There are two things I'll call out, one being the identification of domestic violent extremists, which we saw playing out with the plots against the governors of Michigan and Virginia. Quoting from an op-ed in today's edition of the Washington Post, which in turns quotes the assessment:
"These findings were included in the recently released 2020 Homeland Threat Assessment, which concluded: “Domestic Violent Extremists [present] the most persistent and lethal threat. … Violent extremists will continue to target individuals or institutions that represent symbols of their grievances, as well as grievances based on political affiliation or perceived policy positions. … The domestic situation surrounding the covid-19 pandemic creates an environment that could accelerate some individuals’ mobilization to targeted violence or radicalization to terrorism.”
Secondly, I have to admit I went straight to the Natural Hazards section to see what they wrote there. While there is a quick list of what the hazards might be, the two that are elaborated on are those in the news in 2020, hurricanes and wildfires. OK, but when I think about catastrophic disasters I'm putting earthquakes right up there with the best of them, even topping the list in the number of deaths and amount of physical and economic destruction that they can cause, especially in the case of really large ones like the Cascadia Subduction Fault Zone. The document is supposed to be an assessment and not a situation report.
Then there is the "unknown, un-recognized, undocumented and politically incorrect threat of climate change." If you are talking just 2020 threats, how do you talk about wildfires and hurricanes and not mention climate change? Blame it on "natural climatic variation" if you want, but to leave it out completely is a deliberate affront to what is staring us in the face, which then calls into question the veracity of the rest of the document.
