Source: LAX Shooting Suspect Sent ‘Angry’ Anti-Government Texts

[TomCADem]

Source: Fox 8 News

Eyewitnesses said the suspect asked people, “Hey, are you TSA?” — the acronym for the Transportation Security Administration — according to a federal law enforcement official. If they said “no,” he would move on.

In the aftermath of the shooting, investigators found information on the suspect–identified later by the FBI as Paul Anthony Ciancia, 23, expressing not just anti-federal government sentiment but also anger at the TSA specifically, according to the federal law enforcement official.

An intelligence source with knowledge of the investigation said that Ciancia sent a series of “angry, rambling” texts to his brother and father in recent days that caused concern among family members.

In the messages, Ciancia complained about the government and how he was unhappy and discouraged living in Los Angeles.


Read more: http://fox8.com/2013/11/01/lax-evacuated-after-shots-reportedly-fired/

---

Earlier reports said that the shooter was a TSA employee. I guess the latest was that he was an anti-government nut who was targeting TSA employees.

[jberryhill]

1. The Lone Nut Anti-Defamation League objects to this OP

In a statement released today, the LNADL had this to say, "We deplore what happened at LAX, and we also deplore the rush to judgment in the media to portray the shooter as a lone nut." The LNADL went on to say that its members are highly offended at their portrayal in news coverage of events which, most likely, are part of an elaborate web of misdirection by those who do not want to rouse the sheeple into knowing what is really going on.

[TomCADem]

2. The MSM Is Declining To Acknowledge That They Mistakenly

Spent the first several hours going with the narrative that the individual was a TSA employee, rather than an anti-government lunatic who was specifically targeting TSA employees.

[jberryhill]

3. That's because the plan was accidentally leaked

Someone slipped up and mentioned it was an inside job, so the news reported him as a TSA employee. Then they caught up with the Official Story and fell into line.

[TomCADem]

4. So, You Are Saying That The Gunman WAS A TSA Employee..

...and not an anti-government gunman with an AR 15 assault rifle trying to target TSA employees? Any source on that or are you just speculating?

[jberryhill]

5. Out of curiosity, I checked out Alex Jones

And, as usual, he's got this thing all figgered out:

"Originally CBS and others began reporting that the shooter was an off duty TSA agent, indicating that the motive was personal in targeting colleagues. This began to be quickly memory holed, however, and replaced by a completely different outline.

First we heard that he may have had “strong anti-government views”, and had “anti-government materials” on his person. This turned out to be a hand written note stating that he was a “pissed off patriot” who wished to “kill TSA and pigs,”"

...


"A key question revolves around why Ciancia would be asking plain clothed people if they were TSA agents, when TSA agents are easily identifiable by their blue uniforms. This seems like an attempt to artificially manufacture a narrative around the shooting."

[TomCADem]

9. Are You Seriously Citing Birther/Sandy Hook Denier Alex Jones?

Did I just step into World Nut Daily? I thought I was in DU.

[jberryhill]

10. No, I was ironically citing Alex Jones

You seem to be fascinated by early reports having been contradicted by later ones.

This is of course a common phenomenon in the competitive news rush to get out information that may be garbled, subject to whisper-down-the-lane, rumors etc.

But there is always an element who sees something sinister in the "changing narrative."

Here it appears that early reports indicated he was a TSA employee - something easily garbled with "shooting at LAX involved TSA employee". Indeed, a TSA employee was certainly involved in the shooting, but apparently as the most seriously and fatally wounded victim.

It turns out the shooter had a particular animus against the TSA. Of course, those of the Jonesian bent understand that extreme rhetoric about the TSA is common among their rank, and hence the "powers that be" have tried to make it look like it was a conspiracy nut, in order to make conspiracy nuts look bad.

And thus it is the job of the Lone Nut Anti-Defamation League to fight the negative portrayal of lone nuts in the media.

[JDPriestly]

13. Actually, I listened to an interview with a witness to the events who said the person

was wearing dark pants like a TSA agent. He was describing what he had just seen. So, that is where the idea that the man was a TSA agent came from -- an on-the-scenes witness telling what he remembered very shortly after the event happened. It was on streaming news coverage from the airport that I watched on the internet.

Now they say the shooter was wearing something else. It is beyond me how a person who was still in a bit of shock but quite clear in relating what he had seen could have made such a glaring mistake in describing who and what he saw. But . . . . .

The program I watched was on the scene live, no editing.

Only later did this second story emerge. It's very odd. But if you weren't watching the nearly contemporaneous on-the-scene, straight-from-the-airport, immediate reporting, you are, of course, welcome to repeat the edited, fixed-up version that you heard later on -- the official version.

The witness I heard could have been confused. But he more likely was describing what he saw.

Of course, maybe what the witness saw were the TSA officers who ran through the airport trying to catch the shooter.

I do not, however, think we can totally explain away or ridicule the on-the-scenes statement of a witness shortly after the event. The difference in his perception and the news stories we are getting needs to be explained.

[jberryhill]

16. But why do they "need to be explained"

As you mention, there are any number of reasons why someone may have said they thought the shooter had black pants. But this is where the "need to be explained" runs into the practical reality of chasing someone down for some sort of cross-examination, and the lack of obligation some random traveler has for making him or herself available for cross examination. It is why witnesses to events on 9/11, such as the lady who took the picture of a smoke plume in Shanksville, come to regret having said anything to anyone in the first place, as they are then in for a lifetime of hounding by conspiracy theorists who "need an explanation" of the ordinary course of conflicting eyewitness reports.

The place was locked down, and one would expect that a lot of eyeballs were applied to video recordings to determine how many shooters there were, and whether the incident was being used as a distraction to breach security at some other point. And that's where you run into the usual problem of how many people have to be actively engaged in suppressing "what really happened" in order to accommodate a possibly inaccurate witness account.

And that is not at all about "ridiculing" someone relating what they saw to a TV news crew. It is simply taking into account the normal conflicts of details among witness accounts of any event.

If there is any ridicule involved, it is not directed toward someone relating what they perceived, subject to the common vagaries of perception, but of those who have a compulsive "need" to obsess over a very common fact of the human condition.

But there are, no doubt, those who are likely at this time chasing down this guy to satisfy that need. And they'll keep after him until he confesses that the powers that be have forced him to recant or alter what he first related.

[JDPriestly]

19. Well, anyway, the pundits will tell you the guy was wearing khakis, and all the officials will tell

you he was wearing khakis, so that will be the official story. The witness I heard my have been confused. None of us know what really happened yet.

They shot the suspect they have in custody in the mouth. I assume he won't be talking about it.

[PatrynXX]

18. not sure Alex is involved

in WND infowars yes and for some dumb reason McAffe is going there. he'll make himself look worse than the program.

either way you need to read ahead.

[jberryhill]

21. English please?

Could you elaborate on those thoughts?

[jberryhill]

12. Where is the craziness?

A man walks into an airport terminal, commences to shooting people, and you want to know where the craziness lies?

Or are you talking about the form of craziness which manifests itself as paranoia?

[SoapBox]

6. So bottom line...

The guy was very mentally ill.

[Cryptoad]

7. 1000 to 1

he is a RWN on his mission of Sedition!

[Mika]

8. ... and had a powerful assault rifle.

American exceptionalism on display. Again.

[JDPriestly]

20. Isn't everyone with a high powered rifle mentally ill?

[spin]

22. No. Logically if that was true we would have thousands and thousands of mass murders every year. ...

Remember we have at least 80,000,000 firearm owners in our nation and many own what would be considered a high power rifle. There are an estimated 10,000,000 dear hunters in the states. (ref: http://www.americanhunter.org/mobile/article.php?id=20229) In many states hunting feral hog is very popular. In my region of Florida many residents hunt deer during season and stock their freezers with meat which is very tasty and more healthy than store bought meat. Hog hunting is also popular and there is an open season on this feral pest that is not native to our nation.

Of course a good number of firearm owners use high powered rifles for target shooting. It's a challenging sport and many participants reload their own ammo to find the most accurate round for their rifle.

But of course I suspect you already know this.

[JDPriestly]

14. In other words, he was a Republican stirred up by talk radio.

He was in the age that schizophrenia manifests itself commonly.

[onehandle]

15. And guns are very handy. nt

[alp227]

17. this is actually a CNN article

Updated original link, Deadly LAX shooting: Why did he do it?

[gopiscrap]

23. fucking right wing assholes