Canadian policing plus (merged thread)

[Bill Moore]

David,

According to the news in North America, both the culprits in Canada (the shooter, and driver) planned to go to Syria and fight with ISIS, but had their passports revoked.

In the U.S. we had 3 teenage girls get as far as Germany in their attempt to join ISIS.

They determined quite some time ago the hatchet guy in NYC was attacking in the name of Islam, but kept it quiet for awhile.

It appears that in Canada and the guy in NYC, we're looking at your general loser, mentally ill, drug abuse, etc., who are looking for something to identify with, and for whatever reason ISIS's outreach program via the web and social media has an appeal.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/us/new...html?hpt=hp_t2

Thompson converted to Islam two years ago and then at some point self-radicalized, John Miller, the NYPD's deputy counterterrorism chief, told reporters Friday. Miller said Thompson was self-directed in his actions, and he had no affiliations with any particular group.

Thompson was unemployed, and police said his parents described their son as a depressed recluse who spent much of his time online.

A common theme in his social media presence was "anti-Western, anti-government and in some cases anti-white," Miller said.

On a side note, they just captured the guy who shot and killed to deputies in CA, so this is a tragic period for police in the U.S.. It always seems one shooting begets another, and I suspect media coverage has a fair amount to do with that. Sounds like the guy in California is nothing more than criminal scum, more tomorrow if it turns to be different.

[AmericanPride]

If, as in the case of Hasan, McVeigh, and others, we are dealing with a 'lone wolf' type, I think we should be less concerned about ISIS, etc and more concerned about the causes of self-radicalization. 37 of the 68 (54.41%) attacks in Canada between 1970 and 2013 were committed by individuals without any threat group affiliation. The targets for these attacks included, among other things, the Cuban embassy, an abortion clinic, a Kurdish cafe, oil and natural gas infrastructure, and a TV station. The most deadly attack in Canada was carried out by Sikhs while the most deadly 'lone wolf' attack in the U.S. was by a right-wing extremist (McVeigh). So ISIS (or Islamic groups in general) have no clear monopoly on 'lone wolves'. That's a threat that will exist with or without radical Islam's exhortation for violence.

Bill remarks about the 'general loser', 'mentally ill', 'drug abuse' - all of these are contributing factors and while I can't speak for Canada, the U.S. does not have any meaningful process for handling these problems in a constructive way. We think the 'general loser' "deserves it", while the mentally ill are often left to their own devices, and we lock up drug users to alienate them from the legal economy. We should not be surprised that in the social dysfunction and disolocation created as a result that there occasionally emerges a murderous rage in response. Whether it's dressed in white hate or radical Islam does not matter. We could do a better job in preventing violence than responding to it.

[Bill Moore]

AP

Agreed

The disgruntled homeless and others are an army in waiting that be mobilized by any number of groups.

[davidbfpo]

Just started to listen to a twelve minute podcast, with my emphasis:

This week, the world focused its attention on Canada, after two Canadian soldiers were killed in separate attacks. Neither of the killers had access to Canadian passports, and the RCMP says that played a role in the attacks. And earlier this month, Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said the government was considering revoking the passports of 80 people who have returned to Canada after associating with militant groups abroad. But by revoking passports from would-be terrorists who are still here, could we be putting Canadians in danger? Brent asks (SWC member) Rex Brynen, McGill University professor and terrorism expert.

Link:http://www.cbc.ca/day6/popupaudio.ht...Ids=2569955821

[davidbfpo]

David Gomez, an ex-FBI Agent (@AllThingsHLS on Twitter), has a short FP comment on dealing with the lone wolf / lone wolves threat:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...rorrism_canada

Short of time:

Finding a true lone wolf offender is like trying to find the proverbial needle in a haystack.

[AmericanPride]

David,

Thanks for sharing. In the era of big data though, I wonder how much of the challenges of searching for the 'lone wolf' can be minimized insofar as identifying and detecting a specific pattern of behavior that indicates a potential threat. Corporations have more or less mastered this as far as directed marketing campaigns (one amusing example being a father discovering his daughter's pregnancy through a retail corporation's mailed advertisements). If we know the causes of radicalization, we can in theory develop measures to identify and interdict individuals as they progress through the radicalization process.

The other problem is that law enforcement agencies are not intelligence agencies. Law enforcement is built around criminal conduct, mostly after the fact, and our civil rights and legal protections reflect this frame of thinking. Intelligence however is (mostly) in the business of predictive analysis, and this requires a very different kind of engagement within the operational area. The Threat Matrix by Garrett Graff has a chapter about the FBI's transformation from a criminal-procedural paradigm to a domain intelligence paradigm. Historically, the FBI trained its agents to investigate attacks after the fact, and the FBI by all accounts is very good at that. But intelligence requires casting a wide net, developing a sustained and engaged presence in the operational area, and a measure of risk-taking.

I think this goes back to process - despite the extensive academic research on this subject, the U.S. government does not have a systematic process to address this problem as a preventative effort. Instead, we wait for the next 'lone wolf' to attack and we sit around blaming each other for failure.

[Bill Moore]

AP

The FBI and large city police departments have intelligence sections. Furthermore the FBI has disrupted a number of lone wolf's over the past few years. I'm sure big data played a role, but I suspect good ole HUMINT played a larger role. Police in larger cities seem to be increasingly proactive. I doubt they have the resources to do so in smaller towns.

How proactive can we be though without becoming a police state? Terrorists don't pose a threat to our physical survival as a state, but they can significantly change the character of our country based on how we react. That is a threat to our Constitution, which we took an oath to defend. The challenge is finding the middle ground between protecting our people and defending our Constitution.