But Is It Really?

From ABC News: "It's become more difficult to identify motivations behind mass casualty attacks: DHS." The excuse given is that the attackers are motivated by too many disparate causes or ideologies. From the article:

    The confidential analysis [from the Department of Homeland Security], distributed to law enforcement on Jan. 10 and obtained by ABC News, describes the growing challenge posed by perpetrators who "espoused and engaged with an array of narratives," often online, "likely fueling their mobilization to violence."

    Those attackers' range of beliefs made it easier to escape the longstanding templates law enforcement uses to catch would-be threats – and made it harder for police to intervene or secure potential targets, the analysis found.

    "Since 2018, we have observed mass casualty attacks in which the perpetrators held multiple grievances, challenging our ability to identify a primary motive," the bulletin said.

    Examining eight attacks in the past five years which collectively killed 47 people and injured nearly 130 more, DHS' analysis found the "recent attackers influenced by mixed factors complicate target identification for law enforcement."

    Understanding what spurs a mass killer to action is a crucial piece of the intervention puzzle, experts say. And, the evolving threat environment - heightened by conflict in the Middle East and fueled by hate speech rampant on social media - requires a more elastic screening process to spot warning signs among would-be attackers that might otherwise go unheeded.

    "We can no longer afford to look at emerging threats the same way we looked at them 10 years ago," said John Cohen, a former senior official in the Department of Homeland Security, now an ABC News contributor. "Individuals who now engage in mass casualty attacks will typically adopt a blend of ideological beliefs and personal grievances that they cultivate through the consumption of online content – and if that is not recognized by investigators, they aren't going to understand what they are seeing."

It probably makes it even more difficult when the DHS doesn't consider certain shooter's manifestos or that Leftists can be responsible for shootings.  For instance, the article relates of the 8 case studies:

Some perpetrators consumed violent extremist content online, which "often promoted white supremacy narratives," while "others expressed hate-based grievances against specific groups, including law enforcement officers, women, and the Jewish community."

That sounds more like the DHS is analyzing what it wishes the threat environment to be rather than what it is.