Framing the Dialogue

Lone Wolf

Consider this headline:

Frankfurt Shooting Suspect Likely a ‘Lone Wolf’

The “alleged shooter, Arid Uka, is described as a “a 21-year-old ethnic Albanian whose family moved to Germany from Kosovo,(and) had an “Islamist” motivation for firing at U.S. Air Force personnel.”  I may have my history wrong, but President William Jefferson Clinton got us involved in Kosovo on the side of the Muslims.  Once control was wrested from the government (I know that Milosovic was a “bad” guy) the Christian churches started burning down and atrocities committed against those not practicing the Muslim religion.  At some point, perhaps, authorities will put the puzzle pieces together that, perhaps, a preponderance of evidence, perhaps, exists that since there are so many Muslim “lone wolves” out there that, perhaps, they should no longer be considered lone wolves even though there is not a paper trail linking the wolves. 

Perhaps authorities could find a common thread between these terrorists:

  • Osama bin Laden
  • KSM
  • 911 hijackers
  • U.S.S. Cole bombers
  • Blind Sheik (first World Trade Center Bombing)
  • Nidal Malik Hasan (Fort Hood Murders, allegedly)
  • Fort Dix Six (plot foiled)
  • Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad (Army/Navy recruiting office shooting and murder)
  • Mohammed Taheri-Azar (drove SUV into crowd at UNC)
  • Faisal Shahzad (Times Square bomber – plot failed)
  • Ahmed Ressam (caught trying to sneak bomb into U.S. from Canada)
  • Naveed Afzal Haq forced (attack on the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle)
  • Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (“underwear” bomber)
  • Sulejmen Talovic (Salt Lake City Mall shootings)
  • Michael Julius Ford (Denver Safeway store)
  • Richard Reid (shoe bomber)
  • The “DC Snipers”
  • Hesham Mohamed Hadayet (El Al ticket counter at LAX)
  • Ali Abu Kamal (Empire State Building shooting/murder)

This list is not exhaustive and does not include the many “honor” killings against their own families.  Perhaps the “lone wolf” label make law enforcement more comfortable, but we should not be comforted.  The alleged lack of a direct link to known terrorist organizations doesn’t make the attacks less brutal or less terrorizing.  Perhaps we should be more terrified by the response to the most recent shooting by this White House.  In President Obama’s first remarks about the murders he referred to the “tragedy” as it was some type of natural disaster.  Perhaps you want to excuse that as a slip, but a spokesman for his State Department, P.J. Crowley also stumbled when asked directly whether this was a terrorist attack,

Question:  “Even if the act of terrorism is the act of lone man, it’s not a terrorist attack.  I’m just trying to understand why you can’t make that clear.”

Response:  “Well. I mean, I mean ah um ah um you know.  Was the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords a terrorist attack? I mean, you have to look at the evidence and look at the motivation and then you make a judgment.” [I could not bring myself to call this an “answer”]

The “judgement” was not forthcoming as “judgement” from this White House seems to be reserved for conservative Americans and their causes.  Perhaps the White House should consider Charles Krauthammer to tutor them on presenting a clear, honest, believable message.

Leave a comment

Use basic HTML (<a href="">, <strong>, <blockquote>)