The whole article is a careful framing that ignores inconvenient facts and cherry picks the data.
The study it is built around is not actually available anywhere.
This is propaganda, not journalism.
The whole article is a careful framing that ignores inconvenient facts and cherry picks the data.
The study it is built around is not actually available anywhere.
This is propaganda, not journalism.
Why exclude the 9/11 attacks or the attacks before that? The only reason to exclude the most successful Islamic terror attack on US soil is if you want to skew the numbers to come up with a conclusion that fits your agenda that white people -- especially right-wing white people -- are the true terrorists. Of course, we are going to have less Islamic terrorist attacks post-9/11. The government started an entire new branch of the government - the Office of Homeland Security - and spend billions of dollars to stop Islamic terror attacks. Beyond the academically dishonest tactic of excluding 9/11, the site also paints left-wing Andrew Joseph Stack as some right-wing anti-tax zealot. He quoted from the Communist Manifesto in his suicide note. I don't know too many radial right wingers who do that. I guess that saying holds true: lies, damned lies, and statistics.