Arson Attack Targets Boeing Subsidiary Van in Hood River, Oregon
Executive Summary
An anonymous anarchist communique claims responsibility for a July 23, 2025, arson attack against a van belonging to Boeing subsidiary Insitu in Hood River, Oregon. The group framed the act as resistance to militarism, policing, and surveillance, citing Insitu’s role in manufacturing drones used by the US military, border enforcement agencies, and allied armed forces. Independent evidence confirming the extent of the vehicle damage has not yet been verified.
Key Judgments
Key Judgment 1
The incident reflects continued anarchist targeting of the defense-industrial supply chain, specifically companies linked to aerial surveillance and military intervention.
Evidence: The communique denounces Insitu’s RQ-21 Blackjack and MQ-27 ScanEagle drones, citing their deployment by the US Navy, Marine Corps, Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, and US Customs and Border Protection.
Key Judgment 2
The actors framed the attack within an explicitly anti-colonial and anti-Israel context, aligning the action with Palestinian resistance movements.
Evidence: The statement calls Boeing a key supplier of munitions and aircraft to the Israel Defense Forces, including F-15s and Apache helicopters, linking the attack to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
Key Judgment 3
The lack of independent confirmation of the alleged arson limits assessment of both the operational success and the damage’s impact on Insitu operations.
Evidence: No publicly available photographs, law enforcement statements, or media coverage have corroborated the claimed destruction of the van.
Analysis
If verified, the July 23 incident would represent a continuation of militant anarchist actions against defense sector infrastructure in the Pacific Northwest, an area with a documented history of sabotage targeting corporate and government assets linked to military and law enforcement. The communique situates Insitu within a broader critique of the “national security state,” portraying its products as tools of both foreign military occupation and domestic repression.
Insitu’s ties to multiple security and defense customers—including the US Navy, Marine Corps, and CBP—make it a symbolically potent target for actors opposing both US foreign policy and domestic policing practices. The statement’s explicit solidarity with Palestinian resistance further indicates that the perpetrators view their action as part of a transnational struggle against militarism and colonialism, a framing that may resonate with similar networks in North America and abroad.
The absence of corroborating evidence, however, raises the possibility of exaggeration or fabrication, a factor that complicates evaluation of the group’s operational capability. Without third-party confirmation, the incident’s strategic effect is largely confined to propaganda value and potential intimidation within targeted industries.
