I'm pretty sure everyone including yourself who posted under this sub-thread recognizes we don't know shit yet and is just parroting the news, but let's remember that 24 hours after the incident most of what the media knows is secondhand and if they're talking about the guys web visits as a source of ideology they're 90% full of crap, because the best they probably have is a list of addresses they shouldn't have or a secondhand comment from a loose-lipped and unprofessional investigator or politician. Anyone with medium to heavy net usage is going to have so many web visits over the past year that no single person could reasonably draw much conclusions from it without days of study, and this rarely stops reporters form talking out their asses. I'm guessing Trzaska was not actually trying to finger the left there just responding in kind to what he thought you and others were doing - I could be wrong - that the media tends to scream 'right wing extremist' very quickly and have been wrong roughly half the time. It's also, IMO, pretty redundant to apply a single axis classification where violent lunatics are concerned, lone wolves get their marching order from imaginary dogs or from their alphabet soup and a lot of obvious 'politically motivated attacks' turn out to have nothing to do with that besides the murderer wanting a high profile victim.