Terrorists target Army base — in Arizona

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility.

Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times.

"A portion of the operatives were in the United States, with the remainder not yet in the United States," according to one of the documents, an FBI advisory that was distributed to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the CIA, Customs and Border Protection and the Justice Department, among several other law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. "The Afghanis and Iraqis shaved their beards so as not to appear to be Middle Easterners."

Read it all.



Filed under: * Culture-WatchMilitary / Armed Forces* Economics, PoliticsTerrorism

8 Comments
Posted November 27, 2007 at 6:51 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. William Witt wrote:

“A plot by dozens of foreign terrorists who purportedly planned to attack Fort Huachuca with rocket propelled grenades and mines has proved unfounded, an FBI spokesman said Monday.”

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/213456.php

Not at all surprising.  The physical location of this base would make a surprise attack by sixty individuals in a convey all but impossible, assuming, of course, that such a large group of “clearly not locals” would slip pass the Border Patrol agents, who are everywhere.

November 27, 8:49 am | [comment link]
2. Philip Snyder wrote:

William - you forgot the “close sarcasm” tag at the end of your post.

Can we please start taking border security seriously now or do we have to endure another terrorist attack for that to happen?

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

November 27, 8:55 am | [comment link]
3. William Witt wrote:

Sorry, Phil Snyder. No “sarcasm” tags.  I lived in this area for six months last year.  The Border Patrol agents are indeed everywhere.  Undocumented aliens working for substandard wages are a far greater threat in this area than terrorists attacking the military base.  It just would not happen.

November 27, 9:09 am | [comment link]
4. AnglicanFirst wrote:

This plot failed because the terrorists breached at least three of their security ‘fire walls.

The terrorists that are most dangerous will operate in small cells controlled by a high-security overstructure.  The terrorists from different cells will not ‘know each other’ until just prior to execution of a terrorist plot.  Those within a cell may be ‘known’ only to the cell leader.

Third, weapons needed to produce the greatest ‘terror effect’ can be produced within the United States from ‘everyday’ materials.  Open source information on how this can be done has been available in USG manuals and the manuals of other governments for over fifty years.  Also, the Soviet Union provided extensive terrorist training to Middle Easterners during the 1950/60/70s.

The ‘scariest,’ that is, the ‘most errifying’ terrorist attack would be one in which the approach of the terrorists to their objective is undetected, the actual terrorist event results in a great sense of vulnerability throughout the country, and in which the terroists are able to ‘carry off’ their attack without being apprehended or detected.

November 27, 9:22 am | [comment link]
5. William Witt wrote:

AnglicanFirst,

If you read the story to which I linked, you will note that the plot did not “fail.”  The story says it did not exist.

You note:

The ‘scariest,’ that is, the ‘most terrifying’ terrorist attack would be one in which the approach of the terrorists to their objective is undetected,

An attack by sixty individuals on this military base, given its location, would not have been undetected.  The sixty would never have reached the base. Terrorists choose soft targets.  This was a hard one.

November 27, 9:32 am | [comment link]
6. AnglicanFirst wrote:

William (#5), my obviously unworthy opinion is only that of a person who has been professionally involved, in one way or another, in counter-insurgency/unconventional warfare for a period of over twenty years of military service.

This service includes experience with terrorist/sapper attacks, assessment of asset vulnerability, devising counter-measures, testing counter-measures, etc.

November 27, 10:45 am | [comment link]
7. William Witt wrote:

AnglicanFirst,

I was in no way saying that your opinion was “unworthy.”  Rather, I was agreeing with your assessment that effective terrorist attacks are “undetected.”  Having lived in the area, and knowing the location of Fr. Huachuca, I cannot imagine how a convoy of vehicles carrying sixty armed individuals of Middle Eastern descent could make their way inside the base, or even get close enough to cause significant damage, “undetected.”

When I read the story, the first thought that came to my mind was: This can’t be right.  A quick Google search showed an immediate correction to the story.

November 27, 11:54 am | [comment link]
8. Lawrence wrote:

It is unlikely that a group such as reported would strike a military target.  It is not surprising that the group would be here or be armed in the manner that Sara Carter indicated.  Officials of the FBI and homeland security have testified as much under oath before Congress as one of our Congressmen from the Houston area reminded radio listeners this morning. 

I grew up on the border in South Texas and still travel there often to see family and can only say that most people who do not live there have no idea what is really going on along our border and probably don’t want to know.  We tend to like our truths to be comfortable ones.

November 27, 4:16 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): Michelle Higgins on what It is Like to Fly These Days

Previous entry (below): USA Today: Credit card trap springs eternal, so don’t ignore warning signs

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)