"I have rights! I have rights!" 


Why terrorism succeeds in open societies. 

It most certainly did not begin on July 7 when four young, British-born Muslims set off explosive devices throughout the London public transport system, murdering 52 people and injuring 700 more. But the knowledge that the threat of terrorism does not only come from distant foreigners who are unfamiliar with the ways of Western society still shocked many and was repeated in media reports with a consistent tone of surprise. “How could four well-regarded young men have enacted such murderous carnage on their own countrymen,” asked the talking heads in the days that followed. Even the bombers’ families appeared flabbergasted by their sons’ misdeeds and feared retribution by an angry population. Many people began to wonder whether it was because of or in spite of these murderers’ Western upbringings that they were able to carry out such butchery. Surely it had to be one or the other, but not both… 
Barely two weeks had passed before another attempt on Londoners’ lives was made. Again, four young British Muslims were suspected in the attempted bombings of metro trains and a street bus. But despite the horrific intent, the events of July 21 proved to be a unique opportunity for antiterrorist forces throughout the world. By witnessing the two consecutive attacks, we have observed some curious changes in al-Qaeda’s modus opperandi against the West: first, barely a fortnight of uncertainty was yielded before strikingly similar tactics were used on the same city and people, signifying an alteration to the strike-and-wait directive employed by the terrorists for so long; and second, both attacks were carried out not by Saudi-born radicals or Egyptian chemists, but by Britons, men who enjoyed the freedom of living in a free society and who exploited that freedom in order to kill their own neighbors. 
If seeing a change in terrorist strategy via yet another London attack was the bad news, then the good news was that these four new “bad apples” comprehensively failed in their mission and lived to see another day, a time when they could be captured and interrogated by British police. Whereas British law enforcement officials had their hands full as they scoured the world for anyone who could possibly be linked to the 7/7 bombings, security footage from 7/21 put new, living faces on the enemy. Could these men provide to British authorities some insight on the state of al-Qaeda or on any further plots? No one knew, but now they had become the targets of an entire angry nation. 
It didn't take long before all four bombing suspects had been captured. Three were picked up throughout Britain, while one was arrested in Italy, a fact that illustrates the massive collaboration between governments that we have seen following the 9/11 attacks. On the other hand, we also discovered that American requests made earlier in the summer to arrest another British citizen, Haroon Rashid Aswat, were debated while Aswat–being afforded every right of a British citizen by his government–had the chance to disappear. The alleged former bin Laden bodyguard is now under suspicion for assisting in the implementation of the first attacks on London in July. He was arrested this week in Zambia. 
Is this a bit of “too little, too late?” Quite frankly, yes, it is. But this hasn’t been the last missed opportunity that we will see, especially as the attacks against the world's democracies will undoubtedly continue. 
As Islamic terrorism has hit closer to home in recent years, the democracies have been dealing with the effects in the only ways that they know how: under a system of laws that have been designed to protect the rights of each country’s citizens. Much debate has been elicited by the American legal response to terrorism. Most of it has been aimed toward the Patriot Act, its renewal and expansion, and matters of incarceration of suspected terrorists. Much of the debate is not necessarily unwarranted–and that is exactly the point. 
Law enforcement organizations could make quick work of the scourge of terrorism in a country under constant martial law, where police powers would be permanently strengthened above and beyond the provisions included in any Patriot Act, and where individual rights would be merely nominal for citizens and non-citizens alike. Many in this country claim that the Patriot Act does just those things, and it is true that a regrettable measure of individual liberty has been lost by the passage of these relatively new laws. Even so, we must continue to keep our government in careful check, and we must ensure that our rights are protected while, at the same time, we allow those officers sworn to protect us to have a wide enough berth to do their jobs well. Finding this delicate balance will be difficult and uncomfortable, but necessary. 
When one of the last of the four attempted suicide bombers was cornered for arrest on Friday, he was ordered to come outside of his apartment building with his clothes off and with his hands on his head. His reply was indicative of another element of the terrorists’ strategy, one that not only is designed to keep their targets off balance, but one that seeks to take advantage of the rule of law under which they live and cherish: “I have rights,” he yelled, repeating it as though he learned to say it from a tactical handbook. 
Yes, this man does have rights and that is a good thing. He is a British citizen and his rights cannot simply be taken away because he is under suspicion for attempted mass murder. But what we all must realize is that it is those same rights that make Britain, America, Spain and Australia such easy targets. Where better than a place where even the enemy has undeniable rights to begin the holy war for world supremacy of a fundamentalist Muslim faith? The Islamo-Fascist mouthpiece found in one Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed may have said it best directly after the 7/7 attacks: “I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world.” Europe and America are only the first targets. 
Theirs is not a fight against some perceived inaction in the Arab-Israeli theater, nor is it one based around the world’s drug-like oil fix, but it is only the first phase of a larger war against a diverse group of non-Muslims throughout the world. It is becoming exceedingly clear that the “infidelities” of the world democracies–among them, the concepts of individual rights, secularism and the rule of law–have opened up a door of intensely calculated opportunity into which death, destruction and that very same “Islamic” flag can easily enter. This is why, despite and because of the free way in which we live, terrorism succeeds in open societies and why new threats will most certainly come from within. Although we must come to this understanding if we ever hope to preserve our own rights and security, a simple understanding of this sort is not a panacea, and much must still be done before we can truly slam the door on international terrorism for good. 

Posted: Sat - July 30, 2005 at 11:37 AM          

©