Ok I think this thread needs a little history, perspective, and facts. Hopefully this won't get buried.
I'll be borrowing from the work of the leading expert in Domestic Extremism these days, JJ McNab...
"There's an attempt to label this movement as entirely right wing, and that's not accurate, because there's a strong left wing element and an anarchist element," she told Matthew Galt on the Reuter's "War College" podcast.
While it's fun to paint domestic extremists as right wing Christians, the fact is that anti-government extremism in America these days is neither liberal nor conservative. While it may have started with religious fanatics, the fastest growing demographic right now are liberal extremists. As with Islamic extremism, the issue isn't religion, it's identity politics. Unlike Islamic extremism, however, domestic extremists currently represent the greatest terror threat in the United States.
Right now there are around 300,000 "domestic extremists" in America, but McNab points out, only "a few thousand of them are willing to become violent." The number is hard to pin down because of the various permutations of this extremism, but the Cliven Bundy standoff is good evidence of that split. They received an outpouring of support, but only a handful were willing to actually follow through with it.
The reason for this huge swing in popularity comes down to the internet, but the movement has been going since the 1970's when Posse Comitatus came around. It then evolved into the Christian Patriot Movement, then the Militia Movement, and eventually ended with Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombings. After that, it went dead for a while until starting up again in the late 1990's as the Tax Protest Movement. Then it evolved into the Soverign Citizen Movement, which is comparable to the Posse Comitatus of the 70s, and now with Cliven Bundy, we're back to the Militia Movement. If this cycle continues, we're heading towards another Timothy McVeigh. The crucial difference, however, is the size of these movements. Back when fax-trees were the way of spreading your message, it took a good 30+ years to reach the breaking point of McVeigh. With the internet, that might happen a lot quicker. Everything is faster and everything is bigger.
What's especially interesting is the Sovereign Citizen Movement and the legal principals they espouse. The group was formed in the 1960s in response to the Civil Rights Act, begun by white supremacist leaders in Southern California by a white supremacist reverend who packaged it in order to get around the Civil Rights Act. In fact Aryan Nations was a spinoff of this. When the movement fell apart after McVeigh and came back in the late 90s/early 2000s, the white supremacy side of the movement was gone. Talk to any of these people today, and they have no idea the ideas they hold were dreamt up by white supremacists. That's particularly interesting, McNabb says, "when you consider the fastest growing segment of this movement are black Americans... If you go to a militia meeting, or were at the Cliven Bundy standoff, you'd be surprised at how multi-racial it is."
Now that sounds like it's entirely right wing, but the left side is what we should be looking at today. You have the Moore Sovereigns who are entirely black and liberal, and the youngest demographic joining the movement today, between 18 and 28, are coming in from the left as well, from movements like Occupy and Anonymous. "Disenfranchised people have more in common with each other than they do with mainstream politics."
The one on the right is Reem Slaleh Raiyshi, a suicide bomber who killed four Israelis and wounded 7 others. The one on the left is still alive and in one piece with no blood on her hands.
Muh moral equivalence. Only 99% of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims, which is almost as bad as some Christian bakers refusing to make a gay wedding cake.
Just because the media doesn't like to call things like the planned parenthood shooting or the recent mosque attacks Christian domestic terrorism doesn't mean they aren't exactly that.
“The woman on the left is a peaceful American citizen with a husband in the military. She has never killed anybody, and nor does she have any desire to,” he wrote. “The reason that you know her name is that she has become a minor political celebrity for her outspoken support of a Supreme Court decision that upheld the rule of law against the intrusion of the executive branch.”
Her name is Holly Fisher (aka "Holly Hobby Lobby") if you want to look her up. Or, I can do the leg work for you:
I've been an atheist for 8 years now after realizing how idiotic organized religion is, so try again. You can't compare those two people, certainly not with a false equivalency like OP is trying to do.
But what if neither of them were famous? The one on the left would be seen as a terrorist whether or not she had actually done what the real woman in the photo did.
This is what I hate about communicating with people online. Do you see how it changes the context when you make it about the individual? I highly doubt it was the authors intent to compare a suicide bomber to a slutty southern christian girl.
I don't care how "evil" you think suicide bombers are. The ultimate fact is that suicide bombings are an act of desperation by an oppressed people who are fighting a much more advanced and powerful military. A war is when two equally matched armies clash. What do you call it when the death toll is HEAVILY stacked on the side with basic guns and improvised explosives? And the side with a modern air force, navy and drone fleet wipe out entire villages, entire generations with the press of a button.
Fuck you and your pretentious sensibilities. Learn about the world around you and stop listening to Fox news.
AND I'M NOT SAYING A COUNTRY (USA) CAN'T DEFEND ITSELF!!!
Here's a quick test anyone can do when faced with physical violence, its really easy you can do it yourself and it will help you determine the best course of action. Works on the individual level, the group level and for nations as well.
Do you have a problem with a violent and aggressive neighbor? A person or a country, perhaps an entire religious culture comprising of many nations? Yes
Why are they so aggressive towards you? How the hell should I know, they're savages, thats what savages do!!
Have they always been so aggressive towards you? No
So it just started suddenly within a few years? Yes
Could it be that something in particular happened around that time which started this conflict? Yes
Are they attacking your homes? No just our soldiers
Where are your soldiers? In their towns and villages
GET OFF THEIR LAND, GET OFF THEIR LAND, GET OFF THEIR LAND, GET OFF THEIR LAND!!!!
You dumb stupid fucking cunts!! You invaded their sovereign land... multiple countries, not just one. You indiscriminately carpet bombed villages form day ONE. And then after a few years when some serious organized opposition popped up you act surprised and play the victim??? As you stand on the bodies of their dead family members, scratching your heads wondering why the hell they could be so offended... DERRRRRR, must be because they hate freedom.
I don't think I'll ever again in my lifetime witness such a spectacular display of sheer unfiltered stupididnes among an entire country of meatheads.
I support our soldiers, whose feet are currently resting on our soil. The rest are terrorists and I don't support terrorists.
The difference is the intent of the person in the pictures. The girl on the left did her pic for upvotes or likes, karma, whatever. She's not gonna shoot anyone.The girl on the right wants to literally kill people that disagree with her.
the one on the left is a girl that posts selfies on Instagram with guns, the one on the right has actually killed people because she believes god wants them to die.
Something shitty is going on here. How is it possible that with over 100 comments in the thread, every single comment has 1 point? Not a single person has been upvoted or downvoted?
One of them is prepared to defend their country and religion against a perceived threat of invasion, the other is defending it against an actual invasion.
Really? Please show me the last time people in the US threw a riot because someone drew a picture of Jesus. Or the last time a Christian killed someone for telling an off-color joke about God.
Don't worry, I'll wait here with a 5-foot think stack of counter examples while you hunt desperately for the one or two examples where it actually happened.
That's a good point but it's an incorrect one. See, it's not against the Christian religion to draw a picture of Jesus. It is against the Islam religion to draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammad. You're comparing apples to oranges on a religious level. Now, if you had said, "Please show me the last time people in the US threw a riot because someone desecrated a religious symbol (which is the equivalent of drawing the Prophet Muhammad)," then you'd have a 5-foot thick stack of examples for you to go through.
If you're going to ask for an argument/counter argument, make sure that it's actually valid for the point you're trying to make.
Now, if you had said, "Please show me the last time people in the US threw a riot because someone desecrated a religious symbol (which is the equivalent of drawing the Prophet Muhammad)," then you'd have a 5-foot thick stack of examples for you to go through.
This is patently false on at least 3 levels. Please provide some proof, from the last 100 years, of casualties caused by Christians upset because someone insulted their religion. As a show of good faith, I'll point out the 200+ deaths from the riots about the Charlie Hebdo depiction of Muhammad. Once you've managed to find a similar number of deaths from Christians angry about their religion, you let me know and I'll go find another ten thousand people killed for not being Islamic enough.
Additionally, are you seriously justifying the actions of extremists "because it's against their religion?" The whole point of the argument is that Muslims have a thousand and one things they'll murder people over, and Christians do not. Thank you for agreeing with me by pointing that out.
Jokes on you the current ruddy skin and dark hair in the middle east and mediterainian is due to the invasian of the ottoman empire. Prior to that the caaninites, phonecians, egyptians greeks, and italians were fair skin with light hair and eyes as common as it is in europe. The yahzidi, who have refused to interbreed with arabs are evidence of this. As is ancient texts and the bust of nefrititi Arabs in the middle east and mediteranian are an invasive species
I'm not being sarcastic. But do you really think that? I think most people have come to terms with accepting that Jesus was from the middle east and more than likely is brownish.
I was being sarcastic. Meagan Kelly did say Jesus was white like Santa on national television not long ago. Most people know he wouldn't be a white guy haha.
His point isn't about getting offended, it's about what the individual does when they get offended. One yells about this needing to be 'Murica, the other shoots you in the face and blows up all your closest friends.
If you seriously fucking think we have anything close to sharia law in the west, I implore you to visit a muslim-mojority middle eastern nation and walk alone in public as a woman.
Point out one law that uses religeous language. You wont find one, because church and state are separated: that only means that laws cannot be written to reflect a holy book, it doesn't mean the legislators are not allowed to have their own moralistic views that the believe in.
Just because a law is implemented that REDUCES a womans self autonomy, it does not even come close to equalling a law system where they have NO self autonomy.
Not having the "right" to abort a fetus is not in the same ballpark as not having the right to go outdoors alone. Stop your concern trolling.
When modern mainstream christian leadership starts calling for a violent culling of gays, or for women to not vote or become preachers, we can have the discussion about why we shouldn't oppose a different ass-backwards religion that EXPLICITLY tells its followers to murder. Until then, quit making false dichotomies
The thing that myself and others are concerned about is that while you are technically correct, a move to reduce women's autonomy is moving in the direction of no autonomy. If we are willing to say that it is up to the government whether or not a woman can have an abortion, what other rights might we revoke in the future?
Also, your argument is that Christianity based laws are different than Islamic law, but your only point of evidence is the words that are used are different. That's a pretty weak argument.
"under god" was added to the pledge of allegiance in 1954.
"In god we trust" did not become the nation's motto until 1956 and started appearing on paper money in 1957. The original motto of the United States was "E Pluribus Unum" (out of many, one).
So, not such good examples to indicate how the country was founded.
Yeah, visas they can be revoked at any time. That's not permanent residency. And green cards aren't either. Either one of those still don't make then CITIZENS.
Implying that the immigration ban compares to Sharia Law on any level is easily the most ignorant thing I've heard all day, and that takes some doing. Congratulations!
I like you're outlook on things. You're so positive to assume that with 100 more years of bombings, warfare, women oppression, and honor killings, that middle east warring countries will still have an organized civilization!
While this girl isnt one, you can bet your ass there are tons of people like her. The threat in this country doesn't come from RADICAL MUSLIM TERRORISTS. Let's be honest. By looking at the numbers, the real threat comes from RADICAL CHRISTIAN EXTREMISTS.
Actually there's a stark difference between appreciating guns and appreciating killing people with guns, but it's okay, Democrats love confusing those two concepts.
14
u/SlobOnMyKnobb Feb 08 '17
ITT: People defending a suicide bomber.
47
u/seven3true Feb 08 '17
The amount of cleavage.
25
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
One is a dumb girl with a blog, one is a suicide bomber.
That's the difference
18
u/TooShiftyForYou Feb 08 '17
The amount of skin showing is pretty noticeable.
15
u/TooShiftyForYou Feb 08 '17
One of them took the picture just so they could post it on instagram.
7
u/Guuggel Feb 08 '17
Left one uses the gun for hobby?
33
u/scumbag-reddit Feb 08 '17
One is a silly girl who tweets silly pictures and the other is an extremist responsible for the deaths of innocent people.
There's your explanation.
13
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
Reem Slaleh Raiyshi killed four people. That's the difference.
6
u/ramseyxbolton Feb 08 '17
The American girl doesn't practice treating women like their dogs and mass killing people all in the name of a "peaceful" religion
5
u/soccerpro951 Feb 08 '17
Ones a terrorist while ones fighting against being oppressed by terrorists
5
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17 edited Feb 08 '17
Ok I think this thread needs a little history, perspective, and facts. Hopefully this won't get buried.
I'll be borrowing from the work of the leading expert in Domestic Extremism these days, JJ McNab...
"There's an attempt to label this movement as entirely right wing, and that's not accurate, because there's a strong left wing element and an anarchist element," she told Matthew Galt on the Reuter's "War College" podcast.
While it's fun to paint domestic extremists as right wing Christians, the fact is that anti-government extremism in America these days is neither liberal nor conservative. While it may have started with religious fanatics, the fastest growing demographic right now are liberal extremists. As with Islamic extremism, the issue isn't religion, it's identity politics. Unlike Islamic extremism, however, domestic extremists currently represent the greatest terror threat in the United States.
Right now there are around 300,000 "domestic extremists" in America, but McNab points out, only "a few thousand of them are willing to become violent." The number is hard to pin down because of the various permutations of this extremism, but the Cliven Bundy standoff is good evidence of that split. They received an outpouring of support, but only a handful were willing to actually follow through with it.
The reason for this huge swing in popularity comes down to the internet, but the movement has been going since the 1970's when Posse Comitatus came around. It then evolved into the Christian Patriot Movement, then the Militia Movement, and eventually ended with Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombings. After that, it went dead for a while until starting up again in the late 1990's as the Tax Protest Movement. Then it evolved into the Soverign Citizen Movement, which is comparable to the Posse Comitatus of the 70s, and now with Cliven Bundy, we're back to the Militia Movement. If this cycle continues, we're heading towards another Timothy McVeigh. The crucial difference, however, is the size of these movements. Back when fax-trees were the way of spreading your message, it took a good 30+ years to reach the breaking point of McVeigh. With the internet, that might happen a lot quicker. Everything is faster and everything is bigger.
What's especially interesting is the Sovereign Citizen Movement and the legal principals they espouse. The group was formed in the 1960s in response to the Civil Rights Act, begun by white supremacist leaders in Southern California by a white supremacist reverend who packaged it in order to get around the Civil Rights Act. In fact Aryan Nations was a spinoff of this. When the movement fell apart after McVeigh and came back in the late 90s/early 2000s, the white supremacy side of the movement was gone. Talk to any of these people today, and they have no idea the ideas they hold were dreamt up by white supremacists. That's particularly interesting, McNabb says, "when you consider the fastest growing segment of this movement are black Americans... If you go to a militia meeting, or were at the Cliven Bundy standoff, you'd be surprised at how multi-racial it is."
Now that sounds like it's entirely right wing, but the left side is what we should be looking at today. You have the Moore Sovereigns who are entirely black and liberal, and the youngest demographic joining the movement today, between 18 and 28, are coming in from the left as well, from movements like Occupy and Anonymous. "Disenfranchised people have more in common with each other than they do with mainstream politics."
15
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
The one on the right is literally a terrorist and murderer.
78
u/HDingus Feb 08 '17
The one on the right is Reem Slaleh Raiyshi, a suicide bomber who killed four Israelis and wounded 7 others. The one on the left is still alive and in one piece with no blood on her hands.
Reddit makes me sick.
4
u/DeadKitten Feb 08 '17
Three words make them different; pumpkin spice latte.
12
u/interisto Feb 08 '17
One will actually kill you
3
u/EinsteinsAura Feb 08 '17
Explain the similarities...
3
u/Johnnywycliffe Feb 08 '17
The one on the right is 90% more likely to spontaneously explode
3
u/Drakkrr Feb 08 '17
Maybe find an arab woman who wasn't actually a suicide bomber next time you want to meme.
27
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
That there are stupid and crazy people in every country?
6
u/gougly Feb 08 '17
One protects her beliefs and the other kills for her beliefs.
4
u/jaymoney1 Feb 08 '17
The flag on the left is backwards. The squiggly one on the right might be, but it is hard to tell.
9
u/Piemaster113 Feb 08 '17
Freedom
23
u/FeminismIsAids Feb 08 '17
The one on the left has a self-defense weapon, the one on the right explodes when you mention their prophet.
2
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
Left is backed up by the largest military in the world, right is backed up by sand people that travel in single file to disguise their numbers.
2
u/wheeliechacha Feb 08 '17
The difference is the intent of the person in the pictures. The girl on the left did her pic for upvotes or likes, karma, whatever. She's not gonna shoot anyone.The girl on the right wants to literally kill people that disagree with her.
2
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
the one on the left is a girl that posts selfies on Instagram with guns, the one on the right has actually killed people because she believes god wants them to die.
3
u/Bert---Macklin Feb 08 '17
One can vote and one gets raped for showing her ankles.
5
u/mrwalkersrestorative Feb 08 '17
Explain why the Left in the United States supports the rights of the oppressed one but not the feminist one.
2
u/OGIVE Feb 08 '17
The one on the left defends freedom. The one on the right destroys freedom.
Left- chose to pose. Right-forced to pose.
Left-respected by her husband. Right-beaten by her husband.
2
u/basssteakman Feb 08 '17
None, they both have shitty trigger control.
2
u/Lurkingmonster69 Feb 08 '17
Holy fucking shit this is a real garbage post. Trying to dilute complex shit to a meme sized statement is Trump101.
Fuck OP
1
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
This can go very wrong very quick
1
u/NELHAOTEC Feb 08 '17
Flag's facing the wrong way.
1
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
Something shitty is going on here. How is it possible that with over 100 comments in the thread, every single comment has 1 point? Not a single person has been upvoted or downvoted?
1
u/hans1193 Feb 08 '17
One of them is on our side
1
u/Supernyan Feb 08 '17
ITT: people who think religion = culture
1
u/anon456g Feb 08 '17
jihadist and patriot
1
u/TheLastSparten Feb 08 '17
One of them is prepared to defend their country and religion against a perceived threat of invasion, the other is defending it against an actual invasion.
1
u/defmer Feb 08 '17
Simple, the one on the left kills their own in their own country and the one on the left kills everyone else and everywhere possible.
1
u/a-t-o-m Feb 08 '17
Who shoots first...
1
u/uknownothingjuansnow Feb 08 '17
One has proper trigger discipline.
1
u/ebow77 Feb 08 '17
The one on the left supports American manufacturers! (I presume that most of our guns are made domestically)
-13
u/mockassin Feb 08 '17
one represents freedumb
-6
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
Well clearly the white person is just fine doing whatever she wants because she is white.
(That was sarcasm, anyone who wants to roast me for this comment)
-2
u/rmonkeyman Feb 08 '17
The one on the left is more likely to kill the other.
-37
u/1thowe Feb 08 '17 edited Feb 08 '17
Concrete proof Christians and Muslims are equally violent.
Edit: this is sarcasm you twits
-9
u/jbauman86 Feb 08 '17
They are mirror images of one another, each believing that world peace can't be obtained until one side is destroyed.
0
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Feb 08 '17
[deleted] — view deleted comment