s: If we assume that Vanderboegh is a genuine threat it stands to reason that others are as well.

If they are making speeches to armed crowds about shooting the opposition, buying up guns and ammo, and marching around in public with their weapons yeah, that's a threat that should be taken seriously.

s: I seem to recall you and numerous others jumping through a whole lot of hoops trying to explain how the violent rhetoric coming out of certain wings of OWS was nothing to be concerned about.

The "hoops" being, "OWS aren't the ones showing up with guns and they have generally been the victims, rather than the perpetrators of violence." I realize that reality is inconvenient to a lot of people on the right, and the facts may seem like a "whole bunch of hoops" to you, but to most people it's pretty straightforward.

Do feel free to link to some of those old discussions about OWS if you like. I don't think they'll make your arguments look any better.

s: Likewise that having union members show up at the homes of executives was not a show of force.

And where exactly did I say that?