I didn't realize that a body count was necessary in order to be called an extremist nutjob. As far as him ?advocating direct action, not killing or harming anyone but shutting/slowing down the system ? that is a ridiculous way of reading what he said. Let me help you comprehend what that guy is advocating.
First a look at what you called the post a ?snip of unsubstantiated right wing fear mongering. ?
unsubstantiated
adjective
unsupported by other evidence
I wonder what could substantiate this enough for you to actually believe, coming from a ?right wing fear monger? and all. Ooooh. I know! How about a book that is written and published by HIM as my proof? You can even get it on CD if the book is a little too big for you.
His website: http://www.arissamediagroup.com/polviobook.html
Here are a few excerpts from HIS book ?the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks are defensible because the terrorist acts were meant to send a legitimate message to Americans. ?
?Political violence therefore can be defined as actions taken for political purposes which harm humans. ?
?The next logical question that should be contemplated is why then do those who may not be in an immediate and desperate position of protecting themselves choose to resort to violence as a means of addressing their grievances? This question is problematic for at least two reasons. First, the notion of an immediate and desperate position of protecting one?s life is very relative. Any number of people may perceive the threats to one?s life in varying degrees of seriousness. A man involved in the drug trade, for instance, who learns there is a contract out on his life, knows full well that he is in a desperate and immediate situation. But often times the issue is much fuzzier. Members of the Earth Liberation Front have stated in their communiqués that protecting the environment is a matter of self defense. They feel that the threat to the natural world is so severe, desperate, and immediate that they engage in actions of sabotage to try and protect what they see as all life on the planet. Likewise, Dr. Ted Kazcinski, also referred to as the Unabomber, conducted a multi-year campaign of violence against what he saw as a technological world threatening all life. As the above examples demonstrate, there often times is a considerable discrepancy between what constitutes the notions of desperate and immediate. ?
Read his own words.
Comprehend them.
He is advocating direct violence which ?harms humans?. Not to mention the fact that you would have to be a fool to believe that large scale urban rioting and using any means necessary to actively target U.S. Military installations would not lead to harm and death.
I do hope that you can come up with something better to than ?where is the body count? to respond with.
Facebook
Twitter