This is a serious indication of our enemy's intentions.
The electrical grid is our nation's Achilles' heel.
This may very well have been an experiment on the part of our adversaries to gauge their effectiveness and our response to an attack on a transformer station.
Multiply this attack by ten during a period of peak demand targeting carefully selected transformer stations followed by harassment and interdiction of the repair crews and our nation could be in a world of hurt.
It's painful to imagine the effects of a prolonged (weeks long) grid down event in the LA basin, the Phoenix metropolitan area or even NYC at the height of summer. The human and economic loss would make 9/11 pale in comparison.
The tired argument about what constitutes a "real" sniper is long past getting old. In this case it's a distraction.
Bosh.
1. If this is an effort to attack our electrical grid then we are in good shape. The grid has far more sensitive points of attack than transformers that are much more time consuming and expensive to repair and that don't take 19 minutes and one helluva lot of noise to attack.
2. This is the sort of "attack" on transformers power companies have seen for over 100 years. Confusing vandalism with terrorism is incredibly wasteful in terms of the angst it causes with the general public and the LE resources it consumes. It is also a gross distraction from potential large scale attacks.
3. If power companies choose to do so they can (and sometimes do) install a fairly inexpensive system on every single transformer that would let them know the moment it goes down. That this is not done on every transformer in the country should tell you something about the risk profile.
4. FINALLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY: What constitutes a sniper is pertinent to the conversation because it shapes the story, the amount of attention it gets, and forms the cultural gestalt that is now nothing short of mania. If the public is alarmed over it LE has a tendency to dump more resources into it to assuage fears of jihadist cells attacking our infrastructure. "
Yahoo Vandals Exhibiting Well Worn Behavior For The Billionth Time Over The Last Dozen Decades" isn't the attention grabbing headline that is going to get some pit reporter noticed by their editor or garner the number of hits that will propel them to the forefront of cutting edge interweb terrorist sleuthdom that they seek.
Terms like sniper, terrorist, WMDs, assault rifle, glock, and on and on are spilled onto news pages with astonishing volume so diluting them that it is an important task to parse out what these words actually mean. This is an affliction of the media to which the WSJ only suffered long after the majority had succumbed.
"Is sloppiness in speech caused by ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care."
-William Safire
I consider it an astounding irony that the New York Times, which has devoted so much print on the importance of language and the accuracy of language via Mr William Safire , is the standard bearer of the use of so much sloppy speech. We should never condone it, bow to it, or ease off for a single moment in offering corrections.
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
― George Orwell, 1984