Definition - a series of simultaneous human stampedes likely the result of a viral blitzkrieg
A. Potential scenarios. (College, pro, racing facility)
College football stadiums in the East Coast and midwest time zones would be particularly susceptible as there are a large number of overlapping, afternoon major home games. The Division 1 early schedule is purposely set to take advantage of lesser known opponents in some of the largest stadiums in the more congested parts of the US. But the 1 pm pro-slate of games represents the greatest concern. There are usually a minimum of 9 games that directly coincide. Also, a large scale auto racing event could easily be targeted in conjunction.
I have very serious reservations with regard to discussing projected injury and casualty figures. I would encourage you to look at other past stadium stampedes and extrapolate. Human beings are human beings. Some countries might have more more money to allocate and a greater preoccupation with public safety, but fear and panic are indigenous to everyone. Newer, professional stadiums are far more dangerous than most older college stadiums. Much steeper staircases, bolted plastic seats, more amenities and clutter. Tighter and more secure entrances and exits. Most outdoor stadiums have spiral, open air rotunda. This could result in people being forcibly lifted over the ledges and falling to their death. Racing facilities are a wild card as well. Harder to predict with the all-encompassing noise levels. This could certainly factor into adding to the level of confusion. Many wear ear protection, thus further augmenting the problem. A Nascar race in progress is in the 130-140 decibel range.
B. concern of the likelihood of a viral blitzkrieg (definition)
viral blitzkrieg definition - a bombardment and exponential spread of panic inducing messages via electronic social media platforms.
The viral blitzkrieg easily represents my greatest degree of concern. There is no necessity for professional hacking expertise or a sophisticated comprehension of telecommunications systems and the internet. Just simply overwhelm an entire region with panic inducing messages. Text messages, emails, social media, robocalls, retweets. Sent to employees in the media (particularly news reporters), individuals in radio and print media, high profile local individuals, celebrities and politicians, stadium employees and first responders such as police and firefighters. People in these occupations have a greater tendency to utilize smart phones. You'd be putting bomb threat evacuation protocol in the hands of the general public. These people should not be in a position to make critical decisions. Their reactions would unknowingly become a course OF ACTION. Remember, the dominipede is an event that unfolds in REAL-TIME, in the REAL-WORLD. Furthermore, think of what would happen if two or more stampedes unfolded in real-time. Think of the reaction from the public at-large witnessing this unusual phenomenon on live television. Their likely response would be to alert friends and family in other stadiums. Their message would be simple. Something is terribly wrong. Get out of there now. There isn't a do-over. There is no second chance. An electronic retraction would be of little comfort to the victims - we've seen these things play out in the televised media especially in the last decade.
Gabby Giffords has been pronounced dead.
CONFIRMED: Rep. Giffords & 6 others shot dead!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fkRXzxobic
:00 - :12 - (we have reliable sources on capitol hill and NPR that she has died)
:54 - :56 - (Gabby Giffords is dead)
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords returns to the house
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRMnXCuKn94
9:09 - 9:22 (Nancy Pelosi commenting about the courage and return of Gabby Giffords)
Gabrielle Giffords Speaks at Senate Judiciary Hearing on Gun Control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQqzcu2mGoc
The time is now. You must act.
1:18 - 1:24
As we all discovered, there's a big difference between being alive (reentering the halls of Congress, date) and being dead (Breaking News - Giffords has died, date). But in this day and age, there's a rush to get the story first, at any cost. When news unfolds in real time, people make mistakes.
Gore beats Bush - 2000 election night, excerpt from the movie Recount
CNN Supreme Court overturns Obamacare
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/416046/june-28-2012/cable-news-gaffe-on-obamacare-supreme-court-ruling
Cable News Gaffe on Obamacare Supreme Court Ruling
The Colbert Report - 2012 - 28 - 06 - Video Clip, Comedy Central
:50 - 1:30
We've seen the big screw ups.
After all, you can always issue an apology later. There once was a time when a journalistic source would feel great shame over releasing false information. Nowadays, you just get a little blip apology. At least in the print media (Dewey Beats Truman),
if its a big one, you get a retraction... the next day.
Now imagine a scenario when they're not even trying to discern the truth, they're simply reporting what is transpiring. They're simply broadcasting the news. If a dominipede occurs, you would witness the images unfold in real-time. The facts and information, the complexity overload, causes and impetus surrounding the event would prove largely irrelevant. The live broadcasts would unintentionally serve as an expedited weapons delivery system. And for one moment, imagine the dynamic if tens of thousands of different cell phones are ringing and vibrating... and people are reacting. All of a sudden, everyone simultaneously receiving panic laden information.
There seems to be this outdated 1950's-like understanding of evacuation protocol. It assumes that the person issuing the threat will CALL it in DIRECTLY to the source. That's a very obsolete way to approach emergency evacuation protocol in this day and age. If you think about it, it's the modern day equivalent of children hiding under their desks during a nuclear attack.
Duck & Cover
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXntRJk7wCQ
3:05 - 3:18 (explanation of duck and cover in the event of an atomic bomb)
3:29 - 3:33 (2 kinds of attack, with warning & without warning)
6:12 - 6:15 ("it's a bomb" - duck and cover footage)
6:49 - 6:54 (atta boy, Tony. That flash means act fact)
7:29 - 7:32 (school bus duck and cover)
7:49 - 7:52 (picnic lunch duck and cover)
8:47 - 8:52 (kids in the hallway, "you're on your own")
There's an unwillingness to discuss the indiscussable. There's the same mentality, same disconnect with stuff that happened a half century ago.
Military theorist John Boyd is recognized as the founder of OODA (observe, orient, decide, act) loops.
OODA loops are everywhere - counterinsurgency strategies, in business, whether to go to the movies or stay at home, the decision to watch this dvd.
When OODA loop are severely compromised or nullified, that's really what makes a terrorist attack successful.
And these days, everything unfolds as breaking news (a second snippet thunder/lightning snippet)
C. likelihood of malicious intent progression
If a group or individual was intent on deliberately executing an AGS, they would likely gravitate toward the dominipede. I think it's obvious that someone with this type of insidious, malicious intent would seek to inflict the heavy casualties. It's called maximum impact or getting the most "bang for your buck." It's the same reason our country builds more powerful bombs
BLU - 82 Daisy Cutter
Daisy Cutter -- Extermination on the move
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiP7-HBHwPc
:45 - :50
Or the infamous bunker buster bombs you might have heard about that would neutralize Iran's underground nuclear facilities.
Bunker Buster bomb
Bunker Buster Bomb in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuniKsBxZ10
:00 - :08 (explosion)
:22 - :24 (the result)
If you think about it, it's the same reason a suicide bomber will cover himself with rat poison and nails. Making the matter considerably worse, in the case of the dominipede, money and death are not determining factors or considerations for the individuals(s) executing the attack.
D. Precedent
Society does not remain stagnant. 9/11 set a precedent. Everyone always knew that planes could be used to attack large buildings, but until that moment, humanity thought of hijacking in terms of demanding ransom or airing a grievance. That quickly changed. Humanity already knows that cell phone messages can create a panic. And it has already transpired countless times, but we haven't yet experienced that calamitous tipping point.
But I refuse to accept the retroactive mindset. This time, the stakes are way too high. People do not have to needlessly die in order for the government to act. With regard to the dominipede, it's necessary to break with the traditional big government retroactive approach because the potential result, the dominipede, is cataclysmic. We must set a new precedent.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.