(no subject)
Types of Terrorists, Extremists and State Sponsored Terrorists
In the evaluation and investigation of terrorist attacks we as investigators have to possess an understanding of what kinds of individuals commit acts of terrorism or become involved in terrorist organizations? What kind of attacks have these organizations completed against the US people, property interests and allies? To help answer these questions I am going to give summary information about active terrorist organizations and the kinds of attacks they have attempted in recent past.
Religious Extremists
Some people start along a path that leads them to terrorism by becoming involved with an extremist religious group. An example of one such group, considered an international terrorist organization is the Aum Shinrikyo Cult, lead by Asahora Shoko. While Asahora Shoko was arrested for terrorist acts in 1995 and received the death sentence in Japan; important lessons can still be learned in evaluating the Aum Shinrikyo, which rose and fell as a terrorist organization very quickly. The word Aum means the powers of creation or destruction in the universe and Shinrikyo means the teaching of the supreme truth. The group was established in 1986 after Asahora Shoko, a partially blind yoga instructor and mystic claimed to have received enlightenment while traveling in the Himalayan Mountains (Simmons 2006).
The group gathered followers and revealed it’s teaching as an ascetic cult. The followers were required to shed or donate all personal belonging to the Aum and live entirely off of the Aum support. Leaving the Aum was not allowed and the Aum would kidnap individuals who escaped the group and wanted out.
The group found itself protected by the government when it received protected status under Japan’s Religious Corporations Law of the time (Simmons 2006). This protection hindered the ability of the government to oversee or regulate the Aum. The Aum spread from investments, business practices, criminal involvement and donations of users. The Aum established itself in manufacturing and software businesses and manufactured illicit drugs. The Aum would even extort Japanese officials by threatening to expand their cult into that official’s region if the official did not pay. As the Aum continued to grow and expand Asahora’s teachings became more radical, including attempting to get several cult members elected to the government so that they would be able to help “save the world”. The group believed in an eventual devastating conflict between Japan and the US (Simmons 2006).
After loosing the elections the group changed its ideology from saving the world, to saving its followers. The group began to establish sheltered and protected communes, places where faithful Aum could practice away from the influence of non-believers. These where secure locations, some even had shelters to protect the Aum in the event of a nuclear attack. The group also began to complete its own research on biological and chemical weapons, experimenting and even attempting to utilize botulism and anthrax in failed terrorist attacks against the government and Japanese people. The Aum released Sarin gas into a Japanese neighborhood in Matsumoto, in an attempt to sicken or kill three judges who where working on a dispute over property the Aum had purchased. This attack did not kill anyone, but did delay the trial. Authorities began to investigate the Aum more, and planned a raid on Aum holdings. The Aum received word of the raid and it is believed they planned the Tokyo Sarin attacks at that time. In 1995 the Aum carried packets filled with liquid Sarin onto the Tokyo subway, the packets where wrapped in newspapers to avoid suspicion, the agents committing the attack punctured the pouches and left the trains. The target of the attacks was believed to be the National Police Agency headquarters located in the building above. The attacks killed 12 and injured thousands. It made the Japanese government more aware of the lack of mass casualty or decontamination training. The system for handling these events was not established and the flow of information during and after the attacks was not controlled. If the air circulators within the train station had not worked effectively to disperse the gas safely the attack could have been much more lethal (Simmons 2006).
After the attacks the government made its raid against the Aum and discovered the full extent of the Aum’s activities. The Aum had sought a number of biological agents for use, even sending operatives to Africa to attempt to recover strains of the Ebola virus. Equipment and chemicals were recovered that indicated a much larger attack had been planned and thousands could have possibly been killed if the attacks succeeded (Simmons 2006). Original reports indicated that millions could have been killed, but it is not my belief as an investigator that the organization had the infrastructure or full resources to implement a gas attack capable of killing millions at the time that the investigation was taking place. One of important factors in evaluating the threat of terrorist attacks is keeping fear and scale under control. I cannot believe that a organization that could only muster a practical attack that killed 12 had in its power the practical capability to kill millions at the same time, while in theory the possible and stockpile might have existed it is much more reasonable to state that the group had within it’s capacity enough nerve agent to kill thousands. Actual volume of chemical weapons and tactical volume are two different measures, the tactical volume being the amount of chemical agent that can be successfully deployed to kill or disable the targets, which is far less than the material volume that must be produced and dispersed over the target area.
Overall the leaders and those who orchestrated the attacks were arrested and tried. Japan also changed its laws in regards to how it controls the processes that can be used for manufacturing chemical weapons; how it regulates groups including religious groups like the Aum. The Aum lost recognition as an authorized religion, lost protected status but it is allowed to maintain its spiritual practices and business operations. The group changed its name to Aleph and is attempting to gather new followers. It is still currently under surveillance by Japanese police (Simmons 2006).
State Sponsored Terrorism
State sponsored terrorism is another type of terrorist that we must evaluate and understand. In the aftermath of 9/11 we have to consider how the use of the word terrorism was redefined and labeled “new”. After the 9/11 attacks a great number of terrorism experts labeled the attack as “new terrorism” global in it’s reach and fueled by extremist individuals and groups who are willing to kill themselves for their cause and destroy large groups of civilians in the process (Rolston, 2005). There is nothing new about this, terrorists have always been willing to do whatever it took for their cause, including their own death and the killing of civilians. We must be sure to understand that the state can be a terrorist against its own people; this is common in totalitarian regimes where a dictator uses death squads to enforce his will and terrorize the population into subjugation. A terrorist in this situation may not be acting out of religious fervor or belief, but instead may be acting out of personal survival. In situations where death squads arise out of a democratic government, the terrorist once again becomes a living enforcer of his faction’s altruism.
The state sponsored terrorist is not necessarily someone who puts on a uniform or participates in his nations military traditions, but he is still an agent willing to kill for the beliefs that he holds. In places, even democratic governments, where politics have reached a fever pitch, both the resistance against the state and the state might enact terrorism against each other. It is important to make sure that during our government’s war on terror we do not resort to becoming terrorists ourselves and that line and assessment will fall onto the investigators who investigate and attempt to prevent acts of terrorism. We must be sure to think critically about any individual that is given the label of terrorist, because use of the label ‘terrorist’ serves to discredit opponents; erases any incentive for people to understand opponents’ point of view; deflects attention from grievances they have which may be genuine; rules out negotiation with them; and allows governments a free hand in violence against them (Rolston, 2005).
The underlying belief is that democracy precludes terror. The legitimacy of the democratic state rests on the willingness of citizens to be ruled. This willingness not only gives rulers the mandate to exercise power, but also sets limits on their power. Democracy is thus the ultimate protection against the abuse of power in general and terror in particular. We must consider that while democracy is a protection against the use of terror by the state, the process of democracy alone is not sufficient we must also consider the amount of civil liberties and societies within the democracy (Rolston, 2005). We cannot allow ourselves to be blinded to the removal of civil liberties for anyone; any permanent removal of liberty in any area weakens the democratic state. Security may be increased but terrorism cannot be fought outside of the due process of law.
A situation where the fight against terrorism was taken outside of the due process of law was the Northern Irish Struggle against the IRA. Over the course of thirty years the Sanctioned government of Northern Ireland fought against insurgent terrorists of the IRA. Sanctioned police and intelligence units fought in this insurgency along with paramilitary groups, unsanctioned organizations loyal to the Northern Irish and resisting the insurgents (Rolston, 2005). The problem fully exists when we begin to evaluate cooperation between a sanctioned police force, answerable to the public and the people and a paramilitary organization that might receive support from the government but exists as a sub-national body. A terrorist act, such as the bombing of an IRA car containing insurgents, is still a terrorist act if it was carried out by a group that does not possess the sovereignty or sanction of the people. The Northern Irish government might even support or allow such an act because it benefits them, it removed terrorists that it would have needed to arrest and send to trial. The government may be able to deny that it had any involvement in the killings, because they where committed by unsanctioned agents acting for the government’s benefit.
As another example, In Brazil the death squads were also composed more or less entirely of state forces. Off-duty police in effect hired themselves out as privatized militia to business owners eager to remove street children and young petty criminals whose presence and activities were supposedly bad for business. 7,000 children and youths, mostly male, were murdered between 1988 and 1991. Dismissed as ‘social vermin’, in fact the majority were not criminals (Rolston, 2005). During the majority of this time Brazil was considered a democracy. Part of the vulnerability seems to arise from the sensitive transition time from dictatorship to democracy, it seems that often a new government will want to eliminate insurgents without acting within the same democratic principles that it is trying to establish.
The understanding of the combination of both of these types of terrorists in important in the context of current world events, where a western power is attempting to establish a democracy in a environment where the legal and lawful combatants of the United States, acting with sanction of the united nations must deal with extremist insurgents who are using terrorism as a weapon. It is also important that no shortcuts be made in the establishment of an Iraqi police force and that the force receives the support it needs. We do not want to leave a legacy of terrorism as a result of our war on terror.
Rolston (2005) ‘An effective mask for terror’: Democracy, death squads and
Northern Ireland, Crime, Law & Social Change 44: 181-203, Springer 2006 Recovered on 11-26-2006 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=1061477991&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1164570944&clientId=65562
Simmons (2006) Faith, Fanaticism, and Fear: Aum Shinrikyo-The Birth and Death of a Terrorist Organization, Forensic Examiner. Springfield: Spring 2006.Vol.15, Iss. 1; pg. 37, 9 pgs recovered on 11-26-2006 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1124945061&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=65562&RQT=309&VName=PQD
In the evaluation and investigation of terrorist attacks we as investigators have to possess an understanding of what kinds of individuals commit acts of terrorism or become involved in terrorist organizations? What kind of attacks have these organizations completed against the US people, property interests and allies? To help answer these questions I am going to give summary information about active terrorist organizations and the kinds of attacks they have attempted in recent past.
Religious Extremists
Some people start along a path that leads them to terrorism by becoming involved with an extremist religious group. An example of one such group, considered an international terrorist organization is the Aum Shinrikyo Cult, lead by Asahora Shoko. While Asahora Shoko was arrested for terrorist acts in 1995 and received the death sentence in Japan; important lessons can still be learned in evaluating the Aum Shinrikyo, which rose and fell as a terrorist organization very quickly. The word Aum means the powers of creation or destruction in the universe and Shinrikyo means the teaching of the supreme truth. The group was established in 1986 after Asahora Shoko, a partially blind yoga instructor and mystic claimed to have received enlightenment while traveling in the Himalayan Mountains (Simmons 2006).
The group gathered followers and revealed it’s teaching as an ascetic cult. The followers were required to shed or donate all personal belonging to the Aum and live entirely off of the Aum support. Leaving the Aum was not allowed and the Aum would kidnap individuals who escaped the group and wanted out.
The group found itself protected by the government when it received protected status under Japan’s Religious Corporations Law of the time (Simmons 2006). This protection hindered the ability of the government to oversee or regulate the Aum. The Aum spread from investments, business practices, criminal involvement and donations of users. The Aum established itself in manufacturing and software businesses and manufactured illicit drugs. The Aum would even extort Japanese officials by threatening to expand their cult into that official’s region if the official did not pay. As the Aum continued to grow and expand Asahora’s teachings became more radical, including attempting to get several cult members elected to the government so that they would be able to help “save the world”. The group believed in an eventual devastating conflict between Japan and the US (Simmons 2006).
After loosing the elections the group changed its ideology from saving the world, to saving its followers. The group began to establish sheltered and protected communes, places where faithful Aum could practice away from the influence of non-believers. These where secure locations, some even had shelters to protect the Aum in the event of a nuclear attack. The group also began to complete its own research on biological and chemical weapons, experimenting and even attempting to utilize botulism and anthrax in failed terrorist attacks against the government and Japanese people. The Aum released Sarin gas into a Japanese neighborhood in Matsumoto, in an attempt to sicken or kill three judges who where working on a dispute over property the Aum had purchased. This attack did not kill anyone, but did delay the trial. Authorities began to investigate the Aum more, and planned a raid on Aum holdings. The Aum received word of the raid and it is believed they planned the Tokyo Sarin attacks at that time. In 1995 the Aum carried packets filled with liquid Sarin onto the Tokyo subway, the packets where wrapped in newspapers to avoid suspicion, the agents committing the attack punctured the pouches and left the trains. The target of the attacks was believed to be the National Police Agency headquarters located in the building above. The attacks killed 12 and injured thousands. It made the Japanese government more aware of the lack of mass casualty or decontamination training. The system for handling these events was not established and the flow of information during and after the attacks was not controlled. If the air circulators within the train station had not worked effectively to disperse the gas safely the attack could have been much more lethal (Simmons 2006).
After the attacks the government made its raid against the Aum and discovered the full extent of the Aum’s activities. The Aum had sought a number of biological agents for use, even sending operatives to Africa to attempt to recover strains of the Ebola virus. Equipment and chemicals were recovered that indicated a much larger attack had been planned and thousands could have possibly been killed if the attacks succeeded (Simmons 2006). Original reports indicated that millions could have been killed, but it is not my belief as an investigator that the organization had the infrastructure or full resources to implement a gas attack capable of killing millions at the time that the investigation was taking place. One of important factors in evaluating the threat of terrorist attacks is keeping fear and scale under control. I cannot believe that a organization that could only muster a practical attack that killed 12 had in its power the practical capability to kill millions at the same time, while in theory the possible and stockpile might have existed it is much more reasonable to state that the group had within it’s capacity enough nerve agent to kill thousands. Actual volume of chemical weapons and tactical volume are two different measures, the tactical volume being the amount of chemical agent that can be successfully deployed to kill or disable the targets, which is far less than the material volume that must be produced and dispersed over the target area.
Overall the leaders and those who orchestrated the attacks were arrested and tried. Japan also changed its laws in regards to how it controls the processes that can be used for manufacturing chemical weapons; how it regulates groups including religious groups like the Aum. The Aum lost recognition as an authorized religion, lost protected status but it is allowed to maintain its spiritual practices and business operations. The group changed its name to Aleph and is attempting to gather new followers. It is still currently under surveillance by Japanese police (Simmons 2006).
State Sponsored Terrorism
State sponsored terrorism is another type of terrorist that we must evaluate and understand. In the aftermath of 9/11 we have to consider how the use of the word terrorism was redefined and labeled “new”. After the 9/11 attacks a great number of terrorism experts labeled the attack as “new terrorism” global in it’s reach and fueled by extremist individuals and groups who are willing to kill themselves for their cause and destroy large groups of civilians in the process (Rolston, 2005). There is nothing new about this, terrorists have always been willing to do whatever it took for their cause, including their own death and the killing of civilians. We must be sure to understand that the state can be a terrorist against its own people; this is common in totalitarian regimes where a dictator uses death squads to enforce his will and terrorize the population into subjugation. A terrorist in this situation may not be acting out of religious fervor or belief, but instead may be acting out of personal survival. In situations where death squads arise out of a democratic government, the terrorist once again becomes a living enforcer of his faction’s altruism.
The state sponsored terrorist is not necessarily someone who puts on a uniform or participates in his nations military traditions, but he is still an agent willing to kill for the beliefs that he holds. In places, even democratic governments, where politics have reached a fever pitch, both the resistance against the state and the state might enact terrorism against each other. It is important to make sure that during our government’s war on terror we do not resort to becoming terrorists ourselves and that line and assessment will fall onto the investigators who investigate and attempt to prevent acts of terrorism. We must be sure to think critically about any individual that is given the label of terrorist, because use of the label ‘terrorist’ serves to discredit opponents; erases any incentive for people to understand opponents’ point of view; deflects attention from grievances they have which may be genuine; rules out negotiation with them; and allows governments a free hand in violence against them (Rolston, 2005).
The underlying belief is that democracy precludes terror. The legitimacy of the democratic state rests on the willingness of citizens to be ruled. This willingness not only gives rulers the mandate to exercise power, but also sets limits on their power. Democracy is thus the ultimate protection against the abuse of power in general and terror in particular. We must consider that while democracy is a protection against the use of terror by the state, the process of democracy alone is not sufficient we must also consider the amount of civil liberties and societies within the democracy (Rolston, 2005). We cannot allow ourselves to be blinded to the removal of civil liberties for anyone; any permanent removal of liberty in any area weakens the democratic state. Security may be increased but terrorism cannot be fought outside of the due process of law.
A situation where the fight against terrorism was taken outside of the due process of law was the Northern Irish Struggle against the IRA. Over the course of thirty years the Sanctioned government of Northern Ireland fought against insurgent terrorists of the IRA. Sanctioned police and intelligence units fought in this insurgency along with paramilitary groups, unsanctioned organizations loyal to the Northern Irish and resisting the insurgents (Rolston, 2005). The problem fully exists when we begin to evaluate cooperation between a sanctioned police force, answerable to the public and the people and a paramilitary organization that might receive support from the government but exists as a sub-national body. A terrorist act, such as the bombing of an IRA car containing insurgents, is still a terrorist act if it was carried out by a group that does not possess the sovereignty or sanction of the people. The Northern Irish government might even support or allow such an act because it benefits them, it removed terrorists that it would have needed to arrest and send to trial. The government may be able to deny that it had any involvement in the killings, because they where committed by unsanctioned agents acting for the government’s benefit.
As another example, In Brazil the death squads were also composed more or less entirely of state forces. Off-duty police in effect hired themselves out as privatized militia to business owners eager to remove street children and young petty criminals whose presence and activities were supposedly bad for business. 7,000 children and youths, mostly male, were murdered between 1988 and 1991. Dismissed as ‘social vermin’, in fact the majority were not criminals (Rolston, 2005). During the majority of this time Brazil was considered a democracy. Part of the vulnerability seems to arise from the sensitive transition time from dictatorship to democracy, it seems that often a new government will want to eliminate insurgents without acting within the same democratic principles that it is trying to establish.
The understanding of the combination of both of these types of terrorists in important in the context of current world events, where a western power is attempting to establish a democracy in a environment where the legal and lawful combatants of the United States, acting with sanction of the united nations must deal with extremist insurgents who are using terrorism as a weapon. It is also important that no shortcuts be made in the establishment of an Iraqi police force and that the force receives the support it needs. We do not want to leave a legacy of terrorism as a result of our war on terror.
Rolston (2005) ‘An effective mask for terror’: Democracy, death squads and
Northern Ireland, Crime, Law & Social Change 44: 181-203, Springer 2006 Recovered on 11-26-2006 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=1061477991&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1164570944&clientId=65562
Simmons (2006) Faith, Fanaticism, and Fear: Aum Shinrikyo-The Birth and Death of a Terrorist Organization, Forensic Examiner. Springfield: Spring 2006.Vol.15, Iss. 1; pg. 37, 9 pgs recovered on 11-26-2006 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1124945061&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=65562&RQT=309&VName=PQD