Fascist and nationalist 'lone-wolf' killers are vastly more deadly than those with an Islamist agenda, according to a study by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank.

In its report, 'Countering Lone Actor Terrorism', the RUSI argues that far-right extremists in Europe present a serious threat which should not be ignored.

The authors say that between 2000 and 2014, 94 people were killed and 260 were injured by far-right lone-wolf attackers. By comparison, lone-wolf Islamists killed 16 and injured 65.

The report warns that "right-wing extremists represent a substantial aspect of the lone actor threat and must not be overlooked" and identifies 98 separate plots and 72 attacks in 30 European states over the period in question.

The study warns there is too much focus on Islamist-inspired attacks compared to other kinds of violence.

"The media, and consequently public attention, is largely focused on violent Islamist extremists; while this may reflect the broader threat, it is at odds with that from lone actor terrorism," it warns.

The study also found that lone-wolf attacks are the hardest to predict and counter.

It said the mode of attacks presents "acute challenges for law enforcement practitioners in detection and disruption."

"By definition, they [lone-wolves] act without direct command and control from a wider network, and it is assumed that without such communications they may evade the 'tripwires' that would usually bring them to the attention of the authorities."

While full details are as yet unknown, the alleged killer of Labour MP Jo Cox last week is thought to be a far-right extremist.

Thomas Mair, 52, who has links to neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups, reportedly shouted "Britain first" while he allegedly stabbed, shot and dragged Cox down the street by her hair. It is not yet known whether he was referring to the far-right group of the same name.

http://www.rt.com/uk/347799-far-right-lone-wolves/
is there any liberal that tells any truth nowadays?

was this written before Orlando and Cali?


[

The Truth Has Been (Omitted)

By Ben Shapiro | June 23, 2016 | 9:25 AM EDT

Barack Obama is a dramatic failure.

His economy has been a slow-motion train wreck. His domestic policy has driven racial antagonism to renewed heights and divided Americans from each other along lines of religion and sexual orientation. On foreign policy he has set the world aflame in the name of pretty, meaningless verbiage and a less hegemonic America.

But there's good news: At least he controls the information flow.

This week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch told Americans to believe her rather than their own lying eyes. First, she openly admitted that the FBI would censor the 911 phone call of the jihadi Omar Mateen who murdered 49 Americans at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. The FBI, she said, would remove explicit references to ISIS, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Islam.

The resulting transcript was a masterpiece of hilarious redaction. Here's just a taste: "In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficial (in Arabic) ... Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of (in Arabic). I let you know, I'm in Orlando and I did the shootings. ... My name is I pledge of allegiance to (omitted). ... I pledge allegiance to (omitted), may God protect him (in Arabic) on behalf (omitted)."

This memory holing would make George Orwell cry. In this iteration, Allah becomes God (See, Islam is just like Judaism and Christianity!), but we can't mention terrorist groups and their leaders. In fact, more than a week after the attack, Lynch told the press she didn't know the jihadi's motivation — a motivation clearly stated in the transcript she released.

Insanity.

But this is not unusual for the Obama administration. We know that in the run-up to the Iran deal the Obama administration simply altered reality to fit its narrative: It had fiction writer and deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes cook up an account where negotiations with the terror state began only after the accession of "moderate" President Hassan Rouhani. Never mind that Obama and company had been negotiating with the mullahs behind the scenes for years before that. The narrative had to be falsified and upheld. When the State Department was forced to admit those lies in a press conference, the White House conveniently chopped out that section of the taped conference for public release.

We also know that the Obama administration lied openly about Obamacare. It knew from the beginning that you couldn't keep your doctor or your plan. It simply hid that fact for years. We know that the Obama State Department sliced out a section of transcript mentioning radical Islam when French President Francois Hollande visited the United States.

He who controls the information flow controls reality.

And the Obama administration is already rewriting reality for the historians of decades hence. We won't find out where they hid most of the political bodies until too late — just as we won't find out what Clinton hid in her private server until far too late.

This is why a government must not be trusted with massive power. Politicians have every incentive not just to lie in the present but to lie with an eye toward the future. The more power they have over us, the more power they have over the reality we see — and the more they think they can get away with manipulating that reality.

http//cnsnews.com/commentary/ben-shapiro/truth-has-been-omitted

the talking heads on TV are just parrots, repeating what they are told...


90% of all US media outlets are owned by the same 6 people... and they all have relatives in the Government...

Do you call this a bs story because you dislike the conclusions of the study, or have you discovered flaws in it?

Your post doesn't make that clear.

i'll clear it up... the study, if there even was one, is total BS... every study, poll, or opinion based article are always inconclusive, just for the fact they can alter the outcome by what they look at or who they talk too...

if someone does a study on what is better, Ice cream or pizza, the outcome will change depending on where they do the study, at baskin robbins or pizza hut...

this article is just a liberal fluff piece just to demonize far right peoples... whenever someone does something bad, they are always put in the far right wing category, unless it's the fanatical muslims...

"If there even was one?"

So...you don't know whether or not the study actually exists...which means you haven't seen it, but feel confident in unequivocally saying it is BS?


But you haven't seen this study.
You don't know if it is a poll, opinion, or study.

And if you include "study" then we're all screwed.
Doctors rely on "studies" all the time to provide conclusions to help treat patients.
Clinical trials are studies.

So if "every study" is "always inconclusive" then we're all royally screwed as medicine is only working by sheer random chance.


This article is just a crappy article.
The very first clue should have been where it references a study but provides no links to it.
It's not print media.

At best it's click bait for a certain demographic.
Not really a liberal fluff piece.
And...it worked.
You clicked. You emotionally reacted. You shared. You helped provide more clicks to their website.

This one has to be in the running....

Kind of like the way far right "studies" always conclude that "evil liberals" are to blame for everything.

I agree with you. Partisan self-worship exercises don't inform anyone.

However, if you want to make a valid declaration that a "study" is bogus, and not just post that you are just as biased as you assume the people running the "study" were, you should at least look closely enough at the details, that you can point either to an error in how they gathered the data, or an identifiable error in logic, in how they drew their conclusions.

Just declaring it "BS" because you are on the wrong side of the politics, makes you just like the people you are criticizing.

I agree it is BS.

The narrative of ' lone wolf' & 'home grown' has been pushed for years.
But now.. It is excellerating.
Considering what, NOW is being used to determine, ' a terrorist', on threat, (SLP lists & No fly lists, etc), it could be anyone (with or without a criminal history or even a report

Are you saying that there are no lone wolf type bad guys? Are you saying that every person who insanely goes on a rampage and attacks lots of other people, are coldly acting out the orders of an organized group of some sort?

You just said it. Before 2013-14 terrorists had 'track records', associations communications etc. Now any whack job gay straight, boozer, druggie can off a few " innocents" and all of a sudden spontaneously claim allegiance from anywhere on EARTH and they're posthumously upgraded from shooter/bomber to terrorist. **** off, that's a reserved designation for people with enough balls to declare and join the group in their living state. I could turn down an isle in the grocery store and see a person in a drew brees jersey and tackle him out of nowhere, that doesn't make me an Atlanta Falcon. I could do a signature celebration of a player, I'm still not a Falcon. I could do the dirty bird flap and screech while the cops are arresting me, it still doesn't make me an NFL player. I could claim allegiance to the Seahawks, the Giants, the Lions it doesn't matter if I don't meet the criteria to be an NFL player and earn a spot on the roster, I'm NOT an NFL player and any team I claim to be a part of would be a delusion. Anybody who believed I was a part of the team would be deluded. If you don't meet the criteria you're not a part of the team, or the league.
Doesn't that wool make your forehead itch?

Oh no way I'd think you were an NFL player....after reading all that, I'd think you're high as frick is all....