Religious/Extremist Terrorism: Non-Muslim edition

[PuckChaser]

I had read of Proud Boys, but had no idea there were so many others.

Need to watch more CNN, they're currently burning/looting Portland and Minneapolis. Oh wait, that's Antifa.

 

[mariomike]

Never an excuse for property damage or personal injury.

As far as the political finger pointing goes, this is from the FBI. Prior to 6 Jan., 2021.

FBI’s Wray says most domestic terrorism arrests this year involve white supremacy

FBI Director Christopher Wray said Tuesday that the agency has made about 100 domestic terrorism-related arrests since October, and the majority were tied to white supremacy.”I will say that a majo…

thehill.com

My reply was regarding the NYPD source provided by Bread Guy.

Something out in the past few weeks from NYPD (source)

Recent high-profile mass-casualty attacks in the West have demonstrated the enduring threat posed by a wide range of racially/ethnically motivated violent extremists and conspiracy-driven malicious actors, including those inspired by far-right, neo-Nazi, and white supremacist worldviews. Due to this concerning trend, the NYPD Intelligence Bureau advises law enforcement to maintain awareness of key symbols, icons, and graphics associated with or appropriated by domestic violent extremist movements that- in some cases were observed during the January 6 deadly and destructive riot at the U.S. Capitol.

I have read of Proud Boys. Was not aware there were so many others.

 

[LittleBlackDevil]

(U//LES) NYPD Domestic Violent Extremist Imagery Awareness Guide January 2021 | Public Intelligence

publicintelligence.net

I had read of Proud Boys, but had no idea there were so many others.

In the age of the internet and social media, it's pretty easy to "create a group" with some imagery. I seriously doubt any of these groups have any large numbers.

 

[Weinie]

In the age of the internet and social media, it's pretty easy to "create a group" with some imagery. I seriously doubt any of these groups have any large numbers.

Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 people and injured more than 600 others. Scale/scope does not matter when intent is evil.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 people and injured more than 600 others. Scale/scope does not matter when intent is evil.

FWIW, this FBI site is kind of interesting. At the bottom it also lists some recent events that are considered to be acts of terrorism:

The Current Threat​

The FBI is committed to remaining agile in its approach to the terrorism threat, which has continued to evolve since the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. Years after these attacks, the threat landscape has expanded considerably, and international terrorism remains a serious threat. The threat of domestic terrorism also remains persistent overall, with actors crossing the line from exercising First Amendment-protected rights to committing crimes in furtherance of violent agendas.

Many factors have contributed to the evolution of the terrorism threat on both the international and domestic fronts, such as:

• Lone offenders: Terrorist threats have evolved from large-group conspiracies toward lone-offender attacks. These individuals often radicalize online and mobilize to violence quickly. Without a clear group affiliation or guidance, lone offenders are challenging to identify, investigate, and disrupt. The FBI relies on partnerships and tips from the public to identify and thwart these attacks.
  
  
• The Internet and social media: International and domestic violent extremists have developed an extensive presence on the Internet through messaging platforms and online images, videos, and publications. These facilitate the groups’ ability to radicalize and recruit individuals who are receptive to extremist messaging. Social media has also allowed both international and domestic terrorists to gain unprecedented, virtual access to people living in the United States in an effort to enable homeland attacks. The Islamic State of Iraq and ash-Sham (ISIS), in particular, encourages sympathizers to carry out simple attacks wherever they are located—or to travel to ISIS-held territory in Iraq and Syria and join its ranks as foreign fighters. This message has resonated with supporters in the United States and abroad.

Terrorism | Federal Bureau of Investigation

To counter terrorism, the FBI's top investigative priority, we use our investigative and intelligence capabilities to neutralize domestic extremists and help dismantle terrorist networks worldwide.

www.fbi.gov

 

[OldSolduer]

Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 people and injured more than 600 others. Scale/scope does not matter when intent is evil.

Lone wolf attacks are quite catastrophic - the terrorist doesn't confide to anyone what his plans are and when they strike its a surprise. When the investigators look into the background its generally found these individuals were a bit "Off".

 

[LittleBlackDevil]

Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 people and injured more than 600 others. Scale/scope does not matter when intent is evil.

I was solely commenting on why there might be so many groups, in response to MarioMike's surprise at how many there were.

I made no commentary on whether scale/scope mattered or not.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I was solely commenting on why there might be so many groups, in response to MarioMike's surprise at how many there were.

I made no commentary on whether scale/scope mattered or not.

This is illustrative of the current situation

 

[OldSolduer]

This is illustrative of the current situation

Wait a minute - no Spanish Inquisition? Nobody expects those guys...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Lone wolf attacks are quite catastrophic - the terrorist doesn't confide to anyone what his plans are and when they strike its a surprise. When the investigators look into the background its generally found these individuals were a bit "Off".

So if someone on the far right goes off, they are far more competent and dangerous then their lesser learned counterparts on the far Left?

 

[brihard]

So if someone on the far right goes off, they are far more competent and dangerous then their lesser learned counterparts on the far Left?

I would suggest there’s an increased likelihood that someone of far right persuasion may have served in the military and learned some skills conducive to the execution of political violence. Those with far left views are probably less likely to have military service. The entire raisin d’être of a military is to kill people and break their shit in the defense of the national interest, under the lawful direction of the civil authority. So, if one has learned those skills, and then ditches the ‘lawful direction of the civil authority’ constraint in order to serve some other imagined ‘national interest’ (however ‘nation’ ends up being defined), then yeah, far right extremists may present a greater real threat.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Meh. No-one can beat the lefties when they get worked up enough. FLQ, RAF, Red Brigades.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Meh. No-one can beat the lefties when they get worked up enough. FLQ, RAF, Red Brigades.

I dunno... these maniacs were a good (bad) example of psychopathic right wingers:


The Shankill Butchers were an Ulster loyalist gang—many of whom were members of the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF)—that was active between 1975 and 1982 in Belfast, Northern Ireland. It was based in the Shankill area and was responsible for the deaths of at least 23 people, most of whom were killed in sectarian attacks. The gang was notorious for kidnapping, torturing and murdering random Catholic and suspected Catholic civilians; each was beaten ferociously and had his throat hacked with a butcher's knife. Some were also tortured and attacked with a hatchet. The gang also killed six Ulster Protestants over personal disputes, and two other Protestants mistaken for Catholics.

Most of the gang were eventually caught and, in February 1979, received the longest combined prison sentences in United Kingdom legal history. However, gang leader Lenny Murphy and his two chief "lieutenants" escaped prosecution. Murphy was murdered in November 1982 by the Provisional IRA, likely acting with loyalist paramilitaries who perceived him as a threat.[1] The Butchers brought a new level of paramilitary violence to a country already hardened by death and destruction.[2] The judge who oversaw the 1979 trial described their crimes as "a lasting monument to blind sectarian bigotry".

Shankill Butchers - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Blackadder1916]

Meh. No-one can beat the lefties when they get worked up enough. FLQ, RAF, Red Brigades.

You give them too much credit. But then, particularly over here in insulated (from day to day European news) North America, we don't didn't regularly hear about right wing (fascist, neo-fascist, good old fashioned NAZI . . .) murder and mayhem in Germany, Italy, France et al from the 60s onward. The RAF and Red Brigades were real threats to us, the cold warriors who lived over there, so when they made the news (or int and counter-int summaries) we noticed them and cursed the "fucking commies". However, some of the more horrendous politically (or racially) motivated murders and bombings were from the far right. But they didn't usually pay much attention to foreign (NATO) militaries; after all, we fit into their image of conservatism.

The FLQ, as troublesome as they were in Canada, were amateurs compared to European terrorists (of any stripe) of the same vintage.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You give them too much credit. But then, particularly over here in insulated (from day to day European news) North America, we don't didn't regularly hear about right wing (fascist, neo-fascist, good old fashioned NAZI . . .) murder and mayhem in Germany, Italy, France et al from the 60s onward. The RAF and Red Brigades were real threats to us, the cold warriors who lived over there, so when they made the news (or int and counter-int summaries) we noticed them and cursed the "fucking commies". However, some of the more horrendous politically (or racially) motivated murders and bombings were from the far right. But they didn't usually pay much attention to foreign (NATO) militaries; after all, we fit into their image of conservatism.

The FLQ, as troublesome as they were in Canada, were amateurs compared to European terrorists (of any stripe) of the same vintage.

Having lived in the UK during the 80s you were never really considered 'safe', especially if you were in the military, as the IRA had a healthy bombing campaign going on in mainland Britain. Looking under your car was a pretty routine 'drill'.

Compared with today, though, it seems a relatively less chaotic time given the rise of militant Islam and the random knifing outbreaks, and other random attacks. Those guys don't call in warnings to the police. I also see armed sentries accompanying marching troops in public occasionally, on the news etc, which is a good indication of the threat levels.

 

[Weinie]

Having lived in the UK during the 80s you were never really considered 'safe', especially if you were in the military, as the IRA had a healthy bombing campaign going on in mainland Britain. Looking under your car was a pretty routine 'drill'.

Compared with today, though, it seems a relatively less chaotic time given the rise of militant Islam and the random knifing outbreaks, and other random attacks. Those guys don't call in warnings to the police. I also see armed sentries accompanying marching troops in public occasionally, on the news etc, which is a good indication of the threat levels.

Yup. And check out Belgium and France.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Having lived in the UK during the 80s you were never really considered 'safe', especially if you were in the military . . .

I was responding to the reference made about the most noted European terrorist organizations during that time when we were stationed in Germany. I didn't then and probably still don't think of the Britons as European. If they were proper Europeans they would drive on the right side of the road.

There were quite different attitudes about security among the different NATO forces. We were probably the most relaxed (with some exceptions when the world situation or local activities dictated a more robust response), but then "we're Canadians, we're inoffensive and everybody likes us". The Brits, having been attacked on the continent a few times by the IRA, had a healthy respect to man front gates and perimeter fences with armed soldiers. The Americans, well, they're Americans and their military were an easily identifiable target anywhere in the world.

 

[Weinie]

I was responding to the reference made about the most noted European terrorist organizations during that time when we were stationed in Germany. I didn't then and probably still don't think of the Britons as European. If they were proper Europeans they would drive on the right side of the road.

There were quite different attitudes about security among the different NATO forces. We were probably the most relaxed (with some exceptions when the world situation or local activities dictated a more robust response), but then "we're Canadians, we're inoffensive and everybody likes us". The Brits, having been attacked on the continent a few times by the IRA, had a healthy respect to man front gates and perimeter fences with armed soldiers. The Americans, well, they're Americans and their military were an easily identifiable target anywhere in the world.

Well played sir!

 

[daftandbarmy]

I was responding to the reference made about the most noted European terrorist organizations during that time when we were stationed in Germany. I didn't then and probably still don't think of the Britons as European. If they were proper Europeans they would drive on the right side of the road.

There were quite different attitudes about security among the different NATO forces. We were probably the most relaxed (with some exceptions when the world situation or local activities dictated a more robust response), but then "we're Canadians, we're inoffensive and everybody likes us". The Brits, having been attacked on the continent a few times by the IRA, had a healthy respect to man front gates and perimeter fences with armed soldiers. The Americans, well, they're Americans and their military were an easily identifiable target anywhere in the world.

Short (someone else's) war story: I knew a RM Officer who was attached to the US Marine HQ in Beirut, you know, the one that got blown up in '83.

He arrived in the building and was amazed to discover virtually no standard security measures/ physical barriers were in place apart from, apparently, 'they wouldn't dare take us on because we're the US Marines'. He tried to make some suggestions, but they fell on deaf ears.

Shortly after he was posted out, they got blown up by a giant truck bomb. No coincidence

Having said that, alot of UK bases were amazingly 'porous' too, and didn't even have a simple perimeter fence in place like you might see with any comparable CAF establishment, even after years of being targeted by the IRA. Cost trumps safety!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

One of the safest places to attack is a military base