Then why did you say "The scariest to me personally was someone attempting to start a fire in a building nearby to the convoy while duct taping the doors shut.[1]" and link to the article as proof of violence committed by the convoy?
It was scariest to me because it was personal - I have friends who live currently adjacent to the building in question. Had they succeeded in their goal it's possible many people would have died and at that point it would have largely been irrelevant if they were members of the convoy or just opportunistic arsonists.
You'll also note I was careful in my wording ("nearby to the convoy") because that part is unclear. It's coincidental timing if it wasn't people participating convoy people. I already addressed this part though. I also provided a plethora of other examples.
I also didn't suggest that alone was "proof of violence committed by the convoy" -- Why have you avoided comment on the other links I provided?
I was referring to the other documentation of violent and otherwise criminal behaviour by protestors, not the arson case.