[OAW]

So Rep. Peter King (R-NY) has initiated his hearing which is quite tellingly officially named "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response." Let's not even get into how an avowed IRA supporter has the gumption to even go there on a terrorism related topic. Instead, let's focus on other aspects of his blatant hypocrisy.

So today the topic of Rep. King's infamous statement that "there were too many mosques in this country" was thrown back in his face. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) came to his defense and said “I haven’t heard any member of our committee say there’s too many mosques,” only to be reminded by Peter King himself that he actually did say just that. Now of course, Rep. King tried to clean it up by saying that what he really said was that there were “too many mosques that don’t cooperate with law enforcement” .... but not so much. In 2007 Peter King gave an interview where he proclaimed ...

Originally Posted by Peter King

We have unfortunately we have uh ... too many uh mosques in this country. There's too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam. We should be looking at them more carefully. We should be finding out how we can infiltrate. Uh we should be much more aggressive in law enforcement.

Oh but wait it gets worse! Then in 2009 when the Department of Homeland Security released its report on Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment ... Rep. King (and other GOP leaders) were up in arms because they felt that veterans, especially those who were ideologically conservative, were being singled out.

But some critics have said the DHS is equating conservative views to right-wing terrorism, but a DHS official countered that earlier this year, the department issued a mirror intelligence assessment of left-wing extremist groups.

Of course the Obama Administration in general and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in particular received the ire of Rep. King and other GOP leaders. Never mind that the assessment that provoked their ire was actually ordered by the Bush Administration. Rep. King was so perturbed by this that he sponsored legislation to order the DHS to provide the House Homeland Security Committee, of which he was the Ranking Member then and the Chairman now, with copies of the documents that led them such a preposterous conclusion. Let's see what he had to say about it on Fox and Friends

Originally Posted by Peter King

What I said was Janet Napolitano had said earlier this year that she was not going to use the word "terrorist". Then she put out a directive to all the police departments in our country saying that there is a possible terrorist threat from returning veterans. And my point was that if we are really serious we should be talking about a possible terror threat to the country and that she should be sending out that type of directive to the police departments in the country regarding mosques that do not cooperate with local police. And the fact is that I speak to law enforcement at all levels ... federal, state, and local ... and they all say that they do not receive any level of cooperation from mosques and that on Long Island, Brian, and also New York there are several mosques that are under surveillance. So if Janet Napolitano was being intellectually honest she'd be talking about mosques and not about returning veterans.

Oh wow. Where to even begin? Rep. King has been on this "Muslim Americans Don't Cooperate With Law Enforcement" kick for a while now. He's consistently repeated this allegation numerous times. Dec. 16, 2010 in the NY Times. Dec. 19, 2010 in Newsday. Again on Feb. 8, 2011 in the NY times he makes this claim. And when he's asked why he chose not to include any witnesses from law enforcement or the intelligence community as witnesses in his inquisition hearing he claimed that "they will say these things privately, but not in public". A tad bit convenient n'est-ce pas? But what do actual law enforcement people have to say about Rep. King's allegations you ask?

Originally Posted by Attorney General Eric Holder

And the cooperation of Muslim and Arab-American communities has been absolutely essential in identifying, and preventing, terrorist threats. We must never lose sight of this.

Originally Posted by FBI Director Robert Mueller

And every opportunity I have, I reaffirm the fact that 99.9 percent of Muslim-Americans or Sikh-Americans, Arab-Americans are every bit as patriotic as anybody else in this room, and that many of our cases are a result of the cooperation from the Muslim community in the United States.

Originally Posted by FBI Director Robert Mueller

Let me say that the Muslim community has been tremendously supportive of the bureau since September 11th.

......

They have been supportive. The -- the outreach and the relationships have been exceptional.

.....


Well, I periodically meet with the leaders of the Muslim community. I believe we'll be doing it shortly in the future once again.

Each of our offices meets weekly or monthly with members of the Muslim community. My expectation is that our relationships are as good now as before the guidelines generally across the country.

There may be an issue here or an issue there with a particular institution or individuals, but I do not believe that it undercuts our relationship with the Muslim community around the country.

The Muslim community understands that the worst thing that could happen is that there would be another terrorist attack in the United States. It has been tremendously supportive and worked very closely with us in a number of instances around the country.

Originally Posted by FBI Director Robert Mueller

The -- let me just allude to one thing you said about relationship with the Muslim community. I think it has maintained its positive note throughout. There are segments in the Muslim community that do not necessarily want the relationship to work out. But in every one of our 56 field offices, we have since September 12, 2001 had outreach to the Muslim community. And if you walk around and you talk to individuals in the Muslim community, the leaders in the Muslim community, you talk to our special agents in charge, I think almost to a one, you will find that the relationships are very good.

Now, there are distinct pockets where they don't want to see that relationship succeed. I believe that that relationship has grown and improved and that the Muslim community understands that it's not just the FBI that's responsible for keeping this country safe, but all Americans including the Americans who happen to be Muslim.

Originally Posted by Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough

In fact, many of the incidents and arrests that do make headlines are because of the good citizenship and patriotism of Muslim Americans who noticed something and spoke up. Since the September 11th attacks, a number of individuals inspired by al Qaeda's ideology and involved in supporting or plotting terrorism were stopped, in part, because of the vigilance of members of local communities, including Muslim Americans.

Originally Posted by National Counterterrorism Center Director Leiter

And as you know well, many of our tips to uncover active terrorist plots in the United States have come from the Muslim community.

Originally Posted by Rep. Jane Harman and LA County Sheriff Baca

Cooperation with American Muslims is no secret to law enforcement officials, who have established, all the way down to the local level, formal and informal connections with these communities to cultivate the flow of information - like the Muslim Community Affairs unit of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department.

These communities also denounce extreme views and condemn violence - like the group of nine influential American Muslim scholars who filmed a video for YouTube to repudiate terror attacks

And what do the stats say?

For the remaining 120 individuals, the largest single source of initial information (48 of 120 cases) involved tips from the Muslim-American community.

Triangle Center, "Muslim-American Terrorism Since 9/11: An Accounting

There have been 17 total instances of Muslims voluntarily seeking to help law enforcement prevent Al Qaeda-related terror activities threatening the United States since 9/11. That represents almost ... 4 out of 10 (37.7%) such cases

.....

Furthermore, 8 out of the last 12 plots were foiled with the assistance of Muslims. In other words, since the "Virginia Five" arrest in December 2009, Muslim communities have helped law enforcement apprehend suspects in three-quarters of subsequent plots. This is an important counter-trend to the recent spike of arrests

Muslim Public Affairs Council, "Data on Post-9/11 Terrorism in the United States

Did I mention that Rep. King has chosen not to call any law enforcement or intelligence community people to testify who quite apparently are not in agreement with his allegations?

Now let's return to that DHS report that got Rep. King's panties all in a bunch. The one that he (and other GOP leaders) claimed was "singling out veterans". What did it actually say ....?

(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific
information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,
but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about
several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first
African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and
recruitment.

— (U//LES) Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups
during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry
out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic
downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability
to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing
extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and
government authorities similar to those in the past.

— (U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

(U//FOUO) The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the
1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an
economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to
U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.

— (U//FOUO) During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the
number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in
violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks,
and infrastructure sectors.

— (U//FOUO) Growth of these groups subsided in reaction to increased
government scrutiny as a result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and
disrupted plots, improvements in the economy, and the continued U.S. standing
as the preeminent world power.

(U//FOUO) The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of
military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities
could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists
capable of carrying out violent attacks.

— (U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans
likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups,
as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for
violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and
stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation
of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary
concern to law enforcement.

— (U//FOUO) Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are
attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing
extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to
boost their violent capabilities.

Clearly the report was not focused on "veterans" ... but rather "right wing extremists". But Rep. King took issue with some of his ideological compatriots being considered "terrorists" ... even the ones that fit the description apparently ... so he deliberately mischaracterized the report as if it "singled out veterans" when that was simply one example of an ongoing concern at DHS. But lo and behold ... what do we have here in relation to the attempted bombing of the MLK Day parade route in Spokane, WA on Jan. 17 .... ?

The Spokesman-Review, citing a source, is identifying the suspect as 36-year-old Kevin Harpham, a U.S. Army veteran and white supremacist originally from Kettle Falls, Wash.

The Southern Poverty Law Center says that in 2004 Harpham was a member of the National Alliance, which it describes as one of the most visible white supremacist organizations in the nation. The group was founded by the late William Pierce, who wrote The Turner Diaries, a novel about a future race war that is believed to have influenced Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

Records show Harpham served in 1996 and 1997 with the 37th Field Artillery Regiment at Fort Lewis, Wash., according to Mark Potok, head of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

In a news release, the U.S. Attorney calls it an "improvised explosive device," or IED, the common term for bombs used against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Report: Spokane bomb suspect is Army vet, white supremacist

But Rep. King steadfastly refuses to expand the scope of his hearings to be "radicalization" in general and not "Muslim radicalization". He claims that would succumb to "political correctness". So what we can gather from all this is three-fold ....

1. If you are white and Christian you aren't a "terrorist" in Rep. King's estimation ... even when you (try to) blow innocent civilians up.

2. Rep. King has a serious hard on for Muslims. And it's really kinda creepy.

3. Rep. King is in absolutely no position to criticize DHS Sec. Napolitano about not being "intellectually honest" on this issue.

OAW

[Dork.]

This whole hearing has to be worth at least two and a half Bachmanns on the Batshit Crazy scale.

[finboy]

So if people actually investigate Muslims, it's stupid and racist?

What if people investigate or ask Congressional questions about militias? Is that stupid and racist and reactionary too?

What if people pass around internal reports that tell federal agencies to beware of conservative special interest groups because (without evidence) they are seen as "racist" and made up of borderline psychopaths and mouth-breathers? Is that stupid and racist and reactionary too?

[The Final Dakar]

I feel glad I haven't been following this.

[BadKosh]

Muslims have no track record of violence?

So what if the panel can show the patterns and methods used by radical muslims in other countries, and that the same things are happening here.

Our president and his radical terrorist buddies don't want you to know.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by finboy 

So if people actually investigate Muslims, it's stupid and racist?

1. I never said anything of the sort.

2.. Clearly that wasn't the point.

Originally Posted by finboy

What if people investigate or ask Congressional questions about militias? Is that stupid and racist and reactionary too?

Well had you actually read the OP you would have no reason to ask a question when the answer has already been provided. Such an assessment has already been done ...

Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment


But as I said earlier ... Rep. King and other GOP leaders took great offense to the findings. Accused the DHS of "singling out veterans" and "conservatives". Never mind the DHS releasing such reports is routine and had just released a similar assessment several months earlier entitled ....

Left-wing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyberattacks Over the Coming Decade

And Rep. King's reaction to the right-wing extremist and military veteran that just tried to [b]set off an IED]/b] at a parade in Spokane, WA?

:::::: crickets ::::::::

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Muslims have no track record of violence?

Who ever said that? The point here is that Muslims are not the ONLY ONES with a track record of violence ... or more specifically ... terrorism.

Now just so we are clear, per the Geneva Conventions ......

terrorism: A criminal act inspired by political ideology that seeks to employ violence against unarmed human “civilians”.

Keep that definition in mind for later.

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

So what if the panel can show the patterns and methods used by radical muslims in other countries, and that the same things are happening here.

They are happening here. The point is .... it's not just Muslims. In fact, it's not even primarily Muslims. Now this is what Rep. King had to say about that ...

Originally Posted by Peter King R-NY

There is no equivalency of threat between Al Qaeda and neo-Nazis, environmental extremists, and other isolated madmen. [...] Indeed, by the Justice Department’s own record, not one terror-related case in the last two years involved neo-Nazis, environmental extremists, or anti-war groups.

Oh really? Well the statistics show otherwise. In a report released just this January using data from publicly available data from the FBI and other crime agencies ... as well as the Congressional Research Service, the Heritage Foundation, the Southern Poverty Law Center along with "1) official government documents such as affidavits, criminal complaints, and press releases, and 2) local, national and international mainstream media reporting."

Summary of Findings

• Since 9/11, only 44% of suspects publicly associated with terrorism were prosecuted under a terrorism or national security statute.

• There were 80 total plots by U.S.-originated non-Muslim perpetrators against the United States since 9/11. In comparison, there have been 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11.

So by nearly a 2 to 1 margin, non-Muslims were involved in domestic terrorism more than Muslim Americans and Muslim non-Americans combined.

A breakdown of non-Muslim domestic terrorism since 9/11 ....

Anti-Government/Anti-Tax Extremists: There have been 36 plots by right-wing extremists since 9/11. These attacks include Joseph Stack’s suicide attack on a Texas IRS building and Joshua Cartwright, who became enraged after the election of Barack Obama and “believed that the US Government was conspiring against him.”

KKK/NeoNazi/White Supremacist: There have been 27 plots by white supremacists since 9/11. These attacks include a 2004 letter bombing of the Arizona Office of Diversity and Dialogue that injured three employees.

Unknown/Miscellaneous: There were five attacks that federal crime officials did not categorize.

Christian Extremists/Anti-Abortion: There were three attacks by anti-abortion extremists and Christian extremists. The killing of abortion provider George Tiller is the most prominent of these attacks.

Black Supremacist Cults: There were two plots by black supremacist cults.

Jewish Extremists: There were two plots by Jewish extremists. The most prominent of these was a plot by Robert Goldstein to attack a local Islamic center with home made C4 and other explosives.

Extreme Anti-Immigrant: There were two plots by anti-immigrant extremists. One of these was the attack by Shawn Forde, who murdered a Queens deli clerk and was motivated by racist and anti-immigrant feelings.

Anti-Jewish: There was one plot by an anti-Semitic extremist. Norman Leboon made anti-Semitic threats against Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).

Anarchist: There was a single plot by an anarchist. Joseph D. Konopka “wreaked havoc in 13 counties by setting fires, disrupting radio and television broadcasts, disabling an air traffic control system, selling counterfeit software, and damaging the computer system of an Internet service provider.”

As King Targets Muslims, There Have Been Almost Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

Now let's put aside the fact that with 125 such cases in a decade the threat of domestic terrorism is infinitesimal at best. Are there bad guys out there that want to do Americans harm? Without question. But those handfuls of individuals come in all stripes. So with numbers like this ... there's simply no justification for singling out the Muslim Community in a hearing on "radicalization", "extremism", and what was that word again? ...... "terrorism". That is, if you are being ... I'm trying to recall what he said about Sec. Napolitano ... oh yeah now I remember .... "intellectually honest".

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Our president and his radical terrorist buddies don't want you to know.

Radical terrorist buddies?

OAW

[Big Mac]

It's an Inquisition? What makes you think ridiculous hyperbole counts as political debate? Strike that - I don't think you put much thought at all into these posts of yours, OAW. Did you even look at any of the testimony before jumping to condemn it in a facile, juvenile fashion? I see more thoughtful analysis than that on average over at Yahoo! Answers.

Radical Islam is a threat both foreign and domestic. There have been too many examples in recent days of homegrown Muslim terrorists actively planning to attack or successfully attacking the US, but useful idiots like you rush to condemn anyone daring to point out the threat. Revolting. I'm also fairly disturbed by those who have contended that angering Muslims with hearings like these assures us of future radicalization. Excuse me. The fact that some people in government are courageous enough to look into a threat is supposed to give an out to those Muslims who are radicalized in the future? They should just be let off the hook because they were pushed into being terrorists due to outrage over people asking questions about Radical Islam? Sickening and pathetic.

Peter King is a hero for trying to bring attention to this problem. OAW, you are a pathetic zero for this thread. You give aid and comfort to vile Muslim terrorists who relish murdering innocent people. A bit of American blood will be on your hands after the next radicalized Muslim commits a terrorist attack because of your desire to whitewash and inveigle in support of Radical Islam. You should be ashamed of yourself, but then again the mentally deranged and deficient Left has no shame or sense.

Ban away powers that be, if you must. I'll take a ban for righteousness any day.

[screener]

The fear and paranoia shown by the usual suspects here is disturbing.
King is legitimizing every stereotype paranoid people believe.

Of course the usual suspects here ignore the salient points the op brings up.
Retreat into your turtle shell when the facts don't fit your belief.

This is why I believe the only course of action to pinheads is derision and laughter.

[screener]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Ban away powers that be, if you must. I'll take a ban for righteousness any day.

Makes me wonder how far you'd take this "righteousness" position.
Scary stuff.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It's an Inquisition? What makes you think ridiculous hyperbole counts as political debate? Strike that - I don't think you put much thought at all into these posts of yours, OAW. Did you even look at any of the testimony before jumping to condemn it in a facile, juvenile fashion? I see more thoughtful analysis than that on average over at Yahoo! Answers.

Radical Islam is a threat both foreign and domestic ......

Yet another example of how you supposedly have me on ignore huh? In any event, between your failure to rebut the overwhelming evidence I've presented that Rep. King is at best being "single-minded" in his perceptions of terrorist threats ... and your unnecessarily aggressive attitude and reliance on personal attacks ... well, let's just say that they speak volumes.

OAW

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Ahh, missed this before. Another of the famous 'padded lists' that no one bothers to fact check.

Originally Posted by OAW 

There have been 36 plots by right-wing extremists since 9/11. These attacks include Joseph Stack’s ...
[Bogus labeling- Joseph Stack wasn't a 'right wing' extremist.]

...Joshua Cartwright, who became enraged after the election of Barack Obama and “believed that the US Government was conspiring against him.”

Totally bogus as an example of 'terrorism'. The guy obviously had anger issues over a lot of things (leftists just latched onto Obama and made it the biggest of them, even though the perp himself didn't) and the catalyst was actually a missing tube of Clearasil (!)

But to classify this as terrorism, and point it up as a big example on a supposed list of many, just tells me the entire list must be padded with bogus nonsense. Nothing what-so-ever to do with terrorism.

KKK/NeoNazi/White Supremacist: There have been 27 plots by white supremacists since 9/11. These attacks include a 2004 letter bombing of the Arizona Office of Diversity and Dialogue that injured three employees.


Unknown/Miscellaneous: There were five attacks that federal crime officials did not categorize.
[so by the definition of terrorism you posted to 'remember for later', these can't be terrorist incidents if there's no political motive to even categorize them by]

Christian Extremists/Anti-Abortion: There were three attacks by anti-abortion extremists and Christian extremists. The killing of abortion provider George Tiller is the most prominent of these attacks.

Black Supremacist Cults: There were two plots by black supremacist cults.

Jewish Extremists: There were two plots by Jewish extremists. The most prominent of these was a plot by Robert Goldstein to attack a local Islamic center with home made C4 and other explosives.

Extreme Anti-Immigrant: There were two plots by anti-immigrant extremists. One of these was the attack by Shawn Forde, who murdered a Queens deli clerk and was motivated by racist and anti-immigrant feelings.
[This is probably the most bogus example on the list! Shawn Forde was clearly motivated mostly by MONEY- just like every other two-bit thug in the hood. He robbed the store, and then when the cashier's brother surprised him with a gun, Forde turned around and shot the brother, then escaped.

Now, if THAT'S an example of 'terrorism' then good grief man- the happenings of every other shitty neighborhood and inner city in the ENTIRE COUNTRY have 'terrorists acts' going down every single day, and every time an immigrant is harmed in a robbery, then I guess we can file it under this bogus 'Exteme Anti-Immigrant' category. ]

Anti-Jewish: There was one plot by an anti-Semitic extremist. Norman Leboon made anti-Semitic threats against Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).
[idiotic to be sure, but... terrorism?]

Anarchist: There was a single plot by an anarchist. Joseph D. Konopka “wreaked havoc in 13 counties by setting fires, disrupting radio and television broadcasts, disabling an air traffic control system, selling counterfeit software, and damaging the computer system of an Internet service provider.”
OAW

So in other words, there were 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11, more than any other single group, so let's combine all the other examples, PAD THE LIST with crap that doesn't come close to being actual terrorism, and try and make it seem like it's silly to concentrate on the larger REAL example.

Typical.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Ahh, missed this before. Another of the famous 'padded lists' that no one bothers to fact check.



So in other words, there were 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11, more than any other single group,

Depends on how you do the "grouping".

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

so let's combine all the other examples, PAD THE LIST with crap that doesn't come close to being actual terrorism, and try and make it seem like it's silly to concentrate on the larger REAL example.

Typical.

I'll reiterate what I said earlier ...

Originally Posted by OAW

• There were 80 total plots by U.S.-originated non-Muslim perpetrators against the United States since 9/11. In comparison, there have been 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11.

So let's say for the sake of discussion that we toss out the 9 examples that you took issue with. There are still 71 total plots by U.S.-originated non-Muslim perpetrators compared to 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11. So U.S. originated non-Muslims account for 61% of the terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 ... whereas U.S.and foreign-originated Muslims combined account for the other 39%. In other words, from a hearing that is supposedly devoted to domestic terrorism ... even when you include attacks by foreign Muslims their numbers are still nowhere near the majority. And if you include only US originated Muslims the discrepancy is even larger still.

But hey ... if you want to try to argue that "45 > 71" go right ahead. It only means that you are suffering from the same sort of tunnel vision that Peter King is when it comes to the issue of domestic terrorism. Instead of dealing with the issue even-handedly across the board you guys only see "terrorists" where you choose to go looking for them. Which, interestingly enough, never seems to be in your own backyard. Because we all know that when white guys go blow up buildings because they oppose the federal government and don't want to pay their taxes that's ... different. Right?

OAW

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by OAW 

So let's say for the sake of discussion that we toss out the 9 examples that you took issue with. There are still 71 total plots by U.S.-originated non-Muslim perpetrators compared to 45 total plots by U.S. and foreign-originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11.

You haven't proven there were 71 total plots. The fact that prominent 'examples' of your so-called terrorism list turn out to be completely bogus, means it's on whatever bunch of leftwing shills that compiled such nonsense to prove the rest of the so-called terrorists plots weren't completely bogus also. Why would anyone compiling that point out examples so utterly bogus as FEATURED ITEMS on the supposed lists of many more? Of course you'd never delve into that- it would require actual thought.

To say nothing of the fact that you still haven't figured out that grouping EVERY other type of non-Muslim *supposed* terrorist incident together doesn't create two sides to be compared to each other. That's the oldest trick in the book and doesn't it just figure that lefty shills trying to excuse Muslim terrorists would resort to it.

45 incidents by Muslims greatly outnumbers EVERY other group (the ONLY fact that matters)- and who knows by how many once all the bogus examples are weeded out. Seriously, did you even check before listing that crap?

Yet as usual, we're supposed to ignore the fact that your facts are SERIOUSLY flawed (Common robbiries counted as terrorist attacks! ) and then just grant all you automatic credibility on all your other claims. No sale.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

By the way, I should point out I don't particularly like what Rep. King is doing myself. I think all the clowns in congress should just do their jobs as they were elected to do, and not use the platform for their own personal agendas. Leave worrying about Muslim terrorists or any others to law enforcement. I pretty much agree with that.

But by the same token, lefty shills trying to whine that 'Everyone else is just as likely to be a terrorist as Muslims are!' by the USUAL methods, IE: faulty comparisons, horribly flawed 'logic', weak attempts at moral relativism, *ahem* BOGUS PADDED LISTS and all the usual bullshit is just as counter-productive. Face facts: for their share of the US population, Muslims are responsible for an inordinate amount of terror threats, and it would seem, far more than any other group- and that's a SAD FACT. It doesn't bode well for the 'religion of peace'. Live with it, and move on- no need to slop together little lists padded with total crap to try and prove otherwise unless it's simply a fact you're unable to deal with for whatever reason.

[besson3c]

I still think that fussing over the presence of radical Muslims is not as interesting as the question of what do you do with them, assuming this is a problem that needs addressing?

Since I don't really think that there is anything you can do that would be prudent and wise, I tend to think that none of these discussions are terribly actionable.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

By the way, I should point out I don't particularly like what Rep. King is doing myself. I think all the clowns in congress should just do their jobs as they were elected to do, and not use the platform for their own personal agendas. Leave worrying about Muslim terrorists or any others to law enforcement. I pretty much agree with that.

I pretty much agree with this.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

You haven't proven there were 71 total plots. The fact that prominent 'examples' of your so-called terrorism list turn out to be completely bogus, means it's on whatever bunch of leftwing shills that compiled such nonsense to prove the rest of the so-called terrorists plots weren't completely bogus also. Why would anyone compiling that point out examples so utterly bogus as FEATURED ITEMS on the supposed lists of many more? Of course you'd never delve into that- it would require actual thought.

Take it up with the report. It certainly includes the sources. But let's dig a little deeper into your "objections" because I really didn't even do that for your first response. It was laughable enough that you were trying to argue that "45 > 71" so I just left it at that. So here goes ...

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

[Bogus labeling- Joseph Stack wasn't a 'right wing' extremist.]

The category was actually Anti-government/Anti-tax Extremists. Now granted, people who fall into this category are typically right-wingers. And clearly even you aren't silly enough to try to argue that a guy that intentionally flies a plane into an IRS building doesn't fall into the "Anti-tax Extremist" category are you? So your objection here is that he was associated with the right-wing side of the political spectrum. Ok fine. Let's roll with that. But at the end of the day he still was an Anti-Tax Extremist who committed a terrorist act.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Totally bogus as an example of 'terrorism'. The guy obviously had anger issues over a lot of things (leftists just latched onto Obama and made it the biggest of them, even though the perp himself didn't) and the catalyst was actually a missing tube of Clearasil (!)

What set off the fight with his wife that morning was a missing tube of Clearasil. This is true. But his wife also told the police that "her husband believed that the US Government was conspiring against him. She said he had been severely disturbed that Barack Obama had been elected President". So here we have a guy who believes that the government is out to get him, and when he gets approached by the police he kills them. I'd certainly say that this guy fits the description of the type of individual the DHS was warning about.

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of
military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities
could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists
capable of carrying out violent attacks.

But I'll concede the point on this one. It's a bit of a stretch to classify this as "terrorism". His wife's statement indicates that his "anger issues" escalated significantly with the election of President Obama. But this guy certainly didn't commit a violent act against civilians for a political purpose.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

But to classify this as terrorism, and point it up as a big example on a supposed list of many, just tells me the entire list must be padded with bogus nonsense. Nothing what-so-ever to do with terrorism.

Well that would be a mighty big assumption on your part. Again, the report has publicly available sources for all the incidents it lists. The thing to do would be to examine them individually and see if you can challenge their inclusion as you managed to do in this particular instance. But throwing out the baby with the bath water seems rather silly. There are cases on the Muslim side of the list that many would argue are cases of clear entrapment by government authorities. Would you be so quick to dismiss the rest as you are on the non-Muslim side?

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Originally Posted by OAW

Unknown/Miscellaneous: There were five attacks that federal crime officials did not categorize.

[so by the definition of terrorism you posted to 'remember for later', these can't be terrorist incidents if there's no political motive to even categorize them by]

Well you see ... that's just a really lazy way of looking at it. Again, if you actually read the report you will see the following:

Wade & Christopher Lay

Wade Lay, 44, and Christopher Lay, 20, were convicted on September 26, 2005, for attempting to rob the Mid-First bank in Tulsa on May 24, 2004, and killing a security guard during the attempt. During the trial, both defendants admitted to the robbery, which was caught on videotape. They said they needed to get money to be able to retaliate against the government because of its role in the standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992, and Waco, Texas, in 1993.

So this wasn't classified as "anti-government" because they were caught doing an armed robbery. But by their own admission they committed this crime to finance the "anti-government" activities they were planning later.

Benjamin Kuzelka

Law enforcement officials told ABC News that what's being described as a substantial quantity of the high explosive TATP was found at the home.

Police say what led them to the house was a reported hand injury at a local hospital. The suspect, 23-year-old Benjamin Kuzelka, told authorities his hand was injured in an accidental shooting. But authorities became suspicious because his injuries were inconsistent with a gunshot wound.

Neo Nazi and anarchist-type literature were allegedly found in the home, but police have not confirmed this information.

The FBI said there was no immediate indication that the case was linked to any terrorist investigation or any threat to public safety.

TATP explosives were used in the 2005 London bombings and suspected in the current Zazi alleged terrorism case.

This wasn't classified as "Neo-Nazi" because the guy blew his hand up before he could carry out his plans for that "substantial quantity of high explosive TATP". The same type of stuff used in the London subway bombings. Sounds like a "put 2 and 2 together" sort of situation to me.

Christopher Monfort

Monfort's life, it seems, is one of unfulfilled ambition. Driving trucks, he talked of flying airplanes. Working security, he talked of being a cop. Taking classes at community college, he talked of Harvard Law.

His four years as a 30-something college student in the Seattle area give the clearest picture of the obsessive political ideology of Monfort, who carried a copy of the Constitution in his breast pocket and saw himself as a modern-day version of a Revolutionary War-era patriot.

Monfort, 41, now is accused of what prosecutors call a politically driven, violent campaign against the Seattle police that culminated in the Oct. 31 slaying of Officer Timothy Brenton and wounding of Officer Britt Sweeney.

So this guy was obviously politically motivated, but it's categorized as "unknown" simply because his ideology doesn't fall into a nice, neat little box.

Jacksonville, FL Pipe Bombing

A day after releasing security video of the man suspected of firebombing a Jacksonville mosque, law enforcement officials acknowledged they had not gotten nearly as many calls as they expected.

This is categorized as "unknown" simply because the guy never got caught. But given the circumstances, it again sounds like a "put 2 and 2 together" sort of situation to me.

James J. Lee

In the manifesto, the words, “Focus must be given on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution.” If this is truly the demands of the man which currently holds this building hostage then getting these babies out is even more urgent.

According to FOX news the man, James J Lee suspected to be the perpetrator. He is known to the employees at the building, and they have had trouble from him before, when he launched a “Save The Planet” protest and made demands of the Network at that time.

Environmentally motivated terrorism. Rare enough that it falls into the "Miscellaneous" category.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

This is probably the most bogus example on the list! Shawn Forde was clearly motivated mostly by MONEY- just like every other two-bit thug in the hood. He robbed the store, and then when the cashier's brother surprised him with a gun, Forde turned around and shot the brother, then escaped.

Now, if THAT'S an example of 'terrorism' then good grief man- the happenings of every other shitty neighborhood and inner city in the ENTIRE COUNTRY have 'terrorists acts' going down every single day, and every time an immigrant is harmed in a robbery, then I guess we can file it under this bogus 'Exteme Anti-Immigrant' category.

Gonna give you a pass on this one. The report lists a "Shawn Forde". And there is a guy by this name who did in fact murder a Queens deli clerk. But this is a typo. And the blogger at ThinkProgress apparently referenced the wrong case. It should say "Shawna Forde". A woman who orchestrated a deadly 2009 home invasion that left 9-year-old Brisenia Flores and her father, Raul Flores, dead. Apparently she suspected him of being an "illegal immigrant" and a "drug dealer". Turns out he was neither.

The death sentence handed down Tuesday in Tucson is against Shawna Forde, a resident of Washington State who headed the Minutemen American Defense group. She was convicted Feb. 14 of first-degree murder for orchestrating the killings of Brisenia and Raul Junior Flores of Arivaca, Ariz., a small community just north of the Mexican border.

“I think that the nation as a whole sees us as the wild, wild West, that things like that are going to be OK with us,” says Angie Thomas, who sat on the jury. “And they’re not.”

The case has drawn back the curtain to reveal the dark side of the debate raging in Arizona over illegal immigration.

Ms. Thomas and fellow jurors were told during the trial that Ms. Forde and accomplices gained entry to the Flores home with the expectation of finding drugs there, which could be sold to finance Minutemen American Defense's border-control operations. Finding no drugs, the intruders made away with inexpensive jewelry but, prosecutors said, not before fatally shooting young Brisenia and Mr. Flores. Both victims were American citizens born in the US.

Oh and BTW, even though I gave you a pass on this one ... point still goes to OAW.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

To say nothing of the fact that you still haven't figured out that grouping EVERY other type of non-Muslim *supposed* terrorist incident together doesn't create two sides to be compared to each other. That's the oldest trick in the book and doesn't it just figure that lefty shills trying to excuse Muslim terrorists would resort to it.

45 incidents by Muslims greatly outnumbers EVERY other group (the ONLY fact that matters)- and who knows by how many once all the bogus examples are weeded out. Seriously, did you even check before listing that crap?

Like I said earlier. It depends on how you do the grouping.

- Anti-Government/Anti-Tax Extremists
- KKK/NeoNazi/White Supremacist
- Christian Extremists/Anti-Abortion
- Extreme Anti-Immigrant

These are all certainly different motivations for extremism, but they all have one thing in common. They are all far right-wingers ... and you know it. What is a Klan member if not a "Christian Extremist". They burn freaking crosses for a reason! Do you think the "Anti-government" and "Anti-abortion" crowds are mutually exclusive? No overlap between the "Anti-tax" crown and the "Extreme Anti-Immigrant"? When you constantly hear these people complaining about their tax money being spent on public services for illegals?

So the point still remains. The biggest source of terrorist activity in the US comes from far right radicals. There is nothing particularly earth shattering about this because that has always been the case. But like I said earlier ... for people like Peter King it's somehow "different" when white guys are involved.

OAW

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Take it up with the report. It certainly includes the sources. But let's dig a little deeper into your "objections" because I really didn't even do that for your first response. It was laughable enough that you were trying to argue that "45 > 71" so I just left it at that. So here goes ...

Again, the 71 figure is bogus because just lumping everything else together as if it were all one group committing 71 acts of terror is laughable. That's now how law enforcement views threats at all, and it would be stupid if they did.

What set off the fight with his wife that morning was a missing tube of Clearasil. This is true. But his wife also told the police that "her husband believed that the US Government was conspiring against him. She said he had been severely disturbed that Barack Obama had been elected President". So here we have a guy who believes that the government is out to get him, and when he gets approached by the police he kills them. I'd certainly say that this guy fits the description of the type of individual the DHS was warning about.

But I'll concede the point on this one. It's a bit of a stretch to classify this as "terrorism". His wife's statement indicates that his "anger issues" escalated significantly with the election of President Obama. But this guy certainly didn't commit a violent act against civilians for a political purpose.

So where are all the other examples from the same category? Why would someone point up something so BOGUS as a terrorist example that even you have to concede is a stretch to call it that, as one of the main examples of their tally?

Well that would be a mighty big assumption on your part.

No it wouldn't. You're the one making huge assumptions by listing stupid shit like that as acts of terrorism.

Well you see ... that's just a really lazy way of looking at it. Again, if you actually read the report you will see the following:

Wade & Christopher Lay

So attempting to rob a bank is now terrorism if one has a really dumb ever-so-loosely political based reason for robbing the bank?

To me,90% of this nonsense is like saying the 'Anarchists' who took to the streets and tore up a bunch of shit in the UK recently- yes for political reasons- are 'terrorists' strictly for the fact that they have a political motive. It's nonsense.

Half of this crap you're listing is just random nutballs who happen to have a strong political view, who then commit a crime. That's not really what most Americans are worried about when it comes to 'terrorism', though of course all these nuts belong in jail after they've committed whatever crime.


James J. Lee
Again, actual terrorist, or just disturbed nutcase?

Gonna give you a pass on this one. The report lists a "Shawn Forde". And there is a guy by this name who did in fact murder a Queens deli clerk. But this is a typo. And the blogger at ThinkProgress apparently referenced the wrong case.

And made up a racial motivation too boot! Classic!

It should say "Shawna Forde". A woman who orchestrated a deadly 2009 home invasion that left 9-year-old Brisenia Flores and her father, Raul Flores, dead. Apparently she suspected him of being an "illegal immigrant" and a "drug dealer". Turns out he was neither.

Still very weak calling her a terrorist. Murder? Nutcase? Home invasion robber? Sure. Terrorist? Weak.

Like I said earlier. It depends on how you do the grouping.

More like how you do the fudging!

These are all certainly different motivations for extremism, but they all have one thing in common. They are all far right-wingers ... and you know it. What is a Klan member if not a "Christian Extremist". They burn freaking crosses for a reason! Do you think the "Anti-government" and "Anti-abortion" crowds are mutually exclusive? No overlap between the "Anti-tax" crown and the "Extreme Anti-Immigrant"? When you constantly hear these people complaining about their tax money being spent on public services for illegals?

So when an illegal immigrant breaks into a home and kills the owners, and can be said to have a far left political view, is that terrorism also? (This very scenario has played itself out many times- mostly the reason people in Arizona and other places are fed up.)

So when someone robs homes and banks and whatever else because they're a leftwing tax and spend nitwit that thinks rich people owe them everything or else they get to go and take it- are they Extreme Left Wing Terrorists?

Or gee, are they just common criminals, and nobody in thier right mind really gives a flying F what crazy justification they used to commit their crimes, political or otherwise? NEWSFLASH TO OAW: virtually ALL criminals have some f-ed up reason for why they actually commit their crimes, and most have some warped justification. Few of them qualify as actual 'terrorists'.

So the point still remains. The biggest source of terrorist activity in the US comes from far right radicals.OAW

Pfft. Again, you're reaching this foregone 'conclusion' by not listing every type of crime committed by leftwing wackos, then listing everything under the sun committed by rightwing wackos as terrorism, even when, as pointed out- it's mostly just crime.

And suuuure, cases of Muslim terrorists were just entrapment. It's so easy to 'entrap' someone into thinking they're going to kill innocent people, telling them repeatedly that this will likely happen if they carry through with the plot, and then the person going ahead anyway. Yes, ordinary, non-radical citizens are in danger of being 'entrapped' into doing things like that all the time.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Or gee, are they just common criminals, and nobody in thier right mind really gives a flying F what crazy justification they used to commit their crimes, political or otherwise?

Like I said before ... for some people it's somehow "different" when white guys are involved.

Bottom line Crash ... do you consider this to be a case or domestic terrorism or not?

Report: Spokane bomb suspect is Army vet, white supremacist -

Given your comment above I suspect you wouldn't. But perhaps in this one particular instance you just might surprise me. So what say you .... yes or no?

OAW

[finboy]

When all of the internal DoJ documents came out last year warning of the "militia threat" (the new Red Menace), I don't remember hearing the Lefties talking about defamation. Seems like a double standard.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Like I said before ... for some people it's somehow "different" when white guys are involved.

Bottom line Crash ... do you consider this to be a case or domestic terrorism or not?

Report: Spokane bomb suspect is Army vet, white supremacist -

OAW

Yes, see, THAT'S actually a terrorist plot, not just a criminal act. I know you're playing dumb as usual, but I suspect even you can grasp the difference.

So would this be an Islamic terrorist?

Or these guys?

This guy?

This guy?

These must be right-wingers.

It's funny how on any given day, just doing a random search for terrorist brings up all sorts of Islamic terror incidents/suspects we've never even heard about! Not many right-wingers though.

But you know, not one to take yours or leftykooks.org's word for virtually anything, I was curious what a list of terrorist incidents (that is ACTUAL terrorists, not criminals we're supposed to believe are terrorists because leftwingkook.org said so) since 9/11 2001 would bring up. The best source I could find on short notice was Wikipedia, so feel free to challenge it- but I'd like to see another more complete list. We won't even get into the overwhelming preponderance of Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide, so just going through attacks in the US:

2001

United States: Anthrax attacks on the offices the United States Congress and New York State Government offices, and on employees of television networks and tabloids. (Unknown)

United States, December 12: Jewish Defense League plot by Chairman Irv Rubin and follower Earl Krugel to blow up the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, California, and the office of Lebanese-American Rep. Darrell Issa, foiled. (Anti-Islamic)

United States, December 22: 2001 shoe bomb plot. (Islamic)

2002
United States, May: Luke Helder injures 6 by placing pipebombs in mailboxes in the Midwest. Motivation to protest government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana and promotion of astral projection (Pothead, nutcase)

United States, July 4: An Egyptian gunman opens fire at an El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles International Airport, killing two Israelis before being killed himself. (Islamic/Anti-Israeli)

United States, October: John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo conduct the Beltway Sniper Attacks, killing ten people in various locations throughout the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area from October 2 until they are arrested on October 24. (Converts to Islam/nutcase)

2003
None

2004
None

2005
United States, October 1: Joel Henry Hinrichs III detonated a bomb near the packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma killing himself in the process. (Suspected Islamic connection, not proven/nutcase)

2006
United States: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, an Iranian-born graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, drives an SUV onto a crowded part of campus, injuring nine. (Islamic)

United Kingdom, United States: A major anti-terrorist operation by British Police disrupts an alleged bomb plot targeting multiple airplanes bound for the United States flying through Heathrow Airport, near London. (Islamic)

United States: An Afghani Muslim hit 19 pedestrians, killing one, with his SUV in the San Francisco Bay area. (Islamic)

United States: Federal Agents disrupt Derrick Shareef’s attack on an Illinois shopping mall planned for December 22. His intent was to commit “violent jihad” just before Christmas. (Islamic)


2007
A teenage gunman kills five bystanders and wounds four more in a popular shopping center before being shot dead by police in the Trolley Square shooting in Salt Lake City, Utah. (perp Muslim, but family/FBI insist that has nothing to do with it/nutcase).

2008
New York. A bomb goes off outside an empty military recruiting station in Times Square. (Unknown)

San Diego. A pipe bomb exploded inside a Federal Express distribution facility in San Diego. The blast did little damage to the building a second pipe bomb was found the parking lot and was safely defused. No one was killed or injured in the blast. (Unknown)

Knoxville, Tennessee. Knoxville Unitarian Universalist church shooting, Jim David Adkisson kills 2 people and injures 7 in Knoxville, Tennessee. (Finally a right-winger!)

Dalton, Georgia An explosion at a personal injury law firm in downtown Dalton, Ga., injured four people, including at least one lawyer, and resulted in the death of the apparent bomber in what a federal law enforcement spokesman described as a suicide attack. (Unknown)

Woodburn, Oregon. Woodburn police Capt. Tom Tennant, and Oregon State Police bomb technician Bill Hakim were killed, and Woodburn Police Chief Scott Russell was critically injured after a bomb exploded at the West Coast branch of Wells Fargo in Woodburn. Customer Service Manager Laurie Ann Perkett was taken, and later released from the hospital after being hit by shrapnel. The explosion happened just before 5:30 p.m. while Hakim and Tennant were trying to open the bomb, which Hakim felt confident was not a bomb. Officers were on the scene investigating a bomb threat called in to the bank at 10:19 a.m., when the explosion occurred. Joshua Turnidge and his father, Bruce Turnidge, were charged for the crime, and in December 2010, were found guilty of all charges, including aggravated murder. (Right-wing)

2009
New York City A small explosive device exploded out front of a Starbucks in New York City destroying a bench it had been placed on. No injuries or deaths were reported in the blast that brings fears of terrorism. (Unknown)

Little Rock, Arkansas Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, an American Muslim opened fire on a U.S. military recruiting office. Private William Long was killed and Private Quinton Ezeagwula was wounded. (Islamic)

Killeen, Texas Nidal Malik Hasan, while serving as a Major in the United States Army, opened fire killing 13 and wounding 30 at Fort Hood. (Islamic/made-up stress condition)

Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempts to detonate an explosive on an aircraft enroute from Amsterdam to Detroit. During the incident, the suspect ignites himself on fire until he is extinguished and overpowered by two passengers. The aircraft lands safely in Detroit with the only injuries reported to be the suspect himself and two others. (Islamic)

2010
New York City, New York, United States New York's Times Square was evacuated after the discovery of a car bomb.[46] US government believes radical Islamists in the Pakistani Taliban directed the plot, and may have financed it. (Islamic)

Jacksonville, Florida, United States A man used a pipe bomb to attack a mosque. The bomb exploded while about 60 Muslims were praying in the mosque. The attack caused no injuries. (Anti-Islamic)

Nope, no disproportionate amount of Islamic attacks what-so-ever. Let's pretend right-wingers are responsible for just as many terror acts.