This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Non-Muslims Carried Out More than 90% of All Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil
An FBI report shows that only a small percentage of terrorist attacks carried out on U.S. soil between 1980 and 2005 were perpetrated by Muslims.
Princeton University’s Loon Watch compiled the following chart from the FBI’s data (as explained below, this chart is over-simplified … and somewhat inaccurate):
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI DatabaseAccording to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.
(The chart is misleading in several ways. For example, it labels "Extreme Left Wing Groups" and "Communists", but not "Extreme Right Wing Groups" or "Fascists". It should have either discarded all partisan labels, or included labels for both ends of the spectrum. In addition, "Latinos" is misleading, as Loonwatch is actually referring to Puerto Rican separatist groups, Cuban exile groups and the like. However, as shown below, many of the basic concepts are correct.)
U.S. News and World Report noted in February of this year:
Of the more than 300 American deaths from political violence and mass shootings since 9/11, only 33 have come at the hands of Muslim-Americans, according to the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security. The Muslim-American suspects or perpetrators in these or other attempted attacks fit no demographic profile—only 51 of more than 200 are of Arabic ethnicity. In 2012, all but one of the nine Muslim-American terrorism plots uncovered were halted in early stages. That one, an attempted bombing of a Social Security office in Arizona, caused no casualties.
Wired reported the same month:
Since 9/11, [Charles Kurzman, Professor of Sociology at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, writing for the Triangle Center on Terrorism and National Security] and his team tallies, 33 Americans have died as a result of terrorism launched by their Muslim neighbors. During that period, 180,000 Americans were murdered for reasons unrelated to terrorism. In just the past year, the mass shootings that have captivated America’s attention killed 66 Americans, “twice as many fatalities as from Muslim-American terrorism in all 11 years since 9/11,” notes Kurzman’s team.
Law enforcement, including “informants and undercover agents,” were involved in “almost all of the Muslim-American terrorism plots uncovered in 2012,” the Triangle team finds. That’s in keeping with the FBI’s recent practice of using undercover or double agents to encourage would-be terrorists to act on their violent desires and arresting them when they do — a practice critics say comes perilously close to entrapment. A difference in 2012 observed by Triangle: with the exception of the Arizona attack, all the alleged plots involving U.S. Muslims were “discovered and disrupted at an early stage,” while in the past three years, law enforcement often observed the incubating terror initiatives “after weapons or explosives had already been gathered.”
The sample of Muslim Americans turning to terror is “vanishingly small,” Kurzman tells Danger Room. Measuring the U.S. Muslim population is a famously inexact science, since census data don’t track religion, but rather “country of origin,” which researchers attempt to use as a proxy. There are somewhere between 1.7 million and seven million American Muslims, by most estimates, and Kurzman says he operates off a model that presumes the lower end, a bit over 2 million. That’s less a rate of involvement in terrorism of less than 10 per million, down from a 2003 high of 40 per million, as detailed in the chart above.
Yet the scrutiny by law enforcement and homeland security on American Muslims has not similarly abated. The FBI tracks “geomaps” of areas where Muslims live and work, regardless of their involvement in any crime. The Patriot Act and other post-9/11 restrictions on government surveillance remain in place. The Department of Homeland Security just celebrated its 10th anniversary. In 2011, President Obama ordered the entire federal national-security apparatus to get rid of counterterrorism training material that instructed agents to focus on Islam itself, rather than specific terrorist groups.
Kurzman doesn’t deny that law enforcement plays a role in disrupting and deterring homegrown U.S. Muslim terrorism. His research holds it out as a possible explanation for the decline. But he remains surprised by the disconnect between the scale of the terrorism problem and the scale — and expense — of the government’s response.
“Until public opinion starts to recognize the scale of the problem has been lower than we feared, my sense is that public officials are not going to change their policies,” Kurzman says. “Counterterrorism policies have involved surveillance — not just of Muslim-Americans, but of all Americans, and the fear of terrorism has justified intrusions on American privacy and civil liberties all over the internet and other aspects of our lives. I think the implications here are not just for how we treat a religious minority in the U.S., but also how we treat the rights & liberties of everyone.”
We agree. And so do most Americans. Indeed – as we’ve previously documented – you’re more likely to die from brain-eating parasites, alcoholism, obesity, medical errors, risky sexual behavior or just about anything other than terrorism.
Kurzman told the Young Turks in February that Islamic terrorism “doesn’t even count for 1 percent” of the 180,000 murders in the US since 9/11.
While the Boston marathon bombings were horrific, a top terrorism expert says that the Boston attack was more like Columbine than 9/11, and that the bombers are “murderers not terrorists”. The overwhelming majority of mass shootings were by non-Muslims. (This is true in Europe, as well as in the U.S.)
However you classify them – murder or terrorism – the Boston bombings occurred after all of the statistical analysis set forth above. Moreover, different groups have different agendas about how to classify the perpetrators (For example, liberal Mother Jones and conservative Breitbart disagree on how many of the perpetrators of terror attacks can properly be classified as right wing extremists.)
So we decided to look at the most current statistics for ourselves, to do an objective numerical count not driven by any agenda.
Specifically, we reviewed all of the terrorist attacks on U.S. soil as documented by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). (2012). Global Terrorism Database, as retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd.
The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and – as of this writing – includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.
We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.
We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim … for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like “Al” anything or “Jamaat” anything).
If we weren’t sure what the person’s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.
Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.
In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims.* This is a tiny proportion of all attacks.
(We determined that approximately 118 of the terror attacks - or 4.9% - were carried out by Jewish groups such as Jewish Armed Resistance, the Jewish Defense League, Jewish Action Movement, United Jewish Underground and Thunder of Zion. This is almost twice the percentage of Islamic attacks within the United States. In addition, there were approximately 168 attacks - or 7% - by anti-abortion activists, who tend to be Christian. Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional - a Puerto Rican paramilitary organization - carried out more than 120 bomb attacks on U.S. targets between 1974 and 1983, and there were some 41 attacks by Cuban exiles, and a number of attacks by other Latin American groups. If we look at worldwide attacks - instead of just attacks on U.S. soil - Sunni Muslims are the main perpetrators of terrorism. However: 1. Muslims are also the main victims of terror attacks worldwide; and 2. the U.S. backs the most radical types of Sunnis over more moderate Muslims and Arab secularists.)
Moreover, another study undertaken by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism – called ”Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism in the United States” – found:
Between 1970 and 2011, 32 percent of the perpetrator groups were motivated by ethnonationalist/separatist agendas, 28 percent were motivated by single issues, such as animal rights or opposition to war, and seven percent were motivated by religious beliefs. In addition, 11 percent of the perpetrator groups were classified as extreme right-wing, and 22 percent were categorized as extreme left-wing.
Preliminary findings from PPT-US data between 1970 and 2011 also illustrate a distinct shift in the dominant ideologies of these terrorist groups over time, with the proportion of emerging ethnonationalist/separatist terrorist groups declining and the proportion of religious terrorist groups increasing. However, while terrorist groups with religious ideologies represent 40 percent of all emergent groups from 2000-2011 (two out of five), they only account for seven percent of groups over time.
Similarly, a third study by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Religion found that religion alone is not a key factor in determining which terrorists want to use weapons of mass destruction:
The available empirical data show that there is not a significant relationship between terrorist organizations’ pursuit of CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear) weapons and the mere possession of a religious ideology, according to a new quantitative study by START researchers Victor Asal, Gary Ackerman and Karl Rethemeyer.
Therefore, Muslims are not more likely than other groups to want to use WMDs.
* The Boston marathon bombing was not included in this analysis, as START has not yet updated its database to include 2013 terrorist attacks. 3 people died in the Boston attack. While tragic, we are confident that non-Musliims killed more than 3 during this same period.
We are not experts in terrorism analysis. We would therefore defer to people like Kurzman on the exact number. However, every quantitative analysis of terrorism in the U.S. we have read shows that the percent of terror attacks carried out by Muslims is far less than 10%.
Postscript: State-sponsored terrorism is beyond the scope of this discussion, and was not included in our statistical analysis. Specifically, the following arguments are beyond the scope of this discussion, as we are focusing solely on non-state terrorism:
- Arguments by University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole that deaths from 20th century wars could be labeled Christian terrorism
- Arguments that our recent use of torture and double tap drone strikes are terrorism
»
- advertisements -
It would show that they are 50% more effective at killing than their competitors.
You lie.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/@@wanted-group-listing FBI's top 30. 29 of which are crazy white men.
I don't see any right-wing nutbag groups listed in this article's pie chart.
Kinda fucks the whole left-wing media's arguement in the bunghole, desn't it?
Thougg George's typical hackery shines through in the fact that he presents a chart of the numbers of acts of terrorism, not bodycounts - which would skew wayyy the fuck over toward muslim terrorists. George's pets can feel free to red arrow away now.
Makes you wonder if the FBI is restricted on who can be on these lists.
Actually, George does it right. The data point is "acts", not "numbers" resulting from the acts. The variable is the terrorist, not the number of victims. Dimwit. If I wanted to do a study on what type of species preyed on deer, I wouldn't base my stats on how many deer were killed, I would base my study on the proportion of species that preyed on the deer, that is the variable, and that is exactly what he did. Your method would be completely biased and meaningless. FOCUS PEOPLE!
George does it dishonestly. The data point is "attacks with some philosophical motivation" and the headline is "terrorist attacks." Two different things. Only by diluting the universe of attacks with non-terrorist attacks can support his bias that islamic extremists are not blamed for the overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks.
The Walrus and the Carpenter
Were walking close at hand:
They wept like anything to see
Such quantities of sand:
'If this were only cleared away,'
They said, 'it would be grand.'
'If seven maids with seven mops
Swept it for half a year,
Do you suppose,' the Walrus said,
'That they could get it clear?'
'l doubt it,' said the Carpenter,
And shed a bitter tear.
oh, they do--just wonder why none were listed....John Birch, Tea Party etc
I wonder. I wonder why a women would stay with a man and even in many instances defend him while he beats the living crap out of her and effectively terrorizes her. I wonder why it is so many times easier to blame ourselves for when bad things happen and people hate us. Is it becasue we think so little of ourselves, our families, our country that we just assume we deserve it? Do we deserve our beatings? It seems many here think we do and I wonder. I wonder what we as a people, as a country would have to do before we could justify defending ourselves from anyone, Bernanke or Borat. Do we need to be better than everyone else? Exactly who might that ideal person or country be? Not me.
But the dominant white male culture in the US is the primary source of evil oppression, not just in the US but in the whole world! That's why, for decades, the schools have taught white guilt. Unfortunately, many in the US have come to believe it and use it as justification for all sorts of perverse acts. Consider, for example, the Pigford scandal. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/us/farm-loan-bias-claims-often-unsupported-cost-us-millions.html?pagewanted=8&_r=2&pagewanted=all&
Perhaps you should inform yourself about the Stockholm syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome) or read about Patty Hearst and the Symbionese Liberation Army, or about Battered Wife syndrome, or...
In other words, irrational behavior happens all the time.
Damn, I shoulda known it was us damned white guys again. Blue eyed devils we be! I guess you are saying that because you can't get 4% on your money at the bank is worse than stoning a women to death for adultry?
Of course.
And Obomber carried out 90% of All Terrorist Attacks outside U.S.Soil .
Which attacks are those? I think our policy of war by drone is stupid and counterproductive. I think our policy of going to war all over and for reasons that have nothing to do with defending our borders is criminal. However, labelling these actions as "terrorism" is to confuse the definition of words and so reduce the ability to have a reasoned discussion. It is sloppy thinking that leads to more stupid policy.
So would that classify Obomber as a Christian terrorist a Muslum terrorist, or perhaps a surrogate Jewish terrorist?
Obomber's religon is Terrorism
Obama's religion is Obama. Terrorizing people is just one of the sacraments.
That said, how many people have died from Obama's drone attacks, and how many have died (over the same timespan) from Islamic attacks on other Muslims? Inquiring minds want to know, but are too lazy to actually try finding out the information (lest it shatter my illusions).
Yeh terrible stuff...but not related to this topic.
We could drag up all sorts of individual bent people committing heinous crimes...but not terrorism, just sick murderers.
Washington quotes an article that includes both terrorisma and other mass killings, so maybe your suggestion about Gosnell being irrelevant is a little off.
C-
weak.
hi, george.
And how many Muslim terrorist acts were actually carried out by Israel or US false flag attacks.
Zero. Unless you factor in imaginary evidence.
lavon affair is the most famous and best documented. there are likely many others with less documentation but strong suspicion like the raid at entebbe, the killing of 241 marines in lebanon, and 9/11 and probably countless others, many including abu nidal.
Not only that, but the other day a joooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo stole my wallet.
if you want antisemitic try this. is there an end to the line of stupid jews screaming everyone is antisemitic?
Yeah, it eventually backs into the line of stupid Christians screaming that they are oppressed in 'murika.
Nah, that would never happen here. We take the First Amendment far too seriously, just like the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/01/Breaking-Pentagon-Confirms-Will-Court-Martial-Soldiers-Who-Share-Christian-Faith
At least getting rid of the Christians in the military will avoid the problems that would result when the Army is told to fire on US citizens.
Nice Number 1, Andy.
This article is a a Nice Number 2 that violates your rule #1.
Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule … Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
Nice. Does "no-planers" fall into that category?
Still waiting for that picture George.................................................
Maybe you can show a pretty pie chart with the percentages of plane crashes where there is evidence of plane and no evidence of a plane.
GW.
As you can see people don't like losing an object that they can mindlessly hate and they will reject any data no matter how compelling that inteferes with their knee jerk love to hate .... of muslims.
But what about Bernanke financial terrorism. Or even bankster global terrorism. Put on a white shirt and collar and it is acceptable.
So if you're against radicalized Islam, you hate all Muslims? Do you think all Muslims are the same? Do you often lump Muslims in with those that blow up innocents?
Only when they do it.
- Ned
To everyone who hates all Muslims and thinks they are all evil ... please answer two questions:
(1) How come the U.S. government is supporting the very WORST, most radical and terror-prone of all Muslims?
(2) Given that during the last world war, Hitler said all JEWS are evil, how can you trust anyone who tells you that everyone of any specific religion is evil and must be exterminated?
It obviously has NOTHING to do with the fact that the Middle East is where the richest oil and gas reserves are, does it? No ... that would be crazy!
Christians are more persecuted in the U.S. than are Muslims. It just stays out of the headlines.
Out of all the commets I've ever read on ZH this one is surely the most asinine.
.
Maybe this is where the misunderstanding lies.
Speaking for myself, I don't hate ALL muslims, just the ones that set off bombs and kill the innocent. A bomb is pretty indiscrimnate, not caring what it kills...to be MSM ludicrous. Its the one who plants the bomb that doesn't care what nationality or religion they kill.
(1) Correct.
(2) Getting into religion can be deep stuff for any non-believer in anything besides what can be touched or felt physically by man...but there is only one religion (that I know of) that combines with government to impose a tax on non-believers, the jizya. Now, the taqiya has more to do with that religions belief/doctrine in allowing the believer to lie to an infidel, practical sometimes...but should be morally & ethically repugnant to a deity, in the way the west or the orient consider logic & virtue.
(3) Canada dwarfs what we import from the entire Persian Gulf.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm
Do you want to know what I would actually be in favor of? Any Muslim living in the U.S. must swear an oath that they support the U.S. Constitution and that they WON'T push - as long as they live on U.S. soil - for sharia law.
Of course, most of our politicians have their fingers crossed behind their backs when they swear to defend and uphold the Constitution, but still ...
Sharia will never come to the United States. It's not even that popular in the Middle East.
Sorry about the lapse in time GW, had to check Mrs. N's oil in the car...duty calls...lol.
What we tried here...and apparently failed somewhere along the way...through apathy or MSM or government teaching (whatever) IS there is a difference between freedom of religion and freedom FROM religion.
Everyone has a right to practice their faith or no faith at all. But the law can get tricky or sticky (as the case may be) and become dominant over any religion or faith.
As a society, we've decided handling venomous snakes in a church full of people in Appalachia is not an appropriate "showing of faith". For obvious reasons.
The same is true of honor killings & mutilations (for females) because the victim didn't resist "hard enough to her rape".
The same is true for any law demanding religious groups offer "birth control" which they feel repugnance toward, is against their beliefs and someone else has to pay for it.
The inroads are many and they go both ways...religion influencing law & law influencing religion...we fought against a state religion here and taxation before, we may have to do it again and there is no telling where ones allies may lie.
By the way, I have a muslim doctor, she's alright but we don't see eye to eye on everything ;-)
nmewn,
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. Separation of church and state means that Christians can worship as they see fit ... without interference from the state.
And that Hindus, Buddhists - and even Muslims - can worship in their own way.
And atheists can refrain from worshipping.
No GW, thats not what I'm saying.
We (more properly I) will not condone "honor killings" and mutilations of women (or men) by their belief system...no matter what religion they are.
They can bow to the east or make their women walk behind them (as long as they don't protest against it, sufferage and all, its voluntary on the womans part).
To be perfectly honest, if they were as tolerant & respectful as I, they wouldn't be pushing to build a "muslim center" so near to ground zero...out of respect for what was done.
That is to say, I don't see the supporters of ELF pushing to build a nest next to the local lumber mill...that would just be, unseemly...but it is what they do, historically.
I would think they could let this one slide in deference to...it may not have been them ;-)
There goes nmewn again, "well if everyone was just more like me..."
There's a reason Islam today is generally about how Christianity was 3-4 centuries ago and beyond. There's a reason most of the Middle East still practices cousin-marriage. There's a reason it is not a bastion of liberalism.
Had you figured this reason out, you would not have made such idiotic (and generalizing) remarks as " if they were as tolerant & respectful as I..."
SO you are saying they are Retards and we should elevate them to another protected class of humans. Another justifiable homicidal idiot. They had bad parents, right? It is anmazing that liberals come out in force to defend a huge part of the human population that abhores every tenant of liberalism. Their treatment of women especially. They want my head on a spike in this country if i mention breast size to a women, while a muslim can stone his wife to death and libs tell us it a quaint cultural thing, and God knows we need to respect and preserve other cultures.
So when (largely christians) founded this country TWO CENTURIES AGO with one of the concepts being, freedom OF religion what was going on in the ME at the same time?
Pretty much the same thing as now. Jefferson warned about it.
Or do you have some larger point to make?
This is ZH, say it, you won't be beheaded for it ;-)
When "Masons" founded the country, two centuries ago ... they quickly found it expedient to disguise their illumism under the banner of the prevailing "Christianity" of the populace which they ruled over.
Eventually... it was no longer necessary to disguise the source and intent of the Ashkenazi impetus behind the creation of AMERIKA... so after WW2 they simply dropped the pretence and starting cultivating myths of freedom... and dupes like you.
No larger point needed.... it's all in the fine print.
Read the sionist slavery contract.
Muslims bring Sharia....it is one of the inevitable goals of their religion.
Sharia conflicts with most if not all other governmental forms that man has devised.
Sharia can coexist with other authoritative structures for awhile but it (and the people that support it) will either directly conflict with or actively seek to destroy other conflicting structures. (ie., Democracy, Rule of law, etc)
Thus eventually under Sharia, you either become muslim or suffer under the yoke of what Sharia prescribes for you. (Do some research on how islam was successful at getting everyone to convert throughout the middle east and you will understand what I mean.)
George....either tell everyone what fun they will have under sharia or quit being so fucking naive.....
I invite you to read CHRISTIAN psychiatrist M. Scott Peck.