Want to know how little our police/intelligence agencies seem to have learned from their failures prior to 9/11?
I'm afraid we don't need Black Hat/Defcon to tell us this. Just yesterday we had major terrorism alerts about specific targets and today we find out the information was all years old. Does that mean the buildings weren't targets still? Well seeing as some of the info went back prior to 9/11 it would make it seem a fairly safe bet that the seriousness of the threat was vastly overstated.
So we know what they haven't learned quite well and many of us keep hoping they'll stop crying wolf without good reason. It's only so long till most Americans start ignoring the terror alerts as things now stand, something that would be very bad.
I'm sure there were plenty of more interesting things at Black Hat/Defcon though.:)
today we find out the information was all years old
I think all that means is that the terrorists are going on scouting missions. IOW, scout possible targets, determine some facts about them, etc. It's the same thing militaries have done for centuries: figure out what to attack and what impact it might have.
The question is whether the targets scouted are still considered relevant by the terrorists. This is the type of stuff intelligence services need to find out, and in a timely manner. And if it is s
The question is whether the targets scouted are still considered relevant by the terrorists. This is the type of stuff intelligence services need to find out, and in a timely manner. And if it is still a relevant target, find out if attacks are planned or are being planned. Get info on those plans, etc etc until an attack can be thwarted.
You hit the nail on the head. The prevailing opinion in all the news articles I can find today is that the jumped the gun, that the info the terrorists had on these t
or there is an even more paranoid theory that this whole thing including the "3 year old data" and the terror alert was all manufactured my US intelligence for some political/military issue.
The political motivation right now is strong as this is an issue Bush polls better on than Kerry and the race is too close to call, so you cannot discount that this may have been in whole or part a polictical exercise. What with the timing (3 days after the DNC) as well, I put the chances of a political driving force
The political motivation right now is strong as this is an issue Bush polls better on than Kerry and the race is too close to call, so you cannot discount that this may have been in whole or part a polictical exercise. What with the timing (3 days after the DNC) as well, I put the chances of a political driving force at around 50%
If you want people to take a security warning seriously you do not add a campaign pitch to the end of it which is what Ridge did, claiming that the report is due to the magnifice
Yellow, yellow, orange, yellow, yellow, orange, yellow, RED RED WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE, yellow, yellow...
Are we supposed to continually crap our shorts because they arbitrarily raise and lower some spurious "threat status?" Yea, there may even BE threats, but, you know what, they are at about the same level they've been at for the last 10 years or longer.
Hell, even the rednecks aren't panicing anymore, and it doesn't take much to get them going about "Terrorist Threats." I moved down to Georgia in 2002, f
Well sure it could, but crashing a cropduster into a Waffle House isn't going to have the same kind of effect.
That's a debatable point, actually, and I think you're being a bit of a bigot (and this is from a guy who sometimes wishes much of the "South" would slip off into another dimension).
If I were a terrorist, I'd be looking for the *least* likely targets. I might even just throw a dart at a map. One of the aspects of terror is to, well, terrorize, and an implementation of random "can happen anywhere
Please mod parent poster down. He's a Republican pushing the "Terrorist's for John Kerry" meme. It's disgusting that GOP members and supporters can stoop so low.
Wow. What a dumbass. I'm as far from the GOP as one can get, but an idiotlogical dumbass like you can't be bothered with reality, right? Did I even say which swing they would be trying for? I can see them WANTING Bush in power so they continue to have an excuse for attacking, dumbass. Kerry is an unknown to them, dumbass.
but crashing a cropduster into a Waffle House isn't going to have the same kind of effect.
As if GA lives have less value than NYC lives? C'mon. And I live in DC, fwiw. btw: we were hit too. Why is that always forgotten by New Yorkers?
And if you think it'd have less impact, riddle me this: what would happen to the US Economy if a crop duster flew into the Mall of America a week before Black Friday (the Friday after Thanksgiving Day; the busiest retail shopping day of the year).
Hmmm, I see that you lack appreciation of scale (i.e. That you compare the number of people who can fit into a waffle house, 30, with the number of people who died in the twin towers, 3000+), and that you confuse the Waffle House with one of the largest malls in the world.
First of all, I agree with you vis a vis the mall of america. It's a good target. Which is my point: for terrorism to occur and be effective, there must be a GOOD TARGET.
These massive, irresponsible blanket threats thrown around with ZER
And I live in DC, fwiw. btw: we were hit too. Why is that always forgotten by New Yorkers?
And why do Washingtonians always forget their city stops at the south bank of the boundary channel, just past the GW parkway, and that the Pentagon is in the Commonwealth of Virginia?
I think the big thing that the government did just learn is that the president can stand on TV and announce the creation of an "intelligence czar" and not one damned person in the room will jump up and say "So what in the name of the sweet baby Jebuz is Tom frigging Ridge, then? Huh?"
That scares me more than the Al Quaedas, kids.
I think the big thing that the government did just learn is that the president can stand on TV and announce the creation of an "intelligence czar" and not one damned person in the room will jump up and say "So what in the name of the sweet baby Jebuz is Tom frigging Ridge, then? Huh?" That scares me more than the Al Quaedas, kids.
Well I didn't jump up and say it but I've been wondering myself why we need one, as you point out, what's Tom Ridge for? I thought he, and his new department of Homeland Secu
Well I didn't jump up and say it but I've been wondering myself why we need one, as you point out, what's Tom Ridge for? I thought he, and his new department of Homeland Security, were supposed to at least coordinate info from various agencies.
Putting aside the question of whether either position is a good idea, I don't quite get what you guys are so puzzled about. Homeland Security is supposed to maintain domestic security operations and, as you say, filter relevant intelligence info. It's not supposed to
My next big question is about why we keep announcing "czars" of any kind. Considering the overwhelming success of the drug czar and his friends, it seems we'd have moved on to queens or overlords or all-seeing grand poobahs by now.
There's no such timing information. While they do expect some attack before the elections, that's unrelated to the current information. Which has been determined to have been largely generated pre-9/11 in any event. Read: this was an over-reaction to worthless intel; they were all excited about it because of it's specificity, but it's stale stale. The reconnaissance info that they acquired had no timing information included.
In fact, it made me think of the "intel" that Princess Leia gave to Darth ri
It's only so long till most Americans start ignoring the terror alerts as things now stand, something that would be very bad.
I've been ignoring them from the beginning. So far, everything seems to have worked out fine.
If you ask me, the purpose of the terror alert levels is to give the appearance of transparency and accountability, while actually providing neither. It reminds me of the constant state of war in 1984, so I refuse to let it affect me.
The most important thing is that they will have billions to spend on database technology and what they are trying to do is impossible.
I work in a database company (in migration), All the bases are mine. MO HAHAHAHA
Put in another way:
They have learned that if you:
1/Have no priors that the 'Intelligence' agencies know of. 2/Do not care what happens afterwards. 3/Know a few like minded people 4/Know how to fly a plane
The world is your oyster.
4 is optional, even 3 is just a good thing to have so you are not
Sounds like a PhD all to itself. Maybe to make it hard to tabulate the list one could divide the amount of 'terrorism' by the square of the power of the state, since power corrupts.
Top Eleven in no Particular Order:
China Iran United Kingdom U.S.A Columbia Russia Sri Lanka North Korea Pakistan France Israel
I am not sure is it easier to consider where there are 'freedom fighters' and pick the state involved, or pick where there are the most active 'intelligence' agencies.
>I'm afraid we don't need Black Hat/Defcon to tell us this. Just yesterday we had major terrorism alerts about specific targets and today we find out the information was all years old.
Years old... and yet the last modified date on the file was in January.
Makes you feel real appreciative to the New York Times for assuring us all we're safe, eh?
What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:5, Interesting)
-
Want to know how little our police/intelligence agencies seem to have learned from their failures prior to 9/11?
I'm afraid we don't need Black Hat/Defcon to tell us this. Just yesterday we had major terrorism alerts about specific targets and today we find out the information was all years old. Does that mean the buildings weren't targets still? Well seeing as some of the info went back prior to 9/11 it would make it seem a fairly safe bet that the seriousness of the threat was vastly overstated.So we know what they haven't learned quite well and many of us keep hoping they'll stop crying wolf without good reason. It's only so long till most Americans start ignoring the terror alerts as things now stand, something that would be very bad.
I'm sure there were plenty of more interesting things at Black Hat/Defcon though. :)
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think all that means is that the terrorists are going on scouting missions. IOW, scout possible targets, determine some facts about them, etc. It's the same thing militaries have done for centuries: figure out what to attack and what impact it might have.
The question is whether the targets scouted are still considered relevant by the terrorists. This is the type of stuff intelligence services need to find out, and in a timely manner. And if it is s
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:1)
You hit the nail on the head. The prevailing opinion in all the news articles I can find today is that the jumped the gun, that the info the terrorists had on these t
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:1)
The political motivation right now is strong as this is an issue Bush polls better on than Kerry and the race is too close to call, so you cannot discount that this may have been in whole or part a polictical exercise. What with the timing (3 days after the DNC) as well, I put the chances of a political driving force
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
If you want people to take a security warning seriously you do not add a campaign pitch to the end of it which is what Ridge did, claiming that the report is due to the magnifice
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:3, Insightful)
What do you mean start to ignore terror alerts? I haven't listened to one since the beginning!
Cue the Herman Goering quote about keeping people in fear. . .
How could you? (Score:1, Flamebait)
Are we supposed to continually crap our shorts because they arbitrarily raise and lower some spurious "threat status?" Yea, there may even BE threats, but, you know what, they are at about the same level they've been at for the last 10 years or longer.
Hell, even the rednecks aren't panicing anymore, and it doesn't take much to get them going about "Terrorist Threats." I moved down to Georgia in 2002, f
Re:How could you? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a debatable point, actually, and I think you're being a bit of a bigot (and this is from a guy who sometimes wishes much of the "South" would slip off into another dimension).
If I were a terrorist, I'd be looking for the *least* likely targets. I might even just throw a dart at a map. One of the aspects of terror is to, well, terrorize, and an implementation of random "can happen anywhere
Re:How could you? (Score:2)
It really depends.
If what you do is immediate, very visual and could happen anywhere then you have a good case.
But if its radiation in certain foods, which would only show years later, then it wouldn't have its "terrorist" effect.
Re:How could you? (Score:2)
Wow. What a dumbass. I'm as far from the GOP as one can get, but an idiotlogical dumbass like you can't be bothered with reality, right? Did I even say which swing they would be trying for? I can see them WANTING Bush in power so they continue to have an excuse for attacking, dumbass. Kerry is an unknown to them, dumbass.
Turn on a radio or a tel
Re:How could you? (Score:2)
but crashing a cropduster into a Waffle House isn't going to have the same kind of effect.
As if GA lives have less value than NYC lives? C'mon. And I live in DC, fwiw. btw: we were hit too. Why is that always forgotten by New Yorkers?
And if you think it'd have less impact, riddle me this: what would happen to the US Economy if a crop duster flew into the Mall of America a week before Black Friday (the Friday after Thanksgiving Day; the busiest retail shopping day of the year).
There goes Christma
Re:How could you? (Score:2)
First of all, I agree with you vis a vis the mall of america. It's a good target. Which is my point: for terrorism to occur and be effective, there must be a GOOD TARGET.
These massive, irresponsible blanket threats thrown around with ZER
Re:How could you? (Score:2)
And why do Washingtonians always forget their city stops at the south bank of the boundary channel, just past the GW parkway, and that the Pentagon is in the Commonwealth of Virginia?
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
Well I didn't jump up and say it but I've been wondering myself why we need one, as you point out, what's Tom Ridge for? I thought he, and his new department of Homeland Secu
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2, Informative)
Putting aside the question of whether either position is a good idea, I don't quite get what you guys are so puzzled about. Homeland Security is supposed to maintain domestic security operations and, as you say, filter relevant intelligence info. It's not supposed to
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
Personally, I mislike the idea intensely, as it reminds me a bit much of J Edgar back in the day....
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
My next big question is about why we keep announcing "czars" of any kind. Considering the overwhelming success of the drug czar and his friends, it seems we'd have moved on to queens or overlords or all-seeing grand poobahs by now.
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
His job title would probably Secretary of Intelligence, if it weren't for all the jokes the title leaves room for.
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
There's no such timing information. While they do expect some attack before the elections, that's unrelated to the current information. Which has been determined to have been largely generated pre-9/11 in any event. Read: this was an over-reaction to worthless intel; they were all excited about it because of it's specificity, but it's stale stale. The reconnaissance info that they acquired had no timing information included.
In fact, it made me think of the "intel" that Princess Leia gave to Darth ri
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:1)
I've been ignoring them from the beginning. So far, everything seems to have worked out fine.
If you ask me, the purpose of the terror alert levels is to give the appearance of transparency and accountability, while actually providing neither. It reminds me of the constant state of war in 1984, so I refuse to let it affect me.
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:1)
I work in a database company (in migration), All the bases are mine. MO HAHAHAHA
Put in another way:
They have learned that if you:
1/Have no priors that the 'Intelligence' agencies know of.
2/Do not care what happens afterwards.
3/Know a few like minded people
4/Know how to fly a plane
The world is your oyster.
4 is optional, even 3 is just a good thing to have so you are not
Biggest 'Terrorist' State (Score:1)
Top Eleven in no Particular Order:
China
Iran
United Kingdom
U.S.A
Columbia
Russia
Sri Lanka
North Korea
Pakistan
France
Israel
I am not sure is it easier to consider where there are 'freedom fighters' and pick the state involved, or pick where there are the most active 'intelligence' agencies.
For our purposes we can pick the one where i
Re:What police/intelligence agencies have learned. (Score:2)
Years old... and yet the last modified date on the file was in January.
Makes you feel real appreciative to the New York Times for assuring us all we're safe, eh?