Today's Boston Globe has a column by one of their in-house twits, the impermeable-to-clues H. D. S. Greenway. In it, Mr. Greenway discusses how Islamist terrorists are moving up in social and economic strata -- it isn't just the poor and oppressed that are turning to terrorism.
But this is the Boston Globe, remember. Owned and operated by the New York Times. If they get something right, it's either inadvertent or merely a prelude to getting something horribly wrong.
In this case, Mr. Greenway is touting this grand development as something new, when it's been around for some time.
Further, he repeats a lot of canards that are just not supported by the slightest shred of evidence.
A couple of quotes:
Most Muslims in Europe are as horrified and disturbed by terrorism as the Christian majority.
On the contrary -- there is remarkable evidence that what we call "terrorism" actually has a great deal of support from the rank-and-file Muslims. I have yet to see any significant evidence that "most Muslims" reject or condemn terrorism -- unless it's defined just right, as in "deeds conducted by Israel or the United States." By the standard Muslim definition, "terrorism" is defined as defending oneself against Muslims, or retaliating against Muslims for "martyrdom operations" or "acts of legitimate resistance" or "Islamic justice."
A Muslim community leader in Manchester, England, once told me that if you turn on the evening news a bit late, it sometimes takes a moment to figure out whether smoke, and flames, and gunfire on the screen are in Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan, Somalia, or Iraq. He said this had a big effect on the Muslim young.
Hmm... perhaps they should show some violence that doesn't involve Muslims, just to balance them out. The only problem I can see is that most of the violence in the world today involves Muslims on one side or another.
I guess reality itself is Islamophobic.
A tiny minority turns to extremism, and today's young terrorists are self-starting.
Again, I would question the "tiny majority."
Take a look at this article over at Wikipedia. Go down the list of current conflicts going on in the world, and see how many do NOT involve Muslims. Of the 28 listed, I guesstimate that 20 of those involve Muslims on one side -- or both.
Then look at the map, and compare it with the one shown in this article. The Muslim world, indeed, has "bloody borders."
Mr. Greenway and his fellow overeducated, vapid ivory tower-dwellers can continue to live in their little fantasy world, where "Islam is a religion of peace" and the real root cause of all terrorism in the world is George W. Bush and his war-mongering ways. They're not the ones who will have to pay the price when the bill comes due, and the harsh reality of the current nature of Islam reasserts itself.
(Update: Link to current conflicts added. My apologies, and my thanks to "reality check" for pointing out my oversight.)