Skip to main content

In my home state of Oregon there is an ongoing trial of a bank bombing that occured in 2008 that killed two police officers and maimed a third.


Take the time to read the following articles about the ongoing trial taking place in Salem, Oregon.


Clearly this is a case of domestic terrorism.  On trial is a father who had a grudge against the government and a duplicitous son who didn't question his father's motives.  It appears that these two men acted alone.  There is no great conspericy or funding from religious fanatics, foreign or domestic.  And while their guilt or innocence in the matter is being decided on by a trial of their peers, there is no news on the major networks or cable chatter channels about it.  No talk of shipping the two men to Guantanamo.  No argument over the fact that they are being tried by the U.S. court system and not by a military tribunal.  

So what makes this type of terrorism trial different from that of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani's?  Is one form of terrorism less "terrifying" than another?

Originally posted to Mathonwy Mahony on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 07:49 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The first WTC bombing was handled by (6+ / 0-)

    the police and it resulted in arrests and convictions. The second bombing was also a police matter although the various federal, state and municipal authorities would have needed help from worldwide intelligence agencies.
    I think we would be better off today if the police and federal law enforcement agencies would have been allowed to do their work instead of militarizing the attack carried out by civilians.

  •  It's the same old stuff (6+ / 0-)

    as IOKIYAR, if you are not a Muslim, it's not terrorism.

    May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

    by oldcrow on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 07:58:51 AM PST

  •  While I agree (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pozzo, QuestionAuthority

    with your overall argument there is a hole in it. All terrorist domestic or otherwise apprehended within our boarders are put on civilian trial.  The only exception I can think of  will be the Fort Hood shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, this will be a Court Martial.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 08:00:41 AM PST

    •  So then there is a difference . . . (0+ / 0-)

      between domestic and foreign terrorism.  One is planned and carried out on domestic soil by citizens of the United States, and the other is planned by foreign nationals on foreign and domestic soil and carried out on dommectic soil . . . Both acts of terrorism have to occur against the U.S. right?  I mean, if it happens to another country then it is their issue, right?  So, I'm still confused as to why this case in Oregon is not bandied about by the pundits on Cable News . . .

      As for Major Nidal Malik Hasan's case, it happened on a military base, their jurisdiction.  Makes sense to me!

      •  Ok I have looked (0+ / 0-)

        a little closer into this case in Oregon and as to why it is not getting any serious national play.

        1. They are not being charged as domestic terrorist , but rather as murders and thieves.


        The multiple counts of aggravated murder, which can carry the death penalty, stem from different theories involved in each death: that the suspects caused the intentional death of multiple people in the same incident, caused the death of a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, caused the intentional death by explosives, caused felony murder in the course of committing a first-degree robbery and caused felony murder in the course of committing criminal mischief with an explosive.

        1. The DoJ is not involved in this case in fact the only federal involvement was OSHA, briefly, because the bomb tech failed rather spectacularly at his job and carried the bomb into the bank to check it out after he had declared it a hoax. Proceed to open it in the bank and have it explode

        In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

        by jsfox on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 09:00:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks for the extra information (0+ / 0-)

          But please don't speak so ill of the dead.  The bomb tech was doing his job and made a mistake, a costly mistake, but you make it sound like it was his fault the bomb went off, which is not the case at all.

          Despite the charges leveled on the two "bombers" by the courts, does this incident not fall under the US Code for terrorism?

          US Code, Title 6, Chapter 1, section 101, Statute 16:
          (16) The term "terrorism" means any activity that -
                   (A) involves an act that -
                     (i) is dangerous to human life or potentially destructive
                   of critical infrastructure or key resources; and
                     (ii) is a violation of the criminal laws of the United
                   States or of any State or other subdivision of the United
                   States; and
                   (B) appears 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.

          The fact that they were not charged as terrorists does not mean they weren't terrorists.  I think their actions are clearly a terrorist act if you follow the US Code.  The only reason they were not charged as terrorists is that proving such a case would be difficult.  There is no group, no larger conspiracy.

          In my opinion, such an action was more of a terrorist act than was Maj. Hasan's.  Don't get me wrong, what Hasan did was horrific, but if you use the definition of the US Code for terrorism, his actions just don't fit.  And even though his heinous acts were not really terrorism it didn't stop the pundits from calling him a terrorist.

          •  I wasn't attempting to speak ill of the dead (0+ / 0-)

            however just laying out the facts and the facts are the bomb tech did screw up.

            In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

            by jsfox on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 09:43:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, yes he did . . . (0+ / 0-)

              He didn't react to it as seriously as he should.  I live close to Woodburn.  It's a sleepy bedroom community south of Portland with a large outlet mall and a tulip farm.  So it is kind of understandable that the officer would be lax in his handling of the bomb.  He never thought of it as a real threat.  That aside, the bomb would have gone off even if it had remained in front of the bank.  But I fear that the defense will try to put the detonation of the bomb on the officer's shoulders.  

      •  If they were known to be part of a much (0+ / 0-)

        larger group this would make the news big time.

        Gangs in many of our larger cities are much bigger problems and organizations than this case in Oregon, and Gangs are not a big issue in the major media.

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 10:03:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Well, Maj. Hasan was an active duty serviceman (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pozzo that's entirely appropriate. He goes into the Military Justice system for a courtmartial.

      "Ridicule may lawfully be employed where reason has no hope of success." -7.75/-6.05

      by QuestionAuthority on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 08:43:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  correct (0+ / 0-)

      Zaccahrias Moussaoui is foreign, with a "Funny sounding name", worships a different God or at least one by a different name, is brown skinned, and he wasn't shipped to Gitmo and was given a civilian jury trial. This issue isn't as clear cut as many want to make it.Moussaoui

  •  Duh (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    QuestionAuthority, AnnieR

    Those guys aren't brown, worship a strange god, or speak in a funny accent!

    "We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos

    by Jon Stafford on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 08:25:16 AM PST

  •  Excellant. We need LOTS of citizen journalism (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Thank you for reporting this.  We are news starved, sadly.  Imagine if we each reported the news, both good and bad/sad, for our areas.  We need a coordinated national citizens journalism project to report the important details within our communities to others so we can find trends, etc.

    With that said, may I blither?

    I think this is much more complicated that a word or choice of words.

    The term "terrorism" alone causes feelings of angst which is the goal.  Using it helps those engaged in angry, retaliatory crimes better achieve their goal:  To terrorize people.

    Power and greed are the screed that drives people mad/insane enough to strike out and harm others.  A small percent of those terrorized, imo, go insane enough to do something crazy and harmful.

    There have also been religious zealots throughout history.  That drum is beating everywhere in the world these days, or so it seems.  I sometimes wonder how many would join the zealot leaders if they weren't barely surviving and/or feeling impotent and powerless in their lives?  The zealot leaders aren't the poor.  They are funded and they feed their followers food and a sense of power to retaliate under a cloak of religious righteousness.  Heady stuff for millions who can barely survive because their governments allow them to remain impoverished generation after generation, while the government officials stash cash offshore.  Too many have only two choices:  Extreme powerless poverty or join the Militant Movement.

    In our own country, look at the millions who thought they had finally achieved the American dream when they signed the papers to buy a home, only to be thrown out of it when the interest jumped from near 0% to 12%.  How many of those will literally go insane enough to do harm to others?

    Look at what the people in Haiti have suffered for decades?  Mothers forced to make "mud cookies" so their children's hunger will be placated.  Those Haitian mothers must be strong women not to be driven insane enough to strike out.

    Crime is crime; however, until nations, our own included, address the root causes of poverty and powerlessness by uplifting those neighborhoods were this exists generation after generation, crimes will only increase and, via technology, become more serious and harmful.

    Education is one key.  Good education that includes an unvarnished exposure of both US and World history.  That teaches life skills which is seriously lacking in our model, btw.

    Do truly rational people plan, build, and actually set off bombs in banks?

    A crime/criminal is also a failure on the part of society at large, imo.

    End of blither.

    10.2.10 March On Washington ROCKED

    by War on Error on Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 08:40:25 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site