Critics: U.S. not doing enough to combat domestic terrorism
United States for the same period. Note that some of the cases examined involved plots that were foiled and unsuccessful.
The authors of the study note that collecting data on domestic terrorism is difficult owing to definitional issues. The FBI defines domestic terrorism as “Americans attacking Americans based on U.S.-based extremist ideologies” — but while jihadi terrorist cases are all tried under antiterrorism laws, cases of domestic terrorism are tried under a myriad of other statutes, among them weapons and explosives violations, property destruction, arson, “seditious conspiracy,” and more..
Another problem in dealing with domestic terrorist attacks is that they are committed by people who are motivated by different ideologies. On the left there are anarchists, communist factions, environmentalists, and animal rights advocates, while on the right there are white supremacists, neo-Nazis, individuals and groups who, in different degrees, refuse to recognize or accept U.S. currency, taxation, or federal, state, and local laws, as well as anti-abortion activists.
Johnson says that right-wing groups present a more deadly threat given their affinity to collect and store weapons, while left-wing groups appear to have a preference for vandalizing property and committing arson.
“What worries me is the fact that our country is under attack from within, from our own radical citizenry,” Johnson told CNN. “Yet our leaders don’t appear too concerned about this. So, my greatest fear is that domestic extremists in this country will somehow become emboldened to the point of carrying out a mass-casualty attack because they perceive that no one is being vigilant about the threat from within.”
Attempts by DHS to formulate a coherent approach toward domestic terrorism ran into opposition. In early 2009 DHS published a report – which was researched and developed under the George W. Bush administration – which detailed the growing threat posed by right-wing extremist groups. The report was received with a chorus of criticism from conservative commentators and politicians, and also from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who charged that the report’s true aim was to demonize right-wing political ideology.
Under intense pressure, DHS canceled further efforts to study the topic of domestic terrorism in greater depth, cut the budget allocated for this effort, and dismantled the intelligence unit which was responsible for tracking extremist groups. There are about 220,000 employees at DHS, but Johnson, the former DHS intelligence official, told CNN that as a result of the 2009 firestorm over the domestic terrorism report, DHS now has only one intelligence analyst looking at domestic terrorism.
DHS has also reduced the number and quality of sessions about domestic terrorism in the training it gives its agents. Also, DHS does not maintain an extremist-group list similar to the terrorist organization list of the State Department. As of January 2012, the State Department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism has designated forty-nine foreign terrorist organizations. The FBI, Department of Justice, and DHS do not generate an official list of domestic terrorist organizations.
DHS spokesman Peter Boogaard told CNN he could not comment on these assertions as they involve classified information. In a written statement, however, he said the DHS “protects our country from all threats, whether foreign or homegrown, and we know that violent extremism is neither constrained by international borders, nor limited to any single ideology.
“As such, DHS continues to work with its state, local, tribal and territorial partners to prevent violence that is motivated by any extreme ideological beliefs. This includes training law enforcement to recognize behaviors and other indicators associated with violent criminal activity as well as briefings, products, case studies, and information sharing on violent extremist threats,” the statement said.
