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.

[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.