Baghdad Suicide Bombings

The article here discusses the suicide bombing that we talked about in class today. As it states, two female bombers detonated explosives in pet markets in Baghdad, killing a total of 72 people and injuring many others.
It is incredible to see the amount of damage that can be done by two people. Not only were 72 people killed, but the marketplace was destroyed. The emotional and psychological damage of such a tragedy is also evident in the statements made by witnesses of the event, who were beginning to hope that security in the nation's capital was improving. Additionally, the article notes that the city was ill-equipped for such a catastrophe. Bodies were carried out in pickup trucks and wheelbarrows, and the hospital was unable to adequately treat all the victims.
Overall, this article demonstrates the efficiency of suicide bombing. Terrorists were able to do a great deal of damage, with very few costs of their own.
Not only did this attack result in immediate physical and emotional damage, but it also revealed inefficiencies, as were demonstrated by the city's incapability to deal with the event.

Picture From 1996

Name

Theodore Kaczynski!!

The Picture

The Picture is of The Unabomber!

New header

Good morning, everyone. Today we bid farewell, to our old pal Osama, because we have a new terrorist to head up our blog. As a reward for faithful blog participants, I offer one brownie point to the first student to post a comment correctly identifying the nom de guerre of the terrorist pictured in this FBI composite sketch. A second brownie point goes to the first student to give this terrorist's real name (spelling counts). A third brownie point will be awarded to the first student who posts a photograph (1994 or later) of this terrorist. No student will be awarded more than one brownie point, so don't post comments angling for all three.

Good luck!

--PROF. PAYNE

Taliban is again on the rise

Taliban is again on the rise
This article shows a good example of the social control that terrorists exercise over the areas around them. "The assault on one of the city's best-protected landmarks was the latest — and most dramatic — sign that the Taliban may be gaining strength more than six years after U.S.-led forces invaded to drive the Islamist militant movement from power." With the attack of these high profile targets in the local community the locals are scared of what could happen to them so even though we may be beating them back they have the social control still to the point where even beggars are distrusted "security fears have become so intense that he even shoos away beggars out of fear they could be wearing suicide vests". This leads to an open question after six years of battling the Taliban we apparently have not completely succeeded so What does it take to completely eliminate or beat a terrorist organization ?

Internet Use by Terrorist Organizations

I recently read a very interesting article which addresses the topic we will be discussing in class tomorrow. In the article, a 21-year-old American is spreading propaganda of violent Islamic groups from his parents' home in North Carolina. Although the article states that there is no evidence that he is doing anything illegal, it is alarming to think that there could be many people with similar views close to home. We have no way of knowing if any such activists will one day commit an act of terrorism to further spread their message. The fact that he is a U.S. citizen proposes new threats to domestic security. As terrorist groups successfully recruit using new tools like the internet, their efforts to spread their message are facilitated. These new recruits do not have to worry about traveling into the United States, passports, papers, etc. Another interesting note in the article about terrorists using the internet is that "Since the beginning of the year, Al Qaeda’s media operation, Al Sahab, has issued new videotapes as often as every three days. Even more come from Iraq, where insurgents are pumping them out daily." Terrorists are using sophisticated techniques to indoctrinate and recruit, and I believe that they will be more successful as these technological tools provide avenues to "new fields" of recruitment.

Interesting Source for Suicide Terror Paper

I found this article at UT Austin, about a professor who has specialized in the study of terrorism. He brings up some interesting points about the recruitment of terrorists. In his book about Suicide terrorism he develops the idea that many suicide bombers are not poor illiterate souls who have a death wish. Nor do they even know who they are really killing themselves for. Instead they just think they are serving the people of their community and assume that this is the only way to establish change.

This is contrary to what I have heard about suicide terrorists, I have always assumed it was one of the down trodden society who were brainwashed into believing in the cause. But many of the people recruited are making conscious decisions to blow themselves up, usually because of some feeling or desire to improve the lives of their neighbors. It was also noted that the people believe they are sacrificing for the cause, suicide is not in the job description when being recruited. It's kinda funny how if you change the name of something it suddenly becomes not only acceptable but desirable.

We're not the only ones....

The Article

Interestingly enough, the head of Australia's Federal Police has been under fire recently for using pre-emptive counter terrorist methods, similar to parts of the American public's recent disdain for some aspects of the Patriot Act such as wiretapping. The controversy in Australia stems from what Keelty, the chief of the AFP, calls the "tension, real or perceived, between the right to silence and a fair trial and the right of the community to access information." In the Australian case, the AFP recently brought to trial an Indian doctor whose case they ultimately had to dismiss. The press has called Keelty's anti-terrorism methods bad because he didn't have enough evidence beforehand to convict him. Keelty condemned the press for misleading the public and misrepresenting his agency and their counter terrorist tactics as poor. This article highlights the difficulties that governments face when fighting terrorism. Do they crack down hard and risk civil liberties groups complaints? Or do they ease up and risk terrorist attacks? There seems to be a very fine line that no government has been able to find yet. Where does that line exist? It is interesting that other countries are facing the same difficulties that the US is in fighting terrorists effectively while at the same time respecting the rights of their citizens.

Collective Punishment

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7211966.stm

Whether a stated strategy of Hamas, the groups actions have elicited the kind of response from Israel that could be classified as part of the Indirect Strategy or Outside Intervention Strategy. This article discusses the most recent actions taken by the Israeli government to stop terrorist action against their citizens. These actions have been heavy-handed and have allowed Hamas to gain more support within the Gaza strip and has outraged members of the international community against Israel. In particular, the Israeli government has made it difficult for the Gazans to acquire fuel. This has contributed to a burgeoning humanitarian crisis, in which hospitals do not have the fuel necessary to run their facilities. Hamas, perhaps in an effort to attenuate the crisis and appear as the heros, broke down parts of the Egyptian border so that Gazans could cross into Egypt and gather supplies. Thousands crossed the border into Egypt in pursuit of food.
The international community has put pressure on Israel to allow fuel back into Gaza. Israel has agreed for now. However, they say the withholding of fuel from the Gazans is part of a overarching strategy to combat terror through what can be described as "collective punishment". If the Gazans feel enough pressure, they will turn on their own community and root out potential terrorists. This policy, perhaps, is not working as well as Israel hopes. It might, in fact only perpetuat the problem. If Israel resorts to tactics that hurt the civilian population, they will increase its enemies and those who might have considered peaceful means of protest have no choice but to fight back violently in order to protect themselves and their families. They might want to reconsider their plan.

Suicide Terror...

I am working on the paper that is due next Monday, and I found an article written by Ellen Townsend in which suicide terrorists are compared to suicidal individuals that are not connected with terrorist organizations. She found that suicide terrorists are not "suicidal" in the conventional sense. She then gives her opinion about what motivates people to be suicide terrorists. I hope people find this article useful if they are writing the second paper. If anyone has any other articles they found useful, please post them.

LINKS

To the left you will see a new set of "terrorism links." I took these from some of your posts. If any of you know of other useful websites on terrorism/counterterrorism/bioterrorism, etc., put the links in as comments with a little explanation of the site's importance.

US Must Increase Pressure On Pakistan To Control Terrorism In Tribal Areas

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=5809
This article is on how the United States have attacked tribal areas in Pakistan. It talks about how Pakistan is a main Ally in fighting terrorism but how the United states still fears that terrorist are coming out of the tribal region. However, in the articel it said, "Most of the tribesmen think that US has made a bad deal with Pakistan. Why they have been opposing US presence in tribal areas? Actually Pakistani leaders have been using tribal areas for their game through which they have been earning dollars."
This caused Davos President Musharraf to say that he thinks the United States should worry on Iraq and Afganistan instead of involving itself in other areas.
The main question that I have from this article ishow will this affect the US, Pakistany relationships?
If anyone can help that would be great.
Thanks
Austin

France-India cooperation

I found this interesting article online about France and India cooperating to fight terrorism. You can find the here

At first I thought it was interesting to see cooperation between France and India, but then I read in the article that they actually have very similar goals and concerns as far as terrorism is concerned. For instance, they are both concerned with the issues of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and weapons of mass destruction. France is also worried that an increase in terrorism in Pakistan and Central Asia, could increase the number of terror-related incidences in Western Europe. The article stated: "Mr Sarkozy said extremism in one region has repercussions elsewhere too. "

I think it good to see such cooperation between countries that are so geographically distant from each other. It just goes to show us that countries are recognizing that globalization is weakening borders and the terrorist links between India and Pakistan, and Western Europe are growing stronger.

I would encourage you guys to read this article.

Taliban Activities in Kabul

This Economist article discusses the January 14th suicide bombing of an Afghani hotel. The bombing was notable because it exemplifies a recent shift in Taliban targets to include expatriates living in Kabul. This supports Bruce Hoffman's definition of terrorism: "the deliberate creation and exploitation of fear..." (see Inside Terrorism, p. 40). Because defining terrorism has been a central part of readings, class discussions, and papers, it's important that we recognize the role of fear as a goal of terrorism. Surely the Taliban wants to stir fear in Kabul's foreigners (many of whom are Westerners and byproducts of globalization...which, as discussed in class on Friday, is often severely disliked), otherwise they would not have shifted their violence to include these expatriates, who had thought their hotel to be secure. Why do terrorists want the power to make others afraid? Because enough fear can cripple those who are currently stronger than them. (Remember Paul Pillar defined terrorism as "the quintessential weapon of the weak against the strong" on p. 1 of Terrorism and US Foreign Policy.) Fear may be used to chain supporters or to chase away potential targets.

Spreading of Afgan Violence Into Pakistan

In the New York Times for Friday, January 18th, it contained an article about the spread of violence from the Taliban and Al Qaeda into Pakistan. I thought this was particularly an interesting article because of the change of strategy of many of the Taliban. Obviously the Taliban have an ultimate goal of regaining control of Afghanistan, but many of them are taking refuge in parts of Pakistan. In the town of Peshawar they are especially having difficulties with the Taliban and Al Qaeda insurgents. There appears to be an attempt to overtake the town by the insurgents and according to many involved in the fight, the insurgents are doing quite well. The people are starting to lose their faith in the government and the police fear for their safety. It appears that the insurgents could very well take this territory for their own. I thought that was kind of interesting because I was not aware of too many areas where the insurgents really held land other than small tribal areas outside of this town. It would be interesting to see how the fight evolves from there. I also wonder, what really would be the significance and result if the insurgents did take a town like Peshawar? Especially since Pakistan is not a region that American forces have been fighting the insurgents.

Counterterrorism Calender

*Please do not count this as a graded post*
I know you've all been waiting for this, but the time has finally come. The National Counterterrorism Center has just released the 2008 Counterterrorism Calender. It includes all sorts of interesting information on terrorism, from profiles of the most-wanted terrorists in the world, to terrorist logos, how to spot a fake passport, and something titled "TNT Equivalents for Various Explosives and Fuel-Air Mixtures".
Here it is in pdf form. FYI, it's like 24 mb, so make sure you have a strong internet connection.

Habeas Corpus and Detainees...

Reading the Padilla article brought me to searching the net for more on the Detainees' Appeal to repeal the Detainee Treatment act.

Here is the interesting article about the rights of the detainees in Gitmo as they currently stand. It seems the detainees suddenly really like the western world, they embrace the constitution and all of its intricacies, claiming they have a right to Habeas Corpus. How can someone go from working to topple the government of the US and then whole heartedly expect that the US would give them any rights let alone the same rights as a citizen.

The founding fathers had a clear understanding that treason would be treated as a death penalty offense and in regards to those who participated in British attacks on Americans, or were caught sharing intel with the British would be killed with a simple trial requiring that the evidence be presented and judgment passed. I do think the trials are taking longer than necessary to complete, but the persons still being held are the ones which a legitimate threat has been found, not the other 4000 we have released without harm.

I am obviously a constructionist in this matter but when dealing with traitors why should we grant them the rights they so willingly gave up when plotting attacks against us? Doesn't being a citizen come with any special rights? (ie bill of rights, for the people of the US, not the people against it)

Padilla's Sentencing

I have to say I am oh so fond of how caring our judges are to terrorist conspirators and how concerned we all are over their "treatment." It seems that we are quick to forget that these conspirators sought to kill, maim, destroy Americans and our interests. Regardless of their status as a citizen or not, upon committing treason and such acts, in my mind you have in large part forfeited your generally applicable constitutional rights. I do not condone detention of innocents and people who have no formal charges brought against them, but then again I am not for indefinite appeals and abuse of our legal system by terrorists and criminals. A "Quick and speedy trial" is not just the government's duty to ensure, but is also a responsibility of the accused. So often I see our system abused by those who have informal connections with other governments, private interest groups or other wealthy backers. Justice is not blind in this country. We have become a country full of people who sell our justice for a price, and sometimes it doesn't even cost that much, and our judges just coddle criminals because they have their own agenda, which is a far cry from the oath which they are supposed to uphold. See article on Padilla's sentencing.

Iraqis Stepping it Up

I read this this morning, and a few things struck me as particularly interesting. First was the young age of the bomber, 13 or 14! I did not know that terrorist groups recruited kids that young. Second, and more profound in my view, is that the local people condemned the act, even burning the house of the family of the bomber. In the 6th paragraph, they quote one of the locals as saying "We will not permit anyone with this ideology to stay in our village." I'm wondering if this viewpoint, an open and violent rejection of radical Islam, is more widespread than reported in the media. Certainly it would help the United States if the locals also took it upon themselves to eradicate radical Islam as they do not benefit from terrorism any more than the US does. I think that they media portrays the Iraqis as not liking the American presence, but I also believe that, as shown in this article and a documentary I recently watched in another class (Frontline: The Insurgency), that Iraqis need the help of the US to fight the terrorist. Iraq would be in a catastrophic state if we weren't there and if we leave too soon. (Yet one more reason not to vote for Hillary Clinton: "I will get the troops out within 60 days of taking the presidency." Yeah right.) However, I do believe that the Iraqis need to start taking more responsibility in their government. The US can not be their crutch. And as this article shows, the Iraqis are sick of terrorism too and are taking matters of destroying terrorism into their own hands, which can only be beneficial for the US.