From the Archives: Not all terrible acts are perpetrated by terrorists (1996)

This article originally appeared in the Austin American-Statesman on July 31, 1996.

Not all terrible acts are perpetrated by terrorists

Richard E. Sincere Jr.

Without a doubt, the bomb that exploded in Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta early Saturday was the work of an evil person with malicious intentions. A businesswoman was killed, and 111 others injured. Law enforcement officials are justified in using all legal means at their disposal to find and prosecute the murderer.

It is, however, troubling that both law- enforcement agencies and the news media are treating this crime as as a terrorist event. Not all mass murders are acts of terrorism. Not all bombs are planted by terrorists.

Terrorism is fundamentally a political act, to advance a cause. Terrorists mean to create tyranny, either directly or indirectly, so that the political order that they prefer can take the place of the current one. Terrorists can be rebels seeking to overthrow a state; states seeking to overthrow the international order; or states seeking to maintain privilege for rulers and stifle dissent among the people. In every case, the motivation for terrorism is explicitly political.

Whoever planted the bomb in Atlanta was most likely a "lone wolf" who was seeking some sort of personal affirmation by seeing his morbid act reported on television and in the newspapers. He was no more a terrorist than Jeffrey Dahmer, whose murderous and cannibalistic behavior was disgusting and uncivilized, but had no political content.

The danger of elevating the tragedy at the Olympics to terrorist status is that it will give the U.S. government more excuses to erode our constitutional liberties. Already this year a new terrorism law took effect which limits the rights of foreign nationals to appeal deportation proceedings; which grants the FBI and other government agencies broad new authority to listen to our telephone calls; and which limits the right of habeas corpus for those accused of capital crimes. In short, it shrinks the Bill of Rights to a skeleton of what it should be. Another new law, "justified" by the Atlanta bombing, might rip the guts out of our freedoms of association, dissent, and privacy.

Real terrorism is when the Irish Republican Army takes a sledgehammer to the kneecaps of a suspected informer in order to enforce its will in a Catholic neighborhood. Real terrorism is when the Libyan government plants a bomb in a Pan Am jetliner that explodes over Lockerbie, Scotland. Real terrorism is when the U.S. government uses tanks to knock down the homestead of religious dissenters in Waco, resulting in the deaths of dozens. Real terrorism is when Palestinian gunmen kidnap and murder Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics.

It ill-serves us to redefine simple crimes as terrorism when the result is expanded government power and shrunken human liberty. Such redefinition also, in a perverse sense, glorifies the criminal when our goal should be shame and punishment.

Let's not over-react to the Atlanta bombing. If we do, far more than 112 people will be harmed.

Sincere is the author of "The Politics of Sentiment" and other works.

From the Archives: Virginia businessman Tim Donner relates ‘eerie’ memory of 9/11 in New York City

Virginia businessman Tim Donner relates ‘eerie’ memory of 9/11 in New York City
September 10, 2012 7:38 PM MST

Like all Americans who were old enough to comprehend what happened on Tuesday morning, September 11, 2001, Northern Virginia businessman Tim Donner has vivid memories of that day. His recollection, however, includes what he calls a “chilling coincidence” that borders on the eerie.

Donner is the owner of Horizons Television in Great Falls, Virginia, which specializes in documentary, educational and promotional video production, and founder of One Generation Away, an educational and public policy organization. He was a candidate for the U.S. Senate before withdrawing from the race and endorsing Republican nominee George F. Allen. He also contributes commentary to the online journal of news and opinion, Bearing Drift.

It was his role as a video producer that placed Donner and his wife in Manhattan on the morning of September 11, 2001.

Remember the Regency

As he related the story to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner in a telephone interview, “[we] were in New York on business that day doing a historical documentary for a longtime client and we were staying at the Regency Hotel.”

The significance of the name of the hotel and “why that fits into the story,” he added parenthetically, would become clear “in just a little bit.”

Continuing, he explained, he and his wife got their “gear together for a video shoot that day and as we head out the door, the doorman at the hotel says a plane just hit the World Trade Center.”

Unperturbed by that news, Donner figured “that perhaps this was a light plane, similar to one that had flown into the White House months before that, so we didn’t make much of it.”

So they went about their business and, once they arrived at their client’s office, he recalled, “we sat there and watched on TV live as the second plane hit the World Trade Center.”

‘Chill up my spine’

At that point, he said, like so many others, “we realized we were under attack and at that moment it struck me -- it struck me hard, it sent a chill up my spine -- that I had been to the Regency Hotel [just] three or four times in my life.”

His first visit to the Regency, he said, was when he was about eight years old: “The first time that I had been there was having lunch with my grandparents on November 22, 1963.”

On that occasion, Donner said, “a waiter came up and told my grandmother, ‘The president has just been shot.’”

Two seminal moments

Tim Donner

The spinal chill he felt eleven years ago, he explained, “came from the sudden realization that I was in exactly the same spot on November 22, 1963, when John F. Kennedy was shot and killed, that I was on September 11, when we were attacked in New York and Washington.”

Those dates, he went on, “are the two seminal moments that anybody our age will remember for the rest of their lives. They’ll remember where they were and what they were doing.”

For Donner, “this is a coincidence of incalculable proportions,” he said, “because you couldn’t even set any odds upon being in the same place for both of those events, especially when it was some random hotel that I’d not been to more than three or four times in my life.”

That coincidence, he concluded, “was eerie, to say the least, because the chances of that happening were so astronomical as to be off the charts. The realization of that just makes one wonder about larger metaphysical questions.”



Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on September 10, 2012. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Updated: Gary Johnson and Cliff Hyra React to #Charlottesville

Gary Johnson

Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian Party's nominee for President in 2012 and 2016, issued a statement on the afternoon of August 14 in reaction to the events this past weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Johnson posted his remarks on Facebook:

Racism killed people in Charlottesville this weekend. That is as un-American as it gets.

In the nation our Founders created, even a tiny minority of vile and repugnant 'demonstrators' enjoys the right to express racist white-supremacist evil.

BUT, the rest of us -- the overwhelming majority -- have the right, and I believe, the obligation, to condemn racism of every form. And when racist hate becomes violence and murder, we must respond with nothing less than the full force of the law.

Late Saturday night, Cliff Hyra, the Libertarian Party's 2017 nominee for Governor of Virginia, issued a similar statement, also on Facebook, reacting with shock and disbelief to the carnage precipitated by the presence of neo-Nazis, unabashed racists, and Confederate sympathizers in Charlottesville:

Virginia gubernatorial candidate Cliff Hyra

Horrific and tragic events in Charlottesville today. White nationalists and neo-Nazis threaten the liberty of us all, and as Virginians we must stand united against them. My heart goes out to the victims of the brutal terrorist attack and their families. I wish a swift and full recovery to those hospitalized, and offer my deepest condolences to the families and friends of those who lost their lives.

It is shocking and unbelievable to me that a political disagreement over statues could serve as an excuse for violent combat and heinous murder. I am heartbroken today, and also fearful for the future of our country and our commonwealth. We must act now to root out and extirpate all support for political violence. Peaceful discussion and political action are the only way forward.

Update, August 15: Gary Johnson expanded on his thoughts about last weekend's events and their aftermath in an article for The Jack News headlined "In the Wake of Charlottesville, Let’s Look for Solutions and Not Blame."

From the Archives: Journalist Christian Caryl investigates Boston's 'lone-wolf' Tsarnaev brothers

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 7, 2013. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

In the June 6 [2013] edition of the New York Review of Books, veteran journalist Christian Caryl has contributed an investigative piece about Tamerlan and Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the alleged Boston Marathon bombers.

The article, called “The Bombers' World,” looks into the family background, friendships, neighbors, and remote influences on the Tsarnaev brothers, who came to the United States from the former Soviet Union more than a decade ago but who still had ties to their ancestral homeland of Chechnya.

As Caryl explains the family's arrival in his article:

The Tsarnaevs arrived in the US after a brief stay in Dagestan, another Russian republic that abuts Chechnya, but they had spent most of their lives in the Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan, where Anzor Tsarnaev, the father, had worked for a while in the local prosecutor’s office. But when a new war broke out in Chechnya in 1999, Anzor said, the Kyrgyz authorities (perhaps under pressure from the Kremlin) purged the government’s ranks of anyone with a Chechen background. Anzor lost his job, and for a time, he said, he was even thrown in jail, where his guards subjected him to beatings. It was this abuse that served as the basis for the family’s (ultimately successful) application for refugee status in the US.

The Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner interviewed Christian Caryl about his investigations into the Tsarnaev brothers and their backgrounds after he delivered a lecture about his new book, Strange Rebels: 1979 and the Birth of the 21st Century, at the Stimson Center in Washington.

'Something of an outlier'

Caryl, who is a fluent Russian speaker, explained that he had “talked to people who knew the Tsarnaevs extremely well – indeed intimately, I would say.”

He also “examined their websites [and] their use of social media in some detail.”

That led him to conclude that “we're dealing with perhaps something of an outlier” among terrorist groups and individuals.

“In many respects,” Caryl said, the Tsarnaevs' “case is so unusual and so different that we may not see exactly this same configuration in the future.”

What he found “quite striking,” he said in the interview, as well as “perhaps very threatening,” is the existence of “lone-wolf terrorists who form their convictions almost in isolation from people around them.”

'The Internet is enough'

Rather than being taught by a mentor or someone with more experience or learning, for these lone wolves “it really has so much to do with the Internet and with” what Caryl calls a “virtual community of jihadis on the Internet.”

As a consequence, he explained, “you almost don't need people around you talking about this stuff anymore. The Internet is enough.”

In the case of the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing, he said, “What's fascinating really about the Tsarnaevs is the isolation in which they became what they became.”

That, he concluded, “has somewhat ominous significance for the kind of terrorism we're going to see in the future.”

A question that has been asked many times since the Boston terrorist attack is whether both Dzhokar Tsarnaev and his elder brother were both radicalized as jihadists.

Based on his research, Caryl said, “I think the younger brother is very much a story of the influence of the older brother.”

Older brother's influence

This, he explained, is “the one aspect of this story that really is very Chechen, characteristically Chechen,” – that is, “the fact that the older brother had this enormous influence within the family. That's very characteristic. In other ways, the Tsarnaevs had very little to do with Chechen culture and the whole Chechen story.”

Tamerlan's influence on Dzhokar “sticks out” as characteristically Chechen, Caryl continued, because “in Chechen families, it's the oldest son who has enormous authority and wields enormous influence within the family.”

In the case of the Tsarnaevs, he said, “we're dealing with a case where [Tamerlan] lorded it over his younger brother to really an extraordinary degree and ultimately [to a] fateful extent.”

Suggested Links

GOP candidate Ken Cuccinelli says no to including Libertarian nominee in debates
Former Congressman Tom Davis comments on IRS scandal with warning for GOP
GOP lieutenant governor candidate E. W. Jackson 'certainly used marijuana'
Gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe hosts campaign kickoff event at PVCC
James Robinson discusses 'why nations fail' at George Mason University

From the Archives: Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on November 1, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa

The United States should “engage more with Africa,” says U.S. Senate candidate Robert Sarvis, because “there's a lot of human potential there.”

Sarvis is the Libertarian Party of Virginia's nominee challenging incumbent Democrat Mark Warner and Republican Party nominee Ed Gillespie in the election that takes place on Tuesday, November 4.

An economist and lawyer, Sarvis is the author of various policy papers, including "Understanding Public Pension Debt: A State-by-State Comparison" (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2014) and "The Fiscal Health of the States" (Mercatus Center at George Mason University, coauthored with Jeffrey Miron, 2012).

Wealth creation and prosperity
The LP Senate candidate spoke about U.S. policy toward Africa in an exclusive, one-on-one interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner.

Africa, he said, “needs to move towards a policy that is going to enable wealth creation and prospering societies. [Americans] know how to do that. We know how to have growing economies through property rights and the rule of law, contract rights and things like that.”

He added that, however, there is currently “too much corruption over there, there's too much violence.” To counterbalance those conditions, “everything we can do to help public policy there is a good thing.”

Sarvis emphasized that he does not think “propping up governments through foreign aid is the right way to do it.” Instead, “free trade is the best thing that we can do to help Africa and to help countries around the world,” where workers “just want to compete on the global marketplace through wages and through working hard. Our trade barriers,” he said, “are one of the contributors to global poverty.”

Reauthorizing AGOA
His support for free trade, Sarvis said, inclines him to support the reauthorization of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) when it comes up for a vote in Congress in 2015.

“I would certainly prefer a broader policy of just reducing or removing tariffs, period, full stop. I think that's the right thing to do,” he stated.

“All people around the world should have the ability to compete on the global marketplace, and our consumers -- the American people – benefit from reducing tariffs. That's my ideal policy,” he explained, adding that “we'll see how amenable the Senate and the House of Representatives are to that kind of proposal.”

Asked about the expanding military presence of the United States in Africa through AFRICOM and the growing threats of terrorist groups like Boko Haram and al-Shabaab, Sarvis suggested that U.S. policy should be more circumspect.

Governments in Africa “know what they're dealing with and they don't want the terrorist groups to metastasize” any more than the United States does.

“But the problem,” he pointed out, “is that we have created a security umbrella and made implicit promises that mean that [those governments] are not doing enough to maintain their own security.”

What that means, he explained, is that “we're always, generation after generation, having to go in and provide for the security for them. This is something that has to end unless we want to be paying trillions of dollars over the next generation.”

Drugs in Africa
The role of African countries as transit ports in the international illicit drug trade is something that also concerns Sarvis, and he has a solution for it.

“Our drug war has undermined the rule of law and civil society in Latin America,” he noted. “That's also happening in Africa. It's also undermined our efforts in Afghanistan over the past decade.”

Whether in Africa or elsewhere, he explained, “the problem is our war on drugs and anything that we can do to move away from our prohibitionist mentality is going to undermine the violent gangs and organized criminal enterprises that we created” through current drug policy dating back several decades.

Sarvis said that legalizing marijuana in just two states, Colorado and Washington, has already had an adverse effect on drug cartels operating in Mexico.

“We can have beneficial effects around the world by changing our policy at home on drugs,” he asserted.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Virginia U.S. Senate candidates react to Fourth Circuit gay marriage ruling
GOP can regain control of Senate in 2014, says strategist Grover Norquist
Virginia Senator Mark Warner assesses situation in Iraq and the Middle East
Virginia Senator Mark Warner discusses budget issues, independent voters
'Republicans have learned a lesson' says GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie

Original URL:  http://www.examiner.com/article/virginia-senate-hopeful-robert-sarvis-talks-about-u-s-policy-toward-africa

At start of Sochi Olympics, State Department issues Russia travel warning

On the same day as the opening ceremonies of the 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia, the U.S. Department of State distributed a travel alert that, while couched in diplomatic language, seems designed to discourage American citizens from attending the Olympics this month.

Here's how the travel alert -- which I received by email -- begins:

The Department of State alerts U.S. citizens planning to attend the 2014 Olympic Games in Russia that they should remain attentive regarding their personal security at all times. The Olympic and Paralympic Games will take place in Sochi, Russia, from February 7 to March 16, 2014. This travel alert replaces the alert issued on January 24, 2014, and provides updated information on reported threats against the Games, cyber-security risks, identification requirements, and lodging. This Travel Alert expires on March 24, 2014. Full information about the Olympic and Paralympic games for U.S. citizen visitors is available on the Sochi Fact Sheet and the Country Specific Information for the Russian Federation on our website, travel.state.gov. The Department strongly recommends that all U.S. citizens residing or traveling abroad enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) in order to receive pertinent safety and security information.

The State Department advisory goes on to note potential problems with medical care, hotel room availability, terrorism, crime, and cybersecurity and none of the language is likely to promote confidence in anyone's capacity to remain safe in Sochi:

MEDICAL CARE: The Olympics are the first large-scale event to be held in Sochi and medical capacity and infrastructure in the region are untested for handling the volume of visitors expected for the Olympics. Medical care in many Russian localities differs substantially from Western standards due to differing practices and approaches to primary care. Travelers should consider purchasing private medical evacuation and/or repatriation insurance.

Western Russia (Source: Central Intelligence Agency)

LODGING: There may be shortages of hotel rooms during the Olympics. Some hotels are still under construction, and there are reports that some rooms booked in advance have not been available upon arrival. Advertised rates for standard rooms are currently $300-1,000 per night.

TERRORISM: Large-scale public events such as the Olympics present an attractive target for terrorists, and the U.S. government continues to monitor reported threats of potential terrorist attacks in Sochi or in Russia in general. Acts of terrorism, including bombings and hostage takings, continue to occur in Russia, particularly in the North Caucasus region. Between October 15 and December 30, 2013, there were three suicide bombings targeting public transportation in the city of Volgograd (600 miles from Sochi), two of which occurred within the same 24-hour period. In early January 2014, media reports emerged about the possible presence of so-called "black widow" suicide bombers in Sochi. These reports have not been corroborated, and the U.S. government continues to seek further information. Other bombings over the past 10-15 years occurred at Russian government buildings, airports, hotels, tourist sites, markets, entertainment venues, schools, and residential complexes. There have also been large-scale attacks on public transportation including subways, buses, trains, and scheduled commercial flights, in the same time period. On January 11, 2014 Russia implemented a "no liquids" policy for carry-on bags on flights originating within Russia in response to potential security threats against commercial aircraft. In line with the Government of Russia's actions, on February 6, 2014, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration implemented similar precautionary measures for direct flights between the United States and Russia.

In July 2013, Doku Umarov, the head of the Caucasus Emirate (an organization the United States designated as a terrorist organization in 2010, and known in Russian as the Imirat Kavkaz or IK) released a video message rescinding prior directions not to attack civilians and calling for attacks on the Winter Olympics in Sochi. The Caucasus Emirate is responsible for many of the aforementioned attacks. The group has targeted civilians, as indirect supporters of the government, including through attacks on a ski resort, metro system, high-speed rail, airport, and a theater. Westerners have not specifically been targeted, but are viewed by IK as complicit in the Russian government's efforts to control the North Caucasus region. In January 2014, another video was released by a radical Islamist group claiming responsibility for the Volgograd bombings and promising "a present for tourists" in connection with the Olympic Games in Sochi.

Travelers to Sochi should expect increased police presence and enhanced security measures in and around the Olympic venues. There is no indication of a specific threat to U.S. institutions or citizens, but U.S. citizens should be aware of their personal surroundings and follow good security practices. U.S. citizens are urged to remain vigilant and exercise good judgment and discretion when using any form of public transportation. When traveling, U.S. citizens may wish to provide a friend, family member, or coworker a copy of their itinerary.

The U.S. Embassy will continue to monitor the security situation in Sochi throughout the Olympics. In the event the U.S. government receives information of any specific and credible threat, the Department of State will immediately provide information to the public. Information about potential threats to safety and security can be found on the Embassy's website and the Department of State's travel website. Individuals who have enrolled in STEP will receive this information directly via email.

CRIME: U.S. citizens planning to attend the Games in Sochi should remain alert regarding their personal security at all times. Criminal activity in Sochi is similar to other cities of comparable size. However, major events such as the Olympic Games are a prime opportunity for criminal elements to target tourists, and travelers should be alert to the possibility of mugging, pick pocketing, theft, and harassment. Travelers should avoid going out alone at night and carrying large amounts of money or other valuables. Since cash may be the only accepted form of payment outside Olympic venues, consider keeping money in a hotel safe or dividing money and placing it in several different locations on your person. Purses, wallets, cell phones, and electronics should be secured in public, especially while traveling on buses, trains, or other forms of public transportation. Travelers should only use marked taxi services and prearrange transportation through hotel concierge or other reputable services whenever possible. If you are stopped by the police, you may ask to see the officer's identification. Photocopies of passports, visas, credit cards, and other important documents should be kept in a secure location so proper notifications can be made if original documents are lost or stolen.

CYBER SECURITY: U.S. travelers should be aware of cyber security threats and understand that they have no expectation of privacy when sharing sensitive or personal information utilizing Russian electronic communication networks.

Finally, the State Department travel warning notes that the Russian police have a "papers please!" policy, that freedom of expression is limited, and that Russia is not a welcoming environment for gay people:

IDENTIFICATION: Russian police officers have the authority to stop people and request identity and travel documents at any time and without cause. Due to the possibility of random document checks by police, U.S. citizens are strongly advised to carry at all times their original passports, Russian visas, hotel registration, and migration cards (issued at the airport upon entry into Russia.)

PUBLIC DEMONSTRATIONS: U.S. citizens should avoid large crowds in areas that lack enhanced security measures. Use caution in any areas where protests, demonstrations, or other public disturbances are taking place. Demonstrations intended to be peaceful can develop quickly and unpredictably, sometimes turning violent.

On January 10, Vice Prime Minister Dmitriy Kozak announced that the Sochi authorities have determined that the village of Khost, located seven miles from the Olympic venues, will be the designated area for political demonstrations during the Winter Olympics. Demonstrations must be unrelated to the Olympics and the organizers must receive permission prior to the event from the regional authorities of the Ministry of Interior and the Federal Security Service (FSB). It is also worth noting that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Charter states "no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas."

LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER (LGBT) ISSUES: In June 2013, Russia's State Duma passed a law banning the "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations" to minors. The U.S. government understands that this law applies to both Russian citizens and foreigners in Russia. Russian citizens found guilty of violating the law could face a fine of up to 100,000 rubles ($3,100). Foreign citizens face similar fines, up to 14 days in jail, and deportation. The law makes it a crime to promote LGBT equality in public, but lacks concrete legal definitions for key terms. Russian authorities have indicated a broad interpretation of what constitutes "LGBT propaganda," and provided vague guidance as to which actions will be interpreted by authorities as "LGBT propaganda." LGBT travelers should review the State Department's LGBT Travel Information page.

What Were the Top 10 Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner Stories in 2013?

Over at Examiner.com, I have posted a listicle featuring the top ten stories reported by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner during 2013.

I used Google Analytics to provide the statistics and generate the top-ten list. Technically, the article I listed as number 10 was number 11.

The reason for that is that the article that came in ninth, according to Google Analytics, was originally published in November 2010. It's an interview I conducted with author and documentary filmmaker Mary McDonagh Murphy at the Virginia Film Festival that year, when she presented Hey, Boo: Harper Lee & To Kill a Mockingbird.  (That film covers the same ground as Murphy's 2010 book, Scout, Atticus, and Boo: A Celebration of To Kill a Mockingbird.)

I suspect that the staying power of that three-year-old article, "Filmmaker: To Kill a Mockingbird was ‘ammunition in the civil rights movement'," is largely the result of web searches by high-school students doing research for a term paper about Harper Lee's famous novel or its well-regarded movie version.

Since just nine of the top ten stories for 2013 were actually published in 2013, I decided to skip number nine and include number 11 to reflect more accurately the events of this year.

Here's part of my summary of the 2013 top ten. I'll omit the "number one" article for now. If you want to see that story and be as surprised by it as I was, click here.

Virginia politics, the 1963 Kennedy assassination, humorist Tina Fey, marijuana legalization, liquor laws, and the Boston Marathon bombers dominated the most popular stories reported by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner during 2013.

Given that 2013 was a gubernatorial election year in Virginia, it comes as no surprise that articles about Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe (now governor-elect) and his Republican rival Ken Cuccinelli drew a large number of views. Cuccinelli, in fact, was the subject of three of the top-ten stories, although Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis entered the top ten only in an interview about the election with political scientist Larry Sabato. Marijuana-smoking lieutenant governor candidate E.W. Jackson (R) also made the list.

The JFK assassination was a trending topic on Twitter and Google through much of November, and an interview with Lee Harvey Oswald's co-worker ranked third. (An interview with another assassination witness just missed the cut, at twelfth among 2013 stories.)

Publishing this top-ten list continues a tradition I began in December 2011.  That first yearly list was divided into three parts published over three days: Part I, Part II, and Part III.  The second annual top-ten list, in 2012, was slimmed down into a single article published on the last day of the year.

May 2, 1945: Harry Truman Confirms Adolf Hitler's Death

Last night, as anyone not living under one of Geico's rocks knows, President Barack Obama announced the killing of al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden by U.S. forces in Abbottabad, Pakistan, where he had been living in a luxurious villa belying his claimed ascetic lifestyle.

Bin Laden was actually killed on May 2, Pakistani time, even though the official announcement was made late in the evening of May 1, Washington time.

As it happens, 66 years ago today, President Harry Truman held a press conference in the White House, in which he talked about a number of matters related to the end of World War II -- among others, he announced that Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson had accepted the position as chief prosecutor in what became known as the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi war criminals.

Almost as an afterthought, Truman told the gathered reporters that Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was dead. He had committed suicide on April 30 and rumors of his death had circulated since then, but there had been no confirmation up to that point.

Here is the relevant section of the transcript of Truman's news conference that day:

[20.] Q. The State Department recapitulation of the peace negotiations ends on the note that the
Swedish Count Bernadotte came back from Germany yesterday, after having delivered the last
message to Himmler and had no reply. Has there been a reply since yesterday ?

THE PRESIDENT. There has not been a reply. The release of the State Department
stands just as it is.

[21.] Q. Mr. President, would you care to comment on the death of Adolf Hitler reported, or
Mussolini?

THE PRESIDENT. Well, of course, the two principal war criminals will not have to
come to trial; and I am very happy they are out of the way.

Q. Well, does that mean, sir, that we know officially that Hitler is dead?

THE PRESIDENT. Yes.

Q. Do we know how he died, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT. No, we do not.

Q. Mr. President, I didn't quite get that. Is it official? This is confirmation that Hitler is dead?

THE PRESIDENT. We have the best--on the best authority possible to obtain at this
time that Hitler is dead. But how he died we are not-we are not familiar with the details as yet.

Q. Could you name the authority, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT. I would rather not.

Q. Mr. President, do you mean that the--you are convinced that authority you give is the best
possible, but it is--but that it is true?

THE PRESIDENT. Yes.

[22.] Q. Mr. President, do you care to comment at all on the situation in Germany today; that is,
would you care to make any extension of your remarks on the surrender of the German army in
Italy?

THE PRESIDENT. No, I would not.

Q. Mr. President, do you contemplate a radio broadcast imminently?

THE PRESIDENT. No, I do not.

Q. Mr. President, there have been reports late--later today, following the Italian announcement,
that other groups of Germans are on the point of surrendering in the Dutch pockets?

THE PRESIDENT. I hope that is true. I don't know that it is.

[23.] Q. Mr. President, is there anything you can give us in the way of background, regarding
last Saturday's situation and announcement?

THE PRESIDENT. What was that? [Laughter]

Q. I think that was the one

THE PRESIDENT. I can't give you anything further on it, I am sorry to say.

Reporter: Thank you, Mr. President.

NOTE: President Truman's fifth news conference was held in his office at the White House at
4:02 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 1945.

Over at Examiner.com, I have posted three articles about reactions to the death of Osama bin Laden after nearly ten years of searching for him by U.S. and allied forces:

Virginia political leaders react to news of Osama bin Laden’s death

Libertarian reactions to the killing of Osama bin Laden by U.S. forces

More Virginia political leaders react to news of Osama bin Laden’s death

Additional coverage of political issues, from a classical liberal and Virginia point of view, can be found at the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner. The previous article, before the kerfuffle of the weekend, was based on an interview with Swedish classical liberal scholar Johan Norberg about his new documentary, "Free or Equal," which is a follow up to Milton Friedman's 1980 TV series, "Free to Choose." Norberg's film will be shown on PBS stations around the country starting in August 2011.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

The Subversive Power of John Lennon

Five years ago in this space, I posted my own recollections of learning about the murder of John Lennon on December 8, 1980.

Today the New York Times printed the memories of readers, some of whom were much younger than I was and who remember much more about their parents' reaction to the news than their own.

Two of the readers' responses to the Times query jumped out at me as particularly pertinent.

"Andrea" remembers:

We learned about John’s death in then Communist Czechoslovakia by way of Radio Luxembourg. I was 9, and I remember my parents, especially my mom, being sad. Soon after, students started painting a particular wall in Prague’s old town with images of John Lennon and his message of peace. The authorities did not like it and painted the “Lennon wall,” as everyone knew it, over. It was always renewed within hours.

And this, from "busilak":

I was in a detention cell south Manila; my captors broke the news. The violence abated as everyone took in the loss of part of their life. Then the radio began churning out Beatles songs. I was 21 then, thinking that my future was over. … The songs permeated my dreams, gave consolation in my despair. Thirty years later, I am now part of the government I rebelled against, still struggling to find solutions to my people’s problems.

How are these mini-memoirs relevant today?

The Guardian reported yesterday that one of the things learned from the Wikileaks "Cablegate" revelations of U.S. diplomatic cables that portrayals of American popular culture seen on television in Saudi Arabia are an effective brake against jihadism and extremist elements in Saudi culture.

This should come as no surprise, since we know from Cold War experience (see "Andrea," above) that East Germans who watched West German TV and Estonians who captured Finnish TV and radio through their rooftop antennae had independent sources of news, information, and entertainment that served as a counterbalance to Soviet propaganda and gave them hope for a better day, which eventually came after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.  American books were passed around as samizdat, and -- as Vaclav Havel and Tom Stoppard have attested -- vinyl recordings of American rock-and-roll music were circulated as treasures in Russia and the Eastern European serf-states of Moscow.

What American diplomats in Jeddah learned is an important lesson. Here, in part, is what the Guardian says:

Satellite broadcasts of the US TV shows Desperate Housewives and Late Show With David Letterman are doing more to persuade Saudi youth to reject violent jihad than hundreds of millions of dollars of US government propaganda, informants have told the American embassy in Jeddah.

Broadcast uncensored and with Arabic subtitles alongside sitcoms such as Friends on Saudi Arabia's MBC 4 channel, the shows are being allowed as part of the kingdom's "war of ideas" against extremist elements. According to a secret cable titled "David Letterman: Agent of Influence", they have been proving more effective than Washington's main propaganda tool, the US-funded al-Hurra TV news channel....

Diplomats said they believed the allure of actors such as Eva Longoria, Jennifer Aniston and David Schwimmer meant commercial TV had a far greater impact than al-Hurra which, according to one report, has cost US taxpayers up to $500m (£316m).

"It's still all about the war of ideas here, and the American programming on MBC and Rotana [a channel part-owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation] is winning over ordinary Saudis in a way that al-Hurra and other US propaganda never could," two Saudi media executives told a US official in a meeting at a Jeddah branch of Starbucks. "Saudis are now very interested in the outside world and everybody wants to study in the US if they can. They are fascinated by US culture in a way they never were before," the May 2009 cable says.

We now know the principle. The practical question is, how do we deploy Harry Potter, Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, and Glee as potent weapons against terrorist jihad?

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Clean Talk about Dirty Bombs

When the concept of "dirty bombs" first came to public consciousness in the months following the terrorist attacks on New York City and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, I reached back in my memory to my years as an activist advocating civil defense preparations against nuclear attack in the 1980s and realized that a "dirty bomb" posed little or no threat.  (For several years, I was on the board of directors and a vice president of the American Civil Defense Association as well as a contributing editor to the Journal of Civil Defense.  I traveled around the country lecturing about civil defense policy and debating people who disagreed with me.)

At the time, I shared my opinion with friends in conversation but felt no need to write about it, since the idea of an explosive device used to disperse nuclear material seemed so absurd.

People took it seriously, however, because (sadly) most Americans' "knowledge" of nuclear radiation is based on B-movies of the 1950s and later fright propaganda like The China Syndrome.

I mention this because I just came across an excellent piece on this topic from STRATFOR, a respected provider of intelligence and strategic information based in Austin, Texas.  (Coincidentally, the Austin American-Statesman was the first newspaper to publish my 1996 article headlined "Not All Bombs Are Planted by Terrorists.")  STRATFOR's analysts believe, as I do, that the dirty bomb causes more fear than it should, that is more "hype" than reality.

In its analysis, titled "Dirty Bombs Revisited: Combating the Hype," STRATFOR's analysts write:

In spite of the fact that dirty bombs have been discussed widely in the press for many years now — especially since the highly publicized arrest of Jose Padilla in May 2002 — much misinformation and disinformation continues to circulate regarding dirty bombs. The misinformation stems from long-held misconceptions and ignorance, while the disinformation comes from scaremongers hyping the threat for financial or political reasons. Frankly, many people have made a lot of money by promoting fear since 9/11.

Just last week, we read a newspaper article in which a purported expert interviewed by the reporter discussed how a dirty bomb would “immediately cause hundreds or even thousands of deaths.” This is simply not true. A number of radiological accidents have demonstrated that a dirty bomb will not cause this type of death toll. Indeed, the panic generated by a dirty bomb attack could very well result in more immediate deaths than the detonation of the device itself. Unfortunately, media stories hyping the threat of these devices may foster such panic, thus increasing the death toll.

I might add, such panic could be especially troublesome in the absence of a good disaster-preparedness plan.

The STRATFOR analysis continues:

By its very nature, the RDD [radiological dispersal device] is contradictory. Maximizing the harmful effects of radiation involves maximizing the exposure of the victims to the highest possible concentration of a radioisotope. When dispersing the radioisotope, by definition and design the RDD dilutes the concentration of the radiation source, spreading smaller amounts of radiation over a larger area. Additionally, the use of an explosion to disperse the radioisotope alerts the intended victims, who can then evacuate the affected area and be decontaminated. These factors make it very difficult for an attacker to administer a deadly dose of radiation via a dirty bomb.

It is important to note that a dirty bomb is not a nuclear device, and no nuclear reaction occurs. A dirty bomb will not produce an effect like the nuclear devices dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki. A dirty bomb is quite simply an RDD that uses explosives as the means to disperse a radioactive isotope, and the only blast effect will be from the explosives used to disperse the radioisotope. In a dirty bomb attack, radioactive material not only is dispersed, but the dispersal is accomplished in an obvious manner, and the explosion immediately alerts the victims and authorities that an attack has taken place. The attackers hope that notice of their attack will cause mass panic — in other words, the RDD is a weapon of fear and terror.

In a nice turn of phrase, STRATFOR says that a so-called "dirty bomb" is not a weapon of mass destruction (WMB) so much as it is a "weapon of disruption." Disruption is damaging in itself, of course, but it is not as damaging as the popular imagination has made it out to be.

I have to agree with STRATFOR's concluding paragraph:

As noted above, we believe it is possible that the panic caused by a dirty bomb attack could well kill more people than the device itself. People who understand the capabilities and limitations of dirty bombs are less likely to panic than those who do not, which is the reason for this analysis. Another important way to help avoid panic is to carefully think about such an incident in advance and to put in place a carefully crafted contingency plan for your family and business. Contingency plans are especially important for those who work in proximity to a potential dirty bomb target. But they are useful in any disaster, whether natural or man-made, and something that should be practiced by all families and businesses. Such knowledge and planning provide people with the ability to conduct an orderly and methodical evacuation of the affected area. This allows them to minimize their exposure to radioactivity while also minimizing their risk of injury or death due to mass hysteria. For while a dirty bomb attack could well be messy and disruptive, it does not have to be deadly.

I don't often make suggestions for "further reading," but this is an issue that, as STRATFOR says, requires education and solid information.

Let me first recognize a piece I wrote originally as congressional testimony that was later published by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (with a foreword by Lorne Greene) as Civil Defense:  A Moral, Political, and Strategic Approach.

I would also like to recommend a book (which I reviewed here) by George Mason University physicist Robert Ehrlich called Waging Nuclear Peace:  The Technology and Politics of Nuclear Weapons.

Given the sorts of thinking that lead to misconceptions about "dirty bombs" and other weapons of less-than-mass-destruction, it might be instructive to read The Apocalyptic Premise: Nuclear Arms Debated, edited by E. Stephen Hunt and the late Ernest W. Lefever.

Although all these books were written in the 1980s, they have unusual relevance today, not only because of the insights they might bring to bear on the possible use by terrorists of "dirty bombs," but also because of current debates about the arms treaty recently negotiated between Russia and the United States, and calls by European nations for the United States to remove tactical missiles from their territory, calls that have a remarkable similarity -- mimicry? -- to the nuclear freeze movement of more than 25 years ago.

Is it any wonder that Hollywood is remaking that iconic movie of the 1980s, Red Dawn?

Note:  Excerpts of the STRATFOR report are reprinted with permission of STRATFOR.

Yale University Press Cowers Before Thugs

Many readers, especially those concerned with free speech issues, in particular, and civil liberties, in general, will remember the worldwide controversy that erupted about four or five years ago when a Danish newspaper decided to print some satirical cartoons that featured images of the Prophet Mohammed.

In the years since, Yale University Press decided to publish a book about the controversy, a scholarly examination of what happened and what it meant.

Scheduled for publication in November 2009, the book, The Cartoons That Shook the World, is written by a Brandeis University political scientist, Jytte Klausen, who was born in Denmark.

So far, so good.

Now comes the news that Yale University Press has deleted the cartoons in question from the book. In other words, Klausen can discuss the cartoons in her book, but she cannot show them.

Here's the New York Times on the story:

John Donatich, the director of Yale University Press, said by telephone that the decision was difficult, but the recommendation to withdraw the images, including the historical ones of Muhammad, was “overwhelming and unanimous.” The cartoons are freely available on the Internet and can be accurately described in words, Mr. Donatich said, so reprinting them could be interpreted easily as gratuitous.

He noted that he had been involved in publishing other controversial books — like “The King Never Smiles” by Paul M. Handley, a recent unauthorized biography of Thailand’s current monarch — and “I’ve never blinked.” But, he said, “when it came between that and blood on my hands, there was no question.”

Donatich does not even understand the basic concept of personal responsibility: that blood will not be on "his" hands if someone performs a violent act in reaction to publication of this (or any other book), but rather on the person who acts violently. Violent actors are responsible for their own actions, not the victims of violence. Victims are not culpable for evil done against them.

Yale is afraid, and rather than do the brave thing -- standing up against terrorists and thugs -- it is submitting.

Still, "submission" is just what they want.

The thing is, such submission is not even necessary. The Times' Patricia Cohen explains the view of one Muslim intellectual:

Reza Aslan, a religion scholar and the author of “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam,” is a fan of the book but decided to withdraw his supportive blurb that was to appear in the book after Yale University Press dropped the pictures. The book is “a definitive account of the entire controversy,” he said, “but to not include the actual cartoons is to me, frankly, idiotic.”

In Mr. Aslan’s view no danger remains. “The controversy has died out now, anyone who wants to see them can see them,” he said of the cartoons, noting that he has written and lectured extensively about the incident and shown the cartoons without any negative reaction. He added that none of the violence occurred in the United States: “There were people who were annoyed, and what kind of publishing house doesn’t publish something that annoys some people?”

“This is an academic book for an academic audience by an academic press,” he continued. “There is no chance of this book having a global audience, let alone causing a global outcry.” He added, “It’s not just academic cowardice, it is just silly and unnecessary.”

The book is still available for sale; it just won't be complete.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!

Israel's 'Tragic Paradox'

Somehow I missed commenting on the murders and mass assault in a gay youth center in Tel Aviv earlier this month.

Israelis have not let the incident slip by. A Jewish Telegraphic Agency report noted on Sunday:

Tens of thousands of Israelis demonstrated in solidarity with Israel's gay community at a rally in Tel Aviv.

Saturday night's rally also was a show of support for the victims of last week's shooting at a Tel Aviv community center for gay and lesbian youth in which two were killed and a dozen wounded.

Israeli President Shimon Peres addressed the crowd, which organizers put at 70,000 and police at 20,000.

"The bullets that hit the gay community at the beginning of the week struck us all as people, as Jews, as Israelis," Peres said.

"All people were created in God's image," he added, "and all citizens have equal rights. All men are born equal, and every citizen has the right to be who he is -- to be free and proud.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a personal visit to the gay community center at 28 Nachmani Street in Tel Aviv. According to Ha'aretz:

Netanyahu told leaders of Israel's gay and lesbian community that he would do more to root out manifestations of hate within Israeli society. The premier also promised community leaders that his government would work to address their needs.

"I realize that the gay community has special needs," Netanyahu said. "I want to assure you that we are open and receptive and that I as well as the ministers in my government will advance these important issues, some of which became known to me today."

Netanyahu added that he believed "that the labeling and negation of human beings is wrong in and of itself. We were all made in God's image, we all have basic rights, the first of which is to be respected by our fellow man and to respect others. Unfounded hatred is wrong. Anyone who had experienced that kind of hatred, as an individual or as part of a group, knows how painful and wrong it is. Its something we need to try as hard as we can to root it out of our society."

In an article in The Advocate published yesterday, commentator Jamie Kirchick notes a curious fact that emerges from the attack on a community center that catered to the social needs of gay and lesbian teenagers:

At a Washington vigil held last Monday evening to mourn the victims of the Tel Aviv gay youth center shooting, an official from the Israeli embassy made a keen observation. It was a “tragic paradox,” he said, for “this crime could only take place in Israel out of all the countries in the Middle East because there’s nowhere else in the Middle East where there could be a meeting house for gay young people, which is open and which everybody knows its address.”

Kirchick goes on to point out that

...if there is anything positive to be gleaned from this horrific incident, it has been the reaction of the Jewish state’s citizens. The country’s newspapers have published countless articles about the status of gay people in Israeli society and the persistent problem of homophobia. Even the country’s ultrareligious figures -- perhaps cognizant of how their own teachings may have created an environment in which such an attack could take place -- have condemned the murders.

Then he contrasts the situation in Israel with that in neighboring countries:

Throughout the Middle East, it is usually the governments themselves that are committing the violence against their own gay citizens.

In 2001, Egypt arrested 51 men aboard a gay cruise ship and subjected them to a show trial in which their faces were displayed on national television. Iran executes gays, whose existence its president denies. In Saudi Arabia the punishment for homosexuality is decapitation.

Kirchick reminds his readers for the reason that Israel and the United States have a close relationship: we share "a set of common liberal values, values which Israel’s neighbors simply do not share."

We sometimes forget that liberal values -- including, but not limited to, religious and philosophical tolerance, respect for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and adherence to the rule of (non-arbitrary) law -- are what animate societies like the United States and Israel, and what protect us against the predations of the power-hungry and intolerant. They also separate us from what might be called, perhaps infelicitously, barbarian societies.

Liberal values also include the openness and freedom that sometimes make us more vulnerable to mad acts of terrorism and criminality. These infrequent events are the price we pay for individual liberty.

Years before the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights incorporated the freedoms we challenge into our basic law, Benjamin Franklin wrote (in 1775):

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Consider that the paradox of liberty. It's not just Israel's tragic paradox; it's ours, too.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!