The Largest and Most Active of Terrorist Organizations - Essay Example

?Manmade Hazards and Disasters Workplace violence is defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration as “any physical assault, threatening behavior, or verbal abuse occurring in the work setting (2009).” The work setting is any location, whether temporary or permanent, a business office or a home office, inside or in the field, where employees conduct any work-related task. This also includes the surrounding perimeters of a business, parking lots, and the route taken between the office and an employee’s home and while traveling to and from work assignments. Workplace violence can be initiated by coworkers, strangers, customers or clients, and personal relations. Given the wide expanse of where workplace violence can occur, and the amount of people who can incite violence, these incidences are more common than one might believe. Describe typical pre-event, event, and post-event aspects of workplace violence. There are three aspects of workplace violence, all of which provide businesses and their employees with the proper procedures involved in the event of workplace violence. These aspects are pre-event, the event, and post-event, and they each detail a specific moment in the course of an incident of workplace violence and instructs the employee on the actions that should be undergone. Pre-event The pre-event aspect of workplace violence is the prevention stage. This stage promotes the importance of understanding the presence of workplace violence in order to avoid said violence. All employees in any given business should acknowledge the intolerance of all workplace violence and how important it is to determine prevention measures. This includes raising awareness of acceptance and learning to recognize escalating situations. The pre-event/prevention stage allows employees to determine opportunities of early intervention to diffuse an event that may result in violence. Event The event stage is the stage of response, during which employees quickly and effectively contain a violent incident in an attempt to minimize any potential harm. The most important thing that must be accepted is that there is a one-hundred percent compliance of responding to any incidences, as opposed to ignoring them. This means that every incident, regardless of how minor it may seem, will be treated with the same seriousness as an event of greater magnitude. Response actions that can be utilized include personal defense training for staff, which would benefit any individual who does not have others around them to come to their defense. Other responses can be to initiate a lockdown of the specific section of the building or to implement a strategy of quick response to local law enforcement, such as a panic button. Post-event The post-event stage is the stage of reporting an event that has taken place. This is a vital stage as approximately fifty percent of verbal and physical assaults are never reported in writing, allowing the perpetrator to walk away without severe punishment. When an incident is not reported, it technically does not exist; it did not happen. By reporting an event, including any precursors leading to the event, the names of the individuals involved, and any other details pertaining to the violence, similar incidences can be avoided in the future. Reporting an event of workplace violence makes it so that others do not become victims. Furthermore, a lack of reporting can seriously impede opportunities to improve the safety of a business. Growth can only be accomplished through acknowledging and understanding potential threats. The post-event stage also involves investigating the cause of the workplace violence. This will also aid in preventing further incidences from occurring. Any patterns leading up to the violence can be considered during an investigation. During this time, counseling services will also be made available to those involved in the incident, whether directly as a victim or indirectly as a witness. Discuss three occupations which are among the most vulnerable to workplace violence and why. Workplace violence can occur, and does occur, in all types and sizes of businesses. However, certain occupations have a greater likelihood of workplace violence due to factors that will be discussed herein. The three occupations that are among the most vulnerable to workplace violence are law enforcement officers, prison or jail corrections officers, and taxi drivers. These occupations are at a greater risk for workplace violence due to their constant close proximity to strangers who are experiencing a range of emotional states. Another factor, especially in regard to taxi drivers, is the exchange of money and delivery of services. The more that workers are in the presence of the public – people who are unfamiliar, unaware, or unconcerned with the wellbeing of others – the more likely that violence will occur. Law enforcement and corrections officers, for example, are confronted with workplace violence on a daily basis; it is a central part of what they do. Taxi drivers, on the other hand, often risk their customers going to any means to avoid paying for services. Dealing with the public, and the startling amount of violence among these occupations, is one of the reasons why these professions have the privilege of carrying firearms. Workplace violence has reached of level of expectation that it only makes sense for these workers to always be prepared. Compare the London train bombings in 2005 and the train bombing that occurred in Madrid, Spain in March 2004. On the morning of March 11, 2004, simultaneous bombings occurred on and against Madrid’s commuter train system. Ten bombs detonated aboard four commuter trains. The total number of deaths was one hundred and ninety-one with victims from seventeen countries. These bombings were planned and utilized by an al-Qaeda-inspired terrorist cell, though there was no actual connection found between the bombers and al-Qaeda. Indeed, the majority of those involved in this terrorist attack were born and raised in Madrid. Twenty-nine members of the terrorist cell were tried and found guilty, though a few members committed suicide in the months preceding the trial. A little more than a year later, on July 7, 2005, in London, England, the public transportation system and its many passengers were targeted by suicide bombers. Four bombs were detonated with three being on underground trains and one on a double-decker bus. Four suicide bombers were killed as a result of the detonations, as well as fifty-two civilians and more than seven hundred people who were injured. There were four suicide bombers who died in this disaster and four additional arrests were made in connection to the attacks. All of those involved were heavily engaged in al-Qaeda-inspired practices, though they were native to England, thereby being labeled as homegrown terrorists. These horrific episodes of workplace violence are known as acts of terrorism. While these bombings took place in different locations and at different times, there are many startling similarities. The most noticeable similarity can be found in those involved in these terrorist acts. When the bombings occurred, they were each immediately assumed to be connected to al-Qaeda as they took place only a few years after the tragedy on September 11, 2001 involving the World Trade Centers. Investigators in these bombings were shocked to discover that while the suspects had been inspired by the works of al-Qaeda, they were only imitations and were no way affiliated with the large terrorist network. Even more perplexing was that the majority of those involved were natives to the country that they attacked (Carlton, 2006). Most had Pakistani heritage or a deep Islamic background, whether from their parents or grandparents, but Madrid and London had always been their homes. Another similarity between the two bombings can be found in the methods in which the attacks were executed. These attacks were no way sophisticated, and the perpetrators involved did not have the means for extravagance that a larger terrorist cell would, though these aspects failed to diminish the effects of the catastrophes. Low-tech detonators and homemade bombs were used, and many of these bombs were found, undetonated, in inconspicuous backpacks and suitcases scattered throughout the two cities (Van Natta & Sciolino, 2005). While the London attacks relied on a few suicide bombers, most of the bombs were detonated by remote controls. A third similarity is where the bombings took place. In lieu of sophisticated equipment or intelligent masterminds, these terrorists relied on unprotected civilians in close proximity (Whitlock, 2005). The commuter train system of Madrid and the public transportation system of London, which includes trains and buses, were unguarded; although many public cameras caught the actions of the criminals, they went unnoticed all the same by people who could react in time. Furthermore, both attacks occurred during morning rush hour when the transportation systems would be at their busiest. It would take very little ammunition to cause a significant amount of damage, and that was exactly what happened. The sole difference between the two bombings was why they occurred. In Madrid, the small terrorist cell responsible for the train bombings conducted the bombings as a response to Spain’s unwillingness to withdraw their troops from Iraq. Pakistani by blood, these bombers could not stand to see their blood relations destroyed by their cultural connections. By killing innocent commuters, this terrorist cell believed they were spreading a message about the innocent being slaughtered in Iraq. While the London suicide bombers felt similar hostility toward England’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, the primary reason behind their attack was that they were ashamed of how westernized England had become (Marsden, 2005), as well as Western civilization in general. The beliefs and values of westernized countries and nations went against those in the Islam tradition and the terrorists could not condone such beliefs. A terrorist attack occurred in Mumbai, India in November 2008. Discuss the: Events that preceded the attack Between November 26 and November 29, 2008, twelve bombing and shooting attacks were executed throughout Mumbai, India’s largest city (Kapur, 2013). The first warning about the impending attacks were received in October, when US intelligence agencies shared intel about a potential attack on the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel. Security was heightened but, after an attack failed to occur, was removed not after only a week. The second warning was received on November 18, a week before the attacks, when Indian intelligence agencies intercepted a phone call to the leader of a terrorist organization about a seaborne attack. On November 23, a group of ten terrorists, travelling by boat, hijack an Indian trawler, killing four of its crew and ordering the captain to sail to India (Irani, 2008). This allowed the terrorists to go undetected by the Indian Navy. Once they were within range of Mumbai, in the early hours of November 26, they killed the captain and finished off their journey by means of three inflatable speedboats. From there, the ten terrorists set out on a path of incomprehensible destruction. The group that carried out the attack The groups that carried out these horrendous attacks are known as Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is translated as Army of the Righteous, and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI. Lashkar-e-Taiba is among the largest and most active of terrorist organizations located in and operating from Pakistan. The ten gunmen involved in the Mumbai attacks were trained through this organization. It was not until the aftermath of the attacks when the only surviving suspect from the Lashkar-e-Taiba admitted to having the operation supported by Pakistan’s ISI, which is the agency responsible for providing national security to the Government of Pakistan. Both groups, excelling in their deadly deeds, are infamous for aiding or orchestrating terrorist attacks throughout the world. The selection of the date of the attack, the nature of the attack, and losses that were suffered as a result of the attack There is no known significance to the selection of the dates of the attack. The gunmen involved had trained during the months prior to November, and were deployed when they were deemed ready to execute the attack. The first attack occurred on November 26 when two terrorists open fired on Leopold Cafe, killing ten and injuring many. From there, they planted bombs in two taxis, killing five and wounding fifteen. Later that evening, four terrorists entered the Taj Mahal Hotel, two entered the Oberoi Trident, two entered Nariman House, and the remaining two went to the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, a railway station. After opening fire and throwing grenades at Chhatrapati, killed fifty-two and injuring one hundred and nine, the two terrorists proceed to Cama Hospital and open fire. The patients were protected, but four members of the hospital are gunned down. On November 27, the terrorists held guests hostage in the Taj Mahal Hotel. They open fired on their victims and threw grenades, causing the building to burn (Mackey, 2008). Guests are evacuated when possible, but as the terrorists lost their hostages, they increased their firepower. This horror continued until the early morning hours of November 29, when the hotel was under control of the government and the terrorists had been taken down. The attacks at the Oberoi Trident and Nariman House had the same fate, with innocent people being taken hostage, dead bodies being handed off to military officials, and the events finally coming to an end after the terrorists are gunned down. In all, one hundred and sixty-four people were killed and more than three hundred were injured. References Carlton, N. (2006, April 12). London and Madrid bombings ‘similar’. Londonist. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://londonist.com/2006/04/london_and_madr.php Irani, D. (2008, November 30). How Mumbai attacks unfolded. BBC News. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7757500.stm Kapur, M. (2013, November 26). Reporter's notebook: Remembering the Mumbai terror attack. CNN. Retrieved December 10, 2013, from http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/26/world/asia/india-mumbai-terror-attack/ Mackey, R. (2008, November 30). Tracking the Mumbai attacks. The Lede. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/tracking-the-mumbai-attacks/ Marsden, C. (2005, July 15). The London bombings: Why did it happen here? World Socialist Web Site. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2005/07/lond-j15.html Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2009, May 26). Training and reference materials library. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from https://www.osha.gov/dte/library/wp-violence/healthcare/slide2.html Natta, D. V., & Sciolino, E. (2005, July 8). Timers used in blasts, police say; parallels to Madrid are found. The New York Times International. Retrieved December 12, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/08/international/europe/08intel.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Whitlock, C. (2005, July 8). Probers note similarities with Madrid attacks. The Washington Post. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/07/AR2005070702228.html Read More