Sample Blog Header

Do you worry about terrorist attacks coming to Minnesota?

Posted at 5:00 AM on March 30, 2010 by Eric Ringham (37 Comments)
Filed under: Security

Monday's suicide bombings in Moscow prompted security alerts around the world, including in the United States. Today's Question: Do you worry about terrorist attacks coming to Minnesota?


Comments (37)

I don't worry as I seldom go to the public places and events these people like to target. Also it's likely that the big cities on the coasts would be their first choice targets.

Posted by Mike | March 30, 2010 8:45 PM


To worry is to let the terrorists win. I'm more worried about what we are doing to ourselves by taking the political system to the point of uncivil battling extremes, an economic system of extreme greed, and the loss of community and empathy.

Posted by James G. Ahler | March 30, 2010 6:27 PM


Why perpetuate Americans' "fears" instead of reporting the rarity of such horrors as Moscow experienced?

I agree with many of the comments above that we have less to fear than fear itself.

Posted by pixie martin | March 30, 2010 5:53 PM


It surely could happen. But I don't worry too much about it. We just have to live each day, enjoy the people we love and be kind.

Posted by Linda | March 30, 2010 4:11 PM


I am wondering why when a Christian extreemist group is caught planning mass murders of policemen we call them a "Christian Militia Group", but when Muslim extreemists are caught planning mass murder THEY are called "Terrorists"?

Makes you think, doesn't it......

Posted by Kirk D. Van Dorn | March 30, 2010 3:10 PM


Do I consider it a possibility? Absolutely. Do I worry about it? What good would that do??

Posted by Kirk D. Van Dorn | March 30, 2010 3:06 PM


From foreign terrorists, no.

From Right Wing Christain Dominionists like those recently arrested in Michigan, yes. Enboldened from mainstream Republicans those people are dangerous.

Posted by Elliott | March 30, 2010 2:41 PM


I find it amusing, quoting FDR's first inaugural address when the purpose of that address to was to rally support around the government for a massive intervention, harnessing the fear of the nation to steer public policy towards their own end, the New Deal.

Politicians try to sway public opinion towards their own ends, it's been done since day one. Are the threats of terrorism on our soil overblown by the government and the media? Absolutely. Does that mean that it's all fear mongering or some giant government conspiracy to cow the public into submission to state that it is possible for a terrorist attack to happen in MN or somewhere else in the US? Absolutely not.

There is a difference between giving in to fear and worrying about an attack and accepting that it is possible, or even likely, and continuing on with your life. I won't live in fear, but I won't ignore reality either.

Posted by CHS | March 30, 2010 2:32 PM


No.

Posted by Stacia | March 30, 2010 2:31 PM


Comments texted to MPR:

I worry that Mayo Clinic and Mall of America could be targeted. They are soft targets with international prestige. -Kathy, Big Lake

I do not give terrorism a passing thought. Terrorists will never conquer our soil, yet they have conquered so many minds already. -Patrick, Minneapolis

Yes. I worry that Mall of America is a soft target with a high international profile. -anonymous

Posted by comments sent to MPR | March 30, 2010 2:19 PM


I doubt that they would come here, unless it is for vacation.

Posted by big al | March 30, 2010 2:12 PM


FDR was right: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." I'm more worried about the crazy-making influence of the fear-mongers who capitalize on terrorism to steer public policy toward their own ends.

Posted by Sue de Nim | March 30, 2010 1:14 PM


No. Why live in fear?

Posted by Roxanne | March 30, 2010 12:55 PM


No, I'm not afraid of terrorist attacks. The chance of a terrorist attack in the place that I am is very small. There are other risks to my life that are much more likely to occur.

That said, I assume that there will be an attack in Minnesota at some point in the future. People who think we can stop all terrorist attacks, foriegn based or homegrown, are fooling themselves. It surprises me that there aren't more small scale attacks in unlikely places. That would cause real terror.

Posted by Al | March 30, 2010 12:38 PM


The idea that USA Inc. is brainwashing it's citizens into to be afraid of a 100 terrorists swinging on monkey bars in the middle east is the biggest hood wink in history. This is a law enforcement issue not a military one. The fact that we've spent 5 trillion dollars without interest on wars in the last 19 years is a crime. A war crime to be exact. Ike warned about the military industrial complex strangling this country and no one listened. You are no safer today driving from Maple Grove to Downtown with troops in 50 countries and $1T a year given to contractors and congressman than you would be if you beefed up law enforcement with 5% of that amount. We are bankrupt people, and Washington is stealing your money the easiest way there is, fear.

Posted by tony | March 30, 2010 12:15 PM


All of the people that keep saying that MN is nothing but flyover country or that we have no targets of value seem to have a pretty narrow view of where we live, and an extremely narrow view of the possibilities that exist for terrorism of all varieties.

The Twin Cities is home to a Federal Reserve Branch, an FBI district, Federal district court, and quite a few other government buildings. Many targets of opportunity for radical militia types. When is the next OKC bombing going to happen, and where? You can't just assume that our quiet little corner of the country is immune to things like that.

Government targets aside, we have one of the largest airports in the country, the largest and most garish symbol of consumerism (MOA), a very large shipping sector, two nuclear power plants, and are home to a number of Fortune 500 companies. The list of potential targets is limited only by the ability to imagine them.

Out of all the states besides New York, it seems that only a few states pop on the news regularly when it comes to terrorist investigations and ties, and Minnesota is one of them.

It is completely naive to assume that we live in a bubble that is immune from terrorist type violence or activities. Does that mean that an incident is likely? Of course not, the chances are extremely slim. However, we can ill afford to walk around with an attitude that says it will never happen here, because that in and of itself may be the most inspiring and attractive target that exists.

Posted by CHS | March 30, 2010 12:00 PM


No. If I worried about that then the terrorists have already achieved their goal.

Posted by Mary | March 30, 2010 11:57 AM


"An armed society is a polite society"

Posted by Janet | March 30, 2010 11:17 AM


For my part, I still live in 'the Home of the Brave' and don't let threats daunt me much.

That said, I feel that when it comes to the the dangers of terrorism, we'd best be more wary of the enemy within rather than those beyond our shores.

Rightest anti-government, White-Supremacist, and 'Christian Militias' are far more deeply embeded in America than any Jihadist cadre could ever hope to be. And, they are far better armed to boot.

Posted by stu klipper | March 30, 2010 11:04 AM


I think the news coming out of Michigan should be proof enough that terrorists can be from any place and any ethnicity/nationality.

Posted by JSK | March 30, 2010 10:48 AM


Foreign terrorists - No. Local terrorists - Yes. Nut cases who think their John Wayne and this is the wild west carrying openly or concealed - Very much Yes.

Posted by Brian Hill | March 30, 2010 10:39 AM


Mary Vrabel = head in sand mentality.
The terrorists have said the USA is "The Great Satan and must die."
These people can pull off a takeover of four passenger jets and KILL 3000 people.
They are not the most friendly and tolerant people.
If we forget that and offer an olive branch they will use it to beat us with. Just imagine if they could bribe some nuke material from a guard in the Ex-Soviet union and detonate it in a major city.

Posted by Chet | March 30, 2010 10:33 AM


Totally agree with Mary Vrabel! :D

Posted by David Arcaine | March 30, 2010 10:15 AM


No. I feel that worrying about things out of one's control only needlessly increases the stress level of an already agitated and stressful society. Best case scenario: prepare for the worst, expect the usual, and hope for the best.

Posted by David Arcaine | March 30, 2010 10:13 AM


No. The Twin Cities would be targeted somewhere between Otis, CO and Los Angeles and we can't prevent everything. I agree with the person who said drunk or distracted drivers are far more of a pressing concern!

Posted by Sarah | March 30, 2010 10:11 AM


This is just the kind of question that is part of the problem. The more we are encouraged to live in fear, the more we circle our wagons, the more we circle our wagons, the more we exclude those we think are "different" from us, the more we exclude others, the smaller our world view. The smaller our world view, the more we feel justified doing violence to others in the name of security. The more we do that, the more enemies we make which leads to more violence, more fear, etc. Time to break the cycle, not encourage it.

Posted by Mary Vrabel | March 30, 2010 10:06 AM


Yes,
Be Prepared: The Motto of the Boy Scouts of America.

My experience in electrical engineering / power generation and colleagues in the energy sector are betting the next attack will be on our electrical grid.
-If they take out a few rail bridges between here and our coal supply, we will be hampered / crippled for months.
-Hit us with an EMP, the North American continent will be black for many months (or longer).
-An attack on our computer controls could put power gen down for unknown amount of time.

The small time body count of a suicide bomber would pail in comparison to the die off from loss of electricity.
DTOM

Posted by James | March 30, 2010 9:53 AM


I worry a lot more about drunk or distracted drivers.

Posted by Steven | March 30, 2010 9:33 AM


No. Minnesota is part of the anonymous flyover.

Posted by Khatti | March 30, 2010 9:28 AM


No. The authorities in our state have a pretty good track record. They were the only ones to catch a 9/11 terrorist and they seem to be taking care of the terrorists that sent Minnesota boys to fight in Somalia. Finally, Minnesota has a great citizenry with a "let's get involved mentality" versus "let's get even".

Posted by Jessica Sundheim | March 30, 2010 9:20 AM


No more than I worry about other statistically unlikely events. Life is too short to devote much mental energy to highly unlikely events that are wildly out of one's control.

Posted by Adam | March 30, 2010 8:57 AM


NOT IN THE LEAST. My understanding is that the chance of any given person in the U.S. being the victim of a terrorist attack is less than the chance of being struck by lightning.

I'll save my worrying for bad things that are much more likely to happen, such as getting cancer or some other deadly disease.

Posted by bob h | March 30, 2010 8:48 AM


It is highly unlikely that Minnesota would be targeted. However, I grew up in the UK when the IRA was very active, and the scariest attacks were a couple in towns that would be the equivalent of a small/mid-size midwest US city. So I worry about those terrorists who would think an unexpected attack in a mid-western city would cause the most fear.

Posted by Mark | March 30, 2010 8:44 AM


The only place that I could really foresee an attack would be in Duluth...after all it's the worlds largest inland port, and is a stepping point for so many resources. To it's benefit though, the harbor is very spread out and would be difficult to affect on a large scale. Other than that, I don't see much reason for a large scale terrorist attack in Minnesota.

Posted by Steve from up north | March 30, 2010 8:31 AM


No, I don’t. Higher value targets elsewhere.

Posted by Todd | March 30, 2010 8:25 AM


Of course not. We're too nice. Terrorism only happens in exotic, far-off places like Oklahoma City.

Posted by Steve the Cynic | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM


A little, we always need to keep up our guard, but it is probably unlikely.

In our own minds, we think we are pretty important, but we are probably far down the list. I could think of many more important places to bomb.

Posted by Gary F | March 30, 2010 6:41 AM


Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.


Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.

March 2010
S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      


Master Archive

Public Insight Network

The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.
More

MPR News
Radio

Listen Now

On Air

On Being

Other Radio Streams from MPR

Classical MPR
Radio Heartland

Services