You do understand that using your own numbers, we're talking about less than 1/3 of 1 percent of all murders, right? Call me crazy, and I know math is hard, but I think the approximately 99.997 percent that aren't caused by domestic violent extremists warrant more attention than the .00286 that are.
Here is the photo I took from the beach. I think the photo above was taken at a higher elevation, such as the ridge on the opposite of the bay.
A. That is not an image from Oklahoma. B. 31 are the documented cases of in person voter fraud. Apparently you guys think that’s a big problem. C. Tell the relatives of 168 people in okc that those aren’t important.
They told you already. More Americans are killed in Chicago than by terrorist. Why do you hate logic?
So it's somewhere between 31 and 3,000,000? In person voting fraud is difficult. Absentee voting? Sure. But, in person "fraud" is like getting struck by lightening.
Maybe stop having the mother scratching president of the United States of MOTHER SCRATCHING AMERICA giving them cover. Let's start there. They think he's one of them. Fix that.
Bubba started this thread in defense of Antifa with his socialist brothers defending him. What else do we need to know about them?
I'm just not sure I follow the logic. What does white nationalism have to do with voter fraud? You're comparing apples to freedom pouches.
I'm sure I've said it before. Barry Switzer's picture on a Longhorns message board automatically discredits someone.
He's a Land Thief with an avatar of Barry Switzer. So by definition, it's only cheating if you get caught.
The right thinks voter fraud requires emergency level interdiction yet threats from home grown terrorists should be ignored. Both are statistically insignificant. One deals with actual LIVES and it is significantly less statistically insignificant than the other. That's all I'm pointing out. Also, the White House told DHS to not focus on non Jihadi terrorism. Stable genius, Yo!. Trump Stifled Efforts To Combat White Supremacy While Fueling It | Rantt
In other words, you're approaching the issue in bad faith and bringing up a false comparison to change the subject. And most on the Right aren't calling for emergency interdiction - just a simple ID like we would in any number of non-emergency situations. Maybe he looked at the numbers.
Do you think the lower incidents of jihadi terrorism on American soil are due to jihadis not caring to attack us here? Or do you think it might, just might, be related to our ability to thwart most of those plans before they can be executed?
And to get the preferred outcome, we have to exclude things like 9/11. It's a horse **** narrative that's only enabled with deceptive and out of context statistics.
I was going to bring that up too - given the extreme reluctance of our officials to call domestic Islamist violence what it is, the numbers are wildly under reported.
Maybe that's because he wasn't. Of course, that doesn't make him any less of a bad guy, but facts and reality do matter.
I honest don't know how well we are or aren't thwarting potential plans. There are lot of cases like that, where just trying to apply the correct nomenclature to something results in most people thinking you are making a good/bad statement about it. E.g. if you opine that you don't consider subjectively-judged solo competitions "sports", people will decide that you just said that they require no skill, and cannot be dissuaded from thinking you said that.
How is a guy firing into a crowd killing more than 50 NOT a terrorist? To me, his motives are unrelated to his outcome. Much like "hate" crime. Crime is crime, regardless of the why.
