Counterterrorism

Stratfor:

I could not agree more with Counterterrorism: Shifting from ‘Who’ to ‘How’, (Nov. 4). I spent three years assigned full-time to the FBI-JTTF during which time I was lucky enough to attend the Department of Homeland Security “Response to Terrorist Bombings and Response to Suicide Bombings.” Upon my return, given the emphasis on IED’s, I thought it might be useful to reach out local hobby, beauty and camping supply shops that sold model rocket engines, nitro-methane, remote control devices, hexamine tabs, peroxide (in higher concentrations), and other types of items. The idea was to provide these locations with a kind of “what to look for” guide, but more importantly a single location to forward the information. I was stunned with the level of internal resistance I met from people who felt it was a complete waste of time. It seemed to me at the time and still does now, that this is the “how” and that those seeking to strike might go to such locations to obtain their components. I appreciate all that you do, keep it up.

-Glenn McGovern
San Jose, California
United States



Stratfor:

This is good information for all to consider in their various roles in society. It is too easy to become complaisant after the events of 9-11 or, as you note, to be focused on the whom. Reminders to stay aware are always good.

-William Duncan
Helena, Montana
United States



Stratfor:

Who and how are interesting, but of much more significance is WHY? We may not like it, but there is a provocation at play and if we do not identify it and deal with it, there will be more acts of aggression. Perhaps we should start by considering if the acts of aggression are acts of retaliation, at least as perceived by the assailant.

Our culture seems to embrace the television drama notion that if the bad guy is captured or killed, the problem will be over and us good guys can go about our life in safe blissfulness. This is a fantasy.

Despite the hype and exotic flavor of terrorism, it seems important to note that the aggressive tactics are the creative product of a “little guy” who cannot fight a “big guy” head on. At the heart of it all is a grievance that compels the little guy to fight despite the odds of winning. What is the source of this compulsion? Why is the little guy so driven that he feels he has nothing to lose and the only way to salvage some dignity in his life is to go down fighting?

Trivializing the motive as mere religious fanaticism represents laziness in my view. Thinking those religious fanatics are somehow more dysfunctional than our religious fanatics is an exercise in intellectual avoidance of the real issues at hand.

And so my view is that there is a dire, if not desperate, need to ask the question — Why? The answer may be disturbing, but if we do not deal with it, the circumstances that manifest to current world threat will surely produce more of the same.

-Sal DePasquale
Decatur, Georgia
United States



Stratfor:

There is much food for thought in this article — for those of us who can and should be doing the watching — and for the watched. There is no way for the average American to be made aware of the ordinary citizen’s role without letting the perpetrators in on it also. Thank you for this valuable information.

-George Harris
Manassas, Virginia
United States



Stratfor:

I do not agree with Counterterrorism: Shifting from ‘Who’ to ‘How’, (Nov. 4). Your suggestions for “protective intelligence” would trample individual rights. I am sure you would counter with “we should be willing to give up our freedoms for security.” But once we start down that slope (and we are already on it), much of what made this country great will be lost.

Rather than treating the symptoms, we should stick to and shore up our freedoms guaranteed by our constitution. We should operate in a highly principled manner, arresting and prosecuting those responsible for the attacks, ensuring that individuals and groups are not discriminated against because of their religion, and not tolerating government abuses and law breaking. We should investigate, try, and if warranted, convict and imprison government officials who broke or allowed the breaking of U.S. law.

-Donald Elliott
St. Simons Isle, Georgia
United States



Stratfor:

I am appalled that every talk show host and newspaper editorial in America is not featuring and highlighting the incredible analysis by Scott Stewart and Fred Burton. Can’t America connect the dots?

Last week’s edition of the online magazine “The Echo of Battle” called for simple attacks. Would it not be reasonable that Dr. Hasan regularly read jihadist Internet sites that published the online magazine? Having read the article calling for “simple attacks,” Dr. Hasan have rationalized his role as a jihadist, doing exactly what he did at Fort Hood? Could we logically assume that other jihadists embedded in our society may also attempt “simple attacks” here in the United States?

My profound thank you for the advance notice on Nov. 4, 2009 of the expectation of “small attacks.” My profound grief is that the appropriate people failed to heed your notice that I know is widely read and respected.

-Jon Thompson
Germantown, Tennessee
United States