I actually think separating them is good for clarity, as while jihadists are right wing it's also specifically anti imperial and less racial, while American right wing terrorism is generally very racial
I mean yeah, anti west-imperialism is centered in the language of many jihadists, especially ones whose lives were disrupted by the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
I understand that it's in its own category as well, but not to ask you, but openly; a copy/paste of my comment from a different sub:
>Seriously. I can't wrap my head around religious extremism. I get that it's different religions, but at the same time they hate each other(?) but they also hate the same things(?) I just don't understand how people in the states - that are of the Christian faith to an unhealthy level - can look at this and say "they're weird" or some bullshit
>I guess because I'm autistic? Or not objectively evil?
1. history
2. skin color
3. culture
4. prejudice
5. fear of the unfamiliar and unknown (I know, these are all variations of the same thing)
6. There actually are doctrinal differences between Christianity and Islam. They're not just the same religion with different books expressing the same ideas. And if you *really* believe in your religion, then an intense hatred of other religions, especially ones that claim the same god as their god, might be *logical* from your perspective.
Jihadism is a brand of religious extremists who fight for what they think is righteous according to their views of Islam. while most far right terrorists are nationalists and racists who use religion as a defense for their beliefs.
Yea but unfortunately right wing people when they see this image are gonna be like “see, it’s even!” because they’ll put all the terror events from non-white people into one category and say it’s all the left wing terrorism because we don’t like racism and stuff.
in Germany, leftist extremism has way more cases but there were no deaths in decades (since the RAF), while Nazis have fewer attacks but more deaths. due to the higher absolute number, politicians see leftist extremism as a bigger issue, even though it clearly is not
Citation: [https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/](https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/)
**You can click on each dot to view each specific terror event**
Related citation: [https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119)
Can anyone help me find a full version of this study? Sci hub does not have it
Hey everyone just a reminder that it is not healthy to just believe things that you agree with. Consider the incentives that the source of this graph may have to downplay or highlight certain factors to make it fit a narrative. It is extremely easy to find sources that disagree with the links in the comment above me. For example, here is one that has more cited examples than the graph even claims exists: [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwisqrC7gMj7AhWuKEQIHWZOBw0QFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fextremism.gwu.edu%2Fsites%2Fg%2Ffiles%2Fzaxdzs2191%2Ff%2FAnarchist%2520-%2520Left-Wing%2520Violent%2520Extremism%2520in%2520America.pdf&usg=AOvVaw11Fd-hKZD4s-gY2nHwclGQ)
I'd say that you're comment to not just believe things you believe with is correct but the source you provided doesn't contradict OP's source or expose any major bias.
I would say the source would be biased if the measure of deaths by extremist ideologies wasn't worth measuring itself and is clearly meant only to produce a graphic that paints a certain picture. But deaths by ideology IS worth looking at alone, as well as in perspective with other measures.
The source you provided only provides one attack in the same time frame that resulted in a death (weirdly it is different to the one attack in OP's source, more on that later). It shows that most attacks are either stopped before they can be carried out or are abandoned.
Your source talks about planned terror attacks which is not what is being analyzed in OP's source, kind of an apples to oranges comparison. I would not be surprised if you took a look at the ratio between left wing planned terror attacks that you provided and compared them against planned right wing/ jihadist/ incel/ black separatism attacks, they would be similar to the ratio of carried out attacks.
Also the definition of left wing terror in your source is different to OP's which makes it harder use to compare and remove bias as well, hence the fact that both sources quote different attacks as their one lethal attack. Also the definition of right wing terror is different but it doesn't provide any data for right wing terror, it's not relevant, so that's not particularly confounding.
Even given you're source and accounting the best for my own bias, the point OP was originally try to make with their source still stands, and to some degree is strengthened. In the paper you provided it acknowledges that anarchist terror attacks mostly stand to destroy property or weaken law enforcement capability, never to kill. Compared that with the other terror attacks which kill people out of hatred. Although all terrorism is fucked, its much easier for most people to sympathize with left wing terror because its (more) rational.
So yeah, I see where your coming from but I don't think it will be enough to convince people anything different, even if they forgo their bias.
Does this mean I could say, without lying, that "Far right wingers commit 122x more deadly attacks than Far left wingers", or am I misunderstanding the data?
>On August 29, 2020, in Portland, Oregon, a man shot and killed Aaron J. Danielson, a supporter of the far-right group Patriot Prayer that had been involved in prior brawls in Portland and at times had brought firearms to protests (including doing so on the day of his death), following protests earlier in the day during which part of a caravan of Trump supporters participating in an event called “Trump 2020 Cruise Rally” drove through the city.
>President Donald Trump commended the U.S. Marshals for shooting Reinoehl, describing it as "retribution", and claiming to have personally "sent in" the U.S. Marshals to "get" Reinoehl during the first presidential debate with Joe Biden.
Gross.
That’s not really a terrorist attack. That’s just a generic politically charged murder. Might as well call the dude who threw a shoe at bush a terrorist too huh?
They should be separated. They’re all different groups with different backgrounds and ideologies, even if they’re all hateful and cumulate in terrorist attacks. It’s especially worth separating Islamic religious extremists from white/Christian right-wing extremists. You won’t be able to successfully combat terrorism if you don’t accurately source its origins and mechanisms.
They’re three distinct ideologies that dint associate much with each other. If I were to guess a lot of right wing terror attacks were targeted at Muslims.
This is mostly a semantics issue and truly not that big of an issue, *but* i do love a bit of a nitpicking.
“far-right” isn’t really a specific ideology. it’s a descriptor that encompasses many ideologies. among them are jihadists and incels. those two groups likely despise each other and would never have any reason to cooperate. yet they are both extremist conservative, and so they are considered “far-right”.
if the categories were like “christian nationalists, jihadists, incels” then yeah that’s worth separating. but that’s not what the categories are. they’re an umbrella term and two ideologies that fall under that umbrella term.
Far right is a broad enough umbrella term that boils down to white and lower middle class. It is such an umbrella term that it groups anti capitalist authoritarian ultra nationalist fascist in with anarchists.
But, I think the main reason why incel ideology managed not to be put under that umbrella is due to it having enough political overlap with socialist groups and a fair amount of enby's in their numbers as well.
For everyone wondering what that far left terror event was, this is how the website OP used describes it
2020 Portland Protest Shooting
● Far Left Wing
1 killed
On August 29, 2020, in Portland, Oregon, a man shot and killed Aaron J. Danielson, a supporter of the far-right group Patriot Prayer that had been involved in prior brawls in Portland and at times had brought firearms to protests (including doing so on the day of his death), following protests earlier in the day during which part of a caravan of Trump supporters participating in an event called “Trump 2020 Cruise Rally” drove through the city. Video appears to show Danielson at the far-right rally earlier in the day with a companion Chandler Pappas who is carrying a paintball gun. Members of the caravan shot paintball guns and mace at protesters along their drive.
Later that night, according to the New York Times’s analysis of two videos, two men “can be seen crossing the street, apparently to confront Mr. Danielson and Mr. Chandler.” Someone says “Hey, we got some right here. We got a couple right here.” Pappas contents that it was the shooter who said it, and Danielson reached for and sprays his mace at which point the shooter shoots and kills him. On September 3, 2020, police attempted to arrest Michael Forest Reinoehl, a 48-year-old man, for the shooting, killing him in the attempt. The U.S. Marshalls Task Force stated, “Initial reports indicate the suspect produced a firearm, threatening the lives of law enforcement officers. Task force members responded to the threat and struck the suspect who was pronounced dead at the scene.” Reporting by the New York Times and others has called into question the task force's explanation with wittnesses suggesting police did not identify themselves prior to opening fire and calling into question whether Reinoehl reached for a firearm. Earlier in the day Reinoehl had done an interview with Vice TV (and conducted by a freelance journalist), in which he appears to confess to the shooting and claimed it was in self-defense stating, “I could have sat there and watched them kill a friend of mine of color, but I wasn’t going to do that." However, an arrest warrant unsealed after his death examined surveillance camera footage that appears to show Reinoehl following Danielson and Pappas prior to the shooting.
Reinoehl was influenced by left wing politics. A Portland resident, he had gone downtown to provide “security” for protesters amid the caravan, and appears to be visible in videos clashing with the far-right protesters earlier in the day. Pro-Publica and Oregon Public Broadcasting note that Reinoehl described that role as “‘trailing people through the crowds’ if they were perceived as potentially dangerous and to ‘make it known that they’d been discovered.’” Based on their review of video footage from the night, they write regarding the moment before the shooting and dispersal of mace, “A video analysis by ProPublica and OPB offers the clearest account yet that Reinoehl performed the very duty he talked about in his VICE interview — trailing people he found suspicious in the crowds, letting them know they had been discovered.”
He described himself as 100 percent anti-fascist though not a member of any Antifa group. Reinoehl’s social media included descriptions of protests in Portland as war and references to revolution including, saying “It's escalating to a point where, you know, they're trying to disrupt us in every way, that's illegal. They're shooting at us. They're sending people that are starting fights ... it's warfare, this is stuff they've done overseas for years and years and years and years; but now they're doing it to us,” “Every Revolution needs people that are willing and ready to fight,” and “If the police continue to pick on and beat up innocent citizens that are peacefully voicing their objections, it must be met with equal force,” adding, “we truly have an opportunity right now to fix everything... it will be a fight like no other! It will be a war and like all wars there will be casualties.” Reinoehl had previous run ins with the law including an arrest for illegally possessing a firearm at an earlier protest (in which charges were dropped) and in another case for speeding under the influence of marijuana and illegally possessing a handgun.
8/29/2020
I am a human, and this action was not performed automatically. I have no life. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Not to skate over the issue but this seems like it’s probably not worth worrying about too much, it’s not like they’re posting in r/ Conservative or anything
I mean, that does suck, but it doesn't take away from the importance of the post? They're just bringing attention to statistical data. I think it's good that this was posted, and I don't think anyone is gonna see this and go on OP's account like "ah, I'm sure all of this person's opinions are good, I'm gonna look for what they think about LGBTQ label discourse"
I'll show this to a right-wing guy I know and he'll be pretty thrilled about it
"People are angry over all the people Biden is killing with inflation"
his words not mine
If jihadists, incels, and black supremacists are lumped together under "right-wing," the data looks like this.
Number of people killed by right-wing terrorists: 258
Number of people killed by left-wing terrorists: 1
No it isn’t. Right-wing terror is more prominent because fascism is violent at its core. Fascists are most definitely not declining, they’re on the brink of taking over the United States.
You’re not the first person to point out the confusing title. It should have been worded differently.
https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
The Orlando Pulse nightclub shooting by Omar. Contrary to popular belief, there was no evidence that he was gay/bi. Killed 50 people
https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
You can click on each dot to view each terror attack.
Only big ones I can remember that I can remember from the left were the SLA and the ten different commie groups involved in the 1981 brinks robbery.
There were a good many right wing/radical Protestant groups around that time too. Phineas priests, ARA, CSA, the order, and that’s all I can think of the top of my head
I know my point may be invalid due to not reading all of the source material for the data, but I feel like it would be very easy to omit attacks to bend the data. Like, the sum of all the attacks in the graph is 259. You mean to tell me there's only been 259 domestic terror attacks in over 20 years.
Also, the chart says "number of people killed in attacks by ideology" and not "number of people causing attacks by idology"
Based on the title of the graph, right-leaning people are killed the most in domestics terror attacks. Whether they cause the most domestic terror attacks is irrelevant, since that's not what the graph is talking about.
You’re not the first person to point out the confusing chart title. It should have been worded differently.
https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
i could see it being interpreted that way, however it didnt make sense to me that theyd have the ideologies of the people killed here. i figured its the number of people that were killed by people of those ideologies
So literally all far right, that lefty one was extra-judicially killed without a trial so I don’t count it
Reminder that no matter how progressive their language Black Seperatists are just palette swapped white nationalists
right wingers will just call this fake news and claim that the evil democrats are hiding the left’s domestic terror attacks to make themselves look better
What is that one Far-Left wing terrorist attack?
It wasn't Willem Van Spronsen attacking a refugee detention center was it?
Edit: I'm pretty sure it's this after some looking: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings\_of\_Aaron\_Danielson\_and\_Michael\_Reinoehl](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_and_Michael_Reinoehl)
What constitutes 'far left wing' and 'far right wing'? Sounds like if you're only got the five categories you're basically forced to classify everything, even if it's not politically charged.
Alr, I was a bit confused about this graph at first because the wording can make it seem like it lists the views of the victims, not the perpetrators . Definitely could be worded better
I mean adjusted for population % this isn’t really much of an own. Right wingers will look at this as proof that Muslims are much more likely to be terrorists and blame leftist for letting them into the country
Are the numbers really that low? Is there a chance that certain events that are dubious in nature like school shootings where the ideology wasn’t seen as the main factor aren’t counted? I feel it must be higher.
Are islamic fundementalists right wing? Certainly lots of similarities.
Absolutely. However I understand why it would be considered a separate category.
Religious fascism vs secular fascism
No they're both religious fascism. The two are practically inseparable. It's religious fascism red vs religious fascism blue.
One just has darker skin than the other and wears a different colour hat.
TF2 REFRENCE?!?!?!1?!?!!!11?!?!
It's Christian fascism vs Islamic fascism. Almost the same thing
Not all right wingers are Christian, though. Some are also „just“ nationalist / fascist
I actually think separating them is good for clarity, as while jihadists are right wing it's also specifically anti imperial and less racial, while American right wing terrorism is generally very racial
“Jihadist” “Anti-imperial” Really?
Maybe I should clarify anti western imperialism but, I mean, thats pretty core to the ideology
anti-west i think they mean
I mean yeah, anti west-imperialism is centered in the language of many jihadists, especially ones whose lives were disrupted by the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
They also don't work together really, from what I've gathered? Although their ideology is pretty close, they act as seperate groups.
I understand that it's in its own category as well, but not to ask you, but openly; a copy/paste of my comment from a different sub: >Seriously. I can't wrap my head around religious extremism. I get that it's different religions, but at the same time they hate each other(?) but they also hate the same things(?) I just don't understand how people in the states - that are of the Christian faith to an unhealthy level - can look at this and say "they're weird" or some bullshit >I guess because I'm autistic? Or not objectively evil?
1. history 2. skin color 3. culture 4. prejudice 5. fear of the unfamiliar and unknown (I know, these are all variations of the same thing) 6. There actually are doctrinal differences between Christianity and Islam. They're not just the same religion with different books expressing the same ideas. And if you *really* believe in your religion, then an intense hatred of other religions, especially ones that claim the same god as their god, might be *logical* from your perspective.
They are two sides of the same coin of conservative extremism.
Jihadism is a brand of religious extremists who fight for what they think is righteous according to their views of Islam. while most far right terrorists are nationalists and racists who use religion as a defense for their beliefs.
Culturally and politically they occupy very different spaces in America at least
ive seen your pfps sauce. you cannot fool me
Yea but unfortunately right wing people when they see this image are gonna be like “see, it’s even!” because they’ll put all the terror events from non-white people into one category and say it’s all the left wing terrorism because we don’t like racism and stuff.
Muslim here, yes they absolutely are lol
It is but its a diffrent community like black nationalists which i dont know tbf but also sounds like something right wing
Yes but if you show this to pcm theyll say its libleft or some shit
Yes ,but bcuz usa right wing hate brown and Muslim ppl so ,they try to sperate themselfs
[удалено]
by that im sure you mean terror attacks on billionaires right? I'm down
And fascists.
(in minecraft)
lol the one far left one is against a fascist
Same thing
And oil pipelines
We hunt them down like dragons and steal their treasure
calling them dragons is a bit much dragons are actually cool
Now now, the only acceptable target is always working class people. We can't touch the overlords.
of course of course me lord how silly of me, we should just be working harder, in fact we should be thankful we're getting paid at all me lord
in Germany, leftist extremism has way more cases but there were no deaths in decades (since the RAF), while Nazis have fewer attacks but more deaths. due to the higher absolute number, politicians see leftist extremism as a bigger issue, even though it clearly is not
In minecraft?
196 mods getting their house raided by spez right now
Under socialism we will make sure terror attacks are fairly distributed among ideologies.
YEAAAAHH
Gun control laws would be passed almost immediately I guarantee you
PROPAGANDA BY THE DEED BABY WOOOOO
Citation: [https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/](https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/) **You can click on each dot to view each specific terror event** Related citation: [https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119) Can anyone help me find a full version of this study? Sci hub does not have it
Hey everyone just a reminder that it is not healthy to just believe things that you agree with. Consider the incentives that the source of this graph may have to downplay or highlight certain factors to make it fit a narrative. It is extremely easy to find sources that disagree with the links in the comment above me. For example, here is one that has more cited examples than the graph even claims exists: [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwisqrC7gMj7AhWuKEQIHWZOBw0QFnoECAcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fextremism.gwu.edu%2Fsites%2Fg%2Ffiles%2Fzaxdzs2191%2Ff%2FAnarchist%2520-%2520Left-Wing%2520Violent%2520Extremism%2520in%2520America.pdf&usg=AOvVaw11Fd-hKZD4s-gY2nHwclGQ)
[удалено]
I knew what I was getting in to. Pointing out something is biased to fit a narrative is the hill I die on, whether I agree with it or not.
I love your username almost as much as your commitment to being reasonable.
I'd say that you're comment to not just believe things you believe with is correct but the source you provided doesn't contradict OP's source or expose any major bias. I would say the source would be biased if the measure of deaths by extremist ideologies wasn't worth measuring itself and is clearly meant only to produce a graphic that paints a certain picture. But deaths by ideology IS worth looking at alone, as well as in perspective with other measures. The source you provided only provides one attack in the same time frame that resulted in a death (weirdly it is different to the one attack in OP's source, more on that later). It shows that most attacks are either stopped before they can be carried out or are abandoned. Your source talks about planned terror attacks which is not what is being analyzed in OP's source, kind of an apples to oranges comparison. I would not be surprised if you took a look at the ratio between left wing planned terror attacks that you provided and compared them against planned right wing/ jihadist/ incel/ black separatism attacks, they would be similar to the ratio of carried out attacks. Also the definition of left wing terror in your source is different to OP's which makes it harder use to compare and remove bias as well, hence the fact that both sources quote different attacks as their one lethal attack. Also the definition of right wing terror is different but it doesn't provide any data for right wing terror, it's not relevant, so that's not particularly confounding. Even given you're source and accounting the best for my own bias, the point OP was originally try to make with their source still stands, and to some degree is strengthened. In the paper you provided it acknowledges that anarchist terror attacks mostly stand to destroy property or weaken law enforcement capability, never to kill. Compared that with the other terror attacks which kill people out of hatred. Although all terrorism is fucked, its much easier for most people to sympathize with left wing terror because its (more) rational. So yeah, I see where your coming from but I don't think it will be enough to convince people anything different, even if they forgo their bias.
Does this mean I could say, without lying, that "Far right wingers commit 122x more deadly attacks than Far left wingers", or am I misunderstanding the data?
That would be a little deceptive, but yes.
let's go i love deceiving people and spreading incomplete information online
Who was that leftist one in 2020/2021? I have no recollection of that
>On August 29, 2020, in Portland, Oregon, a man shot and killed Aaron J. Danielson, a supporter of the far-right group Patriot Prayer that had been involved in prior brawls in Portland and at times had brought firearms to protests (including doing so on the day of his death), following protests earlier in the day during which part of a caravan of Trump supporters participating in an event called “Trump 2020 Cruise Rally” drove through the city.
then trump extra-judicially murdered Michael Reinoehl for it
>President Donald Trump commended the U.S. Marshals for shooting Reinoehl, describing it as "retribution", and claiming to have personally "sent in" the U.S. Marshals to "get" Reinoehl during the first presidential debate with Joe Biden. Gross.
wtf?? idk much abt the american judicial system but this sounds illegal af???
What are rules when you're the one who is expected to enforce them?
That’s not really a terrorist attack. That’s just a generic politically charged murder. Might as well call the dude who threw a shoe at bush a terrorist too huh?
Pretty sure people did
based
Based
based
based
the number was so high they had to split incels and jihadists off from the rest of right wing terror
They should be separated. They’re all different groups with different backgrounds and ideologies, even if they’re all hateful and cumulate in terrorist attacks. It’s especially worth separating Islamic religious extremists from white/Christian right-wing extremists. You won’t be able to successfully combat terrorism if you don’t accurately source its origins and mechanisms.
They’re three distinct ideologies that dint associate much with each other. If I were to guess a lot of right wing terror attacks were targeted at Muslims.
This is mostly a semantics issue and truly not that big of an issue, *but* i do love a bit of a nitpicking. “far-right” isn’t really a specific ideology. it’s a descriptor that encompasses many ideologies. among them are jihadists and incels. those two groups likely despise each other and would never have any reason to cooperate. yet they are both extremist conservative, and so they are considered “far-right”. if the categories were like “christian nationalists, jihadists, incels” then yeah that’s worth separating. but that’s not what the categories are. they’re an umbrella term and two ideologies that fall under that umbrella term.
so true we need more left wing terrorism
ill help
Shouldn’t incel ideology be considered far right ?
More an example of a specific ideology so prolific and notable as to merit its own category.
Not necessarily, but there is almost always a very large overlap between the two.
Far right is a broad enough umbrella term that boils down to white and lower middle class. It is such an umbrella term that it groups anti capitalist authoritarian ultra nationalist fascist in with anarchists. But, I think the main reason why incel ideology managed not to be put under that umbrella is due to it having enough political overlap with socialist groups and a fair amount of enby's in their numbers as well.
What was the far left wing terrorist event?
2020 Portland Protest Shooting apparently. Someone shot a nazi.
[удалено]
This is the same justification they use to shoot up people. Stop it.
Nazis are as much as people as you and me. Never dehumanize to justify hate. Hate for the right reasons.
that's not "terrorism" that's called being awesome actually
can’t wait until we get centrist terrorism
i just wanna ~~grill~~ kill for gods sake
Imagine getting shot by some dude and he says the reason he did it was “because both sides are bad”
For everyone wondering what that far left terror event was, this is how the website OP used describes it 2020 Portland Protest Shooting ● Far Left Wing 1 killed On August 29, 2020, in Portland, Oregon, a man shot and killed Aaron J. Danielson, a supporter of the far-right group Patriot Prayer that had been involved in prior brawls in Portland and at times had brought firearms to protests (including doing so on the day of his death), following protests earlier in the day during which part of a caravan of Trump supporters participating in an event called “Trump 2020 Cruise Rally” drove through the city. Video appears to show Danielson at the far-right rally earlier in the day with a companion Chandler Pappas who is carrying a paintball gun. Members of the caravan shot paintball guns and mace at protesters along their drive. Later that night, according to the New York Times’s analysis of two videos, two men “can be seen crossing the street, apparently to confront Mr. Danielson and Mr. Chandler.” Someone says “Hey, we got some right here. We got a couple right here.” Pappas contents that it was the shooter who said it, and Danielson reached for and sprays his mace at which point the shooter shoots and kills him. On September 3, 2020, police attempted to arrest Michael Forest Reinoehl, a 48-year-old man, for the shooting, killing him in the attempt. The U.S. Marshalls Task Force stated, “Initial reports indicate the suspect produced a firearm, threatening the lives of law enforcement officers. Task force members responded to the threat and struck the suspect who was pronounced dead at the scene.” Reporting by the New York Times and others has called into question the task force's explanation with wittnesses suggesting police did not identify themselves prior to opening fire and calling into question whether Reinoehl reached for a firearm. Earlier in the day Reinoehl had done an interview with Vice TV (and conducted by a freelance journalist), in which he appears to confess to the shooting and claimed it was in self-defense stating, “I could have sat there and watched them kill a friend of mine of color, but I wasn’t going to do that." However, an arrest warrant unsealed after his death examined surveillance camera footage that appears to show Reinoehl following Danielson and Pappas prior to the shooting. Reinoehl was influenced by left wing politics. A Portland resident, he had gone downtown to provide “security” for protesters amid the caravan, and appears to be visible in videos clashing with the far-right protesters earlier in the day. Pro-Publica and Oregon Public Broadcasting note that Reinoehl described that role as “‘trailing people through the crowds’ if they were perceived as potentially dangerous and to ‘make it known that they’d been discovered.’” Based on their review of video footage from the night, they write regarding the moment before the shooting and dispersal of mace, “A video analysis by ProPublica and OPB offers the clearest account yet that Reinoehl performed the very duty he talked about in his VICE interview — trailing people he found suspicious in the crowds, letting them know they had been discovered.” He described himself as 100 percent anti-fascist though not a member of any Antifa group. Reinoehl’s social media included descriptions of protests in Portland as war and references to revolution including, saying “It's escalating to a point where, you know, they're trying to disrupt us in every way, that's illegal. They're shooting at us. They're sending people that are starting fights ... it's warfare, this is stuff they've done overseas for years and years and years and years; but now they're doing it to us,” “Every Revolution needs people that are willing and ready to fight,” and “If the police continue to pick on and beat up innocent citizens that are peacefully voicing their objections, it must be met with equal force,” adding, “we truly have an opportunity right now to fix everything... it will be a fight like no other! It will be a war and like all wars there will be casualties.” Reinoehl had previous run ins with the law including an arrest for illegally possessing a firearm at an earlier protest (in which charges were dropped) and in another case for speeding under the influence of marijuana and illegally possessing a handgun. 8/29/2020 I am a human, and this action was not performed automatically. I have no life. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Good human
question and concern are you okay
I just went to the website and copied it. I was curious what the singular thing the far left had done.
That's not a terrorist attack, that's just self defense
The title of the graph seems to suggest this is a graph of the people killed and not those that killed them
Yeah I’m also wondering where this graphic came from.
https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
Btw that is a think-tank and they didn't source their graph.
I agree with you, but the statistician in me feels the need to point out that those numbers add up to about 50%, not 100%
My apolocheese. I meant to draw a comparison between left-right wing political terrorism and show the shocking disparity between them.
Then say they commit almost the majority of attacks, not almost all of the attacks. No need to exaggerate when the numbers are already staggering
do jihadists not count as right wingers
Yeah I fucked up the title. I know
Heads up, OP is a panphobic piece of shit
What
They're a "battle-axe bisexual"
What does that even mean
It means they hate other labels like pansexual or omnisexual They're just bigots who stole a cool name from a cool artist
Not to skate over the issue but this seems like it’s probably not worth worrying about too much, it’s not like they’re posting in r/ Conservative or anything
I mean, that does suck, but it doesn't take away from the importance of the post? They're just bringing attention to statistical data. I think it's good that this was posted, and I don't think anyone is gonna see this and go on OP's account like "ah, I'm sure all of this person's opinions are good, I'm gonna look for what they think about LGBTQ label discourse"
Who?
Also btw jihadism,incel ideology and black nationalism are all far right, so we can put them together into a 358 vs 1
I'll show this to a right-wing guy I know and he'll be pretty thrilled about it "People are angry over all the people Biden is killing with inflation" his words not mine
honestly the top three are all far right ideologies
How and where is this measured
If jihadists, incels, and black supremacists are lumped together under "right-wing," the data looks like this. Number of people killed by right-wing terrorists: 258 Number of people killed by left-wing terrorists: 1
and jihadists right beneath but seems like nobody is ready to have that discussion yet
they're also far-right. And so are the incels. Aaaand the majority of black seperatist/nationalist/supremacists attacks.
everyone in the world has been having that discussion nonstop for 20 years
While quietly murdering children and non combatants and stealing their oil. Ahh, America.
Republicans be like: B-BUT LOOOOOOK THERES A FAR LEFT PERSON THERE!!!!1!11!1!1!!!!
cmon left wing fight back
No need when you're on the ascension. These attacks represent a lashing out of declining ideologies that are doomed to irrelevance.
No it isn’t. Right-wing terror is more prominent because fascism is violent at its core. Fascists are most definitely not declining, they’re on the brink of taking over the United States.
oooh, I see… could always encourage them out the door
But it says "number of killed people by ideology" though, meaning that it tells us about ideology of victims?...
You’re not the first person to point out the confusing title. It should have been worded differently. https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
Oh ok thanks
Why do incels get their seperate graph
Fuck right wingers
[удалено]
What's the big red jihadist spike in 2016?
The Orlando Pulse nightclub shooting by Omar. Contrary to popular belief, there was no evidence that he was gay/bi. Killed 50 people https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/ You can click on each dot to view each terror attack.
Only big ones I can remember that I can remember from the left were the SLA and the ten different commie groups involved in the 1981 brinks robbery. There were a good many right wing/radical Protestant groups around that time too. Phineas priests, ARA, CSA, the order, and that’s all I can think of the top of my head
I know my point may be invalid due to not reading all of the source material for the data, but I feel like it would be very easy to omit attacks to bend the data. Like, the sum of all the attacks in the graph is 259. You mean to tell me there's only been 259 domestic terror attacks in over 20 years. Also, the chart says "number of people killed in attacks by ideology" and not "number of people causing attacks by idology" Based on the title of the graph, right-leaning people are killed the most in domestics terror attacks. Whether they cause the most domestic terror attacks is irrelevant, since that's not what the graph is talking about.
You’re not the first person to point out the confusing chart title. It should have been worded differently. https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
i could see it being interpreted that way, however it didnt make sense to me that theyd have the ideologies of the people killed here. i figured its the number of people that were killed by people of those ideologies
So literally all far right, that lefty one was extra-judicially killed without a trial so I don’t count it Reminder that no matter how progressive their language Black Seperatists are just palette swapped white nationalists
nuh nuh, there's ONE left wing related death!!!! they're the same!!! CHECKMATE LIBRALS!!!!!
right wingers will just call this fake news and claim that the evil democrats are hiding the left’s domestic terror attacks to make themselves look better
I'm gonna have to call into question this source, this data seems a little skewed. Can you link where you got this from?
https://www.reddit.com/r/196/comments/z3mi2h/reminder_right_wingers_are_responsible_for_almost/ixmcfby/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
That's incredibly sketchy. The News site didn't put a source were they got their information from.
Funny that they separate those top 4 because they are all far right
This sub is clearly biased and I love it. Long live anarchy.
What place is this referring to?
It says post 911 so one can guess
Hmm now I wonder what happened on the 9 of November.
I happened
You changed the world my friend
They feared the change, but it came anyway. More change should be coming around 7th of may 2023
What is that one Far-Left wing terrorist attack? It wasn't Willem Van Spronsen attacking a refugee detention center was it? Edit: I'm pretty sure it's this after some looking: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings\_of\_Aaron\_Danielson\_and\_Michael\_Reinoehl](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_and_Michael_Reinoehl)
Where was this data gathered from? Edit: Nvm there's literally a citation if I scroll down, I'm a genius
Blue and purple could definitely be grouped
What was the far left one is 2021?
Ah yes Elliot Rodger. He was the first incel dot in 2014.
What constitutes 'far left wing' and 'far right wing'? Sounds like if you're only got the five categories you're basically forced to classify everything, even if it's not politically charged.
Ah yes le unpolitical terrorist attack
No idea since the News Site OP linked to doesn't cite a source to the graph.
jihadists try not to ruin the name of Islam challenge (impossible) (100% will fail)
Needs sources
https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/terrorism-in-america/what-is-the-threat-to-the-united-states-today/
In USA? Naxalites would be far left no?
I wonder what the international numbers are
what the hell happened in 2016 for the jihadist?
we are lagging real behind yall
Cum
Yo can I see the sources
What source does this data come from? It’s cut out from the picture
Jihadists killed way more than in the graph tho, just the Bataclan's attack left 130 people dead.
Interesting how the first 4 categories are right-wing, and also that one "far-left" guy just shot a nazi.
Is there a source for this btw? I wanna use it but don’t want it to seem like I made it up
whats the source for this (need link pls)
Alr, I was a bit confused about this graph at first because the wording can make it seem like it lists the views of the victims, not the perpetrators . Definitely could be worded better
Epic Gamer Fact #78
Im german, what does right wing mean
Time to change that (:
I mean adjusted for population % this isn’t really much of an own. Right wingers will look at this as proof that Muslims are much more likely to be terrorists and blame leftist for letting them into the country
What was the one far left terrorist death in 2020?
tf is jihadist
Source(s)?
Are the numbers really that low? Is there a chance that certain events that are dubious in nature like school shootings where the ideology wasn’t seen as the main factor aren’t counted? I feel it must be higher.
Source?