|on random as defense
||[Jul. 7th, 2005|08:42 pm]
In amidst the talking heads, I was listening to a bit on security in NYC. I heard something that has fascinated me (and not in a good way).
The security expert, someone involved with the NYPD, said that the terrorists depend on predictable scenarios. A given terrorist cell will spend weeks, months, years in surveillance, observing locations, and that an operation will only proceed if they can be assured that the location will behave according to plan. Therefore, it is the strategy of the NYC that they don't follow a consistent plan for securing the city: one hour, there will be no police, next hour there could be two patrol cars. Barriers are moved, routes are changed. Apparently, this strategy frustrates the ability to plan and surveil locations, and is why the current battle on terror has been successful in NYC.
also: it apparently has only taken twelve hours to find a direct cause of this morning's unpleasantness- the Bush administration. This kind of bullshit drives me insane- and Eric Alterman's blog sums up my feelings nicely on the subject.
We don’t have remotely enough information about what took place in London or who did it to engage in sensible speculation about why it happened or what ought to be done as a result. Speed is the enemy of sensibility in such situations. (So let's all try to resist the urge to exploit the tragedy to demonstrate how right we were about everything in the first place and just show some respect, and compassion, for its victims.)
My feelings are with the people of London this evening.