Talk:List of terrorist incidents in July–December 2013

Why is terrorism only defined as Muslim related Violence?

Why is terrorism only defined as Muslim related Violence? There were Bomb threats in LAX and JAX where the Christian Terrorists were arrested. But they claimed to have bombs which did terrorize the people present. This article is propaganda singling out one religion as terrorists, rather than admitting the whole world has gone a little nuts.

Example the CIA has 80 drones dropping bombs daily based on behavior patterns rather than real targets. Yeah, bad people like to shop here so we bombed it. Yeah, that terrorist always buys coffee on Sundays, so on Sunday blow up all the coffee shops near his last location and we may hit him. Here is a link to the story.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/afghanistan-pakistan/secret-war/the-covert-convert-behind-the-cias-drone-program/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/at-cia-a-convert-to-islam-leads-the-terrorism-hunt/2012/03/23/gIQA2mSqYS_print.html

Our CIA acts like terrorists. 20 teams bombing homes, offices, stores daily. And they do not first clear their attacks with the host nation. They bribe the top official to look the other way, then kill whoever they please. Who is reporting on the death toll? Why are strikes based on a guess of how people behave or where they gather, instead of a known target, not called terrorism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.196.192.38 (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

There were Bomb threats in LAX and JAX where the Christian Terrorists were arrested. Please provide the source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.5.6.220 (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Country count

Please maintain country count in hidden text for end of year map. Listed by the month title(Lihaas (talk) 20:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)).

• Isn't it a bit pointless to keep a count of terrorist incidents, knowing that we are bound to miss most of them anyway because they don't get reported, or reported separately? Also, several organizations present a year-end overview of terrorist activity that already lists the number of confirmed attacks worldwide, or a number very close to the actual, so we can just use that for a map when the year is done? Otherwise we are missing tons of incidents and this will turn into a detailed and exhausting database, and not a WP article. Just my 2 cents. Skycycle (talk) 20:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

POV

It looks rather weird to see some of the IDF actions on this list. Not every murder is automatically a terrorist incident. In my opinion and for example, the incidents on 10 and 20 August by the IDF are plain murders, not terrorism. The Banner talk 15:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Eye of the beholder I guess, and who ever added those decided they were a type of terrorism and checked the State column (which presumably means state terrorism) independently of sourcing. I think it's symptomatic of the utter uselessness of these "terrorist incidents" articles. They should probably be replaced by articles with straightforward factual titles like List of bombing incidents, shooting incidents, assassinations etc based on the Type column. That will never happen though. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:37, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

This is exactly what we did a few years ago with the "List of armed conflists and incidents, XXXX" (or something of the sort) after a similar discussion. And then suddenly it was changed back without a discussion, or at least one has comprehensive as the first one. This IS inherently POV, I agree. How do you define terrorist? (the lead mentions something of the sort) that's the age old question. Virtually NOTHING will neutrally fit on this page otherwise. And yes there is STATE terrorism when it is for the same political (that's the key term) purposes (as opposed to mere common crime). Id support moving back to that incarnation as less POV(Lihaas (talk) 13:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)).

The fact that you don't like Israel should not be of influence on your decisions to add or remove things from the list. You should take the narrow definition of terrorism, especially because this page is a subpage that states to be "a list of non-state terrorist incidents". The Banner talk 10:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Please don't resort to NPA (my "liking" israel has nothing to do with your insecurity complexes, and for the record I have been accused of having a pro-Israel bias on the Yitzhak Shamir page (and possibly the Vidal Sassoon page)). Could very swell say "The fact that you like Israel should not be of influence on your decisions to add or remove things" considering that is the ONLY issue you are incvolved in here.

Once you get over your emotions and abuses then we can discuss the alternative. I supported someone ELSEs notion of moving to the more neutral "List of armed conflicts and incidents" page. Nevertheless there IS a terrorism by states and that is when its for political purposes as opposed to common crime. However the state defined crime is not neutral, its in favour of states, its for their purposes that certain actions are political regardless of what the spins is on it.

Soa page move as in accord with the prevous discussed move and the undiscussed move back is in order.(Lihaas (talk) 11:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)).

Ow, and now you revert to edit warring. Great move, Lihaas. Very cooperative. The Banner talk 11:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I edit warred? ummm, I waited for 4 days for a reply and you had none yet reverted and edit warred. Very vcooperative on your part to ignore discussion nd resort to personal attacks!(Lihaas (talk) 11:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)).

Proposal page move to "List of political violent incidents, XXXX" ro the previous "List of armed conflicts and incidents, XXXX" or "List of non-state terrorist incidents" (though that would need the npov state incidents page)?

Or any other proposals?(Lihaas (talk) 11:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)).

Disagree - and also just to add, the article looks like total !@#$, and Lihaas is one of the reasons I stopped working on these lists - if anyone wants to take a look at previous years, you can clearly see how much more organized they are and how well-worded and concise the descriptions are. I just got sick of constant reverts and ridiculous arguments - and as someone that spends a majority of their time researching, and writing about, terrorism - I eventually found that it's a waste of my time to try and provide a nice and orderly list of major terrorist attacks in the presence of such disruptive editors - especially ones that don't even bother to properly spell out what they want to say, much less take a step back and maybe admit that they are not always right. That having been said, I am completely siding with User:The Banner on the above. Skycycle (talk) 13:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

But the whole premise of the article and similar articles is subjective. There isn't such a thing as "nice and orderly list of major terrorist attacks" from an objective perspective. Objectively there are various kinds of events that are described in various ways depending on how sources are sampled. A suicide bombing is always a suicide bombing though. A car bomb is always a car bomb. An assassination is always an assassination (even if re-branded as a targeted killing). A mortar attack is always a mortar attack etc. Those kind of descriptions are objectively true, inherently neutral and can always be sourced independently of whether a source characterizes an event as a terrorist attack (and some sources will use the terrorism label no matter whether it's a civilian or military target), a militant attack, or any of the numerous other ways to describe it. If some sources describe a particular attack as terrorism that can be included as part of the description of the event with attribution along with the other attributes of the event. Sean.hoyland - talk 13:57, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Agree with Sean. I think that also points to a change back in article title to be NPOV. As for Skycycle, well if you wanna start abusing what you don't like hthen therens no point in the discussions. (and incidentally youre decriptions add redundant content yet you compolain that there is too much prose). Previously the article was at the more neutral List of armed conflict and attacks...?Lihaas (talk) 20:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Can Terry Lee Loewen be added to the tables?

Can Terry Lee Loewen be added to the tables? --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Better wait till some more comments, but in my opinion not. Main reason: he was only plotting the attack, he did not carry it out. The Banner talk 11:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Global terrorism database

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?start_month=0&end_month=12&start_year=2013&end_year=2013&start_day=0&end_day=31

RfC: terrorist incidents list criteria

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of terrorist incidents#RfC: List criteria. – Levivich 17:55, 10 August 2019 (UTC)