I see that an opinion poll in the UK has apparently confirmed once again, that about 25% of the 18 - 35 year old Muslims questioned in a poll (following the attack on Paris), have indicated sympathy for the actions of those who go to fight for IS in Syria.
I also note that on the BBC radio recently, the Islamic terrorists are described as 'terrorists' (for Paris) and merely 'radicals' when being hunted in Belgium. They must go through entire thesauruses in the hunt for words that nearly portray a reasonably accurate meaning, but without putting it plainly .... the words that they stick on are Islam, Islamic, Islamist, Muslim, Jihadi, Jihadist and of course Terrorist.
This of course is because the BBC don't necessarily hold our culture to have any better values than those held by groups who despise us, while living off the benefits of our richer and socially more progressive societies offer.
To be honest, those BBC editors, who decide that Islam is not to be associated with its practitioners crimes, nor the beliefs consistently held by at least 25% (the recent opinion poll showing 25%+ of younger Muslims sympathising with those going to Syria to fight for IS, shows that these views are not a small minority of Muslim opinion) of those same practitioners, are dangerous 'fellow travellers' of the sort of regime that we can expect if they ever get in power.
Or, they are dangerously deluded idealists (a sobriquet which might, if I was charitable, be applied to J Corbyn MP). Whatever the tag given, they betray us all and their own heritage by censoring the reporting of news.
NB: As usual with polls and statistics, there are more than one ways in which the results can be read, and The Sun and The Independent newspapers have clashed over the conclusions to be drawn from this one.
The Independent Newspaper was pointing out that for instance the people travelling to Syria are not necessarily going to fight on the side of jihadis. That there have been high-profile examples of British people going to fight on the side of, for instance, the Kurds, who are fighting against Isis.
However as these 'high-profile examples of British people', are not in fact Muslims, but almost entirely white Christians (ex forces), so it seems most unlikely that the Muslim respondents to the poll were thinking of them, when they showed sympathy for those travelling to Syria to fight.
The arguments about how wishy washy the questions might be, are maybe valid or invalid depending upon which side of the fence the two papers fall ..... such is Britain these days, ever more divided by the actions of a divisive group, whose refusal to integrate or moderate their views, threaten the very cohesion of this country.
 |
| Controversial Opinion Poll ..... |
I also note that on the BBC radio recently, the Islamic terrorists are described as 'terrorists' (for Paris) and merely 'radicals' when being hunted in Belgium. They must go through entire thesauruses in the hunt for words that nearly portray a reasonably accurate meaning, but without putting it plainly .... the words that they stick on are Islam, Islamic, Islamist, Muslim, Jihadi, Jihadist and of course Terrorist.
This of course is because the BBC don't necessarily hold our culture to have any better values than those held by groups who despise us, while living off the benefits of our richer and socially more progressive societies offer.
To be honest, those BBC editors, who decide that Islam is not to be associated with its practitioners crimes, nor the beliefs consistently held by at least 25% (the recent opinion poll showing 25%+ of younger Muslims sympathising with those going to Syria to fight for IS, shows that these views are not a small minority of Muslim opinion) of those same practitioners, are dangerous 'fellow travellers' of the sort of regime that we can expect if they ever get in power.
Or, they are dangerously deluded idealists (a sobriquet which might, if I was charitable, be applied to J Corbyn MP). Whatever the tag given, they betray us all and their own heritage by censoring the reporting of news.
NB: As usual with polls and statistics, there are more than one ways in which the results can be read, and The Sun and The Independent newspapers have clashed over the conclusions to be drawn from this one.
The Independent Newspaper was pointing out that for instance the people travelling to Syria are not necessarily going to fight on the side of jihadis. That there have been high-profile examples of British people going to fight on the side of, for instance, the Kurds, who are fighting against Isis.
However as these 'high-profile examples of British people', are not in fact Muslims, but almost entirely white Christians (ex forces), so it seems most unlikely that the Muslim respondents to the poll were thinking of them, when they showed sympathy for those travelling to Syria to fight.
 |
| Brits Fight For Kurds Along With Other Christians ... |
The arguments about how wishy washy the questions might be, are maybe valid or invalid depending upon which side of the fence the two papers fall ..... such is Britain these days, ever more divided by the actions of a divisive group, whose refusal to integrate or moderate their views, threaten the very cohesion of this country.
BBC has joined the argument about the one in five claims.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34967994
I suspected that they would .... I was surprised that they they hung back so long. Thanks for the link.
Delete