Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

White nationalists shot into, burned Minneapolis police station; killed cop

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Really? First, why would they admit that they were Antifa? Second, why would all, or even the majority, of leftist radicals be Antifa? Third, did these 286 people claim to be right wing? Talk about gullible...
    They did not.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    I see the AP did a big analysis of all the arrests at the 2020 protests...

    AP finds most arrested in protests aren’t leftist radicals

    In 1000s of pages of court documents for the 286 people facing charges, AP found not one single claim that any defendant had a connection to Antifa.

    Pretty amusing given Trump's lies to his gullible cultists about the big scary Antifa running these protests and coming to get everyone.
    Really? First, why would they admit that they were Antifa? Second, why would all, or even the majority, of leftist radicals be Antifa? Third, did these 286 people claim to be right wing? Talk about gullible...

    Leave a comment:


  • Starlight
    replied
    I see the AP did a big analysis of all the arrests at the 2020 protests...

    AP finds most arrested in protests aren’t leftist radicals

    In 1000s of pages of court documents for the 286 people facing charges, AP found not one single claim that any defendant had a connection to Antifa.

    Pretty amusing given Trump's lies to his gullible cultists about the big scary Antifa running these protests and coming to get everyone.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whateverman
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post

    They clearly defined it.
    The article didn't say zero leftwing violence in 2020.

    You did.

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by Whateverman View Post

    The article does not say "zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020", which is what you're incredulous of. If it says anything, it says zero incidents of leftwing terrorism - which is much more believable than zero incidents of leftwing violence.

    Your terminology is very sloppy.
    They clearly defined it. Leftwing groups are in fact engaging in terrorism and violence. I'm not at all interested in that type of political game playing. So like I said to shuny, carry on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Starlight
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    They claim zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020. And you believe that?
    They are writing part-way through 2020. Incomplete data for the current year is a common issue. They also make a distinction between "terrorism" and "violence", and while they note the first can involve the second, they don't say they're identical. Your choice to try and pretend the two words have the same meaning is disingenuous.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whateverman
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post

    Their definition:

    The article does not say "zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020", which is what you're incredulous of. If it says anything, it says zero incidents of leftwing terrorism - which is much more believable than zero incidents of leftwing violence.

    Your terminology is very sloppy.

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by Whateverman View Post

    The article is about terrorism, not violence.
    Their definition:

    This analysis focuses on terrorism: the deliberate use—or threat—of violence by non-state actors in order to achieve political goals and create a broad psychological impact.4 Violence—and the threat of violence—are important components of terrorism.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Whateverman View Post

    The article is about terrorism, not violence.
    Firebombing an ICE facility is terrorism. Trying to burn down a federal courthouse is terrorism.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whateverman
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post

    They claim zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020. And you believe that?
    The article is about terrorism, not violence.

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

    The statistics are so extreme right yes the proportion of extreme right terrorism is overwhelmingly dominant.
    The claim that there has been no leftwing violence in 2020 discredits their whole so-called analysis in my eyes. It's so absurd I can't even believe they actually call themselves researchers. I just wanted to be clear if you actually believed that or not, and I guess you do. So all I can do is say, carry on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
    https://www.startribune.com/charges-.../?refresh=true


    In the wake of protests following the May 25 killing of George Floyd, a member of the “Boogaloo Bois” opened fire on Minneapolis Police Third Precinct with an AK-47-style gun and screamed “Justice for Floyd” as he ran away, according to a federal complaint made public Friday.

    A sworn affidavit by the FBI underlying the complaint reveals new details about a far-right anti-government group’s coordinated role in the violence that roiled through civil unrest over Floyd’s death while in police custody.

    Ivan Harrison Hunter, a 26-year-old from Boerne, Texas, is charged with one count of interstate travel to incite a riot for his alleged role in ramping up violence during the protests in Minneapolis on May 27 and 28. According to charges, Hunter, wearing a skull mask and tactical gear, shot 13 rounds at the south Minneapolis police headquarters while people were inside. He also looted and helped set the building ablaze, according to the complaint, which was filed Monday under seal.

    Two hours after the police precinct was set on fire, Hunter texted with another Boogaloo member in California, a man named Steven Carrillo.

    “Go for police buildings,” Hunter told Carrillo, according to charging documents.

    “I did better lol,” he replied. A few hours earlier, Carrillo had killed a Federal Protective Services Officer in Oakland, Calif., according to criminal charges filed against him in California.


    So, not BLM. I doubt the this is the only incident where white nationalists were the catalyst for the "riots" we have heard so much about. Obviously it wasn't them in all cases, but this police station incident was widely held up by conservatives as somehow proving that BLM was violent.
    Quite a few Boogaloo boys have been allying with BLM, so......

    I see you didn't provide any evidence of this 'white nationalist' stuff you claimed without evidence in the thread title.

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post

    They claim zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020. And you believe that?
    The statistics are so extreme right yes the proportion of extreme right terrorism is overwhelmingly dominant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whateverman
    replied
    Related but not precisely the same thing:

    White supremacists behind majority of US domestic terror attacks in 2020

    Data stands in stark contrast to claims by Donald Trump, who has argued that leftwing violence is a major threat

    4,902White supremacists and other rightwing extremists have been responsible for 67% of domestic terror attacks and plots so far this year, with at least half of that violence targeting protesters, according to a new analysis from a centrist thinktank.

    The report found only a single deadly “far-left” attack in 2020, the shooting of Aaron Danielson, a rightwing activist, by a self-described “anti-fascist” during a protest in Portland this August. Experts on extremism said this was the first killing linked to an anti-fascist in the United States in 25 years.

    Violent rightwing actors were responsible for 41 politically motivated attacks and plots this year, while “far-left” actors were responsible for 12, according to analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who have assembled a database of domestic terror attacks going back to 1994.

    The new data stands in stark contrast to claims by Donald Trump and justice department officials, who have responded to massive protests against police violence and racism by arguing that leftwing violence is a major threat, and that anti-fascist, or “antifa”, activists should be designated as a domestic terror group.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ic-terror-2020

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

    Historically before BLM there were more acts of violence by Extreme Right and White Supremacist movements, and it is still true today. As the Extreme right violence increases in recent years there is actually a proportional decrease in extreme left violence, and increase in religious motivated violence.

    Source: https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states



    The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States

    THE ISSUE

    The United States faces a growing terrorism problem that will likely worsen over the next year. Based on a CSIS data set of terrorist incidents, the most significant threat likely comes from white supremacists, though anarchists and religious extremists inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda could present a potential threat as well. Over the rest of 2020, the terrorist threat in the United States will likely rise based on several factors, including the November 2020 presidential election.



    On June 3, 2020, federal authorities arrested three individuals allegedly associated with the “boogaloo” movement, a loosely-organized group of extremists preparing for a civil war, for conspiring to cause violence in Las Vegas and possessing an improvised incendiary device.1 Less than a week later, law enforcement officials near Richmond, VA, arrested Harry H. Rogers, a member of the Ku Klux Klan, for driving a vehicle into peaceful protesters. Around the same time, members of a Brooklyn anarchist group urged its supporters to conduct “rebellion” against the government.2 Extremists from all sides flooded social media with disinformation, conspiracy theories, and incitements to violence in response to the protests following the death of George Floyd, swamping Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, and other platforms.3

    This CSIS brief examines the state of terrorism in the United States. It asks two sets of questions. First, what are the most significant types of terrorism in the United States, and how has the terrorism threat in the U.S. homeland evolved over time? Second, what are the implications for terrorism over the next year? To answer these questions, this analysis compiles and analyzes an original data set of 893 terrorist plots and attacks in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020.

    This analysis makes several arguments. First, far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Right-wing attacks and plots account for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994, and the total number of right-wing attacks and plots has grown significantly during the past six years. Right-wing extremists perpetrated two thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90 percent between January 1 and May 8, 2020. Second, terrorism in the United States will likely increase over the next year in response to several factors. One of the most concerning is the 2020 U.S. presidential election, before and after which extremists may resort to violence, depending on the outcome of the election. Far-right and far-left networks have used violence against each other at protests, raising the possibility of escalating violence during the election period.

    The rest of this brief is divided into the following sections. The first defines terrorism and its main types. The second section analyzes terrorism trends in the United States since 1994. The third examines far-right, far-left, and religious networks. The fourth section highlights the terrorism threat over the next year.

    DEFINITIONS

    This analysis focuses on terrorism: the deliberate use—or threat—of violence by non-state actors in order to achieve political goals and create a broad psychological impact.4 Violence—and the threat of violence—are important components of terrorism. Overall, this analysis divides terrorism into four broad categories: right-wing, left-wing, religious, and ethnonationalist.5 To be clear, terms like right-wing and left-wing terrorism do not—in any way—correspond to mainstream political parties in the United States, such as the Republican and Democratic parties, which eschew terrorism. Instead, terrorism is orchestrated by a small minority of extremists.

    First, right-wing terrorism refers to the use or threat of violence by sub-national or non-state entities whose goals may include racial or ethnic supremacy; opposition to government authority; anger at women, including from the incel (“involuntary celibate”) movement; and outrage against certain policies, such as abortion.6 This analysis uses the term “right-wing terrorism” rather than “racially- and ethnically-motivated violent extremism,” or REMVE, which is used by some in the U.S. government.7 Second, left-wing terrorism involves the use or threat of violence by sub-national or non-state entities that oppose capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism; pursue environmental or animal rights issues; espouse pro-communist or pro-socialist beliefs; or support a decentralized social and political system such as anarchism. Third, religious terrorism includes violence in support of a faith-based belief system, such as Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and Hinduism, among many others. As highlighted in the next section, the primary threat from religious terrorists comes from Salafi-jihadists inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Fourth, ethnonationalist terrorism refers to violence in support of ethnic or nationalist goals—often struggles of self-determination and separatism along ethnic or nationalist lines.

    In examining terrorism, this analysis does not specifically address several related phenomena. For example, it does not focus on hate crimes. There is overlap between terrorism and hate crimes, since some hate crimes include the use or threat of violence.8 But hate crimes can also include non-violent incidents such as graffiti and verbal abuse. Hate crimes are obviously concerning and a threat to society, but this analysis concentrates only on terrorism and the use—or
    threat of violence to achieve political objectives.

    related to the government and police have also been consistent right-wing targets throughout the period, particularly for attacks by militia and sovereign citizen groups.

    © Copyright Original Source



    The graph at the end of the article is very revealing and the data is not even close.
    They claim zero violence by leftwing groups in 2020. And you believe that?

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 08:13 PM
6 responses
29 views
0 likes
Last Post Starlight  
Started by Christianbookworm, Yesterday, 05:43 PM
13 responses
55 views
0 likes
Last Post Ronson
by Ronson
 
Started by Bill the Cat, Yesterday, 03:25 PM
1 response
26 views
0 likes
Last Post mossrose  
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 02:16 PM
6 responses
46 views
1 like
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by Cow Poke, 03-04-2021, 04:27 PM
8 responses
78 views
0 likes
Last Post Sparko
by Sparko
 
Working...
X