[Plantagenet]

If you don't count the Boston bombers as "home grown" then the ratio of home grown white racist terrorists to home grown Islamic terrorists is even higher.

Trying to skew the data to support a claim that white racist terrorist are more dangerous then Islamic terrorists is silly.

When you use all the data, including the deaths of thousands of Americans killed on 9/11 by Islamic terrorists and the deaths of thousands of US soldiers killed in two wars against Islamist terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, then its clear the Islamic terrorists are far far far more of threat.

Cheers!

[Keith_McClary]

If you don't count the Boston bombers as "home grown" then the ratio of home grown white racist terrorists to home grown Islamic terrorists is even higher.

Trying to skew the data to support a claim that white racist terrorist are more dangerous then Islamic terrorists is silly.

When you use all the data, including the deaths of thousands of Americans killed on 9/11 by Islamic terrorists and the deaths of thousands of US soldiers killed in two wars against Islamist terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, then its clear the Islamic terrorists are far far far more of threat.

Cheers!

Again, again, again, the study was about HOME GROWN terrorists in the USA and victims in the USA. I would agree with you that the Boston bombers shouldn't qualify as HOME GROWN and 9/11 certainly shouldn't.

IF you are interested in worldwide terrorism over a different time period you will have to find a different study, or do your own. (I guess you would want to skew it by only considering American victims and not including the KKK or Irgun.)

[Plantagenet]

(I guess you would want to skew it ...

You'd be wrong again.

You are the one who is skewing data, not me. I'm the one calling for using all the data, remember?

Isn't it obvious that in any study that purports to count how many victims of there were of various kinds of terrorism, all the victims should be counted?

The study of victims of terrorism you are touting was designed in such a way that it leaves out over 99% of all the victims of terrorism. You are looking at less than 1% of the data---that is ridiculously skewed and completely absurd on the face of it.

Cheers!

[Keith_McClary]

(I guess you would want to skew it ...

You'd be wrong again.

You are the one who is skewing data, not me. I'm the one calling for using all the data, remember?

Isn't it obvious that in any study that purports to count how many victims of there were of various kinds of terrorism, all the victims should be counted?

The study of victims of terrorism you are touting was designed in such a way that it leaves out over 99% of all the victims of terrorism. You are looking at less than 1% of the data---that is ridiculously skewed and completely absurd on the face of it.

Cheers!

Oh, please. If there was a study of heart attack frequency in France would you say it is "ridiculously skewed and completely absurd" because it doesn't include data from China?

[Cog]

Look at the data on who kills the most blacks in America. It ain't cops and it ain't white people either.

I know, I know. Facts be racist yo.

[SeaGypsy]

What about the data of who kills the most people in the world? Anyone got a graph on that? Every killing spike since Hiroshima ....


http://www.countercurrents.org/lucas240407.htm

20-30 million victims of the US since WW2

[Keith_McClary]

Look at the data on who kills the most blacks in America. It ain't cops and it ain't white people either.

I know, I know. Facts be racist yo.

I'm waiting for someone to point out that your data is "ridiculously skewed and completely absurd" because it doesn't include Dixie and the African slave trade.

[vtsnowedin]

Look at the data on who kills the most blacks in America. It ain't cops and it ain't white people either.

I know, I know. Facts be racist yo.

I'm waiting for someone to point out that your data is "ridiculously skewed and completely absurd" because it doesn't include Dixie and the African slave trade.

What does the African slave trade have to do with today's death statistics? Just what Data are you talking about and why does it exclude Dixie (not that I think Dixie has markedly different numbers then Detroit or Chicago)?

[Keith_McClary]

Look at the data on who kills the most blacks in America. It ain't cops and it ain't white people either.

I know, I know. Facts be racist yo.

I'm waiting for someone to point out that your data is "ridiculously skewed and completely absurd" because it doesn't include Dixie and the African slave trade.

What does the African slave trade have to do with today's death statistics? Just what Data are you talking about and why does it exclude Dixie (not that I think Dixie has markedly different numbers then Detroit or Chicago)?

I was referring to plant's comment above:
american-collective-blindness-charleston-t71502-120.html#p1255750
He cannot understand why a study on American "home grown" terrorists does not include US military deaths in overseas oil wars.