Yet another right wing domestic terrorist attack.

http://m.krdo.com/news/breaking-active-shooter-reported-at-planned-parenthood/36684340

When will Republicans stop poisoning the minds of their simpleton followers?

Cable news has been talking about it for hours, showing the same 2 minutes of footage over and over, asking pointless questions of the reporters on scene (who have no way of knowing the answers), and speculating endlessly with NO information to go on. At the top of the hour, they switch anchors and start all over again.

Meanwhile, in response to an incident in Colorado Springs that may not even have anything to do with Planned Parenthood (one report says the shooter started elsewhere, and ran in there when chased), New York City has upped security around planned parenthood locations there.

How many of these have we seen in recent years?

A lot.

Well, if I was a psycho killer on the run, wouldn't it make sense to run into a building full of killers to try and blend in?

Far less than Muslim attacks.

T.R. must approve of right wing domestic terrorism the way he always tries to minimize it.

On the contrary I take terrorism very seriously. It is you I minimize every time you rush to judgement and point fingers.

Damn, so hard to pick a side on this one

No, he just thinks your post was hyperbolic and stupid. I mean, I'm just guessing. I don't want to speak for the man.

11 injured with 5 of them being cops.

http://m.krdo.com/news/breaking-active-shooter-reported-at-planned-parenthood/36684340

You do realize that many left wing Democrats oppose abortion too, right? Come on down here to Georgia and stroll into a black holy-roller church and say you are pro-abortion and tell me how that works out for you. And nearly every one is a Democrat BTW. Please post pics/video.

Many liberterians also oppose abortion.

Personally I have no religious reasons to oppose abortion. If there is no doubt the kid has some disease or syndrome that will will make their life and that of their family a living hell, rock that abortion!
But if doctors have determined that the kid will most likely be okay, then it's wrong to have the abortion. It's a matter of practicality. My grand-daughter is four months old and cute and healthy with no birth defects that we can determine. To imagine that kids like that can be terminated and considered not yet "human" and only a lump of cells? Sorry, that's wrong.

They were saying on the radio that the building isn't completely cleared yet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...pping-up-its-response-to-domestic-extremists/

http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html

I've seen other sources but those two were the easy Google hits

The first one is amusing, using a graph to show that right wing domestic terrorism is worse than jihadism, but with only 48 deaths over 14 years, or 3.4 people a year. It claims jihadists killed 26.

13 at Fort Hood, 14 by the pair of Muslim snipers, 1 by a Saudi student decapitating a Jew, 2 by a Muslim attacking workers for El Al, 1 in a Muslim attack on a Jewish center, 1 by a Muslim student seeking revenge for offenses against Muslims, 1 at a recruiting center in Little Rock, 3 when a Muslim slashed the throats of three Jews, 2 when Muslims killed people for converting family members, 1 by a Muslim convert who killed his father to please Allah, 3 at the Boston Marathon and 1 in the getaway, 4 in Muslim executions of gays, 1 in a beheading in revenge for attacks on Muslims, and 5 at a recruiting center in Tennessee.

So that's 80 more after Jihadists killed 2976 on 9/11, and doesn't include the crash of the Egypt Air flight.

So the score is 3,056 to 48 if you don't count all the Americans killed by jihadists overseas.

I think what this shows is that we need to ban Americans from America because they all come from a savage race and they all believe in the same kind terrorism.

Both articles say "since 9/11", not including "including 9/11". What's more your figure for 9/11 bundles in the almost 400 non-Americans (including Muslims) who died in those attacks, so you can knock nearly 3000 off your figure for a start. So once against you're caught red handed in offering up disingenuous posts as facts.

Furthermore, the article is talking about Islamist terror attacks within the US. Your list of statistics certainly doesn't accord with Wikipedia (assuming it is accurate) so I trust that you have the links to show the rest of the events you are talking about were Islamist attacks? Assuming you're not conflating Islamist terror attacks with regular crimes committed by Muslims?

Also, the point of the articles isn't really to demonstrate who has the highest death toll anyway. It's to demonstrate the double standards operated by many Americans when it comes to the supposed threat presented by Islamists. We hear constant theoretic from morons like Trump about shutting down mosques, having watch lists and banning refugees from coming. But nobody talks about the threat from domestic terrorists. Hell, why not also contrast the same double standard with the mass shootings? Far more risk from that than either Islamist or non-Islamist domestic terrorism. Yet you lot can't even have a debate about it.

The real truth is that it's easier to rail against Muslims and portray them all as Islamists because most are of an ethnic minority background, most are first second or third generation immigrants, and a great deal of Americans won't be closely familiar with them or friendly with them as a result. Things that are less understood are much easier to demonise and use as an excuse to get away with stereotypes, profiling and bigotry. Yet when bigotry and hatred leads, for instance, your white next door neighbour to go into a Jewish community centre and start shooting people, then the terrorism aspect is casually ignored and no political or social rhetoric follows, despite the threat to Americans pretty much being the same. That is the point of the articles.

It amuses me that you think you're smarter than everyone else here in that if you trot out a list of figures it'll make you look well read and knowledgeable, and therefore credible. When in reality it's just a smokescreen that a lot of us can see right through.

3 people dead

bolded items already included in the 26 - I can't find any reference to 14 sniper victims, got a link?

that drops your increase to 12, assuming the others are valid

When a Muslim kills workers at El Al, or decapitates people to make a terror video, or pretty much shuts down part of Maryland, it's a safe bet that it's a terror attack. I didn't include regular crimes, murders, and honor killings.

Right-wing domestic terrorists struck once during Bill Clinton's term and then pretty much gave it up. There's been some left-wing terrorism as usual, but the big threat seems to be Islamic.

You don't remember Muhammed and Malvo and the DC Sniper attacks? Guys drilled a hole in the trunk of a car so they could shoot people without being spotted.

disregard this reply, momentarily mixed up "Washington" with DC"

Leaving that one off is a valid criticism.

Looks like a right wing christian terrorist got bothered that ISIS were getting all the kills.

Still points to my favorite reason why I do not see a need for the US to bomb the middle east to protect us. We are certainly in far more danger from our home grown terrorists than from some group half way around the world. Also, considering the refugees coming in it would probably be a lot harder for them to ever get this far than our good old christian terrorists.

It's very silly to keep score, but if you want to do it, at least remember that religious fanatics like ISIS and al'Quaeda are, of course, right-wing terrorists as well.

Except that ISIS is explicitly socialist. Of course the same hold true of the German National Socialist Workers Party.

The leftist definition of "Right-wing = People who do bad things" would be infinitely more accurate if they'd say "Left wing = People who do bad things", because group think about making people behave how you want them to behave, and killing those who won't behave under the new "enlightened" standard, is a hallmark of the left wing. The right wing is happy to put up with all kinds of cranks, religious crackpots, hippie communes, and people who just aren't with the program because the right wing worldview assumes that such morons exist in large numbers and always will. Come back to us when you have a philosophy that doesn't require conformity or extermination.

So why don't they throw their hat/head wrap into the 2016 presidential election for the GOP? Aren't people getting tired of Trump and his rhetoric? Let's take it to the next level bitches!

Well, ISIS is certainly in favour of the gold standard, so it might be a good fit.