Special Interest Domestic Terrorism in the U

docx

School

Broward College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1010

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by alyssatrevino96

1 Special Interest Domestic Terrorism in the U. S. Alyssa Trevino Keiser University CCJ4661: Terrorism Dr. Allan Conkey November 12, 2023

2 Special Interest Domestic Terrorism Domestic terrorism can be defined a s “the unlawful use, or threatened use, of violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States (or its territories) without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (Watson, 2002, para. 8). Now, d omestic terrorism can be broken down into several categories, one of them being special interest domestic terrorism. “Special interest terrorism differs from traditional right-wing and left-wing terrorism in that extremist special interest groups seek to resolve specific issues, rather than effect widespread political change” (Watson, 2002, para. 22). These groups can choose any topic to rally around, however the most common causes tend to be animal rights, anti-abortion, and environmental issues. These groups have taken many forms of action to fight for their chosen cause. “The actions of these groups range from legal forms of civil disobedience to illegal forms of activity including firebombing, arson, vandalism, and murder” ( Vohryzek-Bolden et al., 2001, para. 5). There have been a number of violations committed by Radical Environmentalists and Animal Rights, or REAR. Between the years of 1970 and 2007 there were “three assassinations, 30 unarmed assaults, 44 armed assaults, 55 bombings and 933 attacks on property” (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 337). Unfortunately, terrorism has become a real problem. In 2019 alone, there were about 24,000 deaths due to terroristic acts . 51 of those deaths occurred in the United States (Herre et al., 2023). In the following pages, we will discuss animal rights, anti-abortion, and environmental groups. As well as, how the United States is combatting these organizations. Animal Rights Over the course of the last decade or so, animal rights groups have become a serious terrorist threat. “ The FBI estimates that the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) have committed approximately 600 criminal acts in the United States since 1996, resulting in damages in excess of 42 million dollars” (Watson, 2002, para. 10). Regardless of the violent nature of ALF’s operations, their philosophy discourages acts that harm "any animal, human and nonhuman." Most people do not approve of animal cruelty, nevertheless they are not committing criminal acts to oppose it. However, that is exactly what many of the animal rights groups are doing. Recently, the Animal Liberation Front has become one of the most active criminal extremist groups in the United States. The American branch of this organization was formed in the late 70s. “Individuals become members of the ALF not by filing paperwork or paying dues, but simply by engaging in "direct action" against companies or individuals who, in their view, utilize animals for research or economic gain, or do some manner of business with those companies or individual” (Lewis, 2004, para. 5). Direct action typically came in the form of criminal activity, such as causing economic loss and damaging the property of the target.

3 These groups have now broadened their sights and are targeting animal testing companies and any companies who work with them. Huntingdon Life Sciences is one company that has been heavily targeted (Lewis, 2004). Many of the tactics used are designed to cause financial loss, forcing them to shut down. For instance, when it comes to the companies affiliated with their target, they will repeatedly call and threaten them until they cut ties. Even more alarming is the recent employment of explosives against these companies, accompanied by threats of bigger bombings and even “potential assassinations of researchers, corporate officers and employees” (Lewis, 2004, para. 7). This is quite an extreme tactic. On August 28, 2003, two pipe bomb blasts occurred at the Chiron Life Sciences Center in Emeryville, California. This company was targeted due to their business links to Huntingdon Life Sciences. “An anonymous claim of responsibility was issued which included the statement: “This is the endgame for animal killers and if you choose to stand with them, you will be dealt with accordingly. There will be no quarter given, no half measures taken. You might be able to protect your buildings, but can you protect the homes of every employee?” (Lewis, 2004, para. 8). Just four weeks later, another company was hit. An improvised explosive device wrapped in nails was set off at the headquarters of Shaklee, Incorporated in Pleasanton, California on September 26, 2003. Yet another unsettling claim of responsibility was issued, it stated “We gave all of the customers the chance, the choice, to withdraw their business from HLS (Huntingdon Life Sciences). Now you will all reap what you have sown. All customers and their families are considered legitimate targets… You never know when your house, your car even, might go boom… Or maybe it will be a shot in the dark… We will now be doubling the size of every device we make. Today it is 10 pounds, tomorrow 20… until your buildings are nothing more than rubble. It is time for this war to truly have two sides. No more will all the killing be done by the oppressors, now the oppressed will strike back” (Lewis, 2004, para. 8). It should be noted that the FBI has identified and charged a well-known activist, Daniel Andreas, in connection with these bombings. Thankfully, there was no loss of life due to either bombing. This does, however, show a willingness to abandon the philosophy of “no harm to any animal, human or nonhuman” and turn to more violent tactics. Anti-Abortion It is not uncommon to pass a clinic, such as Planned Parenthood, that is surrounded by protestors. Over the past three decades, violence towards abortion clinics and their employees has risen. “Violent antiabortionists began with bombing and arson attacks more than 30 years ago, and they have expanded their tactics since then” (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 338). Doctors and nurses have been attacked when arriving or leaving the clinics they work at. In 1993, a gunman murdered Dr. David Gunn as he entered the clinic in Pensacola, Florida. A year later, Reverend Paul Hill killed a doctor and his bodyguard as they entered the same clinic (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 338). Abortion has long been a heated topic, and unfortunately, pits pro-life and pro-choice advocates against each other. “Most pro-life advocates abhor and denounce antiabortion violence because it is a contradiction of what they represent” (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 338). Violent antiabortion advocates will justify their actions, just like any other political extremist. They feel

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 that they need to define morality, many of them feeling called by God. “To these extremists, accepting the status quo is more evil than using violence to change behavior. This is the standard justification for terrorism” (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 338). Violence is not the only tactic used to stop the practice of abortion. There is a book called Army of God’s manual that includes information about 99 ways to stop an abortionist. It offered non-violent tactics such as gluing locks, slashing tires and shutting off water. It also discusses different methods for talking to workers and women seeking an abortion (White & Chermak, 2021). There are many tactics used in violent anti-abortion attacks. Some of these methods include:  Anthrax sent through the mail  Malicious destruction of property  Threatening letters and phone calls  False bomb threats  Individual harassment  Bombing and arson  Bombing with secondary devices (designed to kill first responders)  Assault  Intentional murder on the premises  Assassination-style murders (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 339) There is no shortage of violence when it comes to anti-abortion activists. It was found that approximately 40 percent of abortion clinics have experienced some sort of attack, vandalism, or harassment (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 340). That’s an extremely high number, although not surprising. When reading through the news, it is not uncommon to come across a story pertaining to an attack on a clinic. “In 2021, a defendant pled guilty for damaging a Newark, Delaware, abortion clinic. The defendant threw a Molotov cocktail at the facility and vandalized it with spray paint” ( Recent Cases on Violence against Reproductive Health Care Providers , 2021). Sadly, there does not seem to be an end in sight. There is no easy fix to this issue, as both parties feel their view is correct. “Those who are pro-choice feel that they are defending constitutional rights, and those who are pro-life often believe that they are following God’s will” (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 340). Environmental Eco-terrorism can be described as “the use or threatened use of violence against victims or property by an environmentally oriented group for environmental-political reasons” (Eagan, 1996, para. 1). The radical environmental movement is made up of a variety of organizations, from the sizeable and well-funded Sea Shepherds to the lone eco-terrorist. These organizations have fought against a great deal of issues, such as drift-net fishing, nuclear energy, whaling, road construction, and the use of animal fur.

5 Almost all of these environmental organizations share three characteristics which include: 1. “They argue that due to environmental necessity, an uncompromising position is needed” (Eagan, 1996, para. 1). 2. “They spend their time and money on direct action to achieve this goal, rather than on lobbying government and industry” (Eagan, 1996, para. 1) 3. “They typically are grass roots organizations with little or no pay, no perks, and little hierarchical structure” (Eagan, 1996, para. 1) Most of the tactics used by environmental terrorist groups involve destruction of property. Terrorist acts include sinking of ships involved with whaling and drift-net fishing, the dismantling of an electrical transmission tower, throwing paint on individuals wearing animal fur and spiking of trees. Some groups have even put out death threats against individuals they deem an issue. On March 18, 2002, police found heavy equipment used to clear trees at a construction site in Erie, Pennsylvania, had been spray painted with the phrases “ELF, in the protection of mother earth,” and “Stop Deforestation.” Six days later, on March 24, police responded to the same construction site, where a crane had been set on fire, which resulted in about $500,000 in damage (FBI, n.d.) According to Denson and Long, most violence associated with ecoterrorism has taken place in the American West. From 1995 to 1999, damages totaled $28.8 million (White & Chermak, 2021, p. 337). The crimes associated include threats to individuals, sabotage of industrial equipment, arson and raids on farms. Environmental terrorism peaked between 1970 and 2001 and has been on the decline since 2007. However, as environmentalists become increasingly unhappy with the efforts of protecting the environment presented by either political party, the threat of terrorist action is likely to escalate. “The danger of ecological terrorist organizations is that they condition their members to devalue the lives of those they perceive to be obstacles to the implementation of their cause” (Eagan, 1996, para. 1). Efforts of the U.S. to Combat Domestic Terrorism The FBI has developed a strong response to threats posed by domestic terrorism. “ Between fiscal years 1993 and 2003, the number of Special Agents dedicated to the FBI’s counterterrorism programs grew by approximately 224 percent” (Watson, 2002, para. 19). In recent years, the FBI has worked on their counterterrorism program in order to be better prepared. The counterterrorism center was created in 1996, this division of the FBI combats terrorism on three fronts: “international terrorism operations both within the United States and in support of extraterritorial investigations, domestic terrorism operations, and countermeasures relating to both international and domestic terrorism” (Watson, 2002, para. 21). Eighteen federal agencies work within this center and play a part in its daily operations. These agencies include the Central Intelligence Agency, the Secret Service, the Department of State, Homeland Security, Department of Defense, and many others. Another tactic the U.S. has taken is interagency cooperation. Over the past few years, the CIA and FBI have established a better working relationship. This relationship has “strengthened the ability of each agency to respond to terrorist threats and has improved the ability of the U.S.

6 government to respond to terrorist attacks that do occur” (Watson, 2002, para. 21). A factor in this cooperation is the exchanging of personnel between the two agencies. “Included among the CIA employees detailed to the FBI’s Counterterrorism division is a veteran CIA case officer who serves as the Deputy Section Chief for International Terrorism. Likewise, FBI agents are detailed to the CIA, and a veteran special agent serves in a comparable position in the CIA’s Counterterrorist center” (Watson, 2002, para. 22). Due to the fact that warning is essential in the prevention of terrorist actions, the FBI has also expanded their terrorist threat warning system. This system was first implemented in 1989. This system now reaches all law enforcement and intelligence personnel. “Currently, sixty federal agencies and their subcomponents receive information via secure teletype through this system. The messages also are transmitted to all 56 FBI field offices” (Watson, 2002, para. 25). Conclusion Special interest domestic terrorism has erupted in the last several decades. There are several different causes these organizations are in support of. The most common are animal rights, anti-abortion and environmental issues. These organizations often do not commit violent crimes or harm others, however there are times that these groups cross over into criminal acts to get their point across. This is when it becomes terrorism. Destruction of property and arson seem to be among the more common acts, although death threats and assassination do sometimes happen. The FBI has teamed up with other agencies in an effort to combat terrorism. The counterterrorism center was created in 1996 and is made up of 18 different agencies. The FBI and CIA have a better relationship and work together. They have also enhanced our terrorist threat warning system.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 References: Eagan, S. (1996). From Spikes to Bombs: The Rise of Eco-Terrorism | Office of Justice Programs . Www.ojp.gov. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/spikes- bombs-rise-eco-terrorism FBI. (n.d.). Terrorism 2002/2005 | Federal Bureau of Investigation . Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005 Herre, B., Samborska, V., Ritchie, H., Hasell, J., Mathieu, E., & Roser, M. (2023). Terrorism. Our World in Data . https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism#:~:text=While%20the %20number%20of%20terrorism Lewis, J. (2004, May 18). Animal Rights Extremism and Ecoterrorism . FBI. https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/animal-rights-extremism-and- ecoterrorism#:~:text=In%20recent%20years%2C%20the%20Animal Recent Cases on Violence Against Reproductive Health Care Providers . (2021, September 17). Www.justice.gov. https://www.justice.gov/crt/recent-cases-violence-against-reproductive- health-care-providers Vohryzek-Bolden, M., Olson-Raymer, G., & Whamond, J. (2001). Special-Interest Extremists and Terrorists (From Domestic Terrorism and Incident Management: Issues and Tactics, P 140-172, 2001, Miki Vohryzek-Bolden, Gayle Olson-Raymer, et al., -- See NCJ-193133) | Office of Justice Programs . Www.ojp.gov. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual- library/abstracts/special-interest-extremists-and-terrorists-domestic-terrorism-and Watson, D. (2002, February 6). The Terrorist Threat Confronting the United States . Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-terrorist-

8 threat-confronting-the-united-states#:~:text=The%20third%20category%20of %20domestic,than%20effect%20widespread%20political%20change . White, J. R., & Chermak, S. M. (2021). Terrorism And Homeland Security. Cengage Learning Custom P.

Special Interest Domestic Terrorism in the U

Related Documents