DAR AL HARB - U.K.: EDUCATED MOSLEM 'NUTTERS' WAGING JIHAD

Terrorists with degrees? Don't be so shocked
by Andrew Alexander

For a week or so, media commentators have been puzzling over the fact that doctors have figured among the alleged would-be terrorist bombers (but were not very good at getting the mixture right, which would seem all too apt).

Indeed, further study shows that suicide bombers are regularly people with degrees, professional qualifications and decent jobs.

This upsets a widely accepted version of the current socioeconomic doctrines on terrorism. The bombers, it is conveniently supposed, come from ranks of the economically 'deprived' or the 'underprivileged' who have nothing to lose, given their impoverished conditions.

The sloppiness of language should put you on your guard. What are these 'deprived' supposed to be deprived of? What was it that they had and has been taken away from them? And by whom?
Even worse is the term underprivileged, which makes as much sense as describing someone as under-overfed.

As to terrorist bombers being, as it were, middle-class, the only appropriate reply is 'so what'? Perhaps those who are so puzzled - being middle-class themselves - think that this social condition is some sort of moral qualification and that by acting as terrorists, the bombers are letting down the class.

This attitude is an extension-of the sort of thinking which was common enough many years ago when terrorists like the Baader-Meinhof group were reported, with suitable astonishment, to come from bourgeois families.

It is another example of muddled socialist thinking in which immoral or criminal behaviour can be explained away by economic circumstances. The poor resort to crime because of their poverty. Thus more welfare, less crime. Some innocents still believe this.

In fact, the opposite - more welfare, more crime - is probable since it turns so many recipients into professional spongers.

However, we are getting a long way from the issue of suicide bombers. It is most unwise to dismiss them as mad - or 'nutters' as The Times elegantly put it - since it suggests that there is little point in further thought or analysis.

Which by definition must make it harder to defeat them or prevent their acts.

...



Pertinent Links:

1) Terrorists with degrees? Don't be so shocked