300 acts of domestic terrorism in the US are committed by right wing extremists

[sakinago]

From the church in Mississippi, to the stabbings in Portland, the majority of terrorist acts in this country are committed by right wing extremist white males.

America's Biggest Terrorist Threat? The Far-Right White Male
The Trump administration may deny it, but the numbers are there.

The number of violent attacks on U.S. soil inspired by far-right ideology has spiked since the beginning of this century, rising from a yearly avarage of 70 attacks in the 1990s to a yearly avarage of more than 300 since 2001. These incidents have grown even more common since President Donald Trump’s election.
​

Alt right violence is the biggest threat we have in the country today.

Your own article admits it has to ignore 2 big Muslim extremist attacks to get its number. Also the definition of far right the author uses is the European definition. Which the European spectrum isn't so much of a spectrum, but more of a circle, or horseshoe. With fascism and communism at either tops, and what we consider libertarianism at the bottom of the U. This differs from the American spectrum, in that anarchist is far right, then libertarian, then conservative, moderate R, moderate D, progressive, socialist, national socialist, communist at the far left. Remember, NAZI stands for NATIONAL SOCIALIST. Socialist being the operative word there, and is not far off from communism. The only difference is communism has complete control of essentially everything, fascism has control of most with a little bit of ad lib ability. Which doesn't mix well with anything past moderate R. Stop calling it right wing.

Get OVER it. Naziism was extreme right wing. Always was, always will have been. Sorry, Winston Smith and his Memory Hole are part of a work of fiction. You don't get to rewrite actual history. And btw those elements who style themselves "Nazis" or neoNazis today are still far right wing. That's just the way it works.

I don't care what the name was, Nazis were never "socialists". The actual socialists in Germany at the time, they competed with, assaulted with the brownshirts, and eventually sent to Dachau as the first "guests" there. Unless you're actually willing to appear so naïve as to suggest Hitler and his henchmen were some kind of altruistically honest life form that would never ever resort to propaganda.

Nope those guys were communist, and they called themselves...wait for it...ANTIFA. And they were the brown shirts of the communist party.

Oh ******* bullshit. Nazis were never called "Antifa" --- which btw is short for "anti-fascist". NOR did I ever even bring up "antifa"; I corrected your ridiculous rewrite of Nazis. And as far as both your naïve assumption that Nazis would never engage in disingenuous propganda AND those brownshirts (SA), you know what Hitler called them? The "Gymnastics and Sports Division". And their job was to beat up and intimidate socialists. That's historical record and there's diddlysquat you an do about that.

And is a European "liberal" the same as an American "liberal?"

"Liberal" is "Liberal". Why would it change depending on which way the Atlantic Ocean is?

The traditional (european) model was France and that whole revolution, and they had split the different parties, one on the right wing of the lawn, one on the left wing of the lawn. Which is where we the traditional right and left wing. In America the progressive movement relabeled itself, as "liberal" even though the original term "liberal" meant limited government, being maximum freedom.

WRONG. The Progressive Movement didn't even occur until over a century after Liberals created this country. They were around roughly three decades and never called themselves "Liberals". Two entirely different entities from two entirely different eras.

Where do you even scrape up these weird ideas? Lush Rimjob?

Which we know progressivism is for more government. I wasn't the one who changed history. And I'm not the one blaming the American right (which you would probably agree that a constitutionalist falls pretty far on) for people who support fascism, which is tyranny and pretty much the complete opposite of a constitutionalist. This is why it's important to re-tell history.

Do you mean "rewrite"?

If y'all want to use the the traditional European spectrum, I'm fine with that, but stop lumping in conservatives, libertarians, constitutionalist etc. with NAZIs. ITS RIDICULOUS, and completely intellectually dishonest.

NOBODY "lumped anybody in" with anybody. Those of you who live on Composition Fallacies seem to ass-ume somehow everybody else will go down the same fallacy hole. Again, a fallacy is a fallacy, doesn't matter what side it's on. I'd say this here strawman is what's "intellectually dishonest".

What? I never said antifa were the Nazis, where did you get that? I said antifa was the communist counterpart to the nazis. I know what antifa stands for. Nor did I ever say that progressives re-branded to "liberal" over 100 years ago, they did that much more receantly, during and after Reagan. And no, a European liberal would very much disagree with an American liberal. If you say you're liberal in Europe, that means your more like a libertarian, vs the progressives today in the US who identify as "liberal." And where does libertarian fall on your spectrum pogo, pretty far right?

 

[Billo_Really]

What? I never said antifa were the Nazis, where did you get that? I said antifa was the communist counterpart to the nazis. I know what antifa stands for. Nor did I ever say that progressives re-branded to "liberal" over 100 years ago, they did that much more receantly, during and after Reagan. And no, a European liberal would very much disagree with an American liberal. If you say you're liberal in Europe, that means your more like a libertarian, vs the progressives today in the US who identify as "liberal." And where does libertarian fall on your spectrum pogo, pretty far right?

Cut the crap. In England, you'd be a Tory. And your ideology was just rejected big time by the Brits. The Labour party's candidate, Jeremy Corbyn is ultra-left.

In light of what just happened in England (and you being full of shit and all), I just have one word for you....................2018.

 

[Billo_Really]

Right wing free speech rally's are nothing more than a recruiting tool for violence by the alt right.

Right-Wing 'Free Speech' Rallies Are a Potent Breeding Ground for Homegrown Terror​

 

[sakinago]

Right wing free speech rally's are nothing more than a recruiting tool for violence by the alt right.

Right-Wing 'Free Speech' Rallies Are a Potent Breeding Ground for Homegrown Terror​

And any ANTIFA riots and violence were caused oath keepers?

 

[sakinago]

What? I never said antifa were the Nazis, where did you get that? I said antifa was the communist counterpart to the nazis. I know what antifa stands for. Nor did I ever say that progressives re-branded to "liberal" over 100 years ago, they did that much more receantly, during and after Reagan. And no, a European liberal would very much disagree with an American liberal. If you say you're liberal in Europe, that means your more like a libertarian, vs the progressives today in the US who identify as "liberal." And where does libertarian fall on your spectrum pogo, pretty far right?

Cut the crap. In England, you'd be a Tory. And your ideology was just rejected big time by the Brits. The Labour party's candidate, Jeremy Corbyn is ultra-left.

In light of what just happened in England (and you being full of shit and all), I just have one word for you....................2018.

What? I never said antifa were the Nazis, where did you get that? I said antifa was the communist counterpart to the nazis. I know what antifa stands for. Nor did I ever say that progressives re-branded to "liberal" over 100 years ago, they did that much more receantly, during and after Reagan. And no, a European liberal would very much disagree with an American liberal. If you say you're liberal in Europe, that means your more like a libertarian, vs the progressives today in the US who identify as "liberal." And where does libertarian fall on your spectrum pogo, pretty far right?

Cut the crap. In England, you'd be a Tory. And your ideology was just rejected big time by the Brits. The Labour party's candidate, Jeremy Corbyn is ultra-left.

In light of what just happened in England (and you being full of shit and all), I just have one word for you....................2018.

POGO, look above, this is the lumping in that you said wasn't happening, ready to eat crow?

And so an election happened...Corbyn I guess won (not paying attention to Britain). And anybody against Corbyn is a Tory? Not entitled to their own opinion, if they're not for Corbyn, they are an enemy traitor...after an election...and WHO ARE YOU CALLING FASCITST? Examine yourself, you sound like more of a fascist than trump, "anyone against my beliefs is a traitor." You just admitted you give 2 shits about free speech, or free thought. It's YOUR thought, and anything against is an enemy.

 

[Billo_Really]

And any ANTIFA riots and violence were caused oath keepers?

I'm saying the possibility exists that is what happened. I've seen one report stating just that. It is something many Oath Keepers have professional training in; they've got a mask around their face so no one would recognize them; it's not that far of a stretch. It is more believable than James O' Keefe trying to convince people he's a pimp.

 

[Billo_Really]

POGO, look above, this is the lumping in that you said wasn't happening, ready to eat crow?

You want to let me in on you twos little secret?

And so an election happened...Corbyn I guess won (not paying attention to Britain). And anybody against Corbyn is a Tory?

I don't know what you base that on. The Tories are the conservative party. And they lost the election.

Not entitled to their own opinion, if they're not for Corbyn, they are an enemy traitor...after an election

Are you being facetious? Or are you really that "out there!"

...and WHO ARE YOU CALLING FASCITST?

The word is "fascist" and I don't remember calling you that. Yet.

Examine yourself, you sound like more of a fascist than trump, "anyone against my beliefs is a traitor."

Now I know I've never said that. Why did you?

You just admitted you give 2 shits about free speech, or free thought. It's YOUR thought, and anything against is an enemy.

I've never said or admitted anything like that. Why are you making shit up? I guess it's safe to say you're in the spectrum of make believe?

 

[sakinago]

And any ANTIFA riots and violence were caused oath keepers?

I'm saying the possibility exists that is what happened. I've seen one report stating just that. It is something many Oath Keepers have professional training in; they've got a mask around their face so no one would recognize them; it's not that far of a stretch. It is more believable than James O' Keefe trying to convince people he's a pimp.

Okeefe convinced ACORN that he was, with underage prostitutes, and they offered him help in his pimping, on camera, which is why acorn is bye bye, for good reason.

And the possibility exist? Okeefe wasn't actually pimping out underage prostitutes, ACORN was willing to helping out what they thought was a pimp for underage prostitutes. Is that Okeefes fault??? Even if oathkeepers were going undercover in ANTIFA, ANTIFA was still willing to go out and riot, destroy property, and carry out violence. Is that oath keepers fault?

And if your standard is all you need a possibility that it could have happened, then the clintons are guilty of like over a hundred murders or something like that (how ever unbelievable that is) it's still possible. What's even more possible, with even MORE EVIDENCE of trump collusion with russia, is that the clintons are WAAAYY more guilty of collusion with foreign entities and the Clinton foundation that they claimed there was going to be a firewall between when she was Secretary of State. And what we know for sure is that the Clinton foundation emailed Huma, saying this foreign official is a big donator to the foundation who has been trying to get a meeting with the state department through regular channels, but hasn't been able too. Huma responded back, which dates work for you. Then during the Haiti earthquake, Clinton sent out an email, for contractors looking to get in on Haiti aid, who were friends of bill and the foundation to call a special number, and everyone else go through the normal
Channels. Is that ok for you?

What shred of evidence do you possibly have outside of "oath keepers have training in this", may I remind you that oath keepers is made up of a large majority of people without sting and infiltration operation type training. What evidence do you have other than, "I want it to be oath keepers who stirring all this up." As if ANTIFA shares zero fault even if that ridculous, almost as bad as lizard people conspiracy theory? And then you act like it was oath keepers idea for ANTIFA wear face masks...

I have to admit, I'm impressed you can type so well, while wearing a straight jacket

 

[sakinago]

POGO, look above, this is the lumping in that you said wasn't happening, ready to eat crow?

You want to let me in on you twos little secret?

And so an election happened...Corbyn I guess won (not paying attention to Britain). And anybody against Corbyn is a Tory?

I don't know what you base that on. The Tories are the conservative party. And they lost the election.

Not entitled to their own opinion, if they're not for Corbyn, they are an enemy traitor...after an election

Are you being facetious? Or are you really that "out there!"

...and WHO ARE YOU CALLING FASCITST?

The word is "fascist" and I don't remember calling you that. Yet.

Examine yourself, you sound like more of a fascist than trump, "anyone against my beliefs is a traitor."

Now I know I've never said that. Why did you?

You just admitted you give 2 shits about free speech, or free thought. It's YOUR thought, and anything against is an enemy.

I've never said or admitted anything like that. Why are you making shit up? I guess it's safe to say you're in the spectrum of make believe?

It's not a secret, the conversation is plain to see on this thread. You just helped me prove my point, thank you.

And so now are you trying to say the far right isn't fascist?...because that would be a complete 180 from the entire conversation...and would also prove what I've been saying about the 2 spectrums to be right.

And I say that because you said I would be a Tory in England...because England voted for Corbyn. So because I don't believe in the majority over the minority, (which his slogan is the many not the few) I would be a Tory. So anyone else in England who did not agree with that, would also be a Tory.

 

[Billo_Really]

Okeefe convinced ACORN that he was, with underage prostitutes, and they offered him help in his pimping, on camera, which is why acorn is bye bye, for good reason.

No, that is not why ACORN is gone. ACORN is gone as a result to a right wing witch hunt claiming the organization participated in voter fraud. O'Keefe was not taken seriously by anyone, but that didn't stop Congress from de-funding their subsidies. That and all the negative publicity caused its leaders to disband the organization, even though no one associated with ACORN was ever convicted of voter fraud and all ongoing cases were closed.

In summary, ACORN did nothing wrong and the right felt compelled to censor and silence their voice because its members didn't vote republican.

And the possibility exist? Okeefe wasn't actually pimping out underage prostitutes, ACORN was willing to helping out what they thought was a pimp for underage prostitutes. Is that Okeefes fault???

Again, ACORN committed no crime, yet you still speak in terms as if they did. That says a lot about you and the right.

Even if oathkeepers were going undercover in ANTIFA, ANTIFA was still willing to go out and riot, destroy property, and carry out violence. Is that oath keepers fault?

If the report is true that the Oath Keepers going undercover and acting as members of ANTIFA they started the riots and destroyed property, then yes, they are the ones responsible. North Vietnam was not responsible for the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

And if your standard is all you need a possibility that it could have happened, then the clintons are guilty of like over a hundred murders or something like that (how ever unbelievable that is) it's still possible. What's even more possible, with even MORE EVIDENCE of trump collusion with russia, is that the clintons are WAAAYY more guilty of collusion with foreign entities and the Clinton foundation that they claimed there was going to be a firewall between when she was Secretary of State. And what we know for sure is that the Clinton foundation emailed Huma, saying this foreign official is a big donator to the foundation who has been trying to get a meeting with the state department through regular channels, but hasn't been able too. Huma responded back, which dates work for you. Then during the Haiti earthquake, Clinton sent out an email, for contractors looking to get in on Haiti aid, who were friends of bill and the foundation to call a special number, and everyone else go through the normal
Channels. Is that ok for you?

This thread is not about Clinton.

What shred of evidence do you possibly have outside of "oath keepers have training in this", may I remind you that oath keepers is made up of a large majority of people without sting and infiltration operation type training.

The Oath Keepers are former military and police. Why wouldn't they have training in this area?

What evidence do you have other than, "I want it to be oath keepers who stirring all this up."

Go back to my earlier posts if you want that information, I'm not going to post it twice.

As if ANTIFA shares zero fault even if that ridculous, almost as bad as lizard people conspiracy theory?

I never said that.

And then you act like it was oath keepers idea for ANTIFA wear face masks...

I never did that either.

I have to admit, I'm impressed you can type so well, while wearing a straight jacket

It is because, unlike yourself, I'm a "straight" shooter.

 

[Billo_Really]

It's not a secret, the conversation is plain to see on this thread. You just helped me prove my point, thank you.

That'll be $4:50 (+tax).

And so now are you trying to say the far right isn't fascist?...because that would be a complete 180 from the entire conversation...and would also prove what I've been saying about the 2 spectrums to be right.

No, the far right is definitely fascist. And you probably are to. I base that on your tacit approval of what your "side" did to ACORN. You silenced an organization for the simple fact that you didn't like them representing people who didn't like you.

And I say that because you said I would be a Tory in England...because England voted for Corbyn. So because I don't believe in the majority over the minority, (which his slogan is the many not the few) I would be a Tory. So anyone else in England who did not agree with that, would also be a Tory.

I said you would be a Tory in England, because the Tories in England are right wing conservatives. Write it down for future reference.

 

[sakinago]

Okeefe convinced ACORN that he was, with underage prostitutes, and they offered him help in his pimping, on camera, which is why acorn is bye bye, for good reason.

No, that is not why ACORN is gone. ACORN is gone as a result to a right wing witch hunt claiming the organization participated in voter fraud. O'Keefe was not taken seriously by anyone, but that didn't stop Congress from de-funding their subsidies. That and all the negative publicity caused its leaders to disband the organization, even though no one associated with ACORN was ever convicted of voter fraud and all ongoing cases were closed.

In summary, ACORN did nothing wrong and the right felt compelled to censor and silence their voice because its members didn't vote republican.

And the possibility exist? Okeefe wasn't actually pimping out underage prostitutes, ACORN was willing to helping out what they thought was a pimp for underage prostitutes. Is that Okeefes fault???

Again, ACORN committed no crime, yet you still speak in terms as if they did. That says a lot about you and the right.

Even if oathkeepers were going undercover in ANTIFA, ANTIFA was still willing to go out and riot, destroy property, and carry out violence. Is that oath keepers fault?

If the report is true that the Oath Keepers going undercover and acting as members of ANTIFA they started the riots and destroyed property, then yes, they are the ones responsible. North Vietnam was not responsible for the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

And if your standard is all you need a possibility that it could have happened, then the clintons are guilty of like over a hundred murders or something like that (how ever unbelievable that is) it's still possible. What's even more possible, with even MORE EVIDENCE of trump collusion with russia, is that the clintons are WAAAYY more guilty of collusion with foreign entities and the Clinton foundation that they claimed there was going to be a firewall between when she was Secretary of State. And what we know for sure is that the Clinton foundation emailed Huma, saying this foreign official is a big donator to the foundation who has been trying to get a meeting with the state department through regular channels, but hasn't been able too. Huma responded back, which dates work for you. Then during the Haiti earthquake, Clinton sent out an email, for contractors looking to get in on Haiti aid, who were friends of bill and the foundation to call a special number, and everyone else go through the normal
Channels. Is that ok for you?

This thread is not about Clinton.

What shred of evidence do you possibly have outside of "oath keepers have training in this", may I remind you that oath keepers is made up of a large majority of people without sting and infiltration operation type training.

The Oath Keepers are former military and police. Why wouldn't they have training in this area?

What evidence do you have other than, "I want it to be oath keepers who stirring all this up."

Go back to my earlier posts if you want that information, I'm not going to post it twice.

As if ANTIFA shares zero fault even if that ridculous, almost as bad as lizard people conspiracy theory?

I never said that.

And then you act like it was oath keepers idea for ANTIFA wear face masks...

I never did that either.

I have to admit, I'm impressed you can type so well, while wearing a straight jacket

It is because, unlike yourself, I'm a "straight" shooter.

Watch it for yourself. They clearly tell them that they have 13 girls coming overseas for work, that are 15 years old. And the tax specialist tells them to claim them as dependents, and not to worry about taxes since they don't have an SS number. So with that clearly being said in the video, you more willing to believe that oath keepers are infiltrating ANTIFA to get them to riot, based solely on the fact that they have military and LE training...vs that video where they are clearly helping them skirt taxes running an underage prostitution ring??? Listen to yourself.

How many military or law enforcement personnel actually get infiltration training??

 

[sakinago]

It's not a secret, the conversation is plain to see on this thread. You just helped me prove my point, thank you.

That'll be $4:50 (+tax).

And so now are you trying to say the far right isn't fascist?...because that would be a complete 180 from the entire conversation...and would also prove what I've been saying about the 2 spectrums to be right.

No, the far right is definitely fascist. And you probably are to. I base that on your tacit approval of what your "side" did to ACORN. You silenced an organization for the simple fact that you didn't like them representing people who didn't like you.

And I say that because you said I would be a Tory in England...because England voted for Corbyn. So because I don't believe in the majority over the minority, (which his slogan is the many not the few) I would be a Tory. So anyone else in England who did not agree with that, would also be a Tory.

I said you would be a Tory in England, because the Tories in England are right wing conservatives. Write it down for future reference.

Well I happen to believe organizations that offer assistance to underage prostitution rings shouldn't be getting tax payer money. call it extremist if you must.

And anything not left is treasonist, got it.

 

[Billo_Really]

Watch it for yourself. They clearly tell them that they have 13 girls coming overseas for work, that are 15 years old. And the tax specialist tells them to claim them as dependents, and not to worry about taxes since they don't have an SS number. So with that clearly being said in the video...

Stop right there. As inappropriate as that video is, it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. And it is just downright dumb to use it in light of the fact the NO ONE FROM ACORN WAS EVER CONVICTED OF A CRIME! The only one who went to jail for all that crap, was O'Keefe himself.

you more willing to believe that oath keepers are infiltrating ANTIFA to get them to riot, based solely on the fact that they have military and LE training...vs that video where they are clearly helping them skirt taxes running an underage prostitution ring??? Listen to yourself.

There's no vs anything. The video is completely unrelated to this issue. Are you trying to say there is no such thing as covert ops?

How many military or law enforcement personnel actually get infiltration training??

Ask a plumber.

 

[Billo_Really]

Well I happen to believe organizations that offer assistance to underage prostitution rings shouldn't be getting tax payer money. call it extremist if you must.

Maybe they were just playing along because they thought they were getting punked?

And anything not left is treasonist, got it.

Now we're back to make believe?

 

[sakinago]

Watch it for yourself. They clearly tell them that they have 13 girls coming overseas for work, that are 15 years old. And the tax specialist tells them to claim them as dependents, and not to worry about taxes since they don't have an SS number. So with that clearly being said in the video...

Stop right there. As inappropriate as that video is, it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. And it is just downright dumb to use it in light of the fact the NO ONE FROM ACORN WAS EVER CONVICTED OF A CRIME! The only one who went to jail for all that crap, was O'Keefe himself.

you more willing to believe that oath keepers are infiltrating ANTIFA to get them to riot, based solely on the fact that they have military and LE training...vs that video where they are clearly helping them skirt taxes running an underage prostitution ring??? Listen to yourself.

There's no vs anything. The video is completely unrelated to this issue. Are you trying to say there is no such thing as covert ops?

How many military or law enforcement personnel actually get infiltration training??

Ask a plumber.

You brought it up? Don't blame me for going off topic, that was you

 

[sakinago]

Well I happen to believe organizations that offer assistance to underage prostitution rings shouldn't be getting tax payer money. call it extremist if you must.

Maybe they were just playing along because they thought they were getting punked?

And anything not left is treasonist, got it.

Now we're back to make believe?

You will make any excuse, no matter how far fetched.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Alt right violence is the biggest threat we have in the country today.

Like the way you hate all Jews?

 

[Billo_Really]

You brought it up? Don't blame me for going off topic, that was you

I said believing the Oath Keepers infiltrated the ANTIFA movement is more believable than James O'Keefe acting like a pimp. That was a reference to James O'Keefe's ridiculous undercover attempt in contrast to the Oath Keepers and the violence they may have caused, which is definitely "on" topic.

You replied by launching into an entire "off" topic rant into the whole ACORN thing.

You fuckers don't take responsibility for anything you do.

 

[Billo_Really]

You will make any excuse, no matter how far fetched.

I'm one of the few posters at this website who is willing to admit he's wrong when shown to be so with a valid argument. Your arguments have not reached that level. In order to do that, you have to specifically address the points I've made, not try to change the context for which they are said, spectrum boy.