[jaguar]

I believe that. You've consistently displayed more concern for the interaction of political and mercantile forces than for people.

I'm not sure if that's meant to be a condemnation or merely an observation but yes. I think the best way to look after people is to look at what the threats are and deal with them, not get tied up in irrelevent emotive arguments.

it still points to Islam.

But here's where semantics become important. Is Islam the driving force, or is Islam merely the outlet for that force. All extreme movements work by channelling hatred and anger at something, I honestly don't see too much difference, structural issues aside, between the nazi movement and Islamic fascism. Both work by taking a whole lot of pissed off people and giving them targets and justifications. Lots of varied reasons to be pissed, from personal to geopolitical, one joining force. Lots of these 'linked to al-queda' groups are linked by no more than common ideology. While I firmly believe if you remove the sources of that anger, many and varied as they are, the resulting movement will die all by itself. If however, you think that Islam itself is the force, look at it from a different perspective - why is this form is Islam suddenly so successful?

Also, there has been a hue and cry, many influential Muslim figures have waded in, Al Jazeera has pundits who condemn attacks, hell Hamas attacked the kidnappers of the French journalists. Just because it doesn't make the western and particularly the American media doesn't mean it doesn't happen. 'Moderate cleric condemns attacks as against Islam' just doesn't make a good headline doesn't it. I've been to Finsbry Park, that mosque famous for it's 'terrorists', there is a big campaign going on, funded entirely by donations from goers to educate the public about Islam by sending info packs to every public library in the country.