What percentage of Muslims are involved in terrorism?

Can someone give me a figure and a source please?

>0 but <100

ms spock said:

What percentage of Muslims are involved in terrorism?

Can someone give me a figure and a source please?

hint
They call themselves Islamists

I don’t think it works that way where nice clean figures are available.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Terrorism

• I don’t think it works that way where nice clean figures are available.

Maybe in the next census, after they ask what your religion is, they should ask if you are a terrorist. Then we will know…

furious said:

• I don’t think it works that way where nice clean figures are available.

Maybe in the next census, after they ask what your religion is, they should ask if you are a terrorist. Then we will know…

Other muslims don’t consider terrorists to be true muslims, so depending on your definition the answer could be zero.

furious said:

• I don’t think it works that way where nice clean figures are available.

Maybe in the next census, after they ask what your religion is, they should ask if you are a terrorist. Then we will know…

What makes a terrorist wish to advertise his presence before his martyrdom?

party_pants said:

furious said:

• I don’t think it works that way where nice clean figures are available.

Maybe in the next census, after they ask what your religion is, they should ask if you are a terrorist. Then we will know…

Other muslims don’t consider terrorists to be true muslims, so depending on your definition the answer could be zero.

Muslims are a faith.. Islam is a docrine.

+t

• Other muslims don’t consider terrorists to be true muslims, so depending on your definition the answer could be zero.

But the census asks about you, not other people…

furious said:

• Other muslims don’t consider terrorists to be true muslims, so depending on your definition the answer could be zero.

But the census asks about you, not other people…

he had his say, why didn’t you listen?

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Other muslims don’t consider terrorists to be true muslims, so depending on your definition the answer could be zero.

But the census asks about you, not other people…

he had his say, why didn’t you listen?

♫Kevin Bloody Wilson | Australian Broadcasting Corporation♪♩
dilligaf

Spiny Norman said:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Terrorism

I was already looking at that.

ms spock said:

Spiny Norman said:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Terrorism

I was already looking at that.

ever tried picking up nuts off the ground?

• ever tried picking up nuts off the ground?

Or counting all the stones in wales?

• I was already looking at that.

Why the urgency?

furious said:

• I was already looking at that.

Why the urgency?

Having an argument.

ms spock said:

furious said:

• I was already looking at that.

Why the urgency?

Having an argument.

with who?

• Having an argument.

It did seem that way…

furious said:

• Having an argument.

It did seem that way…

what seems this
isn’t necessarily that.

• what seems this … isn’t necessarily that.

Yes, Dr Seuss, which is why I asked…

ms spock said:

What percentage of Muslims are involved in terrorism?

Define terrorism.

Is the execution, of 18 or so Palestinians, in the last day or so by Hamas, considered terrorism or justifiable state sanctioned killing?

Is the beheading of the US journalist, Foley, terrorism, or justifiable state sanctioned killing?

furious said:

• what seems this … isn’t necessarily that.

Yes, Dr Seuss, which is why I asked…

Me to be sussed
you need to do more yet.

Cheshire grin.

ISIS have around 17,000 gunmen

CrazyNeutrino said:

ISIS have around 17,000 gunmen

shit stats for them

when they have engaged outrage

If you ask of religionistic personalities (yes it appears I fabricated thta word accorxding tomy spellcheck)

sectarianism is what it is. We could also realise that any other reality could within any pre-conceived practicality, actually exist.

I reckon America should drop really really strong cannabis on ISIS camps and towns where ISIS gunmen are, that would slow them down a bit, some might even lose interest.

It’s easier to answer if you turn the question around.

Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

The Rev Dodgson said:

It’s easier to answer if you turn the question around.

Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

I’d go along with that.

CrazyNeutrino said:

I reckon America should drop really really strong cannabis on ISIS camps and towns where ISIS gunmen are, that would slow them down a bit, some might even lose interest.

♫Kevin Bloody Wilson | Australian Broadcasting Corporation♪♩

Timothy Leary
The Politics of Ecstasy.

• Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

You mean in the same way that roughly 100% of catholic priests aren’t kiddy fiddlers?

party_pants said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It’s easier to answer if you turn the question around.

Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

I’d go along with that.

in which case.. It actually has nothing at all to do with actually being of the Muslim faith.

let us at least stop to consider this.

For long enough to at least

move on.

roughbarked said:

in which case.. It actually has nothing at all to do with actually being of the Muslim faith.

Well the nobbers committing the atrocities certainly consider themselves Muslims, they find rationale in the Koran and in the words of imans and they do it in the name of Islam, so I am happy to consider them Muslim.

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

in which case.. It actually has nothing at all to do with actually being of the Muslim faith.

Well the nobbers committing the atrocities certainly consider themselves Muslims, they find rationale in the Koran and in the words of imans and they do it in the name of Islam, so I am happy to consider them Muslim.

Islam and Muslim, ask Nasrudin

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

cough

It’s “no true muslim”.

:)

i’m an individual!

ms spock said:

What percentage of Muslins are involved in terrorism?

Can someone give me a figure and a source please?

I’ve never used it for terrorism, but it’s good for making apple and rosemary jelly. Zero (Alex (Everything), 2014).

JudgeMental said:

i’m an individual!

there was never any confusion about that.

So you are deciding that as they are breaking the rules they are out of the club?

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

What does that mean, they consider themselves to be real Muslims. Muslims can argue if they are real or not, whatever that means but that is just doctrinal and religious debates, if they consider themselves to be Muslim, practise whist they interpret as being real Muslim and shout al Akbar before blowing themselves and others up I am happy to take it at face value that they are real Muslims.

furious said:

So you are deciding that as they are breaking the rules they are out of the club?

which rules for which club

c’mon there has to be some science in here..

it is a type of logical phallacy.

AwesomeO said:

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

What does that mean, they consider themselves to be real Muslims. Muslims can argue if they are real or not, whatever that means but that is just doctrinal and religious debates, if they consider themselves to be Muslim, practise whist they interpret as being real Muslim and shout al Akbar before blowing themselves and others up I am happy to take it at face value that they are real Muslims.

Curve, look up the ‘no true Scotsman’ argument. I imagine that’s what Boris was alluding to.

AwesomeO said:

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

What does that mean, they consider themselves to be real Muslims. Muslims can argue if they are real or not, whatever that means but that is just doctrinal and religious debates, if they consider themselves to be Muslim, practise whist they interpret as being real Muslim and shout al Akbar before blowing themselves and others up I am happy to take it at face value that they are real Muslims.

we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. it is IS.. deregulated from ISIS because the internet fucked that course/avenue..

JudgeMental said:

it is a type of logical phallacy.

labelled.. “not to be used internally”?

or is that too specific?

• which rules for which club

PC brigade says people calling themselves Muslim and claiming their actions are on behalf of Islam are breaking the rules so they really aren’t allowed to call themselves Muslim…. Even though they do anyway…

sibeen said:

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

cough

It’s “no true muslim”.

:)

Och aye.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

JudgeMental said:

yeah, but. no real muslim would do that shit.

What does that mean, they consider themselves to be real Muslims. Muslims can argue if they are real or not, whatever that means but that is just doctrinal and religious debates, if they consider themselves to be Muslim, practise whist they interpret as being real Muslim and shout al Akbar before blowing themselves and others up I am happy to take it at face value that they are real Muslims.

we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. it is IS.. deregulated from ISIS because the internet fucked that course/avenue..

Course they call themselves Muslims. Whatever makes you think they don’t?

AwesomeO said:

\
Course they call themselves Muslims. Whatever makes you think they don’t?

Those who do.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

\
Course they call themselves Muslims. Whatever makes you think they don’t?

Those who do.

Those who do call themselves Muslims say that Muslims who commit atrocities don’t call themselves Muslim?

Can you hear yourself?

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

\
Course they call themselves Muslims. Whatever makes you think they don’t?

Those who do.

Those who do call themselves Muslims say that Muslims who commit atrocities don’t call themselves Muslim?

Can you hear yourself?

Can Tony Abbott hear himself?

I’m not involved in religious differences.. only.. the facts.

furious said:

• which rules for which club

PC brigade says people calling themselves Muslim and claiming their actions are on behalf of Islam are breaking the rules so they really aren’t allowed to call themselves Muslim…. Even though they do anyway…

In a land where there is no law they can claim to be belong to any religion

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

Those who do.

Those who do call themselves Muslims say that Muslims who commit atrocities don’t call themselves Muslim?

Can you hear yourself?

Can Tony Abbott hear himself?

I’m not involved in religious differences.. only.. the facts.

Your idea of a fact

“we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. “

CrazyNeutrino said:

furious said:

• which rules for which club

PC brigade says people calling themselves Muslim and claiming their actions are on behalf of Islam are breaking the rules so they really aren’t allowed to call themselves Muslim…. Even though they do anyway…

In a land where there is no law they can claim to be belong to any religion

or.. make one up.. based on hidden meanings within existing texts used by others.. where is the similarity to any other fundamentalist view into whatever text read.. Tertullian.. is a good look at the actuality of the Latinised version..

• In a land where there is no law they can claim to be belong to any religion

Ummm…. Yes, why couldn’t they?

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

Those who do call themselves Muslims say that Muslims who commit atrocities don’t call themselves Muslim?

Can you hear yourself?

Can Tony Abbott hear himself?

I’m not involved in religious differences.. only.. the facts.

Your idea of a fact

“we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. “

They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

furious said:

• In a land where there is no law they can claim to be belong to any religion

Ummm…. Yes, why couldn’t they?

the island of Dr Moreau?

correct spelling?

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

Can Tony Abbott hear himself?

I’m not involved in religious differences.. only.. the facts.

Your idea of a fact

“we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. “

They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

Certainly the end of any argument that you will get from me. Frankly I couldn’t be bothered.

• They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

It certainly looks like English…

furious said:

• They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

It certainly looks like English…

:) I was trying to translate..

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

Your idea of a fact

“we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. “

They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

Certainly the end of any argument that you will get from me. Frankly I couldn’t be bothered.

Jeez, Curve, and it was a perfect cromulent argument :)

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

Your idea of a fact

“we do have to rewalise that they do not use the word Muslim.. “

They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

Certainly the end of any argument that you will get from me. Frankly I couldn’t be bothered.

Best results are difficult to obtain.. Thanks.

I would say that the percentage involved in terrorism would closely mirror the percentage of mental disease in that particular community

terrorism per se is simply a vehicle to travel in to the intended destination I would say

sibeen said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

They, not necessarily being those who consider themselves Muslim.. It is about fundamentalism in it’s operative function which is easily suppressed by sticking to factuality within the fact that there is no reason why God cannot see things reasonably since he owns the factuality of the reasonability of it all .. in all. end argument.

Certainly the end of any argument that you will get from me. Frankly I couldn’t be bothered.

Jeez, Curve, and it was a perfect cromulent argument :)

;)

maybe wookie will translate it for us.

if you wanted to profile a possible terrorist do a quick secret search through hospital records to see if they have suffered from mental disease

then see if they are involved with religion

these are the basic breadcrumbs to following a trail to that possible destination

what you’d do then is say nothing but red flag them from leaving the country (secretly)

make up some excuse about an unpaid fine etc

JudgeMental said:

maybe wookie will translate it for us.

welcome to entertainment unlimited. :)

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

maybe wookie will translate it for us.

welcome to entertainment unlimited. :)

tell me that my assessment is wrong ie rebut the assessment in some coherent way using whatever reasoning you might put together

wookiemeister said:

if you wanted to profile a possible terrorist do a quick secret search through hospital records to see if they have suffered from mental disease

then see if they are involved with religion

these are the basic breadcrumbs to following a trail to that possible destination

what you’d do then is say nothing but red flag them from leaving the country (secretly)

make up some excuse about an unpaid fine etc

and none of them could possibly match a terrorist profile.

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

maybe wookie will translate it for us.

welcome to entertainment unlimited. :)

tell me that my assessment is wrong ie rebut the assessment in some coherent way using whatever reasoning you might put together

yes.

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

if you wanted to profile a possible terrorist do a quick secret search through hospital records to see if they have suffered from mental disease

then see if they are involved with religion

these are the basic breadcrumbs to following a trail to that possible destination

what you’d do then is say nothing but red flag them from leaving the country (secretly)

make up some excuse about an unpaid fine etc

and none of them could possibly match a terrorist profile.

But who is Khaled Sharrouf and how did he end up as the poster boy for Western jihadism?

His history reveals a very different picture – a drug-addled petty criminal whose substance abuse led to chronic mental illness.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-14/khaled-sharrouf-the-australian-radical-fighting-in-iraq/5671974

you need to understand how people are put together to predict how they will react

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

if you wanted to profile a possible terrorist do a quick secret search through hospital records to see if they have suffered from mental disease

then see if they are involved with religion

these are the basic breadcrumbs to following a trail to that possible destination

what you’d do then is say nothing but red flag them from leaving the country (secretly)

make up some excuse about an unpaid fine etc

and none of them could possibly match a terrorist profile.

But who is Khaled Sharrouf and how did he end up as the poster boy for Western jihadism?

His history reveals a very different picture – a drug-addled petty criminal whose substance abuse led to chronic mental illness.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-14/khaled-sharrouf-the-australian-radical-fighting-in-iraq/5671974

you need to understand how people are put together to predict how they will react

no.. reactions relate to equal and opposite to actions.

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

and none of them could possibly match a terrorist profile.

But who is Khaled Sharrouf and how did he end up as the poster boy for Western jihadism?

His history reveals a very different picture – a drug-addled petty criminal whose substance abuse led to chronic mental illness.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-14/khaled-sharrouf-the-australian-radical-fighting-in-iraq/5671974

you need to understand how people are put together to predict how they will react

no.. reactions relate to equal and opposite to actions.

it only relates to people in that they carry these out.

Every man jack of them.
The women don’t count because they have had their clitoris cut out and aren’t any fun.

I think that might be a red card

Arts said:

I think that might be a red card

in agreement.

Anyway, the majority of terrorists are more highly educated than most.

And anybody who doesn’t drink and has lots of facial hair are dodgy anyway.
Except for Bill who is dodgy for heaps of other reasons.

Peak Warming Man said:

And anybody who doesn’t drink and has lots of facial hair are dodgy anyway.
Except for Bill who is dodgy for heaps of other reasons.

Indeed!

furious said:

• Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

You mean in the same way that roughly 100% of catholic priests aren’t kiddy fiddlers?

Yes, and in the same way that roughly 100% of any large group of humans do not engage in the reprehensible activities of a small minority of that group.

>Yes, and in the same way that roughly 100% of any large group of humans do not engage in the reprehensible activities of a small minority of that group.

…hope this is catching, I can see the news oneday, starting with ‘mostly all is well’, we wont be torturing you, viewer, tonight with an attention grab.

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

It’s in vogue to call an enemy a terrorist group.

The Rev Dodgson said:

furious said:

• Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

You mean in the same way that roughly 100% of catholic priests aren’t kiddy fiddlers?

Yes, and in the same way that roughly 100% of any large group of humans do not engage in the reprehensible activities of a small minority of that group.

“At least one in twenty” is not a negligible figure, especially when you remember that offending priests tend to have large numbers of victims per head. And remember these are only the ones who’ve been convicted:

AT LEAST one in 20 Catholic priests in Melbourne is a child sex abuser, although the real figure is probably one in 15, the state inquiry into the churches’ handling of sex abuse was told yesterday.

RMIT professor Des Cahill said his figures, based on analysing conviction rates of priests ordained from Melbourne’s Corpus Christi College, closely matched a much larger American analysis of 105,000 priests which found that 4362 were child sex offenders.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/one-in-20-priests-an-abuser-inquiry-told-20121022-2816q.html#ixzz3BGwOTDIF

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

Terrorism is one of their tactics but they’re more ambitious than is usually implied by the term “terrorist” – they are actually attempting to seize territory by military means (and then slaughtering the inhabitants or terrorising them into doing as they’re told).

Bubblecar said:

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

Terrorism is one of their tactics but they’re more ambitious than is usually implied by the term “terrorist” – they are actually attempting to seize territory by military means (and then slaughtering the inhabitants or terrorising them into doing as they’re told).

They don’t make good negotiators.

Bubblecar said:

“At least one in twenty” is not a negligible figure, especially when you remember that offending priests tend to have large numbers of victims per head. And remember these are only the ones who’ve been convicted:

I didn’t suggest that it was.

eBubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

furious said:

• Roughly 100% of muslims are not involved in terrorism.

You mean in the same way that roughly 100% of catholic priests aren’t kiddy fiddlers?

Yes, and in the same way that roughly 100% of any large group of humans do not engage in the reprehensible activities of a small minority of that group.

“At least one in twenty” is not a negligible figure, especially when you remember that offending priests tend to have large numbers of victims per head. And remember these are only the ones who’ve been convicted:

AT LEAST one in 20 Catholic priests in Melbourne is a child sex abuser, although the real figure is probably one in 15, the state inquiry into the churches’ handling of sex abuse was told yesterday.

RMIT professor Des Cahill said his figures, based on analysing conviction rates of priests ordained from Melbourne’s Corpus Christi College, closely matched a much larger American analysis of 105,000 priests which found that 4362 were child sex offenders.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/one-in-20-priests-an-abuser-inquiry-told-20121022-2816q.html#ixzz3BGwOTDIF

I wonder if those figures could be applied to the general population?

1 in 15 of the general population is a very high figure, so I hope not :(

Bubblecar said:

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

Terrorism is one of their tactics but they’re more ambitious than is usually implied by the term “terrorist” – they are actually attempting to seize territory by military means (and then slaughtering the inhabitants or terrorising them into doing as they’re told).

They seem to behaving more like a Medieval Army

Postpocelipse said:

Bubblecar said:

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

Terrorism is one of their tactics but they’re more ambitious than is usually implied by the term “terrorist” – they are actually attempting to seize territory by military means (and then slaughtering the inhabitants or terrorising them into doing as they’re told).

They don’t make good negotiators.

They need Clive Palmerston

CrazyNeutrino said:

I wonder if those figures could be applied to the general population?

Sex offenders in the general population don’t benefit from the protection of a powerful law-eluding institution, which hushes up their crimes and moves them from place to place, enabling them chalk up such an impressive score of victims.

Bubblecar said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

I wonder if those figures could be applied to the general population?

Sex offenders in the general population don’t benefit from the protection of a powerful law-eluding institution, which hushes up their crimes and moves them from place to place, enabling them chalk up such an impressive score of victims.

It would be interesting to see figures for the general population

CrazyNeutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

diddly-squat said:

FWIW I don’t think you can really define ISIS as a ‘terrorist organization’… I think ‘militant group’ is a better description…

Terrorism is one of their tactics but they’re more ambitious than is usually implied by the term “terrorist” – they are actually attempting to seize territory by military means (and then slaughtering the inhabitants or terrorising them into doing as they’re told).

They seem to behaving more like a Medieval Army

I think you are considerably underestimating the tactics used in many modern conflict zones

You can trawl through this if you want
http://www.johnbriere.com/CAN%20csa%20cpa.pdf

Let’s see. World ACTIVE defence forces (including paramilitary) account for about 0.2% of the total people on Earth.

I don’t distinguish between “terrorists” and other professional murderers.

mollwollfumble said:

Let’s see. World ACTIVE defence forces (including paramilitary) account for about 0.2% of the total people on Earth.

I don’t distinguish between “terrorists” and other professional murderers.

Sorry to quibble, but murder is a legal term, not a moral one.

mollwollfumble said:

Let’s see. World ACTIVE defence forces (including paramilitary) account for about 0.2% of the total people on Earth.

I don’t distinguish between “terrorists” and other professional murderers.

Christ, that’s just woeful.

Real terrorism, reign by terror, was invented to describe the massacre of somewhere between 16,000 and 56,000 people following the French revolution.

In a frighteningly large number of societies since there have been similar acts of terrorism, reign by terror, including at least one Chimpanzee society.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

But who is Khaled Sharrouf and how did he end up as the poster boy for Western jihadism?

His history reveals a very different picture – a drug-addled petty criminal whose substance abuse led to chronic mental illness.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-14/khaled-sharrouf-the-australian-radical-fighting-in-iraq/5671974

you need to understand how people are put together to predict how they will react

no.. reactions relate to equal and opposite to actions.

it only relates to people in that they carry these out.

roughbarked

sane people don’t just wake up one day and decide to cut the heads off people

the concentration camps guards were populated by the world’s nut cases, they chose them deliberately. as for the SS well, if they were sane at recruitment , they weren’t sane by the time they were used – if you have ever read the actions of the SS they were particularly malicious and totally out of character for any sane person.

terrorists are people already out of kilter with society one way or the other

the trademark of terrorists are going for soft targets that often can’t shoot back in some cowardly attack. the IRA were running around planting bombs London in museums blowing up people that had no real knowledge and held no real blame for what was going on in northern Ireland.

ISIS don’t like taking on trained , armed armies, they run away from them and cop a hiding if they do

domestic terrorism is usually about setting off bombs in public spaces and shooting up shopping malls , schools , cinemas

when the joker opened fire in that cinema he did so with full body armour, when confronted by the police he surrendered

same deal, soft targets, unwilling to take on an adversary who has strength