Who IS this guy?!

'Niceguy' Eddie

Political Talk Show Host and Internet Radio Personality. My show, In My Humble Opinion, aired on RainbowRadio from 2015-2017.

Feel free to contact me at niceguy9418@usa.com. You can also friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, and Tumblr, and support my Patreon. Also, if you don't mind the stench, you can find my unofficial "fan club" over HERE. ;)


Thursday, April 25, 2013

Terrorism by the numbers...

Haven't posted in a while, but I needed a place to quickly stash [the following] in the wake of the attrocious media coverage of the Boston marathon bombing, and the nearly non-exsistant coverage of the West, Texas plant explposuon which killed and injured about twice as many people, and cause many times the amount of property damage. (But, of course, was attributable to INDUSTRY, rather that TERRORISM, so... BEHOLD: YOUR LIBERAL MEDIA!)


Consider this…

According to Wikipedia there have been 8969 people killed by Islamic Terrorists since 1970. Over roughly 40 years, that comes out to about 224 people per year, on average. While (admittedly) only a partial list, that number is worldwide, and only considers deaths from ISLAMIC terrorists. (Obviously, there are many others.)

I’m sure I won’t have to make the case here that “all terrorists are NOT, in fact, Muslim.” But roughly what percentage of Muslims are terrorists? Is Islam really so inherently violent a religion that it engenders a culture of death on so large a scale?

Well, there are approximately a Billion Muslims in the world today. If we assume even that every single one of the above deaths was attributable to just one, single, separate terrorist (an absurd assumption, as terrorism USUALLY involves one person killing multiple victims) then even if every one of them were alive and active today, they would still represent just under 0.001% of the world’s Muslim population. And if you are inclined to believe that even 1% of the world’s Muslim population were radicalized enough to kill (suicide bomb, etc…) consider that this would put Al-Quaeda’s numbers at about 10 Million, world-wide – or just over six and a half times the size of the entire active U.S. Military. If that seems far-fetched, it should. After all, WE’RE the ones “winning” the war on terror: Estimates of the Iraqi death toll due to the 2003-2012 Iraq War generally range from 100,000 to 150,000 – twelve and a half times as many killed in nine years as the terrorists killed, worldwide, in FORTY. Even the 4486 U.S. Soldiers that were killed is an astounding number: that’s almost 500 per year, on average nearly twice as many as the terrorists had been killing on their own! IOW: You’re twice as likely to die FIGHTING terrorist as you are to die from one as a civilian.

Some other numbers to consider:

~3000 people killed on 9/11 in NYC, a city of ~9,000,000 people = 0.0003% chance of being killed by a terrorist, if you were IN NEW YORK CITY, ON 9/11 - the target city, on the day of the worst terrorist attack in history!

By comparison, about 30,000 people die every year in the U.S. alone, from traffic accidents…

…about 13,000 are the victims of homicide…

…and about 35,000 were the victims of suicide.

About 440,000 deaths are attributable to tobacco usage (including secondhand smoke), and about 300,000 are attributable to obesity.

And that’s EVERY YEAR, in THIS COUNTRY ALONE! Compared to 8969, worldwide over FORTY+ YEARS!

Tell me again WHY I should be so excited about terrorism?


  1. You're kidding right? 9,000 deaths attributed to Islamic terrorism since 1970? Where do you get your stats from? There ain't no way in the world that is accurate. Hell, you've got that many just in our war in Iraq. You DO know we were fighting against Islamic terrorists while there, right? Maybe you're only counting civilians being killed.
    Let's do it this way, you brought an obviously slanted article (wikipedia) to show an un-believably low number of deaths attributed to Islamic terrorism. I'll bring another link from another obviously slanted source to show your numbers may not be correct. Try going to http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/. They say 20762 have been killed by Islamic terrorists since 2001 (that's 2,000 per year). Obviously, one of these stats is incorrect. Either you wikipedia stat is wrong or TROP's number is wrong. Realistically, wikipedia cannot be accurate. And, TROP's is probably low also.

    Now, on to your per/year deaths of other things. Did you know that the government has (is) controlling each of those aspects of our lives. They control traffic and automobile safety standards and driving license and insurance regulations.
    Did you know that the government has it's hand full creating laws to prevent you from smoking? And, is directly associated with efforts to eliminate illness's caused by cigarettes.
    Did you know the government is probably the ONLY group to create laws to prevent people from getting FAT.
    Did you know the government does everything it can to prevent homicides each year.
    Notice any connection there? The government is doing everything possible to lower deaths in EACH of those categories that you listed. Do you want the government to oppose Islamic terrorism with similar zeal as it does your fatness or driving ability? I wish they would.
    I feel this article is a way of you saying you no longer feel their protection is needed from Islamic terrorism. Is that what your article (and you) are saying? Because your incorrect stat of 9,000 people dying over a 40 year time frame alludes to you being brainwashed by those who support Islamic terrorists. In which case I would fully understand the reason you would bring obviously incorrect numbers on deaths attributed to Islamic terrorism. But, going on the assumption you are not brainwashed, why would you use such obviously incorrect data?

    1. Funny thing is? I can take your stat - 2,000 per year - and the smallest number I cite 13,000 due to homicides is still six and a half times greater.

      Also, you'll see that I mentioned the deaths of our soldiers. I'm not ignoring them. But you can hardly call them "victims of terrorism" when so many were killed IN COMBAT, or BY INSURGENTS, while were were INVADING THEIR COUNTRY! That's not terrorism, that's WAR. And I'd do the same if Iraqi or Afghan troops were over in our country helping our government "keep the peace." (I'd hope you would as well.)

      As for the level of relative zeal? Let's just say that when you look at how issues get covered by the news media, AND get dealt with by the government, AND how willing we are to sacrifice our freedoms and civil liberties in order to "protect" ourselves, I believe terrorism gets blown out of proportion. Not saying it's not a problem. It IS. (Obviously.) And it must be dealt with. (Obviously.) I'm only saying that it occupies an over-inflated spot on our priorities list relative to the actual threat. (The numbers speak for themselves, even if I use YOURS, which I question.)

      Also, let me ask you this: Even using your number, homicides are 6.5 more likely to kill someone than terrorism. Given that, do still oppose any and all measures to enact gun control legislation? (Or support the Republican's efforts to block it?)

      And if you do so on the basis of Civil Liberties, or the fact that you see the actions to be ineffective or counter-productive, then you feel the same way about gun control issue as I do about our counter-terrorism efforts.

      Terrorism remains the smaller issue, however.

    2. "But you can hardly call them "victims of terrorism" when so many were killed IN COMBAT, or BY INSURGENTS, while were were INVADING THEIR COUNTRY" ... Ok, so you're not going to count all the deaths caused DIRECTLY by Islamic terrorism and use that within your stat? Fine. I'll stick with the higher number as a 'real' possibility compared to yours.

      "Given that, do (you?) still oppose any and all measures to enact gun control legislation? (Or support the Republican's efforts to block it?)" ... No, I support severe gun control. Just like the control we (government) has over all other aspects of our lives.

      "Terrorism remains the smaller issue, however." ... Terrorism is in no way the "smaller issue". The other issues are controllable, terrorism is not. Two different things. One is chosen one is taught. To eliminate the mind-set of those will be to eliminate that aspect from our society. Right now they are taught that killing themselves is a good thing. When people are so gullible that they feel blowing themselves up is a GOOD thing then there is something seriously wrong with the message being taught. Why is that message not being addressed as seriously as the damage caused by it?