Ohio proposal to label neo nazis as terrorists. What other groups should be considered?

White supermacists and nazis are resposible for many deaths. They use terror to forward their agenda.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot....socialists / communists have killed far more people than white supremacists (I guess Hitler was both)

Nowadays it's Muslims that are the danger rather than commies. I really don't see neonazis or so called white supremacists as terrorists.
 
What have the Neo-Nazis done to be designated as terrorists? What are their terrorist actions?

This is a slippery slope, and I don't want to start down it.

That is what i asked as well, but a little research shows that members have carried out quite a few mass shootings. The kkk is already on the list, so I say add neo nazis as well. It just becomes difficult to determine which is which sometimes. And sometimes, they are one in the same. Dylan roof was part of both groups, and I can't remember the name, but there was a guy that shot up a Indian sihk temple.

I think that the nazis heil from the north and west-think Seattle, cali, and some cities in the mid west. They also do most of the recruiting on line. While the kkk stays in places where they can wear mullets and fuck their sister.
 
Those damn Libyans.

bttf10.jpg
 
Agga, I agree 100. Street gangs are the scourge of every city. They account for probably 8000 deaths every year. Look at your hometown. They tearing shit up every year.



No doubt, but they're Democrats so, you know, we have to feel sorry for them and try to understand where they're coming from and realize its not their fault -its someone elses. They're being held down.


Motor Cycle clubs are the interesting ones because I believe 'clubs' and the right to form/assemble them are actually protected. However, I do think under the RICO clauses theres ways around that if you can prove specific ones exsist for specific reasons and so on.
 
What have the Neo-Nazis done to be designated as terrorists? What are their terrorist actions?

This is a slippery slope, and I don't want to start down it.



I don't know that it would be easy -or maybe even fair- to label each individual click/group of them terrorists as a whole -but I'm willing to bet that there are groups of them that have performed and have at least intent to perform what would be considered 'terrorist' acts.


I get where you're coming from tho with it being a slippery slope. They'd have to find a way to connect all other groups to the groups I mentioned and prove that they're operating together in some sort of organized setting. And honestly, I doubt they all are that sophisticated, or even get along with one another enough to prove such a thing.
 
Can't disagree with that video. The white supremacist/survivalists/militia types are the most dangerous group, but the lone wolfs are doing most of the killings at this point.
I would say Islam by far is the most dangerous group.
 
I don't have any issue with this at all if the standard we're using is flags and symbols.

but based off this logic I'd also add Antifa to that list.
 
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot....socialists / communists have killed far more people than white supremacists (I guess Hitler was both)

Nowadays it's Muslims that are the danger rather than commies. I really don't see neonazis or so called white supremacists as terrorists.

I would still say communists/marxists are the most dangerous. People living in modern times could in theory wiping out people living like it is 700 AD. You think if the USA and stuff was not around, that China would not just wipe out its muslim population?
 
I would say Islam by far is the most dangerous group.

They were not in that equation. That was simply out of kkk, nazis, sovereign citizens. At least, that was how I answered was out of the white groups.
 
No doubt, but they're Democrats so, you know, we have to feel sorry for them and try to understand where they're coming from and realize its not their fault -its someone elses. They're being held down.


Motor Cycle clubs are the interesting ones because I believe 'clubs' and the right to form/assemble them are actually protected. However, I do think under the RICO clauses theres ways around that if you can prove specific ones exsist for specific reasons and so on.

I can't pretend I am completely up on my rico, but they just have to prove that crime is committed for the club to consider it a gang, or outlaw club.
 
Back
Top