FBI Agent Stresses Citizen Involvement (war on terror, homeland security)

The Pilot ^ | June 22, 2003 | MATTHEW MORIARTY

[Poohbah]

No, but we want to ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones against a terrorist or a terroist act...like the poor bastards on those 9-11 aircraft who couldn't fight off some lowlifes with boxcutters.

The one group of passengers that fought almost succeeded.

Also, please note that, if everyone can tote guns...so can the terrorists. Firearms favor the few and coordinated over the many who don't even know each others' names.

[eno_]

THe FBI could take a better attitude. They need to earn the trust of the people. To this point, they have squandered it.

[Oztrich Boy]

Good grief, talk about fighting the last frickin' war...

Whereas “You are the ones that are going to give us the information that’s going to prevent the next terrorist attack,” Flynn said. is, as has been noted, fighting six wars ago: World War I - didn't work then either.

[ExSoldier]

"The FBI can't be everywhere at once and you have no idea whether an agent believes in the 2nd amendment, in fact, I would think most of them do."

And you would be wrong. Used to be that most street cops believed in the right of citizens to keep and bear (own and carry) arms. Not for a long time has that been true and certainly not in the ranks of federal law enforcement. Remember that these bright eyed young "patriots" who wish to be the 21st century's version of "Elliot Ness" are mostly products of the public schools and their anti-freedom/anti-Bill of Rights AGENDA all the while vociferously advancing the agenda of the United Nations and the coming globalization of the world under one common government...can you guess who loses here???

[Jeff Gordon]

Have the terrorists who killed Rnady Weaver's wife and kid at Ruby Ridge been prosecuted yet? The agency really does not have to look very far to find terrorists.

[ahadams2]

nope, not fighting the last war, just knocking down a strawman. More than one life has been saved in Israel by security guards and other armed nongovernmental sorts taking out terrorists before they can blow themselves up among a larger group of people.

So, I take it you would prefer to wait until one or more homicide bombers take out large crowds, before arming trained citizens to prevent further occurances of same? my, talk about fighting the last war...or if we count the current problems in Israel, then fighting the war before that...

[FairOpinion]

"The Fibbies can take a flying leap."

---

They have undergone a serious change of attitude since 9-11.

Also, would you personally want to be responsible for not foiling the next attack, because you didn't report something suspicious, which may have prevented it?

Obviously one wants to apply common sense, nevertheless the best way to prevent attacks is for everyone to be vigilant and report suspicious things, activities and people.

[wcbtinman]

"...if everyone can tote guns...so can the terrorists."

Well. that's a pearl of wisdom if I ever saw one.

Let me give you one: Mutually Assured Destruction worked like a charm for several decades, and we didn't know their names either. If the terrorists know that any given person on an airplane may be armed, they are less likely to start something with a greatly diminished chance of success. Unlike the present situatiion where they knew that all of the passengers were unarmed.

As an armed passenger, I'll be happy to one of the few.

[Indrid Cold]

Great. Now where's my government-issued M1 Garand?

[ExSoldier]

"If the terrorist wishes to commit suicide, preferably by setting off a bomb concealed on his person...how would everyone having a gun stop him?"

It has already happened last summer in Israel. A private citizen and her husband were shopping in a crowded grocery store in Tel Aviv when the citizen noticed a Palastinian wearing a long floor length coat walk in and position himself in a corner near a large concentration of people. She remarked on the oddity and began to draw her lawfully concealed firearm, just as the terrorist opened the coat revealing the explosives strapped to his body and his hand moving to the detonator. She (the wife) completed her draw, and smoothly put two into the forehead of the suicide bomber killing him instantly before he could set off the device.

She was a hero, and the mayors of Tel Aviv and Jurusalem both continued to encourage citizens to both be alert and carry concealed firearms. The amusing thing is that for the western (LIBERAL) press, this private citizen was magically transformed into "Israeli Forces." The thought that terrorism can be stopped by private and armed citizens is just too much for these CLYMERS to stomach; so they alter the story.

[FairOpinion]

Nobody said anything about being against arming citizens. The point is that if a terrorist shows up and sets off a nuke, all the guns in the world aren't going to help. But if someone tells the FBI about some suspicious activities and people, then they may be able to get those people BEFORE they are at the point of setting off a nuke.

Some people refuse to realize how serious the threat is.

Or what good would guns do against some guy who pumps cyanide into a convention center. How would you even know how did it, unless the plot is discovered before it's being implemented.

[Poohbah]

Let me give you one: Mutually Assured Destruction worked like a charm for several decades, and we didn't know their names either.

Mutually Assured Destruction worked against the national command authorities of the US and the USSR, neither of whom were under the impression that death in battle was a sure ticket to 72 virgins. Kindly recalibrate your expectations to "rational" behavior from terrorists.

If the terrorists know that any given person on an airplane may be armed, they are less likely to start something with a greatly diminished chance of success.

How so? The terrorists will have the advantages of surprise. They will know who their friends are--anyone else is an enemy.

You will not have that luxury.

Unlike the present situatiion where they knew that all of the passengers were unarmed.

It wasn't the armed/unarmed criteria that let the terrorists know that they could easily do this--it was the fact that the odds favored remaining calm. No one had used an airliner as a cruise missile before.

As an armed passenger, I'll be happy to one of the few.

You'll be one of the many--you will have NO idea who your friends are, and precious little time to figure it out.

OK, big boy, here's your first test: Two guys spring up from the front of the cabin, guns coming out.

To your left, an Arab-looking gentleman reaches inside his coat.

All you have to do is figure which, if any, of these people to shoot. And you have about two seconds to do it.

Tick...tick...

[Oztrich Boy]

Not talking to you.

Think you should take it up with poohbah. He's the poster who says armed citizens reacting to an actual threat won't work, instead we should all inform the FBI about anyone who looks a bit Arab.

I wonder how that works in Israel?

[Poohbah]

It has already happened last summer in Israel.

What is the success rate vs. the failure rate for this?

[Poohbah]

I'm not opposed to armed citizens in the slightest--I'm merely pointing out that they aren't a panacea, and that other methods IN CONJUNCTION WITH armed citizens are going to be needed. Thank you.

[ExSoldier]

"Note to everyone: the article said NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING about guns, now all of a sudden everyone is bashing the FBI for "wanting to take our guns". HELLOOOO!"

Hello yourself. Just who took over for the failed raids at Waco and Ruby Ridge for the BATF and the Marshalls service at Ruby Ridge? Just who does Lon Horiuchi work for (Horiuchi is the sniper who assassinated the wife holding her infant son in her arms at Ruby Ridge). Although he was indicted for her death by an Idaho grand jury, the Clinton/Reno team moved the case to Federal Court where it was promptly thrown out. He was at Waco, too. He is a member in good standing of the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team (HRT).

Don't you DARE tell me or anybody else that the war on terrorism as it relates to the FBI, BATF, or any other FEDERAL law enforcement agency has nothing to do with an orchestrated desire that is ongoing within the federal government that would love to see the citizens of this country suffering unilateral personal disarmament!

[FairOpinion]

"He's the poster who says armed citizens reacting to an actual threat won't work, instead we should all inform the FBI about anyone who looks a bit Arab."
---

As I also mentioned, how will it help if everyone in an auditorium is armed, when cyanide, or anthrax is piped in via the air conditioning?

[ahadams2]

I agree that there are those who refuse to understand that the threat is real. Of course eventually the feds are going to slip and one will get through (a la 9-11-01). Even after that, given a relatively good recovery, there will be a great deal of denial. In my darker moments I keep hoping they'll take out someplace like San Francisco or the ritzier parts of New York City, just because it would cut down on the noise from the pseudo-leftists with money.

None the less both of your scenarios appear (at least to me, and I've been out of the biz since 1990) to be low probability...well less a nuke on a cargo ship, but even that has problems. OTOH a dirty bomb would be more likely in the US and even more likely in the EU, especially since they see themselves as 'above all this', while whistling past their own Moslem populations. Also given that the bad guys wanted to play around with one of those stupid hotels that has their (chlorinated) swimming pool up on the roof next to all of their ventilation equipment, they might be able to do something flashy, except how would they be martyred? ...hmm...maybe by sniping at the emergency service personnel? dunno... anyway one can always come up with options that preclude immediate prevention - after all that's what Osama bin wahoo is all about, none the less we've also seen that most such folks lack much in the way of originality. Because of this (remember all those unused suicide vests found in Iraq?) we can be certain that they will try to use traditional methods (the truck bombs in Saudi Arabia, f'rinstance) at least some of which can be stopped by armed citizens.

[FairOpinion]

I never said, neither did the article that being armed is a bad thing, it may help in some situations, BUT by its very nature terrorism is not preventable in MOST cases, by having guns.

But terrorist attacks have been prevented, because people saw suspicious people taking suspicious video tapes, or overhearing something, which they then relayed to the authorities.

I remember a news item, which didn't really get a lot of coverage, that terrorists were going to set off a bomb in a store frequented by US military in Germany. A woman who worked there was friends with the wife of the terrorist, who warned her not to go to work on a particular day. The woman had enough sense to report it to the authorities, instead of just brushing it off, and it turned out the threat was very real. Yes, they were a bunch of Muslims.

[ahadams2]

LOL!! guy you've got to stop getting your firearms training from television shows. (hint: if you see people running with their finger on the trigger, or if you see them firing without using their sights, you are watching people who don't know what they are doing.)

Here's the question YOU need to answer: you are unarmed because you believe that being armed will not help. Your aircraft has just been taken over by three armed men speaking a foreign language. two of them have forced their way into the cockpit using a small amount of plastic explosive to take out the lock on the cockpit door (this is possible with something that would be smaller than one of those 'silly putty' eggs the kids play with). a couple of guys try to rush the one remaining guarding the cockpit door and both are shot down resulting in two additional wounded people. what do you do?

other than die, I mean.