And a cursory look at the data shows that from 1994-2008, I found that 204 high-casualty terrorist bombings occurred worldwide and that Islamists were responsible for 125, or 61 percent, of these incidents, accounting for 70 percent of all deaths.
I exclude from the data all terrorist incidents that occurred in Iraq after the American invasion, and I consider attacks on occupying military forces anywhere to be guerilla resistance, not terrorism. I also use a restrictive definition of “Islamist” and classify attacks by Chechen separatists as ethnonational rather than Islamist terrorism. In other words, even when we define both “terrorism” and “Islamist” restrictively, thereby limiting the number of incidents and casualties that can be blamed on Islamists, Islamists come out as the prime culprits.
So, all that would seem to suggest Islam is more violent, right?
Not so. Rewind fifty or a hundred years and it was communists, anarchists, fascists, and others who thought than any means justified their glorious ends. Even now, Islamists are by no means the sole perpetrators. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka and Colombia’s “narcoterrorists” blow up civilians and have nothing to do with Islam. In the United States, law enforcement considers the “sovereign citizens movement” to be a greater threat than Islamist terrorists. However, Islamists do commit most of the terrorism globally these days…
Another ridiculous piece. Groups like the Tamil Tigers can certainly be violent — but their movement is restricted to a particular time and a particular enemy — in this case the Buddhists of Sri Lanka. All this show is that Homo Sapiens is a violent animal. As for the Communists, Anarchists and Fascists, of course they were very violent, extremely so in their home countries. For the first time in history, crazy ideologues had the full weight of modern killing techniques at their service.
But those movements were a flash in the historical pan. They existed for a century at most (Hitler lasted only 12 years). They are in no way comparable to a religion that existed for 1400 years.
A study of Islamic history reveals violence from the very beginning. It’s enshrined in their holy texts. And of course most Muslims don’t follow the texts (in fact, I’ve been learning, most don’t even know they are there — reading the Koran in translation is discouraged).
But once you get a group following the texts, like Islamic State (or the Wahhabist movement earlier): you get exactly what in those texts.
Thus the with Islam, the history is full of groups who decided to follow those texts. They may settle down some, as the Saudis (following Wahhabism) have done. But you’ll notice that Saudi Arabia is pretty nasty place if you don’t follow the rules.