From Threat Library, updated August 23

Arson forensics (also known as fire investigation) is the application of science to the investigation of arson. Arson forensics aims to determine the origin and cause of a fire and, if it is suspected to be arson, to gather evidence that could help identify the potential arsonists.

An adversary can usually easily determine whether a fire was accidental or arson. It is difficult to carry out an arson and make it appear accidental to an adversary who is knowledgeable in arson forensics.

Fire scene investigation

Fire scene investigation is the inspection of the scene of a fire, looking for:

• The ignition source that started the fire and the fuel that source ignited. For example, in an accidental residential fire the ignition source may be a malfunctioning electrical outlet that overheats and the fuel may be a sofa positioned against the outlet. In an arson the ignition source may be a match and the fuel may be gasoline brought by the arsonist.
• Patterns left by the fire on walls, floors, ceilings, and objects. These patterns can indicate where the fire started and how it spread. For example, a fire that starts at the base of a wall may leave a distinctive V-shaped burn pattern on the wall.
• Eyewitness accounts and video surveillance footage of the scene of the fire before, during, and after the fire.

When a fire occurring inside a room reaches a high enough temperature — typically between 500°C and 600°C — it reaches the flashover point. During flashover, the room is so hot that all ignitable surfaces ignite more or less simultaneously and the fire spreads rapidly throughout the room. Once a fire has reached flashover it is usually significantly harder for the adversary to interpret the patterns it left on walls and other surfaces.
Continue reading Threat Library: Arson Forensics →

PDF: A4 | Letter

Throughout the last decade, both in Europe and beyond, a new generation of activists has brought the climate movement to the forefront. Groups such as Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future, and Ende Gelände have succeeded in breaking out of the sidelines, convincing millions to commit themselves in defence of the planet. It wasn’t so long ago that few were even aware of the possibility of climate catastrophe – nowadays the very opposite is the case. I have no intention to downplay these achievements. What I do want to draw attention to, however, is that climate activism has made little or no difference to something very important, to the only thing which really counts: to actually lowering the amount of carbon emitted by humans across the planet. Such emissions continue to increase every year, as do average global temperatures, weather catastrophes, and rates of species extinction. Earning recognition from across society has not been enough. In all of its core aims, the climate movement remains a decisive failure.

I have a suggestion as to why this is the case. Because the climate movement remains stuck in the assumption that those in power must be convinced to bring about the necessary changes for us. Despite utilising a direct action aesthetic, most climate activism focuses on getting media attention (including mainstream social media, which is as much an extension of capitalist power as television or the newspapers) in order to achieve social recognition, ultimately in order to lobby politicians. However, the political elite will never be able to solve this crisis, because the system which grants them power is also a system which literally thrives on wrecking the planet. What we call “the economy” is an out-of-control megamachine which deems anything short of unlimited expansion (a process which entails ecological devastation) some kind of disaster. No matter their affiliation or the promises they offer, all the politicians and corporations pledge allegiance to the backward logic of this world-eating monster.

Some would argue that certain elements of the climate movement escape this concern. Contrary to Extinction Rebellion and Fridays for Future, anti-capitalist groups such as Ende Gelände do not make explicit demands of politicians, instead focusing on disrupting critical infrastructure directly. However, we cannot suppose that peacefully occupying a coal mine (or its arteries) for a few hours is a realistic way of shutting it down for good; this is just another way of getting the media interested. Such actions make no sense unless one hopes, consciously or otherwise, that they might serve to convince politicians to step in and reform the economy for us. Other mass organisations (for example, Soulèvements de la Terre/Earth Uprisings) might seem like an improvement, given that they favour sabotaging ecocidal infrastructure, and in this sense encourage something resembling direct action (albeit directed by a secretive vanguard). Again, however, this might only be a more seductive way of receiving media attention; for such attacks would be far more effective if performed by small, autonomous groups who strike under the cover of darkness, especially where the authorities do not expect it.

Continue reading MESSAGE TO THE CLIMATE MOVEMENT →