Posted by
Undaunted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:14:22 PM
If you have some sense that it will always be "the other guy" who’s touched by terrorism, then you won’t take the threat seriously because you believe it won’t reach you. We act on our beliefs, on that which we have decided is true ~ or true enough.
We need to personalize the threat or we won’t act.
There are two reasons we buckle up our seatbelts in the car. First, it’s law in many places and we can get a ticket for that infraction. Trust me, I know. One-hundred and one good ol' American greenbacks. Ouch. Second; we put it on just in case "the other guy" is driving HUA. Chances are you’ll never be in an accident. Chances are even less probable that you’ll be a victim of a terrorist attack. But, just in case …
We are engaged in a war. The enemy is not coming ~ they are already here. Our law enforcement agencies have been doing great work and have succeeded in thwarting several attacks. But they cannot do it all. The rest of us, all of us, need to help.
This blog isn’t about accusing any religion or ethnic group of being terrorists. It is here specifically to help us be more aware of any open source / plain view / open sight / reasonable man indicators that may imply some type of criminal or terror-related activity by a person(s), whether or not he or she is affiliated in some way with any terrorist group ~ and then to report such to the proper people in a timely, thorough manner.
No single indicator that we may discuss or observe should be considered "proof" of involvement in terrorism or crime. What we hear or see might be just one element of proof that combines with other elements to provide actionable intel, which law enforcement agencies may or may not choose to pursue. It's their job to assess and investigate and act as appropriate.
The Virginia Tech shooter was Korean. He had a solid tactical plan to kill as many people as he could and then kill himself. He pulled it off. I am not suggesting he was a terrorist, using the FBI definition. I mention him to make this point: It was what he was doing and saying, not the exterior appearance of his race a/o ethnicity, that should have signaled people that he posed a deadly threat to others. In fact, there is evidence that some did know he was a bad actor and yet did not take actions appropriate and permissible under the law. That's an argument not to be advanced or won here.
Remember ...
It's about what they appear to be doing near your or next to you. It's not about where they appear to have come from on the globe, although given the totality of circumstances, that might be imprudent to ignore.