An interesting perspective since all of the burning and looting I have seen have been obvious setups by non-protesters. No matter what the impressive editing done by some news outlets have done, the full video of the incidents have all shown that the start of the more severe incidents has been by non-protesters.

Second, I was specifically referring to the terrorist who picked up a gun, drove to a protest march that was in no way a “riot” or included any burning or looting. Then walk up and shot protesters who had done nothing except assemble to protest actions by their government. Was it terrorist that you disagreed with, or was it radical right-wing? Because I don’t see any evidence that the terrorist was non-radical, and he certainly wasn’t a left wing radical or a middle eastern radical. I prefer to call things by their proper name. It is far past time we stop apologizing for the radical right-wing white supremacist terrorists who are responsible for most of the terror attacks in the United States. It seems to me that if we are going to call brown-skinned people who commit these kinds of attacks, radical Islamist terrorists no matter what their true religion because of the original terrorists. Then we should call the white-skinned people who commit these kinds of attacks, radical right-wing terrorists no matter what their actual party affiliation due to the vast majority of them actually being far to the right politically.

If the truth hurts then maybe you should work to change it, rather than ignoring the discomfort.