Read article and write essay
write a five page essay in which you apply the theory and substance of the chapter to the case study. The purpose of these essays is to integrate the theoretical and academic issues raised in the chapter with the real life material of the case study.
Only a small portion of the essay should be devoted to a restatement of the facts of the case: the large percentage of the case study should be analysis not mere regurgitation of the facts of the case. In writing these essays, you must incorporate the class lectures and cite/footnote the following materials: (1) the textbook chapter; (2) the case study; and (3) four academically rigorous outside sources addressing the issues and context of the case study (and not merely sources summarizing the case). Again, the three outside sources should not merely be summaries of the facts of the case.
The article is attached below ThirdCaseStudy.pdf
In this chapter you will read a case about terrorism, and what has come to be referred to as a “home grown terrorist”. The bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City was a precursor to the profound events of Sep- tember 2001. The content of the chapter focuses on understand- ing these acts and on the legal and quasi-legal developments that follow in their tracks.
Learning Objectives After reading this chapter you should be able to: – Define terrorism. – Explain what motivates terrorists to action. – Describe the role the U.S. Constitution plays in our response to terrorism. – Describe the impact that the U.S. response to terrorism has had on our systems of law and justice. – Explain the conflicts between liberty and security.
case #9: False patriots: the Oklahoma city Bombing
On April 19, 1995, 168 people, including 21 chil- dren, perished in the massive collapse of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Just before 9 oâ€™clock on an ordinary workday when most people were still settling at their desks sipping their morning coffee, a Ryder truck packed with nearly seven thousand pounds of explosives parked strate- gically at the drop-off spot near the entrance of the building. Exactly At 9:01, according to plan, a lit fuse reached its destination. The force of the explosion equivalent to three tons of TNT annihilated half of the building. Some died instantly incinerated in the blast and firestorm that followed while others were crushed beneath the rubble, eviscerated by flying glass, or fell to their deaths as floors collapsed beneath them. Five hundred and nine people sustained
horrific injuries trapped beneath mounds of red-hot twisted metal and concrete. It took days for rescuers to pull the living and the dead out of the steaming wreckage. Of the twen- ty-one babies and toddlers in the Americaâ€™s Kids day care center situated just thirty feet from the entrance, only six survived. The bomber, twenty-six-year-old Timothy McVeigh, was less than two blocks away when the bomb went off. The force of the blast lifted him a full inch off the sidewalk and he was forced to bob and weave as glass from surrounding buildings showered around him. He climbed into his yellow Mercury and drove deliber- ately just under the speed limit away from Oklahoma City. At 9:10 a.m. eight minutes after the bombing, McVeigh was heading in the opposite direction to the screaming fire trucks, police cars, and running pedes- trians rushing toward the billowing smoke and yellow dust of the fiery inferno. By 11 a.m. that morning McVeigh was in the cus- tody of the Noble County Jail in the small town of Perry in the neighboring state of Kansas. A state trooper had pulled him over for a missing license plate and arrested him for carrying a concealed weapon without a per- mit. McVeigh was charged with four misdemeanor offenses and held in the county jail awaiting an appear- ance before a judge. While McVeigh sat in the county jail, the news of the Oklahoma bombing blared from every available radio and television. This was the worst attack on American soil since the bombing of Pearl Harbor and everyone was glued to media. It seemed obvious to most observers that this was the work of foreign terrorists from somewhere in the Middle East looking to instill fear by targeting a federal building in the nation’s heartland. No one dreamed that the polite, lanky young man with military-style buzz-cut hair would have any connection to this horrific act
It was a fluke that McVeigh was still in custody, when authorities realized who it was they were looking for. Under normal circumstances, McVeigh would come before the county judge within twenty-four hours
of his arrest and most likely had been released without bail given the minor charges and his status as a first- time offender. But because the calendar was unusually busy county authorities held him an extra night. By Friday morning, federal agents had traced the rental of the Ryder truck and were typing up arrest warrants for a suspect named Timothy McVeigh, along with two accomplices, Terry and James Nichols. A routine check of his name in the National Crime Information System brought up his arrest less than two hours after the bombing eighty miles north of Oklahoma City. A phone call to the county jail confirmed that he was still sitting in cell awaiting his court appearance: no one could believe this unassuming young man was the Oklahoma bomber.
Who Was timothy McVeigh? There is very little that is exceptional about the boy- hood of Timothy McVeigh. Born in Buffalo, New York, to working-class parents, Tim was the middle child and only son of Bill and Mickey McVeigh. Physically small for his age, Tim had an uneventful childhood marred only by the separation and eventual divorce of his parents. Tim remained living with his father, a hardworking and mild-mannered man, who found it hard to connect with his son who did not share his passion for baseball and golf. Tim’s close relationships were with his younger sister Jenny, who idolized him, and his grandfather, who taught him to shoot at a young age and gifted him his first rifle. By all accounts, Tim was a well-behaved and intel- ligent student, who nonetheless failed to find any real connection with school. When he graduated from high school, he tried a local college for a few semesters but abandoned it as too “boring.” He bounced between jobs working mainly as a security guard but his real passion was guns. He spent all his free time shooting, buying guns, and reading about them. He even pur- chased a small tract of remote land with a friend so he could conduct target practice without complaints from concerned neighbors.
As part of his growing interest in guns, Tim sub- scribed to numerous gun magazines. The more he read, the more he became interested in the ideas that were promulgated through these publications. Increasingly Tim talked with friends and family about the idea of survivalism: the idea that each person needs to be self- sufficient and protect oneself and ones family without relying on assistance from the government. Increas- ingly he talked about the looming threat of govern- ment laws restricting the right of citizens to bear arms. One book more than any other captured his imag- ination. The Turner Diaries is a work of fiction pub- lished in 1978 by William Pierce, a former official with the American Nazi party. The hero of the novel is Ed Turner, a gun enthusiast, who reacts to ever-tighter gun laws by blowing up the FBI building in Washing- ton D.C. with a truck bomb. Pages of the book were in an envelope in the yellow Mercury along with other similar literature and McVeigh had sent excerpts to his sister Jenny in the days just before the bombing to help her understand his mission. In 1988, Tim suddenly decided to enlist in the Army where he met Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, two of the men who would later join him in the execution of the Oklahoma plot. In his two years in the Army, McVeigh found himself to be well suited to the disci- plined life of a soldier. He loved the order, the sense of mission, and the intensity. More than anything else he loved working with firearms. He excelled in the work of being a soldier, became a firearms expert and top gunner and was rapidly promoted to sergeant. After a successful combat tour in Desert Storm, McVeigh was tapped as a recruit to the elite Special Forces unit. But after only a few weeks at the training camp, he backed out of the program. Shortly afterward, McVeigh, who many expected to pursue a career in the military, abruptly quit and returned home to his old job as a security guard. For the next three or four years McVeigh would become increasing adrift from his family and child- hood friends traveling from gun show to
gun show periodically living with Terry Nichols and his wife in Montana, with James Nichols on his farm in Michigan, or with Michael Fortier and his family in Arizona. He supported himself doing odd jobs, selling literature at gun shows and serving as a straw buyer, someone willing to purchase guns for people who could not or would not put their own names on the requisite paper work. He occasionally came home to Buffalo to see his father but kept most contact with his younger sister with whom he shared his growing belief in the threat of a government takeover of individual’s right to bear arms. Jenny McVeigh did not always understand what her big brother was talking about but she loved him and thought he was brilliant. Just before the bombing, McVeigh wrote her a letter in which he explained that he was no longer interested in mere propaganda: he told her it was time for him to move to the action stage and that he was planning something big.
Why Did he Do It? The date of the bombing April 19, 1995 is key to understanding the logic behind this act of mass mur- der. The date is significant for three different reasons. First and foremost the date is the second anniversary of the tragic end of a disastrous federal gun raid on the Branch Davidian religious sect just outside Waco, Texas. On the first day of the raid, a shootout left six Davidians and four federal agents dead; fifty-one days later, on April 19, 1993, federal law enforcement agents ended the standoff using military tanks to fire canis- ters of tear gas into the compound. This barrage even- tually ignited a fire killing seventy-six people inside, including twenty-four children. Timothy McVeigh twice visited the compound to show his support for the Davidians and watched the conflagration with Terry Nichol as it was broadcast on national television. April 19 is significant for another reason. Ten years earlier on that date another federal raid took place on a group called the Covenant, Sword, and Arms or CSA. Part of a loose coalition of organizations known as
the Patriot movement, the leaders of this group were working on a plot to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. They had targeted the building because it housed numerous federal agen- cies, including, most significantly, the ATF, DEA, and FBI and seemed to have only minimum security. They were seeking a target that would kill lots of people because they believed a high body count was nec- essary to make the government sit up and take notice. This plan was never executed because the compound was raided before the bomb could be built: the date of the FBI led raid on the CSA was April 19, 1985, ten years to the day of the Oklahoma City bombing. A third reason that this date had meaning is that one of the leaders of another Patriot underground group called The Order (after the fictional account in The Turner Diaries) was scheduled to be executed on that day. This group believed that 1984 was going to be the year of the Second American Revolution; so starting in September of 1983, they began committing bank robberies and other crimes to purchase land for training camps. They bombed a synagogue and carried out the first of several planned assassinations. Wayne Snell was convicted of murdering a Jewish radio talk show host. He had been sentenced to death and the date of his execution was set for April 19, 1995, the day of the Oklahoma City bombing. A final clue to the logic behind the bombing is the T-shirt McVeigh was wearing on the day of the bombing. On the back of the shirt is an image of a tree with drops of blood dripping from its branches. Superimposed over the tree is a quotation by Thomas Jefferson: The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. On the front of the shirt are the words, Sic Semper Tyrannis, which means, Thus ever to tyrants.These were the words uttered by John Wilkes Booth when he assassinated Abraham Lin- coln in 1865. It was McVeigh’s favorite T-shirt. In the immediate aftermath of the bombing while most experts were speculating that foreign terrorists were responsible, the significance of
April 19 was immediately apparent to Special Agent Clinton R. Van Zandt of the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit in Quan- tico, Virginia. Having served as the lead negotiator at the Waco debacle, he was well aware what the anni- versary of the tragic fire would mean to the members of the Patriot Militia movement. When asked by his supervisor to provide a profile of the Oklahoma City terrorists, Van Zandt made no mention of the Middle East. He told his supervisor, You’re going to have a white male, acting alone or with one other person. He’ll be in his mid- twenties. He’ll have military expe- rience and be a fringe member of some militia group. He’ll be angry at the government for what happened at Ruby Ridge and Waco.â€ His supervisor was not convinced, We’re thinking it’s more of a Third-World terrorist type.
the hidden World of the Far-right Militia Movement In the first half of the 1990s, there was an explosive growth in citizen militias and insurgent anti-govern- ment groups that coalesced around the issue of gun rights and used the national network of gun shows as a venue for recruiting and organizing. With his passion for guns, military training, and seething anger at the government, Timothy McVeigh was in the right place at the right time to be tapped as an eager and talented member of the Patriots. The ideological roots of the Patriot movement harken back to earlier conflicts within American society and to other social movements both on the right and left sides of the political spectrum. To fully understand, it is necessary to look back to the era at the end of World War II in the 1950s and 1960s when fear of the Soviet Union and its quest for world domination captured the political imagination of many American citizens. For many including Senator Joseph McCarthy and President Richard Nixon, the greatest danger to the United States came from those working to subvert the United States from inside American society. The belief led to the infamous anti-communist crusades to cleanse
government, academia, Hollywood, and busi- ness of anyone with communist sympathies. For many on the right, the civil rights movements of the 1960s was really part of the international spread of communism and leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. were merely “pawns” or “fronts” for the Communist Party seeking world domination. The goal was to sow the seeds of racial division and discord within Ameri- can society in order to take control of our government. As early as 1961, armed militias calling themselves the Minutemen (after the U.S. revolutionaries) espoused violent action using arms to resist the federal govern- ment. There groups overlapped and intermingled with the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan in the Deep South already resentful of the federal government’s support of the civil rights movement. In 1957, when the gover- nor of Arkansas called on the National Guard to pro- tect blacks attending all- white schools in Little Rock, many saw this as proof that the federal government was part of the conspiracy to impose a federal dicta- torship on the South. Of particular significance was the ideological rejection of the authority of the federal government itself especially its legitimate right to exercise taxa- tion authority over individual citizens. This movement questioned the constitutional authority of the federal government to levy taxes and enforce federal laws. Some even went so far as to deny the legitimacy of any law enforcement officer above the level of county or sheriff’s office. The resulting mix of ideas was a toxic brew that bundled resentment against the federal government’s income tax with racists fears of a “negro revolution” to enslave whites bankrolled by “Jew- ish bankers” seeking to impose a single world order headed by the United Nations. During the 1980s, the movement gained adherents from the rural Farm Belt in places like Idaho, Michi- gan, and Iowa when thousands of family farms strug- gling under unsustainable debt were forced to declare
bankruptcy and sell off in farm auctions. Encouraged by favorable agricultural policies, small farmers had taken out loans to buy equipment and expand pro- duction but then got caught in a financial bind when China and India expanded their own production of grain. Prices fell and the U.S. government refused to subsidize them. Terry Nichols was one of these small farmers. Unable to continue the family business he joined the military in his late thirties after being forced to sell his farm. Like many others, he bitterly blamed the federal government, who refused to come to their aid, and the greed of bankers, who foreclosed on loans. Nichols, like many other farmers, became highly sym- pathetic to the arguments of the Patriot movement. A final piece of the ideological puzzle and one most important for understanding the motives of Timothy McVeigh and others, who bombed the Murrah Build- ing in 1995, is the growth of military-style policing in both state and federal law enforcement during the 1990s. McVeigh and others believed that the U.S. gov- ernment was engaging in acts of â€œwarâ€ against its citi- zens and they attributed this development to a sinister conspiracy designed to “disarm” and “enslave” white Christians under a One World government. The threat of a war waged by the government against its citizens was made all the more plausible by changes that were taking place within the structure of federal and state law enforcement.
the “War” on Drugs and the Militarization of U.S. policing Since President Nixon, the use of the term “war” was a powerful rhetorical device for garnering support for crime control. Nixon declared a “war on crime” and the Reagan-Bush administrations expanded that even further with the war on drugs. Starting with the Rea- gan administration, however, there was a shift from the mere words of war to the actual deployment of the U.S. military in domestic law enforcement and the mil- itarization of policing tactics, training, and equipment. This
began primarily in the area of drug enforcement but over time expanded to weapons enforcement and terrorism. After the end of the Cold War, there was a declining rationale for a huge federal defense budget to maintain forces around the world. Rather than reduce defense spending the Reagan and then later the Bush admin- istrations recruited the military to assist in various domestic law enforcement agendas. Primary among these was the war on drugs. Reagan lobbied Congress to amend nineteenth-century laws that prohibited mil- itary involvement in domestic law enforcement and began to increasingly use military personnel in the war on drugs. In 1986 Operation Alliance brought together the FBI, DEA, ATF, INS, U.S. Customs, Border Patrol, Coast Guard, U.S. Marshals Service, Secret Service, National Guard, and the Department of Defense in an unprecedented effort to coordinate the war on drugs. This same apparatus would later provide a key role in assisting the ATF on its gun raid at Waco, Texas. Not surprisingly, this raid was structured like a military assault using high-tech military equipment, such as tanks, assault weapons, snipers, and tear gas. Aggressive enforcement of drug laws did not gal- vanize the Patriot movement but once the same approach was applied to the enforcement of gun laws, this apparatus was viewed as a significant assault on the freedom of U.S. citizens. Under President Reagan and then President Clinton, gun laws began to prohibit the use of military-style assault weapons by citizens. Both the passage of the Brady Bill in 1991 and the 1994 Crime Control Act banning assault weapons were seen by the gun rights networks as an attempt to disarm American citizens. The use of military-style policing strategies developed in the realm of drug enforcement in the enforcement of gun laws fed into the existing belief that the government was going to war against its citizens. The gun raids at Ruby Ridge and Waco, Texas, solidified this perception that the government was the enemy of the people.
William Pierce’s novel, The Turner Diaries written in 1978 was a kind of bible and organizing manual for many in the movement, including Timothy McVeigh. For years, McVeigh urged anyone he knew to read the book and often handed out copies to complete strangers. In the plot of the novel, the federal govern- ment passes a law, the Cohen Act, which outlaws the possession and sale of weapons by citizens as a pre- lude to subjugate white citizens in a dictatorship called the New World Order. The government makes use of paramilitary police teams to confiscate all weapons in military-style gun raids. The hero Turner uses guerilla tactics, including blowing up a federal building using a truck bomb made from fertilizer. The rallying cry of the book, which appears on the blurb on the back cover and is repeated endlessly in gun magazines is, “What are you going to do when they come to take your guns? McVeigh believed, “The government is trying to eliminate all private gun ownership in this country . . . they want to rob us of our guns; strip us of all firearms. It’s not going to hap- pen without a fight. If the government wants to use overwhelming force, then we will meet it with over- whelming force. We have the right to defend ourselves against all enemies foreign or domestic. To McVeigh and others in the Patriot movement, the government’s enforcement of gun laws through the use of paramilitary style of policing was evidence of a deeper plot to disarm the U.S. citizen. For them, the use of the military against its own citizens was grounds for armed resistance. As they plotted to blow up the Murrah Building they saw themselves as Patriots of the Second American Revolution.
the criminal prosecution of McVeigh and Nichols Within only two hours of the bombing, the FBI had the names of two American citizens, both former U.S. soldiers, in their investigation. The breakthrough came because a piece of the Ryder truck, the rear axle had been catapulted a full city block away from site. Unscathed the axle
had the CVIN or confidential vehicle number stamped on it. This hidden identifier is crucial in the tracking of stolen vehicles and led investigators to the rental location in Junction City Kansas where McVeigh had rented it two days earlier. McVeigh had used an alias but agents dispatched to the site got a composite sketch from the clerk. This sketch was immediately broadcast on national television. Taking the sketch door to door agents quickly came upon the motel where McVeigh had registered for two nights while he assembled the bomb inside the truck. The manager of the motel confirmed that he had been driving a Ryder truck. Here McVeigh had registered under his own name and had also listed the Nichols family farm in Decker, Michigan, as his home address which led investigators to Terry and James Nichols. Meanwhile another witness came forward with cru- cial information that led authorities to McVeigh. A fellow security guard in Buffalo, Carl E. Lebron Jr., had spent many nights listening to McVeigh’s rant about the government and its threat to U.S. citizens. Like everyone else, McVeigh tried to convince Lebron to read The Turner Diaries and talked ceaselessly about the need for violent action against the federal govern- ment. When Lebron saw the police sketch on CNN, he went straight to the FBI with all he knew about McVeigh.
On August 10, four months after the bombing, a federal grand jury handed down an indictment against McVeigh and Terry Nichols accusing them of using a weapon of mass destruction to kill and injure inno- cent persons and damage the property of the United States.The federal trial U.S. v. Timothy J. McVeigh started on April 24, 1997. The prosecution’s case against McVeigh and his co-conspirator Nichols depended on the strong evi- dence that he had purchased the ingredients to make the fertilizer bomb in the days and weeks before the bombing; his rental of the Ryder Truck; his former accomplice Fortier and his wifeâ€™s testimony about the planning of the operation; and the testimony of his sis- ter who reluctantly testified about his anti-
government views and turned over his letters referencing the “big action” he was planning in the month of April. While McVeigh insisted to his defense team that he alone planned and carried out this operation with the assistance of only Nichols and Fortier, the defense wanted to present evidence that this was not the true and suggest to the jury that FBI had failed to fully investigate all possible suspects once they apprehended McVeigh and Nichols. This defense strategy was curtailed, when the judge refused to allow the defense to enter evidence that suggested that McVeigh and Nichols were only a small part of the larger conspiratorial network of actors. The remaining argument by the defense was that evidence in the prosecution’s case was merely circum- stantial. Although he had no alibi for that morning, the defense argued that simply because McVeigh was found to be nearby wearing ear plugs and an offen- sive T-shirt did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the bombing. Furthermore having incendiary literature in one’s car was not itself a crime and did not prove he actually acted on that literature. The jury disagreed with the defense. On June 2 McVeigh was found guilty of all eleven counts against him. In a capital trial, a jury decides guilt and inno- cence and then qualification for the death penalty in two separate proceedings. In the first trial, his defense attorney vigorously claimed McVeigh was innocent; in the penalty phase of the trial, the defense attorney fully admitted McVeigh had committed the bombing but tried to argue that McVeigh committed this act because he was trying to defend the ideals of his coun- try. The jury did not find this rationale mitigated his culpability for his actions. Two weeks later, on Friday, June 13, the jury handed the death penalty for his crime. At the sentencing, the judge permitted McVeigh to make a statement. Everyone expected him to express some kind of regret but McVeigh had no sympathy or remorse for his victims whom he coolly regarded as collateral damage in an act of war. His statement was intended to justify his actions by blaming the govern- ment for declaring war on citizens in
the first place. His statement was a single quotation from a Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis, Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.â€ Without any further explanation, that was all McVeigh said to his victims and to the American public. McVeigh instructed his attorneys not to appeal his death sentence: he had always expected to sacrifice his life for this cause. Timothy McVeigh was executed by lethal injection on June 11, 2001 three months to the day before 9/11. On December 23, 1997, Nichols was found guilty of conspiracy and involuntary manslaughter and sen- tenced to life in prison without parole. Michael Fortier too was convicted for failing to warn the government about the plot and sentenced to twelve years in federal prison. Yet there are many who firmly believe that it is highly unlikely that Timothy McVeigh was capable of carrying out an operation of this magnitude with only two accomplices. Experts now feel strongly that by claiming to have acted alone, McVeigh was protecting a wider network of domestic terrorists active within our borders.
Who Won? From the outset McVeigh admitted to his defense team that he carried out the bombing but he did not want his defense attorneys to enter a guilty plea on his behalf. Like most terrorists, McVeigh wanted to use his day in Court to get his message to the public. He asked his lawyer to use the defense of “necessity”so he could claim that he was forced to take action against a government that had declared war on its citizens. He wanted to convince the American public of the righ- teousness of his actions. Rather than seeing McVeigh as the self-sacrificing soldier he believed himself to be, however, the Amer- ican public reserved its compassion for the victims. Two acts of Congress had to be passed to accom- modate the needs of an unprecedented number of victims to attend the
trial. The first allowed victims to serve as witnesses and remain in the courtroom during the proceedings. Up until that point federal law did not allow witnesses to hear proceedings for fear it would influence their testimony. The mother of a young woman killed in the blast fought for vic- tims right to be present. The second law allowed the trial to be broadcast to Oklahoma City to accom- modate the large number of victims who wanted to attend. In the end, the public rejected McVeigh’s view of himself as a patriot. Rather than seeing McVeigh as the revolutionary hero he thought himself to be, most Americans viewed him as a baby killer and a cow- ard. When President Clinton referred to the bombing as the ultimate act of cowardice McVeigh was infuri- ated. In closing arguments to the jury, the prosecu- tor echoed the president, Our forefathers didnt fight British women and children. They fought other sol- diers. They fought them face to face, hand to hand. They didn’t plant bombs and run away wearing ear plugs. In the court of public opinion, McVeigh experi- enced the ultimate failure: if his goal was to win hearts and minds of the American public to feel sympathy for his political cause, this act of terror was a complete failure. The Oklahoma bombing marked a decline of the right-wing militia movement, as even supporters turned away in disgust at the naked brutality of ter- rorist violence.
Terrorism (p. 247) lence against a target to create fear or coercion for
the purpose of obtaining some political concession or reward or other
profiling (p. 249) a tool used by law enforcement to narrow
offender characteristics to assist in pre- vention or apprehension.
reign of terror (p. 249) coined by Edmund Burke, the term
described the massive number of execu- tions of formerly powerful
members of the nobility and church by the new government in the
aftermath of the French Revolution; the source of the term
anarchist (p. 250) a political philosophy that rejects the state and
propaganda by deed (p. 250) actions, includ- ing tossing bombs at
important persons in public places, used by anarchists in the nineteenth
century to bring attention to their cause.
nationalists (p. 250) unconventional soldiers fighting for fellow
white supremacy (p. 250) the belief that “white” people are superior to
eco-terrorism (p. 251) people who use violence to draw public
attention to practices related to ani- mal welfare or the environment that
they believe are immoral and unjust.
mujahideen (p. 251) Muslim holy warriors.
suicide mission (p. 252) a task that is so dan- gerous that the person
performing the act is not expected to survive.
jihad (p. 254) an internal journey of purification and the willingness to
carry arms to defend your community.
militant jihadism (p. 249) a term used to describe a movement
claiming to be rooted in Islam and per- ceived to be devoted to the
destruction of “the west.”
patriot act (p. 254) an act of Congress passed in the immediate
aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the main goal of which is to
enhance the ability of the government to collect intelligence inside the
United States by removing the wall or legal prohibition on information
shared between national intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
terrorist organizations (p. 254) organizations designated by the
president, pursuant to the authority of the Patriot Act, as funders or
supporters of terrorism.
material supporter (p. 254) anyone who makes a charitable
contribution to an organization desig- nated as terrorist organization.
criminal intelligence (p. 255) law enforcement surveillance of those
believed to have engaged in illegal activities, typically responding to
such activi- ties; constrained by the Fourth Amendment require- ments
of reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
national security intelligence (p. 255) preven- tative clandestine
surveillance by the government designed to gather information about
potential threats to national security.
fusion centers (p. 255) centers across the coun- try, administered
by the Department of Homeland Security, where information is collected
suspicious activity reports (p. 255) any report of individual
suspicious activity reported to Homeland Security by a citizen or local
police; also referred to as SAR.
cointelpro(p.256) an FBI program the 1950s and 1960s that engaged
in, often illegal, infiltration and disruption of domestic political
counterterrorism (p. 256) a government tactic for responding to
martial law (p. 257) replacing civil law with military law, albeit on an
civil liberties (p. 258) the rights and freedoms provided for by the U. S.
Constitution and espe- cially the Bill of Rights.
right to privacy (p. 258) though not explicitly defined in the U.S.
Constitution, the courts have found a right to be let alone from
surveillance or interference by the government unless there is evi-
dence one has violated the law.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!