FBI Names Greatest Domestic Terror Threat

This ridiculous definition quite clearly makes culprits of the current administration and probably all govmnts around the planet.

No, it's not the same organization. Do you know that employee turnover in the FBI is very high? Saying it's the same organization when it is now run by almost a completely different set of people and/or people who have changed departments, not to mention the massive restructuring going on, is just inaccurate.

did you know that in 7 years all cells in your body have been replaced? does that make you a different person?

Well brain cells don't get replaced, unless you suffer some serious trauma and your brain gets damaged. Then the base regions regenerate...

But brain cells are the ones that matter when it comes to who you are as a person.

WASHINGTON — Environmental and animal-rights activists who have turned to arson and explosives are the nation's top domestic-terrorism threat, an FBI official told a Senate committee yesterday. Groups such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) are "way out in front" in terms of damage and number of crimes, said John Lewis, the FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism. "There is nothing else going on in this country over the last several years that is racking up the high number of violent crimes and terrorist actions," Lewis said. ALF says on its Web site that its small, autonomous groups of people take "direct action" against animal abuse by rescuing animals and causing financial loss to animal exploiters, usually through damage and destruction of property. ELF is an underground movement with no public leadership, membership or spokesman.The British-based SHAC describes itself as a worldwide campaign since 1999 to rescue animals tortured in research labs and shut down the businesses that rely on their use. It says it "does not encourage or incite illegal activity." Lewis said the FBI reached its conclusions after analyzing all types of cases and comparing the groups with "right-wing extremists, KKK, anti-abortion groups and the like." He said most animal-rights and eco-extremists so far have refrained from violence targeting human life, but "the FBI has observed troubling signs that this is changing. We have seen an escalation in violent rhetoric and tactics," he told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. "Attacks are also growing in frequency and size." Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the panel's chairman, said he hoped to examine more closely how the groups might be getting assistance in fund-raising and communications from "mainstream activists" in tax-exempt organizations. "Just like al-Qaida or any other terrorist organization, ELF and ALF cannot accomplish their goals without money, membership and the media," Inhofe said. The FBI said it has 150 open investigations, with activists claiming responsibility for 1,200 crimes between 1990 and mid-2004.

Investigators cite examples of people using arson, bombings, theft, animal releases, vandalism, harassing phone calls, office takeovers and letters rigged with razor blades. Such tactics have been used in what officials call "direct action" campaigns to disrupt university research labs, restaurants, fur farms and logging operations. Newer targets include sport-utility-vehicle dealerships and new-home developments as signs of urban sprawl. Officials say the incidents have caused more than $110 million in damage. The biggest so far was an arson at a five-story condominium under construction in San Diego in August 2003 that caused $50 million in damage. In the past few years arsons and explosives have been used increasingly, Lewis said. Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times

Tradition is the neural network of the FBI. J. Edgar trained the men who trained the men who work there today. They've got new toys that they're using in creative new ways, but at its core, it's the same crew-cut narrow tie organization it's always been.

Every single day, the FBI does good things, necessary things, to protect public safety. But I think they're baffled by a crime wave that thoroughly wrecks tightly-defined targets without any desire to injure or kill anybody. They're confused by organizations that aren't organizations at all, but loosely-networked bands of individuals with no central hierarchy. A real grass-roots movement, not controlled by any political entity, is foreign to their understanding.

They're making the standard risk-management mistake of assigning greater risk to things they don't understand, aided and abetted by special interests near and dear to the President. While our chemical plants remain unguarded against truly violent fanatics foreign and domestic, they're channeling resources into hunting down people who trash torture labs.

I'm not surprised. But I am disappointed.

You'll have to give more concrete examples than simply saying the "traditions are the same and people there now are trained in the same way", especially in light of the major reorganization currently and changes in leadership over the years.

I don't understand what you mean by saying the FBI is "baffled" by certain types of movements. We're not confused by them, but they are? Why is that?

Again, you'll have to be more specific when saying they're aided by special interests close to the president, that's a pretty sweeping blanket statement that doesn't mean anything to anyone unless they happen to agree with your view to begin with.

Also, I think it's correct to be focusing on people and not facilities, or at least to be giving people a higher priority. For a few reasons:

animal rescue (often illegal, but nonviolent) and such.

They're doing FAR more harm that good!

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the panel's chairman, said he hoped to examine more closely how the groups might be getting assistance in fund-raising and communications from "mainstream activists" in tax-exempt organizations. "Just like al-Qaida or any other terrorist organization, ELF and ALF cannot accomplish their goals without money, membership and the media,"

Two powerful industrial interests come to mind: the agribusiness lobby and the pharmacutical lobby. Both routinely attempt to block even rudimentary anti-cruelty measures, both donated heavily to the Bush campaign, and the way the Beltway works, I wouldn't be surprised if they're calling in favors that require some Bureau muscle to help discredit, defame and smear ALL activists (not just militant extremists).

What you desribe is much better. Problem is, the scenario I have described has happened before... and more than a handful of times.

I claim no insider information about the Bureau, but I haven't noticed any significant changes in what the public sees of their methodology, regardless of changes of leadership. The only significant change I see forthcoming is tighter control by the Executive branch and consequently even less independence and innovation.

They're not stupid. But the type of people who gravitate towards a career with the FBI tend to have personality indexes clustered on one end of the scale, and have a really difficult time understanding people on the other end of the scale. They can analyze them, but they never quite "get" it.

Two powerful industrial interests come to mind: the agribusiness lobby and the pharmacutical lobby. Both routinely attempt to block even rudimentary anti-cruelty measures, both donated heavily to the Bush campaign, and the way the Beltway works, I wouldn't be surprised if they're calling in favors that require some Bureau muscle to help discredit, defame and smear ALL activists (not just militant extremists).

I'm not going to argue that, but I think they're monitoring the wrong people.

Hrm, you're right Garoad, I don't see how this could possibly be politically motivated :/ I mean hey, it's just a prominent GOP senator implying that the entire Progressive community abetts terrorism. No biggie, right?

Nono, that totally misses my point. I'm not talking about the senate panel, I'm talking about the FBI itself.

I'm not saying any orders came down from the White House; none were necessary. It doesn't take an intelligence operative to figure out that a clever attack on environmentalists will make President Georgie happy, especially if it includes his favorite word (starts with a "t"...).

No matter what the FBI's motivations in making these groups a priority right now, and in these terms, the Senator's quote above clearly demonstrates that there's no shortage of people in Washington willing to wring every ounce of political capital they can from the announcement, and vigilance now is necessary.

I disagree with your interpretation that he's saying "progressives support terrorism" or something. What he said makes sense to me, if someone is donating money to or cooperating with ELF people, what else do you call it??

So you're saying the FBI is willing to American risk lives, and prioritize the wrong targets purposefully, just so they can make the current administration happy?