Domestic Terror
What it Holds For the New Millenium

FBI U.S. Terror Reports
1998  |  1997  |  1996

FBI U.S. Hate Crimes Reports
1999   |  1998  |  1997  |  1996

FBI Bomb Report
1997
 
United States Government Interagency Domestic  Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan (Jan 2001)
FBI Strategic Assessment of  the Potential for Domestic Terrorism - Project MEGIDDO (pre-2000)

Testimony before Congress:  FBI Domestic Terrorism Section Chief, 2/12/2002
Excerpt from FBI Report on Terrorism, Emergency.com,undated
American Militant Extremists, Terrorsim Q & A, The Council on Foreign Relations, undated

The Hate  Directory, Raymond Franklin, (1999 in HTML),  (2005 in PDF)
Domestic Terrorist Group Profiles
Hispanic Gangs (Illegal Mexican Nationals and Criminal Enterprises)
International Terrorist Group Profiles

Is Eco-Sabotage Terrorism?, Hal Bernton, Seattle Times, 5/07/2006 (Note, "Some say" and "They balk...")

Domestic Terrorism Introduction  The Definition  Testing the Definition  Teachings of  Domestic Terrorists  Categories of  Domestic Terrorists  and Key Domestic Events  Profiles of Selected Domestic Terror Groups  Sparse Chronology

The 20th century held new hopes for a more civilized world.  However the truth of the matter is that the 20th century brought not only the same old barbarism as the 19th century, but also tainted the hopes and promise of new sciences by subverting these new hopes into horrendous new weapons and ways to maim and kill. Along with this calamity has come a new wave of terrorism repeated often in the past, but now updated to match the subversion of science.  Ancient forms of terrorism existed.  In fact, governments then and today have used terror as an effective weapon to get their way.  When a Duke or  other fuedal chief wanted to make sure his subjects learned to obey, he might resort to culling the peasants.  A public dis-embowelment tended to quiet most of the rebellious.

Today governments try awfully hard to be more civilized.  First of all, the majority of the world's governments promise to be governments for the people, the people's servants, and therefore one does not disembowel the boss' children.

But as we said, governments today will resort to terror if they are sufficiently brutal. Take Suddam Hussein's gassing of his own people when it served his purposes to quell an uprising of Kurds. As governments have moved away from terrorizing their own people, and especially in the last few decades, the use of terror has ceased to be a governmental technqiue and has become a technique used by the country-less. And while we like to think that the term terrorist is something of a twentieth century invention, nothing is further from the truth.  What is true, however, is that people with what they believe are just causes have resorted to public display of violence and destruction to state their case.  Take the Boston Tea Party -- an almost legendary act of anti-British taxation law rebellion.

There are actually a number of other cases that can be cited which qualify right up there with most of the twentieth century attrocities committed in the name of any number of  rebel's causes.  So no, terrorism is certainly not in any way, shape, or form a twentieth century phenomonem.

However, as we mentioned the twentieth century terrorist HAS kept a pace with the science of war and as such as become quite the connoisseur of terror.  One only has to think of the AUM group in Japan and their use of a chemical weapon against an unwitting public to understand the kind of terror a modern terrorist can deliver.  And deliver easily and in massive doses to effect widespread destruction. The attack in Japan could have been so much worse -- those in the know shudder at the possibilites and thank god that so far "IT" has been averted.

It is under these conditions that a large segment of American Population struggles to understand their government and looks for signs that everything is all right and that nothing is amiss. Unfortunately for some, the signs point exactly in the other direction. With this mindset, other forces in our country, forces who unwittingly are fueling the paranoia with their own paranoia, have consistently laid the groundwork for increased violence and increased paranoia. One side's paranoia leads to the other sides realization that just because you are paranoid does not mean someone is out to get you.

In this report, we document the feelings, the rhetoric, the groups and their teachings, that have led to the current state of affairs in Domestic Terrorism.

A word of caution. At times during this report, we will take on the personality of the Domestic Terrorist. We will recite the doctrine, and will scare you with the passion. Please don't be alarmed.

MILNET is, and always will be, a research tool for would be writers, historians, or military hobbyists or enthusiasts. We document the present state of terrorism because it is a national issue that not only effects our country's military and government, but confronts each and every citizen in a growing pattern of intrustion upon our lives. We hope to educate and incite you to learn more about these -- how shall we put it -- wackos will do. If for no other reason then to perhaps better understand how we can effectively create conditions to disarm them without either giving in to their agendas or comprimising our own personal safety in our homes, towns, state or entire country.

We are not liberals by any stretch of the imagination, but neither are we in the camps of the far right who feel it is time to revolt against an insane government. We wish to be a force for change, but clearly through public display of the issues and frank and honest discussion.

Domestic Terrorism:  A Definition

One man's International Terrorist is another man's Domestic Terrorist.  Aside from the obvious, a terrorist working at "home" to facilitate his goals makes him a domestic terrorist.  By moving outside his own country to further gain visibility, support, or increase his targets quite possibly makes that Domestic Terrorist an International Terrorist.  So let's try our first shot at making a definition:
 

"Domestic Terrorism is the actions by persons seeking to persuade or dissuade the government or people of their home country using violent means that intend to frighten or coerce, ranging from threats to outright acts of violence such as kidnapping, beatings, or murder."

Obviously, our definition is a little tight. For instance, the use of threats is violent coercion, but there is definitely a fine line between mock threats and real threats with violence waiting behind that threat. If you look at labor struggles and threats on the picket line, you immediately see where the gray line sits separating violence from mere posturing to achieve one's goals.

But if we keep that simple definition in mind, then Timothy McVeigh was surely a Domestic Terrorist.  The cause -- the para-military/militia paranoia that says the attempted seizure and eventual destruction of the "Koresh" compound in Waco, Texas was a government conspiracy against home grown American freedom fighters whose cause is fighting the oppression of a repressive, over-taxing, freedom stealing government.  Quite a mouthful, that one.  Oh yes, freedom, repression, taxation -- all terms from our own countries early history of revolution.  And of course that matches many of the International Terrorist rhetoric as well.  Clearly, the attack on the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April on the anniversary of the "Waco Massacre" as McViegh's friends like to call it, was not because McVeigh got a parking ticket or was unhappy about some war overseas.  This was clearly an action to punish a government and to make his cause visible to not only the citizens of his country but to the entire world.

In fact, in order to test our definition, MILNET began a research project looking at newspapers, books, government releases of statistics, and tracked the publicly available information. This was no small task, since our searches on relevant information turned up more than 2000 newspaper articles alone since 1993! And of course, we are not finished yet. We hope to fill in a few more gaps as we fine tune research in areas that at first seem to be pretty sketchy.

However our efforts at creating a loose definition works at least as far back as the 1960s. This is the period when groups like the Weathermen and the Symbonese Liberation Army took violent exception to the U.S. Government or the faults of society in general.  This was a time when a generation's questioning created a split society, the Johnson era -- "The Great Society" with its new laws integrating minorities with whites, a government fighting a war the people didn't understand or could get behind, and a government made up of a class that suddenly found itself "straight", "the establishment", "racist" and "war-mongers".

Supposedly out of touch with its people, one would have to believe the popular myth that a rebellion was brewing in the U.S.  And to feed this cultural revealation, students rebelled against that government with marches increasingly more virilent and government increasingly more violent until finally bullets silenced all for a few hours at Kent State.

And right along with this turmoil, those empowered by those fostering the anti-government feeling gave funding to several militant groups who began to push the limits of American freedom and finally broke over the line committing violent acts against the very people funding them.  Suddenly, we saw fairly well funded domestic terrorists, visible, and hungry for attention in our very midst.

Fueled by a newly energized radical liberal underground, the 1960s ended with a bang, with riots and anti-war protest in full swing.  Despite slogans sounding very familiar to anyone looking at communist inspired revolutionaries the world over, and the draw of fighting oppression, the revolution in America that threatened to take away "the establishment" and replace it with flower children, just never took shape.  The effects on U.S. politics remains, however, with the children of that generation having come into their own in the decade that ended the 20th century with some pretty amazing, if not disgusting, results.  Some might say the exciting swing to the left in the 1960s produced a wave of politicians that cared not about character but more about them being percieved as free-thinkers and their freedom to not only be above the law, but challenge any moral standard.

In any case, the domestic terrorist of the 1960s turned out to be just a criminal in so many ways, robbing banks, kidnapping industrialists, setting off bombs against innocents, much in the typical terrorist method.  Almost all were rounded up, faced their peers in American cities all over the nation, and oddly enough, very few escaped from long prison sentences or capital punishment.  Obviously the liberal culture of the times did not bend quite far enough to condone the murder of innocents as a rational escalation of anti-war or racial protest. In fact, the result of the 60s was a kind of hiatus of domestic terrorism for a few years.

Moving forward in time, our definition also works with the domestic terrorist first seen in the late 1970s and early 1980s and who still exist today, however, as much on the run as the 1960s Weatherman were at the beginning of the 1970s.  The newer domestic terrorist are militant anti-abortion activists, animal rights activists, environmental activists, or just plain right wing anti-government reactionaries. Three of the four are obvious extensions of the 60s and 70s, with liberal viewpoints boiling over into violence that even the most liberal activist shuns at. Again, like in the 1960s, they seem to be receiving more than adequate funding and protection from those who sympathize with their ideals, if not their actions.

The popular belief is that the violent anti-abortion activist, for instance, has grown from non-violent organizations where a few of the more militant members have grown frustrated with the lack of real progress and have decided to strike out directly against their common enemies. It has even been proposed ³   that a seminal meeting of like minds during jail time after an Atlanta protest in 1988 was the genesis of many of the more horrendous acts in the name of pro-life we have seen in the last decade.

Let's take the case of Charles Barbee, Robert Berry, Brian Ratigan and Verne Jay Merrell, a former Army sniper who decided to take action against a Planned Parenthood clinic near Spokane, Washington, on July 12, 1996.  According to  articles in the Spokane Valley News ¹    and The Seattle Post Intelligencer, ²  Ratigan along with  Berry,  Barbee, and  Merrell attacked not only the clinic, but resorted to bombing a bank and newspaer, then a few months later returned to the very same bank, robbed it to get funds for their continued operation against abortion clinics.  Then they bombed the Planned Parenthood clinic in Spokane. These domestic terrorists were seeking to not only convince people to change their behavior so that it was in accordance with the terrorist's beliefs, but were willing to kill and maim the clinic's administrators, doctors, patients, and even visitors to the clinic.  Interestingly enough, these four not only fit the emerging profile of the typical pro-life terroirst, but also fit the increasingly clear profile for militia based domestic terrorists being pursued by U.S. investigators and prosecutors nationwide.

Of course the Spokane case is not alone.  There have been a frightening number of domestic terrorist acts in the U.S. that relate to abortion clinics, and the robbing of banks. So many in fact, that a search from 1980 to 2001 overwhelmed one of our newspaper archive servers such that we have had to go at the server six months at a time during crucial years of abortion violence.

Another key aspect to the pro-life violence is traced to the release in 1993 of a cookbook created by the Army of God, which instructs would be pro-life terrorists on how to use bombs, threats, and other violence to close down abortion clinics.

The book, whose credits include a figure cited as "Atomic Dog", who we will meet later, has had widespread publication amongst not only the pro-life militants but lately has shown up elsewhere.

 In recent years, the manual has resurfaced, and it is thought that the newer high-tech Environmental Terrorist is using the manual as a primer for their activities as well. See the profile section for more information on the Army of God and the manual.

The other more recent arrival to the terrorist scene is animal rights and/or "environmental freedom".  Rare until the mid 1970s, the same thought processes seem to be at work with this brand of terrorist as well.  An interesting example of this is the May 24, 1990 case of anti-logging activists driving through Oakland, California.  They were arrested after a bomb went off under their car and police suspected they had planted the bomb to draw attention to their cause.  In a rather remarkable turn-about, the activists had FBI agents and Oakland police officers charged with false arrest, illegal search and seizure and conspiracy to violate their free-speech rights.  It is hard to judge this as a case of domestic terrorism however, since their own stupidity may very well have been the cause of their own injuries. For all we know the bombing might have caused more damage to themselves then to anyone else. Certainly it could be said that the activists were trying to use violence to presuade or dissuade someone to act in accordance with the activists believe.  Should we feel sorry for them because their own bomb got them. I don't think so. No one said terrorists couldn't be stupid. Of course, the fact the bomb went off before it could be used for its original purpose also took away any chance or our knowing just what that purpose was. Of course, the fact the bomb went off before it could be used for its original purpose also took away any chance or our knowing just what that purpose was. Of course, there is also the possibility that a pro-logging faction placed the bomb in the car -- assuming there are pro-logging violent activists who knew these two were travelling around Oakland.

In any case, there are, of course, a number of animal rights protests that have turned violent, including bombings of clinics or seizures of clinics where animals have been released.  Few have resulted in human lives being shed, however, the number of humans killed over animals rights issues is by no means zero. Our research was hampered in this area by the low number of occurances in recent history, and the lack of archives in the 1970s and earlier where much of the animal rights activity began. We will endeavor to correct this hole in our research as soon as we find the appropriate research material.

And finally, a more recent trend and in fact second only to abortion as the most active and visible domestic terrorism today is the Eco-Terrorist.

These groups are militant, violent, Environmental Activists. Similar to the progression of abortions rights activists who grew angry and frustrated over the lack of progress in their agenda, the violent Environmentalist is stretching his agenda to include destruction of various pieces of infrastructure which are at odds with their beliefs. For instance, the Eco-Terrorist will attack the U.S. Forest Service for not doing its job of protecting our nations natural resources, or attack a lumber company for clear cutting or the purchase of open space for logging. Infamous in this regard is a group called the Earth Liberation Front. A sub-category within this group of domestic terrorists is the Bio-Tech terrorist who attacks facilities for research, production, delivery or sale of genectically altered seeds, seekstock, or the fruit of those seeds. Examples are the Reclaim the Seeds group and Earth Liberation Front who has also claimed responsbility for acts committed against various university and commercial sites.

There is obviously a strong connection between this decade's environmental terrorist and those involved in peaceful demonstrations against nuclear power in past decades. Clearly the mostly peaceful environmentalist has been replaced with the more violent twin. To date, few if any injuries or deaths have occurred as a result of environmental terrorists, however, just like the cases of growing pro-life violence, it is only a matter of time before one of these groups steps over the line. Once that occurs, there will be a race to see who can be the most violent and infamous.

The most frightening aspect of the Environmental Terrorist is the knowledge they seem to possess. These are technically oriented, especially in the case of the Bio-Tech terrorist. Who can predict what the Environmental terrorist will use as the weapons of the future? Will Domestic Terrorists in the U.S. resort to chemical, biological, genetic, or nuclear weapons. The chilling thought seems so unreal today. But just as the thought of the use of a chemical weapon was unthinkable until AUM released Sarin gas in a Japanese subway station, isn't it juas as foolish to believe it couldn't happen here in the U.S.?

Summary

The Teachings of Domestic Terrorists

It is small wonder that many terrorists make their connections to the terrorist community through their college education, either through idealistic causes which turn to violence or through actual recruitment on college campuses worldwide. After all, higher education is where we truly begin to stretch our minds to look at all different views and to learn to think on our own. Unfortunately there are many who take advantage of this open mindedness to plant the seeds or directly plow the field of dissent.

Of course not all college students become terrorists, nor are all terrorists college students. Many violent militia members chaff under the notion that they are somehow less intelligent because they haven't attended college and may even in fact try to compensate trying to be quite clever in their activities.

The point we are trying to make is that many terrorists have not only moved beyond the contemplation of how to further their agenda through peaceful means, but have realized through some defecit in their thought processes, that the end justifies the means. This turning to violence to meet the objectives of their activist agenda, now has moved them to become something that years before they abhored. No better case can be used to illustrate this then the pro-life, non-violent anti-abortion zealouts turning to bombs and sniper rifles to prevent abortion. Their rationale: only adults can protect the unborn, and we must take an eye-for-an-eye until the remainder of society gives in to our agenda of closing and making illegal all abortion.

This section will explore the teachings that have spawned such reckless and pointless agendas, teachings that bridge the early 60s pro-communist agenda of anti-war, Marxist world of united workers to the pseudo-Christian pro-life militants of today.

Tenet 1: Violence Against Oppressors and Murders is Okay

Most Americans and Europeans are familiar with the Moslem concept of the Jihad, a holy war in which the soldiers of Islam make a holy welcome in heaven by fighting and killing the Infidels. This is an ancient tenet of the religion and is seen throughout western history as well. Many baby boomers may remember a film about Moslems and Christian fighting in the Crusades as depicted by the film, El Cid. Younger generations have heard the rhetoric attached to Islamic Terrorists focused on retribution against the Great Saten, the U.S. or Britain.

While the hollywood protrayl of the Islamic believers does not dwell very deep into their rationale or belief system, it is made clear that they fundamentally believe they are in the right and little Christians can do will change their minds on this fact.

Thus you have a basis for understanding the devote Christian ideals latched onto by the modern, highly violent pro-life terrorist -- kill the infidels is very close to this tenet.

Tenet 2: Government is Evil - Just look at ...

If your particular group hates the beauracy of the Department of Motor Vehicles, then "Just look at the DMV" is your battle cry.

If your pro-life group believes the government is a tool of the devil, "Just look at Roe vs. Wade" and suddenly you want to target the U.S. Supreme Court with a nuclear tipped missile.

Least you think we are joking or are delusional, look at the Montana Freeman. This militant group decided that the government no longer had power over them. They built their own financial system and proclaimed their own court system. Some organizations like them decided that driving was a god given right, not a privilige as our state DMV tells us. And so they refused to take the driving test and refused to pay registration fees.

Many similar groups refuse to pay taxes or pay taxes with checks drawn on non-existent made up nations like the Republic of Texas.

However, the most serious of the "government is Evil" credos is also the most popular and leads to another tenet taught to the milita members, the anti-government side of the Domestic Terror puzzle.

This stems back to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The right to bear arms is crucial in a society that proports to be free of government coercion. Based upon the revolutionary war, and tested by years of World Wars, this American right ensures that America will not be subject to government subjugation. The concept while being somewhat archaic is never-the-less the symbol of trust between the government and its people.

Clearly world history shows plenty of examples where the governments of the world have used force to force their people into accepting a government it does not wish or support. The right to bear arms amendment thus gives a promise to the people that their government knows they are armed and therefore must not govern by force but by reason and the rule of law.

Militia members firmly believe in this symbol. It is engrained by generations of outdoors life and early training in the use of weapons. Not for assault and robbery, but for game hunting, target practice and self protection in the home.

This is many times combined with an extremely passionate hatred of the Internal Revenue Service. Harking back to the farming crisis of the mid 1980s, the midwestern militia member might have lost a farm or ranch to the IRS, who as we all have heard, or may have felt ourselves, is an organization with a rather zealous and hair trigger mindset, and little practical use for due cause. Militia members see the seizure of homes, ranches, farms, equipment and garnishment of wages as just another sign that the U.S. government is their enemy, not their supporter. In other words, the U.S. Government has become the enemy.

Tenet 3: The Government is Coming to Take You Away

The liberalization of the United States Government through its representatives has been a positive force in many areas. However, the connection between guns and violent crime, an unproven theory based on incomplete statistics (for instance, no one knows how many americans have guns and have not nor will ever commit a violent crime, a number suspected to be larger than any of the so called statistical bases used for many anti-gun studies).

This liberalization has consistently eaten away at the basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution -- eaten away at the right of ownership of guns in the U.S. to the point where the Militia warnings of twenty years ago are now the law of the land. A semiautomatic shotgun, allowing a dove hunter to take a second or third shot if missing on the first shot is considered a highly dangerous assault weapon whose use is primarily for urban warfare such as killing innocents in some McDonalds.

The 30-06 big game semi-automatic with large diameter scope is now a sniper weapon used primarily for attacks on innocent children on their way to classes on how to save the whales.

The paranoia of the left has produced an environment where the character of the American people is judged by those who pick up weapons and shoot people in the streets.

In any case, this left leaning condition in America's laws has created the atmosphere where reasonably intelligent gun owners raised from birth to respect and safely use guns, now doubt the government serves them or their safety.

When combined with the fears that the government is now coming to take their weapons away as illustrated by the rabid and almost gleeful approach of law enforcement in the guise of the ATF and FBI at Ruby Ridge and Waco, Texas, and their own need to arm themselves for protection from rogue government elements, you now have the recipe for armed disaster.

Now if this not enough to create havoc, let's throw in unstable, paranoid personalities into the stew. Hand a militia man a rifle and he is liable to check to see if it is loaded, safe the weapon and put it somewhere handy but out of the reach of children. Put it in the hands of a paranoid pro-lifer or a frightened Militia man, and he is liable to check to see if it is loaded and if not buy as many boxes of ammunition he figure he can without attracting attention and then proceed to load the rifle. He will keep it handy and may think about children as he finds a place to store it. Hand that same rifle to a criminal contemplating robbing a bank, and well, he'll probably load it with the right ammunition he already has on hand and put it in the bag with rest of his assault gear.

If you hand the rifle to a liberal anti-abortion pacifist in California, she will immediately call the police because you shouldn't have a rifle in the first place. The police will question you, check to see if you are a felon, confiscate the weapon, and then later after the newspaper reports you as a violent militia man, quietly give you back the weapon and your ammunition without an apology.

This is the world the militia member sees and feels.

Tenet 4: Not Only Do You Need To Make Bombs, Here is How!

Are these people communists? Pretty doubtful. Have they been influenced by the left wing acceptance of ideals put forward by the manifestos of the sixties? Almost absolutely. Is Hillary Rodham Clinton at fault. Come on, get serious, of course not.

Those who try to draw connections between the Clintons and other left wing activists now in middle of our government have missed the point.

It is not necessarily the ideals of the idealist, it is the character of the debate and the edgy acceptance of ideals that have quickly led to acceptance of the actions.

Few liberal you have met would admit to thinking it okay to shoot a physician practicing abortions. Yet the violent pro-life terrorists get their funding and are hidden by everyday citizens, just like the anti-government, white supremicist is given funding and shelter in his particular community.

The point here is that we not only hand them cookbooks for revolution, we give them the money to buy the things they need. Let's take assault weapons out of the hands of every American. Would this have saved the Federal Building in Oklahoma City? Absolutely not. Do you think the reason for the ATF going to Waco would have never arisen if Koresh and his followers could not laid their hands on semi-automatic rifles? Don't be naive. The ATF would have been there to take away the loads of fertilizer and blasting caps or other detonating devices like Timothy McVeigh had.

The point here is that this tenet grants the modern Domestic Terrorist the right to build the weapons they need, whether it be an automatic rifle, a fertilizer bomb, or a ricin chemical weapon, because it is a necessary evil in the fight for the cause. You can't take away castor beans (ricin) chili con carne (botulism), cattle (anthrax), lead pipe (pipe bombs), plastic garbage cans (fertilizer bombs), or any number of household chemicals that can be used to build fertilzer bombs or cyanide gas. The average world household of the middle class has enough of the right chemicals to make the sarin attack in Japan look like a prank. You can't take away the makings of the weapon, you MUST take away the weapons makers.

Tenet 5: You Can Attack Without Getting Caught

Even financial transactions are discussed, allowing the Domestic Terrorist to choose various sources of funding -- for instance setting up a non-profit pro-life organization as a non-violent front from which you can siphon funds.

Tenet 6: You Must Stand Alone

Thus when a Domestic Terrorist like Timothy McVeigh strikes, one is left to wonder, did he plan this all by himself? Where did he get the training to safely build a 4,000 pound fertilizer bomb? How did he create a detonator for this -- it isn't something you figure out by playing around with matches in the desert!

Tenet 7: We Love You and Will Support You No Matter What

A liberal banquet was held called the White Rose Banquet where anti-abortion leaders honored those in jail, under charges, or being sought by the government for murder by bombing, fires, or shootings as well as extortion, bribery or assault. Making heroes of Domestic Terrorists is not exactly the American way most of us were brought up to believe in.

So where do all these tenets come from? It is good question whose answers do lie back in the past. Not so close as the 60s, but all the way back to the early days of the labor unions. We forget that many of the techniques just discussed were part and parcel to the days when labor organizations hired gunmen to make sure union organizers had a chance against industrial magnates who themselves had hired gunmen to fight off the organizers.

And where did the labor unions come from? Ahh, a good question indeed, one that is well outside the scope of this report. However, we point the reader in the general direction of labor unrest in countries like Russia, Cuba, and others where the Worker's Parties took labor unions to a whole new way of life for their countrymen.

For now, let's move on to classifying the key Domestic Terrorist organization credos that are at work in the U.S. today.

Categorizing Domestic Terrorism

It is important to understand the causes that domestic terrorists have used in the 20th century, especially as these same causes may have migrated into the new millenium.

In the table below we list a brief name for the cause and try to describe the terrorist's beliefs.

Note:  Protest is a right of citizenship in the U.S. and we celebrate the right. In fact, we salute Greenpeace, an environmental protest group who have put their own lifes in the path of governments and industry in order to stop activities they cannot support, but without overt and direct violence.  We may not agree with everything thing they do or protest, but the group appears to be non-violent.

While the vast majority of the organizations listed below are proven violent, we try to make note of those whose general character is NOT violent, but the reader will find that distinction rare.  Also, the reader is cautioned that a list of this nature may not be time sensitive, that is, a violent animal rights group might go through legal troubles and eject its violent members and become a true non-violent political advocacy group.  However rare, it is a possibility.

Other groups will claim that members act on their own to conduct violence, and the group will make legal statements condemning such actions, while at the same time funding defense and/or providing other shelter to those offenders.  These legal maneuverings DO NOT remove responsibility for inciting violence through vitriol aimed at their particular enemies.  For example, one animal rights group claims to be a non-violent organization, yet its members continue to accost (misdemeanor) or attack (felonious) their perceived enemies.  The group refuses to take responsibility for those actions.  They remain on our list.

Since we were only able to find one major animals rights activist organization condoning and actively pursuing violence in the last decade,  we have concluded that while hihgly visible, today's Domestic Animal Rights Organizations are  NOT  Domestic terrorists.   For purposes of completeness, however, we took a snapshot in time, listing some of the major animal rights groups reported in  December of 1993.  The reader should note that since December of 1993, only one of the animal rights organizations listed has conducted or condoned violence, and only one has approached violence with minor assaults such as throwing paint or blood products.  Both these are cleared indicated in the table below: 7 

Similarly, we list major Anti-Abortion Groups who we believe are not Domestic Terrorists, however, contribute to the atmosphere of hostility that allows or through their actions, help fund the more, truly violent pro-life terrorists.

The Domestic Terror Group Profiles

The following lists major organizations, most criminal, a few which are not, in the Domestic Terrorism roll call.  We also list up front, several key dates and events which have become crying points for Domestic Terrorists and legal militia members alike.
 
 

Chronology of Domestic Terror Events

The following should be considered a "sparse chronology" since we do not proport to have listed every event known to man. We have tried to focus on events important in domestic terrorism, including events which are also tied into criminal acts that turn into hostage situations of any length.  Also, this is a growing chronology as we find more historical information or as new events  requiring modifications occur.

Much of the period between 1994 and 1997 is taken from an excellent summary of major events from the Seattle Post Intelligencer,   ⁶  article while all others are from various news and/or MILNET archives and compilations.

We should also note that several anti-abortion groups proport to be non-violent, yet become catalysts for other more violent groups.  When clashes between the non-violent groups lead to minor violence, this does not indicate that the group is a anti-abortion terrorist group.  We cite these occurances only as events that set the atmosphere for other more violent group activies.