“It’s a schemer who put you where you are. You were a schemer. You had plans. Look where it got you. I just did what I do best-I took your plan and turned it on itself. Look what I have done to this city with a few drums of gas and a couple bullets. Nobody panics when the expected people get killed. Nobody panics when things go according to plan, even if the plans are horrifying. If I tell the press that tomorrow a gangbanger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will get blown up, nobody panics. But when I say one little old mayor will die, everyone loses their minds! Introduce a little anarchy, you upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I am an agent of chaos. And you know the thing about chaos, Harvey? It’s fair. “-The Joker, from the movie Dark Knight
This is a building snowmobiles post for the simple reason that no one else is covering this arsonist story or fire in this way (minus maybe War Nerd), or really getting into the concepts of the ‘attack by fire’. Oyler, the arsonist, is the ultimate definition of the super-empowered individual, and truly symbolizes a modern day Joker. Fortunately, he will be meeting the same fate as that character.
Now of course I will not give a DIY class about using the attack by fire, but I do want to give a hint to the reader that this is stuff we need to be thinking about. Lets just say it should be in your toolbox of ideas, so you know how to defend against it. But according to the Geneva Convention, fire as an offensive weapon has been ruled out, hence why flame throwers are not used anymore. (I posted the protocol below) But if you read through it, it lists everything a terrorist or an insurgent wouldn’t mind doing to achieve a goal. So learning how to defend against it, is key.
But back to the attack by fire and the super-empowered individual. What Oyler did, is exactly what arsonists do, and that is get off on lighting fires. He had been perfecting his technique all summer in 2006, and the Esperanza Fire was his so called ‘masterpiece of chaos’. So what can we learn from this tragic event? I will attempt to answer that question, both from a smokejumper/forest fire fighter position, and from a security professional position, and also delve into the attack by fire from a warfighter and strategist point of view.
As a smokejumper, I fought many forest fires throughout the west. We would fight the small fires, and we would fight the big fires, it didn’t matter. We would fight naturally started fires(lightening started) and we would fight man made fires (trash fires, thrown cigarettes, etc.). But the most disheartening and frightening fires, are the ones set by arsonists. Especially arsonists that know what they are doing.
With this fire, and the background to the story, I can deduct a few things. Oyler fell in love with fire. It’s easy to do, and that is usually why these guys keep doing it. You can easily create a massive fireworks show, just with a well placed match. And if you know what you are doing, you can create the type of show that will really do some damage and get that beloved ‘news’ treatment. Because that is the next part.
On the news today, we get live coverage, with tons of updates and expert analysis, and links online to learn more about the fires. To an arsonist, it is gold. They love the attention, and it only makes them want to do it more. The really dedicated nut jobs also want to perfect their technique, and create their masterpiece fire. Not many of these guys intentionally set fires to kill people, but I am sure it is something they look beyond in order to get their fix, because like I said, they are driven by the spectacle of the thing.
Other types of arsonists are the ones who were fire fighters and actually want to create more work for themselves and crew. To a fire fighter, more fire equals more overtime out there, and there are a few arsonists that get drawn to the forest fire fighting profession because they actually get paid to play around fire. Scary, I know, but that is the reality of the profession. These guys though are mostly pretty geared towards creating small fires that are no threat to anyone, and easily controllable. Their goal is to make money, not kill and destroy–usually.
But this Oyler character is a special breed of arsonist. He threw caution aside, was not a fire fighter, was a meth user, and loved fire and all of it’s destructive capabilities. And it sounds like he was ‘mad at the world’, for whatever personal problems he was presented. He also had a technique that was extremely cheap and effective, and like the Joker, caused some serious havoc and anarchy that killed people, destroyed property and destroyed environment. That to me is the ultimate definition of the Joker Effect or the Super-empowered Individual.
As a smokejumper/forest fire fighter, we are the ones that see the result of this kind of activity, and it is infuriating to say the least. When a fire is set in just a way to entrap animals, people, and property, and is so hot and destructive that it creates a moonscape and sterilizes the soil, you tend to take a step back and just shake your head in disbelief. Especially if a fire killed some fire fighters, which is the case with this Esperanza Fire.
Back to the point. Todays new media, and Google-centric world with all the easily accessible DIY stuff, are helping to fuel the capabilities of these arsonists and future terrorists. The amount of destruction and death this guy caused with a simple ignition device, is easily right up there with using box cutter knives to hijack a plane and crashing it into a building. It is cheap, easy to do, and if done properly, extremely destructive.
Now let me put my security contractor hat on, and talk about the defense against something like this. We cannot eliminate man’s ability to start fire. We cannot stop man from being innovative or enterprising, or stop their will to do such things really. We cannot stop all the nut jobs out there, or even stop all insurgents or terrorists. What we can do though is prepare and be vigilant. And being aware of such an attack will help you to formulate a defense. Aggressive law enforcement or patrolling will help too, but having a plan for the escape and/or defense of property is key. You can also remove the fuel(chainsaw or burning) in your area, so you are not impacted by the attack, or move to an area with little fire danger.
Going back to some jundisms, being prepared and knowing your stuff are some key components of operating out there. So is intelligence. If you are protecting a FOB in Afghanistan or some estate in the mountains in the Western US (or even the East), or even the flatlands, it would benefit you to study the fire potential in your area. Most of all, if you were an arsonist, how would you attack?
One hint for fire safety that you can apply is acronym LCES. Or having lookouts, having good communications established, having an escape route predetermined and accessible, and having identified safety zones that people can step into and be protected by fire, is key to survival. As a smokejumper, we always asked, ‘can we spell it?(LCES)’, and if we couldn’t for that fire, then that was prime indicator to leave because the fire wasn’t worth the risk. We would also take the time to establish everything (escape routes, safety zones, lookouts, communications) as the first priority, when fighting any fire. So if you are in a high fire danger area, and you must stay in place, having LCES in place (or trying to establish that) will increase your chances of survival. This applies to the security guy, the home owner, the cop, the fire fighter, all of it. LCES saves lives, and that is proven. You can also clear the brush away from a home to protect that, but for personal safety, you need a plan to defend against the attack by fire when and if it comes your way.
I also don’t want to forget the various international fires in which arsonists have done their thing. Australia has terrible fires every year, and I am sure some of my readers from around the world can give examples in their local areas as well. So the attack by fire is an international problem, and certainly must be taken into consideration when planning for the defense.
And taking this conversation to a strategist’s point of view, fire is also a tool of war. We don’t think about this often overlooked weapon, but if used correctly, it certainly can be an effective weapon. If you know about perfect fire weather conditions, have done prescription fire for the government or states, have the tools necessary to protect self while still being able to attack the enemy, then you could easily count fire as a tool in your bag of attack possibilities. With that said, our enemies throughout the world are not clueless to the concept either. Fire has all the elements of being the perfect weapon for terrorists and insurgents. If an individual can ignite a fire that takes out an entire village or a special forces team located in a box canyon, and claims that as an attack, then what is the difference between that fire and a mortar attack or VBIED or any other type of munitions used in warfare? Worse yet, if the enemy used fire munitions to further accelerate the attack, then that is where the art of war and the attack by fire really come into play. Especially in modern times. Imagine if Sun Tzu had a 80mm mortar with white phosphorous rounds? He knew the incredible destruction caused by a well placed fire, and dedicated an entire chapter to the concept.(please see below)
Even in World War Two, we used the attack by fire when we firebombed Japanese and German cities. Those attacks were horrific to say the least, and certainly right up there with the most destructive attacks with the atomic bomb. The Japanese even tried to firebomb the US with balloons outfitted with ignition devices that would land somewhere in the US West. Fortunately, these devices really didn’t do much harm, but still, during WW2 the attack by fire was a weapon used by all sides.
Now I do not want to be an alarmist, I just wanted to educate and highlight a little talked about subject that needed some treatment. For the offense or defense, a little knowledge about fire will go a long way. And with the power of today’s new media and the internet, our enemies and criminal elements or ‘jokers’ are all learning and taking notes.- Matt
—————————————————————–
Raymond Lee Oyler (Riverside County Sheriff’s Department)
Oyler sentenced to death for starting Esperanza fire
By David Kelly
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
June 5, 2009
Raymond Lee Oyler has been sentenced to death for starting the 2006 Esperanza fire in the foothills of the San Jacinto Mountains. The fire killed five firefighters, destroyed 34 homes and charred more than 41,000 acres.
The jury had recommended the death sentence.
Judge W. Charles Morgan could have sentenced Oyler to death or life in prison without parole.
Oyler, 38, was convicted March 6 of five counts of first-degree murder, 20 counts of arson and 17 counts of using an incendiary device. Prosecutors said the Beaumont mechanic had set fires throughout the San Gorgonio Pass in the summer of 2006 leading up to the Esperanza fire on Oct. 26.
Early that morning, he used a combination of matches and a cigarette to light a fire in a remote area of Cabazon. Gusty Santa Ana winds drove the flames into the San Jacinto Mountains, where they reached speeds of 40 mph and temperatures of 1,500 degrees.
A U.S. Forest Service firefighting crew based in Idyllwild was overrun by flames while trying to save a house. Those killed were Daniel Hoover-Najera, 20; Pablo Cerda, 23; Mark Loutzenhiser, 43; Jason McKay, 27; and Jess McLean, 27.
Oyler’s trial lasted more than a month, during which jurors were shown gruesome photos of the dead, some of whom suffered burns to more than 90% of their bodies. But even after seeing and hearing the evidence, and after convicting Oyler of first-degree murder, the jury was hesitant to sentence him to death.
Story here.
—————————————————————–
Arsonist Sentenced to Death for Killing 5 Firefighters
June 6, 2009
By REBECCA CATHCART
New York Times
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California man was sentenced to death on Friday for setting a hillside inferno in 2006 that killed five United States Forest Service firefighters.
The penalty had been recommended by the jury that convicted the man, Raymond Lee Oyler, 38, of murder and arson in March.
In imposing the sentence, Judge W. Charles Morgan of the Superior Court in Riverside County said that Mr. Oyler had “set on a mission — why? no one knows — to create havoc in this county by setting fires of his own design, for his own purpose.”
Judge Morgan added, “He knew young men and young women would put their lives on the line to protect property and people.”
Mr. Oyler remained silent as the judge announced the sentence.
Federal and state fire officials said they believed this was the first time the death penalty had been given in a wildfire arson case in which firefighters were killed.
A jury on March 6 convicted Mr. Oyler of 5 counts of first-degree murder, 17 counts of using an incendiary device and 20 counts of arson for setting fires in the mountains of the San Gorgonio Pass, 90 miles east of Los Angeles, over six months in 2006.
The evidence included fire-starting contraptions Mr. Oyler had made of cigarettes and matches, DNA samples on two cigarette butts, and accounts from witnesses, prosecutors said. Mr. Oyler denied setting the blaze that killed the firefighters, although he did admit to starting 11 other fires, Mark McDonald, his lawyer, said in a telephone interview.
Mr. McDonald said Mr. Oyler had told him that he started one fire as a distraction to “break his dog out of the pound,” and set the others out of anger for losing custody of one of his three daughters because of his methamphetamine use.
On Oct. 26, 2006, forest service firefighters joined Riverside County crews already battling a large blaze, known as the Esperanza fire, as Santa Ana winds spread flames over slopes and canyons. While defending an isolated hilltop home, the five victims were caught in a “burn over,” according to testimony by fire investigators. A wall of flames 70 feet high, fed by 40 mile-an-hour winds and temperatures of up to 1,300 degrees, rolled over them.
Three firefighters — Jess McLean, 27; Jason McKay, 27; and Daniel Hoover-Najera, 20 — died on the slope. Two others — Captain Mark Loutzenhiser, 43; and Pablo Cerda, 23 — died later at a hospital with scorched lungs and third-degree burns over most of their bodies. During the trial, prosecutors showed large photographs of the men’s charred bodies, said Gloria Ayala, Mr. Hoover-Najera’s mother.
“I had been told he died of smoke inhalation,” Ms. Ayala said in an interview, “that it took 11 seconds. But when I saw that picture, the only part left with a flesh color was the tip of his nose. I will remember that forever.”
Story Here.
——————————————————————
The Attack by Fire
1. Sun Tzu said: There are five ways of attacking
with fire. The first is to burn soldiers in their camp;
the second is to burn stores; the third is to burn
baggage trains; the fourth is to burn arsenals and magazines;
the fifth is to hurl dropping fire amongst the enemy.
2. In order to carry out an attack, we must have
means available. The material for raising fire should
always be kept in readiness.
3. There is a proper season for making attacks with fire,
and special days for starting a conflagration.
4. The proper season is when the weather is very dry;
the special days are those when the moon is in the
constellations of the Sieve, the Wall, the Wing
or the Cross-bar; for these four are all days of rising wind.
5. In attacking with fire, one should be prepared
to meet five possible developments:
6. (1) When fire breaks out inside to enemy’s camp,
respond at once with an attack from without.
7. (2) If there is an outbreak of fire, but the enemy’s
soldiers remain quiet, bide your time and do not attack.
8. (3) When the force of the flames has reached its height,
follow it up with an attack, if that is practicable;
if not, stay where you are.
9. (4) If it is possible to make an assault with fire
from without, do not wait for it to break out within,
but deliver your attack at a favorable moment.
10. (5) When you start a fire, be to windward of it.
Do not attack from the leeward.
11. A wind that rises in the daytime lasts long,
but a night breeze soon falls.
12. In every army, the five developments connected with
fire must be known, the movements of the stars calculated,
and a watch kept for the proper days.
13. Hence those who use fire as an aid to the attack show intelligence;
those who use water as an aid to the attack gain an accession of strength.
14. By means of water, an enemy may be intercepted,
but not robbed of all his belongings.
15. Unhappy is the fate of one who tries to win his
battles and succeed in his attacks without cultivating
the spirit of enterprise; for the result is waste of time
and general stagnation.
16. Hence the saying: The enlightened ruler lays his
plans well ahead; the good general cultivates his resources.
17. Move not unless you see an advantage; use not
your troops unless there is something to be gained;
fight not unless the position is critical.
18. No ruler should put troops into the field merely
to gratify his own spleen; no general should fight
a battle simply out of pique.
19. If it is to your advantage, make a forward move;
if not, stay where you are.
20. Anger may in time change to gladness; vexation may
be succeeded by content.
21. But a kingdom that has once been destroyed can
never come again into being; nor can the dead ever
be brought back to life.
22. Hence the enlightened ruler is heedful,
and the good general full of caution. This is the way
to keep a country at peace and an army intact.
Link here.
—————————————————————–
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons
Protocol III
Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons.
Geneva, 10 October 1980
Article 1
Definitions
For the purpose of this Protocol:
1. Incendiary weapon” means any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target. (a) Incendiary weapons can take the form of, for example, flame throwers, fougasses, shells, rockets, grenades, mines, bombs and other containers of incendiary substances.
(b) Incendiary weapons do not include:
(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems;
(ii) Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armour-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.
2. Concentration of civilians” means any concentration of civilians, be it permanent or temporary, such as in inhabited parts of cities, or inhabited towns or villages, or as in camps or columns of refugees or evacuees, or groups of nomads.
3. Military objective” means, so far as objects are concerned, any object which by its nature, location, purpose or use makes an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.
4. Civilian objects” are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 3.
5. Feasible precautions” are those precautions which are practicable or practically possible taking into account all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations.
Article 2
Protection of civilians and civilian objects
1. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects the object of attack by incendiary weapons.
2. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by air-delivered incendiary weapons.
3. It is further prohibited to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by means of incendiary weapons other than air-delivered incendiary weapons, except when such military objective is clearly separated from the concentration of civilians and all feasible precautions are taken with a view to limiting the incendiary effects to the military objective and to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.
4. It is prohibited to make forests or other kinds of plant cover the object of attack by incendiary weapons except when such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or other military objectives, or are themselves military objectives.
Geneva Convention Link Here.