MPACUK have reiterated their claim that all Islamic terrorism stems from our foreign policy. In fact, they claim that only the blind cannot see it. And, once again, this is simply not true; MPACUK and most of the Muslim leadership are conflating two issues.
The Iraq war has certainly served to politicise British Muslims. They are far more aware of events around the world and want to do something about it. However, politicised Muslims do not carry out terror attacks and aim to kill non-Muslims, radicalised Muslims do.
The terrorists themselves produce videos stating that they die for Allah, that they will enter heaven, that their religion compels them to act. The only people who cannot see that at the root of Islamic terrorism is a version of Islam are the people who do not want to see it.
This insistence that Islamic terror is because of foreign policy makes it impossible for Muslims to oppose it. By convincing themselves that terrorism is a result of foreign policy opposing it becomes opposing opposition to foreign policy, and they can't do that.
Now, while MPACUK and the British Muslim leadership and the liberals shout that it's foreign policy, Hamas have stated clearly today that it's an ideology based on religion. Ahmed Youssef, an aide to Ismail Haniyeh, has said this clearly in discussion over Alan Johnston's kidnapping. The Scotsman reports:
"It's on the way to being resolved. It's being addressed religiously and ideologically," he said, but would not say whether he expected Mr Johnston to be released in days or weeks.
Mr Youssef said negotiators were trying to convince the kidnappers that the extremist Islamic ideology they used to justify holding westerners is incorrect.
Here we have an Islamic extremist himself telling us that this terrorism is the result of an ideology based on Islam. Any questions?