Can we start an 'If I were a Terrorist.." thread like the one in the NYTimes?

'If I were a Terrorist - i would LEARN TO SNIPE FUCKTARDS

And a thread like this improves the world in what way?

I know. I know. The better sort of terrorist has sufficient imagination to come up with most of the ideas that would pop up in this thread. But then again, most terrorists are not as intimately familiar with the society they target as are those who live there, so it would be possible for a native to come up with some remarkably fine ideas that would not occur to an outsider. Why give it away for free?

And just think how lovely you'd feel if your stupendous idea were duplicated in real life and you knew deep down that it was too abstruse a concept for the perpetrators to have thought up without assistance.

god I hate steven d levitt.

if they learned to snipe they wouldn't need to blow shit up and "collateral damage" would be lesser

freakonomics is like the most annoying piece of self-aggrandizing poorly-thought-through bullshit for the look-at-me-I'm-smart crowd since dave eggers raised his kid brother

IF I WERE A TERRORIST I'D KILL PEOPLE

WOW AMAZING

NEVER THOUGHT OF IT THAT WAY

xpost

how you would feel = the mixture of guilt and self-satisfaction over your awesome idea would tear you apart, precipitating a descent into alcoholism and loneliness, followed by your resurrection as a hard-nosed anti-terrorist agent with a dark secret in the TNT original series The ILXterminator?

alternately: supervillain

so in infinitesimal likelihood that the rifle attack were to occur, does Levitt just break down and kill himself?

AHEM, I think I've outlined all the possible outcomes, above

Except that one would be called Freakonomicon and would involve GHOST terrorists

From the blog entry:

I presume that a lot more folks who oppose and fight terror read this blog than actual terrorists. So bringing these out in the open could be a public service...

This is just stupid. Very, very stupid. Did I mention how stupid this is? Because it is. Stupid, I mean. Really tremendously stupid.

someone should post a plot to "terrorize" the US by murdering Levitt

lloiguerrillas

terror-zombie R&D

pouring a whole gallon of water into the Times Square subway entrance

i hope that stephen levitt revolutionizes the stagnating field of terorrism with the same no-bullshit rock-n-roll attitude he used to revolutionize economics.

IF I WERE A TERRORIST, I'D INVADE IRAQ

LOL GET IT

Why is economics such a magnet for douchebags?

552 comments so far...

^^ really depressing me, for some reason

I don't quite get the notion that Levitt is so particularly douchebaggy??

you need more evidence than this particular column???

Sorry, but I'm getting major lolz from the "OMG you're GIVING TEH TERRORISTS IDEAS!!1!" crowd over there. They've really internalized the idea that America is suffused with sleeper cells just waiting for the NEXT BIG OPPORTUNITY.

Hey! Wait a sec! We could, like, try to deliberately mislead terrorists into carefully laid traps that would ensure they were caught before they could carry out their plans.

For example, they probably don't know about the concealed man-pits bristling with pungee stakes that have been dug at the front entrances of all feed stores selling bulk fertilizer and cleverly concealed with huge 10x20 foot government issue welcome mats.

phil d. otm, especially because that line of thought implies that there aren't, like 2987367 websites devoted more or less exclusively to thinking of new forms of terrorism

or maybe the 500 readers of levitt's online NYT column thinking half-heartedly on their lunch breaks are smarter than all the terrorists combined!

freakonomics is like the most annoying piece of self-aggrandizing poorly-thought-through bullshit for the look-at-me-I'm-smart crowd since dave eggers raised his kid brother

-- El Tomboto, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 22:39 (36 minutes ago) Link

He is kind of like a terrorist in that he's inspired lots of copycat "lone wolf" economists to write similar crap

Phil, the USA recently surpassed 300 million inhabitants. The 9/11 attacks were carried out by 21 people. The point is that, given the right idea, you can leverage a few trained people for immense effect. Not every idea is equal. That is why a really, really good idea is important.

Now, given that there probably aren't all that many terrorists out there (as you correctly surmise) what are the chances that their combined, oh let's say 50 brains, can think of as many good ideas as the, oh let's say all the insensitive show-offy louts in the nation, which for the sake of convenience I will put at 1 million?

hahaha aimless there are way more terrorists than there are people who read this column

and those terrorists are also immensely more invested in coming up with a "really, really good idea" than "show-offy louts," and are spending a lot more time thinking of ways to scare the shit out of people.

I love how the title of "economist" gives him the license to basically be that jackass at work who says "Now, see, here's what I would do" in PRINT, for MONEY

xpost

max, something tells me this is all a game to you. Unfortunately, this is one game where real people die or are maimed. Why do anything that might increase the inevitable total count of victims by even one more?

This reminds me a bit of driving on narrow, one-lane mountain roads (which I do fairly often). You have to drive like there is a car coming around each and every one of the 500 blind curves you approach. The fact that there is rarely ever an oncoming car shouldn't matter a bit. And every time the driver in the other car takes it for granted that, because they saw no cars on the first 100 curves and therefore they can drive like no one is coming their way, it endangers me by that much more. You are speaking like one of those kinds of drivers.

maybe we should just enact a law that prevents public speculation on possible strategies of terrorist attack

No. That would be a horrible idea, as you well know. Maybe, though, people might give some thought to the possible consequences of their actions and practise some kind of good judgment and self-restraint. This is good preparation for adulthood I am told.

You know, Cheney's 1% doctrine -- of which Aimless's ^^^ us really just a corollary -- is really, really stupid, and goes exactly into what everyone else is saying about risk assessment.

If terrorists are trolling the fucking Freakonomics blog on NYT.com looking for new ideas, we already won.

yeah 1% doctrine is for pussy fuxx

but hey aimless dont let rationality and common sense get in the way of you being a sanctimonious dickhead

xpost

Phil, I do not accept that what I have said is a corollary to Cheney's 1% doctrine. His doctrine is about taking action, often expensive actions, disruptive actions or actions that violate basic legal rights. All I am talking about is a kind of inexpensive and harmless, self-imposed inaction.

Let's assume that you have spent X number of minutes or hours, for whatever reason, thinking about how to attack the USA for maximum terror effect, with the least possible expense and the greatest chance of success. That's OK by me. Knock yourself out. Now, you want to make some good use of this marvelous idea of yours.

You could:

1) gather some acolytes and carry out the attack as you conceived it, or
2) notify the people who would be responsible for preventing such an attack, and allow them to evaluate it and circulate it through relatively secure channels of communication to others in a similar position, or
3) boast about it on the internet for no better purpose than to prove how clever you are to have thought of it and to bask in the awe of other netizens.

I should think that, of these three choices, one stands out as superior in terms of wisdom and judgement. You may feel free to guess which one I favor.

Where Cheney's 1% doctrine takes over is at the point where the government becomes aware of the mode of possible attack that you or someone else has thought up. Nothing in what I said dictates any particular response by the government, let alone the response dictated by Cheney's 1% doctrine. You savvy?

max, you've descended to name-calling. Congratulations, even sarcasm has eluded your capacity.

Poortheatre's Three Ideas for Terrorists

My brother and I used to make bombs out of things around the house when we were kids. Here are some ideas from that!

NUMBER 1:

1 empty metal thermos in carry-on
12 oz. of Drano, concealed in thin tube coiled around your leg
Several sheets of aluminum foil in carry-on

Sneak into the bathroom and empty the Drano into the thermos. Tear the aluminum into shreds and toss them in the thermos. Seal it tightly, and then non-chalantly place it anywhere on the plane. Even if the blast doesn't breach the hull, a veritable 'dirty bomb' will have relased noxious fumes into the cabin. WHAT'S THAT SMELL?

NUMBER 2:

If you're determined to breach that hull, shove a few thin slabs of potassium ($40/lb) in your carry-on. Once on the plane, cut off the oxidized exterior, and then flush those babies down the toilet into the septic tank. BANG!

NUMBER 3:

The Fireball! Cut a small hole in a tennis ball and fill it up with only matchheads. Carry in on board in your jack, and when the time is right, throw it against anything. SMOKIN'!

Wow, dude those ideas are so awesome! Feel better?

you don't need to bother with the tube around your leg, you can carry 12 oz of any liquid you like as long as you put it in a bottle labeled as contact lens storage solution. empty thermos and sheets of tinfoil will get you flagged, though.

Empty Nalgene? And then you can guy a bunch of candy bars and use the foil from them.

aimless, chill, these are just like riddles. el tomboto = bilbo, me = gollum.

guy candy bars, buy candy bars..

if anybody is ACTUALLY interested in this shit I suggest reading Bruce Schneier's blog and not giving levitt any more attention than he deserves (e.g. none). Schneier actually got an interview with Kip Hawley, who he's been mercilessly criticizing for the better part of three years, and didn't beat around the bush at all. Schneier isn't paid to write, either, putting him in the rather elite category of bloggers you might learn something from.

http://schneier.com/blog/

that should be easy enough

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/06/second_movieplo.html

^^^^^Invent the most ridiculous attack possible contest results for 2007

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/06/movieplot_threa_1.html

^^^^2006 winner, also totally awesome

Well noted.

That type of column, as a genre, is fairly common. The NY Times Op-Ed page, for example, regularly runs pieces from counter-terror "experts" who map out some plan they've thought up that they believe terrorists will use against us. There's no shortage of these kinds of things. One ran last week on how terrorists could attack with a variety of radio-isotopes stolen from hospitals or industrial sites.

What there is a shortage of is people who actually look at evidence seized in counter-terror raids. And there's an even smaller number of people who bother to go to the trouble of actually translating terror documents to see what enemy thinking, or lack of it, is. Or at least the people grabbed in counter-terror operations.

From a piece I wrote for GlobalSecurity.Org two years ago and update every now and then:

The newsmedia when dealing with potential problems, like the threats posed by terrorists . . . has an extremely poor track record. It does not ask hard questions of anyone. It simply acts as a conduit for the delivery of nightmare claims. Employing a Nexis search, I was able to quickly find around one hundred stories devoted to spreading permutations from the last two years containing some fashion of the assumption or assertion that "it's easy for terrorists" to bring on calamity using a multitude of plans and practices.

Rail road yard security is a joke, it's easy for terrorists to walk right in. .50 caliber sniper rifles, powerful enough to shoot down airplanes...are easy for terrorists to acquire but even easier for Americans to get. It's still too easy for terrorists to get across the border. A new driver's license bill is bad because it makes it easy for terrorists to have them. A blackout reveals how easy it might be for terrorists to knock down the electrical grid. Colorado is vulnerable to terror because federal focus on big cities has made it easy for terrorists to strike in landlocked states. It is easy for terrorists to contaminate water so a scientist's new sensor system is a necessity. Be alert for farm terror because it is easy for the enemy to strike there. A state leads or lags in bioterror readiness and it's a matter for concern because it is easy for terrorists ... Assume a bioterror attack is coming because it is easy for terrorists...

The entire piece is here.

Here's some translation and analysis from documents picked up in various British sweeps and filtered through the court system this summer. I do it as part of my work.

Ultimate Jihadist Poisons Handbook.

Sitting around idly thinking how terrorists could do something in the US is a rube's game. It always ends the same way. A universal fragility is ascribed to everything, terrorists always have a frictionless environment to work in and are more common than roaches. And then someone comes up with what they think is a lightbulb idea, like squirting rat poison into cream donuts in the bakery section of the supermarket, sniping, defecating in paper bags, setting them afire on front porches, etc.

gorge what's your opinion on kevin flynn, and schneier? IF you have one, I dunno.

I'm almost finished with macphee's Uncommon Carriers and it almost amuses me the degree to which our nation could be ass boned by even a half-assed attack on the Louisville KY airport.

RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE

almost an oxymoron

not quite a paradox

You pointed out that interview he did with Hawley which is a good piece of work. Getting someone from the government to respond to an interview request and actually furnish something substantial rather than the usual cant is an achievement in and of itself.

I bought a copy of Schneier's book on cryptography years ago although I haven't bought his latest. While the subjects we cover are somewhat different, we seem to have a similar take on things. He's written about the government's arresting of low-level patsies and then the peddling of their theoretical plans as audacious plots.

His take on ABC's resale of the liquid bomb plot this week was like mine. It was old news and simply because a video is produced by a national lab, one doesn't have to take it seriously other than as a dog and pony show. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what the liquid bomb terrorists were capable of. It only shows what Sandia scientists with unlimited resources and training are capable of.

Could Sandia scientists come up with a way to punch a hole in an airplace? Yes. Wow.

It seems to me, from indirect observation, that there isn't a lot of good information sharing anymore between Brit counterterror men and US intelligence. That may be because US political agendas have regularly burned the Brits with regards to terror plots intercepted in London. Plus we've given the Brits reason not to trust us. This leaves US intel men to regularly make a big wind about what they think is going on, not necessarily what is going on.

One of my old takes on an aspect of the liquid bomb plot.

idea 4: get yourself a large hat and a monkey

2) notify the people who would be responsible for preventing such an attack, and allow them to evaluate it and circulate it through relatively secure channels of communication to others in a similar position

yes, lets call the DHS as soon as we think of a potential terrorist plot, theyll take your ideas right to the top.

dick destiny - how to access all your terrorism and TWAT articles?

people might give some thought to the possible consequences of their actions and practise some kind of good judgment and self-restraint is quite funny

#
277.
August 8th,
2007
3:44 pm

So you REALLY wanna kill people? OK, here goes. Take your 20 terrorists and have them drive gasoline delivery trucks into every US refinery, splitting the main storage tank and detonating it. First, that destroys many lives. Second, it destroys the infrastructure needed to move food across the US. In a matter of weeks famile will kill as many people as a nuclear strike might. Third, regulations are so restrictive now it would be near impossible to get new refineries built. Fourth, until that is done we would be in a choke hold from people whom we’ve alientated during the past six years. Fifth, the rise in fuel prices would drive the country into a depression. That was with 5 minutes thought. Be VERY glad I’m NOT a terrorist.

— Posted by Louis

i need to find a new newspaper to read

#
301.
August 8th,
2007
3:56 pm

I like all of the ideas… The sooner the terrorists strike and kill a sizable number of Americans (make it simple, though… we don’t want people thinking Bush / Israel was behind it like 9/11)… The sooner Americans will get serious and start ridding the country of Muslims. Think the local fire department would have the manpower to put out all the mosques that “somehow caught fire”?

— Posted by Roger

good lord

Google, punch in "Dick Destiny" and [whatever terror subject word you like] usually does it. Should put a tab on the side that does this but haven't yet.

For example, site:dickdestiny.com "Dick Destiny" "TATP"

Which looks like this.

The second result down contains the scientific papers published on the web for synthesis of triacetone peroxide.

This one does theoretical cyanide bombs.

Now, upstreamers please don't get in a twist. The cyanide bomb plans were distributed in jihadi circles a couple years ago. DHS got ahold of the schematic, which is on the top page listed and duplicated it, passing it around in an alert. While the thinking was these were easy to make, they don't really work for reasons which start to become obvious if you understand the nature of the chemical reaction involved and the limitations of the design. It looks like it is efficient and simple but it isn't. One was deployed in Afghanistan. It didn't work. This never seems to have made the news.

This is also a factually rewarding string.

Be VERY glad I’m NOT a terrorist.

sanskrit my advice is to stop reading newspapers

— Posted by Roger Adultery