Domestic Terrorism In The United States Essay

To varying degrees, domestic terrorism has survived and affected the social and political structure of the United States. As defined by the country’s Department of Justice, these words connote â€Å"the unlawful use of force or violence, committed by a group(s) of two or more individuals, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives† (U. S. Department of Justice, 1994, p. 26). Though such characterization is considerably clear in its meaning, oftentimes a case-by-case interpretation is necessary to ascertain where extremism ends and terrorism begins. Terrorism vs. Extremism A more concise demarcation between extremism and terrorism is evident in the recognition that extremism is not unusual in any political environment, and is more often than not directed by societal pressures, civil discourse, education and the law. On the other hand, in terrorism, the violence is far beyond control by civil, educational or societal elements and must be tracked down, penalized and castigated by law enforcement agencies. The Dictionary of Political Thought defines extremism as â€Å"a vague term, that can mean a) the taking of a political idea to its limits, regardless of unfortunate repercussions, impracticalities, arguments and feelings to the contrary and with the intention not only to confront but also to eliminate opposition; b) intolerance towards all views other than one’s own; and c) the adoption of means to political ends which show disregard for the life, liberty and human rights of others† (Scronton, 1982). The complexity of separating terrorism and extremism is that in various situations, domestic groups which are seemingly law-abiding at present, may be contemplating of violent actions in the future. As it is, many violent groups started as non-violent discussion or protest movements with very lofty ideals; however, as time elapsed they evolved into something else. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, provides a suitable and a more fitting characterization of terrorism when he described it as â€Å"the deliberate and systematic murder, maiming and menacing of the innocent to inspire fear for political ends. † USA Patriot Act Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act stretched the definition of terrorism to include domestic in contrast to international terrorism. An individual is said to be involved in domestic terrorism if he/she does an act that is dangerous to human life, that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, and if the act appears to be intended to a) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; b) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or c) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Further, the acts have to take place chiefly within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, then these acts can already be regarded as international terrorism. Clearly, Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. Nonetheless, it does extend the kinds or the nature of actions that the government can examine and probe into when it is investigating terrorism. The USA Patriot Act stretched out the powers of the government when they do their investigations and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism. Such definition of domestic terrorism is expansive enough to cover the actions and activities of many known activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could make them subject to investigations as engaging in domestic terrorism. Contemporary Domestic Terrorism Though governments, private and public institutions have been beleaguered and weighed down by terrorism for hundreds of years in one form or another, the strategies and the application associated with it have changed and progressed as surely as the societies upon which it is imposed. Technological advances in the transportation, communication and in the area of weaponry have permitted the capacities of current domestic terrorist groups to get their message out and have enhanced their ability to take aggressive and sadistic action to achieve their objectives. President Clinton launched a counter-terrorism bill to the Senate and House of Representatives in February of 1995. One exceedingly contentious proposal in the bill is the assigning of the Department of Defense a dominant role in assisting the investigation of domestic terrorism incidents in which chemical and biological agents are utilized. Currently, the military can be used in cases of terrorist activities where there is an alleged employment of nuclear weapons or devices and much more if such allegation has been established (Hall, 1995, Sec A). Though the amplified role of the military would be limited, necessitating a further amendment to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, civil liberties experts cautioned that it would infringe the tenets of civil supremacy over the military and would only rekindle the hostilities and anti-government sentiments of the citizen-militias and conspiracy theorists (Landay, 1995). Furthermore, several Congressmen, law-enforcement officials and some military advisers concur that such employment of the military would be an exceedingly precarious approach in combating domestic terrorism. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat from New York, responded to questions as to whether the use of the military, in an expanded role, should be a part of the counterterrorism package, said, â€Å". . . the military defends the nation and does not involve itself in internal affairs† (Minzesheimer, 1995, Sec A). Incidents and Implications There has been an evident and persistent decline in the number of terrorist incidents in the United States during the past twenty years. To further delineate the trend of decline over time, a comparison of the average number of incidents per year during each of three, six-year periods would be useful. During the six year period from 1977 through 1982, there was an average of 59. 0 incidents/year; from 1983 through 1988 an average of 15. 7 incidents/year were recorded; this compared to an average of 5. 3 incidents/year investigated during the period from 1989 through 1994 (FBI, 1994). *** ACTIVE GROUPS OPERATING WITHIN THE UNITED STATES CLASSIFIED AS TERRORISTS African National Prison Organization (ANPO). An arm of the African Peoples Socialist Party. Animal Rights. Principally against use of animals for any purpose beyond their natural existence. Armed Resistance Group (ARG) aka Revolutionary Fighting Group, Red Guerrilla Faction. This group has been characterized in 1988 as â€Å"tired and aging revolutionaries. † Greenpeace Principally environmental-use extremists. Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Reorganized and relocated several arms of its group in 1989. Macheteros. Puerto Rican nationalists. Ohio Seven. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Very public-relations oriented. Radical Feminist Organizing Committee (RFOC). Driven-out of the feminist movement in 1989, operating independently. RAMBOC (Restore a More Benevolent Order Coalition). Targets and actively pursues the US assets and people of foreign groups with terrorist links, such as the PLO, SWAPO, ANC, etc†¦ Rolling Thunder aka American Foundation for Accountability; primary focus is to draw attention to the POW/MIA issue from Vietnam War. Satanic Cult. Associated with attempted bombing of churches and kidnapping, and animal sacrifices, tombstone vandalism, and miscellaneous actions. Skinheads (SKA). Groups consist of both racist and anti-racist factions. SS Action Group. Principally anti-Semitic. Apparent Motivation There are principally four classifications into which groups that are regarded as domestic terrorists can be distinguished currently existing in the United States. These groups can be generically delineated as being either motivated by religious convictions, racial prejudice and supremacist goals, anarchistic/anti-government/politically motivated, or in pursuit of unique special interests. These classifications have been extracted from a collection of the categorization and delineation of extremist and terrorist groups by two respected subject-authorities, Stephen Segaller and FBI’s Department of Justice. Segaller, in his book Invisible Armies, classified domestic terrorism in the United States into four groups as well, but lists them as being: a) Cuban infighting (political), b) â€Å"backwoods terrorism† (a combination of religious, racist and anarchistic), c) violent Puerto Rican independence groups (political), and d) a handful of domestic revolutionary Marxist groups (anarchistic/anti-government and racist) (Segaller, 1987, pp. 221-225). Theoretically speaking, the stimulus for the creation and sustained existence of extremist and terrorist groups can unequivocally be associated in many circumstances to ethnic, cultural, religious, and racial feelings of superiority. An accurate depiction of the continuum formed by these supremacist attitudes, and how they promote further tension is succinctly articulated by Frank G. McGuire, when he said that as long as Christians feel superior to Jews (or vice-versa) and Catholics feel superior to Protestants and Ashkenazic Jews feel superior to Sephardic Jews, men feel superior to women and whites feel superior to blacks/browns/yellows/reds and so on, such phenomenon will be with us (McGuire, 1990, p. 10). These cultural, racial, gender, and a myriad of other differences that are present among people in society, particularly one as diverse as the United States of America, must be acknowledged and respected, but shouldn’t be seen or considered as a encumbrance to peace and harmony within society. Nor should these diversities be seen as wholly benign in their impact on the functioning of society as a whole. Tibor Machan, a social and political commentator, showed a well-timed dissertation on the myths and erroneous beliefs associated with viewing multiculturalism as simply a difference in dress, music, dance, and customs. Dr. Machan asserted that cultural differences, whether a result of race, gender, religion, or whatever, impacts both negatively and positively on other cultures within the society (Machan, 1996, pp. 134-135) and further opined that attitudes of cultural-superiority and intolerance are directly related and incorporated into many of the extremist views and motivations that are plaguing America today. The period from 1982 through 1994 showed that the targets of domestic terrorism were predominately commercial establishments. The majority of incidents directed against commercial establishments were conducted by animal-rights and/or anti-abortion extremists, either attacking stores that sold fur, or clinics that performed abortions or provided abortion advice, respectively (FBI, 1994; McGuire, 1990). Religious & Racial Supremacy/Intolerance Religious intolerance founded upon fundamentalist standpoints has been the stimulus for acts of terrorism all throughout history and such as involved Orthodox Jews, Moslems, Catholics, and Protestants. Perhaps, there is no issue or idea among human beings that is as provocative and as seditious as that of religious beliefs. Auspiciously, at least as far as the United States is concerned, terror stimulated by religious intolerance has not been as significant a threat as in other parts of the world like in Africa, the Middle East or Bosnia. â€Å"America is a unique nation in that it guarantees the freedom of religion with the First Amendment and the right to [keep and] bear arms with the Second Amendment. This means that people can believe whatever they want, and they can buy the guns to protect that belief† (LeBaron, n. d). The statement was made in direct reference to Mormon fundamentalism and summarizes the very ideology upon which this country was founded which also provides an insight into the potential dangers that exist with religious extremist groups. Recently however, there has been rhetoric and open threats of aggression from different extremist groups that describe themselves as being inspired by religion, nonetheless, have undisputedly displayed racial supremacist and hate-mongering views. The leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, advocates sundry rhetoric of black supremacist views and religious fervor. He professes to have the faith and devotion of some four million people (Fletcher, 1996). In addition, several white-supremacist clusters, including some of the many Christian militia splinter groups, advocate exceptionally caustic and hate-filled threats as well, apparently an endless, ages-old game of â€Å"I call you a name, you call me a name. † Oddly enough, two racial supremacist groups representing opposite extremes, the Nation of Islam and the Posse Comitatus, have concurred to an ultimate end-state segregation of the United States into regions of pure racial integrity. Another group operating within the United States that has historically merged a racist agenda with religious rhetoric, and was truly very sadistic in its actions and objectives, is the Ku Klux Klan. They have, however, considerably lessened in both their membership numbers and invisible power-base in recent years, and though there are still very strident individuals appearing from time to time, the danger posed by the Klan nowadays is essentially restricted to local regions, and their activities are in the form of parades and rallies. As the Klan has faded in its activities and numbers, it has been replaced by the tremendously vicious and rapidly growing racist movement known as the Aryan Nations, which is strongly associated with the Identity Church that proclaims Anglo-Saxons as God’s chosen people. The fundamentalist Mormons are another religiously-motivated cluster within the United States that are catching the attention and concern of law enforcement and other government officials. This group has been at odds, to a certain degree, with the government since its creation in the early 1800s. Many of these fundamentalist Mormons are well-armed conspiracy-minded survivalists, who have retreated to the mountains of central Utah to await Armageddon, which they believe will occur on April 6, 2000. Believing in their gifts of prophecy and revelation, and fired-up by heavenly visions and doctrines of blood atonement and oaths of vengeance, they have isolated themselves awaiting the end of the world and fearing that the government is about to take away their freedoms (LeBaron, n. d. ). A specifically insightful yet explosive issue to a huge section of the American people, despite individual beliefs, is the classification of particular abortion clinic-related hostility as domestic terrorism. The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act of 1994 in concurrence with the Attorney General Guidelines (AGG) on General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise and Domestic Security/Terrorism Investigations, instigated and directed the creation of the Department of Justice Task Force on Violence Against Abortion Providers to look into conspiratorial acts of violence against abortion clinics and personnel as domestic terrorism (FBI, 1994). Although personal opinions on the ethical aspects associated with abortion, whether for or against, are not wholly confined to religious beliefs, the most articulate, open and visible anti-abortion advocates are directly allied with religious organizations. As it is, abortion rights and issues persist to be one of the most contentious and conflict-ridden questions among Americans and motivate exceedingly passionate and rousing rhetoric and reactions from people from both sides of the matter. In the period between 1982 and the end of 1984, there were a total of 220 separate acts of violence, including 89 cases of bombing, arson and other serious incidents, conducted against clinics where abortions were performed or abortion-advice offered (Segaller, 1987, pp. 222-223). Ethnically and racially stimulated bias, extreme loathing and carnage are as much a part of human history as any other characteristics of mankind, and have at least to some extent have a bearing on the cultural and social identities of essentially all civilizations to date. From the subjugation of Hebrews by ancient Egyptians, to present-day current situation in the Balkans, racial and ethnic differences have triggered incalculable suffering and death. The history of racial and ethnic turmoil in the United States is no different, and is seemingly experiencing an increase in such activity recently. Racially-motivated extremist and terrorist groups in the United States, especially those of today, seem to employ religious rationalizations and teachings for their sadistic tendencies and aggressive actions, and all indications point to the fact that such trend will continue at an accelerating rate into the foreseeable future. Anarchistic/Anti-government /Political Terrorist clusters of today that are actually anarchist, anti-government or political in their motivations are mostly associated with the growing self-determination, radical citizen-militia movements, or have been around a relatively long time, such as the Puerto Rican freedom fighters. The former has drawn considerable attention, and extracted wary concern from law-enforcement and civil-rights groups due to the bombing in Oklahoma City, and their rapid and continuing growth in numbers and visibility. A few of the more extreme citizen-militia groups, often motivated by New World Order conspiracy theorists and anger over a belief that government has become too large and repressive in everyday life, are openly soliciting and calling for the overthrow of the United States government. These groups, when linked with the self-described â€Å"Constitutionalists,† are being considered as extremely dangerous by many law-enforcement and watchdog groups (Knickerbocker, 1995). The Puerto Rican terrorist groups have been almost exclusively limited in their actions to operating within Puerto Rico against local and federal targets of opportunity. Unique Special Interests Within this designation of domestic terrorist groups are those of relatively recent creation, or at least they have relatively recently gained high public visibility through their actions. Groups such as the extremist animal-rights groups, environmental extremist groups and homosexual-rights groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Earth Night Action Group, and Act Up, respectively, have emerged within the past two decades and have actively used violence, destruction and intimidation to gain recognition, and to further their respective political agendas. References *** McGuire, Frank. 1990. Security intelligence sourcebook: Who’s Who in terrorism. Silver Spring, MD. : Interests, Ltd. U. S. Department of Justice. 1994. Terrorism in the United States, 1994. Washington, DC. : National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Terrorist Research and Analytical Center Scronton, R. 1982. Dictionary of Political Thought. New York: Hill and Wang Hall, M. 1995. â€Å"Clinton’s Military Police Plan Under Fire. † USA Today, 11 May Sec. 5A. Landay, J. S. 1995. â€Å"Tempering Terrorism. † The Christian Science Monitor, 8 May Sec. US. Minzesheimer, B. 1995. â€Å"Terrorism Bill Warning: Go Slow. † USA Today, 1 May Sec. 5A. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1994. Terrorism in the United States 1982 – 1992; Terrorism in the United States 1994. Segaller, S. 1987. Invisible armies, terrorism into the 1990s. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Machan, T. 1996. â€Å"Fallacies of Uncritical Multiculturalism. † The Freeman, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 134-135. LeBaron, G. Jr. â€Å"Mormon Fundamentalism and Violence: A Historical Analysis available at http://www. tcd. net/~garn/ polygamy. html>. Fletcher, M. A. 1996. â€Å"Farrakhan Vows to Take Libya’s Aid. † Washington Post, 26 February, Sec. A1. Knickerbocker, B. 1995. â€Å"US Militias: The Dark Side of Frontier Independence. † The Christian Science Monitor, 24 April, Sec. NATIONAL.