This time, it doesn’t appear that Bedell was some “right wing loon” that targeted the government, but a “left wing loon” that targeted the government. The Associated Press reports that Bedell was connected with a social networking page that believed the government was responsible for Sept. 11, 2001. Is he a “terrorist?” will be the next media issue. Terrorism is so difficult to define because it depends on what side one is on and who is doing the defining. Got it?

The family told the police their son was unstable and reported him missing. Pundits and second guessers will be harping on this for a long time. “Why didn’t the police do this?” or “Why didn’t the police do that?” But, what if anything, would you expect the police to do?

An officer stopped Bedell and was keenly aware that something was wrong. So he went above and beyond what he had to do and called Bedell’s mother. The AP reported that she mysteriously replied that her son was fine. The officer issued him a warning and Bedell was sent away to wreak havoc, ironically, on other police officers.

Thousands of families have similar problems with their children; it must be heart wrenching. In this case, the system worked and the family failed. The police found a missing person, only for the mother to let him loose, which is not an uncommon problem.

What is even more outrageous, however, is the mother failed to tell the officer that her son may be in possession of a firearm. All of this could have been avoided, but an ulterior motive for her not mentioning it existed, keeping her son out of jail. That did a lot of good. A selfish move on her part could have cost the lives of at least two officers.

Unfortunately, a lot of people in society need mental health care, but it is not the job of the police to make sure they get it. Most people either do not have an insurance plan that covers it or the state they live in refuses to pay for it. Either way, the individual winds up in the street, sometimes hurting others.

It’s a conundrum.

Media outlets from Internet to television are scurrying to capture the moment. Citizens are questioning and challenging the hegemony of their leaders. Truly, this is a new era for the youth of the Middle East and the ripples have reached the shores of the United States.

There is a sense of excitement as Mohamed ElBaradei’s plane touches down in Egypt. ElBaradei was born in Cairo, where he became a lawyer. He left Egypt and for 12 years was the International Atomic Energy Agency chief and a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.

The spotlight was on ElBaradi when the U.S. was in the planning stages to invade Iraq. He stated that Iraq had not reinstated its nuclear program. During the standoff between Iran and the U.S., he tried to find a resolution between the two nations. Both situations left ElBaradei in disfavor with the Bush Administration, who unsuccessfully tried to block his reappointment when his term expired in 2005.

For many, ElBaradei is the candidate that has the best chance against Mubarak, the leader of Egypt for the last 29 years. Mubarak, who came to power after Anwar Sadat’s assassination, continued close ties with Israel and ruthlessly cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood. Mubarak has been criticized routinely for jailing opponents of the government and intimidating any opposition in the presidential elections—the reason he has been in power for so long.

Egypt, once a secular society, has descended the slippery slope towards Islamofascism. In 2005, the Muslim Brotherhood’s resounding victory in the parliamentary elections captured one-fifth of the seats. Even while walking the streets of Egypt, one can see a significant number of women that now wear a niqab (an all black garment, where only the eyes show), as opposed to the hijab (a scarf, which covers only the hair). This is only a harbinger of things to come.

ElBaradei’s run for the presidency represents a time of change in Egypt. The U.S. considers Egypt not only an ally, but a stable nation among many troubled nations.

Here is an opportunity for a renowned and worldly candidate to take charge and propel the country into the 21st Century. The U.S. must stand behind ElBaradei and his views, for they are very similar to much of what President Barack Obama ran for in the last election.

The window opportunity is small and the U.S. cannot afford to miss it.

Examples outlined in the report include: $3 million worth of Pedialyte (a drink for children that helps to prevent dehydration) that was purchased after Hurricane Katrina that was never distributed and eventually expired; more than $1 million spent on mobile surgery units that were never used after Hurricane Ike; $637,000 for mobile sleeper units to house emergency responders after Hurricane Ike that were never assembled or used; and $8.7 million for two base camps to accommodate 1,000 emergency responders and provide them with 3,000 meals a day—FEMA filled the camps to about half of total capacity but still decided to re-sign the contract for an additional month, a move that cost taxpayers another $8.7 million.

The report also details the purchase of a FEMA facility in Brentwood, Tenn. FEMA ended up paying twice as much for the real estate that was in poor condition, infested with insects and full of harmful chemicals. The building was plagued by sewage leaks, contaminated water, debris and chemical pollution. Employees became ill from the conditions—one employee developed a rash that lasted for three months. Between the lease and additional maintenance put into the facility, FEMA ended up paying nearly $300,000 more than other buildings in the area with full service leases. An independent company estimated it would take $1.2 million to clean up the property.

FEMA has had its share of public relations headaches since Hurricane Katrina and this report certainly doesn’t help matters. It should be noted, however, that progress is being made, albeit slowly.

It took FEMA years to develop a National Disaster Recovery Framework—a Congressionally requested document that was to be presented 270 days after the implementation of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006. After years of missing deadlines, current FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate finally delivered a draft to Congress. Despite this progress, the submitted framework falls short of Congressional expectations and requires extensive revision.

FEMA plays an important role on the emergency response stage. It is critical those past wrongs are corrected and that the agency continues to earn the trust of Congress and the American people. Baby steps are being taken in the right direction, but the rehabilitation of FEMA needs to be a bigger priority for the current administration.

All one has to do is read the news to realize that disasters and emergencies are going to keep on coming. These problems must be adequately addressed.

We only can hope that FEMA fulfills its mission by learning from past mistakes and focusing on fine-tuning response plans.

Interpol

According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, most victims are killed by someone they know, especially when the victim is a spouse. Therefore, it is quite natural for a police detective to suspect the victim’s closest friends and relatives. In the case of a murdered Hamas leader, however, the suspect list is even shorter: Israel.

In a criminal investigation the question, “Who would benefit most from this crime?” is where most theories are developed—and it seems the Dubai police chief is zeroing in on that same topic. Dahi Khalfan Tamin, the chief, though, must be careful and look before he leaps. Conjecture in an investigation is fraught with pitfalls.

At least 11 individuals were dispatched by some entity to rid the world of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh—and they did—but in a real messy way.

Mabhoud was fingered by Israel for the kidnapping and the killing of two Israeli soldiers in 1989, so it’s not a stretch to theorize that Israel was involved, however, that could also be the perfect cover-up for an inside job. In a murder investigation, this would be called “staging”—making it look like something else or someone else was responsible.

These days, though, assassinating someone in a public place has its drawbacks. For instance, surveillance video captured the likeness of the individuals believed to be responsible for the murder. The technology that is available today is incredible. Video clips show the alleged suspects entering their rooms and leaving in disguises.  Are fake beards and wigs really the work of an elite group of assassins dispatched by The Mossad?

Although the assassins were provided with counterfeit European Union documents, in the end, they didn’t fool anybody. Six of the stolen identities came from Britons living in Israel. If Israel was trying to distance themselves from this operation, something went terribly wrong and, if someone was trying to frame them, perfect.

The real investigative question is, “What was the Hamas leader doing in Dubai by himself?” Reports state that his security team was not allowed to fly with him. This is an investigative clue that cannot be ignored. As the investigation continues, we may see evidence point to a setup by a political rival. As a result, the Dubai chief must stop his tunnel vision.

In the end, it is starting to look like a mafia style “rub out” than the works of The Mossad.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

The Austin plane crash incident sends a message to communities and law enforcement entities tasked with protecting them, which is, “Catch me if you can.”

There’s debate on the Internet since the incident Thursday when Joe Stack allegedly slammed his Piper Cherokee PA-28 into an Austin, Texas, building that housed the FBI, IRS and additional agencies, that Stack is a domestic terrorist, is insane, is depressed—the list is endless and somewhat worthless.

The point of the matter is that Stack was crying out. Similar to Maj. Nidal Hasan, the alleged shooter at Fort Hood.

Initial reports state Stack posted a suicide-type letter on his company’s Web site days prior to the incident.

The letter, posted on Embedded Art’s site, a software company that appears to be founded by Stack, was later removed at the FBI’s request, following Thursday’s incident.

“If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, ‘Why did this have to happen?’ The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time,” states the letter. “We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was ‘no taxation without representation.’ I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a ‘crackpot,’ traitor and worse.”

This should have raised red flags. If Stack wasn’t on law enforcement radar (we don’t know as investigation is ongoing), then where was his family to inform law enforcement or seek out assistance? They surely viewed his company’s Web site.

There’s no question that Stack was seeking out help. We can’t say that if he received it, the Austin incident would not have happened. Predicting the future just is not possible. But, it may have been prevented.

There’s a lot to Stack’s life that isn’t known—at least not publicly—yet. CNN confirmed matches in his apparent suicide note to details of his life, such as his move from California to Texas in 2004 and the purchase of a $230,000 home in an Austin suburb. This is the same home he torched that morning before flying into the building.

Stack’s letter shows a man simply irate at a government who he seems partly to blame for his life slipping away.

“To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA,” he allegedly wrote in the letter. “This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed…I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.”

Brent Turvey, a world-renowned forensic criminologist, said in an e-mail interview that cases such as these are rare where people threaten violence against the government and then act.

“The past is everything,” he said. “They (those threatening violence) will have walked in a straight line to their ultimate goal, telling everyone along the way.”

And it seems Stack’s past should have been cause for alarm.

There’s no single agency that’s finger pointing in this incident (that is, unless further investigation proves otherwise). Instead, it seems the community at large is somewhat to blame.

Turvey said in incidents such as these, people do raise alarms, but little action is done.

“(This) happens every day. And most days, nothing happens,” he said. “We need to shift our thinking about the nature of threats and take them seriously. Also, raise and enforce penalties for making such threats. Right now, people just want to keep their heads down and stay out of it, mostly. They don’t want the responsibility of knowing things or having to act upon them.”

It’d be interesting to see how many people came across Stack’s spouting—whether online or in person—and thought nothing of his ramblings. Or, if they did contact help, how many officials ignored the complaints.

For this, only time will tell.

Read the entire letter here. Letter via CNN.

In Stack’s words, “I’ve had enough.”

Stack has never been quite normal about the IRS. It apparently has been a thorn in his side since puberty. And he had been recently feuding with them. Many of us can relate to the feelings of frustration concerning a phone book-sized self-help manual designed by politicians for politicians with the sole intent of liberating someone from their hard-earned dollars. We payup, drink up, and fantasize about that flat tax nirvana way out yonder and a government expansion formula tied to GDP instead of the printing press at the U.S. Mint.

On some level, we all get Stack. We understand his frustration with the IRS, but the question, however, is Stack a domestic terrorist?

The FBI has defined terrorism as, “The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The Rand Corporation’s Brian Jenkins has defined terrorism as, “The use or threatened use of force designed to bring about political change.”

By definition, Stack is a domestic terrorist.

In practicum, he is a sad, mal-content saturated in baby-boom victim speak, and absolutely sure that his problems and set-backs have come by the hand of his government.

The mess Stack has left is another story. He has unwittingly uncorked the bad genie in the general aviation bottle that has remained confined and docile since Osama bin Laden’s boys took their first flying lesson. The truth is that anyone with a pilot’s license can rent or purchase a small aircraft (get one of your own on E-bay for less than $15K) and fly it into a building to make a statement.

Most find the reverie in this practice short lived. For the rest of those folks with a burr under their saddle and a penchant for raising their game above their friends at the Post Office, we now have a new security concern. This concern will be Stack’s legacy. Not a revision of the tax code, but another layer of administrative and security-based nonsense that will target a subset of our society who are known for their Type-A, squeeky clean, no nonsense appoach to recreational flight or the inclusion of general aviation into their business practices.

Private pilots are not our big concern America, any more than licensed gun owners are. Statistically, one is in far more danger from associating with your lawnmower or snowblower.

Unfortunately, the security nightmare for general aviation will probably begin today with politicians calling for a review of FAA guidelines concerning GA regulations. Private pilots and small airports will bear the burden of this increased interference in an already regulated and highly monitored practice.

To people outside of general aviation, the new entangelments will all make perfect sense.

Thanks, Joe.

The Bipartisan Policy Center, along with Georgetown University and the National Security Council, sponsored the Cyber ShockWave Exercise, an emergency management exercise to test cyber security.

Emergency Management lives and dies by conceiving and planning exercises that focus on hazards, vulnerabilities, and preparing for the worst scenarios.

The exercises, when produced correctly, as seen in Cyber ShockWave, place extreme pressure on responders to work within the parameters of policy and training—and still remain spontaneous and disciplined enough to handle variables that may not have been planned.

The most successful exercises usually don’t go well. The variables introduced reveal weaknesses in existing plans that require further analysis and re-thinking.

What went well about this exercise was that it revealed myriad weaknesses, especially as they pertain to U.S. communication infrastructure and the compromises to U.S. cyber defenses.

There’s no question that participants were definitely overwhelmed by the steady pace of the unfolding quagmire of some 60 million cell phones going zombie, bombs exploding near power facilities, hurricanes hitting the gulf coast, pipelines erupting, aviation grounded and intelligence capabilities infiltrated.

The all-star team assembled to handle this Dr. Evil-like scenario included former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, Assistant Secretary for Homeland Security and Policy Stewart Baker, former Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, Deputy Commander of the U.S. European Command Charles Wald, and former Homeland Security Advisor Frances Fragos Townsend, among others.

The results of this exercise will become the foundation for a new way of planning, responding, recovering and mitigating the unending offensive against our nation and the cyber integrity of our most-trusted institutions.

Government bureaucrats rarely provide us with a model we can emulate. However, in this case, we are seeing the principles of emergency management at their zenith.

Let’s hope this continues.

John Darkow, Columbia Daily Tribune, Missouri/caglecartoons.com

In a recent vote, the Virginia Senate approved a measure that allows concealed weapon permit holders to carry guns in restaurants that serve alcohol, as long as the weapon holder does not consume alcohol. Debate over the Second Amendment ignites passions from both sides of the political spectrum, but I will admit that this latest development (in a state where I lived for two years) has left me a bit bewildered.

Maybe it’s the marathon of anti-gun episodes of The West Wing I indulged in while being snowed in for 12 days, but I’m having trouble understanding the need for this proposed law. The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Emmett Hanger (R-Augusta), said he wants to reduce a burden on people who currently carry concealed weapons but are forced to leave them in their car rather than carry them into such establishments. Hanger said he was particularly sensitive to women who carry guns in their purses to defend themselves when they go to Red Lobster (his words, not mine).

I’m sorry, but as a young woman living in a major metropolitan area, I honestly can say I’ve never felt the need to pack heat while on a dinner date. Last time I checked, we don’t live in the Wild West and the food you order on the menu is already dead. What’s wrong with leaving your gun in the car?

Supporters of the law basically are saying that people should carry guns to protect themselves from people with guns. That seems counterproductive to me. The proposed law prohibits those carrying concealed weapons in restaurants from consuming alcohol, but how will this be enforced? Will metal detectors identify who is carrying a gun? Will servers be required to ask all patrons before fulfilling their request for an alcoholic beverage? It’s pretty well known that some people do not hold their liquor well. Violence often accompanies alcohol consumption—add a few guns into the mix and it could be a recipe for disaster. Anyone is capable of going postal, whether they legally obtained their gun or not, and I honestly can’t say I’d feel safer knowing more people are carrying concealed weapons in public places.

According to the Washington Post, similar efforts to loosen gun restrictions are under way in Arizona, Mississippi, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. One bill under consideration in Arizona this year is a measure to allow residents to carry concealed weapons without a permit, basically abolishing existing training and certification requirements. Wyoming’s House enthusiastically passed a similar bill.

The Bill of Rights is important, and the Second Amendment certainly is an important part of that document. It’s a delicate balance trying to maintain the integrity of the Second Amendment while also protecting American citizen. This debate will likely continue for decades to come, and there may not be a right or wrong answer. As new gun laws continue to be formed and old ones repealed, let’s hope lawmakers don’t let personal freedom—and political gain—negatively impact personal safety.

Huntsville Police Department

Nothing to see here folks, just move along.

It has been a great weekend for girls off their meds. Who says Valentine’s Day is just a Hallmark holiday? Some take it seriously. This past weekend, with pre-V-day angst running high for the ladies, two broke ranks and decided to express themselves.

First, we have the tenure-frustrated Harvard-educated Amy Bishop who decided to “go postal” at her biology department faculty meeting at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Bishop did not think it was fair that she had been turned down for tenure and was appealing the process. She came up with a unique tenure-expediting technique that involved shooting six of the faculty members (killing three) that she believed may have voted against her.

Note to Amy: Demanding the censure of the university president and being described by the chairman of the chemistry department as a “lone wolf” with “bizarre personality,” might have been a clue that behavior modification was in order, unless that wasn’t an option.

This wasn’t the first time that Bishop decided to go “Marshal Dillon” to handle a dispute. When she was 20, a family argument ended with her brother fatally shot, Bishop holding a 12-gauge and the police file missing. Gun accidents do happen, but is it plausible that a Harvard wizkid would point a loaded shotgun at her brother’s abdomen and have her finger on the trigger with the belief that she was practicing rudimentary gun safety?

In the meantime, the university tenure appeals committee is consulting the Fort Hood officer review committee for advice on whether or not to give Bishop tenure.

The weekend didn’t end there.

Kimberly Suzanne Al-Homsi was not up for tenure—that is, unless they are offering it to the frequently arrested at the Arlington, Texas, jail.

Al-Homsi has been a busy girl. Being a contrarian by nature, Al-Homsi decided to convert to Islam as a lesbian. In April 2007, Al-Homsi and her girlfriend, Aisha Abdul-Rahman Hamad, were arrested at Dallas Love Field airport for filming takeoffs and landings of passenger jets from a restricted area of the airport. They also were found to be noting and analyzing airport security patterns.

Always up for a good time, the girls decided to test fire some IEDs and pipe bombs outside their home in July 2007 and, just in case there was any confusion about this being a misunderstood expression of seasonal patriotism, a six-hour standoff with police ensued.

It should be noted that Al-Homsi’s fear of attracting attention began in 2005 when she caused a traffic jam by stopping her car and holding up a dummy grenade, threatening other motorists.

All these events culminate to this past Friday, when she and companion, Yasinul Alan Ansari, decided to drive around Fort Worth, Texas, pointing a toy gun at fellow motorists. This eventually attracted the attention of police who chased Al-Homsi and Ansari for 20 minutes until they spun out of control and were captured.

In the spirit of public safety, the pair told police that they had an incendiary device in their vehicle.

These two—Bishop and Al-Homsi—exemplify what may be called the “Fort Hood Synapse.”

Everyone involved with Maj. Nidal Hasan, the alleged Fort Hood shooter, knew that he was mentally unstable, but in the interest of political correctness and worship of the concept of diversity, Hasan was not helped. Instead, he was promoted.

Promotion makes the issue someone else’s problem and makes the promoter appear fair-minded, until the shooting starts.

In the case of Bishop, the “Fort Hood Synapse” was upheld when her increasingly bizarre behavior went unchecked in a “values neutral” university environment where “bizarre” is a relative term.

In the case of Al-Homsi, she is a clear overachiever when it comes to letting all of the proper authorities know, with absolute certainty, that she is not happy with the status quo.

Local authorities employed the “Fort Hood Synapse” by taking their lead from the mega-institutions of the American military and the education establishment and, ultimately, decided that being pro-active in the face of potentially dangerous behavior is a possible career killer.

It comes down to: Save your career or save lives.

Most never will face this dilemma. But, from the White House to the lowest-paid security guard, this pox on basic human integrity is rendering our nation vulnerable to lunatics.

We should not be targeting Muslims, women professors, female snipers or military officers who are not happy with foreign relations.

Instead, we should be targeting any individual in the workplace, school, airport or church who exhibits behavior that could be considered threatening or out of the norm.

Clues would be: Videos proclaiming Jihad against the American military, pipe bombs, IEDs, aviation students who pay for instruction on how to fly passenger jets but not how to land them, underwear packed with explosives, young men with no luggage buying one-way tickets on airlines and sweating profusely, unregistered firearms, tarp and tent complexes in the backyard with extension chords and young children in shackles, 70 pages of threatening e-mails (if you are a now-deceased Hooter’s waitress in Florida) or the smell of a sausage works gone bad (if you’re living in Cleveland) coming from the house next door.

Come on, America, what the hell will it take before you stop behaving like lemmings? “See something, say something” is the credo of the MTA in New York City.

Is that too complicated for everyone?

Obviously our institutions of defense, civil protection and education, as well as our judicial system are content with the current paradigm of response in favor of mitigation. That means you’re on your own until the problem becomes lethal.

All of the emergency management practice in the world cannot mitigate this risk if everyone refuses to speak up when they know something is amiss.

One can, however, become a squeaky wheel and endlessly document to authorities disturbing behavior until action is taken.

Granted, you may be ignored initially or feel that you are putting yourself at risk, but here’s a news flash: We are all at risk unless we get on the offensive.

At first glance, the shooting Friday at the University of Alabama in Huntsville does not appear to be the work of a mass murderer, but that of a college professor. However, it could have been a lot worse.

Many students that were in lockdown at the University of Alabama in Huntsville were tweeting on Twitter that they did not get a notification of the university’s alert system. Why? The chief of the university police stated that the people in charge of making the notification were responding to the emergency. That’s not good enough.

Schools and companies across the world have experienced a rash of violence over the last three years and the statistics are trending upwards.

Security directors have scrambled to identify a way to warn students, tenants, customers, etc., about the potential danger as it’s occurring.

Security budgets are tight enough without having to implement an expensive notification system. Any security consultant worth their weight in gold has a solution that is the best, is time tested and is the most cost effective.

There may be a simple solution, however, to the communication breakdown. This “silver bullet” is social media, such as Twitter and Facebook.

Students in Alabama were using it to report on matters as they happened—and emergency managers must embrace these new technologies. It seems the best way to fix the communication problem is to ask the students.

Such technology makes an emergency manager’s job more productive—and could have assisted law enforcement and security personnel in Huntsville.

Emergency action plans are required by law, and many, if not all states, require part of that plan to cover workplace violence, including colleges and universities.

It’s understandable in these situations, such as the Alabama shooting, that nerves set in before action, but hesitating on the latter costs lives.

One of the first steps in designing a workplace violence plan (even at the university or college level) should be to create an instant notification system. Phone trees take too long, e-mails might not be read in time, but social media—as seen during the 2009 Iran elections and now among students in Huntsville—is the dominant notification system.

Let’s hope if there’s ever a “next time,” authorities’ alerts keep up to speed, er, tweet.