Terrorism in the USA:threat & response

[davidbfpo]

Caught via Twitter is a new report on the extensively reported NYPD domestic information gathering operation, co-written by CUNY School of Law and an advocacy group. It is 50 pgs:http://www.law.cuny.edu/academics/cl...ng-Muslims.pdf

There is a wide-ranging article in Salon, with multiple links, which is very critical:http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/new_..._islamophobes/

[davidbfpo]

An abridged edition of a 700+ page research report by the UK branch of the Henry Jackson Society, with a very comprehensive set of figures:

.. shows how the terrorist threat within the U.S. has developed, by profiling all AQ or AQinspired terrorists who were convicted in U.s. courts (federal and military) or who participated in suicide attacks against the US homeland between 1997 and 2011.

Link:http://henryjacksonsociety.org/wp-co...WRES-Final.pdf

[davidbfpo]

I suspect the recent shootings of Colorado's prisons and two prosecutors in Texas have prompted the CNN piece by Peter Bergen 'Growing threat of extreme right-wing violence':http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/op...nce/index.html

At the start:

While American politicians and the U.S. public continue to focus on the threat from jihadist extremists, there seems to be too little awareness that this domestic form of political violence is a growing problem at home.

From 2002 to 2007, only nine right-wing extremists were indicted for their roles in politically motivated murders and other types of ideologically motivated violent assaults. But between 2008 and 2012, the number mushroomed to 53, according to data collected by the New America Foundation.

The NAF data:http://homegrown.newamerica.net/

CNN and NAF have some interesting facts / statistics and Peter draws attention to important facts:

Fifteen right-wing extremists were indicted in 2012 ...only six people who subscribed to al Qaeda's ideology were indicted on terrorism-related charges in the United States....it's striking that the jihadists charged with crimes were much less likely to have actually carried out a violent attack before they were arrested.

[Bill Moore]

The focus on right wing violence is nothing new, and I suspect the recent announcements (past 5 or so years) calling for a focus on right wing violence is at least partly a recognization we dedicated too much focus on Al-Qaeda within our borders, which gave other groups and individuals in the criminal arena more room to maneuver.

I'm not comfortable with the term "right wing" violence, because too many occassociate it with the far right fringe of our political parties. They have their criminals that attack abortion clinics (though it can and is debated about who the actual criminals are), but for the most I would argue that Aryan Nation, Neo-Nazis, and others along those lines are to the far left much like the Marxists. Hitler was a socialist, and like in many in our far left who embrace burning books, telling others what they can say and think, and even telling families how they "will" raise their kids, the far left terrorists want to impose their way of life upon others. Neither the Aryan Nation or Neo-Nazis represent the conservative branch (even at its extreme) on the far right side of our political parties.

The media focuses on the far right because it has headline appeal, but the reports also mention the traditional whackos from the the far left and the environmentalists. It should also be noted the Aryan Nation despite claims to the contrary is largely a criminal organization, and lot of their violence resembles the violence from Biker gangs. Problematic, but hardly on the scale of risk that a large scale terrorist attack intended to kill as many people as possible.

One of the few things I agree with the President on regarding domestic policy is we need to focus more on mental health. The potential to move that field forward with the advances in science is significant and could potentially reduce a wide range of criminal behavior to include dumb kids that will grabbing a gun and killing as many kids as possible at a local school or movie theater.

More surveillance and arrests may reduce some the violence, but it will continue to come at us unless we address more fundamental issues. Our Law Enforcement focus on the war on drugs keeps the police busy, but it doesn't seem to reduce the demand for drugs. We should all take a step back and reconsider where we need to focus to make our society safer.

[davidbfpo]

After the all the analysis the NYT reports:

...in the end, it apparently came down to a bitter local grudge. A former justice of the peace whose legal and political career collapsed in a hard-fought legal battle was accused Wednesday of killing the two prosecutors, who had been his courtroom rivals. And his wife not only named him as the gunman, but also confessed to having been the driver in both shootings as part of her role in the vendetta, the authorities said.

Link:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/us...pagewanted=all

[davidbfpo]

Moderator's Note

There is a thread 'Explosion at Boston Marathon', with 149 posts and 4,798 views to date; it remains separate at the moment:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ad.php?t=17930

[davidbfpo]

I always wonder about the contribution of WaPo's David Ignatius, who appears to be very close to parts of the US government and this RCP article is no exception.

It starts with a commentary on the DNI's testimony on Boston and he writes that:

Given the limits on government surveillance of homegrown extremists, what's the strategy for preventing domestic terror? Basically, it focuses on outreach to Muslim and other communities to get their help in monitoring and disrupting mobilization for terrorist activities.

(He ends with) Analysts say talking to Muslim communities -- through Community Awareness Briefings at mosques, community centers and other meeting places -- is the most effective tool for preventing home-grown Islamist extremism. If Muslim families feel part of a larger American community, they have a greater stake in monitoring and preventing violence. That's not Dr. Phil talking, but some of the nation's hard-nosed counterterrorism specialists.

Clapper and his analysts have concluded that the right answer to home-grown plots isn't police-state surveillance but good community policing. This won't stop the occasional plot by people who get radicalized, like the Tsarnaevs, but as one analyst noted, "it's not likely to spike into a mass phenomenon."

Link:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ce_118241.html

I suspect a few interested parties, notably the IT providers and other contractors, will wonder if their hi-tech approach will be so generously funded.

[davidbfpo]

In a surprising move, Texas House and Senate budget negotiators have agreed to wipe out funding for the Department of Public Safety’s fusion center (one of seven in Texas), part of a nationwide intelligence gathering initiative that has generated controversy in Washington.

If the House and Senate affirm the change, it could make Texas the first state to pull the rug from under one of the statewide fusion operations that began under a Department of Homeland Security offensive that has been criticized for wasting taxpayers’ money.

Link:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...atesman_launch

Responses via Twitter by an ex-FBI agent:

Absent access to classified USIC intel, or dedicated intel collectors, Fusion Centers are just crime data and lead aggregators.....Lack of clearance to the intel data is a big issue with Fusion Centers. Without clearance, there is no real fusion

For reference there is a seperate, historical thread on fusion centers, which is closed now this thread covers more than fusion:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...read.php?t=277