more on What's in that bottle : could be stuff toproduceNitro,sohow to wonder ?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: pat hache <tercasa () prodigy net mx>
Date: July 17, 2006 1:08:27 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave () farber net>, alberti () sanction net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on What's in that bottle : could be stuff  
toproduceNitro,sohow to wonder ?

Dave,
I was reading reactions to the nitro post, and was just  wondering  
more about terror , as follows... post it if you consider it  
interesting. You have a lot more of knowledge about the thème here I  
suppose.
Pat

Before "terrorists" offered their own lives trying to kill their  -  
generally civilian - "enemies" in the last decades, there are  
relatively few examples of suicidal attempts to fight an enemy   
requiring the sacrifice of the civilian (?) author of the "attentat"  
or the "blow up".

What's the difference between a civilian (or quite so) guy going to  
his own announced or videotaped death in Palestine or Mosoul, and the  
first rows of multicolored regiments fighting at Auzterlitz marching   
"au son des fifres et des tambours"  to their very probable death  
under the leaded mitraille of their contrincants ?
But then a strict discipline forced those to become "suicidal", and  
the same in the WW1 war at Verdun when hordes of allied or german  
fantassins were drunked to receive their enemy's machinegunnery, but  
those really suicidal attacks were legitimized using the uniform, or  
the pseudo cause of the conflict as thought by their leaders. Their  
suicide was a disciplinary attitude.  Enforced by military law. And  
the terror was suffered basically by military people, drafted or  
professionals.
Now "terrorists" require also a disciplinary attitude, inforced not  
only by the hierarchy of their social or political organisation but  
also their religious ideology.  Just a slight change of minds. But  a  
total change of targets.

I remember "anarchist" attempts against one .Us president, another in  
Sarajevo , or even some cases of Vietcong "terrorists" or "freedom  
fighters" in the vietnam war against the .Us presence, when a decided  
person took a decision including fatal risks for his own life. But  
those were attacks directed against military or officials in charge.

Submarines torpedoes caused during the WW1 some kind of terrific  
attacks (sunking the Lusitania f.i.) because the attack on a steam  
paquebot with civilians aboard had become "normal" for some military.  
Dresden is another example of desastrous attack mostly on civilians  
apparently justified in those days...
But for those two examples the captain of the U-boot or the commander  
of the Mitchell bombers were relatively safe and away from the  
effects they produced. They were not exactly suicidal, meaby just the  
top most adventurers, adrenalin driven. But  Tippets suffered some  
effects of his atomic bombing, eventually, but certainly was  
psychologically affected - at least.

The terror they delivered was used as a "normal way" of warfare by  
the military or states, already including WMD like atomic bombs in  
"those days".
How to compare terrific ( terrorific )WW2  with  "modern  terrorist"  
actions ?

When Napoléon , MacArthur or Washington send their troops to a  
probable death , for a noble cause eventually, they acted in reaction  
to a necessity.
Too many Irakian civilians die now with their killer, for a  
"necessity" they had nothing to understand about, just as so many  
others in Lebanon or Palestine or in Israel where the modern idea of  
suicidal attack took form and was extended to use airplanes when 9/11  
happened. Those attacks are not made using WMD, but those SAD bombs,  
when someone activates his own  destruction hoping for the death of  
others around him. Self applied destruction. Unhappiness. Nope ?

About liquids or substances on airtravel, the way we humans travel is  
the reflect of our organization , our commercial needs and the  
evolution of our methods of communication.
Then about airplane security, the higher you travel from the ground,  
the more sofisticated  your way of travel has become makes it easier  
for a disciplined (or trained) civilian or partisan to have it  
grounded using simple methods including many  possible instrumental  
procedure. Trains and tube also became a target. But airplane  
security now is much higher compared to tube , railroads or even  
tunnel security.

(btw, not much was said here recently about the success obtained in  
security alert including the possible flooding of NY tunnels :  
preemption well applied, probably)

Therefore all details carried aboard an airplane should be secured.  
Onboard flying machines any details matters more than on a ferryboat  
or even a Eurostar crossing the Channel. The necessity of security   
is not the same . Of course trains could explode just as happened in  
India. But there is NO WAY to avoid such attacks if the numbers of  
passengers are outnumbering the efforts. Airplaine passengers are  
less than those using Amtrak. Imagine security level on trains or Bus  
transport (London ?) at the same level as air transport ?
 The only way to restore some security from SAD bombing would be  
educating the candidates to suicide to think more before their  
performance, and to  understand - just as some mutineers in the WW1  
trenches did - that their effort is worthless the way they perform it  
when perforating themselves  (And learning or remembering what the  
french anarchist and singer Georges Brassens wrote : " Mourir pour  
des idées , d 'accord ! , mais de mort lente.. !!! " )

Recent terrorism using suicide is an act of desesperation against a  
superior force with which there seem to be no way to win the cause.
Possibly the presence of  unilateral force or his imposition  
generates such terror in a kind of legitimate reaction and   
eventually such terror later becomes justified, legal or is  
recognized if the political force succeeds later and gain control of  
the whole system. Such imposition always happened in history of  
social "warfare".
So did Ben Gourion fighting Brits in Palestine/Israel just after ww2,  
after all.
Now Hamas or Hezbollah does quite the same using the suicidal  
touch... When will Palestinian fight  be recognized as legitimate the  
same way let's say Israel was 50 years ago , after using relatively  
similar methods ?  Didn"t some Jewish or Sionist militant blow  
himself with a grenade to kill some Britannic troopers in Jerusalem  
in the 40s ? what would be the difference now except some videotaped  
record ?

Just some thoughts. No offense I hope for nobody.


Patrice Herbiet S.
52-55 -  17.100.160
 fax        17.36.90.90
Mexico City
On 17 juil. 06, at 08:24, Robert Alberti wrote:

On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 07:38 -0400, pat hache <tercasa () prodigy net mx>
wrote:
> happens to carry in another - marked or not - container, but just
> enough - when mixed  - for a terrorist to implose f.i. some door of a
> high altitude flying  aircraft,  killing all aboard?

Confiscating unmarked bottles does nothing to reduce the risk of
terrorists brewing deadly cocktails in the restrooms.  All the
terrorists have to do is replace the contents of labeled bottles.

> therefore no liquids allowed on a plane seems a good precaution ,
> except eye drops in small bottles, and even some powders for face
> makeup or babie's care should'nt ...

If baby bottles are not prohibited you can bet that's what the
terrorists will use to transport their cocktails. Or the liquids will be
in the hollowed heels of their shoes. Or they may bring the liquids
aboard inside their own bodies. Defending against what Bruce Schneier
refers to has "movie terrorism" does little to reduce risk, but rapidly
erodes our civil liberties.


The only way to make the flight perfectly safe would be to prohibit
having people on board.  In the meantime we will all soon be boarding
airplanes wearing only the paper gowns issued at the security
checkpoint...

Robert Alberti, CISSP, ISSMP
President, Sanction, Inc.
http://sanction.net
(612) 486-5000 x211





-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/