Mississippi Burning - Essay Example

As a result, the defendants were tried in state and local court systems, where local influences had a significant effect on the outcomes of the verdicts. In light of the nation's current legal status on domestic terrorism, and society's modern view of the intimidation of an entire population, the acts of the KKK in Mississippi Burning went beyond the line of mere criminal activity and would today qualify as domestic terrorism, while the FBI simply acted with a lack of ethical behavior. One of the ways to differentiate domestic terrorism from criminal activity is the motivation for committing the act, and the KKK in Mississippi Burning clearly fit the definition of terrorism from this aspect.

The KKK was targeting the African-Americans' right to vote, a political right. They were not targeting an individual for revenge, or taking an action for economic gain. Their actions were designed to frighten a population and entire society out of exercising their constitutional right to vote. In one segment they expressed their anger at Jews, Catholics, Turks, and Orientals. When the Preacher gave his sermon in the church, he professed a declaration of war against a people. It was not the de-politicized act of a criminal, but was designed to inflict fear and incite violence against random targets in a larger population.

By the modern definition, this would qualify as terrorism and clearly fits today's definition.Another aspect of the KKK's actions that qualified them as terrorists was the fact that it was perpetrated by an organized group that had terrorism as an agenda. The FBI has stated that "special interest extremism" has "emerged as a serious terrorist threat" (Jarboe, 2002). The involvement of a group increases the potential threat by giving individual members increased motivation, some degree of anonymity, and an escalated sense of moral justification.

In Mississippi Burning, there were cases of blowing up a house, attacking a general store, and chasing the three victims at night with a violent convoy. These actions were taken as a group. Though the individuals were ultimately held responsible for their involvement, the group was guilty of encouraging and inciting the level of violence. When the FBI violated the rights of the citizens and terrorized the man in the barbershop, this was the act of an individual agent, and not authorized by the group.

The further use of KKK sympathetic law enforcement officers to participate and chase the victims was another factor that defined it as terrorism. The fear and inability of the African-Americans to get protection or justice was increased by this factor. The involvement of law enforcement, the group mandates and proclamations, and the common agenda of the group all contributed to escalation of random violence directed at an entire people, and the terror that they inflicted upon innocent victims.

Critics will contend that constitutional rights protect the KKK and its actions are pro-white, rather than anti-minority. They will argue that the KKK was simply responding to the pressure of the FBI and their tactics. White (2008) contends that "its acts of violence have tended to be retaliatory rather than symbolic". However, the lynching of an innocent man, their mandate of White Nationalism, and the random attacks of violence