quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I dont know what is worse, profiling or Hilary's approach, more intel.
Now, more intel to deal with lone wolf terrorists is basically a dead end street.
Here is the problem:
Lone wolves do not work within the normal structure of a terrorist organization, they may be inspired by the rhetoric, but that is as far as it goes.
So, for intel to find these guys, the following has to be done:
1) Run everyone that ever accesses any information/web site of groups linked to known terrorist organizations.
While data worm programs, such as used by the NSA are good, but those use specific parameters in order to do their search, beginning with a suspect.
The original data worm used by the FBI was quickly overwhelmed when it was introduced back in the mid 90's. It literally searched every email sent for key words, i.e bomb, target, and 400 others. Within weeks, the FBI was chasing ghosts consisting of teenagers and shoppers discussing sales etc.
The new data worms start with a specific suspect, basically anyone that ends up on a watch list.
That is the rub.
The lone wolf does not show up on a watch list, in fact, the ones recently have not even attended mosques where fundamentalists frequent. More often than not, the influence is through a process similar to osmosis, they see stuff on the news, do some searches on the net, catch bits and pieces of rhetoric and go from there.
A good example is Timothy McVeigh. His act is typical of the lone wolf. He was not on any watch list for internal terrorists, and was found to have contacts on the periphery of the groups under the glass.
So, the feds went another way.
You buy a lot of bulk ammonia nitrate fertilizers and a lot of agricultural use diesel, your local ATF agent pops in for a 'friendly' visit. If you are associated with a political movement that is still listed by the DoJ as militant and subversive, you get a friendly visit from a group of ATF agents.
Now, with the Clinton approach, it will mean a lot of new government jobs, is still gonna bog the hell out of anything but a super computer.
Then you gonna have man power to actually run down the possibles.
From a purely practical standpoint, it is not cost effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I dont know what is worse, profiling or Hilary's approach, more intel.

Now, more intel to deal with lone wolf terrorists is basically a dead end street.

Here is the problem:

Lone wolves do not work within the normal structure of a terrorist organization, they may be inspired by the rhetoric, but that is as far as it goes.

So, for intel to find these guys, the following has to be done:
1) Run everyone that ever accesses any information/web site of groups linked to known terrorist organizations.

While data worm programs, such as used by the NSA are good, but those use specific parameters in order to do their search, beginning with a suspect.

The original data worm used by the FBI was quickly overwhelmed when it was introduced back in the mid 90's. It literally searched every email sent for key words, i.e bomb, target, and 400 others. Within weeks, the FBI was chasing ghosts consisting of teenagers and shoppers discussing sales etc.

The new data worms start with a specific suspect, basically anyone that ends up on a watch list.

That is the rub.

The lone wolf does not show up on a watch list, in fact, the ones recently have not even attended mosques where fundamentalists frequent. More often than not, the influence is through a process similar to osmosis, they see stuff on the news, do some searches on the net, catch bits and pieces of rhetoric and go from there.

A good example is Timothy McVeigh. His act is typical of the lone wolf. He was not on any watch list for internal terrorists, and was found to have contacts on the periphery of the groups under the glass.

So, the feds went another way.

You buy a lot of bulk ammonia nitrate fertilizers and a lot of agricultural use diesel, your local ATF agent pops in for a 'friendly' visit. If you are associated with a political movement that is still listed by the DoJ as militant and subversive, you get a friendly visit from a group of ATF agents.

Now, with the Clinton approach, it will mean a lot of new government jobs, is still gonna bog the hell out of anything but a super computer.

Then you gonna have man power to actually run down the possibles.

From a purely practical standpoint, it is not cost effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I dont know what is worse, profiling or Hilary's approach, more intel.

From a purely practical standpoint, it is not cost effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

So, the feds went another way.

You buy a lot of bulk ammonia nitrate fertilizers and a lot of agricultural use diesel, your local ATF agent pops in for a 'friendly' visit. If you are associated with a political movement that is still listed by the DoJ as militant and subversive, you get a friendly visit from a group of ATF agents.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I dont know what is worse, profiling or Hilary's approach, more intel.

Now, more intel to deal with lone wolf terrorists is basically a dead end street.

Here is the problem:

Lone wolves do not work within the normal structure of a terrorist organization, they may be inspired by the rhetoric, but that is as far as it goes.

So, for intel to find these guys, the following has to be done:
1) Run everyone that ever accesses any information/web site of groups linked to known terrorist organizations.

While data worm programs, such as used by the NSA are good, but those use specific parameters in order to do their search, beginning with a suspect.

The original data worm used by the FBI was quickly overwhelmed when it was introduced back in the mid 90's. It literally searched every email sent for key words, i.e bomb, target, and 400 others. Within weeks, the FBI was chasing ghosts consisting of teenagers and shoppers discussing sales etc.

The new data worms start with a specific suspect, basically anyone that ends up on a watch list.

That is the rub.

The lone wolf does not show up on a watch list, in fact, the ones recently have not even attended mosques where fundamentalists frequent. More often than not, the influence is through a process similar to osmosis, they see stuff on the news, do some searches on the net, catch bits and pieces of rhetoric and go from there.

A good example is Timothy McVeigh. His act is typical of the lone wolf. He was not on any watch list for internal terrorists, and was found to have contacts on the periphery of the groups under the glass.

So, the feds went another way.

You buy a lot of bulk ammonia nitrate fertilizers and a lot of agricultural use diesel, your local ATF agent pops in for a 'friendly' visit. If you are associated with a political movement that is still listed by the DoJ as militant and subversive, you get a friendly visit from a group of ATF agents.

Now, with the Clinton approach, it will mean a lot of new government jobs, is still gonna bog the hell out of anything but a super computer.

Then you gonna have man power to actually run down the possibles.

From a purely practical standpoint, it is not cost effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
I am in favor of profiling people with narcissistic personality disorder
and preventing them from becoming President."

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

There's always a Sandy Berger around when Hillary needs intel... Who's she trying to kid?