No, you’re not more likely to be killed by a right-wing extremist than ...


#1

NO, YOU’RE NOT MORE LIKELY TO BE KILLED BY A RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST THAN AN ISLAMIC TERRORIST
by Damion Daniels

The fact that the two deadliest attacks upon the U.K. in recent memory were at the hands of Islamic terrorists is not simply pub trivia. I mention it because when these apologists for Islam get bored of claiming that jihadists are incessantly and inexplicably lying about their religious motivations, they invariably engage in the crass exercise of throwing around skewed data in a desperate attempt to deemphasize the danger posed by Islamic terror. …

Each of these claims are variations on the assertion that right-wing or far-right terrorism poses a greater danger than Islamic terrorism, and they are based on several studies which attempt to make the same claims.

… the MSNBC article referenced above was published in the summer of 2015. And whilst the information contained within it is frozen at this point in time, the source report that it cites is not. The report has since been updated, and so anyone citing the article now, is citing statistics that do not include the 49 Orlando clubbers murdered the following year by ISIS inspired gunman Omar Mateen … . The updated statistics … show that deaths from jihadist terror attacks in the U.S. are now almost double those attributable to far-right terrorists.

… but even when using the most up-to-date figures, there are a number of issues with the actual dataset this report relies on which further skew the statistics towards downplaying the Islamic threat. … the numbers here ostensibly focus on the threat to Americans, but do not take Americans killed abroad by Islamic terrorists into account. …

The lopsidedness of this report is also evident in the fact that … it treats terrorists with an Islamist agenda as one dataset, and compares it to terrorists with a white supremacist agenda, terrorists with an anti-government agenda, and terrorist with a fundamentalist Christian agenda, by treating all three non-Islamic motivations as one dataset. This is not an apples to apples comparison. This is an apples to fruit bowl comparison.

But surely the most blatant and deliberate skewing of the numbers here is in the fact that the biggest terror attack in the history of the United States is discounted by beginning the tally on 12th September 2001. …

Statistics don’t lie, but liars mutilate and manipulate statistics.

Bottom line, the “research” “study” Jihadi apologists cite begs the question (builds its conclusion into its premises) in several ways: it ignores American civilians killed by Jihadis outside of the US; it lumps multiple diverse non-Islamic terrorist types into a single category; the study excludes the nearly 3000 people slaughtered by Jihadis on 9/11/2001. Were those latter 3000 victims included in the study, even lumping the diverse non-Islamic terrorists into one fruit bowl yields a deaths stat that is like an anthill compared to the Mt. Everest of those slaughtered by jihadis.


#2

And in any case, the likelihood of either is incredibly low, just like mass shootings in general, like winning the death lottery.


#3

There are ver FEW far right wing bad guys in the US according to the FBI…est around 25,000 max and that is the KKK, and other extreme groups all lumped together…


#4

You’re forgetting – Everyone is racist, everything is racist, everyone is a misogynist, everything is misogynist, everyone is transphobic, everything is transphobic, everyone is homophobic, everything is homophobic.