Thinking outside of the convential square in law enforcement these days, but what if the Maryland sniper is a real terrorist in the essence of an Al Queda terrorist?
Surely, conventional profiling goes out the window, along with motive. If trained to strike havoc and fear, this is an optimum point right now. How can law enforcement catch the killer(s) especially if trained to shoot innocent victims from a distance, move on according to a pre-determined plan, shoot again, move on, etc?
If this rampage continues for an undetermined time, how long will the general population last before they “demand” from their government that curfews be established, even have the military patrolling the streets? With the people in the DC area succumb to giving up their rights to catch the killer(s)?
Is this type of brutal killing of innocent victims by potential terrorists, especially now that it has moved to school children, the Archilles Heel of America?
If you want to see how America will handle it, look at Israel. I think the U.S. would start to move in that direction. Rather than demanding curfews and hiding, Americans will likely respond by doing things like giving police more money, loosening gun control laws so people have a chance to protect themselves, being more vigilant, hiring more private security, etc.
At least, I hope so. I’m assuming the fundamental character of the two countries is similar, other than that Israel has been hardened by constant terrorism. America will probably just get tougher.
Do you live in the DC area, Duckster? Right now, nobody is thinking that way. In fact, most people are pretty much convinced that this is just some serial killer. I don’t think that this will change until some terrorist organization claims responsibility. And I certainly don’t see curfews or military occupation a possibility unless about 20 people start doing it at about the same time.
Which is precisely my point. If “nobody” in the DC area is thinking that way, then any terrorists doing this have a blank check to continue unabated and little “fear” of getting caught. (I do assume law enforcement is thinking outside of the square.)
But what if it is a terrorist action and as part of the plan they deliberately choose not to claim responsibility? As long as people think along conventional lines, unconventional killing continues.
As for, no imposition of curfews, etc., “unless about 20 people start doing it at about the same time,” lets carry the scenario a bit further. Assume it is a terrorist action. Assume, too, there will be no “claiming responsibility,” for the foreseeable future, if at all. And finally assume as a terrorist action this is a “test” case for the terrorists. By creating a planned, terrorist action in one heavily developed area (Metro DC no doubt, the heart of Satan), they are testing local law enforcement operations, along with any federal assistance. Carry the attacks for the rest of the week and then stop, never to be repeated there. Then six weeks, eight weeks later, about the time Americans are settling into their typical self-absorption, a series of well-coordinated sniper attacks erupt in a dozen cities nation-wide, at the height of the end of the year holiday shopping season.
Not only do you have mass fear nation-wide, but you attack at a time when many retailers must make their profits to stay in business. With holiday shopping now drying up overnight, not only do the terrorists instill fear into average Americans, but put a serious dent into the economy. Now we have more economic uncertainty. Since two-thirds of the economy is consumer spending, imagine a sluggish recession economy now hit with life and death fears that ordinary shopping means dodging a bullet?
If two goals of terrorism here in America is to strike fear and damage the economy, this is about as bad as it could get.
I’m hoping that Sam Stone’s observations would hold true and Americans start taking action themselves and not let the government do it for them. Otherwise, curtailment of individual rights will have longer and deeper repercussions than any terrorism here.
I jest not at all, dan. Al Qaeda has targeted:[ul][]The military (Khobar towers, USS Cole, the Pentagon, the foiled plot in Indonesia where they were videotaping military bus routes, another foiled plot like the Cole attack in Morocco)[]Embassies (Africa, the foiled plot in Europe last fall, the grenade attack in Pakistan)[]Economic targets (WTC, the foiled plot to blow up airliners in the Phillipines, and the foiled plot against the L.A. airport)[]Synagogues and churches in Muslim countries (Algeria, Pakistan, foiled plot in Morocco)[/ul]If you have any examples of Al Qaeda doing anything like sniping civilians, please provide them.
I would say that ramming two planes into the WTC wasn’t just a shot at the economy, it was a shot at the innocent people contained therein. I understand those other targets are perhaps a lot more obvious, but my impression was that Al Qaeda wanted to kill innocents whom they considered to be symbolic of all they despised regarding the U.S.
They have a blank check anyway, if they honestly feel they’re not going to be caught. The issue isn’t whether this is a terrorist plot, because that fact isn’t relevant yet. The killers still need to be caught, regardless of the motivations. It’d be different if a group had taken responsibility (for the infamy and notoriety), but since this has not happened, it’s not reasonable to assume terrorists are behind it.
What would the law enforcement people be doing any differently? We have local, state, and federal operatives working on the case, which would also be the case if this were an obvious terrorist plot. How are we to know they’re thinking in any particular manner?
Not really. Weren’t we all very fearful after September 11? Didn’t the economy start to decline rapidly? Your scenario serves only to foster paranoia; it may happen, and it may not.
Wait a second, because I want to make sure I understand you. You wish the gun control laws would be relaxed so that Americans could then go on their own manhunts for these snipers? Does this not sound like mob justice to you? What would then stop people from just shooting anyone who drove a white box truck? Or, if they got it into their heads that it was a terrorist attack, from killing Arab-Americans or anyone who looks like he or she is from the Mideast?
If I’m misunderstanding you, my apologies.
I’m directly in the middle of where this is all taking place, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to be fearful about any of it.
Yeah, I can see the misunderstanding but my carte blanche acceptance of Sam’s post was not intended.
My point actually is for average Americans to change their current behavior of self-absorption and take active, deliberate roles in combating whomever is doing the killings, among other things. If Americans allow their government to do whatever they must – at least if you believe the polls – then Americans have no problem giving up their rights just to be safe and secure couch potatos.
I have a real problem with that, far and away more than any potential terrorist or serial killer.
You have my support dantheman.
“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
– Benjamin Franklin
I don’t believe it’s a terrorist–not in the sense of a member of an external organisation, anyway–purely because it’s not obvious enough. If you’re spreading terror to achieve political goals or to make a statement, wouldn’t you want people to know it? Leaving people confused as to whether it’s part of a bigger terror campaign or the work of a lone disturbed individual would strike me as a fairly poor plan.
Well, if it is not a terrorist plot, it may soon be, if Al Qaeda sees how effective random killings are at disrupting life and instilling terror in the populace. Imagine the impact if the Maryland killings were replicated in 20 cities simulatneously across the country. Like the WTC atrocity, it is low tech, requiring only a lot of logistical planning, with a a huge payoff in terror. Look for it in your town soon.
True, but (a) it wouldn’t be a fair test (since people seem to be assuming crime rather than terrorism generally) and (b) why would you need a dry run? Surely a ‘sniper blitz’ without warning across the US would be a more effective terrorist attack than a media-saturated dry run that might feed into anti-sniper tactics (or at least increased anti-terrorist vigilance).
Al Qaeda wouldn’t need any further evidence of the killing spree as an effective tool - it’s not as if this has never been done before. After all, there are scores of movies that cover just this kind of territory.
I heard someone on the radio today - an “expert” being interviewed - who thought it was more of a thrill kill than anything else, and he noted that because the killings have taken place in different areas and were of people of different ethnicities and ages, it’s tough to gauge the motivation. I take this to also mea it’s tough to profile the killer or killers.
I live in the area, and I’ve been watching the virtually non-stop coverage, and the local media here are not bringing up the “T” word, as if they’ve got a gag order on it. Of course, I could very well be missing something…
I don’t believe that these shootings are a terrorist act. Most likely it’s some psycho with a rifle. Probably a white male between 25 and 40, an ex-militarary type guy who got kicked out and is a sociopath. He probably hates women and grew up without a Dad. He was also probably abused as a child. His nieghbors will probably say he was a nice guy but very quite. (I am not a shrink but I’ll lay down 3 to 1 odds that I got the snapshot of the guy right)
Terrorists want to kill in a big way and stamp their name all over the place. Sniping isn’t there style.
dantheman, you’re continuing to assert that this may be an act of organized terrorism, but you still haven’t provided any remotely comparable terrorist act with which to compare it. So my question is this: Why do you conclude that it is likely to be Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization as opposed to some random loony, of which we have more than our share in this country already?
My take is that based on what the public knows, this could be:
A guy
A lady
More than one person
A planned event
A random event
And so on. Of course, the police in both counties (and D.C.) certainly know more than they’re able to tell the rest of us, but right now any scenario is possible.
I’d prefer not to think of it as a terrorist attack and will continue to do so unless and until evidence is furthered that indicates otherwise.
