Recently we’ve heard a lot about domestic terrorism and the threat it now presents to many ‘western-style’ democracies. I find this an interesting prospect, especially given the world wide prevalence of anti-government groups through the (late) 1960s and 1970s. Leftist organizations like The Weathermen and the United Freedom Front in the US and the Red Army Faction in Germany all participated in prolonged violent political action that led to the death of civilians. Not to mention all of the right-wing nutter groups like the Aryan Nation, the KKK.

So the question is simple, is domestic terrorism a bigger threat in western democracies now than it has ever been previously?

diddly-squat said:

Recently we’ve heard a lot about domestic terrorism and the threat it now presents to many ‘western-style’ democracies. I find this an interesting prospect, especially given the world wide prevalence of anti-government groups through the (late) 1960s and 1970s. Leftist organizations like The Weathermen and the United Freedom Front in the US and the Red Army Faction in Germany all participated in prolonged violent political action that led to the death of civilians. Not to mention all of the right-wing nutter groups like the Aryan Nation, the KKK.

So the question is simple, is domestic terrorism a bigger threat in western democracies now than it has ever been previously?

No it is not. It is a more conveniently non-justifiable than the activist movements of the 60s/70s. The threat itself does not put the public at any greater risk than it has ever faced as an entity. Supporting sweeping reforms because the subject is one that easily sways public oipinion and fervor is of more immediate concern.

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

Recently we’ve heard a lot about domestic terrorism and the threat it now presents to many ‘western-style’ democracies. I find this an interesting prospect, especially given the world wide prevalence of anti-government groups through the (late) 1960s and 1970s. Leftist organizations like The Weathermen and the United Freedom Front in the US and the Red Army Faction in Germany all participated in prolonged violent political action that led to the death of civilians. Not to mention all of the right-wing nutter groups like the Aryan Nation, the KKK.

So the question is simple, is domestic terrorism a bigger threat in western democracies now than it has ever been previously?

No it is not. It is a more conveniently non-justifiable than the activist movements of the 60s/70s. The threat itself does not put the public at any greater risk than it has ever faced as an entity. Supporting sweeping reforms because the subject is one that easily sways public oipinion and fervor is of more immediate concern.

I’m not sure I’d call any the organisations I listed as ‘activist’ groups

You probably missed the most important ones. The IRA and the UDA.

diddly-squat said:

Postpocelipse said:

diddly-squat said:

Recently we’ve heard a lot about domestic terrorism and the threat it now presents to many ‘western-style’ democracies. I find this an interesting prospect, especially given the world wide prevalence of anti-government groups through the (late) 1960s and 1970s. Leftist organizations like The Weathermen and the United Freedom Front in the US and the Red Army Faction in Germany all participated in prolonged violent political action that led to the death of civilians. Not to mention all of the right-wing nutter groups like the Aryan Nation, the KKK.

So the question is simple, is domestic terrorism a bigger threat in western democracies now than it has ever been previously?

No it is not. It is a more conveniently non-justifiable than the activist movements of the 60s/70s. The threat itself does not put the public at any greater risk than it has ever faced as an entity. Supporting sweeping reforms because the subject is one that easily sways public oipinion and fervor is of more immediate concern.

I’m not sure I’d call any the organisations I listed as ‘activist’ groups

I used the term loosely as they were active then as these groups are active now.

sibeen said:

You probably missed the most important ones. The IRA and the UDA.

indeed…

The sheer number of potential Islamic terrorists is far larger than the previous groups you mentioned (the lefty & righty groups were basically small cells of nutters, the Irish groups were small and focused on Irish issues). Violent Islamist supremacism is a commonplace doctrine in the Middle East and there are huge numbers of potential recruits in that region and elsewhere. For example, the number of Muslims living in Western countries who have recently gone to fight for Islamic State already greatly outnumbers the membership of all the earlier Western terrorist groups you mentioned.

Having lived in London during the height of the IRA bombing campaigns I would say the threat and danger to the public is far higher now.
The IRA used to call in warnings ( sometimes) and their campaign was largely to inconvenience and hassle their way to political gain.

Islamic terrorists want to kill and maim as many as possible. 56 dead was it in the London tube bombings? 200 in the Madrid train bombings.

Although the likelihood of dying in a terrorist attack is miniscule, it’s far greater now than in the 60s or 70s.

pommiejohn said:

Having lived in London during the height of the IRA bombing campaigns I would say the threat and danger to the public is far higher now.
The IRA used to call in warnings ( sometimes) and their campaign was largely to inconvenience and hassle their way to political gain.

Islamic terrorists want to kill and maim as many as possible. 56 dead was it in the London tube bombings? 200 in the Madrid train bombings.

Although the likelihood of dying in a terrorist attack is miniscule, it’s far greater now than in the 60s or 70s.

Not if you include Vietnam and Cambodia in your numbers for the 60’s and 70’s.

You left out the Pan-Am bombing as well.

Militant uncompromising and especially Wahhabist islam seems to be attractive to a lot of young and disenfranchised. It has also morphed from a directive personal form of command and control, to the franchise method of alquida to now a self radicalising method with all the material required easily available on the net.

I reckon it is only just starting to kick off.

AwesomeO said:

Militant uncompromising and especially Wahhabist islam seems to be attractive to a lot of young and disenfranchised. It has also morphed from a directive personal form of command and control, to the franchise method of alquida to now a self radicalising method with all the material required easily available on the net.

I reckon it is only just starting to kick off.

Bloody Non existent Gods, just wish they would piss off

CrazyNeutrino said:

AwesomeO said:

Militant uncompromising and especially Wahhabist islam seems to be attractive to a lot of young and disenfranchised. It has also morphed from a directive personal form of command and control, to the franchise method of alquida to now a self radicalising method with all the material required easily available on the net.

I reckon it is only just starting to kick off.

Bloody Non existent Gods, just wish they would piss off

How are any gods involved? They use Islam as a prop to provide the appearance of some human dignity in their ideology. Anyone with half a mind can see they are simply degenerate malcontents with a taste for blood and not having to pay taxes.

The Rev Dodgson said:

pommiejohn said:

Having lived in London during the height of the IRA bombing campaigns I would say the threat and danger to the public is far higher now.
The IRA used to call in warnings ( sometimes) and their campaign was largely to inconvenience and hassle their way to political gain.

Islamic terrorists want to kill and maim as many as possible. 56 dead was it in the London tube bombings? 200 in the Madrid train bombings.

Although the likelihood of dying in a terrorist attack is miniscule, it’s far greater now than in the 60s or 70s.

Not if you include Vietnam and Cambodia in your numbers for the 60’s and 70’s.

You left out the Pan-Am bombing as well.

I left out lots of terrorist attacks, surprisingly enough there isn’t room to list every one since the 60s.

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

Bubblecar said:

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

I suspect you’ve just jumped the shark on that one, Bubbles.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

I suspect you’ve just jumped the shark on that one, Bubbles.

Just be thankful it wasn’t a trained suicide shark wearing Semtex floaties.

Bubblecar said:

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

It’s the elephant-repellent argument.

If you give me lots of money, i can guarantee to make your home garden here in Australia secure from elephants. No chance of them eating your rose blooms, or tearing limbs off your trees.

The proof of my effectiveness is in the absence of elephants from your garden.

Then, if i tell you that i need more money and resources to deflect the elephants, you have no way of knowing the extent to which that’s true. So, you give me what i ask for, just in case. And, i can keep coming back with the same story time after time.

Thus has terrorism been a boon to the ‘security services’. And just in the nick of time it was , with the traditional Cold War justifications on the wane. How they must have given thanks on 11 Sept 2001.

captain_spalding said:

Thus has terrorism been a boon to the ‘security services’. And just in the nick of time it was , with the traditional Cold War justifications on the wane. How they must have given thanks on 11 Sept 2001.

Maybe so, but now they actually have to work hard for their pay, and it’s unlikely that funding & staffing will be able to keep up with the workload. Unless there’s an unexpected drop in the popularity of homicidal religious fanaticism.

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

It’s the elephant-repellent argument.

If you give me lots of money, i can guarantee to make your home garden here in Australia secure from elephants. No chance of them eating your rose blooms, or tearing limbs off your trees.

The proof of my effectiveness is in the absence of elephants from your garden.

Then, if i tell you that i need more money and resources to deflect the elephants, you have no way of knowing the extent to which that’s true. So, you give me what i ask for, just in case. And, i can keep coming back with the same story time after time.

Thus has terrorism been a boon to the ‘security services’. And just in the nick of time it was , with the traditional Cold War justifications on the wane. How they must have given thanks on 11 Sept 2001.

It is hardly an imaginary elephant scam when there are elephants in custody, elephants piloting planes into buildings, elephants blowing themselves up, videotaping themselves cutting off heads and burning people alive, and otherwise good evidence that there are a lot of elephants planning harm, other than that, your analogy is spot on.

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

Another obvious difference is the much larger amount of money, resources and personnel that now go into countering terrorism, and far more security procedures and infrastructure in place. Without all that the terrorist situation in Western cities might now be as bad as Baghdad.

It’s the elephant-repellent argument.

If you give me lots of money, i can guarantee to make your home garden here in Australia secure from elephants. No chance of them eating your rose blooms, or tearing limbs off your trees.

The proof of my effectiveness is in the absence of elephants from your garden.

Then, if i tell you that i need more money and resources to deflect the elephants, you have no way of knowing the extent to which that’s true. So, you give me what i ask for, just in case. And, i can keep coming back with the same story time after time.

Thus has terrorism been a boon to the ‘security services’. And just in the nick of time it was , with the traditional Cold War justifications on the wane. How they must have given thanks on 11 Sept 2001.

It was like a Jewish Fire Sale for the security industry. Not hard to empathise with those who saw conspiracy in the act. It’s a conspiracy contrived by the practice of devil advocation.

Bubblecar said:

…now they actually have to work hard for their pay…

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

…now they actually have to work hard for their pay…

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

Yep, stuff like that happens, systems are fallible, our society is generous, people err toward favourable interpretations, like to give second chances.

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

…now they actually have to work hard for their pay…

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

Hopefully they’ll use the investigation into that to improve future monitoring of such individuals.

AwesomeO said:

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

…now they actually have to work hard for their pay…

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

Yep, stuff like that happens, systems are fallible, our society is generous, people err toward favourable interpretations, like to give second chances.

They were probably busy infiltrating university student groups or something. Old habits die hard.

captain_spalding said:

AwesomeO said:

captain_spalding said:

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

Yep, stuff like that happens, systems are fallible, our society is generous, people err toward favourable interpretations, like to give second chances.

They were probably busy infiltrating university student groups or something. Old habits die hard.

You are sounding increasingly like wooki I have noticed. No doubt they are trying to infiltrate groups, or at least monitor them, no doubt the defects that allowed the cafe incident will be looked at and where possible changed to be more effective. Maybe the defects are built in and part of an open society and our legal system and thus open to exploitation.

AwesomeO said:

You are sounding increasingly like wooki I have noticed.

I think that either wooki or myself have just been either insulted or complimented. I’m unable to determine who, or which.

I remember the good ol’ days when ASIO planted members in uni groups. A bloke who ran one told me that they knew they had ASIO infiltrators in the group, and who they were (they weren’t very good at it, he said.)

When i asked why they weren’t kicked out he explained that:

they would have just been replaced by others, entailing joining paperwork etc.

they always paid their dues promptly, which a lot of other members didn’t

without them, the group would have often failed to form a quorum

“In short”, he said, “the group couldn’t have continued if the ASIO people had left”.

captain_spalding said:

Bubblecar said:

…now they actually have to work hard for their pay…

Yet, somehow, with all their increased resources and funds, and all their hard work, they were unable to detect that a known self-styled religious nutter in Sydney, on bail for a murder charge, had access to firearms and presented a threat to the community.

I understand the sentiment here but the fact is this isn’t Minority Report and we can’t police against pre-crime.

but yes I think that being on bail for a violent crime and owning a gun should be setting off all kinds of alarms…

Whatever happened to the Symbionese Liberation Army?

Woodie said:

Whatever happened to the Symbionese Liberation Army?

Tries to conjure a joke about Patti Hearst.

fails

I’m off my game tonight, peeps.

Woodie said:

Whatever happened to the Symbionese Liberation Army?

Wasn’t the same after Patty Hearst left.

AFAICR, the rest went down in a big gunfight some time later

sibeen said:

Woodie said:

Whatever happened to the Symbionese Liberation Army?

Tries to conjure a joke about Patti Hearst.

fails

I’m off my game tonight, peeps.

4/162 in the 37th?

Woodie said:

Whatever happened to the Symbionese Liberation Army?

They eventually realised there’s no such country as Symbion, so liberating it was a waste of time.

diddly-squat said:

but yes I think that being on bail for a violent crime and owning a gun should be setting off all kinds of alarms…

Yet they wanna come at you and me with this meta data bullshit crap, when they had more bells than St Mary’s going off with that nutter, and they reckon he “didn’t meet the threshold”.

OK then, WTF is this purported “threshold”?

Woodie said:

OK then, WTF is this purported “threshold”?

Well, he never said anything rude about Tony Abbott, now did he?

Woodie said:

diddly-squat said:

but yes I think that being on bail for a violent crime and owning a gun should be setting off all kinds of alarms…

Yet they wanna come at you and me with this meta data bullshit crap, when they had more bells than St Mary’s going off with that nutter, and they reckon he “didn’t meet the threshold”.

OK then, WTF is this purported “threshold”?

Obviously there is a lot they could do with the data they already have.

captain_spalding said:

Woodie said:

OK then, WTF is this purported “threshold”?

Well, he never said anything rude about Tony Abbott, now did he?

I don’t know what that is supposed to mean.

AwesomeO said:

captain_spalding said:

Woodie said:

OK then, WTF is this purported “threshold”?

Well, he never said anything rude about Tony Abbott, now did he?

I don’t know what that is supposed to mean.

‘
I reckon it’d get a Post-It note stuck on your file – ‘watch this one’,

diddly-squat said:

Obviously there is a lot they could do with the data they already have.

Why don’t the just ask Facebook and Twitter? That’s where they seem to put it all. Sorta like fake passports. no one ever seems to get caught at airports. Always after that fact when they’ve blown something up and “they were on fake passports”.