JoeyB
10-20-2011, 06:25 AM
This is an article from Finland (from an English language site of a Finnish newspaper). It tells of the mistakes Finland could make in the face of terrorist threats:
The low threat of terrorism in Finland could change some day. Helsingin Sanomat asked Anssi Kullberg, the editor of a fresh book on terrorism, to list three significant mistakes that Finnish society might make in efforts to quell terrorism.
Rewarding acts of terror:
Terrorism must not be made attractive as a way of influencing events in a desired direction.
Kullberg mentions as one bad example the terror attacks in Madrid in 2004, which appeared to lead to a dramatic change in an election result and to Spain’s immediate withdrawal from Iraq.
“A rapid panic reaction will significantly increase the risk of new attacks”, Kullberg says.
Excessive reactions affecting people’s lives:
A typical reaction to terrorism is to increase various security measures. Anssi Kullberg says that excessively harsh reactions could actually play in to the hands of terrorists.
“If the lives of people are made more difficult through new security measures, they might end up causing more harm to society than the original security threats.”
Hysterical blame game:
Terrorism or the threat of it must not lead to a hysterical apportioning of blame, going beyond the small and radical terrorist group, and extending to other members of the same religious, ethnic, or political group, even if they do not approve of terrorism.
“Terrorism often aims at a deliberate provocation. Al-Qaeda itself has stated in a few public statements that it is actively seeking a clash of civilisations.
Also, this is from another article, detailing why Finland has little threat of terrorism. It mentions sometimes I have often said...DO NOT CENSOR THE EXTREMISTS. If you drive people 'underground' it only makes them more dangerous. This is why, for instance, I am disturbed by France's law against saying anything deemed to be anti semetic, or for being an apologist for the Nazis.
The new terrorism expert of the Security Intelligence Service (SUPO) sees many reasons why the risk of serious acts of terror in Finland is among the lowest in Europe. Other countries in the low-risk group include Iceland, Switzerland, the Baltic countries, and the countries of Eastern Central Europe.
“They are all relatively small or medium-sized countries that are not colonial powers or regional great powers, and their role in world politics is limited”, says researcher Anssi Kullberg, who has edited a new book on Finland, terrorism, and SUPO.
The book, which was published on Tuesday, is the result of a research project by the Security Intelligence Service and the Defence Forces. The contributors discuss political violence and the fighting of terrorism in Finland from the early 1990s to the present day, and they ponder how Finland has managed to avoid being targeted by terrorists.
According to the book, bloody terror attacks have been prevented in Finland by the fact that movements of various types have found it more effective to take part in legal political activities than to resort to crimes and violence.
“Finnish society lost its tradition of political violence after exhaustion from the past wars. People here would probably not be receptive to the demands of a group resorting to terrorism”, Kullberg says.
The book takes a negative view of fighting extremist groups through bans and restrictions.
“Censoring the opinions of radical groups would be quite dangerous. It would easily lead to a situation in which they would not voice their message verbally, but with fists, guns, or bombs”, Anssi Kullberg says.
Kullberg is concerned about the spread of anti-Islamic hate speech.
“The danger is that it might provoke the other side. Finland has so far avoided a conspicuous Islamic discourse. We do not have the same kind of situation as Sweden or Norway have in which certain religious leaders incite people to hate”, he says.
This fellow, Anssi Kullberg, is a very smart individual and I'm right impressed with him.
The low threat of terrorism in Finland could change some day. Helsingin Sanomat asked Anssi Kullberg, the editor of a fresh book on terrorism, to list three significant mistakes that Finnish society might make in efforts to quell terrorism.
Rewarding acts of terror:
Terrorism must not be made attractive as a way of influencing events in a desired direction.
Kullberg mentions as one bad example the terror attacks in Madrid in 2004, which appeared to lead to a dramatic change in an election result and to Spain’s immediate withdrawal from Iraq.
“A rapid panic reaction will significantly increase the risk of new attacks”, Kullberg says.
Excessive reactions affecting people’s lives:
A typical reaction to terrorism is to increase various security measures. Anssi Kullberg says that excessively harsh reactions could actually play in to the hands of terrorists.
“If the lives of people are made more difficult through new security measures, they might end up causing more harm to society than the original security threats.”
Hysterical blame game:
Terrorism or the threat of it must not lead to a hysterical apportioning of blame, going beyond the small and radical terrorist group, and extending to other members of the same religious, ethnic, or political group, even if they do not approve of terrorism.
“Terrorism often aims at a deliberate provocation. Al-Qaeda itself has stated in a few public statements that it is actively seeking a clash of civilisations.
Also, this is from another article, detailing why Finland has little threat of terrorism. It mentions sometimes I have often said...DO NOT CENSOR THE EXTREMISTS. If you drive people 'underground' it only makes them more dangerous. This is why, for instance, I am disturbed by France's law against saying anything deemed to be anti semetic, or for being an apologist for the Nazis.
The new terrorism expert of the Security Intelligence Service (SUPO) sees many reasons why the risk of serious acts of terror in Finland is among the lowest in Europe. Other countries in the low-risk group include Iceland, Switzerland, the Baltic countries, and the countries of Eastern Central Europe.
“They are all relatively small or medium-sized countries that are not colonial powers or regional great powers, and their role in world politics is limited”, says researcher Anssi Kullberg, who has edited a new book on Finland, terrorism, and SUPO.
The book, which was published on Tuesday, is the result of a research project by the Security Intelligence Service and the Defence Forces. The contributors discuss political violence and the fighting of terrorism in Finland from the early 1990s to the present day, and they ponder how Finland has managed to avoid being targeted by terrorists.
According to the book, bloody terror attacks have been prevented in Finland by the fact that movements of various types have found it more effective to take part in legal political activities than to resort to crimes and violence.
“Finnish society lost its tradition of political violence after exhaustion from the past wars. People here would probably not be receptive to the demands of a group resorting to terrorism”, Kullberg says.
The book takes a negative view of fighting extremist groups through bans and restrictions.
“Censoring the opinions of radical groups would be quite dangerous. It would easily lead to a situation in which they would not voice their message verbally, but with fists, guns, or bombs”, Anssi Kullberg says.
Kullberg is concerned about the spread of anti-Islamic hate speech.
“The danger is that it might provoke the other side. Finland has so far avoided a conspicuous Islamic discourse. We do not have the same kind of situation as Sweden or Norway have in which certain religious leaders incite people to hate”, he says.
This fellow, Anssi Kullberg, is a very smart individual and I'm right impressed with him.