Robert Spencer

|

Pamela Geller

|

Bat Ye'or

|

Brigitte Gabriel

|

Daniel Pipes

|

Debbie Schlussel

|

Walid Shoebat

|

Joe Kaufman

|

Wafa Sultan

|

Geert Wilders

|

The Nuclear Card

Annual Report: Zero Civilians in U.S. Killed by Islamic Terrorism… Just Like Every Year Since 9/11

Posted on 09 June 2012 by Danios

Following the devastating 9/11 attack, terrorism has become the number one issue for the U.S. government.  Just under 60% of discretionary spending for the 2012 federal budget was allocated to the military–ten times the amount spent on education and health care.  As a U.S. citizen, over half of your income tax goes to sustaining the war state.  Since 9/11, more than a trillion dollars have been spent funding the War on Terror.  Aside from depleting the nation’s treasury, thousands of U.S. soldiers have been killed during these hostilities.

To justify this exorbitant cost, the American establishment must convince its citizenry that terrorism is a major threat to their safety and well-being.  Terrorism is portrayed as an existential threat to all Western civilization.  For this reason, government officials, with the help of the mainstream media, routinely fear-monger about the overwhelming threat of Islamic terrorism.  Right-wing Islamophobes lead the way, but the basic paradigm is generally accepted by both left and right, Democrat and Republican alike.  There is bipartisan consensus when it comes to the basic premise of the War on Terror, with little difference in foreign policy between George Bush and Barack Obama.

To prove the gravity of the threat, various government-affiliated organizations have been documenting terrorism.  The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), for example, has been diligently recording data on terrorist attacks.  Just this week, the NCTC released to the public its annual terrorism report for the year 2011.

Micah Zenko of The Atlantic published an article entitled Americans Are as Likely to Be Killed by Their Own Furniture as by Terrorism.  Although Mr. Zenko’s good intention and clever title deserve praise, I feel that his article is (unintentionally) misleading.  For one thing, Americans are much more likely to be killed by their own furniture than by terrorists.  And for another, the article’s byline is misleading:

Terrorist attacks killed 17 U.S. civilians last year and 15 the year before.

Those of you who regularly read my writing know that I closely follow such data and have proven again and again that, since 9/11, Islamic terrorists have killed a grand total of zero civilians in the United States.  So, why does Mr. Zenko state that 17 U.S. civilians were killed by terrorist attacks in 2011 and another 15 the year before?

It’s unfortunate that Mr. Zenko failed to mention the very important fact that none of these deaths occurred in the United States.  Moreover, all of these fatalities occurred in war zones–in regions that the U.S. is militarily occupying (Afghanistan and Iraq) or assisting in the occupation of (Palestine).  Buried on page 17 of the NCTC report, we read:

Seventeen U.S. private citizens worldwide were killed by terrorist attacks in 2011. These deaths occurred in Afghanistan (15), Jerusalem (1), and Iraq (1). Overall, U.S. private citizen deaths constituted only 0.13 percent of the total number of deaths worldwide (12,533) caused by terrorism in 2011. Fourteen U.S private citizens were wounded by terrorism in 2011; 10 in Afghanistan, three in Jerusalem, and one in Iraq.

In the entire year of 2011, the Afghan and Iraqi insurgencies killed a combined total of 16 U.S. private civilians.  By way of comparison, note that in a single event in March of 2011, “[a]n American soldier went on a house-to-house shooting spree in two [Afghan] villages…killing 16 people…four men, three women and nine children.”  Not surprisingly, this incident–clearly an act of terrorism if that word is to have any meaningful definition (although admittedly, it does not)–does not find its way into the NCTC report.  This is because it’s only terrorism when our enemies (especially Muslims) do it.

This huge double standard is apparent from the NCTC report itself, which declares on the opening page:

In compiling the figures of terrorist incidents that are included in the CRT and the NRT, NCTC uses the definition of terrorism found in Title 22, which provides that terrorism is “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” (See, 22 U.S.C. § 2656f(d)[2]).

In other words, by definition the United States or its military cannot commit acts of terrorism.  An act becomes terrorism based not on the action but on who commits this action.  If “subnational groups or clandestine agents” kill civilians in an attack, this is terrorism–especially if that group is Muslim or named “Al-Qaeda”.  Meanwhile, if the United States kills ten times as many civilians in an even greater attack, that’s not terrorism at all and will never find its way in the government’s database of terrorist attacks.

If an American soldier guns down 16 Afghan villagers (including three women and nine children), that’s not terrorism.  Meanwhile, the NCTC counted Major Nidal Hasan’s shooting spree against U.S. soldiers on a military base as an act of terrorism. This, in a nutshell, summarizes the American government’s mentality.

A cursory search of news report in 2011 reveals that on a seemingly routine basis the United States killed more Afghan civilians than the 17 U.S. civilians killed by Muslim terrorists in the entire year.  Here is a very incomplete sampling of the victims of various U.S.-led raids in the previous year:

three civilians, five civilians (including one woman and two children), 65 civilians, nine boys, the Afghan president’s own cousin (can you imagine if the Afghans shot and killed a U.S. president’s cousin–or even the president’s dog?), two children, seven civilians (including women and children), six civilians, two women and a child, two civilians (including a 12-year old girl), a boy, a girl, four civilians (including two women), one civilian (shot and killed because he had a flashlight in his hand), 14 civilians (two women and 12 children), 13 civilians (including three women and eight children), two civilians, “up to 16 civilians”, four civilians, six civilians (including an 11-year old girl), a journalist, four civilians, and seven civilians.

Recently it came to light what I suspected long time ago: to minimize reported civilian deaths, the United States government, borrowing a tactic used by Israel, defines “militant” to mean “all military-age males in a strike zone.”  Simply put, wherever an American bomb falls, there lies a militant.  Even using such an absurdly restrictive definition of “civilian”, the United States has killed way more Afghan civilians than the Afghan insurgency has killed American civilians, a fact that is evident from the incomplete list above.

Long before it was revealed that the U.S. was counting “militants” in this way, Gareth Porter of Counterpunch had astutely noted:

Except for a relatively few women and children killed by accident, the civilians who died in the raids were all adult males who were counted as insurgents in press releases and official data released by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

Porter estimated that in reality U.S. Night Raids Killed Over 1,500 Afghan Civilians in Ten Months in 2010 and 2011, far outstripping the meager 17 civilians killed by Muslim terrorists as reported by the NCTC.  This is not even to speak of the civilians killed by the U.S. in other Muslim countries, such as Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.

But, always remember: they are the violent ones.

*  *  *  *  *

The NCTC has released annual terrorism reports since 2005 (see: 20052006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011).  Going through these, we find that in this entire seven year period, there were only two successful acts of Islamic terrorism inside the U.S. (the Little Rock recruiting office shooting and the Fort Hood Shooting).  Both were against military targets: in the former, Carlos Bledsoe shot and killed a U.S. soldier outside an army recruiting center.  In the latter, Major Nidal Hasan shot and killed 12 soldiers and one military-contracted ex-soldier on a military base.

In other words, at least since 2005, not a single civilian has been killed in the U.S. by Muslim terrorists.  

As for American deaths outside the U.S., the majority of these (over 80%) have been in war zones, according to the data available in the NCTC reports.  Of these fatalities, 97% have been in Afghanistan and Iraq.  From 2005 to 2011, the total number of U.S. deaths outside of war zones has been limited to 17.  This means that, outside of those countries the U.S. wages war in, an average of two American civilians per year are killed by Muslim terrorists.  This, I think, should put Micah Zenko’s article in further context.

*  *  *  *  *

In fact, we can go further back than 2005 using the RAND Corporation’s list of terrorist attacks within the United States.  (RAND is a nonprofit global policy think tank financed by the U.S. government.)  Going through this 2010 report, it becomes clear that Muslim terrorists haven’t killed a single civilian in the U.S. since 9/11.

A similar situation exists in Europe: Europol has been releasing annual terrorism reports since 2006.  As I indicated in my 2011 article Europol Reports Zero Deaths from Islamic Terrorism in Europe:

Zero civilians in Europe have been killed by Islamic terrorists in the last half decade.  In fact, the only injuries incurred from Islamic terrorism were to a security guard who “was slightly wounded.”  Perhaps the “anti-jihadist” blogosphere should find this one security guard and give him a medal of honor and declare him a martyr for the cause.

Unfortunately, since the publication of that article, a French citizen of Algerian ethnicity shot and killed three soldiers and four civilians.  This brings the total civilians in Europe killed from Islamic terrorism (2006-present) to a grand total of four, or an average of less than one person per year.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the great threat of Islamic terrorism in the Western world: you are more likely to die from an allergic reaction to peanuts, being struck and killed by lightning, or being crushed to death by your television set than being killed by a Muslim terrorist.

Nonetheless, the NCTC report states that the “ultimate goal” of the publication “is to maintain global awareness of the persistent threat terrorism poses and the critical need to secure its defeat.”  Could this be anything other than rank propaganda?  Yet, in spite of the horrifically biased methodology employed by the NCTC, the data belies the case being made, a strong indication of how flimsy the ideological basis for the War on Terror really is.

Danios was the Brass Crescent Award Honorary Mention for Best Writer in 2010 and the Brass Crescent Award Winner for Best Writer in 2011.

  • Reynardine

    I would point out that when a medically unnecessary abortion was criminal, it was still not a homicide. If there was a question concerning a perinatal death, the lungs of the natus were placed in fresh water at autopsy. If they sank, no breath had been taken, and it was a fetal death, whose deliberate causation without medical justification was, at worst, criminal abortion. If they floated, then a human life had come into being, creating an issue of homicide.

    The idea that a fetus is a person, and still more preposterously that a fertilized egg as a person, had no currency outside the Catholic Church until somebody thought of it as a handy way to get around Roe v. Wade.

  • Steve

    @Reynardine, so the unborn baby was a legitimate military target?

  • Reynardine

    Steve: Either embryo or fetus. It did not yet have the standing of a person, but would, on live birth to an active duty member of the military, have assumed that of a military dependant and been covered by military medical coverage, been entitled to live on base, and been eligible to go to base schools (though it is admittedly quite a few years since I had friends in this status at Homestead Air Base).

  • http://thepenofawanderingstranger.com/personal/ Jack Cope

    “If we did not have counter-terrorism policies, the potential acts of at least 22 would-be terror plots would have added more bodies to the list.”

    Are these the ones the FBI set up themselves or the guys with fireworks trying to blow up the internet al la ‘The Four Lions’? But yes, please be scared because we are all coming to eat your babies and kick puppies etc etc. Until you get bored of course and we can all go back to bashing another minority.

  • Steve

    @Reynardine, “If that “unborn baby’s” mother was in the military, then so was it.”

    What rank did the unborn baby have?

  • Abed

    @Danios

    Thank you for yet another excellent piece. I used to keep a private blog but dropped the habit so I could focus on work (but also due to health issues making focus difficult if I’m mentally preoccupied with other things). Even having taken a hiatus from writing myself you have my vote in favor of sporadic contributions from you as opposed to none at all.

    Your work is not just getting heard (hard enough these days!), it’s getting *taken in*. Thanks again and please keep up the hard work even if infrequent.

    (I may not comment to verbalize this sentiment elsewhere, but this can be taken as positive feedback for all the contributors to Loon Watch, incl. the ones none of us ever hear about. Really, keep up the good work.)

  • mjasghar

    Sussana when that student went nuts at that college was that terrorism?
    The Fort Hood incident was a soldier going mental. But so was the Afghan massacre. Both commited by US soldiers, but because one was a muslim he is automatically labelled a terrorist.
    It’s your sheep like mentality of swallowing whatever your rightwing neocon pastor and the nutters he invites to speak at your church that leads to ethnic cleansings and lynchings. So much for ‘Chrisitan love’ all we ever seem to hear from you is your hate which you then project on to others.

  • Ahmed

    Include the shooting at the recruiting station where one soldier [emphasis is mine] was killed by a convert to Islam with the purpose of jihad.

    Don’t you actually read the articles? Since when did a soldier become a civilian?

  • http://ramio1983.wordpress.com/ Ramey

    Danios as usual a FANTASTIC article! The Islamophobes won’t stop at anything to mark a smear campaign against Muslims. I recently wrote an article on my blog that was partially inspired by Loonwatch about some recent scams recently and how Islamophobia is a fantastic money making business, if you get a moment please check it out. Salam.

  • Reynardine

    Susana, what part of “civilian” don’t you understand? If that “unborn baby’s” mother was in the military, then so was it.

  • Reynardine

    Clearly, I have not been killed by my furniture, but since I am a small person with heavy furniture who has to resort to the tactics of a pissant with a sugar donut just to get it from one place to another, I have been injured by it fairly often, a couple of times seriously. I have never been injured by a “Mooslamic” terrorist at all.

  • Ahmed

    @Danios,

    One year hiatus? Noooooooo. Your articles are the ones I most anticipate – not because the other writers aren’t good – they are – but because you’re just something supernatural!

    If you did have to take time off though, I can just imagine Bobby suddenly saying he will debate you without you having to reveal your identity, and then telling everyone that you did not reply to him because you’re scared to debate him :D

  • Susanna

    I think you are not counting those killed by Major Hussan at Fort Hood. This was not “work place incident” but an act of terrorism. 13 people plus an unborn baby were killed. Include the shooting at the recruiting station where one soldier was killed by a convert to Islam with the purpose of jihad.

    If we did not have counter-terrorism policies, the potential acts of at least 22 would-be terror plots would have added more bodies to the list.

  • Nur Alia

    If I may as a question here.

    If Americans concider any ‘military age male’, regardless of any evidence that that person was participating in terrorist activity (which seems a double standard in itself, since any citizen of an occupied nation has the right to self preservation)a ‘militant’, as a woman, if say, I am his mother, or husband…and do things which sustain his existance, such as cook dinner for him…does that make me ‘complicit’ in ‘militant’ actiivity, and also a ‘target’ in a ‘strike zone’?

    It seems that now, the rhetoric and propaganda against Muslims in general, in the public discourse of the west, has demeaned Muslims to ‘less than human’. Simply, the ‘strike zone’ has become ‘where ever there is a Muslim male of ‘military age’, regardless of where they live, what they believe, or who they are, or what they are doing at the time/

    As a Muslim, I think we need to concider this point of view as a threat, because of what it leads to.

    Let us understand something VERY CLEARLY now. When US President Harry Truman told the American people about the use of the atomic weapon on Hiroshima, he told them that Hiroshima as a ‘military base’, and he also said that ‘we tried to limit the loss of civilians as best we could’

    Notice the simalarities between the mindset of American discourse against the Japanese then, and Muslims now…and how officals describe thier terrorist attacks against civilians purposely targeted to force capitulation for political reasons.

    YES…Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrorist attacks. No less evil than driving airplanes into buildings.

  • Géji

    > @ Danios says .. “I took a 1-month break due to a very heavy work schedule. It came to the point where I was strongly considering a 1-year hiatus in writing”

    I also like Sam Seed wondering where you were and why you deprived us this long from your legendarily informative articles, and notice that that’s just from 1-month break you took (certainly deserved). But a whole 1-year hiatus? even if its well deserved, even its there are great writers of this site for certain more than capable holding the cadence of Islamophobia, nonetheless, its safe to say that for most Lwatchers here, it will be unthinkable that they’ll let you go for a whole year without putting a fight! even if its against your already busy work-schedule of 60-70 hours per week, and your responsibilities that for certain we know must go first and foremost to your precious family, as well as the personal hobbies any human being deserves to have and that we’re sure fighting Islamophobia to your extent takes it away from you, so I know its selfish of us to demand such from you, but what can we say other than its your own fault if you have us hooked to your writings ?!

    And beside, yes that the other LW writers articles informs well about Islam-o-phobia. But your articles informs bout Islam- period! — And as a Muslim, I can state that your articles informed me more about my faith in ways that are rarely out-there, which are the neutral, more logical, more middle-way ways Islam, and not the polarized Islam that seems to be out-there recently even since decades, that is so abusedly pulled and pushed between 2 camps that don’t seem to care the bruises they may inflict to it. The “conservative” camp represented by zealot Muslims and their Islamophobic counterparts that wishes Islam be of stone-age forever to sooth their liking, and that of the camp “liberal” that is represented by pseudo “reformist” Muslims and some lots secular “humanists” that wishes Islam since they believe its not ‘advancing’ fast-enough of its own for their liking, then lets give-it quickly the push (needed?) to mix-it with whatever shaky-waters previously unknown to her so that it catches-up with whatever fashionable trends in current 21st century. So you see, that confuses and deludes even Muslims, let alone non-Muslims. And that’s why I think neutral Islam ~ (which I’ve always heard-of since my childhood that that’s how Islam meant to be – I’m sure your familiar with the saying, middle-way Islam) ~ and which I believe your articles does represent to the closest, is needed not only by those non-Muslims that are confused from such polarized Islam, but also by the Muslims that are confusing themselves in such. So you see, you’re trapped in between Mr Danios! selfish that you been trapped? probably yes, but sadly for you (happily for us) nonetheless trap! — Salaam to you and your family bro.

  • Fantom

    Thank you Danios, great article as usual.

    Charles Kursman’s book “The Missing Martyrs: Why There Are So Few Muslim Terrorists” is relevant to this topic.

    http://www.amazon.com/Missing-Martyrs-There-Muslim-Terrorists/dp/0199766878/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1339304700&sr=1-1

    I heard about this book here at Loonwatch in the Book Review section.
    http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/08/book-review-the-missing-martyrs-by-charles-kurzman-2/

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/GargamelGold?feature=mhee CriticalDragon1177

    @Danios

    Especially when it comes to that NCTC study.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/GargamelGold?feature=mhee CriticalDragon1177

    @Danios

    You’re welcome! I hope to see more work of yours here again, sometime soon.

  • Danios

    Also, I just wanted to say that I have much more to say about the NCTC study…So, stay tuned for that.

  • Danios

    @Critical Dragon: Thank you.

    @Mindy: Great song, thanks! I’m listening to it on repeat right now.

    @Sam: I took a 1-month break due to a very heavy work schedule. It came to the point where I was strongly considering a 1-year hiatus in writing. However, I have (at least temporarily) decided against doing that, largely due to the support of LW readers–their support has made me realize that it’s worth it to put up with the huge burden it places on my already busy work schedule (working 60-70 hours per week) along with family/personal responsibilities…So, I thank you and all the other LW readers who have shown their support. It’s important: One wants to think that all this effort is not for nothing and that one is making an impact, if but a small one.

    @Haddock: Thank you!

  • Haddock

    Great article, Danios. *Claps*

  • Sam Seed

    Was wondering where you been all that time, Danios.

    BTW nice article and to the point, cue Jihate Bob with an axe to grind.

  • mindy1
  • http://www.youtube.com/user/GargamelGold?feature=mhee CriticalDragon1177

    @Danios

    Good job writing this article. You’re one of Loon Watch’s best writers.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/GargamelGold?feature=mhee CriticalDragon1177

    @Danios

    The problem of so called “Islamic Terrorism” at least in the U.S and Europe has definitely been exaggerated to the point of absurdity. People really need to realize that.

Advertise Here
Advertise Here