Georgetown Sec Program Lone Wolf Study

[Badger52]

This report was prepared by the Security Studies Group at Georgetown, part of their National Security Critical Issue Task Force.

Interestingly, one of the first things they had to do was actually define, for the study purposes, just what is a "lone wolf terrorist" - as the USG and others have a myriad of definitions that don't always jive between agencies.

Also in the findings, there are some statistical nuggets worth noting (e.g., use of metadata was an aid in only 7.5% of ALL terrorism investigations, and domestic LWT is a very small subset of that. So one could argue that bulk metadata collection still hasn't proved its worth when contrasted against the civil liberties upon which it infringes (and they make this point).


Link to Final Paper (approx 58 page PDF)

[Paslode]

I notice that Page 1 has no mention of Left-wing Extremism, apparently only Right-wing extremism is a concern.

Maybe I am way off base, but this seems like they are recommending a Lone Wolf Terrorism Czar and a new layer of bureaucracy to do Cheech and Chongs Dog Shit routine.

On top of they recommend a hard and fast definition of Lone Wolf Terrorism as a 'single actor who pursues political change linked to a formulated ideology'...and anything out side definition would be become something completely different.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Paslode

I notice that Page 1 has no mention of Left-wing Extremism, apparently only Right-wing extremism is a concern.

Maybe I am way off base, but this seems like they are recommending a Lone Wolf Terrorism Czar and a new layer of bureaucracy to do Cheech and Chongs Dog Shit routine.

On top of they recommend a hard and fast definition of Lone Wolf Terrorism as a 'single actor who pursues political change linked to a formulated ideology'...and anything out side definition would be become something completely different.

Yeah, I noticed that call for a focal point for lone wolves - maybe a new Under Secretary Den Mother at some DHS entity?

On page 9, they fully discuss their rationale for using a single definition of LWT to distinguish it from other analyses and targeting efforts. The one you cite is the one they used for purposes of their study.

[Paslode]

I just browsed the pdf and my initial thought was bullets are flying, horses are dying and they have to call a committee meeting to clearly define what is a Lone Wolf Terrorist before they can react to the threat.....looking up a dead horses ass to see what it died from syndrome.

I will read it in full this evening and see if it changes my opinion.

[JJ_BPK]

Not sure I agree/disagree with the report, but I do think that there is a mind set definition needed to separate "types".

If you're doing Clarice Starling style profiling, you do need the distinction between a LW and cells that are controlled at different levels.

The collection of data is only good if you know where to look..

Look at some of the modern serial murderers. Jeffrey Dahmer, who continued for 13 yrs and Dennis Rader for 19yrs.

Compared to the Tsarnaev brothers, who used social media and bragged of their efforts.

An LEO org looking for terrorist cells is not going to find Hannibal Lecter.

My $00.0002

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

If you're doing Clarice Starling style profiling, you do need the distinction between a LW and cells that are controlled at different levels.

I can see your point there....to better know your enemy so to speak.


But to a large degree I believe we know where and how it starts and the who the motivators are.........preachers of hate and discontent..... Louis Farrakahn come to mind.

On top of that the powers to be won't call these act terrorism or the the actors terrorists, it is work place violence and disgruntled workers

Like Mohammad Whitaker a Kansas City-area man suspected in connection with about a dozen highway shootings that wounded three people.......he was charged with 18 felony counts, not terrorism.

[Hand]

Originally Posted by Paslode

But to a large degree I believe we know where and how it starts and the who the motivators are.........preachers of hate and discontent..... Louis Farrakahn come to mind.

Have there been any terrorist or terrorist acts that have been attributed to Farrakahn and his violent hate of the white man?

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by Hand

Have there been any terrorist or terrorist acts that have been attributed to Farrakahn and his violent hate of the white man?

Don 't know. I don't know whether Whitaker was ever sentenced either.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Paslode

But to a large degree I believe we know where and how it starts and the who the motivators are.........preachers of hate and discontent..... Louis Farrakahn come to mind.

Knowing the haters and their followers, will not find the LW. It is only relevant after the fact, as a cause or symptom.

Eliminating haters is good business, but the 1st amendment protects them unless you can show a direct link.

That's one reason most of the heaters use religion as a screen. They are protected by the 1st, under free speech & religion.

[MtnGoat]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Not sure I agree/disagree with the report, but I do think that there is a mind set definition needed to separate "types".

If you're doing Clarice Starling style profiling, you do need the distinction between a LW and cells that are controlled at different levels.

The collection of data is only good if you know where to look..

Look at some of the modern serial murderers. Jeffrey Dahmer, who continued for 13 yrs and Dennis Rader for 19yrs.

Compared to the Tsarnaev brothers, who used social media and bragged of their efforts.

An LEO org looking for terrorist cells is not going to find Hannibal Lecter.

My $00.0002

I will agree to disagree with this report, it have some very good points. But as we can tell that it is written by Liberal point of views. For me a study shouldn't be left or right leaning, just give the facts.



JJ_BPK very good points on LEO "looking" for these individuals or cells.

[Team Sergeant]

Georgetown Sec Program Lone Wolf Study or

"How to keep 200,000 new "Terrorism" and "Security Industry" "Experts" employed.

What an industry.

200,000 "experts" and a trillion dollar budget and no one stopped the Boston Bomber.

America knows how to make a mountain out of a molehill.

[The Reaper]

Oh, they know who is doing it.

They just won't or can't bring themselves to say it.

TR

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Oh, they know who is doing it.

They just won't or can't bring themselves to say it.

TR

They might lose a grant or two. Almost didn't post it but thought a few nuggets, including the value of bulk collection of metadata, were noteworthy. Wonder if they're on the same grant-gravy-train as the sources (like Southern Poverty Lie Center) that contributed to getting DHS to declare veterans such a significant threat.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

Knowing the haters and their followers, will not find the LW. It is only relevant after the fact, as a cause or symptom.

Eliminating haters is good business, but the 1st amendment protects them unless you can show a direct link.

That's one reason most of the heaters use religion as a screen. They are protected by the 1st, under free speech & religion.

Doing Gods work is a good disguise to wear, and good protection unless you are in the sinister wedding cake business

I think Frazier Glen Miller validates your comment that knowing haters and their followers will not find the LW. Apparently Miller had been on the extremists radar for years before his lone shooting spree in 2014.......but I am surprised the NSA Super Center did not stop him before he left for his destination.

[TFA303]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Oh, they know who is doing it.

They just won't or can't bring themselves to say it.

TR

They know (deep in their hearts and counter to all evidence) that the real threat is lone wolf right-wing gun-owner veterans. That's where studies like this one keep saying we need to be vigilant.

Because reasons, that's why.