http://disqus.com/by/johnbyrnes/enMon, 19 Apr 2010 14:27:56 -0000http://cono.rs/2010/04/are-your-values-danger-to-your-health.html#comment-45519535<p>“Bullying” is a topic that is on the hearts and minds of individuals in position of responsibility whether in the workplace or our schools. With the most recent incident where a young 15 year old girl hangs herself due to what is described as “relentless bullying” and by prosecutors as statutory rape has gone well beyond the parameters of “bullying.”</p><p>It is only when we realize that this bullying behavior is “intent-driven aggressive behavior;” that there is a Continuum of Aggression, of which Bullying is an element, that we can actually prevent bullying. Through this continuum we can learn the “precursors” to bullying, and through this understand and application we can actually prevent and stop this culture of bullying. Until we learn the Continuum of Aggression we are relegated to reacting to bullying, not preventing it.</p><p>I am writing the definitive book on “preventing bullying,” and I need your help. I will illustrate how “bullying” is an element on the Continuum of Aggression and through this continuum we can foresee the precursors of bullying and therefore can prevent bullying and stop bullying behavior. However, I need as many examples of bullying as possible. I would like to read about any accounts of bullying you have experienced or observed, whether in the workplace or in education. I would particularly like to understand how you responded to this bullying and how and why it worked or didn’t work? Please go the my blog and share your account. In return, I would share excepts of the unique approach for your review and comment. My blog is located at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a></p>johnbyrnesMon, 19 Apr 2010 14:27:56 -0000http://canuctude.blogspot.com/2010/04/renovating-away-curse-of-bullies.html#comment-45514624<p>“Bullying” is a topic that is on the hearts and minds of individuals in position of responsibility whether in the workplace or our schools. With the most recent incident where a young 15 year old girl hangs herself due to what is described as “relentless bullying” and by prosecutors as statutory rape has gone well beyond the parameters of “bullying.”</p><p>It is only when we realize that this bullying behavior is “intent-driven aggressive behavior;” that there is a Continuum of Aggression, of which Bullying is an element, that we can actually prevent bullying. Through this continuum we can learn the “precursors” to bullying, and through this understand and application we can actually prevent and stop this culture of bullying. Until we learn the Continuum of Aggression we are relegated to reacting to bullying, not preventing it.</p><p>I am writing the definitive book on “preventing bullying,” and I need your help. I will illustrate how “bullying” is an element on the Continuum of Aggression and through this continuum we can foresee the precursors of bullying and therefore can prevent bullying and stop bullying behavior. However, I need as many examples of bullying as possible. I would like to read about any accounts of bullying you have experienced or observed, whether in the workplace or in education. I would particularly like to understand how you responded to this bullying and how and why it worked or didn’t work? Please go the my blog and share your account. In return, I would share excepts of the unique approach for your review and comment. My blog is located at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a></p>johnbyrnesMon, 19 Apr 2010 13:51:07 -0000http://washingtonindependent.com/76448/feinstein-leahy-clarify-support-for-911-perps-civilian-trials#comment-34044856<p>Last Tuesday, Directors of the CIA, FBI and National Intelligence declared that an attack by Al Qaeda in the next 3 to 6 months “is certain!” Leon Panetta, CIA Director announced, “The biggest threat is not so much that we face an attack like 9/11. It is that Al Qaeda is adapting its methods in ways that oftentimes make it difficult to detect.”</p><p>Panetta’s statement does not take into account the ability to identify any terrorist whose goal it is to give up their life for a cause. Only when you are observing measurable emerging aggression can you identify a terrorist before they effect their violence.</p><p>The Center for Aggression Management discovered 15 years ago that there were two kinds of aggression: adrenaline-driven Primal Aggression and intent-driven Cognitive Aggression. The Primal Aggressor, in the extreme, is “red-faced and ready to explode,” the Cognitive Aggressor (the terrorist) is not. When a person, regardless of the culture, gender, education or position, rises to the level where their goal is to give up their life for a cause, their body looses animation and we see the “thousand-yard stare.” But it is more than this, the whole body and behavior looses animation and this is how we can identify them. The problem is that security and law enforcement are still looking for the Primal Aggressor (red-faced and ready to explode). Of course they are finding it difficult to detect these terrorist; a terrorist is a Cognitive Aggression; they are looking for the wrong person!</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>You can read more at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a><br></p>johnbyrnesFri, 12 Feb 2010 14:53:14 -0000http://www.theatheistconservative.com/2010/02/06/go-tell-bin-laden/#comment-33122121<p>Last Tuesday, Directors of the CIA, FBI and National Intelligence declared that an attack by Al Qaeda in the next 3 to 6 months “is certain!” Leon Panetta, CIA Director announced, “The biggest threat is not so much that we face an attack like 9/11. It is that Al Qaeda is adapting its methods in ways that oftentimes make it difficult to detect.”</p><p>Panetta’s statement does not take into account the ability to identify any terrorist whose goal it is to give up their life for a cause. Only when you are observing measurable emerging aggression can you identify a terrorist before they effect their violence.</p><p>The Center for Aggression Management discovered 15 years ago that there were two kinds of aggression: adrenaline-driven Primal Aggression and intent-driven Cognitive Aggression. The Primal Aggressor, in the extreme, is “red-faced and ready to explode,” the Cognitive Aggressor (the terrorist) is not. When a person, regardless of the culture, gender, education or position, rises to the level where their goal is to give up their life for a cause, their body looses animation and we see the “thousand-yard stare.” But it is more than this, the whole body and behavior looses animation and this is how we can identify them. The problem is that security and law enforcement are still looking for the Primal Aggressor (red-faced and ready to explode). Of course they are finding it difficult to detect these terrorist; a terrorist is a Cognitive Aggression; they are looking for the wrong person!</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>You can read more at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a><br></p>johnbyrnesMon, 08 Feb 2010 16:05:42 -0000http://disinfo.com/2010/02/breast-implants-as-a-terrorist-weapon/#comment-32829270<p>Last Tuesday, Directors of the CIA, FBI and National Intelligence declared that an attack by Al Qaeda in the next 3 to 6 months “is certain!” Leon Panetta, CIA Director announced, “The biggest threat is not so much that we face an attack like 9/11. It is that Al Qaeda is adapting its methods in ways that oftentimes make it difficult to detect.” <br>Panetta’s statement does not take into account the ability to identify any terrorist whose goal it is to give up their life for a cause. Only when you are observing measurable emerging aggression can you identify a terrorist before they effect their violence.</p><p>The Center for Aggression Management discovered 15 years ago that there were two kinds of aggression: adrenaline-driven Primal Aggression and intent-driven Cognitive Aggression. The Primal Aggressor, in the extreme, is “red-faced and ready to explode,” the Cognitive Aggressor (the terrorist) is not. When a person, regardless of the culture, gender, education or position, rises to the level where their goal is to give up their life for a cause, their body looses animation and we see the “thousand-yard stare.” But it is more than this, the whole body and behavior looses animation and this is how we can identify them. The problem is that security and law enforcement are still looking for the Primal Aggressor (red-faced and ready to explode). Of course they are finding it difficult to detect these terrorist; a terrorist is a Cognitive Aggression; they are looking for the wrong person! <br>You can read more at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> </p>johnbyrnesSat, 06 Feb 2010 07:12:24 -0000http://www.thenextgreatgeneration.com/2010/01/06/give-poor-tired-muslims/#comment-32559189<p>Profiling has failed us; we don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber or the Fort Hood Shooter! There is a better solution!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.<br></p>johnbyrnesWed, 03 Feb 2010 21:58:15 -0000http://jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com/2010/01/pre-state-of-union-essay.html#comment-31119141<p>Profiling has failed us; we don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber or the Fort Hood Shooter! There is a better solution!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.<br></p>johnbyrnesSun, 24 Jan 2010 21:30:35 -0000http://washingtonindependent.com/74413/inhofe-i-believe-in-racial-and-ethnic-profiling#comment-30930066<p>Profiling has failed us; we don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber or the Fort Hood Shooter! There is a better solution!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.<br></p>johnbyrnesFri, 22 Jan 2010 19:17:32 -0000http://www.gloucestertimes.com/permalink/local_story_013222749.html#comment-29872281<p>We don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.</p>johnbyrnesThu, 14 Jan 2010 16:25:58 -0000http://washingtonindependent.com/73704/experts-question-efficacy-of-profiling#comment-29538799<p>We don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.</p>johnbyrnesTue, 12 Jan 2010 15:51:12 -0000https://securitydebrief.com/2010/01/11/napolitano-was-right-the-system-worked-almost/#comment-29487827<p>We don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.</p>johnbyrnesTue, 12 Jan 2010 07:56:30 -0000http://newmexicoindependent.com/44227/wilson-talks-with-npr-about-abdulmutallab#comment-29486126<p>We don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber!</p><p>Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>The Problem<br>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>The Solution<br>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.</p>johnbyrnesTue, 12 Jan 2010 07:06:00 -0000http://intoxination.net/node/14511#comment-29280939<p>We don’t need to profile!</p><p>We don’t need to profile. At the Center for Aggression Management, we use easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.</p><p>Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.</p><p>The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.</p><p>All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:</p><p>1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!</p><p>2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.</p><p>3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh</p><p>Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.</p><p>The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.</p><p>As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?</p><p>Visit our blog at <a href="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://blog.AggressionManag...</a> where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253. </p>johnbyrnesSun, 10 Jan 2010 11:39:44 -0000http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/21779764/detail.html#comment-24633982<p>LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how the current programs in place to protect us have all failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.</p><p>Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses by the military and homeland security failing us?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military and Homeland Security do not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a><br></p>johnbyrnesWed, 02 Dec 2009 16:50:32 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/20/major-hasans-e-mail-i-cant-wait-to-join-you-in-afterlife-abc-news/#comment-23760084<p>LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.</p><p>Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a><br></p>johnbyrnesSat, 21 Nov 2009 19:13:21 -0000http://rawstory.com/2009/11/sen-levin-significant-evidence-ft-hood-shooting-terrorism/#comment-23748111<p>LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.</p><p>Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a><br></p>johnbyrnesSat, 21 Nov 2009 18:04:38 -0000http://elitestv.com/pub/2009/11/pentagon-launches-review-of-fort-hood-shooting#comment-23613739<p> LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.</p><p>Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a> <br></p>johnbyrnesFri, 20 Nov 2009 08:19:07 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/20/major-hasan%e2%80%99s-islamist-life-%e2%80%93-by-daniel-pipes/#comment-23613517<p> LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifies how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisors, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifically on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” standout, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters.</p><p>Major Hasan was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The use of subjective/qualitative indicators, prone to stereotype individuals by culture or religion; versus quantitative indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstrue, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificity of “aggression” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a> <br></p>johnbyrnesFri, 20 Nov 2009 08:13:09 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/17/hasan%e2%80%99s-islamic-mind-by-jamie-glazov/#comment-23486835<p>HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>Profiling is not the answer. We can protect Americans without profiling. Let me show you how. We have read with concern the many signs Major Hasan provided which would indicate an unstable and potentially dangerous frame of mind. Our concern is that those who actually saw and heard the signs and those to whom the signs were reported did not act upon them. From Hasan’s contact with a radical imam, to the initials SoA (Soldier of Allah) on his business card, to his comment that he was a Muslim first and a soldier second – there is no doubt the signs that he was potentially dangerous were there for all to see.</p><p>Furthermore, he was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information within an objective system nor a team who is responsible to evaluate it and respond. The military does not have the AMIS solution and it desperately needs it! Major Hasan has illustrated out vulnerable we are, learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a> <br></p>johnbyrnesWed, 18 Nov 2009 17:26:43 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/17/hasan%e2%80%99s-islamic-mind-by-jamie-glazov/#comment-23468488<p>Thank you, Melisa- I was responding to an email and thought I was emailing directly to you. I will be more careful in the future. John</p>johnbyrnesWed, 18 Nov 2009 12:50:34 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/17/hasan%e2%80%99s-islamic-mind-by-jamie-glazov/#comment-23455166<p>Thank you, Melisa Hubbard-</p><p>I have made the change.</p><p>John</p><p>John D. Byrnes, President<br>Center for Aggression Management<br>Mailing Address: <br>P.O. Box 2395 <br>Winter Park, Florida 32790<br>Physical Address:<br>905 Lotus Vista Drive<br>Suite 302<br>Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714<br>Phone: 407-718-5637<br>Email: JohnByrnes@AggressionManagement.com <br>Blog: <a href="http://blog.aggressionmanagement.com/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.aggressionmanagement.com/">http://blog.aggressionmanag...</a><br>Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/AggressionMgmt" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://twitter.com/AggressionMgmt">http://twitter.com/Aggressi...</a> <br>Web Site: <a href="http://www.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="www.AggressionManagement.com">www.AggressionManagement.com</a> <br>Author: Before Conflict, Preventing Aggressive Behavior</p><p>This transmission is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is unauthorized and prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address.<br>Thank you</p>johnbyrnesWed, 18 Nov 2009 10:25:24 -0000http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/17/hasan%e2%80%99s-islamic-mind-by-jamie-glazov/#comment-23392388<p>HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS</p><p>We have read with concern the many signs Major Hasan provided which would indicate an unstable and potentially dangerous frame of mind. Our concern is that those who actually saw and heard the signs and those to whom the signs were reported did not act upon them. From Hasan’s contact with a radical imam, to the initials SoA (Son of Allah) on his business card, to his comment that he was a Muslim first and a soldier second – there is no doubt the signs that he was potentially dangerous were there for all to see.</p><p>Furthermore, he was under surveillance by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?</p><p>The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects information and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying, nor has it people who have a clear responsibility to observe and report this information within an objective system nor a team who is responsible to evaluate it and respond. The military does not have the AMIS solution and it desperately needs it! Major Hasan has illustrated out vulnerable we are, learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: <a href="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Blog.AggressionManagement.com">http://Blog.AggressionManag...</a> <br></p>johnbyrnesTue, 17 Nov 2009 18:46:15 -0000http://news.beiruter.com/node/77970#comment-12944813<p>If you are participating in the Iranian Riots or know someone who is and wish to remain safe? Let me help by showing you how to distinguish between those who are angry and those who are lethal. <a href="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm">http://www.aggressionmanage...</a> </p>johnbyrnesMon, 20 Jul 2009 07:16:31 -0000http://www.breakingtweets.com/2009/07/01/iran-suspends-nuclear-program-talks-with-eu/#comment-12157498<p>If you are participating in the Iranian Riots or know someone who is and wish to remain safe? Let me help by showing you how to distinguish between those who are angry and those who are lethal. <a href="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm">http://www.aggressionmanage...</a> </p>johnbyrnesSat, 04 Jul 2009 14:23:33 -0000http://themoderatevoice.com/37187/eu-demands-iran-release-arrested-british-embassy-employees/#comment-11876912<p>If you are participating in the Iranian Riots or know someone who is and wish to remain safe? Let me help by showing you how to distinguish between those who are angry and those who are lethal. <a href="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/Riots-in-Iran.htm">http://www.aggressionmanage...</a> </p>johnbyrnesMon, 29 Jun 2009 05:53:41 -0000