There are probably a few of them. That the FBI investigates for good reason. There will always be those groups same as "communist" groups.
IMO the debate about how to call it doesn't hold so much relevance anyway here. Some people just want this to be compared to Islamic terrorism.
Also, the attack from the guy driving the car and radical Islamic terrorism are two different things. So I don't see why they get so much comparison.
I do consider his action an act of terrorism. But I am not really bothered how other people see it. The focus should be on how to stop in in the future.
Not trying to get Trump on something or desperately trying to link it to radical Ismalic terrorism.
It won't solve anything. It's just wasting time to defeat both.
I believe that an act of terror has to be pre-meditated. From what I've read, the man involved with the killing has been charged with second-degree murder (thus not premeditated, atleast based on current knowledge), and he was apparently also on anti-psychotic medicine. Now I'm not one of the people who use mental illness as an excuse, because it may as well be excuse for all killings ever committed, but it would lend credibility to the idea that the car driver did not necessarily require much of a "shove" from any organized group, in order to commit himself to the killing. It is more than likely that he was simply waiting for the chance, and attached himself to any cause that would grant him justification to act on his impulses.
This was a man who likely reacted, possibly out of "revenge", over a protest turned bad. Did "white nationalist" ideals possibly influence this killing? Sure. But this was most likely not an act of terror in the sense that it had been planned, organized and executed, in order to instill a climate of fear through political violence.
In Germany, there was a case where a mentally ill Muslim man attacked people on the streets. Some called it terrorism. I called it like I saw it, then, too, because there was no terrorist link to be found. This was the action of a lone man who was influenced by an ideology, perhaps, but only to impulsive, rather than organized action. I believe terrorism ought to be regarded as organized violence towards the fulfillment of an ideological objective. If we dilute the meaning of it, then we would have to report all sorts of politically, religiously or racially motivated violence, as terrorism.
It only makes the fight against terrorism harder, when we do not draw clear lines on what legitimately amounts to terrorism, and what doesn't.
The people who seek to vehemently denounce and fight against KKK/Neo-nazis/alt-right terrorism, are fighting against ghosts (no pun intended). There's no clear trend of "white nationalist" terror causing havoc around the world, and there hasn't been in decades.
