Aligned Analysis from @CSIS
The @washingtonpost has a big story claiming a massive rise in right wing terrorism.
washingtonpost.com/investigations…
However, the data tells us that attacks have been declining since 2016. Why did they claim the opposite?
The @washingtonpost has a big story claiming a massive rise in right wing terrorism.
washingtonpost.com/investigations…
However, the data tells us that attacks have been declining since 2016. Why did they claim the opposite?
@CSIS @washingtonpost Here's the @CSIS data in the @washingtonpost showing a massive uptick in right wing terrorism (yellow dots). 
@CSIS @washingtonpost Why the difference?
@CSIS and the @washingtonpost included plots (a dysphemism for online chatter).
Basically, they counted messageboard and messaging 'plots' as actual attacks.
@CSIS and the @washingtonpost included plots (a dysphemism for online chatter).
Basically, they counted messageboard and messaging 'plots' as actual attacks.
@CSIS @washingtonpost @CSIS knew what they were doing.
They have the same data as the ADL on the declining number of real attacks.
Instead, they fudged the numbers to fit a narrative.
They have the same data as the ADL on the declining number of real attacks.
Instead, they fudged the numbers to fit a narrative.
This narrative is going to get LOTS of media and Twitter replay over the next week. The feature-length coverage the @washingtonpost gave to it guarantees it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
