Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Myths of Domestic Terror
Good piece from Rolling Stone reporting on the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF), and its tenacious battle against something that may or may not exist.
Reporter Guy Lawson finds a history of minor criminal agents provacateur ginning up feckless plans for impossible terror feats, misleading statistics, secrecy behind a veil of "if you knew what we know you'd understand, but we can't tell you" and some truly scary excrement setting off a radiological attack monitor in Chicago.
Some summational excerpts:
The expenditure of such massive resources to find would-be terrorists inevitably requires results. Plots must be uncovered. Sleeper cells must be infiltrated. Another attack must be prevented —or, at least, be seen to be prevented. But in backwaters like Rockford [Illinois], the JTTFs don't have much to do. To find threats to thwart, the task forces have increasingly taken to using paid informants to cajole and inveigle targets like [convicted domestic terrorist Derrick] Shareef into pursuing their harebrained schemes.
..........a closer inspection of the cases brought by JTTFs reveals that most of the prosecutions had one thing in common: The defendants posed little if any demonstrable threat to anyone or anything. According to a study by the Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law, only ten percent of the 619 "terrorist" cases brought by the federal government have resulted in convictions on "terrorism-related" charges —a category so broad as to be meaningless. In the past year, none of the convictions involved jihadist terror plots targeting America.
....In most cases, because no trial is ever held, few details emerge beyond the spare and slanted descriptions in the indictments. When facts do come to light during a trial, they cast doubt on the seriousness of the underlying case.
Of course, when there's no threat, that means that the people responsible for keeping us from the threat must be doing something right. Right?
When I ask what kinds of cases his CT squad has made, [Special Agent Robert] Holley cites the example of a local cab driver who came up on the JTTF's radar some time back —he won't say how or why. The man was East African, Holley says, a suspected Islamic extremist "connected to known bad guys overseas." After being interviewed by the JTTF, the cabbie decided to leave the country. Nothing criminal had occurred, and no charges were laid. The cab driver had simply come to the attention of the JTTF, and that in itself was enough to dispose of the matter.
"Can we consider that a success because we didn't put him in jail?" Holley asks. "Absolutely. This guy is no longer here. He is not a threat to one person in the United States."
..........
"Have you ever found a terrorist cell?" I ask.
"That's kind of a vague question," [Master Sgt. Carl] Gutierrez [of the Illinois State Police] says. "There are certain things we can't talk about, because it leads to more."
"Do I believe there's a cell in Chicago?" [Sgt. Paul] DeRosa [of the Chicago Police Department] asks. "I bet you there is. Do I have any direct physical knowledge? No. But I think there is one, and that's why we're here."
The story has more detailed discussions of such supposed terror plots as the JFK jet fuel conspiracy, the "Albany pizza" case, and the "Liberty City Seven" case. Read the whole thing.
I wondered where's the terror? here on 9/11/06.
Jennifer|2.11.08 @ 7:08PM|#
"Can we consider that a success because we didn't put him in
jail?" Holley asks. "Absolutely. This guy is no longer here. He is
not a threat to one person in the United States."
Wow.
John M. Joy|2.11.08 @ 7:09PM|#
I don't remember now whether it was the feds or the local clown
college bringing charges, but I seem to recall some time not long
ago (a year or so maybe) a local kid was brought up on terrorism
charges...
(Wait for it...)
For lighting off a couple of firecrackers in a grocery store, as a
prank.
JMJ
|2.11.08 @ 7:32PM|#
Jennifer | February 11, 2008, 7:08pm | #
"Can we consider that a success because we didn't put him in jail?" Holley asks. "Absolutely. This guy is no longer here. He is not a threat to one person in the United States."
Wow.
If not being here = not a threat to one person in the United
States, correct me if I'm wrong, but Saddam and Osama and a
multitude of others ain't here now, and ain't never been here... so
what's the deal?
"I bet you there is. Do I have any direct physical knowledge?
No. But I think there is one, (a threat?)and that's why we're
here there."
Okay, now I get it.
Wow! ... I'm with Jennifer.
(Well I'm not actally with Jennifer; I'm
quite happily espoused to someone else, I'm just sayin' I agree
with Jennifer that's all.)
thoreau|2.11.08 @ 7:38PM|#
What struck me about a lot of the cases in the article is that
they involved guys who almost needed to be mentored into terrorism.
You find some angry loser who mouths off. "Damn, man, I sure wanna
do something! Show the world I won't take it!" But he's a threat to
nobody except those who stand between him and the bag of cheetos.
Then some informant comes along and acts receptive and encouraging,
and steers him into planning an attack.
I'll leave it to the lawyers to decide whether the investigations
met the legal definition of entrapment. For all I know, it may very
well be that the undercover informant never uttered a word that
would cross any of the lines in the law, and only acted as a
sympathizer who would go along with the suspect's ideas rather than
instigating. Still, an angry loser might not get off the couch
unless he has an eager friend who's very interested in his
ideas.
I see nothing honorable in talking an angry loser into getting off
the couch and trying to take action. Keep an eye on him if you
must, but don't do anything that might encourage him to get off the
couch. I'm not a big fan of surveillance, but I'd rather see an
angry loser under surveillance than see him encouraged to take
action so he can be arrested.
And then there's the fact that so many of the informants were
criminals seeking the favor of FBI agents. I am highly skeptical
that none of these guys ever did anything that might cross legal
lines into entrapment territory.
REAL AMERICANS STAY VIGILANT|2.11.08 @ 7:42PM|#
YOU TERRORIST APPEASERS WANT TO SEND YOUR KIDS TO MADRASSAS FINE BUT I SLEEP BETTER AT NIGHT KNOWING JACK BAUER IS OUT THERE TORTURING PEOPLE AND NOT BLABBING TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT CAUSE SURE YOU THINK THAT "CABBIE" LEFT HA HA HA IM SURE HES GETTING FISTED BY REAL AMERICAN AGENTS IN GUADALCANAL SAFEHOUSE I HAVE A FEW CABBIE NAMES TO SUBMIT AS WELL I RIDE TAXIS SOMETIMES AND GUYS NAMED ABUL ARE DOING NOTHING BUT CHATTING THERE TERRORIST PLANS ON BLUETOOTH THINGS ALLDAY I TOLD THE CIA THAT THOSE ROBOCOP THINGS WERE SUSPICIOUS AND NOW THEY USE SNEAKY TECH TO LISTEN TO THE CABBIES ALL DAY SO MUCH FOR YOU GUYS WHO THINK THEY DO NOTHING
Al Aqsa Abu Sherif Muhammad Ob|2.11.08 @ 7:53PM|#
Psst. Hey!... uh. Anyone like, hate America??? I mean REALLY
hate America? COol! Me 2 dood!~ Lets blow stuff up! Call me!!
1-800-KLL-OSMA
----------------------
All Hoo Akbar!!!
"the song remains the same" - Led Zepp
1.8Ghz Athlon XP,128MB RADEON BADAZZ2488,500GB Seagate SATA,Secret
Encryption Thingy,
24LBs C4, 4 suicide belts, AK47 MKII (ROOOOLZ!!!!), red kifaya, mad
IEDs up in the hizzy 08!!!!!!!!
==========================================
This email was sent to you by the Joint Terrorism Taskforce
Operations Center. If you've received this mail by accident, please
set fire to your home and eat the nearest cyanide pill. Agents in
black helicopters will be on hand shortly to stage a suicide based
on your secret life as a child pornographer. Thank you for your
continued assistance in protecting America.
|2.11.08 @ 8:14PM|#
On the day the Department of Homeland Security was born the
terrorists won for sure. Big time.
End of story.
Ruthless
|2.11.08 @ 8:35PM|#
Something about this reminds of the Tom Sharpe novel Riotous
Assembly, set in apartheid South Africa. The police send ten
undercover agents into a small town where they believe that
terrorists are lurking. Their goal is to contact the terrorists,
join them and collect intelligence on their operations.
The cops, not knowing each other, start sniffing around and
eventually they come in contact with each other. Each one is
convinced the other nine are genuine terrorists. The wreck havoc on
the town as they blow things up trying to prove to one another they
are really with them -- lest their cover be blown. The entire
terrorist network existed in the minds of the police and their
agents who were responsible for the actual terror.
There is one hilarious episode where they accidentally feed plastic
explosives to a bunch of ostriches on a local farm. The birds
escape and start running through town randomly exploding.
Speaking of libertarian oriented books Laissez Faire Books has a
new book blog at laissezfairebooks.blogspot.com which reviews books
and mentions new titles and special offers.
miche|2.11.08 @ 9:27PM|#
but I seem to recall some time not long ago (a year or so maybe) a local kid was brought up on terrorism charges...
(Wait for it...)
For lighting off a couple of firecrackers in a grocery store, as a prank.
Something similar happened days ago in Penn.
|2.11.08 @ 9:34PM|#
"Say, how come you're wearing that garlic in a bag around your
neck?"
"It's to keep the elephants away."
"What? There's not an elephant within 100 miles of this
place."
"Works pretty well, huh?"
The Wine Commonsewer|2.12.08 @ 12:08AM|#
Miche, when my dad was a kid, the cops would have kicked your
butt and sent you home to your parents, who would have also kicked
your butt for pulling a stunt like that.
I'm not so sure that was such a bad system.
|2.12.08 @ 1:01AM|#
Here's an appropo funny:
http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=2716
It's funny, I'd laugh, but its not funny.
Brandybuck|2.12.08 @ 2:12AM|#
Years ago my brother set off a smokebomb in high school history class. The cops kicked his butt and sent him home, then my dad kicked his butt.
sine|2.12.08 @ 3:02AM|#
1.8Ghz Athlon XP,128MB RADEON BADAZZ2488,500GB Seagate
SATA,Secret Encryption Thingy,
24LBs C4, 4 suicide belts, AK47 MKII (ROOOOLZ!!!!), red kifaya, mad
IEDs up in the hizzy 08!!!!!!!!
Dude, every good terrorist knows you need a combination of hardware
and software to ensure security.
anonymous fan|2.12.08 @ 6:05AM|#
Sam-Hec: Interesting, I used to read Sinfest, and it feels it
has gotten a.. libertarian edge to it? Or did I just miss it
before?
Stuff like this
http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=2690
|2.12.08 @ 6:52AM|#
There's been a handful of home-grown Islamic terrorist plots in Europe, but none in America (so far). This is a testament to how successfully America has integrated its Muslim immigrants into its society compared with Europe.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 8:02AM|#
Al Qaeda's New Face Of Terror: American?
Top Counter-Terrorism Official At FBI Tells CBS News Next Attack On
U.S. Could Be Carried Out By Americans
(CBS) U.S. officials are increasingly worried that the next attack
on America could be carried out by Americans trained in terror
tactics inside al Qaeda's safe-haven in Pakistan, reports CBS News
correspondent Bob Orr.
Arrests last month in Barcelona underline the fear. More than a
dozen trained suicide bombers - many of them European citizens just
back from Pakistan - were taken down as they prepared to launch
attacks against transit systems in Spain and four neighboring
countries.
"They've realized that if they want to operate successfully, they
need to have people who look like us, act like us, and are very
difficult to find," said Philip Mudd, a top counter-terrorism
official at the FBI.
cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/11/eveningnews/main3819364.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3819364
|2.12.08 @ 8:46AM|#
reader - That's reminiscent of Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday, which features a seven-man Central Council of Anarchists... six of whom are undercover detectives.
Episiarch|2.12.08 @ 8:47AM|#
So basically, Abdul, they are saying that any one of us could be a terrorist. Time for 24-hour surveillance of everybody!
|2.12.08 @ 8:54AM|#
If Episiarch was a terrorist, that's just how he'd act - making a joke like that to throw everyone off the scent.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 9:02AM|#
There are some Americans who would like to see America harmed in
the name of radial Islam. Jose Padilla, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, John
Walker Lindh, John Allen Muhammad, to name a few. They've all
demonstrated the will to commit terrorist acts, and in a few cases,
they've even had the means.
Do you really think Al Quaeda will turn away an American who has
the will and is searching for the means? Don't you think it is
worth some effort on the Government's part to keep those with the
motives away from those with the means to commit terrorism?
I understand that the Rolling Stone took a week off investigating
what's going on with the Police re-union tour to print the cliche
that Dick Cheney manipulates terror alerts to insure his
re-election/fulfill his bargain with Satan. However, it's still
worthwhile for law enforcement to discourage those who want to be
terrorists from hooking up with those who have the means.
|2.12.08 @ 9:07AM|#
If Joe was a terrorist, that's just how he'd act- telling everyone that if Episiarch was a terrorist, that's just how he'd act- making a joking to throw everyone off the scent.
|2.12.08 @ 9:11AM|#
"Do I believe there's a cell in Chicago?" [Sgt. Paul] DeRosa [of
the Chicago Police Department] asks. "I bet you there is. Do I have
any direct physical knowledge? No. But I think there is one, and
that's why we're here."
Geeez. I replaced "cell" with bigfoot and it made as much sense.
Also interchangeable with "championship cubbies team."
|2.12.08 @ 9:13AM|#
"connected to known bad guys overseas."
If you believe in 6 Degress of Separation, we are all connected to
known bad guys overseas.
Abdul, I'd appreciate the government not giving Americans or anyone
else reason to be pissed off at America, like say, honoring the
Constitution and leaving everyone else alone. Since that's not
likely to happen any time soon, the situation will perpetuate
itself.
Episiarch|2.12.08 @ 9:24AM|#
Let's see:
1. No attacks = there are terrorsts out there, we just haven't
found them yet, we need more men and money
2. Attacks = terrorists out there, we need to find them all, we
need more men and money
It seems to all lead to the same result.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 9:28AM|#
Nick,
This isn't a question of foreign policy. As you note, America's
foreign policy is unlikely to become isolationist. It's a question
of risk assessment. Is there a risk? All signs point to yes. This
leads to the questionof what we should do about the risk. I suggest
that minimizing and mocking it is not a realistic strategy.
miche|2.12.08 @ 9:33AM|#
TWC,
When I was in Jr. High some boys at the school threw some M80s in
the toilets of the boys' restroom. They were paddled by the
principal and sent home with a bill. I'm not sure how their parents
handled the situation once they were home. There were stories of
the same boys putting Fart in a Can in the ventilation system but I
don't remember how that turned out.
Being girls, my friends I did nothing more destructive than egging
Old Lady Rome's house. She and her sisters were mean old bitches
who would curse children for picking the flowers on the public side
of their fence and set poisoned traps for dogs that might've
wandered into their yard so we used no less than 2 dozen eggs a
week.
Beyond the egging, most of our pranking was done by phone. I
remember being caught by our parents once for a particularly mean
phone prank and getting a belt across my ass.
Russ 2000|2.12.08 @ 9:36AM|#
"Do I believe there's a cell in Chicago?" [Sgt. Paul] DeRosa
[of the Chicago Police Department] asks. "I bet you there is. Do I
have any direct physical knowledge? No. But I think there is one,
and that's why we're here."
This guy oughta be fired for gross incompetence. The fuckin' El
Rukns plotted with Qadhafi and this idiot couldn't even come up
with that as an example??
|2.12.08 @ 9:51AM|#
There are some Americans who would like to see America harmed in the name of radial Islam. Jose Padilla, Adam Yahiye Gadahn, John Walker Lindh, John Allen Muhammad, to name a few.
There is nothing about any of those people that couldn't be handled
by good plodding old-fashioned police work
Aside from Adam Yahiye Gadahn, none on your list has any capability
to do harm than the thousands of garden variety criminals and
psychos that we already have. And that's only because Gadahn has
actual influence in Al Qaeda.
There is absolutely nothing in the Joint Terrorism Task Force
regime that will help in protecting citizens from the likes of
petty thugs like Jose Padilla or John Allen Muhammad. or clueless
teenagers like John Walker Lindh (I have yet to see evidence of
actual harm that he did, except maybe to himself). What use is a
JTTF against the likes of Jeffrey Dahmer of Ted Bundy, after
all?
LarryA|2.12.08 @ 10:02AM|#
"Absolutely. This guy is no longer here. He is not a threat
to one person in the United States."
Unless, of course, you need to get to work and can't find a
cab.
|2.12.08 @ 10:18AM|#
Abdul said: "All signs point to yes."
Do they?
""Do I believe there's a cell in Chicago?" [Sgt. Paul] DeRosa [of
the Chicago Police Department] asks. "I bet you there is. Do I have
any direct physical knowledge? No."
All signs tell me this fucker is full of shit.
|2.12.08 @ 10:21AM|#
Is there a risk from "homegrown terrorism"? Yes.
What is the magnitude of this risk? Very small indeed.
Much smaller than the other risks that make law enforcement so
difficult.
And that's why the feds have to "market" their "counter-terrorism"
to local authorities.
dhex|2.12.08 @ 10:24AM|#
There is nothing about any of those people that couldn't be
handled by good plodding old-fashioned police work
yes but issac that doesn't involve being able to play SWAT dress-up
and throw a GET DOWN GET DOWN POLICE dance party.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 10:36AM|#
Nick,
Do you really believe that all risk of terrorism is zero?
It's one thing to say that the JTTF is over-rating the risk, it's
another to suggest that it's all BS.
Issac,
There is nothing about any of those people that couldn't be
handled by good plodding old-fashioned police work
What police force had jurisdiction to go to Afghanistan and arrest
John Walker Lindh for providing material support to
terrorists?
John Allan Muhammed may have had less capacity to harm than, say, a
serial killer like Richard Kraft in that Muhammed had a lower body
count. But who provoked more terror? The sniper who targeted random
individuals. Garden variety criminals (and even serial killers)
usually don't have the goal of provoking terror. Terror has
collateral effects on society and our behavior. It's worth some
extra effort to to prevent it.
|2.12.08 @ 10:53AM|#
What police force had jurisdiction to go to Afghanistan and arrest John Walker Lindh for providing material support to terrorists?
How did John Walker Lindh's providing material support to
terrorists in Afghanistan harm any person living in the United
States? As near as I can tell he was not committing acts of terror
either. He was fighting for the Taliban in defense of that regime
which was at that time the recognized government of Afghanistan.
That made him a traitor, not a terrorist.
Yes it's true that he may have harmed some soldiers in the military
force that we sent there (and for that he was prosecuted in a
regular US court) but how does that relate to JTTFs.
And how exactly does a JTTF help with the apprehension of the likes
of John Allan Muhammed? He was captured through the combination of
painstaking investigation and (to be blunt) happenstance that
characterizes most police work.
And no I don't know of anyone arguing that terrorism is a zero
risk. It's just a risk that you and the proponents of JTTFs seem to
be exaggerating.
|2.12.08 @ 11:02AM|#
Abdul, it's a lesser risk than the JTTF is saying it is, of that
I have little doubt. If there were such a grand risk, I have no
doubt they would be on every network all the time talking about how
scared we should all be, because that would mean they get more
resources. Every politician would be saying we need to do more,
more, more.
Instead they have to resort to arresting kids performing pranks to
pad their numbers. I have no problem with law enforcement being
vigilant against a real threat, but they shouldn't falsify anything
to make it seem worse than it is. They lose credibility when they
do this, and they lose people like me who support our rights to
self-defense and would otherwise stand with them in the fight. I
don't trust them when they have a history of exaggeration.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 11:24AM|#
Issac
How did John Walker Lindh's providing material support to
terrorists in Afghanistan harm any person living in the United
States?
Are you suggesting that someone has to be harmed before they can be
arrested for a crime? Most of us consider it better to arrest
someone before they commit the harm than afterwards.
My point about John Allen Mohammed was not that the JTTF might have
caught him, but that he didn't need to rack up a record body count
to create terror. Terrorism is a separate category of crime because
of the effect of terror. It deserves a different law enforcement
approach.
The JTTF works with local law enforcement to fight terrorism. You
seem to suggest that local law enforcment can go it alone. In
Mohammed's case, the local cops worked with the Secret Service and
the FBI, as well as other police departments. That's the kind of
cooperation that the JTTF is meant to, and does, provide.
Furthermore, if there is terrorism with an international
connection, how could a local law enforcement agency handle it?
|2.12.08 @ 11:35AM|#
Gee, I wonder why America didn't go apeshiz when two white guys blew up a federal building killing a bunch of people?
|2.12.08 @ 11:49AM|#
Masshole,
found in a search of Nichols and Mcveighs personal effects was a
koran, subscriptions to Ebony, Soldier of Fortune, Delta Burka
Force, and an extensive collection of Soul Train on beta max.
Dello|2.12.08 @ 12:05PM|#
"The expenditure of such massive resources to find would-be
terrorists inevitably requires results."
You must not be familier with the War on Drugs...
|2.12.08 @ 12:07PM|#
Gee, I wonder why America didn't go apeshiz when two white
guys blew up a federal building killing a bunch of
people?
For some reason, President Clinton's call for a crackdown on
conservative talk radio hosts just didn't catch fire. Different
times, I guess.
Robert|2.12.08 @ 12:30PM|#
Now that I've read the article, I gotta ask: If it were your job
to prevent terror, how would you do it? My methods would probably
differ from those written of only in degree, not kind. I too would
dangle bait, I just wouldn't wiggle it as much.
However, one method I didn't see mentioned was to provide phony
targets. If we could get them to waste their effort attacking fake
events and fake installations, we'd reduce the effectiveness of
terror by that much.
|2.12.08 @ 12:59PM|#
Abdul: "Are you suggesting that someone has to be harmed before
they can be arrested for a crime? Most of us consider it better to
arrest someone before they commit the harm than afterwards."
Hence the script for "Minority Report". It's better to arrest them
only if you can be reasonably certain that they were taking actions
that would harm someone. And that the actions you took in getting
to that level of certainty didn't skew the outcome. Which is what
people are questioning here with the JTRF and their motives.
It's still theoretically legal to Think Bad Thoughts. If you start
arresting people for just that - or if you bait them into Doing Bad
Things which they wouldn't otherwise do - then you've gotta wonder
whether or not your'e actually punishing people for Thinking
Thoughts You Don't Like.
|2.12.08 @ 1:17PM|#
Most of us consider it better to arrest someone before they
commit the harm than afterwards.
What?
Most of "us" believe that people shouldn't be arrested until they
have actually committed or are currently committing a crime.
Everything that the JTTF is doing can be handled by the many
existing Law Enforcement and Intelligence agencies already in
place.
The bottom line is, that if the risk were really as high as you and
the other moron supporters of JTTF and the like say it is, then
there would be some real results and some real terrorists being
arrested. Not trumped up charges against a bunch of clowns who have
to be goaded and cajoled (bordering on entrapment) in order to
act.
You wanna wet your bed in fear of the scary terrorists out there
looking to harm us go ahead, but stop trying to scare those of use
who can think clearly and rationally and spare us the nonsense
about arresting people before they commit crimes
|2.12.08 @ 1:20PM|#
found in a search of Nichols and Mcveighs personal effects was a
koran, subscriptions to Ebony, Soldier of Fortune, Delta Burka
Force, and an extensive collection of Soul Train on beta max.
All that funk and no way to play it!?!?!
It all makes sense now....
|2.12.08 @ 1:23PM|#
"""Terrorism is a separate category of crime because of the
effect of terror."""
Not true at all. Serial murders create much terror in an area,
that's not terrorism. Many crime invokes terror. A SWAT teams
intentional invoke terror when conduting a raid for the purpose of
overwelming and forcing the occupants to submit. Are they
terrorist?
GILMORE|2.12.08 @ 1:24PM|#
Abdul,
You're arguing a negative. It's fucking stupid. Your case is that
no amount of useless activity is really useless because "you never
know".
In research it's called 'boiling the ocean'. AKA the least
effective approach to anything. Going after idiots doesnt "break up
rings" of international terrorists. It nets fools. If we cant
locate anyone more serious than this, then we're fucked when
someone really does plan something.
It's no different than taking shoes off at the airport or
confiscating deodorant. The semblance of doing something.
Mocking and dismissing is absolutely the right thing to do to force
people to get their act together
GILMORE|2.12.08 @ 1:31PM|#
"Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the
Omnipresent Enemy
- John Mueller"
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060901facomment85501/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat-the-myth-of-the-omnipresent-enemy.html
"Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists
and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike
nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable --
but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists
within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination
to strike from abroad."
read the whole thing, it's worth it. The last few grafs sum it up
nicely.
|2.12.08 @ 2:22PM|#
Terror has collateral effects on society and our behavior.
It's worth some extra effort to to prevent it.
then you support hate crimes legislation, yes? the entire point of
a hate crime is to intimidate and instill fear in a particular
community.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 3:44PM|#
ChicagoTom,
Most of "us" believe that people shouldn't be arrested until
they have actually committed or are currently committing a
crime.
I didn't say that we should arrest someone before they commit a
"crime," but before they commit "harm." Do you see the
difference?
|2.12.08 @ 3:49PM|#
Gilmore, the same arguement could have been made on September
10, 2001, and the next day prove them wrong. I take a different
point of view. Yes, there is always a threat of someone doing you
wrong including kill you and many other people. I see that
vulnerability as the price for freedom. The more free you are, the
more you expose yourself to threats.
Freedom is for the brave, not the chicken shits that demand
protection from everything.
|2.12.08 @ 3:55PM|#
"""I didn't say that we should arrest someone before they commit
a "crime," but before they commit "harm." Do you see the
difference?"""
There is no difference. In order to be arrest for harm, that harm
must be a crime. How do you know that someone is going to harm
anyway? What are the metrics? You have the freedom to think
whatever you want, it's the action which people have a problem. In
other words, you could dream about killing me 24/7. I could care
less, but once you put that thought into action is when you crossed
the line and could be arrested.
Abdul|2.12.08 @ 4:01PM|#
Trickyvic,
Have you ever read about anyone being arrested and convicted for
"attempted murder?" How about conspiracy? Or are you of the
Sideshow Bob mindset that attempt and conspiracy liability are bunk
because "They don't give Nobel Prizes for attempted
chemistry?"
I never said that we whould arrest people for thought. I said it's
better to arrest people before the harm occurs.
|2.12.08 @ 5:01PM|#
Attempted murder requires action. You can indict a ham sandwich
of conspiracy. In either case, conspiracy and attempted murder are
crimes for which you can be arrested. When someone commits a crime
they are subject to arrest, the willingness to do harm is already
implied, be it harm against an individual or the state. We don't
really wait for one's intent of harm to surface after they commited
a crime before we arrest them.
I do not know Sideshow Bob's mindset nor do I care, nothing
personal Bob. Don't assume people who take a contra position are
birds of the same feather.
"""I never said that we whould arrest people for thought. I said
it's better to arrest people before the harm occurs."""
The harm and the crime are more often the same thing. So how would
your idea work?
|2.12.08 @ 5:05PM|#
""""They don't give Nobel Prizes for attempted
chemistry?""""
Al Gore begs to differ. ;-)
GILMORE|2.12.08 @ 5:23PM|#
TrickyVic | February 12, 2008, 3:49pm | #
You sure you were replying to me?
I think we were on the same basic point. I personally think the
JTTF are a bunch of boobs. If we are going to have some kind of
security element a la MI5, at least let them not be so fucking
stupid and useless.
like the TSA
1996|2.13.08 @ 8:22AM|#
Party like it's 1996 .
And
this.
On July 1, a dozen citizens of Phoenix were arrested and charged with being members of the "Viper Militia." The next day, President Clinton stood on the White House lawn. saying. "I'd like to begin today by saluting the enforcement officers who made arrests in Arizona yesterday to avert a terrible terrorist attack." But as the indictments are made available to the public and more evidence about the Vipers' activities emerges, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Viper case is merely the government's latest assault on citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights. No "terrorist attack," terrible or otherwise, was planned or even mentioned in the charges. In fact, as the indictments show, the Vipers' supposedly criminal acts consist merely of (a) the day's work of a "well-regulated militia," (b) petty tax violations, and (c) ownership of books, magazines, and insignia (shoulder patches) which are, of course, constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. Furthermore, whenever the indictment refers to a plan for a genuinely criminal act, it appears to have been instigated by ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) infiltrators and rejected by the membership.
Chris|2.15.08 @ 11:29AM|#
You guys are absolutely right. One man planning to blow up a
mall in N. Illinois and actually seeking weapons to carry out and
who was former roommate and friend of islamists. Sure it all seems
a bit circumstantial but what real threat could just one guy pose
even if he did obtain weapons?
I mean, I live in DeKalb, Illinios and ...oh wait, one man with
weapons can do alot of damage- jihadist or not. Glad this one was
stopped while in the planning phase.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245