Domestic political violence (USA)

[Bill Moore]

David,

This is opinion piece is deeply flawed. White supremacist commit on average less than 30 "murders" a year, which is certainly a security concern that I believe is being addressed by our law enforcement entities. Making it a mainstream topic of discuss in my view would risk making the problem worse. The government cracked down hard on these groups after the Oklahoma Federal Bombing, the most significant terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland prior to 9/11. It is still the most significant attack conducted by a U.S. citizen.

Shifting to left wing wing terrorist groups, in the U.S. much like Europe, they killed scores of people throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Today, we see a re-emergence of left wing violence. Most notably they are killing police officers in large numbers in recent years. ANTIFA and other left wing mobs have committed consider damage, and their activities seem to be increasing. Sadly, some U.S. politicians seem to back them with their rhetoric, such as our former President.

The greater threat posed to our nation isn't white supremacists and left wing extremists violence, it is the dumbing down of American society that they represent. Mainstream media, social media, and unqualified university professors promote these views by failing to encourage critical thinking. A democracy only works with an educated electorate willing to intellectually debate issues and seek comprise solutions. Extremists by definition reject compromise. Congress has an opportunity to demonstrate how to do this, but in fact have become part of the problem (both sides of the aisle).

The author believes voters will reject white supremacist candidates??? America has largely rejected these idiots over the last 50 years, so this is an attempt to paint all conservatives as supremacists to shape voter perceptions. It is dishonest and only further divides our people. The media did a poor job assessing how Americans would vote during the last election, and I see no indication their assessment, or more accurately their bias, has improved. However, there is good news. I'm pleasantly surprised that irresponsible social media and main stream media has not prompted more left and right wing extremist attacks in the U.S. Perhaps behind all the hyped noise most of us are relatively content? There isn't anything at this time worth killing or physically harming other Americans over, and the system can still work if we hold it accountable.

[AdamG]

America has largely rejected these idiots over the last 50 years, so this is an attempt to paint all conservatives as supremacists to shape voter perceptions. It is dishonest and only further divides our people.

Exactly so.

For anyone unclear on the motives behind these shennanigans, they need only to read the writings of Saul Alinsky.

Anyone paying attention can see the following in play, each and every day across the media spectrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

The Rules
"Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
"Never go outside the expertise of your people."
"Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
"A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
"A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
"Keep the pressure on."
"The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
"The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside"
"The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

[davidbfpo]

There is a relevant, closed thread 'DHS Report: Rightwing Extremism', which refers to a controversial 2009 report and the ensuing controversy. It has relevance here I think.
Link:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...wing-Extremism

[davidbfpo]

The actual, full title of a NYT article is 'U.S. Law Enforcement Failed to See the Threat of White Nationalism. Now They Don’t Know How to Stop It.' It is added here as this DHS report gets a lot of coverage.
Link:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/m...ar-right.html?

It is a 'long read' blending the historical and contemporary, in particular with one extremist being interviewed, alongside his personal history.

[Bill Moore]

This article follows the recent arrest of Lt Chris Hasson, a serving U.S. Coast Guard officer. He allegedly was planning a mass-casualty attack in the U.S. and threatening to kill several politicans in the Democratic Party and left leaning journalists in main stream media (which frankly is most of them). He's a Lt, so probably young, but still an officer with some education and hopefully ability to think about the consequences of his planned actions. So what did he and these other whackos think would happen after their actual or planned attacks? Do they really believe their hoped for civil war and destruction it will cause better than the current situation? Manifestos existed long before the internet and social media, but I can't help that the disinformation on Facebook and Twitter is resulting in those with perhaps lesser capacity to think rationally to simply feed upon each others' anger to the point it results in extremism. This radicalization process amplified by Russia using bots and trolls to spread disinformation. Once you understand the outcome, the term weaponized information has more meaning. It nothing less than a form of warfare, if not an undeclared act of war.

The Dangerous Spread of Extremist Manifestos

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/201...seone_today_nl

It starts with,

Allegations against a Coast Guard lieutenant are a reminder that, by sharing the writings of terrorists, media outlets can amplify their impact.

Nearly eight years ago, the Norwegian extremist Anders Behring Breivik set the bar for what an individual terrorist could accomplish—detonating a truck bomb in Oslo that killed eight, then murdering 69 more, mostly teenagers, with semiautomatic weapons in another nearby location. All this was done in the name of a twisted ideology he had compiled largely from the internet, cobbled together into a sprawling, 1,518-page tract titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence,” in which he raged against multiculturalism, liberalism, and Muslims, while describing his attack preparations in considerable detail.

And ends with,

All the journalistic restraint in the world will not stop killers from memorializing their actions, and it will not stop extremists from fixating on those memoirs. But the success of terrorism is measured largely by its reach. The horrific act of Anders Breivik propelled his intended meaning to a global audience, where it has found purchase. Less deadly acts of violence by Dylann Roof and Elliot Rodger have been elevated in the same way. We have only begun to suffer the cost of these writings, crafted with an intent no less lethal than their authors’ violent crimes. We must do better when we confront the next, inevitable outbreak.

For more on the Anders Breivik in Norway see the closed thread, Norway Attacks What Happened

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...w-title)/page3

[davidbfpo]

An article by Clint Watts, who was once active on the Forum and his bio has time in the FBI. Now he comments on CT and information warfare, so US readers may have heard of him.

So a couple of passages:

A decade of neglect and turning a blind eye to the rising current of white supremacist movements, combined with the rise of political divisiveness built on racial, religious, and ethnic divides, has brought an unprecedented modern wave of domestic terrorism.
(Later) If left unabated, the pattern of jihadists (Top-down, Directed-Networked-Inspired) will reverse itself for white nationalist terrorists as they grow in strength (Bottom-up, Inspired-Networked-Directed).

Link:https://www.fpri.org/article/2019/05...-should-we-do/

[davidbfpo]

Alerted by a "lurker" to this article, published by the Dutch ICCT and the summary:

In the past several years, the United States has witnessed a concerning rise in far-right extremism and terrorist violence. Attackers in Oak Creek, Charleston, and Pittsburgh emerged from an increasingly emboldened radical right, which has grown in size and ambition in recent years. The Atomwaffen Division—a small, neo-Nazi terrorist organisation—is part of this movement. This Policy Brief tracks the reasons behind the American far-right’s rise and increasing turn to terrorism, and warns that the threat is likely to imminently worsen. To illustrate this trend, Atomwaffen’s story is applied as a case study. This Policy Brief will conclude with a series of recommendations for policymakers looking to understand and address the threat posed by rising violence from the far-right.

The PDF has twenty pgs and has not been read.
Link:https://icct.nl/wp-content/uploads/2...e-July2019.pdf