Is Don Lemon right about who are the biggest terror threat to this country?

[Donimic]

Excluding 9/11 from these statistics is like excluding the Holocaust when talking about Jewish persecution

It is relevant because you can not hold a grudge on an entire region of the world for a single event, no matter how horrific. I mean if you want to bring up the holocaust, maybe we should still be persecuting and barring entry to all Germans of the slight chance they are extremists? If you want 9/'11 included, perhaps we should the # of Americans that died in WW2 and the race of those who killed them.


anyone can make cuts in the data to fit their narrative, don't be ridiculous.

[Tierbook]

Between 9/11 and through 2016? https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf

106 deaths due to right-wing terror attacks, in 62 separate incidents.

Before Venant whines about them starting the numbers on September 12, it's a report meant to analyze post-9/11 violence and responses, explicitly. They explain all this in the document.

Hmmm Tallying up Islamic terrorism in the US since 9/11 I get 76 deaths 319 wounded and 8 attacks

Just looked at your link and they seem to be adding a few that aren't on wiki since they come to 119 for Radical Islamic terrorists

[Endus]

This is the game the left plays, you begin with the conclusion you want and then work backwards to manipulate your 'data' to fit the narrative.

There's no "game". You're the only one talking about manipulating data.

[Venant]

I mean he’s not wrong, people try and play up fear of spooky brown terrorist in America but comptly ignore that pretty much all attacks in America are done by white guys. He Proabbly went about making his point the wrong way though.

If I rephrased what you said as:

It's the same way with how people villainize the Nazis for doing that one bad thing, but they completely ignore that almost every attack on Jews is carried out by Muslims.

would it help you realize how ludicrous it sounds.

[smokii]

And that's just delightful.

- - - Updated - - -



How did he go about it the wrong way if you agree with what he said?

again perpetuating this shit that leftist ideology somehow tolerates racism. which you have yet to factually prove, because you can't, because leftist ideology doesn't tolerate racism.

[zorkuus]

If I rephrased what you said as:

It's the same way with how people villainize the Nazis for doing that one bad thing, but they completely ignore that almost every attack on Jews is carried out by Muslims.

would it help you realize how ludicrous it sounds.

What the hell are you rambling on about? Nazis have done more than one bad thing. They're doing them right now.

[ONCHEhap]

What the hell are you rambling on about? Nazis have done more than one bad thing. They're doing them right now.

read his post again,slowly,try to focus on what he meant
He makes perfect sense,unlike you

[Dextroden]

again perpetuating this shit that leftist ideology somehow tolerates racism. which you have yet to factually prove, because you can't, because leftist ideology doesn't tolerate racism.

It does. That's why this feather goes right in the cap.

[Venant]

It is relevant because you can not hold a grudge on an entire region of the world for a single event, no matter how horrific. I mean if you want to bring up the holocaust, maybe we should still be persecuting and barring entry to all Germans of the slight chance they are extremists? If you want 9/'11 included, perhaps we should the # of Americans that died in WW2 and the race of those who killed them.


anyone can make cuts in the data to fit their narrative, don't be ridiculous.

You do realize that the current incarnation of progressivism and identity politics on the left is completely dependent on historical grievances? It would be the equivalent of an unconditional surrender if everyone on the left suddenly just capitulated to history not mattering.

- - - Updated - - -

What the hell are you rambling on about? Nazis have done more than one bad thing. They're doing them right now.

Can't you say the same thing about Genghis Khan? I bet Genghis Khan kills more people every year than Hitler.

[Independent voter]

This is the game the left plays, you begin with the conclusion you want and then work backwards to manipulate your 'data' to fit the narrative.

You post these threads with a 30 second clip that's out of context. Or you repeat what some talking head said who trying boost his ratings.

In this case I think you did both.

[Trollhammer]

again perpetuating this shit that leftist ideology somehow tolerates racism. which you have yet to factually prove, because you can't, because leftist ideology doesn't tolerate racism.

Where is the lefts outrage over this?

If anyone on the right ahd said this they would have been lynched.

[smokii]

It does. That's why this feather goes right in the cap.

it doesn't, what don lemon said is "So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right"

not all white men. if it was a blanket statement regarding all white men, then yes, it'd be racist. but this is calling out intolerant radicalised white men.

are all muslims terrorists? no. to call all muslims terrorists is racist, to call radicalised muslims terrorists is accurate.

you need to go read up on ideology and stop perpetuating bullshit until you have.

[Malaky]

At this point it's not even hidden anymore how much racist CNN is.

So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men

[smokii]

Where is the lefts outrage over this?

If anyone on the right ahd said this they would have been lynched.

confusing ideology and personal opinions. seriously, some of you people really need to use a dictionary and understand what words like ideology mean.

please try to understand the difference between politics and ideology, they are not the same.

[Biomega]

Excluding 9/11 from these statistics is like excluding the Holocaust when talking about Jewish persecution

The issue isn't that people are trying to pretend 9/11 (or the Holocaust) didn't happen - it's that these events are such massive STATISTICAL outliers they would skew the perception of data if they were universally included. Same reason you don't include WWII in statistics about gun violence, for example.

To illustrate, say you were looking at statistics about violence against Jews. If you include the Holocaust in that (which was, to be sure, a MASSIVE act of violence against Jews) then you also diminish all the other, post-Holocaust violence to be far less statistically significant; what would a Pittsburgh Shooting of 11 people really say in the face of 6 million deaths? It would become a blip, a flicker, a statistical irrelevancy as a singular event. But it's not irrelevant, and it's more than a blip. It's a frighteningly significant event IN THE RIGHT CONTEXT - i.e. one that looks at a subset of violence against Jews that excludes the Holocaust. Not because you pretend it didn't happen or wasn't a shatteringly terrible event, but because it skews the perspective on other events.

Statistics are a very tricky thing, because you can set them up in a myriad of ways, and each of those can over- or underemphasize certain aspects. And though an experienced statistician (or any scholar versed in statistical data analysis) could easily dissect such statistics, the vast majority of people are not exactly prone to be doing that. They are impressed by charts and curves, and it's important that we make it as easy as possible for those people to visualize what's relevant in the discussion when we bring up a statistic.

Of course, it's not always easy to just arrive at THE perfect solution for a statistical representation. There's so many factors involved. Take rape charges, for example. A few years ago, Sweden (I think?) was in the press for having staggeringly high numbers of rape; but closer examination revealed that the reason for this was in large part due to the way the statistics counted rapes - they would count every. single. incidence. of rape; so if it was, say, a marriage in which the husband raped his wife hundreds of times over 20 years, then in Sweden, that would be hundreds of counts of rape entered into the statistic - while in many other countries, this would all be collated into a single rape "case", and counted only once. There's arguments for and against both ways of counting, and it's hard to objectively decide which one is more useful for the task at hand. "That task" being, of course, very easily abused by political agendas, and represented in a way that seems to reinforce their particular angle.

That's why it's very dangerous to arrive at easy conclusions and generalizations. I get that Don Lemon in this case was (presumably) trying to emphasize that "immigrants" are a minority cause of violence and death within the USA. In the big picture, radical Muslim extremists, for example, have killed or injured a laughably minute number of Americans compared to how many were killed or injured by other Americans. But to put the "white male" emphasis on these statistics is another kind of bias, and quite problematic in its own right - not necessarily because it is a misrepresentation of statistical data (which does, for the most part, confirm that less people have been killed in the US by acts of Islamist terrorism than by acts of domestic terrorism committed by white male perpetrators) but because it skews the PERCEPTION of that data. Data doesn't tell you everything right away. You need a lot of work and analysis to understand data, and that's where it's all-too tempting to fall into easy generalizations and statistical "creativity".

Personally, I think the biggest threat to American lives is no sinister terrorist plot or even tribalism and bigotry - it's a fundamentally broken political system that fosters these things in the first place. And I guess you could blame the "white males" for that one, if you were so inclined, because there certainly are a lot of them in that system - but I don't think that them being white or them being male is where the problem lies. They're connected, to be sure, but if anything, they are more symptomatic than causative.

[Dextroden]

it doesn't, what don lemon said is "So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right"

not all white men. if it was a blanket statement regarding all white men, then yes, it'd be racist. but this is calling out intolerant radicalised white men.

are all muslims terrorists? no. to call all muslims terrorists is racist, to call radicalised muslims terrorists is accurate.

you need to go read up on ideology and stop perpetuating bullshit until you have.

It is a blanket statement. That's why we need to be afraid of white men while still trying to pretend racism is bad. If Trump's Muslim ban is bad, isn't Lemon and his want for a ban on white men?

[Doctor Amadeus]

I thought Statistics were facts, seems odd that those that try to tout that nonsense seem to find a convenient way to calls someone else racist. I think Don Lemon is making a point no he isn't a racist.

[Kathandira]

Where is the lefts outrage over this?

If anyone on the right ahd said this they would have been lynched.

Threw that up on my FB Page this morning, only got 2 replies. 1 was a friend (Left) trying to explain that the context was missed. Another friend saying she needs to fade into obscurity and just go away (Left).

So two left leaning people, with differing opinions. To be fair though, FB is blowing up with halloween stuff, so it likely didn't get seen by many today.

[Venant]

You post these threads with a 30 second clip that's out of context. Or you repeat what some talking head said who trying boost his ratings.

In this case I think you did both.

I post the clip so that there is context, so that you can see what he said in his own words. It's much more honest than what happened with Megyn Kelly last week, where there was very little reference to what she actually said, and instead all of the articles just repeatedly stated how 'offensive' her comments were. (And I for the record I can't stand Megyn Kelly, but I also recognize the tactic used against her was extremely unfair when comparing the context of what she said to how it was portrayed)

[Tierbook]

I thought Statistics were facts, seems odd that those that try to tout that nonsense seem to find a convenient way to calls someone else racist. I think Don Lemon is making a point no he isn't a racist.

But if the fact is "more people have been killed by right wing violence than Islamic violence since 9/11" is untrue, Endus' link early showed that.