Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Why Aren’t We Prosecuting Domestic Terrorists?
We’re hearing the term “domestic terrorism” tossed around a lot these days. It seems to be a hot topic for the Left and the Right, even though people don’t really know what it means. In addition, there are indications that we may be getting closer to broadening the definition of domestic terrorism, and if that happens, it doesn’t bode well for anyone in this country.
So, what is domestic terrorism?
Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ‘domestic,’ as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act ‘dangerous to human life’ that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.
In contrast to Section 802, the Center for Strategic and International Studies defines it this way in one of their reports:
This report focuses on terrorism—not other issues, such as hate crimes, protests, riots, or broader civil unrest. Terrorism is the deliberate use—or threat—of violence by non-state actors in order to achieve political goals and create a broad psychological impact.8 Violence and the threat of violence are important components of terrorism. This analysis divides terrorism into several categories: religious, ethnonationalist, violent-far-right, violent-far-left, and other (which includes terrorism that does not fit neatly into any of the other categories).
Please note the actions above that are not included in this definition.
In defining domestic terrorism for the far Right, these were the definitions they used:
Far-right terrorism refers to the use or threat of violence by subnational or non-state entities whose goals may include racial or ethnic supremacy; opposition to government authority; anger at women, including from the involuntary celibate (or ‘incel’) movement; belief in certain conspiracy theories, such as QAnon; and outrage against certain policies, such as abortion.13 Some extremists on the violent far-right have supported ‘accelerationism,’ which includes taking actions to promote social upheaval and incite a civil war.
The following is their definition of far-Left terrorism:
Far-left terrorism involves the use or threat of violence by subnational or non-state entities that oppose capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism; advocate black nationalism; pursue environmental or animal rights issues; espouse pro-communist or pro-socialist beliefs; or support a decentralized social and political system such as anarchism.15
Footnote sources can be seen in the original document.
Based on their definitions, they state that most domestic terrorist attacks and plots between January 1 and August 31, 2020 were committed by ‘white supremacists, anti-government extremists from the violent far-right and involuntary celibates (incels)’:
. . . far-right terrorists committed 67 percent of attacks and plots, far-left terrorists committed 20 percent, and extremists with other motivations (such as supporters of the Boogaloo movement) and Salafi-jihadists each committed 7 percent.
One of the main reasons that there has not been a strategy enacted against domestic terrorism is because the government is limited by the U.S. Criminal Codes, and no criminal statute is tied to that Code.
Also, extremist groups are often loosely organized; few resources are dedicated to pursuing the networks that do exist. And of course, there are those who are reluctant to move funding from international terrorism to domestic terrorism.
According to another report from the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the FBI also doesn’t perceive that “Black Identity Extremism” and anarchists are a threat:
Current legislative debates place equal emphasis on Black Identity Extremism and anarchists. There have been remarkably few violent incidents by Black Identity Extremists; according to the FBI’s estimate, ‘Violence has been rare over the past 20 years and there is sparse evidence of any convergence.’ The FBI and DHS assess that anarchists and Antifa ‘principally target property,’ not people. FBI Director Wray has publicly called white nationalist terrorism a ‘persistent, pervasive threat,’ and America has watched white supremacists kill and wound hundreds of its citizens. To place Black Identity Extremism and Antifa/anarchists on equal footing is simply silly, and shows gross negligence by our elected leaders and great weakness by our institutions.
FPRI also calls itself a non-partisan organization.
* * * *
In spite of the biases of these reports, they present us with a great deal of helpful information; it’s apparent that they define far Right domestic terrorism as a much larger problem than the Left’s version. And the conclusions we might reach are that, with the cry for dealing with domestic terrorism, the hysteria of the far Left, and the data that suggests that most plots and activities are committed by groups on the far Right, we need to consider the possibility of the following steps being taken:
- Domestic terrorism will be broadened in its definitions and terminology to make it easier to pursue investigations.
- The U.S. Criminal Codes will be expanded and criminal statutes will be added to make prosecution easier and more targeted.
- People who appear to support the ideology of the far-Right groups, even though they refuse to accept their methods, will be watched.
- Expressing traditional ideas of the Right will become further marginalized and condemned; it’s conceivable at some point that right-leaning thought will be considered criminal.
These are only a few of the future steps that may be taken. Actions of the far-Left will be ignored or excused, just as they have been over the last several months; they will be seen as defensive actions against the far-Right.
Don’t be surprised if they start watching you.
Published in Domestic Policy
For the Left, speech is violence and violence is speech. Now, speech is terrorism and terrorism is speech. The only way back to freedom is to reduce the power of the Corporate Fascists that rule over us.
Good on them if they can stand it.
I don’t understand. My meaning is that they will be spying on you. Are you responding to that comment, Randy?
Ah, but the folks out in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis were the good domestic terrorists. Absolutely huge difference…
It wouldn’t surprise me to hear someone make that distinction–good and bad terrorists. Sigh. After all, they tried to vaccinate the prisoners at Gitmo. . .
He’s making a funny, Susan. :-)
As with all terms you hear on the left, it doesn’t mean anything. It was just chosen as an effective pejorative, placed in the talking points, and distributed.
That said, folks on the right should take advantage of the situation and start making arrests.
I assume this is from The Center for Strategic and International Studies. Talk about misinformation!
(from Jan 1 to Aug 31, 2020) “…far-right terrorists committed 67 percent of attacks and plots, far-left terrorists committed 20 percent, and extremists with other motivations (such as supporters of the Boogaloo movement) and Salafi-jihadists each committed 7 percent.”
Susan there is 177 citizens arrested for the event on Jan 6. One man has been in solitary confinement for refusing to take a COVID test. Many have not posted bail or have had bail hearings. The Swamp is prosecuting but selectively.
I agree, @tigerlily! But others are using their numbers. It’s so unfair!
Because the real domestic terrorists won’t police themselves as they protect the democrat party and the media protects them. It is a RICO crime syndicate.
Last year, HR 5602 and its companion Senate bill were passed. Here’s why (from Rep. Schneider’s wep bage):
Schneider and Durbin have not rested:
Clockwise from top left: Rep. Ayanna Presley (D, MA), Kamala Harris, (then California’s junior senator, now VPOTUS), Speaker of the House of Representative Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Rep, Maxine Waters, (D, CA)
All voted in favor of the 2020 bills and will doubtless support Schneider/Durbin in their future efforts to fight
terrorismdomestic terrorism.And they will accuse the Right of all the terrorist acts. Just watch!
I didn’t realize legislation had gone this far. We’re in more danger than I realized. Thanks, OTLC.
Edit: And we all know how reliable the Southern Poverty Law Center is. Good grief.
This is a very nice summary of the lies the organizations that professional conservatives have defended have peddled. This weaponization of government law enforcement and intelligence, with associated “non governmental organizations,” against conservatives goes back decades. Ask Vicki Weaver and all the Branch Davidian women and children. They are unavailable for comment, but you are paying their killers’ pensions today, thanks to Bush the Younger and multiple Congressional Republican majorities’ malfeasance and nonfeasance.
I have long called attention to the British worship of the NHS, with no politician daring ever criticize and always reflectively praising these unaccountable public employees. It has recently stuck me that Republicans have the same problem with worship of law enforcement, reflexively, always genuflecting before the supposed noble and good FBI.
That part made me giggle. (Through the tears, of course.)
I know it’s a bit off topic but consider the not so deep implications of this passage from March 2019:
Don’t be surprised by what has already been planted on your computer for that day when it becomes useful to them.
I want to point out that HR 5602 has only been passed by the House and not the Senate–yet. It has been sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
You are correct, Clifford. They are coming together to spread the lies and they are serious about pursuing this agenda.
You are right, of course, philo. I think we are tempted to believe that these things only happen to other people, or high profile people. We are learning that this impression is a false one.
I never understood the Rights love of law enforcement since law enforcement has showed no love of conservatives
How do you see that, Fake John? Law enforcement supported Trump in the election. Do they normally support the Dems?
They seem very arrest happy toward Trump supporters, tracking then throughout the country together them weeks after the event. Left protestors get excuses, very few arrest, most time cops just stand down and let it burn.
(sigh)
What was invaded was the doggone Capitol. What Congress was doing was counting the doggone Electoral College votes. The lives of the Vice President and Speaker were threatened.
Yes, every single person who trespassed should be prosecuted, and those committed violence should have the full extent of the law come down on them. No bail. Fly in extra prosecutors and extra judges if need be, and rent hotel ballrooms if you need extra courtrooms. No quarter except for “mere” trespassers, and only if they fully cooperate.
Let’s roll. We only have a Constitution and Republic to save.
Don’t go there @garyrobbins.
Moderator Note:
Personal Insult[Redacted]
Moderator Note:
Personal Insult[Redacted]
Most legislators are lawyers, both at the state level, and the federal level. They write legislation that benefits other lawyers, lawyers on both the Left and the Right. When some lawyer is struggling in their practice the ABA places their name on the ballot for judge. Most judges run for office without opposition in local and state elections.
Protected speech is not arson, assaults, looting, trespass, or blocking traffic. What did I leave out in my definition? Left, and Right. Cause doesn’t matter. It’s not that difficult.
Moderator Note:
The CoC still applies to Gary Robbins.Let’s roll. We only have a Constitution and Republic to save. ..Yes, every single person who trespassed should be prosecuted, and those committed violence should have the full extent of the law come down on them.
Spoken like a true <insult redacted>.
What about all those videos that show the Police opening doors and the barricades for dozens if not hundreds of the Protestors? Are they guilty of trespassing if the Police invite them in? I think not. Then how do we prosecute the “trespassers” when we probably have very little evidence that would determine who broke in and who was invited in?
Or perhaps have we thrown out that “Reasonable Doubt” thingy as well?
Oh and Gary, how about one your hero’s Kevin Clinesmith ,who got only probation and a pittance of a fine for fabricating evidence against a senior Trump official that forced him out of government and took hundreds of hours of time of the President? Is not his crime a million times greater than any of your “trespassers”?
Sounds a lot like a conspiracy theory.
Whatever happened to the rule of law?