Terrorizing

When is a terror attack not really a terror attack? One possibility is that it’s not at all terrifying. For example, there was an attack on a Bay Area electrical substation last April, evidently done in a “military fashion ... quickly and professionally.” The goal was to “take down the electrical grid.” Unfortunately, I have to use these quotes because when such a goal is completely unsuccessful it’s too difficult to paraphrase them effectively.

The practical outcome was the cutting of fiber-optic lines, damage t transformers, and an oil leak. Plus an article almost 10 months later that it was terrorism (according to this one guy). Nothing about it appears to be a hallmark of Al Qaeda, so the question could be “What sort of terrorists are they, and do we need to be afraid of them?”

Maybe we do - could have been a proof of concept, might have been folks who are going to learn from their mistakes and try again. Could even be that this is what Al Qaeda is down to: a few potshots at electrical equipment that’s out in the open and unprotect-able. 

Or could be outside the scope of the Crisis. Just because it is happening at this point in history doesn’t make it definitely a part. There’s nothing about it obviously related to the generational constellation, it’s not driving folks together and doesn’t inspire much in unified thought and action. The only part that might match is the “response to a perceived thread,” but if nobody even saw it as terrorism, it’s probably not much of a threat.