Trends in terrorism

[Mormolyce]

No, my point from the beginning is that downplaying Islamic terrorism by saying that "IRA, ETA and a few others killed way more people in Europe than Islamic terrorism ever did" as you did - is misleading when a substantial fraction "a few others" are terrorist from an Islamic background - many with a (moderate) Islamic agenda.

That's utterly ridiculous. Again, is the IRA pushing a (moderate) Christian agenda?

No, it's a deliberate misrepresentation of the situation. You're being intellectually dishonest, plain and simple.

What do you think this nitpicking will accomplish? Even if I gave you Lockerbie, which I won't (arguably it shouldn't even be listed here since it more likely fits under state sanctioned terror anyway), it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of the violence in that era was IRA and ETA, exactly as I said. You think if you keep clicking reply you'll stay in the running? You lost the argument pages ago and have brought nothing to the table of your own other than equivocation and disingenuity.

TLDR: Bitch, please.

[Forogil]

That's utterly ridiculous. Again, is the IRA pushing a (moderate) Christian agenda?

Some IRA were - some were more pushing a Marxist agenda.

As for Libya - yes, it was pushing for a moderate Islamic agenda; and more importantly - you tried to hide that Libya and Palestinian terror under "few others", since it didn't fit your agenda.

So, your statement was a deliberate misrepresentation of the situation. You're being intellectually dishonest, plain and simple.

What do you think this nitpicking will accomplish? Even if I gave you Lockerbie, which I won't (arguably it shouldn't even be listed here since it more likely fits under state sanctioned terror anyway), it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of the violence in that era was IRA and ETA, exactly as I said.

You are moving the goal-posts, and removing state sanctioned terrorism would be moving them even more.

When you wrote "IRA, ETA and a few others killed way more people in Europe than Islamic terrorism ever did" - you clearly implied that it was in total not 1970-1990 by saying "ever did".

[Mormolyce]

Some IRA were - some were more pushing a Marxist agenda.

As for Libya - yes, it was pushing for a moderate Islamic agenda; and more importantly - you tried to hide that Libya and Palestinian terror under "few others", since it didn't fit your agenda.

Alright, I'm done talking to you, since you have nothing more to add and your points have already been amply defeated.

[Forogil]

Alright, I'm done talking to you, since you have nothing more to add and your points have already been amply defeated.

At the start I didn't know if you made a mistake in ignoring Libyans and Palestinian terrorism and attempting to frame it as if terrorist were either Islamic or IRA/ETA by writing "IRA, ETA and a few others killed way more people in Europe than Islamic terrorism ever did", were a few others include a substantial part of moderate Islamist.

Based on your attacks, and goal-post moving it is now clear that it wasn't a mistake but a deliberate attempt of misrepresenting the situation - to make people ignore that we have had significant amount of deaths due terrorist attacks from Islamic background for a long time.

- - - Updated - - -

So despite the doomsayers of the internet saying that Europe will soon be destroyed by islamist terrorists, the trend doesn't seem to support that claim.

"Far-right terrorism is a growing concern. The
number of deaths from terrorism associated with
far-right groups and individuals has increased from
three in 2014, to 17 in 2017."

That statement from the document is unclear and not explained further in the document itself. And most importantly it doesn't say that it happened in Europe - or Western Europe - or where at all.

Table 2.11 states that in 2014 there were 0 deaths due far-right extremist terrorism in Western Europe and in 11 in North America, and in 2017 those numbers were 1 and 16 respectively.

Thus based on that table it should be a rise from 0 to 1 (Western Europe) or from 11 to 17 (Western Europe and N. America), neither would be as spectacular. The total numbers since 2008 have been 0, 2, 4, 79, 7, 1, 11, 26, 11, 17 - not really a clear trend. (The number of attacks show a clearer trend, but that might also be due to increased reporting.)

[FeinHammer]

17? How many people died of lightning strikes?

[PosPosPos]

Alt-righters are basically ugly walking sacks of psychological projections. Whatever they accuse others of, they are also definitely guilty of. Which is of course convenient for law enforcement, if it exists in a working state.

17? How many people died of lightning strikes?

Oh, because it's not statistically relevant yet in your book, we should wait until the next Nazi uprising before doing anything about it.

- - - Updated - - -

At the start I didn't know if you made a mistake in ignoring Libyans and Palestinian terrorism and attempting to frame it as if terrorist were either Islamic or IRA/ETA by writing "IRA, ETA and a few others killed way more people in Europe than Islamic terrorism ever did", were a few others include a substantial part of moderate Islamist.

Based on your attacks, and goal-post moving it is now clear that it wasn't a mistake but a deliberate attempt of misrepresenting the situation - to make people ignore that we have had significant amount of deaths due terrorist attacks from Islamic background for a long time.

And yet we get more terrorist attacks and killings from you and your ilk. Looks like you are worse than what you hate. Whoops.

[Daedius]

On the grand scale when we have a group that very easily give out death threats for "insulting" their prophet at the drop of a hat I find that rather concerning... there are far too many radicals. Sure, they may not act but they condone... such as the many praising the attacks on Charlie Heebo. Or their many protests with "Death to whatever" on placards.

No, I got no love for Islam and its integral indoctrination.

[Machismo]

On the grand scale when we have a group that very easily give out death threats for "insulting" their prophet at the drop of a hat I find that rather concerning... there are far too many radicals. Sure, they may not act but they condone... such as the many praising the attacks on Charlie Heebo. Or their many protests with "Death to whatever" on placards.

No, I got no love for Islam and it's integral indoctrination.

Then don't become a Muslim, problem solved.

[camhun]

Terrorism is a threat to global peace and stability. Thankfully, Terrorism has not reached Canadian shores.

[Forogil]

And yet we get more terrorist attacks and killings from you and your ilk. Looks like you are worse than what you hate. Whoops.

You falsely accuse me of committing terrorist attacks, just because I tried to stop the spread of misinformation.
That is how low you have sunk - you don't want facts, and anyone opposing you can be accused of any crime.

And based on the thread I don't know what you falsely believe to be "my ilk", or what you mean with "more".

[ohwell]

Mmmm, the MAGA bomber tried to blow up politicians the right wing told him were evil and a guy rammed a car into a crowd at the neo-Nazi rally at Charlottesville, but watch out everyone there's an elderly professor with a bike lock!!!

Moral equivalence! Moral equivalence!

If you're claiming the jackass in Charlottesville then you basically need to also count every single Antifa person who has struck someone in the head. Would the idiot in Charlottesville have been fine if he rammed his car into her and she lived? It'd be ok then because she could have been killed but wasn't in that case and it's ok to use potentially lethal methods to suppress speech like hitting someone in the head. No wait, you'd still be claiming the same things while condoning hitting someone in the head if you don't like what they're saying.

[Forogil]

Terrorism is a threat to global peace and stability. Thankfully, Terrorism has not reached Canadian shores.

It has:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Canada - includes Sikh terrorism (the most deadly attack was technically in Irish air-space, but it is normally not included in European terrorism), Quebec-issue, early anti-feminism terrorism in 1989, several foiled Islamic terrorism attacks (only one death due to them), anti-Islamic attack, and earlier the "Sons of Freedom" - with their bombs, arson, and nude protests.

[rootfifth]

Massive surge of right wing violence and killings but what about that time two years ago when someone got bopped on the head with a bike lock? Both sides are exactly the same, literally no difference between a bike lock bopping and multiple mass shootings, multiple mass stabbings, car attacks and a bombing campaign.

[Mormolyce]

If you're claiming the jackass in Charlottesville then you basically need to also count every single Antifa person who has struck someone in the head. Would the idiot in Charlottesville have been fine if he rammed his car into her and she lived? It'd be ok then because she could have been killed but wasn't in that case and it's ok to use potentially lethal methods to suppress speech like hitting someone in the head. No wait, you'd still be claiming the same things while condoning hitting someone in the head if you don't like what they're saying.

Have Antifa driven cars into crowds with survivors? The Charlottesville Nazi didn't just kill Heather Heyer, he injured about 20 more people. So we have 1 killed, 20 injured from that attack alone. The MAGA bomber sent bombs to 14 people, so that's 14 more targets. Antifa sent bombs to anyone? No? Okay still zero then.

Shall we also include all murders committed by white supremacists? That's 18 in 2017 (the most recent complete year). How many has Antifa killed again? Oh, zero?

But oh yeah, they hit some people. BOTH SIEDS AR THE SAEM!!!

[FeinHammer]

Alt-righters are basically ugly walking sacks of psychological projections. Whatever they accuse others of, they are also definitely guilty of. Which is of course convenient for law enforcement, if it exists in a working state.



Oh, because it's not statistically relevant yet in your book, we should wait until the next Nazi uprising before doing anything about it.

- - - Updated - - -



And yet we get more terrorist attacks and killings from you and your ilk. Looks like you are worse than what you hate. Whoops.

If it’s not statistically relevant then it isn’t relevant and just further indicates that “far right violence” is a made up narrative.

62 people were killed by Muslims in Europe in 2017. Factoring in the likelihood of being a right winger and being a Muslim in Europe, one of them is way more prevalent than the other

[I Push Buttons]

Massive surge of right wing violence and killings but what about that time two years ago when someone got bopped on the head with a bike lock? Both sides are exactly the same, literally no difference between a bike lock bopping and multiple mass shootings, multiple mass stabbings, car attacks and a bombing campaign.

*3000 people killed by Muslim terrorists in a single terrorist attack*

The fringe left: "Muslims are no threat to you, you evil racist bigot!"

*17 people killed by right wing extremists over the course of an entire year*

The fringe left: "This is literally the biggest threat we have ever faced and we should ban free speech to protect society from the existential threat of the right wing! We should beat those right wingers wherever we find them and it is perfectly acceptable for us to use violence because at least we aren't killing people!"