• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Study claims right-wing extremists bigger threat to US than jihadis

Jun 24, 2015 6:46 pm By Robert Spencer

The study is based on the number of those killed by each group since 9/11. Not only does it skew the results by leaving out 9/11, but it also ignores the many, many foiled jihad plots, as this story points out. Also, right-wing extremists like Dylann Roof, the murderer in Charleston, South Carolina, kill because of their paranoid fantasies, but are not part of any movement with an articulated agenda or goal, while Islamic jihadists are members of or ideologically aligned with groups that have declared their intention to destroy the U.S. and the free world. Islamic jihad groups are determined to kill as many Americans as possible and conquer free societies, and as this article concludes, “losing track of that singular fact will end up getting a lot of Americans killed.”

“Study: Right Wing Extremists a Bigger ‘Threat’ to US than Islamic Terrorists?,” by Rick Moran, PJ Media, June 24, 2015:

A study by the New America Foundation shows that right wing, anti-government extremists and white supremacists are a bigger threat to the US than Islamic terrorists.

Does the study really say that?

Well, no. But it’s a sexy headline, don’t you think? Mediaite headline screams, “White Americans Are Biggest Terror Threat in U.S.”

What the New America Foundation study showed was that more Americans have been killed by homegrown, non-jihadist radicals since 9/11 than were killed by Islamic jihadis.

White Americans are the biggest terror threat in the US, killing more people in attacks than Muslims or any other group in the last 14 years, according to a study done by the New America Foundation.

The group looked into the 26 attacks on US soil that it defined as terror and found that 19 of those attacks were done by non-Muslims. All the studied attacks are post-9/11.

Since then, 48 people have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, compared to 26 killed by people who claimed to be jihadist. The non-Muslim groups include right-wing, anti-government organizations and white-supremacist groups.

Last week’s Charleston shooting — after which reports surfaced of the confessed shooter’s white-supremacist ideology — was included in the count.

Other attacks, like the massacres in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut, were not included, since they do not appear to have been caused by a specific ideology, the standard used by New America Foundation to qualify terrorism.

This information may shock the public, as post-9/11 trauma has made jihadi terror attacks more prominent in the media, but US law enforcement is well aware of the danger of white extremist groups, the New York Times reported.

A recent survey done by researchers at the University of North Carolina and Duke University asked 382 US police departments to list top threats and 74 per cent listed anti-government violence, while just 39 per cent said “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence.

Are white Americans the biggest threat? It depends how you define the word “threat.” The Heritage Foundation released an update to their own study earlier this month that showed law enforcement authorities preventing 69 separate Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11, the most recent being the Boston plot to kill Pamela Geller. Some of those were mass casualty plots that could have killed hundreds of Americans. And while the inspiration for some of these plots are from overseas, the plotters lived and worked for the most part in America.

There have been 6 Islamic terror plots foiled just since April:

Two years ago, The Heritage Foundation conducted an exhaustive review of publicly available U.S. court and federal and state government records. The researchers documented at least 60 terrorist plots related to Islamist extremism following the 9/11 attacks—all aimed at the U.S. And the pace of plotting has only quickened.

There have been nine additional plots since that report came out in 2013. Seven occurred this calendar year, six since April. Plot number 69 was thwarted just a few days ago. On June 2, federal law enforcement officers killed Usaamah Abdullah in Boston. Dawud Sharif Abdul Khaliq, an alleged accomplice, was arrested later. It is suspected they intended to behead anti-Islamist activist Pamela Geller.

So, yes, Islamist terrorism in America is on the rise. The numbers don’t lie. Still, there is a ferocious debate over what they mean….

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, moral equivalence, Useful idiots, willful ignorance Tagged With: New America Foundation


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. rev g says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 6:58 pm

    It all helps push the ideology for a race war.

  2. abad says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 7:26 pm

    Proof positive that the media is leftwing dominated

  3. nathan says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 7:30 pm

    Did they take into account that only 1% of the USA are muslim?

    And that this 1% generated about 35% of all the deaths!

    Probably not.

    • Francis Merde says

      Jun 24, 2015 at 7:41 pm

      I was going to point this out too. Thanks for saving me the trouble.

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 24, 2015 at 10:51 pm

      Yes—exactly what I was going to note.

      Even if you took these slanted stats at face value, Muslims commit more than half as many acts of terror as whites, even though Muslims make up less than 1% of the population, while whites make up the largest population group in a nation of over 300 million—77% by the latest census.

      So that means that there are 77 times more whites than Muslims in the US (there is, of course, some overlap between these two groups, but it is comparatively slight).

      So that means that Muslims are almost *40 times* more likely to murder people in acts of terrorism, even by their own bogus cooked stats.

      Do they just hope no one with do this very elementary math?

      Moreover, Jihad terrorism is not just growing, it is *mushrooming*, both here and abroad. The idea that Muslim terrorists represent a small threat is simply ludicrous,

  4. Jaladhi says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 7:35 pm

    If for a moment you believe this study and its methodology, then ask them who are the biggest threat to world security nd see how they wiggle out of the right answer – Islam and Muslims! Since 9/11 how many thousand attacks done and thousands of innocent human beings have been killed by Muslims world wide. There is no comparison of Muslim atrocities thorughout the world!!

  5. Wellington says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 7:40 pm

    Here’s the biggest difference: Far-Right wing nut jobs are overwhelmingly properly and accurately identified as adhering to a hateful ideology while Muslims (yes, all of them just as with all Far-Right loons) are not overwhelmingly properly and accurately identified as adhering to a hateful ideology.

    This, I submit, is the essence of it all in microcosm.

  6. Angemon says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 7:41 pm

    All the studied attacks are post-9/11

    Ah, ok then. Going by that random starting point, totalitarian regimes did not murder tens of millions of people either, and therefore are not a threat to the US either.

    Since then, 48 people have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, compared to 26 killed by people who claimed to be jihadist. The non-Muslim groups include right-wing, anti-government organizations and white-supremacist groups.

    Was the Fort Hood shooting considered on the jihadi count?

    Last week’s Charleston shooting — after which reports surfaced of the confessed shooter’s white-supremacist ideology — was included in the count.

    Which organized group did he belong to?

    • Bezelel says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 9:51 am

      Angemon, Excellent point. Just who decides what is a Jihad attack or who is an anti government right winger? The right wingers I know are not anti government. Since when is Pro Constitutional government considered anti government? The US Constitution to me is the reference point for sane government and the left wingers are the ones who refuse to respect it.

    • spot on says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 2:15 pm

      When the data is easily refuted, it is called politics.

  7. Westman says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 8:26 pm

    Muslim terrorists tend to yell “Allahu Akbar” while commiting mayhem indicating a common motivation. What are those white supremists shouting during their mayhem?

    Unweighted statistics often produce false conclusions. The accurate conclusion would require dividing the number of attrocities of a group by the total numbers in the group. How does US Jihad violence look when properly weighted?

    The true threat is the probability per group member.

  8. Ayatrollah says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 9:31 pm

    There is a patch that says “good night red side”, and what looks like a man kicking a women in the picture. Any ideas what that means?

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 8:56 pm

      Not easy to track down, Ayatrollah—all the references I found were pretty muddled.

      From what I have been able to gather, I think “Good Night Red Side” or “Good Night Left Side” refers to Neo-Nazis beating up Communists, perhaps based on Fascists brawling with Communists on the streets of Berlin during Hitler’s rise.

      It doesn’t help with clarity that there are also what I have come to believe are parodies, such as “Good Night White Pride”.

      This is just my best guess, though. If anyone has more concrete information, I’d be interested.

  9. jewdog says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 9:40 pm

    If Muslims are about one to two percent of the American population and white non-Muslims are the great majority, then one can easily conclude from the report that the frequency of violence from Muslims per capita is far larger based on absolute numbers of incidents. And, as Muslims become a greater percentage of the population, one can also infer that at some point soon they will surpass all other ethnic groups in violent attacks. Besides, if you already have vipers in your house, why invite scorpions?

  10. Joe Shmo says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 10:14 pm

    Well, that’s nothing. I’ve seen seen an even better study. I’ve seen a study that claims that left-wing contortionists are a bigger threat to the US than jihadis

    This study has taken place inside the functioning minds of people with eyes in their head and can see the endless exagerations, ommissions and lies that most of the MSM constantly push on us and how their seeming ambition is to drive us all off the cliff. Right now, they’re the bigger threat. But probably not for long…

  11. voegelinian says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 11:07 pm

    “Since then, 48 people have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, compared to 26 killed by people who claimed to be jihadist. ”

    Did the study include Fort Hood (13 people — 14 if you count the unborn child one victim was carrying)? Did the study include the Boston Marathon attack (3 people killed and 264 injured which = to any sane person 267 killed, since fanatically murderous intent is what we should be afraid of)?

    • Peter B says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 3:56 am

      The data omit the black lives related terror crimes, does include Ft. Hood in the jihad column, but calls the Las Vegas shooters right wing; they were Occupy activists.

    • Angemon says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 11:11 am

      voegelinian posted:

      “3 people killed and 264 injured which = to any sane person 267 killed”

      Any sane person should be able to tell the difference between living and dead. What you’re suggesting is not out of place in totalitarian regimes, but has no place in Western civilization. Try calling the fat midget in North Korea, he might have a job for you.

      • voegelinian says

        Jun 25, 2015 at 3:31 pm

        What I meant (which should have been clear from what I wrote) is that when a terrorist intends to kill 100 but fails to realize his intent and only succeeds in killing 10 because he has been stopped by law enforcement or because his killing devices had a malfunction, our society concerned about safety should count that as 100 and not minimize the deadliness of the attacker’s ideology and group to which he adheres.

        Why Angemon can’t see that indicates either obtuseness or lurking PC MC.

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 25, 2015 at 3:42 pm

          And once again, other longtime Jihad Watch readers like gravenimage, Mirren, or Wellington ignore such a blatant misstep in their friend Angemon (to add to the hundreds of others he has blurted out over the last 2 years).

        • Angemon says

          Jun 25, 2015 at 4:04 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “And once again, other longtime Jihad Watch readers like gravenimage, Mirren, or Wellington ignore such a blatant misstep in their friend Angemon”

          From what I know of GI and Wellington, I’ll postulate that neither of them would be comfortable with the lie you suggest. Nor would they classify speaking the truth as being a “misstep”. What the CJ movement has on it’s side is the truth, and you’re suggesting we throw it away.

          “(to add to the hundreds of others he has blurted out over the last 2 years).”

          And once again, the voeg propaganda machine is running at full steam. I’ve asked you this before, and you scurried away like a cockroach under light, but here it goes again: show me one of my alleged “attacks” on you from 2013. I maintain that we first locked horns around July or August 2014.

          Prove your case or retract your words, liar.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 25, 2015 at 4:00 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “What I meant (which should have been clear from what I wrote) is that when a terrorist intends to kill 100 but fails to realize his intent and only succeeds in killing 10 because he has been stopped by law enforcement or because his killing devices had a malfunction, our society concerned about safety should count that as 100 and not minimize the deadliness of the attacker’s ideology and group to which he adheres.”

          A lie is a lie, voeg, and what you’re proposing is no different, in nature, than “palestinian” anti-Israeli propaganda. If there were 3 victims and 264 injured then the news should report just that and experts and pundits should add that the goal of the Tsaernev brothers was to kill as many people as possible. Frankly, I don’t understand what you have against the truth – you lie about regulars here and now you’re suggesting that the media should lie as well.

          “Why Angemon can’t see that indicates either obtuseness or lurking PC MC.”

          No, voeg, there’s no obtuseness or lurking PC MC on my side. What is on my side is the truth, and I will not suffer liars or totalitarian propaganda. What you’re proposing would play right into the hands of organization like Hamas-linked CAIR, who would certainly use it to tar anyone opposing jihad as liars and bigots.

        • Champ says

          Jun 25, 2015 at 11:05 pm

          voeg wrote:

          And once again, other longtime Jihad Watch readers like gravenimage, Mirren, or Wellington ignore such a blatant misstep in their friend Angemon (to add to the hundreds of others he has blurted out over the last 2 years).

          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          How pathetic!! Guys, you are not his doormat, so don’t respond to this nonsense.

      • voegelinian says

        Jun 26, 2015 at 3:01 pm

        “Actually, Voegelinian, it was *not* entirely clear whether you meant that this was the *intent* of the Jiahdist, or whether you were suggesting that this story should have been reported as such.”

        My original post was asking about “this study” not the report of the study, nor even about any reporting per se. When a study (pertinently, “this study”) is assessing what is the greatest threat to society’s safety from violent attacks, then the intent to kill more stopped only by a bullet or a maltunction should be part of the threat assessment. That should have been clear from my direct reference to “this study” and the central point of this whole article here. Angemon not only failed to see that, he went on to imply “totalitarian” motives to me — something he and his (and your) friend Phillip Jihadski have done to me before. This is an outrageous implication — all the more so because it’s in defense of softness vis-a-vis the Muslim threat.

        • Angemon says

          Jun 26, 2015 at 3:33 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “My original post was asking about “this study” not the report of the study”

          Let’s see what you posted that I objected:

          “3 people killed and 264 injured which = to any sane person 267 killed”

          3 people killed are 3 people killed, not 267. No sane person would say otherwise. What you’re proposing would play right into the hands of organization like Hamas-linked CAIR, who would certainly use it to tar anyone opposing jihad as liars and bigots.

          “Angemon not only failed to see that, he went on to imply “totalitarian” motives to me — something he and his (and your) friend Phillip Jihadski have done to me before. This is an outrageous implication”

          Let’s see what I actually said:

          “What you’re suggesting is not out of place in totalitarian regimes, but has no place in Western civilization.”

          Quite different from your strawman, isn’t it? There’s a distinct lack of attribution of motives, wouldn’t you say?

          “all the more so because it’s in defense of softness vis-a-vis the Muslim threat.”

          No, voeg, it’s in defense of the truth. What you could possibly win by lying about something easy to check? You’d get blow-back, lose credibility, and let islamic organizations gain leverage.

          But perhaps you’d like to explain, in a very detailed and thorough fashion, how lying about the number of deaths in the Boston bombing would make things different.

        • voegelinian says

          Jun 26, 2015 at 4:49 pm

          Generally speaking, in terms of an informed threat assessment, the threat from Islamic terrorism is unique for some of the reasons adumbrated below:

          1. Quantity:

          a. # of attacks
          b. # of casualties
          c. geographic dispersion of attacks
          d. damage and/or destruction to infrastructure

          2. Quality

          a. an ideological blueprint and motivation that is —

          i. supremacist (hateful and paranoid of the Other)
          ii. expansionist (with global conquest the ultimate goal)
          iii. historically longlasting (1400 years and still going strong) with historical achievements of conquest to make modern members proud and reinforce the rightness of the ideology in their minds
          iv. fanatical (absolutist, impervious to reality, psychologically self-reinforcing)
          v. ‘doubly totalitarian’ (in the fine description of G.H. Bousquet)
          vi. eschatological (every battle and the ongoing struggle against any and all enemies are part of the End Times — no matter that the world has been coming to an end for 1400 years, like the song from Annie, the Eschaton is always “just a day away”…)

          b. A cultural and psychological system of indoctrination, dissemination, and networking cohesion
          c. An underlying and overarching unanimous agreement of the Umma for offensive jihad — not mitigated by an ostensible “diversity” of disagreements and styles
          d. The prosecution of the offensive jihad mentioned in (c) above to be conducted by hook (violence) AND by crook (taqiyya, immigration & stealth)
          e. The violence mentioned in (d) entails every style of violence under the Sun, with one exception: frank military invasion by conventional armies — not because Muslims don’t want to do this, but because their anti-Civilization has been, through a combination of external factors and internal corruption, reduced to such a nadir of inferiority vis-a-vis its greatest enemy (the West) that it simply can’t muster what it did in fact muster during the first 800 years of its bloody career.
          f. The stealth jihad factors mentioned in (d) are also necessary, to supplement the violent jihad, with which it works in tandem to confuse, distract and disinform the Enemy (enormously assisted by the plethora of Useful Idiots abounding throughout the West).
          g. The nexus between (e) and (f) — violent jihad and stealth jihad — includes the function of terror which also includes a whole array of other effects that slowly chip away at the morale of the enemy the Muslims are attacking (cf., the concept of “sidération” developed by French terror analyst Alexandre Del Valle — see link at end of this comment). This strategy of sidération finds great assistance in the ongoing confusion sown by the various disinformation tactics (resembling, for example, the “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky) of the stealth jihad.

          h. More specifically now, we get to my comment which so got Angemon’s obtuse hackles up: As (e) noted, Muslims in their modern period of conventional weakness, have been deploying a wide array of myriad forms of violence – from the “lone wolf” attacks, to seeming violent crimes that have no apparent political dimension, to small terror attacks proper, to larger-scale terror attacks meant to deliver a dramatic whallop, to commando raids (which themselves can vary in style, from a Charlie Hebdo operation to the Mumbai city or the Nairobi shopping mall razzias). As part of this wide array of forms of violence, we note for our threat assessment:

          i. any given attack invariably intended to wreak much higher casualties than occurred
          ii. any foiled & failed attack was intended to be successful and only failed due to circumstances luckily beyond the control of the Muslims involved – and thus should count with the same alarming weight as the successful attacks

          iii. the purport of the data of all of the above, 1.a-d + 2.a-f, leads us to include in our threat assessment:

          — the exigent ongoing threat of potential attacks we must assume are being assiduously, industriously and cleverly planned as we speak, and will be for as long as Muslims are able to do so, and

          — the likelihood, which we reasonably suppose based on all the data we have, that Muslims want to devise ever more numerous, dispersed, clever, creative and destructive attacks against us (including the use of various types of WMDs as well as methods to maim, murder and damage creative enough in form and deployment as to elude our proactive attempts to anticipate them.

          A final note that could get buried in all the details: 2.h.ii above must be understood in the context of two dire facts:

          — Muslims pursuing their global revival of Islamic jihad are getting metastatically worse.

          — The Muslims at the multifarious spearhead of their violent jihad (cf. all the details noted above which demonstrate the diversity and complexity of this violent jihad) not only draw for their support from ordinary Muslims in general, they would likely be unable to put much of a dent in the West without that broad base of ordinary Muslim enablement (which, in turn, continues to be enormously facilitated by the Useful Idiots of the West).

          P.S.:

          As to which of these many factors and sub-factors are unique to Muslims vis-a-vis non-Muslim threats, perhaps the more pertinent approach would be to ask which of these many factors and sub-factors are not unique.

          Link to an analytical discussion of Alexandre Del Valle’s concept of the strategy of sidération —

          http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-strategy-of-sideration.html

        • Angemon says

          Jun 26, 2015 at 5:28 pm

          voegelinian posted:

          “More specifically now, we get to my comment which so got Angemon’s obtuse hackles up”

          Not “obtuse hackles”. I rightfully called you out on what you suggested: to lie and inflate the body count for no good reason.

          In any case, it takes more than half of your post for you to pretend to address what I asked you to address – I’d say you’re not very good at making succinct points, but the truth is that you try to make up for lack of content in word count, and that simply doesn’t fly around here. As I said before, if an attack kills 3 people and injuries 264 then it should be reported that the attack killed 3 people and injured 264, not that it killed 267 people. It can, and it should, be added that the attackers wanted to kill as many people as possible, but lying about the number of deaths would be wrong. Of course, you already proved you don’t have a moral compass and that won’t matter to you, but that you fail to realize the myriad of ways it would cause more harm than good to the CJ movement does not bode well for you.

    • gravenimage says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 10:12 pm

      Voegelinian wrote:

      Did the study include Fort Hood (13 people — 14 if you count the unborn child one victim was carrying)? Did the study include the Boston Marathon attack (3 people killed and 264 injured which = to any sane person 267 killed, since fanatically murderous intent is what we should be afraid of)?
      …

      And in reply to Angemon:

      What I meant (which should have been clear from what I wrote) is that when a terrorist intends to kill 100 but fails to realize his intent and only succeeds in killing 10 because he has been stopped by law enforcement or because his killing devices had a malfunction, our society concerned about safety should count that as 100 and not minimize the deadliness of the attacker’s ideology and group to which he adheres.

      Why Angemon can’t see that indicates either obtuseness or lurking PC MC.
      ………………………………..

      Actually, Voegelinian, it was *not* entirely clear whether you meant that this was the *intent* of the Jiahdist, or whether you were suggesting that this story should have been reported as such. If the former, I agree—but it was not unreasonable for Angemon to interpret this as your suggesting that it should have been *reported* using these figures. Interpreting your words in this manner does not make Angemon either obtuse or “politically correct”.

      I think it is perfectly reasonable to note that the murderous Tsarnaev brothers likely *wish* they had killed rather than “merely” injured those 264 victims. After all, it’s not as though they were targeting a discrete individual or group, and other victims just got caught in the crossfire.

      But then, the Tsarnaevs likely wish they have murdered *more* than 267 people—do we count those, as well? I imagine this is true of most Jihad terror attacks.

      I believe the steadily mounting body count from Jihad terror attacks is appallingly high as it is—such stats do not need to be inflated.

      More:

      And once again, other longtime Jihad Watch readers like gravenimage, Mirren, or Wellington ignore such a blatant misstep in their friend Angemon (to add to the hundreds of others he has blurted out over the last 2 years).
      ………………………………..

      Firstly—and God knows I have mentioned this often enough—if I don’t comment on a post, that does not mean that I am ignoring it. I have just returned to this thread now (I did make a comment before this one during this session, but that was before I got to these posts). In this case, you made your comment just about four hours after Angemon’s post.

      But in this case I agree with Angemon when he said,

      “If there were 3 victims and 264 injured then the news should report just that and experts and pundits should add that the goal of the Tsaernev brothers was to kill as many people as possible.”

      I very much take your point that Jihadists intend to be even more murderous than they have been—this is clear in the number of plots, “work accidents”, and general dreaming aloud by pious Muslims about slaughtering vast numbers of Infidels—but it is clear that Angemon also agrees with this.

      There are all sorts of reasons Jihadists fail to reach the body counts they desire: apathy, ineptitude, and the still generally robust efforts of Western law enforcement. Of course, this doesn’t make such homicidal Muslims ultimately less dangerous.

  12. G179 says

    Jun 24, 2015 at 11:21 pm

    Not only did they omit 9/11, they also deliberately hurried to conduct the “study” a few days after the church massacre. The only purpose of this biased nonsense is to provide a talking point to Islamic apologists.

  13. JIMJFOX says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 2:19 am

    Typical cherry-picking academic survey, made to mislead.

    LIES, DAMNED LIES AND….. STATISTICS

  14. Champ says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 2:57 am

    Rick “Moran” wrote this? …more like Rick Moron!

  15. John Jimson says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 4:48 am

    So 48 deaths caused by non Muslims & 26 by Muslims.. So if we take the American Islamic population of 1% in America, with simple math. this ‘study’ tells us that Muslims are around 50 times more likely to cause death to innocent people than a non Muslim. Maybe the true facts of the report should be represented by the blinded Left wing loonies

  16. duh_swami says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 7:10 am

    It’s just an unpleasant fact, some of the biggest jerk-offs on the planet are my fellow Americans…Moran is just another one of them…

  17. ICH says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 7:28 am

    Red vs Blue is nothing but a distraction , AGREED !!

    I just want to protect myself and family.

    Rather than witnessing Allahs Peaceful Warriors killing people
    in Michigan or Ontario !!

    Then saying , what happened !?

    Why did NO ONE protect us. wahh wahh

  18. Greg Scotto says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 11:23 am

    Yeah, well, there weren’t many Americans killed by the Nazis before we entered the war, either. Does that mean they weren’t a threat to us? This is silly and specious bullshit.

  19. Alarmed Pig Farmer says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 1:33 pm

    I agree that so-called right wing extremists represent a great potential source of future violence in the streets of this nation. But be careful with that, cuz their violence, if it emerges, will be *reactive* in nature, unleashed only after decades of encroachment on freedom and justice. One source of such encroachment is inevitable, in the form of all the Moslems we’re bringing into the country. Moslems will do what Moslems do, in fact they’ve already started, and when push gets to be too much, there will be a reactive shove, and it won’t be golden-hearted liberals shoving back, it’ll be the rednecks.

    But the more present threat are the racists, ranging from Al Sharpton to Jesse Jackson to Barack Hussein to Eric Holder to Jeremiah Wright to Louis Farrakhan… there are too many to list. Many of them are college professors, many “work” in taxpayer funded NGOs, many “work” as bureaucrats for the gubmint, many are self-loathing white reverse racists on point against their own… but they are race pimps all.

    It’s a nasty business, but a profitable one. It also is a business that by nature requires handling explosive material.

    As a redneck myself, I ask: so what’s the problem with putting up a struggle against these people, this tidal force? If they wanna screw up the nation beyond all recognition, and they certainly do, then there will be hell to pay. There will be a requirement to physically subjugate the rednecks before the nouveau racists can bring the majority into total miserable subjugation, which after all is every G.S.E.R.S’s dream (pronounced Geezers).

    G = Globo-
    S = Socialist
    E = Environmentalist
    R = Racist
    S = Sexist

    Ah, the five floating flashing toxic bubbles that animate the fictive reality of our times. Rednecks up to bat. Go get ’em, boys. Let’s get it on.

  20. Nimrod says

    Jun 25, 2015 at 1:51 pm

    Typical junk science “study”. The timeframe was arbitrarily set to eliminate the bulk of the fatalities from the dataset, that bulk of fatalities being 9/11.

    If you were to pick another timeframe such as 20 years or 50 years, you get a drastically different result. There’s no valid scientific reason to eliminate all this available data.

    The assumption seems to be that something like 9/11 can’t possibly happen again. It most certainly can happen again especially if this possibility is ignored. If it hasn’t happened since 9/11 then it’s only because the possibility has not been ignored since then.

    The media reaction to the study seems about as stupid as “record low crime rates suggest that police no longer needed.”

    • Alarmed Pig Farmer says

      Jun 25, 2015 at 2:05 pm

      You know, record low crime rates were predicted with confidence back in the 1970s. The predictions were made with a high level of confidence, and they proved accurate, because they were based on demographics: the older a population gets, especially its male half, the less crime there is.

      But looking at today’s national policy, we’re set to radically shift to radically younger demographics, and of a worse kind than during the young Baby Boom years. We’re gonna move in as many as 30 million new native Americans over our southern border. in addition to the 20 million we already have. (Only a fool would believe the 11 million figure that has magically remained static for decades now.)

      The new native American population — fallaciously branded “Hispanic” even though there is no such race — has already proven to be crime prone, much of that attributable to the fact that they are low wage, low skill, and some would even say low aptitude people.

      So fasten your seat belts. If you thought Baltimore was bad, you ain’t seen nuthin yet.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • janicevanguilder on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Boycott Turkey on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • Yogi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe
  • Hoi Polloi on Why so many Muslims can’t wait for Biden to get inaugurated
  • Hoi Polloi on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.