How safer are we ?

By    John Garner on  Saturday, August 12, 2006
Summary: I came across several interesting articles and comments on articles in French, US and UK newspaper sites today about the foiled terrorist plot in the UK. In Dickey's article called "Foiled Plot doesn't make us safer" there are several comparisons to the period leading up to 9/11 : Panicked CIA analysts flew to Texas to […]

I came across several interesting articles and comments on articles in French, US and UK newspaper sites today about the foiled terrorist plot in the UK.

In Dickey's article called "Foiled Plot doesn't make us safer" there are several comparisons to the period leading up to 9/11 :

Panicked CIA analysts flew to Texas to brief Bush personally in 2001, “to intrude on his vacation with face-to-face alerts.” Bush sized them up, as is his wont, looking to judge the content of what they told him by the confidence with which the message was delivered. Bush wasn’t convinced. “All right,” said the president, “You’ve covered your ass now.”

and further down :

Presidents cover their backsides, too. If this attack had succeeded, or another one still does, the people to blame wouldn’t be Bush or his advisors, the culprits would be those who limit his “tools.” Massive wiretaps? Secret prisons? The list is long.

Dickey is often insightful in his articles and this article really covers and discusses some of the key issues that are leading to all these attacks, the fact that many a Muslim most probably feels 'under attack' with constant images of blood and carnage in the news concerning the Muslim world.

An article on the Guardian points out that :

Downing Street admitted Tony Blair would not have left the country on Monday for his Caribbean holiday if he had known the police would need to swoop so quickly to disrupt a terrorist plot.

Further down in the article, we find out that Blair and Bush had a "conversation on a secure line" about this. Well it's good to know that they have changed their habits.

It seems from an article on the WashingtonPost that the whole counter terrorist operation began after July 7 attacks in London, following a tip. Although all arrested are British citizens who are nearly all tied in some way to Pakistan.

These problems are being used however to silence people that don't agree with the government or policies as an amazing article by Henry Porter illustrates. Policies that aim to stop people that encourage and participate in violence and killing is in my opinion justifiable. Policies aiming people that "have traditionally brought their grievances to those in power" and laws, in order to silence them is very "Nineteen Eighty Four" or "V for Vendetta" (for reference to a modern take on 1984). Such policies are unacceptable. It seems that like Bush in the US, Blair and his government have been busy creating policies that allow them to silence domestic grievances in the name of counter-terrorism.

Update (16 Aug): In a Guardian blog there is a rant from H. Evans about the danger of extremists as opposed to the loss of civil rights. This is following the letter from muslim leaders about UK foreign policy. There are even those who would like to believe it is a hoax.

Article written by  John Garner

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

Check out the most recent posts from the blog: 
Sunday, September 24, 2023
The reliability & accuracy of GenAI

I question the reliability and accuracy of Generative AI (GenAI) in enterprise scenarios, particularly when faced with adversarial questions, highlighting that current Large Language Models (LLMs) may be data-rich but lack in reasoning and causality. I would call for a more balanced approach to AI adoption in cases of assisting users, requiring supervision, and the need for better LLM models that can be trusted, learn, and reason.

Read More
Saturday, September 23, 2023
From Chatbots to Reducing Society's Technical Debt

I discuss my experience with chatbots, contrasting older rules-based systems with newer GenAI (General Artificial Intelligence) chatbots. We cannot dismiss the creative capabilities of GenAI-based chatbots, but these systems lack reliability, especially in customer-facing applications, and improvements in the way AI is structured could lead to a "software renaissance," potentially reducing society's technical debt.

Read More
Friday, June 16, 2023
The imbalance of power in the AI game: in search of the common good

The article discusses the contrasting debate on how AI safety is and should be managed, its impact on technical debt, and its societal implications.
It notes the Center for AI Safety's call for a worldwide focus on the risks of AI, and Meredith Whittaker's criticism that such warnings preserve the status quo, strengthening tech giants' dominance. The piece also highlights AI's potential to decrease societal and technical debt by making software production cheaper, simpler, and resulting in far more innovation. It provides examples of cost-effective open-source models that perform well and emphasizes the rapid pace of AI innovation. Last, the article emphasises the need for adaptive legislation to match the pace of AI innovation, empowering suitable government entities for oversight, defining appropriate scopes for legislation and regulation, addressing ethical issues and biases in AI, and promoting public engagement in AI regulatory decisions.

Read More
Thursday, June 1, 2023
Japan revises copyright laws for AI

Japan has made its ruling on the situation between Content creators and Businesses. Japanese companies that use AI have the freedom to use content for training purposes without the burden of copyright laws. This news about the copyright laws in Japan reported over at Technomancers is seen as Businesses: 1 / Content Creators: 0 The […]

Read More
crossmenuarrow-down