10-12-2015, 03:10 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2015, 03:52 PM by Drew Phipps.)
My thoughts and prayers go out to the families of those people who died during the shooting. As much as I know that they want closure, and for the healing process to begin, there must also be hard questions. I hope that the family and the survivors eventually realize the importance of learning the truth, whatever that might be, and the necessity for some dispassionate and insensitive questions. Please also realize that I intend no offense or insult. So, here are my current insensitive, dispassionate, and hard questions:
If this couple were planning a massacre for years why on earth did they pick his workplace as a target? Surely, with any foresight at all, if random violence were their aim, they could have picked a target with more casualties, or more cultural significance, a more politicized organization, or one with less obvious (or no) connections to the couple? Despite the anguish and the pain that they did actually cause, how is it that they didn't cause more?
Roof (Charleston church shooter) killed fewer people but struck a target of far greater symbolic importance. The Boston marathon guys injured hundreds and struck at a cultural icon. Whitman (UT Tower sniper) killed more people. Even crazy Holmes (Batman movie guy) killed and injured more people. Dear, the Planned Parenthood guy, killed three people, but his target left no doubt as to the symbolic importance or his ideological motivation. How is it now that this "jihadist couple" would plan such an "ineffective" operation, and ambiguously motivated choice of target?
To finish my thoughts: I think this was a case of workplace violence, of "going postal," if I can borrow that phrase. And I also think that government officials and the media, in trying to link these murderers to terrorism, for either propaganda purposes, or some political agenda, are posthumously giving this couple a twisted sort of legitimacy, when they deserve none. Why glorify their deeds by linking them with an agenda? Why create martyrs to some sort of cause, when the killers didn't even openly espouse a cause? Let their faces fade from public discourse into the compost pile of distant memory they so richly deserve.
Let us bury the dead, comfort the bereaved, take reasonable precautions against future similar acts, and look forward to a better day.
If this couple were planning a massacre for years why on earth did they pick his workplace as a target? Surely, with any foresight at all, if random violence were their aim, they could have picked a target with more casualties, or more cultural significance, a more politicized organization, or one with less obvious (or no) connections to the couple? Despite the anguish and the pain that they did actually cause, how is it that they didn't cause more?
Roof (Charleston church shooter) killed fewer people but struck a target of far greater symbolic importance. The Boston marathon guys injured hundreds and struck at a cultural icon. Whitman (UT Tower sniper) killed more people. Even crazy Holmes (Batman movie guy) killed and injured more people. Dear, the Planned Parenthood guy, killed three people, but his target left no doubt as to the symbolic importance or his ideological motivation. How is it now that this "jihadist couple" would plan such an "ineffective" operation, and ambiguously motivated choice of target?
To finish my thoughts: I think this was a case of workplace violence, of "going postal," if I can borrow that phrase. And I also think that government officials and the media, in trying to link these murderers to terrorism, for either propaganda purposes, or some political agenda, are posthumously giving this couple a twisted sort of legitimacy, when they deserve none. Why glorify their deeds by linking them with an agenda? Why create martyrs to some sort of cause, when the killers didn't even openly espouse a cause? Let their faces fade from public discourse into the compost pile of distant memory they so richly deserve.
Let us bury the dead, comfort the bereaved, take reasonable precautions against future similar acts, and look forward to a better day.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."