Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

[Sandy Sandfort]

Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> My apologies; I never meant that as the
> implication. I highly doubt that you, or
> most people, would ever be capable of evil
> on 1/10th the scale of this attack.

Thanks, but I'd go a bit further.  The percentage of humans who would be
capable of such evil has to be vanishingly small.  Unfortunately, that
percentage is not zero so this sort of thing continues to happen.

> However, if you assume lack of conscience
> and moral indifference, this does become a
> cost/benefit situation.

We have to assume it because it demonstrably exists.  The trick then is, to
make the costs greater or the benefits less.  Easier said then done, but
those are our only alternatives.

> One of the problems with capital punishment
> is that it isn't much of a deterrent, except
> to the Christians who believe in Hell.

I think a much strong argument can be made that those who do not believe in
an afterlife would be more deterred than those who do.

> You can only be executed once.

Yeah, but it's that once that counts forever.  In any event, that's the
situation in which we live.  There will always be that tiny minority that
will do evil.  The rest of us are left to monkey with the cost/benefit to
reduce the incidences of such evil.  Life goes on.

> Americans will do everything they can not
> to believe that this could have been a
> domestic action. We want to blame the
> "sand-niggers" and the "rag-heads." The
> fact that this could have been a sociopath
> with the ultimate get-rich quick scheme is
> unthinkable.[2]

And so far, unsupported by the facts.  Time will tell.  In the mean time,
Meyer, I'll bet you, or anyone on this list, a C-note that this is the work
of Bin Laden.  Any takers?


 S a n d y