5 ms·

> Italians, Germans, Swedes, Jews, and Japanese didn't immigrate to other countries and slaughter its citizens. Neither do Muslims? I mean, show me the statist

by ctrl-j 10y ago

> Italians, Germans, Swedes, Jews, and Japanese didn't immigrate to other countries and slaughter its citizens. Neither do Muslims? I mean, show me the statistics that show that they have a higher terrorism rate than other groups. The IRA, the extremist christian groups, and the mentally ill all do a lot of damage as well, but they're not being banned from the USA. I think Muslims get targeted by the media because they're different looking, and so they get reported on more thoroughly. I could very well be wrong, but I honestly don't believe they are statistically more prone to terrorism.

zimpenfish 10y ago
> The IRA Indeed, Pete King, one of the group assembled to work on the "Muslim Ban" has been a long-standing supporter of the IRA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Support_for_the_IRA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Support_for_the_...
paulddraper 10y ago
Overall numbers are hard to come by, especially for smallish incidents, but of the 23 acts of terrorism in 2016 killing a hundred or more people, 100% of them were done by Muslims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... > they're not being banned from the USA Were there countries with huge numbers of extremely violent mentally ill people, I have no doubt the US would limit or halt immigration from those places. There are huge numbers of radical or radical-sympathetic Muslims. If you have an open mind, I suggest getting a Muslim's take on the actual numbers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk (warning, has numbers, may not be PC) It's fine to support open immigration, but denying that there is an unusual problem with violence in the Muslim community is indefensible.
- beat 10y ago
  Go back to the 1970s, and you'll see similar numbers by the Irish.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    Okay... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1970 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1971 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1972 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1973 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1974 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1975 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1977 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1978 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1979 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... Perhaps you could be more specific?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - beat 10y ago
      Well, it depends on your point. Your point seemed to be that Arab Muslims are uniquely violent, that terrorism is their own thing. Look at the 1970s, and you see plenty of terrorism from Europeans.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      I don't know about the Irish in particular, but the list of links you've presented --- sorted by casualties, on a year-by-year basis --- makes a powerful case for the diversity of terrorist attacks in the 1970s. It doesn't well support an argument that terrorism is somehow endemic to specific ethnicities.
- Avshalom 10y ago
  >all but one of which were part of the civil wars in Iraq or Syria. Unsurprisingly all sides in a muslim majority country's civil war are muslim, equally unsurprising is that the non-recognized-states action are written down as terrorism.
- AbrahamParangi 10y ago
  I notice that reading that link, 22/23 acts of terrorism killing a hundred people or more happened in Iraq and Syria which is literally a war-zone. Just as a thought experiment, if you listed civilian casualties in the Ukraine-Russia war as deaths from terroristic acts you could easily come to the conclusion that it was Eastern-European Christians that were the world's greatest terrorists.
  - and0 10y ago
    The Bible and Quran share the same DNA. There's no difference between any type of religious extremism, just as there's no difference between any group of humans. The difference is context, and in the case of the Middle East the socioeconomic context is crushingly awful. Much of this (shoutouts to the Hypernomalization mention above, which I can't seem to reply to, excellent documentary) is even a result of more powerful, "Christian" nations.
    - toyg 10y ago
      The current Ukraine-Russia conflict has little to do with religion.
    - paulddraper 10y ago
      That's probably why the "Muslim ban" wasn't a ban on Muslim immigration, but a ban on immigration from particular Middle East countries.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        It is a ban on immigration exclusively from Muslim-majority countries with a bypass for Christians from those countries.
        paulddraper 10y ago
        Christians do not have a pass. That wouldn't make sense anyway...how would they prove their Christianity?
- splawn 10y ago
  The issue with terrorism isn't the body count. Its all the destabilizing damage people do to themselves in response out of fear. Look at all this chaos over such a tiny body count.... its dumb, imo.
- ctrl-j 10y ago
  > but of the 23 acts of terrorism in 2016 killing a hundred or more people, 100% of them were done by Muslims. From your link, 100% of those killing 100+ are done by the islamic state militants who are fighting what they consider to be a civil war. If you cannot manage to see the distinction in that, then you don't really have an open mind about this discussion. > It's fine to support open immigration, but denying that there is an unusual problem with violence in the Muslim community is indefensible. Being scared shitless of over 1.5 billion people just because some of them are bad people, is just ridiculous. There isn't a problem with violence in the Muslim community. Go to any Muslim community not in the middle of a war, and I doubt you'll find more violence than you do in your average Jewish or Christian community.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- blincoln 10y ago
  I spot-checked the stats you linked to, and 100% of the "acts of terrorism" in which 100 or more people were killed were committed by paramilitary groups like ISIS and the Taliban, and took place outside the US. Those are horrific acts, but IMO are more akin to the US' behaviour in Vietnam, or Blackwater contractors in Iraq. Would you support a ban on Americans travelling to other countries because of those events?
- mgbmtl 10y ago
  I strongly recommend watching the documentary "Hypernormalisation" by Adam Curtis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation). The main focus of the documentary compares the styles of Trump and Vladimir Poutine, but has interesting recap/point of view on the evolution of terrorism in the middle east. (his previous documentary, Bitter Lake, was on Wahhabism from Saudi Arabia, also interesting, but the visual/narrative style kind of annoyed me) I think it's easily misleading to look at these things only by the numbers. We need a better understanding of the background. Numbers can support your argument/context, but you need a better argument.
- soundwave106 10y ago
  In my opinion it's one thing to acknowledge that Islamic terrorism is an issue; it is another to hand-wave this into an entire billion strong community with a simplistic framing. Fitting a United States perspective into your criteria seems difficult. Using this Wikipedia reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States), there have been only three terrorist incidents in the United States that have killed more than 100 people. One was September 11th (Islamic extremists). The second was the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 (right-wing extremist). The third, curiously enough, appears to be Mormon militias (the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre). Note, the Tulsa Race Riots of 1921 could possibly fall in this category depending on the death estimate. A rather oddball collection there, not enough to generalize for sure. Recent terrorist incidents in the United States with >=10 deaths have been biased towards Islamic terrorism, sure. However, going back to 2001, the perpetrators were: a person born to Afghan immigrants in the US (Pulse nightclub shooting); a Pakistani couple, one a US citizen and one a permanent resident (San Bernardino); a person born to Palestinian immigrants (Fort Hood); an African American who converted to the Nation of Islam (Beltway shootings); and September 11th (15 from Saudi Arabia, 2 from the UAE, 1 from Egypt, 1 from Lebanon). Aside from September 11th, all of these incidents involve US citizens. And even if in the greatest of stretches we include the nationality of the parents, it is worth noting that (including September 11th) none of the nationalities that committed these terrorist acts are on Trump's 7 country travel restriction list.
- tptacek 10y ago
  By something like an order of magnitude, more people are killed annually by armed toddlers in the US than by radical Islamist foreign nationals. Both Islamists and toddlers take a back seat to the nationwide vending machine threat --- vending machines can be counted on in 2017 to kill enough Americans to justify a travel ban on all employees of the Coca Cola and Frito Lay corporations. I fear you many have selected the wrong forum to litigate this argument in. The deeper we dig into the facts behind the argument you're trying to make, the (rapidly) less credible that argument is going to become. You might have more luck with it on Facebook.

by ctrl-j 10y ago

zimpenfish 10y ago

> The IRA Indeed, Pete King, one of the group assembled to work on the "Muslim Ban" has been a long-standing supporter of the IRA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Support_for_the_IRA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Support_for_the_...

paulddraper 10y ago

Overall numbers are hard to come by, especially for smallish incidents, but of the 23 acts of terrorism in 2016 killing a hundred or more people, 100% of them were done by Muslims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... > they're not being banned from the USA Were there countries with huge numbers of extremely violent mentally ill people, I have no doubt the US would limit or halt immigration from those places. There are huge numbers of radical or radical-sympathetic Muslims. If you have an open mind, I suggest getting a Muslim's take on the actual numbers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk (warning, has numbers, may not be PC) It's fine to support open immigration, but denying that there is an unusual problem with violence in the Muslim community is indefensible.

beat 10y ago
Go back to the 1970s, and you'll see similar numbers by the Irish.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Okay... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1970 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1971 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1972 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1973 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1974 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1975 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1977 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1978 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_1979 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in... Perhaps you could be more specific?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - beat 10y ago
    Well, it depends on your point. Your point seemed to be that Arab Muslims are uniquely violent, that terrorism is their own thing. Look at the 1970s, and you see plenty of terrorism from Europeans.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    I don't know about the Irish in particular, but the list of links you've presented --- sorted by casualties, on a year-by-year basis --- makes a powerful case for the diversity of terrorist attacks in the 1970s. It doesn't well support an argument that terrorism is somehow endemic to specific ethnicities.
Avshalom 10y ago
>all but one of which were part of the civil wars in Iraq or Syria. Unsurprisingly all sides in a muslim majority country's civil war are muslim, equally unsurprising is that the non-recognized-states action are written down as terrorism.
AbrahamParangi 10y ago
I notice that reading that link, 22/23 acts of terrorism killing a hundred people or more happened in Iraq and Syria which is literally a war-zone. Just as a thought experiment, if you listed civilian casualties in the Ukraine-Russia war as deaths from terroristic acts you could easily come to the conclusion that it was Eastern-European Christians that were the world's greatest terrorists.
- and0 10y ago
  The Bible and Quran share the same DNA. There's no difference between any type of religious extremism, just as there's no difference between any group of humans. The difference is context, and in the case of the Middle East the socioeconomic context is crushingly awful. Much of this (shoutouts to the Hypernomalization mention above, which I can't seem to reply to, excellent documentary) is even a result of more powerful, "Christian" nations.
  - toyg 10y ago
    The current Ukraine-Russia conflict has little to do with religion.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    That's probably why the "Muslim ban" wasn't a ban on Muslim immigration, but a ban on immigration from particular Middle East countries.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      It is a ban on immigration exclusively from Muslim-majority countries with a bypass for Christians from those countries.
      - paulddraper 10y ago
        Christians do not have a pass. That wouldn't make sense anyway...how would they prove their Christianity?
splawn 10y ago
The issue with terrorism isn't the body count. Its all the destabilizing damage people do to themselves in response out of fear. Look at all this chaos over such a tiny body count.... its dumb, imo.
ctrl-j 10y ago
> but of the 23 acts of terrorism in 2016 killing a hundred or more people, 100% of them were done by Muslims. From your link, 100% of those killing 100+ are done by the islamic state militants who are fighting what they consider to be a civil war. If you cannot manage to see the distinction in that, then you don't really have an open mind about this discussion. > It's fine to support open immigration, but denying that there is an unusual problem with violence in the Muslim community is indefensible. Being scared shitless of over 1.5 billion people just because some of them are bad people, is just ridiculous. There isn't a problem with violence in the Muslim community. Go to any Muslim community not in the middle of a war, and I doubt you'll find more violence than you do in your average Jewish or Christian community.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
blincoln 10y ago
I spot-checked the stats you linked to, and 100% of the "acts of terrorism" in which 100 or more people were killed were committed by paramilitary groups like ISIS and the Taliban, and took place outside the US. Those are horrific acts, but IMO are more akin to the US' behaviour in Vietnam, or Blackwater contractors in Iraq. Would you support a ban on Americans travelling to other countries because of those events?
mgbmtl 10y ago
I strongly recommend watching the documentary "Hypernormalisation" by Adam Curtis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation). The main focus of the documentary compares the styles of Trump and Vladimir Poutine, but has interesting recap/point of view on the evolution of terrorism in the middle east. (his previous documentary, Bitter Lake, was on Wahhabism from Saudi Arabia, also interesting, but the visual/narrative style kind of annoyed me) I think it's easily misleading to look at these things only by the numbers. We need a better understanding of the background. Numbers can support your argument/context, but you need a better argument.
soundwave106 10y ago
In my opinion it's one thing to acknowledge that Islamic terrorism is an issue; it is another to hand-wave this into an entire billion strong community with a simplistic framing. Fitting a United States perspective into your criteria seems difficult. Using this Wikipedia reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States), there have been only three terrorist incidents in the United States that have killed more than 100 people. One was September 11th (Islamic extremists). The second was the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 (right-wing extremist). The third, curiously enough, appears to be Mormon militias (the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre). Note, the Tulsa Race Riots of 1921 could possibly fall in this category depending on the death estimate. A rather oddball collection there, not enough to generalize for sure. Recent terrorist incidents in the United States with >=10 deaths have been biased towards Islamic terrorism, sure. However, going back to 2001, the perpetrators were: a person born to Afghan immigrants in the US (Pulse nightclub shooting); a Pakistani couple, one a US citizen and one a permanent resident (San Bernardino); a person born to Palestinian immigrants (Fort Hood); an African American who converted to the Nation of Islam (Beltway shootings); and September 11th (15 from Saudi Arabia, 2 from the UAE, 1 from Egypt, 1 from Lebanon). Aside from September 11th, all of these incidents involve US citizens. And even if in the greatest of stretches we include the nationality of the parents, it is worth noting that (including September 11th) none of the nationalities that committed these terrorist acts are on Trump's 7 country travel restriction list.
tptacek 10y ago
By something like an order of magnitude, more people are killed annually by armed toddlers in the US than by radical Islamist foreign nationals. Both Islamists and toddlers take a back seat to the nationwide vending machine threat --- vending machines can be counted on in 2017 to kill enough Americans to justify a travel ban on all employees of the Coca Cola and Frito Lay corporations. I fear you many have selected the wrong forum to litigate this argument in. The deeper we dig into the facts behind the argument you're trying to make, the (rapidly) less credible that argument is going to become. You might have more luck with it on Facebook.