Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Open Discussion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Open Discussion Discuss Ignored - The Real Terrorist Threat to America at the General Forum; Originally Posted by AZRWinger The Obama administration was so disconnected from reality the President couldn't even bring himself to say ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2017, 10:40 PM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,370
Thanks: 1,491
Thanked 2,302 Times in 1,836 Posts
Default Re: Ignored - The Real Terrorist Threat to America

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The Obama administration was so disconnected from reality the President couldn't even bring himself to say Muslim extremist but we are supposed to believe an assessment that domestic extremists are the biggest threat.
How about because this isn't political and because it's the consensus of 382 United States law enforcement groups

Why is it that there are those that believe everything is a LEFT or RIGHT political debate?

Guess what - it's not.

The RIGHT doesn't like terrorist and the LEFT doesn't like terrorists. It's common ground. Do people on the RIGHT actually believe that anyone on the LEFT condones terrorist acts committed by Muslims? That would be one of the most insane beliefs anyone could have.

That's like believing illegal aliens don't want criminal illegal aliens that represent a threat to public safety deported. They want those hard-core criminals gone just as much as your average Republican.

A threat is a threat is a threat and everyone opposes the threat.

If you want to understand why "Muslim extremist" wasn't/isn't used then it would be a good idea to ask. There are very good reasons but that wasn't the point of this thread.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2017, 12:05 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,135
Thanks: 9,711
Thanked 8,034 Times in 4,776 Posts
Default Re: Ignored - The Real Terrorist Threat to America

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
How about because this isn't political and because it's the consensus of 382 United States law enforcement groups

Why is it that there are those that believe everything is a LEFT or RIGHT political debate?

Guess what - it's not.

The RIGHT doesn't like terrorist and the LEFT doesn't like terrorists. It's common ground. Do people on the RIGHT actually believe that anyone on the LEFT condones terrorist acts committed by Muslims? That would be one of the most insane beliefs anyone could have.

That's like believing illegal aliens don't want criminal illegal aliens that represent a threat to public safety deported. They want those hard-core criminals gone just as much as your average Republican.

A threat is a threat is a threat and everyone opposes the threat.

If you want to understand why "Muslim extremist" wasn't/isn't used then it would be a good idea to ask. There are very good reasons but that wasn't the point of this thread.
As typical, no source linked. Being a curious person, I looked it up for you.

https://sites.duke.edu/tcths/files/2...reat_final.pdf

I'm not going to analyze the study for you, but a couple notes. The study compares Al Queda terrorist threats against all other threats. Presumably against all other threats includes other non Al Queda Muslim terrorist groups.

Later on the survey changes to Muslim vs non Muslim, the answers change. There are other discrepancies. Like one chart compares Muslim through 2015 and non Muslim through 2013.

Check the charts yourself. The're at the link you didn't provide.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2017, 06:45 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,370
Thanks: 1,491
Thanked 2,302 Times in 1,836 Posts
Default Re: Ignored - The Real Terrorist Threat to America

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
As typical, no source linked. Being a curious person, I looked it up for you.

https://sites.duke.edu/tcths/files/2...reat_final.pdf

I'm not going to analyze the study for you, but a couple notes. The study compares Al Queda terrorist threats against all other threats. Presumably against all other threats includes other non Al Queda Muslim terrorist groups.

Later on the survey changes to Muslim vs non Muslim, the answers change. There are other discrepancies. Like one chart compares Muslim through 2015 and non Muslim through 2013.

Check the charts yourself. The're at the link you didn't provide.
Thank you for the link. You're correct I hadn't done all of my homework and it's always a very good thing to go to the actual study.

I believe that Table 6 is what's referred to in the last paragraph that reflects post-9/11/2001 through 6/22/2015 for Muslim extremism towards targets in the United States. It reports 129 perpetrators, 85 plots, 21 attacks, and 50 fatalities based upon Muslim extremism.

Table 7 provides two different studies on right-wing extremism with vastly different results based upon the criteria being used by the reporting source. The "Perliger" report from 2002-2011 reports 3,375 attacks and 254 fatalities presumably from all types of right-wing extremism while the much stricter Anti-Defamation League report that only addresses premeditated plots/attacks/fatalities and reports 72 plots, 34 attacks, and 38 fatalities.

The statistical differences in the actual comparisons between Muslim extremism and right-wing extremism with time frames and numbers is reference information that doesn't change the actual study that's based upon the "perceptions" of law enforcement agencies.

Perceptions are what the person believes and sometimes the perceptions aren't backed up by the numbers. The study was on what the representatives of the law enforcement agencies "believed" (their perceptions) to be the greatest threat. It didn't ask these law enforcement agencies to provide a report based upon the numbers.

What we perceive, what we believe, can be contracted by the actual numbers.

For example I live in a relatively small Arizona town and although I only moved here less than 2-years ago my parents lived here since the 1980's so I've been here often. There's never been any terrorist attacks by anyone to my knowledge in this town but about 3-4 years ago there was a shootout between the local police and a family of right-wing extremists from Idaho in the local Wal-Mart parking lot. I'd bet a dollar that local law enforcement in this town believe, or perceive, right-wing extremism as being the greater threat regardless of any national numbers.

What the charts actually provide is a reason to consider BOTH forms of terrorism as being a serious threat in the United States.

The real point in the thread creation was to make people aware of the fact that perceptions on terrorism can either ignore significant threats of terrorism or can be exaggerated (i.e. not backed by the numbers) because of prejudice.

What the study provided demonstrates is that regardless of whether law enforcement regards right-wing extremism or Muslim extremism to be the greater threat that BOTH represent a significant threat and to focus on one while ignoring the other is a really stupid thing to do.

So far only Muslim extremism and right-wing extremism have been mention but there's also left-wing extremism as well but there's a difference that can be noted. Most left-wing extremism is related to eco-terrorism attacks and the number of these attacks is extremely high. I don't have those numbers on hand but if I recall correctly the number of eco-terrorism attacks exceeds right-wing extremism and Muslim extremism attacks combined (but I could be wrong). There's a significant difference though because eco-terrorism typically targets property and not people so human fatalities are very, very rare and are almost always incidental to the actual attack.

We can look at a few studies to see if the current focus of our government, and even our personal perception, is pointed in the right direction in future posts.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2017, 07:26 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,370
Thanks: 1,491
Thanked 2,302 Times in 1,836 Posts
Default Re: Ignored - The Real Terrorist Threat to America

The (ultra-conservative) CATO Institute released a recent study covering the terrorist threat from 1975-2015 that is significant related to the focus of the current administration.

Quote:
Including those murdered in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), the chance of an American perishing in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that was committed by a foreigner over the 41-year period studied here is 1 in 3.6 million per year. The hazard posed by foreigners who entered on different visa categories varies considerably. For instance, the chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion per year while the chance of being murdered in an attack committed by an illegal immigrant is an astronomical 1 in 10.9 billion per year. By contrast, the chance of being murdered by a tourist on a B visa, the most common tourist visa, is 1 in 3.9 million per year. Any government response to terrorism must take account of the wide range of hazards posed by foreign-born terrorists who entered under various visa categories.

The federal government has an important role to play in screening foreigners who enter the United States, and to exclude those who pose a threat to the national security, safety, or health of Americans. This terrorism risk analysis of individual visa categories can aid in the efficient allocation of scarce government security resources to those categories that are most exploitable by terrorists. The hazards posed by foreign-born terrorists are not large enough to warrant extreme actions like a moratorium on all immigration or tourism.
https://www.cato.org/publications/po...-risk-analysis

A few quick facts are worthy of noting when it comes to foreigners in the United States committing acts of terrorism.

The odds of an American being murdered by terrorist illegally in the United States is extremely remote (1 in 10.9 billion per year).

The odds of being murdered by a terrorist that's a refugee is also extremely remote (1 in 3.64 billion per year).

In addressing the terrorist threat by foreigners the last two places that would need review are arguably border security and refugees (e.g. Syrian refugees) because statistically the threat is extremely remote.

As the CATO Institute also points out the "foreign-born terrorists (threat is not) large enough to warrant extreme actions like a moratorium on all immigration or tourism" such as the travel ban issued by the White House.

The CATO Institute also debunks the claim often made that we don't have exceptionally good screening processes to prevent terrorists from entering the country on a visa but it also implies that those processes can be improved but that the improvements need to be based upon rational decisions.

Quote:
Substantial administrative hurdles and barriers are in place to block foreign-born terrorist infiltration from abroad. Any change in immigration policy for terrorism prevention should be subject to a cost-benefit calculation. A sensible terrorism screening policy must do more good than harm to justify its existence.
The CATO Institute historically is overly concerned with "spending" but a "cost/benefit" analysis should cover more than just dollars because there are other costs and benefits that can be more important than just dollars. The statement the policy "must do more good than harm" is relevant to many issues.

For examples "banning Muslims" would cause far more harm than good because of the backlash against the United States would be extreme by virtually all Muslims around the world because the ban would be based upon religious intolerance as opposed to a documented threat. It would be like putting a target on our chest for racial Muslim extremists and the terrorist threat would literally increase against American interests predominately in foreign countries (the primary terrorist threat to Americans is in foreign countries - not on US soil).
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
america, ignored, real, terrorist, the, threat

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0