This article pertains only to the U.K. and comes to us from the brilliant left-wing minds of the people at The Independent who are about as "independent" in a political bias sense as Breitbart or CNN.
"Security Correspondent" (had to chuckle when I read her title) Lizzie Deardon uses statistical manipulation and outright omission of a rather important overlying statistic to paint a picture that isn't true. Her clickbait title is all that people are going to read anyway and her race-bating garbage has already been shared all over Facebook.
I don't want to get into the argument about what the purpose of this article and almost every article that she writes is about - that refugees are good and should be welcomed to the U.K - but just like so many other journalists she starts with a conclusion and then finds the "facts" to support said discussion. Just a cursory glance at her other "security correspondent" articles will quickly reveal what her true objective is. Hell, if you just type her name into a google image search this is one of the first results.
So, it is safe to say that ol' Lizzie might just be a little bit compromised when it comes to this particular topic but I'll give the skinny anyway.
She states that "whites" accounted for 117 arrests, "Asians" for 111 arrests, and "Blacks" for 21 arrests related to terrorism. What she does not mention is how much of the overall population each of these ethnic groups actually are. I'll go ahead and do the honest presentation of this rather important aspect of her silly argument.
"Whites" constitute 81.9% of the overall U.K. population
Why didn't she state that? Well because doing so would reveal to a somewhat intelligent person that given their portion of the population, non-whites are far more likely to be involved in terrorism in the U.K.... which is the opposite of what she is trying to portray.
None of this will matter to Lizzie though, because her mind, like many other people out there, is already made up. Statistics that go contrary to her pre-determined conclusion are ignored or in the case of a "journalist" like her, intentionally omitted.
I would imagine that if she were to use the overall population percentage numbers she would use them as follows: She will take a page out of the American media playbook and make an article that states that minorities are disproportionately arrested despite being less than 20% of the population!
This article is "dumb" because the author is clearly biased and is intentionally not showing major (and important to understanding the real conclusion) portions of the overall research.
