Was that supposed to be informative, or just simply extremely patronising and insulting to one's intelligence?

So if a liberal is reported on an act of terror, then your response is "typical...", but if a conservative is reported to do so, you blame the media for investigating it? GENIUS!

Tell me, are you one of those individuals who saw the one or two rapes at the Occupy movement and said "Look at them all. They're rapists and criminals"? It wouldn't take me long to browse through the history for it.

The DHS report even warned of a rise in right-wing extremism. At least two of those ones that you mentioned are a direct result of such a thing, direct scare campaigning by groups looking to drive fear into people, such as "we're becoming a socialist state" or "they're coming for your guns". They're designed to make the few act on instinct and do something regrettable, and when something actually happens, all they can do is blame the media for saying it, and preferring to keep it swept under the rug in the name of political ideals.

This is evident on both sides, so don't go saying one side is totally innocent. That's a load of horseshit.

wrong post** nevermind***

Did you really need to ask that in your second paragraph? Are you fighting his argument or attacking him without any concrete base whatsoever? Besides, your whole answer, besides a lot of machine gunning directed at the strawman, is mostly based on a "tu quoque" argument; essentially, the old childhood tactic of declaring, “Well, you do it, too!”.

You'd be surprised how many people associate those three words as one entity, obviously you're much too educated to take this as informative

No, it's pointing out hypocrisy. When you have a double standard for one side, blaming others instead of acknowledging the root of the problem, while declaring total blame on the other side should it happen to them, that's being a hypocrite. Really, you should look it up sometime. 

The initial argument was that the media goes out of their way to look for connections to possible terrorist links, (which is their job, by the way). What he pointed out was that doing so is unacceptable if it shows they have connections to conservatives. The truth of the matter is, the DHS predicted right-wing extremism before these occurances, and was thoroughly dismissed. Now that it's happening, they're calling it "media hunt for conservative links". Ohhh no! we cannot blame the conservatives for anything, right?

I note the hint of sarcasm in your post here, but it's much more complex than that. Western countries generally denounce all terrorism no matter who commits it. Americans don't like it that their government has taken them to war and that is sometimes called "terrorism", while it technically isn't at all. Same for people in the UK.

The difference with Muslims in general is that they don't disagree with the blatent terrorist acts that are carried out by extreme elements in the name of the faith they belong to. These acts are terrorism in the classic sense of the word, yet they stand by and look away and neither support nor denounce it.

So in some respects Muslims are passive terrorists.

When was the last time you heard a Muslim publically denounce a terrorist act carried out by a Muslim? I'm not saying all Muslims are terrorists but they sure don't help themselves by just turning a blind eye like they do.

They are only two sides. Terrorists and counter-terrorists.

Also, whenever I think of terrorists I think of Russians. I blame pretty much all action movies ever.

For some reason they kept targeting the United States after Rocky's gret spirit won over the Moscow crowd, ended the cold war and brought down communism.

Which two, pray tell? The schizo Jared Loughner who didn't even bother to vote in 2010 (you know, the Tea Party's banner year) despite voting in the two previous elections? Joe Stack, whose manifesto was pure Occupy Wall Street? Or maybe Bill Sparkman bought so strongly into anti-government rhetoric that he decided all government workers had to go, starting with himself.

The telling thing is that the media often tiptoes around the views of outspoken jihadists like Nidal Hasan, and despite the (not really) anti-war movement's extreme rhetoric during the Bush years, the media didn't try to pin every random instance of violence on them. But now that the scary conservatives are the ones who are pissed off about being out of power, the media regularly rushes to hang anything around their neck until it's proven otherwise. And once they finally have to admit that there was no link, the damage has already been done and it's an established meme that Jared Loughner was a Sarah Palin fanboy or some such nonsense.