One must take serious pause to give thought to the reality, that they even must be or are viewed as radical, if they are for their country & people in their own country & among their own people
Worldwatcher wrote:Terrorism in the USA is mainly from internal sources. "Lone Wolves" are the most dangerous, as they work in ones or twos, and don't readily reveal their intentions, although this is a recent change. The most dangerous groups are the Militias, KKK, and Neo-Nazis. That isn't to say there are not other groups, these are just the most prominent.
I must reiterate a lesser known fact, that alleged pro-White terrorism in the past, is often instigated by the Feds. Actual groups will either be subverted in one of two ways, they are either progressed towards violence which ensures being shutdown, or toned down to "cut off the pass" and thus render the group inert.
Just because a radical group has not committed violent acts themselves, doesn't mean they are exempt. Often, they are the enabler or start of radical ideas and motives. "Planting the seed', if you will.
Daily Stormer has a "Book Club", basically gathering together chapters, if you talk about planning violence there you are immediately banned from the group. Contrary to Hollywood or the media, there are multiple reasons that non-violence is prevalent in real organic groups, for one Feds are the most likely to engage in this type of plotting to ensure entrapment -- for two random violence is obviously not seen as a viable method to advancing interests.
So if the police were not watching these fringe groups, violence would be openly advocated? It is not a crime to have extremist views, it is pretty bad, but not a crime. The crime comes when one acts on those extremist views, whether it be the encouragement of violence, or violence itself. "People can believe what they like, as long as it is not imposing on anyone else's human-rights, safety, or belief system". If the authorities were to shut down easily monitored extremist sites that do not, at least openly, advocate violence, then it pushes it underground, making members more susceptible to commit acts of violence.
Traditionalist Worker Party not that long ago held a protest which they were legally allowed to & planned for, ANTIFA was caught planning terror against them on camera before the confrontation, technically they committed terrorism by pushing their ideology against the protest group to achieve political goals at least in their own minds even if they are funded by certain individuals.
As I said, terror comes from all across society, and appears in "waves" left wing is not as prominent in this time period, as a few decades ago, but that is not to say they are not there.
I must argue that to say they are the most dangerous is in fact wrong.
- Context is actually missing & thus does not differentiate the "who" pro-White movements are dangerous to. Are they dangerous to White people, counterpoint, how come they [We] are in this situation in the first place?
The same could be argued for the phrase "middle eastern terrorists".
[*]Foreign agents cause death & destruction which is excused at an increasing rate by multiple means.
That is irrelevant to the topic of homegrown terrorism.
[*]KKK has been heavily infiltrated in the past on numerous occasions.
And there are reasons for that. They still have thousands of members, and are somewhat coordinated. If the groups themselves do not commit as many actions as the past, they are still by broad definition, terrorists. Their ideas spread, forming would-be extremists.
[*]It doesn't acknowledge the many [Dangerous] negatives pro-White movements stand against.
That is not the point, simply saying "the other is worse" doesn't discount the threat of that group. When people think that they have right on their side, they can do an awful lot of damage.
[*]The ADL & SPLC hold full reign over where you got this information from.[/list]
What do you mean by this?
To address your point as a whole:
Please view this:
http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extr ... tacks.html
http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extr ... lysis.html
As this data shows, Jihadist terror has the most casualties, but that is not a viable factor, as deaths are circumstantial on the attack themselves. Far right-wing attacks are more widespread. Simply saying that the "other side" does it too doesn't make your point correct.
I will list notable extreme groups / movements that have used violence to attempt to achieve their goals:
- KKK (the most notable group)
- Christian Identity & Neo Nazi groups
- Patriot & militia movement
- Sovereign Citizens movement
- Islamic Extremism (it is still up for debate whether this is right / left / other)
- Anarchist movement
- Weather Underground
- Black Panthers
- Symbionese Liberation Army
- Antiabortion violence
- Animal / Earth Liberation Fronts
- Jewish Defense League
- Puerto Rican Nationalists groups
List Source: Bridget L. Nacos, Terrorism and Counterterrorism, 5th edition, pgs: 72 - 99
"Lone-wolves" may align themselves to these movements or others, or none. My argument is that Lone-wolves are the most dangerous form of terror, not right wing groups, but in saying that, they are currently the most active. I (and my Uni lecturer) predict that the next "5th wave" of global terror will shift from religious to nationalist / right wing terror, as the "Waves of Terrorism" tend to work like a pendulum.