The terrorists among us

The master race

Those in denial about Islamic terrorism pounced gleefully on the recent report counting the number of people killed in the US by right-wing violence and those by Islamic extremists. Actually, it's not really even a report, just a tally of those killed in this country by the two types of violence: only 26 killed in "jihadist attacks" and 48 killed in "right-wing" attacks since 9/11. 

The count of course is radically skewed by excluding the 9/11 attacks themselves that killed 2,996 people, bringing the Islamist score up to 3,022 killed in the United States since 9/11.

The Chronicle used a New York Times study to the same effect in its editorial this morning, as if we can't combat both forms of terrorism. The Chronicle's point: that we are allocating too much to fight Islamic terrorism rather than right-wing terrorism, that the focus on potential Islamist terrorists is somehow "scapegoating" Moslems!

The Chronicle, like the rest of the local media, has been consistently wrong on this issue, as if acknowledging the special threat posed by violence motivated by Islam contradicts a liberal, multicultural perspective.

On the other hand, many islamist attacks in the US have been foiled since 9/11. 

The thing about Islamic terrorism is that, when successful, the casualties are greater. The Boston marathon bombers, for example, killed three people and wounded more than 200 with a couple of crude pressure cooker bombs. The foiled underwear bomber almost brought down a TWA airliner over Detroit. The foiled Times Square bomber could have killed hundreds, etc.

Both types of violence are going to be with us for a long time. The Dylann Roof kind of racial violence has already been with us for more than 200 years, while Islamist violence is a relatively new phenomenon.

Putting Islamic violence in an international perspective:

Thanks to The Religion of Peace.com