Elephant in the room: terrorists are not white and are Muslim

[mr.turbo]

In excess of 70% of the American population are white.  As well, christianity represents 70% of the population .  Islamic followers represent less than 1% of the population.  

Go bring your bullshit somewhere else.  It's easy to manipulate the data if you don't present all the facts.  Muslims commit these terroristic act at an exponentially higher rate than these nutty right wing christians.

what bullshit?

the FBI, DHS, West Point reports?




where do you get your information on terrorist threats?

[iwantmass]

what bullshit 

the FBI, DHS, West Point reports?

where do you get your information on terrorist threats?

I'll take your data at face value and trust that it is correct.  In a total American population of +320 million people, I would say 48 acts of terror being committed by a population that is both 70% of the entire population in race and religion, is a more a more acceptable number than 45 dead in that same time span by a group that represents less than 1% of the population.

The occasional white supremacist nut job is disgusting, but they aren't the bigger problem.  Muslims are the bigger terrorist threat and it gets worse as there numbers increase.  I'm not anti-muslim and I don't want anyone persecuting innocent muslims, but let's not be naive here

[mr.turbo]

I'll take your data at face value and trust that it is correct.  In a total American population of +320 million people, I would say 48 acts of terror being committed by a population that is both 70% of the entire population in race and religion, is a more a more acceptable number than 45 dead in that same time span by a group that represents less than 1% of the population.

The occasional white supremacist nut job is disgusting, but they aren't the bigger problem.  Muslims are the bigger terrorist threat and it gets worse as there numbers increase.  I'm not anti-muslim and I don't want anyone persecuting innocent muslims, but let's not be naive here

like I said, let me know how you arrived at this conclusion and where you get your information. . For now I'll stick with well known terrorism experts, experts at FBI and DHS etc.

Looking forward to seeing the reports, studies to support your claims.

[drkaje]

@ iwantmass,

Dead is dead.

[mr.turbo]

the face of the enemy!







http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/us/19crash.html

dead is dead!

 

[iwantmass]

like I said, let me know how you arrived at this conclusion and where you get your information. . For now I'll stick with well known terrorism experts, experts at FBI and DHS etc.

Looking forward to seeing the reports, studies to support your claims.

And like I said, I'll assume your data is true and accurate.  Aparently math is yet another one of your weaknesses.  Lemme try and help.
Muslims commit an act of terror at 0.000014 per muslim

Let's just assume for the sake of napkin math that all acts of these 48 acts of terror were committed by christians.  It won't be exact but it will be close.  0.00000021 act of terror occur per a christian given their population.

I'm not going to insert my opinion here. We will just rely on the numbers.  A quick look at those 2 numbers tells me that there are 2 more zeros after the decimal point if we look at the amount of Christians that commit an act of terror given their demographic.    As we know, you aren't good with numbers but that is a lot.  That is why I earlier used the term "exponential" when referring to the severity that a muslim in would commit a crime vs a christian white right winger.

If we look at those numbers, we can honestly say that both christian and muslim acts of terror are certainly an anomaly.  That being said, muslim acts of terror occur much more frequent rate than christian if we factor their percentages.

I'm certain you won't understand this as I don't suspect they call you Mr turbo for your quick wit, but I tried for the 3rd time

[iwantmass]

@ iwantmass,

Dead is dead.

I agree 100%. That is why I said deaths at the hand of white supremacist are disgusting.  That isn't the issue at hand between me and mr turbo. Mr turbo would like to imply that this right wing white supremacist group is more of a danger.  It isn't, and that is if we completely ignore 9/11 as he did.  Read the rest of the thread

[drkaje]

I agree 100%. That is why I said deaths at the hand of white supremacist are disgusting.  That isn't the issue at hand between me and mr turbo. Mr turbo would like to imply that this right wing white supremacist group is more of a danger.  It isn't, and that is if we completely ignore 9/11 as he did.  Read the rest of the thread

Safety is probably relative to where people live and lifestyle. I kind of doubt the typical American lives in daily danger from Islamic terrorists. In fact, I believe our way(s) of life and rights are more in danger from how the political process is manipulated by playing on people's fears.

[mr.turbo]

And like I said, I'll assume your data is true and accurate.  Aparently math is yet another one of your weaknesses.  Lemme try and help.
Muslims commit an act of terror at 0.000014 per muslim

Let's just assume for the sake of napkin math that all acts of these 48 acts of terror were committed by christians.  It won't be exact but it will be close.  0.00000021 act of terror occur per a christian given their population.

I'm not going to insert my opinion here. We will just rely on the numbers.  A quick look at those 2 numbers tells me that there are 2 more zeros after the decimal point if we look at the amount of Christians that commit an act of terror given their demographic.    As we know, you aren't good with numbers but that is a lot.  That is why I earlier used the term "exponential" when referring to the severity that a muslim in would commit a crime vs a christian white right winger.

If we look at those numbers, we can honestly say that both christian and muslim acts of terror are certainly an anomaly.  That being said, muslim acts of terror occur much more frequent rate than christian if we factor their percentages.

I'm certain you won't understand this as I don't suspect they call you Mr turbo for your quick wit, but I tried for the 3rd time

ok but you just decided arbitrarily that this was an appropriate analysis. To be honest I don't get it totally. I don't have an opinion but the data indicates that whitey is at least as bad as the jihadi factor. No need for 10 decimal points of precision.

If the terrorism experts at West Point put out a 150 page report on domestic right-wing terrorism, it's your prerogative to dismiss it. If fifteen different major media outlets print a University study by terrorism experts you have a right to dismiss it and apply your own set of analyses come to your own conclusions etc.  Keep doing what you're doing, I hope it works for you. Call it bullshit and recalculate the numbers if that make you feel better but it won't reduce terrorist attacks.

[chaos]

LOL @ mr turdball trying to play statician and not realizing what a fool he comes out looking.

In fact, I believe our way(s) of life and rights are more in danger from how the political process is manipulated by playing on people's fears.

This x2

[mr.turbo]

LOL @ mr turdball trying to play statician and not realizing what a fool he comes out looking.

This x2

conehead getting defensive again, ready at any moment to fly into another extreme tizzy

a wise man once said "you're part of the problem"

[TuHolmes]

Safety is probably relative to where people live and lifestyle. I kind of doubt the typical American lives in daily danger from Islamic terrorists. In fact, I believe our way(s) of life and rights are more in danger from how the political process is manipulated by playing on people's fears.

This is a very accurate statement.

[chaos]

conehead getting defensive again, ready at any moment to fly into another extreme tizzy

a wise man once said "you're part of the problem"

I've never flown into a tizzy, let alone an extreme one. Sounds dangerous.
You should listen to that wise man.

[MoralMan]

They ve all got it in them, their backward, sick book condones and encourages it. Trust me I read the thing and couldn't believe it. Cut off the heads of non believers, shun non believers.

[iwantmass]

ok but you just decided arbitrarily that this was an appropriate analysis. To be honest I don't get it totally. I don't have an opinion but the data indicates that whitey is at least as bad as the jihadi factor. No need for 10 decimal points of precision.

If the terrorism experts at West Point put out a 150 page report on domestic right-wing terrorism, it's your prerogative to dismiss it. If fifteen different major media outlets print a University study by terrorism experts you have a right to dismiss it and apply your own set of analyses come to your own conclusions etc.  Keep doing what you're doing, I hope it works for you. Call it bullshit and recalculate the numbers if that make you feel better but it won't reduce terrorist attacks.

I can't think of 1 news outlet or liberal college that would have a political agenda and manipulate data....

[mr.turbo]

I can't think of 1 news outlet or liberal college that would have a political agenda and manipulate data....

so what's the specific political agenda at work here?

[iwantmass]

so what's the specific political agenda at work here?

Can you at least provide consistent data if you are going to try and defend your point.  Your first link doesn't agree with your last graph

[mr.turbo]

Can you at least provide consistent data if you are going to try and defend your point.  Your first link doesn't agree with your last graph

the data on the website is updated to include the latest stats.  the graphs are from a period before the latest jihadi shooting spree. They haven't been updated fully yet 

let me know about this agenda. eagerly awaiting that material.

[iwantmass]

the data on the website is updated to include the latest stats.  the graphs are from a period before the latest jihadi shooting spree. They haven't been updated fully yet 

let me know about this agenda. eagerly awaiting that material.

In a generation where people use terms like white guilt/privilege regularly, and our president says things like isis is the jv team, I can't imagine where you would find it hard to skew data in a direction that deflects criticism away from muslims.  The studies that you presented are even flawed in the sense that they outright ignore 9/11 because it would make the data so lopsided there would be no point in debating.  How convenient that your data starts the year after the worst terror event in history.  I gave you the numbers.  I'm sorry you choose to ignore them or can't comprehend them.

[Fortress]

Not too mention the amount of jihadist plans thwarted vs home grown right wingers is night and day

To, too and two. Figure it out.

[drkaje]

To, too and two. Figure it out.

"To help two people is too much trouble" is a great way to remember it.

[mr.turbo]

In a generation where people use terms like white guilt/privilege regularly, and our president says things like isis is the jv team, I can't imagine where you would find it hard to skew data in a direction that deflects criticism away from muslims.  The studies that you presented are even flawed in the sense that they outright ignore 9/11 because it would make the data so lopsided there would be no point in debating.  How convenient that your data starts the year after the worst terror event in history.  I gave you the numbers.  I'm sorry you choose to ignore them or can't comprehend them.

I think the point of starting after 9/11 is to understand the effect of the new legal environment, anti-terror practices etc. That's only interesting if you're concerned with doing things that work.  The study is also confined to "home grown terrorism".  If you want to discuss international terrorism that's a different subject but happy to discuss 9/11 too. Those guys were mostly Saudis.

There are two possibilities. One is that there is an agenda across several law enforcement and security agencies to present a false picture and deflect attention from muslims. I guess it's to curry favor with a certain political segment? OK. Or possibility number two is when the FBI, DHS etc. says the most pervasive domestic terror threat is white supremacists that they really mean it.

If you like to do your own analysis you should check out the reporting of the shooting at the planned parenthood clinic and compare it to the San Bernardino shooting. I think they happened about the same time.  This would be the perfect way to prove your case of bias in the media and how these topics are reported. Let me know what you find!  

[iwantmass]

I think the point of starting after 9/11 is to understand the effect of the new legal environment, anti-terror practices etc. That's only interesting if you're concerned with doing things that work.  The study is also is confined to "home grown terrorism".  If you want to discuss international terrorism that's a different subject but happy to discuss 9/11 too. Those guys were mostly Saudis.

There are two possibilities. One is that there is an agenda across several law enforcement and security agencies to present a false picture and deflect attention from muslims. I guess it's to curry favor with a certain political segment? OK. Or possibility number two is when the FBI, DHS etc. says the most pervasive domestic terror threat is white supremacists that they really mean it.

If you like to do your own analysis you should check out the reporting of the shooting at the planned parenthood clinic and compare it to the San Bernardino shooting. I think they happened about the same time.  This would be the perfect way to prove your case of bias in the media and how these topics are reported. Let me know what you find!  

I think the point if starting after 9/11 is to tilt the data in favor of a particular narrative.  A muslim has a higher percentage to commit a terroristic attack per your data.  I didn't provide it, you did.  They are sorely misrepresented in terms of population yet they still commit nearly the same terroristic acts.  I dont expect you to acknowledge this because this is the same argument that has been made about blacks and the rate they commit crimes for years.  You will hear nothing of it and completely ignore the occurrences per population

[Nomad]

like I said, let me know how you arrived at this conclusion and where you get your information. . For now I'll stick with well known terrorism experts, experts at FBI and DHS etc.

Looking forward to seeing the reports, studies to support your claims.

Are you retarded? Skip your pills today?

What he is saying is that relative % wise. A higher percentage of the tiny muslim population in USA commits terrorists acts against USA and its law abiding citizens compared to the percentage of extreme right-wingers who commit terrorist acts.


How about this, assuming pop of usa is 320 million. 70% of 320 is 224 million. Also 1% of 320 is 3.2 million. So

If if out of 224 million 500 right wingers comitted terrorism that's  0.00000223214%.

If out of 3.2 million, 200 muslims commited jihadi terrorism that's 0.0000625%.

Do you see how much of a difference that is?!?!  Its separated by a factor of 20. Muslims are more likely to commit terrorists acts that will kill American citizens compared to Christians.



Did you learn common core math or something?

[mr.turbo]

I think the point if starting after 9/11 is to tilt the data in favor of a particular narrative.  A muslim has a higher percentage to commit a terroristic attack per your data.  I didn't provide it, you did.  They are sorely misrepresented in terms of population yet they still commit nearly the same terroristic acts.  I dont expect you to acknowledge this because this is the same argument that has been made about blacks and the rate they commit crimes for years.  You will hear nothing of it and completely ignore the occurrences per population

It doesn't qualify as a bigger problem if the numbers aren't greater in quantity. Very simple no calculations needed. It's not my opinion maybe you should email the authors of the reports or write a letter to the FBI. Regardless, as you stated, the percentages are so low as to represent an anomaly so whats the point?