th attacks was the "If You See Something, Say Something" campaigns. This should be adopted throughout the country and I would like to see a movement in educating High School aged children as to what they should look for.

Additional Suggestions continuing from Part I:

Sixth, we need to start profiling as I mention above, and check every person flying and implement the system the Israelis use.

Seventh, we do need to stop being politically correct in certain aspects of our security. For instance, if we use bomb sniffing dogs everyone is subject to the same conditions Muslim and non-Muslim alike, no exceptions ever. The same holds true if we do complete body scanning or pat downs.

Eighth, no longer should we keep attacks that have occurred or attempted especially the ones that are self-admittedly jihadist in nature by the people who did them. (yes there have been numerous incidents throughout the country but little in the way of reports on them). The public should be aware of the threat at hand.

Ninth, we need better training and standards for the TSA personnel we have. We also need to be tough on them for making mistakes (like being fired) but increase their pay and make it a more important job than what it is today. Under no circumstances do I want these folks unionized which would make it harder to discipline them. It will take time, but must be done.

Tenth, we need to have security check at all major transportation hubs, not just at airports.

Eleventh, we need to educate the public on what to look for and be alert to,  maybe pamphlets like the use to have for civil defense, or even a website, a good place to start would be to add a terrorism section to Ready.gov

Twelfth, we need to by more dynamic and change our tactics and environments to keep the terrorists off guard. Having teams of bomb sniffing dogs that travel from location to location and having law enforcement squads like the NYPD's Hercules team in every major city. It would also be nice to see several of these teams on a federal level (U.S. Marshalls) who travel around the country in a show of force as a suplement to local police teams. These federal teams would also be able to assist in smaller cities as well.

Thirteenth, we need to listen to the non radical Muslims who speak out against the radicals, and we need our Media to cover these events and give them more of a voice.

These suggestions and those from part I of this article would be a great start, still many more things can and should be done. One of the first things that should be implemented is to replace Napolitano, she has zero experience in National Security, or counter-terrorism. We should replace her with NYC Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly who has done an excellent job protecting the city. 

While doing research for this story I learned that John Brennan the current Whitehouse advisor on terror is the one who "foiled" the plan to capture Bin Laden. He should be fired and replace immediately. 

One last note before closing this article, In this article I refer to the Christmas day attack as a failed bombing. One thing should be noted however is that it was a SUCCESSFUL ATTACK, a terrorist was able to get on a plane headed to the United States, with a bomb in his underwear. He sat on the plane for hours and attempted to detonate the device. Whether he failed to do it correctly, or the device was put together incorrectly is unknown, at least to me. The fact it did not function properly was a miracle by the grace of God. 

Also, the fact is that we face a radical, ideological and religious threat and that this was planned for Christmas day was no accident. 

 Endnotes:

i Dr. Jasser, M. Zuhdi and Shore, Raphael. "U.S. Prison Recruitment for Jihad." The Counter Terrorist Jan. 2010: 30-39