Manhattan explosion

[McHrozni]

The bottom line: if you treat all these cases as one homogenous terrorist thing, you will be very ineffective at intervening in the next one. Yes, they are no doubt being influenced by the social media, ISIS et al propaganda. But at the same time there may be few similarities beyond that.

It really depends on the extent the social media and ISIS propaganda influenced them, in addition to any other underlying conditions.

In case you're keeping score, the Muslims represent 1% of US population, but people "who happen to be Muslim" kill up to 94% of all people killed in terror attacks in the US (not counting the deadliest terror attack of all time). It depends a bit on what you define as a terror attack of course, but the result is clear: the social media and ISIS et.al. propaganda enlarge the problem by at least one order of magnitude and possibly up to two.

So, um ... 90-99% of the problem is one big similarity. What you're discussing are minor variations of the problem.

McHrozni

 

[Belz...]

I called myself a bigot?

Are you sure you are reading this thread right?

Stop pretending to misunderstand. I'm asking you why you're saying that "not wanting to murder all Muslims" means that one is not a bigot, given the definition I provided.

 

[Aepervius]

It really depends on the extent the social media and ISIS propaganda influenced them, in addition to any other underlying conditions.

In case you're keeping score, the Muslims represent 1% of US population, but people "who happen to be Muslim" kill up to 94% of all people killed in terror attacks in the US (not counting the deadliest terror attack of all time).

Where did you see that ? On he FBI web site they seem to dance another tune saying the majority of terrorism is actually various groups like animal protection, anti abortion, right wing KKK like, or anti federalism which makes the majority of terror attacks in the US.

 

[Giz]

Where did you see that ? On he FBI web site they seem to dance another tune saying the majority of terrorism is actually various groups like animal protection, anti abortion, right wing KKK like, or anti federalism which makes the majority of terror attacks in the US.

Because the FBI are including non-murders in their list of terrorist incidents, while mchrozni is only counting that?

 

[McHrozni]

Where did you see that ? On he FBI web site they seem to dance another tune saying the majority of terrorism is actually various groups like animal protection, anti abortion, right wing KKK like, or anti federalism which makes the majority of terror attacks in the US.

By counting dead bodies instead of the number of incidents. I believe I explicitly said so. I consider a terrorist attack that kills 50 people worse than one that kills just one, but this is still worse than one that just does minor damage to the property. You're free to disagree, but I'm also free not to respect that position.

As I recall the said FBI database says 6% of all attacks are committed by Muslims (and various 'analysts' making a big deal that 94% weren't). Even taking that number at face value, that's still six times what it should be. There are reasons why Muslims are viewed with suspicion and fear. Statistics show they commit attacks significantly more often than other demographics, and their attacks tend to kill more people.

Moreover, US only gets the fringe of the problem. The incidents in US don't take place in a vacuum, and opinion in US is shaped by events outside of US as well. In the West, France currently bears the brunt of the problem. A single attack in Nice killed about as many people proportionally to population as all mass shootings in US did. This wasn't the only incident in France in this year, and there was an even worse incident less than a year prior. There were far more deaths caused by Muslims in just two terrorist attacks less than a year apart in France than from terrorist attacks in the entire 20th century from all sources, including Muslims - and Muslim extremists were behind some of the worst incidents in the 20th century.

We haven't even touched the worst problems (Syria et.al.), but this is already enough to conclude it's really no wonder Islamic religion is fast becoming a major issue. I would actually be quite astounded if it didn't become an issue after all this.

McHrozni

 

[catsmate]

On the contrary - they are very popular for cheap pre-paid "burner" phones. They are robust, cheap, reliable, the battery lasts for ages (days/weeks) and the flip cover protects the keypad from unwanted knocks. Walmart does them for less than $15 for instance.

This. They're very popular with tourists visiting Ireland from countries without decent roaming plans.

 

[catsmate]

Held without charge.

Awesome

As happens in New Zealand too.

 

[Belz...]

By counting dead bodies instead of the number of incidents. I believe I explicitly said so. I consider a terrorist attack that kills 50 people worse than one that kills just one, but this is still worse than one that just does minor damage to the property. You're free to disagree, but I'm also free not to respect that position.

Personally I think both approaches have merit.

 

[William Parcher]

Reports seem to indicate that this guy was more interested in al-Qaeda than ISIS.

 

[A'isha]

Because the FBI are including non-murders in their list of terrorist incidents, while mchrozni is only counting that?

Which makes this not a terrorist incident, by that measure.

 

[Belz...]

Reports seem to indicate that this guy was more interested in al-Qaeda than ISIS.

Pfft! Al-Qaeda is so 1991. Guy should get with the program.

 

[Giz]

Which makes this not a terrorist incident, by that measure.

You're right! Another minimalisation of Islamic terrorism, good job A'isha, keep it coming.

 

[Belz...]

You're right! Another minimalisation of Islamic terrorism, good job A'isha, keep it coming.

I think 'by that measure' explains her wording.

 

[Giz]

I think 'by that measure' explains her wording.

I understood her point. .. and her body of work.

 

[A'isha]

I understood her point.

Apparently not.

EDIT: If someone discounts the attacks on the FBI's list that don't result in fatalities and doesn't count them when tallying terrorist incidents, then by that person's measure this bombing should also be discounted and not listed as a "terrorist incident" because it didn't result in fatalities despite it being, you know, obviously a terrorist attack. If they discount the attacks on the FBI's list that don't result in fatalities and don't count them when tallying terrorist incidents, while still considering these bombings to be a terrorist incident despite the lack of fatalities, then they're a hypocrite.

 

[John Nowak]

Personally I think both approaches have merit.

I agree. Someone blowing up my car or burning a cross on my lawn is likely terrorism, but it also makes sense to weight for "People get hospitalized" and "people get killed."

 

[Donal]

Ya, but then you are measuring ineptitude rather than intent and motivation

 

[John Nowak]

Ya, but then you are measuring ineptitude rather than intent and motivation

There is that. The problem is that "Intent to kill" might be difficult to establish. In the case we're discussing, I think there was a clear intent to kill, but still.

 

[The Man]

There is that. The problem is that "Intent to kill" might be difficult to establish. In the case we're discussing, I think there was a clear intent to kill, but still.

Well it's kind of hard to argue against that mens rea


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

Though with our system requiring zealous representation someone is probably going to have to try real hard at that. The simple act of placing the steel balls and such in the device makes it an anti-personnel device (an actus reus).

 

[Belz...]

I understood her point. .. and her body of work.

If you understood her point (see her edit in the post after yours quoted here), then why the comment?