People's Choice
Choose something related to CH 21 and/or this week's topic of terrorism, reflect, and write about it. Provide links as appropriate.
Topical Blog 4/28 10pm
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://www.psychologicalscience.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/2369
4/5 Freebie... thank you!
I'd like to use my freebie from 4/5. Thanks!
For this assignment, I found a very interesting article from the MSNBC website.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42795935
The article talks about a senator from Massachucetts, Scott Brown, and how he met with a major technology company. The company, Implant Sciences Corporation, has technology that is believed to have the potential benefits of putting an end to terrorism. Implany Sciences makes it their mission to provide technologies that can help keep the United States safe and combat terrorism.
The article then goes on to talk a little more about the company in detail.
The company primarily focuses on items that help keep us secure, like sensors. These items have the ability to detect explosives and other harmful objects that try to make their way into the wrong hands.
Personally, I really liked this article and feel that it really helps to illustrate what we have been talking about in class. It shows that people are more concerned with fighting terrorism that we don't necessarily do it in the proper way. Sure, having technologies that we can use in the event of a terrorist attack is a good thing. But, what do we know about the people that commit acts of terrorism themselves? What do we know about other countries and the technologies they have at their disposal? It could be the case that some countries have items that are just as advanced, if not more so, than what we have. If that is the case, wouldn't we be better off spending our time with learning more about these terrorists before we actually spend time and money in fighting them?
It goes back to the old saying that you should keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. If we know more about the people that are trying to do harm to us, then we can beat them at their own game before they can even touch us. Personally, I have also been a fan of the saying, "An eye for an eye, and the whole world goes blind."
Of course, this is not to say that it is bad to have these technologies available. I would just like to know a little bit more about the technology and the research that went in to developing them. For example, did the scientists that produced these technologies have an idea of what kinds of other technologies they would be up against should we be the victim of another terrorist attack?
The fact that the objects are primarily sensors, too, raises a bit of concern. How do we know these will work on the items that other countires try to bring in? What if they bring items that are not explosives that can still do a great amount of damage? This is why I feel we need to do more research and develop even stronger items to help keep us secure. It is nice, however, to know that people are at least beginning the process and seem to be making sure that the basic bases are covered before they contine.
For this assignment I searched through news articles using the search term ‘terrorism’. The following article was one of the more interesting ones for me to read.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/28/fbi-247-people-terro-watch-list-bought-guns-2010/
This article from Fox News is about a debate that’s going on about whether or not people who are on the terror watch list should be restricted from purchasing firearms. According to FBI, 247 people on the terror watch list bought guns in the U.S. in 2010 after going through the appropriate steps including background checks. According to the article, when someone tries to buy a gun in the U.S. the background check also includes the terror watch list. If someone pops up as being on the list, the information goes to the FBI’s terrorism division. Keep in mind, it’s not illegal for people on this list to buy weapons. For one Senator, Frank Lautenberg from New Jersey, allowing people on the list to purchase weapons bothers him greatly because he’d rather keep weapons away from terrorists (alleged that is). Supporters of this are pushing to allow the attorney general to have the authority to prevent someone on the list from buying a firearm if he/she believes the weapon will be used in a terrorist act. Although the senator and others make a good argument about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists, other organizations like the NRA (National Rifle Association) don’t agree with doing so. They argue that people who cannot buy weapons (e.g. felons, illegal immigrants) are actually convicted of crimes and are given the opportunity to defend themselves; whereas people on the terror watch list have not been convicted of terrorism crime and are put there and removed (without their knowledge sometimes) without the opportunity to defend themselves. Also, some people have been mistaken as having ties to terrorists and are in fact law-abiding citizens without ties to any terrorist organization but are still put on the list. A spokesman for the Justice Department stated the department remains committed to working with Congress to keep weapons out of the hands of people who may use them in terrorist acts. At the same time, to deny all people on the watch list the right to purchase a weapon would mean the government would have to tell that individual they were on the list which could jeopardize any investigation the government might be involved in. Letting people on the terror watch list buy guns kind of illustrates a double-edge sword.
For my final Topical Blog Assignment, I decided to focus on post-traumatic stress disorder discussed in Chapter 21. I came across an article written about a year into our military involvement in Iraq. It discusses the Army’s first study of the mental health on our troops in Iraq. The article claimed that an average of 1 in 8 soldiers was reporting symptoms of PTSD. PTSD is one of several anxiety disorders in the DSM-IV-TR. The main criterion involves having witnessed a traumatic event. Classic PTSD symptoms involve vivid flashbacks, flattened affect, irritability, insomnia, feelings of detachment, and the list goes on. In this particular study conducted by the Army, they surveyed 6,201 soldiers who had seen combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Four different groups were surveyed: Army brigades before they went to Iraq, Army brigades who had already experienced 6 months of combat in Afghanistan, brigades who had already spent 8 months in Iraq, and Marine battalions after spending 6 months in Iraq. Returning troops completed the survey 3-4 months after coming home. Results showed that between 16 and 17% of those who served in Iraq reported symptoms of major depression, anxiety, or PTSD. For those who were in Afghanistan, 11% reported the same symptoms of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. The greatest differences were reported for PTSD: twice as many Iraq war vets reported PTSD symptomology (12%) than vets who served in Afghanistan (6%). This difference could be due to the fact that military personnel serving in Iraq saw more combat, including firefights and attacks, than personnel serving in Afghanistan.
Being that this study was conducted in 2004, it is safe to say that these rates in depression, anxiety, and PTSD may have shot through the roof, considering that most soldiers have by now, experienced more than 1 deployment. The research presented from Chapter 21 discussed how rates of PTSD and other disorders increased with the amount of exposure to combat situations. What saddened me the most about his particular article is that a high number (about half) of war vets have not sought treatment for these symptoms for fear of being stigmatized, or as the article put it, “The study’s participants ‘apparently were afraid to seek assistance for fear that a scarlet P would doom their careers.” This begs the question “How many war vets are currently walking around with severe psychological issues that are going untreated? What does this mean for their current and future mental health? What does this mean for their family and loved ones? My father-in-law just barely sought treatment about a year ago even though it’s been 30+ years since his tour in Vietnam. Although it’s great that he was finally able to seek help, and benefit from that help, all the years he refused to seek treatment (for fear of being stigmatized) took a toll on my husband and his brother and sisters. My husband talks about how detached his father sometimes was growing up. He couldn’t hold a steady job, there was always tension in the family, his dad sometimes did things that were very bizarre (e.g. sleeping with a firearm), he would talk about suicide at times, and he would often miss important family events such as my husband’s college graduation. It broke my heart one day when my husband was talking to his mom about how my relationship with my own dad is so different. My dad and my siblings and I are very affectionate. My husband said, “Mom, you can see how much they love each other. When he comes home, they greet each other with big hugs and a kiss on the cheek. Her dad is so affectionate…We never had that with Dad.” To me it’s really sad and I think we need to do more research on how PTSD and other psychological issues that vets face also affects their loved ones. I also think that more should be done to help veterans recover. Maybe making treatment more anonymous would help encourage vets to seek help? Or maybe we should create nationally publicized support groups that could help reduce the stigmatization that comes along with seeking treatment? Maybe we should mind our own business and focus on all of our domestic issues and stop sending young men and women to the slaughter house? Or maybe we should do all three?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5334479/ns/health-mental_health/
I found two articles discussing PTSD that I believe relate quite well to chapter 21: http://www.vietnow.com/ptsd.htm and http://www.vietnow.com/ptsd.htm. Both the articles actually have some reference to my last bloggings by bringing to attention the amount of soldiers who end up with PTSD after being in war compared with those who actually get help from professionals. The first article described outside problems that arise with PTSD, such as divorce and suicide rates. The website is mainly to gain more knowledge about the magazine VIETnow, which is supposed to help other Vietnam veterans and their families in dealing with troubles that arise from the soldier’s time in war. The second article discussed how 1 in 8 soldiers that return from combat develop PTSD and of those who do, an alarmingly small rate actually seek help, most often due to a fear of potential damage to their careers along with concerns how their peers would judge them. Within the article, there was the mention of a study done and how it raises the idea of a need to “reduce the barriers” so people will feel less stigmatized about getting the help they need in situations such as this.
There is not nearly enough help being done for victims of PTSD now, although more is being done. Stigma seems to play a big role in retrieving help from those who did acquire PTSD, especially soldiers. In both articles, people are often experiencing the consequences of PTSD yet still want to be able to maintain their regular lives and jobs. Even if the army was able to distribute tests to soldiers before and after combat along with offering therapy, there is still the matter of a stigma. Those who do decide to seek help often have trouble returning to their previous positions, due to those in charge often not wanting those who have been seen as “emotionally unstable.”
A certain amount of the funding that the army receives should be given to discovering helpful ways in which to further implement positive changes within victims of PTSD’s lives. However, PTSD does not seem to be nearly as well-known as it should be to garner such media coverage. When learning about PTSD, we often hear of what it is and how people are affected after traumatic events. However, there are not many studies being implemented, as well as not many studies being completely effective.
There are many times in which I have been in contact with people who had previously engaged in combat, and even those not diagnosed with PTSD still have often have some emotional upsettings, such as limited patience and anxiety issues. I have heard many times how soldiers know how to fake being “okay” after combat, because they want to still be able to be a soldier. The fact that soldiers do not have effective therapy after engaging in sometimes traumatic combat is quite disappointing. And of course, it still leads back to the fact that there is such a huge fear of not being able to stay in one’s job, which often allows benefits for one’s family.
I was really intrugued by the philosophy of Daniel Dennet on memes and memetics. I think the guy is really on to something here. So, even though it is not usually applied to terrorism alone, I figured it's the end of the semester and maybe I could end on a lighter note. After taking another look at the Al Qaeda manual I have a different view on what is going on in the mind of one of these terrorists. I just want to clarify, I do not condone their actions, I don't want something out on the internet implying I am supporting terrorists actions. So, with that said... I think that anyone who is being told how evil american government and american ways of life are would certainly be more persuadable to take on a violent nature towards us. we have to keep in mind that in some of these countries the share of information is more limited and people are not really allowed to question thier government if they feel as though the truth is not being told to them. If the spred of thoughts and beliefs is like a virus, taking over and driving us to do things that just don't make sense, I think memes are truly scary things.
So I took a little trip around the web to seek out memes and people knowledge of them. Turns out that George W really was a meat puppet, Al Qaeda owns BP, and big foot is really a government experiment gone wrong. So, obviously some of these so called memes are just silly rumors that have been mis-labled. But theres other stuff out there. Memes, or the concept of memes at least, have been around since the 70's. I took the time to read some free chapters of a book entitiled "the Lucifer Principle" by Howard Bloom. He takes a look at the thoughts or mental states that go against all biological drives and can lead us to do things which will bring about our own death. this is like the ants Dennet described climbing the grass to be eaten because of this virus. One thing that caught my attention was that Bloom asserts that being socially isolated can bring on this type of phenomenon. He uses Jane Goodalls story of male monkey which never bonded with the other monkeys, only his mother. after the mothers death her son soon just gave up, laid down, and waited for death. Bloom attributes this to the fact that the male monkey never became socially involved with any of the other monkeys and suffered vast amounts of isolation after his only companion passed. We can see this sort of thing in elderly people when one spouse passes and the other soon follows. If we take a look at some terrorist groups we may have a better understanding of how this fits in wiht this weeks topic. Just as Napoleoni described in her Ted Talk we watched tuesday, there is a certain type of person that is sought after to join the terrorist groups... She wasn't that type. I would have to assume that when looking for someone to be a suicide bomber they are not going to go for the person with close family ties or a close knit social network. Even if there is some sort of eternal reward awaiting this person, there can't be too much working as pressure to keep them here. Plus, what woman is going to support her husband suicide bombings so he can have a hundred virgins in the afterlife? Sorry, that may have been a bit crude and steeped in predjudice, but I think my point is still valid. I think it would take a lesser degree of convincing to get an isolated person to take hold of these memes and be willing to lay down their life for a cause. What I find truly scary is the number of people who will willingly die when they have things to live for. How deeply do these viral thoughts take hold? Then an even scarier thought occurs to me... how much of my life is dictated by my own memes? Religion is a meme, the american dream is a meme, my love for recycling is based on my memes... Do I have any original thoughts or are they all born of these viruses controlling my mind? are we creatures of free will or meme will? thankfully there is what I see as hope for us. I found links not only to the wierd and scary types of memes, but also to sites promising ways to spread joy and peace to the minds around us. Imagine what happens when we all get infected by those viruses! This is what the world needs, good vibe mental viruses, happy memes!
so. here are the sites I checked out, and heres to you having a happy meme in your life.
http://www.memecentral.com/ follow the links, some are good and some are just rediculous, but its all fun!
http://www.rubinghscience.org/memetics/dawkinsmemes.html
When reading about the rates of PTSD in Israeli soldiers, I was wondering how they compare to the rates of PTSD in American soldiers. I decided to look up how many American soldiers are known to have PTSD and if the rates are rising since there has been continued deployment. I found the same page as Elizabeth, but will reiterate the study here. According to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5334479/ns/health-mental_health/ in 2004 the Army’s first study of the mental health of troops who fought in Iraq was done. They found that 1 in 8 soldiers reported symptoms of PTSD! They also found that less than half of them sought help. A few months after the return of Army and Marine combat units, a survey was conducted as well. In the study, 6,201 service members were surveyed. There were 4 different groups: Army brigades before deployment to Iraq, after 6 months in Afghanistan, and after 8 months in Iraq; and Marine battalions after 6 months in Iraq. Of the soldiers who served in Iraq, 16-17% had symptoms of PTSD. Of those in Afghanistan, 11% had symptoms and 9% before they left. Before deployment, the rate was about 5% and after it was significant the differences between Iraq (12%) and Afghanistan (6%). The authors of the study conclude that the difference may be due to the different in Iraq combat units and Afghani combat units. In Iraq, they saw more combat, including firefights and attacks. They also took part in the early fights. As the book discussed, the longer the service, the higher the rates of PTSD, so this would concur with the study on American soldiers. It is important to realize the difference in rates because in order to help alleviate the likelihood of PTSD, we must first acknowledge what is creating such high numbers. They also looked at how many of those with PTSD sought help. Only 38-40% were interested in getting help and only 23-40% sought it.
Looking at these statistics, it is interesting to see how they compare to those of Israeli soldiers. It is obvious that the rates of PTSD are much lower in American soldiers than Israeli soldiers. The book explained that the high rates for Israelis might be due to the fact that they are soldiers they whole lives; they are continually exposed to violence and war. Understanding why these rates differ, I thought it would be interesting to look at more current statistics of American soldiers to see if the rates have gone up. If the rates have gone up, it would support the theory in the book that the longer you are in combat the higher the rates and that more than one deployment in war creates more chance that you will experience PTSD. If the rates have not gone up, it would seem as if the rates are more of a cultural phenomena than one correlated with the specifics of deployment. In 2008, 4 years after the first study, http://healthandsurvival.com/2008/05/27/40000-us-soldiers-with-ptsd/ released an article showing how the rates of PTSD among American soldiers have changed. From 2003 to 2008, roughly 40,000 troops were diagnosed with PTSD. It is estimated that there are plenty more, but that they are keeping their illness a secret. In 2006, in the Army, there were nearly 9,500 new cases and in 2007, they jumped significantly with nearly 14,000 new cases. The Marines had more than 2,100 new cases in 2007, compared with 1,366 in 2006. From 2003 to 2008, more than 5,000 Marines were diagnosed with PTSD. Researchers think that this may be due to a new record system that is able to track PTSD better, but it is also hypothesized, as it is in the book, that the explosion of rates is due to the exposure of troops to combat and troops serving their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th tours of duty. They also conclude that tour lengths are being extended to 15 months from 12 months, which puts increased stress and emotional strain on soldiers. The VA (Veterans Affairs) said that recently (as of 2008) they have seen nearly 60,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans receive a diagnosis of PTSD. It is very obvious that the problem is increasing and will continue to increase as long as there are deployments and soldiers who are serving in more than one deployment.
I think another interesting thing to compare is the amount of soldiers who seek help for PTSD. I think the differences between soldiers seeking help is largely due to the different cultures and the way they are viewed. War is something that is very “macho”. This is not to diss any women who are in the service (I know plenty), but it is a view that is commonly held by many people and cultures. I think this is much more the case with Israeli soldiers. The book discussed that soldiers probably feel like they cannot seek help because admitting they cannot handle it or are having problems from it dishonors their country. They do not want to be seen as weak or failing their fellow soldiers. While this view is probably held across many cultures and can definitely been seen in America, I think that there is less of this in America. There is much support in America to get help for soldiers who need it. A lot of this help is geared towards physical injuries, yet I think that in recent years, there has been a movement to understand and accept mental illness. With this accepting movement, I think there are more men and women who have served our country that are willing to admit they need help and get it. I think that the support systems they have, such as parents, friends, siblings, partners, etc., increases the likelihood that they will seek help. The huge differences between cultures in the way we view mental illness and private matters creates a large difference in the number of those with PTSD that need and seek help. What needs to be done, across the world, is more awareness of the problem and making it not so stigmatized that soldiers are afraid to ask for help. Like the problems in war, we can only start helping once we start understanding. Overall, I think the differences between rates of PTSD in Israeli soldier and American soldiers highly supports the theories put forth in the chapter. Unfortunately, I don’t think that the rates will be reduced and begin a downward tread anytime soon.
As I was searching for topics to do with terrorism I ran into the topic of child armies. I found so much information on the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) of Uganda. Children were abducted into the violence of the Ugandan civil war. These children witnessed all of the violence, they were beaten, raped, and they were forced to kill people. One man told us that he was forced to kill his brother because he did not have money to give the LRA when they were abducted. The video I found was about former child soldiers of the LRA and the issues they faced and now face as adults. Almost 60,000 children were kidnapped by the LRA over 20 years. The LRA originally fought on behalf of the tribal people who felt oppressed by the government but the leader of the LRA became a terrorist and began killing the tribal people. Rehabilitation centers have been set up for the former child soldiers. As we would imagine after reading this week’s chapter, many of these now adults suffer from depression and PTSD.
Many of these former child soldiers have trouble adjusting back to their community because they were held in captivity for so long. The rehab centers provide group and individual counseling and art therapy. Something that really shocked me is that there is only 1 psychiatrist for every 1.3 million people in Uganda. This makes it extremely difficult for these people to get necessary treatment and help for things they are dealing with. One former child soldier reported feeling weak and like he would not be able to do anything good in his future. Their return to the community is not only hard due to the psychological disorder they deal with. These people also have to deal with some of their community member’s bitterness towards them because they are back home but some of the community will never see their family again because they were killed by the LRA or in the LRA. They feel like they cannot get full acceptance back into their community.
This video relates to both the chapter about PTSD and the topic of terrorism that we covered in class. The chapter talks about the effects of war and captivity on soldiers. These child soldiers participated in war unwillingly. They were held captive and their lives were threatened. They had to suffer some of the same conditions as the POWs talked about in the chapter except these were children having to go through these stressful situations. They do not have the same coping skill that adults have. It must have been harder for the children in LRA. This video relates to terrorism because LRA became a terrorist group. The LRA is basically no longer active but the leader of the LRA continues to terrorize people in different areas. This video was very interesting but what I really wanted to find was comparisons between the PTSD due to childhood trauma and PTSD due to adult trauma. Specifically the trauma of war and captivity but I couldn’t find what I was looking for.
http://www.newslook.com/videos/266772-in-uganda-former-child-soldiers-struggle-to-heal
http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/15/forbes-india-david-livingstone-smith-psychology-of-violence-opinions-ideas-10-smith.html
EVERYONE should read this article published on Forbes.com. It incorporates almost every topic of violence we have discussed this semester. David Livingston is a philosophy professor at the University of New England. I think this article is brilliant. Livingston discusses the idea that every person who commits an act of violence is a regular human being. Even those involved in genocide, murder, wars, etc. Very rarely is it a result of a monster. He also talks about a very particular aspect of human nature. He states, "There is a strange paradox at the heart of human nature. We humans are the most sociable creatures on earth, with a remarkable ability to cooperate with one another....And yet, our species also displays a more ominous side. Human beings are also creatures of unparalleled ferocity. No other animal is capable of the horrors--the wars, genocides, torture and oppression--that we have regularly visited upon our fellow human beings." I put this all in quotes because there is no way I could possibly say it better in my own words. Livingston further discusses the perplexities of violence in that killing is not an act that comes easily to humans. This is why society functions as it does; if we get upset at someone, we learn tolerance, not killing. He states the paradox as humans have both violence and an adversion to violence in their nature.
Livingston asks, "What goes on in the human mind to make such brutality possible?" Livingston contends a lot of the violence and killing among humans is due to dehumanization; convincing ourselves one is less than human. Livingston identifies dehumanization at the root of an uncanny amoung of violence throughout cultures. He gives examples and real-life accounts that are impossible to ignore.
Why did I chose this article for this class? I think dehumanization is an important aspect of violence as well. We touched on it in a couple classes as well. I think Livingston's ideas and insights about human nature are incredibly interesting and intriguing. Most of all, after I read this article and thinking about Livingston's statements regarding taking dehumanization more seriously and doing something about it, if it is against human nature to act violently, yet humans still act violently, will there ever be a way to end violence?
For the final topic blog I choose to reflect on the video we watched in class on tuesday.
I can't remember the speaker's name (should have taken more thorough notes I guess) but her views on terrorism and mass violence from the perspective of a buisness corporation was very intriguing to me. I choose to look at violence from the perspective of gaining more insight to have a better understanding of ways to intervene that may be more effective than what is currently being offerred. As we all can probably agree and I specifically have learned from class, terrorism and group violence are not issues that are easy to address and are very difficult to end. I have never considered in depth the option of viewing these issues from a business standpoint. The video help me to gain a better, more holistic understanding of these issues. In my opinion, I think that by understanding the motivation behind these groups from a business aspect opens a significant more amount of intervention opportunities that may have been previously overlooked. The speaker discussed the overall structure of these groups from a different perspective. I believe that if we are making attempts to stop or at least subdue these groups, it would be ineffective to just assume that interventions and support from society to intervene would be best sought out by identifying how inappropriate the behaviors and outcomes are. A specific example was the Quaran "handbook" we reviewed in class. This was a great example to display why individuals become involved in a group and agree to such behaviors that we find unexcusable. I believe we all have a general understanding as to why individuals participate in some groups or another, violent or not. My concern is that intervention techniques do not appear very well tailored towards intervention of the specific group or motivation of that specific group. I feel that if society had a better understanding, specifically the business aspect more effective intervention techniques could be applied. By utilizing this approach, war against another county does not always appear to be the most effective intervention. We do not go to war with the banks because we do not agree with their behaviors..... I think it would be more effective to consider this when addressing terrorism issues. I think that more progress would be made to deter these groups if society addressed the business aspect of the issues. If supply and demand are not present in a business, it is not going to be productive. Maybe more progress could be made by taking this approach.
At the beginning of the semester, I had the opportunity to view a film called The Anatomy of Hate: A Dialogue for Hope. The film was so incredibly powerful and insightful that it changed my perception on things. "The Anatomy of Hate; A Dialogue to Hope reveals the shared narratives found in individual and collective ideologies of hate, and how we as a species can overcome them. For six years the filmmaker worked with unprecedented access to some of the most venomous ideologies and violent conflicts of our time including the White Supremacist movement, Christian Fundamentalism as an anti-gay platform, Muslim Extremism, the Palestinian Intifada, Israeli Settlers and Soldiers, and US Forces in Iraq. By juxtaposing this verite footage with interviews from leading sociological, psychological, and neurological experts, and interspersing stories of redemption told by former “combatants”, the film weaves a tapestry that reveals both the emotional and biological mechanisms which make all of us susceptible to acts and ideologies of hate, and demonstrates how these very same traits make us equally capable of overcoming them..." (qtd. from http://theanatomyofhate.com"
Sixteen weeks later, I've realized just how well this film can be incorporated into our class, especially in the areas we've discussed regarding ingroup vs outgroup violence.
During the film, the director (Mike Ramsdell) provided footage of how children were being "conditioned," if you will, to embrace the hateful and violent ideologies of their cultures or ingroups. It was incredibly sad to hear these 12-14 year old boys from the Gaza strip singing songs and talking about martyrdom. The views they gave about how they felt there was no way out and no way to solve the problem except to be a martyr was so incredibly disturbing for me as a parent.
This film truly allows you to gain an understanding of groups with extremist views. It gives you an inside look of how individual people adopt and internalize the extremist views their groups preach.
But the film isn't focused only on the motivations for hate. As the second part of the title suggests, it's also about giving hope to people for a better world. Through interviews with former members of these extremist groups (like Palestinian militants, Israeli combatants, Nazi/white supremacists, etc), you see an opportunity for peace. For example, there is a group called the Combatants for Peace. It was started by 14 former Palestinian militants and 12 former Israeli combatants with the promise to never raise arms against one another ever again. As a group, they sit down and peacefully discuss their differences and similarities so that they may not only start viewing their counterparts as actual people but to also gain an understanding about them so that they can work out a way to live together in harmony. The Combatants for Peace have grown in members and now work with villages and towns by organizing sit-downs with both groups. They even expand their mission for peace by educating children in school designed specifically to integrate Palestinian and Israeli children together.
This is truly a powerful film. For more information go to http://theanatomyofhate.com The site also has a section where you can see clips of the film (which I highly recommend you all to view).
For this final blog, I chose to look at and reflect on the FBI website (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism). I really like using the FBI websites because they are so detailed and provide so much information on any given topic. This particular site has a vast amount of information on terrorism and what the FBI is doing to prevent and study terrorist attacks and the people behind them. It also has various links to articles and publications related to terrorism, many of which provide links upon links to more websites. This spider web of information gives details on pretty much every topic you could think of that involves terrorism. The FBI states that protecting the United States from terrorist attacks is their “top priority,” which is likely why they want to provide the public with so much information on the topic.
The FBI site provides information on everything from training to precautions and protections, with various points of view on case studies and approaches to prevention. They even allow insight as to what goes on behind the scenes of the terrorist investigation unit, and have articles on each of the major units within the terrorist investigations. One of the more interesting links provided here are the “Weapons of Mass Destruction” articles. What caught my eye at first was how the site grabs the reader’s attention right away with this quote; “There is no room for failure. When it comes to weapons of mass destruction, even the smallest incident could be catastrophic.” From there the webpage goes into details as to how this unit of the FBI came about, history of the unit, training involved, and even some case examples.
I also thought it was interesting to take a look at how their internet tip line is set up, and how they separate false tips from the real ones. It was interesting to see the trends in the years since 2001 at the number of hits that the terrorist hot line receives, with a large spike in 2003 and a dip in 2005. Since 2005 the number of terrorist tip line hits has been steadily increasing according to the chart provided here. It’s amazing to see how the terrorist hotline can help the FBI prevent attacks or solve cases after attacks have happened.
The last link that I will reflect on in this blog is the “Most Wanted Terrorists” link. I liked this link because not only are you able to see who the FBI interested in finding most, but by clicking the photo of each terrorist you are able to pull up a bio of that person, including rewards involved with information on this person and why they are on the Most Wanted list. It also includes where this person is likely to be hiding, scars and marks that can be used to confirm the criminal’s identity, aliases that they are known to go by, and demographic information on each criminal. They even provide such specific details such as “Bin Laden is left handed and walks with a cane.” Knowing that the FBI is so detailed in their investigations makes me feel that much more confident in their abilities to protect our country. I also like the fact that they share this information with the public, and encourage citizens to participate in preventing attacks and protecting our families and our country.
4/5/11 Freebie, Thanks.