Tuesday, 15 August 2006

Poverty-causes-jihad myth exposed by 'Telegraph'

Britain's Daily Telegraph points out that those arrested in Britain for the fortunately failed plot to blow up passenger-laden planes were relatively well-off muslim university students who were recruited on campus. Indeed, "Waheed Zaman, 22, a bio-chemistry student and the president of the Islamic Society at London Metropolitan University, was one of 24 people arrested last week." (Zaman's sister also reports that he met 'Baghdad' George Galloway "many times.")

So if those arrested were young middle-class muslim students in touch with high-profile MPs, why does the Washington Post, a whole ocean away from the truth, describe the motivation of these would-be murders to be "young men [who] face a lack of jobs, poor educational achievement and discrimination in a highly class-oriented culture"? As The Unalienable Right Blog points out [hat tip Jihad Watch],
if The Washington Post is correct, that unemployment and rage at foreign policy cause extremism, how many Britons who are unemployed, against British foreign policy, and non-Muslim have been found to have plotted to blow up airliners? Perhaps the common denominator here is not employment status or objection to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And if the rage is being fueled by unemployment and lack of education, why are so many of the plotters tied to British universities?

The view from the Post looks like nothing more than a rehash of the old left-wing "poverty causes crime" canard, re-tooled as the "poverty causes jihad" canard.
As Jihad Watch and The Unalienable Right conclude, "the Post is simply repeating the old poverty-causes-jihad myth, and if the facts are otherwise, so much the worse for the facts."

Fortunately, some western politicians understand that. In an article in the unlikely place of The Guardian, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett, a champagne socialist from way back,
told the BBC that drawing a link between government policy and the terror threat would be the 'gravest possible error'. She said such suggestions were "part of a distorted view of the world, a distorted view of life. Let's put the blame where it belongs: with people who wantonly want to take innocent lives."
Yes. Let's.

LINKS: Young muslim rage takes root in Britain - Washington Post
University students at centre of terror plots - (UK) Daily Telegraph
UK Telegraph vs. The Washington Post on roots of jihad - Jihad Watch
UK Telegraph vs. The Washington Post on roots of jihad - The Unalienable Right
Beckett rejects links between foreign policy and terrorism - The Guardian
Terror suspect Waheed Zaman met George Galloway "many times" - Gateway Pundit
Who are the 'bomb plot suspects'? - The Times

RELATED: War, Religion, Politics-World

1 comment:

  1. Ah, but would Margaret Beckett say so if she wasn't in power herself?

    And as for George Galloway .. in another era his actions would verge upon treasonous ... or perhaps seditious? :)


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.