The Emerging Threat of Domestic Terrorism and White

THE EMERGING THREAT OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM AND WHITE

SUPREMACIST GROUPS:

A SYSTEMATIC-REVIEW

JOSE CAMPOS

B.A., American Military University, 2013

A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the

University of Colorado Colorado Springs

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Master of Criminal Justice and Master of Public Administration

School of Public Affairs

2020

JOSE CAMPOS

This thesis for the Master of Criminal Justice and Master of Public Administration

degree by

Jose Campos

has been approved for the

School of Public Affairs

Edin Mujkic, Chair

Henriikka Weir

Steve Recca

Date 14 December 2020

Campos, Jose (M.C.J & M.P.A)

The Emerging Threat of Domestic Terrorism and White Supremacist Groups: A Systematic-Review

Thesis directed by Assistant Professor Edin Mujkic

ABSTRACT

On September 17, 2020, Christopher A. Wray, the Federal Bureau of

Investigations’ director, testified in Congress that violent extremist groups and racially motivated violent extremism, mostly from white supremacists, are the number one threat to this nation. Additionally, the director made it clear with his statement that white supremacists and anti-government groups have carried out the most lethal attacks on

American soil in recent years. In the light of these uncertainties with white supremacist violence and domestic terrorism, the first objective of this systematic review is to understand further the proliferation of white supremacist groups' structures, tactics, and bigoted ideologies and investigate the causes of domestic terrorism and its connection to white supremacist groups. This review’s second objective is to examine the relationships between domestic terrorism threats with a specific focus on white supremacist groups in the State of Colorado. This examination’s third objective is to incorporate the research of domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups using peer-reviewed articles, published books, and providing a brief background into the threats, white supremacist groups embody, its causes, and motivations. Lastly, examining of the information and the data in this review will help identify the best explanation of domestic terrorism to facilitate research progression.

iii

DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis work to my loving wife, Estela. Without your support, this process of ten months would never have come to fruition. Thank you for your constant support and encouragement during the challenges I encountered in three years as a graduate student. I am genuinely thankful for your love, dedication, and having you in my life. This thesis is also dedicated to my beloved friend Gilbert Sanchez, for his unconditional love and encouragement for the last 32 years of my life. He has been an inspiration to me, and he is the epitome of a man I always aspire to be. Also, I would like to thank Lieutenant Belk back then in 1999 Senior Airman Belk to help me catapult my

Air Force career in 2000. He helped me secure a critical position running the Weapons

Safety and Security System when my career was stagnated. His actions helped expand my horizons and increase the confidence I lacked, which led me to the fascinating world of writing academically. Finally, I dedicate this work to Dr. Edward Coufal; although you are no longer in this world, the endless advice you gave me as a mentor continues to regulate every aspect of my life. I will ensure that your loving memories live as long as I shall live in this world. There is no doubt in my mind that God has truly blessed me with loving relationships.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The onset of this process started in January 2020 as an attempt to understand why the threats of domestic terrorisms and white supremacist groups are emerging at an alarming pace in the United States. Predominantly, my research led me down several pathways, revealing that this country does not have adequate statutes for combating domestic terrorism. Most importantly, these threats are multifaceted, dynamic, and pose a more significant threat than international terrorism. Additionally, understanding the explanations in the direct involvement of violence by white supremacist groups and whether they represent a clear and present threat.

My first indebtedness is to Dr. Mujkic, the chair of this research. This thesis would not have been possible without your help. I would like to thank you for your unwavering support during the darkest stages of this research and your expert guidance.

My second indebtedness is to Dr. Weir for your inputs proved to be invaluable during my thesis defense and the methodology. My third indebtedness is to Mr. Recca for your proficiency and excellent feedback. My fourth indebtedness is to Dr. Caudill for always invigorating my learning, and your determination to make me a logical thinker and writer was not unproductive. My last indebtedness is to Dr. Wonnett, Dr. Lee, Dr. Winters, Dr.

Moon, and Dr. Landon-Murray. They never faltered with their commitment to my academic progress, and each of them are masters of encouraging teaching.

Finally, I would like to thank the entire School of Public Affairs for their support every time I had a question or assisted me in navigating the requirements for graduation and completing my thesis. It is a blessing to be part of such a fantastic team, and I would like to express my deepest gratitude.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 ...... 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Introduction of the Problem ...... 1 1.2 The Systematic Review ...... 2 1.3 Purpose of the Study ...... 4 1.4 Description of the Chapters ...... 5 CHAPTER 2 ...... 6 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 6 2.1 Defining Domestic Terrorism ...... 6 2.1.1 The Problems Toward a Practical Definition of Domestic Terrorism...... 9 2.1.2 What is Domestic Terrorism...... 10 2.2 History and Examples of Domestic Terrorism ...... 14 2.2.1 Critical Aspects Complicating Domestic Terrorism……………...... 19 2.3 The Evolution of Domestic Terrorism ...... 22 2.3.1 Why the Emerging Threat of Domestic Terrorism is Growing…...... 24 2.3.2 Responding to the Threat of Domestic Terrorism ...... 27 CHAPTER 3 ...... 29 METHODS ...... 29 3.1 Data Collection ...... 29 3.2 Articles and Books Included ...... 30 3.3 Resources Excluded ...... 34 CHAPTER 4 ...... 39 FINDINGS ...... 39 4.1 Introduction ...... 39 4.2 Causes of Domestic Terrorism ...... 40 4.2.1 Organizational Level Motivations ...... 41 4.2.2 Individual Level Motivations ...... 42 4.3 Operations of White Supremacist Groups in Colorado……………..…..…….43 4.3.1 Websites and Social Media Presence ...... 44 4.3.2 Membership, Recruitment, Propaganda, and Violent Activities………...45 CHAPTER 5 ...... 47 DISCUSSION ...... 47

5.1 Conclusion ...... 47 5.2 Limitations of the Current Research ...... 48 5.3 Future Research ...... ….49 5.4 Recommendations ...... 49 REFERENCES ...... 53

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table

3.1 Articles and Books Included in the Review………………..…………………….31

3.2 Articles and Books Excluded from the Review………………………………….35

4.1 White Supremacist Groups in Colorado……………………………...……….…43

viii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AFA Asatru Folk Assembly

AIM American Identity Movement

AWD Atom-Waffen Division

CT Counterterrorism

DoD Department of Defense

DOJ Department of Justice

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

JSTOR Journal Storage

PF Patriot Front

RS Right Stuff

SME Subject-Matter-Experts

SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center

TSDB Terrorist Screening Database

UCCS University of Colorado Colorado Springs

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction of the Problem

The Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, 1995, was not the first time a domestic terrorist attack occurred in this country by anti-government extremists driven by personal ideologies (Levin, 2006). Based on chronological records, occurrences of domestic terrorist attacks had taken place throughout history. As early as 1857, the Mountain

Meadows massacre was a series of attacks on the Baker-Fancher emigrant wagon train at

Mountain Meadows in southern Utah (Denton, 2007). Another notable example of domestic terrorism in the early 20th century includes, the Milwaukee Police Department bombing by the Church of the Anarchist Movement in 1917 (Cornell, 2016). The most recent domestic terrorist attack in modern history occurred in El Paso, Texas, at the

Walmart shooting on August 3, 2019, by Patrick Crusius. His motivation was to terminate Texas’ Hispanic invasion and the ethnic and cultural replacement brought by this invasion (Parada, 2019).

Despite the variety of motivations for each attack, there is one notable similarity that can be determined. Domestic terrorism is more idiosyncratic to the motivations of their causes and extremist ideologies (Levin, Eubank & Weinberg, 2006). It is worth noting that domestic terrorism is hard to ignore; therefore, it is critical understanding the nature of domestic terrorism threats and the circumstances behind these attacks. Due to the devastation and death toll of the magnitude of the terrorist attack of September 11,

2001, in this country, it is easy for the majority of the American public to believe that terrorism has its origins internationally (Hoffman, 1997). However, between 1980 and

2001, at least 310 out of 482 episodes of terrorist incidents had been derived from anti- government groups.

This review focuses on understanding domestic terrorism and the motivations behind extreme ideological violence. Most importantly, understanding the methods these actors are willing to use to maximize their objectives is paramount. One of the most important first steps in this study is to identify who the perpetrators are. Where are they coming? What are the objectives from the attacks? Likewise, are the erosion of faith and assurance in political organizations motivations for their violent attacks.? To further explore the paradigms of domestic terrorism in the State of Colorado, this review explores the research on the multiple motivations and explanations in the direct involvement of violence by white supremacist groups and whether or not they represent a clear and present threat to Colorado. One overreaching conclusion stands out sharply with the unpredictability of domestic terrorism as the commission of these attacks will not be expected to disappear suddenly Brockhoff, Krieger & Meierrieks, 2015). Instead, the degree of success or failure depends on comprehending the actual circumstances behind these attacks and understanding government policy implementations.

1.2 The Systematic Review

This systematic review primarily focuses on the motivations and explanations of domestic terrorism and the threats of white supremacists groups. Furthermore, this paper carefully examines the current knowledge as well as the opinions about domestic terrorism, as it is defined in several ways in popular media and scholarly literature, creating confusion. For the purposes of this review, Domestic terrorism consists of “acts or attempted acts of terrorism in which the perpetrators are citizens or permanent

2 residents of the country in which the action takes place and are not members or agents of foreign or international terrorist organizations” (Chermak & Gruenewald, 2006, p. 429).

Second, domestic terrorists are people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements that have killed

American citizens and damaged property across the country (Bjelopera, 2017). Third, domestic terrorism constitutes the illegitimate use of force to achieve political objectives when innocent people are targeted (Best, Nocella, & Anthony, 2004). Even more striking, when ample time and energy are devoted to analyzing international terroristic actions, the circumstances surrounding the problems of defining domestic terrorism are unclear. However, domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups are topics with a considerable amount of challenges.

Additionally, the purpose of this systematic review is to expand existing knowledge of white supremacist groups in the State of Colorado. The main objective of white supremacist movements is to provide concrete organizational and institutional settings where recruiting, celebrating, protesting, committing violent acts bring individuals together (McDermott & Samson, 2005). In particular, the FBI explains that individuals belonging to this group engage with a range of violent crimes, including civil rights violations, racketeering, firearms and explosives violations, and witness tampering

(Federal Bureau Investigation, 2012).

As of February 2017, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) report identified

100 active white nationalists and 99 functional neo-Nazi groups in the country (SPLC,

2017). At the individual level, most of the groups’ demographics are comprise a younger demographic of individuals in their 20s and 30s and primarily target youth for

3 recruitment through social media platforms (Schils & Verhage, 2017). Substantially, with the advent of the internet, social media has provided white supremacist groups to explore new outlets to spread their messages and recruit supporters (Lieberman, 2017).

Predominantly, it is relatively easy to recruit members as the internet provides an unrestricted and unregulated area of a domain where propaganda disseminates effortlessly.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to expand existing knowledge about the white supremacist groups in the State of Colorado by systematically reviewing the existing literature on this topic. More specifically, the present paper will examine two additional elements with the concept of domestic terrorism. First, by assessing if there is a current threat level inflicted by white supremacist groups in Colorado identified as white nationalists; the Patriot Front (PF), The Right Stuff (RS), the American Identity

Movement (AIM); Neo-Volkisch group, the Asatru Folk Assembly (AFA); and Neo-Nazi group, the Atom-Waffen Division (AWD). By establishing the reasons for these threat levels, a better understanding can be formulated to assess the threats and mitigate the risk of attacks. Additionally, law enforcement agencies deem anti-government violent extremists, not radicalized Muslims, to be the most severe threat of political violence that they face (Kurzman & Schanzer, 2015).

Second, it provides a reference for further explaining the importance of critical infrastructures like energy, transportation, and public health sectors. These sectors are significant targets of opportunities to be exploited by domestic terrorism or extremist attacks. Subsequently, to guard against the likelihood of these threats, the U.S. critical

4 infrastructure protection requires security from external threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences. Here, “threat is the likelihood that an attack occurs, and that likelihood includes the attacker’s intent, capability, and probabilities,”whereas “vulnerability is the likelihood an attack is successful, given that it is attempted, the consequence is the effects of an attack” (Taquechel & Saitgalina, 2018, p. 2). Further, critical infrastructure sectors interrelate with each other in such a way as to resemble a domino effect in which one sector’s collapse would affect the different sectors associated with its resources (Hemme,

2015).

1.4 Description of the Chapters

The basis for this systematic review is established here in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 will discuss the existing literature presented on domestic terrorism in general. It will provide background information on the issues concerning domestic terrorism and the prevalence that these threats represent. Additionally, this chapter will highlight the aspects of complicating domestic terrorism with the federal government and federal law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, it will depict the history and examples of domestic terrorism throughout history. The methodology of this systematic review and a summary of the resources will be annotated in chapter 3. The results of the research are presented in Chapter 4. The review concludes with chapter 5, by discussing the implications of domestic terrorism, by stating the limitations of this review, and by providing the recommendations from this research.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter, a review of the literature will bring to light the documentation that will support this study. It will respond to the issues of domestic terrorism to compel a deeper understanding of these threats. Furthermore, the review will include information from multiple published books on domestic terrorism, government documents, peer- reviewed journal articles, and government reports emphasizing the issues concerning domestic terrorism and the prevalence of these threats represent. The literature review will also specify why it is important to understand domestic terrorism at the federal government, the complications domestic terrorism presents towards a practical definition, clarifying domestic terrorism, and depicting the history and examples of domestic terrorism. Most importantly, the literature will highlight the aspects complication domestic terrorism, interpret the evolution of domestic terrorism, explain why the emerging threat of domestic terrorism is growing in the U.S., and explain the concepts of responding to the threat of domestic terrorism.

2.1 Defining Domestic Terrorism

Domestic terrorism is an act employed to deliver a message to a targeted audience. One of the most important objectives of a domestic terrorist group is to be identified as responsible for such acts. However, one particular factor with domestic terrorism is that it is widely divergent and does not receive the same attention as international extremist terrorism. Lichtblau (2005), explains that since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the threat of domestic terrorism has not received the same amount of attention as international extremist terrorism, and it does not have a specific

6 definition. However, the inescapable fact is that the vast majority of domestic terrorist attacks in this country have been committed and perpetrated by domestic extremist groups. Most importantly, to underscore the relevancy of these attacks, the Federal

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported in 1999 that in the last 30 years, most terrorist attacks were committed by domestic terrorists (FBI, 2000).

One pertinent issue with the definition of domestic terrorism is that it relies on the fact that most federal law enforcement agencies utilize different terminology and definitions to describe domestic terrorism. At the federal government, there are issues in assessing the significance of domestic terrorism. According to Riley and Hoffman

(1995), domestic terrorism’s problems are mainly contributing to the inability to define domestic terrorism, making it difficult to evaluate the scope of how this type of terrorist activity affects preventive and defensive strategies. Operationally, however, it is essential to recognize that although there is a significant presence with the threat of domestic terrorism, the problem is that there is no precise or entirely accepted definition of domestic terrorism, creating a deluge of vagueness.

From a pragmatic and strategic perspective, it is critical to establish a clear definition of domestic terrorism. First, what specific constitutes the term domestic terrorism? Second, what precise groups fall under “domestic terrorist” organizations. At one level, the term “domestic terrorism” is the most practical definition highlighting the

American citizens’ involvement in committing crimes driven by ideological goals. These actors do not have any influence or direction from foreign organizations, regardless of whether it is philosophical or tactical. Similarly, Hanley (2015), refers to the same analogy by stating that since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many

7 people have been killed by domestic terrorist groups and antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists as radical Muslims.

At a second level and with the most general statutory term, domestic terrorism is an action that will only engage in the homeland. Before going further into broader terms of domestic terrorism, it is essential to note that the FBI is responsible for leading federal investigations when these attacks occur at the national level. Sessions (1990), emphasizes that the FBI has a great responsibility within the U.S. government to fight against domestic terrorism; therefore, understanding what this organization is fighting is a critical mission. The FBI relies in general on two fundamental sources for the definition of domestic terrorism, first, the Code of Federal Regulations and second, the 18 USC.

Section 2331(5) (Bjelopera et al., 2017). One of the most significant characteristics of the Code of Federal Regulations is that it identifies “terrorism” as unlawful use of force and violence to intimidate a government or civilian population to attain political or social objectives (Litman, 2004). On the contrary, the 18 USC. Section 2331(5) explains that domestic terrorism occurs within the U.S. jurisdiction and involves:

(A) acts dangerous to human life that is a violation of the United States’ criminal laws or any state;

(B) appear to be intended;

(I) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(II) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(III) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

2.1.1 The Problems Toward a Practical Definition of Domestic Terrorism

As previously noted, even when researchers and government officials encounter difficulties with the agreement on a specific term for domestic terrorism, one of the most damaging issues is that not all individuals committing these attacks are prosecuted under federal terrorism statutes. Smith, Damphousse, Jackson, and Sellers (2002), explain that even when the U.S. government tried to prosecute domestic terrorists with traditional criminal trials, the extent to federal prosecutors "explicit politicized" these trials vary among the types of terrorist groups yielding to unsuccessful prosecutions. In this case, there is devastating and little evidence about that proven tools to prosecute domestic terrorist is not openly delineated. The problems toward a practical definition of domestic terrorism create an indistinctness problem that worsens the capability to investigate this phenomenon and dilutes the effectiveness in dealing with domestic terrorism.

Consequently, the most visual and controversial aspects of a practical definition empower the inability to help prevent domestic terrorism. They are other detrimental factors paving the way to domestic terrorism problems based on ideological rhetoric and social media. The difficulty of understanding domestic terrorism and the ambiguity with its definition creates issues at the federal investigative process with this criminal activity

(Rabe‐Hemp, 2014). Even when there is an inability to accurately define domestic terrorism among researchers and at different national government levels, this term is widely used within various federal law enforcement agencies. Therefore, this case study will continue to use the term “domestic terrorism” even when there is ambiguity with its meaning.

2.1.2 What is Domestic Terrorism?

After a brief explanation of defining domestic terrorism and its definition leads to problems toward a practical meaning to persecute individuals involved in domestic terrorism, it is imperative to underscore what domestic terrorism encompasses as most of the ambiguity for a narrower definition remains opaque. To further explore the factors involving domestic terrorism, this section will vastly concentrate on describing this phenomenon. In simple terms, most domestic terrorist attacks often involve the use of firearms, arson, explosive offenses, crimes relating to fraud, threats, and hoaxes

(Cordesman, 2002). The threat of domestic terrorism in this country has not been abated; instead, there are many domestic terrorist groups. Their modus-operandi is profoundly robust with the implementation of sophisticated communications and the exploitation of technology. Additionally, domestic terrorist organizations' main objectives are to establish centralized leadership and radicalization efforts to create best practices to integrate their operations' goals (Waxman, 2009; Dahl, 2015).

The perceptions mentioned above are consistent with the statement that the threats of domestic terrorism continue to adapt and evolve despite federal counterterrorism efforts to increase the public's safety. In this case, weighing the consequences with the protection of critical infrastructure and the public is an ongoing debate when the key decision-makers and law enforcement agencies focus on domestic terrorism issues and national security. Along these lines, Svendsen (2012), notes that the criticality of domestic terrorism, the security threats posed by its attacks, and the changing nature of these occurrences places considerable emphasis on counterterrorism policies.

Individually and collectively, the ability to engage in domestic terrorism measures increases the importance of preventing attacks and improves preparedness for counterterrorism measures.

An additional peculiarity with contemporary domestic terrorism is that like any other form of terrorism, i.e., international terrorism or state-sponsored terrorism, violence against civilian targets, or the threats of violence with physical bodily harm creates a dark atmosphere of anxiety and fear. A different number of factors also are interconnected with domestic terrorism; however, at the end of this spectrum, domestic terrorism is an unlawful use of force against civilians, the destruction of critical infrastructure, and the furtherance of their extreme ideologies (Campbell & Flournoy, 2001; Harrow, 2008;

Badey, 2006). Moreover, the empirical evidence becomes overwhelming with the evolving threat of domestic terrorism. Mostly, as it continues to escalate with terrorist attacks perpetrated by anti-government groups or the arbitrary series of deadly aggression committed by active shooters.

These dynamics suggest two critical implications; first, these vulnerabilities are incredibly notable in depicting these attacks. Second, these threats continue to underestimate the safety of the public, the government, and federal law enforcement agencies. Among other considerations, there are at least eight primary factors that bear on domestic terrorism: the factor of violence, the required intention, the nature of the victim, the connection of the offender to the state, the justice and motive of their cause, the level of organization, the element of theatre and the absence of guilt (Fletcher, 2006).

The following portions of this sub-section will underscore how presenting this information is a profound weapon to understand these threats' essential indications. It

11 will also explain why domestic terrorism's contemporary threat environments of domestic terrorism are embedded with violent elements. Additionally, underscoring how the imminent threats of domestic terrorism pose a great concern by these alleged perpetrators embracing violent extremist ideologies.

Domestic terrorists rely on the "factor of violence" as it is ordinarily the use of violence to achieve political or ideological goals and achieve the most considerable publicity for their acts' atrocities. For instance, Koerner and Byers (2000), recognized that having the ability to influence their ideologies is more prominent by inflicting physical damage to civilian populations or achieving long-term psychological repercussions. On the contrary, the most visual manifestations of "the required intention" is recruitment, radicalization, and proliferation with the advent of the internet and social media. Clarke and Newman's (2006), article discuss a massive increase of proliferation by using these platforms to facilitate radicalization efforts with unlimited virtual access.

Conversely, the factor of “the nature of the victims” is one of the most critical steps for large-scale operations of domestic attacks, and the main target of opportunities are the civilian population or random victims. As an illustration, the FBI reported that a total of 165 terrorist incidents from the period 1982 to 1992 occurring domestically, primarily by domestic terrorist groups attempting to kill civilians in confined and populated areas (Ruby, 2002). Furthermore, “the connection of the offender to the state” is mostly carry-out by terrorist lone actors (lone wolves), primarily, as many groups are relaying toward lone-offenders attacks as they are not easy to identify, investigate, or disrupt lonely operations. The FBI recorded 20 domestic terrorist attacks in the U.S. between 2000 and 2001, and at least four of the 20 attacks were perpetrated and carry-out

12 by lone actors eager to express their ideologies (Clarke & Newman et al., 2006; Gill &

Corner, 2013; Borum, Fein & Vossekuil, 2012). One of the primary reasons to act alone was because of the operational demands of organizational structure.

In a more pragmatic sense for domestic terrorists, the factor of "justice and motive of their cause" are among the most important. For example, Fletcher et al., (2006) maintained a significant implication stemming from domestic influences as domestic terrorist groups further their ideological, social, racial, and political goals. Additionally, the interplay of interest in domestic terrorism is critical with the factor of "the level of organization" as most organizations are formed with robust operational procedures for their particular level of extreme and high-profile ideological activities. As a practical organization, the use of non-traditional tactics, social media exploitation, and the internet's exploitation are significant for their extremism goals (Cornish, Lindley-French

& Yorke, 2011; Combs, 2017).

Another related factor is “the element of theater,” as it is an essential first step within domestic terrorist groups’ operations and resources and the theater of operations.

For example, Bennell and Corey (2008), explain that geographic profiling areas include; places of interest for the federal government, critical infrastructure, private property, and worship places. The last factor is the “absence of guilt,” which is one of the most controversial aspects for three reasons. First, ideology plays a crucial role in terrorist attacks; second, their ideologies provide an initial motive for their attacks or threats; and third, they feel justified to adopt the use of violence. An interesting twist in the absence of guilt is that violence is justified by displacing the responsibility onto either their victims or other groups (Drake, 1998; Smith, 2008).

2.2 History and Examples of Domestic Terrorism

As previously stated in the introduction chapter, the bombing of the Alfred P.

Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, by Timothy McVeigh’s was not the first time a domestic terrorist attack occurred in this country, claiming the lives of 168 and injured more than 500 others. However, it is essential to note that this attack, in terms of the magnitude of the casualties, is second only to the events of

September 11, 2001 (Stickney, 1996; Kight, 2010). One pertinent observation is that the fruitions of domestic terrorism are not a recent event, and the history of domestic terrorism has been inextricably bound to this country. According to Okoye (2018), it is also critical to evaluate past terrorism incidents to learn from historical facts to understand the current and envisage the future domestic and extremist attacks.

Based on chronological records, occurrences of domestic terrorist attacks had taken place throughout history in this country as long as there is a strategic benefit for these attacks. For instance, as early as 1857, the Mountain Meadows massacre was a series of attacks on the Baker-Fancher emigrant wagon train at Mountain Meadows in southern Utah (Denton et al. 2007). Within the same parameters, another notable example with similar ideologies and characteristics of domestic terrorism in the early

20th century includes the Milwaukee Police Department bombing by the Church of the

Anarchist Movement in 1917 (Cornell et al., 2016). At the individual level, the most recent domestic terrorist attack in modern history occurred in El Paso, Texas, at the

Walmart shooting on August 3, 2019, by Patrick Crusius. He argued that his motivation was a rational decision as he sought to terminate Texas's Hispanic invasion and complete

14 the extermination of the ethnic and cultural replacement brought by this widespread invasion (Parada et al., 2019).

Domestic terrorist groups mainly drive the degree of success or failure emanating from their threats and extreme ideologies. For instance, domestic terrorist organizations are mostly motivated to commit atrocities in the name of their subjective ideologies.

Another significant alternative explanation in this respect is that "Aware of the lines between constitutionally protected speech and criminality; domestic terrorists often rope themselves off from ideological (above-ground) elements that openly and often legally espouse similar beliefs" (Bjelora et al., 2017, p. 2). For instance, regardless of whether domestic terrorist groups operate autonomously or utterly in secret, all share one determination; the nourishment of their ideologies to commit violent crimes or project their acts' propaganda. Domestic terrorists place a pronounced emphasis on how attacks can be categorized, from conventional criminal activity, to opportunistically inflicting harm (Spaaij, 2011; Michael, 2012; Silkoset, 2016; Hamm & Spaaij, 2017).

This section will identify and illustrate the different domestic terrorism examples taking place in this country in six categories: the name of the attack, the perpetrator (s) of the attack, the reason(s) for the attack, what was the objective(s), the use of the tactic(s), and the ramifications of the attack.

As previously stated, it is almost unquestionable that the Oklahoma City bombing is the deadliest domestic terrorist attack on U.S. soil. 168 people died, and 759 injured, mainly when the building collapsed after a bomb carried inside a Ryder truck exploded

(Teague, 2004). The specter of this attack, Timothy J. McVeigh, was a U.S. Army recipient of a Bronze Start for servicing a Bradley vehicle along the Kuwait Border in

1991 while reacting to an ambush from Iraqi forces. Mainly, there were two reasons he committed this devastating attack; first, he distrusts the government; and second, he believed that the government was conspiring to disarm and slave the American people

(Beardsley & Beech, 2013). Given the crucial importance and devastation of this attack,

McVeigh’s tactics were not utterly multifaceted. The attack consisted of placing a van in front of the federal building with 5,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate and nitromethane and an ignition device. The ramifications of this attack were numerous; first, he ignited and altered a revolution of the militia movement; and second, he changed domestic terrorism drastically; and third, efforts at the federal government were implemented to strengthen national anti-terrorism laws (Gottman, 1999; Goertzel, 2002; Mullins &

Thurman, 2011).

Another tragic domestic terrorist attack occurred in 2009 in Fort Hood, Texas, on

November 5 2009, this attack is commonly known as the 2009 Fort Hood Shooting. The death toll included 13 people (12 military members and one Department of Defense

(DoD) employee) and 29 wounded (Kenber, 2013; Porterfield, A. & Porterfield J., 2015).

The perpetrator of this attack was Virginia-born Nidal M. Hasan, a U.S. Major Army

Medical Corps, serving as a psychiatrist. This attack is considered one of the most infamous examples of lone-actor terrorism (Poppe, 2018). To a large degree, the reasons why Hasan committed this attack was imparted as a jihad to fight illegal and immoral aggression from the government. Furthermore, the objective of this attack was to complete his mission of radicalization. According to Gruen (2010) and Szpunar (2013), the attack’s ramifications of the led intelligence and law enforcement communities to re- evaluate counterterrorism processes and assumptions about radicalization in the U.S.

Within the same shooting parameters as the method of delivering a message of domestic terrorism, the Orlando nightclub shooting was a domestic terrorist attack at a gay club on June 12, 2016. This terrorist attack was considered the deadliest shooting by a single shooter until Las Vegas Shooting in 2017 (Stonehem, 2016; Walter, Billard &

Murphy, 2017). The perpetrator of the attack was Omar Mateen, an American-born citizen, and his actions led to the death of 49 people and 53 injured. Although he had no ties to any international terrorist organizations, he was inspired by the Islamic State of

Iraq and Levant (ISIL); therefore, the reasons for the attacks lead to his pledged allegiance to ISIL. These terrorist attacks' objective was not directly to the extermination of gay people; instead, it was a target of opportunity (Meyer, 2020). Crenshaw and La

Free (2017), estimated that there were no distinctive tactics used in this attack; instead,

Omar Mateen merely legally bought a semi-automatic rifle and a 9mm handgun to conduct this deadly attack. In retrospect, the attack's ramifications highlighted the vulnerabilities of lax gun control in the U.S. and the spike in gun sales motivated by increased threat perceptions of future attacks (Cook, 1983; Squires, 2012).

The Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting occurred on October 17, 2018, at the Tree of

Life, L'Smicha Congregation, in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood in Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania. The attack was perpetrated by Robert Bowers, a conservative with anti- government tendencies, hints of paranoid, and violent thoughts, which later transformed him into a far-right white supremacist (Brody, 2019; Jones, 2018). During this attack, 11 people were killed, and seven were injured. Tobias, Roth, Weiss, Murray, and Yealy

(2020), highlight that political ideologies and targeting a specific group were the motivations for this vicious attack. For the most part, the attack's objective was to

17 exterminate Jews as he believed that they were committing genocide to his people and blamed Jews for helping the exodus of migrant caravans U.S.-Mexico border. The use of tactics was not a critical factor; he was a vivid arm collector and have an active license to carry firearms (Vogel-Scibilia, 2020). This attack's ramification demonstrated the capacities of the impact of social media sites that foment hate speeches (Mathew, Dutt,

Goyal, & Mukherjee, 2019).

The San Bernardino Attack in the State of California combined two methods of inflicting casualties at a vulnerable target of opportunity; first, a mass shooting; and second, an attempting bombing (Fitzpatrick, 2018; Picart, 2017). The attack was the deadliest mass shooting attack in this country since the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting and the fatal domestic terrorist attack since September 11, 2001 (Bennett, 2018).

The attackers, Syed R. Farook, an American citizen born in Chicago, Illinois, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik; the attack resulted in the death of 14 and 22 injured. Both perpetrators were not part of any terrorist cell; however, they were inspired by foreign terrorist groups (Schmidt & Perez-Pena, 2015; Cohen & Taylor, 2018). In one direction, the reasons for the attack revolved around their radicalization and martyrdom. In a second direction, the objective of the attack was to inflict as many casualties as possible.

In this attack, there was plenty of immense target practice with firearms and detailed planning. Studdert, Zhang, Rodden, Hyndman, and Wintemute (2017), go as far as suggesting that the ramifications of the attack led to yet another federal gun control discussion and the expansion of stringent background checks for gun sales.

The last and most lethal example of domestic terrorist attacks is El Paso Shooting at a Walmart Store on August 3, 2019, in the Cielo Vista Mall. The perpetrator was

Patrick L. Crusius, a 21-year-old American citizen from Allen, Texas (Sparrow, 2019).

Predominantly, the reason for the attack was the inspiration of a far-right conspiracy theory known as the "the Great Replacement." The objective of the attack was the fulfillment of his manifesto titled "The Inconvenient Truth" posted on the 8chan (white supremacist website), an imageboard website created to post online messages (Quek,

2019; Sheppard, 2019). Crusius spent countless hours researching his tactics, practicing firing with various weapons of different caliber, and acquittanced himself with anti- immigration propaganda. The ramification of this attack was the FBI's incompetence in investigating and promptly disseminating information about the rising threat of homegrown racially motivated terrorism, even when Crusius posted the details of the attack online with his manifesto (Maldonado, 2020; Lavi, 2020).

The individuals mentioned above were not prosecuted as domestic terrorists because of the lack of chargeable federal or state domestic terrorism. It is more difficult when the federal statute makes it difficult for law enforcement to investigate, prosecute, and track overall domestic terrorism trends (O'Neill, 2004; Vardalis & Waters, 2010).

Perhaps, the most dramatic example of why domestic terrorists are not prosecuted federally is because there is no chargeable offense for domestic terrorism at the federal or state level (Goodell, 2015). Another problematic factor contributing to the legal dilemma of prosecuting individuals with domestic terrorism is that although there is a federal statute defining domestic terrorism, it does not include any domestic terrorism offenses

(Anderson, 2019; Molstad, 2020).

2.2.1 Critical Aspects Complicating Domestic Terrorism

Up to this point, the previous sections highlighted the contrast between why

19 defining domestic terrorism is essential, the problems toward a practical definition at the federal level, what is domestic terrorism, and depicted the history and examples of domestic terrorism. Despite the numerous factors contributing to the significance of domestic terrorism, there are continual efforts toward utterly understanding domestic terrorism and the emphasis on the factors complicating domestic terrorism. In this case, this section will provide significantly more data to be analyzed for federal law enforcement agencies to counter domestic terrorist attacks. The awareness of the interconnectivity of the causes of domestic terrorism and potentially influential factors.

The identification of terrorism driving forces is a critical portion of understanding domestic terrorist groups. By far, the most visual effects of domestic terrorism are the upsurge of violence in the commission of these acts, the widespread of ideologies, and the difficulty to detect and prevent domestic terrorist threats (Wilkinson, 1995; Worrall,

1999). Equally significant, the proliferation of current threats, the hasty radicalization of potential recruits, and the impact that social media has in reaching massive audiences to spread propaganda with free platforms sites as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, among others (Deflem, 2005; Parker, 2007). According to Bjelopera et al., (2017), a specialist in terrorism at the Congressional Research Service, the critical step of collecting funds for training and planning future attacks is a fundamental idea for creating the most lethal driving force with terrorist attacks. Adding to these problems, domestic terrorism is incessantly fluctuating as a violent and multifaceted threat.

From a pragmatic tactical standpoint, non-traditional tactics for domestic terrorists are not the same as extremist Jihadist tactics. For descriptive purposes, as hijacking an airplane to use it as a projectile to inflict mass casualties or the indiscriminate use of

20 suicide bombing (Frost, 2005; Biddle, 2005; Breazeale, Pleggenkuhle-Miles, Ligon &

Harms, 2015). Instead, most tactical activities engage in domestic terrorist attacks, including mass shootings, vandalism, destruction of property, critical infrastructure, and bombings (Smith, 1994; Purpura, 2011). In the most extreme cases, domestic terrorist organizations or lone-wolfs rely on paramilitary tactics, survival skills, weapons familiarization, target practices, and, most importantly, becoming familiar with their movements' ideologies (Bolz, Dudonis & Schulz, 2016; Hudson, 2018). For instance,

Kirchner's (2013) article discusses the circumstances in which the combination and culmination of these tactics are essential to instill fear of civilian populations and pose a significant threat to national security.

At the same time, perversely, the level of domestic terrorist activity has increased radically since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks (Crenshaw, 2007; Ackerman,

2003; Parker & Stern, 2002). However, the basic argument of the level of activity from domestic terrorism is difficult to disclose. It is difficult to evaluate the scope of their actions as terrorist groups or sympathizers are driven by different and particular ideologies (Mythen & Walklate, 2006; Nemeth, 2014). According to Dershowitz (2002) and Newman (2007), another detrimental part of tracking the level of activities by a domestic terrorist group is that the U.S. government does not keep a public list of terrorist incidents, making it particularly challenging to measure these particular threats.

Since the federal government does not either publish or generates a list of domestic terrorist groups or sympathizers, it creates an anomaly within the concept of domestic terrorism (Schmid, 2004; Tappeiner, 2005). Mahan and Griset (2012), underscore that adding to the constellation of issues, the lack of an official public list

21 makes it extremely difficult to assess the threats or evaluate what efforts to implement to counter domestic terrorist threats. Therefore, without the designation of terrorist groups, the alleged legal actions against these groups fail utterly to explain the reasons why acts of violence are not individually reported by law enforcement agencies (Marcus, 1994;

Cuéllar, 2004). As it is often the case, the primary focus of a policy is to address issues.

However, vagueness still lingering without an official public list when the federal government is uncertain what constitutes a domestic terrorist organization (Young, 2006;

Beckman, 2013).

It sounds overly pragmatic that the FBI does not include domestic terrorist organizations in its “Terrorist Screening Database” (TSDB), also known as “terrorist watchlist” (Bjelopera, Elias & Siskin, 2016; De Goede & Sullivan, 2016). Citron and

Pasquale (2010), provide an analysis that demonstrates that this is not entirely shocking as the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General has criticized the list for frequent errors and slow response to domestic terrorist threats. It is for these reasons that the development and implementation of an official CT are critical.

2.3 The Evolution of Domestic Terrorism

As time passed, domestic terrorism's evolution has undergone radical and dramatic changes in recent years. Especially, Young et al., (2006) and Catron (2017), point out that fanaticism and ideologies are the most underlying factors in the evolution of domestic terrorism. According to Norris, Kern, and Just (2003), domestic terrorism has been dominated by pragmatic considerations such as public opinions and political and social change in past years. While exploring the evolution of terrorism, Pluchinsky

(2006), concluded that one of the most substantial issues with domestic terrorism is that

22 organizations rely more on lethality as mass shootings, death, and property destruction.

Valeri and Borgeson (2018), describe that the most visible dynamics in domestic terrorism evolution are changes from previous years with sophisticated technology, social media, and news coverage.

As previously stated, the internet and social media have dramatically increased facilitation options and strategies for domestic terrorist groups and lone-wolfs. From these vantage points and platforms, the percentage of online radicalization and recruitment has soared to the skies (Neumann, 2013; Vargas, 2017). Among other options, the most valuable is that terrorist groups can attain more effective approaches, more productive strategies, and a more effective lethal force. "The following is an example of the degree to which terrorists engaged in online activities. Of 119 individuals, 35% interacted virtually with a wider network of activities, while 46% learned aspects of their attack method by using virtual sources" (Gill, Horgan & Deckert,

2014, pg. 102). Therefore, it will be prudent for federal law enforcement agencies to deeply understand and penetrate this virtual environment to prevent domestic terrorism with a strategic framework to enhance this nation's security (Brownlow, 2013; Della

Porta, 2018).

Conceivably, the most dramatic example in the evolution of domestic terrorism is the proliferation of right and left-wing extremist groups and the sporadic nature of domestic terrorist attacks. Seger (2001) and Chenoweth (2010), explain that left-wing radical groups have a prominent footprint domestically and internationally; however, the current level of threats from domestic terrorist groups emanates principally from right- wing extremist groups. Both extremist groups continuously evolve with their ideologies

23 and goals to a significant degree and have clearly defined characteristics, but they differ depending on their specific ideologies (Laqueur, 1996). Much of the focus on these extremist groups is that the federal government and law enforcement agencies must be conscious of their proliferation and criminal activities (Baysinger, 2006). It is probably worth noting, as Beck (2002), indicates that the threat posed by these groups is a persistent and present danger. Therefore, to safeguard the public and infrastructure's safety, it is imperative to have a continuous cognizance of their extremist beliefs and unlawful activities (Kydd & Walter, 2006).

The perpetual evolution of domestic terrorism’s radicalization and recruitment will always create a considerable amount of pressure on the government and federal law enforcement agencies to mitigate these threats (Hafez & Mullins, 2015; Mueller &

Stewart, 2016). McCauley and Moskalenko (2011), cite the struggles of the extreme nature and unpredictability of these threats and note that it is becoming harder to predict and prevent these threats due to the diversification and evolution of domestic terrorism.

As an illustration, during a hearing before the US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reforms. Gartenstein-Ross (2015), explains that another dilemma domestic terrorism present is that every group does not utilize identical capabilities, distinctive sophistication of their modus-operandi, and criminal approaches.

Subsequently, the tangible cost of radicalization and recruitment plays a critical role in enabling the mobilization of violence and facilitating acts of terrorism (Angelini, 2017).

2.3.1 Why the Emerging Threat of Domestic Terrorism is Growing in the U.S.?

It is relatively unprecedented that the emerging threat of domestic terrorism is growing at alarming rates in this country. Even when there have been reforms to fight

24 domestic terrorist organizations, these threats still concern law enforcement agencies and, primarily, the federal government. Miller (2013), notes the criticality of this issue by emphasizing that amid the challenges why domestic terrorism is growing is the online incitement of several extremist and radical websites to encourage violent acts and property destruction. Adding to this problem is the perseverance to inflict serious bodily harm or death to civilians or distort the government (Robert, Eric & John, 2013; Hardy,

2011). However, despite the recognition that websites transcend geographical and physical boundaries, the inability to distort and combat incitement online is limited by the

First Amendment of the Constitution (Renieris, 2008; Barak-Erez & Scharia, 2011).

With these detrimental caveats lingering with domestic terrorism, achieving a proper balance to counter these threats is implausible.

Domestic terrorism is a complex and asymmetric threat, and this hatred environment of uncertainties creates a myriad of self-inflicted issues (Lambakis, Kiras &

Kolet, 2002; Fenstermacher, Rieger & Speckhard; 2010). First, legal constraints limit the fighting of domestic terrorism; second, there are numerous vulnerabilities with government strategies and policies to fight domestic terrorism; third, the level of unpreparedness in what priorities are appropriate to understand these threats (Ressler,

2006). Neumann and Smith (2007), observe that there are no coordination efforts between the federal government, the intelligence community, and law enforcement agencies to address domestic terrorism actions.

There are other issues with paradoxical consequences influencing why domestic terrorism is growing in the U.S. In terms of discord, there are two elements in this process. First, there is a solemn antipathy against the federal government. Second, there

25 is hatred and anger against the government (Boyd, Berk & Hamner, 1996; Bailey, 1998).

In terms of civil freedoms, the unceasing debate over U.S. gun policies and legislation on banning semiautomatic assault weapons is a prime paradigm for domestic terrorism growing at alarming rates (Cramer, 1994). Collier (2014), observes two connections; gun ownership is rooted in the Second Amendment of the Constitution, and the U.S. Supreme

Court has upheld firearms arms restrictions to individuals with domestic terrorist connections.

Even when there is a colossal cacophony from the restriction of firearms, hatred, and anger, another pronounced motivational factor for the proliferation of domestic terrorist groups is the perceived injustice imparted in these groups. Therefore, it is essential to note the interconnectivity between the sense of belonging and no-belonging to terrorist groups (Borum, 2010; Charkawi, Dunn & Bliuc, 2020). For example, the sense of belonging rests with the fellowship of social identity with a particular domestic terrorist group, and it is a critical contributor to the predisposition to support extremism groups (Pyszczynski, Motyl & Abdollahi, 2009). On the contrary, Bartlett and Miller

(2012), explain that the sense of non-belonging increases the process of radicalization of recruits when there is a social rejection from other groups, families, and society.

Along the parameters encompassing the sense of belonging, there are more deeply rooted issues with the government's function, leading to the growing threat of domestic terrorism and socio-economic challenges. More recently, however, the focus has immensely shifted to the U.S. economic crisis (Syverson, 2017). In a more aggressive approach to the financial crisis, Rothman, Romero-Lankao, Schweizer & Bee (2014), suggest that as the implications of poverty and grievances increase in society, individuals

26 are drawn to radicalization and recruitment by domestic terrorist groups. Along the way, the same analysis can be applied to socio-economic challenges. The profound strain placed on these individuals results from aggressive behavior in domestic terrorism

(Saper, 1988; Vertigans, 2013).

Despite the efforts of the government to conceptualize domestic terrorism, "The

Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) do not officially designate domestic terrorist organizations, but they have openly delineated domestic terrorist threats" (Bjelopera et al., 2017, p. 2). In all likelihood, there are no indications that domestic terrorism is diminishing; on the contrary, the threat of domestic terrorism is challenging the safety of the public and national security. Under these circumstances, Lovelace (2018), observes that domestic terrorism issues should be more protruding and require the full attention of Congress, federal, state, local law enforcement agencies, and the public. Without achieving a proper balance, the emerging threat of domestic terrorism in this county will strengthen its radicalization and ideologies and prevail with its effectiveness (Stepanova, 2008; Sánchez-Cuenca & De la Calle, 2009).

2.3.2 Responding to the Threat of Domestic Terrorism

In light of the uncertainties surrounding domestic terrorism, it is preeminent to uncover its root causes to prevent future attacks, and correspondingly, it allows an ample opportunity to understand these threats (Bauman et al., 2013). As a result, understanding domestic terrorism's threats is an essential tactic for the federal government to minimize ambivalence. As already emphasized, domestic terrorist organizations or lone-wolfs will always be willing to carry out attacks to further their ideological goals. Hence, finding

27 ways to mitigate these threats is more feasible as it is virtually impossible to prevent every domestic terrorist attack or the threat itself (Frey, 2004; Posner, 2005).

For example, Aly (2013), clarifies that as a remedy to face a complex, uncertain, and evolving threat of terrorism, the federal government must confront these challenges by enforcing current best practices developed to fight terrorism. The question is not whether the federal government is conducting the best practices are working against the threat of terrorism. Moreover, the question is how to develop more stringent visions which can provide a more holistic approach to extremist ideologies. First, to prevent domestic terrorism; two, to curtail the violence that originated in this country; and third, to provide the resource necessary to federal law enforcement agencies to counter these threats in their jurisdictions.

CHAPTER 3

METHODS

As previously mentioned, the purpose of this systematic review is to examine three components. The specific research questions asked are as follows: Is there a threat of domestic terrorism in the State of Colorado with the proliferation of white supremacist groups? What practical changes must occur for Colorado to conceptualize these threats to facilitate tangible recommendations? What steps are necessary to implement to prevent future attacks with counter-radicalization strategies to identify domestic attacks’ trends? In summary, this systematic review is intended to expand the existing knowledge about the current threat of domestic terrorism, focusing on white supremacist groups’ structures, tactics, and ideologies.

3.1 Data Collection

Multiple articles, peer-reviewed articles, and books were gathered from various sources to collect from the existing literature available. To account for available variations, the research for this systematic review was attained from multiple search engines such as, the University of Colorado’s (UCCS) One-Search engine, ProQuest

Criminal Justice Database, the SPLC’s database, google scholar, Journal Storage

(JSTOR), United States Code, the FBI website, Office of Homeland Security, and

Published Books. As previously stated, researchers and officials encounter difficulties with the agreement on a specific term for domestic terrorism (Silke, 2001; Rich, 2004).

Therefore, to familiarize domestic terrorism with this review, the following key phrases were included with the research to develop an objective, well-researched thesis: the causes of domestic terrorism, the threat of domestic terrorism, understanding the threat

29 of domestic terrorism, strategies to combat domestic terrorism, influence of white supremacist groups, white supremacist groups’ threats, and why is it critical to study white supremacist groups. The collection of these sources mentioned above will help this research understand the relationships between domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups.

3.2 Articles and Books Included

To emphasize the prevalence of domestic terrorism, the threat of white supremacist groups, and the prospect these threats represent to the federal government and federal law enforcement agencies. Table 3.1 underneath lists the articles and books included in the “Findings” chapter, and it is organized by the author (s), the year of publication, and the articles' title. Table 3.2 is organized by author (s) name (s), the year of publication, the title of the articles and the books, and the reasons for the omissions.

The organization used in this research served to highlight the importance of domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups, and the visibility of emerging threats or attacks.

There were a total of 25 articles and 17 books that were systematically reviewed to examine the causes of domestic terrorism, and white supremacist groups. The specific findings from each article and book will be discussed in more detail in the “Findings”

Chapter. The articles and books ranged from specific causes to domestic terrorist groups to white supremacist groups' threats. Additionally, it should be noted that only articles and books written in English were considered for this systematic review. Furthermore, the time span for this review started in 1995 with the Oklahoma City bombing. The rationale for this time span is that this attack has been categorized as the deadliest domestic terrorist attack in the history of the U.S. In addition, peer-reviewed articles

30 were collected from multiple sources. Lastly, the geographic location of the materials used were studies conducted in the U.S.

Table 3.1: Articles and Books Included in the Review

Author Year Title Journal Noricks, D. M. (2009). The Root Causes of Social Science for Terrorism Counterterrorism, 74: 06-11 Peterson, P. A. (2019). Domestic Terrorism in the Johns Hopkins University. United States: Ideology, Baltimore, Maryland. Radicalization, Mobilization, and the Law. Piazza, J. A. (2011). Poverty, Minority Journal of Peace Research, 48(3), Economic, Discrimination, 339-353. and Domestic Terrorism. Ghatak, S., & (2017). The Homegrown Threat: International Interactions. Vol. 43, Prins, B. C. State Strength, Grievance, No. 2, 217–247 and Domestic Terrorism. Riedel, M., & (2002). Criminal violence: Los Angeles: Roxbury. Welsh, W. N. Patterns, Causes, and Prevention Mooney, C. (2014). Domestic Terrorism Greenhaven Publishing LLC. Kellner, D. (2015). Guys and Guns Amok: Department of Economics, School Domestic terrorism and of Economic, Political & Policy school shootings from the Sciences, University of Texas at Oklahoma City bombing Dallas. Routledge. to the Virginia Tech massacre Kushner, H. W. (1997). The Future of Terrorism. Violence in the New Millennium. Sage Publications. Burch, J. (2007). (2007). A Domestic Intelligence Homeland Security Affairs, 3(2) Agency for the United States? A Comparative Analysis of Domestic Intelligence Agencies and their Implications for Homeland Security. Goss, T. (2006). "Who's in charge?" New Homeland Security Affairs, 2(1) Challenges in Homeland Defense and Homeland Security. Koehler, D. (2019). Violence and Terrorism International Center for from the Far-Right: Policy CounterTerrorism. Options to Counter an Elusive Threat. Bakker, E. (2012). Forecasting Terrorism: Journal of Strategic Security, 5(4), The Need for a More 69-84. Systematic Approach. Howitt, A. M. (2003). Countering Terrorism: MIT Press. Dimensions of Preparedness

Author Year Title Journal Davis, R. (1998). Combating Terrorism: US Government Accountability Observations on the Nunn- Office, National Security and Lugar-Domenici Domestic International Affairs Division, & Preparedness Program. United States of America. Harrison, T. (2016). Book Review of International Journal of Criminal Understanding Terrorism: Justice Sciences, 11(2), 187-189. Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues. Turner, B. M., & (1998). Counter-Terrorism, Anti- Journal of Security Lovell, R. D. Terrorism, and Blowback! Administration, 21(1), 1-11. Toward Discovery of the Obvious. Borgeson, K., & (2009). Terrorism in America. Jones & Bartlett Learning. Valeri, R. Martin, G. (2017). Understanding Terrorism: SAGE publications. Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues. Williams, J. B. (2018). Domestic Terrorism in the Walden University United States. Vohryzek, M., (2001). Domestic Terrorism and Charles C. Thomas Publisher. Olson-Raymer, G., Incident Management: & Whamond, J. O. Issues and tactics. Borgeson, K. (2018). Right-Wing Domestic Terrorism in America, 39(39.3), Terrorism. 38.

Schils, N., & (2017). Understanding how and International Journal of Conflict Verhage, A. why young people enter and Violence, 11, 1C,1-17. radical or violent extremist groups. Gaibulloev, K., & (2013). Determinants of the Southern Economic Journal, 79(4), Sandler, T. Demise of Terrorist 774-792. Organizations. Kydd, A. H., & (2006). The Strategies of International security, 31(1), 49- Walter, B. F. Terrorism. 80. Indridason, I. H. (2008). Does Terrorism Influence Journal of Peace Research, 45(2), Domestic Politics? 241-259. Coalition Formation and Terrorist Incidents Suttmoeller, M., (2015). The Influence of External Studies in Conflict & Chermak, S., & and Internal Correlates on Terrorism, 38(9), 734-758. Freilich, J. D. the Organizational Death of Domestic Far-Right Extremist Groups Thomas, P., & (1993). U.S. Steps up Efforts to The Washington Post. Lippman, T. W. Combat Terrorism: Strategies Changing with Nature of Threat. Barbari, N. (2018). The Unintended Homeland Security Affairs Consequences of Countering Violent Extremism Efforts in America.

Author Year Title Journal

Dandurand, Y. (2007). Strategies and Practical Crime, Law and Social Measures to Strengthen Change, 47(4-5), 225-246. the Capacity of Prosecution Services in Dealing with Transnational Organized Crime, Terrorism and Corruption. Sykes, P. C. (2018). Preventing Domestic University of Wisconsin- Terrorism: Local Law Platteville Enforcements Role in the Homeland Security Mission, and the Shortcomings in the Fight Against Domestic Terrorism. Southern Poverty (2020). Hate map Extremist files Law Center. Jones, S. G. (2018). Rise of Far-Right Center for Strategic and Extremism in the United International Studies (CSIS). States. Jackson, P. (2020). Transnational Neo-Nazism United Kingdom and in the USA. Australia Studies. Blessing, J., & (2018). The Rhetoric of White New York: Syracuse University. Roberts, E. Supremacist Terror: Assessing the Attribution of the Threat. Haskin, J. M. (2016). When all roads lead to the Algora Publishing. standoff: How Corporate Governance Fuels White Supremacy. Adams, J., & (2005). White supremacists, Social Forces, 84(2), 759-778. Roscigno, V. J. oppositional culture and the World Wide Web. Leets, L. (2001). Responses to internet hate Communication Law & sites: is speech too free in Policy, 6(2), 287-317. cyberspace.? Wong, M. A., (2015). The supremacy of online Information & Communications Frank, R., & white supremacists. An Technology Law, 24(1), 41-73. Allsup, R. analysis of online discussions by white supremacist. Berlet, C., & (2006). Overview of U.S. White Journal of Political and Military Vysotsky, S. Supremacist Groups. Sociology, 34(1), 11. Freilich, J. D., (2009). Critical Events in the Life Criminology & Public Chermak, S. M., & Trajectories of Domestic Policy, 8(3), 497-530. Caspi, D. Extremist White Supremacist Groups: A Case Study Analysis of Four Violent Organizations

Author Year Title Journal Schafer, J. A., (2014). Awakenings: The Deviant Behavior, 35(3), 173-196. Mullins, C. W., & Emergence of White Box, S. Supremacist Ideologies. Latif, M., Blee, K., (2018). How emotional dynamics Humanity & Society, 42(4), 480- DeMichele, M., & maintain and destroy 501. Simi, P. white supremacist groups Windisch, S., (2018). Understanding the Micro- Perspectives on Terrorism, 12(6), Simi, P., Blee, K., Situational Dynamics of 23-37. & DeMichele, M. White Supremacist (2018). Violence in the United States. Tabachnik, S. (2019). Colorado ranks third in the The Denver Post nation for white supremacist Propaganda.

Zeskind, L. (2009). Blood and politics: The Farrar, Straus and Giroux. history of the white nationalist movement from the margins to the mainstream. Vacca, J. R. (2019). Online terrorist CRCPress. propaganda, recruitment, and radicalization. Gilliard-Matthews, (2009). Homegrown Terrorists: A 157: 91-113 S. Comparative State Analysis of White Supremacist Groups in the United States. Caspi, D. J. (2013). Ideologically Motivated LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. Murder: The Threat Posed by White Supremacist Groups. Brody, S. H. (2019). White Nationalist Journal of Feminist Studies in (2019). Violence and the Religion, 35(2), 103-105. Religious Studies Classroom: Brief Reflections on a Response to a Shooting. Sparrow, J. (2019). El Paso shooting and the Eureka Street, 29 (15), 7. Rise of Eco-Fascism.

3.3 Resources Excluded

Many articles and books provided valuable information from a multitude of

Subject-Matter-Experts (SME) throughout this review, highlighting the importance of domestic terrorism and its connection to white supremacist groups. However, the arguments presented in the excluded materials did not fully aid in understanding the

34 concepts of domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups again. On the other hand, the articles that were also excluded from the review provided critical background knowledge that was also exceptionally beneficial for further exploring domestic terrorism. However, the excluded books and articles were outside the scope of the review in terms of previously established specific parameters for this thesis. Table 3.2 also briefly explains the reasons why these resources helped to provide a rationale for the explanation of domestic terrorism's causes. Notwithstanding, it was also explained why these resources did not apply to this review to maximize or create a more transparent and concise picture of these events' perspectives.

Table 3.2: Articles and Books Excluded in the Review

Articles and Books Reason for Omission DeLeeuw, J. G., & This article mentions that recent international terrorist attacks in the Pridemore, W. A. (2018). United States have led to increased levels of terrorism; however, less The Threat from Within: A attention has been directed at domestic terrorism. Most importantly, this Conjunctive Analysis of article points out that even when the U.S. had a long history of domestic Domestic Terrorism terrorism, there is still limited existing literature on domestic terrorism. Incidents in the United Although the author alludes to the threat of domestic terrorism, it only States. covered four groups: right-wing, left-wing, nationalist/separatist, and single-issue domestic terrorist groups. In this case, the article did not Perspectives on Terrorism. include other prominent groups that are also present severe threats to the U.S. Boylan, B. M. (2010). This article analyzes how domestic terrorism’s threat differs from other Economic Development, forms of violence and how these threats have specific and distinct Religion, and the features depending on the group. Also, the author alleges that economic Conditions for Domestic factors are unique in every single geographic location. Even when the Terrorism. article focuses on economic factors, it did not underscore how different economic outputs are measured as an overall economic factor that brings School of International domestic terrorism threats. Studies. Taylor, H. (2019). The journal generates a compelling finding when it states that the United Domestic Terrorism and States is facing domestic terrorism as “the definition of terrorism itself is Hate Crimes: Legal the subject of lengthy and ongoing debates within scholarly circles” (p. Definitions and Media 228). Additionally, it underlines that another cause is the inconsistency Framing of Mass rooted in how U.S. federal laws define an act of terrorism and the double Shootings in the United standards in the treatment of domestic terrorism. Although the journal States. identifies the issues with domestic terrorism’s definition and the problems it presents with federal laws; it does not specify or recommend Journal of Policing, what steps are necessary to gain greater consistency in labeling domestic Intelligence and terrorism. CounterTerrorism.

Articles and Books Reason for Omission Niskanen, W. A. (2006). The article discloses how the bombing of the federal building in The Several Costs of Oklahoma City in 1995 by Timothy McVeigh started a chain reaction in Responding to the Threat this country for the threat of domestic terrorism. Furthermore, these of Domestic threats amplified the perception of domestic terrorism and how the Terrorism. American people began to be terrified by domestic terrorist attacks. The article’s positive argument is highlighted by six questions the author presented; however, the article did not specify how the apparent trends of JSTOR Digital Library. domestic terrorism are affecting citizens or where the threat of terrorism is more blatant. Guittard, A. (2019). The author of this article provided five recommendations for preventive Beyond CVE: Evolving measures against the threat of domestic terrorism. The author also US Countering Violent described how the threat of countering violent extremism (CVE) Extremism Policy to controversial issues like a lack of funding and authorities is not Prevent the Growing diminishing this evolving threat. The author provided plausible Threat of Domestic recommendations; however, the article did not how should the federal Terrorism. government should restructure the approach to domestic terrorism.

Homeland Security Policy. Harvey, M. G. (1993). A In this article, the author considered threats of domestic terrorist attacks Survey of Corporate emanating from homegrown terrorists sharing the same characteristics as Programs for Managing mostly males, below 35 years old, with a lack of criminal records and Terrorist Threats. education. Although the article highlighted these demographics, the article did not fully explain how hatred as the key driving factor in domestic terrorism’s growth correlates with these demographics. Journal of International Business Studies. Abadie, A. (2006). In this article, the author provides the readers an example of the Poverty, Political Freedom, frequency of domestic terrorist when he points out an excerpt from the and the Roots of National Memorial for the Prevention of Terrorism Database “The MIPT Terrorism. (2004) reported 1,536 events of domestic terrorism, but only 240 events of international terrorism. The difference between reported domestic and international terrorist events is larger and tends to have more visibility” American Economic (pg. 50). Although the information is precise, the author failed to find a Review. significant association between domestic terrorism and economic variables and how they affect the causes of domestic terrorism. Smith, A. G. (2018). How This book highlights how radicalization with domestic terrorism groups Radicalization to occurs in the United States in the Introduction. The books emphasize Terrorism Occurs in the first, understanding the engagement of violence; second, by their United States: What particular beliefs and identities concerning terrorism groups; and third, Research Sponsored by the how the increase of isolation leads to the association with domestic National Institute of Justice terrorist groups. Additionally, the book studied 135 homegrown terrorist Tells Us. groups, but rather than pinpointing their interactions. This book was unable to find positive and negative information on specific National Institute of characteristics and behaviors only with a certain portion of particular Justice. groups. Choi, S. W., & Piazza, J. This article explains that a domestic terrorist group develops from a A. (2016). Ethnic groups, group of people sharing the same social and cultural characteristics to Political Exclusion and support their causes. In addition, the article states that most terrorist Domestic Terrorism. groups share ethnic ties to provide a higher emotional connection and become better equipped to carry out terrorist operations. However, the authors did not fully identify the characteristics of specific groups; Defense and Peace instead, there were limitations. There is a lack of domestic terrorist Economics. groups data conceptualizing the threat of domestic terrorism in this country.

Articles and Books Reason for Omission Farrell, L. C., & Littlefield, This journal’s focus is to demonstrate how domestic terrorism must be R. S. (2012). Identifying differentiated from other types of crises to implement strategies to Communication Strategies combat these threats. The authors also conceptualize that one of the most in Cases of Domestic critical approaches to domestic combat terrorism is communication Terrorism. strategies to avoid threats’ enigma and unpredictability. On a practical level, the author describes the importance of communication; still, the Journal of Homeland author did not express how different communication strategies should be Security and Emergency implemented at the federal level to combat domestic terrorism threats. Management. Nakashima, E. (2019). In this article, the author informs that domestic terrorism threats are a DHS Says Domestic Terror significant threat to the United States, and the DHS has unveiled a new is a Major threat, Outlines strategy to combat domestic terrorism. The intention of the new strategy Strategy to Combat it. advocates for a “whole-of-society” at the federal, state, and local agencies. For the most part, the author goes in-depth with the intentions The Washington Quarterly. of the new strategy; nonetheless, the article does not explain how the government plans to accomplish these goals in greater detail. Falkenrath, R. A. (2001). The author brings out how the U.S. domestic preparedness program is Problems of Preparedness: seeking to protect critical infrastructure from domestic terrorist attacks. U.S. Readiness for a Moreover, the article explains how these programs aim to reduce the Domestic Terrorist Attack. civilian population’s vulnerability with more operational response capabilities. In important ways, the author highlighted how preparedness programs have multiple challenges; however, the author does not specify JSTOR Digital Library. in the article how the uncertainty of these programs could be better coordinated. Burris, V., Smith, E., & In this article, the authors summarize the white supremacist movement Strahm, A. (2000). White and how these groups use the internet as a medium to spread their Supremacist Networks on propaganda and recruitment. Conversely, the author confirms that the Internet. several hundred of white supremacist organizations are represented on the web. One of the most critical questions is that the article does not JSTOR Digital Library. explain the recruitment methods used by white supremacist groups on the internet. Downey, D. B. (2000). This journal discloses how a new generation of younger men and fearless Domestic Terrorism: The leaders are emerging within the subculture of domestic terrorism. Enemy Within. Collectively, the author’s ideas also imply that a particular distinction between these groups is their boldness of anti-government and racist ideologies. Nevertheless, the journal does not provide examples of how Security Journal mere speech instigate violence of domestic terrorist groups. Mascolo, M. F. (2017). In this article, the author asserts that racism and extremist ideologies are The Transformation of a strong reactions from most domestic terrorist organizations and typically White Supremacist: A engaged with violence with only specific targets, and when there is Dialectical-Developmental public at large. Although other studies have perceived extremist Analysis. ideologies, the article only partially explains how future directions could track the structures of development changes to combat domestic Qualitative Psychology. terrorism.

Durso, R. M., & Jacobs, D. The subject of this article explains how the determinants of the number (2013). The Determinants of white supremacist groups’ movements as resource mobilization and of the Number of White political opportunity are not the primary goal of these groups; instead, the Supremacist Groups: A objectives of these movements aim to create social changes. Under these Pooled Time-Series circumstances, the authors articulate that although qualitative Analysis. investigations provide useful information with these movements, there are still oblivious gaps in the knowledge of white supremacist groups. Nevertheless, the article does not present pertinent information about Social Problems. these gaps.

Articles and Books Reason for Omission

Arena, M. P., & Arrigo, B. This article intends to underscore the behaviors of white supremacist A. (2000). White groups. The article shares four noteworthy characteristics of behaviors. Supremacist Behavior: The first characteristic is power; the second; influencing behaviors with a Toward an Integrated sense of identity; the third is gender, sexuality, and masculinity; and the Social-Psychological fourth, is the definition of the situation. Also, the authors’ primary Model. argument is that future research would help fully understand the phenomena of hate crimes and raced-based discrimination; In contrast, Interdisciplinary Journal. the article does not establish how future research could help understand these four characteristics. Asal, V., Chermak, S. M., The authors’ objectives in this article were to disclose four organizational Fitzgerald, S., & Freilich, variables in domestic terrorist organizations. The first variable is the J. D. (2020). concern of the threat of domestic terrorism; second, the growing number Organizational-Level of groups; third, the scarceness of reliable domestic terrorism databases; Characteristics in Right- and fourth, organizational characteristics of each group. Some of the Wing Extremist Groups in other ways the authors demystify these variables include the observations the United States Over of numerous case studies and how domestic terrorist groups change over Time. time. Nonetheless, the articles do not give examples of domestic terrorist organizations, and their impact in the research arena. Criminal Justice Review. Simi, P. (2010). Why This article indicates that “the study of terrorism is growing faster than Study White Supremacist any other field in the social sciences. Yet, observers have long noted the Terror? Deviant overall inadequacy of terrorism research stemming in part from Behavior. superficial methodological” (p. 251). Additionally, the author alludes that incomplete data do not fully explain the motivations and tactics of School of Criminology & terrorist’s violent and non-violent threats. Even when the article typifies Criminal Justice. these groups’ motives, it does not thoroughly examine or categorize the effects of violent and non-violent acts. Dentice, D., & Bugg, D. This article intends to explain the motivational factors of white (2014). Fighting for the supremacist groups as; in-group solidarity and dominant status. By Right to be White: A case finding ways to adhere to these rules of domestic terrorist organization’s Study in White Racial membership, the result is reinforcing these norms to keep pushing Identity. forward their objectives. The article coalesces key elements in solidarity except, the authors do not explain in-depth how to identify formation in Journal of Sociology these groups brings solidarity to their members. Castells, M. (2009). White This article’s focus is to describe how empirical studies have shown that Supremacist Social white supremacist rhetoric is different now with the advent of the internet Movements Online and In versus the print-only period. It is remarkable how a critical shift has a Global Context. occurred by only posting online propaganda. In a contemporary context, this is one of the reasons why studying white supremacist groups is Perspectives on a urgent. However, the article did not provide any information to the Multiracial America readers on how to discern these ubiquitous publications online.

CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This systematic review examines the elements with the emerging threat of domestic terrorism and more specifically, explores white supremacist groups’ structures, tactics, and ideologies. Restated from chapter 3, the data collection methods of this review consisted of peer-reviewed journal articles and books using various available electronic databases. To reiterate, most domestic terrorism problems emanate from the federal government’s inability to construct a clear definition of domestic terrorism.

However, it is worth noting that domestic terrorism is widely divergent and does not receive the same attention as international extremist terrorism. Another pertinent issue with the definition of domestic terrorism is that it relies on the fact that most federal law enforcement agencies utilize different terminology and definitions to designate domestic terrorism.

Adding fuel to the problem with defining domestic terrorism and the implications to a practical definition are white supremacists group's threats. This review is concerned with white supremacist groups' resurgence as their ideologies keep prevailing with their threats, structures, and tactics to spread their propaganda. There are also other pragmatic reasons as recognizing that there is a deluge of limiting factors to understanding white supremacist groups expanding their radicalization and recruiting supporters. It is not difficult to overstate that the emerging of a variety of white supremacist groups in the

United States is proliferating. As noted earlier, the State of Colorado is not the exception with the emerging issues white supremacist groups bring to the table. White supremacist

39 groups' influence with their bigoted ideologies will remain a prominent part of their tactics as their attacks have become more deadly, violent, and unpredictable.

4.2 Causes of Domestic Terrorism

Most of the surmised causes of domestic terrorism emanate from its distinctions of other types of terrorism. For instance, international terrorism tends to emphasize the determinants of the threat than domestic terrorism in general (Noricks, 2009). Domestic terrorism acts are carried out by groups at their most basic level, mainly targeting the civilian population or law enforcement. More broadly, domestic terrorism is a complex threat; therefore, understanding the causes is imperative. Peterson (2019) conducted a review of the current literature on domestic terrorism and contends that the threat of domestic terrorism is as equally significant as international terrorism

An effective violence reduction from domestic terrorist groups is reachable by balancing prevention policies and robust federal government approaches. Domestic terrorism could be understood and prevented only by valid information about the violence perpetrated by these groups and feasible prevention strategies from the federal government and federal law enforcement agencies (Riedel & Welsh, 2002; Mooney,

2014; Kellner, 2015). Most importantly, the lack of critical responsiveness to prosecute domestic terrorists produces a broader range of issues at every level with the federal government, law enforcement, the media, and the public (Kushner, 1997; Burch, 2007).

Another ominous paradigm affecting domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups’ problems is the use of asymmetric threats in carrying out their objectives and the curtailment of laws against domestic terrorism. Goss (2006) found that by perpetuating unconventional and unembellished methods to inflict harm or destruction of property,

40 both entities have created an unparalleled asymmetry threat. As this review has illustrated, the U.S. faces a massive spectrum of threats, and the range of these threats is distinctive in asymmetry and elusive with their individualities. The use of asymmetric threats has led to a fallacious understanding of these threats and incompetent ways of encountering domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups (Koehler, 2019).

Another example of domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups’ threats is the opacity of methodologies and the absence of theoretical frameworks limiting their understanding (Bakker, 2012). Therefore, adopting preparedness programs to mitigate these threats is critical; however, these programs require legal authorities to assess their legitimacy. Furthermore, there are unfathomable gaps of information within the federal government and law enforcement agencies (Davis, 1998). The next two sub-sections will identify the differences between individual-level and organizational-level motivations among domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups.

4.2.1 Organizational Level Motivations

Identifying the driving forces with domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups is critical to understanding these groups at the organizational level. The driving force of different groups’ ideologies and threats is vital to a significant presence as they rationalize and justify violence in different ways (Harrison, 2016; Turner & Lovell,

1998). The process of understanding organizational motivations is accentuated by

Borgeson and Valeri (2009), as they explain that attaining a better understanding of organizational level motivations could be determined with more levels of knowledge and clarity of their attacks and threats. The most recent examples of organizational level motivations are American political environments and federal laws domestic terrorists see

41 as peripherally (Martin, 2017; Williams, 2018). Frequently, for example, only a small amount of domestic terrorist groups engaged in terrorism. However, a couple of domestic terrorist groups’ decisions create havoc by belligerently challenging the federal government or counterterrorism programs (Vohryzek, Olson-Raymer & Whamond,

2001). Therefore, defining and identifying various organizational motivation levels is difficult as no single group or ideology is different.

4.2.2 Individual Level Motivations

At the individual level, most of the domestic terrorist groups profiled are comprise a younger demographic of individuals in their 20s and 30s (Borgeson, 2018).

They are primarily targeted for recruitment, radicalization, and amenability (Schils &

Verhage et al., 2017). Expressly, Gaibulloev & Sandler (2013) point out that the process of radicalization and recruitment of individuals ultimately has resulted in the determinations of these groups' survival. Several other problems are related to individual motivations are angry and marginalized individuals with expertise in every field as tactical weaponry and technology (Kydd & Walter et al., 2006). Another assessment of domestic terrorist groups' threat is lone wolves, primarily, as many groups are relaying toward lone-offenders attacks as they are not easy to identify, investigate, or disrupt lonely operations (Indridason, 2008; Suttmoeller, Chermak & Freilich, 2015).

There is no doubt that the threats of domestic terrorism are controversial.

Additionally, the nuisance of its threats dominates the headlines and renews the federal government's attention (Harrison et al., 2016). Predominantly, the threats of white supremacist groups have added fire to the bigotry of the dilemma with the phenomenon of domestic terrorism (Thomas & Lippman, 1993; Barbari, 2018). White supremacist

42 groups and their ideologies are not a simple transitory problem difficult to study yet alone to analyze. One of the first and most difficult quandaries is that the attacks perpetrated by white supremacist groups peak at certain and unpredictable times, and then, the attack dived episodically (Dandurand, 2007). In the latest study focusing on the widespread of white supremacist groups, Sykes (2018) alludes that the clear implication is that there is no single state free from the threats or attacks of white supremacist groups.

4.3 Operations of White Supremacist Groups in Colorado

As of 2020, the SPLC produced an annual report monitoring the number of white supremacist groups in Colorado. The SPLC’s most recent report highlights the most active groups by operations, categories, and locations. Table 4.1 is organized by the name of the white supremacist group, the group’s category, and the area where the groups have a footprint or activities.

Table 4.1: White Supremacist Groups in Colorado

Name Category Locations

The Patriot Front (PF) White Nationalist Statewide

The Right Stuff (RS) White Nationalist Statewide Denver, Boulder & Colorado The American Identity Movement (AIM) White Nationalist Springs

The Asatru Folk Assembly (AFA) Neo-Volkisch Statewide

The Atomwaffen (AWD) Neo-Nazi Statewide

As previously mentioned, the SPLC monitors these white supremacist groups and exposes their activities to the public, the media, and federal law enforcement agencies.

The SPLC is responsible for publishing investigative reports, sharing critical data with intelligence agencies, training police departments, and providing expert analysis to the public, and the media (SPCL, 2020).

White nationalists groups as the Patriot Front, the American Identity Movement, and Right Stuff embraced extreme rhetoric and advocate terrorism and violence. White supremacist groups support changing demographics, end non-white immigration, and putting an end to multiculturalism (Jones et al., 2018). On the contrary, the Asatru Folk

Assembly groups fall under the category of Neo-Volkisch, alluding to racial, ethnic, and cultural essentialism, and promote racial supremacy. Present-day Folkish groups embrace their bigotry inexorably based on white identity's superiority (Sykes et al.,

2018). The Attom-Waffen Division groups fall under the category of Neo-Nazi; one simple characteristic is that these groups emphasize hatred to its fullest. "Neo-Nazism is often presented as the most taboo and dangerous form of far-right activism focusing on hate crimes, violence, and terrorism, as well as their fascination with cultic" (Jackson,

2020, p.2). The distinction between these groups is essential as their ideologies evoke violent behaviors and threaten homeland security's sustainment.

The white supremacist groups’ abovementioned traditional operations vary from private meetings, by maintaining a steady web presence, and social media platforms.

Furthermore, Blessing and Roberts (2018) observe two strategies for their conventional operations: mainstreaming and vanguardism. On one side, mainstreaming consists of infiltrating and subverting political institutions to ensure a path to power, and vanguardism consist of reforming the system, if feasible, to increase their rhetoric

(Haskin, 2016). These two effective methods play a critical role in white supremacist groups’ conventional operations and can be instrumental with their ideologies.

4.3.1 Websites and Social Media Presence

The white supremacist groups listed in table 4.1 do not remain dormant in their

44 attempts to increase their ideologies, endeavors their influences mass audiences, and increase their recruits' numbers for their operations. Adams and Roscigno (2005) indicate that the rapid dissemination of information free of any mainstream media restrictions, the efficiency of the internet and its inexpensiveness, and the retail of apparel and literature promote groups' prominence. Since these groups' objectives are to change people's mindsets with their incendiary hate, the internet and social media have propelled opportunities to empower proliferation (Leets, 2001; Wong, Frank & Allsup, 2015).

4.3.2 Membership, Recruitment, Propaganda, and Violent Activities

Unmistakably, white supremacist groups listed above share specific characteristics and common elements such as religious, political, and ideological beliefs.

Despite different ideologies, there is one element among these groups that have in common; members must meet certain aspects required for their selection (Berlet &

Vysotsky, 2006; Freilich, Chermak & Caspi, 2009). However, more often, white supremacists are social movement supporters with structural differentiation, racial dualism, generalized influences, and the willingness to overthrow any opposition necessary for membership (Schafer, Mullins & Box, 2014; Latif, Blee, DeMichele &

Simi, P. (2018). Within the parameters of membership, Windisch, Simi, Blee, and

DeMichele (2018), underline the impact of membership by explaining that it relies on the fact that members must possess strong convictions with their ideologies to motivate violence and to provoke change.

The emerging threat posed by white supremacist groups has increased during the past few years using two trendy communication platforms using websites to improve their recruitment, and social media to increase their ideologies and propaganda. These

45 are the most direct means to bring news about the white supremacist group's threats, awareness, and incidents to the public. In his (2019) article, "Colorado ranks third in the nation for white supremacist propaganda," Tabachnik discusses that Colorado ranks third for the highest number of white supremacists distributing propaganda behind only

California and Texas, with a least 72 propaganda and recruitment distributions.

Generally, the use of websites and social media is aimed at targeting young recruits.

These two dynamics are conceptually simple to promote ideologies and re-brand their groups, limiting public exposure (Zeskind, 2009; Vacca, 2019).

As noted earlier, the attacks in the Oklahoma City bombing and the Boston

Marathon bombing had created a high profile of domestic terrorism plots and the increase of white supremacists' rampages. For example, Caspi (2013) explains that extreme ideological activities have been directed to destroying federal buildings, inflicting bodily harm to police officers and civil rights figures, shooting at crowds at public places, and increasing extreme rhetoric. From the shooting at the El Paso, TX, Walmart by Patrick

Crusius to terminate Texas's Hispanic invasion to the Pittsburgh, PA, Synagogue shooting by Robert Bowers, violent activities are one of the most highlighted factors determining white supremacist attacks (Brody et al., 2019; Sparrow et al., 2019). These two examples are among a myriad of violent activities perpetrated by white supremacist groups at the national level. What might not be surprising, however, at a local area, that the state of Colorado is relatively hot right now with the rise of extremism to incite criminal behavior in support of their ideologies.

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION

5.1 Conclusion

The academic research explaining the causes of domestic terrorism and the threats of white supremacist groups has dramatically expanded recently. Since the Oklahoma

City bombing on April 19, 1995, domestic terrorism and white supremacist extremist has created a deluge of controversy and security concerns in this country. Furthermore, another issue with domestic terrorism is the vagueness of its definition and the fact that federal law enforcement agencies utilize different terminology to describe domestic terrorism. Most importantly, white supremacist groups' emerging threat keeps escalating as their attacks have become more deadly, violent, and unpredictable. Government officials and federal law enforcement agencies understand the urgency to address the causes and motivations of domestic terrorism and white supremacist threats.

Additionally, developing and implementing practical policies and federal programs capable of conceptualizing domestic terrorism and white supremacist threats. The implementation of current research has expanded our understanding of domestic terrorism and the reasoning behind extremist ideological violence; however, there is a need for continually raising the knowledge with this area of uncertainties.

The emerging threat of domestic terrorism and the threats of white supremacist groups was the center of this systematic review, helping reveal essential aspects of current research outlining domestic extremists' threats as it remains the most persistent threat to national security and the public. First, this systematic review's content consisted of a greater length of peer-reviewed articles and published books based on previous

47 research encompassing domestic terrorist attacks and the rise of domestic terrorism in this country. In particular, the research attained from these resources helped understand the historical context of the threat of violence as they are an essential component behind domestic violent extremist motivation. Second, even when earlier research has identified the need for more practical policies and the government's efforts to conceptualize the threat of domestic terrorism and extremist violence. Federal law enforcement agencies as the FBI do not officially designate domestic terrorist organizations. Still, this agency has openly delineated domestic terrorist threats leading to the difficulties of judging these threats' degree. Even when there are provisional and reactive government policies to address these issues, there is still vagueness in understanding these threats and extremist motivated violence.

Lastly, the peer-reviewed articles and resources used in this systematic review identified the causes and motivations of domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups' threats. However, there is still the crucial implementation of effective policies addressing their root causes, and most importantly, not overstating these threats.

Significantly, when the immense power of the internet and social media have propelled extremist ideologies and propaganda, they have helped promote ideologies, re-branding their groups, and limiting their public exposure.

5.2 Limitations of the Current Research

Due to the difficulty in studying domestic terrorism and extremist violence, it is not entirely unexpected that there are limitations of the current research; however, it is essential to note that research progress has decreased these limitations. The white supremacist's landscape is complex, particularly concerning hatred and rhetoric, and since

48 it is decentralized, these groups could shift to more organized and structured groups. In these cases, researchers began to encounter limitations with groups as the Atom-Waffen

Division with leadership structure. Despite a large number of domestic terrorist incidents and the increased frequency of attacks, the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies' involvement was instrumental in the prevention of significant attacks.

However, the increase of these attacks has created limitations of the current research as violent extremist groups have improved their effectiveness by increasing recruiting, propaganda, training, attacks, and fundraising.

5.3 Future Research

The future of research encompassing domestic extremists as there is a growing concern about this threat; therefore, further empirical research can be enhanced in the areas with more significant challenges. In this case, it is imperative to look at the future as several issues develop with the persistence of domestic terrorism will continue to manipulate national security. Moreover, future research should incorporate data on why the threat of domestic terrorism is continuously emerging and understanding white supremacist groups’ structures, tactics, and ideologies. Gradually, future research can help researchers build on existing knowledge and generate data that can be used effectively.

5.4 Recommendations

The Unite the Right rally of August 11, 2017, in Charlottesville, Virginia, serves as a suitable example of American white supremacist groups' bigoted ideologies where marchers were chanting antisemitic and racist slogans. These white supremacists groups carried Nazi and Neo-Nazi symbols and Confederate Battle flags, leading to a violent

49 clash with counter-protesters. The dispute led to one death and nineteen injured.

Reactions to this attack created thousands of online, political, religious, and academic responses, leading to many uncertainties with domestic terrorism threats and its link with white supremacist groups. This recognition means that the dangers posed by domestic terrorism and white supremacist groups' actions are dynamic and more threats occur than it has in the past. Unmistakably, this country's white supremacist movement is decentralized, vibrant, and has undergone radical and dramatic changes in recent years.

Therefore, this systematic review will provide five recommendations to understand white supremacist threats and the lack of federal statutes for combating domestic terrorism.

The first recommendation incorporates combating white supremacists’ threats by implementing mitigation steps as understanding the evolving threat of domestic terrorism and extremist violence to promote awareness at every level of the federal government.

As mentioned in this review, mitigation will help assess the current situations by applying long-term projections outlining overall responsibilities from crucial government organizations, federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, and political decision- makers. Mitigation steps must adapt adjustments to accommodate the evolving threat of terrorism (Mitchell, 2003).

The second recommendation is to engage law enforcement agencies with white supremacists' networks and monitor these groups' violent ideological activities on the web. As previously stated, the white supremacist groups listed in table 4.1, do not remain dormant in their attempts to increase their ideologies, influence mass audiences, and increase their recruits' numbers for their operations. Therefore, strictly monitoring these

50 websites and social media platforms will increase these extremist groups' understanding

(Conway, 2017).

The third recommendation evolves around the insufficient collaboration levels between the federal government and federal law enforcement agencies. One pertinent issue with domestic terrorism and extremist groups is that most federal law enforcement agencies utilize different terminology and definitions to describe both phenomena

(Pumphrey, 2000; LaGuardia, 2019). For instance, the development of homegrown extremist groups keeps skyrocketing in this country. However, there is no proper dissemination from local police to the general public about the benefits of being vigilant or coordination to be proactive against these threats (Kruglanski, Crenshaw, Post &

Victoroff, 2007; Lum, Haberfeld, Fachner & Lieberman, 2009). A prime example of minimal coordination is the inexistence of a counterterrorism point of contact for information sharing between the public and the local police. Therefore, a salient reason will be to have a more balanced approach within all government, law enforcement, and public levels.

The fourth recommendation is to enhance methods for collecting data among all the appropriate agencies. As previously illustrated, one interesting finding is that white supremacist groups are linked to other groups with the same radical ideological orientation. However, not all white supremacist groups are equal with their tactics, and most importantly, they all possessed different ideologies (Lesser, Arquilla, Hoffman,

Ronfeldt & Zanini, 1999). Consequently, here lies the dilemma for crucial decision- makers and law enforcement agencies: Each group believed that their roles have more significant causes than other groups. In this case, the likelihood of focusing solely on one

51 particular group brings a deluge of gaps in analyzing each extremist group (Bjorgo &

Horgan, 2008; Berry & Wilcox, 2015). In these cases, it makes substantially greater sense to increase the methods for collecting pertinent information to address these issues.

Finally, the fifth recommendation will consist of highlighting the challenges with an overall focus on white supremacist groups. The first challenge with extreme ideologies is to implement long-term and multi-dimensional approaches for understanding extremist ideologies to mitigate these threats. The second challenge is the standardization with a more precise definition of domestic terrorism and minimizing the problems towards a practical description. The third challenge is the awareness of the interconnectivity of domestic terrorism causes and potentially influential factors for the white supremacist groups. The fourth challenge is to conduct further research that includes comprehensive evaluations to promote transparency by identifying domestic terrorism and extremist ideologies' driving forces. By focusing on these challenges, the threat environment could be reduced, leading to an understanding of why the emerging threats of domestic terrorism and white supremacist threats are sources of fear for public safety, the federal government, law enforcement agencies, and national security.

References

Abadie, A. (2006). Poverty, Political Freedom, and the Roots of Terrorism. American

Economic Review, 96(2), 50-56.

Ackerman, G. A. (2003). Beyond Arson? A threat assessment of the Earth Liberation

Front. Terrorism and political violence, 15(4), 143-170.

Active Hate Groups (2016). Southern Poverty Law Center, February 15, 2017,

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2017/active-hate-

groups-2016.whitenationalist.

Adams, J., & Roscigno, V. J. (2005). White supremacists, oppositional culture and the

World Wide Web. Social Forces, 84(2), 759-778.

Aly, A. (2013). The policy response to home-grown terrorism: Reconceptualizing,

Prevent, and Resilience as collective resistance. Journal of policing, intelligence

and counterterrorism, 8(1), 2-18.

Anderson, N. (2019). Exploring the Viability of a Federal Domestic Terrorism Statue.

Gonz. L. Rev., 55, 475.

Angelini, P. M. (2017). Terrorism: Difficulties in Countering US Phenomenon of Self-

radicalization in the Digital Era.

Arena, M. P., & Arrigo, B. A. (2000). White supremacist behavior: Toward an

integrated social psychological model. Deviant Behavior, 21(3), 213-244.

Asal, V., Chermak, S. M., Fitzgerald, S., & Freilich, J. D. (2020). Organizational-Level

Characteristics in Right-Wing Extremist Groups in the United States Over

Time. Criminal Justice Review, 45(2), 250-266.

Badey, T. J. (2006). US counterterrorism: Change in approach, continuity in policy.

Contemporary Security Policy, 27(2), 308-324.

Bailey, F. G. (1998). The need for enemies: a bestiary of political forms. Cornell

University Press.

Bakker, E. (2012). Forecasting terrorism: The need for a more systematic approach.

Journal of Strategic Security, 5(4), 69-84.

Barak-Erez, D., & Scharia, D. (2011). Freedom of Speech, support for terrorism, and the

challenge of global constitutional law. Harvard. National Security. J., 2, 1.

Barbari, N. (2018). Reconsidering CVE: The Unintended Consequences of Countering

Violent Extremism Efforts in America. Homeland Security Affairs.

Bartlett, J., & Miller, C. (2012). The edge of violence: Towards telling the difference

between violent and non-violent radicalization. Terrorism and Political

Violence, 24(1), 1-21.

Baysinger, T. G. (2006). Right-wing group characteristics and ideology. Homeland

Security Affairs, 2(2). Retrieved fromhttps://libproxy.uccs.edu/login/docview/

1265818454.accountid.25388

Bauman, Z. (2013). Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty. John Wiley & Sons.

Beardsley, N. L., & Beech, A. R. (2013). Applying the violent extremist risk assessment

(VERA) to a sample of terrorist case studies. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and

Peace Research, 5(1), 4-15.

Beck, A. T. (2002). Prisoners of hate. Behavior Research and Therapy, 40(3), 209-216.

Beckman, J. (2013). Comparative legal approaches to homeland security and anti-

terrorism. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

Bennell, C., & Corey, S. (2008). Geographic profiling of terrorist attacks. In Criminal

profiling (pp. 189-203). Humana Press.

Bennett, B. T. (2018). Understanding, assessing, and responding to terrorism: Protecting

critical infrastructure and personnel. John Wiley & Sons.

Berlet, C., & Vysotsky, S. (2006). Overview of US White Supremacist Groups. Journal

of Political and Military Sociology, 34(1), 11.

Berry, J. M., & Wilcox, C. (2015). The interest group society. Routledge.

Bjorgo, T., & Horgan, J. G. (2008). Leaving terrorism behind: Individual and collective

disengagement. Routledge.

Blessing, J., & Roberts, E. (2018). The rhetoric of white supremacist Terror: Assessing

the attribution of threat. Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism.

New York: Syracuse University.

Bolz Jr, F., Dudonis, K. J., & Schulz, D. P. (2016). The counterterrorism handbook:

Tactics, procedures, and techniques. CRC Press.

Borgeson, K. (2018). Right-Wing Domestic Terrorism. Terrorism in America, 39(39.3),

38.

Borgeson, K., & Valeri, R. (2009). Terrorism in America. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Borum, R. (2010). Understanding terrorist psychology. The psychology of counter-

terrorism, 19-33.

Borum, R., Fein, R., & Vossekuil, B. (2012). A dimensional approach to analyzing lone

offender terrorism. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(5), 389-396.

Boyd, E. A., Berk, R. A., & Hamner, K. M. (1996). "Motivated by Hatred or Prejudice":

Categorization of Hate-motivated Crimes in Two Police Divisions. Law and

society review, 819-850.

Boylan, B. M. (2010). Economic Development, Religion, and the Conditions for

Domestic Terrorism. 28-44.

Brownlow, W. E. (2013). Shaping the Spread of Ideas: The Mechanics of Radicalization,

Construction of Strategic Narratives, and Intrinsicness of Strategic

Communication to Counter Radicalization Strategies.

Burch, J. (2007). A Domestic Intelligence Agency for the United States? A comparative

analysis of domestic intelligence agencies and their implications for homeland

security. Homeland Security Affairs, 3(2).

Burris, V., Smith, E., & Strahm, A. (2000). White supremacist networks on the internet.

Sociological Focus, 33(2), 215-235.

Best, S., Nocella, A., & Anthony, J. (2004). Defining terrorism. Animal Liberation

Philosophy and Policy Journal, 2(1), 1-18.

Biddle, S. D. (2005). American grand strategy after 9/11: an assessment. Strategic

Studies Institute, US Army War College.

Bjelopera, J. P. (2017). Domestic terrorism: An overview.

Bjelopera, J. P., Elias, B., & Siskin, A. (2016). The terrorist screening database and

preventing terrorist travel.

Brockhoff, S., Krieger, T., & Meierrieks, D. (2015). Great expectations and hard times:

The (nontrivial) impact of education on domestic terrorism. Journal of Conflict

Resolution, 59(7), 1186-1215.

Breazeale, M., Pleggenkuhle-Miles, E. G., Ligon, G. S., & Harms, M. (2015). Branding

Terror: Building notoriety in violent extremist organizations, strong brands,

strong relationships, 295-309.

Brody, S. H. (2019). White Nationalist Violence and the Religious Studies Classroom:

Brief Reflections on a Response to a Shooting. Journal of Feminist Studies in

Religion, 35(2), 103-105.

Campbell, K. M., & Flournoy, M. A. (2001). To prevail: An American strategy for the

campaign against terrorism. CSIS.

Caspi, D. J. (2013). Ideologically motivated murder: The threat posed by white

supremacist groups. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.

Castells, M. (2009). White Supremacist Social Movements Online and in a Global

Context. Cyber Racism, 39.

Catron, E. (2017). Domestic Terrorism. Pulse Publications.

Charkawi, W., Dunn, K., & Bliuc, A. M. (2020). The influences of social identity and

perceptions of injustice on support to violent extremism. Behavioral Sciences of

Terrorism and Political Aggression, 1-20.

Chenoweth, E. (2010). Democratic competition and terrorist activity. The Journal of

Politics, 72(1), 16-30.

Chermak, S. M., & Gruenewald, J. (2006). The media's coverage of domestic

terrorism. Justice Quarterly: JQ, 23(4), 428-461.

Choi, S. W., & Piazza, J. A. (2016). Ethnic groups, political exclusion and domestic

terrorism. Defense and Peace Economics, 27(1), 37-63.

Citron, D. K., & Pasquale, F. (2010). Network accountability for the domestic

intelligence apparatus. Hastings LJ, 62, 1441.

Clarke, R. V. G., & Newman, G. R. (2006). Outsmarting the terrorists (p. 144).

Westport, CT: Praeger Security International.

Clarke, J. W. (2012). Defining danger: American assassins and the new domestic

terrorists. Transaction Publishers.

Cohen, G., & Taylor, R. W. (2018). Understanding Terrorism in the Modern Era.

Transnational Crime and Global Security, 281.

Collier, C. W. (2014). The death of gun control: an American tragedy. Critical Inquiry,

41(1), 102-131.

Combs, C. C. (2017). Terrorism in the twenty-first century. Routledge.

Conway, M. (2017). Determining the role of the internet in violent extremism and

terrorism: Six suggestions for progressing research. Studies in Conflict &

Terrorism, 40(1), 77-98.

Cook, P. J. (1983). The influence of gun availability on violent crime patterns. Crime and

Justice, 4, 49-89.

Cornell, A. (2016). Unruly Equality: US Anarchism in the Twentieth Century. Univ of

California Press.

Cordesman, A. H. (2002). Terrorism, asymmetric warfare, and weapons of mass

destruction: Defending the US homeland. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Cornish, P., Lindley-French, J., & Yorke, C. (2011). Strategic communications and

national strategy. Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Cramer, C. E. (1994). The racist roots of gun control. Kan. JL & Pub. Policy, 4, 17.

Crenshaw, M. (2007). The logic of terrorism. Terrorism in perspective, 24, 24-33.

Crenshaw, M., & LaFree, G. (2017). Countering terrorism. Brookings Institution Press.

Cuéllar, M. F. (2004). The mismatch between state power and state capacity in

transnational law enforcement. Berkeley J. Int'l L., 22, 15.

Dahl, E. J. (2015). A Homeland Security net assessment needed now.! Strategic Studies

Quarterly, 9(4), 62-86.

Dandurand, Y. (2007). Strategies and Practical Measures to Strengthen the Capacity of

Prosecution Services in Dealing with transnational organized crime, terrorism and

corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 47(4-5), 225-246.

Davis, R., (1998). US Government Accountability Office, National Security and

International Affairs Division, & United States of America. Combating

Terrorism: Observations on the Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Domestic Preparedness

Program. General Accounting Office.

Deflem, M. (2005). Reading terrorism and terrorists. Theoretical Criminology, 9(2), 231-

236.

De Goede, M., & Sullivan, G. (2016). The politics of security lists. Environment and

Planning: Society and Space, 34(1), 67-88.

Della Porta, D. (2018). Radicalization: A relational perspective. Annual Review of

Political Science, 21, 461-474.

DeLeeuw, J. G., & Pridemore, W. A. (2018). The Threat from within: A conjunctive

analysis of domestic terrorism incidents in the United States. Perspectives on

Terrorism, 12(4), 26-54.

Dentice, D., & Bugg, D. (2014). Fighting for the right to be White: A case study in White

racial identity.

Denton, S. (2007). American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, September

1857. Vintage.

Dershowitz, A. M. (2002). Why terrorism works: Understanding the threat, responding

to the challenge. Yale University Press.

Downey, D. B. (2000). Domestic Terrorism: The enemy within. Current History,

99(636), 169-173.

Drake, C. J. (1998). The role of ideology in terrorists’ target selection. Terrorism and

Political Violence, 10(2), 53-85.

Durso, R. M., & Jacobs, D. (2013). The determinants of the number of white

supremacist groups: A pooled time-series analysis. Social Problems, 60(1), 128-

144.

Falkenrath, R. A. (2001). Problems of Preparedness: U.S. readiness for a domestic

terrorist attack. International Security, 25(4), 147-186.

Farrell, L. C., & Littlefield, R. S. (2012). Identifying communication strategies in cases

of domestic terrorism: Applying cultural context to the Fort Hood Shooting.

Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 9(1).

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2000). Terrorism in the United States: 30 Years of

Terrorism. A Special Retrospective Edition.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (2012). Domestic threat white supremacy extremism.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/domestic-threat.

Fenstermacher, L., NSI, L. K., Rieger, T., & Speckhard, A. (2010). Protecting the

homeland from international and domestic terrorism threats. White Paper:

Counter Terrorism, 178.

Fletcher, G. P. (2006). The indefinable concept of terrorism. Journal of international

criminal justice, 4(5), 894-911.

Fitzpatrick, T. M. (2018). Global Radicalization and the San Bernardino Attack. Evolving

Extremist US Domestic Threat. International Relations and Diplomacy, 6(9),

500-506.

Freilich, J. D., Chermak, S. M., & Caspi, D. (2009). Critical Events in the Life

Trajectories of Domestic Extremist White Supremacist Groups: A case study

analysis of four violent organizations. Criminology & Public Policy, 8(3), 497-

530.

Frey, B. S. (2004). Dealing with terrorism: stick or carrot.? Edward Elgar Publishing.

Frost, R. M. (2005). Terrorist psychology, motivation and strategy. The Adelphi

Papers, 45(378), 41-62.

Gaibulloev, K., & Sandler, T. (2013). Determinants of the demise of terrorist

organizations. Southern Economic Journal, 79(4), 774-792.

Gartenstein-Ross, D. (2015). Radicalization: Social Media and the Rise of Terrorism.

House Testimony, Hearing before the US House of Representatives Committee on

Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on National Security, 28.

Ghatak, S., & Prins, B. C. (2017). The homegrown threat: State strength, grievance, and

domestic terrorism. International Interactions, 43(2), 217-247.

Gill, P., & Corner, E. (2013). Disaggregating terrorist offenders: Implications for

research and practice. Criminology & Pub. Policy, 12, 93.

Gill, P., Horgan, J., and Deckert, P. (2014). Bombing alone: Tracing the motivations and

antecedent behaviors of lone‐actor terrorists. Journal of Forensic Sciences,

59: 425-435

Gilliard-Matthews, S. (2009). Homegrown Terrorists: A Comparative State Analysis of

White Supremacist Groups in the United States. 157: 91-113

Goertzel, T. G. (2002). Terrorist beliefs and terrorist lives. The Psychology of Terrorism:

Theoretical Understandings and Perspectives, 1, 97-111.

Goodell, J. A. (2015). The Revival of Treason: Why Homegrown Terrorists Should Be

Tried as Traitors. Nat'l Sec. LJ, 4, 311.

Goss, T. (2006). "Who's in Charge?" New Challenges in Homeland Defense and

Homeland.

Gottman, A. J. (1999). Fair notice, even for terrorists: Timothy McVeigh and a new

standard for the ex post facto clause. Wash. & Lee L. Rev., 56, 591.

Gruen, M. (2010). The massacre at Fort Hood. The NEFA Foundation.

Guittard, A. (2019). Beyond CVE: Evolving US Countering Violent Extremism Policy to

Prevent the Growing Threat of Domestic Terrorism. Harvard Kennedy School,

Belfer Center.

Hafez, M., & Mullins, C. (2015). The radicalization puzzle: A theoretical synthesis of

empirical approaches to homegrown extremism. Studies in Conflict &Terrorism,

38(11), 958-975.

Hamm, M. S., & Spaaij, R. (2017). The age of lone wolf terrorism. Columbia University

Press.

Hardy, K. (2011). WWWMDs: Cyber-attacks against infrastructure in domestic anti-

terror laws. Computer Law & Security Review, 27(2), 152-161.

Harrison, T. (2016). Book review of understanding terrorism: Challenges, perspectives,

and issues. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 11(2), 187-189.

Harvey, M. G. (1993). A survey of corporate programs for managing terrorist threats.

Journal of International Business Studies, 24(3), 465-478.

Hanley, D. C. (2015). Homeland security fights domestic terrorism: The Trillion Dollar

Hustle. Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, 34(6), 32–33.

Harrow, M. (2008). Inside a wave of terrorism: The dynamic relation between terrorism

and the factors leading to terrorism. Journal of Global Change and Governance,

1(3), 1-18.

Haskin, J. M. (2016). When all roads lead to the standoff: How Corporate Governance

Fuels White Supremacy. Algora Publishing.

Hemme, K. (2015). Critical infrastructure protection: Maintenance is national security.

Journal of Strategic Security, 8(5).

Hoffman, B. (1997). The confluence of international and domestic trends in terrorism.

Terrorism and Political Violence, 9(2), 1-15.

Howitt, A. M. (2003). Countering terrorism: Dimensions of preparedness. MIT Press.

Hudson, R. A. (2018). Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why? The Psychology and

Sociology of Terrorism. Simon and Schuster.

Indridason, I. H. (2008). Does Terrorism Influence Domestic Politics? Coalition

formation and terrorist incidents. Journal of Peace Research, 45(2), 241-259.

Jackson, P. (2020). Transnational Neo-Nazism in the USA, United Kingdom and

Australia.

Jones, S. G. (2018). Rise of Far-Right Extremism in the United States. Center for

Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

Kellner, D. (2015). Guys and guns amok: Domestic terrorism and school shootings

from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Virginia Tech massacre. Routledge.

Kenber, B. (2013). Nidal Hasan sentenced to death for Fort Hood shooting rampage. The

Washington Post.

Kight, M. (2010). Forever Changed: Remembering Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995.

Prometheus Books.

Kirchner, R. (2013). Surveillance and Threat Detection: Prevention Versus Mitigation.

Butterworth-Heinemann.

Koehler, D. (2019). Violence and terrorism from the far-right: Policy options to counter

an elusive threat. International Center for Counterterrorism.

Koerner, L. M., & Byers, B. D. (2000). Domestic Terrorism in the United States: A

Secondary Analysis of National Data on Assessment and Preparedness.

Kruglanski, A. W., Crenshaw, M., Post, J. M., & Victoroff, J. (2007). What should this

fight be called.? Metaphors of counterterrorism and their implications.

Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(3), 97-133.

Kurzman, C., & Schanzer, D. (2015). Law enforcement assessment of the violent extremism threat. Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security. Kushner, H. W. (1997). The future of terrorism: Violence in the new millennium. Sage

Publications.

Kydd, A. H., & Walter, B. F. (2006). The Strategies of Terrorism. International security,

31(1), 49-80.

LaGuardia, F. (2019). Considering a Domestic Terrorism Statute and Its Alternatives.

Nw. UL Rev., 114, 1061.

Lambakis, S., Kiras, J., & Kolet, K. (2002). Understanding" Asymmetric" Threats to the

United States. Comparative Strategy, 21(4), 241-277.

Latif, M., Blee, K., DeMichele, M., & Simi, P. (2018). How emotional dynamics

maintain and destroy white supremacist groups. Humanity & Society, 42(4), 480-

501.

Laqueur, W. (1996). Postmodern terrorism. Foreign Affairs, 24-36.

Lavi, M. (2020). Do platforms kill? Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 43(2),

477-573. Retrieved from https://libproxy.uccs.edu/login.url.https://search-

proquest-com.libproxy.uccs.edu/docview/2415857024.accountid.25388

Leets, L. (2001). Responses to internet hate sites: is speech too free in cyberspace.?

Communication Law & Policy, 6(2), 287-317.

Lesser, I., Arquilla, J., Hoffman, B., Ronfeldt, D. F., & Zanini, M. (1999). Countering the

new terrorism. RAND corporation.

Levin, J., Eubank, W. L., & Weinberg, L. (2006). Domestic terrorism. Infobase

Publishing.

Levin, J. (2006). The roots of terrorism. Domestic terrorism. Chelsea House

Lichtblau, E. (2005). For F.B.I., not enough progress in combating terrorism. New York

Times Retrieved from https://libproxy.uccs.edu/login.url.https://search-proquest-

com.libproxy.uccs.edu/docview/433049849.accountid.25388

Lieberman, A. V. (2017). Terrorism, the internet, and propaganda: a deadly combination.

Journal of National Security Law & Policy, 9(1), 1-44. Retrieved from

https://libproxy.uccs.edu/login.url.https://search-proquest-

com.libproxy.uccs.edu/docview/1869124877.accountid.25388

Litman, H. (2004). Pretextual Prosecution. Georgetown Law Journal, 92(6), 1135.

Lovelace, J. D. (2018). Terrorism: Commentary on Security Documents. Volume 148:

Lone Wolf Terrorists. Oxford University Press.

Lum, C., Haberfeld, M. M., Fachner, G., & Lieberman, C. (2009). Police activities to

counterterrorism: What we know and what we need to know. To protect and

to serve (pp. 101-141). Springer, New York, NY.

Mahan, S., & Griset, P. L. (2012). Terrorism in perspective. Sage Publications.

Maldonado, L. (2020). Why There Should Be a Law Against US Domestic Terrorism.

Martin, G. (2017). Understanding terrorism: Challenges, perspectives, and issues.

SAGE publications.

Mathew, B., Dutt, R., Goyal, P., & Mukherjee, A. (2019). Spread of hate speech in online

social media. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on web science (pp.

173-182).

Marcus, I. (1994). Reframing domestic violence, terrorism in the home, and the public

nature of private violence: The discovery of domestic abuse, 11-35.

Mascolo, M. F. (2017). The Transformation of a white supremacist: A dialectical-

developmental analysis. Qualitative Psychology, 4(3), 223.

McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2011). Friction: How radicalization happens to them

and us. Oxford University Press.

McDermott, M., & Samson, F. L. (2005). White racial and ethnic identity in the United

States. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 245-261.

Meyer, D. (2020). Omar Mateen as US citizen, not foreign threat: Homo-nationalism and

LGBTQ online representations of the pulse nightclub shooting. Sexualities, 23(3),

249-268.

Michael, G. (2012). Leaderless resistance: The new face of terrorism. Defense Studies,

12(2), 257-282.

Miller, G. (2013). FBI chief sees online attacks emerging as a top security threat. The

Washington Post Retrieved from https://libproxy.uccs.edu/login.url.https://search-

proquest-com.libproxy.uccs.edu/docview/1458440823.accountid.25388

Mitchell, J. K. (2003). The fox and the hedgehog: Myopia about homeland security in

U.S. policies on terrorism. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 11, 53-

72.

Molstad, M. (2020). Our Inner Demons: Prosecuting Domestic Terrorism. BCL Rev., 61,

339.

Mooney, C. (2014). Domestic Terrorism. Greenhaven Publishing LLC.

Mueller, J. E., & Stewart, M. G. (2016). Chasing ghosts: The policing of terrorism.

Oxford University Press.

Mullins, W. C., & Thurman, Q. C. (2011). The etiology of terrorism: Identifying,

defining, and studying terrorists. Criminologists on terrorism and homeland

security, 40.

Mythen, G., & Walklate, S. (2006). Communicating the terrorist risk: Harnessing a

culture of fear.? Crime, Media, Culture, 2(2), 123-142.

Nakashima, E. (2019). DHS Says Domestic Terror is a Major threat, Outlines

Strategy to Combat it. The Washington Post Retrieved from https://libproxy.

uccs.edu/login.url.https://search-proquest-com/2294289506.accountid.2538.

Nemeth, S. (2014). The effect of competition on terrorist group operations. Journal of

Conflict Resolution, 58(2), 336-362.

Newman, E. (2007). Weak states, state failure, and terrorism. Terrorism and political

violence, 19(4), 463-488.

Neumann, P. R. (2013). Options and strategies for countering online radicalization in the

United States. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 36(6), 431-459.

Neumann, P. R., & Smith, M. L. R. (2007). The strategy of terrorism: How it works, and

why it fails. Routledge.

Niskanen, W. A. (2006). The several costs of responding to the threat of domestic

terrorism. Public Choice, 128(1-2), 351-356.

Noricks, D. M. (2009). The root causes of terrorism. Social Science for Counterterrorism,

74: 06-11.

Norris, P., Kern, M., & Just, M. (2003). Framing terrorism. Framing terrorism: The news

media, the government, and the public, 3-23.

Okoye, I. E. (2018). Trends in terrorism incidents in the united states: Analysis of data

from 1980–2013. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences,

13(1), 200.

O'Neill, M. E. (2004). Understanding federal prosecutorial declinations: an empirical

analysis of predictive factors. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 41, 1439.

Parker, T. (2007). Fighting an antaean enemy: How democratic states unintentionally

sustain the terrorist movements they oppose. Terrorism and Political Violence,

19(2), 155-179.

Parker, C. F., & Stern, E. K. (2002). Blindsided? September 11 and the origins of

strategic surprise. Political Psychology, 23(3), 601-630.

Parada, P. (2019). White Supremacists Have Committed Domestic Terrorist Attacks, but

Why Have the Attackers Not Been Indicted as Domestic Terrorists.? U. La Verne

L. Revision., 41, 104.

Peterson, P. A. (2019). Domestic terrorism in the United States: Ideology, radicalization.

Mobilization, and the Law. Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, Maryland.

Piazza, J. A. (2011). Poverty, minority economic discrimination, and domestic terrorism.

Journal of Peace Research, 48(3), 339-353.

Picart, C. J. K. (2017). American Self-radicalizing Terrorists and the Allure of Jihadi

Cool/chic. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Pluchinsky, D. (2006). Terrorism and the American experience: A state of the field. The

Journal of American History, 98(1), 73-94.

Poppe, K. (2018). Nidal Hasan: A Case Study in Lone-Actor Terrorism.

Porterfield, A. B., & Porterfield, J. (2015). Death on Base: The Fort Hood Massacre.

(Vol. 8). University of North Texas Press.

Posner, R. A. (2005). Preventing surprise attacks: Intelligence reform in the wake of

9/11. Rowman & Littlefield.

Pumphrey, C. (2000). Transnational threats: Blending law enforcement and military

strategies. DIANE Publishing.

Purpura, P. (2011). Terrorism and homeland security: An introduction with applications.

Elsevier.

Pyszczynski, T., Motyl, M., & Abdollahi, A. (2009). Righteous violence: killing for God,

country, freedom and justice. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political

Aggression, 1(1), 12-39.

Quek, N. (2019). El-Paso Shootings: Growing Threat of White Supremacists.

Rabe‐Hemp, C. (2014). Terrorism, Domestic. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and

Criminal Justice, 1-4.

Renieris, E. M. (2008). Combating Incitement to Terrorism on the Internet: Comparative

Approaches in the United States and United Kingdom and the Need for an

International Solution. Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L., 11, 673.

Ressler, S. (2006). Social network analysis as an approach to combat terrorism: Past,

present, and future research. Homeland Security Affairs, 2(2).

Rich, P. (2004). Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failures. Psychology

Press.

Riedel, M., & Welsh, W. N. (2002). Criminal violence: Patterns, causes, and prevention.

Los Angeles: Roxbury.

Riley, K. J., & Hoffman, B. (1995). Domestic terrorism. Rand Corporation.

Robert, W. T., Eric, J. E., & John, L. (2013). Digital crime and digital terrorism. Pearson

Publishing.

Rothman, D. S., Romero-Lankao, P., Schweizer, V. J., & Bee, B. A. (2014). Challenges

to adaptation: a fundamental concept for the shared socio-economic pathways and

beyond. Climatic change, 122(3), 495-507.

Ruby, C. L. (2002). The definition of terrorism. Analyses of social issues and public

policy, 2(1), 9-14.

Saper, B. (1988). On learning terrorism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 11(1), 13-27.

Sánchez-Cuenca, I., & De la Calle, L. (2009). Domestic terrorism: The hidden side of

political violence. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 31-49.

Schafer, J. A., Mullins, C. W., & Box, S. (2014). Awakenings: The emergence of white

supremacist ideologies. Deviant Behavior, 35(3), 173-196.

Seger, K. A. (2001). Left-wing extremism: The current threat. Oak Ridge Institution for

Science and Education, TN.

Sessions, W. S. (1990). The FBI's mission in countering terrorism. Studies in Conflict &

Terrorism, 13(1), 1-6.

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2020). Hate map. Extremist files. https//www.splc.org.

Silke, A. (2001). The devil you know: Continuing problems with research on terrorism.

Terrorism and political violence, 13(4), 1-14.

Simi, P. (2010). Why study white supremacist terror? A research note. Deviant Behavior,

31(3), 251-273.

Sparrow, J. (2019). El Paso shooting and the rise of eco-fascism. Eureka Street, 29 (15),

Schmidt, M. S., & Perez-Pena, R. (2015). FBI treating San Bernardino attack as terrorism

case. The New York Times, 4.

Schils, N., & Verhage, A. (2017). Understanding how and why young people enter

radical or violent extremist groups. International Journal of Conflict and

Violence, 11, 1C,1-17.

Sheppard, B. (2019). Mass shootings reveal danger of white supremacist terror. Green

Left Weekly, (1233), 12.

Silkoset, E. (2016). Lone-Actor Terrorists: How Long Does It Take to Plan a Terrorist

Attack?

Schmid, A. (2004). Terrorism-the definitional problem. Case W. Res. J. Int'l L., 36, 375.

Smith, Allison G. (2018). How radicalization to terrorism occurs in the United States:

What research sponsored by the National Institute of Justice tells us. US

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Smith, B. L., Damphousse, K. R., Jackson, F., & Sellers, A. (2002). The prosecution and

punishment of international terrorists in federal courts: 1980–1998. Criminology

& Public Policy, 1(3), 311-338.

Smith, A. G. (2008). The implicit motives of terrorist groups: How the needs for

affiliation and power translate into death and destruction. Political Psychology,

29(1), 55-75.

Smith, B. L. (1994). Terrorism in America: Pipe bombs and pipe dreams. SUNY Press.

Spaaij, R. (2011). Understanding lone wolf terrorism: Global patterns, motivations and

prevention. Springer Science & Business Media.

Squires, P. (2012). Gun Culture or Gun Control? Firearms and Violence: Safety and

Society. Routledge.

Stickney, B. M. (1996). "All-American Monster": The Unauthorized Biography of

Timothy McVeigh. New York: Prometheus Books.

Stonehem, B. (2016). Orlando nightclub shooting: The worst mass shooting in United

States history (Vol. 1). First Rank Publishing.

Studdert, D. M., Zhang, Y., Rodden, J. A., Hyndman, R. J., & Wintemute, G. J. (2017).

Handgun acquisitions in California after two mass shootings. Annals of internal

medicine, 166(10), 698-706.

Suttmoeller, M., Chermak, S., & Freilich, J. D. (2015). The influence of external and

internal correlates on the organizational death of domestic far-right extremist

groups. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 38(9), 734-758.

Svendsen, A. D. (2012). The Federal Bureau of Investigation and change: Addressing US

domestic counter-terrorism intelligence. Intelligence and national security, 27(3),

371-397.

Sykes, P. C. (2018). Preventing domestic terrorism: Local Law Enforcements Role in

the Homeland Security Mission, and the Shortcomings in the Fight Against

Domestic Terrorism. University of Wisconsin-Platteville.

Syverson, C. (2017). Challenges to mismeasurement explanations for the US productivity

slowdown. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 165-86.

Szpunar, P. M. (2013). The horror at Fort Hood: disseminating American exceptionalism.

Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 182-198.

Tabachnik, S. (2019, March 7). Colorado ranks third in the nation for white supremacist

Propaganda. The Denver Post. https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/03/colorado-

white-supremacist propaganda.

Taquechel, E. F., & Saitgalina, M. (2018). Risk-based performance metrics for critical

infrastructure protection? A framework for research and analysis. Homeland

Security Affairs. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-

com.libproxy.uccs.edu/docview/2203206301.accountid.25388

Tappeiner, I. (2005). The fight against terrorism. The lists and the gaps. Utrecht L.

Rev., 1, 97.

Thomas, P., & Lippman, T. W. (1993). U.S. steps up efforts to combat terrorism:

Strategies Changing with Nature of Threat. The Washington Post.

Taylor, H. (2019). Domestic terrorism and hate crimes: Legal definitions and media

framing of mass shootings in the United States. Journal of policing, intelligence

and counterterrorism, 14(3), 227-244.

Teague, D. C. (2004). Mass casualties in the Oklahoma City bombing. Clinical

Orthopedics and Related Research (1976-2007), 422, 77-81.

Tobias, A. Z., Roth, R. N., Weiss, L. S., Murray, K., & Yealy, D. M. (2020). Tree of Life

Synagogue Shooting in Pittsburgh: preparedness, prehospital care, and lessons

learned. Western journal of emergency medicine, 21(2), 374.

Turner, B. M., & Lovell, R. D. (1998). Counterterrorism and AntiTerrorism Blowback:

Toward Discovery of the Obvious. Journal of Security Administration, 21(1), 1-

11.

Vacca, J. R. (2019). Online terrorist propaganda, recruitment, and radicalization. CRC

Press.

Valeri, R. M., & Borgeson, K. (2018). Terrorism in America. Routledge.

Vardalis, J. J., & Waters, S. N. (2010). An Analysis of Texas Sheriffs' Opinions

Concerning Domestic Terrorism: Training, Equipment, Funding and Perceptions

Regarding Likelihood of Attack. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency

Management, 7(1).

Vargas, J. M. (2017). Understanding the Radicalization Process of US Homegrown

Terrorists.

Vertigans, S. (2013). The sociology of terrorism: people, places and processes.

Routledge.

Vogel-Scibilia, S. (2020). Community resilience and the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting.

In Anti-Semitism and Psychiatry (pp. 223-241). Springer, Cham.

Vohryzek, M., Olson-Raymer, G., & Whamond, J. O. (2001). Domestic terrorism and

incident management: Issues and tactics. Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Walter, N., Billard, T. J., & Murphy, S. T. (2017). On the boundaries of framing terrorim:

Guilt, victimization, and the 2016 Orlando shooting. Mass Communication and

Society, 20(6), 849-868.

Waxman, M. C. (2009). Police and national security: American local law enforcement

and counterterrorism after 9/11. J. National Security & Policy, 3, 377.

Williams, J. B. (2018). Domestic Terrorism in the United States. Walden University.

Wilkinson, P. (1995). Violence and terror and the extreme right. Terrorism and Political

Violence, 7(4), 82-93.

Windisch, S., Simi, P., Blee, K., & DeMichele, M. (2018). Understanding the micro-

situational dynamics of white supremacist violence in the United States.

Perspectives on Terrorism, 12(6), 23-37.

Wong, M. A., Frank, R., & Allsup, R. (2015). The supremacy of online white

supremacists. An analysis of online discussions by white supremacist.

Information & Communications Technology Law, 24(1), 41-73.

Worrall, J. L. (1999). Focusing event characteristics and issue accompaniment: The case

of domestic terrorism. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 10(3), 319-341.

Young, R. (2006). Defining terrorism: The evolution of terrorism as a legal concept in

international law and its influence on definitions in domestic legislation. BC Int'l

& Comp. L. Rev., 29, 23.

Zeskind, L. (2009). Blood and politics: The history of the white nationalist movement

from the margins to the mainstream. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.