Was Janet Napolitano Right?

This post may provoke some heated discussion so here goes…

If you’ve read the news today, you know that some *$%@#* drove by a photo radar van on the north 101 and shot and killed the Red Flex operator in the van. Many of us disagree with photo radar but that disagreement does NOT justify some *$%@#* to take to the street and express that anger.

We also know that Janet Napolitano is largely responsible for placing these photo radar vans along the highway.

What really bothers me is that Napolitano made the statement just last week about domestic terrorists and some *$%@#* has now gone out and given her report credibility or am I missing something?


  1. There is a difference between a murderer and a “right-wing extremist”. Every murderer is not automatically a right-wing extremist. That’s what you’re missing.

  2. Veritas Vincit says

    A violent crime is not domestic terrorism, and to suggest so is irresponsible.

    Most of those photo-radar units are unmanned. It is entirely possible that the shooter simply was firing at the van and, afterwords realized their mistake.

    There is a lot of anger towards the monitoring of peoples travel habits and comings and goings. Read the press from GB where attacks on traffic cameras has become a sport of sorts.

    There is an axiom in Arizona that states; ‘Janet Reno-Napolitano is *never* right’.

  3. Antifederalist says

    Hmmm, a violent crime not domestic terrorism? Can you clarify that, Veritas? Because the government has been defining several violent crimes as domestic terrorists. McVeigh bombed a federal building, a violent act, and he was called a domestic terrorist. I believe John Lee Malvo and his accomplice were called domestic terrorists for random shootings in the beltway area, again, violent crimes. The Unabomber set off bombs in several places and wounded and killed a couple people. Those are violent actions and he was called a domestic terrorist. Eric Rudolph bombed a couple of abortion clinics and gay bars as well as an Olympics-related gathering. Those bombings were violent crimes and Rudolph was called a domestic terrorist. So, I’m sorta lost. Mind explaining your assertion to me? Or is it that the government has been irresponsible in labeling these individuals as terrorists?

    “When the government fears the people, you have freedom. When the people fear the government, you have tyranny.” — Thomas Jefferson

  4. SonoranSam says

    When lefties bombed draft board offices back in the day, that was domestic terrorism.

    When McVeigh left that truck bomb in Okla City, that was domestic terrorism.

    And when some gun-toting lunatic shoots and kills an unarmed civilian employee monitoring traffic, yes, that is domestic terrorism.

    Carnelian: You add to the integrity of this website with a post such as this. You have my respect, and my thanks.

  5. Veritas Vincit says

    Which one is it? Where is the political agenda in this act of individual violence?

    terror – the use of extreme fear in order to coerce people (especially for political reasons)

    terror – the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political

    terrorist – a radical who employs terror as a political weapon

    Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of political coercion. There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.

  6. Grumpy Gus says

    Someone suggested above the death was an accident because the guy may have just been trying to shoot at the van, not a person. Probably not, but if that’s the case, does it change whether the incident would properly be labeled “domestic terrorism.”

    What about graffitti? Street gangs? If the object of attack is government or a symbol of government, does that make it terrorism? If we let that quality slip into the debate, all anti-government activists are in a lot of trouble.

    Some animal rights or enviro groups are labeled domestic terrorists by the FBI, and they don’t really attack government but car dealerships and labs full of rats and mice. They use explosives and threaten to use explosives, so many would consider that terrorism.

    I don’t have a definition yet either. But an isolated incident with one perp, gun or bomb notwithstanding, probably does not constitute terrorism. But just because the guy used a gun, is that a sufficient condition to call it terrorism?

  7. I don’t know, none of us do, if this is domestic terrorism. It could just be someone succumbing to road rage.

    This, however, is attempted domestic terrorism (thwarted by the terrorist getting shot by his wife):


    This is what Janet is referring to…

    Or this recent gem:

    A Clearfield County man caught with several homemade bombs told undercover federal agents how he would hope to see Sens. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama assassinated if either of them reaches the White House, according to an affidavit unsealed today.
    Bradley T. Kahle, 60, of Troutville was arrested Sunday by the Pittsburgh Joint Terrorism Task Force on a charge of unlawful import or manufacture of firearms.

    Kahle unwittingly discussed his ominous desires with undercover FBI agents in April, according to federal authorities.

    “Kahle said words to the effect of, that ‘if Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama, get elected, hopefully they will get assassinated, if not they will disarm the country and we will have a civil war,'” FBI Special Agent William B. Weiss wrote in an eight-page affidavit.

    (You can find the link for that over at noted right-of-center website “Little Green Footballs)

    That’s the past-prologue to the DHS report.

  8. Antifederalist says

    Do you honestly think that there IS NOT a political message behind this shooting? I haven’t heard the afternoon press briefing on the suspect, but I bet the shooter rather dislikes the government watching our moves with cameras like in Britain or in Orwell’s 1984. And I bet the bullet was a message to the government: “We won’t tolerate your constant surveillance of the public, stop watching us, and take down your cameras.” Unfortunately, since the shooter was caught, his likely message has been flipped on its head and it now reads, “Resistance is futile.”

    “When the people fear the government, you have tyranny.” – Thomas Jefferson

  9. Antifederalist says

    One more thing, Veritas, I’m sure the government would LOVE to call this terrorism so they’ll have an excuse to tighten the tumbscrews by passing more gun control laws or some other equally inane freedom-restricting legislation.

  10. Veritas Vincit says

    “… police say they have a suspect in custody. The motivation for the crime is unknown. ”

    This is the disturbing line, “…was shot multiple times”. The suggestion of road rage seems appropriate rather than a political motivation.

    The shooter actually took time to conduct the murder suggesting he didn’t care if he got caught or not.

    I still take issue with the rush to judgment of this blog. It can be very dangerous when the legal boundaries of “domestic terrorist” are not well defined; for both the Left as well as the Right.

    Klute, stories such as you cite have been in the news since the 1960’s. They come and go depending on the overall mood of the nation.

    I guess everyone has forgotten good old fashioned crime aka The Arizona Project? Today that might be misclassified as domestic terrorism.

  11. The RedFlex photo radar van is a symbol of intrusive government just as the FBI building in downtown Oklahoma City was a symbol of intrusive government to Timothy McVeigh. When the individual shot at the van parked along the 101, he was “sending a message” that he hates government intrusiveness. He is no different from Timothy McVeigh.

    If I was driving down the 101 and someone shot at me and my family, I would find it extremely hard to resist chasing them down and taking the law into my own hands.

    Hopefully the law will prevail, this guy will be found and put in prison for the rest of his life.

  12. Grumpy Gus says

    Attributing the shooter’s motives in attacking photo radar to be the same as one’s own is not useful. There will be no end to the speculation until the trial is over.

    I’m sure there are plenty of people from anarchists to conservatives who hate government but think photo radar is a good, practical idea. I’m neither, but so what.

  13. Multiple shots is suggestive of rage or anger. Linger time at the crime scene is also suggestive of indifference to being caught.

  14. Don’t even make the comparison! Napolitano is & was wrong, all she cared about was money (backdoor tax) because her spending was out of control, not safety & sadly her greed cost this man’s life.

  15. Emily Carson says


    I’ve been disappointed with Napolitano in her new job (that’s an understatement), but I’m going to have to take you to task here. Let’s put party aside for a moment, the fact is she did a pretty good job in her old one.

    With her as Governor spending in Arizona remained lower than it is in most states. It’s easy to point to some particular program here or there but the fact is that our state government spends less on a per person basis than just about any state government in the country. Just look at California if you really want to see some out-of-control spending.

    Now, granted the legislature deserves some of the credit for that, but the truth is that Janet Napolitano never once tried to raise taxes directly during her tenure as Governor and cut taxes on businesses at least twice.

    I’m a Republican but I was one of the 1/3 of Republicans in the state who voted for her the last time she ran.

  16. Veritas Vincit says

    Then you’re not much of a Republican. And how good lady do you define “good job”? Please, enlighten us.

    Comparing us to California (where perhaps you hail from?) is a non-sequitur of logic. Both states have little in common except a border.

    Kathy’s right, the radar cameras are here for one reason, Napolitano wanted revenues and didn’t give a da*m about privacy rights. If you only knew Nappy’s games while governor.

  17. So, Veritas, are you going to stand by your statement that it is “possible” the shooter, pumping four bullets into the drivers door or window of a van, thought it was empty and only later realized his mistake? Are you going to seriously speculate that he put four shots in the place that a person would likely be but can’t be held responsible because someone was unexpectedly sitting in the driver’s seat? Or are you going to retract that statement? Never mind. Your words speak volumes as to your state of mind.

  18. Veritas Vincit says

    Jack, can you read beyond posting #2?
    How about posting #10 and #13?

    I stand by my position that by definition, this is not domestic terrorism. See posting #5 if you think otherwise.

    And in posting #13 I mention the multiple shots which, to a LEO suggest rage, anger and not caring if they get caught. A terrorist would want to be caught at the crime to make a public statement as to his *cause*. This guy just drove away. I’m going to speculate that both individuals may have known each other.

    Jack, check the time of posting #2… there was little firm information out on the shooting.

    I think Jack didn’t read past his nose on this one. Retraction Jack? Or is it your state of mind that’s the issue?

    The suspect is in custody and there was supposed to be a press conference Monday afternoon.

  19. A terrorist would want to be caught at the crime to make a public statement as to his *cause*.

    Of course. You mean like Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski and Eric Robert Rudolf, not to mention members of the weathermen, the Klan, the S.L.A. and every other domestic terrorist group, all of of whom drove straight to the newsroom after their crime so they could read a statement and hang around until the FBI showed up.

    I’ve never yet hard of a terrorist who wanted to be caught. Hell, if that’s the requirement then there is no such thing as a terrorist, even Osama bin Laden goes to great lengths to not get caught!

  20. I do however want to make it clear that I am assuming nothing about the motivation of Mr. Destories. I am not speculating in any way about whether he is a ‘domestic terrorist’ or not until I know something about his motivation.

  21. Emily, you’re nuts with those statements. Nappy grew our state budget by leaps and bounds. Trying to compare the total dollars spent to California’s budget is dumb because the populations aren’t anywhere close to each other. Arizona actually has a WORSE budget problem than California if you want to look at the deficits as a percentage of the total budget. Our hole is much deeper relative to the amount of sand in each sand box. Nappy dug it, then she split.

  22. How could Napolitano be correct? The killer was a Democrat.

    From Voter Vault:


  23. So, Veritas, do you still believe he “accidentally” shot another human being? I’ve read all the posts and I still can’t find any additional insight from you. If it wasn’t an accident than you refer to “road rage”, which I normally associate with an incident between two drivers, usually when one cuts off another in traffic. You also refer to rage and anger in another post, and yet the van was merely passively taping passing traffic. Is that, in your mind, sufficient provocation for violent acts? The photo radar van is clearly marked as a law enforcement vehicle. Any attack on a law enforcement asset can easily be construed as an attack against government and social institutions. I don’t see rush to judgment. I see rampant speculation — especially on your part — to try to explain away what is in all respects a senseless and tragic act.

  24. Veritas Vincit says

    “I’ve never yet hard of a terrorist who wanted to be caught.”

    Let me clarify, they want to “take credit” and for terrorism to be effective, those responsible have to be publicly known for what they did.

    Jack, stuff it pal. Ramble and rant as you wish.

    I’ve said; its not “domestic terrorism”. My reference to multiple shots fired are to highlight that this doesn’t appear random, it was very deliberate which suggests that the killer may have (note may have) known the victim.

    Note; it is nearly a full 24 hours later and the last time I checked (7am news), the police did not release any motive.

    Was this senseless? Absolutely. Was it “domestic terrorism” as the blog asks? No.

  25. Antifederalist says

    Um, Veritas, I think I’m gonna go with Eli Blake and Jack (post 23) on this one. As I said before, if a terrorist is caught, he message is flipped upside down. Instead of making a message of his actions: that he can attack the government with impunity, the message becomes, exactly as I said it becomes: “Resistance is futile.” Also, I’ve got to say that if LEO’s really interpret 4 shots as unthinking rage, then their analysis is VERY thin and they’re every bit as dumb as I think they are (BTW, I have a very smart bro-in-law that works as a LEO). Yes, Veritas, rage is involved. It’s called rage at the government. And I’m sure the shooter fired 4 shots to make SURE he killed a government-contracted worker to make sure his message was clear. If he missed, what’s the message? Property damage? Sorry, Veritas, I have to disagree. He was enraged at the government and hoped not to get caught. The fact that he did get caught attests to this individual’s stupidity. Now he’s got to pay for what he’s done AND he’s shown the people that they HAVE to be complacent because if you stand up against the government, you WILL be caught and you WILL be punished. Same with McVeigh.

    Until the unwashed masses start attacking the government en mass (disabling speed cameras, refusing to pay taxes, etc.), the government will never fear the people and we will live in tyranny. If we attack singly, we’re caught and punished and government power grows. Jefferson told us this. Care to disagree with one of the nation’s forefathers?

  26. Grumpy Gus says

    Lo and behold, the FBI just added a California animal rights activist to the domestic terrorist “most wanted” list for bombing animal testing labs.

  27. I think that the desire to attack can often be the result of a sense of powerlessness. In the government context, Powerlessness comes about as a result of an overwhelming cynicism that government doesn’t care and that we (individually or collectively) have no voice. We do have a voice and we do make a difference both with our participation (votes, testimony and protests), but not necessarily in the exact direction we desire, nor in that timeframe. If there is any provocation here, it is not government intrusion, it is cynicism. I don’t take from this incident that resistance is futile. What I take from it is that our focus must be on legal and acceptable forms of action. Hold electeds accountable, seek agreement across ideological spectra, and pursue the greater good through advancement of individual freedom and responsibility. Yes to Ghandi. No to McVeigh.

  28. @#22: What the heck does Destories party registration have to do with anything?

    Someone please tell me that the nutjob posting under Jack Harper’s name is not actually the elected official.

  29. This thread by “Carnelian Saloon” says that this incident has “given her report credibility”. This incident has nothing to do with the profile that Janet Napolitano paints in her report.
    How can a Democrat be a “right-wing extremist?”

    I am sure that Carnelian Saloon is a very informed person, but this just didn’t pan out as the act of a right-wing extremist.

  30. Senator Harper – two things I find funny about your comment about this guys voter registration.

    First: I thought ALL democrats were against owning guys, clearly this accused man had a gun.

    Second: This man is the accused, because we are in the wonderful United States of America where you are innocent until proven guilty by the court of law.

    Too funny how Senator Harper becomes tackier and more extreme by the day.

    My prayers are for the man killed while working. How sad.

  31. *guys = guns

  32. Veritas Vincit says

    Thomas Patrick Destories, 68, was arrested Monday on suspicion of first-degree murder. The motive was unknown.

    DPS Director Roger Vanderpool noted that Destories has not given any motive for the shooting.

Leave a Reply