Whilst lounging in bed this Sunday morning (I will not mention if I was joined by a quintet of sex-primed pantheresses, as I don't want to unwittingly elicit jealousy from the lady-less lads on the board), I gave a quick read of Left-Wing Terrorism and Political Violence in the United States: What the Data Tells Us.

As Mr. X notes, it was assembled by the Center for Strategic & International Studies.

I found it interesting and thorough.

Worth a look.

(10-25-2026 05:46 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 07:33 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 05:49 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Great analysis, Mr. X. From the appendix of your cited report:

Quote:The definition of terrorism used here excludes the series of attacks against Tesla vehicles and facilities.

[Also excluded] were three high-profile terrorist attacks in the United States in the first half of 2025 motivated by the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

[And also excluded were] political demonstrations against immigration and customs enforcement activity across the United States in 2025 also resulted in many violent encounters, namely between law enforcement and demonstrators.

You leftists are a complete joke. Just not a particularly funny one.

Of course you trash the source, a well respect source, because you can’t defend your ludicrous position that is based on feels and not data.

I didn’t attack the source. They attacked themselves. My guess, Mr. X., is that you are tanq.-lite - - incapable of admitting error. But I’ll at least give you a chance:

—> Are 20 instances of Tesla dealership fire-bombings examples of left-leaning terrorism? Your “well-respected source" says no. Do you agree?

—> Are multiple attacks on Jews an example of leftist terrorism or just an understandable reaction to to the current Israeli/Palestinian conflict? Your “well-respected source” says it’s the latter. Do you agree?

—> Are the countless attacks on ICE officers and facilities an example of leftist terrorism, or simply people justifiably acting out to government provocation? Your “well-respected source” says the latter.

You say I am projecting. Yet I am perfectly willing to acknowledge disgraceful behavior on the right, such as the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Despite the embedded government provocateurs, it was a shameful display - - including not least by our president at the time. Yet it was very much an exception for conservatives. Violence by progressives has become the go-to tactic.

You ought to be ashamed, Mr. X. But as a tanq.-like ideological puppet, I know you are not. Faced with facts you will do one of two things: either deny the obvious or disappear.

Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

(10-25-2026 09:43 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:43 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

(10-25-2026 09:48 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:43 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

Maybe not the DNC itself, but the FBI? Yes, as was proven.

(10-25-2026 09:50 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:48 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:43 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

Maybe not the DNC itself, but the FBI? Yes, as was proven.

Lot of disagreement regarding the FBI involvement.

As a political independent, it seems to me that Jan. 6 involved primarily pro-Trump supporters who were upset and stormed the capitol. Were there some Antifa? Probably. But ... no need to complicate it.

And I would say the same thing if the situation were reversed and BLM/Antifa had stormed the building to keep a Democratic president in power.

It's become too easy for both the left and right to look for conspiracies so as to fit their respective political narratives — instead of simply seeing what is logical.

(10-25-2026 10:03 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:50 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:48 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:43 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  I think you mean "conflate" - - and you are right, it was unfair of me to do so.

Unfair to the to Jan. 6 protesters, that is.

Unlike BLM, which resulted in BILLIONS of damages to American cities, and several dozen directly involved deaths - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe...ial_unrest - - the inexcusable Jan. 6 riot resulted only in the direct death of a single protester (by a trigger-happy, and unaccountable Capitol police officer), and convictions and actual jail time for virtually all of those involved (excepting the embedded federal provocateurs).

There is a difference. Political violence is the exception on the right. It is standard operating procedure on the left.

Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

Maybe not the DNC itself, but the FBI? Yes, as was proven.

Lot of disagreement regarding the FBI involvement.

As a political independent, Jan. 6 was primarily pro-Trump supporters who were upset and stormed the capitol. No need to complicate it.

And I would say the same thing if the situation were reversed and BLM/Antifa stormed the building.

It's become too easy for both the left and right to look for conspiracies so as to fit their respective political narratives.

I'll just agree to disagree with you on this one, Bill. I'm just saying that the accepted narrative and therefore the prevailing one in the media has always been fishy to me, and not only that, but there's been footage of Nancy Pelosi admitting Trump actually suggested the National Guard be deployed around the Capitol building in case something like this were to happen to protect the building and the people inside it. But she's a typical Democrat. She insists the video is fake even though it's been authenticated.

As for why I think the FBI would resort to a cout de tat of sorts, look at the Hunter Biden Laptop fiasco. Fifty FBI senior officials publicly signed a letter saying Hunter's laptop was fake when two of those fifty were just arrested over pushing the false narrative. They did this to influence the election. If they had just told the truth about it (saying it was real, as we later found out), enough people who voted for Biden would've voted for Trump instead. And don't get me started on the Russia collusion hoax. I need to eat breakfast. lol

(10-25-2026 10:12 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 10:03 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:50 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:48 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

Maybe not the DNC itself, but the FBI? Yes, as was proven.

Lot of disagreement regarding the FBI involvement.

As a political independent, Jan. 6 was primarily pro-Trump supporters who were upset and stormed the capitol. No need to complicate it.

And I would say the same thing if the situation were reversed and BLM/Antifa stormed the building.

It's become too easy for both the left and right to look for conspiracies so as to fit their respective political narratives.

I'll just agree to disagree with you on this one, Bill. I'm just saying that the accepted narrative and therefore the prevailing one in the media has always been fishy to me, and not only that, but there's been footage of Nancy Pelosi admitting Trump actually suggested the National Guard be deployed around the Capitol building in case something like this were to happen to protect the building and the people inside it. But she's a typical Democrat. She insists the video is fake even though it's been authenticated.

As for why I think the FBI would resort to a cout de tat of sorts, look at the Hunter Biden Laptop fiasco. Fifty FBI senior officials publicly signed a letter saying Hunter's laptop was fake when two of those fifty were just arrested over pushing the false narrative. They did this to influence the election. If they had just told the truth about it (saying it was real, as we later found out), enough people who voted for Biden would've voted for Trump instead. And don't get me started on the Russia collusion hoax. I need to eat breakfast. lol

I can see how you or others who lean right would take this approach, G-Coog.

All good.

I trust you enjoyed your breakfast.

(10-24-2026 10:37 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Bill, we're tired of you posting 'both sides do it.

Bill loves his logic fallacy of false equivalency. Confucious say, "Man who always sits on fence eventually gets board up his ass!" The right will never harm the middle. The left sees them as an obstacle to their goal of polarization and conflict. Therein resides the fallacy. Both sides may do the same things from time to time, but only one side is intentionally seeking conflict. Their goal is revolution. They'll kill the middle or the right to get it. Example has been given in this thread, Charlie Kirk and the continued assassination attempts on Trump, and most horrifically the trans attacks on innocent school children. Sadly, their tactic will eventually provoke an equitable response and then they will have their revolution, and they will see the bloodshed as necessary while the right will see it as regrettable. In the end it is always the innocent who pay the price of the right's tolerance of the left's crimes. One day perhaps we'll learn that when they make a threat preemptive action is justified. Then maybe innocent children or people will not bear the impact of weak-minded fools seeking a target which can't fight back!

(10-25-2026 06:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 10:37 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Bill, we're tired of you posting 'both sides do it.

Bill loves his logic fallacy of false equivalency. Confucious say, "Man who always sits on fence eventually gets board up his ass!" The right will never harm the middle. The left sees them as an obstacle to their goal of polarization and conflict. Therein resides the fallacy. Both sides may do the same things from time to time, but only one side is intentionally seeking conflict. Their goal is revolution. They'll kill the middle or the right to get it. Example has been given in this thread, Charlie Kirk and the continued assassination attempts on Trump, and most horrifically the trans attacks on innocent school children. Sadly, their tactic will eventually provoke an equitable response and then they will have their revolution, and they will see the bloodshed as necessary while the right will see it as regrettable. In the end it is always the innocent who pay the price of the right's tolerance of the left's crimes. One day perhaps we'll learn that when they make a threat preemptive action is justified. Then maybe innocent children or people will not bear the impact of weak-minded fools seeking a target which can't fight back!

I believe the killing of Charlie Kirk was a hate crime, JR.

Oddly, some on this board don't — because they don't believe there is such a thing as a "hate crime."

(10-25-2026 06:19 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 06:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 10:37 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Bill, we're tired of you posting 'both sides do it.

Bill loves his logic fallacy of false equivalency. Confucious say, "Man who always sits on fence eventually gets board up his ass!" The right will never harm the middle. The left sees them as an obstacle to their goal of polarization and conflict. Therein resides the fallacy. Both sides may do the same things from time to time, but only one side is intentionally seeking conflict. Their goal is revolution. They'll kill the middle or the right to get it. Example has been given in this thread, Charlie Kirk and the continued assassination attempts on Trump, and most horrifically the trans attacks on innocent school children. Sadly, their tactic will eventually provoke an equitable response and then they will have their revolution, and they will see the bloodshed as necessary while the right will see it as regrettable. In the end it is always the innocent who pay the price of the right's tolerance of the left's crimes. One day perhaps we'll learn that when they make a threat preemptive action is justified. Then maybe innocent children or people will not bear the impact of weak-minded fools seeking a target which can't fight back!

I believe the killing of Charlie Kirk was a hate crime, JR.

Oddly, some on this board don't — because they don't believe there is such a thing as a "hate crime."

Bill, until the media recoils in horror at the killing of innocent children from the attack of deranged and gender conflicted young people, recoils in horror at the assassination of anyone, but condemns any response which takes a hostile action we will continue codling criminals. Free societies are only free because of the enforcement of laws. Any politician seeking to circumvent the enforcement of laws is sowing the seeds of sedition and it is again the innocent who will pay for their sins.

Calling Charlie Kirk's murder a hate crime is meaningless unless all such crimes get the same label and hopefully a stronger response than Kirk's murder! There is no middle ground on atrocities and crimes, ever! People who encourage violence are every bit as guilty as the idiots who carry it out. And that needs to be despised and aggressively dealt with by both sides of the political aisle if we are to return to being the nation I grew up in. Freedom of speech ends when its message urges criminal action. The media has wandered well away from its ethical standards.

(10-25-2026 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 06:19 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 06:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 10:37 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Bill, we're tired of you posting 'both sides do it.

Bill loves his logic fallacy of false equivalency. Confucious say, "Man who always sits on fence eventually gets board up his ass!" The right will never harm the middle. The left sees them as an obstacle to their goal of polarization and conflict. Therein resides the fallacy. Both sides may do the same things from time to time, but only one side is intentionally seeking conflict. Their goal is revolution. They'll kill the middle or the right to get it. Example has been given in this thread, Charlie Kirk and the continued assassination attempts on Trump, and most horrifically the trans attacks on innocent school children. Sadly, their tactic will eventually provoke an equitable response and then they will have their revolution, and they will see the bloodshed as necessary while the right will see it as regrettable. In the end it is always the innocent who pay the price of the right's tolerance of the left's crimes. One day perhaps we'll learn that when they make a threat preemptive action is justified. Then maybe innocent children or people will not bear the impact of weak-minded fools seeking a target which can't fight back!

I believe the killing of Charlie Kirk was a hate crime, JR.

Oddly, some on this board don't — because they don't believe there is such a thing as a "hate crime."

Bill, until the media recoils in horror at the killing of innocent children from the attack of deranged and gender conflicted young people, recoils in horror at the assassination of anyone, but condemns any response which takes a hostile action we will continue codling criminals. Free societies are only free because of the enforcement of laws. Any politician seeking to circumvent the enforcement of laws is sowing the seeds of sedition and it is again the innocent who will pay for their sins.

Calling Charlie Kirk's murder a hate crime is meaningless unless all such crimes get the same label and hopefully a stronger response than Kirk's murder! There is no middle ground on atrocities and crimes, ever! People who encourage violence are every bit as guilty as the idiots who carry it out. And that needs to be despised and aggressively dealt with by both sides of the political isle if we are to return to being the nation I grew up in. Freedom of speech ends when its message urgers criminal action. The media has wandered well away from its ethical standards.

I agree with all this, JR.

Until the left acknowledges that to kill a person for no other reason than because that person is white, and/or an evangelical Protestant Christian and/or a conservative is, in fact, a hate crime ... our society has problems.

The killing of Charlie Kirk, in my sincere opinion, was a hate crime.

Similarly, the killing of anybody just because the person is "different" is a hate crime.

Left, right, center ... I don't care. Killing somebody because you don't like "those people" ... that's a hate crime.

Smartest thing you’ve said all day.

(10-25-2026 06:57 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Smartest thing you’ve said all day.

Thanks, my good man.

(And thanks for putting up with me. Your patience is impressive.)

If you really annoyed me I’d have you on ignore.

btw

(10-25-2026 10:12 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 10:03 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:50 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:48 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 09:46 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  Yep. (And I was gonna say that J6 was a false flag operation anyway. You kinda already said it for me.)

I respect you, G-Coog, but do you really believe the Dems orchestrated the coordination of hundreds of Antifa members attacking the nation's capitol?

Maybe not the DNC itself, but the FBI? Yes, as was proven.

Lot of disagreement regarding the FBI involvement.

As a political independent, Jan. 6 was primarily pro-Trump supporters who were upset and stormed the capitol. No need to complicate it.

And I would say the same thing if the situation were reversed and BLM/Antifa stormed the building.

It's become too easy for both the left and right to look for conspiracies so as to fit their respective political narratives.

I'll just agree to disagree with you on this one, Bill. I'm just saying that the accepted narrative and therefore the prevailing one in the media has always been fishy to me, and not only that, but there's been footage of Nancy Pelosi admitting Trump actually suggested the National Guard be deployed around the Capitol building in case something like this were to happen to protect the building and the people inside it. But she's a typical Democrat. She insists the video is fake even though it's been authenticated.

As for why I think the FBI would resort to a cout de tat of sorts, look at the Hunter Biden Laptop fiasco. Fifty FBI senior officials publicly signed a letter saying Hunter's laptop was fake when two of those fifty were just arrested over pushing the false narrative. They did this to influence the election. If they had just told the truth about it (saying it was real, as we later found out), enough people who voted for Biden would've voted for Trump instead. And don't get me started on the Russia collusion hoax. I need to eat breakfast. lol

Look at the Gov. Whitmer kidnapping! That was a bunch of big mouthed do nothing extremists until the FBI planned a kidnapping of the governor to entrap them.

I don't know how involved the FBI was in the 1/6 riots, but we do know there were many, many FBI agents there who did nothing to try to discourage the riot.

Who is Ray Epps?

(10-25-2026 09:15 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(10-25-2026 05:46 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 07:33 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(10-24-2026 05:49 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Great analysis, Mr. X. From the appendix of your cited report:

Quote:The definition of terrorism used here excludes the series of attacks against Tesla vehicles and facilities.

[Also excluded] were three high-profile terrorist attacks in the United States in the first half of 2025 motivated by the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

[And also excluded were] political demonstrations against immigration and customs enforcement activity across the United States in 2025 also resulted in many violent encounters, namely between law enforcement and demonstrators.

You leftists are a complete joke. Just not a particularly funny one.

Of course you trash the source, a well respect source, because you can’t defend your ludicrous position that is based on feels and not data.

I didn’t attack the source. They attacked themselves. My guess, Mr. X., is that you are tanq.-lite - - incapable of admitting error. But I’ll at least give you a chance:

—> Are 20 instances of Tesla dealership fire-bombings examples of left-leaning terrorism? Your “well-respected source" says no. Do you agree?

—> Are multiple attacks on Jews an example of leftist terrorism or just an understandable reaction to to the current Israeli/Palestinian conflict? Your “well-respected source” says it’s the latter. Do you agree?

—> Are the countless attacks on ICE officers and facilities an example of leftist terrorism, or simply people justifiably acting out to government provocation? Your “well-respected source” says the latter.

You say I am projecting. Yet I am perfectly willing to acknowledge disgraceful behavior on the right, such as the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Despite the embedded government provocateurs, it was a shameful display - - including not least by our president at the time. Yet it was very much an exception for conservatives. Violence by progressives has become the go-to tactic.

You ought to be ashamed, Mr. X. But as a tanq.-like ideological puppet, I know you are not. Faced with facts you will do one of two things: either deny the obvious or disappear.

Fact is you tried to inflate BLM while minimizing J6. Both were violent riots. Fact. You can talk about what led up to each one or what happened after them but the events themselves were riots.

The original argument that ONLY Dems and ALL Dems are violent is just ludicrous. Only a small percentage of the population account for the majority of violent crime. One study showing 1% responsible for 63% of violent crimes. Also men are responsible for 75% of violent crime. Men lean republican and aren’t you guys always talking about how the soy bois of the left couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag? It does happen on both sides. Right now the left is committing more awful acts but let’s not forget the past either.

The us vs them talk is tired. Actually be the difference.

Walk it back, yeah, walking it back, tap dancing like Sammy Davis Jr. yeah. In this century alone there have been ten times more violent events committed against innocent people by leftist pigs than by anyone on the right. And it's not even close. I don't need a reference book to inform me of it either. All I need is my memory and new stories about the hundreds and hundreds of events in which antifa and BLM were showing up and acting destructive and violent. We see it damn near every single day now at detention facilities and at places ICE is trying to enforce our immigration laws.

Horseassman is nothing more than a wannabe communist.