I, who worked in the intelligence field and should know a threat assessment when I see one, confess that my B.S. detector went off big-time on the Dept. of Homeland Security's "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." It contains nothing that can be described as "actionable intelligence," i.e., information that identifies individuals or groups that may cause trouble in the future. The report reveals more about the biases of the authors than about the likely direction of domestic terrorism. We have learned from bitter experience in Iraq and Afghanistan that even insurgents of limited education are capable of adapting to new technologies and changing their tactics whenever it is expedient for them to do so. I'm inclined to agree with Lance Fairchok, when he wrote:
"If this DHS Assessment is an example of the kind of analysis our decision makers receive from our intelligence agencies, we are in far worse straits than I had imagined. It is amateurish, poorly written and its logic is absurdly shallow. It sounds as if it was cobbled together from bits and pieces of dated research to quickly fill a short notice requirement. I suspect it was not intended to inform or educate law enforcement first responders and decision makers, so much as it was designed to shape their perceptions in the information war the Left is waging on the American people."
Michael Reagan has a few choice words to say about this report, which is vaguely worded enough to entagle millions of people (so much for its predictive value).
UPDATE: Big Dog gives us an example of reductio ad absurdum by listing the many ways we fit the Dept. of Homeland Security's definition of "right-wing extremist."
No comments:
Post a Comment