home

Domestic Terrorists?

By TChris, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Sun Jun 26, 2005 at 12:11:46 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

The FBI claims that environmental and animal rights activists are "the nation's top domestic terrorism threat" -- a position that plays well with lobbyists for the timber and fur industries, but puzzles those who wonder why the FBI doesn't have greater concern about extremists like Eric Rudolph who blow up abortion clinics and gay bars. Rudolph's "manifesto," casting his bombing spree as a protest against abortion, has been posted to the internet by one of his supporters.

The Webmaster of the site, Donald Spitz, a minister whose site also includes photographs of aborted fetuses, said Friday that he had been writing to Mr. Rudolph in jail for months, and that Mr. Rudolph had mailed him the 21-page handwritten account. Mr. Spitz said he posted the account at [his Army of God website] with Mr. Rudolph's approval.

Terrorism is the use of violence against civilians for a political purpose. The FBI has redefined terrorism to encompass those who cause only economic damage. Why doesn't the FBI believe Rudolph's supporters are a greater terrorist threat than activists who (without killing people) pursue causes that are contrary to the interests of businesses that the administration favors?

Emily Lyons, a nurse who was critically injured in the Birmingham clinic bombing, said Friday that Mr. Rudolph seemed to be "a puppet" of Mr. Spitz and other anti-abortion activists who accept donations through their Web sites. "Eric Rudolph does the time and those creating the Web sites get money for publishing Rudolph's ramblings," she said in a statement.

< Billy Graham's Last Sermon | New Report: Dick Cheney Had EKG in Vail >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Domestic Terrorists? | 28 comments (28 topical)
    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Why doesn't the FBI believe Rudolph's supporters are a greater threat than activists who (without killing people) pursue causes that are contrary to the interests of businesses that the administration favors?
    Because, in the rightwing mind, advancement of their agenda by ANY means necessary is acceptable, but like I said before, lest you break wind at a slightly higher decibel level than normal as a Democrat, you're automatically a terrorist. So lets cut down all the trees, kill every animal until all we have left on this planet are pigs, cows, chickens, and stray dogs, fill the air with enough noxious gas to turn our world into another Venus, and we'll all just have a swell party then, won't we.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#2)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Remember most of what the FBI Is doing is making a threat for the show, eric is a setup guy that was once or is still an inforer for the FBI/ICE/CIA/NAS/MSMBC...only joking about MSMBC...god help us all from our own government who can't find the white racists\extermists, while overlooking the other race hate guys yelling about lost lands that never were, the fact is this government and i don't just mean bush is totally under the control of others that have no political or culture\economic caring about the people or its ideas. this nation is not a nation is just a business for dismantling.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    What Bush and his lot hope this creates in the heartland:

    "Hey Wilma, them enviromentalist is all terrist, theys jus like Osama. Biily-Bob, Jo-Jon, the res' you boys go get tha guns. We gots us some hippies jus down the road."

    PPJ,

    PPJ,

    Where are you PPJ?

    Come save us from the enviro-terrorists with your tiger kung fu.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    I wonder why the FBI hasn't Labled those who poison our waters and fish with arseniic. or those who poison our air with Sulphur TERRORISTS. I do.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Ashcroft: Soft On (Right-Wing) Terrorists?

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#6)
    by LorettaNall on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Back a few months ago the Rudolph case was big here in the Alabama media and the Birmingham News put out this non-story about Rudolph and marijuana. I wrote an LTE about it (more like an ass chewing of the "journalist" who wrote it and not really for publication) in which I stated the following; "Can we please stay focused on the issue which is the fact that this man committed violent acts that were sympathetic to the neo-con agenda on domestic social issues. He has not been called a domestic terrorist, which is what he is, and he has been allowed to escape the death penalty suppossedly in exchange for his guilty plea and his providing information about explosives he hid in the mountains of North Carolina. I think the fact that the Bush Administration has not labeled this man a domestic terrorist and sought the death penalty is because he is one of their own." If you are so inclined you can read the story and the rest of my rant HERE

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#7)
    by DawesFred60 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Do you think that Bush and government business are all Cylons? after all this government\court system just did away with the ideals of ownship of homes inside the empire. Hey, Fenria this non nation is now owned by the business interests and its got to find or make domestic terrorists and it will. its all about the ancient desire to control people and the day to day life of the people; its insane but it works for the business interests that own people like bush. oh yes, it will also use the old line of terrorists in time on millions of people here in the land of freedom.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    I, for one, have always been very concerned about the way the Feds acted at Ruby Ridge and at Waco. It doesn't matter a bit to me that the whackos at those locations were right wing whackos. People should have the right in this country to hold crazy political views. It's called freedom. It's possible to look back and see that the Delta Force, the FBI, et al were just itching for the freedom to get it on with some "bad guys." Of course, the ATF got their butts kicked at Waco, but the ATF is another story altogether. Oh, and lest anyone should misunderstand, when I mentioned the right wing whackos I was thinking of the Weaver family and Koresh and his congregation, but I can see where a reasonable person might look back at Ruby Ridge or Waco and think that the FBI, Delta Force et al were the right wing whackos. I think it fits both ways. I am more partial to the Weaver family and Koresh and his congregation than I am to the FBI and Delta Force in these particular events.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#9)
    by jarober on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    Look up the word "volume", and also "quantity". You might learn something.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#10)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    LorettaNall writes:
    I think the fact that the Bush Administration has not labeled this man a domestic terrorist and sought the death penalty is because he is one of their own."
    Why do you write this? Do you have any proof? Just wanna rant, eh? BTW - You can't consider either RR or Waco, "right wing." Fat albert - There are many I would save. You aint one of'em. And we don't shoot hippies... No sport in it. But we might make an exception in your case. ;-) Fenria - Can you name me any Rudolph supporter(s)? Everyone I know wanted him executed. So who didn't? And your proof is? Don't have any, do you.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#11)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    PPJ, "Why do you write this? Do you have any proof? Just wanna rant, eh?" David Neiwert, in my opinion, has lent great credence to the idea that radical right-wingers have quite a bit of support from what most would consider the mainstream conservative movement. Also, it's surprisingly bad form for you to start a post with "Just wanna rant, eh?" and then call people liars whom you'd like to shoot. Actually that post was just all-around bad. But I'll indulge you; having spent some time in North Carolina while he was on the lam, I discovered that quite a few people didn't think he did anything wrong. I also discovered federal agents with machine guns staking out the national parks. Oh, and there were clearly people keeping him alive for all these years; I don't think I met any of them but I assure you they're out there.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:35 PM EST
    "The FBI has redefined terrorism to encompass those who cause only economic damage." Oh, really... I can think of a few occupiers of the Whitehouse who fit that description. Perhaps they could start there.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    PPJ,

    A death threat, on a site geared toward the legal aspects of our world. One where they have your IP address. Smart PPJ, real smart. This shows your intelligence level and seems to cut any credibility you have, if you ever had any.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    What the...! I told PPJ once that he was rude, but that doesn't cover this. Talking about shooting someone? That's not simply rude. That's over the top, and uncalled for to the max. I am surprised talkleft would allow that to be posted.

    And on a thread concerning domestic terrorists no less. CREEPY!

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#15)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    Fat albert writes:
    Hey Wilma, them enviromentalist is all terrist, theys jus like Osama. Biily-Bob, Jo-Jon, the res' you boys go get tha guns. We gots us some hippies jus down the road." PPJ, PPJ, Where are you PPJ?
    Hey, you the one who brought up the subject. I just said I don't. Back on topic. Can anybody answer the questions I asked?

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#16)
    by LorettaNall on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    LorettaNall writes: I think the fact that the Bush Administration has not labeled this man a domestic terrorist and sought the death penalty is because he is one of their own." Why do you write this? Do you have any proof? Just wanna rant, eh?
    PPJ, I said "I think" which makes what I said clearly my own opinion. I never stated what I said as "fact" so therefore "proof" is not required. Pay attention when you are reading and you will make fewer embarassing mistakes.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#18)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    LorettaNall - Well, excuseeeeeeee me. Can you tell us why you think that, or did it come to you in a dream? I mean, most people think things because they have heard, read, seen or felt some, however small, amount of information. Still waiting to know, so I guess it was a dream. DA - Actually I was in my luxury hotel room. But yes, all the fine food and wine does make you groggy. And yes, the secretary position is still open. Do you also pick up cleaning?

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    PPJ: When the FBI and the Bush administration comes out and declares the Army Of god a terrorist group I will believe that they are both not in line ideologically with them. ALF homicides, attempted murder, arson, battery, burglary, and a variety of other Violent crimes = 0 AOG - On their website they list their top ten murderers, arsonists and other violent offenders. I find it hard not to correlate that the env. groups with whom the Bush administration is at ideological odds with is deemed a terrorist group although they have committed no acts of violence, while the other group, with which the Bush administration is completely in agreement with ideologically, has numerous violent offenses and is not deemed a terror group.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#21)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    DA - There is a lot I haven't told you. Shall we trade my tutoring services for you being my secretary? Preview? Didn't know you had pne. Tale mem aboit.. JL writes PPJ: When the FBI and the Bush administration comes out and declares the Army Of god a terrorist group I will believe that they are both not in line ideologically with them.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#22)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    JL - well, as long as you are not just thinking about it...

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#23)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    PPJ: I recognize that 6th grade was difficult academically and most of HS you were the victim of those who garnished your lunch money and this is the only forum where you can truly be a bad*ss, but your wit falls dramatically short of bite and it would seem that your hyocrisy knows no bounds. I am sorry you got your *ss kicked on a regular basis, but I can really understand why it happened.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    Posted by James Robertson: "Look up the word "volume", and also "quantity". The volume of Bush's lies is equivalent to the quantity of his backroom profits.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#26)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:37 PM EST
    DA - Alas I was in a plain jane Holiday Inn. Sorry to disappoint you. The joint was filled to the brim with nothing but Demos, I'm sure. BTW - Do you do anything yourself? You keep referencing your family. As for the wine, I never spill the good stuff. Got any othter snarky remarks? JL - Lunch money? School children had lunch money? What a concept.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#28)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:37 PM EST
    You are right Jim, I give you too much credit, I am certain they bullied you simply because you were the kid that was always right.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#29)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:37 PM EST
    DA - Ho hum.... now that we've made a bunch of inane remarks, mine in jest, yours in leftie personal attack mode, tell me. Who are these people that are supporting Rudolph in his terrorist activities? Of, I forgot, hera is spomegyhing you will want to commment on.... JL - Got any answers, I mean since you are so all seeing, let's hear it!

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    PPJ: Don't change the subject because you are mentally challenged, address the issue regarding the AOG and why they are not a terrorist group. Your snide and end around insults to people on this site demonstrate your cowardice. When faced with an argument of reason you resort to snarky comments. So tell me why there is such a discrepancy in branding? It doesn't take much to see through you Jim, I don't have to be all seeing, just informed with a basic knowledge of psychology to determine your narcissism is derived not from knowledge, but from grandiosity.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#32)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    JL - Argument of reason? I have seen few lately. From the article:
    "Emily Lyons, a nurse who was critically injured in the Birmingham clinic bombing, said Friday that Mr. Rudolph seemed to be "a puppet" of Mr. Spitz and other anti-abortion activists who accept donations through their Web sites."
    I understand that Ms Lyons will be upset at anything associated with Rudolph. I would be. Heck, I would be really pis*ed that he didn't get death. But, saying that the AOG is a "supporter" of Rudolph doesn't wash. If they were, why did he have to live as he did, which, in his own words was a miserable existence. I think "using" him might be a better description. i.e. By publishing his sad tale on the run they draw contributations from people who drop by and read it. And some of the people will read the other arguments against abortion, and become members. But supporting him? No. DA - How about some proof? You claim common sense? Funny, you use it here and reject it in other places. As for the rest of your dwaddle... Boringgggg.

    Re: Domestic Terrorists? (none / 0) (#33)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    Perhaps a bit of reading might help you PPJ. And I find it odd, scratch that I do not find it odd, I find it completely consistent that you are able to tie Hussein and Osama together with ZERO evidence, yet you cannot tie any of these white christians together. Founding Philosophy: The Army of God is an underground network of terrorists who believe that the use of violence is an appropriate tool for fighting against abortion. An excerpt from the Army of God Manual says that the Army of God "is a real Army, and God is the General and Commander-in-Chief. The soldiers, however, do not usually communicate with one another. Very few have ever met each other. And when they do, each is usually unaware of the other's soldier status. That is why the Feds will never stop this Army. Never. And we have not yet even begun to fight." Pastor Michael Bray is the Chaplain of the Army of God. He hosts the annual "White Rose Banquet" honoring those imprisoned for anti-abortion violence. He also wrote the book "A Time to Kill," which provides a biblical justification for the use of violence against abortion providers. Bray has served time in jail for bombing abortion clinics. Bray's daughter is named after a murderer of an abortion doctor. The Army of God manual is a "how to" for abortion clinic violence. It details methods for blockading entrances, attacking with butyric acid, arson, bomb making, and other illegal activities. The manual contains anti-abortion language as well as anti-government and anti-gay/lesbian language. The manual begins with a declaration of war on the abortion industry and continues, "Our Most Dread Sovereign Lord God requires that whosoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. Not out of hatred of you, but out of love for the persons you exterminate, we are forced to take arms against you. Our life for yours - a simple equation....You shall not be tortured at our hands. Vengeance belongs to God only. However, execution is rarely gentle." Several Army of God members have been involved in highly publicized incidents of terrorism. Eric Robert Rudolph was charged with the Atlanta Olympic bombing, as well as the bombings of an abortion clinic and a gay bar in Atlanta. Secondary bombs, designed to detonate after emergency service personnel arrived at the scene, were planted at both the abortion clinic and the gay bar. Another Army of God member, James Kopp, was convicted in the fatal shooting of clinic doctor Dr. Barnett Slepian in 1998. Kopp is believed to be connected with a half dozen other similar shootings that took place between 1994 and 1997. Clayton Waagner, the man who has claimed responsibility for sending over 550 anthrax threat letters to clinics in 2001, signed many of his threat letters with the name Army of God. He also posted threats to kill 42 individuals working at abortion clinics on the Army of God website. Current Goals: Recent reports have noted the Army's increased anti-gay rhetoric and worry that this may be a precursor to attacks on gays and lesbians.

    Domestic Terrorists? | 28 comments (28 topical)