THE OTHER TERRORISTS AMONG US

This morning, like every other morning, I woke up, got the children off to school, sat and talked with my husband for a while before he left for work. Like everyone else, I have things in my life that I have to be concerned about, education, household matters, and what’s going on in hotspots around the world. Admittedly, the local school council’s latest agenda, and getting my floors sanded without costing an arm and a leg weigh more heavily on my mind than fanatics in the Middle East or Afghanistan.

It’s not that I’m some self-absorbed ugly American. The order of my daily concerns has more to with the comfort that I feel in knowing that President Bush’s doctrine, is being carried out by the best trained military personnel in the world. I know that our Homeland Security initiatives will thwart any future sneak attacks by foreign evildoers. I rest assuredly of my safety whenever Attorney John Ashcroft announces that another charitable organization has been exposed as a financial arm of Al-Queada or the Taliban. When Ashcroft announced that law enforcement around the nation was being asked to bring in Arab men who had been in the country for less than to years for questioning, I figured, good police work. Or the fact that over 1,200 men of Arab decent continue to be detained for questioning simply means that our intelligence forces are still not satisfied with the results of the interrogation of these men.

I’ve flown since September 11th, and will continue to do so, because the re-tooling of airport security, in spite of the flaws, along with increased public awareness has eliminated a repeat of the devastation of that day. Many people are critical of the profiling tactics being used, which clearly has resulted in the random selection of people most unlikely to be terrorists being pulled out of line at the airport for security checks. But it’s also widely known that profilers have identified foreign men, especially those of Arab descent, as the target of aggressive profiling. This is troublesome to some, but the reality is that the events of September 11th were carried out by men of that particular ancestry.

The message is quite clear; foreigners looking to harm Americans, here or abroad will be caught and dealt with. But what about Americans who want to harm Americans?

There have been numerous other acts of terrorism committed on American soil, by Americans. As I was having my coffee this morning, listening to the morning news, there was a report on the most recent act of domestic terrorism. The reporter said that the FBI strongly believes that the 15 pipe bombs that have been placed in mailboxes in rural areas in three midwestern states could be the work of an American (the number of bombs has now reached 17 in five states). The reporter went on to say that a veteran FBI profiler surmised that the hand-written note revealed that the person responsible for the bombs may not be a foreigner, but likely a middle-aged white male, a loner, with military or government experience and very angry. These profilers are truly amazing.

Another profiler being interviewed on a radio show said that the bomber could possibly be a foreigner, but that his experience, and that of the Bureau in general shows that domestic terrorism involving bombs is usually the work of a white male. Honestly, I was rather surprised that the word usually was used. Because my immediate thoughts of domestic terrorism are limited to the infamous Unabomber, Theodore "Ted" Kaczynski, and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. Two, albeit prolific, domestic terrorists. So my curiosity was piqued by the use of the term usually. Well, a quick internet search on domestic terrorism does indeed justify the use of the word, as there have been several such incidents. Though foreigners committed a few of these cowardly acts, white men usually carried out these acts (radical animal rights activists are also responsible for several acts of domestic terrorism).

By now, I’m sure that some of you are wondering, just what is the point of all of this? The point is, our Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has stated emphatically that the issue of further episodes of domestic terrorism is no longer a question of if, but when. So why then are we not taking the necessary steps to thwart the actions of the other terrorists—twisted Americans who want to harm Americans? Can anyone say with any degree of certainty that when this next act occurs, it will be the work of Al-Queda or Taliban sympathizers? Will the next major act of domestic terrorism be less devastating if it is masterminded and executed by an American? Of course the answer is no on both counts.

It is not my desire to be either sensational or polarizing. But this is a matter that for reasons that are probably obvious, is never explored. Even when I think back to the rash of anthrax letters that resulted in the deaths of some Americans, and created a climate of fear throughout the land, I can’t help but wonder, who was behind those acts of domestic terrorism? Unnamed government sources close to the case have been quoted as saying these acts of domestic terrorism were not likely to have been committed by anyone associated with horrors of September 11th. That the investigation was now focusing on identifying a trusted American scientist, a government worker or at the very least, someone with access to that particular quality and strain of anthrax, working within the small network of highly secured laboratories that have access to it. Does this mean that the culprit is a white male? No. But there is a strong possibility that when the case is solved, we’ll find a disgruntled (angry) white male, a loner with a grudge against his own nation responsible.

These days, everyone eschews political correctness on some level. Yet, this appears to be at the heart of why there has not been any attempt at engaging in the same level of profiling as we are doing in tracking down terrorists of Arab descent. Americans who have been responsible for acts of domestic terrorism, like any other terrorists do indeed have a profile. A sound and proactive approach to preventing domestic terrorism seems to dictate that Attorney General John Ashcroft issue another call to law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. A call to round up angry white men, who are loners, who have a grudge against the government, who have knowledge of and experience with the use of explosives, who have been known to express an interest in joining the ranks of foreign terrorists (John Walker Lindh for example), or are sympathetic to radical subversive groups whose main thrust is to eventually overthrow the U.S. government, and certainly, those who have an unusual interest in potentially deadly biological agents. For those of you fearful of the infringement of First Amendment Rights, I am not advocating that these individuals not be allowed to continue to enjoy this right, only that they be put under the microscope until law enforcement is satisfied that they are indeed harmless.

I don’t know about you, but when I start my day, my main concerns do not include worry about an attack from abroad or by those from foreign soil. But increasingly, I do worry about the other terrorists among us. Those who are able to incubate, and perfect their diabolical deeds under the radar, because no one dare isolate them for closer scrutiny. Failure to expand the pool of potential terrorists and begin immediate profiling is a risk not worth taking, no matter the political costs.

the comfort that I feel in knowing that President Bush’s doctrine, is being carried out by the best trained military personnel in the world. I know that our Homeland Security initiatives will thwart any future sneak attacks by foreign evildoers.

While I do have confidence in President Bush's plans, I don't think this author realizes that alot of US Forces have been woefully undertrained due to the PC practice of lowering standards so women can qualify...

further it has been a long held truth that a determined terrorist with no concern for his own life can still hit just about any target!!

When you talk about domestic terrorism. There are clear profiles. Now I know I'm going to be flamed for this, but the governemt considers blowing up abortion clinics terrorism. There is a clear profile, this is generally the only time you'll see your white christian male involved, usually very relgious, usually protestant though sometimes catholic. Rarely, but on occasion is it a woman, when gun violence in involved, its always a male. Never any military background, and usually has been seen on more then one occasion protesting either that clinic or other clinics, and usually takes orders from somone else (i.e. somone speaking for god). Every other act of domestic terrorism has basic features. The people are young, liberal (leftists), have burned the flag, are vocal in there hatred of america. Have a history of protests, and emotional outbursts and tend to come from liberal regions and support either nader or any dem. Almost always white, and usually act in groups, usually have several ideologoies, socialists/gay rights/animal rights/enviormentalists/atheists or wiccan or nature worship. Foreign terrorists also have a profile, is it so politically incorrect to say that there are profiles for terrorists for different crimes? Bin Laden is not going to blow up an abortion clinic, a lone religious christian male is not going to burn down peoples houses to protect the enviorment, and a crazy leftist is not going blow up a mosque (maybe a synagouge).

The biggest threat to America is our pre-occupation with the middle east. The environmentalists are the domestic terrorists for stopping the drilling of precious oil resources of which we are now dependant upon a supply from unpredictable, dictatorial governments who know they can play us like puppets.

Closing our borders to the steady influx of persons from the countries identified as having a hatred for Americans has to stop. Drilling for oil within our borders has to resume. Profiling of terrorists has to be vigorous.

Domestic terrorism does not hold a card compared to those foreigners who would nuke us, poison our food and water, and spread deadly viruses to our population, because they do not live here. They do not have family here who would be affected. They do not care about anything but death to America.

They have nothing to lose, but as Americans, we have everything to lose if we believe that negotiation will stop the threat, and the showmanship measures of increased security will protect us. Taking it for granted that our leadership will somehow save us is a dangerous assumption that I am not convinced into accepting.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.