Talk:Domestic terrorism in the United States

Possible areas

Oklahoma City,
the Klan,
abolitionists,

I thought to include both the Sacking of Lawrence and the Pottawatomie Massacre, but it looks to me like they were nearer to open guerilla warfare than terrorism.

tar-and-feathering loyalists during the Revolution.
massacres of Native Americans
Native American raiding parties
1890-1900 anarchists
left-wing 1960's
Puerto Rican separatists
radical environmentalists
80's right-wing militants
animal rights
anti-globalization anarchists

Possible topics

leaderless resistance
counterterrorism
media coverage
morality in historiography

I think we need to agree on a definition of terrorism and verify that any act fits that definition. Otherwise, we should be careful to say who says it's terrorism. I imagine we'd all like to avoid making another 'some say/it has been alleged' innuendo page. If any facts are in dispute we'll want to present a blanced account. I think this could be a very good page. Tom Harrison ^{User_talk:Tom harrison (talk)} 17:38, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a definition is needed. For more recent times, I think it is safe to operate under the rules laid out by the Department of Justice or, where applicable, in statutory law. I think that's fairly reasonable, no matter how distasteful I find the source. (Patriot Act. Ergh.)

Quoting the FBI, it's “the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

This is an invaluable primary source for the past twenty years. There is also a fair bit of valuable material from the Close Up Foundation, which is pretty reliably non-partisan. (A lot of it is at a middle-school level, as well, which can be helpful in an encyclopedia article.)

Historically, that's a bit harder. Perhaps looking through journal articles would be of value? If we can find a basic academic consensus on what events in American history are considered acts of domestic terrorism, we'd be one step closer.

Here are a few events that I would consider members of this category:

The assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and William McKinley. (Overt political motivations are known for these acts. Kennedy? Not so much.)

Unabomber is a given.

Racial violence outside the Klan should be examined. All sorts of resources here. And, of course, the SPLC Intelligence Project.

The Beltway snipers. There were political motives behind the shootings.

Various actions of the Puerto Rican nationalist movement. (JFK bombing, et cetera).

The midwestern pipe-bomb scare of a few years ago. (Right-wing anti-government types.)

I guess we should start with "now" and move backwards, maybe. Tom Lillis 00:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

immigration and the development of "know how" attitudes

Much prevalent and popular American literature which describes North American population encounters with explorers and colonists, as well as with modern immigrants, uses the word "Indians" to describe the native peoples and the word "how" as typical of speech interface. From this comes the interpersonal attitude, especially pronounced among some families, that they learn a lot from foreign visitors and immigrants -- but they still aren't those.

As example, the surname 'Keller' as a speech-sound is a short mental hop to the word 'killer'; and indeed specific indivi-duals and populations actively identify with 'Kellers' as a family who "knows how" to sing the passages in the 'Books of Kells' yet are not those composers/authors neither in ancestry nor culture [i.e., only in latitude]. The mental leap from 'Keller' to 'killer' is so short that active verbal terrorism often results from family adherents, exemplified by call-demand strategies which move directly from 'ask/request' mode of oral delivery to 'demand' type terrorism, and are quite frightening when first encountered [in modern times, usually through the telephone, directly into the inner ear]. Beadtot 01:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC) December 21, 2005 beadtot[reply]

Added Earth Liberation Front (ELF)

Info from the main ELF page

Added Army of God

with information from the main page.

Jewish Defense League

They should really be on here, they comitted several embassy bombings and possibly asassinations domestically and numerous murders abroad.69.9.30.191 06:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By every definition the JDL was a terrorist organization. I have put both attacks and foiled plots by them in the List of terrorist incidents and the Terrorism in the United States list. But were they a domestic one? Their main cause when they were doing attacks within the U.S. was the treatment of Jews in the Soviet Union. I would categorize them as what we would call today “homegrown terrorists”. To me homegrown terrorism is a plot/action by an individual or a group within the U.S.(or whatever country) done for international reasons. The Fort Dix plot done for Jahid is an example . Domestic terrorism is done to change a social or political situation within the United States or policy of the United States Government. All of the actions and groups in the article with the exception of Alpha 66 and possible exception of the anthrax attacks fit that definition. There are no clear definitions or distinctions between the two types of terrorism in media reporting and Wikipedia does not have separate articles for homegrown terrorism Edkollin 07:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about the James-Younger Gang?

With the movie about the assassination of Jesse James coming out this hybrid of traditional criminal gang and terrorists deserves consideration. This gang had many Confederate ex solders and supporters and some of the targets were businesses associated with Union supporters and the Republican Party. Jesse James made populist statements and according to the Wikipedia article on the gang member Archie Clement on election day 1866 led his men into Lexington, Kentucky where they drove Republican voters away from the polls, and secured a Republican defeat Edkollin 20:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to an author who wrote a book on Jesse James and claims he was the forerunner to todays terrorist [1] Edkollin 06:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

School shootings?

Aren't school shootings like Virgina tech or Columbine highschool incidents considered domestic terrorism? 67.5.157.107 (talk) 00:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there has to be a political agenda on the part of the perpetrators. Otherwise, it's just mass murder.Maziotis (talk) 11:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Early 20th Century additions to Notable Acts of Domestic Terrorism

Italian Hall disaster An anti-labor action that is currently the largest unsolved mass murder in US history. Bath School disaster While other circumstances; poor health, financial problems, and possible life long mental health issues, may have been the actual causes for Andrew Kehoe's behavior. The attack he carried was intended to deliver an anti-tax message to the school board and community at large. RCMall (talk) 06:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know we are walking on thin ice, but I don't understand how we could define the actions behind the bath school disaster to be a part of a political act of terror. The anti-tax message is the reason for the personal act of revenge of this man. There isn't at any point an attempt to give an altruistic justification for this action, like the other cases of "terrorism". This is what I mean when I say that this is an act of personal revenge and not an action intended to push a particular political doctrine.

As for the Italian Hall disaster, I understand that there are political reasons involved in the incident. But these were not the cause of the disaster, as being used as motivation for an act of terror, where the use of violence is intended to push a political agenda. The whole incident turn out to be an accident.

I find this somewhat subjective. If you have a different view, please share. I don’t claim to have the best definition of terrorism, by any means.Maziotis (talk) 13:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posse Comitatus

I suggest the addition of 'Posse Comitatus to the list of organizations. See: Posse Comitatus (organization). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.76.95 (talk) 15:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In all reality, the NYC Draft Riots should not be on a list with the Ku Klux Klan and Animal Liberation groups. By that logic you should include Shay's rebellion, or the Whiskey Rebellion.69.112.123.6 (talk) 06:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of the draft riots.

Either put the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion on the list or the Draft Riots weren't terrorism. The Rodney King riots can even be argued to be terrorism by the logic for the draft riots. Basically rebellion and terrorism are very closely linked conceptually, and unless it is carefully delineated, people like whoever put the draft riots on there are merely categorizing any form of reactionary violence as terrorism (rather than revolution, rebellion, or insurrection, or what have you.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.210.77 (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Riots Should be Removed or Many Other Events Added

First of all, Pete Hamill is a journalist that writes for NY's Daily News. His statement implies that all inter-gang violence is Domestic Terrorism, and if that were the case and all events of that type included, this article would completely miss the point. Besides, he's not a political scientist or a scholar.

The definition provided by Jenkins would classify Shay's Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion in particular as acts of Domestic terrorism. I also believe the Draft Riots should be denied inclusion in this article because every other group and event is highly ideologically rooted and their events of terror carefully planned and executed by small numbers of devoted followers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.123.6 (talk) 17:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested additions

Why was the Boston Tea Party Added?

I'd like to at least hear why before suggesting its removal. It's considered in the text to be "direct action," so how is it a "terrorist" act?