R.K. Locke Wrote:Have we heard any more about the "crazy" neighbour that they got the gun(s) off or has that one gone down the memory hole already? That is the nuttiest part of the whole story for me.
Syed Farook, one of the shooters who killed 14 people last week at a social services agency in California, was discussing staging a terrorist attack in the Los Angeles area with a neighbor as early as 2012 but got cold feet, investigators said Wednesday. Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik arrive in Chicago on July 27, 2014. U.S. Government
The neighbor, identified as Enrique Marquez, bought the two semiautomatic rifles used in the shootings last week at the Inland Resource Center in San Bernardino. Farook was killed along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, in a shootout with police after they stormed the center.
Marquez is still being questioned by investigators, sources told NBC News. Related: FBI Talking to Enrique Marquez, Who Bought Guns Used in San Bernardino
The disclosure adds to the evidence that Farook and Malik may have been underground terrorists plotting violence long before last week's assault. FBI Director James Comey described the couple Wednesday as "homegrown violent extremists" who were radicalized and dedicated to jihad as early as the end of 2013 before they started dating online and even before the rise of ISIS.
FBI: San Bernardino Shooters Radicalized in 2013, Before Dating Online 0:56
Related: FBI: San Bernardino Shooters Radicalized Before They Met
The couple also left behind evidence that they were contemplating other targets in Southern California, multiple sources told NBC News on Wednesday.
Sources said it remained unclear how far along any planning might have been, but one source said a university building may have been among the potential targets, while two sources said possible targets could have included gatherings in public areas. NBC has confirmed that this is a photo of Enrique Marquez, the man who bought the two semiautomatic rifles used in the San Bernardino shooting.
Sources told NBC News the information was developed from examination of electronic media Farook and Malik left behind on their smashed phones and computers. The material was encrypted, and only images have been retrieved so far, not communications, the sources said.
In addition, the couple practiced their shooting skills at a gun range for a year or more before their attack - with Malik dressed in traditional Muslim garb - two sources told NBC News on Wednesday.
As well as the 14 people who were killed at the Inland Resource Center, 21 others were injured.
A strangely muted report for the L A Times --- no penetrating questions, no questions for features / identities of the perp etc.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
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.
"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."
Drew Phipps Wrote: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?
Yes, they could easily have picked a target with more casualties, like a shopping mall. There is a synagogue not too far away to the southeast. Why didn't they hit that if the guy is obsessed with Israel?
https://www.rt.com/usa/324589-gun-channel-launched-us/ "A first-ever US home shopping channel selling and delivering small arms will start airing in early 2016, media says. In the wake of the recent mass shooting, there are serious concerns the arms-centric TV will promote "gun culture."" And if the Swedes dished-out swords to everyone, they'd be all sake 'n' cozy too; >thinks Ted Cruz "You don't stop bad guys by taking away our gunswibble"<
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.