I’ve
known Richard since 1981, as a mentor, competitor, and colleague, and I
consider him a friend. I only recently though found out how liberal he actually
is, but I do not hold that against him.
During
a recent business trip, he brought up the subject of terrorism. He stated that
the biggest terrorist threat in the U.S. comes from right-wing extremists, not
the Jihadis. He then doubled down: white right-wingers have committed more
acts of terrorism than radical Islamists. We were two days into a business trip
and his diatribes were already wearing thin. This one caught my attention.
I
learned his source was a Huffington Post article: “Most
Of America’s Terrorists Are White, And Not Muslim” by Sarah Ruiz-Grossman
The
article was based on a study: “Home
Is Where the Hate Is” by David Neiwert, published by “the Investigative
Fund” organization.
Therein
lies the problem. Richard, as well as too many other people, have a tendency to
take what they read at face value.
Mr.
Neiwart’s piece is full of numbers and statistics to back his claims. However,
I am reminded a
quote by Aaron Levenstein: “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal
is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.”
·
From January 2008 to
the end of 2016, we identified 63 cases of Islamist domestic terrorism… The
vast majority of these (76 percent) were foiled plots,
·
During the same
period, we found that right-wing extremists were behind nearly twice as many
incidents: 115. Just over a third of these incidents (35 percent) were foiled
plots.
The
claim is also made that “Right-wing extremist terrorism was more often deadly.”
It is
not surprising that they ignore the over
3000 deaths (counting first responders) which resulted from 9/11.
Simply
put, the claim is made that not only are right-wing extremists committing such
acts with a higher degree of frequency, they are also better at it.
A
closer look is certainly warranted, but before analyzing domestic terrorism,
the term needs to be defined. Niewart’s article uses the following:
“What
distinguishes an act of terrorism from a violent crime… is the ideological
component of "the perpetrator's motivation, his ideology and what he
wanted the outcome to be. There needs to be a desire to instill fear among the
general public, change government policy, or draw attention to a political or
social cause."
In
the case of this study the fair definition above is not applied equally, which
is standard fare for the political left.
Three
examples of questionable inclusions from the report:
Richard
Popolawski -- A known white supremacist, he opened fire on
Pittsburgh police officers responding to a domestic dispute, killing three and
leaving two injured.
Wade
Lay and son Christopher Lay -- In
2004 they killed a guard during an armed robbery. Wade Lay testified that the
money was meant to buy weapons and according to the district attorney there was
a 'self-proclaimed’ mission to revenge Waco.
Joseph
Stack -- In 2010, Stack committed
suicide by crashing a small aircraft into an IRS building killing one
additional person. Stack left an anti-government, anti-tax manifesto
behind. The FBI stated that it was investigating the incident "as a
criminal matter of an assault on a federal officer" and it was not
considered terrorism.
No one is defending the actions of these
men, but does a domestic dispute or armed robbery qualify as terrorism, as
defined above?
Regarding
Mr. Stack, his gripe was with the IRS. His actions may or may not, meet the
criteria for domestic terrorism, but does he qualify as being ‘right wing’? No
proof on that was given. It’s telling that one of the figures that Stack quoted
in his manifesto was that notorious right-wing rabble-rouser Karl Marx.
It
appears the methodology used was too quick to label crimes as ‘terrorist’ acts,
especially if they could be linked to the “right wing,” even if only tenuously.
Let’s
assume their numbers are accurate. The data shows that the non-Muslim population commits twice as many
terrorist attacks as the Muslim population. Yet Muslims comprise less than 2%
of the total U.S. population. They are attempting to make the case that non-Muslim Americans are a
greater threat to the country than the Muslim population. Yet are the authors
really so naïve that they can’t tell they have proven the opposite? The
relative risk from Muslims in America is 24 times as high as from everyone else
combined.
Let’s look at it another way, as the
point warrants emphasis:
White Americans comprise 72.5 % of the
U.S. population. Muslim Americans comprise less than 2% of the total.
Again if we use their numbers, combined
with the sourced demographics for 2008, we have the following:
For every two million white
people, over a ten-year period there will be 1.3 acts or failed plots of a
terrorist event.
For every one million adult
Muslims, over the same time period, there will be 54 such events or failed
plots.
Even
adjusting the figures for white people to take out children, the resultant
figure will not approach that given for the adult Muslims.
We can
know with certainty that a very small percentage of any population
will be afflicted with mental illness. Naturally, whites being the largest
percentage of the population, will have a correspondingly high number of such
people.
Muslims, on the other hand, are a very
small component of the population, yet they account for a very large percentage
of terrorism domestically.
Knowing that the propensity for
terrorism is inordinately slanted to a narrow range of the population, logic
dictates a focus in both law enforcement efforts, as well as immigration
restrictions would be appropriate.
This
is unacceptable to much of our nation. Today proposed restrictions are being
fought; at the ballot box, through the courts and through domestic terrorism,
(including use of chemicals in launched
projectiles) by Antifa and other well-organized riot-promoting terror
groups.
If we
are going to eradicate the primary source of terrorism, the impetus will need
to come from within the Muslim communities. It is they that must stand up to
declare terrorism is at odds with their faith. It is good to know that this isoccurring in many circles. But
they must take these proclamations to the next level by pointing their fingers
at guilty parties and turning them in to the legal authorities.
Until
the time comes that it is no longer safe for radical Islamic terrorists to find
safe haven in their own communities, then this issue will not be eradicated.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/06/the_domestic_terrorism_count_jihadists_vs_right_wing_extremism.html
