The Big Question: What does the latest attack say about anti-terror?

Alan Abramowitz, professor of political science at Emory University, said:

It suggests to me that right now al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations have very limited capabilities of planning and carrying out attacks in the U.S. so we can probably expect to see more of these sorts of rather small if still potentially deadly attacks relying on individuals with limited skills and training rather than the much larger, more dramatic kinds of attacks that they’ve carried out in the past.

Justin Raimondo, editorial director of Antiwar.com, said:

It’s a bit early to tell for sure, but given what we know — that this was in all likelihood done by an American citizen — I think we are going to see more government attacks on our civil liberties here at home, as well as a determined campaign by some elements against the Muslim minority in America.

At the very least, it should give the president pause before he makes another “drone attack” joke.

Glenn Reynolds, blogger at Instapundit, said:

The NYC bomb attempt suggests current anti-terrorism efforts have been misguided. Under Janet Napolitano, the Department of Homeland Security has been profiling Tea Party protesters and veterans, while NYC mayor Bloomberg was opining prior to Faisal Shahzad’s capture that it was probably the work of people unhappy with ObamaCare. I eagerly await reports of Mr. Shahzad’s views on healthcare policy.

That those who are supposed to be keeping us safe are blinded by domestic partisan politics inspires no confidence. I hope this event serves as a wake-up call.

David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, said:

Unfortunately, it means our vigorous counterterrorism efforts will need to continue for the foreseeable future. The extremist ideology propagated by Osama bin Laden and many others around the globe continues to inspire relatively small numbers of people to engage in violence – but small numbers of people can cause large scale destruction and death. Because extensive counterterrorism will be necessary for the long-term, this means these efforts have to be sustainable – both politically and fiscally. Interventions abroad need to be targeted at the core problems we face. Defensive measures – screening devices, surveillance cameras, and the like will be of limited utility against an adaptive adversary – we should rigorously scrutinize these expenditures. Ultimately, the hard work of prevention falls to intelligence collection and analysis, both at home and abroad. Efforts to engage with domestic communities that can provide early warning of individuals who are radicalizing will be far more cost effective than massive surveillance and detection networks.  Strategic communications aimed at discrediting al Qaeda’s violent ideology, by Muslim and non-Muslim leaders alike, is a critically important element of our counterterrorism strategy.

Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist.org, said:

Hopefully this reminds websites that they need to help the cops fast, while not disclosing anything that can hamper investigation.

Bernie Quigley, Pundits blog contributor, said:

Hopefully it will bring New York City to an awakening as the Christmas bomber did to Massachusetts. Scott Brown owes his election to the Christmas bomber. He was 15 points behind the week before. Judging from the op-ed pages of the New York Times, this city, which contains a good number of America’s five million Jews, is still in denial of the terror situation. Graduate students in writing should study the prose of the opinion pages in the Times, which claims to speak for New York,  from 9/11 to the present; it is the textbook prose of accommodation, transference and denial.  Its lighter-than-air editorialists are citing English pacifist Christopher Isherwood when they should be talking Malraux. This injures Israel as well and empowers her enemies. New York is still in the Pierre Laval stage; a state of political denial where the weakling is championed. Laval was  head of government of Vichy France after the German invasion. In 1932 he was Time magazine’s Man of the Year. In 1945 he was tried as a traitor and hung.

Hal Lewis, professor at UC Santa Barbara, said:

Almost nothing. It was a small amateurish “bomb,” designed to kill pedestrians, made into a press bonanza. If we modify any of our so-called anti-terrorism practices to concentrate on little things like this while we give real enemies like the Iranians  a free ride to nuclear capability, we will be making a terrible mistake, and will pay heavily. We’re already in a state of denial about the real threat, and history is not kind to people who ignore danger.

Damon N. Spiegel, entrepreneur and writer, said:

Thank goodness the bomb did not detonate.  Thank goodness the past 10 years has made our citizens more alert and more aware of their surroundings.  The notification of a police officer of a smoking car may not have been an issue in the past.  Our anti-terrorism efforts have a long way to go and they include both more diligence on the Arab community, more efforts towards bonding the bridge between the United States and our foreign adversaries, and most importantly not being afraid as a nation to target those that we know are trying to hurt innocent US civilians.  Kudos to the FBI, NYPD and other international agencies that assisted in capturing this terrorist very quickly and without much incident.  The current administration cannot be seen as weak with this terrorist and make sure that he endures the full weight and gravity of the law.  Isn’t it time we deported these individuals and executed them after several weeks of water boarding, torture and complete humiliation?  Isn’t it time we let the world know that we will not tolerate this behavior and that the consequences of such will be great.   That the pain of failure will far exceed the joy of success.
 
If we continue down a passive policy the future may bring a severe consequence. No different than Arizona taking matters into their own hands.  We want to avoid States and or people taking matters into their own hands in the future.  Let’s pass some legislation that treats a terrorist like a terrorist.

John M. Snyder, Public Affairs Director of  Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said:

It indicates and underscores the necessity of allowing law-abiding citizens to be armed in order to be able to protect themselves and others from terrorists and other cirminals.  Federal authorities for some time have been warning the public about the probability of such events.  Terrorists can perpetrate their acts in different ways.  Innocent civilians do not know when or where these various sorts of attacks may occur.  What America needs from Congress is national recognition of state-issued permits to carry concealed firearms.