--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Osama is a millionaire. Many of the terrorists come from affluent or 
> upwardly mobile lives--esp. in Britain where many are college educated. 
> Honestly, the idea that it is caused by poverty may just be PC BS or 
> government disinformation. The connection between terrorism and 
> poverty  has been disproven again and again--but don't expect to 
> hear  the from a  politician.


While I was nodding my head at some points, the broader tone and
implications of this articl emade me shake my head.



"Politicians and much of the media in
Britain are engaged in a familiar Western practice after a terrorist
attack. They think they can explain it using Western standards."


On the other hand, Tom Friedman and others have made a persuasive case
 that bin-laden and others have been quite clear on what caused their
grievances and what it would take for them to "move on". An
implication of this is that their jihads are more grievance-based than
enemy-specific based. The Moojahideen fought the Russians fiercely to
rid Afghanistan  of Russian invaders, and they stopped fighting
Russians when the Red Army pulled out in 1989. 

Bin-laden helped organize and he fought with the Moojahideen in
Afganistan to fight off the Russian invasion. The CIA funneled
literally billions of dollars to the Moojahideen via Zia head of
Pakastan at the time (The Secret War of Charlie Wilson is a
fascinating account of it.) We liked fundamentalist muslim jihads 
then when it helped to shake apart the Soviet empire. We don't like
them when they are directed at us. The jihadists were happy to work
with us when we had a common grievance: the russian invasion. They
work against us when we create grievances for them. 

Jihadist grievances inlude massive support of Israel in light of their
slaughter of Palestinian  in the refugee camps,  military rule of the
wast bank and its human rights violations, support of a repressive
Saudi and other regimes in muslim countries, western imperialist
impacts going back to the beginning of the 20th century and the 
desecration of Islam's holiest sites, in their view, by US presence in
Saudi Arabia in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

If Palestine were a free, indpendent, propsperous state, I think a
substantial portion what inflames muslims and creates the furror that
transforms some into  terrorist, would subside greatly. So while
terrorists operating in western countries are not impoverished, their
cause, their furor and self-righteousness stems in good part from the
poverty and repression in the west bank,  and additionally in muslim
countries which have been afflicted economically by western powers
over teh past 100 years.  

Further, in Afghanistan, Karzai (sp) is really only president of Kabul
-- 90% of the country is in warlord's hands over which he has little
influence. The Tailaban are making a strong comeback. A major fuel on
the fire there is poverty. If Afghanistan had a thriving economy,
strong schools and infrastructure, it would be much less suseptible to
terrorists emerging there, and provide much less fuel for jihadist
minds and hearts  throughout the world. Similiar stories, different
details,  for Iraq,  Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia, etc. 

So to conclude as Cal does that poverty has no link to terrorism is
anaive and superficial claim -- and dangerious if it becomes imbedded
in policy making themes. 


"Now unemployment and hopelessness among Muslims are the root cause of
terrorism. Finding jobs for them so they can drive nice cars, live in
upscale flats and attend West End theaters supposedly will convert
them to the British way of life."

This is a typical empty strawman arguement. The options are not
impoverished and repressed muslims vs. muslims as upscale Brit clones.
Its about assisting 100s of millions of impoverished and repressed
muslims rise to a basic level of non-repression and economic viability.

"Or maybe evil America caused the terrorist attacks. If only the U.S.
had not invaded Iraq and dragged Britain along, perhaps Britain might
have been spared the bus and tube bombings."

Again strawman bs. What did contribute to all the bombings, to a
degree, is the past and current presence of massive amounts of US
troops and civilian support structures in what muslims consider sacred
lands. Its not relevant if a westerner does not "get it", that the
lands are not sacred to him so why should anyone care if he is there. 


"These are not Muslims without a future. These are bright and educated
students who, if they wished, could be productive and prosperous
members of British society. But many embrace a false theology and a
god who requires them to kill infidels."

A western christian telling a muslim that they  have "embraced a false
theology and a god" does not solve ANYTHING. Just as white civil
rights workers in the early 60's were bright and educated
students who, if they wished, could be productive and prosperous
members of suburban America. But they were shocked and dismayed at the
state of civil rights in the south, were pissed off, and risked
careers, life and limb to do something about it. Why is it so hard to
imagine idealistic muslims doing the same.   
 

"No amount of aid from the G-8 industrial nations to the
"Palestinians," nor resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict, will pacify
these current and potential killers."

Sure it will. As well as reducing repression in the west bank, saudia
arabia, egypt, etc. Cal has used a number of empty arguments, not
substantial ones, to draw this bogus conclusion.


"Even if Israel was obliterated
(the goal of much of the
Muslim world), the terror would continue until the entire non-Islamic
world is under their control."

This is his conjecture -- and he appears not a person whose wisdom and
isights I would place much faith in. The Jijadists did not follow the
Russians back into Russia after they force marched them out of
Afghanistan. Its a western myth, perhaps with racial and genicial
undertones, that  Muslims seek world domination. (An underlying
implication is that the west has to kill them all before they kill us
all.) 

Why don't we focus on helping to end repression, poverty, lack of
eduction, etc in the muslim world, and see where that brings the state
of hostilities between muslim and non-muslim worlds.


http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050712-091449-9219r.htm
  





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to