OK, reader TM Lutas was kind enough to use his mad OCR skillZ to provide a text version of the NCTC doc. I ran it through a fast parsing, and pulled the # of incidents by country out.
Not much changed from the limited sample I did earlier.
|Iraq | 30.8%|
|Afghanistan | 2.8%|
|subtotal =| 33.6%|
|||
|India | 45.9%|
|||
|Israel/ Palestine| 8.4%|
|||
|TOTAL |87.9%|
If we’re asking ourselves if terrorism is a worldwide or localized phenomenon, this certainly suggests that it’s highly localized. Two countries that are being pacified post-invasion; one country in a territorial/religious dispute with a neighbor; and Israel/Palestine which is also in a kind of territorial dispute.
The interesting note would be to localize the attacks within India and come to a conclusion about how concerned all the folks doing offshoring ought to be. Amusingly, my wife was v. upset when I got invited to go to Iraq last year; but I don’t doubt that she would have let me go to India without a thought.
Two things to follow up with; I’ll add casualties and am probably going to do a piece on the role of attention and perception in evaluating these numbers.
Full list by country:
|Country|Incidents|Percent|
|Afghanistan|18|2.8%|
|Angola|1|0.2%|
|Argentina|1|0.2%|
|Bangladesh|1|0.2%|
|Bolivia|1|0.2%|
|Bosnia|1|0.2%|
|Chile|1|0.2%|
|Columbia|2|0.3%|
|Democratic Republic of the Congo|1|0.2%|
|Egypt|2|0.3%|
|France|3|0.5%|
|Germany|1|0.2%|
|Greece|2|0.3%|
|Haiti|2|0.3%|
|India|300|45.9%|
|Indonesia|1|0.2%|
|Iraq|201|30.8%|
|Israel|15|2.3%|
|Malaysia|1|0.2%|
|Mexico|1|0.2%|
|Nepal|10|1.5%|
|Pakistan|3|0.5%|
|Palestine|40|6.1%|
|Philippines|2|0.3%|
|Russia|5|0.8%|
|Saudi Arabia|12|1.8%|
|Serbia|2|0.3%|
|Somalia|1|0.2%|
|Spain|2|0.3%|
|Sri Lanka|1|0.2%|
|Sudan|5|0.8%|
|Thailand|3|0.5%|
|Turkey|4|0.6%|
|Ukraine|1|0.2%|
|United Kingdom|1|0.2%|
|Uzbekistan|2|0.3%|
|Venezuela|3|0.5%|
Basically two main groups:
(1) those under UN peacekeeping operations for over 50 years (Kashmir 1949) (Palestine 1948)
(2) those invaded by the US and allies in the last few years (Afghanistan) (Iraq)
May 2, 2005
Friends:
We at the Massachusetts School of Law want to share with you Dean Lawrence Velvel’s posting from May 2nd’s velvelonnationalaffairs.com concerning truth and morality, entitled:
A Question of Honesty
We have several recent postings concerning the plagiarism scandal at Harvard and the way that situation was handled, so please visit velvelonnationalaffairs for more in-depth commentary.
But this matter of truth and honesty in particular, we feel, cuts across political lines, and will be of interest to all, so we welcome you to our site.
We also welcome, and are willing to post, any feedback you have on this important topic.
Best,
Robert Kent
rkent@mslaw.edu
MONDAY, MAY 02, 2005
Re: A Question of Honesty
From: Dean Lawrence R. Velvel
Date: Friday, April 29, 2005 10:35 AM
To: AuthorSkeptics
Subject: Re: A question of honesty
April 29, 2005
Dear AuthorSkeptics:
Your latest email causes me to briefly discuss the question of complicity regarding what I think a very important matter in our society and in any democratic society. (Perhaps it is also an important matter to some extent in non-free societies, although there the possibility of dire retribution, even death, enters the equation.)
In democratic countries we are free to take stands, to vote, etc. Yet most people do not take stands on most issues, for a wide variety of reasons that are too plain to need elaboration. The result is that evil, bad, call-it-what-you-will triumphs regularly, from politics, to business, to academics, to personal affairs. It seems to me that not taking a stand when faced with something bad is a form of complicity, although I have only ruminated about this, and have not considered it systematically.
One person who has considered it systematically is Barbara Kellerman of the Kennedy School. She has written about the matter in a new book from the Harvard Business School Press called “Bad Leadership[:] What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters.” I think it fair to say she is properly antagonistic to the complicity displayed by followers and bystanders who allow bad things to happen. You might wish to read her book and/or to get in touch with her. (She is, I note, going to be interviewed about her book for one hour on a television program I host called Books of Our Time, which appears on Comcast’s Channel CN8 at 11:00 a.m. on Sundays about twenty times per year. The interview will be taped on May 4th, shown in New England on June 26th, and shown in the mid Atlantic states on an as yet undetermined date. The extensive outline that will be written in order to prepare for the interview will be posted on a website called VelvelsBookOutlines.com shortly after May 4th.
The outline will in effect give people a relatively quick precis of Ms. Kellerman’s important ideas.) In the present instance, the question of complicity involves acquiescence in the lowering of academic standards and in further erosion of honesty in American society — an erosion already responsible for much of what has gone wrong in the last 45 years. Strictly in the academic realm, moreover, the erosion — and complicity — go beyond the Harvard Law School and beyond Harvard University. And conceivably one might find it especially problematic to learn of the erosion — here due to ghostwriting and plagiarism — in the sciences and in medicine. (Richard Lewontin has written strongly of the problem in the sciences, if memory serves.)
One is aware that, as lawyers and/or as law students, we tend to focus on law schools. But one also suspects that, should you choose to seek it, you might find a lot of support in Cambridge from faculty in departments other than the law school, particularly, perhaps, from professors who already have shown the courage to speak out publicly against various actions of Lawrence Summers. One might equally suspect that, again should you choose to seek it, you might also find support in non-law school departments of other universities. There probably are, after all, a lot of people out there, liberals and conservatives alike I would guess, who are disgusted by the erosion in standards of academic honesty and in standards of honesty generally.
There may also, of course, be people who to one degree or another would justify or defend what has occurred at Harvard with regard to the ghostwriting and/or lack of punishment. If so, they too should weigh in rather than remain silently on the sidelines. If you do not object, I shall post your email to me and this reply email, and you of course should feel free to do the same. Please let me know, however, if you object to my posting your email.
Sincerely yours,
Lawrence R. Velvel
thanks for posting this.
What are these 40 terrorist attacks in ‘Palestine’?
All attacks on settlers in the West Bank and Gaza.
A.L.
The reason why Kashmir and Palestina have such a large share is because they only look at “international” terrorisme which i assume means muslim terrorisme against the US in reality plus some other attacks to not look bias.
The number of terrorists acts is a lot higher if you drop the international connection. Columbia has than a lot more than 2 and even that number sounds like they didn’t count any of kidnappings of the FARC. India has 30 other insurgents going on so i doubt that there are only 300 acts. Pakistan must be dreaming with only 3 acts. I also miss Oeganda and their Sudan supported Army of the Lord
ps. North Ireland is still going on on a very low level but if you count the setting on fire of a german owned house in Corsica than i seriously doubt that the UK number is only 1. Also only 2 incidents in the whole stan region with their terrorists that want a unite muslim stan? I somehow doubt this.
India has 50% more attacks, but spread over a population nearly 40 times larger – IOTW about 3.5% as risky on a per-capita basis. Your wife’s concern is thus not misplaced.
The attacks are also not concentrated around the capital city.
Wait, the Phillipines only had two incidents? That doesn’t scan. There are three distinct non-military terrorist incidents in 2004 just listed in this travel advisory, and I could swear I remember a number of incidents not covered by that list, including a number of mall bombings.
#5 A.L.
Thanks – I figured that out after posting…
So no attacks from Settlers on Palestinians? Those are not exactly non zero
Al,
Suppose we call them attacks on the Jewish residents of the West Bank and Gaza.
Unless of course you are a supporter of a Jew free Arabia.
Jews have been resident in those places for thousands of years. Why not now?
Why doesn’t the PA welcome them as potential citizens? Could it be that they might not be as willing to put up with thuggery as your typical Arab?
Of course I’d be willing (in theory at least) to take the Jews out of the West Bank and Gaza if the Moslems were required to leave Israel for the territories.
Nothing wrong with transfer if it helps keep the peace.
Funny thing is the Arabs drove the vast majority of the Jews out of their lands (most were required to relinquish title to all their property except for a packed suitcase) not too many years ago so culturally at least transfer ought to be a viable option.
Sauce for the goose, eh?
Not to state the obvious, but did anyone notice that the US is not on the list? Who would have thought that in the weeks and months following 9/11? _Thanks, GW!_
Mr Simon,
was this before or after the Palestinians were driven off their land?
I bet that the Arabs would allow a return of the Jews if the Palestinians can return to their ancestrial homes. But i somehow doubt that this will be a good bargain for a Jewish Israel
a, the Jews were ethnically cleansed out of every country in the middle east (except Yemen) following the the failure of the Arab armies (with superior numbers) to ethnically cleanes the Jews from Israel upon the British withdrawal, in 1948.
No Jews were left to be driven out when the Arabs again builtup, provoked and prepared to slaugther the Jews in the 6-day war in 1968.
The Arab nations were still pretty much Jew free when the Arab armies attacked Israel again with the attempt of ethnic cleansing the area during the Ramadan War in 1973.
Hope that clears up your questions.
To be more specific, the Arabs don’t want a right of return, they want the region ethnically cleansed. If you believe the right of return is anything other than a trojan horse to destroy Israel you are a fool.
I think the most interesting entry is the one that isn’t there in the detailed list:
United States 0 0%
Actually, let’s go further than that.
Nations actively supporting and being involved in the Iraqi campaign: US, UK, Australia, Italy, Poland == 1 attack (0,1,0,0,0)
Nations actively opposing the Iraqi campaign: Germany, France, Spain, Russia, China == 11 attacks (1,3,2,5,0)
“the Arabs don’t want a right of return, they want the region ethnically cleansed.”
Exactly. This was well illustrated by anti-Jewish violence which occurred long before Jews had any power, even the most basic means of self-defense. And the rhetoric of the period made it clear that the objection was to the existence of uppity Jews who didn’t know their place. And to make it worse in the eyes of these Arab Muslim bigots, the Jews were wealthier and better educated.
What sticks out to me is the low level of _incidents_ in Pakistan (3). Anyone who follows events in Pakland knows that there are _incidents_ almost everyday in the Northwest Frontier Province and other parts.
Afganistan, Pakistan, Kashmir, Iraq, the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, and Israel/Palestine account for 99% to the total.
I’m confused…where is Palestine? I can’t find it on any maps.
FACT: virtually all terror is muslim; either muslin versus non-muslim, or muslim versus muslim
thro in the odd eta and ira and farc attack.
if the source of 90% of all attacks was PETA or ETA, we’d do be more aggressive thsan we are, i think.
sure: there’re 1 billion muslims and most are NIT terrorists. yet. and we sure don’t need to be fightiong them all.
but i feel that the anti-fanatiuc anti-terror response of saudi arabia and pakistan and especially IRAN has been DISMAL at best.
improving our relationship with India is one key: it would allow us to put more pressure the pakistanis.
and we need to topple assad and then bring more pressure to bear on the mullah-tyrants of Iran.
and we need to build refineries and nuclear power plants and drill for oil off of florida and everywhere else so we are less dependent on muslim oil.
that will also make them smaller targets of their own fanatics.
#22 rvail: You need to look on a map printed in a nation where it’s a crime to put Israel on a map…and a capital crime to object to being oppressed.
_FACT: virtually all terror is muslim; either muslin versus non-muslim, or muslim versus muslim_
FACT is that you don’t have a clue. The reason why you get such a high number of muslim terrorisme is that it explitive looks at transnational terrorisme. That means killing Whites outside Kashmir and Palestina/Israel. So South America, with such peacefull countries as Columbia and Peru are not looked at because it is for the local terrorists not in their best interest to target Americans. The same is true for the north eastern of India (30 plus guerilla movements). In Birma you simply don’t have Americans but to say that it is quiet is not completely true. And according to the stats China had zero terrorisme in 2004 which i can only explain by the way communists keep statistics (by lying). I also assume that they don’t name what is happening in Congo terrorisme because it is too bloody for that (it really is WWIII out there)
ps. If you count what is happening in Congo as terrorisme than most deaths would have fallen there and not Iraq and 2004 is a quiet year in Congo.