Writers Are Terrorists

[HConn]

Be careful with that Internet research. (http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_10_24_digbysblog_archive.html#109864025365506 773)

[evanaharris]

I feel safer already.

[maestrowork]

If you're seen me you'd believe.

[evanaharris]

If you're seen me you'd believe.

You make no sense.

[Jules Hall]

Sometimes I'm glad to live in a free country. I mean, we Brits had a bit of an issue with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act a few years back, and there's still ongoing issues over who can demand your logs from your ISP, but we still don't seem to be having this kind of problem.

I wonder what the FBI would make of my habits of reading material about the manufacture of improvised munitions? :)

[Risseybug]

I know of someone, whose name I won't use here, who was writing a screenplay, pre-9/11. The action ms. was about terrorists (I forget who) who used a plane as a bomb.

The ms got sent back from the Hollywood people. One said "too unbeliveable - who would use a plane as a bomb? People would never buy it." She blogged about this ms, I think might have mentioned it on her website.

Quick as lightning, on Sept 15 or so, the FBI took her site down and knocked on her door.

[Jamesaritchie]

This sounds like a case of "Believe nothing you hear, and only half what you see." I'd have more confidence in this story if teh writer were named, and if I heard the other side of the story.

It's always naive to believe something where people aren't named, and stupid to believe anything until you hear both sides of the story.


I've seen several similar stories in the past, and in every case there turned out to be much more to it that the poor, innocent victim claimed.

[Risseybug]

No, no, I actually know this person. This is not a "friend of a friend" story. I just don't want to put her name on this forum without her permission.

She laughs about the story now, but it wasn't very funny then.

[James D Macdonald]

<a href="http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/040727.htm" target="_new">Artist as bioterrorist</a>

[evanaharris]

This sounds like a case of "Believe nothing you hear, and only half what you see." I'd have more confidence in this story if teh writer were named, and if I heard the other side of the story.

Ah, but under the provisions of the Patriot Act, telling people you're under investigation, or someone telling YOU you're under investigation (you are not guaranteed this information), is a federal offense.

It COULD be fake. But it doesn't have to be. It's entirely plausible.

But again, not that we could ever know or find out.

[zerohour21]

Why would anyone say that using a plane as a bomb is unbelievable? In World War II the Japanese did it all the time; they were called kamikazi missions.

Certainly tells you something about various publishers and their outlook on what kinds of things are believable.

[James D Macdonald]

Tom Clancy used a plane as a bomb in one of his published novels.

[evanaharris]

That explains the Al Qaeda/Ronald Reagan connection.

[Eowyn Eomer]

Paranoia is such an unbecoming personality trait. Might make for an interesting antagonist in a plot though. Take, for example, Mel Gibson's character in "Conspiracy Theory." Hmm. . . is it okay to mention a movie in a writers forum?

[FM St George]

I've heard this particular story three times in the past two days and have to be skeptical about it if ONLY because no major network, American or International, has picked up the story.

where's the BBC? Al-Jazeera? CBC? Heck, where's the regular MSNBC, CNN et al who usually jump all over this sort of thing? Where are the local papers, the talk shows, the college newspapers? This is international news and no one seems to be covering it...

I've Googled for the past two days and can't find anything more than two or three sites quoting each other and that's not really enough to convince me that this happened.

yes, it *COULD* have happened - but given the lack of substancial evidence at this point, I'm not believing it.

(all, of course, subject to change if the reporting gets more widespread...)

jmo, ymmv...

[Writing Again]

Actors as ??? (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030314-035358-2204r)

[preyer]

i clicked on the top link and it dropped me on this paragraph:

'If anyone wonders why the Bush campaign doesn't feel the need to do much campaigning in the essential state of Ohio, you don't need to look any further than this. They haveplans in place to ensure he wins no matter what.'

i don't need to read anymore. sure, they have plans. it's called the electoral college and redistricting. no campaigning in ohio? huh? if bush stops here one more time we're going to have to charge him rent. he was here this friggin' morning telling people thanks. i mean, if they can't get this basic information right, why trust in a single other word the site has to say? i'm one of the bigger conspiracy nuts you'll ever run across, but, hey, you have to separate the wheat from the chaff *especially* when you're trying to support your paranoid lunacies. why these guys take the suspension of disbelief to illogical levels amazes me. a good buddy of mine is a paranoid schizophrenic, which at least gives him a reason to look over his shoulder.

i once did searches on everything they said would get me in trouble. just for fun. nothing happened. if they're monitoring me, i could care less. i'd like to have one of those thermo-camera deals, though.

[Jules Hall]

Searches won't get you into trouble, I don't think. It's too difficult to monitor that volume of data.

What "they" can do, realistically:

* Set up web sites with information that might attract the kind of person they're looking for, and then try to find more information about everyone who visits it. Although only if very few people did so -- any more than ten or twenty visitors a week and it would quickly become impractical to find out who the visitors were, so this will only really work for obscure things.

* Ask libraries/bookstores for details of everyone what has checked out particular books.

[FM St George]

update on this one...

www.booksquare.com/archiv...11/19/798/ (http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2004/11/19/798/)

seems the woman's been arrested for Social Security fraud - nothing to do with the Patriot Act after all - she's "just" a criminal...

wonder if this'll get as much play as the original accusation.