26 Miles

Is Joseph Stack A Terrorist

// February 19th, 2010 // No Comments » // Security & Privacy

Apparently not to most of the people voting in the CNN.com poll.

Look it up people, it’s terrorism.

Wouldn’t you say the Oklahoma City bombing was terrorism? The news media sure did. Joseph Stack harbored a grudge against the US Government for perceived wrongs, much like Tim McVeigh.

Several easy-to-find definitions of terrorism (although a widely agreed-to definition somehow still escapes us).

Princeton.edu

The calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.

Wiktionary.org

1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.
2. Violence against civilians to achieve military or political objectives.

An act of violence against civilians in the furtherance of a political or social agenda is terrorism no matter who the perpetrator is.

All Subversive Organizations Now Must Register in South Carolina

// February 16th, 2010 // No Comments » // Security & Privacy

Apparently All Subversive Organizations Now Must Register in South Carolina. I’m guessing this will save the authorities countless hours of investigation time in finding criminals accused of crimes where these organizations are suspected of involvement. Brilliant!

Portrait of the Modern Terrorist as an Idiot

// June 18th, 2007 // No Comments » // Business & Politics, Security & Privacy

Bruce Schneier has an excellent article that aligns exactly with how I feel every time I hear news of a new “terrorist plot” that has been disrupted. Inevitably, the story that follows paints a picture of a marginalized, incompetent set of characters who had little chance of carrying out a mass-casualty attack, and who often hadn’t progressed beyond the “yelling-at-the-TV” phase of their so-called “plot”.

I’m sure there is real investigation going on and real plots are being uncovered and disrupted. But the ones that seem to get the most attention are the ones that revolve around sensational targets or the potential, however remote, of mass-casualties, regardless of the actors’ operational capacity.

As he says in his article: “[...] in this country, while you have to be competent to pull off a terrorist attack, you don’t have to be competent to cause terror.”

Perhaps these stories are the security equivalent of an opiate for the masses. The appearance that the security folks are “on the job” and “getting things done”. The reality sometimes seems so different.

There are real terrorists out there that pose a real threat to us. Too often, the ones you see getting arrested on TV or simmering in their cages at Gitmo aren’t the ones we should worry about.

Welcome To Boston! Let’s Blow-Up Something!

// March 2nd, 2007 // No Comments » // Security & Privacy

If you haven’t been following the various terrorism false alarm stories in the last few months, you’ve been missing what has to be both one of the funniest and saddest security stories of the year.

That said, it has given us some quality satire and art to reflect the humor we find in collective paranoia and overreaction.

But sadly, these stories represent more about what we lost after 9/11 than what we gained. Stories of Homeland Security pork begging to be spent are available for almost daily digestion.

Our perceived threat matrix has become far too broad and our methods for dealing with diverse threat vectors too narrow (e.g., “blow it up!”). While blowing things up is unquestionably fun and makes for great TV, it’s not cheap and worse, when not outright embarrassing, does little to quell public fear about the authorities’ ability to prevent whatever real threat there may be.

This even reached me personally last year at our neighborhood elementary school. One of the children had left their backpack outside after school was dismissed for the day. Eventually someone noticed it and (of course) phoned 911. The bomb squad from a neighboring community was called in to show off their toys. The media also came, complete with a helicopter overhead to observe what would inevitably be a dramatic detonation of the suspicious backpack. The police robot gently tugged at the backpack and dragged it away from the building, then, however they do these things, the backpack was blown up on live TV.

Scattered across the schoolyard were the guts of what used to be some poor kids backpack — books, multi-colored folders, etc., and what remained of the backpack. It was all very exciting, and all very ridiculous to most any casual observer….

Debunking Cheney’s One Percent Doctrine

// October 12th, 2006 // No Comments » // Business & Politics

A premise as absurd as Vice President Dick Cheney’s approach to the Global War On Terror, characterized by author Ron Suskind as “The One Percent Doctrine” (in his book of the same name), hardly merits any worthy attempt at “debunking”.

Few besides the Veep himself would argue such a perspective. But as entertaining as penetrating the stew of U.S. foreign policy can sometimes be, pundits can hardly keep themselves from a topic so rich with opportunity.

Temple mathmetican John Allen Paulos offers a curious thought experiment in the implications of applying the “one-percent doctrine” to other aspects of human life, and it’s associated fallout.