https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/us/g … litia.html
Fresh off the presses folks, so who is telling me all the biggest national threats are from the BLM and Antifa?
This stuff seems to have going on for some time but the rightwingers see this form of resistance as either ok, or chooses to ignore it hoping that the rest of the country does not see it.
Sorry for the headline misprint, I meant "Gov".
Rightwinger, Trump's own FBI is acknowledging where this nation's extremist excesses are found. I certainly don't need to print in Braille and shove it up your bums, now do I?
For the rest of us mere mortals, I take the assault from these groups quite seriously, we all should.
I for one AM taking it very seriously. I see it as a continuation of the violence that is taking place all over our country, and if we continue to ignore it and pretend that we don't need law enforcement it will only grow. Right wing, Left wing - it makes no difference what labels we assign; if we don't get a handle on it we are in serious trouble.
Have they mentioned the words terrorist and terrorism yet in the news? As this is basically what it is.
The Trump Administration would never use as strong a word as "terrorist" to describe a bunch of "good ole boys"
If the definition of terrorism is along the lines of "causing harm to people innocent of any wrongdoing" (intentional civilian casualties, in other words) then it isn't terrorism, for the governor is the one making orders they don't like.
That term is grossly overused today.
I take them all seriously but I see the left downplaying the violence from the left so, frankly, I'll listen carefully to the comments of conservatives and moderates but those who never, ever, criticize left wing violence and make excuses for it at every turn are, in my mind, responsible for fueling it all. Whether it come from left or right.
OK, but I see the Right downplaying violence from their side while the FBI says they are clearly most dangerous. Trump and Barr minimizes this daily. So, who is doing the most "downplaying"? The Rightwing extremists I see as the most dangerous and those that lean in its direction are the most guilty of denial, IMHO
"So, who is doing the most "downplaying"
Personally, I would have to say those accepting or promoting the hundreds of violent "protests" (actually riots) we have seen in the past year or so. I can think of only one death from a dreaded "right winger" (the one that ran his car through a protest), but there have been more than a few deaths and many injuries in the riots, not to speak of the ruined lives as their life's work disappeared into the flames.
And, of course, that doesn't count the "left wingers" that wire tapped the presidential candidates offices, that proclaimed him to be colluding with Putin to fix the election, cobbled up a worthless impeachment, has publicly stated they will change the foundation of the Constitution (stacking SCOTUS) if possible and is now attempting to pass a law allowing Congress to remove a President they consider "mentally unfit" without the need of an impeachment (read: of a different party dogma). I could go on, but I think you get the picture. These kinds of activities are "dangerous" beyond anything a few armed nuts might (or might not ) accomplish.
(Oh, there was one more death - in that occupation of a federal park building in Oregon - but it was the "right winger" that violated the law that died, so doesn't count.)
If you can only think only of those two, you've been living under a rock.
I imagine there are more. Maybe many, many more depending on your definition of "right wing".
But I notice you didn't supply any examples?
it gets really old supplying information that, if you pay any attention to what is happening in the U.S., you would already know. A quick Google will reveal hundreds of deaths caused by right-wing extremism in the U.S. over the last twenty years.
Bet if you went to a hundred years, and widened the definition of "right wing" to "anything not the rabid left" you would find even more.
As far as I'm concerned the discussion was about the last 2 or 3 years - the period where violence suddenly bloomed nationwide from fringe groups on both sides.
To mention some...
John Earnest, Patrick Crusius, Steven Carrillo and Robert Justus, James H. Jackson, Dylann Roof.
I asked Google about your list of names and viewed the Wikis on them.
Just for clarity . . . The topic was the danger from Right-wing militia and extremist groups. with the exception of one—who claimed to be part of a nation-wide Boogaloo Boys 'movement', none of your listed names claimed to be part of any such group.
One even said he had voted for Pres. Obama in 2008.
However, none of this is intended to deny or defend the danger of Right-wing extremists. Or any extremists.
Well, let's see. Googling "Steven Carrillo", I see the following: "California prosecutors have filed 19 charges against a cop-hating Air Force sergeant in the ambush killing of a county sheriff’s deputy." This sounds more like BLM than a "right winger", yes?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/air-force-se … ys-killing
Patrick Cursius produces: "Lawyers for Patrick Crusius, the man accused of killing 23 people at an El Paso Walmart last year, said he was in a psychotic state when he was taken into custody minutes after the shooting and suffers from mental disabilities." All psychotics are "right wing", yes?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/us/el-pa … index.html
This sounds more like BLM than a "right winger", yes?
Sure, based on your bias.
Federal prosecutors have linked Carrillo with the extremist, anti-government group called the Boogaloo movement and said that Carrillo chose the timing of his attacks to "take advantage of a time when this nation was mourning the killing of George Floyd." Inside the three vehicles Carrillo used, police found a boogaloo patch, ammunition, firearms, bombmaking equipment and three messages scrawled in blood: “I became unreasonable,” “Boog” and “Stop the duopoly.”
The group started in alt-right culture on the internet with the belief that there is an impending civil war, according to experts. The movement’s followers, some of whom call themselves “Boogaloo Bois,” are generally younger and more likely to turn to acts of violence than members of other militia-type groups.
All psychotics are "right wing", yes?
So, he said that. He also:
Used the internet to purchase a GP WASR-10 semiautomatic rifle and 1,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition.
Drove from his home in Allen, Texas, with the rifle and the ammunition to the East El Paso Walmart Supercenter store near Cielo Vista Mall, where he opened fire on hundreds of people.
Posted a document he wrote titled, “The Inconvenient Truth".
To quote Cred, " I see the Right downplaying violence from their side while the FBI says they are clearly most dangerous."
Perhaps I didn't properly research Carrillo, but I found nothing indicating he was connected to boogaloo.
What are you saying? That anyone purchasing a rifle and ammunition, driving to Walmart and shooting people is automatically considered "right wing"? Because that's the point of my post: that killing people does not mean the killer is politically in the far right. I'm seeing more and more of this; anytime someone really crosses the line they must be "right wing", without ever knowing their political bent. It's becoming just another meaningless label for something we don't like.
What little I've seen of boogaloo, it seems like the far right, along with supremacists. But just any killer in general? No.
How can you miss the point so easily, Wilderness? These people are not just mad killers but play from a philosophical playbook.
You are always SO certain about what constitutes the left but always remain fuzzy about this? Why is that?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/04/us/p … tings.html
I find it irritating how the Right explains those that fly its banners and operate from within its playbook, racism and intolerance that expresses itself through heinous violence, as merely mentally ill.
We look at the MOTIVES behind the killings and killers to see if they align with the definitions of right and left or neither (Islamic based or mentally ill) How can we believe that the radical left has a plan and an agenda but the radical right does not? The killings associated with school children in Connecticut a few years ago would qualify as being derived from a motive of mental illness.
But rest assured, that the national body count for most such crimes are due to Right wing oriented goals and objectives.
Whenever there is the most dirty and heinous, rest assured that the political Right is behind it.
Dylan Root was mentally ill, or was he a racist, the classic definition of rightwing advocacy and the impetus for its violence?
It BS and its bad for you......
Murderous white supremacist and xenophobes are not necessarily crazy, but could just be malevolent and sordid people, perfectly sane, Adolf Hitler is an example.
I know you're being purposely obtuse, but I will play along.
You're excuse for Patrick Cursius was his lawyers defense, "a psychotic state". I was pointing out that it must have been a really long coherent psychotic episode.
About your fallacy, not one is saying that "anyone purchasing a rifle and ammunition, driving to Walmart and shooting people is automatically considered "right wing". No one said any killer in general is a supremacist. All psychotics are "right wing", you said that, not me.
But HE is. As are all the other killers on my list.
I didn't say all killers are supremacists. YOU seem to feel that all killers are "right wing", though, and by definition. That was the point - that anyone doing things you don't like are automatically labeled "right wing" without regard to their political stance. As far as I know or understand, "right wing" means those people that are politically on the right, not that they are killers. Or supremacists, for that matter, although supremacists ARE considered a tiny subset of those on the right.
This is so tiresome. The categorizations of "right-wing" and "left-wing" are done by organizations that are highly qualified to do so. You know, like the FBI.
Of course, you know better, don't you.
YOU seem to feel that all killers are "right wing", though, and by definition.
I give you specific names. Do your homework. Or you could keep spinning, twisting, and excusing killers without even bother to read about them. Be my guest.
LOL I did. And found that at least two of those names did not qualify as far as I could see.
Whereupon you replied that the psychotic one also bought guns and ammunition, drove to WalMart and began killing people. No other indication of political affiliation - is it not reasonable to assume that those guns and killing is what you are using to determine they are "right wing"? This is not spin; it is reading your post and finding nothing whatsoever that indicates an individual from the political right, yet you have determined that they are.
Which is the whole point here - that the label "right wing" is being morphed from a political stance into anything that you consider evil and wrong. Politics aren't even in the picture - just that they did something you feel is bad so the label is applied.
And then you claim that I'm "excusing killers" when I absolutely did no such thing - I have only addressed the question of where your label of "right wing" came from. Pure, absolute spin, then, even as you complain that I am doing the spin. An apparent attempt to vilify anyone that considers themselves "conservative" or on the "right", yes?
Again, I was pointing out that your defense of "the psychotic one", per his defense team, is not credible. "I didn’t spend much time at all preparing for this attack. Maybe a month, probably less. I have to do this before I lose my never. I figured that an under-prepared attack and a manifesto is better than no attack and no manifesto."
If you wanted "other indications of political affiliation", google is your friend.
"My right wing label" comes from the FBI, police, government.
Maybe they misinterpreted his manifesto, like:
America will soon become a one party-state.
The Democrat party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic Debate. They intend to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters. With policies like these, the Hispanic support for Democrats will likely become nearly unanimous in the future.
Our European comrades don’t have the gun rights needed to repel the millions of invaders that plague their country. They have no choice but to sit by and watch their countries burn.
I am against race mixing because it destroys genetic diversity and creates identity problems. Also because it’s completely unnecessary and selfish... Cultural diversity diminishes as stronger and/or more appealing cultures overtake weaker and/or undesirable ones.
This is just like his repeated assertion that WMDs were found in Iraq, a desperate attempt to defend and retain his erroneous stance. By nitpicking to infinite absirdity, he can continue to feel justified in his false beliefs
I know. I was bored so I played along. But I should have known better.
Sure, that sounds reasonable. But, it ignores the point that what Wilderness is "arguing" is the inaccuracy of your statements.
As a 'perception' I think your arguments make sense, but as factual statements, they fail—and for the reasons wilderness points out.
I agree with the essence of the "Right-wingers" arguments as presented, but I also agree that, as wilderness points out, that that label is too eagerly applied to the deviates of our society as if they represented the entirety of Conservative thought.
Of those in your original list of "Right-wing" zealots not one fits the profile of a Right-wing organization. They were all radicalized idiots with mental issues. And they were all outlyiners of a conservative mindset.
You may think you were "playing along," but in reality, you were propagating a consensus that is more wrong than it is right.
Again, Im not debating any point of labels too eagerly applied, (labels like you guys eagerly apply to anyone remotely associated with BLM, Antifa, etc.)
He said he only knew about ONE death from a right winger. You know there are more than one case. He asked for examples.
But if you think no one from the list "fits the profile of a Right-wing organization" you must know better than the FBI and Police. However, that wasn't what he argued. I get that you want to control the discussion into what you think it should be, but it wasn't.
When you say things like "they were all radicalized idiots with mental issues" is another example of Cred's general point of "Right downplaying violence from their side". You already made up an excuse in your mind even in cases that are still in court.
Perhaps the problem is that "my side" (and that of GA) is NOT the side those "radicalized idiots with mental issues" are. You choose to lump it all together, but it isn't, any more than actively promoting communism (more of the "radicalized idiots") is your side.
"When you say things like "they were all radicalized idiots with mental issues" is another example of Cred's general point of "Right downplaying violence from their side". You already made up an excuse in your mind even in cases that are still in court."
You got me. That quote, (and thought), was technically inaccurate and poorly phrased. At the risk of making it worse, I will try to explain.
I was not trying to downplay the violence of their actions, I was trying to differentiate between the dangerous Right-wing fanatic organizations, (the ones the FBI spoke of), and the crazy radicalized idiot lone wolfs that represent no ideology except their own.
When I said "radicalized idiots with mental issues" I did not intend to mean true diagnosable mental issues, (the inaccuracy of my statement), I was pulling a thought from a basket of generational colloquialisms.
For instance; my generation, (at least the ones that are fairly normal ;-) ), would think that anyone that would believe that Pizzagate conspiracy isn't really rational, and we have a basket of euphemisms to draw from; nuts, fruitcakes, idiots, mental issues, just ain't right, etc. That was my intended message. It appears that at least one, (possibly two), of those in your list, do have diagnosable mental issues, but even though that is what I said, (the poorly stated part), it wasn't what I meant. I wasn't attempting to make excuses or preempt the court case decisions.
I still think that some on your list fail to qualify for the label of "dangerous Right-wingers," and none, (maybe one—the Boogaloo Boys guy), qualify for the FBI's description of Right-wing extremist organizations.* The most obvious example would be the one that voted for Obama in 2008.
*I have already noted the misapplication of my original comment to your reply to Wilderness's comment.
I understand, thanks for the clarification. And even though my response to wilderness and subsequent exchange wasn't about organizations, I will address your concern.
Yes, I agree. Some of the killers of the list dont appear to be part of an organization. But then, I don't think the "dangerous rightwingers" we were talking about (and the FBI for that matter) are only right wing organizations.
Confronting White Supremacy
The threat posed to the United States has expanded from sophisticated, externally directed plots to attacks conducted by self-radicalized lone actors who mobilize to violence based on international and domestic violent ideologies.
We are most concerned about lone offenders, primarily using firearms, as these lone offenders represent the dominant trend for lethal domestic terrorists. Frequently, these individuals act without a clear group affiliation or guidance, making them challenging to identify, investigate, and disrupt.
The current racially motivated violent extremist threat is decentralized and primarily characterized by lone actors. These actors tend to be radicalized online and target minorities and soft targets using easily accessible weapons.
Violent extremists are increasingly using social media for the distribution of propaganda, recruitment, target selection, and incitement to violence. Through the Internet, violent extremists around the world have access to our local communities to target and recruit like-minded individuals and spread their messages of hate on a global scale. The recent attack at the Chabad of Poway Synagogue in Poway, California, not only highlights the enduring threat of violence posed by domestic terrorists, but also demonstrates the danger presented by the propagation of these violent acts on the Internet.
Your final point is valid and supported by your link. So I had to go back through the thread to see where I got off-track.
And the culprit seems to be . . . you.
Cred's OP spoke of groups, and a quote from his NYT link spoke of the FBI speaking of "groups." And the comments—until yours—were speaking of groups.
Even Wilderness's "I can think of only one death from a dreaded "right-winger" (the one that ran his car through a protest)" comment, that appeared to send you off-track, was about an extremist that was part of an organized group of extremists.
Then . . . it was your reply; "To mention some...John Earnest, Patrick Crusius, Steven Carrillo and Robert Justus, James H. Jackson, Dylann Roof. that changed the narrative from groups to individuals.
So, it's all your fault. (even so, I agree with the point of your comments regarding your FBI link)
*sigh* Are you being intentionally obtuse? You provided a list of names you said were dangerous or killers and were right wing. I googled them and found some information, but zero to do with political affiliation.
I called you on it, and your reply was that he bought guns and killed people: obviously a right wing fanatic, but still without any indication that it was true.
So I called you again, saying that simply claiming people you don't like are "right wing" is ridiculous. Now you are making claims again, providing a "manifesto" from an unknown source and once more claiming the man in question is "right wing". You even claim the FBI says so, too, but still without any evidence that that is true.
You simply HAVE to know better: you HAVE to understand that simply making statements in this day and age of internet lying is not a reason for anyone to believe you.
If (IF! You have presented nothing checkable yet) this information is true then I would accept that label. But it is you that made the statement, and label, it is up to you to provide checkable information, not I. Google is not my friend in trying to prove all your statements correct: it is yours.
If you want agreement with those that might disagree it is up to you to convince them...with proof, not opinions and claims.
So I provided a list. You made a quick search. (And took the word of a defense team). And instead of saying "hey, you were right about the other names, but I cant find anything about the political views of these two names. Do you have any info, link, source?"
You decided to accused me of saying and thinking and feeling "all killers" are right-wingers, etc.
And now you accused me of lying. LOL
Oh, btw, I dont need you "to accept that label". I told you, be my guest.
If you want agreement with those that might disagree it is up to you to convince them...with proof, not opinions and claims.
I dont want you to agree. I just wanted to give information that you obviously dont have. But I see is just a recurring theme. You argue and form opinions without reading/knowing about something and refuse to learn about it when it goes against what you want to be true.
I agree with you Cred, I think the potential danger from all extremist and fanatical groups should be taken seriously. Liberals and Conservatives both have their fringe elements.
The militia of your topic is/was(?) very dangerous—a bunch of idiot macho guys with guns that have watched too many Rambo and Seal Team movies.
However, I think the tone of your comment trends to hyperbole. "Rightwinger Trump's own FBI"? Are you implying the FBI leadership is partisan?
And, if you want to frame this as a national threat, how do the number and scale of "national" events by BLM/Antifa compare to the militia and Rightwing extremist groups? Instead of that old Let me count the ways . . ." thought, we could say Let me count the cities . . ."
Also, you can stay the hell away from my "bum"
Wilderness was correct about his assessment that the problems comes from all sides.
Trump said in the last debate that the threat was from left wing extremists, not from the Right.
The FBI is not partisan which gives all the more credence to its assessment that radical Right wing groups pose the greater threat to national security.
It is more than a matter of Numbers, it is about the ferocity of threats and attacks that I think is more important. The Leftist radicals never threaten to kidnap and kill a major public figure.
Looking at the Right wing objectives and approach, I would consider them the more dangerous. Anyway, the FBI says so and that is good enough for me.
"Anyway, the FBI says so and that is good enough for me."
And it is good enough for me too. I think these extreme-right militias are very dangerous. But, I don't think it is because they are extreme-right, I think it is because they are fanatics.
If you don't think the FBI is partisan, then why did you make a point to note "Right-winger Trump's own FBI"?
Im not Cred, but I believe the point is that Trump, WH and Trump fanatics accuse every person that says something they dont like or that is contrary to their message as Trump haters, Democrats, disgruntled employees, etc. in a mission to destroy America and to remove Trump from office.
That is probably a fair point. I bet the anti-Trump fanatics have an equal list of descriptors for claims by Trump supporters.
To come back to the point of my comment, I don't think it was 'like pulling teeth' to get the FBI to make the statement it did about Right-wing extremist groups—as Cred's phrase implied.
I would have to check to be sure, but I think the FBI has been saying this about those groups since McVeigh's time. And I have agreed with that assessment since McVeigh's time too.
Funny GA, no one seems to have problems identifying "left wing" extremists that would include the Attorney General and Trump himself. And after all that "rot" I have had to suffer through listening about "an out of control Left" in Democrat controlled cities and such.
This Wolverine Watchmen IS a rightwing oriented extremist group affiliated with the boogaloo bois and dedicated to the goal of violent insurrection, so who is kidding who here? I have read that McVey and his accomplice had associated with such an organization in Michigan many years ago
Obviously, the FBI seems to know how to make distinctions between radical Right and left, these Wolverines can and has been categorized as "rightwing" from any number of sources except Brietbart, of course. If not, then you will have to prove your point. I will go with the FBI assessment. If the FBI can make the distinction, you and I can, as well.
Let's not try to amalgamate the distinctions that classically define Left verses Right oriented. And this group is a loathsome RIGHT wing outfit.
My point about the FBI is that in spite of Trump's dismissal of the threats posed by the Right since he assumed office, even he could not muzzle the FBI in regards to the data it had gather regarding the Rightwing extremists as being far more menancing and dangerous than any challenges coming from the left. That is what makes the FBI reports all the more credible.
While I often accuse Democrats as seeing the world through rose colored glasses, I accuse Republicans of actually putting them on others, instead. They will tell you that a "polecat" is just a large kitty with white paint down its back. And you know what, there are people that will believe it.
You must be arguing with yourself Cred, because I can't think of anything I said that contradicted what you just said. And I surely can't control or be held liable for what "no one" says. ;-)
The only possible difference might be that I said they were dangerous because they were extremists and fanatics, not because they were "Right-wing." I didn't mean that to be taken as saying that they weren't a Right-wing group. My perception is that almost all of these 'militia-type' groups are and that Left-winger extremists and fanatics would not let the word "militia" anywhere near their names.
So, those the same guys Trump called very good people, eh?
"Two brothers who were charged Thursday in a plot to kidnap and kill Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer were identified as the identical twins photographed months earlier carrying long guns during a protest inside the state Capitol."
The FBI arrested 13 people Thursday in the plot by members and associates of a right-wing militia group, Wolverine Watchmen, to identify the homes of law enforcement officers in order to target them and plan and train for an attack on the state Capitol where they would kidnap government officials, including Whitmer.
Prosecutors also allege those indicted made credible threats of violence to instigate a civil war leading to societal collapse.
In early 2020, the FBI learned through social media that a group was discussing a violent overthrow of certain government and law enforcement components, according to the criminal complaint obtained by Fox News. FOXNEWS
On Thursday, hundreds of protesters — many of them carrying guns — descended on the Michigan Capitol to oppose Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's extension of the state's stay-at-home order by another two weeks, to May 15.
"The Governor of Michigan should give a little, and put out the fire," Trump wrote. "These are very good people, but they are angry. They want their lives back again, safely! See them, talk to them, make a deal." Business Insider
From the limited info I've gotten on this, at least one arrested was a BLM supporter, hated Trump and is anti government.
I'm not sure this is totally 'right wing'. I'll wait til I have full info to pass judgement.
It's important to keep current on a story as it develops. Doesn't seem to be what the left claimed it to be in the beginning.
"The suspects charged in the plot to kidnap Michigan Democrat Gov. Gretchen Whitmer are anarchists who in a series of videos professed hatred for police and referred to President Donald Trump as a “tyrant,” reports say.
U.S. attorneys have charged Adam Fox, Barry Croft, Ty Garbin, Kaleb Franks, Daniel Harris, and Brandon Caserta with conspiracy to commit kidnapping, the Detroit News reported on Thursday."
https://www.worldtribune.com/reports-su … and-trump/
That's a good point Mike. I think we got so engaged in a valid discussion—the danger of home-grown radical extremists, that we stopped speaking of the validity of the claim of the OP, (as in, didn't check that what we were saying was the truth of the event).
I think we get to blame Cred for this one, but that probably won't help Conservatives with their "Right-winger" label, I think anarchists usually get laid at their doorstep too.
Thanks for the update.
It's why I refrained from commenting on the thread.
I knew hours after Cred posted it that there was no legitimacy to these people being "Right Wingers" one had been active in BLM rallies, another was a radical Trump & police hater.
This is the "news" we have today folks, they lie to you all the time... they didn't want it getting out what politics these lunatics really had, so they put out a false narrative... the only one that people will remember.
And in following the message of the OP, I also failed to research the topic, as Mike's link shows.
I addressed one thing, when the reality of the OP's topic was something else entirely.
But, I will stick with the thought that from the Left's perspective, and much to their detriment, even anarchists are Right-wingers.
Labels, labels, everywhere, and not an ounce of truth to be found anywhere.
World Tribune is a far right web site that's garbage. Absolute garbage. I would go so far as to say that anybody who regularly read such a thing would not be somebody I would trust. Might as well be reading The Daily Stormer or some such thing. Or listening to Alex Jones.
Don't wear a mask, don't get a flu shot. Anthony Fauci is a fascist:
https://worldtribune.com/life/value-hea … t-bullies/
You want to go there...huh?
You know what else is absolute garbage? Media Bias Fact Check. Absolute trash.
"Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) is a website founded in 2015 by editor Dave Van Zandt. The website has been described as an amateur effort to rate news media sources based on factual accuracy and political bias."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bia … cal%20bia.
"A little bit about the “right-wing” terrorists who plotted to kidnap Whitmer: —One was a BLM inc. protestor —One called Trump a “tyrant” —They hated police —They were anarchists —They claimed to hate the Constitution These people are anything but conservative."
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/v … p-n1034330
Great articles from World Tribune:
That Jew, George Soros, is behind everything:
https://www.worldtribune.com/soros-fund … nderstood/
Nasty Kamala Harris:
https://www.worldtribune.com/fly-didnt- … ty-kamala/
Trump concerned about UFO's:
https://www.worldtribune.com/trump-to-t … y-of-ufos/
Take your hydroxychloroquine:
https://www.worldtribune.com/effectiven … ain-sight/
The coup against President Trump:
https://www.worldtribune.com/we-have-re … ies-media/
Indict Obama and Biden:
https://www.worldtribune.com/trump-enou … and-biden/
Why the Left despises Christmas:
https://worldtribune.com/life/holly-jol … christmas/
The facts about there being members of Antifa and BLM part of the kidnapping plot against the Michigan governor are many. There is even an article about it on MSN. That is a fact that can't be disputed.
Show me his Antifa membership card. He attended one protest march.
For certain, he was a Marine.
Does the latter give you reason to question the Marines?
Clearly, his political motivations are many. He was emphatically anti-government.
"That Jew, George Soros, is behind everything:,
Mike, do really expect me to believe a source that writes stuff like this?
The link source may be just as you describe Crankalicious, but I didn't take the link's claims at face value, I asked my friend Google.
There are multiple sources that support the article's claims, but here is the truth—straight from the horse's mouth, this group is an anarchist group:
You can shoot the messenger, but that doesn't change the message.
Well, GA, the values are awfully similar:
“He was afraid the government was going to take his guns,” the employee said. Those at the store were aware of Fox’s Second Amendment views and involvement with a group of armed men, which did not strike them as unusual for the area.
"The plotters, according to an FBI affidavit, were motivated in part by their belief that state governments, including Michigan’s, were violating the U.S. Constitution by imposing restrictions to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus — and they referred to Whitmer as a tyrant."
Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf said he met Null several years ago when Null came to his office to vent about the Black Lives Matter movement. Leaf said Null wanted to start his own cause: My Life Matters, which he would eventually turn into what he called the Michigan Liberty Militia.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
I suppose you can disavow them based on whatever their life philosophy, but given their views on government, gun rights, and COVID restrictions, it certainly seems they share a lot of Right concerns.
I will concede, however, if that you dig into their backgrounds, writing them off as right-wing kooks misses a valuable piece of their story, which is their poverty. In fact, a deeper look into their lives and their struggles reveals how those mired in poverty look for anything to cling to that will give meaning to their lives. Definitely, a more robust reporting of how this occurred and why is necessary and neither side has done much of that so far.
It would appear that they did not target Whitmer because she was a Democrat as much as they targeted her for how they perceived she was impacting their lives.
This begs the need for an examination for those in society for whom politics is largely irrelevant.
There have been repeated calls by the Trump administration to designate antifa as a terrorist organization, a move that academics, legal experts and others argue would both exceed the authority of the presidency and violate the First Amendment. Several analyses, reports and studies concluded that antifa is not a domestic or major terrorism risk and ranked far-right extremism and white supremacy as the top risk. A June 2020 study of 893 terrorism incidents in the United States since 1994 found no murder that was specifically attributed to anti-fascists or antifa while 329 deaths were attributed to right-wing perpetrators.
So, Let's cut the BS and make things crystal clear, shall we?
Rightwinger = Conservative squared
Rightwing Extremist = Rghwinger squared
You are all on the same wavelength, it is just that some of you are more brazen than others.
After all, conservatives so comfortably link progressives to the unrest in major cities.
So, two can play at that game.
What is Right wing extremism?
Bigotry, intolerance, xenophobia, and rabid anti-government views. That has to be a great deal it.
To try to separate these lone shooters from the larger organized philosophies is incorrect. If these lone shooters are insane, how is it that the direction of their insanity correlates so closely with the manifesto of right wing groups? The so called individual mad-dog shooter, is a part of, a brazen part of, right wing extremist philosophy.
Th Wikipedia link to the El Paso shooter for example, his "mental illness" seems inconsistent with the ugly manifesto he penned regarding his objectives and fit well into every rightwing extremist's goals.
To hide the true nature of the Whitmer incident is just another attempt at misdirection from the advocates on the Right.
This is just one example, there are more available upon request.
It appears you are saying, ("To hide the true nature of the Whitmer incident "), the Michigan Militia/Wolvervines are not anarchists and their intended mission was not one of anarchy?
This has been an interesting exchange from several people. My take on it: "If you are not firmly entrenched well into the (beautiful, caring, wonderful, loving) left wing group where I live then you are hereby relegated to the (ugly, hateful, murdering, uncaring) "right wingers".
Do I hear the faint chants of "Divide Americans NOW!" coming closer and getting louder?
Funny though, how anti-government anarchists representing both the left or right are looked upon differently, depending on which side you are looking at them from.
"anti-government anarchists. . . " Isn't that redundant? Are there pro-government anarchists?
Is it your view that the Portland anarchists were 'Left-winger' anarchists and the Wolverines are 'Right-winger' anarchists?
If so, which is the primary label, and which is the secondary one?
by Tim Mitchell 2 weeks ago
Where does Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Left Wing Authoritarianism (LWA) come from? They both are personality types with traits within psychology. They do not describe the general populous of either conservative or liberal spectrums since results of individuals will vary. Those with strong...
by kirstenblog 11 years ago
I have never understood all this right wing, left wing stuff. Can anyone explain what its all about, what are these wings and do we get dipping sauce to go with em?
by Susie Lehto 3 years ago
Well, this has gone largely unreported. The 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., has spawned a violent domestic threat from “black identity extremists” who have stepped up attacks on police.“It is very likely that BIEs’ perceptions of unjust treatment of African-Americans and the...
by TMMason 9 years ago
Commies claim Right-wing stole the 4th of July from them... and they must now reclaim it from us.---"According to an article in the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) News, People's World, CPUSA Organizer and People's World reporter, Tony Peckinovsky, gave a speech at the 2011 CPUSA Hershel Walker...
by sasta10 9 years ago
I have seen many times people associating the word Extrimist to names of certain religion. In my opinion the word extrimist and name of religion can not go together as religion is there to bring peace to society. I don't think any religion tells you to do bad things, so why do people...
by Credence2 23 months ago
( So guess who just became public enemy no 1.)Newsweek Article banner headlineFBI RANKS 'BLACK IDENTITY EXTREMISTS' BIGGER THREAT THAN AL QAEDA, WHITE SUPREMACISTS: LEAKED DOCUMENTSLeaked FBI documents indicate "black identity extremists" and animal rights activists are among the agency's...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|