Terrorism in the USA:threat & response

[Bill Moore]

Mike, appreciate the link on the Wall St attack (I wasn't aware of that one).

As you know not all lone wolf attacks are terrorist attacks and it is important to point out the difference. If the attack doesn't have a political agenda then it isn't terrorism, even if it terrorifies those exposed to it. While the numerous school shootings in our country and workers going postal are equally tragic regardless of motivation they are not generally terrorism. I think the attack on the Bath School was a guy that was pushed over the edge and went postal on his family and the school (local gov).

Timmy McVeigh wasn't a lone wolf, but supposedly he was part of a very small cell and his attack on Okalahoma City was clearly terrorism (politically motivated). Some lone wolf terrorists in the U.S. were the unibomber and MAJ Hason at Ft Hood. I agree that lone wolfs are probably harder to detect, and therefore their attacks may be more likely to succeed, but not necessarily be overly effective.

[jmm99]

contained in just two paragraphs:

from Bill

As you know not all lone wolf attacks are terrorist attacks and it is important to point out the difference. If the attack doesn't have a political agenda then it isn't terrorism, even if it terrorifies those exposed to it. While the numerous school shootings in our country and workers going postal are equally tragic regardless of motivation they are not generally terrorism. I think the attack on the Bath School was a guy that was pushed over the edge and went postal on his family and the school (local gov).

Timmy McVeigh wasn't a lone wolf, but supposedly he was part of a very small cell and his attack on Okalahoma City was clearly terrorism (politically motivated). Some lone wolf terrorists in the U.S. were the unibomber and MAJ Hason at Ft Hood. I agree that lone wolfs are probably harder to detect, and therefore their attacks may be more likely to succeed, but not necessarily be overly effective.

A valid answer to all of these (but certainly not one providing bright lines) is "it depends" - and that answer then expands multi-fold when you get into the remedies. I've been staring at this post for a half hour thinking about ways to address strategic, tactical and legal differences. Nothing bubbled up.

Obviously, all of this has everything to do with how and why we kill - and the lines we draw to justify or condemn killing. The morals, ethics, legalities, strategy and tactics are much easier to analyze where we have a defined person declared hostile - e.g., as in a targeted killing situation or in a conventional war.

Regards

Mike

[jmm99]

my comments in this post, Adding some balance ..., which presents a raw start to a methodology which addresses some of the issues presented in your two paragraphs.

That approach gives very little truck to the primacy of formal legal definitions, etc. - for example, whether a "terrorist" or "non-terrorist". It would look to the degree of violence and the motive for the violence since choice of strategy and tactics would hinge on those and other factors.

Regards

Mike

[AdamG]

Federal officials on Thursday announced the arrest of a Saudi citizen who was attending a community college in Texas while allegedly plotting to conduct a bombing campaign within the United States.

No. 1 priority for US security: domestic terrorism, threat report says
Terrorist plots uncovered in the US since 9/11
Homegrown terrorism a growing concern for US intelligence
Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari, 20, of Lubbock, Texas, was arrested by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation after an intense 'round-the-clock investigation uncovered ongoing efforts to obtain and mix explosive chemicals and to identify potential targets, officials say.

Agents found an e-mail file entitled “Tyrant’s House” containing the Dallas address of former President George W. Bush. Other files included information about hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, and the names and addresses of three individuals previously stationed with the US military at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/02...nuclear-plants

[AdamG]

White House defends Muslims ahead of hearing on 'homegrown terrorism'
By BARBARA FERGUSON | ARAB NEWS
Published: Mar 7, 2011 22:03 Updated: Mar 7, 2011 22:04

WASHINGTON: Rep. Peter King, R-New York, defended this Thursday's scheduled hearings on homegrown radical Islam against protests that his Homeland Security Committee is unfairly targeting a single religious group.

"The main goal is to show the extent of radicalization within the Muslim-American community, how dangerous that is, how serious that is," he said Monday on Fox News's Fox and Friends. "I will have witnesses there to show it's a real threat. It's a growing threat, and it's not just me saying this."

*

In Washington, the White House extended its hand to Muslims by sending Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough. He told an audience on Sunday at a Virginia mosque — known for its cooperation with the FBI — that the White House is committed to a positive and productive relationship with Muslims, and that "we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few."

"We must resolve that, in our determination to protect our nation, we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few. In the US, we don't practice guilt by association," McDonough told the All Dulles Area Muslim Society, or ADAMS mosque.

http://arabnews.com/world/article306235.ece

STERLING, Va. — As a Republican congressman prepares to open hearings on the threat of homegrown Islamic terrorism, President Obama’s deputy national security adviser visited a mosque here on Sunday to reassure Muslims that “we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few.”

The White House billed the speech by the adviser, Denis McDonough, as a chance for the administration to lay out its strategy for preventing violent extremism. But the timing was no accident; Mr. McDonough was in effect an emissary from the White House to pre-empt Representative Peter King of New York, the Homeland Security Committee chairman, who has promised a series of hearings beginning Thursday on the radicalization of American Muslims.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/us...im.html?src=me

[davidbfpo]

Post 48 referred to a mystery device in Spokane and thanks to CLS mailing:

A man with past ties to a white supremacist group was arrested early Wednesday by federal agents in connection with the bomb found on January 17 along a MLK parade route in Spokane, Washington. The suspect was identified in multiple reports as Kevin William Harpham, 36, of Colville, Wash. He was charged Wednesday with one count of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and one count of knowingly possessing an improvised explosive device. The AP reports that the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups in the United States, says Harpham, who has served in the U.S Army, has been a member of the National Alliance, a white supremacist group.

Link:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/us/10bomb.html?_r=1

Not much detail and yes the SPLC is not admired by all.

[davidbfpo]

Thanks to a CLS pointer to a Wired story:

In a forthcoming report, Brian Michael Jenkins, a terrorism expert and senior advisor at the Rand Corporation, updates a previous study on the subject and counts the number of Muslims in America who’ve participated in jihadist-related crimes from 9/11 through 2010. He shared the results with Danger Room ahead of publication.

181 Muslims have either been indicted, arrested or self-identified (such as through suicide bombings in Somalia) as participating in jihadist-related crimes since 9/11, according to Jenkins’ study. Estimates on the number of Muslims in America population are numerous and inconsistent; the Pew forum fixes the number at 2.6 million, Jenkins uses a figure of 3 million. In either case, the figure lies between 0.007 to 0.006 percent of American Muslims — an extreme minority in the fullest sense of the words.

“This is half-hearted jihad,” says Jenkins. Even if hundreds or thousands of American-based Muslims support or tolerate the radicals on the sly, it’s still a tiny, tiny percentage of the whole.

Link:http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011...lims-you-suck/