Domestic Threat: Armed Anti-Everything Groups Demanding Their Way or No Way

 

More and More Common Sight

Armed: In State Capitol, Lansing, MI

Boogaloo Bois on Move for What

Two Proud Boys Armed & Standing By 

(For another January 6 Capitol Riot)

Is domestic terrorism more serious than outside terrorism? Here is an excellent analysis from The Hill and from a research project by a terrorism researcher and senior advisor at the Rand Corporation, Brian Michael Jenkins. He has been researching terrorism since 1972. This post from The Hill has this headline:

“Domestic violent extremists will be harder to combat than homegrown jihadists”

Also, excellent articles here from The Guardian and here from CSIS – two other great references on this same topic.

First, this quick comparison and contrast between those two extreme groups and the remarkable differences between them with these key points:

Larger constituencies. Jihadists, with few exceptions, gained very little traction in U.S. Muslim communities. In contrast, the beliefs driving today's domestic extremists are deeply rooted in American history and society.

Domestic extremists are better organized. Hindered by FBI infiltration, far right extremists long ago adopted a strategy of leaderless resistance, avoiding a hierarchical structure and instead relying on local autonomous cells to carry out attacks on behalf of the cause. What is new about today's domestic extremists is their mobility - moving across the country to participate in action. This creates contacts and coalescence. 

It requires coordination and logistics. Social media has added a new and dangerous dynamic. Organizationally, these groups may be maturing.

The nation has not been galvanized. The unprecedented 9/11 terrorist attacks bound the country together in a fervent national effort to prevent further attacks. But domestic extremist attacks thus far have not unified the nation. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing – the second worst terrorist attack in the United States – did not generate a similar response nor has the January 6 assault on the Capitol Building.

Indeed, political differences appear to have become more intense and will hamper federal efforts to counter violent domestic extremism. Any attempt to legislate new counterterrorism statutes or expand the list of terrorist groups – already an arbitrary designation - will prompt fierce arguments about the definition of terrorism and who is a terrorist.

Rightwing extremists are far better armed. They are part of an American gun culture. Their acquisition and display of personal arsenals reflect their defiance of any effort to limit what they see as their Second Amendment right to bear arms. The jihadists never had this, although they also could get guns and carry out deadly attacks.

Gunning down unarmed civilians requires fanaticism, not advanced training, but to move beyond a lone shooter will require operational skills.

Many rightwing extremists have military or police training. A few American jihadists had served in the military, more sought to join the army, but for the most part they were untrained. There are concerns that extremists have recruited veterans, and that extremist ideologies have penetrated the Armed Forces and Police Departments. It's unclear how pervasive the problem is, but it could undermine trust and cooperation between federal authorities and local police departments.

My 2 cents: One outstanding element in all domestic terrorism/anti-this or anti-that groups in the U.S. is seen on those pictures above: The so-called “right to carry” firearms anyplace, anytime, and for reason  to a rational person, I think is insane to allow firearms open carry in public like that. In short, we are NOT the Wild, Wild West, and BTW: I totally support the 2^nd Amendment.

It is obviously total arrogance on the part of those participants as matter of fact. That was painfully clear during the insurrection into the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 to stop the final EC vote certification process.

In my view, the U.S. Supreme Court must step in reverse any rulings they have made vis-à-vis the right to open carry firearms in public.

Additionally, I strongly support the right to peacefully assemble, demonstrate, and seek government change but NOT the way we are seeing over the last few years.

That is the not the country I know, grew up in, and served in uniform, and in public office for 44 years. I hope others feel just as strongly on that as I do. 

Those pictures above and tons of others say it all – enough is enough.

The high court must step in and help get us back on a steady forward looking course to help stop this insane madness now sweeping the nation (again as we saw on January 6).

Thanks for stopping by.