Jihadis Twice As Likely To Be Students of Science Than Of Sharia (telegraph.co.uk)
Bruce66423 writes: Time to cancel all the encouragement of studying STEM subjects, obviously...
The Telegraph is reporting that prominent jihadists "are twice as likely to have studied science at university than subjects related to Islam," citing a new report by the Centre on Religion and Geopolitics. "The report, which analyzed the histories of 100 of the most prominent jihadist leaders of the last three decades, said that despite claiming to be the sole interpreters of Islamic theology, they often had little or no training in the subject." Osama bin Laden went to a secular school and studied economics at college with little formal Islamic training, while the "underpants bomber," who tried to detonate a bomb in a plane over Detroit in 2009, got his degree in mechanical engineering. Of the 100 cases examined, "Around half had attended university, with 57 per cent of them studying science subjects, compared to only 28 per cent studying Islamic subjects."
The Telegraph is reporting that prominent jihadists "are twice as likely to have studied science at university than subjects related to Islam," citing a new report by the Centre on Religion and Geopolitics. "The report, which analyzed the histories of 100 of the most prominent jihadist leaders of the last three decades, said that despite claiming to be the sole interpreters of Islamic theology, they often had little or no training in the subject." Osama bin Laden went to a secular school and studied economics at college with little formal Islamic training, while the "underpants bomber," who tried to detonate a bomb in a plane over Detroit in 2009, got his degree in mechanical engineering. Of the 100 cases examined, "Around half had attended university, with 57 per cent of them studying science subjects, compared to only 28 per cent studying Islamic subjects."
This just in: some completely random and useless data. Coming up next on this slow news day, our anchorman will stand on his head for your amusement.
This will be the sixth time we have submitted the same story over the years and by now we have become very good at it:
https://slashdot.org/index2.pl...
My opinion to this was and still is that Engineers make the better terrorists because they are the only ones with the necessary skills to excel at it.
Art, Literature, Law and even Sharia students simply do not have the know-how nor the analytical mindset to take apart a problem (building standing, people living) and formulate an efficient solution (bomb) to archive the desired end result (panic, destruction and mayhem).
Perhaps if they studied Islam a little more, they'd realize blowing shit up does not constitute religious devotion.
I would wager it's exactly the same reason why so many nerds I went to university with turned into raving, foam-at-the-mouth libertarians:
Wahhabism/Qutbism is yet another simple, crude world view, which makes sense to smart minority kids who have to deal with adversity and petty racism that most Slashdotters don't have to deal with. Never mind the fact that it's wrong.... seeing yourself as a king who is being held down by people you see as culturally and religiously inferior to yourself (and then getting a license to rape and murder at will) has a lot of appeal to impressionable young minds.
And it's not xenophobia to question it (it's definitely not racism, either, as Islamic isn't a race). It's that most people think of Jihadis as being some cave-dwelling illiterate camel-herders halfway across the world, then call me names when I question the vetting process of the people we're letting into our modern, western, civilized nations. We've seen what's happened in Europe, yet it's still cliche amongst the liberals and elites to question an open border policy.
You see, it appears that many fundamentalist Islamics are highly educated, in many cases (as referenced here) in the sciences, and many come from wealthy families. Combine that type of training and means with someone motivated to cause harm and you've got a perfect storm. At least here in the states, people like to compare fundamental Islam with Christian fundamentalists. Forgetting for the moment that Christianity's holy book doesn't call for the extermination of non-believers and infidels, most Christian fundamentalists are poor, very uneducated, and without the means (and in most cases, motivation) to cause any real harm.
This being said, I don't for a second believe that every Muslim wants to blow something up or cause anyone harm. They probably just want to come here to get an education so they can better themselves. I've met them, and most seem like normal people. But it only takes a few suggestible people to cause one hell of a shit-storm. This is why I didn't understand the outrage towards Trump when he simply said we should take the time to make sure the Islamic people we are letting into our countries are not of the "kill-the-non-believer" persuasion. To me, it would be common sense to vet members of a religion that has sworn the destruction of western society into our western countries, but that makes me a "racist" xenophobe. Especially when the majority of Muslims that enter the U.S. in particular are military-age men here to attend our universities and earn advanced STEM degrees.
But I digress, my point is when you live in country where it is illegal to NOT swear allegiance to Allah, even the rich, educated, jetsetting types that we in the western world equate with liberalism and atheism/agnoticism have the potential to be fundamentalist nutcases. And this is something that concerns me, whether it's fashionable or politically correct to do so.
Empiric evidence differs. Just like huge intimidating bodybuilder who turn out to be very nice guys, I have more confidence in a gun carrying republican than a sneaky slim frustrated liberals...
We're just fed up to compromise over, and over, and over, with mindless crybaby liberals...
If you're hellbent on blowing shit up, studying religion in college is useless. That's why you go for the scientific stuff instead. They don't teach you chemistry or offensive network penetration in a class about the Koran.
Seems like this is being posed as a counter-intuitive idea, but it really makes perfect sense.
Go on, read the books.
Like this one?
https://qzprod.files.wordpress...
You are welcome on my lawn.
What does that have to do with the GP's point? Answer them, answer the point they were making about lack of opportunity. They are absolutely correct in that assertion.
It's well understood why young, educated Muslims get radicalized. They know enough to see that the deck is stacked against them and all that is on offer is a life of mediocrity, especially in certain parts of the US and UK. Of course that's the same for most people, but the difference is that they experience some bigotry that makes it much easier for recruiters to radicalize them.
Whiney conservatives complain that it's not their fault if people decide to blow themselves up, trying to simplify the problem down to "it's those crazy idiots, and the crybaby liberals who aren't hard enough on them", when it's just a little more complicated.
That's why we keep failing to address the problem.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Let's see where to start.
They are for denying women birth control, but not men viagra. They are for forcing invasive and unnecessary procedures on women in the name of "medical care" but it's really just religion. They gerrymander districts significantly more than most Dem states, often to the detriment of the poor. They restrict voting to felons who have already served their time, which disproportionately affects people of color. They routinely "accidentally" purge voter rolls almost all of which end up being Democratic voters or people of color. This is all as a group.