FBI: ‘No Indication’ That Washington State Mall Shooting Was ‘Terrorist Act’

This video image provided by Skagit County Department of Emergency Management shows a suspect wanted by the authorities regarding a shooting at the Cascade Mall in Burlington, Wash., Friday, Sept. 23, 2016. Authoriti... This video image provided by Skagit County Department of Emergency Management shows a suspect wanted by the authorities regarding a shooting at the Cascade Mall in Burlington, Wash., Friday, Sept. 23, 2016. Authorities in Washington State say several people have been killed during a shooting at a mall north of Seattle and that at least one suspect remains at large. (Skagit County Department of Emergency Management via AP) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The FBI said Saturday morning that there is “no evidence” that a mass shooting that killed five at a mall north of Seattle on Friday has any connection to terrorism.

“We have no indication this was a terrorism act,” an assistant special agent in the FBI’s Seattle office said at a Saturday press conference, as reported by ABC News. “There is no evidence to support that.”

Authorities are still looking for the gunman who killed five in a mass shooting at a mall north of Seattle. Police described the shooter as a Hispanic man wearing black and armed with a rifle, according to the Associated Press.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Well, that’s a relief. Nothing to worry about.

  2. There isn’t any evidence either way at this time.

    Unless the FBI knows something they’re not passing along.

  3. Avatar for pine pine says:

    " ‘No Indication’ That Washington State Mall Shooting Was ‘Terrorist Act’"

    Tell that to the families of the victims.

    "The lack of consensus as to what a terrorist is can affect policies designed to deal with terrorists. Some view them as soldiers that can be held at the end of a war and are entitled to various privileges spelled out in the Geneva Conventions. Others view them as criminals that should be tried in civil courts. Still others will argue that terrorists are best treated as a category to themselves and need policies tailored to them.[14] This is the case because a) they often cannot be prosecuted because they commit suicide and b) prevention is more important that punishment.

    In November 2004, a Secretary-General of the United Nations report described terrorism as any act “intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act”.[15]"

  4. But has HO weighed in with an inane self-congratulatory opinion yet?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

22 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for littlegirlblue Avatar for charliee Avatar for feathered_head Avatar for sysprog Avatar for mattinpa Avatar for the_lone_apple Avatar for eggrollian Avatar for 1gg Avatar for epicurus Avatar for manhattan123 Avatar for 1strepublic14thstar Avatar for twowolves Avatar for ronbyers Avatar for pine Avatar for dave_mb Avatar for omahhum Avatar for mpower1952 Avatar for tiowally Avatar for katscherger Avatar for suesponte Avatar for maximus Avatar for overthefall96 Avatar for mediamaverick

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: