|
|
LOL , our resident hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' sudah habis modal .... cannot think anymore.
So easy for me to corner you. Again and again ..... Islam employs logic whereas a hater of a Christian like you .... tsk - tsk , employs rhetorics
 
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth. 
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from 1MDB scandal to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wkk5159 replied at 14-9-2015 09:40 AM
LOL , not a whimper of an answer from our resident hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan'
Waaah! Didn't know you are into ladyboys , ie. having sexual tendencies towards males and transvestites. Your wife knows about your sexual inclination? Just off the cuff question - from your experience and inclinations , which one satisfy you sexually? Your wife or your tranny boy-girlfriend? Are you the dominant or passive sexual partner?
Can you answer wan aah?
This reflects the mentality of a defeated christian knight templar. Ha ha , being so tough in the beginning but now waving the white flag.
Now do you know why i label this sissy ustazy@sam1528 as a shemale ???
Click here to see how this shemale ustazy sam1528 looks and sounds like....https://myladyboydate.com/profiles/sam154935
LOL , that is it. Confirm our resident hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' sudah habis model. Showing the white flag. Its ok , I understand.
From trying to argue that ISIS or IS is Islamic he finally settle with his liking for trannys. Ha ha , not to mention him being mad against Riduan Tee.
Come on lah .... don't be shy to answer :
Waaah! Didn't know you are into ladyboys , ie. having sexual tendencies towards males and transvestites. Your wife knows about your sexual inclination? Just off the cuff question - from your experience and inclinations , which one satisfy you sexually? Your wife or your tranny boy-girlfriend? Are you the dominant or passive sexual partner?
Pssst .... do you know the meaning of 'interpretation' or the context of article 160?
I reproduce in part my post#188
If you refer to article 160 (interpretation) , it states :
If you refer to article 160 (interpretation) , it states :
The article defines a “Malay” as a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom and (a) was before Merdeka Day born in the Federation or in Singapore or born of parents one of whom was born in the Federation or in Singapore, or is on that day domiciled in the Federation or in Singapore; or (b) is the issue of such a person; As a result, Malay citizens who convert out of Islam are no longer considered Malay under the law. Hence, the Bumiputra privileges afforded to Malays under Article 153 of the Constitution, the New Economic Policy (NEP), etc. are forfeit for such converts.
Likewise, a non-Malay Malaysian who converts to Islam can lay claim to Bumiputra privileges, provided he meets the other conditions.
My questions are based on the interpretation of article 160 (see link). It just a matter of utilizing one's logic. Oops .... my bad .... you don't have any because you are claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' .... ha ha
Can you now answer to the cumulative logical requirements of article 160? Appears that you cannot and would not .... I am not surprised ...
Back to be matter , why are you trying your best to scamper from the issues?
The statement I made is that your thinking is just too narrow as I utilized credible databases instead of a rigged FBI data base (which is corrupted with the NCTC database) , which you appeal to.
Your answer :
- Riduan Tee lah
- Frog in a well is a chinese proverb lah therefore a malay (hmmm , I am malay now) cannot use it
Your latest answer :
Bingo ! In other words, he is admitting he wasn't a Malay then but he is a Malay now after converting....
Now you blabber about article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution.
Even that your argument falls really short apart from you being
- narrow minded
- a christian bigot in addition to a racist chinese supremacist
- angry with Riduan Tee as he got under your skin
- angry with just about anything making you the angriest man on earth)
- mad with just about anything
- confused about everything
Aiyoyo Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' .... ha ha
There you are as you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , gone case already , our resident hater has admitted defeat. Waving the white flag ..... sudah habis modal ......
This is just too easy for me. Muslim bagi akta , kristian bagi auta ....
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand teh difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , gone case already , our resident hater has admitted defeat. Waving the white flag ..... sudah habis modal ......
This is just too easy for me. Muslim bagi akta , kristian bagi auta ....
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , you sudah kalah lah leng chai. .
Absolutely nothing from you in any form of response except repeating already refuted arguments over and over again. This is already a sure sign of a defeated person but with a huge ego while waving the white flag. Oops , sure lah , after all you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' ..... ha ha
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , you sudah kalah lah leng chai. .
Absolutely nothing from you in any form of response except repeating already refuted arguments over and over again. This is already a sure sign of a defeated person but with a huge ego while waving the white flag. Oops , sure lah , after all you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' ..... ha ha
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , the response of a defeated person in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan'. Just too afraid to answer any questions but keep repeating already refuted issues hoping for it to be true. This is what we call a defeated person in self delusion.
Ha ha , in you repeating already refuted arguments is evidence of you waving the white flag.
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , you sudah kalah lah leng chai. .
Absolutely nothing from you in any form of response except repeating already refuted arguments over and over again. This is already a sure sign of a defeated person but with a huge ego while waving the white flag. Oops , sure lah , after all you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' ..... ha ha
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , why are you just repeating already refuted arguments. You sudah kalah lah. You have lost and lost big time.
Ha ha , the ramblings of Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' who has already lost but ego is preventing him from admitting it. The issue now is why are you so scared to answer any questions?
A defeated person in delusion .... yes?
Ha ha , in you repeating already refuted arguments is evidence of you waving the white flag.
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , why are you still at it fighting a losing battle? Issit because you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field'?
Ha ha , truly you have no shame at all. So scared to answer any questions but keep on repeating already refuted arguments hoping for it to be the so called 'golden truth' ..... Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159' - a defeated person in delusion ...
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , why are you still at it fighting a losing battle? Issit because you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field'?
Ha ha , truly you have no shame at all. So scared to answer any questions.......
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' is just a sore loser. Ha ha , your ego is just trying to prop you but you are soooo scared to answer any questions. Oh yeah ..... you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field' .....
How come you got no shame aah? Why are you repeating already refuted arguments hoping for so called 'golden truth' in the already refuted arguments? LOL , Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159' - a defeated person in delusion ...
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but reinforced lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Err .... repeat of questions is because you are so scared to answer. Why are you so scared? A so called lame questions makes it a lot easier for you to answer.
LOL , this means that you have already lost and lost big time. Well , you tried to troll the internet for answers but too bad , no answers for you. You are now running away from the issue. Oh yeah , that is because you are 'a true professional and an expert in your field' ...
Ha ha , Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159' repeating already refuted arguments hoping for it to become the so called 'golden truth'. However so scared to answer to any counter arguments and questions because you cannot find the answer in the internet. LOL , Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159' - a defeated person in delusion ...
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but reinforced lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , the loser in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' pops in once in a while trying to show that he still have some fight in him. Oops , issit because you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field'? Dunno whether to laugh or take pity on you.
Ha ha , so scared to answer any questions up to a point of recycling already refuted arguments hoping for it to be the so called 'golden truth'.
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
Recycle a repeatedly refuted lame questions won't make it any truthful but reinforced lies..............
And it feels good to recycle the unshattered truth which sissy ustazy sam1528 has no answers but instead starts mumbling sissily like a shemale that she is...
But it it is definitely good to repeat the Golden Truth.
CATCHING UP TO A RESURRECTED INTERNET LIE
By David Stein It’s hard to believe that the saying “A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on” was written almost a century-and-a-half before the age of the Internet. The extent to which falsehoods can reach millions of people in the blink of an eye has never been greater. Internet lies are very difficult to kill. Even if debunked, they have a tendency to be continually “rediscovered” again and again. Such was the case with a false and deceptive Internet essay about Muslim terrorism that went viral the weekend of September 19th.
The essay was first posted in January 2010, on the website Loonwatch.com (a site dedicated to attacking those who confront Islamic extremism). Titled “All Terrorists are Muslims…Except the 94% that Aren’t,” the essay, which was posted by Loonwatch’s anonymous administrator “Danios,” claimed that “FBI statistics” prove that Muslims account for only 6% of terrorist acts in the United States (I am purposely not linking to the original source for the piece, because the Loonwatch site attempts to download malware into visitors’ computers. Anyone wishing to look the essay up on Loonwatch does so at their own risk). According to Danios, a shocking 42% of all terrorist acts are committed by Latinos. “Extreme left-wing groups” account for 24%, Jews 7%, and Muslims a mere 6%..... Within hours, the essay made its way to radical Muslim (and Muslim apologist) message boards, with its title changed to “FBI: More Jewish Terrorists Than Muslim Terrorists in USA.” Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete). The FBI report begins with two paragraphs which warn readers that it is not intended as a complete catalog of terror incidents. The authors point out that, prior to 2001, the FBI “Terrorism” series was extremely limited in scope: Since the mid-1980s, the FBI has published “Terrorism in the United States,” an unclassified annual report summarizing terrorist activities in this country. While this publication provided an overview of the terrorist threat in the United States and its territories, its limited scope proved inadequate for conveying either the breadth or width of the terrorist threat facing U.S. interests or the scale of the FBI’s response to terrorism worldwide.
Following 9/11, the series was renamed simply “Terrorism,” and expanded to include discussions of certain overseas cases. The report’s authors strongly caution readers NOT to take the report as a comprehensive review, redirecting readers to the actual source of complete listings of terrorist incidents: While the discussion of international terrorism provides a more complete overview of FBI terrorism investigations into acts involving U.S. interests around the world, “Terrorism” is not intended as a comprehensive annual review of worldwide terrorist activity. The chronological incidents, charts, and figures included in Terrorism 2002-2005 reflect only those incidents identified in the “Terrorism”/”Terrorism in the United States” series. For more complete listings of worldwide terrorist incidents, see the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov and the Terrorism Knowledge Base compiled by the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at www.tkb.org.
“Danios” not only ignored (or failed to comprehend) these very easy-to-understand warnings, he also lumped together the incidents from 1980 through 2005 as though they were all equally current. “Danios’” claim that Latinos commit the greatest number of terrorist acts in the U.S. comes from his deceitful mixing of modern-day Islamic terror incidents with thirty-year-old crimes committed by long-defunct “Puerto Rican liberation movement” groups back in the early 1980s. During the1970s and ’80s, Puerto Rican independence groups took up a significant amount of the FBI’s time, and justifiably so. Al-Qaeda was over a decade away from even being conceptualized, and the threat from the new Islamic dictatorship in Iran (and from older dictatorships like Libya) was confined to the Middle East and Europe. Yet “Danios” mashed thirty years of statistics into one clumsy lump, with no respect for the simple fact that terrorist movements, like political movements, come and go, rise and ebb. In his essay, “Danios” linked to the FBI report he so badly misused, and, as anyone with the ability to read basic English could see, the report was neither comprehensive nor was the closing summary complete or current. As a result, “Danios’” drivel quickly died on the vine (even far-left sites like Daily Kos and Media Matters didn’t touch it). Until last week. Sabrina Park, a reporter for the Daily Titan (the student newspaper at Cal State Fullerton), apparently stumbled upon the Danios essay, and decided she had uncovered the scoop of a lifetime. Ms. Park, whose previous “investigative reports” included articles titled “Summer Hot Spot Review” and “Guide to Nightlife in Downtown Fullerton,” titled her explosive article “Only 6 Percent of Terrorists Are Muslim.” Note the word “are.” It’s repeated endlessly in her article, to imply that the figures she cites are current, not thirty years old. Nor, of course, does Ms. Park ever mention that the FBI figures she cites are not intended to be seen as complete or thorough. But unlike “Danios,” Ms. Park did not link to the FBI report. And by not linking to the source material that would instantaneously discredit her conclusions, Ms. Park has been able to accomplish what “Danios” couldn’t…she’s made the story go viral. By Monday the 20th, her article had been reposted on thousands websites and Facebook pages. Ms. Park begins her tirade by lambasting those who view Muslim extremist terror as an international scourge (I haven’t fixed her questionable grammar. I’ll also highlight her continued use of the word “are,” which gives the impression that she’s referring to current and not thirty-year-old statistics): Why people continue to generalize all terrorists as being Muslim is beyond me- perhaps it has to do with their lack of knowledge on the topic and laziness to find out the legitimacy of the claim. It is also possible that since people are so quick to believe what they are told, they are able to easily adopt someone else’s views as their own. I wouldn’t doubt it- I mean; we all know hardly anyone can think for themselves these days anyway. So, that being said, let’s think for ourselves and do some research: exactly what percent of Muslims are terrorists? Well, according to FBI files, which can be accessed through fbi.gov, only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim. The remaining percentage of terrorist attacks on U.S. territory includes: Latinos at 42 percent, extreme Left Wing groups at 24 percent, Jewish extremists at 7 percent, Communists at 5 percent, and other terrorist organizations at 16 percent.
It’s like watching a train wreck. Ms. Park’s essay is so terribly juvenile and poorly thought-out that I can only blame her editor for allowing a young would-be journalist to embarrass herself so badly. I wouldn’t even be taking the time to debunk it had it not gone viral. Ms. Park takes a cursory, incomplete study of selective terrorist acts over thirty years and not only writes as though the thirty-year-old figures are current, but also that they demonstrate “what percent of Muslims are terrorists.” There is nothing in the FBI “Terrorism” report that examines the percentage of Muslims who are involved in terrorism. As the report itself indicates, prior to 9/11, the “Terrorism” series didn’t even mention overseas terror incidents. Where was this young woman’s editor? It’s inexcusable that he or she allowed this nonsense to be published. With no concept of how she has misused and distorted the FBI statistics, Ms. Park asks: If only 6 percent of terrorists are Muslim, then why does the media only cover the attacks by Islamic extremists? It doesn’t make sense and the way it is being portrayed is entirely deceptive and misleading. This leaves me perplexed beyond explanation. How is it that FBI files have record (sic) that Latinos are responsible for the highest percentage of terrorism toward the U.S., yet we still live in constant fear of being attacked by Muslims?
Ms. Park simply doesn’t have the cognitive ability to understand that the Puerto Rican independence movement incidents that the FBI report cites are thirty years old. She honestly believes that there is a plague of Latino terrorism going on in the world today, and the anti-Muslim media is covering it up. The editors of the Daily Titan should be ashamed of themselves. They allowed a student journalist to humiliate herself and spread inaccuracies and falsehoods. For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites). From January 1st 2000 through August 31st 2010, the breakdown of ethnic and religiously-motivated global terror acts is: Islamic: 16,177
Hindu: 18
Jewish: 52
Christian extremist: 288
Neo-Nazi/white supremacist: 5
Tribal/clan/ethnic: 542
Other: 7 This is not a complete list, as the NCTC keeps a separate list of “politically-based” terrorist acts (which includes territorial disputes, even those in which religion plays a factor). In that separate category, 1,065 Palestinian acts of terror are listed, and 2,326 incidents from India (most revolving around the disputed Kashmir territories). We can safely add the Palestinian acts to the Muslim list. In India, although Muslim terror has taken a horrible toll (as evidenced by the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks in which Muslim terrorists murdered 173 people), there are Hindu extremist groups as well. Considering that India is a Hindu-majority nation, let’s be generous and consign two-thirds of the India terror acts to Hindus, and one-third to Muslims (not a scientific method, but, frankly, we could relegate 100% of the Indian terror attacks to Hindus and it still wouldn’t make the total figure of Muslim acts any less lopsidedly huge). With the new calculations, we get:
18,010 Muslim terror attacks
1,553 Hindu terror attacks
542 tribal/clan/ethnic terror attacks
288 Christian terror attacks
52 Jewish terror attacks
5 neo-Nazi/white supremacist terror attacks
7 “other” If “Danios” and Sabrina Park had bothered to actually read the FBI report they misrepresented, and if they had cared enough to consult the statistics that the report itself cites as comprehensive and complete, they would have discovered that if you add up every Hindu, Christian, Jewish, white supremacist, tribal, and unclassified terror attack over the past ten years, they amount to a mere 13.5% of the number of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims. That’s the truth, ready to “pull its boots on” and play catch-up to Sabrina Park’s fabrications.
So you see, deception and lies just second nature to pios muslims like sam1528, you see it everywhere, from Red shirt rally to religious forum in Cari.com....
|
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL ..... kesian ..... our resident religious bigot and racist hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' is pitifully trying to put up his last stand. You already know that you have lost. Hmm , wonder why you are so scared to answer to any counter arguments or questions. Could it be that you claim to be 'a true professional and an expert in your field'?
Ha ha , so scared to answer any questions up to a point of recycling already refuted arguments hoping for it to be the so called 'golden truth'.
Enjoy my brilliant refutation .... up to a point that you are now lost for words .... ha ha
****************************
Can you now answer why you do not understand the difference between 'all' and 'selection'?
Why are you so scared to answer the following :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
** BTW , questions are not 'refuted arguments' if you don't know.
+++++++++++++++++
Ha ha , recycling already refuted arguments. Refer to my post#122. Excerpts of my counter argument which you ran away from :
You don't even know the meaning of 'all'. You think 'all' means a 'selection' ..... ha ha
LOL , you have just been refuted by your own reference. You appealed to an article which states the following :
Yet the bogus essay never achieved viral status, in part because it was, well (there’s just no way to sugar-coat this) idiotic. “Danios’” statistics were taken from an FBI document titled “Terrorism: 2002-2005.” The final page of the report contained a selective summary of terrorist incidents in the U.S. from 1980 through 2005. The report made it abundantly clear that this was not a comprehensive list of ALL terror attacks in the U.S. The FBI’s annual “Terrorism” report is intended to examine onlyspecific non-classified cases, in order to provide the American public with a general overview of how the Bureau deals with terror threats (anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of U.S. terror attacks would know that the selective summary is far from complete, as it omits the 1990 assassination of Meir Kahane, the 1993 mass-shooting outside CIA headquarters by a Muslim terrorist, and the 1997 mass-shooting on the Empire State Building’s observation deck by a Palestinian gunman. The fact that the Kahane assassination is cited in the body of the report but not listed in the summary at the end is a dead giveaway that the closing summary is selective and not complete).
The following is taken from your post link to the FBI webpage (under updates at the near end of the page) :
The following Chronological Summary includes all of the terrorist incidents recorded in the Terrorism/Terrorism in the United States series. The statistical information contained in the following summary supports the graphs and charts presented in this publication.
Hello! Do you know what is the meaning of 'all'. Is 'all' selective or everything? That is where the data for the tabulation of the piechart comes from. Do you actually read and verify the sources or you just believe what others tell you? Appears that it is the latter for you. What this person does is very simple , he included the NCTC data into the FBI data but the NCTC data is not local US data.
For the record, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center at www.nctc.gov – the site recommended by the FBI for thorough, exhaustive terrorism statistics – provides the actual figures (remember – this is the source that is recommended for complete terrorism stats in the FBI report that Ms. Park cites).
Just a cursory glance I could detect that the author of the said article rigged the FBI data with the NCTC data. On the other hand it appears that you are not even critical of what you read.
Yet you claim to be a true professional and an expert in your field. So far ...... nothing much from you .....
You still need to answer my questions :
- why did you appeal to an article which rigged the FBI data?
- why are you counting mugshots and then claim it to be statistical data?
- why are you avoiding the NCTC and RAND data?
Sit back and watch the show folks. See how our resident Islam hater in Goh Mas Lan or 'wkk5159-maslan' goes about in circles chasing his backside ... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Author
Post time 14-9-2015 07:13 PM
