The hijackers were generally scions of well-to-do middle-class and better families, most with university degrees.

Sometimes, one of the ‘root causes’ is that certain people are evil. I know that seems simplistic but consider this:

Was the root cause of the Holocaust the Treaty of Versailles? No. It may have been a contributing factor to (and hence root cause of) the second world war, but not to the Holocaust.

The root cause of the Holocaust was the fact that Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime were monstrously evil.

I certainly agree with your line about a young man who thinks he has nothing left to lose. And that’s a difference (often to men’s detriment) between men and women.

-wolfe

I also think it is a truism that the one of the most dangerous beings on the face of the planet is a young man who thinks he has nothing left to lose, wherever he is on the planet. I understand that is but one aspect of the problems we are now facing; I do think it is a very important one, though. To address these kinds of things, though, takes longer-term policy and continuity, which given our system of government is hard to achieve. Not that I want the alternative. Staying the course doesn’t look all that good to me right now. Basically, though, I think we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t, now. It’s a mess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom

One appears to be racial in nature, where the majority culture (anglo-saxon) exhibited racism against a minority, the minority being youths of Middle Eastern appearance (see Cronulla riots). There is a word for this type of racism, pognomy? something like that, I can’t think of it right now.

The other two were triggered by police chases resulting in the deaths of the chased youth. See Redfern riots, see Macquarie Fields riots. Both youths came from predominantly poor neighbourhoods but both deaths appear to be accidents, though the communities have perceived them as deliberate.

One youth was impaled on a fence after fleeing police on his bicycle. The other lost control of his car. Both deaths were tragic.

But even that’s rather interesting. One shouldn’t have to ‘infer’ from a brief news story. Inferences drawn from a novel are great, or analysis of a situation, or a column. But a brief, raw news story shouldn’t leave one inferring what’s meant.On the ‘05 riots in Paris and elsewhere. Occasionally the term ‘ethnic youth’ or some such was used. Rarely ‘North African’ or Algerian heritage.

On your point “the grievances were concerning economic and assimilation issues. The assimilation angle seemed to be coming from a perspective that the youths felt shut out, not that they were not trying to assimilate”.

There’s certainly some truth to that. The banlieus [yes, I know the French is banlieue] can be fairly miserable, soulless places. There was a general sense in Europe that people would be imported almost as ‘guest workers’ to do some dirty jobs, and that they’d be segregated and isolated.

Moreover, along the root cause lines, these are powerful welfare states (France especially) with highly restrictive employment laws that tend to raise unemployment. A generation sitting on welfare… well, look at how well that worked out in Ireland. Or in America’s inner cities.

But that doesn’t excuse rioting, arson or murder.

I do see a troubling propensity on the part of many ‘mainstream’ Muslims and some on the left to make excuses for this sort of behavior, citing ‘root causes’.

I think that the media is replete with such excuses.

As for bias in the media? Definitely, though mostly in my view to the left. I’m not sure if Fox News’ News coverage is that biased. I don’t generally perceive it to be, but I’d certainly agree that a lot of their commentary is highly biased to the right. While Hannity is nominally balanced by Colmes, one has only to watch the show to see who’s in the driver’s seat.

NB- I quite honestly don’t watch enough TV news to be able to speak with authority on whether or not Fox is biased, and of course I’m biased to the right, so might inadvertently fail to be entirely objective.

I agree wholeheartedly with your comments on the ‘dumbing down’ of news. I’m not sure which channel is the worst, though Fox (regular, not the cable news channel) might win the contest there.

Newspaper news isn’t quite as bad… and that’s where I get most of my news. I think the WaPo (somewhat left) and the Wall Street Journal (left wing news, right wing editorial page) are both pretty good. The Guardian (UK) is a good left-wing paper. The Times and the Telegraph (UK) are good right-wing ones. Globe and Mail (Canada; centrist/left) and National Post (Canada, centrist/right) are decent. The Economist (centrist?) is an outstanding publication in my view. (UK ‘Newspaper’ in weekly magazine format).

I used to read Le Figaro (Paris), but have found it to be too biased and too close to an odiously corrupt nominally conservative French government. If the socialists take over in France I might resume reading it. Who knows. My French could use the practice.

I don’t recommend Paris Match. Too biased, on the left.

-wolfe