Domestic Terrorist Threat - Research Paper Example

 Domestic Terrorist Threat Introduction Domestic terrorists are “people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements” (Bjelopera, 2012, p.1). Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, federal law enforcement has given more attention to the issue of terrorism related to the Al Qaeda’s ideologies, arising from foreign soil, than to domestic terrorism. Earlier to the attacks of 9/11, there was greater focus on domestic terrorism. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported in 1999 that from 1970, most of the deadly terrorist attacks which took place in the United States were perpetuated by domestic extremists. The new counter-terrorism efforts of law enforcement take into account both external threats as well as those of domestic terrorism. Today it is “difficult to evaluate the scope of domestic terrorist activity” (Bjelopera, 2012, p.1), partly because of the government’s efforts to counter international terrorist activities. For example, federal agencies employ different terminology and definitions to describe domestic terrorist activity; and intelligence collection on domestic terrorism has received less attention than efforts to counter foreign threats. Further, the Obama Administration’s strategy of community outreach to suppress terrorism-related radicalization in the United States focuses on individuals inspired by Al Qaeda, to counter domestic terrorism. It is essential that Congress investigates these and other issues related to domestic terrorism. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to examine domestic terrorism in the United States of America, as a growing issue threatening national security and peace. Defining Terrorism Although there is increasing amount of scholarly literature available on terrorism as a result of growing awareness of the myths and realities related to political terrorism, this has “not been accompanied by a commensurate increase in the understanding of the phenomenon” (Stohl, 1979, p.1). This observation of Michael Stohl in 1979 continues to be valid more than three decades later. Academics constantly attempt to understand terrorism, its potential threat as well as terrorist activity; however law enforcement is no closer to comprehending terrorism and its repercussions. Hence, defining and addressing the phenomenon of terrorism is in the preliminary stages (Ronczkowski, 2004). There are numerous working definitions of terrorism, an abstract concept with no tangible presence; hence a true definition that accounts for all the potential uses of the term is not possible. At the same time however, two common characteristics are that terrorization is done, and terrorists have targets and victims. The definition changes according to the context of the violent activity. This weakness is taken into consideration when examining some popular defitions of terrorism (White, 2003). Of five official definitions from various United States government agencies, “three of the more commonly cited definitions come from the FBI, the U.S. Department of State, and the U.S. Department of Defense” (Ronczkowski, 2004, p.18). The FBI (2003) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof” towards achieving political or social purposes. According to Ronczkowski (2004), the United States Department of State defines terrorism as an activity directed against persons involving violent acts or measures hazardous to human life which would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States. Further, it purposefully intimidates or compels a civilian population to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or terrorist acts affect the performance of a government by assassination or kidnapping. Similarly, the Department of Defense defines terrorism as the predetermined use of violence or threat of violence to create fear, “intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological” states Heymann (1998, p.3). The common elements among the above definitions are clear, but they differ on the basis of different types of terrorist missions. Hence, instead of an all-inclusive definition of terrorism it would be better to focus on an understanding of the elements that constitute terrrorism (Ronczkowski, 2004). Functional comprehension of the term is essential; law enforcement personnel as well as analytical practitioners require a foundation for performing their duties related to terrorism and terrorist activity, along with an understanding of its history. Background to the Critical Issue of Domestic Terrorism Islam focuses on performing the will of God by action and on following the law. Muslims are called to act, to struggle (jihad) to carry out their belief, to lead an obedient life, to defend religion and to help develop a just Islamic society throughout the world. The spread and defense of Islam through hijra or emigration, coupled with jihad has evolved from the early community of Muslims. When Muhammed and his companions underwent continued persecution in Mecca, they emigrated to Medina which was earlier known as Yathrib. In Medina, after regrouping and strengthening the community, Prophet Muhammed started jihad to spread and defend God’s word and rule. Thus, to overcome adversity, Muslims always followed the pattern of hijra and jihad. This was integrated with ummah or the emphasis on world-wide inter-Islamic unity, and has guided Muslims through the ages including contemporary terrorists (Esposito, 2003). Islam has the second largest number of followers among the world’s religions, and as a contrast to the religious militancy and terrorism that now symbolize the religion, Islam means “peace” and submission to God’s will. Jihad has had three meanings: first, the struggle of all believers to be faithful to the religion and to lead virtuous lives; second the struggle or process of understanding and interpreting Islam; and third is the sacred struggle to defend and to spread Islam through holy war, thus legitimizing aggression. Terrorist attacks by Jihad organizations all over the world: in America and the West, and also in Egypt, Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank, as well as in South Asia as in India, with its mindless killing of “unbelievers” in the name of a holy war, have repeatedly portrayed militant Islamic fundamentalism. These attacks of religious extremism reduce Islam to an international crusade threatening global stability and security. As a result, “Islam and the vast diversity of Muslim believers are often equated simply with fundamentalism, radicalism and terrorism” (Esposito, 1996, p.131). There are two important concerns related to the ideology of radical Islamists and its threatening features. First, it is radically separatist; Al Qaeda “seeks to preserve a puritanical, strictly fundamentalist Islam by isolating it from the destructive influences of modern, and especially Western culture” (Biddle, 2002, p. 8). This is because western ideas are believed to be a profound threat to the proper practice of the faith. Radical Islamists see in western concepts a permissive self-indulgence that disrespects God and corrupts humanity. Hence, the conviction is that only through removing the temptation of western ideas and culture can the community of the believers in Allah serve Him properly. The second significant feature of Al Qaeda’s ideology is its commitment to violence in its quest for political empowerment. Terrorist organizations such as Hamas or Hezbollah though violent, have far more limited political aims to install fundamentalist Islamic governments in specific states (Biddle, 2002, p. 9). Domestic Terrorism: An Imperative Concern There appears to be a general impression among the public that the American security system worked efficiently in thwarting recent terrorist attacks such as the bombing plots at Times Square, in a flight over Detroit, and during a Christmas tree lighting ceremony at Portland, Oregon (Stakelbeck, 2011). However, these were isolated plots that failed anyway, and were not saved by the intervention of security agencies. Erick Stakelbeck, an investigative journalist argues that there is a great increase in the numbers of Muslims in the United States, in their establishment of numerous mosques and religious schools across the country, and in their extremist attacks against Americans. The author argues that the United States’ government refuses to acknowledge or accept the growing threat of terrorism despite the increasing onslaught of Islamic extremism after their attacks on September 11, 2001 (Stakelbeck, 2011). Similar to Stakelbeck’s views in his book The Terrorist Next Door: How the Government is Deceiving You About the Islamist Threat, 2011, Catherine Herridge, a television journalist, writes in her book The Next Wave: On the Hunt for Al Qaeda’s American Recruits, 2012, of the increasing possibilities of having Islamic terrorists for neighbours. She adds that the lax attitude of the American government towards recruiting Islamist sympathizers in the work forces has resulted in several attacks from within organizations. For example, an U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan gunned down forty-five people including 12 soldiers, and an airport shuttlebus driver plotted a subway slaughter. Home-grown terrorists born and raised in the United States have posed a great threat in the recent past, and will continue to be an ominous, concealed danger in the future. They cannot be identified because they appear American in every way, have clean records, American passports, “and mass murder in their hearts” (Herridge, 2012). Although domestic terrorist attacks have not caused the extent of the devastation of 11th September, 2001, it is important to note that the Timothy McVeigh bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April 1995 claimed 168 lives and injured over 500 other people. “It ranks as the second deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil, behind only the devastation wrought by Al Qaeda on 9/11” (Bjelopera, 2012, p.38). The Pew Research Center Report, (PRC, 2011), forecasts that America’s Muslim population will triple in number, from 2.6 million to 6.2 million in 2030. For ensuring the spread of Islam, American Muslims are engaged in a campaign of mosque-building across the country, “including in the very heart of the Bible belt” (Stakelbeck, 2011, p.6). Today there are over 2000 mosques and innumerable Islamic schools, where extremist Islamic ideologies are taught. For gradually achieving Islamization over the entire nation, “mosque-building is a crucial component of the strategy” states Stakelbeck (2011, p.22). A 2005 Freedom House Investigative Report on Saudi Publications found in U.S. mosques revealed literature that spread hatred for non-Muslims, endorsed the murder of converts from Islam, advocated the subjugation of women, and condemned America for being un-Islamic. These teachings based on a totalitarian ideology of hatred can ignite violence, and necessitate urgent attention from the American government. Besides mosques and schools, Islamic radicals have established exclusive compounds and Jihadist training camps in several locations in rural America, where the enclave’s residents undertake firearms training (Stakelbeck, 2011). The Muslim Brotherhood or Ikhwan, is a Jihadist organization whose goal is integrate the entire Muslim world into a unified Islamic state governed by Sharia law. There are two critical facts associated with the Brotherhood’s impact on the West. However, Western governments have deliberately ignored these facts, embracing the Brotherhood as “outreach partners”. The first significant fact is that the Brotherhood is the founder of all contemporary Islamic terrorist groups, providing “ideological inspiration and blueprint for Al Qaeda, Hamas, and many of today’s most violent Jihadist outfits” (Stakelbeck, 2011, p.37). A special section of the Brotherhood had links with Nazi Germany. Although the leaders of the Ikhwan claim non-violence, it is evident that the organization was created as a terrorist organization, and it has carried out various terror campaigns. The second critical fact is that, the motto or creed by which the Brotherhood lives is “an undisquised call to establish global Islamic domination through violence” (Stakelbeck, 2011, p.38). In Egypt, in September 2010, Mohammad Badi, the current supreme leader of the Brotherhood, endorsed Jihad against American ‘arrogance and tyranny’, in a weekly sermon. Despite the extensive human toll and damages caused by the events of 11th September, 2001, and the adverse consequences of open borders facilitating the entry of illegal aliens, the Bush administration at all levels refused to screen out those who were sympathetic to Jihadis’ cause “in our military, at the FBI, in prisons, and even in city fire departments” (Stakelbeck, 2011, p.xii). A sympathetic media were willing to present the Muslim Jihadist as victim. Under President Obama’s leadership, homeland security weakened even further, because of the chief executive’s approach that empathy and education were the cure for Islamic imperialism. Since 9/11, the Fort Hood massacre is the most distinct example of the dangers of the American government’s use of political correctness in implementing measures against terrorism. Thus, it is evident that “America’s counter-terrorism policy both at home and abroad is being fatally undermined by the Obama administration’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge the deep theological roots of violent Jihad” (Stakelbeck, 201, p.197). Anthrax as a Weapon of Mass Destruction in Domestic Bioterrorism “Anthrax is a deadly biological weapon with the potential to cause significant destruction and loss of life” (Katz, 2001, p.1835). Anthrax is not a communicable disease in its active state. The anthrax spores can be stored for decades and can be spread over large areas. Hence the greatest danger by anthrax lies in its inhalation which is the most lethal, and also the most difficult to detect and treat making it the “preferred portal of entry for biowarfare and bioterrorism” (Trippon, 2002, p.18). As an excellent weapon of mass destruction, the spores can enter the body in one of three ways: by inhaling it into the lungs, by ingesting it into the digestive tract, or by cutaneous exposure through contact with the skin. If anthrax were disseminated by the explosion of a missile and billions of anthrax spores were in the air, only one or two deep breaths would be sufficient to inhale enough organisms to cause serious infection (Katz, 2001). The most recent incident of the use of anthrax in bioterrorism occurred in 2001 in the United States of America. The evidence indicates that refined anthrax spores in the form of a highly concentrated dry powder were sent to a variety of media institutions and governmental offices. The anthrax attack caused 22 confirmed cases of infection, out of which 11 were due to inhalation, 5 resulting in casualties. Anthrax powder was identified in at least five letters sent to Florida, New York City and Washington, DC. All the contaminated letters were mailed from Trenton, New Jersey. The fatalities resulting from the mailed anthrax spores extended to other states such as Virginia and Connecticut besides those given above (Zubay, 2005). Individuals with access to laboratories with anthrax cultures were also investigated. The Ames strain of B. anthracis was used in the attacks. “Interestingly, this strain was not developed on foreign soil, but rather by scientists associated with the USAMRIID” (Zubay, 2005, p.136) the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. This information and the Trenton as origin caused law enforcement to focus on domestic terrorists. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were given the responsibility to prepare a public health bioterrorism preparedness plan for the United States. The plan was prepared in collaboration with individuals and agencies, and it “outlined responsibilities of federal, state and local government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and individual citizens” (Brachman, 2003, pp.109-110). The different components of the plan include detection, diagnosis, investigation, therapy, communication, and training. An individual plan will be required for each bioterrorist event, because of differences in the events. Conclusion This paper has highlighted domestic Islamic terrorism in the United States. The difficulty in defining terrorism, the background and the increasingly critical issue of domestic terrorism have been examined. The evidence indicates that the earlier Bush government, followed by the present Obama government have been exceedingly lax in eliminating Jihadist forces from the country, particularly necessitated after the events of September 11th, 2001. There have been several further attacks by Islamic terrorists, some brutally successful and some failed attempts. The Muslims, most of whom are born and raised in the United States, are proving to be concealed dangers waiting to destroy the American people, to fullfill the dictates of their ideologies against the West. They are rapidly establishing militancy training camps, as well as mosques and schools for teaching their violent ideologies against non-Muslims, across rural America. It is concluded that the Obama government has to take immediate action against the extensive threats posed by domestic terrorism, and implement urgent initiatives to counter the increasing issue. This is required to be prioritized by law enforcement and other agencies. References Biddle, S. (2002). War aims and war termination. In J.R. Martin (Ed.), Defeating terrorism: Strategic issue analyses (pp.7-12). Carlyle Barracks, Pennsylvania: Strategic Studies Institute. Bjelopera, J.P. (2012 May). The domestic terrorist threat: Background and issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R42536.pdf Brachman, P. S. (2003). The public health response to the anthrax epidemic. In B. S. Levy, & V. W. Sidel (Eds.), Terrorism and public health: A balanced approach to strengthening systems and protecting people (pp.101-117). New York: Oxford University Press.. Esposito, J.L. (1996). Jihad: The struggle for Islam. In W.S. Green, & J. Neusner (Eds.), The religion factor: An introduction to how religion matters (pp.130-148). Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press. Esposito, J.L. (2003). Unholy war: Terror in the name of Islam. New York: Oxford University Press. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation). (2003 February). US Code of Federal Regulations. Justice Department. Retrieved from: < http://www.fbi.gov/publish/terror/terrusa.html> Herridge, C. (2012). The next wave: On the hunt for Al Qaeda’s American recruits. New York: Crown Publishing Group. Heymann, P.B. (1998). Terrorism and America: A commonsense strategy for a democratic society. Cambridge, Massachussetts: MIT Press. Katz, R. D. (2001). Friendly fire: The mandatory military anthrax vaccination program. Duke Law Journal, 50(6), 1835-1865. PRC (Pew Research Center) Report. (2011). The Future of the Global Muslim Population: Projections for 2010-2030. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1872/muslim-population-projections-worldwide-fast-growth Ronczkowski, M.R. (2004). Terrorism and organized hate crime: Intelligence gathering, analysis, and investigations. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. Stakelbeck, E. (2011). The terrorist next door: How the government is deceiving you about the Islamic Threat. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing. Stohl, M. (1979). The politics of terrorism. New York: Marcel Dekker Publications. Trippon, J. M. (2002). The anthrax scare: Tips for leaders. Military Review, 82(2), 18-23. White, J.R. (2003). Terrorism: An introduction. Edition 4. Pennsylvania: Wadsworth Thomas Learning. Zubay, G. (2005). Agents of bioterrorism: Pathogens and their weaponization. New York: Columbia University Press. Read More