Yikes!
On BBC radio a few nights ago, listening in Hong Kong, a program on why it was converts to Islam who went on the rampage in Canada. What is it about converts that bends them to kill random civilians?
Well, fair enough question. And the Beebs gathered several worthies to discuss it under the baton of a young Beebianista whose name I didn't get.
Everything was going swimmingly along accepted routes: the first fellow said that "every religion has its terrorists" (yes, we all recall the rampaging Jainiasts, don't we?), and concluded that "Islam was not immune". ("Not immune"?? Only that it's been responsible for over 24,000 terror attacks since 911. See how many Christian terror attacks you can count in that time. And, no, you can't count drone strikes...).
An Imam then weighed in on cue to say that these new converts "misunderstood" the Religion of Peace, which was one of tolerance, warmth, mercy and so on.
Then the Outlier. A fellow who had once belonged to Al Qaeda until he'd reverted to his senses said that these Muslims rampaging in the name on Islam were NOT misunderstanding the religion. They were acting in accord with its doctrine and on the explicit example of Muhammad. He then started to quote scripture to support his point.
At which point the young Beebianista shut him down with "we're not going to get into scriptural argument".
Imagine. They're trying to work out what it is that's radicalizes new converts to Islam. And they ignore the single most important reasons: the scripture of Islam and the example of its "prophet".
Shame on the BBC.
Sent from my iPhone
On BBC radio a few nights ago, listening in Hong Kong, a program on why it was converts to Islam who went on the rampage in Canada. What is it about converts that bends them to kill random civilians?
Well, fair enough question. And the Beebs gathered several worthies to discuss it under the baton of a young Beebianista whose name I didn't get.
Everything was going swimmingly along accepted routes: the first fellow said that "every religion has its terrorists" (yes, we all recall the rampaging Jainiasts, don't we?), and concluded that "Islam was not immune". ("Not immune"?? Only that it's been responsible for over 24,000 terror attacks since 911. See how many Christian terror attacks you can count in that time. And, no, you can't count drone strikes...).
An Imam then weighed in on cue to say that these new converts "misunderstood" the Religion of Peace, which was one of tolerance, warmth, mercy and so on.
Then the Outlier. A fellow who had once belonged to Al Qaeda until he'd reverted to his senses said that these Muslims rampaging in the name on Islam were NOT misunderstanding the religion. They were acting in accord with its doctrine and on the explicit example of Muhammad. He then started to quote scripture to support his point.
At which point the young Beebianista shut him down with "we're not going to get into scriptural argument".
Imagine. They're trying to work out what it is that's radicalizes new converts to Islam. And they ignore the single most important reasons: the scripture of Islam and the example of its "prophet".
Shame on the BBC.
Sent from my iPhone
