An FYI. Terror from the Right

[stamperben]

Terror from the Right
A synopsis of radical-right terrorist plots, conspiracies and racist rampages since the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. It includes a roster of murdered law enforcement officials.

At 9:02 a.m. on April 19, 1995, a 7,000-pound truck bomb, constructed of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and nitromethane racing fuel and packed into 13 plastic barrels, ripped through the heart of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

The explosion wrecked much of downtown Oklahoma City and killed 168 people, including 19 children in a day-care center. Another 500 were injured. Although many Americans initially suspected an attack by Middle Eastern radicals, it quickly became clear that the mass murder had actually been carried out by domestic, right-wing terrorists.

The slaughter engineered by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, men steeped in the conspiracy theories and white-hot fury of the American radical right, marked the opening shot in a new kind of domestic political extremism — a revolutionary ideology whose practitioners do not hesitate to carry out attacks directed at entirely innocent victims, people selected essentially at random to make a political point. After Oklahoma, it was no longer sufficient for many American right-wing terrorists to strike at a target of political significance — instead, they reached for higher and higher body counts, reasoning that they had to eclipse McVeigh's attack to win attention.

What follows is a detailed listing of major terrorist plots and racist rampages that have emerged from the American radical right in the years since Oklahoma City. These have included plans to bomb government buildings, banks, refineries, utilities, clinics, synagogues, mosques, memorials and bridges; to assassinate police officers, judges, politicians, civil rights figures and others; to rob banks, armored cars and other criminals; and to amass illegal machine guns, missiles, explosives and biological and chemical weapons. [Each of these plots aimed to make changes in America through the use of political violence.] Most contemplated the deaths of large numbers of people — in one case, as many as 30,000, or 10 times the number murdered on Sept. 11, 2001.

Here are the stories of plots, conspiracies and racist rampages since 1995 — plots and violence waged against a democratic America.​

 

[stamperben]

For those of you who can't figure out the source of the link, which is right there at the top of the page, on the left, it's from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Or of you get all the way through it, their name is also clear at the bottom.

 

[stamperben]

And by the by, the quoted words, that's easy less than 20% of the total. Probably even less than 5%. My, that's a lot of right wing violence in this country, ain't it?

 

[rambot]

And by the by, the quoted words, that's easy less than 20% of the total. Probably even less than 5%. My, that's a lot of right wing violence in this country, ain't it?

Funny, you never really hear about all those stories gathered up in one place.
I wonder how that compares to violence perpetrated by Muslims IN THE US, during the same time frame. I know the body count is completely incomparable.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Ben, I think we know what the purpose of this thread is (even though you didn't explicitly say it). If I'm assuming correctly, you're out to prove, once again, that people who are on the right wing are hypocritical for expressing concern about Muslim terrorism, based on the assertion of "look at all the violence perpetrated by right wing extremists"

Not an apples to apples comparison...

I believe you and I have had this go-around on this very same topic probably 4 or 5 times now in the last 3 months lol.

Comparing "Right Wing vs. Muslims" isn't a valid comparison. You're comparing a conglomeration of a wide variety of different groups, vs. a single group. (and by "you're", I'm referring to the articles that you're posting to support your claims)

The make an analogy, that's as logically incorrect as saying
"There are more traffic crashes in all white cars combined than there are in 2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados, so that means driving a white car is more dangerous than driving the blue silverado"

"White cars" includes a wide variety of years, makes, and models
as to where "2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados" refers to a very specific year, make, and model

...and once again, this list (like the other lists you've posted on this topic in other threads) contains a few issues.

First and foremost, anything on this list that references Nazi extremism needs to be shifted over to the left-winger column... The Nazi ideology is not right wing, they're strong advocates of socialism, collective ownership of the means of production, mandatory profit sharing for large corporations, state-run healthcare and education, and strong advocates of unionization...those aren't right wing ideologies. The fact that they're raving racists may be an inconvenient truth for people on the left side of the spectrum, but the fact remains, aside from racial attitudes, very little differs between a Neo-Nazi and your buddy Bernie when it comes to attitudes about the scope of government, socialism, and attitudes about the rights of the working class (and economic systems in general)

Second, anti-government extremism knows no wing. There are anti-government extremists on the left side as well. Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army, and The Armed Resistance Unit were examples of such groups. It only stands to reason that if you can have a left-wing or right-wing government, you can have someone from either side be "anti-government" depending on which side is currently in power in Washington.

...but to circle back around to my original point, if you want to do an accurate comparison, you compare groups on a one-on-one basis, not by comparing the cumulative stats of 6 different groups combined vs. the stats of a single group. Of course you're going to get a higher number when you're aggregating stats from numerous groups and comparing them to just one single group.

 

[rambot]

Ben, I think we know what the purpose of this thread is (even though you didn't explicitly say it). If I'm assuming correctly, you're out to prove, once again, that people who are on the right wing are hypocritical for expressing concern about Muslim terrorism, based on the assertion of "look at all the violence perpetrated by right wing extremists"

For the record, the OP said ABSOLUTELY nothing about Muslim terrorism. That was me.

Comparing "Right Wing vs. Muslims" isn't a valid comparison. You're comparing a conglomeration of a wide variety of different groups, vs. a single group. (and by "you're", I'm referring to the articles that you're posting to support your claims)

Can you explain what you mean when you say "different groups" because I don't quite think I'm on board there?


The make an analogy, that's as logically incorrect as saying
"There are more traffic crashes in all white cars combined than there are in 2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados, so that means driving a white car is more dangerous than driving the blue silverado"

"White cars" includes a wide variety of years, makes, and models
as to where "2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados" refers to a very specific year, make, and model

...and once again, this list (like the other lists you've posted on this topic in other threads) contains a few issues.

First and foremost, anything on this list that references Nazi extremism needs to be shifted over to the left-winger column... The Nazi ideology is not right wing, they're strong advocates of socialism, collective ownership of the means of production, mandatory profit sharing for large corporations, state-run healthcare and education, and strong advocates of unionization...those aren't right wing ideologies. The fact that they're raving racists may be an inconvenient truth for people on the left side of the spectrum, but the fact remains, aside from racial attitudes, very little differs between a Neo-Nazi and your buddy Bernie when it comes to attitudes about the scope of government, socialism, and attitudes about the rights of the working class (and economic systems in general)

Now this is just totally false. Nazis were, at BEST economically slightly left wing but look at what their party did politically:
They went after left wingers EVEN BEFORE the Jews.
You'll recall this beautiful poem:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

You'll note the first two groups there?

They took out communists and socialists RIGHT away (doesn't sound like an overly "left wing" thing to do); as well as ALL left wing parties in Germany at the time. They aligned themselves with other right wing governments. And I don't know how you're talking about the "strong advocates of unionization"; Hitler was freaked out by them because he thought they'd have more control over the workers than he would. Again, unions were busted and members were jailed. And most importantly, they did NOT believe in any kind of class struggle; a pretty huge component of left wing thought.

Why you are conflating an "economically left sided" approach to a, CLEARLY right sided political outlook, is convenient for you but not really honest in a debate about politics.

Second, anti-government extremism knows no wing.

You say this...then you say this in the next sentence:

There are anti-government extremists on the left side as well. Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army, and The Armed Resistance Unit were examples of such groups.

I agree with the second sentence but disagree with the first. Which one did you mean to agree with?

It only stands to reason that if you can have a left-wing or right-wing government, you can have someone from either side be "anti-government" depending on which side is currently in power in Washington.

But come on...seriously, there hasn't been a legitimately "left wing" (nor far right wing) government since before 95. They have been, primarily centre right to slightly more right (note: I REALLY wouldn't consider Clinton overly left wing; nor Obama).
So, essentially, your governments have been centrist. So, given the centrist nature of your government, obviously you can expect attacks from either left or right side of the extreme political wing. I would REALLY love to see a comparative list of "left wing" terrorism too; to keep it real, of course.

 

[stamperben]

Mini, since you're now a clairvoyant can you give me the winning lotto numbers?

No, it's as posted, it's an FYI. If anyone, Rambot for example, or you mini, want to alert us on terror from Muslims then please do so, sure those wouldn't be hard to find. I'd never seen THIS list compiled before and thought I'd share it.

Now if y'all want to pick it apart that's fine with me. Bottom line is that this shows a very disturbing trend in my country.

 

[JustOneWay]

Ben, I think we know what the purpose of this thread is (even though you didn't explicitly say it). If I'm assuming correctly, you're out to prove, once again, that people who are on the right wing are hypocritical for expressing concern about Muslim terrorism, based on the assertion of "look at all the violence perpetrated by right wing extremists"

Not an apples to apples comparison...

I believe you and I have had this go-around on this very same topic probably 4 or 5 times now in the last 3 months lol.

Comparing "Right Wing vs. Muslims" isn't a valid comparison. You're comparing a conglomeration of a wide variety of different groups, vs. a single group. (and by "you're", I'm referring to the articles that you're posting to support your claims)

The make an analogy, that's as logically incorrect as saying
"There are more traffic crashes in all white cars combined than there are in 2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados, so that means driving a white car is more dangerous than driving the blue silverado"

"White cars" includes a wide variety of years, makes, and models
as to where "2011 Blue Chevy 4x4 Silverados" refers to a very specific year, make, and model

...and once again, this list (like the other lists you've posted on this topic in other threads) contains a few issues.

First and foremost, anything on this list that references Nazi extremism needs to be shifted over to the left-winger column... The Nazi ideology is not right wing, they're strong advocates of socialism, collective ownership of the means of production, mandatory profit sharing for large corporations, state-run healthcare and education, and strong advocates of unionization...those aren't right wing ideologies. The fact that they're raving racists may be an inconvenient truth for people on the left side of the spectrum, but the fact remains, aside from racial attitudes, very little differs between a Neo-Nazi and your buddy Bernie when it comes to attitudes about the scope of government, socialism, and attitudes about the rights of the working class (and economic systems in general)

Second, anti-government extremism knows no wing. There are anti-government extremists on the left side as well. Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army, and The Armed Resistance Unit were examples of such groups. It only stands to reason that if you can have a left-wing or right-wing government, you can have someone from either side be "anti-government" depending on which side is currently in power in Washington.

...but to circle back around to my original point, if you want to do an accurate comparison, you compare groups on a one-on-one basis, not by comparing the cumulative stats of 6 different groups combined vs. the stats of a single group. Of course you're going to get a higher number when you're aggregating stats from numerous groups and comparing them to just one single group.

Way to minimize the terrorism and offer an apology for right wing extremists in America.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

For the record, the OP said ABSOLUTELY nothing about Muslim terrorism. That was me.

Yep, I know...that's why I even said that I acknowledged that they didn't explicitly say that...however, StamperBen has been attempting to make that point in numerous threads over the past couple months with a wide variety of these "See, look at how much right wing extremism there has been since 9/11" articles.

Can you explain what you mean when you say "different groups" because I don't quite think I'm on board there?

When I say different groups, I mean this...they're bundling in numerous ideologies and putting it under the term "right wing" in order to aggregate their numbers to attempt to prove a point.

Neo-Nazis
KKK
Anti-abortionists
Anti-government
Christian Radicalism

Those are all very different groups...to pretend that their "all part of the same big happy family" in order to try to prove that "right wing extremism is worse that Islamic extremism" is intellectually dishonest. An honest comparison would be to compare the numbers to each one of the individual groups combined above.

The fact is, each of the groups above, while they may share some slight overlap in a few regards, are not one big happy family. In fact, if you were to lock some neo-nazis in a room with Christian radicals, you'd see some sparks fly. It'd be like if someone lumped in The New Black Panther Party in with Animal Liberation Front for the purposes of pointing out "left wing" extremism. Left wing and right wing are too broad of terms to have any logistical meaning in terms of trying to make comparisons.

Now this is just totally false. Nazis were, at BEST economically slightly left wing but look at what their party did politically

I'm referring more to modern day Nazi's...not the 1930's German predecessors. If you want to see the current attitudes of the modern day ones (and be disgusted at the same time :\), take a look at the StormFront website.

I won't post any links directly as that would violate forum rules, however, if you do some searching, it's riddled with people making comments like the following (and these are their words, not mine, so I apologize for any offensive tones)

Specifically pertaining to Sanders...
"I'd vote for him if he weren't a Jew"
"What he's saying about the working class is spot on, but since he's a Jew, I don't believe he means a word of it"
"We might need to take a bullet on this one so we can at least get socialized medicine and education in place, then focus on getting a real leader in place next time"
"He is a Jew,but I do agree with his views on workers rights,higher wage and universal healthcare...certainly better than that hag Clinton."

In a thread about Bernie's comments about wall street:
"I think most people realise that it's possible to applaud a message without applauding the messenger."
"I hate the SOB, but at least he's got more sense than zionist puppets like Donald Chump or Hillary"
"He certainly shares MANY of views...especially on wage slavery and jobs and free trade etc. It's unfortunate that the accurate message has to come from [offensive term deleted]"

You say this...then you say this in the next sentence:

I agree with the second sentence but disagree with the first. Which one did you mean to agree with?

When I said "anti government extremism known no wing", I meant that it's not exclusive to one party/wing/ideology. Sorry if I didn't word that well. In a nutshell, my point was that any group could be anti-government, depending on the type of government that's in place.

So, essentially, your governments have been centrist. So, given the centrist nature of your government, obviously you can expect attacks from either left or right side of the extreme political wing. I would REALLY love to see a comparative list of "left wing" terrorism too; to keep it real, of course.

I would agree that our governments have been centrist...however, that's not how extremists thing. Left wing extremist would think that anything that's right of their own stance is "too far right", and Right wing extremists would think the same about anything that's left of their own position.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Way to minimize the terrorism and offer an apology for right wing extremists in America.

I'm not apologizing for anyone...

Simply pointing out that "right-wing" (or "left-wing" for that matter) are too broad of terms in regards to evaluating extremism.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Mini, since you're now a clairvoyant can you give me the winning lotto numbers?

No, it's as posted, it's an FYI. If anyone, Rambot for example, or you mini, want to alert us on terror from Muslims then please do so, sure those wouldn't be hard to find. I'd never seen THIS list compiled before and thought I'd share it.

Now if y'all want to pick it apart that's fine with me. Bottom line is that this shows a very disturbing trend in my country.

...here are some recent posts by you in other threads
More terrorism uncovered!
10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men

More terrorism uncovered!
Stop Using the Term 'Radicalized' Unless You Apply It to White Christian Extremists, Too


Given your recent postings in other threads, sorry if I'm sceptical about you just wanting to arbitrarily point out concern for "right wing extremism" without having ulterior motives for a point you want to prove.

 

[JustOneWay]

I'm not apologizing for anyone...

Simply pointing out that "right-wing" (or "left-wing" for that matter) are too broad of terms in regards to evaluating extremism.

I read it differently.

The commonality is the right wing conservatism. Nobody is claiming that Islamist extremism is liberalism.

 

[JustOneWay]

...here are some recent posts by you in other threads
More terrorism uncovered!
10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men

More terrorism uncovered!
Stop Using the Term 'Radicalized' Unless You Apply It to White Christian Extremists, Too


Given your recent postings in other threads, sorry if I'm sceptical about you just wanting to arbitrarily point out concern for "right wing extremism" without having ulterior motives for a point you want to prove.

Now we have ad hominem.

 

[stamperben]

...here are some recent posts by you in other threads
More terrorism uncovered!
10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men

More terrorism uncovered!
Stop Using the Term 'Radicalized' Unless You Apply It to White Christian Extremists, Too


Given your recent postings in other threads, sorry if I'm sceptical about you just wanting to arbitrarily point out concern for "right wing extremism" without having ulterior motives for a point you want to prove.

"Ulterior motives?" Who here doesn't have motives in anything they write or post? Tell us, what are your motives in trying to say that those groups listed are not linked under one banner of right wing terrorism?

I've made clear the reason why I put this thread up. It's to show the terrorism that is so often denied in these threads. Do with it what you will, but the fact that it exists is there, clear as any eye can detect.

 

[Sistrin]

From the OP article, here is an example of how the SPLC classifies "right-wing terror plots," quote:

October 9, 1995

Saboteurs derail an Amtrak passenger train near Hyder, Ariz., killing one person and injuring about 70 others. Several antigovernment messages, signed by the "Sons of Gestapo," are left behind. The perpetrators remain at large.

The perpetrators were never found, therefore right-wing terrorism. Surprised they didn't apply the term Christian as well. Regardless the term "Sons of Gestapo" refers to a train derailment which occurred in 1995 near Palo Verde, Arizona. Four copies of an identical note were found at the scene, citing that the "Sons of Gestapo" had taken credit. The FBI has since concluded the "Sons of Gestapo" never even existed, that the derailment was actually part of a plan to rob a freight train.

Yet right-wing terror plot.

 

[Sistrin]

Another example:

January 18, 1996

Peter Kevin Langan, the pseudonymous "Commander Pedro" who leads the underground Aryan Republican Army, is arrested after a shootout with the FBI in Ohio. Along with six other suspects arrested around the same time, Langan is charged in connection with a string of 22 bank robberies in seven Midwestern states between 1994 and 1996. After pleading guilty and agreeing to testify, co-conspirator Richard Guthrie commits suicide in his cell. Two others, Kevin McCarthy and Scott Stedeford, enter plea bargains and do testify against their co-conspirators. Eventually, Mark Thomas, a leading neo-Nazi in Pennsylvania, pleads guilty for his role in helping organize the robberies and agrees to testify against Langan and other gang members. Shawn Kenny, another suspect, becomes a federal informant. Langan is sentenced to a life term in one case, plus 55 years in another. McCarthy is released from prison in 2007, while Stedeford's release date is set in 2022. Thomas receives eight years and is released in early 2004.

The Aryan Republican Army was also known of as the Midwest Bank Robbers. The group consisted of six people, and were said to be responsible for some 22 bank robberies. The claim they were a "white supremacist" group was largely tied to the claim the "leader" of the ARA once spoke to Tim McVeigh.

But hey, six guys, what an army!

The article also list Eric Robert Rudolph four separate times in regard to four separate attacks he was guilty of, as if in each case he represented a different right-wing terror group.

 

[Sistrin]

Here is another gem, quote:

May 29, 1998

A day after stealing a water truck, three men shoot and kill a Cortez, Colo., police officer and wound two other officers as they try to stop the suspects during a road chase. After the gun battle, the three — Alan Monty Pilon, Robert Mason and Jason McVean — disappear into the canyons of the high desert. Mason is found a week later, dead of an apparently self-inflicted gunshot. The skeletal remains of Pilon are found in 1999 and show that he, too, died of a gunshot to the head, another apparent suicide. McVean is not found, but most authorities assume he died in the desert. Many officials believe the three men intended to use the water truck in some kind of terrorist attack, but the nature of their suspected plans is never learned.

Three guys steal a water truck and after a shoot-out with police slip into the desert to die. No plan was ever announced, no evidence of a plan was ever found, but hey they might have been right-wing terrorist perhaps maybe planning to possibly do something, therefore perfect example of right-wing terrorism.

 

[morningstar2651]

Funny, you never really hear about all those stories gathered up in one place.
I wonder how that compares to violence perpetrated by Muslims IN THE US, during the same time frame. I know the body count is completely incomparable.

I haven't read it yet, but I suspect there is probably a bit of over-lap. Muslim terrorists tend to be extremely conservative Muslims.

 

[morningstar2651]

It's easy for us to criticize Islamic extremism when we're not Muslims, but it appears to be very difficult for some of our fellow members to criticize Christian extremism or right-wing extremism. I've also noticed that those that have trouble criticizing Christian extremism are Christians and that those that have trouble criticizing right-wing extremism are right-wing.

Maybe these criticisms hit too close to home for these people.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I read it differently.

The commonality is the right wing conservatism. Nobody is claiming that Islamist extremism is liberalism.

You can find a commonality between any groups if you really wanted to. One could just as easily lump Christians & Muslims in the same group and refer to it as "religious terrorism" and make it a "religion vs. atheism" conversation. However, the term "religious" is too broad a term to really assess a person's viewpoint and what they're all about.

If a person were to come up to you and say "I'm religious", without giving anymore info, could you confidently say what their viewpoints are? They could be Hindu, they could be Lutheran, they could be catholic, they could be a Muslim...we wouldn't know.

I feel that the same is true with the term "right-wing". Saying a person is "right-wing" isn't exactly a specific identifier.

It's just being used in these contexts in order to lump a bunch of ideologies together as a means of pointing out flaws with peoples' political opponents.


Like you said, nobody is claiming Islamist extremism is liberalism...however, people who embrace liberalism are making the statement (indirectly) that "Right wing extremism is a bigger threat than Islamic extremism" based on the numbers.

Sure, if you're going to combine and aggregate the numbers from 4-5 different extremist ideologies under a single identifier, and then compare the grand total to that of a single ideology, of course the grand total of the 5 is likely going to be a bigger number.

To me,
Anti-abortion extremism
Anti-government extremism
Racial-extremism
Religious-extremism

...are all distinct entities and should be evaluated as such.

...and as I pointed out earlier in this thread, racial-extremists and anti-government extremists aren't even exclusive to "right-wing" or "left-wing"