Al-Shabaab Video Threat Means Heightened Security at Mall of America
Reuters and other news outlets carry the news that the Minnesota's gigantic Mall of America is under heightened security after a video threat posted online by terrorist group Al-Shabaab. Also at CNN and CBS News. According to Reuters' version of the story: The U.S. homeland security chief said on Sunday he takes seriously a threat made by Somali-based Islamist militants against shopping malls, including the Mall of America in Minnesota, and urged people going there to be careful.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson was reacting to a video released by al Shabaab appearing to call for attacks on Western shopping areas, specifically mentioning Mall of America, the West Edmonton Mall in Canada and London's Oxford Street. ... Mall officials issued a statement about the threat made by the group, saying they are monitoring events with the help of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.
"Mall of America has implemented extra security precautions, some may be noticeable to guests, and others won’t be," the officials said.
impact is what counts, and groups like Shabaab understand that even if they are incapable of rendering an attack, its the threat that counts most. Commercial targets instituting checkpoints and screening are what these groups are going for, as these hallmarks serve as a consistent reminder that Shabaabs presence is taken seriously by america as a legitimate threat they cannot proactively reduce or mitigate through normal foreign policy to a level that would permit the american "way of life."
legitimate terrorist attacks have no source, no warnings, are unpredictable and incur large-scale casualties. The boston marathon bombing is an excellent example of a functional implementation of terrorism. One or two of these every 10 years and you dont need funding or training for anything else. just send a tweet or post a youtube, and the target entity will do all the work to ensure your message and intent are expressed.
Good people go to bed earlier.
These terrorist groups have slowly realized that the the biggest damage is not from bombs or airplanes, it is the self-inflicted damage that results. The DHS apparatus, multiple foreign wars and entanglements, loss of liberties, police militarization, "papieren, bitte" and a collective nervous breakdown are draining away the treasure and economic and social vitality of the USA. This is achieved at no cost beyond posting a video on the internet, and beheading any Americans who are stupid enough to visit them.
This is as asymmetric as warfare can get. You may say things are ok in America, but in reality it could have been much, much better..
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
I've seen a joke, maybe on a t-shirt, along the lines of "Every day a vegan skips meat, I'll eat three extra burgers." It's interesting because it exposes the question of whether the vegan is really trying to minimize animal deaths, or just seeks personal sanctity.
I wonder if a similar thing could be made with a Koran-burning machine. The machine is configured so that every time the internet has a new message from Islamicists, the machine automatically dips a Koran in pig blood, burns it, posts the video on YouTube, and sends a Tweet giving credit to the Islamicists who triggered that action.
Somehow I doubt having overconfident civilians in a chaotic situation with guns will help anything. Surprise is a key element of terrorism, and well-intentioned people with guns may not have the opportunity to respond when something bad does happen. You're more likely to get injured civilians shot in the crossfire from friendly fire or just poor aim. Heck, it's hard enough getting police to use/refrain-from-using firearms appropriately in crowded areas.
Islamic history that they don't teach at Harvard: When American colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American merchant ships lost British Royal Navy protection. With no American Navy for protection, American ships were attacked and their Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the control of the "Dey of Algiers"--an Islamist warlord ruling Algeria. In 1786, Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and Adams, then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the "Dey of Algiers" ambassador to Britain. During the meeting Jefferson and Adams asked the Dey's ambassador why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts. The two future presidents reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that Islam: "was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise." In 1805, American Marines marched across the desert from Egypt into Tripolitania, forcing the surrender of Tripoli and the freeing of all American slaves.
How about removing that rule as a first step? 'Gun free zones' are instant targets.
You might possibly have had a point if we were considering an armed robbery of the mall, although the fact that countries with strict gun control laws have murder rates that are a tiny fraction of the US suggests that the downsides far, far outweigh any small benefit.
However I really don't understand how a civilian armed with a gun will stop a terrorist bomb. Having armed civilians wandering around a shopping mall shooting anyone with a backpack, bag or briefcase who looks "suspicious" frankly sounds like a far more terrifying prospect than a terrorist with a bomb and one likely to result in far more deaths. What we need is a plan to stop them from causing "terror", not one where you do it for them
Oh come on. Even during the Blitz, Britons made jokes about the Germans. Humor is how people cope with stressful situations, and it is a hell of a lot better a way to deal with terrorist threats than running around screaming your fool head off, or worse, in some ways, become a hyper-serious worry wort believing at any moment you're going to die in some terrorist bomber's explosion.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Why didn't they land a bit closer? Seems Americans' awesome knowledge of geography isn't a new phenomenon.
Because if you read First Barbary War you learn that the expeditionary force consisted of 8 Marines and 500 local mercenaries. Given that the US navy was only about 7 years old at the time, I doubt that they had the ships available to transport all those people.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Why are you limiting it to just terrorist attacks?
At last check, with the exception of the Gabrielle Giffords's shooting... every single mass shooting in this country since the 1950's where there have been more than 3 deaths have taken place at a location where people were not able to carry a firearm.
This applies not only to every single school K-12 shooting you can think of, but the Aurora theater prohibited firearms on their premises, Ft Hood only allowed MPs to consistently be armed, Virginia Tech prohibited students (even with CPLs) from carrying... the list goes on and on.
Let me turn that Q around for you... when in the history of a world has a person hell-bent on doing evil, walked up to a door that said "Gun Free Zone" and said "Damn, I guess I'll have to find another place to create carnage?"
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Because attacking the Army directly would lead to instant loss. Attacking civilians is a much more successful strategy.
Now it is nothing but clothing stores and bad restaurants.
What else has there ever been at a mall?
Even back in the 80s when I was a kid, almost all the stores were clothes stores and fast-food restaurants ("food court"). The few exceptions were things like bookstores (like Waldenbooks), software/game stores (Electronics Boutique), arcades, Radio Shack, music/video stores, and tobacco stores. Book stores are mostly gone now, with Barnes and Noble being the sole survivor (besides odd little used book stores) (B&N sometimes does have mall locations though), most malls still have a game store (GameStop), some malls do have an arcade, Radio Shack just recently went under, music/video stores are mostly gone thanks to Netflix and Amazon and iTunes, and tobacco stores were forced out of malls ages ago.
But the point is, I can't remember a time when malls weren't mostly clothing stores and bad restaurants.
We can stomp ISIS into the ground should we be so inclined - but we're not so inclined.
No, we can't. We have no such capability.
The problem is that ISIS is not a uniformed, traditional military force. It's supported by the cities it rules over. It's one and the same with the local population of Sunnis. The only way you're going to stomp ISIS into the ground is to level Sunni cities, and kill ALL the people living in them. The west is not willing to do that.
Mentioned on Slashdot?
Seriously, I think it's all about being as shitty as possible. It's like 8chan with religious self-justification.
You are welcome on my lawn.
> what the hell are they going to get by attacking a mall for god sakes!
To terrorize, an extreme form of intimidation.
Remember "Apocalypse Now" : "Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared."
The idea is to make people afraid of ever offending Islam. To be afraid of getting on an airplane, or shopping at the mall, or drawing a carton, or expressing an opinion. After a while, it because easier to submit to Islam than to live in constant fear.
And it works. It works like all hell. There are 57 Muslim nations, practically all taken by force. There are about 1.5 billion Muslims. No other ideology has grown so fast.
For you kids, a "mall" is a place where they have stores. Think amazon.com except you have to drive to it, and they never actually have what you want there. The concept might have been more successful if it wasn't for that last bit.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Tell the Boston bombing victims that nothing like this has happened, or the victims at Fort Hood. This stuff happens in Europe all the time.
Some Muslim clergy talks some crazy into some such attack. Then the media, and the politicians, fall all over themselves to tell the public that the attack has nothing to do with Islam. Then the big story will be that Muslims fear a backlash - as if the Muslims are the victims, and not the aggressors.
We need to stop the PC bullshit. Pull our heads out of our asses, and see Islam for what it is.