User Profile: HerrZauberer

Member Since: October 03, 2012

CommentsDisplaying HerrZauberer's 10 most recent comments.

  • Your right, professionals do hate exercises like this. However it is
    nothing more than professionals having a bad attitude toward the
    amateur. (Please read my above post.) Does the amateur think like a
    professional warfighter, usually no. But guess what, neither do many
    of those actually committing terrorism. Professional CT units are
    no different than anyone else, they just don’t like having their plans
    and to some degree their intelligence called into question.

    When you need scenarios from outside the box, do you bring in a
    complete outsider, or someone who can only think in a slightly
    larger box. If the study and planning for terror scenarios were
    that easy; why would EVERY branch and intel service set up schools
    to specifically train professionals in asymmetrical warfare. (Hint: it’s
    not because they can think outside the box.)

    The purpose of exercises like this are to war game “what if ”
    scenarios. Ironically it’s not exercises like this that get people
    killed. It’s when professionals fail to prepare for scenarios
    because they refuse to accept a “what if” as a possibility.

  • No one has said she was giving classified and/or restricted data
    to the students. Like it or not, the Feds get as much data from
    independent classes like this as they do from professional
    depts in our intelligence services. (See my above post)
    If the students get a hold of info restricted (or that should be)
    especially without breaking any law, shows where vulnerabilities
    in internal security are.

  • Everyone here is too reactive. Sit down and chill. The #1 question that
    needs to be asked (and NOBODY has) is what the prof intends to do with
    the reports and data she collects.

    How in the world do any of you think the planning for different problems
    originates?! The DoD, FBI etc. only come up with a percentage of
    “what if” scenarios. That rest are filtered through by fire depts. , law
    enforcement and yes COLLEGE CLASSES. This is done on purpose
    to reduce the likely hood of a larger response agency getting stuck in
    a rut. I teach Emergency and WMD response in the Northeast and have
    conducted dozens of exercises where responders design an attack
    for the purpose of identifying weak areas. I routinely bring in outsiders
    to design scenarios LEOs and FDs may not have considered.

    I never tell outsiders specifics on capabilities. However, if they do find
    out specifics this can directly point to security issues with intelligence.

    The ONLY difference between this prof and myself is that as soon as
    my “what if” exercises are done all conclusions are sent to the necessary
    Local, State and Federal agencies. If this prof was doing the same
    she is no different than hundreds of trainers across the country and has done
    a tremendous amount of good. If not, than this prof deserves as much
    derision as she’s getting.

    So again I ask all of you, what was the prof doing with the reports and data.

  • Whoa! There’s an article here!?! I thought the headline was rhetorical!

  • We need to get one thing straight here: BILL NYE IS NOT A SCIENTIST.
    A scientist makes observations and from conclusions based on evidence.
    The evidence may support macro evolution be we cannot call it 100%
    fact for the simple reason that we do not have a million plus years of observed
    data. I have no problem with Nye refusing to believe in God, but do so
    with a logical argument. Believing in evolution without examining and/or
    disproving alternate theories shows that Nye in no scientist and makes him
    no better than the religious fundamentalists he refers to. In science you do not
    prove what is right (this leads to testing bias) instead you examine everything else and
    try to disprove yourself. What remains is fact which may not be your hypothesis.

    What I have a real problem with is Nye saying their is debate in the science
    community. There’s plenty of debate, but ironically the louder you bring the topic up,
    the faster the acolytes of evolution shout you down and try to black ball you.

  • I’m not an Armstrong fan by any stretch, but the way the USADA handled the
    whole thing made it seem like something from the Inquisition.
    “Where going to keep asking until they confess.”

    Because of this I think the USADA has done more damage to itself than
    they are willing to admit. Did Armstrong dope up in some fashion? Probably.
    Did the USADA keep on him in order to find anything that would “prove”
    they weren’t on a witch hunt from the word go? Again, probably.

  • Tainted! That’s the nicest way I’ve ever heard to describe Southern Maine.
    Maybe with this case we can add some new adjectives.

  • As long as the ME GOP hammers the comments and not the game, they’ll
    be fine. Considering the demographic, the ad might actually help the GOP.
    ME has one of the of the oldest populations in the country. Regardless of
    party, if a lot of older citizens find out how much time someone is willing to
    waste on a computer game it could seriously affect a race.

    As for the under 30 vote, many are familiar with the trash talk of online gaming
    and will either dismiss this ad entirely or just think the ME GOP has a
    few Luddites in it.

  • Could’ve been a one time occurrence but chances are the teacher has
    a history of such behavior and the school has let them get away with it.

    If public scrutiny doesn’t keep pressure on the district, this girl will find
    herself blackballed by the system, forcing her to change schools
    or drop out and get her GED. This is why in many school systems
    students are reluctant to speak out against teachers.
    Every day the district does not publicly condemn the actions of this teacher
    is one day closer to forcing this courageous girl to leave.

    Take it from someone was in a similar situation in high school.

  • So he saw what was going on (literally) and did nothing but report it to his supervisor?
    Why hasn’t he been charged as an accessory?