Monday, July 02, 2007
No one should be surprised that several of the (latest) British terrorists are highly educated Muslims. Two years ago, a respected special ed teacher was one of the 7-7 bombers.
While we disagree with Osama bin Laden's goal of "civilizational apartheid," it nonetheless may be wise to minimize the globe's commerce with the Arab world while pushing as much humiliating feedback to her as possible.
"Modern Islam is Radical Islam," indeed. This is the fault of a deeply sick Arab world that we must do our best to transform into something human.
How would you minimize commerce with the Arab World?
Posted by: Steve French | Monday, July 02, 2007
More specifically, we want to maximize our impact on them while minimizing their impact on us. Cutting back on human immigration is the logical approach. The dangers of unskilled Arab immigration should be obvious, but through the recent attack we learn that highly-skilled Arab immigrants are much more likely than other potential newcomers to fight an insurgency against the government.
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Oh. I think "contact with the Arab world" would be a better phrase then.
Now that I think about it, I'm surprised you haven't done a piece on immigrations brain drain and it's effect on the source countries.
Posted by: Steve French | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
I think that this would be a poor policy to implement. Embargoes rarely, if ever, work. You are right, however, no one should be surprised that there were M.D.s involved in this, very pathetic, terror attempt. Terrorism has long been an outlet for disaffected, wealthy, educated elites. Also, this more evidence that a lot of education does not necessarily indicate intelligence. These guys were either very stupid or very naive (most likely both.)
Posted by: TDL | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
I agree - no one should be surprised by the fact that these alleged terrorists are doctors - after all, the ideologue who took over Al-Qaeda after 1993 was none other than DOCTOR - Al Zawahiri, now the brains behind Bin Laden's money.
Furthermore - it was an Egyptian university professor who started Al Jamiyaat Islam in Cairo in the 1950's - the fount of almost all modern radical Islam, and it was the intellectual elites of Cairo who spread their brand of radical fundamentalism to the universities in Saudi Arabia during the 1980's when they were tossed out of Egypt after the Sadat assasination. It was in Jeddah's Faisal University where Osama Bin Laden was first exposed to radical Islamic fundamentalism - at least, of a brand a bit more radical than Wahhabism.
Posted by: Mark | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
It is way past time to just quit playing around with Arab/muslimes. islum is a cult that is incompatable with rational thought or action! The sooner we disengage with muslimes completely. the better!! That may well include deportation and even internment camps in this country to halt this scourge on mankind!!!
Posted by: Dave | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
I have to note how the most dangerous Islamist elements combine a rigorous science-based education with a general ignorance of the humanities, particularly history and literature. (One exception was French educated Dr. Hassan Turabi of the Sudan, who despite his zeal ended up being neutered by his own military partners).
The critical thinking engendered by higher mathematics and science is coupled by enormous gaps of knowledge and a religious prohibition ( depending on what scholar the Muslim intellectual follows) that walls entire subjects off from critical analysis.
Posted by: zenpundit | Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Many idiots on the right (Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, their ilk) confuse the following two statements:
Many terrorists are Muslim, and
Many Muslims are terrorists
In this post, you seem to confuse a related set of statements:
Many terrorists are elites, and
Many elites are terrorists.
When it comes to immigration, I believe the benefits of recruiting elites to America far outweighs any potential terror attacks they might ineptly plot.
Posted by: a517dogg | Wednesday, July 04, 2007
An analysis of the Brain Drain is now up . Thanks for the idea!
The purpose of cutting back immigration from the Arab world would not be to change Arab governmental policies (as in a typical embargo or boycott), but rather to avoid insurgent contamination.
Also, I would not confuse unintelligent with irrational. Terrorism can be seen as a form of altruism , after all.
Indeed, Islamism is a modern ideology, and so i smost current among those exposed to modernism. Very good comment.
Is your comment serious or satire? I cannot tell.
Does this imply that engineering-based societies, such as China and India, are especially vulnerable for an Islamist-type revival?
"In this post, you seem to confuse a related set of statements:
Many terrorists are elites, and
Many elites are terrorists."
Not at all. Merely, I am weighing
a. the cost of preventing skilled immigration from the middle east (which, if we keep the overall immigration rate constant, may merely mean more immigration from India, China, etc)
b. the cost of additional terror shocks
As (a) seems quite low and (b) seems quite high (even after factoring in indirect consequences on both ends, it seems foolish to encourage immigration from the Arab world.
Posted by: Dan tdaxp | Wednesday, July 04, 2007
I agree with what you say. However, much of terror research has repeatedly shown how terror groups tend to be made up of (especially at inception) of elites. What is necessary is to differentiate what types of terror groups were are speaking of as well. National/ethnic liberation groups do not tend to be created by elites (although it is just as easy to find elite created groups as non-elite created groups.) Most of the idealogical groups tend to grow out from radical groups at universities. You are correct to say that simply because many groups tend to be elite or muslim that it does not mean all elites or muslims are terrorists.
That is definitely interesting insight. I've never considered that angle.
Fairly silly and unrealistic comment. I believe Russell Kirk called Catholicism a cult (and went on to explain how the word culture stems from the word cult.) Catholics have done some pretty bad things in the past. If we believe that Catholicism is a cult (as I would say any religion, or even ideology is a cult to a degree) should we begin wall ourselves off from all Catholics?
Posted by: TDL | Wednesday, July 04, 2007
You respond quickly!
Posted by: Steve French | Wednesday, July 04, 2007