"Last summer the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC), in conjunction with the polling company YouGov, released a survey of Muslim student opinion in the UK. Forty per cent of Muslim students polled supported the introduction of sharia into British law for Muslims; a third supported the introduction of a worldwide caliphate instituted in accordance with sharia; and a third believed that killing in the name of their religion could be justified. This is the sea in which Muslim students who go on to carry out acts of terror are able to swim. But instead of engaging with the problem, Bill Rammell, the Minister for Higher Education, attacked the poll for finding out these things and declared that the problem of radicalism on campus was in fact "serious, but not widespread". It is just one example of a government that cannot make the moral distinction between firefighter and fire."
I'll repeat that -
"Forty per cent of Muslim students polled supported the introduction of sharia into British law for Muslims; a third supported the introduction of a worldwide caliphate instituted in accordance with sharia; and a third believed that killing in the name of their religion could be justified."
So the next time someone says it's a small majority do feel free to quote those figures back to them.
Here's another extract:
"The Iranian government recently revealed that it was in talks with British Islamic studies departments – the same ones that the Government has described as a vital component of its counter-terrorism policy – in order to "train and educate experts on Islam". So now the Iranian regime, the world's largest sponsor of Islamic terror, is funding the very institutions the UK Government says are part of the means of stopping that terror."
So it's not just Pakistani "students" and Saudi Arabian funded courses, now we have Iranian money. Just one question; how stupid and craven are our leaders and those who run our education system?
While it is one thing to slate the reporting of this poll, I do query as to the nature of the questions themselves. In a discussion on Polls on Saturday on You & Yours they reported that 1 in 3 men think fidelity is overrated. This was used to imply one in three men condone infidelity in their relationships. The point that it may also mean they condone their own infidelity but not that of their partner is completely missed, making the results ambiguous and invaid.
ReplyDeleteJust as the government used statistics spin to justify legislature is abominable, so is using "polls" to provide evidence of terrorist support based on religious views.
Polls themselves are no more acurate than IQ tests and shouldn't be used as evidence of anything.
Please do show me where the ambiguity is in "Forty per cent of Muslim students polled supported the introduction of sharia into British law for Muslims; a third supported the introduction of a worldwide caliphate instituted in accordance with sharia; and a third believed that killing in the name of their religion could be justified."
ReplyDeleteThe use of a survey to measure the likelihood of terrorism is a misuse of inappropriate medium. The conclusions from the survey are so two dimensional it might as well be asking equally important questions such as "which My Little Pony are you?"
ReplyDeleteOf course people who have grown up under Sharia would like to see Sharia put in place; it makes sense to them. Western law is still adjusting to a contrast of sensetive, racial matters and an overuse of racism as a cultural lacuna. It is bound to have an uncomfortable fit in comparison. In spite of this, the survey quite correctly points out "...For Muslims."
Political and religious killing is always justified by someone. The survey's conclusion has taken from this that 30% of participants would be happy to kill in cold blood. The participants probably assumed it meant to kill in the name of a good cause. This doesn't mean they've come to the country strapped up with explosives and if they have they probably wouldn't have completed the survey.
"a third believed that killing in the name of their religion could be justified" Stop trying to excuse the inexcusable. Do you believe that a third of Christians or a third of Jews or a third of Hindus - in the UK - would say they believe that?
ReplyDelete