posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 11:58 AM
It seems the authorities and media are going with the angle that the 2 brothers may have been radicalised in their muslim beliefs? The dead brother
(older one) looks to have been the more dominant and more influential of the 2, and that the younger one is acting out of a 'role model'
relationship to his older brother? Now that his older brother is dead, probably in a sacrificial role to aid his younger brother to escape, which is
why he went to towards the police shooting and possibly wearing an explosive vest, the younger brother may be seeking to carry out last instructions
his older brother gave him?
His state of mind will be incredibly mixed and confused. He will feel like a fox being hunted by hounds, knowing that if caught, he will be torn to
pieces. If he is set on revenge for the death of his brother, he will seek to find a place to hide and lay low, and hope to be able to emerge at a
later time to carry out a suicidal revenge attack. His current objective is to escape the area of search and obviously evade capture.
Even if they became radicalised over the last few years one has to ask the question...why attack now? They've both been in the US for at least a
decade, so why have they not carried out attacks beforehand? What was the trigger for this instance?
The younger brother was more Americanized than the older one, so I would say that the motive for the attack belongs more to that of the older brother
and that it was the older, probably self-radicalised brother whom influenced the younger.
The crudity and amateurish first attack does not really link them to any particular underground radical network seeking to attack Americans on
American soil. By this I mean they were not actually trained by a genuine terror cell, but have acted independently through an affiliated and shared
ideology. They will have had a close-knit group of friends equally as radical in an ideological sense, and if the younger can gain access to these and
if they give aid, he may evade capture?