Have You Heard of Stochastic Terrorism???

I heard this term "Stochastic Terrorism" on the radio today for the first time and thought it succinctly described something I have felt for a long time about American media. Link

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to stir up random lone wolves to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.

The stochastic terrorist is the person who uses mass media to broadcast memes that incite unstable people to commit violent acts.

The person who actually plants the bomb or assassinates the public official is not the stochastic terrorist, they are the "missile" set in motion by the stochastic terrorist. The stochastic terrorist is the person who uses mass media as their means of setting those "missiles" in motion.

An interesting example would be Sarah Palin's response video where she accused the media of creating a "blood libel". This is an extraordinarily charged choice of words! First let me remind you that blood libel describes a false accusation that Jews--murder children to use their blood in religious rituals, and has been a historical theme in the persecution of the Jewish people. Specifically the Jews were purported to use the blood of Christian or Muslim children as an ingredient for their passover bread. This story was used with great success by the Nazi's, among others, to incite fear and hatred.

"Well" you say "Sarah is simply using a historical analogy of persecution to make a point about being falsly accused." This runs deeper than that obvious connection. She is using a blatantly anti-semitic hateful remark to justify her rhetoric, including the cross-hairs graphic trained on Gabrielle Giffords. Gabrielle Giffords is JEWISH! Bad taste? or a Message?

There are many examples of stochastic terror:

Some lone wolves have no provable connection to the hate-talkers and pot-stirrers, other than memes in common. One example of this type is James Wenneker von Brunn who shot and killed security guard Stephen Tyrone Johns at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. Another is Andrew Joseph Stack III, who flew a Piper Dakota into the Austin Texas field office of the Internal Revenue Service, killing IRS manager Vernon Hunter and himself, and injuring thirteen others. At this point it appears as if Jared Loughner is one of these: all-over-the-map crazy, with an incoherent ideology that is mostly rightwing but difficult to trace to specific sources.

(UPDATE: to be very clear about this: at this point I am not aware of any evidence to suggest that Loughner falls under the definition of stochastic terrorism, because there is nothing yet to link him to being a fan of one of the mass media hate-talkers. However there are enough other cases out there to make this issue topical and relevant right now.)

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
An interesting example would be Sarah Palin's response video where she accused the media of creating a "blood libel". This is an extraordinarily charged choice of words! First let me remind you that blood libel describes a false accusation that Jews--murder children to use their blood in religious rituals, and has been a historical theme in the persecution of the Jewish people. Specifically the Jews were purported to use the blood of Christian or Muslim children as an ingredient for their passover bread. This story was used with great success by the Nazi's, among others, to incite fear and hatred.

Actually there are some Jews who practice the blood sacrifices. This is more of a satanic thing than a Jew thing, though, as there are Christians and Hindus and Agnostics who do it as well.

It only speaks to good marketing that it has been labeled as a "libel" when it is actually true. Hell, Oprah even did a show about this once.

The smiley face killers are also practicing the human sacrifice ritual, and from the evidence gathered and shown on another forum, they are pretty evenly split between Catholic monks and Jews.

Stochastic literally means random. So if the media is not focusing on any particular target, then to what end are they perpetrating this terrorism? So that they have new & horrible stories to tell to boost ratings? What is the motive?

reply to post by HattoriHanzou


I have many Christian and Jewish friends and I can't think of one that drinks the blood of children! The topic is stochastic terrorism...

Originally posted by Tasty Canadian
Stochastic literally means random. So if the media is not focusing on any particular target, then to what end are they perpetrating this terrorism? So that they have new & horrible stories to tell to boost ratings? What is the motive?

The media is a pipeline to an audience. Mass media=mass audience. You pay to put your message in the pipeline. So I guess the answer would be the motives of say Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. The right might use their own examples of mass inflammatory rhetoric like pop culture for instance.

The concept isvalid, and it would apear to have been practiced very heavily in our free society.
I believe that not only is this being practiced to create the climate of distrust between people,but to advance the goverments anti gun lefislation as well as its anti terror laws.
In fact i believe that there is evidence to show that not only do shadowy figures place psychologically potent news before the people, but they actually help, and guide some of these people to comit their terror acts.
The FBI, was involved with more than one of the 9/11 terrorists before sept 11. 2001

Good post.
"Stochastic Terrorism" good word.
hopfuly people will stary useing good words.
insted of just trying to discredit the next man to help you look better.

reply to post by Leo Strauss

That's an interesting concept and useful term. Being a constituent and resident located under the cross hairs of a district that was targeted by a certain someone so 'n so I can tell I found it very upsetting when it first appeared and still unsettling when I see it now. You'll know what it feels like when something like it comes your way and singles you out with violent undertones for whatever their reason.

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by HattoriHanzou

 

I have many Christian and Jewish friends and I can't think of one that drinks the blood of children! The topic is stochastic terrorism...

I was responding to your use of a term that is unfortunate. The "blood libel" is not a libel at all. It's just not limited to Jews.

This is an important footnote for your topic, as you were most likely unaware of just exactly what you were attempting when you started the topic.

Then again, back onto your topic, it seems to me that you are attempting to subvert the idea of free will of the individual, and place the blame for their actions on a media that they are perfectly free to ignore or refute. This is evidence that you wish to place people into a position of weakness with regards to the media. An unfortunate view and one that is only compatible with the theory of predestination. You might as well argue that these poor individuals who you claim were motivated by the media, were motivated by fate, as was the media that was fated to "launch the missile" as you put it.

reply to post by Leo Strauss

Interesting concept, seems plausible to me.

I think the TPTB have long-studied, and understand well, effective mass-psychology/group-think programming techniques and have been utilizing them for decades.

As to what would be the benefit to 'them' of generating random acts of violence from already unbalanced individuals amongst the general populace, I think that a terrorized population, especially one where everybody is suspicious of their neighbor, is one less likely to unify for, or against, any cause - divide and conquer. Also, In this environment, many may also clamor for 'something to be done', signaling TPTB to dust off the 'solution' that's been sitting on the shelf for a while.

I agree that TPTB are very much aware of the power of propaganda aka advertising in influencing peoples action.
American business alone spent 280 billion dollars in 2007 on advertising. Is business getting a return on that money? The short and simple answer is yes. They spend that kind of money because it works.

I remember reading years ago a recollection of a former Nazi an average German person. She talked about how exhilarating it was to be permitted to hate freely and fully. Something about that rings true to me. To be permitted by civil society to hate. To be encouraged to hate.

Who benefits?

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to stir up random lone wolves to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.
This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe to commit a bombing or shooting.
This is also the term for what Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, and others do. And this is what led directly and predictably to a number of cases of ideologically-motivated murder similar to the Tucson shootings.

reply to post by Leo Strauss



I'd just like to point out that famous lawyer Alan Dershowitz (who is Jewish) has stated that he is not offended at Palin's use of the "blood libel" term, and in fact she was using it correctly.....

This is an issue I first heard of through listening to Thom Hartmann—the progressive radio host and author.
It makes a lot of sense and there is direct proof that it is a fact.

Are Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and the rest of the gang guilty of stochastic terrorism?

Hartmann Link

When you listen to people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and the rest of the gang – it’s easy to see – these men and women are guilty of something called stochastic terrorism. That is – the use of mass communication like radio or television to encourage individuals to commit random lone acts of violence. It’s what Glenn Beck was guilty of when he encouraged Byron Williams to attempt to massacre members of the Tides foundation and ACLU. It’s what Bill O’ Reilly was guilty of when he shouted “Tiller the baby killer” a dozen times on his show – and then someone killed Dr. George Tiller.

2 words:

cass sunstein

The bottom line is that they can toss a grenade through your window, and you don't dare to toss it back.

reply to post by Leo Strauss


The thing that cracks me up and exposes leftist's for the fascist's they are is the simple fact of facts. There have been some "right-wingers" that done bad stuff, but most of them went postal(like the guy who crashed the small plane into the IRS building after tax related problems ruined his finances), but yet the kind of violence that is most dangerous everyone is ignoring. From intimidation at the polls, assaulting of people involved in the political system, harassment and assaulting of peaceful protesters, violent thuggish protesters intimidating private citizens(even children), bomb's sent to political enemies; all those things have been utterly ignored.

I guess because it is coming from the "left" it is "ok"? It is funny, since this whole thing began left wingers have been calling right wingers violent, even though the vast majority of political violence in the last decade has been left-winger violence. It's like a spouse accusing their partner of being a violent abuser and how they are scared of them as they hit their partner over the head with a baseball bat and the partner never done a thing wrong.

reply to post by Leo Strauss


I think there is something in the theory. I have been very interested in how memes have been designed and manipulated to deliberately influence public opinion. Stochastic terrorism seems to fit the lone wolf activity quite clearly especially when the person is mentally unstable and or lacks critical thinking.

S & F

there is a concept known as 'fighting words' which are phrases and statements designed specifically to goad your opponent into attacking you. this concept has come to the defense of many a person who has been provoked into fighting and even (IIRC) successfully defended in court.

Is this no less? If you know your population is riled already, then to feed that anger until someone who is unhinged explodes with violence is ethically and morally wrong, even if legally everyone is responsible for their own actions.

Fighting words are not protected under the Constitution as seen in Chaplinsky vs New Hampshire.

reply to post by korathin


What evidence of these things? The two "Black Panther" guys at that one polling station? Was there a case of that happening more than there?

Is that at all analogous to the Rebublican mob that shouted down the recount in Florida back in 2000?

These are minor things you speak of. Bombs? What bombs? Threatening congress or the media? Like suddenly the terrorists thought it a good idea to send white powder to the two members of congress most vocal against the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act?

I'm not sure I follow this mass leftist fascism...a total oxymoron, by the way, if the hallmark of fascism is corporate and government collusion, then leftists would find it hard to stomach the corporatist control of this government.

This ATS member, also a reporter, spoke to us at length about the use of the term "knives" in the media, and he made some interesting correlations between the use of the word in newspapers, and then forthcoming events in London.

This OP reminded me of him. I followed his struggles with this for quite a while. He hasn't logged in since May, but it's interesting reading.

www.abovetopsecret.com...