So, as we now know from current reporting, a person, or persons, had been sending packages through the mail, to various politicians and celebrities, with similar bomb devices. An individual, we can call him a suspect, is identified as Cesar Sayoc. That he has been identified and arrested is the good news. That no one was physically injured as a result of any bombs detonating is also the good news. That terroristic (select wording) threats resulted, that countless local, state and federal resources were needed to bring this to the current level of closure is part of the bad news.
Perhaps the worse news is that this level of response was necessary, that this kind of extreme conduct by this or any person is deemed necessary or an option. We are certainly at a point in time in American history when such actions can be considered acceptable. Such a response as opposed to dialogue, study, thought and meditation…or whatever means one can
So, what do we know, based on what we can see?
We do not factually know the motivations and intent of the suspect at this point. These things are likely to be learned as the investigation continues. The good news, evidenced by the quick arrest, is that there is likely a wealth of evidentiary detail to be had from the unexploded devices, the locating of the van associated with the suspect, and the living suspect taken into custody.
The combined resources of the government will begin a new level of analysis to answer a number of questions. They might include:
- We have someone in custody, is that the only person involved?
- We have a number of unexploded devices in custody, are there more in transit and more still under development at some yet to be known location?
- What other locations may be associated with this suspect?
- What other targets have yet to be identified and are those persons and locations still at risk?
- Where were the bomb-making materials obtained?
- How were the acquisitions of the various devices paid for and financed?
- What were the specific motivations and intent of the suspect?
- Why were some devices ready to detonate and others not complete to the point of capable detonation?
- Is there a greater and ongoing threat by friends or associates of this suspect?
- Is there an organization or group associated with this suspect that may harbor similar intentions and capabilities?
A question that might also exist that asks what the state of mind of this person might be? Is he crazy, is he rational, is he simply highly motivated, is this political or social and more?
The effect of his actions certainly has been to create an environment of fear, or put in common terms, terrorism against a body of people. In this case being the persons targeted, but more broadly the general public. Was this something of an initiation that works in support of a group hiding out there, watching the responses of officials and the public.
Many questions beyond this, the answers will come over time. Do we have time? Fear can be a strong motivating factor in the hearts and minds of people. Can this kind of act create a movement or trend?
I certainly hope not!
His past lawyer was on CNN. He defended him 4 times. In his opinion he doesn’t think the bomber is smart enough to do all he did.
Yes the info for bomb making is out there but he lived in a van. Someone showed him how to make them. And then there is the issues of the addresses, not easy to get. He probably delivered them to the USPS. This he could do.
If this scenario is happening it seems the real brains knew he was getting caught.
This stone should not be left unturned.
Yes, interesting information. I never close the door on what information can impart the truth of a matter. It is also true that often people associated with a suspect will express doubt about their involvement in the terrible thing that suddenly redefines that person. I seriously doubt the officials will jump to any short sided conclusions in this case. But, you never know.
Thanks for your comment my friend.
You are welcome.
To make my point, check this CNN video of Anderson Cooper with his lawyer at minute 10:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YvVV_lFKFs
Yes my friend I watched the interview. Very informative. But while all that the lawyer put forth is valuable for background, the investigation is still key. The investigators must sift through ALL forms of physical evidence, follow all leads that come from such evidence…and see where that leads and what “facts” can be derived. The truest picture is the factual picture. After that everything is circumstantial. It may be true that this guys personality and psyche do not support him being the lone perpetrator and mastermind of this crime, but he is involved criminally, based on fact (fingerprint evidence). If there are, in fact, others, that might be established with the benefit of analysis of all the real factual evidence.
Having said all that, if you think about it, whenever one of these crazy things happen, the family and associates seem to all have the same response. That being “I never saw this coming”…”this is not possible, he/she would never do such a thing”…” there must be some mistake” etc.
None of this is to discount what is said by the lawyer, nor your very good viewpoints.