Think you can hide in your handicap shower when the Proud Boys come for you?
they come, they die
Think you can hide in your handicap shower when the Proud Boys come for you?
On 6 October Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of homeland security, released his department’s annual assessment of violent threats to the nation. Analysts didn’t have to dig deep into the assessment to discover its alarming content.
In a foreword, Wolf wrote that he was “particularly concerned about white supremacist violent extremists who have been exceptionally lethal in their abhorrent, targeted attacks in recent years. [They] seek to force ideological change in the United States through violence, death, and destruction.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...cist-domestic-terror-threat-looms-large-in-us
I rely on the agencies who have the information and criteria to determine who are terrorists.
Murder.
So, nothing else counts?
Murder is the worst offense. Kidnapping is right under it.
Homeland Security is not anecdotal. Get lost, bozo.
So, do any of these groups practice kidnapping?
What I'm driving at is that counting just murder as the criteria is nothing short of idiotic. Violent crimes of all sorts count.
We can also assign a dollar value to those crimes
Some radical Right nutjob with a rifle that kills say five people in a single, stand alone incident that lasts maybe an hour or two at most is very inexpensive by comparison. That may seem callous, but that's how the world works.
That's why I say the using the measure of just a body count is idiotic. It ignores the very real, and very expensive, other violence that goes on and mostly from the radical Left.
Gov. Whitmer.
Destruction of properties is different from hurting people physically.
There is no dollar value on human lives.
An irrelevant appeal to emotion. Yes, I would. I would also tell it to all those people that get beaten by Antifa.Yeah that's pretty callous. Would you be willing to tell the Jew victims that?
In other words, let's ignore the threat.
Antifa are white supremacist?
A single case, hardly a compelling argument.
No, it's not. Both have an economic value that can be assigned to them. In both cases, it is generally accepted that use of force, including deadly force, can be used to stop someone from doing either. That's right. You can shoot somebody trying to commit say, arson and you can shoot somebody who's beating the snot out of another person.
If that's true how many "starving kids in Africa or Central America, or wherever are you giving up $25 a month to support? How would life insurance work if that were true? We put a dollar value on human life all the time.
An irrelevant appeal to emotion. Yes, I would. I would also tell it to all those people that get beaten by Antifa.
Wrong. To ignore the threat is to say that only murder / the body count is relevant. That ignores all the lessor violence and destruction going on. It means that a mass of very violent and destructive mass of Leftists are ignored in favor of concentrating on the occasional but deadly Rightist who is better at killing people in an individual act.
Now that's a perfect whataboutism!
I'm just curious to know which bombings and mass shootings you are referring to. I get the reference to running a person over with a car, but, not the other crimes.
Synagogue shootings.
Anymore, I just assume anti-semitic stuff is from the left.![]()