Sunday, February 21, 2010

systemic disruptions featuring Doogie Howser

For the foreseeable future, this blog will cover my recent interest in systems disruptions. More than just kidnappings, extortion, suicide bombings, blah - I will attempt to create fresh and innovative ways to maximize their value. One thing concerning 9/11, those jihadists really got a lot of "bang for their buck." It cost them about $250,000. The immediate damage and economic fallout was a few hundred billion. The long term impact - justification of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and the continued remnants of the war on terror - probably about 2 trillion. That's the greatest conceivable rate of return in the history of human warfare. Nothing else even comes close regarding transaction costs. Fortunately, not all suicidal terrorists are that sophisticated and most don't have the mental/physical capabilities or financial backing. Hence, they're just equipped with a bomb and some will cover themselves with nails and rat poison in an attempt to extract maximum misery. How refreshing. Yet even these bozos could take additional steps. A greater impact as they make the "ride, ride, slippety slide" (Coolio) to martyrdom. Coolio = underrated. Didn't he win a grammy or get screwed out of one or something?

Hear me out on this. Let's offer up a typical low-level Islamic terrorist in Islamabad, Pakistan. This nutcase will try to blow up a crowded civilian marketplace because it's more difficult to target police stations and heavily fortified military posts. They go after the easier civilian targets in a desperate attempt to inflict human suffering and create further governmental instability in Pakistan. These situations are well documented. So you're probably thinking, "That's wonderful Saf. What would you do better?" Smother your body with higher quality rat poison?" Well no.

But I think it's reasonable to include realistic demands and ominous threats in your martyrdom video. The trick is to make your demands credible. The problem with most Jihadists - their videos call for unachievable goals. They'll demand the complete U.S. troop withdrawal in Iraq, Afghanistan and the holy lands of Saudi Arabia. While this might make for a decent sound byte with the fringe practitioners of Sunni Wahabism, it doesn't really achieve anything. I suppose it's more of a motivational and recruiting tool to further promote the cause. Doesn't it make sense to actually accomplish multiple goals considering that your body will soon be blown to bits?

A brief aside - I think Fox News, when reporting on isolated suicide bombings, should use the song "Bodily Dismemberment" by the death metal band Rigor Mortis. It would invoke vivid memories of the Trash House at the University of Dayton (1988). Thrasher Mike, the fearless leader of the pit, would awaken from a drunken stoned haze and murmur the following...

Your body's in slices
You're in six fucking pieces
Bodily dismemberment

at the 2:05 minute mark

Maybe get Glenn Beck to sing the words as they roll the video footage. And one more point - In the intro to the forgotten sitcom Doogie Howser M.D., there's a Rigor Mortis poster in his bedroom.

You have to look very closely for the partially obscured Rigor Mortis poster. It's in the top center of the clip at the 8 second mark.

I had no idea that Doog was such a big fan of death metal. They never portrayed him as a hardcore headbanger. Especially in that weird, dreamy episode where he loses his virginity to the indomitable (and really annoying) Wanda character. Never much cared for his girlfriend. I did like Vinnie though - the perpetually young friend that was afflicted with Gary Coleman disease. I think he was 26 years old hangin' with a bunch of teenagers. Even on The Sopranos in 2008, he's still looking good.

But back to my main point. I would call for something achievable in my martyrdom video. Considering that I'm likely a demented misogynist, I would call for additional attacks on specific elementary girl schools on certain dates on a future yearly basis - maybe coincide them with days of Islamic significance. If I were the principal of one of these schools, I'd have to take such a threat seriously. Would they close down school for those days? Perhaps early on as a precaution. But I'm sure there would be some concerned parents who keep their daughters home on those dates. So at least you achieved SOMETHING realistic and verifiable. You managed to inspire fear and promote the subjugation of young women. And you also managed to kill 3 civilians and severely maim 9 others. Well done.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Stack attack

I almost never post links to other blogs because I prefer to express personal observations. And to be honest, most people concerned with politics and religion are probably not interested in the incessant rants against Maury Povich or a lousy meal they just had. But I'm such a huge fan of the John Robb's Global Guerrilla blog and his recent post about Joseph Stack (the IRS airplane bomber) accurately reflects my thoughts concerning the inevitably of looting in the U.S.

Here's the link to one of the sharpest, most insightful individuals you'll ever come across. Robb analyzes everything without bias. The reading is occasionally heavy. It takes a while to fully appreciate concepts like resilient communities and decentralized platforms. The terms he uses are often unique, because he discusses concepts well ahead his time. Fortunately, his post about Stack is an easy read though. Sometimes, the comment section is equally enthralling. And I'll be honest - sometimes, it's over my head. When you strip it down, Robb and his faithful readers are discussing the future of societal breakdown and devising remedies for weathering the storm. If you're more concerned with the American Idol contestant who just came out of the closet, exit now.

Obviously, Joseph Stack was mentally ill and a lone wolf. But here's the underlying point made by Robb (and it's the same point I've often conveyed) -

"Will we see more of this violence? Most assuredly. Further, as this economic failure matures, damaging ever greater numbers of people, we may see less violence against people and more economic violence (disruption) in an attempt to extract from society as great a cost as they possibly can. A couple of hundred people, using the super-empowerment afforded by network disruption, could easily cause countless billions in economic damage. A thousand people?"

He doesn't mention looting specifically. But the looting model I've constructed is totally relevant. We've arrived at a point in history where "company loyalty" has vanished. This ain't the 1950's. People who have invested their entire lives into the blue collar work ethic have witnessed their pensions evaporate and their health care safety net disappear. The CEOs and attorneys walk away with millions. This is in direct contradiction to the American dream and the entire notions of capitalism and democracy. If you work hard, play by the rules (and the Palinites might want to include "love God and country"), you'll be rewarded. Well, now we all know that this is a complete fallacy. Perhaps their are still a few diehards who adhere to these principles. Some live right here in Wheeling, the others I'm guessing Bartlesville, Oklahoma.

Back to the looting. What would a hundred people do if they channeled their frustration toward corporate America? Well, let's try to build a model for straight smash and grab, pillage and plunder. Keep in mind, I'm not advocating violence against your local Walgreens. I'm telling you it's right around the corner. It is the future of the United States. Disaffected individuals in an inflated economy will ban together and exercise their focused wrath on corporate America. There's this underlying sense that the "little guy" is helpless and can't do anything against the overwhelming power of big government and corporate America. Well that's right... one "little guy" can't do shit. But 100 "little guys" is a TRIBE and can inflict massive destruction for their own personal gain.

I think the future will resemble something like the illegal drug market. Instead of people being defined by selling heroin or marijuana, they'll be defined by selling Prilosec and bacon. When looters assign themselves specific commodities for resale. Ohhh, you need an electric razor - you should pay a visit to Shaver Jim. He's got hundreds of them. That might sound a bit far fetched, but if time is of the essence and the looters are focused and have adequately game planned using basic military tactics... Well, that's a different story. You're in charge of disseminating the message and the timing. You're in charge of restricting traffic flow and first responders. You're in charge of smashing the security camera. You're in charge of stealing all the cigarettes. There just isn't much evidence left behind when the building gets torched.

So many beautiful glass storefront windows. Look at all those Macs. Ooooh, gaze lustily at that IPod. Well, let me tell you something. There's a downside to all that exquisite presentation. There's balance on this planet. You can't maintain this level of unabated retail sprawl. There are consequences.

As I see it, the difficulty is organizing and training your "looting tribe" without being infiltrated by corporate narcs and police detectives. Notification can be done via a simple text message. The technology to send untraceable messages and emails is available, just not widespread. That will soon change and society will respond accordingly. After a bunch of looting runs have been successful and reported in the media, the stigma of "stealing is wrong" will quickly dissipate. After all, it's just payback for the fat cats who stole our hard earned money in the first place.

Friday, February 19, 2010

more Maury more Maury more

Yep. Wasn't it one of the East coast rappers that said "Mo money mo money mo?" Honestly, I don't know which thug to assign credit. Regardless, if you follow this blog, I've spoken of something I call the "Maury Povich progression." It's a tool used to determine the results of paternity tests before the actual results are read.
I've decided to expand the "MoPo progression" axiom into the realm of lie detector tests. I've been forced to do this because I have caught Maury Povich in a bold-faced lie. And he lies quite a bit. Allow me to explain.

Maury will often follow up a paternity test with a lie detector test directed at the woman. When the Maury team does both areas of investigative work, he will reach for the sacred manila envelope as the crowd shrieks with delight. At this point, he'll invariably preach, "Well, let's do the paternity results FIRST because the ONLY THING I CARE ABOUT IS THAT CHILD." This is a blatant lie. His staff will vary which test results are revealed first based on the situation in order to maximize crowd involvement.

Consider this. Let's say there's a woman named LaSquisha who just had a baby girl named Levonica. She's accusing a guy aptly named Levon, a man she met and fell in love with over the course of one night. As is often the case, they fell in love at the bar. But Levon is adamant that he is not the father. Regardless, they stayed together until baby Levonica was born. Turns out Levonica looks racially mixed. Levon and Squisha are both very black. Well, Levon wants a lie detector test because it's rumored that she slept with all her co-workers at the Taco Bell. She denies having slept with anyone else and is 10 million percent sure that Levon is the daddy.

Judging from the picture of baby Levonica, it's obvious that Levon is NOT the father. The kid's a borderline version of a dark ginger. Well, when Maury reaches for the envelope - it's going to be the lie detector results FIRST. We can make this conclusion because we all know the seed planted was not that of Levon. If Maury were to read the paternity results FIRST, LaSquisha would bolt off the stage and we wouldn't even need to hear the lie detector results because we've already ascertained that she slept with someone else (in this case, it may have been the sour cream dollop dispenser dude).

So when Maury proclaims, "Let's do the paternity test results FIRST because the ONLY thing I'm concerned about is the welfare of the child" - Well, here's the proof that he's completely full of shit. He reads the test results of whichever one makes better dynamic sense. And that's incontrovertible, logistical proof that Maury Povich is a lying sack of shit.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

additional facebook observations

A few months ago I wrote about my impressions of facebook. To be honest, I have mixed feelings about it. In many ways, facebook is a fantastic way to keep tabs on what's going on. Someone's birthday, so and so had a baby, this one got engaged, new job, just signed the contract on a new house, posting graduation pics, etc. blah. - I think these are relatively important things that transpire during the course of ones life. I think events like this are newsworthy or at the very least, I understand why everyone else thinks they're important. But what has facebook become?

Lately my impressions have turned (most would say predictably) sour. It just seems that things have been really "dumbed down." It's a difficult dilemma. Freedom of speech is the right I treasure the most, by far. But incessantly posting the words "HA HA" or "LOL" - is that really speech? I think John Hancock would be spinning in his grave if he were abruptly exposed to the modern-day version of the first amendment he was willing to die for. Sarah Palin? Now she could probably handle it. I think she once scribbled LMAO on her palm when anticipating a question about how Obama is trying to reign in the national deficit.

I sifted through some recent updates and have managed to lump some of them into several sub-groupings. I have then assigned a numerical ranking to each type. This way you can scroll back through some of your previous updates and rate yourself accordingly.

a ranking of 10 is generally good - it means your update was interesting and inspired
a ranking of 1 is not good - you have little creativity and are basically sheep.

As a general rule of thumb, wouldn't the status updates be more interesting if you were only allowed to post maybe once per day. There are far too many habitual status posting offenders. Is it narcissism? Is it sheer boredom? I do not know.
What about the copying and pasting fad? If you love God, know someone who has been impacted by a terminal illness, want others to reflect on human suffering from a natural disaster, on it goes. It's difficult to envision a world without people encouraging others to spread the word, or if you prefer, gospel. Kind of like a modern day chain letter.
Unless the content is original, I give you copy and pasters a 2.

Bustin' Out.
Soooo Drunk!

How about these impassioned two word/phrase updates? These strike me as very peculiar. If there ever was a way to tell the world - "I have virtually no utilitarian value. I crave attention but this is the absolute best I can do." Very annoying. I desperately want a bunch of people to respond - "What's wrong", "U okay","hang in there" But wait, the "PISSED OFF" comment was only meant for a dozen people, not all of my 874 friends.
You get the worst ranking - .3

People who always post the same crap. C'mon show some creativity. These tend to be people who are always caught in a rut - country/metal/rap or "Go team" sports related posts. I realize it's easy to wrap your entire identity and sole purpose for existence around musical acts and sports teams. We've all suffered from this - even yours truly. Here's a general rule of thumb - if you are attending the game/concert or plan on turning it into an event, I think it's ok to post. But if you just want to say "Go Steelers" - that's wading into the lameness of the kiddie pool. And yes - I'm talking fatso, hairy-backed pedophile at the public Wheeling Park pool on an overcast Tuesday morning.
Not a strong ranking - 1.

What about people that post song lyrics? I have mixed views on this and it gets a little biased. If you quote rap lyrics - this trends weak. Mostly teen white girls making a desperate plea for attention. "Big Pimpin in Bellaire" - this is not good. But if you were to write "Bel-Dirty Pimpin" - that's a little better. And may I make a suggestion. If you're heading to let's say the upcoming Megadeth concert: rather than writing "We're on our way to go see Megadeth" how about employing a lyric and a more subtle, cryptic message - "Farewell tonight, R.I.P. (Rust in Peace)."
So if it's pop country or rap lyrics, you get a 2.
If it's hippie or metal lyrics, you get a 4.
I suppose this is biased, but it is grounded in reality based on the intellectualism of the musical genre.

What about the people who feel compelled to raise controversial political topics? Stuff like - Global warming? Al Gore's an idiot! It's freezing out!
Here's my thoughts on this one. It's really a bad idea to broach anything political or religious on Facebook. Mostly because the format does not lend itself to informed discussion. One response can be a lengthy doctoral dissertation about the melting ice cap causing greater fluctuations in climate. Then, someone else chimes in with a winning one word rebuttal - FAG! It reminds me of the endless, mostly unsubstantiated back and forth in the online Wheeling newspaper. The anonymous nature of the forum just does not lend itself to anything inspiring or substantive.
As far as the religious stuff goes, these days I don't view it as controversial but trending worthless and nonsensical.
So political comments - you get a 1
Religious stuff - you don't get shit. Oh wait, you get into heaven. My bad.

Farmville, Mafia Wars, Pillow Fight, Serving imaginary drinks, Headless chicken got out of its cage...
I have mixed thoughts on this. First, let me be up front. I actively choose to be a NON-participant in all of these applications. I have NO interest in any of this whatsoever. But here's what I do find relevant. Seeing which friends of mine who get actively involved in a barn-raising and selling apple cider by the roadside. This could be a valuable tool in determining your relative degree of sanity. Now I get it - you're a claims adjuster for Progressive Insurance, live in a studio apt. on the Southside and drink Starbucks super-double choco-lattes for breakfast but are overwhelmed with the dream of being an Amish bearded recluse selling woodcarvings and rhubarb pies. This helps me better understand the tsunami of mental confusion you face on an hourly basis. Truly vexing. So it's safe to say that I do find relevance in the ubiquitous, pummeling cascade of diarrheal verbiage. May the fragrant odor of fictitious bacon permeate your kitchen. Just make sure my make believe wheat toast isn't smothered in margarine and covered with grape jelly.
Imaginary application addicts - I give you a 1. For the information you unknowingly supply others - I give you a 6. Believe it or not, it does possess extrinsic value. As for intrinsic value... lamentably, it has none.

I joined the "I love Arethra Franklin's hat" club.
I'm a fan of Michelle Obama's Fist Pump.
Does anyone out there who clicks on these "Give Blood, Save A Life" links ever check back and see how the cause is going? Sometimes, you'll see these profiles with over 200 links. This is a troubling phenomenon because I know that you're desperate to let people know, "Hey, this is what I'm all about. This stuff defines me. I never gave it a second thought until I saw the "Eating a Primanti Brother's sandwich in the Strip District after the Penguins game" club. Yeah, that's what I'm all about. Good for you. I will let others define my entire existence, then I will let them know about it whether they want it or not. Everyone needs to know that "I bleed back and gold, but not so much in the pre-season." I suppose a few links is alright. If you have over 100, you might want to reexamine your link-clicking compulsion tendencies.
Hardcore link clickers - I give you a 2.

...more to follow

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Walmart trouble

I just got back form Walmart in the Highlands. I was there at 11:30am this morning stocking up on some essentials as the blizzard continues to drone on like a Rosie O'Donnell comedy routine. The store was basically a ghost town. About 30 cars in the lot. Nonetheless, I was still pleasantly greeted by a hearty-bearded man. I rarely respond - the most they'll get back is a "Yo" or a brief head-nodding acknowledgment.

Anyway, I made an immediate left and headed toward the aspirin/toothpaste aisles. I then sweep around the store in a full circle. I call this classic Walmart envelopment strategy. It's my theory that you should NEVER start in the food aisle because if you get any frozen stuff, it just has extra time to melt or congeal. So I'm wrapping up my last bit of shopping and I walk into the bread/coffee aisle to obtain my Dunkin Donuts medium roast coffee original blend. As I enter the aisle, there is a disheveled man in his mid 40's with a young girl. The man looked a little bit like what I think would resemble country music legend Boxcar Willie. At about 5'8" and 220 lbs, he appeared unkempt. His wardrobe consisted of sweats and a mangy t-shirt. I suppose you could affix the dreaded white-trash label upon him. The young girl he was with looked a bit on the ratty side as well, kind of like a Dallas Pike truck stop Punky Brewster. Anyway, the girl is throwing a mild temper tantrum. He's yelling at her and shaking her shoulders as she continues to cry (not ear-piercingly loud, but definitely causing a commotion).
I'm trying to avoid making eye contact as I grab my coffee. We are the only three in the aisle. As I leave the twosome behind to settle their problems, a woman comes running past me charging at the dirtbag. At first, I thought it was the mom, but then realized it was a non-related third party. She starts yelling very loudly, "I saw you hit that girl! I'm calling the cops! You don't have the right to hit her!" She was very defiant. Well, dirtbag yells back, "Fuck you! I raised 4 kids. Don't tell me how to treat my kids. I didn't hit nobody!"
Well, now the commotion has spilled out front and center into the main area, right in between the produce section and the self-checkout machines. These two are yelling back and forth and a crowd of about a dozen has gathered around the two. And of course, the young girl is still bawling. An young, oafish employee says, "Alright, everyone can we please just calm down." The woman, "I saw what I saw. I'm calling the cops." She picks up her cellphone and dials 911. The man gathered up the daughter and said, "Well, I've had enough of this bullshit. I'm leaving." They leave the store and the woman is still in a huff.
I was checking out, making small talk with the cashier, while the rest of this incident transpired. As I was leaving the store, a cop pulled up and an employee outside directed him in the direction dirtbag went. The cop then sped off. As I got on the interstate, I noticed two more cruisers heading up 2-mile hill.
So here's my dilemma. What should I have done? Normally, I'm an acute observer of human behavior, but at this moment I just felt uncomfortable. I wanted to get my last item (the coffee) and get the hell out of there. Truth be told, I never saw dirtbag "hit" the girl. I did see him kneel down and shake her by the shoulders. I saw this out of the corner of my eye; whereas, the other woman had a full-frontal view of the incident. I was a lot closer to the action and never saw any striking motions or any overtly hostile behavior.
It's my belief that the woman over-stepped her bounds. When she started yelling the word "hit" instead of "shook," all the Walmartonians immediately reacted. And this woman was not going to let the matter dissipate. She was LOUD.
Maybe I should have said something. To be honest, I just didn't want to get involved. I do fear that if dirtbag was apprehended, he might not get a fair shake based on his slovenly appearance and crud-like hygiene.

Saturday, February 06, 2010


An anagram is the changing of words and phrases using the same existing letters. I employ anagrams when altering signs for a variety of local businesses. The main goal is to manipulate the letters to convey an irrelevant message. The ultimate victory is when you fundamentally change a sign to the opposite message.

Church marquees provide the best example.

or how about

You get the gist. And with today's technology, you need not be highly gifted. Anyone can participate, even the mentally uninspired viewers of Fox News. All you need is one of those cell phones w/ internet access. This site is the best I've come across...

Usually, the simpler the better. Stick with the main message and alter a key word or two. Make sure you disable the profanity setting when using the anagram program. Derogatory references to human genitalia are always the best. This is ideal for low standing church marquees. I'd also encourage changing signs that promote "CIGARETTES AND ALCOHOL" which can easily be transformed to read "SCATALOGICAL ADHERENT." This is the dream come true anagram. For those of you who don't know, the term scatalogical refers to scat - a fixation with fecal matter. Anything that includes mention of Sarah Palin... can often be changed to ASS PAIN if there's an extra "S."

I'm currently considering buying one of those 10 foot high letter changing devices. This would open up a whole new era where I could target fast food chain signs and major retailers. If you happen to own one of these, let me know. They can't be that costly. It's just a long pole with a "prong-gripping device" on the end.

Can you even fathom the possibilities? Think about the world we live in. It's all a bunch of crappy slogans and sound bytes. MCRIB IS BACK, ALL NUDE ENTERTAINMENT, BUCKET NIGHT, blah, etc. With the start of a new decade, it's time to encourage this hot new fad - I'm going to call it "Sign System Disruption" or "SSD" for short. I predict that SSD will placate our ailing melancholy in these recessionary times. This is just what Detroit needs. All those inner city convenience store signs are making me fucking salivate. It's as if I'm at Bob Evans and the waitress just asked me, "And your choice of breakfast meat?"

Just make sure you uphold the "Sign Alteration Code of Ethics." Under no circumstances is it ever acceptable to steal letters or bring your own lettering to enhance a troublesome sign. And there's a an absolute zero-tolerance policy for any type of vandalism whatsoever. That's a meaningful setback to a just cause, you know, like voting against the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Make sure to take before and after pictures and post them on your facebook crap. In these times of uncertainty, let us convey random, nonsensical messages to the masses.

I just did a few other commonplace phrases:
and how about this local favorite

And by the way, most of those expensive, elaborate church marquees under glass have miniature Masterlocks on them. All you need is the tiny generic key. It's one size fits all. Thank God.

Friday, February 05, 2010

free speech

I just watched a 6 minute speech concerning the suppression of freedom of speech in Europe and it reminded me of the importance and vitality of the first amendment. This guy has a pretty harsh assessment for those trying to criminalize anti-Muslim sentiment. He has tremendous verbal flair, a cohesive argument and doesn't mince words. His other diatribes are equally poignant. I recommend all of them.

For the past several months, I've debated over whether it's wise to write the following post. If you're one of my faithful readers (I estimate the total number at about a bakers dozen), you already know my thoughts and where I'm heading. I've decided to go on record with my concerns, even though it's the modern-day equivalent of screaming "fire" in a crowded theater.

At the 9/11 hearings, Condoleeza Rice testified before Congress that no one in the government "could have ever conceived of terrorists hijacking commercial planes and near-simultaneously crashing them into buildings." This statement was later proven erroneous when Richard Clarke gave testimony concerning the no-fly zone over the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. During an Olympic security meeting, Clarke was incredulous - "What if someone flies a plane into the Olympics? Why hasn't there been a no-fly zone established?" And what about the kamikaze pilots of World War II? My point - Our defense apparatus was certainly aware of the concept of using airplanes as 100,000 lb. cruise missiles. And Condoleeza later recanted and modified her original testimony.

I'd be willing to bet that somewhere in our massive defense infrastructure, the conceptual nature of 9/11 was conceived and discussed. Perhaps not the totality of 4 planes, but certainly 1 plane and a high value target. I'd also think it was deliberated upon and eventually rejected, not because it was implausible, but rather because in a pre-9/11 world, nothing could have been done regardless. There was no momentum for government to act. I can't fathom how the government would just construct a Department of Homeland Security, hire TSA agents & flight marshals, and order people to remove their shoes before boarding a plane. Something cataclysmic needed to transpire before there was governmental inertia.

If someone in the late 1990's had accurately predicted what transpired on 9/11, would you have held him liable? What if he concocted the entire scenario, wrote about it and then some crazed cell of suicidal terrorists found out about it and carried it to fruition? There's the conundrum. And it's a big one. What if someone out there had accurately predicted 9/11? Would the government have acted? No. Would civilians at the World Trade Centers reconsidered their vocations? No.

But isn't it always best to err on the side of trying to save innocent lives. That's what our leaders always say. "My #1 priority is safeguarding the lives of American citizens!" I've heard both Bush and Obama utter that exact phrase on a number of occasions. What if I conceived of an innovative terrorist plot, one which has surely been conceived of within the guarded walls of our bureaucratic defense department? But much like 9/11, you really can't discuss it for fear of it causing a government induced panic. After all, what if some extremist group sees your idea and takes action? Should you be held accountable? Can you be held liable for mere postulations? Is there a separate set of rules for the internet regarding freedom of speech? Is it feasible to monitor the blatherings of 6 billion human beings and selectively prosecute those with whom you disagree? Who makes that determination? If you keep reading, I assure you of one thing - you will soon see a test on the limits of free speech.

If you go online and search for the next 9/11 attack, you'll often see the "private planes flown by suicidal pilots detonating suitcase nukes over major metropolitan areas" scenario. The sonic amplification waves instantly killing hundreds of thousands. Ouch! That would probably throw a crimp in my weekend golf plans. And our government has also established "top secret safety protocol" for fear of some moron trying to crash a plane into a nuclear facility. Again with the ouch! That would nullify my plans to go see Pearl Jam. Why am I bringing this up? Because even if the likelihood is remote, it's an acceptable discourse when discussing national defense. The recent use of the explosive (PETN) by the Nigerian Abdulmutallab is also grounds for concern and an open forum. Anthrax, salmonella, botulinum toxin, poisoning the water supply - the last time I checked, it's all fair game for discussion and even preparedness.

But what if the next 9/11 is vastly simpler, conventional and here's the scary part, incredibly INEVITABLE. I've recently written about who might carry out the next significant 9/11. Aside from the massive shock value, 9/11 succeeded because it was a powerful demonstration of asymmetric tactics, especially employing the use of Islamic Jihadists willing to martyr themselves. It's amazing how much damage you can do if you're willing to die for your cause.

CNN website - A league source recently told us that the NFL anticipates that all-time audience record will be "shattered" by Super Bowl XLIV.
Last year, Super Bowl XLIII generated for NBC an all-time record audience of 98.7 million viewers. This year, the average audience is expected to extend into nine figures, for the first time ever.

Well, 100 million viewers +. That's one hell of a captive audience. If you're a follower of my blog, you've come to recognize one immutable fact. I believe that 4th generation warfare is comprised of MESSAGE. The vast majority of the American public has become immune and desensitized to the daily killings abroad. Just ask Joe Smith, "Do you know which Pakistani City was the site of a recent marketplace bombing that killed 28 and injured over 70?" As he struggles to even name a city in Pakistan, now ask him, "Are you going to fill out a NCAA Final Four bracket?" If you can't figure out his response, you're really out of touch with what Joe Schmo considers important. If you believe in the universal laws of balance (probably the only thing I actually believe in), at some point Joe Schmo is going to have to reexamine what he considers fundamentally important.

But wait a minute, this weekend is the Superbowl. The most prized platform for delivering a MESSAGE. Let me make this point so there can be absolutely no room for confusion. I believe it is inevitable that during the course of my lifetime, a group of individuals (you could call them terrorists if you wish), will try to "steal the superbowl." I've been dancing around this in previous blogs because I'm well aware of the sensitive nature of this subject. AND LET ME BE CLEAR, I have no desire whatsoever to see my prediction validated. Yet, I can't rely on the U.S. government to issue a public warning that adequately protects its citizens. Remember what Richard Clarke said during the 9/11 hearings - "I'm sorry. Your government failed you. I failed you." Well, if the U.S. government can't protect you, I suppose the burden falls on this 39 year old from Wheeltown, WV.

So what's your ominous prediction? How do you "steal the Superbowl?" Well, it's pretty damn easy. Assuming you have 2 or more people dedicated to delivering their MESSAGE, I think you would see either car bombs or improvised explosive devices detonated at sports bars/restaurants in the cities of origin for the Superbowl opponents (in this years case, New Orleans and Indianapolis). The simultaneous attacks would occur at roughly 6:30pm. Depending on the size and scope of the terrorist group, I think it would also be conceivable to see similarly timed/orchestrated attacks in Minneapolis and the New York/New Jersey metro area (representing the other teams recently eliminated). That's either 2 or 4 cities with accurate, alarming and indefensible relevance.

The main point - you have achieved absolute dominance with the ability to disseminate message. The network will be forced to alert the viewing public. If they don't, they would be held morally culpable in the event of additional attacks. But trust me, they would. This isn't like Fox News refraining from initial coverage of the Haiti earthquake because there's the inaugural Glenn Beck interview with Sarah Palin. This one's a no-brainer. Even the likes of Fox News cannot bypass a story of this magnitude.

But wait a minute. The government just spent millions fortifying the Superbowl site in Miami. Bomb sniffing dogs, chemical & biological weapons detectors, staggered checkpoints, enhanced security, FBI & Secret Service presence and the now-predictable no fly zone. Let's take a minute and thank the government for wisely allocating all this relatively worthless additional security. Perhaps we should be grateful that the government is only 20 years removed from the current threat. Why on earth would any terrorist worth his weight in Yemeni currency travel to Miami to deliver their message?

Let's focus on some of the defining characteristics of what I'm going to call "Stealing the Superbowl."

1) It transforms low value targets (sports bars/restaurants) into high value targets.

2) It's asymmetrical in nature. Much like 9/11, it has just simply never been conceived of and executed. Yet, it's entirely conventional in nature. No need for the sophistication of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

3) It utilizes TIMING as a weapon, a favorite tactic of Al Qaeda. Timed attacks would be even more terrifying because they're largely indefensible but highly predictable. Who, in their right mind, would go to a city/team relevant sports bar for future championship games? And yes, I think the fear would spread contagiously to other sporting events. There would be a terror-fueled, sociological shift in the way Americans spend their leisure time.

4) It cuts straight through the heart of the capitalist system and our obsession with professional football, right through the collective jugular of America. What company would spend mega-advertising bucks during the next Superbowl? All of a sudden, the sock puppet in the pet food commercial just doesn't seem as comical. Peyton Manning's TD/INT ratio doesn't seem that important either.

5) With the exception of a few isolated incidents through the last century, it brings the return of the car bomb to the United States in a dramatically meaningful way. Historically speaking, the car bomb has been a very useful tool in advancing meaningful political change as well as creating mass hysteria. The return of the car bomb, used as a weapon to assist in the delivery of message, is INEVITABLE as our nation state begins to further hollow and erode. And regrettably yes, unless you're a politician, the United States is currently in a stage of decline.

6) The actors need not be suicidal, religious inspired fanatics. Their death is not a necessity. This really opens up the spectrum of potential attackers. And since it's all about message, a significant body count is not a prerequisite. This will be a significant trademark of 4th generation warfare as the barriers to entry (committing acts of war) become more easily attainable.

7) And to put it bluntly, it's a real kick in the ass. Kudos! Congratulations to your city for achieving this wonderful opportunity on sports' grandest stage. Now, here's your reward.

I've covered more of these points adequately in previous posts. You can draw your own conclusions with regard to the attributes and pernicious fallout from such an attack.

Who would do pull it off? A foreign terrorist group - Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, or perhaps some geopolitical blowback from a Mexican or South American drug kingpin. How about a homegrown terrorist entity - perhaps the MS-13 gang or maybe some deranged group of pro-lifers. I've already covered who I think poses the greatest danger in a previous blog, so I won't regurgitate it.

I'm going out on a limb, but it's my contention that it will be a group of Fox News inspired, white supremacist birthers. I've never seen such a flow of unrestricted venom in the "news" business. And they're supposedly the #1 media outlet in a very hostile economic climate (horrible job market, precarious mortgage foreclosure situation, massive contempt for government and big business and all the accompanying inflation). This could provide the necessary spark to light the fuse. It would play especially well with the deranged birthers who believe Obama's not even an American citizen, let alone a legitimate president. These are the disillusioned, downtrodden rural types with more exposure to weaponry and a contempt for anyone they deem sophisticated and elitist. After having been exposed to the seemingly endless flow of Fox News propaganda, as well as a the inclination toward being receptive to brainwashing, and of course an already inherent predisposition towards embracing virulent racism - it just seems like the perfect storm. An amalgamation of incendiary factors and considerations.

Or now I'll get a little conspiratorial. Perhaps it could be a rogue element deep within the confines of the Republican party. A group committed to pulling it off but unwilling to assign responsibility. Such an attack would beckon for accountability, and would painfully linger over an administration already perceived as weak on terror. I wouldn't be surprised to see this administration eventually pay for the consequences of affording Abdulmutallab (the attempted PETN Nigerian bomber) the rights of an American citizen. This issue plays overwhelmingly in favor of the Dick Cheney machine. Closing Gitmo splits about 50/50. Waterboarding maybe 60/40. But offering foreign terrorists the same rights as American citizens is a LOSER. Probably splits about 85/15, if that. I expect to see it reemerge because it would play better than a Willie Horton ad. Except this time there would be long-bearded Muslim terrorist in full regalia being informed of his Miranda rights.

Why do I think it will happen this year? Just a strange hunch based on the prevailing climate of hostility. The undercurrent of racial tension with the election of Obama and the unabated contempt for the President via the constant drivel of Fox News. Eventually, there has to be some social blowback. You can't keep feeding the propaganda machine without consequence. Home foreclosure market, depressed job market, but mostly a newer trend - an obsession with instant "youtube-like" fame and notoriety - something I like to call the "American Idol Complex" - everyone can get their 15 minutes of fame all contribute to the problem. Well, except with my scenario you get at least 15 days of exposure. It would take quite some time before this story to dissipate out of the news cycle. It could conceivably have this magical ability to reemerge every time there's a major sporting event.

Am I worried about being investigated by the FBI? Yep. If you were to execute a simple google search on key words and phrases in this blog, I'm positive I'd surface somewhere in there. Here's something I find odd - I haven't scoured the internet, but I have poked around a good bit regarding this topic and nothing ever comes up. I'm convinced that google might be purposely suppressing their search engine results. I can't be the only person on the planet who has figured this out and decided to write about it (well, in English). Then again, not many saw 9/11 coming. What a fitting tribute - they could call me 2-7 boy, Superbowl conspirator, message-man, blah, etc.

I'm sure I could expect a knock at my door. Hopefully, they'll screw up and go to fuckface's house instead. Although concerned, I should be on safe ground. I'm not advocating violence. Merely trying to convey a sense of urgency to my enfeebled government. Plus, I'm posting this a couple days before the Superbowl. Hardly enough time for a sophisticated group of terrorists to get their act together.

The responsibility lies within each of us to remain vigilant and aware of our surroundings. And I'll be the first to admit, this post stretches the 1st Amendment in a precarious direction. But it's my contention, that your slightly sophisticated evildoer could figure this out. Remember in 2001-02 when the government felt obligated to put out heightened terror alert threat levels for the Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge, and of course my favorite, shopping malls. Of course, all these terror alerts had nothing to do with protecting its citizens. It was all about bureaucratic ass-covering. In retrospect, it's difficult to blame the government for this. But how about when they overplayed the anthrax attacks and there was a run on duct tape. I just think people should occasionally avoid sports bars at specific times in certain cities. I don't consider that to be fear mongering.

How can our government protect us, mired somewhere between 2nd and 3rd generation warfare, when it's painfully obvious that there entire military defense model is obsolete and incapable of transitioning? Our defense department reminds me of those words uttered by Dr. Phil - "You cannot change what you're not willing to acknowledge." What about the heralded Department of Homeland Security headed up by Janet Napolitano? The preceding statement doesn't even call for a sarcastic follow-up. So I'll go on record here, if you live in one of the representative cities involved in the Superbowl, do yourself a favor and stay at home. In any event, don't head out to the local sports pub. You could find your position heavily compromised, far worse than losing a coin toss wager or narrowly missing the square on your office pool Superbowl board.

Welcome to the fourth generation, a world where body counts become increasingly irrelevant. A world where smaller, non-state related actors vie for message exposure. As citizens become further disillusioned with the state, they'll become loyal to a variety of disparate groups or tribes - a distinct myriad of causes, each with a differing amount of perceived justification for the use of terror. And what's truly scary, as our country trends toward decentralization and the potency of modern technology rises, the ability for the aforementioned Joe Schmo to wage war makes just about everyone a player, and everyone a threat.

At the intersection of timing and the media lies the MESSAGE. I'd set up some kind of sophisticated model or flow chart to explain it better, but to be honest, I lack the cognitive skill. To be blunt, I'm just not smart enough. But I stand firm on my original prediction, the stealing of the Superbowl or a televised event of mass exposure is inevitable. At some point, it will happen.

One final thought, thank God Pixburgh isn't in the Superbowl this year. When the FBI comes a knockin', my traditional yearly Steelers playoff beard would have me lookin' all Al Qaeda up in n'at. The ensuing mugshot would not play well if I'm trying to garner/salvage hearts and minds. Yeah, that Saf guy is GUILTY. Well, at least with an Obama administration, I'll get a civilian trial instead of being blindfolded and water boarded. I could see Dick Cheney wearing a cowboy hat, sipping a gin and tonic, seated in a wheelchair in the corner of the room. "Let's get him boys! It's payback time!"

All kidding aside, I know this post is a "bit" edgy and a kind of conspiratorial, but I stand firm behind the original, fundamental assessment. Major live television events will eventually be usurped by "Breaking News." It's the next logical progression. It is INEVITABLE as message takes center stage. Here's an interesting idea - try building a model for which actions would be successful and which actions would fail. Damn! Wouldn't that make for some intriguing test cases for the 1st Amendment? But before I get into some real trouble, I think I'll go back to restaurant reviews and paternity tests.