This graph appears in the New York Times story “What Investigators Know About the San Bernardino Shooting,” December 4, 2015:
The entire purpose of this graph, and of the survey it illustrates, is to downplay the Islamic jihad threat. For some unknown reason, the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media have made one of their chief aims the exoneration of Islam. Their goal is that, even as the jihadi death toll mounts, no one has a negative view of The Religion of Peace.
This graph is ridiculous for five reasons:
1. It begins after 9/11. Including nearly 3,000 jihad deaths on 9/11 would make it look significantly different.
2. It does not include foiled plots, which also would make the jihadi line dwarf the non-jihadi line.
3. It does not include the global component of the problem. There is a global jihad. Jihadis have murdered people all over the world. There is no global “right-wing extremist,” “white male Christian” threat.
4. It ignores the fact that a minuscule part of the U.S. population — Muslims — is responsible for around half of the successful attacks.
5. It lumps together shootings by clearly deranged people such as James Holmes with those of other deranged people who seem to have some ideology, such as Adam Lanza, to create the impression that there is some ideological movement and threat equivalent to that of Islamic jihad.
The mainstream media is no longer in any sense a news source. It is a propaganda arm for those who want you to think Islam is wonderful. Several days ago I was contacted by NPR for a show hosted by Warren Olney and also joined by Peter Bergen and Frank Rich, on “the San Bernardino mass shooting and the impact on Americans who according to the latest Quinnipiac poll feel that homegrown terrorists are America’s biggest threat. Will this increase gun sales and anti Muslim sentiment?” I was extremely surprised to be asked, since usually only one point of view is allowed on NPR. The producer called me to talk over the issue and I soon realized that she wanted me to be the foil on the show, the ranting right-winger countered by cool and knowledgeable leftists. I explained to her why “Islamophobia” was a propaganda concept and why concern about the refugees was not racism and xenophobia. She seemed surprised that I wasn’t a ranting, frothing-at-the-mouth bigot, and I in turn wasn’t at all surprised when I got the email saying they didn’t want me on the show after all, as they had “decided to go in a different direction.” Reasonable arguments for resisting jihad and opposing a massive influx of Muslim refugees are not allowed on NPR, or anywhere else in the mainstream media.

boakai ngombu says
You said it all: “The mainstream media is no longer in any sense a news source. It is a propaganda arm for those who want you to think Islam is wonderful.”
d wayne says
You are absolutely correct….. Our Bible tells us that God will send a great delusion upon the earth in the end days….
He did, I call it, Islamo-Liberalism.
AgamemnonsShield says
Notice the graph. The have left out many things: the beltway snipers ( yes, there were two), the murders in Dearbornistan, MI and many others. They must not let the truth get in their way…
mortimer says
NYT is the house organ of the Democratic Party. They are holding the line that evil white Christian males are the source of all evil. They are slandering white males wholesale while claiming Muslim jihad is an aberration within Islam. It is profoundly dishonest…a sad and very transparent DISINFORMATION to defend the Muslim allies of the Democrats.
The cultural Marxists within Western society want to create a political crisis or a social crisis in order to step in and suspend the constitution, thus ushering in the New Millenium of Pure Socialism. They do not realize that their fantasy utopia passes through rivers of blood.
Spot On says
Cultural Marxists are a serious problem as are the true Marxists. The practicals result from both are the same. Marxism is a belief system and they have their own faithful participants. Today we all try to analyze every facet of everything as an observer. This is what academia, of course, is supposed to do. However from an operational and practical point of view, cultural or regular Marxists are engaging in criminal or dishonest behavior. I say this because they instigate trouble, murder, and mayhem by their words and actions. We should call them out for what they do. They are liars, criminals, and their intent is to ruin or end lives. They are ruthless, narrow minded, greedy, and have no moral high ground. Criminals also think they are on high moral ground but they are not. The same for liars, cheats, and thugs. They all think they are right in what they do. We cannot just observe, we need to call them out for what they do.
A perfect example is the NY Times or cultural Marxist Pope Francis. The NY Times supports liars, cheats, thugs, and murderers, They are a menace to the world. If we had millions being murdered by an enemy, they would be on the enemy’s side. Pope Francis needs to be called out for his genuine support of Islam. Anyone who has ever read any religious history (and most certainly he has) knows that Islam is historically and intrinsically evil. He is supporting evil while acting as the premier Christian leader. Everyone observes but no one calls them out for what they do.
jihad3tracker says
A rousing hello to The Usual Suspects posting above me.
Shouldn’t you be doing something truly useful today — cutting the lawn / learning ikebana / reading use-by dates on the amontillado stash?
Here is a link to a recent & relevant Jamie Glazov episode —- with Dan Greenfield, whom Robert describes as incomparable [and he does not throw praise around casually] :
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/new-glazov-gang-when-brown-shirts-need-to-feel-safe-on-the-american-campus
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald has called the NYT the “New Duranty Times” for their earlier whitewash of even the most appalling atrocities by Stalin. Their whitewash of Islam is very much in this ugly “tradition”. And they are hardly the only ones.
Paul Green says
It is also a propaganda arm for those who want you to think Obama is credible. Yesterday morning the lead header on page one of the St.Paul Pioneer Press was “Suspects’ Motive in Attack Unclear.” This was exactly Barry Hussein’s line — it might’ve been workplace violence, blah blah blah.
john spielman says
yep, it just more lies damn lies and statistics but if when you add 3000 dead killed by muslims from 2001 to this graph the whole picture changes!!
Captain says
Sulzberger family must take personal responsibility and be held accountable for each falsehood, biased account of Islamic violence towards Jews and Christians ; their liberal bias stops objective reporting. If you know these people speak to them. Their duty is to be honest . The truth will set them free even though the truth will make them uncomfortable as owners of the NY Times the buck stops with them.
jihad3tracker says
Hello Captain — Protecting the Sulzberger “legacy” is uppermost as a motive in what we see with endless attempts to deceive about Islam’s violent essence.
DEFENSIVENESS BECAUSE, IN THIS LATEST CALIFORNIA MASSACRE, WE SEE HOW WRONG ALL OF THOSE ARROGANT JOURNALISM “BLUEBLOOD” ELITES HAVE BEEN.
And they cannot stand to be embarrassed — therefore desperation seizes their feverish little brains . . . resulting in kindergarten counter-push like that graph.
nabiZK (pbum) says
They may have shot themselves in the foot, as item #4 seems to imply that mohametans are 50-100x more likely to be mass murderers. Not a particularly flattering assessment.
nabi ZK (pbum)
Shmooviyet says
The Pinch family-fishwrap knows its readers will see that graph and feel all toasty and justified in their own multi-culti tolerance.
“The ‘wingers are much more violent than Muslims– the proof’s here in the Times!”
It would just confuse and distress them to show Mr.Spencer’s five most excellent points.
Dave says
This is an important chart. It shows that 1% of the American population is responsible for 50% of the extremist attack since 9/11.
J.Morika says
Also see this letter from “The society of professional journalists”.
I think its genuine… https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVUJS2aW4AQqcfh.png:large
PorknDeen says
This graph actually shows that muslims in America are 25 times more likely to commit terrorist acts than non-muslims. See the article at American Thinker today.
Boston Tea Party says
I remember when I was in college in the late 80s, and was studying the Soviet Union. We read accounts of Soviet dissidents, where they talked about the big state-run newspapers, Pravda and Izvestia. The dissidents said that living under the Soviets, one just had to understand that the newspapers were primarily ideological organs, and conveying actual news was only their secondary purpose. That being said, the dissidents explained, you COULD get some real news from them, if you understood the code words, and knew how to read between the lines. At the time I thought, “wow, that’s crazy.” And now in 2015, that pretty much describes the mainstream media in the West.
BlueHawK says
Obvious code word all over the “news” – “Asian”, right? Certainly not meaning Charlie Chan, are they?
Boston Tea Party says
Exactly.
Paul Green says
The two most prominent papers in the USSR were “Pravda” (Truth) and Izvestia (News). This gave rise to the aphorism that in “Truth” there is no news, and in “News” there is no truth.
Tasine says
The NYT serves one good purpose: it makes great bird cage liners.
Tim says
The figures also ignores the fact that almost every city in America avert dozens of attacks every single year. Not attacks by non-Muslim extremist but Muslim plotted attacks. In the UK, for example, over 200 terror plots a month is averted.
ECAW says
No, that’s not so. I think the current official figure is 7 this year. Where did you get 200 a month?
Boston Tea Party says
I’m not sure these are all separate plots, but as far as arrests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11398825/Terror-suspects-arrested-every-day-in-UK-as-police-call-for-extra-funding-to-cope-with-Isil-threat.html
gravenimage says
Yes–as bad as things are in the US, they are *much* worse in Britain and the rest of Europe.
The *only* thing that keeps American figures from being just as bad is that Europe has a much larger Muslim population. Wait for things to get worse here, as well, if we continue on the path of letting huge numbers of Mohammedans invade.
gravenimage says
The shocking thing is that *every single* unsuccessful terrorist plot since 9/11 in the US listed by Wikipedia was plotted by Muslims.
“List of unsuccessful terrorist plots in the United States post-9/11”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11
Even the handful of names that don’t sound Muslim turn out to be: Richard Reid, José Padilla, and Coleen La Rose were infamously Muslim, and lesser known figure Michael Finton turns out to have the very Islamic Muslim name Talib Islam.
VRWC member77 says
Robert,
I’m guessing that they will have their propaganda forum and make some mention that they “invited Jihad Watch ‘blogger’ Robert Spencer to be part of their discussion but he declined.”
VRWC member77 says
…….or something along that twisted line of effect. I believe in the very near future, NPR will have no problem with flat-out lying like that. Eventually the WH (aka Valerie Jarrett) will order them to act in such marching order fashion.
WCM says
Correct. If she encounters resistance or conscience (unlikely) VAL-JAR will hint to the NPR execs that they might just accidentally lose all or part of their gummint funding, due to those evil Republicans
Asian Crusader says
Senior NPR/PBS staff are carefully selected for ruthless but (somewhat) intelligent adherence to the progressive socialist, Frankfurt School, party line.
To exert power over a wider range of individuals, Valerie Jarrett and her official staff (WH) and inofficial organization (Soros organizations) can call on NSA intercepts of every phone conversation, text, email, vehicle transit etc. This makes it easy to issue rather more personal threats, pardon me: suggestions to keep the PROJECT moving forward.
Don McKellar says
An extremely enlightening post on what’s going on behind the scenes in this inexplicable leftist defence of Islam! This NY Times ridiculous chart and that NPR incident really shows how this works. Instead of reporting and investigating the news and facts and going wherever they lead, and offering balanced opinion pieces with good debates, the Mainstream Media of our age operate with a predetermined spin for every story. Especially if it has anything to do with Islam. They ignore or skew data to make it fit their agenda, and when it’s clear they can’t demonize an opposing viewpoint guest because he’s talking nothing but sense, they “decided to go in a different direction” and don’t have him on.
The Liberal journalists of the 20th Century who worked so hard to uncover hypocrisy and corruption and advance social justice have been replaced by the Leftist journalists of the 21st Century who are hypocritical and corrupt themselves, and advance social injustice to favor Islam! When did this shift happen? When did the left-fascist element take over Mainstream Media (and academia, for that matter)??? There is a major book in this that somebody should write (if they haven’t already).
When I see this in academia and the media, I tend to think that we have a new generation of people in those jobs who completely misunderstood what they learned in university. By this I mean that academic study of different cultures and religion means that all must be considered objectively and on an equal footing with one another — none are judged superior to another. That’s the academic ideal. But what they seemed to have completely missed is that this does not at all reflect how these things should be approached outside of an academic setting. Communism really is a failed, disastrous fantasy system and is vastly inferior to a free market economy. It is harmful to people and society. Islam really is a nightmare death cult that is vastly inferior to modern western culture. It is harmful to people and society. It’s as if they can’t approach Islam in a real world context.
Peter says
6. It doesn’t include people injured, wounded, and maimed (the Boston Marathon Jihad Attack numbers for this category were roughly 100x the three people killed)
7. It doesn’t include estimates of the social and economic costs of the attacks (e.g., locking down entire areas, security and emergency service manpower, etc..)
خَليفة says
And there is not real method to graph the fear factor that lingers in the community after an attack.
After a non Muslim does a mass killing, people are grieving, but NOT concerned that another person from the killer’s organization or church is going to make another attack.
After a Muslim does a mass killing, people are grieving, and are fearful of where or when the next attack will happen – THIS is the “terrorism” aspect of Muslim jihad. History shows the same pattern of Muslim violence again and again. All one needs to do is read the Koran to see how much Muslims are directed to hate non-Muslims.
Dave says
The chart shows that 1% of the American population cause 50% of the extremist attacks in America.
somehistory says
Three reasons: (There may be many more)
There are moslims in the business…*news* reporters, writers, editors, government insiders, funders, etc.
There are enablers in the business who, for one reason or another, money or fear being two, wish to help the moslims hide the truth of where and why there are terrorists advancing and increasing. Much like family members will enable a drug addict or alcoholic to hide their addictions as long as possible.
When a person does something different, that person stands out.
For some reason, those in the media have chosen not to want to stand out from the herd, so each one reports what another one reports. If a person reports something different from what the herd is reporting, that one is looked at as…(choose an adjective)…and what normal person wants all others in their *field* to view them in a bad light?
Because there are individuals…Mr. Spencer, Mr. Ibrahim, Ms. Geller and a few others… that risk being labeled with unhappy adjectives and attacked for telling the truth, we find out that islam is the root and cause of terror.
Westman says
40 years ago, one could depend on Government & public-funded radio to provide the most credible news, often with views seen as opposing government policies as it cut through administrative propaganda. Over the years as government funding was curtailed, the discussions became more distorted as the donors views became the “Stylebook” for NPR. Robert Spencer’s honest explanations of Islamic militancy and it’s origins in Islam’s ideology simply do not fit the current major donor’s narrative. NPR is leading from behind; always a safe position.
I have a friend who describes this as “encapsulated delusion” where everyone close to the central figure adopts the same view whether in agreement or simply to remain employed. NPR is no longer independent; it is a leftist commercial enterprise with no more credibility than the Huff Post. It lives in a world it wants to see instead of the reality.
jon hanks says
I am curious, does this include the Chattanooga killings and the recent attack in Oregon? Thanks.
Kepha says
I dunno, Robert. Maybe you should’ve played the foil for her, and then on the air spring the figures on FGM, Scandinavian rapes, British rape-grooming gangs, and associated quotes from Qur’an and Hadith and let them explode in wrath in front of their own constituency.
DJM says
Gee, I wonder what the graph would look like if it started on 9/11/01 instead of 9/12/01?
Jimbo says
The author deliberately misses out the Beltway sniper attacks. So you can add another17 bodies to the red line.
? says
“they didn’t want me on the show after all, as they had “decided to go in a different direction.”….”
I wonder what that direction was….
dsinc says
Dhimmitude, or outright submission. Pay Jizya. Or just follow the money.
Jaladhi says
If you start with wrong faulty assumptions and distorted data, you can come up with the desired results!!
This is the tactic of lying hypocritic NYTimes. Anyone with even a iota of gray matter(brain) can see through their lies but these libtards still think they can fool the American public and sadly they do succeed in their mission!
ronen says
This is so sad really, the way our societies are forced into this willfull blindness. If Mr. Spencer is not allowed to talk anywhere, there is really something wrong with us. Hope things will change soon.
Myxlplik says
The headline should read, “Islam, 98% more likely to cause mass killings than all other ideologies and random incidents combined”.
Mike says
> 4. It ignores the fact that a minuscule part of the U.S. population
> — Muslims — is responsible for around half of the successful attacks.
is the gist of it, to me. If you view it on a percentage of the population basis, all of a sudden it looks massive…
>She seemed surprised that I wasn’t a ranting, frothing-at-the-mouth
> bigot, and I in turn wasn’t at all surprised when I got the email saying
> they didn’t want me on the show after all, as they had “decided to go
> in a different direction.”
Consider “frothing” a bit next time, just in order to get on, and then deliver the message. Just an idea…
Myxlplik says
Robert can never froth at the mouth, not even for show, or during an interview. It’s all being recorded, one small slip would take a century to undo I think.
The media hive mind wants so badly to see an irrational lunatic, but are faced with sober logic and not even a scent of what they want in order to discredit him. He slips up one time and it’s over.
Mo says
@ Myxlplik
“Robert can never froth at the mouth, not even for show, or during an interview. It’s all being recorded, one small slip would take a century to undo I think.
The media hive mind wants so badly to see an irrational lunatic, but are faced with sober logic and not even a scent of what they want in order to discredit him. He slips up one time and it’s over.”
Absolutely right. Maddening, but true.
jewdog says
As a very conservative estimate, let’s assume that Muslims are between 1-2% of the US population. According to the chart, which shows that “extremist” deaths in both the Muslim and non-Muslim categories are about equal, then one can conclude that the death rate due to Muslim extremism is roughly 50-100 times the non-Muslim death rate, an estimate which excludes 9/11.
Taking into account 9/11, the multiplier grows by about 60x (3000/50), to around 3000-6000x.
Currently, Muslims are the fastest growing demographic in the US, their population more than doubling since 9/11, and may almost triple by 2030, according to Pew Research. If one includes the 9/11 death toll, in less than 15 years, the 3000+ deaths may easily expand to five figures or beyond. If nuclear weapons become available to terrorists, we could eventually be dealing in megadeaths.
mortimer says
Yes…exactly. Even without 9-11, the result is that Muslim males are 66 times more violent than white Christians in America. When 9-11 is included, the violence ratio of Muslim males shoots up to 100 to 1!!!
Westman says
I think you have zeroed in on the true interpretation of this step graph, Jewdog and mortimer.
One line is composed of linked random acts by the majority population while the other is composed of acts with a common motivation from a common ideology; acts that will increase as the number of Muslim males of 18-35 yrs increases. The latter group has produced far more acts of terror per person than the former.
The San Bernadino male Muslim shooter was influenced by a woman who emmigrated to the US; anecdotal evidence that Muslim immigrants will bring higher rates of terrorism with them both as actors and influencers.
The accuracy of this expectation can tested by watching the terrorism rates in Europe due to the influx of “refugees”. There are crimes and mob violence already happening in refugee shelters and refugees “disappearing” into Europe. Google “Dutch Moroccan Youth” for a slightly exaggerated picture of what is coming to Europe even after a second indigenous generation.
mortimer says
CRUCIALLY, the graph begins after 9-11. That really gives their slippery game away doesn’t it? It’s a con job, showing the NYT has no integrity.
Muslim males are less about half of 1% of the US population, but white males are 33%. That’s a 66 to 1 ration?
Muslim males are 66 times more likely to commit violence and when they do so, their motive is RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY.
Long live the NYT hiding the RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY of Muslim males! What an unconscionable manipulation of statistics! Shame on the editors! Shame on the owners! Shame of the journalists!
Westman says
If we can see the step graph actually shows a common minority, Muslims, commiting terror at far grester rates than the population at large, then many others will see the same. The NYT would be wise to bury this graph before someone points out that inconvenient fact on a news or debate program.
Anyway, good spotting, mortimer.
eduardo odraude says
realclearpolitics.com, which side-by-side publishes articles by left and right, has a review today by Catholic economist and theologian writing about the new book Christian Persecution in the Middle East.
Michael Novak, who in the past seems to have had little strong opinion on Islam and therefore used to give it the benefit of the doubt, has since become aware of exactly what is going on with Islam. Here are excerpts from Novak’s review of the book:
For the rest, see http://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2015/12/05/the_tragedy_of_christian_persecution.html
BringBackTheCrusades says
Nailed, it (except your estimate is still to low). Any person with a 5th grade education or above, could have normalized the curves and immediately, the graph of (murders committed by jihadist)/(muslims in the US) would render the plot of (‘cherry picked’ murders committed by non jihadist)/(non-muslims in the US) a horizontal line at 0.
Even assuming the number of ‘cherry picked’ deaths to murders by jihadists in US is equal, the Lower Bound multiplier for increased likelihood of being ‘extremely’ killed by a jihadist (as opposed to not) is:
(100-‘percent of muslims in the us’)/(‘percent of muslims in the US’)=99.4/0.6=165.666 times more likely.
That is assuming the CIA world fact book is correct in reporting that only 0.6% of US Citizens are muslim.
PrayerWarrior says
This diseased main stream media we have right now is quite depressing. But history is the thing that gives me hope for the future. We’ve been through things like this before. Before World War II, the Right in our country was wrong about Hitler, favoring isolationism and even believing that Hitler
was useful for keeping Russia out of Europe. It was the Left, in the person of FDR and his associates that worked behind the scenes to aid England and try and re-arm us for war.
When WWII was won, things shifted again. The USSR was the threat, and the Leftist media ( the “New Duranty Times” as Robert puts it) was blind to it, while our Right mobilized us against it and eventually ended it (Ronald Reagan).
The human mind has always had these dichotomies. In philosophy, it was nominalism vs realism, in economics, capitalism vs.socialism (communism), in religion, free will vs. predestination, and in anthropology, its emic realiiy vs entic reality. In politics, its Left and Right. And because of this, if you believe totally in one thing,you will be blind to other things.
The news media this country used to split along these lines. Once upon a time We had newspapers with names like “the Arizona Republican” and “the Suwannee Democrat.” It was the advent of newspaper monopolies like William Randolph Hearst’s that started the fiction of ‘objective reporting.’
To gain market share, these monopolies dropped their overt political affiliations and started posing as Olympian intelligences above all that sort of thing – while still remaining very much that sort of thing.
Sometimes a dichotomy just has ascendance in the press for a while. It takes something very big to break through that. Pearl Harbor was the big thing in WW II. 9-11 should have been that big thing for our time. That the mainstream media was effectively able to absorb that event and
continue spinning what it has been spinning, means that it may take something even bigger to break through the fog. (But God forbid that ever happens.)
Or then again, it may mean that a dichotomy is no longer a dichotomy at all. A long time ago Robert Ringer, the author of “Winning through Intimidation,” used to write about the “Demopublican Party.” I.e., that Democrats and Republicans have been swapping seats in the Senate and the House for so long that we, effectively, now have a one party system. And lets not forget the effect that the endless pool of Saudi money has had on the Republican Party as well as the Democratic Party. Maybe its time for a new political party. That was the big thing that finally got the American Civil War going
(yet another Dichotomy. Slave vs Free.) And what a fight that would be, against a single party system that’s backed by the mainstream media. It would be like living in an old style Latin American or African country.
Westman says
Good analysis PrayerWarrior,
Unity happened in WWII because every American adult knew that not winning the war meant eventual war within the homeland. None of the undeclared “wars” since that time have contained any credible threat of war within the US. In 70 years since WWII, a randomness of opinion and interests has set in which is a historical norm for humans.
The Islamic threat hasn’t yet risen to a “war in the homeland” level so our “leaders” are pursuing economic “national interests” while soft-pedaling the militant threat with the minimum containment.
The “leaders” are as randomly divided as the public; no real consensus will happen until another 9/11 or worse.
G179 says
Let’s overlook the bias for a moment. Should one stop fighting cancer because heart diseases are more deadly?
ds says
This is false analogy. Whenever they make such a false comparison, they have the argument twisted in their favour from the beginning itself.
Muslims killing non-muslims, because of islam, in non-muslim countries, is not comparable to non-muslims killing non-muslims, in non-muslim countries because of a non-muslim ideology.
If we want to compare crimes by muslims because of islam, then we can only compare them to crimes by non-muslim extremists against muslims in muslim countries. Or muslims killing other muslims in muslim countries, because of islam. Then the real extent of the threat that jihadis pose will come to light. Muslims kill because of islam pretty much every day in muslim countries.
Furthermore, when we talk about extremist non-muslims,the ideologies that give rise to these commonly, for instance white supremacism, racism etc are treated as illegal and discriminatory. They are condemned by the entire society.
On the contrary, islam is valued by the society. We have not made islam illegal yet, nor does the entire society condemn islam. In fact, the mainstream media and a significant part of the population do their best to exonerate islam.
Myxlplik says
The answer to this is the fact that those in control of the information believe in Multiculuralism in totality as a religious faith.
The are religious fundamentalists
eduardo odraude says
I doubt it is the best strategy for us to attack multiculturalism wholesale. The problem with Islam is that it tends gradually to eliminate pluralism and multiculturalism and substitute a totalitarian monoculture. Pluralism and good aspects of multiculturalism are what we are fighting for. If we attack multiculturalism, we create unnecessary divisions between ourselves and the Left, when what we need is for right and left to unite to any extent possible in defense against Islam’s attacks on open societies.
Multiculturalism is good except when it tolerates totalitarian intolerance. The other bad aspect of multiculturalism is that it embodies self-contradiction by making relativism an absolute. Relativism must apply not only to absolutes, but also to relativism itself. Once you relativize relativism itself, then absolutes of a sort can reappear. Because relativism is a partial truth, not an absolute one, we can sense absolutes, though only through a glass darkly, because we are fallible human beings living in a relativized world. But the absolutes exist, and truth exists. We cannot attain perfect certainty in a relativized world, but we can attain what theologian and economist Peter Berger called “mellow certainty.”
We should not make wholesale attacks on multiculturalism, but instead tell leftists that Islam will gradually suppress multiculturalism and substitute a totalitarian monoculture.
Myxlplik says
I agree, we can’t be absolute about Multiculturalism :).
Happy to have Hispanic culture around, feel lucky actually.
PrayerWarrior says
http://www.dailywire.com/news/1593/loretta-lynch-vows-prosecute-those-who-use-anti-james-barrett
“Loretta Lynch Vows to Prosecute Those Who Use ‘Anti-Muslim’ Speech That ‘Edges Toward Violence’ ”
Interesting. I wonder just how ‘edging’ that will have to be before she ponces.
PrayerWarrior says
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12/05/former-congressman-unleashes-on-attorney-general-in-rant-against-islam-go-ahead-and-prosecute-me-i-dare-you/
“Former Congressman Unleashes on Attorney General in Rant Against Islam: ‘Go Ahead and Prosecute Me. I Dare You.’ ”
Bravo, Joe Walsh.
jihad3tracker says
THANK YOU PRAYERWARRIOR —- Excellent link. The San Bernardino massacre is our first U.S.major jihad attack. More to come as ISIS “inspires” Muslims after a body count of 14.
Email your federal and state elected officials if they are still in fantasy denial:
Thousands of rounds of ammunition / planning for weeks or months for multiple attacks / suicidal mother leaves baby / Qur’an Chapter nine is the Jihad engine.
jihad3tracker says
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR DESERVEDLY SLAMMING MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL ! ! !
What I had in mind was “Our first major jihad attack by one or two persons with enough firepower to kill thousands— the ISIS ideal lone-wolves template.”
But even that revision is not really adequate — s, how about this: a global war to bring down America WAS JUST GIVEN ITS LATEST VICTORY ?
Mo says
These insufferable, TRAITOROUS leftists will not stop! It enrages me!
Sergio says
The funny thing is that this graphic, although trying to exonerate Muslims, shows that Jihad is as dangerous as all other evil ideologies combined. It shows that Jihad is undoubtedly the most dangerous evil ideology out there, even in a country with a Muslim population of 1%.
Draki says
Agreed, so out of one religion in the whole world… they nearly double “extremist murders” certainly seems to show that islam has a problem
John Johness says
Excellent point.
It is similar to the family and mosque trying to distance themselves by saying how quiet, religious and nice the couple were. The obvious meaning for the rest of America is that it is the nice quiet ones who are the extreme danger. Destroys the usual “yes but I know this Muslim at work and he is really nice” argument.
The real weapon here is the culture of the Islam and the Press reporters. Give them a microphone and they will eventually shoot themselves in the foot.
They do not see ‘facts’ they only see emotion and power in words. (BTW this is the reason so few books are translated into Arabia and why they take to the internet so easily). Hence they contradict earlier statements, have no consistency, and come up with these.
To them only fact is the Qur’an and everything else is fluid.
Paul says
It clearly highlights that as the Muslim population grows so does the number of jihad deaths. And how much more dangerous the Muslim community is per % of population.
Kurt says
I have a problem with this statistic because it does not break the “Non-Islamist Extremist” graph down. The “Islamist Extremist” graph is very specific.
Wellington says
NPR in truth stands for National Propaganda Radio.
Dave J says
The difference between the two groups being compared is that in general non-Muslim maniacs do not have a global organization, an evil book of instructions or a network of brick and mortar barracks behind them but Muslims do..
Angemon says
Unless someone other than the wannabe jihadis got killed in those foiled plots they shouldn’t be included, since it’s a tally up of confirmed kills. Although a companion graphic comparing the number of foiled terror plots by muslims and non-muslims would provide interesting data – I bet we’d get a hockey stick curve after the declaration of the islamic state in 2014.
They added up all victims from non-muslims “terrorist” attacks and came up with only a couple fatalities above the total of (known) deaths caused by jihadis after 9/11? That’s not reassuring, that’s the polar opposite of reassuring – it means that 1% of the population is responsible for almost as many fatalities as the remaining 99%.
gravenimage says
NY Times: “Non-Muslim extremists” more lethal than jihadis
This graph is ridiculous for five reasons:
4. It ignores the fact that a minuscule part of the U.S. population — Muslims — is responsible for around half of the successful attacks.
…………………………….
For me, this is the most absurd point. Whites make up 77% of the population; Muslims less than 1%–and yet Muslims (even without counting 9/11)–make up *half* the killings. That means that Muslims are about *38 times* as dangerous as are “white people”.
The other point, as well, is that the danger from Jihad is *not* static–instead, it is *mushrooming* with each small increase in population.
For instance, over the past half decade, *!00%* of stranger rapes in Oslo have been committed *by Muslims*, and atrocities like those in France, Britain, and the US are becoming more common. Paris has been hit twice with Jihad massacres just this year–and a planned massacre on a Paris-bound train was foiled by American heroes.
When you factor in all the foiled Jihad plots–note that there is *nothing* similar being done by “white people”, or any other Infidels–then the rate goes up even further. And as we see in Europe, security is fast being overwhelmed by Jihad plots.
Westman says
The NYT would be wise to bury this graph before the obviously high ratio of terrorisms per Muslim to terrorisms per citizen of the general population is pointed out. All that would be necessary to correct this graph is the representative percentage of the population printed on each line.
JF says
I hope people from Jihad Watch will take a few minutes to go over and point this out on the NYT comments section. If multiple comments say the same thing, the NYT will be discouraged from printing these kinds of deceptive statistics.
Bezelel says
I for one don’t like the “non muslim” category lacking subdivisions. Talk about a broad brush. How many of the “non muslims were taking mind and or mood altering meds? yada yada…
Radegunda says
The Times must consider its readers pretty simple-minded if it expects them to take that farcical graph seriously. But undoubtedly a great many of them will.
Mathew Solo says
Our Political Machine…along with media allies may want to Imply that more Gun Control
can help with gun violence…but more laws won’t help…that dog won’t hunt…we have strict laws already in place…Our trying to placate Islam or any other violent source will only encourage not dissuade…just admitting that some sources have that inherent potential is a start.
The Second Amendment allows all law abiding citizens to have and bear arms…
it is a stroke of social genius…it smacks of American…and hinders a dictator.
Over 300 million privately owned legal guns in the U. S. is the SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guise)…What that estimate would be if the illegal gun population is included…you guise.
Gun Violence is highly concentrated in urban areas and associated with gang violence involving male juveniles or young adult males… Although mass shootings have been covered extensively in the media…mass shootings account for a very small amount of gun-related deaths…so far.
We all know that…Action Produces Results…If any President would act on the overwhelming source of gun violence in this country…that very source which Causes Our Numbers To Be So High…by focusing on this one area of the most gun violence…it could be diminished greatly…and A WIDE OPEN REAL SOURCE OF ILLEGAL GUN DISTRIBUTION could be disrupted…these gangs can connect with any one for profits.
We can not stop all Lunacy…yet where we do know we can find it…we could try there.
There are certainly things this President is just Un-Able to Approach.
Our Present President has made His Statement after this last tragedy:
“As I said just a few months ago, and I said a few months before that, and I said each time we see one of these mass shootings, our thoughts and prayers are not enough,” President Obama said. “It does not capture the heartache and grief and anger that we should feel. And it does nothing to prevent this carnage from being inflicted someplace else in America next week or a couple of months from now.”
Actions speak louder than words…I do not know what has been tried…but the results are
that there is major gun violence in these urban areas it’s still going strong…and action can be taken by any President…this murder rate is shameful and must be recognized… finally after all these decades…He could act on this decisively…there Is and Has Been For Far To Long…Heartache…Grief…Anger…that goes un-captured…but felt.
Any President can use His Bully Pulpit to address this nonsense…I am sure most of us thought this one might when He got elected…yes there will be severe resistance from so many directions…but someone with Real Conviction can garner support from enough citizens…this might get the ball rolling.
It seems we somehow come to view this urban violence as…it is just the way it is there…it is expected…and let it be there…not here…but…these are major chunks of major cities…
major chunks of our Nation…it is in fact the Nation’s Problem.
If any President wants to unify our people…let them see one law for all…wishing something will change is fine…But it takes action to produce results…wanting to be a leader and leading are different subjects completely…let us hope for such a leader soon.
These are not just a bunch of kids…so many hands are in this pie…in so many ways…
Real money is generated in so many ways here…there are international associates.
If We can not reign in these long standing criminal gangs they are still going to be a major source of Illegal Gun distribution and they will aid an abet any one with the funds…If we can not get a lid on this…WE WILL FIND FIGHTING JIHAD MUCH MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT WOULD NEED TO BE.
abad says
Precisely.
Muslims may be a minority population yet they commit the highest rate of crimes against non-Muslims while screeching “Allahu Akhbar.”
That is very telling right there.
H says
Even though the graph is crap like you said, I’m still noticing an exponential trend. And it’s also interesting that things were quiet for a long time after 9/11 and really only started amping up after fort hood in 09. A lot of changes to the FBI happened with Obama and you see the difference in the presidencies. Perhaps they’re getting more emboldened under Obama along with the worsening in Homeland security and FBI education on Islam.
Radegunda says
Considering that Islamic pressure groups have a big part in determining how the FBI and other security agencies approach Islamic terrorism, it’s almost surprising that many plots have actually been stopped. Unfortunately it isn’t surprising that some of Farouk’s neighbors didn’t report suspect activity for fear of being accused of “profiling” or “Islamophobia.” Clock Boy’s stunt looks designed to achieve precisely that effect — unless it was just about the lawsuit and the money.
Mickey says
Robert,
Thank God you are out there. I am not learned enough to counter Liberal arguments in the way that you do so easily. I am grateful for your articulate, logical, and reasonable TRUTH.
We need you. We need Jihad Watch.
Ren says
The NY Times does not get it. The issue is not about the number of deaths, but about the killing in the name of a religion, islam.
Paul says
“NY Times: “Non-Muslim extremists” more lethal than jihadis”
If the media is too cowardly to tell the truth, or if this is some
pathetic attempt at warped humour (I can’t think of any more
possibilities), then they should really look for another profession
instead of wasting our time with this insulting crap. On the very rare
occasions I bother to pick up a newspaper I just check the sports results.
It’s one of the very few things I know they won’t be lying about.
Ashley says
I agree…the graph is rubbish.
In the face of a potentially dangerous situation, I have learned to trust my instincts. And my instincts tell me to be wary of those who identify themselves as Muslims.
Lindda says
just waiting for the day ISIS blows up NT Times…we’ll see what they have to say..if they survive.
somehistory says
The Garland attack…unsuccessful as it was only because some police officers were on the job and good of aim…doesn’t seem to be listed either.
Just read an article from Judicial Watch posted here:
http://www.rightsidenews.com/us/homeland-security/middle-eastern-men-arrested-near-mexican-border-steel-cylinders-ieds/
Radegunda says
We know what an “Islamic extremist” is: someone who takes the doctrines of Islam extremely seriously. But what is a “non-Islamic extremist”? What exactly are such people extremely serious about?
“Extremist” refers to degree of dedication. But in the leftists’ nonsensical world, an “extremist” is simply a “violent individual” who may happen to be a Muslim, or a white supremacist, or a paranoid schizophrenic. Leftists don’t want to address the “extremely what?” question — unless they think they can answer it with “right-wing.”.
somehistory says
Very astute.
A few years ago, the word was used in one area especially. Many people evidently engaged in *extreme sport* and that seemed to hold a lot of fun and excitement…not many commentators had anything negative to say about it either even though most of it involved danger to life and limb.
Now, extreme is a word, as you said, the left wants to connect only to those with whom they disagree.
Radegunda says
My favorite was “extreme ironing.”
H says
Right on. Bill Warner said a similar thing, that’s there’s no such thing as radical or extremist Islam because extreme means you take it beyond what the text says. But IS and every other terrorist organization and sharia law, is following the texts to the letter. So just call it Islam.
Jeremiah says
That’s only if we can ignore the rest of the world.
Ashley says
Mr. Spencer writes: I was extremely surprised to be asked, since usually only one point of view is allowed on NPR. The producer called me to talk over the issue and I soon realized that she wanted me to be the foil on the show, the ranting right-winger countered by cool and knowledgeable leftists. I explained to her why “Islamophobia” was a propaganda concept and why concern about the refugees was not racism and xenophobia. She seemed surprised that I wasn’t a ranting, frothing-at-the-mouth bigot, and I in turn wasn’t at all surprised when I got the email saying they didn’t want me on the show after all, as they had “decided to go in a different direction.”
________________________
NPR has some fucking nerve airing their flagship “All Things Considered” segment.
All things considered, NPR? You mean like considering a contrary viewpoint to your PC format?
With all due respect to Ms. Geller, NPR should have approached Pamela if they were seeking “a ranting, frothing-at-the-mouth bigot.” Pamela delivers a fine, “fuck you” sentiment that compliments Robert’s signature measured interviews. Again, no offence to Pamela Geller. She is a diamond in the rough…and I do mean rough. Spencer and Geller are a great team, each with a unique approach in addressing THE THREAT. IMO, best balanced blend since peanut butter and jelly did a jig.
Robert…you are a great threat to the likes of NPR. And to silence your voice is the height of hypocrisy.
E Ward says
Spencer and Geller complement each other perfectly. We need both approaches. I also love that Spencer never rants—just delivers the goods.
ffinder says
For some unknown reason, the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media have made one of their chief aims the exoneration of Islam.
THEY ARE ALL BOUGHT BY SAUDI ARABIA ! !
SAUDI ARABIA SPENDS > > BILLIONS < < TO BRAINWASH US AND EUROPE . .
The money goes to constructing and operating mosques and madrassas that preach radical Wahhabism. The money also goes to training imams; MEDIA OUTREACH AND PUBLISHING; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks, and endowments to universities and cultural centers. A cable released by Wikileaks explains, regarding just one region of Pakistan:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html
ff
Ashley says
Wow!
Thank you so much for this link!
Ian H says
This graph is about creating evidence that can be quoted by others to support the claim that Islam is not dangerous. It enables the statement “The NY times showed that non-muslims are responsible for the majority of terror attacks since 9-11.” Used in this way in a discussion or online debate it is hard to counter unless you area aware of the details of the graph and its massive deficiencies. And even if you are and respond by listing those deficiencies, this only mutes the impact of the statement, it does not nullify it.
Toby says
Whoever created this graph is an absolute fool. Even after the obvious attempts to distort the figures such as ignoring 9/11 and lumping all non-muslim attacks into a single bucket there is only 1 logical conclusion to draw from the data: 1% of the population has murdered the same number of people as the remaining 99%.
The fool puffs out his chest showing how tolerant and diverse he is, not realising that he has just demonstrated how dangerous Muslims are in the community.
If a single breed of dog that made up 1% of dogs in the US was responsible for half the attacks on people it would rightly be declared a dangerous breed.
If a brand of car that made up 1% of cars on US roads was responsible for half the car crash deaths the NYT would be screaming for it to be banned and for the car company executives to be charged.
When 1% of the population commits half the attacks it’s somehow proof that they are good people just like us. It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.
Radegunda says
Excellent point.
Semeru says
100,000 people are hit by gunfire in the United States every year, of whom 32,000 die.
More people, over 400,000, have been killed by guns since 2001 alone than America lost in the whole of World War 2.
Jay Boo says
It is all about accessibility.
Islam is way to accessible to Muslims.
The US and EU is way to accessible by Muslims.
Ban the assault weapon called the Qur’an.
Jay Boo says
— too —
Radegunda says
How many have been killed by knives? How many have been killed by fists? by rocks? by choking? by poisoning? Are all those victims less worthy than victims of “guns”?
How many have been killed by automobiles? Why don’t we ban them?
How many innocent lives have been saved because potential victims were (legally) armed? Usually they don’t even need to fire the weapon — only display it. Would it be better if they had become victims?
“Gun violence” overall has been declining in the U.S. — except for high-profile shootings in designated gun-free zones. So it’s strange that some people want the whole country to be a designated gun-free zone (like Paris), so that the only people with guns would be people who don’t respect laws.
Baucent says
The NY Times is a left wing rag, every bit as contemptible as “Pravda” during the height of the Cold War.
Mathew Solo says
Propaganda…deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread…
it may or may not be obviously misleading…yet once it is out there it is part of the
mix now…the mischievous writers of The NYT…Know this…look at the attention it is getting…plenty of folks will view it as plausible…it is already in the mix…something does not have to be true
to be believed.
This Used to be labeled “Yellow Journalism”.
dumbledoresarmy says
this graph and the associated ‘report’ are being circulated on social media by many earnest non-Muslim Defenders/ Excusers of Islam, and for one reason only – in order to kill discussion and ‘prove’ that ‘right wing extremists’ are ‘more dangerous’ than Muslims.
They ignore, of course, the fact that it *only* deals with events within the USA, and they also ignore the fact that it conveniently begins *after* September 11 2001 and therefore does not include the death toll exacted on that day by allahu-akbaring Muslims.
Mike says
It is interesting to see that both began to skyrocket after Obama became President in 2008 and continue to rise while he is President. Based on that alone, I’d say Obama must carry much of the blame for these murders.
Edward says
Tracing the NYT “extremist attacks in the US since 9/11” timeline graph of both the domestic and the Islamic based atrocities you can notice the offset time parallel similarities of the perpetrators activities.
AFTER THE LEADING EDGE CRIMES THAT ARE COMMITTED BY THE ISLAM RELIGION ADHERRENTS; there seems to be a “copycat” syndrome effect that triggers the American terrorist violence!
Interestingly, the NYT’s graph doesn’t trace the 1993 World’s Trade Towers bombing event or Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Oklahoma Murrah Building. BTW, McVeigh’s crime occurred in 1995 and was executed on 11 June 2001 exactly three months before 9/11!
I once read an article by the NYT’s writing about the “Copycat” syndrome if I remember correct, they wrote about the “contagion” effect. That heightens the propensity to cause violent chaos.
Contagion > the contagious transmission or spread as of an idea or emotion from person to person to promote violence.
A side note:
This is the NYT’s article I mentioned here. If they know so much about this malaise (the contagion effect) why don’t they link the present Islamic violence as the blueprint that really causes the rise of US the domestic copycat syndrome triggered terrorism? Instead of blaming us in reverse, for being the ones that antagonizes the Muslim world. Ah yes, you wouldn’t be a good Muslim if you would not declare yourself being a victim first. >
http://www.nytimes.com/1982/10/30/us/experts-theorize-about-copycat-syndrome.html
Edward says
Typo error needs correction: I wrote!
“If they know so much about this malaise (the contagion effect) why don’t they link the present Islamic violence as the blueprint that really causes the rise of US the domestic copycat syndrome triggered terrorism?”
It should be said instead:
“If they know so much about this malaise (the contagion effect) why don’t they link the present Islamic violence as the blueprint that really causes the definite rise of the US domestic copycat syndrome terrorism?”
Adding this comment also:
Has this “contagion effect” phenomenon really been concocted by Islam to be aiding and abetting them; by assisting in the commission of a crime by words or conduct of the American terrorist wannabes unknowingly? Was this phenomenon invented or it was it a coincidence that “it” has manifested by its own accord? Just thinking!
dumbledoresarmy says
My husband is a professional statistician who has spent his entire working career attempting to be as *accurate* and truthful as possible. He is, therefore, well aware of all the practices that he must *avoid* when a/ gathering his data and b/ analysing and presenting it.
Many of those bad practices are summed up in a deadly little book called “How to Lie With Statistics” that every high school student of any intelligence at all needs to be walked through, several times, slowly and carefully, so that they will be less likely to be fooled by things like this “New America” ‘report’ with its sneakily-misleading little graph.
What might be more interesting and useful would be to have four graphs, all starting in 1990.
The first one could show an estimate of the number of Muslims in the USA as a percentage of total population, year by year from 1990 to 2015. That would cover 25 years.
The second could show the death toll from known Muslim attacks on non-Muslim persons and/ or infrastructure within the USA in the same time period. By starting in 1990 you can include the *first* attack on the Twin Towers.
A third could map the number of known attempted (but failed) or averted (nipped in bud by law enforcement0 Muslim attacks that were *intended* to kill five or more people.
A fourth could map attacks by non-Muslims, but divided into categories – e.g. random psychiatrically-disturbed person of no particular ideological affiliation, and then groups defined by self-declared ideological affiliation (e.g. eco-terrorist, opponent of abortion, etc).
For purposes of comparison, one could map any such attacks that were attempted but failed, or were plotted but detected ahead of time and squelched by law enforcement.
I wonder whether there’s anyone affiliated with the counter-jihad Resistance who has been trained in the gathering and analysis of statistics and could have a go at creating a more accurate representation of what is going on?
dave fertig says
When are we (that know the truth) going to stop using “muslim extremist” and instead refer to them as what they actually are?
Devout Muslim
Orthodox Muslim
Conservative Muslim
Shane says
You forgot “Fundamentalist Muslim” as these guys are emulating Muhammad the first Islamic terrorist!
Reason Number 4 is the most important as there are over 300 million more non-Muslims in the USA than Muslims!
“4. It ignores the fact that a minuscule part of the U.S. population — Muslims — is responsible for around half of the successful attacks.”
Emjay See says
How ABOUT Jihadi Fascist, if we look back upon Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pol Pot (and others, too numerous to mention) they certainly appear to me to VERY FASCIST to me!
Will that do?
JIMJFOX says
Will that do WHAT, precisely???
Scott says
I don’t know but our biggest enemy is the white house and there minions in the media.
gordon miller says
By the way, In the interest of fighting terrorist (read Muslim) attacks on USA soil, our so-called president is getting ready an executive order to establish a federal registry of all gun purchases. Folks, are y’all ready for gun confiscation?
Taylor says
The Media is not shy about hiding their intent
Society of Professional Journalists
Improving and protecting journalism since 1909
Guidelines for Countering Racial, Ethnic and Religious Profiling
On Oct. 6, 2001 at its National Convention in Seattle, the Society of Professional Journalists passed a resolution urging members and fellow journalists to take steps against racial profiling in their coverage of the war on terrorism and to reaffirm their commitment to:
— When writing about terrorism, remember to include white supremacist, radical anti-abortionists and other groups with a history of such activity.
— Avoid using word combinations such as “Islamic terrorist” or “Muslim extremist” that are misleading
http://www.spj.org/divguidelines.asp
Ralph says
Edward says
Earlier dave fertig wrote earlier December 6, 2015 at 9:52 am
“When are we (that know the truth) going to stop using “muslim extremist” and instead refer to them as what they actually are?”
I already thought they were:
Devout Muslim
Orthodox Muslim
Conservative Muslim
BTW, have you ever heard about “TAQUIYA”, the April Fool’s Joke they play on us?
Seriously, Islam will be “The Religion of Peace”, if only the non-Muslim convert to Islam or die. That’s certainly not a joke…..it’s a religious mandate out of the Koran!
There’s an absolute glitter of hope and affirmed promise that the Religion of the God of Israel church will always prevail as it has always but, we have to do more to receive his blessings!
“Because he loves me,” says the Lord, “I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name. – Psalm 91-14
Yaakov Perez says
If you want to know why the Powers That Be protect Islam so avidly and promote it with such zeal, read Why the Jews Are the Canary in the Coal Mine at http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6168/jews-canary-coal-mine. It’s long but it will open your eyes.
JBubs says
How To Lie With Statistics, 101.
UNCLE VLADDI says
THIS IS WHY they never tell us the truth about anything!
From here:
http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/36676/Anthony-Wile-Directed-History-Hey-We-Told-You-So/
nacazo says
RS says: “She seemed surprised that I wasn’t a ranting, frothing-at-the-mouth bigot, and I in turn wasn’t at all surprised when I got the email saying they didn’t want me on the show after all, as they had “decided to go in a different direction.”
Funny. Maybe he should get an in person interview where he acts like a maniac (no cameras allowed, neutral territory). Then at the time of the interview (request that it is carried out live), act as his reasonable self of always….
Jackson says
Shut the NYTimes down. Piece of crap floating in the toilet of the dying print newspaper industry.