The Nuclear Terrorism Threat and the Aum Shinrikyo Cult
Until the mid seventies, the term nuclear terror was used predominately to describe the threat of a nuclear attack by the Soviet Union. Since then, however, it has taken on a whole new meaning which many security experts feel poses a more serious threat to national security. In the past few decades, formal terrorist organizations have exploded planes out of the sky, bombed US military and diplomatic facilities abroad, and with the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombing incidents, they have even launched attacks on American soil.
Yet until 20 March 1995 when five members of the Aum Shinrikyo cult released sarin nerve gas in the Tokyo subway system, the world had not seen a successful case of the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by a terrorist organization. The Aum cult did not limit itself to the development of chemical weapons; the acquisition of biological and nuclear weapons was on their agenda as well. Because of the group's diverse efforts at attaining nuclear weapons, the Aum Shinrikyo cult is an excellent illustrative case of the possibilities for nuclear terrorism. Using Aum as a reference point, valuable insight can be gained into the potential motivations behind nuclear terrorism as well as the means of acquisition and delivery. Throughout this analysis, the Aum case demonstrates that the dynamic and unpredictable terrorist mindset requires security officials to think beyond preconceptions in order to correctly determine the nature of the nuclear terrorist threat.
Brief Background and Description of the Aum Shinrikyo Cult
The group was founded in Japan in 1987 by Shoko Asahara, a forty-year-old legally blind former yoga instructor. The Sa...
... middle of paper ...
...ohn Lepingwell, "Are Suitcase Nukes on the Loose?" Center for Nonproliferation Studies (8 December 1999) <http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/lebedst.htm>.
William H. Webster dir., "Wild Atom" (Washington, DC: CSIS Press, 1998) 5.
Falkenrath Achilles' 139.
Falkenrath Achilles' 141.
US Senate Permanent Subcommittee 106.
US Senate Permanent Subcommittee 41.
Falkenrath Achilles' 29.
Leventhal 64.
Webster 45.
Falkenrath Achilles' 100.
Mark 127.
US Senate Permanent Subcommittee 82.
Shigeyoshi Kimura, "Japanese Cult Admits Culpability," The Associated Press (2 December 1999) <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-
12/02/232l-120299-idx.html>.
Falkenrath Achilles' 187.
Tom Raum, "Arrests Prompted Terrorist Warning," The Associated Press (14 December 1999) <http:// dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/19991214/pl/terrorism_arrests_5.html>.
The modern teen court concept began in the early 1970’s when a small number of local communities in America began to establish the first Global Youth Justice programs (Peterson, p. 2). In 1994 there were 78 youth court programs in existence. As of March, 2010, there are over 1,050 youth court programs in operation in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Teen courts serve as a “diversion” program used to divert first time offenders away from a lifetime of criminal activity. The primary function of most teen court programs is to determine a fair and restorative sentence or disposition for the youth respondent. Although the primary function of teen courts is to rehabilitate offenders, some may wonder if teen courts are actually beneficial to young offenders.
Perhaps no other jurist could have come to the Supreme Court under greater expectations. When President Ronald Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor in 1981 to be the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court, he did soto keep a campaign promise. O'Connor's nomination was quick to draw criticism from both the political people left and right. Conservatives put down her lack of federal judicial experience and claimed that she didn't have any constitutional knowledge. They considered her a wasted nomination and suspected her position on abortion. Liberals, on the other hand, could not deny their satisfaction at seeing a woman on the High Court, but they were disappointed in O'Connor's apparent lack of strong support for feminist issues. In time, however, O'Connor has come to answer all these criticisms. O'Connor has emerged from the shadow of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and the Court's conservative bloc with her own brand of pragmatic and centrist-oriented conservatism. Even those liberals who branded her a "traitor" in her early years for compromising on abortion rights, now appreciate her efforts to keep the "pro-choice" message of Roe v. Wade in 1973. O'Connor's success should come at no surprise. From her country childhood to her career climb through a profession dominated by men, O'Connor often resorted to practical solutions as she worked within the system. This made her more important in the Supreme Court.
To become the first to hold a position is a tremendous accomplishment; However, it is also something that may come with extra criticism and possibly scorn. Sandra Day O’Connor was the first woman to become a Supreme Court Justice. She was a remarkable person, born on March 26, 1930 in Texas. She began her education by attending Stanford and majoring in economics, then recognizing her interest in law, she returned to Stanford, and completed law school in two years as opposed to the standard three, finally graduating in 1952. After struggling to find work, O’Connor served as a civilian lawyer in the Quartermaster’s Corps in Germany, with her husband John Jay O’Connor. For six years following this, she worked as a stay at home mom raising her three sons, Scott, Brian and Jay. In 1969 she went back to work in politics, after being appointed to a vacant senate seat by Governor Jack Williams; Sandra was very successful, and was re-elected for this position twice. The year 1981, however, is when O’Connor earned what is likely to be considered her greatest achievement: she was appointed by Ronald Reagan to become the first ever woman Supreme Court Justice (biography.com 2012).
Ruth Ginsburg, born March 15, 1933 in Brooklyn, New York is a United State Supreme Court Justice and the second woman to become a Justice. The second daughter of Nathan and Cecelia Bader, she grew up in a low-income, working class neighborhood in Brooklyn. Ruth’s mother, Cecelia, who was a tremendous influence on her life, taught her the importance of independence and a good education, although she herself did not attend college but worked in a garment factory to pay for her brothers tuition, an act of selflessness that forever impressed Ruth. In Ruth’s later years she attended James Madison High School where she excelled in her studies. During her time in high school, Ruth’s mother struggled with cancer and passed away the day before her daughter's high school graduation. After high school, Ruth attended Cornell University and graduated first in her class in 1954. The same year Ruth married Martin D. Ginsburg who was also law student.The early years of their marriage were challenging as their daughter Jane was born after Martin was drafted into the military in 1954. Martin served fo...
The development of the atomic bomb and chemical warfare forever changed the way people saw the world. It was a landmark in time for which there was no turning back. The constant balancing of the nuclear super powers kept the whole of humankind on the brink of atomic Armageddon. Fear of nuclear winter and the uncertainty of radiation created its own form of a cultural epidemic in the United States. During these tense times in human history officials made controversial decisions such as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Dangerous biological experiments and bombs tests were carried out in the name of the greater good and national defense. Some historians and scientists argue that the decisions and acts carried out by the U.S. during World War II and the Cold War were unethical because of the direct damage they did. The United States' decisions were moral because it can be proven their actions were aimed at achieving a greater good and those that were put in potential danger volunteered and were informed of the risk.
On December 7, 1941 Japan launched a surprise attack on a U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii with the possibility of forcing the U.S. to join World War II. About 2,400 Americans were dead, 21 ships had been sunk, and 188 aircrafts were destroyed. On August 6 and 9 of 1945, the U.S. retaliated and dropped two atomic bombs called Fat Man and Little Boy on the Japanese cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The U.S. was not justified in dropping the atomic bombs on Japan because of the locations that were bombed, the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, and the lack of previous bomb testing.
Harassment, reckless endangerment, and burglary are all juvenile offenses. These juvenile offenses almost always stay on the juvenile’s criminal record, and the offenses displayed on a juvenile’s criminal record may cause employers, educators, and other authority figures to think less of the juvenile offender. As a viewer can see, this one mistake or lapse in judgment can ruin the juvenile offenders chance to further their success in life. For example, juvenile offenders may not obtain the dream job that they have always wanted, get into the college that they have always wanted to, or be eligible for a scholarship whether athletic or academic. However, there is a loophole in the juvenile justice system called teen courts. Teen courts give first-time offenders and some re-offenders a second chance because the offense (s) do not go on their criminal record, and their peers get to decide what sanctions the juvenile offender receives or performs. The big question that I am going to discuss throughout this essay is do juvenile offenders who appear before teen courts recidivate?
When juveniles commit crimes, it is critical that society finds a successful way to divert their criminal actions into good behavior. The main purpose of this essay is to find the different outlets the juvenile justice system is using to rehabilitate juveniles, how well those strategies are working, and personal suggestions for improvement that might result in a more effective juvenile justice system.
Since the end of the Korean War, the United States has enacted policies to isolate and undermine the Kim Dynasty in North Korea. A key development took place in the past several decades where North Korea broke away from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to develop their own nuclear weapons and while lacking launch capabilities, they have been successful in their development. During this process, the United States took active policies to deter the North Koreans in pursuit of their goals. It is easy to assume that the United States took this stance in order to maintain a military edge in the region. But under closer examination, this neo-realist perspective does not explain why the United States pursued this policy. In reality, North Korea to this day does not pose a significant military threat, even with limited nuclear capabilities. A constructivist perspective is more able to explain US policy in this instance because it does not focus on sheer militaristic power. It takes into consideration the state's identities which drives their interests. The identities of the US and North Korea and the interactions between them drove both nations to the point of acquiring and deterring nuclear use.
Kay, H. H. (2004, Jan). Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Professor of Law. Columbia Law Review, 104, 1-20. doi:10.2307/4099343
The Justice Department estimates that about 10 percent of all homicides are committed by juveniles under the age of 18. Nearly every year, the FBI arrests more than 33,000 young adults under the age of 18 for offenses (Khan). This clearly shows Juvenile offenders are not taking the justice system seriously. The justice system was created to provide individualized rehabilitation to young offenders that have committed minor crimes. However, juveniles are committing violent crimes because they believe their age will get them off easy. “In order to provide justice to victims and their families and to prevent more and more juveniles from committing violent crimes, the United states must hold criminals accountable; regardless of their age, and impose a tough punishment system. To that end, juveniles should sometimes be tried as an adult.”(Mary). This shows juveniles are manipulating the justice system, and in fact old enough to take responsibility for the crimes they commit. In today society. They are being tried every day in juvenile courts, they are receiving shortened sentences, and they are being released and given a clean slate and the opportunity to continue living their lives in peaceful and happy bliss, all while their victims and their families are left to suffer forever. Because the courts and juvenile rights advocates believe that second chances shou...
Krisberg, Barry and James F. Austin. Reinventing Juvenile Justice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1993.
Juvenile crime is a term around the world that is difficult to pinpoint and although there are several definitions many fail to be concrete. There are many factors that play into sentencing juveniles or minors upon a crime committed. How old are they? Can they mentally form criminal intent? Are they old enough to no longer be treated as children? Some people would argue that a criminal is just that, regardless of age. Research on the other hand shows that juveniles have underdeveloped brains who at times have difficulty rationalizing decisions and weighing out consequences. It is important that these issues are addressed because of the implications this has on not only the juveniles but the community around them. These juveniles have the opportunity to be molded into functioning members of society, yet lack the necessary resources to do so. This occurs due to the negative connotation that comes with juvenile delinquents and their behaviors. Every country has their own ways of dealing with crime, and in particular juvenile delinquency, in this piece there will be an in depth analysis of the United States juvenile justice system and England’s juvenile justice system. Although there are many similarities between both developed countries England’s approach to juvenile justice is more effective long term by its implementation of rehabilitative and restorative programs. In return tackling the problem of high recidivism rates and reintegration into society.
Since its origin in 1948, North Korea has been isolated and heavily armed, with hostile relations with South Korea and Western countries. It has developed a capability to produce short- and medium-range missiles, chemical weapons, and possibly biological and nuclear weapons. In December 2002, Pyongyang lifted the freeze on its plutonium-based nuclear weapons program and expelled IAEA inspectors who had been monitoring the freeze under the Agreed Framework of October 1994. As the Bush administration was arguing its case at the United Nations for disarming Iraq, the world has been hit with alarming news of a more menacing threat: North Korea has an advanced nuclear weapons program that, U.S. officials believe, has already produced one or two nuclear bombs. As the most recent standoff with North Korea over nuclear missile-testing approaches the decompression point, the United States needs to own up to a central truth: The region of Northeast Asia will never be fully secure until the communist dictatorship of North Korea passes from the scene. After threatening to test a new, long-range missile, Pyongyang says it is willing to negotiate with "the hostile nations" opposing it. But whether the North will actually forgo its test launch is anyone's guess. North Korea first became embroiled with nuclear politics during the Korean War. Although nuclear weapons were never used in Korea, American political leaders and military commanders threatened to use nuclear weapons to end the Korean War on terms favorable to the United States. In 1958, the United States deployed nuclear weapons to South Korea for the first time, and the weapons remained there until President George Bush ordered their withdrawal in 1991. North Korean government stateme...
Yet, that beginning provided the foundation for how our Nation deals with juvenile offenders. A century ago, “the focus of the juvenile justice system was on the juvenile offender—rather than the offense—and that remains largely true today” (Martin, 2005). The juvenile court system is based on “the principle that youth are developmentally different from adults and more amenable to intervention” (Martin, 2005). At its best, the juvenile court “balances rehabilitation and treatment with appropriate sanctions—including incarceration, when necessary” (Martin,