100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Domestic Terrorism: A Persistent Threat | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Domestic Terrorism: A Persistent Threat in the United States
August 23, 2012 By Scott Stewart A string of incidents over the past month has served as a reminder that despite the intense, decadelong focus on the jihadist threat, domestic terrorism is still an issue in the United States. On Aug. 5, Wade Page opened fire on the congregation of a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., killing six and wounding three others. Though Page killed himself and did not leave any evidence explicitly listing his motives for the attack, his long association with the white supremacist movement was clearly a factor in his target choice. On Aug. 15, Floyd Corkins shot and wounded a security guard in the lobby of the Family Research Council's office in Washington after the guard blocked him from entering the office. Corkins reportedly was carrying a bag containing a box of ammunition and a number of Chick-fil-A sandwiches. He apparently targeted the Family Research Council because of its public support for Chick-fil-A in the wake of the controversy over statements made by the fast food chain's founder regarding gay marriage. According to media reports, Corkins said, "I don't like your politics," before opening fire. And on Aug. 16, an off-duty sheriff's deputy was shot and wounded while working as a security guard at an oil refinery in St. John the Baptist Parish, La. When two other deputies responded to a nearby trailer park where a vehicle reportedly associated with the shooting was spotted, the trailers' occupants ambushed and killed the deputies. An additional officer was wounded, along with two of the suspects involved in the shooting, Brian Smith and Kyle Joekel. Seven people have been arrested in connection with the incident, including Smith's father and brother. News reports indicate that the group was associated with the sovereign citizen movement, and members of it were under investigation for weapons offenses and previous threats to law enforcement officers in other states. All three of these incidents stem from distinct ideological streams: the white supremacist skinhead movement, the radical left and the Posse Comitatus/sovereign citizen movement. While unrelated as far as timing and motive, when taken together they show that extremist ideologies subscribed to by certain individuals on the fringes of U.S. society continue to radicalize some to the point that they are willing to take violent action in accordance with those ideologies. Domestic terrorism is thus alive and well. Old Streams First, we need to remember that terrorism is a tactic practiced by actors from a wide array of ethnic and religious backgrounds who follow various ideologies stretching from anarchism to neo-Nazism. Terrorism does not equal jihadism. Long before jihadism reared its head in the United States, anarchist Leon Czolgosz assassinated President William McKinley, white supremacist James Earl Ray assassinated Martin Luther King Jr., and Posse Comitatus member Gordon Kahl killed three law enforcement officers in a multistate spree of violence. Indeed, as we look at all of the recent attention being paid to lone assailants and small cells, it must be remembered that anti-government and white supremacist leaders in the United States embraced the leaderless resistance model of operations long before jihadist groups began to promote it. In 1989, William Pierce wrote his novel Hunter, which detailed the exploits of a fictional lone wolf named Oscar Yeager and was loosely based upon real-life lone wolf Joseph Paul Franklin. In 1990, Richard Kelly Hoskins published a book titled Vigilantes of Christendom, in which he introduced the concept of a "Phineas Priest," or a lone wolf militant chosen and set apart by God to be his agent of vengeance upon the earth. In 1992, former Ku Klux Klan leader Louis Beam published an essay in his magazine, The Seditionist, that provided a detailed outline for moving the white supremacist movement toward a leaderless resistance model. Jihadists such as Abu Musab al-Suri first began to promote leaderless resistance only after the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks began to severely affect al Qaeda. But even so, groups such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula did not really embrace al-Suri's concept of leaderless resistance until late 2009, and the al Qaeda core did not follow suit until 2010. The recent spate of incidents is also not all that unusual. Other examples stand out in recent years of different streams of domestic radicalism leading to a confluence of attacks by different types of actors. For example, on April 19, 1995, a large truck bomb built by anti-government extremists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols detonated outside the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. Five days later, on April 25, timber lobbyist Gilbert Murray became the third fatality and final victim of Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski's long Neo-Luddite bombing campaign. Another such convergence occurred in the summer of 1999. After conducting arsons at three Sacramento-area synagogues, brothers Matthew and Tyler Williams killed a gay couple in their home in Happy Valley, Calif., on July 1. On July 2, World Church of the Creator adherent Benjamin Smith began a multistate shooting spree that killed two and wounded nine and that only ended when he killed himself July 4. On Aug. 10, former Aryan Nations member Buford Furrow mounted an armed assault against a Jewish day care center in Los Angeles, during which he wounded five people before killing a Filipino-American mailman on the street. Domestic terrorism in the United States is a cyclical phenomenon. There are discernable peaks in that cycle, like those we've discussed -- and like the one the country is currently experiencing. The intense political polarization that has occurred in recent years in the United States, the widespread distrust of the government on both the extreme right and the extreme left, and the current election-year rhetoric will further inflame political passions. This means that the current cycle of domestic terrorism plots and violence is likely to continue for at least the next several months. Implications While domestic terrorism is currently at the peak of the cycle in the United States, it is important to remember that most domestic terrorism cases tend to be simple attacks conducted by a lone actor or small cell. There are far more instances of simple bombings, such as those conducted by Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph or animal rights bomber Daniel Andreas San Diego, than the sort of large truck bomb attack committed by McVeigh and Nichols, which was an anomaly. Even more common than bombing attacks are the armed assaults that we've seen recently, and they are generally implemented against soft targets -- something we've talked about in relation to other terrorist threats. And that means that the implications for domestic terrorist threats are essentially the same as they are for the jihadist or Iranian threat. First, it is critical for people to remember that terrorist attacks do not appear out of a vacuum. Individuals planning an attack -- no matter what their motivation or ideology -- follow a discernable cycle, and that cycle involves behavior that can be identified and detected before the attack is conducted. Indeed, it appears that the Smith family and their associates involved in the Louisiana shooting were known by authorities in several jurisdictions and were considered armed and dangerous. It is also important for individuals to understand that it is physically impossible for governments to protect all potential targets from every sort of attack. This means that many places are vulnerable to an attack, should an assailant choose to strike and should the assailant's preoperational activities go undetected. Therefore, citizens need to assume responsibility for their own security. This involves citizens not only reporting suspicious activity to the authorities, but also practicing good situational awareness and having updated and appropriate contingency plans in place for their families and businesses. "Domestic Terrorism: A Persistent Threat in the United States is republished with permission of Stratfor." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should research more and think outside the box, about whats really going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic Terrorism: A Persistent Threat in the United States August 23, 2012 By Scott Stewart A string of incidents over the past month has served as a reminder that despite the intense, decadelong focus on the jihadist threat, domestic terrorism is still an issue in the United States. On Aug. 5, Wade Page opened fire on the congregation of a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., killing six and wounding three others. Though Page killed himself and did not leave any evidence explicitly listing his motives for the attack, his long association with the white supremacist movement was clearly a factor in his target choice. On Aug. 15, Floyd Corkins shot and wounded a security guard in the lobby of the Family Research Council's office in Washington after the guard blocked him from entering the office. Corkins reportedly was carrying a bag containing a box of ammunition and a number of Chick-fil-A sandwiches. He apparently targeted the Family Research Council because of its public support for Chick-fil-A in the wake of the controversy over statements made by the fast food chain's founder regarding gay marriage. According to media reports, Corkins said, "I don't like your politics," before opening fire. And on Aug. 16, an off-duty sheriff's deputy was shot and wounded while working as a security guard at an oil refinery in St. John the Baptist Parish, La. When two other deputies responded to a nearby trailer park where a vehicle reportedly associated with the shooting was spotted, the trailers' occupants ambushed and killed the deputies. An additional officer was wounded, along with two of the suspects involved in the shooting, Brian Smith and Kyle Joekel. Seven people have been arrested in connection with the incident, including Smith's father and brother. News reports indicate that the group was associated with the sovereign citizen movement, and members of it were under investigation for weapons offenses and previous threats to law enforcement officers in other states. All three of these incidents stem from distinct ideological streams: the white supremacist skinhead movement, the radical left and the Posse Comitatus/sovereign citizen movement. While unrelated as far as timing and motive, when taken together they show that extremist ideologies subscribed to by certain individuals on the fringes of U.S. society continue to radicalize some to the point that they are willing to take violent action in accordance with those ideologies. Domestic terrorism is thus alive and well. Old Streams First, we need to remember that terrorism is a tactic practiced by actors from a wide array of ethnic and religious backgrounds who follow various ideologies stretching from anarchism to neo-Nazism. Terrorism does not equal jihadism. Long before jihadism reared its head in the United States, anarchist Leon Czolgosz assassinated President William McKinley, white supremacist James Earl Ray assassinated Martin Luther King Jr., and Posse Comitatus member Gordon Kahl killed three law enforcement officers in a multistate spree of violence. Indeed, as we look at all of the recent attention being paid to lone assailants and small cells, it must be remembered that anti-government and white supremacist leaders in the United States embraced the leaderless resistance model of operations long before jihadist groups began to promote it. In 1989, William Pierce wrote his novel Hunter, which detailed the exploits of a fictional lone wolf named Oscar Yeager and was loosely based upon real-life lone wolf Joseph Paul Franklin. In 1990, Richard Kelly Hoskins published a book titled Vigilantes of Christendom, in which he introduced the concept of a "Phineas Priest," or a lone wolf militant chosen and set apart by God to be his agent of vengeance upon the earth. In 1992, former Ku Klux Klan leader Louis Beam published an essay in his magazine, The Seditionist, that provided a detailed outline for moving the white supremacist movement toward a leaderless resistance model. Jihadists such as Abu Musab al-Suri first began to promote leaderless resistance only after the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks began to severely affect al Qaeda. But even so, groups such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula did not really embrace al-Suri's concept of leaderless resistance until late 2009, and the al Qaeda core did not follow suit until 2010. The recent spate of incidents is also not all that unusual. Other examples stand out in recent years of different streams of domestic radicalism leading to a confluence of attacks by different types of actors. For example, on April 19, 1995, a large truck bomb built by anti-government extremists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols detonated outside the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. Five days later, on April 25, timber lobbyist Gilbert Murray became the third fatality and final victim of Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski's long Neo-Luddite bombing campaign. Another such convergence occurred in the summer of 1999. After conducting arsons at three Sacramento-area synagogues, brothers Matthew and Tyler Williams killed a gay couple in their home in Happy Valley, Calif., on July 1. On July 2, World Church of the Creator adherent Benjamin Smith began a multistate shooting spree that killed two and wounded nine and that only ended when he killed himself July 4. On Aug. 10, former Aryan Nations member Buford Furrow mounted an armed assault against a Jewish day care center in Los Angeles, during which he wounded five people before killing a Filipino-American mailman on the street. Domestic terrorism in the United States is a cyclical phenomenon. There are discernable peaks in that cycle, like those we've discussed -- and like the one the country is currently experiencing. The intense political polarization that has occurred in recent years in the United States, the widespread distrust of the government on both the extreme right and the extreme left, and the current election-year rhetoric will further inflame political passions. This means that the current cycle of domestic terrorism plots and violence is likely to continue for at least the next several months. Implications While domestic terrorism is currently at the peak of the cycle in the United States, it is important to remember that most domestic terrorism cases tend to be simple attacks conducted by a lone actor or small cell. There are far more instances of simple bombings, such as those conducted by Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph or animal rights bomber Daniel Andreas San Diego, than the sort of large truck bomb attack committed by McVeigh and Nichols, which was an anomaly. Even more common than bombing attacks are the armed assaults that we've seen recently, and they are generally implemented against soft targets -- something we've talked about in relation to other terrorist threats. And that means that the implications for domestic terrorist threats are essentially the same as they are for the jihadist or Iranian threat. First, it is critical for people to remember that terrorist attacks do not appear out of a vacuum. Individuals planning an attack -- no matter what their motivation or ideology -- follow a discernable cycle, and that cycle involves behavior that can be identified and detected before the attack is conducted. Indeed, it appears that the Smith family and their associates involved in the Louisiana shooting were known by authorities in several jurisdictions and were considered armed and dangerous. It is also important for individuals to understand that it is physically impossible for governments to protect all potential targets from every sort of attack. This means that many places are vulnerable to an attack, should an assailant choose to strike and should the assailant's preoperational activities go undetected. Therefore, citizens need to assume responsibility for their own security. This involves citizens not only reporting suspicious activity to the authorities, but also practicing good situational awareness and having updated and appropriate contingency plans in place for their families and businesses. "Domestic Terrorism: A Persistent Threat in the United States is republished with permission of Stratfor." Personally, I think it is a time to reaffirm personal rights like the right to bear arms and encourage those, such as ex military, who are good at it, to do so. The government cannot protect us all nor should they be expected to do so. Neither should the government use an event such as a mass shooting to change our society to a police state and allow only criminals and nutcases to arm themselves. Our liberal society has slowly eroded personal responsibility to the degree that it (lawlessness) is a way to fund lawyers through the revolving door of justice ... not a condition that must end. Keep the police and make the laws strong. Make the citizen's right to self protection much stronger. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should research more and think outside the box, about whats really going on. I posted an article from a intelligence site. How does that indicate what I think? Please, do try to think before you post. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think it is a time to reaffirm personal rights like the right to bear arms and encourage those, such as ex military, who are good at it, to do so. The government cannot protect us all nor should they be expected to do so. Neither should the government use an event such as a mass shooting to change our society to a police state and allow only criminals and nutcases to arm themselves.
Our liberal society has slowly eroded personal responsibility to the degree that it (lawlessness) is a way to fund lawyers through the revolving door of justice ... not a condition that must end. Keep the police and make the laws strong. Make the citizen's right to self protection much stronger. I think you've hit the nail on the head in one respect. Legislation that is seen to be limiting personal freedom is not really intended to introduce a Fascist state as such, but as way of limiting the exponential rise of litigation. I see governments and the independent judiciaries at loggerheads on this issue, not conspiring together as some would like to believe. However, there is more to this phenomenon than this aspect. Irrational thought and extremism (on both sides of politics) are as the article pointed out, cyclical, and this can be linked to the current economic conditions. One thing that I find ironic is that often individuals who act in this manner (often championing liberty of some form or other), casually deprive others of their fundamental rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think it is a time to reaffirm personal rights like the right to bear arms and encourage those, such as ex military, who are good at it, to do so. The government cannot protect us all nor should they be expected to do so. Neither should the government use an event such as a mass shooting to change our society to a police state and allow only criminals and nutcases to arm themselves.
Our liberal society has slowly eroded personal responsibility to the degree that it (lawlessness) is a way to fund lawyers through the revolving door of justice ... not a condition that must end. Keep the police and make the laws strong. Make the citizen's right to self protection much stronger. I think you've hit the nail on the head in one respect. Legislation that is seen to be limiting personal freedom is not really intended to introduce a Fascist state as such, but as way of limiting the exponential rise of litigation. I see governments and the independent judiciaries at loggerheads on this issue, not conspiring together as some would like to believe. However, there is more to this phenomenon than this aspect. Irrational thought and extremism (on both sides of politics) are as the article pointed out, cyclical, and this can be linked to the current economic conditions. One thing that I find ironic is that often individuals who act in this manner (often championing liberty of some form or other), casually deprive others of their fundamental rights. I think each domestic terrorist has something fixated in their mind as a reason (ironic word in this case) for being anti-social to the infinite degree. The political motivation of shooting a bunch of random moviegoers is vague, at best. Getting attention? Payback for not being popular? The random workings of a tortured mind? Who really knows? The Sikh shooting by a "skinhead" type personality runs in the same direction with different motivations. Does wearing a turban make you an Arab extremest? Some think so. In this case low intelligence and poor choice of playmates seems to play a large role. It can be said that one out of a hundred is "crazy". As the population grows, the odds of being hit by the bad apple go up too. Poor role models don't help and may go far to exacerbate the situation. An interesting study was done some years ago on rats. A limited population was allowed to grow with unlimited food but limited space until extreme overcrowding occurred. The personalities of the rats changed to hostile, neurotic, gay, depressed, and just generally insane. The human population may be reaching that point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think it is a time to reaffirm personal rights like the right to bear arms and encourage those, such as ex military, who are good at it, to do so. The government cannot protect us all nor should they be expected to do so. Neither should the government use an event such as a mass shooting to change our society to a police state and allow only criminals and nutcases to arm themselves.
Our liberal society has slowly eroded personal responsibility to the degree that it (lawlessness) is a way to fund lawyers through the revolving door of justice ... not a condition that must end. Keep the police and make the laws strong. Make the citizen's right to self protection much stronger. I think you've hit the nail on the head in one respect. Legislation that is seen to be limiting personal freedom is not really intended to introduce a Fascist state as such, but as way of limiting the exponential rise of litigation. I see governments and the independent judiciaries at loggerheads on this issue, not conspiring together as some would like to believe. However, there is more to this phenomenon than this aspect. Irrational thought and extremism (on both sides of politics) are as the article pointed out, cyclical, and this can be linked to the current economic conditions. One thing that I find ironic is that often individuals who act in this manner (often championing liberty of some form or other), casually deprive others of their fundamental rights. I think each domestic terrorist has something fixated in their mind as a reason (ironic word in this case) for being anti-social to the infinite degree. The political motivation of shooting a bunch of random moviegoers is vague, at best. Getting attention? Payback for not being popular? The random workings of a tortured mind? Who really knows? The Sikh shooting by a "skinhead" type personality runs in the same direction with different motivations. Does wearing a turban make you an Arab extremest? Some think so. In this case low intelligence and poor choice of playmates seems to play a large role. It can be said that one out of a hundred is "crazy". As the population grows, the odds of being hit by the bad apple go up too. Poor role models don't help and may go far to exacerbate the situation. An interesting study was done some years ago on rats. A limited population was allowed to grow with unlimited food but limited space until extreme overcrowding occurred. The personalities of the rats changed to hostile, neurotic, gay, depressed, and just generally insane. The human population may be reaching that point. Interesting post Joe....I'm thinking domestic terrorism cannot survive (and thrive as it does today) without some level of support...Stopping the problem is not just a matter of being proactive as in identifying and intercepting perpetrators, it is a matter of determining and extinguishing active and "passive" causes... I have always assumed environment only played a part in exacerbating existing, but undiagnosed, mental illness..The study you mentioned would suggest environment alone can "create" mental illness.... There is no one formula for terrorist acts, but a common denominator among single person and small cell terrorist attacks is mental illness....This leads me to believe radical behavior needs to be examined at deeper than fundamental levels connected with religious, political, or economic ideology...I personally believe the universal and virtually unlimited internet access to hate speak which comes packaged in a myriad of flavors is a huge contributing factor to feeding or aggravating issues existing in an already troubled mind, a mind that otherwise might not erupt into terrorist acts.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want a true definition/example of "Domestic Terrorism" look no further than DC and the White House.... Compare the actions of these few to the definitions given by Webster or any other source.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 08/25/12 12:06 PM
|
|
I think you should research more and think outside the box, about whats really going on. I posted an article from a intelligence site. How does that indicate what I think? Please, do try to think before you post. If you do not agree with an article's agenda and you post it anyway then what are you doing? Spreading agenda and propaganda. The new buzz word "domestic terrorism" was designed to add power to the unconstitutional illegal powers of the Patriot act where anyone labeled a "terrorist" can be kidnapped off the street without being arrested and taken to a prison and waterboarded (tortured) without being read his rights or being allowed to have a lawyer. Extremist ideologies have always existed. The agenda of the article is the statement "Domestic terrorism is thus alive and well." Propaganda. Who are the real terrorists? The Media, the government, who spread terror with their spewing of this kind of nonsense. The buzz word "domestic terrorism" and "terrorist cells" are themselves just different terms created to get people to support the growing police state and the government's need to confiscate citizens guns, and arrest anyone who might want to rise up against their tyranny. You are spreading propaganda. By reposting this propaganda, you are aiding the efforts to mold the minds of the unsuspecting public who is supposed to shiver and be afraid and be convinced to support the police state because they are so afraid and they need to be protected by the government against these "domestic terrorists" who abound in our society. I have a solution. Give everyone guns. Let everyone carry guns to protect themselves against all threats. Tell the police and the government that we don't need their protection. Just let us have our guns and our rights. Stop taking our guns, and stop stepping all over our rights and stop stealing our freedom. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
again..
these things aren't new.. some lone nut or group of well organized nuts have been waging some sort or war for some sort of reason since... oh I would say the inception of the country.. here is an example that doesn't get the hype of being called domestic terrorism.. "Four people were killed and more than a dozen others wounded in shootings Friday evening into Saturday in Chicago, continuing the trend of surging gun violence in the United States' third-largest city. One day after 13 people were wounded in shootings over a half-hour in Chicago, at least another 17 people were shot as the city experienced a violent start to the weekend, the Chicago Tribune reports. who decides what is what and what is not? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.R.D does......Why?...Cause he said so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should research more and think outside the box, about whats really going on. I posted an article from a intelligence site. How does that indicate what I think? Please, do try to think before you post. If you do not agree with an article's agenda and you post it anyway then what are you doing? Spreading agenda and propaganda. The new buzz word "domestic terrorism" was designed to add power to the unconstitutional illegal powers of the Patriot act where anyone labeled a "terrorist" can be kidnapped off the street without being arrested and taken to a prison and waterboarded (tortured) without being read his rights or being allowed to have a lawyer. Extremist ideologies have always existed. The agenda of the article is the statement "Domestic terrorism is thus alive and well." Propaganda. Who are the real terrorists? The Media, the government, who spread terror with their spewing of this kind of nonsense. The buzz word "domestic terrorism" and "terrorist cells" are themselves just different terms created to get people to support the growing police state and the government's need to confiscate citizens guns, and arrest anyone who might want to rise up against their tyranny. You are spreading propaganda. By reposting this propaganda, you are aiding the efforts to mold the minds of the unsuspecting public who is supposed to shiver and be afraid and be convinced to support the police state because they are so afraid and they need to be protected by the government against these "domestic terrorists" who abound in our society. I have a solution. Give everyone guns. Let everyone carry guns to protect themselves against all threats. Tell the police and the government that we don't need their protection. Just let us have our guns and our rights. Stop taking our guns, and stop stepping all over our rights and stop stealing our freedom. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 08/25/12 05:44 PM
|
|
Ras427, and saying that on a public forum might get you hauled off to a mental institution for evaluation.
oooh I'm so terrorized... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are spreading propaganda.
Well, if it is good for the gander, then it is good for the goose. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I only spread the Gospel truth.
People who can't handle the truth don't like it. The truth hurts them. So, I'm not surprised to find dissent among them. I don't mean to alarm people. I just spread the truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I only spread the Gospel truth. People who can't handle the truth don't like it. The truth hurts them. So, I'm not surprised to find dissent among them. I don't mean to alarm people. I just spread the truth. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo David only spreads his rolling heads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's no wonder people lose their heads when I tell them the truth.
They can't handle the truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's no wonder people lose their heads when I tell them the truth. They can't handle the truth. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The truth hurts doesn't it? Poor mousy.
|
|
|
|
|
