'It is serious and intense': white supremacist domestic terror threat looms large in US
By: Ed Pilkington (the Guardian)
From the frequency of attacks to the scope of ambition, racist terror groups
- encouraged by the president,
are showing unparalleled activity in the modern era
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
stands in front of the governor’s office after protesters occupied the state capitol building in Lansing, Michigan, on 30 April 2020.
Seth Herald/Reuters
On 6 October Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of homeland security, released his department's annual assessment of violent threats to the nation. Analysts didn't have to dig deep into the assessment to discover its alarming content.
In a foreword, Wolf wrote that he was "particularly concerned about white supremacist violent extremists who have been exceptionally lethal in their abhorrent, targeted attacks in recent years. [They] seek to force ideological change in the United States through violence, death, and destruction."
Two days later, the FBI swooped. It arrested 13 rightwing extremists who had allegedly been plotting to carry out a range of attacks in Michigan, including the kidnapping of the Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer.
Later revelations revealed that a group of anti-government paramilitaries that included some of those arrested had also discussed kidnapping the governor of Virginia.
The double strike, just days apart, of the threat assessment and the Michigan plot arrests marked an important moment in America's tortured history of racist terrorism. US authorities appeared not only to have woken up finally to the extent of the white supremacist threat but were actually doing something about it.
As the FBI director, Christopher Wray, told Congress in February, "racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists" have become the "primary source of ideologically motivated lethal incidents" in the US. The danger overshadowed the jihadist threat that has dominated the security debate since 9/11.
Last year was the deadliest on record for domestic extremist violence since the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995. White supremacists were responsible for most of that bloodshed in 2019 - 39 out of 48 deaths, including 23 people who died at the hands of an anti-Hispanic racist in El Paso, Texas, and a Jewish worshipper murdered at Poway Synagogue in California.
The makeshift memorial for victims of the shooting at the
Cielo Vista Mall Walmart in El Paso, Texas, on 6 August 2019.
Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images
"The threat is serious and intense," said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a terrorism and extremism expert at Brookings. "It is by far the most serious domestic danger in the US on many levels - the frequency of attacks, the level of recruitment, the scope of ambition of the groups and the wider political capital they are building."
If 2019 was the deadliest year in a quarter of a century for domestic terrorism in America, 2020 is shaping up to be the year that white supremacy spreads its wings. Groups are showing a degree of confidence unparalleled in the modern era.
Agitators have seized the dual opportunities of the coronavirus pandemic and the Black Lives Matter protests to come out of the shadows and on to the streets. Even before the start of the pandemic, they were flexing their muscles.
Felbab-Brown recalls attending the gun rally in Richmond, Virginia, in January that attracted thousands of extremists carrying semi-automatic assault rifles. "There were militia members from all across the US, Trump supporters with guns, gun rights supporters, all mixing together in large crowds. They drew energy from each other, enlarged their networks and emboldened their thinking - and that was before Covid."
Since the pandemic struck in late January, the rightwing surge has gathered pace. Armed groups of extremists have presented themselves as vigilante security guards, ostensibly protecting property during anti-police brutality protests but in reality confronting peaceful protesters and sowing chaos and violence that has culminated in loss of life.
Though studies have noted the rise of far-right violence in the US as far back as 2007, there is one aspect of today's political climate that makes the current threat level uniquely dangerous: Donald Trump. In the recent presidential debate with Joe Biden he notoriously declined to denounce the extremist group the Proud Boys, exhorting them to "stand back and stand by".
Gun rights advocates attend a rally organized by The Virginia Citizens Defense League near the state capitol building on 20 January in Richmond, Virginia.
Zach Gibson/Getty Images
Trump has issued calls to arms to domestic terrorist groups during pandemic lockdowns in Democratic-controlled states. In April his cry of "Liberate Michigan!" was interpreted by militant groups as an invitation to storm the state capitol with their weapons.
His incendiary "law and order" posture in the wake of largely peaceful protests has had similar effect, as did his defence of Kyle Rittenhouse, the white teenager charged with killing two people amid anti-police brutality protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
On Thursday, and again over the weekend at his rallies, Trump returned to the theme of the enabling of extremists during the NBC town hall in which he effectively endorsed the toxic pedophilia conspiracy theory espoused by QAnon, the rightwing movement identified by the FBI as a potential domestic terrorism threat. The president also renewed his attacks on Whitmer - an astonishingly rash act given the terrorist plots against the Michigan governor.
"Trump's messages to the groups have been egregious and disastrous, on a par with the behavior of Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil and Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines," Felbab-Brown said. "They have been enormously harmful to the US."
Donald Trump participates in an NBC News town hall event
at the Perez Art Museum in Miami on 15 October.
Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images
German has watched too as the groups have grown more methodical and practiced in their tactics over the past four years of Trump approbation. The tacit approval they have received from the Trump administration has rendered them far more effective and dangerous.
"As an undercover agent, I was present in the room when militants tried to convince a recruit to carry out a violent act and either go to the grave or become a fugitive. That's a hard hump to get over. If you feel the president of the United States has authorized you to engage in this activity, it's a lot easier."
With white supremacy showing a new vitality, German is skeptical that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are serious about taking on the threat. The recent acknowledgments of the extent of the danger from Wolf and Wray are a step in the right direction, but much more urgency is needed.
"I want to see it in data. I want to see the arrests, the investigations, I want to know what the FBI is actually doing. I suspect the data would show that there have been a lot of deaths caused by white supremacists, but disproportionately few investigations," German said.
The FBI's use of resources tells its own story. The agency divides its counter-terrorism pie up 80 to 20: 80% goes on fighting international terrorism, 20% domestic.
An armed civilian stands on a roof during protests on 25 August over the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Tayfun CoskunAnadolu Agency/via Getty Images
At least at the federal level, the FBI is having some success in infiltrating extremist groups as the arrests of the alleged Michigan kidnap plotters attested. The record among state and local law enforcement looks far less impressive.
Among local police forces, the pattern is less likely to be infiltration of far-right groups by officers than the other way round - extremists are inveigling themselves into police forces. German's work for the Brennan Center, drawing on FBI policy documents, has pointed out that white supremacist and anti-government groups often have "active links" with law enforcement officials.
Yet the justice department has no national strategy for spotting and removing white supremacist police officers.
On Thursday, armed members of the Boogaloo Bois - extremists agitating for a second civil war - illegally assembled outside the police headquarters in Newport News, Virginia. Instead of arresting the men for violating a ban on firearms on city property, the police chief handed their leader a bottle of chocolate milk and allowed him to address his ranks through a microphone and sound system that the force provided.
An insight into the world that is being created by this heady combination of a supportive president and fraternizing local police amid the turmoil of the pandemic and a fast-approaching volatile election is afforded by a new podcast from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Baseless takes listeners inside the leadership of the Base, a domestic terror group dedicated to destroying US democracy and sparking a race war that they believe and hope will transform America into a white ethno-state.
Drawing on 83 hours of secret recordings of top leaders inside the Base, including its founder Rinaldo Nazzaro whose true identity was revealed by the Guardian in January, the podcast conveys with chilling intimacy the scale of the white supremacists' ambitions.
Armed Boogaloo Boy protesters led by Mike Dunn holding a banner during a demonstration against new firearm restrictions.
Chad Martin/Sopa Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Promising applicants are then invited into the "vetting room" in which a panel of five or six Base extremists, headed by Nazzaro, quiz them through an encrypted phone app. If they pass that stage, they are then given a task such as posting flyers around schools and college campuses that say "Save your race, join the Base"; and "Learn, train, fight, organize".
The Base perceives itself not so much as an organization, but as a web of like-minded violent extremists. "We see ourselves more of a network," Nazzaro is heard saying on the tapes.
But the one quality above all others that the terrorists crave is military experience. One in five of the 100 individuals who make an appearance on the recordings have had combat training as former or serving military personnel.
"This is a clear target," said Jamila Paksima, co-producer of the Baseless podcast. "They are looking for people with military experience who can then train other recruits. So the US government is equipping people with the skills of warfare that are then potentially being turned back against the American people."
Tags
Who is online
75 visitors
Nutcases.
Nutcases with guns.
Nutcases with guns and the stated intent to use them.
These nutcases have always been around but have really crawled out of the woodwork and in greater numbers ever since President Obamas' election and after that with this farce of a tRump 'presidency' who have been told to 'stand back and stand by'
I'm not worried about isolated and unconnected small groups of right wing patriots. I'm much more concerned with these organized and financed Democrat supported criminals.
Reality is a bridge too far for some.
Good effort, Bob, in finding something that basically tells us that if these fuckers like Boogaloo Bois and Base get their way, we're doomed.
But as you can see, some will turn a blind eye and attempt to deflect to Antifa, BLM, and supposedly Democratic backed criminals. Of course, if one were to ask for proof on that democratic backed criminal allegation, all one will get is more deflection, more lies, and probably insults. Or just crickets
There are more guns than people in the US. I'm worried.
There are some of us good guys that own more than one gun, too.
Unless the military betrays the country (which seems very Improbable), idiots like the Boogaloo Bois haven't a chance... but they could kill a lot of people before going down.
Of course then can. Lord knows what kind of firepower they're carrying. Average Jills like myself have a hand gun or two and maybe a rifle and/or shotgun. These guys probably have 50 caliber tanks in their back yards...
....they won't get past the military, but I do think they may get law enforcement in their pockets and then.....
Yes. It's scary.
Kyle
They seem to only concern themselves with property damage and not dead people
Republicans.
220 000 dead, to get the economy going... which it isn't...
Thanks to the antics of Biden supporters, gun sales have gone through the roof!
Interesting perspective...
He's a murderer?
Please point out the date and time Joe Biden was inaugurated as POTUS
Should have been easy for him while he was holed up in his basement. He could have coached from the cheap seats......................of course we all know how effective Monday morning armchair quarterbacks are......
Biden isn't President. Trump is.
The TWO HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND dead are his. Trying to duck responsibility is cowardice.
Seriously?
You don't remember Trump's denial? Allow me to help you:
ok...allegedly
better?
Would you kindly point out where I said Biden had a plan?
talk about putting words in people's mouths...sheesh!
The countries that applied the measures that you are mocking came through with far fewer deaths than we did.
Compared to other leaders, Trump's results are terrible.
Those other leaders followed experts' advice... exactly what Trump despises.
Trump owns his failure.
Joe Biden wasn't the one briefed in January and knew how deadly the virus was and did nothing. Joe Biden wasn't the one who hid the truth from the American people while advising some Wallstreet investors of the pending pandemic. Joe Biden didn't try and silence the CDC and the NIH and force them to capitulate to the administrations whims instead of letting them speak for themselves. Joe Biden wasn't the one who refused to wear masks, floated dangerous treatments such as injecting detergents or kept claiming the virus would just "go away, like a miracle". Joe Biden wasn't the one who claimed he didn't tell the American people the truth because he didn't want to "panic" people.
Joe Biden would have done the exact opposite of what this inept moron in the white house has done when it came to the pandemic. He would have set the example by wearing a mask himself, as he's done since it was recommended by the CDC and NIH. He wouldn't have hidden the truth from the American people, he knows we are strong enough to handle it and would have worked together to mitigate this pandemic by instituting the real recommendations from health experts instead of downplaying the threat and dismissing smart practices such as mask wearing and social distancing. By doing so they would have saved tens of thousands of American lives. But sadly, we did not have such a competent leader like Joe Biden in the white house earlier this year, we had the king of incompetence running things and now have over 220,000 dead Americans and over 8 million infected.
And even now, the inept Presidents approach to Covid has morphed from complete inaction and downplaying to pushing "herd immunity" by infection, the most dangerous possible response to a pandemic which almost guarantees millions more dead Americans. Sane patriotic Americans are disgusted with this President and his monumental incompetence which is why there is a tsunami of blue coming this election cycle which is going to wash away this deadly divisive conservative Republican regime.
I don't debate Flat-Earthers.
There are a lot of "would haves" in your response. Supposedly Biden had a plan, according to his website, early on. But can't find the date of that supposed plan anywhere on the site. But wait, there's more!!!!!!
All those recommendations that Europe knows that stopped the virus in it's tracks.
Oh wait...
You watch too much bad TV.
Yeah, I was promised a plan from February that no one could ever actually delivered.
Seriously, Sean?
Are you really going there again?
Sean... Sean...
Can't you do any better than this?
When Kyle shot his victims?
Can't you? Politicizing a virus is tawdry, especially when you can't make a coherent argument in support the partisan red meat you dish out for ignorant liberals.
France has more reported cases per capita right now than America has at any point, with eight months to prepare. Do you blame Macron for every death in France?
Of course.
Do you know how many (few) there have been?
[removed]
You made up everything in that post . . . unreal.
Folks chased after killer Rittenhouse after he killed someone in cold blood. Killer Rittenhouse didn't have any injuries despite allegedly being hit in the head with a skateboard.
Ah, so you hate science. More of a blame a witch, blame the moon, blame a leader when bad things happen type of person.
It's not prehistoric times anymore, educated man has come to grips with the idea that some things are not within their power to control. There's a psychological issue on that score you might want to look into.
Do you know how many (few) there have been?
Yes, an inordinate amount of officially registered cases die in France, which means they aren't really catching the spread of the virus in their official count. Or you can argue French healthcare is preposterously bad, but I don't think that's the reason for the high death rate.
On a per capita basis there were more deaths In France the last couple days then in the USA. And, of course, that doesn't event take into account the incredible number of new infections that have occurred in the last week and will cause skyrocketing death counts in the next few weeks.
You really are something, Sean
One thing I'm not is an unhinged partisan who cobbles tries to exploit a virus for partisan reasons.
It's not Macron's, or any other European leader's, fault that the virus is raging out of control in their borders. No one controls luck, geography, demographics or the weather.
Might they KILL as many as Trump has? 220,000 to date and counting!
How on earth does someone dispute something they don't even look at?
I didn't realize Joe Biden was getting security updates in January as the President was, but apparently you expect him to have known the seriousness and that it was airborne at the same time.
There are a lot of "would haves" because Biden was not the President at the time and wasn't being briefed on the seriousness of the virus as Trump was. Also, the question I was replying to asked "what he would have done to save the US".
I don't trust anything you or your buddies post. Especially something from the NY Post.
Everything you said was a lie.
He never posted the fucking video until I accused him correctly of lying.
Looks the video is right there.
Have you seen it?
Of course not.
Again, he never posted a video of anything until I correctly accused him of lying.
Again, the video is right there.
You know--the video you haven't looked at.
Again, he never posted any video, until I correctly accused him of making shit up.
So the video shows that the THIRD person he shot was a 'good guy with a guy' trying to stop the 'bad guy with a gun'.
Okay. So you claimed it is all lies but of course, can't support that.
And the video is there NOW--the one you still haven't seen!
The video wasn't there until I correctly accused him of lying.
Like I said, goose was lying
Okay. So you claimed it is all lies but of course, can't support that.
And the video is there NOW--the one you still haven't seen!
But it wasn't there then, when he lied.
it is there now.
Cheers!
But it wasn't there when he initially lied.
You can have the last word, for now.
Time to go take a trump.
I watched that trashy propaganda piece with lots of disparate videos of different protests and riots as if to prove Rittenhouse rightly feared for his life because of the unarmed man chasing him who he shot four times and then fled the scene and shot several other people when they tried to take the gun from the suspected shooter.
Why not link just the footage of the Rittenhouse incident? Because that would make it look like he was a killer, so let's confuse people by piecing it together with a bunch of other random clips of violence that happened in other States and claim that justifies it! Yeah, that's the ticket! /s
Well the 'bad guy with the gun' was carrying that gun illegally, so there's that...
No one is responsible for a disease's existence.
National leaders are responsible for the consequences. Two hundred twenty thousand dead, in Trump's case.
Macron has dithered a bit. Thirty-four thousand dead. Proportionally, about half Trump's carnage.
Want to cite Ardern?
that little turd really had no business being there and where's the proof that he was defending himself?
Before you go asking Tessy questions, why don't you answer mine first?
I knew it was highly edited/doctored which is why I didn't waste about 12 minutes of my time on the lies.
Here's a hint, I don't answer to you or your lies.
"He shouldn't have..." but he did. He killed people. If he hadn't had a gun, he wouldn't have killed anyone.
Duh.
“If he hadn't had a gun, he wouldn't have killed anyone.”
because guns are the only way a person can kill another? 🙄
Did you pay any attention at all to that incident?
Do you think Kyle would have behaved as he did if didn't have a gun?
Seriously?
“I don't understand.”
The video that was doctored? The eyewitness that is probably lying? Do you know how often prosecutors actually rely on eyewitnesses?
And he's 17 years old. He can't legally own a gun
Yes, it IS 100% accurate. A Class A Misdemeanor is a criminal offense, i.e. ILLEGAL.
BTW, section 2:
(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.
That goes without saying . . .
That's the point I was making. There is a higher penalty by the person who gave him the weapon if the firearm is discharged. BTW, you highlighted the 'any person' part of the statute so WHY did you falsely insert 'adult'? No such predicate exists in the statute.
There is NO predicate in that statute that states that 'any person' has to be an adult goose. NONE.
The statute is clear and it doesn't matter what I think, it matters what the statute says and means.
I'm pretty fucking sure that the legislature would have used the SAME word you did if they meant for that section of the statute to include ONLY adults.
BTW, in the future, if you have a question, PLEASE use the proper punctuation.
Hint: It's a question mark [?].
I never said you tried to change the statute goose so I can only wonder why are you breaking your arm patting yourself on the back. You're the one that misread the statute and insisted that 'any person' means an adult, not I.
Then you proceed to post argle-bargle.
I never heard anything about these allegedly violent right wing groups until a couple. weeks ago...here on NT.
that's because you don't pay attention
Centennial Park bomber, Oklahoma Bomber, Abortion Clinic bombers, Black Church Bombers, Synagogue shooters, Amem Militia from Texas ... there are hundreds of Right-Wing, Gun Rights groups, primarily from the South, who believe that they, and they alone, are the only ones that can save America from itself.
Unfortunately, these mental midgets are unable to take care of their own family. The insane have always suffered from delusions, but, they were never permitted to parade around "armed to the teeth" until Republicans started taking HUGE DONATIONS from Arms Manufactures.
"Gun Rights," my Tukas. It is all about power, money, and dominance.
So you missed the whole Charlottesville thingy and all of their 'marches' after that?
wake me up when they start rioting n the streets and burning innocent peoples businesses... tks
So militia members are now white supremist? Agitators? Extremists? Far right terrorists?
If one is to lump all the ills of the world into one category use the term militia? .. cuz .. they like themselves some gunz? ....... Think I even read a comment along the lines of 'lunatic fringe militia misfits' ... I get it fear sells .. but I thought it was the far right extremists / white supremacist racist bastards dealing in the fear mongering Bob .. not the left of center UK tabloids...!
Missed you too Bob
"So militia members are now white supremist? Agitators? Extremists? Far right terrorists?"
Yes, Yes, yes, yes
Actually no, as was pointed out in another seed. But those black militiamen are making the white boys piss their pants
"Actually no, as was pointed out in another seed. But those black militiamen are making the white boys piss their pants"
My mistake. Are they tRump supporters?
Since I never check out any links from certain posters, are these black militiamen in response to all the killings/shootings/unarmed of their brethren/their wives/their mothers/their children/their family members/friends/loved ones and in response to all the white supremacists/right wing/exremists/domestic terrorists?
idk
I guess you could say it was a rhetorical question then. I'll check out a link from someone I trust then.
lol
ok
I didn't see the rest of your post before I posted my "idk".
I do believe that this black militia is in response to the shootings of unarmed black people. They call themselves NFAC. I'm not sure what AC stands for but I know that NF stands for Not Fucking. I think it means that they're not going to take it any more.
update: Not Fucking Around Coalition
It's up to the cops, really. They either continue to use a double standard, with deadly results, or they do their job right.
I fear that if there are just a few more unjustifiable deaths... random cops will pay.
No biggie, I added on to it, edited, after I asked if they were tRump supporters, but that makes sense to me, enough is enough.
No. It's a lucid observation. Abuse eventually draws reaction.
Like to see you try to sell that crap to these guys:
They might not take too kindly to you calling them white supremacist, agitating, extremists, far right terrorists.
You talking to me?
No!
That was supposed to be a reply to post 8!
LOL!
I used it in post 7 expressing my irritation at 'militia' being the new catch all phrase of the left anti everything gun people : ) Just had to check : )
Well of course not, DUH, John and I are referring to the white supremacists, white agitators, white extremists, white far right terrorists that the 'president' has enabled - 'Stand Back and Stand By'
Not the militia you are referring to. DUH. . .
Uh, huh.
Sure you were.