Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: Stopping terrorism

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Minton <dminton AT mindspring.com>
  • To: InterNetWorkers <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Stopping terrorism
  • Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 13:35:04 -0400


The reason there is such enthusiasm for some sort of military action, is the
unfortunate reality that our way of life will end if we try to deal with all
of the vulnerabilities to our modern civilization. How can we defend
ourselves from a terrorist that is prepared to do what we witnessed on
Tuesday?

Think about the new security rules being put into effect at the nation's
airports. They will end convenient air travel as we know it, and I doubt
will make a single difference. The new goal seems to be geared at preventing
knives from getting onto airplanes. Sure, better metal detectors and more
vigilant x-ray operators. This prevents someone from smuggling a knife onto
the concourse. Great, now security needs to make sure no knives are acquired
from potential terrorists on the concourse. So now we see restaurants with
plastic cutlery preparing precut food since they won't allow knives in the
kitchen (they could be stolen). No more box-cutters at any business in the
airport past the security screen. Now the better question, how do you
prevent a terrorist organization from placing members in jobs at the
airport? Do we practice some sort of racial profiling in hiring for any
airport related jobs? I guess we need to get rid of all of the stores at the
airport inside the security area for this type of security to work.

Now what about the airport and airline employees? How do we prevent
terrorists from placing people in these jobs? They could get weapons into
the hands of terrorists on airplanes.

Wow, now it is getting complicated, but we hove covered everything, right?
Wrong. We forgot about ceramic knives that will pass through metal detectors
(and maybe through x-rays machines). Sure they are illegal in the US, but is
that going to stop someone ready to kill thousands? I doubt they are too
tough to smuggle into the US.

So, what have we achieved with al of this new airport security? Nothing as
far as making the airways safer, but a great deal toward making civil air
travel very unpleasant.

Just because I sound paranoid does not mean it can't be true.

We can't stop terrorists once they reach our shores without turning the US
into a police state. Terrorists must be stopped before they reach US shores
to maintain our way of life.

David

On 9/14/01 1:07 PM, "mdthomas AT mindspring.com" <mdthomas AT mindspring.com>
wrote:

>
> The intellectual challenges here are:
>
> * understanding a decentralized "enemy"
> that isn't hierarchial and doesn't take
> the form of a large, easy to distinguish
> and attack nation-state, and which will
> have many of the same advantages of de-
> centralization that the Internet has;
>
> * understanding the vulnerabilities
> to our way of life;
>
> * stepping above raw emotion. In the words
> of an Oklahoma City victin when asked if
> the McVeigh execution brought closure, she
> said "You close on a house. You don't *get*
> closure on something like this." Responses
> that only strive to satisfy our bloodlust
> are incorrect. The only good reason for
> war is to acheive peace.
>
> I think that the our knowledge of the Internet,
> a vast, decentralized network originally designed
> by the DOD to be hard to disable, can lend understanding
> of this new "enemy."
>
> For instance, disabling of one node (bin Laden) doesn't
> destroy the Internet (the enemy).
>
> Also, this attack was tactically simple and cheap against
> an obvious vulnerability. I've flown in to Reagan-National
> Airport, almost directly over the Pentagon, as I've flown
> in to La Guardia within sight of the WTC. I'm also aware
> that when planes crash they tend to burst in to flames.
> I'm embarrassed that I've personally never made the intuitive
> leap to forsee this kind of attack, which could have been
> easily committed any time in the last 30 years (or more.)
>
> Obviously, we'll shore up against this tactic -- we already
> have with all of the new aviation security measures. But
> what other tactics haven't we thought of which are just as
> obvious vulnerabilities? Remember the score so far:
>
> Them: 14, Us: 20,000 (?)
>
> For instance, the Barbarians took Rome very simply -- they
> cut the aquaducts going in to Rome. The city just folded
> up and hundreds of years of the progress of civilization
> dried up with it.
>
> What is the "water" of our civilization? How about oil --
> the very commodity that forces us to be so involved in
> the Middle East (I've never heard of a terrorist attack
> emerging from a region that doesn't have assets that
> we aren't dependent on, like sub-saharan Africa), and which
> is also necessary to fuel the kind of massive land war
> initiatives that are being advocated.
>
> Ethanol, anyone?
>
>
> InterNetWorkers <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu> wrote:
>> So, we're a bunch of smart people with diversified outlooks and
> attitudes (and I, for one, am seriously torn between morals/concerns
> about collateral damage and kicking ass). Why not bring something
> productive out of this discussion?
>
> I propose a thought exercise for this think-tank: a comprehensive plan
> to address military, economic, religious and social components of the
> terrorism problem. We already have a start on defining the problem: A
> decentralized fanatical base that is willing to die (for their God and
> country) in order to harm their enemies.
>
> The next step would be to define the causes of this problem, citing
> facts, stats (note: these are not considered facts for a reason),
> personalities, social attitudes, etc.
> Example:
> Niblet 1) Taliban has made even informally educating a woman illegal
> until separate facilities can be made, but few facilities are being
>
> built. This may be analagous to making it illegal to teach a slave how
> to read in America in the 1850s.
> Impact: One segment of Afghanistan has both been targeted for
> subordination and is being robbed of one tool for resistance
> Solution: ?
>
> Would internetworkers be interested in setting up a separate list to
> discuss this? Maybe a document storage spot at Yahoo?
>
> Some real think-tank will be doing this somewhere, but our techno slant
> may come up with some interesting solutions...
>
> julie "I'd get out of the digest, but there's too many messages..."
> waddle
>
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to internetworkers as: mdthomas AT mindspring.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
>
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to internetworkers as: dminton AT mindspring.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page