The Greatest Threat We Face

Dear Friends,

In the second Democratic Presidential debate, Bernie Sanders said that climate change was the biggest threat that we face.  President Obama has made similar statements.  In light of the terrorist attacks in Paris, many politicians particularly those on the right are pushing the narrative that ISIS is the biggest threat and that there is a real threat that ISIS will destroy the world as we know it.  While stoking fear and hatred of others is a constant political strategy for Republicans, it is important to point out that there is absolutely no way that ISIS can destroy the world as we know it and that ISIS, while a threat that must be eliminated, is in no way a major threat to the world as know it.  For more on that point, I commend to you Paul Krugman's Op-ed piece, entitled "Fearing Fear Itself" published in The New York Times (here).

After 9/11 our Congress passed the Patriot Act to take away our freedoms in order to prevent another terrorist attack.  Then through a series of leaks, particularly by Edward Snowden, we learned that our government was exceeding its authority and that there was no proof that all the invasions of our privacy were of any help.  Now after the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, John Brennan is claiming that the disclosures have made it more difficult to track terrorists, so we need to sacrifice more of our privacy rights.  In addition, Republicans are calling for legislation to stop all Syrian refugees from entering the country.

We can pass more and more legislation that goes against our Constitutional rights and our values to pretend to guard against terrorism, but we cannot pass any legislation to help reduce the gun violence that is rampant in this country.  CNN did this analysis recently (here).

Using numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, we found that from 2001 to 2013, 406,496 people died by firearms on U.S. soil. (2013 is the most recent year CDC data for deaths by firearms is available.) This data covered all manners of death, including homicide, accident and suicide.
According to the U.S. State Department, the number of U.S. citizens killed overseas as a result of incidents of terrorism from 2001 to 2013 was 350.
In addition, we compiled all terrorism incidents inside the U.S. and found that between 2001 and 2013, there were 3,030 people killed in domestic acts of terrorism.* This brings the total to 3,380.

The numbers used by CNN include the deaths from the 9/11 attacks.  It should be obvious from this analysis that gun violence is a much greater threat to us than terrorism, yet the Republicans are unwilling to consider any action to reduce gun violence.

The threat from climate change is in the short term immense and in the long term existential.  The World Health Organization estimates that there are 150,000 deaths worldwide annually caused by climate change and estimates that between 2030 and 2050 that number will rise to 250,000 additional deaths annually just from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and heat stress.  For comparison, the worldwide death toll from terrorism in 2014, the latest data available was just under 33,000 people.  That toll was the highest on record, but it is unclear if it represents a trend.  These incredible numbers are only the direct impact.  They do not reflect the deaths and other impacts of the conflicts that will result from the shortage of natural resources and the movement of displaced populations.

Obviously, terrorism is a problem that must be dealt with, but the threat from climate change is much more serious and if left unchecked will actually destroy the world as we know it.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Terrorists and Bigots

Dear Friends,

The terrible terrorist attacks in Paris last week have brought back into the front of our consciousness the fact that terrorism is alive and well in the world.  My heart goes out to all of those who suffer as the result of terrorist acts whether they take place in Paris or Beirut or Charleston.  We need to do all that we can to end terrorism, but to do that we need to understand and admit the facts surrounding terrorism today.

There is a very common misconception that terrorist attacks are most often perpetrated by those claiming to be acting on their Islamic beliefs.  This misconception is reinforced by politicians who are using fear and hatred of "others" for their own selfish political gain.  Here are some facts which clearly counter the common wisdom.

The chart below, courtesy of ThinkProgress (here) is based on information from Europol, the EU's law enforcement agency.

Most of the terrorist attacks in the EU have been by separatist organizations.

The ThinkProgress article goes on to discuss the statistics in the United States.

Religious motivations makes up just a slightly larger portion of terrorist attacks in the U.S.
Islamist militants lag far behind other groups when it comes to carrying out terrorist attacks in the U.S. too. According to FBI data compiled by the Princeton University’s Loon Watch, Islamist extremists were responsible for just 6 percent of terrorist attacks between 1980 and 2005 — falling behind Latino groups, Extreme left-wing groups, and Jewish extremists.

While the coverage by the media in the United States has helped to perpetuate the myth that most terrorist attacks are related to Islam, an article in The New York Times (here) from June 24, 2015 actually does a good job of summarizing the facts.

But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.

Here is the table from New America showing the incidents that is cited by The New York Times.

The tables below show the lethal terrorist incidents in the United States since 9/11.

Deadly Jihadist Attacks
Total number of people killed:
26
Plot name Persons killed2014 Washington and New Jersey Killing Spree 4
2014 Oklahoma Beheading 1
2013 Boston Marathon Bombing 4
2009 Little Rock Shooting 1
2009 Fort Hood Shooting 13
2006 Seattle Jewish Federation Shooting 1
2002 Los Angeles Airport Shooting 2

Deadly Right Wing Attacks
Total number of people killed:
48
Plot name Persons killed
2015 Charleston Church Shooting 9
2014 Tallahassee Police Ambush 1
2014 Las Vegas Police Ambush 3
2014 Kansas Jewish Center Shooting 3
2014 Blooming Grove Police Shooting 1
2012 Tri-State Killing Spree 4
2012 St. John's Parish Police Ambush 2
2012 Sikh Temple Shooting 6
2011 FEAR Militia 3
2010 Carlisle, PA Murder 1
2010 Austin, TX Plane Attack 1
2009 Pittsburgh Police Shootings 3
2009 Holocaust Museum Shooting 1
2009 George Tiller Assassination 1
2009 Ft. Walton, FL Shooting 2
2009 Flores Murders, Pima County, AZ 2
2009 Brockton, MA Murders 2
2008 Knoxville, TN Church Shooting 2
2004 Tulsa OK, Bank Robbery 1

An article on the Huffington Post website (here) entitled "White Supremacists More Dangerous To America Than Foreign Terrorists, Study Says" describes very clearly the misconception itself as well as a view on it based on the history of the United States.  I recommend the article to you.

The politicians and the press do not call terrorist groups that claim to have Christian views, Christian terrorists, but they should if they are going to call terrorist groups that claim to have Islamic views, Islamic terrorists.  Salon, reprinting an article from AlterNet, has a great article entitled "6 modern-day Christian terrorist groups our media conveniently ignores" (here).  Below is the first paragraph of that article.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) recently released an in-depth report on terrorism in the United States. Covering April 2009 to February 2015, the report (titled “The Age of the Wolf”) found that during that period, “more people have been killed in America by non-Islamic domestic terrorists than jihadists.” The SPLC asserted that “the jihadist threat is a tremendous one,” pointing out that al-Qaeda’s attacks of September 11, 2001 remain the deadliest in U.S. history. But the study also noted that the second deadliest was carried out not by Islamists, but by Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995—and law enforcement, the SPLC stressed, are doing the public a huge disservice if they view terrorism as an exclusively Islamist phenomenon.

You will note that while the time frame for the data from the Southern Poverty Law Center is different from the New America report that the conclusion is the same - non-Islamic related domestic terrorists are a greater threat.  The article then goes on to discuss six terrorist groups that claim to have Christian views.  You can find another list of eight terrorist groups that claim to have Christian views here.

In the last two days the Republican Presidential candidates and the media have given us many perfect examples of our unwillingness to accept the fact that Christian extremists are just as bad as Islamic extremists.  Yesterday, The Washington Post published an article entitled "Cruz: 'No meaningful risk' of Christians committing terrorism" (here).  Cruz's comment is patently false and provided the perfect opportunity for the media to expose the false narrative that we only need to be concerned about terrorists who claim to believe in Islam.  However, the author of the article, Katie Zezima, never once mentions the fact that Cruz's comment is factually incorrect.  Cruz was making the point that the United States should only take Christian refugees from Syria. Cruz was using fear of the "others" and the terrible attacks on Paris for his own selfish political gain, and Ms. Zezima and The Washington Post let him do it.  Jeb Bush has taken a similar position without coming out and saying that Christians are safe and Muslims are not.

The Washington Post is not alone in missing the opportunity.  Time and President Obama both missed today.  Time published an article (here) about President Obama's reaction to Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush.  Neither President Obama nor Time mentioned that the premise for the Bush/Cruz position was blatantly false.  President Obama focused only on not having a religious test for refugees.

The Republican governors are now lining up to declare that their states will not take any Syrian refugees because they do not want to put their populations at risk for terrorist attacks.  While they do not say out loud what Bush and Cruz have said about accepting Christians only, it is clear that they are focusing on creating fear and hatred of "others".

We must stand up to bigotry in all its forms, just as we must have compassion for those who feel the pain of terrorism.  We must not permit people to fuel hatred and fear for their own selfish political gain, just as we must not give into the fear that terrorists strive to create.

Thank you for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Racist Terrorism in America

Dear Friends,

The news of yet another act of terrorism against black people in America seems to come as a shock each time it happens.  There is always hand wringing and the usual denial of racism and terrorism in America by the Republicans and the usual call for gun control by the Democrats, but as Jon Stewart said, "We still won't do jack shit."  Rick Perry calls it an "accident" later corrected to an "incident", but it was not just an incident.  It was a racially motivated terrorist attack by an American on other Americans.

People say it was a single person who assassinated those nine people in Charlestown.  It was one person who pulled the trigger, but he was created, supported and encouraged by a community of racist terrorists.  His white supremacy website was just one of thousand on the internet. This community thrives on and encourages each others' hatred which ultimately, predictably and obviously leads to somebody carrying out a violent act of racist terrorism.

But it is not just the white supremacy community that creates, supports and encourages racist terrorism.  It is our leaders who use dog whistles to gain the votes and the support of the racists among us.  It is the institutional racism in America that is exemplified by the inherent racism in our justice system.  When blacks are stopped and harassed by the police far more frequently than whites, when blacks are arrested far more frequently than whites, when blacks are killed by police far more frequently than whites, when blacks receive sentences far longer than whites, all not because of what they have done but because they are black, our racist justice system provides a perfect example for the racists among us and encourages their terrorism.

Our racist justice system terrorizes the black community every day and destroys more lives than just the lives of the blacks killed by the police or a racist, terrorist gunman.  We, as a society, are destroying lives by not providing equal opportunity and a level playing field for all.  We deny the poor and particularly minorities a good education, good healthcare and real opportunities for them to attain their true potential.  Our society continues to treat them as "other" and therefore not entitled to the same treatment as "us".

Our first black President makes essentially the same speech each time the racist terrorism surfaces in the form of the violent assassination of black people.  He calls for minimal gun control, but lobbies harder for an ill-conceived trade agreement than for those minor controls.  Certainly gun control is important, but the availability of guns just makes committing the acts of terrorism easier.  The reason for the terrorism is much deeper.  It is embedded in the institutional racism in America.

Our leaders will not be the ones that end this monstrous evil that afflicts our country.  We must act.  We must join with all of our brothers and sisters to create an active community of people who name racism and terrorism wherever it exists, who work to change our racist justice system, who demand that all people are given a chance to attain their potential, who denounce acts of racism, terrorism and violence regardless of who the perpetrator is and who strive to provide a living example of the best of humanity.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Saudi Arabia

Dear Friends,

I have been troubled for a long time about the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.  Despite the reality of their human rights abuses and support of terrorists and terrorism, the United States maintains a very close relationship with Saudi Arabia and portrays the Saudi government as moderate.  The official policy of the United States government towards Saudi Arabia  for decades seems to be that the Saudis can do whatever they want as long as they keep selling us oil.

Human Rights Watch's 2015 World Report on Saudi Arabia (here) starts with this summary paragraph.

Saudi Arabia continued in 2014 to try, convict, and imprison political dissidents and human rights activists solely on account of their peaceful activities. Systematic discrimination against women and religious minorities continued. Authorities failed to enact systematic measures to protect the rights of 9 million foreign workers. As in past years, authorities subjected hundreds of people to unfair trials and arbitrary detention. New anti-terrorism regulations that took effect in 2014 can be used to criminalize almost any form of peaceful criticism of the authorities as terrorism.

Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi.  Saudi royal family members were allowed to leave the United States during the no fly period after the attacks.  If you have the time, there is a fascinating article in Vanity Fair entitled "Saving the Saudis" (here) that details the flight of the Saudis and the continued attempts by the United States government to deny that they happened.  This paragraph summarizes my underlying concern.

The bin Laden family neatly exemplifies the dilemma the United States faces in its relations with Saudi Arabia. On the one hand, the bin Ladens are products of Wahhabi fundamentalism, a puritanical Islamic sect that has helped make Saudi Arabia a fertile breeding ground for terrorists. Contrary to popular belief, Osama was not the only member of the immense bin Laden family—there are more than 50 siblings—with ties to militant Islamic fundamentalists. As early as 1979, Mahrous bin Laden, an older half-brother of Osama’s, had befriended members of the militant Muslim Brotherhood and had played, perhaps unwittingly, a key role in the Mecca Affair, a violent uprising against the House of Saud in 1979 which resulted in more than 100 deaths.

A Frontline report "analysis wahhabism" (here) starts with this paragraph.

For more than two centuries, Wahhabism has been Saudi Arabia's dominant faith. It is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don't practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. Critics say that Wahhabism's rigidity has led it to misinterpret and distort Islam, pointing to extremists such as Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Wahhabism's explosive growth began in the 1970s when Saudi charities started funding Wahhabi schools (madrassas) and mosques from Islamabad to Culver City, California.

The funding of the madrassas is made possible by the United States oil consumption and the willingness of the United States government to ignore the Saudi human rights record and support for terrorists worldwide.

King Salman the new Saudi king is no reformer.  While his predecessor King Abdullah was seen by some as a reformer, he made little progress and King Salman is seen as more closely tied to religious conservatives.  My fears about the direction that Saudi Arabia is heading and the unholy alliance that the United States has with Saudi Arabia were confirmed and fueled by a recent article in The New York Times about Prince Mohammed bin Salman (here).

Prince Mohammed is 29 years old and the King's son with the King's third wife.  King Salman is giving him huge amounts of power and control.  The Prince seems to be a major force behind Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen.  Prince Mohammed has been educated only in Saudi Arabia which I believe gives him a very limited view of the world and one that is tainted by Wahhabism.  The following quote from The New York Times article gives me great concern about his world view.

Prince Mohammed seemed to be planning for a future in government from an early age, said one family associate who knew him well. Unlike many other Saudi princes of his generation, Prince Mohammed never smoked, drank alcohol or stayed out late. “It was obvious to me that he was planning his future — he was always very concerned about his image,” the family associate said.

President Obama is, of course, following the well established United States government line in this quote from the same article.

After meeting with both princes at a summit meeting of gulf nations at Camp David last month, President Obama said the younger Prince Mohammed “struck us as extremely knowledgeable, very smart.”
“I think wise beyond his years,” Mr. Obama added in an interview with the Saudi-owned Al Arabiya network.

The last line of the article gave a much better assessment of the situation.

Abu Fahad, a businessman sipping coffee in a luxury hotel, said, “He has become Mr. Knows Everything. But he is 29 years old — what does he know?”

As long as we continue to support the Saudi regime because of our desire for its oil, the Saudis will continue to support Wahhabism which will produce young Saudis who are hateful and are taught that if one does not practice their form of Islam they must die.  We are not only destroying the planet, we are creating terrorists in the process.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal