Violence and The Left

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Schwarzer Ritter

Crazed liberal attacks federal officer with a club...a club sandwich! This DOJ employee is now unemployed and charged with a felony. FAFO.

Let this guy get away with this and he'll escalate to turkeys and wedding cakes.

that case was tossed out

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by texassapper

Loveland family’s memorial to Charlie Kirk burned

Looking back, this thread appears especially prophetic... not that you need to be Nostradamus to know that Democrats are going to cause violence again in the near future...

unrestricted violence is part of left wing violence.

Its also part of the communist DNA. If they can't get what they want, they go violent. seems to work for them.

you see this happen repeatedly through out history; Against the Kingdom of France, Russian Empire, Kingdom of Nepal & Peru Republic.

all of those nations were afflicted with left wing violence that the governments were unable to put down which led to the collapse of those governments. the exception is with Peru, it took a strong leader to actually do something about that violence.

[dilbert firestorm]

media perception matters on how the incidents are presented to the public.

you get this media narrative that the so-called right wing extremists (they're not right wing in any way) commit more violence than left wing extremists. Yet, media shows far more reports of left wing violence than right wing violence. Is it because left wing violence are more "flashier", "hotter" than so-called right-wing extremist.

here's the important difference between those two extremists, one is supported by the democratic party, the other, no one supports them and they're much smaller than the left wing groups. figure that one out.

[ICU 812]

I have been off the grid for a few days. . . .

No one wants to comment on the Charlie Kirk shooting on this thread?

That event alone makes the point raised in the OP.

[ICU 812]

I have been off the grid for a few days. . . .

No one wants to comment on the Charlie Kirk shooting on this thread?

That event alone makes the point raised in the OP.

[ICU 812]

I posted the following on a different thread, but it is even more relevant here.

*************************
As this thread's title says, Charlie Kirk was shot for his ideas.

As Rush Limbaugh did before him, Charlie Kirk showed that Democrats, and progressive liberals in general, cannot compete in the arena of ideas. Kirk refuted their agendas in every topic and exposed their mendacious intellectual dishonesty and moral bankruptcy publicly every time he sat under that awning. . . .and they killed him rather than talk with him.

So much for the often expressed desire to " . . .have a conversation about . . ." whatever.

[ICU 812]

I posted the following on a different thread, but it is even more relevant here.

*************************
Charlie Kirk was shot for his ideas.

As Rush Limbaugh did before him, Charlie Kirk showed that Democrats, and progressive liberals in general, cannot compete in the arena of ideas. Kirk refuted their agendas in every topic and exposed their mendacious intellectual dishonesty and moral bankruptcy publicly every time he sat under that awning. . . .and they killed him rather than talk with him.

So much for the often expressed desire to " . . .have a conversation about . . ." whatever.

[royamcr]

Trump is demanding a crackdown on the ‘radical left’. But a new study shows more political violence comes from right-wing extremism.

https://www.the-independent.com/news...-b2828170.html

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

media perception matters on how the incidents are presented to the public.

you get this media narrative that the so-called right wing extremists (they're not right wing in any way) commit more violence than left wing extremists. Yet, media shows far more reports of left wing violence than right wing violence. Is it because left wing violence are more "flashier", "hotter" than so-called right-wing extremist.

here's the important difference between those two extremists, one is supported by the democratic party, the other, no one supports them and they're much smaller than the left wing groups. figure that one out.

[royamcr]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

I posted the following on a different thread, but it is even more relevant here.

*************************
Charlie Kirk was shot for his ideas.

As Rush Limbaugh did before him, Charlie Kirk showed that Democrats, and progressive liberals in general, cannot compete in the arena of ideas. Kirk refuted their agendas in every topic and exposed their mendacious intellectual dishonesty and moral bankruptcy publicly every time he sat under that awning. . . .and they killed him rather than talk with him.

So much for the often expressed desire to " . . .have a conversation about . . ." whatever.

Liberals just don't entertain hate, racism, and bigotry in any way. Liberals also don't have a cult that goes around and rallies constantly. The cult has to constantly try to sell their extremist ideas to stay somewhat relevant.

[RX792P]

Originally Posted by royamcr

Trump is demanding a crackdown on the ‘radical left’. But a new study shows more political violence comes from right-wing extremism.

https://www.the-independent.com/news...-b2828170.html

Seems the DOJ has 'disappeared' their own 2024 study (but it remains on the 'wayback machine'
https://archive.ph/cBfwR

or
https://web.archive.org/web/20250911...stic-terrorism

The report, “What NIJ Research Tells Us About Domestic Terrorism,” was a project of the National Institute of Justice, an agency under DOJ, and based on internet archives, was still available on the DOJ website on September 12 but was gone by September 13.

Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives.[1] In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives.[2] A recent threat assessment by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concluded that domestic violent extremists are an acute threat and highlighted a probability that COVID-19 pandemic-related stressors, long-standing ideological grievances related to immigration, and narratives surrounding electoral fraud will continue to serve as a justification for violent actions.[3]

[Lantern2814]

And that "study" the loyal sheep here bleat our has already been shown to be garbage and lies. As usual. The amount of gaslighting and denial from the left for the last week has been disgusting.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by royamcr

Liberals just don't entertain hate, racism, and bigotry in any way.

Yes. And disagreement gets you a bullet through the carotid.

Liberals also don't have a cult that goes around and rallies constantly. The cult has to constantly try to sell their extremist ideas to stay somewhat relevant.

They riot, murder, and burn cities down instead.

[txdot-guy]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...g-dark-history

In the aftermath of Kirk’s assassination, Trump and other conservatives blamed the left for political violence.

“For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals,” Trump said in a video message.

“This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.”

“The Left is the party of murder,” tech entrepreneur Elon Musk said on X.

But recent political violence has affected both Democrats and Republicans.

In addition to Kirk’s assassination and the attempts on Trump’s life, Republicans were targeted in a mass shooting at a congressional baseball practice in 2017. Democrats were targeted in the 2011 shooting of then-Rep. Gabby Giffords, D-Ariz.; a 2022 attack on the husband of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; and the attacks on Hortman and Shapiro in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, respectively.

And on Jan. 6, 2021, the U.S. Capitol was stormed by Trump supporters who falsely claimed Democrats had stolen the 2020 election. When Trump won back the White House four years later, he pardoned or commuted the sentences of everyone who had been charged in the attack.

In 2023, Reuters identified about 200 more instances of political violence since Jan. 6, 2021.

There’s a ripple effect. As political violence rises, Kleinfeld said, it will affect everyone, regardless of political party.

“The more people justify violence from their side of the aisle, the more unhinged, aggressive people will commit violence from that side,” Kleinfeld said. “And the more that will justify the other side in doing the same.”


Be aware that this entire thread is just an example of the kind of rhetoric (ie lies) that fuels the violence against the American people.

Saying one side is more violent than the other is just not true.

[Jacuzzme]

The only dead people on January 6 were Trump supporters.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

The only dead people on January 6 were Trump supporters.

Sure, it was a total love in. No violence occurred there.