Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news team.
Speaker 2: They did a great job in the last twenty four
Speaker 2: hours Divine and now mulroy from the CIA, and of
Speaker 2: course with mcmlroy's public service to the nation and to
Speaker 2: our military, mcmorroy joins the Lobo Institute. Nick, I want
Speaker 2: to get away from the talking points. People have to
Speaker 2: come out of press conferences and say the usual, what's
Speaker 2: really going on away from the media, the lights of
Speaker 2: the media in New Orleans.
Speaker 1: So good to be with you guys. Obviously a horrible
Speaker 1: issue to discuss. I think right now law enforcement and
Speaker 1: especially the intelligence community is trying to determine whether this
Speaker 1: was just ISIS inspired, which it seems obviously that it was,
Speaker 1: or was it Isis directed, and they're going to be
Speaker 1: looking at all of this individual's communications, potentially is travel.
Speaker 1: There has been in reports. Do you travel to Egypt
Speaker 1: and traveled to Canada. That doesn't mean that was anything
Speaker 1: done there, but they're certainly going to look at who
Speaker 1: he met and why he met them, and to try
Speaker 1: to determine if there was any direction or any support
Speaker 1: that was lended by main Isis, either in Syria or Afghanistan.
Speaker 1: And I think that's probably where they're looking right now
Speaker 1: to determine I guess, ultimate culpability when it comes to
Speaker 1: this horrendous attack.
Speaker 2: Do we have a strategy for lone wolfs.
Speaker 1: That's a good question, because it's very difficult. It's very
Speaker 1: difficult to determine who who's been self radicalized, as they
Speaker 1: call it. The only way to really do that, of course,
Speaker 1: is to kind of somehow get an informant into the mix.
Speaker 1: But when they're self radicalized, although this individual does look
Speaker 1: like for the FBI worked with other people, which does
Speaker 1: indicate that there was some kind of organization that might
Speaker 1: have gone beyond the actual attacker. Doesn't mean it was,
Speaker 1: but it's very difficult if it's just one person, which
Speaker 1: is why it's so hard to stop these, you know,
Speaker 1: singular people that decide to either get a weapon and
Speaker 1: shoot up a public place or drive a truck into
Speaker 1: a public place. But that is what's really trying to
Speaker 1: be determined right now, and whether there was multiple people
Speaker 1: involved in this, it does appear from the FBI statements
Speaker 1: that there were, and then we obviously need to find
Speaker 1: these individuals, capture them. They are a threat to the
Speaker 1: public right now.
Speaker 3: Mick is there any reason to believe at this time
Speaker 3: that there's any connection between what happened in New Orleans
Speaker 3: and what happened in Las Vegas. Could they be connected
Speaker 3: at all?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 1: I know people have talked about the similarities. They both
Speaker 1: rant a truck from the same company. Both appear to
Speaker 1: be US Army veterans, which is obviously a horrible thing
Speaker 1: for any veteran. Myself included that should just be coincidence.
Speaker 1: But I think they are looking at the connection. There's
Speaker 1: potential that they served at the same location, at the
Speaker 1: same base. That doesn't mean they know each other or
Speaker 1: this is connected, but those similarities seem to be out there.
Speaker 1: At least they're being reported, and I'm sure the FBI,
Speaker 1: which is in the lead of this both investigations, would
Speaker 1: be looking to see if there was a personal connection
Speaker 1: and whether there was anybody directing both of them to
Speaker 1: do this or not. I think it's too early to
Speaker 1: really have any direct knowledge of whether that's the case.
Speaker 3: Micking your long career, you've had a lot of experience
Speaker 3: in the Middle East. We're going to have a new
Speaker 3: president taking office here in about eighteen days. What do
Speaker 3: you think the policy should be could be as it
Speaker 3: relates to the Middle East, trying to get some resolution
Speaker 3: there in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: Well, I do think if we look at all the
Speaker 1: issues that are going on in the Middle East right now,
Speaker 1: the common denominator is are on They of course supported
Speaker 1: or support Hamas, they support Hezbola, they were basically given
Speaker 1: free reign in Syria, they support the Huthis, and yeah, Man,
Speaker 1: I think that is one of the main efforts that
Speaker 1: the incoming Trump administration is going to focus on. They
Speaker 1: are likely to go back to what was called the
Speaker 1: maximum pressure campaign, which is a maximum amount of sanctions,
Speaker 1: some of some of whom were withdrawn with the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: I think they'll all be put back into place, and
Speaker 1: potentially even more strict sanctions implemented. I think that's going
Speaker 1: to be the biggest shift when it comes to foreign policy,
Speaker 1: trying to starve, of course, the Uranian regime from being
Speaker 1: able to support say a billion dollars a year is
Speaker 1: a high estimate for how much they supported HEZBLA and
Speaker 1: try to force them back to the table because their
Speaker 1: economy is essentially collapsing.
Speaker 2: The reality, I.
Speaker 1: Think is at seven hundred and eighty five thousand per dollar,
Speaker 1: and they can't even keep the lights on, essentially in
Speaker 1: a country that's main main resources as energy. So it
Speaker 1: is teetering, and I do think the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: going to try to push them to point that they'll
Speaker 1: want to come back to the table on an agreement
Speaker 1: not to of course, develop a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 2: And make one final question, Lisa Matteo and I were
Speaker 2: talking about this. I mean, Lisa's got to sit with
Speaker 2: a fam. I got to sit with a fim. Paul
Speaker 2: Sweeney's got to sit with a fim and try to
Speaker 2: explain all this. How do you is the real deal?
Speaker 2: How do you explain this violence, whether terror based or
Speaker 2: not in America? What do you tell kids? What do
Speaker 2: you tell people afraid to go on the subway, afraid
Speaker 2: to go to a bar, etc.
Speaker 1: Well there's two parts, right, So one is if we
Speaker 1: adjust the way we live. We're a free country. We
Speaker 1: have freedom of association, speech, and we need to fight
Speaker 1: for it. And one of the way to fight for
Speaker 1: it is to utilize it. So if you start adjusting
Speaker 1: everything you do based on this, the terrorists win. But
Speaker 1: then again it's a very real threat. And in the
Speaker 1: United States, because of our freedom, that freedom includes you
Speaker 1: the right to bear arms, which means other people could
Speaker 1: get those weapons. It is particularly troublesome when it comes
Speaker 1: to these large public events, so you have to make
Speaker 1: your own decisions. But I think it's a balance between
Speaker 1: those two. You can't let them dictate your life, them
Speaker 1: being the terrorist, but you have to be reasonable and
Speaker 1: proactive when it comes to your own security. So it
Speaker 1: really is is a balance. We can do better. I
Speaker 1: think when it comes to protecting these public events. It's
Speaker 1: easy to be the Monday morning quarterback and look at
Speaker 1: everything that they didn't do, but I think collectively, rather
Speaker 1: than point fingers, we should just take every incident like this,
Speaker 1: do an after action, find out what didn't work and
Speaker 1: what did work, and fix what didn't work. And I
Speaker 1: think that's what, unfortunately or we're going to have to
Speaker 1: do on each one of these events until we make
Speaker 1: it just so difficult for these terrorists to really be
Speaker 1: able to carry out these attacks.
Speaker 2: Nick Mark, thank you for joining us today with the
Speaker 2: Lobo Institute. I have much more is