Someone called it Hybrid Jihadi Workplace Violence, which I guess is fair enough. It's like the Fort Hood case, from all appearances. It was ridiculous when some people said the Fort Hood case was Workplace Violence and not Terrorism. It obviously had to do with terrorizing people for the sake of some starkly clear religious/political reasons.
Of course, this sort of hybridization apparently doesn't make sense in a big-picture way. I mean, if you're looking to create terror in America, why hit a county holiday party?
But in a small-picture way, in the mind of the deranged persons, it probably makes perfect sense, or what passes for sense.
1) They're already familiar with the ins and outs of the location. No need to case the joint clandestinely.
2) They get to kill people they know and secretly hate, just like other employees who "go postal".
I remember when I heard about the Boston Marathon bombing, I thought to myself, "Oh, it's local Boston people, whoever they are." In Boston, the Marathon's a huge familiar deal. But to everybody else, it's a weird target.
To me, this is evidence of semi-spontaneous terror - radicalized people in random locations, picking out their own targets, with minimal central control, but plenty of ideological inspiration.
Like rabid dogs, deranged and morose,
they start by biting whatever is close.