Out of Egypt Censorship, US Tech Export Under Fire

AndyAndyAndyAndy writes "After it was exposed that American firm Narus had sold Egypt the Deep Packet Inspection equipment used to spy on and censor its citizens, the US House Committee on Foreign Relations held a hearing where Reps. Chris Smith and Bill Keating 'grilled Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg on the sale of this Internet spying technology to an Egyptian Internet provider controlled by the Mubarak regime.' It seems there is now a push for stronger controls and monitoring for technology exports 'that would provide a national strategy to prevent the use of American technology from being used by human rights abusers.'" Several readers have noted that Hosni Mubarak has now stepped down as president of Egypt. Control of the country's affairs has been passed to the high council of its armed forces, which has some journalists and bloggers worried.

Comments

The USG Wants Two Things From You, Narus

[severoon]

1. We would like you to stop selling this technology to other countries so they can use it to oppress their citizens.
2. We would like to see a price list, please.

Re:The USG Wants Two Things From You, Narus

[Tackhead]

1. We would like you to stop selling this technology to other countries so they can use it to oppress their citizens.
2. We would like to see a price list, please.

1. Now that the beta testing is complete, we would like you to stop selling this technology to other countries so they can use it to oppress their citizens.
2. Put whatever you like on the price list, because it's not our money, it's our taxpayers' money.

Re:The USG Wants Two Things From You, Narus

[DCFusor]

Surely you were already aware that the US gov already knows the price list in detail, and is a major customer. That was outed all over the Internet awhile back (including here), complete with pictures taken by an AT&T employee of one of the setups in a "restricted access" room -- if which I snagged a copy, along with the writings of the (ex) employee before they disappeared.
.

We said we didn't want them to have a kill switch too...what hypocrisy.
.

All the actions of our government over the last few years are those of a governement afraid it's own people will rise against it, not one worried about our safety from terrorists, should be clear to almost anyone by now.
.

To the extent they've stopped even a single credible terrorist plot (I haven't noticed they have prevented a single one) all they've managed is to deny me some good clean fun on moving target practice -- it's a total lose-lose.

Re:The USG Wants Two Things From You, Narus

[GPLDAN]

His name was Mark Klein.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/05/70914

that was Narus equipment then, as well. The Egyptians saw how good AT&T had gotten at it, and ordered themselves up some of that spy pie.

Stronger controls

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems there is now a push for stronger controls and monitoring for technology exports 'that would provide a national strategy to prevent the use of American technology from being used by human rights abusers.'"

I can't see that getting through unless the small print includes a special exception for Israel.

Not so scared of Army control

[RazzleFrog]

Based on how well the Egyptian army has handled itself these past few weeks and how they tried to stay as independent as possible I think it may actually be a GOOD thing that they are taking over for now. Better the army than the Muslim Brotherhood.

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[RazzleFrog]

Right exactly. As much as I don't think anybody outside of the middle east wants to see them win the elections there is nothing we or should do if they do win. From what I understand they really aren't that popular. They'll win some seats but not likely a majority.

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[Yeknomaguh]

Tired of this rhetoric. The Muslim Brotherhood is not as influential player in the region as fox news would have you believe. Nor are they a terrorist group or extremist group bent on anything other then the common goals of the revolutionaries. This just in, Islam is not the new Communism.

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[RazzleFrog]

I'll be honest with you - if they were called the Christian Brotherhood, Jewish Brotherhood or even Buddhist Brotherhood I'd be equally against them taking power. Egypt needs a secular government with a firm separation of church and state. God should have no place in government.

But I do agree that their threat is overrated by the news companies.

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[Narishma]

How can they win the election when they said they won't present a candidate?

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[Wyatt Earp]

The military leadership are all war veterans from before Mubarak and are all career professional soldiers.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/201121185311711502.html

Egypt's military isn't one where the military leadership are there by grace of Mubarak like Iraq's was. Egypt has a professional officer corps along the British system, reinforced by the Soviets and augmented by 30 years of sending folks to War Colleges in the United States.

Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi is a Nubian too, so for older Egyptians he has that tie to Sadat and he's worked his way up over the decades, not a political appointee.

http://www.mmc.gov.eg/Commanders/general/default.htm

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[mapkinase]

"I'll be honest with you -..., Jewish Brotherhood ... I'd be equally against them taking power."

Does it have to be called "Jewish Brotherhood"? Could it be called "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" instead?

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[Mashiki]

Ignorance is not an excuse to the realities of the world.

49% of Egyptians say Islam plays only a "small role" in public affairs under President Hosni Mubarak, while 95% prefer the religion play a "large role in politics."

  84% favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim faith.

  82% support stoning adulterers.

  77% think thieves should have their hands cut off.

  54% support a law segregating women from men in the workplace.

  54% believe suicide bombings that kill civilians can be justified.

  Nearly half support the terrorist group Hamas.

  30% have a favorable opinion of Hezbollah.

  20% maintain positive views of al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden.

  82% of Egyptians dislike the U.S. â" the highest unfavorable rating among the 18 Muslim nations Pew surveyed.

And every place where 'islam is on the rise' including moderate indonesia, you'll see: repression, repression, repression. It's not the new communism, it's a push towards the dark ages.

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[the eric conspiracy]

Washington wasn't the first President.

http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/history/samhuntington.htm

Re:Not so scared of Army control

[tqk]

82% of Egyptians dislike the U.S. " the highest unfavorable rating among the 18 Muslim nations Pew surveyed."

I too would dislike the country that supported my dictator. Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, Mubarak, Saudis, numerous south & central American dictators, ... It seems the only one that avoids this opprobrium is Israel, perhaps because they have bigger and badder stuff to fear (annihilation) than mere tyrants, maybe? Yes, I do consider Zionism tyrannical; the new constitution just disenfranchised non-Jews, didn't it?

The US strip searches its own citizens, FFS, for the crime of wanting to travel.

Honestly, it sometimes seems miraculous that the US has any friends at all, including among its own citizens.

That "Worried" Blogger is FUD

[Yeknomaguh]

According to my Egyptian friends and from common knowledge of the region, the people in general are not against a military run country in the interim between dictatorship and democracy. It assures stability while also assuring that things are changing. The culture of Egypt is very intertwined with the military, almost every family has at least one person actively serving, so when they chant "The military and the people are one" they aren't being selective as to exactly who in the military they're talking about. The military up to this point was already seen and acted as an unbiased arbitrator not influenced by politics. As has been stated, they are there to protect Egypt and the people of Egypt and will not spill Egyptian blood. They're probably the very best group to hold the country together in the potentially long process of redrafting a constitution and instituting a democratic system.

Re:That "Worried" Blogger is FUD

[ColdWetDog]

While this may be true, the leaders of the Egyptian military are very much a part of the kleptocracy which seems to be one of the major issues in the current revolution - the fact that the average Egyptian is getting economically mauled. It will be hard for those generals to relinquish their economic grip and further it will be extraordinarily hard to prevent the kleptocracy from merely playing musical chairs.

This is hardly unique to Egypt and is more likely to be a near universal issue. How to establish a basically just democratic rule-of-law country out of a chronically dysfunctional system is a question often brought up but rarely answered.

Rather hits close to home, doesn't it?

Re:No Time to Worry!

[msauve]

The US is the only one allowed to use this tech to abuse human rights, and it really doesn't want to risk losing its lead in technology used for spying on citizens.

Sad but not unexpected

[IamTheRealMike]

This coming from the government that invented the PATRIOT act, national security letters and directly taps internet backbones. Do members of congress not understand what hypocrisy is or do they just not care?

Re:Sad but not unexpected

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Seriously, that's what I was thinking:

It seems there is now a push for stronger controls and monitoring for technology exports 'that would provide a national strategy to prevent the use of American technology from being used by human rights abusers.'"

Fuck monitoring and controlling exports! I want want a push for stronger controls on and monitoring of human rights abusers here in America. Ever heard of the NSA you hypocritical fuckwit Congress-critters? Or is it okay because they import their equipment from China? So as long as American technology isn't being used to spy on American citizens, it's all fine and dandy? Fucking assholes.

Egypt's Military, Inc.

[JThaddeus]

From http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/07/133503696/the-friday-podcast-egypts-military-inc "So far, the Egyptian military has largely sided with the protesters in the streets of Cairo. This is not only because the military supports the people; it's also because the military sells the people lots of stuff."

Re:Egypt's Military, Inc.

[marcosdumay]

So, now they are governed by real free market entusiasts?

Now, seriously, the military took the government the day they stood between the people and the government goons, and stopped the violence. Now we'll see if they are really on the people's side.

Re:Egypt's Military, Inc.

[PolygamousRanchKid]

This is not only because the military supports the people

Egypt has universal conscription for its military. So, the military are the people. Some kid doing his stint is very reluctant to shoot at his parents, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, etc.

Actually the reports that I saw on CNN said that the military was distributing, not selling, water and food. And that they built places for the protesters to wash. People who really lost out are the ones in the tourist industry. Planes were flying from where I live empty, and returning with tourists anxious to get out. So the tourist industry folks were out of a job. One interview I saw was a guy who gave camel rides. He complained, "I have to feed my wife and children, and my camels!"

We'll see a parade of pundits on the news in the coming days, all commenting on the question: "Would the military actually have shot at the protesters?" Revolutions are good business for the news channels . . . and pundits.

Re:Egypt's Military, Inc.

[ColdWetDog]

But remember the military is very much part of the problem. The generals (and likely other upper level officers) have been bribed by giving them lucrative economic opportunities spanning the past 30 years. The generals are deeply entrenched in running the economy. An economy that really does not seem to benefit the 'average' Egyptian much. It is clearly in the military's best interest to stabilize the country - otherwise their investments (other than the money already taken out of the country) won't be worth all that much. How much they are willing to share the power is very much in question. They probably don't even know the answer.

One other wild card in this crazy, interlocked system is the Swiss banks. They have allegedly frozen some bank accounts belonging to Mubarak and ? others. If their is a significant amount of money extorted from Egypt lying in Swiss accounts (a likely scenario since everyone else seems to to do it) and if the Swiss start cracking down on that, then it significantly limits what individual Egyptian officers can get away with. They may have to make some concessions / deals / arrangements.

A bit hypocritical to hold hearings about this

[A beautiful mind]

...given the billions of dollars in military aid and training the USA has offered to Mubarak's regime - the teargas branded "made in USA" was just the obvious part.

Re:A bit hypocritical to hold hearings about this

[chemicaldave]

...given the billions of dollars in military aid and training the USA has offered to Mubarak's regime - the teargas branded "made in USA" was just the obvious part.

You mean the military aid and training that went to the Egyptian military who have remained pretty neutral throughout the ordeal? Perhaps Egypt should have purchased weapons from the Russians instead?

Re:A bit hypocritical to hold hearings about this

[copponex]

Don't take this personally.

But for everyone who is trying to give credit to the United States for giving tens of billions in military equipment to a regime that's been murdering it's own citizens for thirty years, fuck you. It's like giving kudos to the NRA for putting guns in the hands of idiots, and then congratulating them the one time someone uses it for good and simultaneously ignoring the tens of thousands of times it ended in tragedy.

And yes, in fact, there have been a few bloodless revolutions backed by military holding Soviet weapons who have received Soviet training, fucking Perestroika being the first one coming to mind. Not that anyone should be imposing their will on a sovereign nation, but Jesus H. Christ. Pick up a book once in a while.

Re:A bit hypocritical to hold hearings about this

[chemicaldave]

Whoa there. I'm not giving credit to anyone. If it were up to me the US would exert as much pressure on foreign oppressive regimes just shy of military action. But you said it yourself. Nobody should be imposing their will on a sovereign nation. So does that mean we should just completely ignore relations altogether? The fact of the matter is that Egypt's peace with Israel brings stability to the region. Diplomacy is a delicate thing. And if we had stopped giving aid to Egypt, that wouldn't have stopped Mubarak's rule. Don't make this out like it's completely the US's fault for Mubarak being in power for so long.
Yeah it's hypocritical, but that's no reason to ignore it.

Re:A bit hypocritical to hold hearings about this

[tnk1]

Actually, I think his point was a response to the initial assertion that because we sold weapons to the Egyptian military, we were supporting or even helping to cause oppression.

The fact is that the oppression started before the US or even the Soviets started selling arms to Egypt. Nasser started off having some western equipment, then he became a Soviet client. Sadat continued that and then after the Peace Accords he brought Egypt closer to the US. Mubarak brought Egypt all the way to the US sphere.

In all of that, the oppression was happening because the Egyptian internal situation was the way it was. The US sold arms to Egypt to make the Middle East more stable. It kept Egypt firmly on the side of the US and the US is against its allies attacking its other allies. In the sense of preventing more wars in the Middle East, weapons "Made in the USA" certainly were a lot more effective at keeping Egyptian conscript soldiers alive than Soviet arms or no arms at all.

Sure, its nice to say "we shouldn't sell anything to oppressors at all on principle!" That's just not reality. Perhaps we could have leaned on Mubarak more to be better to his people, but is that really our job any more than it is our job to prop him up internally? He was a partner that kept yet another Arab-Israeli war from breaking out. One of those would have probably ended up killing more people than probably "disappeared" in the entire 30 years of his rule.

In the end, perhaps its not enough to say that "they just would have bought the tear gas from someone else", but at the same time, most of the progress that we have actually made in the Middle East, which includes the ability for the Israelis and Palestinians to even negotiate at all, is based on the Egypt being kept stable, peaceful and Western-aligned. I am nearly certain it saved lives, including many of the people who are now alive to protest, and these protests are properly the business of no one but the Egyptian people themselves.

Re:Government hypocrisy strikes again

[Anonymous Coward]

Something neither the anti-obama ranters nor the liberals "get" is that in the long run, America is only there for the Suez Canal, and would support whoever it takes to keep oil flowing through it. When the public gets around to electing someone else, we'll support them too, unless they stop keeping the Canal open again, in which case we take back all their toys.

Does anyone know who they really are?

[spun]

The Muslim Brotherhood are not fanatics. They are the real equivalent of our Southern Baptists, stuffy old conservative men who want a society centered on religion. They have always condemned violence, and continually speak out against all terrorism. I wouldn't want to see them elected any more than I want our country ruled by Southern Baptists, but they are not radical terrorist Muslims. Oh, you will find some people claiming they are, but those are the same people who would believe a Muslim stamp collecting club was a terrorist organization. You won't find Al Qaeda praising the Muslim Brotherhood, indeed, all radical Muslims condemn it as too moderate.

As I said, i wouldn't want to see them elected, not because they would attack Israel, or turn against us, but they might require women to wear Burkhas and a lot of them seem quite keen on stoning adulterers. Not good, but not suicide bombers, either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

Re:Does anyone know who they really are?

[pslytely psycho]

The Muslim equivalent of the Mafia?

"Hey Vito Umar, you'se 'sposed ta git uz a suicide bomber today, wha' happon?"

"Yo, Vinnie Usaed, I called up Fat Faheyed, but da moron had is own phone hooked to da bomb man! It blowed 'im all da way to Allah!"

"Oh Vito, I tol' you Fat Faheyed was a idjit! Why you use 'im mon?"

"I'm so sorry Vinnie, but 'e let me feel up 'is goilfren UNDER her Burka! I had to use him!"

"Dats ok Vito, we'll jus' stone da chick an' yo honor will be restored"

Re:Does anyone know who they really are?

[spun]

I agree it should stay secular. However, that is not for us to decide. It won't be the end of the world if the Egyptians democratically elect a government run by the Muslim Brotherhood. The one thing Egyptians won't stand for at this point is anything that takes their hard-won democracy from them. They might accept or even desire a religious country, but not one that forbids democratic elections. Therefore, while we may comment on what we would like to see in the region, we have no excuse to step in and take control if things look as though they aren't going our way.

I was just using your post as a stepping stone to make my point about the MB, not accusing you of hyperbole about them.

Re:In regards to Mubarak stepping down

[pitchpipe]

Agreed! Why does this news (that Mubarak just stepped down) only get a footnote to a small news story? Surely nerds will think this is big news as well.

Re:No Time to Worry!

[HTH NE1]

Wait a minute: "prevent the use... from being used"? So they can use it, but they can't use using it?

Military control

[ndogg]

Yes, it is a little scary to think that the military might use this opportunity to take control, but I think there are a few reasons we don't need to worry about that.

1. The military is nearly all conscripts. When Mubarak asked the military to push back the protesters, the soldiers instead participated. I'm willing to trust that they are on the side of the people in this case.
2. The US will never stand for the military taking power, and at $1.3 billion per year, I think the military will listen.

For right now, I think we are just going to have to trust that the military is going to help foster Egypt's transition to democracy because there isn't anyone else that has the capability.

Re:No Time to Worry!

[RightSaidFred99]

Yeah, we've got it so god damn bad here. Why just the other day a bunch of goons in facemasks busted down my door because I said Obama sucks in a phone conversation.

Fucking perspective - get some you drama queen.

Re:No Time to Worry!

[sortadan]

Deep packet inspection has been around for several (technology) generations. I don't fault the software company for selling it to anyone, if they didn't some other software vendor would have (or the Egyptian authorities would have rolled their own). The demand was there, and it was going to be filled one way or the other. The real problem I see is that the base communication protocols haven't been encrypted, even after many years of evidence that it's needed. 100% of traffic should go over SSL, or something stringer with a distributed authentication scheme, rather than having a centralized authority like Verisign holding all the root keys.

Closing the barn door ... Hacktivismo warned us

[EnergyScholar]

It's rather silly to discuss legislative limits to technology transfer at this late date. It is already mostly done. The big Western tech companies have already sold what they had to sell to the highest bidders. We were explicitly warned about this. The clearest and most apropos warning of how Western technology companies were selling censorship technology to repressive regimes came from Hacktivismo, years ago. Please see their article Waging Peace on the Internet (probably not work safe, depending on your workplace), and see whether it exactly describes this story. I especially like the 'pigs at the trough not noticing the bacon being trimmed off their a$$' metaphor.

Re:In regards to Mubarak stepping down

[Mashiki]

If you had a clue about middle east politics you'd know that a large part of the people there support a form of sharia law(80% or more). Which in turn means that the MB has strong peripheral support from the public to push for such a thing. Now with this being a defacto coup, there is the possibility that the military would step in before such a thing happened as well, just as it did here. But that remains to be seen.

Welcome to reality, she's a cold mistress. Mubark was a bottom feeder, but he isn't as bad as it can get. Of course Iran is now panicking, and has cut various news feeds of it too.

Re:In regards to Mubarak stepping down

[Mashiki]

In an obvious point to myself, I should have posted this but I guess it doesn't matter. I'll expect the usual partisan hacks to start trolling now. But you can read some reality right here: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/562840/201102101920/What-Egyptians-Really-Do-Want.htm

Re:In regards to Mubarak stepping down

[L0rdJedi]

LOL!

Because the story isn't over yet. Mubarak may have stepped down, but that doesn't mean Egypt is free. If they aren't careful, they will end up like Iran. Lots of signs are pointing to exactly that happening.

Gaza had free and open elections. Hamas was elected. That doesn't mean they're free.

The entire Middle East is on fire right now. They all want Sharia law. You're about to see what it looks like to have a Caliphate in a large part of the world.

With out a *hint* of irony

[neotokyo]

"now a push for stronger controls and monitoring for technology exports 'that would provide a national strategy to prevent the use of American technology from being used by human rights abusers.'"

Where is the grilling of our own country's use of this technology to spy on our citizens? Yeah, I thought so, not a single word. That'd be looking in the past and we never do that. Nope never...

Honestly, this is consistent with what the US has been saying for the past 10 years on any human rights abuse. We've continued to rack up our own abuses and as long as the targets are "terrorists" or "Muslims" or whatever the current boogeyman, it's OK if the US does these things. Meanwhile, out of the other side of our mouth, while we continue these abusive and repressive tactics, we have the gall to point the finger at other countries, ones who we even have supported and ASKED to do our repression because it gives the US some value, we point our finger and tsk tsk tsk, spying, invasion of privacy, these are the things of tyrants and dictators... let the sound of freedom ring...

Nope, not even a hint of irony there...

Separation of church and state does not mean wytim

[kernelcache]

Separation of church and state was stated to prevent congress from enacting law which would prevent or otherwise curtail the freedom of people practicing religion; it was not a statement which would prevent religion from being practiced in such things as school, or any other government-backed organization. Most people think that separation of church and state is a hard piece of legislation, which it is not. To think that decisions made within state are made without religious bias is naive and those who seek firm separation really don't understand the implications of that. Imagine that any place you go, which was subsidized by governement funds, would adhere to this clear separation, and anything it deems as religion...even the absense of religion as being a religion. Well, then everything would collapse - we would have a state which criminalized such behavior since we all rely on the state (roads, voting, police, fire-fighers, libraries, etc). Usually this separation is just a mechanism for people to identify differences and try and make other people compromise their freedom.

Re:No Time to Worry!

[bertok]

There's a historical reason why SSL is not more common: because the hierarchy of certificate trust was not propagated through the hierarchy of DNS. That's the logical thing to do: If you control the domain name servers for your own domain, you can publish your own public keys. It would have been free and open, reducing the barrier of entry to practically zero. Instead, administrators have been forced to establish the relationship between certificates and DNS names using a commercial third party. Instead of extending the DNS protocol, we pay people to perform a workaround.

This was a huge mistake that basically led to companies like Verisign extorting billions of dollars in exchange for permitting web administrators to encrypt traffic to their sites. What's brilliant is that Verisign owns a significant chunk of the root DNS name servers! It's a conflict of interest for them to enable a free and open hierarchy of trust based on DNS, because it would eliminate most of their business overnight.

That, right there, is corporate corruption on a billion dollar scale that is directly detrimental to human rights, privacy, and information safety.

I wonder how many people have been executed or imprisoned due to Verisign's stifling of internet cryptography enabling corrupt governments to spy on their citizens?

Re:No Time to Worry!

[msauve]

You forgot "Think of the Children."

Re:No Time to Worry!

[rtb61]

Gees, silly me and I thought it all started here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun, with a bunch of terrorist attacks upon the British by Jewish Palestinians and those terrorists seeking to establish a Jewish apartheid state in the middle east. Apparently the US got drawn into this by the cold war on the side of the terrorists (go figure), which really pissed off the Saudis, who have ever since worked to gain revenge for a diplomatic betrayal (they have oddly enough been protected in doing this by American politicians who get rich doing so, sick stuff).

The US has a history of supporting terrorists groups only to have those self same terrorists turn around and bite the hand that fed them. The current crop of course were created and supported by the US during http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan. Which makes you think, were we would be now if the US had simply minded it's own fucking business and let the Soviets win in Afghanistan and re-establish law and order and work to achieve cultural modernisation.

Re:No Time to Worry!

[cold fjord]

You forgot "Think of the Children."

Well, that's maybe where we differ. I think we need to be adults and think of everybody, especially if Al Qaeda is successful in getting nuclear weapons, which they already have permission to use.

But, if it will make you more comfortable, for the moment lets forget about the children, and see where we stand. We can recap, and maybe you could point out what is actually wrong instead of in essence saying "I don't like it".

I pointed out that the courts have ruled against your assertion that the government's national security wiretapping is illegal, and a human rights violation: Intelligence Court Releases Ruling in Favor of Warrantless Wiretapping

Even the page you linked to noted the EFF defeat on the legal question:

EFF Plans Appeal of Jewel v. NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Case
Court Rules That Mass Surveillance of Americans is Immune From Judicial Review
San Francisco - A federal judge has dismissed Jewel v. NSA, a case from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on behalf of AT&T customers challenging the National Security Agency's mass surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans' phone calls and emails.

I also pointed out just a handful of the many active terrorism investigations and court cases going on inside the US. This points to a genuine, current, dangerous threat of people being killed by militant Muslim extremists. I assume you don't debate that they are genuine.

Daniel Boyd pleads guilty to US terrorism charges -9 February 2011
Domestic Terrorist 'Jihad Jane' Pleads Guilty to Four Charges - Feb 2, 2011
Stockham requests new attorney - February 05, 2011
Note: This individual is apparently an American Sunni Muslim who tried to attack a Shia Muslim Mosque.
Iranian Book Celebrating Suicide Bombers Found in Arizona Desert - January 27, 2011
Baltimore man accused of plotting to blow up military recruiting station in Md. - Thursday, December 9, 2010
Oregon Bomb Suspect Mohamed Osman Mohamud Wanted "Spectacular Show," - November 29, 2010
Faisal Shahzad: 'War With Muslims Has Just Begun' - Oct. 5, 2010
2 MN women charged with aiding Somali terrorists - Aug 5, 2010
U.S. links 8 to Somali terrorist group - November 24, 2009
And here's one for the Canadians: Converts Who Kill

I then pointed out that this current turmoil started with Al Qaeda's 9/11 attacks, and that according to Bin Laden, he won't stop trying to a

Google

[xnpu]

In other news: Google has, as of yesterday, started to actively report Chinese users or proxies/VPN's to the Chinese government. Can we be upset about this please? As someone living in China the last thing I need is Google as a government agent..