all terrorists are muslims.. well actually not

[yusuf]

hey all..


hell i was getting really pissed off in the last few months by no brain dickwads like Robert Spencer, and the ra ra merchants for perpetual war / clash of civilisations nonsense. One thing i heard a lot of was

"Not all muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are muslim'

Well it turns out, like most of us have been saying' that statistic is bullshit. Here is CNN destroying the exaggeration.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/01/06/muslim.radicalization.study/

here is the FBI saying only 6% of all terrorism was comitted by muslims, 7% by Jewish extremists.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terrorism2002_2005.htm

Can you imagine the outcry if one of these right wing pundits (http://smearcasting.com/smear.html) came on Fox and said

"Not all Jews are terrorists, but most terrorists are Jews'.. how much of an outcry would there be..

yusuf

[yusuf]

[wiesiek]

so catholic extrema is included in just 16%?
i really don`t belive , `
cause more than all 50% of catholic are narrow minded /my experience/
if we connect "others" and latino it will be 58% -more realistic number.
however they work some more subtele way than big bang or torture in those days...

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Latino terrorists make up the bulk of terrorists?

How does that work?

[Harvey]

so catholic extrema is included in just 16%?

Didn't you hear, we stopped and they all became social owrkers or politicians. That being said dissident republican terrorists did manage to pull off one of the worst possible attacks recently. They blew up the cpatain of the NI Police Gaelic team, a cotholic and fluent irish speaker. The guy was a benchmark for the police force we've been looking for and they put him into a critical condition and surgeons had to remove one of his legs. Wow there boys way to fight for the cause.

[Dmitri]

Latino terrorists make up the bulk of terrorists?

How does that work?

Move to, say, Venezuela and you'll find out.

The numbers are global, but perception of terms like "terrorism" is local/subjective to a culture/populace. "Latino terrorists" doesn't mean anything in Israel, "Jewish terrorists" doesn't mean anything in Ireland, "Irish terrorists" doesn't mean anything in Afghanistan, etc., etc.

(And "Canadian terrorists" doesn't mean anything in Switzerland, and vice versa. )

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Ah I see.

So in context and as a Canadian in North America, it is Muslim terrorists with whom I am most concerned and who present the greatest threat to me personally as a citizen of Canada.

[yusuf]

hey

I think this is actually figures for attacks on US Soil,(including Puerto Rico)

yusuf

[yeniseri]

Some of government statistical data appears so off the wall that it is incredible they get away with stuff!
42% Latino This category is so vague that one wonder hwo they compiled the data.
If Puerto Ricans? are such then they are US citizens, so are they left, right, oblong, what?
16% Other: What kind of compilation is that.

The problem should be on those who do harm to US citizens and corresponding interests and I do not see that from the vague "Latino" category and the Other category? Perhaps, it is just me!

[Darth Rock&Roll]

lol.

did they aggregate this data based on articles at urknet.net?

[Steve James]

Latino is not a very precise category, but there have been more terrorist attacks in Spain by non-Muslims than terrorist attacks in the US by Muslims (in any period you'd like). We could also count the number of American state officials murdered by Muslim terrorists and compare it to the number of Colombian state officials who have been murdered by non-Muslim terrorists. (Actually, it wouldn't be fair, unless we count American state representatives killed while overseas). Of course, Italians are also Latins --a trivial point-- and there have been plenty of killings and kidnappings of gov't officials in Italy, especially Sicily.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

If anyone has consistently suffered at the hands of muslim and arab terrorists, it's Israel.

check this chronology of attacks out.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrori ... srael.html

No wonder they have zero tolerance for it nowadays. who can blame them?

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Latins = French, Spanish, Italian, Romani, Portugese.

Therefore, it also includes eastern canadians, eastern residents of the USA and southern residents of the USA, Mexicans, Carribeans, South Americans.

that's a lot of people! and no doubt, some of those countries are rife with violent crime.

I would say that in this new century that muslims are responsible for the greater portion of terrorism that has occured.

[Steve James]

Portugese are "Latins" but not Latinos; and I think you mean Romanians, not Romani. But, I used Italians as a semi-serious example of the problems with the term. Btw, residents of the Caribbean (the British West Indies, specifically) and for the most part not Latin or Latino (or Lusophone).

Anyway, I think your statement about the "new century" could be true, except that you didn't specify where in the world you are talking about or what you mean by "terrorism." Imo, people only associate "terrorism" with Muslim terrorism. And, in the end, that's the only terrorism they care about. Millions could die in political, ethnic or religious violence elsewhere in the world; but, it's not considered terrorism, so there's no big concern. It would be refreshing to hear about a "War on violence toward women" or children.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

yes, sorry, romanian.