Well, 7% Jewish versus 6% Islamic, so my title is a bit out there. But it certainly should make one think about terrorism perception versus reality.
quote:On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005.
According 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.
It seems like another case of the media just sucking at their job, and of people hearing what they want to hear.
quote:If one follows the cable news networks, it seems as if all terrorists are Muslims. It has even become axiomatic in some circles to chant: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terrorists are Muslims.
This data is just for terrorists attacks on U.S. soil, and I don't really have a good idea what the global picture is, but I still find this an interesting piece of data.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Very interesting. I haven't checked out the original source article, but I'd be curious to see not just a comparison of percentage of attacks, but also a comparison of the amount of lives lost relative to the different groups' attacks, as well as maybe an estimated projected death toll for failed attacks.
i.e. - Do Islamic terrorists account for 6% of attacks, but 80% of deaths? adjusted for both successful and failed attacks. The answer may be no, but I think that the size of the intended target(s) is a factor to be considered.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: ... 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 ...
QFT
As for the rest, I'm not sure there is a double-standard (well, yes in the crummy US media, I'll grant that).
But elsewhere, after all, Israel is often referred to as a rogue or pariah state, Israel is at the bottom of the world reputation pile neck-and-neck with North Korea, and for my part I've certainly contended that US support of Israel and its bombing Iran is probably what is going to get us all into the next major war.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
I happen to find the way these results are being framed unnecessarily inflammatory, but the study makes an excellent point that many people are deliberately oblivious to.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, so the instant someone calls you on your anti-Semitism, it must be a joke, right? Because there can't be a serious discussion of these issues.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
I happen to find the way these results are being framed unnecessarily inflammatory, but the study makes an excellent point that many people are deliberately oblivious to.
I generally agree with you but I'm not sure which specific point you're referring to.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always been a fan of supporting the broad perspective rather than focusing on terms such as "rogue nation" or "pariah state."
I grew up in a religion that was the minority between two giants - a billion Christians and a billion Muslims. So it always weighed heavily on me - how could I be correct when the vast majority of the world ISN'T Jewish.
Well, logically, A billion Muslims think a billion Christians are wrong and vice versa - I rejected the value of "majority" as a valid form of evidence.
But it also left me with an important lesson learned - we, as humans, have a HUGE bias for whatever group we are a part of. And we think everyone else is insane.
Of course I grew up with anti-Mulsim and anti-Arab rhetoric. But I always knew that if I grew up as a Palestinian, I'd hate Israel, and if they grew up as Israelis they'd be just like me.
The only cure for that is perspective.
I decided to be a history major because the psychology of the masses fascinated me. Whenever you study history you learn context and perspective - why people acted the way they did, and why they couldn't get along.
On Hatrack, in our discussions, we have these biases. The only way out is to consider opposite perspectives, realize that you both come from mutual truth, and to build a new perspective that encompasses the validity of both sides.
I think that this article is poor. And sensationalist. Muslim terrorism is the real threat out there, it's so much bigger, so much more focused, and so much a greater reflection on a large segment of the world's population. But that doesn't really mean anything anyways. You're not going to stop terrorism by condemning it. Terrorism is an act of desperation on those who have other means to achieve their goals. If our politicians understood that, and had the full support of their governments, then we could sooner achieve peaceful coexistence.
What bothers me about Mucus's comments is that it just makes me bow my head in sadness. I'm Jewish. My parents are Israeli. We obviously don't perceive ourselves as members of a rogue or pariah state. We see ourselves as striving so hard for the world's recognition and respect, and at the same time really upset and frustrated that the world ties our hands at our attempts to defend ourselves. It just seems like your comment so sorely lacks perspective.
Israel doesn't bomb Iran for funzies. It did it because it felt that Iran was a threat.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
King of Men, no, I am not an anti-semite. I'm actually Jewish (though i guess I can be a self hating jew). I was raised in a conservative Jewish environment, and though I am no longer religious, I still identify culturally with Judaism to a strong degree.
But to get to the root of your question, it's not that I don't think Jewish terrorists can be as effective as Muslim terrorists. I'm just trying to point out a distinction between types of terrorism. If I'm not mistaken, terrorist acts can be acts in which no harm is done to human beings, correct? A terrorist act can be blowing up an empty building, correct? While certainly all terrorism needs to be addressed and stopped, and since the point of terrorism is to cause fear in the citizenry, you can certainly make an argument that terrorist acts that don't intend to harm people, are just as bad as terrorist acts that purposely target and attempt to murder people. I'm not sure I agree with that. Lets say you have limited resources and have to choose between fighting terrorists who attack and kill people, and terrorists who destroy property, but don't harm people, what would you do?
So my question was an expression of that curiosity, not really having anything to do with Jews vs. Muslims at all (in fact, at the time i was shocked by the 24% of the pie chart representing left wing groups), but just saying that given my view on the greater harm caused by the death of human beings, those statistics alone (while certainly opening our eyes to some really important data that points out the difference between fact and perception) are somewhat meaningless in the sense that they don't relay actual damage done.
My questioning of whether you were joking was because I couldn't figure out how my question somehow portrayed me as an anti-semite.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I'm not sure which specific point you're referring to.
Islamic terrorists are not the overwhelming problem that the media often portrays them as. That is, they are far from the worst/most dangerous element out there.
Strider, KoM is just being a jerk. No need to take him seriously. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not trolling anyone, I just think it's very important to acknowledge that Jews can be as good at terrorism as Arabs, or indeed Germans, if they work hard and stick to their passion. "Hath not a Jew gunpowder / to hoist the Doge sky-high", Shakespeare makes Shylock ask, and then "if you wrong us, will we not revenge?" Clearly Shakespeare was a bit ahead of his time here, but in this twenty-first century I think we should all acknowledge that all ethnic groups can make good terrorists.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny what they call terrorism. So they have the Earth Liberation Front back in 2002 committing "vandalism and destruction of property". But when four synagogues and Jewish schools in Chicago were attacked and Muslims were arrested for it, that apparently wasn't enough to make the list. Maybe whoever the ELF attacked had better connections.
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Well, logically, A billion Muslims think a billion Christians are wrong and vice versa - I rejected the value of "majority" as a valid form of evidence.
There are potential reasons why the majority can be wrong, but there's no reason for a conflict in this case. A billion Muslims and a billion Christians can *both* be right in thinking that the other is wrong (Assuming your numbers, 5 billion-odd non-Muslims and 5 billion-odd non-Christians, whatever)
quote:My parents are Israeli. We obviously don't perceive ourselves as members of a rogue or pariah state ... Israel doesn't bomb Iran for funzies. It did it because it felt that Iran was a threat.
*shrug* I suspect very few perceive themselves as a rogue/pariah state. But that doesn't mean there aren't any! And who IS happy about the upcoming Iran war? (Aside from, well, maybe 'bomb, bomb, bomb Iran McCain') "They made me hit them" is not exactly an uncommon excuse for starting wars.
But whatever, this is as Lisa points out, a well trodden-path.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But elsewhere, after all, Israel is often referred to as a rogue or pariah state
Libya, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Bahrain and Uganda (just to name a few) are on the U.N. Human Right Council. I am proud to be considered a rogue or pariah state in such a context.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Funny what they call terrorism. So they have the Earth Liberation Front back in 2002 committing "vandalism and destruction of property". But when four synagogues and Jewish schools in Chicago were attacked and Muslims were arrested for it, that apparently wasn't enough to make the list. Maybe whoever the ELF attacked had better connections.
Also, <yawn>
That Chicago attack was in 2009. This data extends from 1980 to 2005. How quickly you jump to convenient conclusions.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly, the notion that terrorism is scary is ridiculous to begin with. I don't live in constant fear of getting killed in a car accident, I'm not going to freak out over something orders of magnitude less likely. (I recall a statistic that after 9/11, a lot of people avoided planes out of fear. And as it turned out, traffic fatalities bumped up for the next few months).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember a bit in the book Predictably Irrational, where he gives a statistic that people are willing to pay much more for airline insurance that protects against death by terrorism than they are for airline insurance that protects against ALL types of death.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But elsewhere, after all, Israel is often referred to as a rogue or pariah state
Libya, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Bahrain and Uganda (just to name a few) are on the U.N. Human Right Council. I am proud to be considered a rogue or pariah state in such a context.
*shrug* I hardly limit my remarks to such a context.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Well, logically, A billion Muslims think a billion Christians are wrong and vice versa - I rejected the value of "majority" as a valid form of evidence.
There are potential reasons why the majority can be wrong, but there's no reason for a conflict in this case. A billion Muslims and a billion Christians can *both* be right in thinking that the other is wrong (Assuming your numbers, 5 billion-odd non-Muslims and 5 billion-odd non-Christians, whatever)
quote:My parents are Israeli. We obviously don't perceive ourselves as members of a rogue or pariah state ... Israel doesn't bomb Iran for funzies. It did it because it felt that Iran was a threat.
*shrug* I suspect very few perceive themselves as a rogue/pariah state. But that doesn't mean there aren't any! And who IS happy about the upcoming Iran war? (Aside from, well, maybe 'bomb, bomb, bomb Iran McCain') "They made me hit them" is not exactly an uncommon excuse for starting wars.
But whatever, this is as Lisa points out, a well trodden-path.
1) Not really. There you don't have a majority to say that they are both wrong, since they believe they are right. It could be that they are both wrong, and I think that they are, but the point is that it leads to the conclusion that people can be so sure that they are correct when surrounded by what they perceive is a majority. We have the ability to blur contexts and perspectives and it's a dangerous bias.
2)What is the point of looking at another state as rogue or pariah? I find that living witht he fundamental assumption that people are a lot more similar to you than you think brings you a lot closer to the truth. Also I find that instead of physically forcing you to do what I want, it's easier to manipulate another person by manipulating their desires. Those are ugly and technical terms for it, but in actually, when you are using someone else's desires to acheive your own desires, you are, in effect, achieving both of your desires.
Applied in this context, I am suggesting that the sides misunderstand one another and/or are unwilling to achieve a resolution.
Mucus - assume you were in charge of the world, what would you do? You can do anything that you want. Godly powers.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But elsewhere, after all, Israel is often referred to as a rogue or pariah state
Libya, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Bahrain and Uganda (just to name a few) are on the U.N. Human Right Council. I am proud to be considered a rogue or pariah state in such a context.
*shrug* I hardly limit my remarks to such a context.
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Funny what they call terrorism. So they have the Earth Liberation Front back in 2002 committing "vandalism and destruction of property". But when four synagogues and Jewish schools in Chicago were attacked and Muslims were arrested for it, that apparently wasn't enough to make the list. Maybe whoever the ELF attacked had better connections.
Also, <yawn>
That Chicago attack was in 2009. This data extends from 1980 to 2005. How quickly you jump to convenient conclusions.
And for that matter, were they merely arrested, or arrested, tried and convicted?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for this post! This has definitely given me a reality check like whoa.
I'm most surprised not at the fact that Jewish terrorists outnumber Muslim ones, but that both of them together comprise such a small percentage of the total. Latinos at 42%, really? I'm not surprised at the numbers for left wing extremist groups though.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
But gang violence/ war on drugs kind of stuff is more than just shootings. I just listed drive by shootings cause it was my first example. I have read some stuff on the war on drugs that is just terrifying.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, the war on drugs. That makes sense. I thought you were talking about random drive by shootings and such. I'm curious, what were some of those terrifying things you read?
posted
Well, most of it was more in South America/ Mexico. Just lots of kidnapping, murder, cities controlled by drug cartels, immunity, police inaction. Also, lots of claims that in Mexico, there is a lot of self censoring going on in the media because the reporters are afraid to say just how violent it is (for fear of reprisals). While a lot of that is on the other side of the border, some stuff does spill over. I wish I had links, but I don't and my brain is being very pregnant (which is my excuse for being extremely stupid).
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not sure how we're miscommunicating on the numbers issue, but lets' leave that aside.
My question about rogue or pariah was part of my larger point - labels can be very harmful in limiting perspective and in affirming the biases that we often have that prevent us from making sound decisions.
I'm not sure if we should have this discussion in gchat because I'll ask a lot of follow-ups, but yea - I'm sure Ill enjoy whatever answer you give, I don't really know what gods you were talking about, but I'm looking to see how you would change things if you were in charge.
Edit - Mucus, did you delete your post?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, yeah, it took me answering point by point to realize that I really didn't feel like going point by point. Bad timing I guess.
Edit to add: IIRC, I was trying to clarify the question about which kind of god with what kind of godly powers we're talking about. As in Gao'uld-like (mere power to boss people around by force), Vorlon (time travel and more insidious but more power), or Q (pretty much equivalent to the Christian god, except fun).
And are we talking about the US homeland security situation with terrorists or about the middle east situation with Israel?
But as a start, maybe create two new Earths exactly the same as ours, that should take 2*7=14 days. Transplant Israel into one world and the Palestinians into another. Replace the transferred land with a new gulf, maybe put in a few coral reefs, some sea life. Irradiate the area ala Chernobyl so the wildlife is reasonably protected until people get over losing the area.
*shrug* As long as the situation isn't pushing or pulling world powers into a potential WWIII over a country the size of a couple provincial parks with as many people as a medium Chinese city, I think that would be a plus.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, so in your ideal conception, the desires of the two or three groups in question are irrelevant.
You are using your own conception of morality and logic to determine that the groups who are arguing are unreasonable in their desires, and yet they still have them. Like the parent of children who desire things that are harmful for them, you remove the harm and expect the children to adjust.
This correct?
If so, can you convey how you feel each group involved (Palestinian, Israeli, and if you like, Christian) is unreasonable?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:*shrug* I hardly limit my remarks to such a context.
The context, it seems to me, is 'the world', which appears at times to be much more concerned with Israeli transgressions, real or otherwise, than with other things such as genocides or farces such as Lisa mentioned.
'Rogue state' usually says as much about the person or state using the term as it does about the state mentioned, and people using it for Israel but not elsewhere is certainly a pretty clear-cut example of that, or do you disagree, Mucus?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would disagree. In fact, if you mind the context, I'm making a bit of a tangential point. I was talking about the article which seems to claim that Islamic terrorism is unfairly hyped over Jewish terrorism. I was actually making the case that in my judgment Jewish terrorism has been *adequately* hyped and that is why Israel is in the dumps today.
Anyways, I have little interest in going point-by-point on this matter. I think this particular thing will work itself out from like so to so, although the day-to-day details will always go back and forth.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
If so, can you convey how you feel each group involved (Palestinian, Israeli, and if you like, Christian) is unreasonable?
I'm not sure "reasonable" or "unreasonable" even factor into my decision. I guess I'm role-playing me with biblical god powers but not biblical god history, meaning I see that all three groups religious claims are obsolete and irrelevant.
I'm not sure the children analogy works that well because I'm removing them not just to protect them but to also protect the rest of us 'from' them.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Go with the Biblical God. Middle East situation.
I would start by showing up and stating clearly and undeniably that all peoples are equal with no group that has requirements or privileges that other people don't have per Me. Tell them if you were going forward with that idea, you cut it out now.
That would go a long way down the road to getting people to get along without having to babysit them.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: In fact, if you mind the context, I'm making a bit of a tangential point. I was talking about the article which seems to claim that Islamic terrorism is unfairly hyped over Jewish terrorism. I was actually making the case that in my judgment Jewish terrorism has been *adequately* hyped and that is why Israel is in the dumps today.
Adequately hyped, hm? Well, I can see some reasons why you wouldn't want to go point by point on that matter. I certainly agree Israel has screwed up, quite badly and egregiously in fact, over the years on many things. But 'adequately hyped'? Heh. Well, as I said, statements like that say as much about the speaker as the subject. If only the US would take a fairer line on Israel, we would not be so roundly hated in the Middle East!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Samp AND Mucus - you are both making a similar point. Religion is obsolete, irrelevant, or just plain wrong.
I understand you are taking the Atheist position. In order for you to solve the middle east crisis, in discussions, it would be best to discover how to convince others that there is no god, or that their current conceptions of religion are incorrect.
You perspective is one where you are entirely removed of the situation. You do not consider these people's religions as being their perspectives on the truth of existence - but rather you think they're all wrong, and that they're going to continue to perpetuate trouble until they realize the error of their ways.
So you, as Samp or Mucus, how do you propose to go about actually changing their opinions? -----
Secondly, I know, for me at least, my religious perspective comes from an honest look at reality. I am not religious because I was born into a religious family, I'm religious because I think it is true. There are Christians and Muslims who believe this as well. You believe in your truth - that there is no god. Assume we cannot convince one another that our truth is the real truth - what is the solution?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Israel is hanging out in the neighbourhood of North Korea with 19 and 17 respectively. But say we take out all the Middle Eastern countries that are "unfair" to Israel meaning Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan, what happens to Israel then?
Israel only moves up to 21 without affecting any rankings (20 without the US). This is pretty much noise. Say we take only Asia (minus Pakistan) an area with little at stake in the conflict? Israel's score actually goes *down* to 17.
I think that pretty clearly shows that Israel has problems with its reputation that clearly go far beyond "hostile" countries in the Middle East or the countries on Lisa's UN council (which don't even show up in the survey). (All numbers referring to % that view Israel as a positive influence)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: We're talking about Israel's reputation and I think the effect of the Middle East is overplayed...
Ah. I wasn't suggesting that Middle-East opinion skews it unfairly one way, actually-I was suggesting much of world opinion is pretty oddly biased and inconsistent when viewing Israel, independent of Arab opinion.
quote: Israel is hanging out in the neighbourhood of North Korea with 19 and 17 respectively.
Sure they are.
quote:
I think that pretty clearly shows that Israel has problems with its reputation that clearly go far beyond "hostile" countries in the Middle East or the countries on Lisa's UN council (which don't even show up in the survey). (All numbers referring to % that view Israel as a positive influence)
Well, I'll certainly agree with that.Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Samp AND Mucus - you are both making a similar point. Religion is obsolete, irrelevant, or just plain wrong.
What? no. Wait, how did you get that?
quote:Secondly, I know, for me at least, my religious perspective comes from an honest look at reality. I am not religious because I was born into a religious family, I'm religious because I think it is true. There are Christians and Muslims who believe this as well.
So under your perspective, a muslim, who is wrong about reality, is getting their perspective from an 'honest look at reality.' And to a muslim, your being wrong about reality is also from an 'honest look at reality.' I think what you mean but are not comfortable with is that your religious perspective comes from, obviously, faith in a specific version of the truth that you expect you are faithfully interpreting.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do you think he's somehow uncomfortable with that, Samprimary? I see that said not infrequently about religious people. "You're not comfortable with the fact that it's just your faith." There are certainly religious people like that, but religious folks are hardly strangers to doubt and uncertainty, however much you might like to think otherwise.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: ... I was suggesting much of world opinion is pretty oddly biased and inconsistent when viewing Israel, independent of Arab opinion.
Then thats where I'd have to see proof otherwise we're heading into conspiracy theory territory. I can see how one could ascribe antisemitism to biasing opinion in historically Muslim or Christian areas. But we can already account for that by observing that Asia while lacking that, isn't significantly different.
We really need a mechanism that can affect countries as disparate as China, Japan, India, and so forth and I'm just not seeing one.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
(Assuming your numbers, 5 billion-odd non-Muslims and 5 billion-odd non-Christians, whatever)
