'Who are those idiots?' Bill O'Reilly reacts to STUNNING claims that 'right-wing' groups are bigger threat than THE TALIBAN
Bill O'Reilly joined "The Glenn Beck Program" Friday to discuss a recent House Homeland Security Committee briefing on the impact of the 9/11 terror attacks, during which "national security experts" claimed "right-wing" groups pose a greater threat to the United States than groups like the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.
Glenn played two video clips from the briefing that showed Senior Fellow Brookings Institute Center for Middle East Policy, Daniel Byman, and former National Intelligence Council Chair during the Obama administration, Christopher Kojm, in apparent agreement that "right-wing extremists" are a bigger threat to Americans today than "jihadists."
"I'm someone who has written extensively on both jihadist groups, but also right-wing, white supremacist groups," Byman says in the first video clip. "And in my mind, there's no question that today in the United States, the right-wing and white supremacist violence is a much greater risk."
"I agree with your assessment and those of my colleagues who have spoken already, there's little doubt that the domestic terrorist threat from white nationalists and right-wing extremist groups is greater than the jihadist threat today," Kojm states in the second clip.
"Who are those idiots?" O'Reilly exclaimed. "It's just unbelievable ... they're not even in the same universe. Yeah, there are bad neo-Nazi Americans running around, yeah, but there are very few of them. I mean, the jihadists are causing death and destruction, death and destruction all over the world. Not just in the United States. These people are so blatantly irresponsible and ignorant, it's just staggering."
Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Jordan Peterson shares poll showing white liberals embrace using violence to pursue political goals more than conservatives
Following the summer of regular riots in American cities by Black Lives Matter and Antifa members as well as the January storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters, there is debate about which side of the political spectrum embraces violence to achieve their goals. A poll found that white liberals are far more likely to support using violence to advance their political agenda.
The new data was provided by the American National Elections Studies, which was established by the National Science Foundation in 1977. The Time Series Study has been conducted before and after U.S. general elections since 1948. The 2020 ANES Time Series Study was carried out by the University of Michigan and Stanford University.
Participants were asked: "How much do you feel it is justified for people to use violence to pursue their political goals in this country?" Respondents could answer with "Not at all," "A little," "A moderate amount," A lot," and "A great deal." The study has a total of 8,280 interviews that were conducted before the 2020 presidential election.
Bestselling author and University of Toronto psychology professor Dr. Jordan Peterson shared an eye-opening revelation from the 2020 ANES Time Series Study. On his Twitter page, Peterson shared a graph from the poll showing responses from white American adults across the political spectrum from "very liberal" to "very conservative."
The graph shows each political demographic and the percentage of respondents who answered "Not at all" to the question: "How much do you feel it is justified for people to use violence to pursue their political goals in this country?" The graph shows the percentage of white Americans who would never consider using violence to advance their political goals.
The survey found that 95.8% of "very conservative" white respondents said violence should never be used to pursue a political ambition, which was up from 93.3% in 2016. "Conservative" respondents were nearly identical, with 95% disavowing political violence in 2020 and 93.3% in 2016.
However, on the other end of the political spectrum, leftists are more likely to embrace political violence as a means to an end. According to the poll, only 66.5% of "very liberal" white respondents said it was wrong to use violence to attain their political goals. That means that over a third of "very liberal" Americans would justify using some or a "great deal" of violence to pursue their political goals. In the 2016 survey, the percent of "very liberal" respondents willing to endorse political violence was much higher at 86.9%.
There were 82.8% that identified as "liberals" who were against political violence, down from 88.1% in 2016.
The survey found that 85.8% of "moderates" said political violence should never be used, down one percentage point from four years ago.
Bad. And getting worse? https://t.co/M2VCBBaeZh— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@Dr Jordan B Peterson)1615507095.0
The 2020 ANES Time Series Study found that Republicans were less accepting of using violence for political gains compared to Democrats and independents. Along racial lines, white Americans were the least to support using violence to pursue political goals compared to Asians, Hispanics, and blacks.
Thank you for sharing your work with the #ANES2020 https://t.co/WqHUMYxzWf— American National Election Studies (ANES) (@American National Election Studies (ANES))1615479116.0
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com