Feds Arrest Al Qaeda Suspects With Plans to Poison Water Supplies on Them

ABC News
Al Qaeda in America?
FBI Considers Charging American With Aiding Terrorists
July 24, 2002

July 24 — The American Muslim being held by the FBI as a material witness eventually could be charged with aiding terrorists, sources told ABCNEWS.

As part of the federal government's ongoing investigation into possible al Qaeda activity in the United States, the FBI arrested James Ujaama at a family member's home in Denver on Monday. He is being held at an undisclosed location.

Ujaama, 36 of Seattle, is being investigated for suspicion that he helped Osama bin Laden's terror network, sources said. A grand jury is looking into whether members of a controversial Seattle mosque were trying to set up an al Qaeda cell in the United States.

"The FBI came and got him," his mother, Peggi Thompson, told The Associated Press. "It's a federal charge of being a material witness. There's nothing I can do or anything right now. Nobody's saying anything."

Federal law enforcement officials refused to comment publicly on the arrest.

The FBI is investigating whether Ujaama, when he lived in London, associated with a radical Muslim fundamentalist who repeatedly has called for holy war against the West, sources told ABCNEWS.com.

Plus, sources said authorities are probing Ujaama's work on a Web site called http://stopamerica.org and a British site dubbed the "Ultimate Jihad Challenge." And officials want to know whether Ujaama took laptop computers to the Taliban in Afghanistan when the militant religious regime ran the country.

Sources told ABCNEWS federal prosecutors are considering charging Ujaama with aiding terrorists.

"If this individual indeed turns out to have concrete links to terrorists, to al Qaeda, then he is a big fish," said Matthew Levitt, an analyst with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Suspect Denies Terror Activities

Ujaama, an African-American Muslim, has denied ties to terrorists. In an e-mail mailed last week to a columnist with the Seattle Post Intelligencer, Ujaama said he and his brother Mustafa were ready to challenge any criminal charges that may be brought against them.

"My brother and I are not terrorists and we should not have been charged in the media and harassed," James Ujaama said. Mustafa Ujaama was also briefly detained Monday.

Mustafa Ujaama told reporters following his release that he and his brother had been unfairly treated. "My grandparents had this house in the '40s, man. This is not right," he said.

The brothers are well known in Seattle, where some community leaders have applauded their work to fight drugs and prostitution.

"If my brother and I end up being indicted or jailed, we will understand that many great leaders before us suffered the same consequences. We are proud to stick to our Islamic convictions of standing out for truth and justice against all consequences," James Ujaama wrote in the seven-page statement.

James Ujaama emerged as a target in a grand jury investigation focused on whether members of the now defunct Dar-us-Salaam mosque in Seattle were trying to organize a U.S.-based al Qaeda cell.

Sources said members of the group had looked into setting up a training camp at a ranch near Bly, Ore. The intensive investigation is symbolic of the continuing fear in the Bush administration that terrorists who trained in Afghanistan have made their way into the United States.

"Suffice it to say, the threat is real, as you know. Over 10,000 men went through those [foreign al Qaeda] camps," said Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson.

The Viewpoint of http://www.StopAmerica.org

James Ujaama has strong views on America's foreign policy, specifically its war on terrorism. This conclusion about the Seattle Muslim arrested Monday comes from a review of a Web site he founded.

Ujaama took his criticism of "America's New War" to http://www.StopAmerica.org - an organization of "Americans united against war," and committed to exposing how "America's policy reigns terror on the weak and oppressed."

Contributors to the site are members of the Global Alliance for U.S. Foreign Policy Change, an officially registered non-governmental organization. They come from "all over the world," and say they "despise war, militaries and America's new world order."

The site hosts a collection of articles "from the other side," calling into question whether U.S. politicians have a hidden agenda in the war against terror, whether Osama bin Laden was truly behind the Sept. 11 attacks, and whether President Bush acted inappropriately in the attacks' aftermath.

There's also a section featuring photographs of "pain, murder and mayhem, scars and death, tears and fears of thousand of innocent lives caught in the net of America's destructive foreign policy."

Ujaama wants to drive home the message of accountability to the decision makers at the top of the U.S. government. "Our campaign will not end until America's foreign policy has ended," he writes in a founder's message. "We the people of the United States charge this government and their coalition with conspiracy to commit genocide and crimes of terrorism against Muslim people in our names."

ABCNEWS' Pierre Thomas contributed to this report.

The domestic war on terrorism is going very well. The FBI seems to have understood its marching orders and is less prone to be intimidated by DOJ. And DOJ seems to understand the president's bottom line: no more screw-ups. So why do we need a Department of Homeland Security? Answer: Bush made a tough, quick call within hours of the September attacks that the executives power to wage war would be eroded by congressional (Daschle) meddling. The President had to get out front. A republic is a complicated thing.

And we let them all in, and continue to let more in!

Very true, Betty. But the guys in the article, James and Jon Thompson, were born and raised in the U.S.

I was just responding to Travis McGee.

James Ujaama (or James Thompson)
Founder of stopamerica.org

Hopefully, he has been stopped.

"Just keep a pitcher of drinking water in the fridge"

Better yet, stock up on beer (domestic only). Not only do breweries have high levels of quality control but you will be contributing to capitalistic society while doing something proscribed by the Koran. Kills three birds with one stone.

Bump!

These fellows are Puget Sound boys! One was in the Navy Reserve!

"...acted as a courier delivering laptop computers to the
Taliban."

Gotta admit, that would look good on the resume.

. Unless you exceed the human body's natural defenses against ionizing radiation, your chances of getting cancer do not go up.

Even standing in your clean house, you are bombarded by dangerous gamma rays, which cause cancer fer sure, but you may not get cancer in your lifetime.

I concede that my statement:"If a microscopic piece of radioactive material gets into your body, you WILL get cancer -- may not happen for 10 or 20 years, but it will happen. " --- is an overgeneralization and in that sense an exaggeration.

But then again, the original post claiming it would take "truckloads" of contaminant to poison a reservoir is, at least, as 'inaccurate'.

The basic idea is that there are radioactive materials that are granular enough and potent enough so that dispersal into a reservoir would compel you to NOT drink from it BECAUSE "you do not want radioactive material to be lodged in your body where its emmissions are damaging enough to your DNA to significantly increase the likelyhood of cancer"

I'll grant you your technical semantic objections to my assertions, to the extent that my non-factuality comforts you as you drink water that has been contaminated by radioactive materials.

No, you need a science class.

The reason I responded to the post about 'needing truckloads of contaminant' is because I was very surprised to hear this was the governments stance -- I felt it was a misdirection.

In the interests of full disclosure -- I am not a scientist. I do not even hold a degree of any sort. In fact, I am a high school dropout who has completed only 3/4 of a year of high school.

But here is the irony, you can 'take' the word of the government -- the government who told you the environment was 'safe' in NYC after two asbestos and silica laden towers had collapsed dusting the city with these materials -- while, on the other hand, this government will FINE YOU for having a sandpile on a construction site that is not covered by a tarp and labeled as HAZARDOUS MATERIAL...

OR--

You can read what some anonymous drop-out nobody has written on the net and at least apply enough common sense to it to give one pause and reconsideration, illuminating arguments and questions hopefully disconcerting enough to cause a person to seek a second opinion other than USGOV.

So yea, Im an ignorant nobody, I made the assumption that, having scored in the top 3 percent in the nation on the American College (entry) Test in math and science, and having an IQ of 140, it was reasonable for me to put forth a few general axiomatic statements about science as I understood it in the context of the question at hand.

They were obviously, on their very face, not meant to be exacting, definative, absolute or precise. I think that a reasonable person could see that by their very baldness. I was not issuing them as an adamant claim on scientific truth -- their very style and overgeneralization SHOULD HAVE deflected such interpretation.

The intent is communication of an idea, and when people fall into the 'nit-pick legaleze debate-every-assertion to the nth degree trap' -- they are choosing to gaze into their navels and contemptate the meaning of 'is' instead of acknowleging and lending proper weight and intent to the communication and implications in the real world itself.

So, "Yadda, yadda" right back at-cha. =)

You are now free to continue to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, and ramble on about how much stronger steel is than ice.

OK, tell me, smartypants: what could you and a dozen or two friends pack in on your backs and put in a municipal resevoir that could make anyone ill now or in the future? You may use powdered plutonium if you like. It won't work.

Al Quaida DOES have credible plans for poisoning water supplies and just such a plan was busted in Italy. But it won't be done by putting stuff in reservoirs.

I'll grant you your technical semantic objections to my assertions, to the extent that my non-factuality comforts you as you drink water that has been contaminated by radioactive materials.

Actually, I am NOT at ease with the public water supply, for the reasons I mentioned (easy to poison from anyone's house...etc)

Low on my list is concern about radioactivity, because it can be detected rather easily at the source or destination.

I'm primarily concerned with faster chemical killers which are IMMEDIATELY dangerous to your life-span such as Cyanide and Arsenic, etc. These non-radioactive poisons can kill real fast while cancers can grow for years before they do any harm.

And what about hazardous gases commonly used around semiconductor processing facilities?? Arsine, phosphene...that can kill in such minute concentrations that no one actually knows what phosphene smells like, because no one has ever lived long enough to tell.

Get over your curie-phobia!! Radioactivity is not your biggest problem!

mindP, Take this as a compliment, arrived at by objectively reading your posts here and nothing else. It is merely my (very insightful) opinion.

You have a pronounced liberal-arts slant. (That's not to say you are a liberal!!!! I don't know.) But you are arguing a broad creative insight with two left-brain folks (eno_ and myself).

You are very intelligent, as shown by your writing style, which is superior to any typical HS dropout.

Just try to appreciate the perspective of our "conversation" here. You are creatively looking at a big picture, and trying to expose a tertiary concern. Which is good.

Meanwhile, us "nitpickers" are complaining about radioactivity this, or steel vs. iceberg that. This perturbs you. But this is the normal give and take between predominantly right and left brained folk!! It's a good thing. It's why architectural engineers don't get along with "architects." Architects see a grand design, and Arch E's say "no, that bridge cannot be made of glass."

So, Wenesday morning kudos to you. Please do not despair at those who would nitpick. If you are to maximize your potential, you will learn to adopt and address the complaints of the nitpickers, and eventually you will own the grand design for a glass bridge with steeel underpinnings....

OK, tell me, smartypants: what could you and a dozen or two friends pack in on your backs and put in a municipal resevoir that could make anyone ill now or in the future? You may use powdered plutonium if you like. It won't work.

In theory: Preferably, I would hijack a single truck full of nuclear waste material, probably of the type generated by a hospital, then I wouldnt bother with trying to access a reservoir and simply dump it in a small lake, or lake system that has plenty of residential development around it. Being from Michigan, I see plenty of candidates for such a thing.

Now, lets assume that the end result of this doesn't "really" poison anything seriously (ie residents on the lake will have a 1 in 10,000 chance of getting mildly ill if they continue thier normal lake activities for a period of 2 years)....

Is that really relevent in the overall effectiveness of this scheme to terrorize?

Remember, we are a nation afraid of second hand smoke, afraid to let pilots carry a gun, afraid of someone smoking a joint...

Think about it, we let our fear of boxcutters KILL 3000 PEOPLE.

Heck, if one is a suicidal terrorist, you could keep a city in terror for weeks simply through a random handgun killing everyday before you got caught, especially if you targeted a specific class of people like children or the elderly.

Another venue is simple arson.

Actually, if you had powdered plutonium, I know of a fairly easy and far better place to put it than in the water, but I won't say it.

Architects see a grand design, and Arch E's say "no, that bridge cannot be made of glass."

All I know is summed up best by a "hic-farm-boy-sounding" caller on C-SPAN:

"You cant stop crazy people."

So, all you Engineers out there need to explain the type of world that needs to be created before we could stop achilles-heel type of terrorism pioneered and ground-tested by the following:

Buford Furrow. (opened fire on a day care)

Harris and Kliebold. (school massacre)

Larry Ashbrook. (church massacre)

No matter what you do to the airlines, the reservoirs, the nuclear power plants, etc -- in the end there is no defense against a suicidal terrorist with a gun of any sort charging into one of these 'sensative' sites and blasting away.

Not even guards help, as illustrated by the airport shooting.

(the LACK of any of the above happening should tell us something about the allegation of terrorist cells existing in the US -- they are either lazy, uncreative, ambivalent or simply non-existant)

For a self proclaimed genius, you sure arrive at some funny conclusions.

First of all, meny people who read FR are convinced that lower-grade sobotage and thuggery, ranging from railroad track sabotage to maybe AA587 being bombed, and certainly including the shoe bomber and the LAX shooting, has been going on since 9/11.

Also, the most straightforward explanation of the likely cover-up and minimization - i.e. "No evidence he was motivated by terrorism." in the LAX shooting - is that our government wants to propagandize us that it has the terror thing under control, when, in fact, there are still dozens to hundreds of dangerous people running around, and Moslems in the U.S. generally support these scum.

How do we minimize the threat agianst soft targets in teh U.S.? Deport all illegal Moslems NOW. Review the visa and PR status of all other Moslems and deport all that have a whiff of radicalism on them. Poisoning all of NYC is not likely. Derailing passenger trains, on the other hand, is very likely to continue until we get serious about removing the threat from our midst.

Thanks honway for the ping on this article.

The recent video taping of OKC's municipal water supply by ME men from Florida should be taken as a potential serious threat given what this article says about ALQaeda operations involving water supplies in the US.