Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said that authorities believe the suspected shooter who they say opened fire on National Guardsmen in Washington, D.C., last week might have been radicalized after he arrived in the United States.

The suspected gunman, 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwalis accused of firing at two National Guard members, 20-year-old Sarah Beckstrom and 24-year-old Andrew Wolfe, on Wednesday afternoon.

Lakanwal — an Afghan national who worked with the CIA during the U.S. war in Afghanistan — came to the U.S. after Afghanistan’s government fell to the Taliban in 2021 and was granted asylum in April of this year.

“He was brought into the country by the Biden administration through Operation Allies Welcome. And then, maybe vetted after that, but not done well, based on what the guidelines were put forward by President Biden,” Noem told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl on Sunday morning. “And now, since he’s been here, we believe he could have been radicalized in his home community and in his home state.”

Noem repeatedly claimed that the alleged shooter was “unvetted” by the Biden administration. Pressed by Karl on whether any vetting had been performed by the Trump administration, which had been in office for several months when Lakanwal was granted asylum earlier this year, Noem said that the information that was used to vet him was collected by the previous administration.

“All the information that was gathered on that vetting process was gathered under the Biden administration. His asylum claim application started under the Biden administration. That information was provided by them, and the responsibility lies with them,” she said.

Karl asked, “You were simply relying on what had been done under the Biden administration? You did no vetting before granting him asylum?”

Noem responded: “The processes put in place were put in place using information that was gathered during the application process. It happened under Joe Biden, and that has been completely fixed, and new metrics and new processes have been added under President Trump.”

Claims by Noem and other administration officials that the Afghans who resettled in the U.S. after the August 2021 withdrawal were not vetted are disputed by others familiar with the process at the time.

But ABC News contributor and former Homeland Security undersecretary for intelligence John Cohen said under Operation Allies Welcome, those traveling to the U.S. were vetted against classified and unclassified intelligence and submitted biographical and biometric data as part of the process.

According to Cohen, while there were some delays in vetting — and even instances where individuals boarded planes or arrived at destinations outside the U.S. prior to a full vetting being completed — those individuals had that information collected at processing locations.

“These people spent anywhere from a couple of days to a couple of weeks, in some cases months, at these third-country lilypad sites,” Sam Aronson, a former State Department official who spent 10 days in Kabul at the height of the U.S. withdrawal, said. “That’s where the extensive vetting took place.”

Additionally, ABC News previously reported that a senior U.S. official said that the suspect had been vetted at one point by the National Counterterrorism Center and “nothing came up” during that review. The official added that “he was clean on all checks.” The suspect’s arrangement with the CIA during the war, which was confirmed by the director, would have almost certainly required him to be vetted by the agency at the time.

Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen also pushed back against Noem’s assertion that the Biden administration’s vetting procedures led to Wednesday’s attack.

“We should always review our vetting, but in this case, there’s no evidence that there was something that escaped the vetting,” Van Hollen said.

Van Hollen criticized the Trump administration’s announcement on Friday that it was pausing all asylum decisions following the shooting.

“I do think it is outrageous and unfair to try to punish an entire class of people for the evil acts of one person. That is collective punishment,” he continued. “These are individuals who worked side by side with America in the fight against the Taliban. And if they were sent back now, the Taliban may likely kill them.”

How might governor Noem’s statements impact the ongoing investigation into the shooting?

south Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem Links National Guard Shooting to Potential U.S. Radicalization

The Allegations and Initial Response

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem has ignited a national conversation by suggesting a potential link between the recent shooting involving a National Guard member and the growing issue of radicalization within the United States. The suspect, identified as[Suspect’sName-[Suspect’sName-replace with actual name], allegedly shot and wounded two individuals in[LocationofShooting-[LocationofShooting-replace with actual location]before being apprehended. Governor Noem, in a series of interviews and social media posts, posited that the suspect may have been influenced by extremist ideologies circulating domestically. This statement has prompted immediate scrutiny and debate, raising questions about the role of radicalization in violent incidents and the obligation of goverment officials in addressing this complex issue.The investigation is ongoing, led by[InvestigatingAgency-[InvestigatingAgency-replace with actual agency], and authorities are exploring all possible motives, including potential extremist connections.

Understanding Domestic Radicalization: A Growing Concern

The concept of domestic radicalization refers to the process by which individuals within a country adopt increasingly extreme political, social, or religious beliefs, potentially leading to violence. This isn’t limited to any single ideology; it encompasses far-right extremism, far-left extremism, religious extremism, and other forms of radical thought.

Here’s a breakdown of key factors contributing to domestic radicalization:

* Online Echo Chambers: The internet and social media platforms can create echo chambers where individuals are primarily exposed to information confirming their existing beliefs, reinforcing extremist views.

* Social Isolation: Feelings of alienation, loneliness, and disconnection from society can make individuals more vulnerable to radical ideologies offering a sense of belonging.

* Political Polarization: increasing political division and animosity can fuel extremist sentiments and create a climate conducive to radicalization.

* Personal Grievances: Individuals experiencing personal hardships or perceived injustices may be drawn to extremist groups offering explanations and solutions.

* Exposure to Extremist Propaganda: The proliferation of extremist content online and offline can normalize radical ideas and incite violence.

The National Guard and Security Clearance Vetting

The involvement of a National Guard member in this alleged shooting raises serious questions about the effectiveness of security clearance vetting processes. National Guard personnel, like other members of the military, undergo background checks and investigations to assess their suitability for handling sensitive information and wielding lethal force.

These vetting procedures typically include:

1. Background checks: Thorough reviews of an individual’s history, including criminal records, financial history, and social media activity.
2. Psychological Evaluations: Assessments of an individual’s mental health and emotional stability.
3. Interviews: Discussions with the individual and their references to gather information about their character and beliefs.
4. Continuous Monitoring: Ongoing monitoring of an individual’s activities and associations to identify potential red flags.

Tho, critics argue that these processes are frequently enough inadequate, especially in detecting subtle signs of radicalization or extremist sympathies. The rise of online radicalization makes it increasingly challenging to identify individuals who may be harboring extremist views without openly expressing them. The Department of Defense is continually reviewing and updating its vetting procedures to address these challenges, focusing on improved data analytics and threat assessment techniques.

governor noem’s Statement: Context and Criticism

Governor Noem’s suggestion that U.S. radicalization may have played a role in the shooting has drawn both support and criticism. Supporters argue that it’s crucial to acknowledge the growing threat of domestic extremism and to investigate potential links to violent incidents. Critics, however, accuse her of prematurely drawing conclusions and potentially prejudicing the investigation.

Key points of contention include:

* Premature Accusations: Concerns that linking the shooting to radicalization before a thorough investigation could unfairly stigmatize individuals and groups.

* Political Motivation: Accusations that Governor Noem’s statement was politically motivated, aimed at bolstering her conservative credentials.

* Lack of Evidence: Criticism that the governor presented no concrete evidence to support her claim.

* Focus on Mental Health: Arguments that the focus shoudl be on addressing mental health issues and providing support to individuals struggling with emotional distress.

The Role of law Enforcement and Intelligence Agencies

Addressing domestic radicalization requires a coordinated effort involving law enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies, and community organizations. The FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and state and local law enforcement agencies all play a role in identifying, investigating, and disrupting extremist activities.

Effective strategies include:

* Intelligence Gathering: Collecting and analyzing information about extremist groups and individuals.

* Counter-Terrorism Operations: Disrupting extremist plots and preventing attacks.

* Community Outreach: Building relationships with community leaders and organizations to foster trust and cooperation.

* Online Monitoring: Tracking extremist activity online and removing illegal content.

* Prevention Programs: Developing programs to counter radicalization and promote tolerance and understanding.

Resources for identifying and Reporting Radicalization

If you are concerned about someone potentially being radicalized, here are some resources:

* FBI: https://www.fbi.gov/

* Department of Homeland Security: [https://www[https://www