FBI: majority of domestic terrorism arrests tied to white supremacy

[MillCreek]

https://www.theroot.com/fbi-director-majority-of-domestic-terrorism-cases-tied-1836642321?

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/454338-fbis-wray-says-majority-of-domestic-terrorism-arrests-this-year

Interesting testimony from the FBI director on most domestic terrorism arrests this fiscal year are linked to white supremacy.

[Ben]

Doesn't this have a great deal to do with who is defined as a domestic terrorist, and how equally the law is applied?

My understanding is that antifa is still not officially a domestic terror organization. Plus they seem to be able to get away with a lot without being arrested (ref: Portland).

[TommyGunn]

CURSE YOU, TRUMP!!!!!!!!!


I don't doubt skinheads, neonazi nutz,  and some other whacko right wingers are out there committing mayhem.

We largely know these groups.

The fanatic Jihadis are out there, but being hidden by "political correctness" (you're an evil bigot if you think all Muslims are jihadis!) and antifa is also out there....hiding behind masks beating people with chains while liberal mayors order the police to stand by and watch.

In truth,  I would not care to guess which side has worse extremists.  I don't trust the media on this subject... and besides, molotov cocktails and bicycle lock chains work equally well for both sides anyway.

[WLJ]

Doesn't this have a great deal to do with who is defined as a domestic terrorist, and how equally the law is applied?

My understanding is that antifa is still not officially a domestic terror organization. Plus they seem to be able to get away with a lot without being arrested (ref: Portland).

Don't forget the Dems keep labeling the NRA a terrorist group

[Ben]

Don't forget the Dems keep labeling the NRA a terrorist group

Also I would think the "hate crime" category is going to be somewhat biased. I rarely see "hate crime" charges for people of color on white crime. I'd be curious what the actual percentages by race/gender/ethnicity populations are.

[Ron]

How many of these white supremacists are felons who became white supremacist in jail I wonder?

I'm not sure I've ever met a white supremacist in person before.

Of course as a white, Christian, hetero male who "identifies" as a US Nationalist I'm sure many on the left would classify me as a supremacist. Especially considering my antipathy toward our current immigration policies dealing with legal and illegal immigrants.  

[MechAg94]

Doesn't this have a great deal to do with who is defined as a domestic terrorist, and how equally the law is applied?

My understanding is that antifa is still not officially a domestic terror organization. Plus they seem to be able to get away with a lot without being arrested (ref: Portland).

That was my first thought.  In order for that testimony to be worth anything, you would have to assume the "terrorism" label is applied equally and it certainly is not.

[cordex]

Glad they got them off the street.  I have no love for white supremacists.

I do wonder if the "majority" of arrests that were classified as white supremacist terrorists was more or less than about 72%.

[Perd Hapley]

Also I would think the "hate crime" category is going to be somewhat biased. I rarely see "hate crime" charges for people of color on white crime. I'd be curious what the actual percentages by race/gender/ethnicity populations are.

"People of color"? Are you woke now?

[Ben]

"People of color"? Are you woke now?

It was just a faster way to write, "all races not not white". Though I guess I could have written, "anyone not white". :)

[WLJ]

What terrorist attacks have we had in the past twenty years or so that can be attributed to a white supremacist or WS group?
Closest I'm coming up with is that kid with the Moe haircut (can't remember his name) that shot up the black church. But even then IIRC I think he had white supremacist leanings and was not actually part of a WS group if that matters.

[zxcvbob]

What terrorist attacks have we had in the past twenty years or so that can be attributed to a white supremacist or WS group?
Closest I'm coming up with is that kid with the Moe haircut (can't remember his name) that shot up the black church. But even then IIRC I think he had white supremacist leanings and was not actually part of a WS group if that matters.

Was Timothy McVeigh a skinhead?  He was some kind of rightwing nutjob so is probably being included, and he killed enough people to skew the statistics if they count victims rather than perps.

[cordex]

What terrorist attacks have we had in the past twenty years or so that can be attributed to a white supremacist or WS group?
Closest I'm coming up with is that kid with the Moe haircut (can't remember his name) that shot up the black church. But even then IIRC I think he had white supremacist leanings and was not actually part of a WS group if that matters.

There were several foiled White Supremacist plots to kill Barack Obama, and have been a number of acts of White Supremacist violence, although thankfully most have been pretty poorly executed.  Hard to argue against these being considered terrorism or attempted terrorism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville_Unitarian_Universalist_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_bombing_attempt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Sikh_temple_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overland_Park_Jewish_Community_Center_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Timothy_Caughman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Portland_train_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Blaze_Bernstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poway_synagogue_shooting

I haven't gone through these in great detail so it's possible some don't qualify.

As far as "not actually part of a WS group", I don't think it matters.  If someone blows up infidels while yelling the Takbir it doesn't matter if they're card carrying members of Al Qaeda it is still Islamist terrorism.

From what I can tell, in recent years white supremacist violence has the quantity, Muslim violence has the body count, and left-wing violence has the tacit support of governments.

[dogmush]

Was Timothy McVeigh a skinhead?  He was some kind of rightwing nutjob so is probably being included, and he killed enough people to skew the statistics if they count victims rather than perps.

Probably not. Even going all the way back to 95 and adding up every little skinhead dustup, I suspect Islam is >50% of terrorist body count in the US.


Honest guess? It says arrests.  I bet white supremacist groups just have shitty OPSEC and are more likely to talk to newish recruits than some of the other big groups. I suspect that the FBI is still having a hard time recruiting from and/or infiltrating the insular non-white fringe groups.

[HankB]

. . . I'm not sure I've ever met a white supremacist in person before . . .

I did exactly once - it was Frank Collin, who was running a small neo-Nazi organization in Chicago. He and a couple of brownshirts were standing on a corner spouting off (with several police officers looking on) as I walked by. He came up to me and tried to give me some of his literature.

I said "<expletive> you, Nazi" and kept walking.

He didn't even blink at that - I think he was getting a lot of similar responses and had gotten used to it.

Last I heard of him was several decades ago - IIRC he was serving time for child molestation.

[brimic]

From what I can tell, in recent years white supremacist violence has the quantity, Muslim violence has the body count, and left-wing violence has the tacit support of governments.

That sounds about right.

[MikeB]

There were several foiled White Supremacist plots to kill Barack Obama, and have been a number of acts of White Supremacist violence, although thankfully most have been pretty poorly executed.  Hard to argue against these being considered terrorism or attempted terrorism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville_Unitarian_Universalist_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_bombing_attempt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Sikh_temple_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overland_Park_Jewish_Community_Center_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Timothy_Caughman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Portland_train_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Blaze_Bernstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poway_synagogue_shooting

I haven't gone through these in great detail so it's possible some don't qualify.

As far as "not actually part of a WS group", I don't think it matters.  If someone blows up infidels while yelling the Takbir it doesn't matter if they're card carrying members of Al Qaeda it is still Islamist terrorism.

From what I can tell, in recent years white supremacist violence has the quantity, Muslim violence has the body count, and left-wing violence has the tacit support of governments.

I don’t think it’s hard to argue with them at all. Just two examples, the Portland Train thing, the guy was just nuts. Questionable how much he was a supremacist vs nuts. Also most often the whole supremacist thing is tied to right wing and that guy was also a sometimes Bernie supporter.

The Charlottesville thing as well is hardly terrorism. He didn’t plan an attack with an agenda, pretty much the definition of terrorism and instead he used his car as a weapon during an altercation. I’ve never read that he intended to do that ahead of time.

This list is a perfect example of how these types of statistics are formulated. People who wrote these wiki articles are more likely than not to label these white supremacist terror attacks based on their own biases.

[cordex]

I don’t think it’s hard to argue with them at all. Just two examples, the Portland Train thing, the guy was just nuts. Questionable how much he was a supremacist vs nuts. Also most often the whole supremacist thing is tied to right wing and that guy was also a sometimes Bernie supporter.

The guy defined himself as a non-racist white nationalist.  Sure he was nuts - many terrorists are and have been nuts or stupid, or both.  Being nuts doesn't mean you can't be a terrorist.

The Charlottesville thing as well is hardly terrorism. He didn’t plan an attack with an agenda, pretty much the definition of terrorism and instead he used his car as a weapon during an altercation. I’ve never read that he intended to do that ahead of time.

What kind of BS definition of terrorism is that?  For something to be considered terrorism you think it has to be planned?  And what altercation was the guy in before driving through the crowd?  If there hadn't been so many cases of Islamic terrorists driving vehicles into groups of their political opponents I might be a little more open to your interpretation.  The *expletive deleted*che in this case called himself a Nazi and then rammed a group of people (many probably douches too) protesting Nazis.  Unless I've got the fundamentals of the case wrong that's good enough for me.

If a Muslim drove his car into a group of Catholic nuns because seeing them enraged him as he was driving past would you be as strident in calling it "just an unplanned hit and run"?

This list is a perfect example of how these types of statistics are formulated. People who wrote these wiki articles are more likely than not to label these white supremacist terror attacks based on their own biases.

Again, are you as critical about cases labeled as Islamic terror?

Look, if ignored the Pulse nightclub shooter's repeated assertions that he killed people because of Islam, and you nitpicked when he was labeled as Islamic terror because maybe he was gay and had an alternate motive, fine.  If you start crossing off suicide bombers with mental illnesses or eco-terrorists with low IQs because they can't be called terrorists if they're nuts or stupid, okay.  If you're at least internally consistent then that's great.  You can spend all day picking the fly poop out of the pepper.  Otherwise, you're doing what you are charging others with - namely changing your interpretation of events based on your own biases to prove the point you already believe.

I don't like people who use violence to further their political ends, and it doesn't hurt me to call them terrorists whether they're Nazi, Muslim, Aunty Fah or whatever else.

[Ben]

I don't like people who use violence to further their political ends, and it doesn't hurt me to call them terrorists whether they're Nazi, Muslim, Aunty Fah or whatever else.

I know you were responding to MikeB, but for my part, I agree with the above. The problem I have with these kinds of reports is who is doing the labeling.

Much like "racism", it often seems "white on X" crime is labeled white supremacism / hate crime or whatever nutty KKK stuff there is, while "X on white", or even "XYZ on XYZ" crime is simply labeled as plain old crime. "White on X" violent crime is still a crime and should be punished appropriately, and if it can be shown to be white supremacism and/or terrorism, call it that. However they need to do the same if it's "Antifa on X" crime, and I'm not sure they're doing that. I see a strong bias towards calling crime by white males that may simply have conservative (vs supremacist) values domestic terrorism/hate crimes. One could say the same for someone who happens to be Muslim committing a violent act against someone as a simple crime, vs as a political statement, but still being labeled an Islamic terrorist, even if his crime was killing the guy his wife cheated on him with. 

[MikeB]

The guy defined himself as a non-racist white nationalist.  Sure he was nuts - many terrorists are and have been nuts or stupid, or both.  Being nuts doesn't mean you can't be a terrorist.
What kind of BS definition of terrorism is that?  For something to be considered terrorism you think it has to be planned?  And what altercation was the guy in before driving through the crowd?  If there hadn't been so many cases of Islamic terrorists driving vehicles into groups of their political opponents I might be a little more open to your interpretation.  The *expletive deleted*che in this case called himself a Nazi and then rammed a group of people (many probably douches too) protesting Nazis.  Unless I've got the fundamentals of the case wrong that's good enough for me.

If a Muslim drove his car into a group of Catholic nuns because seeing them enraged him as he was driving past would you be as strident in calling it "just an unplanned hit and run"?
Again, are you as critical about cases labeled as Islamic terror?

Look, if ignored the Pulse nightclub shooter's repeated assertions that he killed people because of Islam, and you nitpicked when he was labeled as Islamic terror because maybe he was gay and had an alternate motive, fine.  If you start crossing off suicide bombers with mental illnesses or eco-terrorists with low IQs because they can't be called terrorists if they're nuts or stupid, okay.  If you're at least internally consistent then that's great.  You can spend all day picking the fly poop out of the pepper.  Otherwise, you're doing what you are charging others with - namely changing your interpretation of events based on your own biases to prove the point you already believe.

I don't like people who use violence to further their political ends, and it doesn't hurt me to call them terrorists whether they're Nazi, Muslim, Aunty Fah or whatever else.

Yes, I am as critical of cases labeled as Islamic terror. To qualify as a terrorist attack, there needs to be a plan and a goal, not just some nutjob that snaps. Or with the Charlottesville example someone that used their car as a weapon during an altercation. Unless i completely missed something, that guy did not go there that day intending to run over a crowed with his car. He was trying to leave and was surrounded and then decided to use the car as a weapon. He should have backed up instead if possible, but it was an altercation not a pre-planned terror attack. He was mostly surrounded and had people beating on his car. He may have been a white supremacist, but to call that a terror attack is some stretch.

[MechAg94]

There were several foiled White Supremacist plots to kill Barack Obama, and have been a number of acts of White Supremacist violence, although thankfully most have been pretty poorly executed.  Hard to argue against these being considered terrorism or attempted terrorism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville_Unitarian_Universalist_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_bombing_attempt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Sikh_temple_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overland_Park_Jewish_Community_Center_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Timothy_Caughman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Portland_train_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Blaze_Bernstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poway_synagogue_shooting

I haven't gone through these in great detail so it's possible some don't qualify.

As far as "not actually part of a WS group", I don't think it matters.  If someone blows up infidels while yelling the Takbir it doesn't matter if they're card carrying members of Al Qaeda it is still Islamist terrorism.

From what I can tell, in recent years white supremacist violence has the quantity, Muslim violence has the body count, and left-wing violence has the tacit support of governments.

I don't think white supremacist incidents are non-existent.  I just think there are plenty of other incidents that happen every year that would be left wing communists, islamic terror, non-white racism, or other.  IMO, there could have been dozens or hundreds of Antifa arrests had anyone been interested and had they not had protection for local politicritters.  Another thought is how much black on white crime could be considered terrorism?  I think a lot more than most people think.  

An example of the bias of the FBI is the Fort Hood shooting.  They never did classify that as terrorism when that was exactly what it was.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

The U.S. government declined requests from survivors and family members of the slain to categorize the Fort Hood shooting as an act of terrorism, or motivated by militant Islamic religious convictions.

[cordex]

I know you were responding to MikeB, but for my part, I agree with the above. The problem I have with these kinds of reports is who is doing the labeling.

Much like "racism", it often seems "white on X" crime is labeled white supremacism / hate crime or whatever nutty KKK stuff there is, while "X on white", or even "XYZ on XYZ" crime is simply labeled as plain old crime. "White on X" violent crime is still a crime and should be punished appropriately, and if it can be shown to be white supremacism and/or terrorism, call it that. However they need to do the same if it's "Antifa on X" crime, and I'm not sure they're doing that. I see a strong bias towards calling crime by white males that may simply have conservative (vs supremacist) values domestic terrorism/hate crimes. One could say the same for someone who happens to be Muslim committing a violent act against someone as a simple crime, vs as a political statement, but still being labeled an Islamic terrorist, even if his crime was killing the guy his wife cheated on him with. 

Absolutely.  I think on "our side" there are people are doing the same thing, though.  Wrong both ways.

Yes, I am as critical of cases labeled as Islamic terror.

I'll take your word for that.  I don't recall you ever nitpicking something labeled an Islamist terror attack but it's possible I missed it.

To qualify as a terrorist attack, there needs to be a plan and a goal, not just some nutjob that snaps.

That's still BS and I have yet to see a legitimate definition of a terrorist attack that requires planning as a defining attribute.  A goal, sure, but that goal can be as simple as "strike fear into the hearts of those with whom I disagree".

Or with the Charlottesville example someone that used their car as a weapon during an altercation. Unless i completely missed something, that guy did not go there that day intending to run over a crowed with his car. He was trying to leave and was surrounded and then decided to use the car as a weapon. He should have backed up instead if possible, but it was an altercation not a pre-planned terror attack. He was mostly surrounded and had people beating on his car. He may have been a white supremacist, but to call that a terror attack is some stretch.

The video I've seen and the reports I've read did not seem to show any of that although I agree he probably didn't go there intending to drive over people.  

Some jerks were blocking an intersection as part of a protest against the Unite the Right rally.  The *expletive deleted*che driver was behind a couple of other vehicles.  He did in fact back up (reportedly for more than a block and well out of the area of the protesters) but instead of turning around and driving away he then accelerated into the crowd and the vehicles in front of him.  The decision to back up - leaving whatever dangers the crowd is alleged to have posed - and then accelerate into the crowd gives a lot of intent.  If you are dead set against it being terror, fine, we can disagree on that, but I still get the feeling you're being extra lenient in this case and I don't see why any of us should be.  Sometimes the enemy of my enemy is just another enemy.

[cordex]

I don't think white supremacist incidents are non-existent.  I just think there are plenty of other incidents that happen every year that would be left wing communists, islamic terror, non-white racism, or other.  IMO, there could have been dozens or hundreds of Antifa arrests had anyone been interested and had they not had protection for local politicritters.  Another thought is how much black on white crime could be considered terrorism?  I think a lot more than most people think.  

An example of the bias of the FBI is the Fort Hood shooting.  They never did classify that as terrorism when that was exactly what it was.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

I absolutely agree.

[MikeB]

That's still BS and I have yet to see a legitimate definition of a terrorist attack that requires planning as a defining attribute.  A goal, sure, but that goal can be as simple as "strike fear into the hearts of those with whom I disagree".

Some jerks were blocking an intersection as part of a protest against the Unite the Right rally.  The *expletive deleted*che driver was behind a couple of other vehicles.  He did in fact back up (reportedly for more than a block and well out of the area of the protesters) but instead of turning around and driving away he then accelerated into the crowd and the vehicles in front of him.  The decision to back up - leaving whatever dangers the crowd is alleged to have posed - and then accelerate into the crowd gives a lot of intent.  If you are dead set against it being terror, fine, we can disagree on that, but I still get the feeling you're being extra lenient in this case and I don't see why any of us should be.  Sometimes the enemy of my enemy is just another enemy.

Sure the goal can be that simple, but I think for it to really qualify as terrorism there has to be a pre-mediated attempt. I don't think the couple minutes he spent in the car dealing with the protesters is enough time for it to be  pre-mediated plan vs. a violent reaction to circumstances.

If I recall the video correctly, they weren't just protesting, but throwing things at his car and whatnot. Yes he should have kept backing up if he could and maybe not done anything and waited for police. We have all argued here before though that a protest or mob doesn't have the right to block people in public spaces. We've even seen people dragged out of cars by mobs. I don't think he should have done what he did, and should have been convicted of assault, murder, etc. It clearly wasn't a terrorist attach though, he didn't go there that day planning to kill people to further a political cause.

I certainly don't defend his beliefs or actions. I think he was stupid to even be there, but again not a real terrorist attack. It's like when the anti-gun people call a shooting across the street from a school between gang members as a school shooting.

[brimic]

Sure the goal can be that simple, but I think for it to really qualify as terrorism there has to be a pre-mediated attempt. I don't think the couple minutes he spent in the car dealing with the protesters is enough time for it to be  pre-mediated plan vs. a violent reaction to circumstances.

If I recall the video correctly, they weren't just protesting, but throwing things at his car and whatnot. Yes he should have kept backing up if he could and maybe not done anything and waited for police. We have all argued here before though that a protest or mob doesn't have the right to block people in public spaces. We've even seen people dragged out of cars by mobs. I don't think he should have done what he did, and should have been convicted of assault, murder, etc. It clearly wasn't a terrorist attach though, he didn't go there that day planning to kill people to further a political cause.

I certainly don't defend his beliefs or actions. I think he was stupid to even be there, but again not a real terrorist attack. It's like when the anti-gun people call a shooting across the street from a school between gang members as a school shooting.

Iirc, a protestor struck his car with a baseball bat or similar club near the tail light before he stomped the gas and rammed it into the crowd.
Honestly, if he weren’t there to protest and cause trouble to begin with and was just a passerby who was threatened by rioters, I don’t think he could be convicted of anything.