For years, Richard Holzer regularly used social media to glorify violence and advocate for the superiority of the white race.
Holzer consumed and promoted racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism (RMVE), and in 2019, the self-identified neo-Nazi began to move toward acting on his beliefs with violence. His intended target was the Temple Emanuel Synagogue in Pueblo, Colorado, the second oldest synagogue in Colorado, listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
For months, Holzer told associates that he wanted to attack Temple Emanuel, and he visited the synagogue to observe Jewish congregants.
The FBI’s Southern Colorado Joint Terrorism Task Force worked with the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Department and the Pueblo Police Department to investigate Holzer’s plans. After Holzer was contacted by an undercover FBI employee, Holzer sent pictures of himself holding automatic weapons and said he was “getting ready for RAHOWA,” shorthand for a racial holy war.
During a meeting with undercover agents to discuss his plans, Holzer repeatedly expressed his hatred of Jewish people and suggested using explosive devices to destroy the synagogue. Holzer told the undercover agents that he wanted to “get that place off the map.” Holzer was arrested on November 1, 2019, after he accepted inert explosive devices that had been fabricated by the FBI, including two pipe bombs and 14 sticks of dynamite. In October 2020, Holzer pleaded guilty to federal hate crime and explosives charges, and in his plea agreement, admitted to conduct that met the federal definition of domestic terrorism. Earlier this year, Holzer was sentenced to more than 19 years in prison, followed by 15 years of supervised release.1
The FBI expects that for the near future, RMVEs—such as Holzer—and anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists (AGAAVE) will very likely continue to pose the greatest domestic terrorism threat to the United States. In fact, 2019 was the most fatal year for domestic violent extremist attacks within the United States since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.2
In recent years, domestic violent extremists (DVEs) have caused more deaths in the United States than international terrorists. Between 2015 and 2019, RMVEs were responsible for the most domestic terrorism fatalities. A majority of the RMVE attacks—about 80 percent—were committed by those advocating for the superiority of the white race. In 2020, AGAAVEs were responsible for three of the four fatal DVE attacks.3
The January 6, 2021, siege of the U.S. Capitol emboldened some of these actors, and it is impossible to discuss the evolving domestic terrorism threat in the United States today without examining those events. The siege of the Capitol demonstrates a willingness by some, including DVEs, to use violence against the U.S. Government in pursuit of their political and social goals.
As of early July, more than 535 people had been arrested in connection with the Capitol siege. The FBI has received more than 270,000 digital media tips from the public and continues working with local and state law enforcement to identify and charge individuals who participated.4
The Evolving Terrorism Threat
In the 20 years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the overall terrorism threat has evolved significantly. In the past two years, as part of the FBI’s annual threat review, the Bureau elevated RMVE and AGAAVE as the top two DVE threats.5 The FBI’s caseload of domestic terrorism investigations has doubled, and the organization has increased the number of personnel working domestic terrorism investigations.
The FBI has also continued arresting more domestic terrorism than international terrorism subjects, using a combination of federal, state, and local charges. In fiscal year 2020, more than three times as many domestic terrorism subjects were arrested compared to international terrorism subjects.6
Across the board, the greatest terrorism threat faced by the United States is posed by lone actors or small cells who typically radicalize online, have no formal or overt connection to a group or organization, and look to attack soft targets with easily accessible weapons.7 This threat is manifested in both DVEs and homegrown violent extremists (HVEs). DVEs and HVEs are two distinct sets of individuals, but they both frequently radicalize and mobilize to violence on their own.
HVEs are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations, primarily the Islamic State of Iraq and Ash-Shām and Al Qaeda.
DVEs are motivated by domestic influences, including perceptions of government or law enforcement overreach, racial tensions, socio-political conditions, feelings of disenfranchisement within society, reactions to legislation (or lack thereof), partisan political grievances, or world events. Online conspiracy theories and narratives of electoral fraud following the 2020 U.S. general election may also, in some instances, be an inspiration for violent attacks.
While trends on the domestic terrorism side continue to evolve, most drivers remain constant and are often very personalized. Many DVEs mobilize to violence in response to a unique mix of ideological, socio-political, and personal grievances.
Both DVEs and HVEs seek to engage in violent, criminal acts. The solitary, insular nature of lone actor HVEs and lone actor DVEs is challenging for law enforcement, as there are a greater number of potential threats, far fewer “dots” to connect, and less time to detect and disrupt an attack.
The FBI cannot open a domestic terrorism investigation based solely on a person’s exercise of rights protected by the First Amendment. Instead, it focuses its investigative efforts on individuals who commit or intend to commit violence and criminal activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security.
Membership in a group, no matter how repellant its beliefs, is not grounds for opening a domestic terrorism investigation, and the FBI does not investigate beliefs or ideology.
Preventing acts of terrorism continues to be the FBI’s number one priority, from any place, by any actor, whether foreign or domestic. Potentially for the first time in 20 years, the threats from domestic terrorism, Salafi jihadism, and state-sponsored terrorism are all elevated.
Definition of Domestic Terrorism
Domestic terrorism is defined in the U.S. Code as any act dangerous to human life that violates U.S. criminal laws and appears intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping. The statute holds that the act must occur primarily in the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.8
While domestic terrorism is defined in U.S. legal code, there is not an independent charging mechanism under federal law the way there is for international terrorism.
Instead, domestic terrorism prosecutions rely on a variety of federal and state statutes, with the goal of disrupting DVEs using any applicable criminal offense. The FBI frequently relies on statutes covering federal firearms charges, communication of interstate threats, and attempted use of explosives to disrupt domestic terrorism subjects. The FBI partnerships with state and local enforcement are also critical to disrupting DVEs, as about half of the arrests of domestic terrorism subjects arise from state charges.
Partnerships Are Key
To confront domestic terrorism, the FBI turns to its network of partnerships and information sharing.
The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) partnerships remain a critical element of the FBI’s counterterrorism strategy. Across the United States, there are now more than 200 JTTFs, bringing together federal, state, and local law enforcement partners.
In fiscal year 2020, JTTFs were responsible for the arrests of 235 terrorism subjects, both international and domestic.9
To address the “internationalization of domestic terrorism,” the FBI continues to strengthen its engagement with international partners, particularly within Europe and the traditional Five Eyes partners of Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. This engagement includes discussing best practices for disruption and prevention and sharing relevant investigative information.
Nearly half of the FBI’s counterterrorism cases are predicated on tips from the public or referrals from other law enforcement agencies and private sector partners.10
How the Public Can Help
The FBI continues to appeal for the public’s help in preventing terrorism. In almost every instance of a violent attack, investigators have found there was a family member, friend, coworker, or somebody close to the person who saw something and didn’t report it.
Family members and friends are always best positioned to notice a change in the behavior of their loved ones. If someone is concerned about a person who might be radicalizing to violence, encouraging the concerned person to reach out to law enforcement or others in the community who can help is critical to preventing terrorism here at home.
Notes:
1U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), “Southern Colorado Man Sentenced to More Than 19 Years for Plotting to Blow Up Synagogue,” news release, February 26, 2021.
2FBI, Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism (Washington, DC: FBI, 2021).
3FBI, Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism.
4Clare Hymes, Cassidy McDonald, and Eleanor Watson, “More Than 535 Arrested So Far in Capitol Riot Case, Including 55 Who Have Served in the Military,” CBS News, July 6, 2021.
5DOJ, United States Department of Justice Domestic Terrorism Backgrounder (Washington, DC: DOJ, 2021).
6DOJ, United States Department of Justice Domestic Terrorism Backgrounder.
7DOJ, United States Department of Justice Domestic Terrorism Backgrounder.
8FBI, “Domestic Terrorism: Definitions, Terminology, and Methodology,” 2020.
9FBI, Counterterrorism Division Terrorism Backgrounder (Washington, DC: FBI, 2021).
10DOJ, United States Department of Justice Domestic Terrorism Backgrounder.
|
Jill Sanborn currently serves as the executive assistant director of the National Security Branch of the FBI. In this role, she is responsible for ensuring the FBI successfully executes its national security mission to protect the national security of the United States. Previously, she served as the assistant director of the Counterterrorism Division. |
Please cite as
Jill Sanborn, “Countering the Evolving Terrorism Threat,” Police Chief 88, no. 9 (September 2021): 76–79.
