4 ms·

I think I agree with you sentiment, but let me ask this: If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Said differently, maybe it is working. If it w

by mbesto 4y ago

I think I agree with you sentiment, but let me ask this: If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Said differently, maybe it is working. If it was, what would be the way that you would know that it is working?

klyrs 4y ago
> If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Yes, because the feds brag about it nonstop on the rare occasions they actually nab somebody.
- feet 4y ago
  Exactly. Somehow we know how they use these systems for parallel construction yet we don't hear a peep about actual terrorists being stopped.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  Even when they were the ones that Planned, and started the process only to "swoop" in to save the day like an arsonist firefighter
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    No, so the fact that we see those over and over again is evidence that they have nothing to brag about.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      To me it is evidence we need massive reform in the FBI and several other Agencies, and a rebalance of entrapment laws to favor the citizenry not the government
  - CrazyPyroLinux 4y ago
    "FBI Foils FBI terror plot!" Happened in Michigan, too.
bhaney 4y ago
> what would be the way that you would know that it is working? Probably a decrease in successful terrorism attempts or an increase in thwarted terrorism attempts (with neither being attributed to something else instead). I don't think there's any value to this question though, since it can be used to justify literally anything. If a policy needs to prove its own value, then it should be constructed in a way that allows its value to be tracked.
a_techwriter_00 4y ago
At least in America, the relevant organization would be shouting their successes from the rooftops to get more budget, get more goodwill, and make careers on the back of that casework.
- dylan604 4y ago
  Our failures are known. Our successes are secret. --old intelligence agency saying Shouting successful secret missions just doesn't seem like something they would be doing as it could lead to the "enemy" learning ways and methods and what not. The only people they have to convince are the Gang of Eight.
  - lazide 4y ago
    Uh huh, keep drinking the coolaid. They had no issues publicizing Osama Bin Ladens assassination, and the most recent ones. Or the various drone assassinations. Plenty of ways to take credit without revealing sensitive info.
Karellen 4y ago
The number of successful prosecutions, with guilty verdicts and jail time, on offences under whichever anti-terror statutes you're measuring for effectiveness. If individual acts of terror are being prevented, but none of the people planning them are put in prison, and are free to walk the streets and try another plot, would you say those laws are effective? I wouldn't.
- celtain 4y ago
  Putting people in prison is a means to an end, not a goal itself. If anything, preventing violence without locking anyone up is even better than preventing it by keeping potential perpetrators under armed guard. Maybe on a longer time horizon it won't work as well, but it's already been 20 years since 9/11.
kodah 4y ago
The Heritage Foundation tracks this: https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/40-terror-plots-foiled-911-combating-complacency-the-long-war-terror https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/40-terror-plots-fo... As of 2011, the number was 40.
- mbesto 4y ago
  > As of 2011 From 2001 until 2011. Where is the number now? Also those are all public...where are the ones the CIA knows about?
- mbesto 4y ago
  > As of 2011, the number was 40. Is that high? Low? How many is that versus successful terrorist attacks?
  - nl 4y ago
    4 per year seems relatively high to me. They aren't minor plans either - they include carbombings, bombing buildings, targeted assassinations. There is one where someone was sending money to al-Qaeda in Kashmir. That seems the least serious (as in it wasn't a planned attack on US soil).
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- Spooky23 4y ago
  The one in Albany, NY was a joke. The “informant” was a questionable character whose long string of misdeeds, enabled by mysterious good fortune, culminated in the deaths of 20 people. Read this and contemplate using the Heritage Foundation as a source of truth in the future. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/limo-crash-ny-fbi-informant.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/limo-crash-ny-fbi-in...
  - kodah 4y ago
    I'm not a big fan of the Heritage Foundation, but nobody else tracks this statistic. On top that, it's better than they put this information in the clear, if journalists choose to track this in the future they at least have a list someone has been auditing. Lastly, instead of trying to find another source you chose to lecture me on mine, not knowing that there are no other sources. Maybe pack your high and mighty attitude up and put on your thinking cap next time.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pram 4y ago
Well, there's not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is sure doing its job.
thephyber 4y ago
This is an important concept for people to understand. All aspects of security (policing, counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, etc) are all fundamentally impossible to prove how effective measures taken are. Usually the best we can do is use a proxy measure or test pre/post.
- infamouscow 4y ago
  There would be media reports and court cases to point to if any of these measures were effective. As a reminder, virtually every school shooter was monitored or on a watchlist.
naasking 4y ago
> If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Said differently, maybe it is working. If it was, what would be the way that you would know that it is working? The government would never pass up an opportunity for good PR. They openly cheer when they assassinate foreign enemies don't forget, even when they're government officials.

by mbesto 4y ago

klyrs 4y ago

> If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Yes, because the feds brag about it nonstop on the rare occasions they actually nab somebody.

feet 4y ago
Exactly. Somehow we know how they use these systems for parallel construction yet we don't hear a peep about actual terrorists being stopped.
phpisthebest 4y ago
Even when they were the ones that Planned, and started the process only to "swoop" in to save the day like an arsonist firefighter
- pessimizer 4y ago
  No, so the fact that we see those over and over again is evidence that they have nothing to brag about.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    To me it is evidence we need massive reform in the FBI and several other Agencies, and a rebalance of entrapment laws to favor the citizenry not the government
- CrazyPyroLinux 4y ago
  "FBI Foils FBI terror plot!" Happened in Michigan, too.

bhaney 4y ago

> what would be the way that you would know that it is working? Probably a decrease in successful terrorism attempts or an increase in thwarted terrorism attempts (with neither being attributed to something else instead). I don't think there's any value to this question though, since it can be used to justify literally anything. If a policy needs to prove its own value, then it should be constructed in a way that allows its value to be tracked.

a_techwriter_00 4y ago

At least in America, the relevant organization would be shouting their successes from the rooftops to get more budget, get more goodwill, and make careers on the back of that casework.

dylan604 4y ago
Our failures are known. Our successes are secret. --old intelligence agency saying Shouting successful secret missions just doesn't seem like something they would be doing as it could lead to the "enemy" learning ways and methods and what not. The only people they have to convince are the Gang of Eight.
- lazide 4y ago
  Uh huh, keep drinking the coolaid. They had no issues publicizing Osama Bin Ladens assassination, and the most recent ones. Or the various drone assassinations. Plenty of ways to take credit without revealing sensitive info.

Karellen 4y ago

The number of successful prosecutions, with guilty verdicts and jail time, on offences under whichever anti-terror statutes you're measuring for effectiveness. If individual acts of terror are being prevented, but none of the people planning them are put in prison, and are free to walk the streets and try another plot, would you say those laws are effective? I wouldn't.

celtain 4y ago
Putting people in prison is a means to an end, not a goal itself. If anything, preventing violence without locking anyone up is even better than preventing it by keeping potential perpetrators under armed guard. Maybe on a longer time horizon it won't work as well, but it's already been 20 years since 9/11.

kodah 4y ago

The Heritage Foundation tracks this: https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/40-terror-plots-foiled-911-combating-complacency-the-long-war-terror https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/report/40-terror-plots-fo... As of 2011, the number was 40.

mbesto 4y ago
> As of 2011 From 2001 until 2011. Where is the number now? Also those are all public...where are the ones the CIA knows about?
mbesto 4y ago
> As of 2011, the number was 40. Is that high? Low? How many is that versus successful terrorist attacks?
- nl 4y ago
  4 per year seems relatively high to me. They aren't minor plans either - they include carbombings, bombing buildings, targeted assassinations. There is one where someone was sending money to al-Qaeda in Kashmir. That seems the least serious (as in it wasn't a planned attack on US soil).
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
Spooky23 4y ago
The one in Albany, NY was a joke. The “informant” was a questionable character whose long string of misdeeds, enabled by mysterious good fortune, culminated in the deaths of 20 people. Read this and contemplate using the Heritage Foundation as a source of truth in the future. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/limo-crash-ny-fbi-informant.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/limo-crash-ny-fbi-in...
- kodah 4y ago
  I'm not a big fan of the Heritage Foundation, but nobody else tracks this statistic. On top that, it's better than they put this information in the clear, if journalists choose to track this in the future they at least have a list someone has been auditing. Lastly, instead of trying to find another source you chose to lecture me on mine, not knowing that there are no other sources. Maybe pack your high and mighty attitude up and put on your thinking cap next time.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pram 4y ago

Well, there's not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is sure doing its job.

thephyber 4y ago

This is an important concept for people to understand. All aspects of security (policing, counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, etc) are all fundamentally impossible to prove how effective measures taken are. Usually the best we can do is use a proxy measure or test pre/post.

infamouscow 4y ago
There would be media reports and court cases to point to if any of these measures were effective. As a reminder, virtually every school shooter was monitored or on a watchlist.

naasking 4y ago

> If terrorism was being stopped, would you even know it? Said differently, maybe it is working. If it was, what would be the way that you would know that it is working? The government would never pass up an opportunity for good PR. They openly cheer when they assassinate foreign enemies don't forget, even when they're government officials.