Posts Tagged ‘Terrorism’

House of TRUMP House of PUTIN

August 27, 2018

The title of this post is identical to the title of an important book by Craig Unser. The subtitle is “The Untold Story of Donald Trump and the Russian Mafia.” The book begins, “This book tells the story of one of the greatest intelligence operations in history, an undertaking decades in the making, through which the Russian Mafia and Russian intelligence operatives successfully targeted, compromised, and implemented either a willfully ignorant or an inexplicably unaware Russian asset in the White House as the most powerful man on earth. In doing so, without firing a shot the Russians helped put in power a man who would immediately begin to undermine the Western Alliance, which has been the foundation of American national security for more than seventy years; who would start massive trade wars with America’s longtime allies; fuel right-wing anti-immigrant populism; and assault the rule of law in the United States.”

“In short, at a time at which the United States was confronted with a new form of warfare—hybrid war consisting of cyber warfare, hacking, disinformation, and the like—the United States would have at its a helm a man who would leave the country all but defenseless, and otherwise inadvertently do the bidding of the Kremlin.”

“It is a story that is difficult to tell even though, in many ways, Donald Trump’s ties to Russia over the last four decades have been an open secret, hiding in plain sight. One reason they went largely unnoticed for so long may be that aspects of them are so unsettling, so transgressive, that Americans are loath to acknowledge the dark realities staring them in the face.”

The Russian victory is even more remarkable when it is considered from whence it came. The disintegration of the Soviet Union left it without many of its constituent republics and the task of coming up with a new type of economy to replace Communism. Putin was depressed. He wanted to bring Russia back to the international power it once was. He worked in various jobs, currying favor, and learning along the way. His KGB skills proved invaluable.

Russia was in chaos, crying for disorder. The Russian Mafia knew how to capitalize on this disorder. The American Mafia is a bunch of pantywaists compared to the Russian Mafia. The ruthlessness of the Russian Mafia is well captured in this book. It engages in all the crimes gangsters typically do, drugs, prostitution (including children) gambling, protection rackets, virtually every type of illegal activity. Putin was able to organize and control these gangsters to establish order in Russia, something that was sorely wanted.

He warned of the dangers of terrorism, committed a terrorist act, but then blamed it on Chechnya. Thus he made himself a Russian hero and the protector of Russia against terrorism. He ran for President of Russia and might have won legitimately, but Putin is careful not to leave anything to chance. He stepped down and had one of his lackeys serve as president for one term. But now he is back as president and is likely to stay.

Many have pondered the apparent control the Russians have over Trump. This control has been manifest many times, most apparently in Helsinki. It is quite clear what that control is. Trump has been doing business with Russia since the seventies. It began with the purchase of five condos in Trump Tower. The many Trump properties have served effectively as laundromats for Russian illicit activity. Donald Jr. has said that Trump gets all the money he needs from Russian banks. And Putin and the Russian Mafia run and control these banks.

Trump has expressed many times his affinity for Putin and the Russians. He wants to be best friends with Putin and the Russians and screw our traditional allies.

Another troublesome question is why are Republicans, once the foremost bulwark against the Soviet Union and communism, following Trump . Technically, Russia may no longer be a communist nation, but it is no democracy in the western sense. It is a kleptocracy in which the rich exploit the poor. Life might be more peaceful for typical Russians now, and their standard of living improved, but they are nowhere near western democracy.

Unser’s book provides some insights as to why Republicans are behaving as they are. In 2005, Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska hired Bob Dole as a lobbyist in 2005. He also tried to hire John McCain, but it should be no surprised that he declined (HM’s guess is that he told Deripaska to stuff himself). Russian conglomerate Alfa paid nearly 2$ million in lobbying fees to Barbour Griffith & Rogers, the lobbying firm cofounded by former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour.

In 2016 millions of dollars in Russian money was funneled to Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell and other high-profile Republicans to finance GOP senatorial candidates. McConnell took $2.5 million dollars for his GOP Senator Leadership Fund from two of Blatavatnik’s companies. Others included political action committees for Senator Marco Rubio, and Senator Lindsay Graham.

An earlier healthy memory blog post explained that when the intelligence agencies had confirmed that Russia was interfering in the presidential election, President Obama arranged a meeting between the leaders of the intelligence agencies and the Democratic majority leader in the Senate, McConnell. McConnell refused to believe the intelligence he was receiving claiming that this was a political act by the Democrats (even though the leaders were not Democrats, and some were Republican). So it appears clear that McConnell was bought by the Russians and had, in effect, sold out his country.

This was a new kind of warfare being waged by Russia. It was the first non-linear war. A previous healthy memory blog post about Valery Gerasimov, the chief of he General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia, who published a paper in 2013 that became known, appropriately enough as the Gerasimov Doctrine. It concluded that costly armed invasions often fail to advance strategic goals. “In the 21st century we have seen a tendency toward blurring the lines between the states of war and peace. Wars are no longer declared and, having begun, proceed according to an unfamiliar template..The very ‘rules of war’ have changed. The role of nonmilitary means of achieving political and strategic goals has grown, and, in many cases, they have exceeded the power of the force of weapons in their effectiveness.”

There is much more interesting information that leads one to believe that Trump’s complaints that there has been no evidence of collusion will be answered. There will be loads of evidence supporting collusion. But that needs to await Mueller’s report.

However, this hypothetical needs to be asked. Suppose that Mueller’s report not find any violations of any standing laws. Do we still want to have Trump as President? We would be losing many of our freedoms and likely becoming a kleptocracy like Russia.

This country will not be safe until Trump leaves office. We also need for true Republicans to return to the traditional Republican party. Currently the Republican party belongs to those motivated by gaining power and money by any ends and with anybody.

The book includes an annotated list of Trump’s Fifty-Nine Russia Connections
And the book is well-documented with an extensive list of notes.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

How Could a Trump Triumph? — Part One

February 6, 2018

The question posed in this post is identical to a chapter title in “Twilight of American Sanity: A Psychiatrist Analyzes the Age of Trump” by Allen Francis, MD. There needs to be multiple parts to this post.

Let’s begin with the campaign theme, “Make America Great Again.” The implicit assumption here is that America is no longer great. However, by all indications America was great having been brought back from an economic crisis by President Obama. When he became president, we were on the verge of a depression. He rescued us from that fate where all objective indicators indicated that the United States was already great again, if, indeed, it had ever fallen from greatness. The free nations of the world admired the United States and looked to it for leadership. However, dictatorial oligarchies like Russia, looked at the United States as a rival that needed to be defeated.

It is true that some people were unhappy. But HM would argue that in democracies, people are usually unhappy. This is true even when one’s favored party is in power. It is unlikely that they’re doing everything individuals want. There are also shortfalls due to the economy and what the government can deliver. HM has been unhappy his entire voting life regardless of which party was in power. All other advanced countries are way ahead of us with respect to medical care, many advanced countries offer less costly educational opportunities, and yet other advanced countries offer more freedoms. The term “American Exceptionalism” is frequently invoked to explain why we are different. HM argues that “Stupidity” can be readily and more accurately substituted for “Exceptionalism.”

It is true that since 1970 real wages in the United States have declined. When HM was in elementary school it was unusual for women with children to work. Now working spouses have become the norm. The question here is why have so many married women joined the workforce. Do they have to or do they want to? After all, there are still women who prefer to be full time mothers. But a very large number would be extremely unhappy if they were denied careers.

Middle-aged whites without a college degree (Trump’s most solid base) feel that a they are worse off then their parents. When they think that African-Americans and Latinos are somewhat better than they are, they become angry. So an ethnic factor exacerbates the problem. And, indeed, election time presents an opportunity to correct the situation. But it appears that whites who are not college educated do not widely read, if, indeed, they read at all. Otherwise, they would have realized that Trump’s solution was faulty. The loss of jobs was attributable primarily to automation. Other industries like coal were going out of fashion. Moreover, breaking trade agreements will likely have an adverse effect on the economy. So Trump will likely make the jobs problem worse, not better. Time will tell.

The preceding accounts were from the text. But more recent research questions the belief that job or income losses led to Trumpism. A 2016 study of 125,000 American adults by Gallup’s Pablo Diego-Rosell found that Trump voters had slightly higher incomes than others and were no more likely to be unemployed or exposed to competition from trade and immigration.

Terrorism is a factor exploited by Trump. Since 9/11, an average of only 9 people a year in the United States died from terrorist acts by radical Islamists; while each year more than 250,000 die from medical mistakes, 50,000 from drug overdoses, 37,000 from car accidents, and 33,000 from guns (not wielded by terrorists). Nevertheless, people are worried about terrorists. HM was in high school during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He remembers saying good-bye to his classmates at the end of a school day wondering, along with his classmates, whether we would ever see each other again. In those days, nuclear annihilation was a distinct possibility. At worst, terrorism is a minor nuisance. Even the detonation of a dirty bomb pales in comparison to nuclear annihilation. However, whenever people see a terrorist event on television, they feel threatened. Moreover, most mass killings are the result of the number of guns readily available, and not Islamists. Nevertheless, Trump capitalized greatly on these fears. He went beyond terrorists to immigrants in general.

The world is changing rapidly, and many people have difficulty coping with this change. It’s almost like stop the world, I want to get off. So the campaigning on the theme of “Making the World Great Again” promises a return to the quieter, good old days, if they, indeed, ever truly existed.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2018. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Some Thoughts on Privacy and Data Security

March 2, 2016

The current iPhone controversy regarding whether Apple should be required to unencrypt the phone of the California terrorist shooters to enable the identification of potential future terrorists motivated this post.  This information could potentially save an unknown number of lives.  The fear is that personal privacy could be compromised.

I find irony in the way the public regards personal privacy.  On networks such as Facebook detailed personal information is published.  I frequently wonder why people regarded this information of being of any interest to other people.  We frequently read how this information is used against people to preclude employment or to embarrass them.  Yet when the government wants access to information for purposes of national security and to obtain information that could save lives, there is a large degree of push back.

I perceive some personal conceit in this concern.  Why do people think the government would have any interest in them. Personally, I would be flattered to learn that I was under surveillance and to think that the government regarded me as that important.  And I know that they will find nothing to make me personally liable.

But apparently people fear that they have data that the government can use against them.  They perceive the government as evil and they want laws to protect themselves against this evil government.  But it would be the government that enforces these laws.  So why regard  this evil government as being trustworthy.  I do not think it would be difficult to find laws in totalitarian  states that protect their citizens, but which are never enforced.

And why be concerned only about governments?  I believe that business has more data and will always have more data on me than the government.  There are also individuals who can access information and demand payment or threaten to release information.

Focusing on collection will not work.  Laws should be passed on how this information is used.  Should information be used to embarrass or cause financial loss, the laws should carry severe penalties against persons or organizations, including government.  Legitimate uses such as prosecuting criminals or preventing terrorist acts would be exempted.  Today criminals are released because of the way information was collected.  This is wrong and is due to the locus of the laws.  Again, laws should be focused on how information is used rather than how information is collected.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Syndrome E

November 27, 2015

In the recent healthymemory blog post, “A Single Shifting Mega-Organism,” Syndrome E (E stands for evil) was briefly discussed.  Syndrome E was developed to describe the atrocities, mass-killings, genocides such as the holocaust and the killings by ISIS.  The neurosurgeon Itzhak Fried describes these atrocities as examples of Syndrome E.   He defined the following seven symptoms of Syndrome E:

Compulsive repetitive violence
Obsessive beliefs
Rapid desensitisation to violence
Flat emotional state
Separation of violence from everyday activities
Obedience to an authority
Perceiving group members as virtuous

Having decided that neuroscience has come a long way since his original paper in 1997 (Syndrome E in The Lancet, Volume 150, No. 9094, p1845-1847) Fried  organized a conference in Paris earlier this year to revisit the concept.  Highlights of this conference were published in the New Scientist, November 14-20, 2015 in a feature by Laura Spinney.

Fried’s theory starts with the assumption that people normally have an aversion to harming others.  If this is correct, the higher brain overrides this instinct in people with Syndrome E.  So how might this occur.

The lateral regions of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) are sensitive to rules from the newer parts of the brain.  The medial region of the PFC receives information from the limbic system, a primitive part of the brain that processes emotional states and is sensitive to our innate to preferences.  An experiment using brain scanning was designed to put these two parts of the brain in conflict.  Both these parts of the PFC were observed to light up.  People followed the rule but still considered their personal preference showing that activity in the lateral PFC overrode the personal preference.  The idea here is in the normal brain the higher brain overrides signals coming from the primitive brain.  However, in the pathological brain with Syndrome E, the primitive brain prevails.

Fried suggests that people experience a visceral reaction when they kill for the first time, but some become rapidly desensitized.  And the primary instinct not to harm may become more easily overcome when people are “just following orders.”  Unpublished research using brain scans has shown that coercion makes us feel less responsible for our actions.  Although coercion can cause people to take extraordinarily actions (see the healthy memory blog post “Good vs. Evil”), there are individuals who are predisposed to violence who are just awaiting an opportunity.

Unfortunately, the question remains as to how to prevent people from joining such radicalized groups.  Research in this area is just beginning and much more needs to be done (See the healthy memory blog post,”Why DARPA is studying stories”). Being a neuroscientist, it is not surprising that Fried thinks  that we should use our growing neuroscientific knowledge to identify radicalization early, isolate those affected and help them change.  We wish him, and hopefully many others in this effort.

What is not mentioned in this article is that it can be advantageous for one group to adopt Syndrome E to take from or to take advantage of another group.  Consider North America.  Syndrome E was involved in vacating Native American lands for Europeans.  Moreover, up until the Civil War, blacks were enslaved and slavery was a key component of the economy of the United States.  I sometimes ponder how would North America been settled by Europeans had we the moral and ethical standards of today.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Future of Technology and the Future of Terrorism

October 10, 2015

These topics are addressed in The New Digital Age:  Transforming Nations, Businesses, and Our Lives, a book by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen.  Eric Schmidt, Ph.D., is the executive chairman of Google.  He has a long history in the technology field.  Jared Cohen is the founder and director of Google Ideas.  He is a Rhodes Scholar and the author of two books, Children of Jihad and One Hundred Days of Silence.  From 2006 to 2010 he served as a member of the secretary of state’s Policy Planning Staff and as a close advisor to both Condolezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.  He is now an adjunct senior fellow and the Council of Foreign Relations.  So it is clear that these gentlemen are experts in the areas of which they write.  Moreover, they are widely traveled, having been to both war torn Iraq and Afghanistan.

For example, in Afghanistan they learned of an entire village that revolted against the Taliban when the extremist group tried to seize their phones.  In Kenya, they visited Maasi nomads in Loodariak who live without electricity or running water, but carry, along with their swords, mobile devices that they use to pay for items at the market.  In North Korea, citizens risk imprisonment in the gulags and in some cases death, which can also be applied to three generations of relatives, in order to obtain smuggled phones and tablets and make extremely risking trips to the Chinese border just to capture a signal.

There is simply too much material here to even attempt to summarize.   Descriptions by the experts on the development of technology can certainly be regarded as authoritative.  There are chapters on Our Future Selves, The Future of Identity, Citizenship, and Reporting, the Future of States, the Future of Revolution, the Future of Terrorism, the future of Conflict, Combat, and Intervention.  If one is prone to worrying, you might want to reconsider reading this book, for there is much to worry about, many nightmare scenarios.  Nevertheless , the discussion of cyberwarfare are detailed and informative.

Central to the discussion of terrorism is the question of what makes a person a terrorist? How can terrorism be fought?  General Stanley McChrystal draws on his experience from commanding troops against terrorist offers these suggestions.  “What defeats terrorism is really two things.  It’s the rule of law and then it’s opportunity for people.”  Young people need to be provide with context-rich alternatives and distractions that keep they from pursuing extremism.  Outsiders do not need to provide content, they just need to create the space.”

I think highly of the general’s ideas and recommendations.  However, I don’t think they provide a complete solution.  The terrorists who flew planes into the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were well educated and well off.  They had opportunity and context-rich alternatives.  These people need to be addressed at another level with helpful narratives to replace their distorted versions of reality.

The authors do identify the Achilles Heel of Terrorism, and that is technology itself.  To remain hidden, Osama bin Laden had to remain off-line to avoid capture.  But when he was captured his flash drives and hard drives contained a trove of information to fight the terrorists.

The authors remain optimistic.  They are especially optimistic about the future of reconstruction.  So once disasters or attacks strike, if communications technology is set up enough has bee learned about receiving from these disasters that recovery, if done right, can be done with increasing efficiency.

The authors note that there are physical and virtual civilizations.  Thy note that their case for optimism lies not in sci-fi gadgets or holograms, but in the check that technology and connectivity bring against the abuse, suffering, and distraction in our lives.

I hope the authors are correct, and they certainly know more than I do.  But there remains the potential of technology to be used by totalitarian regimes to control and abuse their populations.  RFID chips could be implanted in people so that their locations would always be known, and other technology could provide information on their activities.  So, I hope the authors are correct and that technology will be used for good rather than evil.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Why DARPA is Studying Stories

October 3, 2015

Why DARPA is studying stories is the title of another section in Humans are Underrated:  What High Achievers Know That Brilliant Machines Never Will  by Geoff Colvin.  DARPA stands for the Defense Advanced Projects Agency.  At time this has been called ARPA, by simply dropping the D.  But regardless of the acronym, it has been sponsoring  advanced research.  The internet was developed from research sponsored by DARPA, as was GPS.

The U.S. Defense establishment is convinced that stories are at the foundation of today’s security environment that it has established a program called Narrative Networks DARPA.  The program asks “Why are some narrative themes successful at building support for terrorism?”  The Narrative Networks program aims to understand how these stories contribute to radicalization, violent social mobilization, insurgency, and terrorism among populations.

Given that we can now destroy civilization several times over with Nuclear Weapons, it appears that we can already achieved the maximum in kinetic effects.  But now our security is jeopardized by narratives.  We need to know how to counter and neutralize these narratives.

A tremendous resource we had to conduct research on this problem has been overlooked, and that is the large population of terrorists imprisoned in Guantanamo.  This might be an overstatement as we cannot confidently say that everyone imprisoned is a terrorist as many have been languishing in prison without being tried.  Some might even die having been falsely charged.

This population should have been used to develop and test different narratives with respect to their effectiveness.  If it appeared that certain narratives had been effective for certain inmates, then the ultimate test would have been done by releasing them.  True this is risky, but what right do we have to keep people imprisoned indefinitely without trial?  If we saw that certain narratives were effective, then perhaps a more general effective campaign could be developed.  This would be an effective war on terrorism, which is what we want to develop.  The term “War on Terror” is nonsensical.  Terror is a tactic of warfare.  It is analogous to saying war on tactical dogfights, or war on amphibious warfare.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Prefrontal Cortex and Violent Jihadists

March 21, 2015

We have a more highly developed prefrontal cortex than any other species. The prefrontal cortex is the seat of logic, analysis, problem solving, good judgment, planning for the future, and decision-making. Unfortunately, our prefrontal cortex is not fully mature until we are well into our twenties, so there is time, perhaps even too much time, in which to make poor decisions. Not surprisingly the prefrontal cortex is frequently called the central executive, or CEO of the brain. There are extensive two-way connections between the prefrontal cortex and virtually every other region of the brain, so it is in a unique position to schedule monitor, manage, and manipulate almost every activity we undertake. These cerebral CEOs are highly paid in metabolic currency. Clearly, understanding how they work and how they get paid can help us to use our time more effectively.

It might be surprising to learn that most of prefrontal cortex’s connections to other brain regions are not excitatory, but inhibitory. One of the greatest achievements of the human prefrontal cortex is that it provides impulse control and the ability to delay gratification. Without this impulse control, it is unlikely that civilizations would have developed. And I can’t help speculating how there might be fewer wars, crime, and substance abuse if the prefrontal cortex were more fully engaged.

As the prefrontal cortex does not reach maturity in most of us until our mid-twenties (although it continues to develop into our forties), there is ample time to ruin our lives. During this period we must decide what we want to pursue in life and to start devoting resources to achieve our goals. Skipping or providing short shrift to education, unwanted pregnancies, premature marriages, or committing criminal or immoral acts can result. This is not to suggest that we are victims of our prefrontal cortex and are not responsible for these problems. But we do need to bear in mind that although individuals might be legally mature, they are not necessarily biologically mature with respect to important brain maturation.

Reading about young Muslims leaving their families to join ISIS or other terrorists to commit atrocities, and against fellow Muslims no less, is quite puzzling. Some Muslim parents live in fear that their children might leave them to commit atrocities. How can children from good families do such things? Immature prefrontal cortices might be a contributing factor.

I am curious as to whether any research has been done on the corpses of terrorists. Might autopsies reveal pathological or immature prefrontal cortices?

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

A 9/11 Message

September 10, 2013

 

For most people, 9/11 started a war on terrorism. This is unfortunate as terrorism is a tactic for conducting war, not an enemy to be attacked. In my view, the message of 9/11 is that in this age of technology we are all vulnerable to any wacko group or individual. Even a single individual could assemble a dirty bomb, perhaps even a primitive nuclear device.

 

Let’s review what happened on 9/11. Four planes were hijacked. Two of them brought down the twin towers in New York, and one struck the Pentagon in Arlington, VA. The fourth plane did not reach its intended target, because by that time passengers revolted because they knew if they did not try, their fate was certain death. Actually, from this point forward, it was highly unlikely that a hijacking would be successful, even if one were attempted. Nevertheless a fortune is being spent on airport security when there are many, many points of vulnerability remaining. To name just two, our ports and our malls.

 

After the “shoe bomber” Richard Reid failed to blow up a commercial airline in flight, all airline passengers departing an airport in the United States were made to walk through security checks in socks or bare feet while our shoes were scanned for bombs. After British police foiled a plot to detonate liquid explosives on board airlines in 2006, passengers at UK airport were not allowed to take liquids on board. When a passenger tried to set off plastic explosives sewn to his underwear, the US government announced plans to spend about$1 billion on full-body scanners and other security technology such as bomb detectors. The security expert Bruce Schneier has dubbed many of these measures “security theater” on the grounds that they serve merely to create the impression that the authorities are doing something, but do nothing to reduce the actual risk of terrorist attack. Instead, it was intelligence tip-offs, not airport checkpoints, that have foiled the vast majority of attempted attacks. We really cannot know of all of the intelligence tip-offs that have precluded these tragedies as acknowledging them risks compromising ways and means that might preclude future tip-offs.

 

I would argue that the real war on wackos began on April 19, 1995, when Timothy McVeigh detonated a bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. This also calls attentions that our enemies are not necessarily foreign. There are the recent bombings that took place at the Boston, Marathon. Although the perpetrators were radical Islamists, no evidence has been linked to foreigners supporting them. If you are skeptical that there are not abundant wackos within the United States that are potential sources of danger go to http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map

 

The recent disclosure by the macro leaker Snowden, and he is most definitely a leaker and not a whistle blower, have called into question U.S. Policy on what is called domestic spying. My concern is not that there is too much, but rather that there is too little of this so-called domestic spying. My concern is based on the abundant supply of domestic wackos.

 

I definitely think that the protection of civil rights and personal privacy is important. But I think that the laws should be on how this information is used, not collected. If the information is used to embarrass someone, or is used in any unauthorized manner with the exception of planning or executing criminal or terrorist acts, severe penalties should be enforced. Otherwise the law protects criminals and terrorists. Under current laws, criminals and terrorists can be set free on the basis of legal technicalities. I can also envision a so-called terrorist attack being executed while the permission to conduct surveillance was under review. I am concerned about my personal security, but my primary concerns are with criminal hackers and businesses, not the government. At some point, one needs to have faith in one’s government. It is not difficult to find countries whose written laws and policies are not followed. Laws can be set up and not followed by an unethical government.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2013. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

 

 

 

The Terrorist Mind

May 11, 2013

The recent terrorist act at the Boston Marathon has been difficult for many Americans to understand. To understand it, you need to try to understand the terrorist mind. We read that they were upset about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Drone killings. This is but a part of a larger narrative that the United States is at war with Islam. This larger narrative ignores disturbing facts such as the efforts the United States took to protect Muslims in the former Yugoslavia. It even includes a belief that 9/11 was self-inflicted, even though Al Qaeda took credit for the terrorist acts. Unfortunately, our minds are good at ignoring negative evidence and for compartmentalizing information.

Even if you grant militant Islamists their beliefs, one can still ask, do they merit the indiscriminate killing and maiming of innocents? What does the Koran say about that? The argument would be that they are at war and that war justifies the killing and maiming.

But then, one can ask, how do you think you will win? If terrorist attacks increase, the response against them would also increase. The consequences would be dreadful, but it is difficult to see how radical Islam would prevail in the west. Osama Bin Laden thought that because they were able to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan, they would prevail against the west. He forgets that the victory was largely due to American aid and technology. The Soviets concluded that Afghanistan was not worth the loss of human life, and that it was not worth exercising the nuclear option.

The response of the West in dealing with the irrationality of Terrorism is the use of kinetic events. There are large scale kinetic events, like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and small kinetic events such as drone strikes. The question is, do they work? Are they decreasing the number of terrorists, or increasing the number of terrorists? If it is the latter, then we are adding fuel to the flames rather than extinguishing the fire.

So what is the alternative to kinetic events? It goes by a number of terms, information warfare, propaganda, psyops (psychological operations). Unfortunately, these terms have negative connotations. Nevertheless, I would argue that they provide the only alternative. The problem is that they are not very sophisticated, and that we do not know how to target them at either the militant Islamic or potentially militant Islamic mind. Much research needs to be done.

Unfortunately, there was a natural laboratory for conducting this research that was overlooked, and that is the infamous facility at Guantanamo. The inmates could have been used as subjects to try to understand how their minds worked, and what potential arguments or information could possibly change their minds. They could have released inmates if they thought their interventions had been successful and then tracked them after they left. It is likely that some, perhaps, many would just have told the researchers want they wanted to hear, so that they would be released. Others might have changed their minds in the facility, but then reverted to their old ways of thought upon returning to their environments. There was this risk, but I think an argument could be made that it would be worth it. There might have been successes.

It needs to be remembered that the terrorist threat goes well beyond radical Islamists. Remember Timothy Mcveigh. Unfortunately, there are many more Timothy Mcveighs in the world. Their narratives and belief systems also need to be studied and countered.

In any case, this an area of research that needs to be vigorously pursued. I believe that the Saudi’s have done some research in this area that has met with some success. Memetic Theory along with the memetic analytic framework holds promise. Terrorist minds are full of dangerous, erroneous memes that must be destroyed and corrected. New conflicts, both international and domestic, must increasingly be met by changing people’s minds. Historically, humans have resolved conflicts by kinetic events. Human history is largely a history of human wars. But if kinetic events work to exacerbate rather than to resolve conflicts, then I see no other path to pursue.

© Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com, 2013. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Douglas Griffith and healthymemory.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.