Biden Admin’s Strategy to Combat Domestic Terrorism Calls White Supremacy, Militia Groups as Biggest Threats
“Today’s domestic terrorists espouse a range of violent ideological motivations, including racial or ethnic bigotry and hatred as well as anti-government or anti-authority sentiment.”
President Joe Biden’s administration released its strategy to combat domestic terrorism. It labeled white supremacists and militia groups as the most significant threats.
Biden ordered a review of threats due to the January 6th Capitol Hill riots. In March, the National Security Council determined “that domestic violent extremism posed a ‘heightened threat’ in 2021.”
The document is vague. The NSC did not provide enough specifics except those they find the biggest threat to America.
Honestly, it sounds like the government is more concerned about the politicians than we regular people.
The NSC defined domestic terrorism as “activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
By the way, the NSC placed us small government and anti-authority people in the same group as racists.
“Today’s domestic terrorists espouse a range of violent ideological motivations, including racial or ethnic bigotry and hatred as well as anti-government or anti-authority sentiment,” wrote the NSC. “They also take on a variety of forms, from lone actors and small groups of informally aligned individuals, to networks exhorting and targeting violence toward specific communities, to violent self-proclaimed ‘militias’ who, despite legal prohibitions in all fifty states against certain private militia activity, assert a baseless right to take the law into their own hands.”
The strategy does not include new domestic terrorism laws, even though Biden demanded one during his presidential campaign.
People, especially liberty-minded people, remained skeptical about a law due to possible “government overreach and infringements on privacy rights.” The NSC addressed it:
New criminal laws, in particular, should be sought only after careful consideration of whether and how they are needed to assist the government in
tackling complex, multifaceted challenges like the one posed by domestic terrorism and only while ensuring the protection of civil rights and civil liberties.
Therefore, even as we augment our approach to domestic terrorism under existing authorities, the Department of Justice is examining carefully what new authorities might be necessary and appropriate. As with the rest of this Strategy, we are ensuring that such examination is driven by the facts and informed by the analysis of the experts who can guide our understanding of both the current authorities for addressing domestic terrorism threats and the implications for civil rights and civil liberties of pursuing any changes to those authorities. Duly informed by their analysis and by the recommendations of Federal law enforcement leadership, we will, in consultation with the Congress, consider whether seeking legislative reforms is appropriate and, if so, which to pursue.
The White House also wants to strengthen the sharing abilities between all law enforcement in America and the private sector.
Yes, Biden’s administration is seeking help from social media platforms:
Availability of domestic terrorism related recruitment material online is almost certain to persist at some level. That is especially true on the platforms that explicitly encourage or tacitly condone such material, as well as on end-to-end encrypted platforms where such material can be harder to identify, even by those operating such platforms. Dealing with the supply is therefore necessary but not sufficient: we must address the demand too. Today’s digital age requires an American population that can utilize essential aspects of Internet-based communications platforms while avoiding vulnerability to domestic terrorist recruitment and other harmful content deliberately disseminated by malicious actors online, such as international terrorist groups like al- Qa’ida trying to incite imminent violence or hostile foreign powers seeking to undermine American democracy. Consequently, we will pursue innovative ways to foster and cultivate digital literacy and related programs, including educational materials and interactive online resources such as skills-enhancing online games. This can prove a useful component to forging the resilience that may help to stem domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization to violence.
About Those Civil Liberties…
When does the promise of not violating our civil liberties begin? How about they start now with the rioters?
Authorities have placed many of the participants in solitary confinement. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and the ACLU are furious. I’m not kidding:
“I do not believe in solitary confinement for extended periods of time for anyone,” Warren, a Massachusetts senator and former Harvard Law School professor, said of the Jan. 6 rioters when asked by the Washington Examiner.
[Sen. Bob] Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, who says he wants to look into the issue further said, “Obviously, in any instance, I think solitary confinement is concerning.” Republicans also objected to the treatment of the jailed Jan. 6 rioters.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which has recently drawn criticism for favoring liberal causes over its tradition of representing unsympathetic clients and causes, is also weighing in on the side of Trump protesters being held alone.
“Prolonged solitary confinement is torture and certainly should not be used as a punitive tool to intimidate or extract cooperation. We’re pleased to see that message is getting through to Senators,” Tammie Gregg, deputy director of the ACLU National Prison Project, told the Washington Examiner in a statement.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.