The REAL terrorism threat


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.
    In contrast, right-wing extremists averaged 337 attacks per year in the decade after 9/11, causing a total of 254 fatalities

    Discuss.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Discuss.

    Since the article's behind a paywall, it's rather difficult. What right-wing extremists have killed nearly as many people as the 9/11 hijackers? Does that count people the media hoped and/or rushed to assume were right-wing, but then turned out not to be?


  • Dupa

    @asdf aren't jihadists right-wing extremists too?


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @FrostCat said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Since the article's behind a paywall

    Not for me. Weird…


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @kt_ One could say so. Not entirely sure whether that classification would make sense, though. Depends on your definition of "right wing", I guess.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @FrostCat said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    What right-wing extremists have killed nearly as many people as the 9/11 hijackers? Does that count people the media hoped and/or rushed to assume were right-wing, but then turned out not to be?

    I'm not sure those are the most relevant questions to ask. I'd say the more important question is: Why are we only focusing on radical Islam and not on other forms of terrorism? Why is the public discussion so heavily biased? I'm not denying it's a huge problem, but those numbers definitely put the whole issue into a different perspective.

    And also maybe - and I know you'll disagree there: Can you really continue acting like gun control and terrorism prevention are completely unrelated issues?



  • One thing we learn from that is that (assuming those figures are valid) Muslim terrorists are more lethal:
    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities

    2.5 fatalities / attack

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    right-wing extremists averaged 337 attacks per year in the decade after 9/11, causing a total of 254 fatalities

    3370 attacks, 254 fatalities, 0.075 fatalities / attack


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @HardwareGeek That would be consistent with my personal perception: Right-wing extremism is more widespread, but Islamic terrorism is more lethal.



  • Why would the number of casualties be relevant to this discussion? Terrorism isn’t about causing as many deaths as possible, it’s about causing fear — and yes, a good way of doing that is by killing lots of people, but that isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be, for a true terrorist) the primary objective. So I guess the reason must be because more deaths means more media attention, and that’s why twenty attacks makes one class of terrorist more important than 3370 attacks makes another. You could even draw an analogy to traffic: I wonder what the ratio is of the percentage of people who are afraid to fly compared to the percentage that’s afraid to drive around in a car.



  • @FrostCat said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    What right-wing extremists have killed nearly as many people as the 9/11 hijackers?

    Hitler. :trolleybus:


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Gurth said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Terrorism isn’t about causing as many deaths as possible, it’s about causing fear

    Also, in this case, triggering a war between religions. And it seems like the IS is succeeding because we're letting it succeed.



  • @FrostCat said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Discuss.

    Since the article's behind a paywall, it's rather difficult.

    The article is about a year out of date too. Nothing about protesters at Trump rallies causing terror. :trolleybus:


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    White, Christian, right wing extremists aren't terrorists, by definition. They're all crazed, mentally ill lone gunmen who've never yelled Allah Ackbar



  • @HardwareGeek said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    337 attacks

    @HardwareGeek said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    3370 attacks,

    Uhh...



  • @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.
    In contrast, right-wing extremists averaged 337 attacks per year in the decade after 9/11, causing a total of 254 fatalities

    Sounds very cherry-picked to fit the agenda. Like most of these kinds of articles.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Maciejasjmj @HardwareGeek is correct, one is the figure for 10 years and the other one is per year.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Also, in this case, triggering a war between religions. And it seems like the IS is succeeding because we're letting it succeed.

    I shouldn't be telling you this, but it's all an atheist plot to divide an conqu****NO CARRIER****



  • The details are left kind of vague, but I think most people would look at a Sovereign Citizen as a mentally ill person, very different from a militia.

    Maybe that these guys are supposedly focused on doing stuff to the government and not people makes a difference too.

    I'm positive that the relative lack of bodies is the biggest factor.


  • mod

    @boomzilla said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    I'm positive that the relative lack of bodies is the biggest factor.

    Call me cynical, but I suspect if we had a big, powerful Muslim Lobbyist Association throwing money at politicians, suddenly nobody would care about radical Islam anymore. Any group that can be defined as "half the politicians in the US and their voter base" will never be held up as a "terrorist threat" no matter what they do, and that goes for left-wing and right-wing. There's just too much money involved.



  • @Yamikuronue said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Call me cynical, but I suspect if we had a big, powerful Muslim Lobbyist Association throwing money at politicians, suddenly nobody would care about radical Islam anymore.

    Doubtful.

    @Yamikuronue said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Any group that can be defined as "half the politicians in the US and their voter base" will never be held up as a "terrorist threat" no matter what they do, and that goes for left-wing and right-wing. There's just too much money involved.

    I don't think the people described in the article as right wing terror threats fit in any sort of giant group there. The closest might be the militia guys, who seem to get some high profile coverage, like the thing in Oregon recently. And that stuff usually boils down to some sort of dispute about property rights, so very localized and not trying to really terrorize the broader public like the Orlando shooting.

    The other descriptions of actual events seem to just kind of melt into the larger crime picture, especially since they're not terribly lethal. Obviously, stuff like black on black shooting in Chicago is much worse than either right wing or Islamic terrorism (with the obvious exception of 9/11). I don't know what the solution is there, but it would probably involve being called a racist to suggest it.



  • @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Why are we only focusing on radical Islam

    Religion is inherited and has strong incentives to convert other people to it. Other radicalisms don't spread as strongly.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Other radicalisms don't spread as strongly.

    History begs to differ.

    Also, of course political movements try to convert people just like religions. Since when do they not?



  • @asdf There are billions of radical muslims. I doubt there is even a million extreme right-wingers.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    There are billions of radical muslims.

    This is bullshit and you know it.

    @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    I doubt there is even a million extreme right-wingers.

    I don't. There's at least a million of them in Germany alone.



  • @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    I doubt there is even a million extreme right-wingers.

    I don't. There's at least a million of them in Germany alone.

    A million right wingers willing to commit acts of terror?


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @DogsB A million people who I'd say have extreme political views. I have no idea how many of them are willing to commit acts of terror, like igniting inhabited refugee homes. That happens almost every other week now, so there must be many.



  • @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @DogsB A million people who I'd say have extreme political views. I have no idea how many of them are willing to commit acts of terror, like igniting inhabited refugee homes. That happens almost every other week now, so there must be many.

    Just to get a bearing on what you consider extreme right would you like to say what makes them extreme right?

    The people igniting refugee homes could be a fringe element of another group. If you're lumping them in with this extreme right you risk alienating them completely. Does the majority of this extreme right actually condone igniting refugee homes?



  • @asdf From wikipedia:

    In a 2007 Pew Research poll in response to a question on whether suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets to defend Islam could be justified,[29] in Europe:

    (36 vs 64) 64% of Muslims in France believed it could never be justified, 19% believed it could be justified rarely, 10% sometimes, and 6% thought it could be justified often.
    (30 vs 70) 70% of Muslims in Britain believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 12% sometimes, and 3% thought it could be justified often.
    (17 vs 83) 83% of Muslims in Germany believed it could never be justified, 6% believed it could be justified rarely, 6% sometimes, and 1% thought it could be justified often.
    (31 vs 69) 69% of Muslims in Spain believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 10% sometimes, and 6% thought it could be justified often.

    In mainly Muslim countries:

    (55 vs 45) 45% of Muslims in Egypt believed it could never be justified, 25% believed it could be justified rarely, 20% sometimes, and 8% thought it could be justified often.
    (39 vs 61) 61% of Muslims in Turkey believed it could never be justified, 9% believed it could be justified rarely, 14% sometimes, and 3% thought it could be justified often.
    (57 vs 43) 43% of Muslims in Jordan believed it could never be justified, 28% believed it could be justified rarely, 24% sometimes, and 5% thought it could be justified often.
    (72 vs 28) 28% of Muslims in Nigeria believed it could never be justified, 23% believed it could be justified rarely, 38% sometimes, and 8% thought it could be justified often.
    (31 vs 69) 69% of Muslims in Pakistan believed it could never be justified, 8% believed it could be justified rarely, 7% sometimes, and 7% thought it could be justified often.
    (29 vs 71) 71% of Muslims in Indonesia believed it could never be justified, 18% believed it could be justified rarely, 8% sometimes, and 2% thought it could be justified often.



  • @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    A million people who I'd say have extreme political views.

    I would not be surprised if there were near a billion Muslims (and would be very surprised if it were less than a few hundred million) with what you or I would describe as extreme political views.


  • mod

    @boomzilla :moving_goal_post: There's not a billion anyones in Germany

    0_1466771907674_upload-d0cfedba-ffc4-4466-98e0-d8abafc95fd7



  • @Yamikuronue Hmm....your :moving_goal_post: confuses me. I would have thought :pendant: would have been more appropriate. I'd also accept variations on :trolleybus:.


  • mod

    @boomzilla asdf was specifically talking about a million extremists in Germany. You then specified there were a billion Muslim extremists in the world. That's :moving_goal_post:



  • @Yamikuronue No, because I was referring back to @fbmac's post to which @asdf was replying. If I was moving them, it was only trying to put them back. I was really focusing on what we meant by "radical": extreme views or willingness to commit violence.

    Because I'd agree that there are a lot less than a billion Muslims willing to commit violence.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    I'm not sure those are the most relevant questions to ask. I'd say the more important question is: Why are we only focusing on radical Islam and not on other forms of terrorism? Why is the public discussion so heavily biased? I'm not denying it's a huge problem, but those numbers definitely put the whole issue into a different perspective.

    Incorrect. The most important question would be: Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

    There are so many assumptions implicit in those questions that I would say they are not really even questions.



  • @antiquarian said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

    No. I almost always beat her in boardgames. In exchange I let her beat me in almost all arguments.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @Yamikuronue said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    f we had a big, powerful Muslim Lobbyist Association throwing money at politicians

    Like the Saudi royal family?


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    The whole article is cherry-picked so hard the cherry tree is completely bare at this point.

    In a survey we conducted with the Police Executive Research Forum last year of 382 law enforcement agencies, 74 percent reported anti-government extremism as one of the top three terrorist threats in their jurisdiction

    That's meaningless unless you define what anti-government extremism is. Does it include libertarians shitposting on reddit from their mothers' basements? It does, doesn't it? And actually it's meaningless even then because it's not supported by any evidence, it's literally a poll about how the police feel. It's like claiming you were actually assaulted because you were walking outside alone in the dark and you felt unsafe.

    I also like this bit:

    Other data sets, using different definitions of political violence, tell comparable stories. The Global Terrorism Database maintained by the Start Center at the University of Maryland includes 65 attacks in the United States associated with right-wing ideologies and 24 by Muslim extremists since 9/11. The International Security Program at the New America Foundation identifies 39 fatalities from “non-jihadist” homegrown extremists and 26 fatalities from “jihadist” extremists.

    So, let me get this straight: Muslims, which are a tiny minority in the US at 3.3 million (or roughly 1 % of the total population), are responsible for roughly 25% (former source) or 40% (latter source) of terror attacksfatalities? Excellent argument to use if you want to redirect blame to those evil right-wing nutjobs, yeah. "Comparable"... yeah, I guess it's comparable, but these actual comparison shows a huge difference from the rest of the claims in the article.

    And the most important question I have: Why is the article claiming 50 fatalities from Muslim terrorism since 9/11 less than two weeks after a mass shooting by a self-professed ISIS member in a gay club which alone claimed 49 lives? What the FUCK.


  • mod

    @blek said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    a self-professed ISIS member

    pfft. The guy seems to have been a nutball screaming "I'M TOTES WITH ISIS, GUYZZZZ" to justify his actions. Of course Isis wants to claim him; it helps add fuel to their fire to claim he was part of them. The best way to fight that is to set a higher bar than they want to set for what counts as an "Isis member".

    You can count it as part of Muslim terrorism, though, which makes your point still valid, I just wanted to :pendant: about it being an ISIS attack.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @Yamikuronue Anyone who shoots up a place or sets it on fire is a nutball, don't you think? But yeah, I agree it seems likely he didn't actually have any prior contact with ISIS.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    I'm not denying it's a huge problem, but those numbers definitely put the whole issue into a different perspective.

    I'm not prepared to believe there are that many "right-wing terrorists" without a reliable citation, which is why I complained about the article being behind a firewall. As I said, every time there's a terrorist attack, the media assumes it's a white right-winger, and when it's not one, they tend to lose interest.

    Someone in the media said in so many words "I sure hope the Boston bombers are white, and not Muslims".


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @asdf said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Also, in this case, triggering a war between religions.

    Remember, the end goal of all this is that Islamists want the entire world to convert to Islam (or live in subjugation or die). Terrorism is just a means to an end for them..



  • @FrostCat so, if you all convert to Islam the problem is solved. What's keeping you from doing that?



  • @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @FrostCat so, if you all convert to Islam the problem is solved. What's keeping you from doing that?

    Oh, great, another one who thinks that there's The Islam. Just like there's The Christianity.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Maciejasjmj said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Uhh...

    337 average per year for 10 years.

    Which is another thing--I find it wildly unlikely that "right-wing terrorists" committed three thousand attacks and the media didn't trumpet that constantly. I bet it'll turn out to be like how the government says half of all bankruptcies (or whatever) are caused by medical bills, and if you drill down, you find out that what that means is half or whatever of them, the person had unpaid medical bills along with their other bills. That doesn't mean the medical bill is what caused them to declare.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blek said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Why is the article claiming 50 fatalities from Muslim terrorism since 9/11 less than two weeks after a mass shooting by a self-professed ISIS member in a gay club which alone claimed 49 lives?

    The government did try to claim Nutjob Hasan's shooting up Fort Hood was "workplace violence", just like after a guy gets fired from a factory and goes back and kills his ex-coworkers. That's 13 more deaths right there.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Oh, great, another one who thinks that there's The Islam. Just like there's The Christianity.

    Did I say that? All 5 of the current major schools of thought in Islam feel that way. The kuffaar[1] has three options: convert, die, or live as a dhimmi.

    [1] this, of course, doesn't include Jews. As various Hadith[2] say "Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
    I heard Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] saying, "The Jews will fight with you, and you will be given victory over them so that a stone will say, 'O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me; kill him!' ""

    [2] http://quotingislam.blogspot.com/2011/06/muhammad-says-that-one-day-very-trees.html



  • @FrostCat Umm, I was talking to @fbmac - you must've parsed the quote wrong.

    I was actually alluding to the fact that there's no monolithic Islam and that you thus can have problems even if you convert.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @FrostCat said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @blek said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    Why is the article claiming 50 fatalities from Muslim terrorism since 9/11 less than two weeks after a mass shooting by a self-professed ISIS member in a gay club which alone claimed 49 lives?

    The government did try to claim Nutjob Hasan's shooting up Fort Hood was "workplace violence", just like after a guy gets fired from a factory and goes back and kills his ex-coworkers. That's 13 more deaths right there.

    Oh, it turns out this article is a year old, that's why it doesn't include Orlando. For some reason I can see it now, but the first time I clicked on the image in the first post it wanted a login.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    you must've parsed the quote wrong.

    I guess so--looks like I saw you quoting him @mentioning me and suffered some kind of stack error.

    @Rhywden said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    thus can have problems even if you convert.

    Yup. The worst part--for them--is that the Sunni-Shi'ite schism runs so deep that if a region where one is dominant is taken over by the other sect, like is happening in places in Iraq, the odds that the natives would be trusted to convert are fairly low.



  • @Rhywden said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @fbmac said in The REAL terrorism threat:

    @FrostCat so, if you all convert to Islam the problem is solved. What's keeping you from doing that?

    Oh, great, another one who thinks that there's The Islam. Just like there's The Christianity.

    Which one is the peaceful Islam. That's the one we should all convert to!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.