All Aboard

--L'Ange du Foyeur, Max Ernst

Honey, honey, can't you hear?
Funny, funny music, dear
Ain't the funny strain
Goin' to your brain?
--Everybody's Doin' It Now,
Irving Berlin

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?
--The Sesame Street Song
_________________

Why does the media spread hype about terrorism versus the actual facts?

The hype has perhaps seen its apotheosis being woven into the plots of most criminal television programs with the latest fad -- the terrorist takeovers of schools. Surely this is crime most heinous, yet it is naught but a hotch-potch of fiction seasoned by a smidgeon of outdated news.

But that is adequate to strike fear in the average viewer, who hasn't much time to fact-check before bedtime and the morning alarm. People watch these programs feeling uneasy that they are viewing something familiar ... and they are. But Hollywood is constructing this toxic brew serving to keep everyone all aboard the war bandwagon -- liberal Hollywood!

NCIS, Blue Bloods, The Unit and Flashpoint are each complicit in serving us this horrible fantasy: The terrorists are here, they're strac and they want your children, now.

What is the point of this fantasy? Is it the sublimation of exhausted, hyper-vigilant helicopter parents? The resolution always involve bloody fights won by assault teams. The program "Criminal Minds" gave the same unrealistic scenario, except with serial killers. Ranger predicts the next trend will be serial-killing terrorists.

These shows are so far from reality that they should be viewed after dropping acid, in place of a planetarium visit. There have been two isolated incidents of terrorists attacking schools: The 1974 Ma'alot Massacre off 22 Israeli students by the PDFLP, and the 1977 Moluccan hostage crisis in the Netherlands in which the terrorists did not kill any of their hostages, but two students died in a subsequent police raid.

Terrorists soon realized that attacking schoolchildren will not generate sympathy and erodes the aura of the group, and so this activity was not repeated. It is simply not conducive to gaining funds and new members, which is the goal of most terrorist activity. Also, terrorists will not waste their assets on a schoolhouse attack because there is no way to extricate their assets; a professional operative is not suicidal.

Terror has a purpose beyond the simple violence suffered by the target group: it is symbolic and aims to spread fear beyond the target audience. If it does not accomplish that goal, it is simply crime. What would any terror group hope to achieve by killing children on U.S. soil?

If the answer were as simple as the war hawk/fundamentalist crowd claims, we would imagine their purpose would actually be eradicating Americans. But that would an arduous way to go about the task of winnowing down a nation of 300+ million people; there are simply too many of us. (The 22 Israeli students killed was a far greater actual loss to a small nation like Israel, so the PDFLP attack could be seen as achieving both ends, though the publicity was a negative gain.)

These t.v. programs are simply hawking fear in the guise of machismo. The writers shamelessly conflate news of actual school murders -- like those in China, Scotland, Chechnya, Columbine and Pennsylvania -- taking the onus off the crazy one-off shooter and institutionalizing it in the form of a well-oiled generic terrorist machine; it just ain't the reality.

The U.S. media consumer is never exposed to the facts on terrorism, which can easily be found in non-classified United Nations or State department reports. Why? Put in perspective, so many more of your fellows are killed each year by auto accidents and medical mistakes as to make the actual threat of terrorism pale.

But that wouldn't generate the kind of mass paranoia that needs to be kept on a low simmer to fuel the complacency of the average citizen, Democrat and Republican, alike.

Terrorist Catwalk

--Edgar Ramirez,
as Carlos the Jackal

We have begun to change
Into the worst kind of people
So unkind
Oh apologies? No apologies
--High Life, Counting Crows

My name is Carlos -- 
you may have heard of me?
--Carlos the Jackal

Screws fall out all the time, 
the world is an imperfect place
--The Breakfast Club (1985)
___________________

Time improves wine and the legends of terrorists.

Sundance presented a three-part miniseries, Carlos, last week. The trailer featured the much handsomer Edgar Ramirez in beret and leather jacket, soaked in a blood-red filter, caption: "Only one man would hijack the world".

The real Carlos the Jackal was a classic fuck-up who nonetheless has gained mythic status and is being immortalized in a 5 1/2-hour film, as well. A breathy Boston Globe review says the film "brings real terror to the screen." The average viewer, if he even knows about Carlos, will imagine him as the sexy and iconic ideolog CHE, whose image is printed on the front of T's in Target. The truth is far less ideal.

Carlos was an ideological mercenary moreso than a terrorist as he performed his services for monetary gain. One of his acts was to kill two unarmed French intelligence-type uniformed gendarmes and a former PFLP informant. Not a smart move, and totally counterproductive. Police don't appreciate such activity and it does not pay to alienate an entire national police force.

Carlos failed an assassination attempt in England of an Israeli diplomat as he failed to double tap his target. No professional shooter should make such a mistake.

The most significant operation of his career was the takeover of the OPEC oil ministers in Vienna, 1975. However, he was later kicked out of the PFLP because he hadn't killed two specific OPEC ministers, in violation of his orders. There was also the matter of claiming to have misplaced some of the funds he was to have disbursed.

There was a suspicion that Venezuelan representatives gave Carlos the details needed to carry out this operation. Ironically, Carlos killed the security guard of the Venezuelan representative to the conference. (A mistake?) His taking of a Saudi Royal family member was also a strange action, as the Saudis supported the Palestinian causes for which Carlos worked.

Another high point was Carlos' RPG attack at Orly Field that was more flash than dash. A professional would have used a Redeye-type missile, which could have blown an aircraft out of the sky. Instead, a few RPG rounds blasted down range in what was something of a joke.

It is 2010 now and Carlos sits in a French prison, where he has been since 1994 and where he shall remain for life. Yet he is being touted in Western culture as a mythical, prototypical terrorist, and this is hype. Carlos did not "hijack the world", and his feats were short of world-shattering.

The key lesson from Carlos should be the networking of terrorist groups and their cross-fertilization. Al-Qaeda fits the mold, as well. We should not be wowed by any one man or group. Their behaviors are archetypal and are firmly set in precedent. Carlos looms large in Carlos's mind, but he should not in ours.

The groups become more lethal as they cross-fertilize and exchange operational lessons. Unlike Carlos, most terror operatives maintain a low-profile and prefer anonymity. Even a terrorist is well-advised to limit and control his level of violence.

In addition to turning the French against him, he also alienated and made enemies within organizations sympathetic to and supporting terrorism. For all of his failures, present terrorist operatives are less dangerous than he as they lack the state sponsorship to finance their operations or provide intelligence and weaponry. Carlos was financed by a large network of national interests opposed to Israel and the West.

Ultimately, his downfall was his hubris. Carlos was no Otto Skorzeny.