RSS Feed
Loading ...
Steven D. Levitt wrote this opinion piece that was published in the NYT’s. Here is a sample:
the best terrorist plan I have heard is one that my father thought up after the D.C. snipers created havoc in 2002. The basic idea is to arm 20 terrorists with rifles and cars, and arrange to have them begin shooting randomly at pre-set times all across the country. Big cities, little cities, suburbs, etc. Have them move around a lot. No one will know when and where the next attack will be. The chaos would be unbelievable, especially considering how few resources it would require of the terrorists. It would also be extremely hard to catch these guys. The damage wouldn’t be as extreme as detonating a nuclear bomb in New York City, of course; but it sure would be a lot easier to obtain a handful of guns than a nuclear weapon.
I’m sure many readers have far better ideas. I would love to hear them. Consider that posting them could be a form of public service: I presume that a lot more folks who oppose and fight terror read this blog than actual terrorists. So by getting these ideas out in the open, it gives terror fighters a chance to consider and plan for these scenarios before they occur.
And yet the NYT’s can’t figure out why they are rated just above a junk rating!
August 8, 2007 - 07:27 PM on August 8th, 2007
I can think of a number of things. Our infrastructure is and always will be woefully unprotected. It’s simply impossible to protect it all, or for that matter even major elements of it. There is simply no way for any government to adequately protect a free country from terrorist attacks without destroying that freedom. Sorry folks, that’s just a fact. It has been for hundreds of years. Thomas Jefferson said the he’d “rather live in dangerous freedom than in safe slavery.” There are simply too many ways to attack this country. Truck bombs in tunnels and on bridges, tankers of chemicals exploded causing poisonous clouds, the aforementioned rolling sniper attacks, etc etc etc. Properly placed, a few dozen truck bombs could nearly cripple our transportation system. A few chemical trucks exploded at the right times and locations would kill hundreds if not thousands. Tip for all of you looking to move into a new development. If the house is more than 2 streets away from a major thoroughfare, plan on not being able to evacuate in an emergency for at least an hour. We have developments here in AZ where there are 2 exits for 200 - 400 homes. Exactly how fast will an evacuation go when you have hundreds of tired, scared and panicky people with kids trying to use ONE single lane exit? Another thing that would concern me would be the long distance water lines to cities like LA, Vegas, or NYC. You don’t have to kill anyone to cause a lot of panic. If you cut off the water supply to any of those cities, it would be impossible for the authorities to provide adequate water to the residents and hence maintain order. Phoenix isn’t as much of a problem because we have wells.
August 9, 2007 - 05:40 AM on August 9th, 2007
I think if people have to think up and express such ideas for terrorist attacks, the place to “publish” them is not online or in the NYT, but to the FBI.
August 9, 2007 - 05:58 AM on August 9th, 2007
Where to start? I thought it was bad enough that the liberals in the Congress were trying to pass laws that protected terrorists and their supposed civil rights.
Now we have a prominent newspaper publishing someones ‘vision’ on how to commit terrorist acts? If people like this are so eager to have terrorism committed here in the U.S. I can only hope they would be the first ones to DIE.
August 9, 2007 - 06:54 AM on August 9th, 2007
BonBon,
That never happens. Neville Chamberlain never died from his folly, but how many died in WW2 that would not have if Churchill had been PM and Never Chamberlain?
August 9, 2007 - 07:22 AM on August 9th, 2007
Good point PCD but in spite of how bad the nazi’s were in WW2 I get the feeling the Islamic terrorists are a much more ruthless and scary group. By that I mean Hitler allowed Chamberlain to the table; I would guess someone like Osama bin Laden would allow negotiaters to the table and then murder them before they left.
August 9, 2007 - 07:27 AM on August 9th, 2007
According to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, Bin Ladin would have killed Rohrabacher in Afganistan if he had been discovered. This meeting took place during the Russian occupation of Afganistan and Rohrabacher was not a member of Congress then, just a volunteer fighting against the Russians.
August 9, 2007 - 08:21 AM on August 9th, 2007
“If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?”
What a simple answer: Be G.W.Bush…
As a consequence of his actions more people died than in all terror-assaults in mankinds history! Just remember how Borat interviewed Americans about “the war OF terror”- and nobody noticed the “mistake”…
August 9, 2007 - 08:25 AM on August 9th, 2007
Care to try and back that up Matthias?
August 9, 2007 - 08:28 AM on August 9th, 2007
Mattias,
You are a sick idiot. Borat was a fiction, a movie, not real life, you complete FOOL!
August 9, 2007 - 09:02 AM on August 9th, 2007
18- This forum proves best that most of the attitudes displayed in Borat’s movie are unfortunately no fiction.. at least not in southern US…
August 9, 2007 - 09:06 AM on August 9th, 2007
19….and you know this because? I thought you lived in Germany?
August 9, 2007 - 09:48 AM on August 9th, 2007
17,
Matthias repeatedly makes statements such as that made in 16 without proof.
However, I will join you in asking matthias to back uop his statement.
19.
Such a bigoted statement- especially from someone who claims to be “cristian”.
August 9, 2007 - 10:03 AM on August 9th, 2007
19, Mattias, time to tell Herr Doktor to take away your computer privileges until you take your anti-psychotic medicines. You didn’t prove anything, except how ill informed you are and how lazy your thinkings are.
August 9, 2007 - 10:05 AM on August 9th, 2007
“Good point PCD but in spite of how bad the nazi’s were in WW2 I get the feeling the Islamic terrorists are a much more ruthless and scary group.”
BonBon, the Islamists absolutely are far worse than the nazis. The Nazis at least had some restraints; they didn’t want to throw their lives away. For example, the reason Hitler never used Chem or Bio weapons is because he knew the retaliation would be in kind and they didn’t want to deal with that either.
The lower-than-animals Islamofascists have no restraints at all. They are far worse than any scourge, any pestilence that has ever threatened civilization.
August 9, 2007 - 10:09 AM on August 9th, 2007
OBL said it best…”they love death more than we love life.” IMO the only way to rid of the world of these people (or animals I should say) is to continue to fight them until they die.
No civil liberties granted, no legislation protecting them in any way. Nothing.
August 9, 2007 - 11:08 AM on August 9th, 2007
Exactly. Do we give roaches access to the American Justice System? Rabid skunks? Why should those who have announced and demonstrated they want to destroy us be treated any differently?
August 9, 2007 - 11:20 AM on August 9th, 2007
“Do we give roaches access to the American Justice System? Rabid skunks?”
Yes we do- they are called lawyers.
August 9, 2007 - 11:32 AM on August 9th, 2007
August 9, 2007 - 11:36 AM on August 9th, 2007
Ted,
I think you need to apologize to rabid skunks. They have a disease and need a Federal Program to help them. They are victims of James Carville.
Lawyers are like roaches, they multiply ferociously and feed upon human wreckage.
August 9, 2007 - 12:33 PM on August 9th, 2007
You guys!!!
August 9, 2007 - 12:34 PM on August 9th, 2007
“Lawyers are like roaches, they multiply ferociously and feed upon human wreckage.”
Ahh…so we should put them on a scaled welfare program for each child they have and register them as Democrats?
August 9, 2007 - 01:00 PM on August 9th, 2007
I think they should be limited in number and the law schools restreicted in the numbers they may graduate.
Also, I think lawyers should be barred from serving in any legislative body as a conflict of interest since they would be making the laws they litigate.
August 9, 2007 - 01:02 PM on August 9th, 2007
29, BonBon,
My goal is to get you to either spit up your drink upon the monitor or have a depends moment.
I got a Libertarian friend to do it several times.
August 9, 2007 - 01:34 PM on August 9th, 2007
When you guys start going at it I certainly laugh out loud and today was a day when I really, really, needed a good laugh. I want to thank all of you for that.
August 9, 2007 - 01:46 PM on August 9th, 2007
21- Fishing for a mind-twisting game of “I said- you said” again, Ted? Sry… too busy today and too bored by the last thread in which you claimed me having referred to things which I never said (”weapons delivery” vs “weappons delivery system”)…
August 9, 2007 - 02:05 PM on August 9th, 2007
34, what’s the matter, Mattias? Herr Doktor threaten you computer privileges if you can’t play well with others?
August 9, 2007 - 02:13 PM on August 9th, 2007
34,
Nope- along with Peejz, just asking you to back your insane claims.
BTW, you failed once again which just makes you claim nothing more than
August 9, 2007 - 02:17 PM on August 9th, 2007
Just when we’re having fun Matthias comes in being serious! Matthias, chill…smoke some Ganja…have a brewski!
August 9, 2007 - 02:28 PM on August 9th, 2007
37.
I really think a lot of Matthias’ problem is he has trouble comprehending the intracacies of the English language. He gets in over his head, and is too stubborn to admit his errors. He also has an inate ignorance to many American political topics, but fails to learn because he wants to appear the expert.
Lots of folks on the left and right have debated me, and while I can respect those folks that present an opinion backed with reason and a logical arguement Matthias just plain fails to do this. However, he keeps throwing out claims without any proof and approaches topocs from what seem to be a scatter brained idealistic path that it is evident at face value that his opinions are based on rhetotic, emotion and parroted commentary that has all the depth of a mud puddle yet at the same time just digs a deeper hole that just presents him as being foolish.
I have to pity the fella.
August 9, 2007 - 02:49 PM on August 9th, 2007
“…he keeps throwing out claims without any proof and approaches topocs from what seem to be a scatter brained idealistic path that it is evident at face value that his opinions are based on rhetotic, emotion and parroted commentary that has all the depth of a mud puddle yet at the same time just digs a deeper hole that just presents him as being foolish.”
This is the typical, average Leftist m.o. Not that there are not any Libs who cannot make an intelligent argument.
But the average Lib/Leftist is only capable of parroting popular rhetoric and talking points, and is incapable of applying logic to them.
Years ago I debated a point with a pleasant, but thoroughly programmed Gorebot at a party. She threw out a statement, and i very carefully, respectfully, and step-by-step laid out the logical path to the conclusion why that was wrong. She listned intently and seemed to be following along. Just at the verge of having to state that I was correct, she suddenly went into reset mode
. Her eyes glazed over, she looked throughly confused for 1-3 seconds, then blurted out the same statement she had made at the very beginning, as though we had discussed nothing.
Too bad, too, cause she was good looking…but I do have standards!
August 9, 2007 - 03:39 PM on August 9th, 2007
Robert…unfortunately I have run into that kind of thing many, many times here where I live. In some cases the talking points are just a rehash of what the New York Times or other liberal idiot publications write about. It’s almost like the libs are automatons just moving about.
or 
Automaton =
August 9, 2007 - 07:02 PM on August 9th, 2007
30. Aren’t they already Democrats?
August 9, 2007 - 07:40 PM on August 9th, 2007
Hey Robert, Like I recounted in a previous post, I had just such a discussion with Ramsey Clark when I was 18. His position was that as long as the government provided everyone with food, housing and clothing there wouldn’t be any crime. Can you believe this guy was an Attorney General of the US at one point in time? I simply recounted how following a recent escape from a state penitentiary, a cell by cell search yielded two rooms full of illegal weapons and drugs. I then asked that considering that since all of the prisoners’ economic needs were being met, why would they need weapons and also commit other crimes while in prison? He refused to answer and went on to another student. This was after he had returned from his little trip to Iran in violation of the presidential travel ban. He’s been acting an ass in international politics for almost 30 years.
August 9, 2007 - 09:24 PM on August 9th, 2007
38.
“I really think a lot of Matthias’ problem is he has trouble comprehending the intracacies [sic] of the English language. He gets in over his head, and is too stubborn to admit his errors. He also has an inate [sic] ignorance to [sic] many American political topics, but fails to learn because he wants to appear the expert.”
Yup, that English language can be pretty tricky!