It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Right wing domestic terrorism

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned. There are plenty of extremists on all sides of the political spectrum willing to do such things and it is on all of us to condemn such violent actions.

All of them....not just the one we are opposed to. Too often people are willing to turn a blind eye to violence when it is used for something we support to a certain extent.



I don't agree with the statement:


Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned.


What about the US revolution? The Civil war? WWII? Any war?
Those are state acts, two of them were revolutions. I’m sure plenty of terrorism went on during those events, but in the context of war, i don’t think they should be included.




posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


And it really doesn't bode well to see you folks coming up with the usual whataboutisms here.


Me coming up with "whataboutisms"??? The OP is entirely about "whataboutisms"... "Forget Antifa and BLM... whatabout White Supremacy and White Nationalism???"

I'm not excusing or rationalizing or apologizing for anyone's violence. Exactly the opposite, to quote myself:


Violence isn't limited to one side or another... Violence isn't wrong because it's from one side or another... Killing isn't wrong because it's associated with one side or another... it's wrong because violence is wrong.


The OP asked for examples of leftist ideological violence, and specifically involving deaths. I provided one. To now invoke "whataboutism" is intellectually dishonest.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

The facts show that 7 people die per year from the perceived threat of right wing radical terrorism.

If you think that's a problem then we definitely have different opinions.


First time I have done this in this thread: Sources please?

I think your number is about right, but I would like it to be documented, rather than just a number that you threw out.



Those numbers came from the post you put as a response.

"According to a 2017 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent). The total number of fatalities is about the same for far right wing violent extremists and radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period (106 and 119, respectively). However, 41 percent of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event—an attack at an Orlando, Florida night club in 2016."[3]

Did you notice how the stats you linked to started on September 12th 2001?

That conveniently left 3000 Muslim murders of the list....



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey


And once again :Not a member of BLM.


And there it is. So this is just a gotcha question. You really don't care about the violence... and particularly about violence committed for leftist ideology. Nope. Just put enough conditions on your question and you can rationalize away the crimes of the left for cheap partisan political points.

Gotcha.


Another big NOPES. You wrote


really don't care


Is that the classic definition of strawman - telling me what I think - what i do or do not care about?

The OP is about right-wing terrorism. It is not about the complete lack of other forms of terrorism. You pull out an anecdotal example of non-right-wing terrorism, ignore the OP and the statistics presented and sourced, that roughly 60 percent of domestic terrorism is committed were driven by racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, antigovernment or other right-wing ideologies, and then turn around and tell me what I care about.

Your comments are a deflection from the topic, dishonest, disingenuous, and demonstrate a lack of desire to discuss the topic at hand.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Here's my take.

Violence is bad in almost every context.

The numbers do appear that more domestic terrorism deaths have been at the hands of extremist views in line with the far right.

The numbers are low (obviously we all want zero).

This debate can be framed to suit one's preferred narrative though just by changing the time frame of years and countries involved.

But I think we can all agree that senseless violence is just that.
edit on 14-1-2019 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned. There are plenty of extremists on all sides of the political spectrum willing to do such things and it is on all of us to condemn such violent actions.

All of them....not just the one we are opposed to. Too often people are willing to turn a blind eye to violence when it is used for something we support to a certain extent.



I don't agree with the statement:


Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned.


What about the US revolution? The Civil war? WWII? Any war?
Those are state acts, two of them were revolutions. I’m sure plenty of terrorism went on during those events, but in the context of war, i don’t think they should be included.


So there is no state-sponsored terrorism? Interesting. You might want to call that into Washington.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned. There are plenty of extremists on all sides of the political spectrum willing to do such things and it is on all of us to condemn such violent actions.

All of them....not just the one we are opposed to. Too often people are willing to turn a blind eye to violence when it is used for something we support to a certain extent.



I don't agree with the statement:


Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned.


What about the US revolution? The Civil war? WWII? Any war?
Those are state acts, two of them were revolutions. I’m sure plenty of terrorism went on during those events, but in the context of war, i don’t think they should be included.


So there is no state-sponsored terrorism? Interesting. You might want to call that into Washington.


War is not state sponsored terrorism. The three examples you gave were all wars. I don’t know where you got that i said there is no state sponsored terrorism. I even said there was probably terrorism going on during these wars.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Woodcarver

Why on a thread about right-wing domestic terrorism are you wanting to talk about Antifa?

OP brought them up and specifically excluded them or anyone affiliated with them. Stating that they are too loosely affiliated to be included in the study. OP then includes lone wolf actors from the right who are not affiliated with any groups. It just seems like an unfair distinction.

I simply asked which groups make up antifa.


Notice in the OP (if you read it) that I talk primarily about right-wing domestic terrorists, not right-wing terrorist groups. The only "groups" i did bring up were BLM and Antifa, because that seems to be the fact-free go-to for posters on ATS to respond to the topic of this OP.

You wanted to know what right-wing groups are out there, rather than discuss the topic. Are you shopping around for a new club or something? /sarc
the topic is right wing groups. But the real point is that there are groups of people who commit acts of terrorism. Most people don’t care what crazy murderers believe. Or who their favorite politician is. They just want the violence to stop, and the fingerpointing to stop. By saying far right or far left is missing the point entirely. Their political beliefs are just as crazy as the rest of their beliefs. So let’s just call them political terrorists or maybe religious terrorists if that is their motivation. The point is that they are terrorists. That is the line in the sand. Whether they are lefty or righty is kinda moot to me. I want it all gone and for peaceful discussion to take the forefront.

I certainly don’t want to be associated with either side. Although i have already been charged with wanting to join “far right terrorists” in this thread.




edit on 14-1-2019 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Re read the post (if you read it at all).



The OP asked for examples of leftist ideological violence, and specifically involving deaths. I provided one. To now invoke "whataboutism" is intellectually dishonest.


I did not ask for for an "examples of leftist ideological violence." I asked about Antifa and BLW for examples of committing murder, which posters on ATS use as the "go-to" example of leftist terrorism. Turns out, I could not find one murder attributed to members of Antifa or BLM. Looks like you couldn't either.

Please don't twist the words I wrote in the OP. It is all too easy to debunk your statements when all one has to do is go back a few pages and read....



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Thanks. That is why I said your numbers sounded about right. I thought you might have a different source to share.

Yes, the numbers start after 9/11.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned. There are plenty of extremists on all sides of the political spectrum willing to do such things and it is on all of us to condemn such violent actions.

All of them....not just the one we are opposed to. Too often people are willing to turn a blind eye to violence when it is used for something we support to a certain extent.



I don't agree with the statement:


Any group or individual that uses violence to achieve their political or social goals is to be condemned.


What about the US revolution? The Civil war? WWII? Any war?
Those are state acts, two of them were revolutions. I’m sure plenty of terrorism went on during those events, but in the context of war, i don’t think they should be included.


So there is no state-sponsored terrorism? Interesting. You might want to call that into Washington.


War is not state sponsored terrorism. The three examples you gave were all wars. I don’t know where you got that i said there is no state sponsored terrorism. I even said there was probably terrorism going on during these wars.


Your words:


Those are state acts, two of them were revolutions. I’m sure plenty of terrorism went on during those events, but in the context of war, i don’t think they should be included.


That is where I got that from.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea




"Forget Antifa and BLM... whatabout White Supremacy and White Nationalism???"


Let's just assume you have a point here, you saw the numbers? Do you think those numbers could justify different threat assessments?



I'm not excusing or rationalizing or apologizing for anyone's violence. Exactly the opposite, to quote myself:


Nobody asked you to do so, nor was it my intention to imply anything else. And more to the point: you rounding up this murderer with Antifa and or BLM activism would be another fallacy. Just saying...



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver




the topic is right wing groups


No it isn't about right wing groups. I wrote the OP.. I think I would be the resident subject matter expert on what it is about. Did you read the title? The OP?

Do you see how I specifically call out "lone Wolves."

I never started looking into right-wing terrorist groups in the US till you brought it up, correct?

Don't try to derail the thread into right-wing terrorist groups. However, if you want to do some research, like other posters have, calling out specific right-wing domestic terrorist groups, I think that would be a helpful and productive addition to this discussion.


edit on 14-1-2019 by FilthyUSMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Yes, Right-wing terrorism is bad just like left-wing terrorism. I think we can all agree that Islamic terrorists are the worst though. They killed more Americans in one attack than all left and right wing terrorists combined in recorded history.

Source



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Middleoftheroad




Yes, Right-wing terrorism is bad just like left-wing terrorism. I think we can all agree that Islamic terrorists are the worst though


In the last 18 years right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse than either left-wing or Islamic terrorism in the US. Check the stats I posted, or refute them with credible sources.

I agree 9/11 was terrible.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey
a reply to: Boadicea

Re read the post (if you read it at all).



The OP asked for examples of leftist ideological violence, and specifically involving deaths. I provided one. To now invoke "whataboutism" is intellectually dishonest.


I did not ask for for an "examples of leftist ideological violence." I asked about Antifa and BLW for examples of committing murder, which posters on ATS use as the "go-to" example of leftist terrorism. Turns out, I could not find one murder attributed to members of Antifa or BLM. Looks like you couldn't either.

Please don't twist the words I wrote in the OP. It is all too easy to debunk your statements when all one has to do is go back a few pages and read....
Antifa and blm don’t have rosters that we can cross reference, so it should be no surprise that it would be difficult to attribute any murder to someone who agrees with those groups ideologies.

now you are ignoring the riots and violence that comes specifically from protests where these groups show up in the hundreds to attack city infrastructure and police. Which for everyone paying attention, is inevitably going to create groups who specifically counter those groups. For every extreme movement, you will have opposition movements. Ad infinitum.

These movements are demonstrably funded by political elites on the left and the right. This is what is called a manufactured crisis. You are playing into the real terrorists plans.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey
a reply to: Woodcarver




the topic is right wing groups


No it isn't about right wing groups. I wrote the OP.. I think I would be the resident subject matter expert on what it is about. Did you read the title? The OP?

Do you see how I specifically call out "lone Wolves."

I never started looking into right-wing terrorist groups in the US till you brought it up, correct?

Don't try to derail the thread into right-wing terrorist groups. However, if you want to do some research, like other posters have, calling out specific right-wing domestic terrorist groups, I think that would be a helpful and productive addition to this discussion.

You call out lone wolves from the right. The media conveniently lets us know who the far-right lone wolves are, but they intentionally don’t mention “lone wolf” when it’s an act by a leftist
edit on 14-1-2019 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

The OP is not about riots and violence that comes specifically from protests. It is about murder caused by domestic right-wing terrorist since 9/11. All credible evidence that I could find shows roughly 60 percent of those incidents were driven by racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, antigovernment or other right-wing ideologies.

If you want to start a thread about violence at protests, be my guest. I might even have something constructive to contribute. I would appreciate it if you could stay on topic.

Thanks for your consideration.



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey
a reply to: Middleoftheroad




Yes, Right-wing terrorism is bad just like left-wing terrorism. I think we can all agree that Islamic terrorists are the worst though


In the last 18 years right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse than either left-wing or Islamic terrorism in the US. Check the stats I posted, or refute them with credible sources.

I agree 9/11 was terrible.
And if you add one more day to that study, the jihadist/religious terrorists take a firm lead.

You are cherry picking stats and everyone here has pointed this out. You don’t get to choose what information is allowed for discussion.
edit on 14-1-2019 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: FilthyUSMonkey
a reply to: Woodcarver




the topic is right wing groups


No it isn't about right wing groups. I wrote the OP.. I think I would be the resident subject matter expert on what it is about. Did you read the title? The OP?

Do you see how I specifically call out "lone Wolves."

I never started looking into right-wing terrorist groups in the US till you brought it up, correct?

Don't try to derail the thread into right-wing terrorist groups. However, if you want to do some research, like other posters have, calling out specific right-wing domestic terrorist groups, I think that would be a helpful and productive addition to this discussion.

You call out lone wolves from the right. The media conveniently lets us know who the far-right lone wolves are, but they intentionally don’t mention “lone wolf” when it’s an act by a leftist


As of 2015 "Lone wolves"

were responsible for 25 percent of all U.S. terrorist attacks.
Source


The term "lone wolf" was popularized by white supremacists Alex Curtis and Tom Metzger in the 1990s. Metzger advocated individual or small-cell underground activity, as opposed to above-ground membership organizations, envisaging "warriors acting alone or in small groups who attacked the government or other targets in 'daily, anonymous acts.'"[5][6]
Source

So it looks like the term "Lone Wolf" is synonymous with "right-wing domestic terrorist" to some degree.

But you are deflecting again, refusing to discuss the topic of the OP, and are now throwing in the media to try and derail the tread.

Once again, the topic of of the thread is right-wing domestic terrorism, and how roughly 60 percent of those incidents were driven by racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, antigovernment or other right-wing ideologies.




top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join