Pentagon to Help in Hunting Sniper

AP ^ | 10/15/2002 18:18:13 EST | PAULINE JELINEK

[11th_VA]

What a turn of events ...

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

The news report I just heard on the radio basically said that a witness has described the shooter as someone with a "slight build" and of either "Middle Eastern" or "Hispanic". I'm thinking "terrorist"!

[11th_VA]

What bothers me (if he is Middle Eastern), we'll never know if he's the only one ... til we all go back out ...

[concerned about politics]

Law enforcement officials have not said they suspect anyone from the services. Experts have said the shooter also could be a hunter, a target shooter, someone with law enforcement experience, and so on.

CNN - About 1/2 hour ago, said they're "looking for a man that's Hispanic or Middle Eastern, and drives....."(then they showed the pictures of the vans).
I said to my spouce: "Did you hear that part? The part about the man being Hispanic or Middle Eastern?" He said "no", he "missed that part."
They said it quick.
I'm suprised the press isn't even SUGGESTING Middle Eastern terrorism. Does anyone else find that odd? They're not even asking!

[Imal]

That's not all they're up to. Based on the governor's ban on shooting in the areas hit by the "Beltway Sniper", I think there's a good chance that they're deploying a ShotSpotter(tm) system in the area. The Pentagon has other surveillance resources at its disposal as well, items that civilian law enforcement agencies can't afford.

This killing must be stopped, and I'll be the good guys will try just about anything by now.

[LibWhacker]

Since when is fighting enemy troops on our own soil considered domestic law enforcement?

[groanup]

How would you introduce the military into domestic law enforcement if that was your goal? What calamity would you create to necessitate the need for military interdiction into local law enforcement activities? I am not a conspiracy nut, hate that s##t as a matter of fact, but this seems a little to convenient. More people have died in automobile accidents in the four counties in the last ten days than have died at the hands of a sniper. This is a reason to tickle with the law against military police action?

[concerned about politics]

Asked whether there were links to al-Qaida or other foreign terrorists, Ridge said, "I don't think we can foreclose that. Certainly, nobody in the FBI or the White House has foreclosed that."

I'm impressed.

[savedbygrace]

The aircraft would perform general reconnaissance, such as looking for or tracking the light-colored van authorities say was seen at one or more of the shooting sites.

A gazillion of these vehicles and from 10,000 feet the military can figure out which one?

Pentagon participation also could involve a system of sensors that could detect flashes of gunfire on the ground, the official said.

Like at Waco?

[concerned about politics]

White House Concedes Sniper May Be Foreign Terrorist

another thread

[big'ol_freeper]

Give me a break. You might want to consume a bit less caffeine my friend.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

I believe there is a "very good" (as in plausible) reason why both the Administration (government) and media are downplaying [as much as they can] the Jihadist or ME terrorist angle:

If it is a ME terrorist, an Islamist, then there is a whole new and extremely tough set of problems that arise in dealing with it. And those problems relate to public reaction...which could run the gamut right up a sort of mini-civil war on our soil against muslims. There WILL be a majority public (non-Islam public) reaction and it isn't likely to be a reaction within the Kum-bay-a tradition. There may well be serious violence against muslim targets and individuals.

And the last thing the Administration wants is for things to boil over out of control domestically while we are fighting two additional external offensive wars.

Indeed, it would be an effective enemy tactic to bring the war to our soil in this manner -- those are the tactics that we use against our enemies (take the battle to his home). I think this is what the Administration is attempting to avoid if they can.

But if the truth is as we expect they might need to reconcile themselves to much harsher internal measures against Islamist targets while they fight offensively against both Al Qaeda and Iraq (Al Qaeda's storehouse). But that ratchets up the degree-of-difficulty a great deal.

[agrandis]

Pentagon participation also could involve a system of sensors that could detect flashes of gunfire on the ground, the official said.

But, but, but... I thought these sensors didn't work. The Danforth comittee on Waco tells us that what looks just like a burst from a gun is actually light bouncing off of ground litter. Of course, the ground litter, in this strange phenomenon, is always locted right next to a man with a gun, so maybe it would still be useful.

[agrandis]

Thought you might find it interesting that the Feds plan to use aerial recon. to identify gunfire on the ground. Ironic, no?

[DWPittelli]

How would you introduce the military into domestic law enforcement if that was your goal?... this seems a little too convenient. More people have died in automobile accidents in the four counties in the last ten days than have died at the hands of a sniper. This is a reason to tickle with the law against military police action?

Yes, it is.

Even apart from the possibility (probability?) of jihadist connections, what kind of civil liberties requirement says that military sniper-locators must not be used to catch a mass-murdering sniper? An insane one.

[ClearCase_guy]

Since when is fighting enemy troops on our own soil considered domestic law enforcement?

A good point. It's almost as if, had the Japanese sent an invasion force into California in 1942, we would have been nearly powerless. "No, no! No troop deployments! Let the local police handle that! Murder cases and property destruction are just the sort of crimes that the sherrif is equipped to handle. It would be improper to deploy troops to stop those 10,000 uniformed criminals. No law enforcement by the military under any circumstances!"

[DWPittelli]

Pentagon participation also could involve a system of sensors that could detect flashes of gunfire on the ground, the official said.

I'd bet the primary locator is audio direction ranging. Flashes are far less certain.

[DWPittelli]

Thank you. You have the best post here. (#12)

[Mensch]

How come the powers that be can shred the Posse Comitatus Act over the deaths of a handfull of Washingtonians without batting an eye, yet when it is suggested the military be used to secure the borders, the wailing is long and loud?

[Orion]

Since when is fighting enemy troops on our own soil considered domestic law enforcement?

Just curious...
Since we are in the perpetual war against a phantom enemy, are all criminals "enemy troops?" Is the next serial killer an "enemy combatant?" Does he get a 1-way ticket to XRAY - no trial, no confronting of accusers, no ability to compel witnesses?

This is scary. As sheeple, we have allowed the gov't to operate an eternal war against a philosophy, and seem overjoyed at the promise that the etheral boundries of this new-found power expand at a whim. All our problems are "terror" therefore any person who is a problem is a terrorist, and therefore denied all the constitutional protections afforded us who are, at present, on the good side of our gov't and popular opinion.

If you give gov't a hammer, expect to get hit on the head.