PDA

View Full Version : The Muslim Council of Britain is worried....



Bluebird
22-07-2005, 17:42
In the wake of the recent bombings, in London, the Muslim leaders are worried, that the police now have a "shoot to kill policy."

They should be! There are fanatic elements among them that have a "bomb to kill" policy...Moreover, law abiding, peacful, civilians - going about their everday lives/routines.

A bullet, unlike a bomb, does not kill several people in one go - indiscrminately. The (Muslim leaders) leaders should be fully cooperating with the relevant authorities, and taking steps to try to weed out these radicals and hand them over to the police.

I fear that there will be revenge attacks, on the Muslim communities and their places of meeting; before long - especially if these fanatics are not winkled out and are not brought to heel; before they can do further damage and cause loss of life.

This is, however, much easier said than done, of course, and I fear for what the future can and could bring. We have and are facing - not just in the UK, a serious situation.

We had the IRA, in the UK, bombing camaigne during the 70's and 80's. But, the IRA would usually phone someone, somewhere, and say that you've got a bomb, in the area - best evacuate a bit sharpish.

Here we've a new type of terror...No warning, and no idea, of where or how or when, it could happen.

The British police usually use great restraint, when it comes to the use of firearms, and are indeed world famous for it too. However, in the days of hightened security, nerves, and terror, on the streets - if a person fails to stop (and even attempt to run off), when challenged, by an officer of the law; then that person is surely inviting a bullet or two.

Bels
22-07-2005, 21:50
Much concern in this subject, watching the news a lot. I think at last the moderate Muslims have got the message, instead of British government , you have a problem, what you going to about it for us, No , the moderate muslims also have a problem, the extremists are damaging your name, its time to report to the police of any claims of extremist talk, of gloryfying terrorism, of any forms of suspicion in regards to terrorism. Support your country and your faith. Report anyone who may have been involved in this recent offense

trebor
22-07-2005, 23:18
While i agree with all that has been mentioned above, Britain has not helped itself in the past with a policy allowing extremists to shelter there.
Several Chechens wanted by the Russian government and many known muslim fanatics are currently residing in the UK.
Time to kick these ar*seholes out to face the authorities in their home countries.

Bels
23-07-2005, 00:37
Totally agreed, and it's time that Russia got a lot closer in relations with England. I think the problem lies with English laws, which they are trying to change. USA also has this problem with UK. I was personally shocked for example when USA released some criminals sent to UK, as they had no law to hold them. UK must get tougher

J.D.
23-07-2005, 00:54
so who is guitry >>? askdk yoursorlf why no frudts wored coungty has and extraodaiton tresa;y with rjussya;l

Bels
23-07-2005, 01:25
so who is guitry >>? askdk yoursorlf why no frudts wored coungty has and extraodaiton tresa;y with rjussya;l

I am concerned, you are some one who has many posts in expat.ru and you are American looking at your profile, yet you have written like some one who has portrayed as writing English in a second language, very poorly.

I can understand "Who is guilty" Obviously the terrorists who have no concern for nationality or religion in who they kill. Infact they appear to be brain washed in believing they are doing good in destroying their own good life in the process

I can't understand the rest, perhaps someone else can translate it for me.

tbill
23-07-2005, 01:43
From an editorial in the Financial Times (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/e81df2ee-f236-11d9-8e69-00000e2511c8.html) (Requires registration)


America's Muslims failed to rise up to their citizenship responsibilities after the September 11 attacks, choosing instead to play the role of aggrieved, helpless victims. Their voices in America's body politic are now marginalised as a result. Britain's Muslims have an opportunity to set an important example by elevating the duties of citizenship above fears of looming civil rights violations.

He then gives the following suggestions to help isolate extremists which I think would work in the US and UK:


1) Forbid the use of mosques and other religious institutions to preach bigotry and hatred.

2) Open Islamic charities to greater scrutiny; limit foreign donations to 10% of operating budgets and ensure that all domestic donations come from transparent and legal income sources.

3) Form local community watch organizations to cooperate with authorities against extremists and terrorists.

Non-Muslims should realize that moderates are afraid for their lives if they speak out. We should be willing to protect them. Also, we have to stop pussyfooting around with gov'ts in the ME that support radicals in our midst. The Saudi's fund many Mosques in the US, I am not sure ab9out the UK, and they demand that these Mosques follow the hardline Wahhabi sect. They should not be able to fund Imams who preach violence.

Bels
23-07-2005, 02:20
All British Musims now have a duty to inform the police of any suspicion, radical movements, any form of terrorist glorification involved. Let us see the Muslims doing something. If the fear for there lives . tell the official in confidense, there names and identity will be safe

Gabster
23-07-2005, 02:20
I can't understand the rest, perhaps someone else can translate it for me.

I think it was "So who is guilty? Ask yourself why no first world country has an extradition treaty with Russia." That was a nice little challenge...a little like Esperanto mixed with pig latin and English! :)

And usually his posts are pretty clear; perhaps this time he was posting from his cell phone or Palm, he'd injured his hands and was typing with a stylus held in his teeth, gritted tightly of course...or he was in front of the computer, but couldn't put down the drink, or get the girl off his lap, as the case may be. The possibilities abound. :rolleyes:

(Assuming J.D. is a he, of course.)

Bels
23-07-2005, 02:27
OK, let us go for it, why not. Let us start with better relations with UK and Russia. It is important I believe.

Gabster
23-07-2005, 02:41
Bels--considering the fact that you call yourself an EFL Teacher and have taken J.D. to task for HIS English writing skills--perhaps you should edit your own postings a little more, because they're not well-written, either. Cheers.

Braders
23-07-2005, 09:38
I must admit it sent a chill through my heart when i read the report on SKY that they cornered a guy on the tube and he bent/lay down and 1 officer put 5 bullets into him, whether he spread his arms out wide was of minor relevance (he could have had a detonator in one of his hands).

When faced with these situations after recent events, it's sad to say but i know what i would have to do if i knew at any moment a suspect could trigger a device.

I was livid the other day when i watched SKY news and a radical cleric was giving an interview and he refused to condemn the bombings even when asked 4 times by Kay Burley, he had little or no sympathy and was as cold as a fish. One person emailed SKY and their thoughts couldn't have been more accurate.

'If this person acts like this on LIVE national TV, i shudder to think what he says behind closed doors'

The police should have been waiting outside, taken him to the airport and put him on a plane to wherever his fanatical ideals are more suited. In reality that would never happen, because Britian has been soft for too long and they tend do to everything by the book, which is good, however when national security is threatened you take the hardline approach in my eyes. It doesn't matter what nationality/race/religion you are.

In my eyes it's time Britain got tough, we're famous for being the soft touch in Europe, letting every Man and his wife/kids/brother/sister/uncle/aunty/dog/cat into the country.

trebor
23-07-2005, 11:09
Recently agreements have been reached with a couple of North African countries to send some extremist back.
The problem in the past has been even when the authorities have know these individuals have been inciting violence they hide behind our very liberal laws that don't allow people to be repatriated because they might be tortured ect.
Those governments have now guaranteed their human rights will be respected and thay will face trial at home.
At least they wont be in Britain.

DPG
23-07-2005, 11:21
a radical cleric was giving an interview and he refused to condemn the bombings even when asked 4 times

It sickens me that this is the norm rather than the exception. Indeed, even when they do partially condemn the actions in question, the sentence usually immediately continues with a phrase from the terrorist-apologist handbook such as "if there were no war in Iraq" or "had the UK not participated in Afganistan". Condemnation of terrorism should be unconditional, and if there are people on UK soil who fail to immediately and wholly condemn it, they should not have the right to remain on British soil.

It angered me to read a letter from a British Muslim in the Telegraph the day after the first wave of attacks that read something like (cannot find the link unfortunately)
"We British Muslims are now scared of reprisals from some elements of the population. Of course we realise that the vast majority of the British people are moderates and it is only a few who may choose to take such action..." Perhaps we are too moderate - after all, we are the ones who allowed the people who killed over 50 innocent commuters to live and work in our country.


letting every Man and his wife/kids/brother/sister/uncle/aunty/dog/cat into the country.

I agree - I am of the opinion that if anyone is known to be linked with terrorism, or indeed proved to be involved with some terrorist action, not only should they be deported immediately, but their entire family (regardless of how extended it is) should be too.

Something needs to be done to make these communities realise that if these incidents occur (or are planned) and no one does anything to attempt their prevention, the consequences will be negative not only for the person who built/transported/detonated the device or the people who preach hatred/extremism or anything else at odds with the British way of life but for those for whom they care about as well.

Furthermore, I think Britain needs to take a break from the leftist pussy-footing around that is political correctness and start having the guts to label these people as "Muslim or Islamic terrorists". When the IRA were blowing up London with frightening regularity, we had no problems labelling them as "Irish Terrorists".

It seems that when religion is involved people are afraid to say what everyone knows. This IS Islamic/Muslim terror - the people who planned and carried out the events in London in the last two weeks were not Christians, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists or Agnostics...

Bluebird
23-07-2005, 13:08
[QUOTE=DPG]It angered me to read a letter from a British Muslim in the Telegraph the day after the first wave of attacks that read something like (cannot find the link unfortunately) Perhaps we are too moderate - after all, we are the ones who allowed the people who killed over 50 innocent commuters to live and work in our country.

I whole heartedly agree with that sentiment - that their families, regardless of how extended they might be; should also be deported too. That is, if anyone of their members (should be it proved beyond reasonable doubt); that any member of their family has been involved in any form terror activity, in the UK - should be sent back to whence they came from.

About that Sky, interview...Why on earth are we giving these people air time anyway? The only air time I'd give them, is with a rocket stuffed somewhere, where the son doesn't shine. He should've been detained, for questioning, immediatly after the show.

These people came to our lands (The UK and America) to enjoy a better life and freedom, and this is the thanks we get - for giving them just that. And, and, we rolled out the welcome mats for them too.

This would send a very strong signal, that such actions will not be tolerated without far-reaching consequences.

That being the case, then perhaps they should pay more attention as to what their offspring are up to, and ask more exacting questions about their travel plans, and reasons for going there, in the first place.

We also harbour Chechen terrorist leaders - with infinate links going all over the show and who knows where....??? And, as we always do - give them asylum, at the drop of a hat, what kind of signal, does that give to others', I wonder?

Vladimir Putin's correct, counter action needs to be universal and information shared. And, if a persons on the wanted list, in Russia (for terrorist activities) then he/she must be extradited and sent back, to face the music here.

Personally let's cut the crap on this political correctness gambit, and also send Vansessa Redgrave on a fact finding tour of duty, in some hot spot (say Chechnaya), whilst we're at it.

J.D.
23-07-2005, 13:36
I think it was "So who is guilty? Ask yourself why no first world country has an extradition treaty with Russia." That was a nice little challenge...a little like Esperanto mixed with pig latin and English! :)

And usually his posts are pretty clear; perhaps this time he was posting from his cell phone or Palm, he'd injured his hands and was typing with a stylus held in his teeth, gritted tightly of course...or he was in front of the computer, but couldn't put down the drink, or get the girl off his lap, as the case may be. The possibilities abound. :rolleyes:

(Assuming J.D. is a he, of course.)

Excellent job deciphering, Gabster. I couldn't have done better myself.
Sorry for the poor, uhh, grammar. My hand was fine but I believe my brain was slightly damaged from the Albion. Feeling much better now thank you.

I believe my point was that Russia is always demanding that some person be extradited to Russia when they know that no treaty exists to do this. And the main reason no treaty exists for this is because first world countries do not approve of the Russian legal system. So Russia could help the whole matter by cleaning their own act up a bit.

and yes, J.D. is a he.

trebor
23-07-2005, 13:55
................ And the main reason no treaty exists for this is because first world countries do not approve of the Russian legal system. So Russia could help the whole matter by cleaning their own act up a bit......

Radical Muslim clerics have escaped justice in their own countries to setup in Britain and preach Jihad and incite terrorist acts.
Why is it our concern if their legal systems are less than favourable for them back home?

DPG
23-07-2005, 13:57
I for one would be GLAD if one of these people were sent back to a 'less than favourable' legal/political system, with the act of doing so, effectively signing their death warrant...

J.D.
23-07-2005, 16:13
Right or wrong the good guys in this movie will not extradite or even deport the worst of the bad guys if we don't think that they will get a fair trail where they are going.

Bluebird
23-07-2005, 16:44
Radical Muslim clerics have escaped justice in their own countries to setup in Britain and preach Jihad and incite terrorist acts.
Why is it our concern if their legal systems are less than favourable for them back home?Agreed, and it's for those very reasons they came to roost in our country...

If they incite terror, in the land that's given them freedom, business opportunities, and the like thereof - they and their families must be ordered out, and their assets put up for auction, by the state.

Gabster
23-07-2005, 17:31
Excellent job deciphering, Gabster. I couldn't have done better myself.
Sorry for the poor, uhh, grammar. My hand was fine but I believe my brain was slightly damaged from the Albion. Feeling much better now thank you.
Any time...it wasn't poor grammar, just impaired typing :)

And I agree...without the proper mechanisms in place to facilitiate matters--extradition treaties being one of those mechanisms--"international law" and "international justice" are oxymorons.

trebor
23-07-2005, 20:14
Agreed, and it's for those very reasons they came to roost in our country...

If they incite terror, in the land that's given them freedom, business opportunities, and the like thereof - they and their families must be ordered out, and their assets put up for auction, by the state.

Assets?
1 pair of beard clippers
2 pairs of long white robes
1 grubby pray mat.
a brand new rucksack, not yet used.
and a "Daily Rover" underground pass. :)

trebor
23-07-2005, 20:18
Right or wrong the good guys in this movie will not extradite or even deport the worst of the bad guys if we don't think that they will get a fair trail where they are going.

That's not exactly true.
Measures are already underway to send people back to North African countries for inciting hatred.

Bluebird
23-07-2005, 20:31
Assets?
1 pair of beard clippers
2 pairs of long white robes
1 grubby pray mat.
a brand new rucksack, not yet used.
and a "Daily Rover" underground pass. :)Oh, not much, is it? So where do they get their money from, for living - oh and their bomb-making chemistry sets then....??? Don't tell me....The "Real British" taxpayer...??? :cussing:

Bluebird
23-07-2005, 20:34
That's not exactly true.
Measures are already underway to send people back to North African countries for inciting hatred.Haven't heard of that one....Till now, that is....

trebor
23-07-2005, 22:06
Haven't heard of that one....Till now, that is....

Announced last week.
At the sake of repeating myself. Agreements have been reached with several N.African countries. In return for quaranteeing the saftey of certain muslim clerics Britain can bypass their defense of appealing against any deportation on the grounds that they will be persecuted.

trebor
23-07-2005, 22:12
Oh, not much, is it? So where do they get their money from, for living - oh and their bomb-making chemistry sets then....??? Don't tell me....The "Real British" taxpayer...??? :cussing:

I imagine there are four irrate terrorists demanding their money back.
The bombs never went off! :)

koba65
24-07-2005, 04:48
I don't buy this whole "moderate" Muslim argument. If a Muslim is moderate he has to deny what is written in the Quran. Perhaps a better term is a "not-completely practicing Muslim." Here's what a leading former Muslim author (Dr. Ali Sina) says about moderate Muslims:

"What is the difference between a moderate Muslim and a terrorist Muslim? As a former Muslim myself, my long and careful analysis leads me to the conclusion that the only difference is the latter wants to start the jihad against the infidels now, while the former thinks it is better to wait until the Muslims are strong and then attack. The difference is in the form not the substance. Their only disagreement is when and how the jihad against the infidels should take place. Otherwise, all the Muslims, whether moderate or extremists, belive in the same book. That book calls for waging war against the non-Muslims until they are subdued and humilated."

I don't want to come off as an anti-Muslim inciter, BUT, if you look at the Quran and what it says about non-Muslims (non-believers) you cannot help but deny that this is any theology of peace. Furthermore, if a "new" religion suddenly appeared using the same theology and wording as used in the Quran it would be whole-heartedly denounced and, more than in likely, some countries would take measures to ban said hypothetical religion due to its philosophy of hate.

Let's look at some interesting Quran verses (and keep in mind, if you are a practicing Muslim then you would believe and follow such dictates):

"Allah said to them: Die" - The Quran, Surah 2:243

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizyah (poll tax) with willing submission , and feel themselves subdued" The Quran, Surah 9:29

"Not equal are those Believers who sit (at home) and receive not hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons and to those who sit (at home)." The Quran, Surah 4:95

"..instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers... ... smite above their necks" The Quran, Surah 8:12

"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you..... ... And slay them wherever ye catch them." The Quran, Surah 2:190, 191

"They do baspheme who say: Allah is Christ the son of Mary." The Quran, Surah 5:72

"They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity. For these is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them." Surah 5:73

"When ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks... [I]f it had been Allah's Will, he could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself). But (He lets you fight) in order to test you... [T]hose who are slaim in the way of Allah -- He will never let their deeds be lost. Soon will He guide them and improve their condition, and admit them to the Garden which He has announced for them. Surah 47:4

"If a wound hath touched you, be sure a similar wound hath touched the others. Such days (of varying fortunes) we give to men and men by turns that Allah may know those that believe, and that He may take to Himself from your ranks Martyr-witnesses (to Truth).... Allah's object also is to purge those that are true in Faith and to deprive of blessing those that resist Faith. Did ye think that ye would enter Heaven without Allah testing those of you who fought hard (in His Cause) and remained steadfast? Ye did indeed wish for Death before ye met it: Now ye have seen it with your own eyes (and ye flinch!). Surah 3:140-143

"Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods. For theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise). They fight in His cause, and slay and are slain. Surah 9:111

"To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory -- soon we shave give him a reward of great (value). Surah 4:74

I'd like to hear, see, read how these are not statements of violence to be meted out on non-believers. I'd also like to see the madrassas and private Islamic schools throughout the world (US, Canada, UK, Germany, Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, etc) stop teaching that the Jews are worthy only of a horrible death and those who help them the same. If a Catholic, Baptist, Jew, Buddhist, etc., preached such they would be shouted down and ostracized. It's time for some equality.

PHolmes
24-07-2005, 05:04
During 1990 there was a huge skinhead problem in Northern West USA in which the skinhead which looked like punks were recruiting the punks. They were goiing in gangs in the middle of the night and beating minorities. The whole punk movement got blamed. Clubs got shut down. Shows cancelled and generally public opinion was lower than normal. Bunch of punks got together and became SHARPS or Skinhead against racial prejudice. They went out informed police of the real skinhead activities. They also went bashed the skinheads physically. Skinheads did not know who was a fellow or a skinhead. It basically broke the racial activities of the Skinheads in USA. In turn, Clubs and gigs were reopened and more freedom was given to the punks.

koba65
24-07-2005, 05:29
I remember the skinhead problem -the punks solved that well, but unfortunately in the case of radical islam you have revered "clerics" fomenting hate by passing their interpretations of religious edicts contained in the Quran to inspire a younger generation that killing others and themselves will set them on a higher ground in Allah's heaven. And, the most frustrating for me is that we've become so afraid of offending others that we fear speaking out because we might be labeled racist or prejudiced against another religion. Ludicrous - hate speech is hate speech regardless of one's religion, race, ethnic group, sexual preference, etc. Can you imagine the outrage that would accompany a sitting Pope putting a death threat on the author of an anti-Catholic book? Or, Jerry Falwell calling for Muslims or Jews to be eradicated because they did not believe in his religion? Hell, Falwell can't even call someone immoral without getting lambasted. As far as I'm concerned, it's time for Muslims, if they really want to be respected and accepted in the "community" to start taking action against these purveyors of hate and death. Enough of the "we condemn such actions BUT blah blah Israel, blah blah Iraq, blah blah Palestine." It's time for more them to do more than just make empty statements of condemnation. They know who the radical clerics are, they know where the mosques that support radicals are, they know where they meet, they know how they think. You cannot, cannot, conduct such terrorist activities without the assistance of the communities in which you reside. That assistance can be something as trivial as looking the other way at suspicious activities. It's time for the Muslim community to step up to the plate. And, those who do or want to do so should enjoy the full support of the total community.

PHolmes
24-07-2005, 05:39
Punks in this case would be moderates and Skinheads are the radicals.
Everyone thought being a punk was the lowest and it was caused by violent racist skinheads who hide behind the punks. So the punks not only reported skinheads, they went after them.

The skinheads would have their "preachers" also. They would invite to a party with a couple of cool guys and nice looking women. They would through out racist comments(you know the usual stereotype comments) and see your reaction at the party. You get suckie face with a cute girl and you would be invited to another party with more people and the comments are more harsh. The leaders knew who to go after. Unemployed and disenfranchised kids who are seeking purpose and meaning. For many of the kids, it was the first time they belong and felt like a family. They felt they could trust the leader and he was always there for them. It is the first time they were truly motivated and had purpose and they had a "family". Also they had a place to blame the minorities for all their problems and why they were not successful. They were told they were superior.

It is really scary seeing these guys get programmed. I was invited to these parties and I went once (not knowing). A little side racist conversation and group think and next thing you see the aryan tattoo .

J.D.
24-07-2005, 09:28
I don't know if Muslim(ism) is a fundamental threat to the rest of the world or not. But the idea that it is fundamentaly bad certainly wasn't well presented at the start of this thread. A lot of short verses given out of context. Many of them were clearly talking about killing during a war or when being attacked.
I would say that Catholocism had it's day as the prime force in eradicating the competition and the protestants gave it a somewhat lesser try after that.
Even if this is the true goal of Muslim(ism) I'm not ready to go out and exterminate all Muslims in a pre-emptive strike because most people who claim a particular religion don't really know shit about it; Muslims, Jews, Christians, whatever.

trebor
24-07-2005, 10:02
I don't buy this whole "moderate" Muslim argument. If a Muslim is moderate he has to deny what is written in the Quran........

The same could be said of Christians. In the bible, the old testament is full of the same rhetoric.

CaveMan
24-07-2005, 10:34
I think we are talking about a small minority of fundemental's here..I believe it is wrong to generalise the whole religion (which ever religion we are talking) as 'Fundementals'.


Reading other threads currently running, general consensus I see, is we are talking about poorly paid 'Muslims', and these people can be bought using the book, promises of after life and of course cash to him/her or family.

This was the case in Turkey few years back, in general elections where current ruling party has bought votes in rural, generally low paid areas by giving them full shopping bags, cash and a promise of building more mosques !! And guess what? they won....

As these people are brainwashed mainly using the book, there is not much a modern society can do, apart from proper intelligence, information gathering and stopping these so called 'Matryies' in their tracks, before they push the button. So far intelligence in many countries has failed miserably, mainly I believe they didn't see this as a major thread, which they do now.

My two cents.....

J.D.
24-07-2005, 10:43
The same could be said of Christians. In the bible, the old testament is full of the same rhetoric.
I don't think there were any Christians in the old testament. Maybe you're talking about Jews.

doogiecb
24-07-2005, 11:50
I will sound like a simpleton here, but just like everything in life the shooting of the alleged suicide bomber will either quickly be forgotten as a casualty trying to defend the innocent or be used as a tool to incite more muslims to join the jihad .... it all depends on from what perspective you have obtained from personal experiences so far.

I think that this one incident will blow over, a few muslims who were leaning towards radicalism may now have enough cause ... but my fear is that if there are several more shootings of what becomes "percieved" to be innocent muslims or vigilante violence against muslims then those radical muslims will have more small pieces of evidence to twist & exagerate about how the west hates all muslims so everyone should join the jihad.

I guess I'm not making a point on the past shooting other than it should be looked at from the big picture, when a terrorist commits such a terrible act they are asking for the victims to "overreact" with the hope that it will help them in their recruiting efforts of other muslims .... Jihad is viewed as a long term war.

Just sharing my concern for what I hope does not happen.

trebor
24-07-2005, 16:09
I don't think there were any Christians in the old testament. Maybe you're talking about Jews.

Smart answer JD but you didn't quite think it through did you?
Who reads the bible?

J.D.
24-07-2005, 17:49
Smart answer JD but you didn't quite think it through did you?
Who reads the bible?

You didn't read my previous post. Most people who claim membership in a religion are not too bright so
1. if your "Christians" do read it they probably don't understand it
1.B. if they did understand it they would not adhere to it, being as they are Christians they're not suppose to
2. I doubt that most self-professing christians read it

but it's all beside the point. The point being that religion is often just another form of nationalism. And I mean nationalism in the most negative conotation.

koba65
24-07-2005, 18:26
I don't know if Muslim(ism) is a fundamental threat to the rest of the world or not. But the idea that it is fundamentaly bad certainly wasn't well presented at the start of this thread. A lot of short verses given out of context. Many of them were clearly talking about killing during a war or when being attacked.
I would say that Catholocism had it's day as the prime force in eradicating the competition and the protestants gave it a somewhat lesser try after that.
Even if this is the true goal of Muslim(ism) I'm not ready to go out and exterminate all Muslims in a pre-emptive strike because most people who claim a particular religion don't really know shit about it; Muslims, Jews, Christians, whatever.

Not taken out of context - see, that's the problem. There's a basic misunderstanding that these are verses to do solely with war - HOWEVER, according to the Quran, Islam is in a state of war as long as other religions exist. If you take the premise that the verses were written only to be used when in a state of "war" then how do you explain the verses that say blasphemers (those who do not follow Islam) shall be smited? In the Bible, it says "Thou Shall Not Kill" and goes on to talk about how one can find his/her way into heaven - the tenants in the Bible are that every believer should treat their fellow human beings with respect and do onto them as they would have done to themselves. So, true believers in these tenants would go out of their way to follow them. In the Quran it's smite, punish, overcome, conquer - so what should true followers of Islam do?

P.S. Nobody (at least I'm not) is saying go kill Muslims.

Trebor - Old Testament. Then JC came down, a New Testament was written, which, if I'm not wrong, the vast majority of Christians follow today.

koba65
24-07-2005, 18:48
I think we are talking about a small minority of fundemental's here..I believe it is wrong to generalise the whole religion (which ever religion we are talking) as 'Fundementals'.


Reading other threads currently running, general consensus I see, is we are talking about poorly paid 'Muslims', and these people can be bought using the book, promises of after life and of course cash to him/her or family.

This was the case in Turkey few years back, in general elections where current ruling party has bought votes in rural, generally low paid areas by giving them full shopping bags, cash and a promise of building more mosques !! And guess what? they won....

As these people are brainwashed mainly using the book, there is not much a modern society can do, apart from proper intelligence, information gathering and stopping these so called 'Matryies' in their tracks, before they push the button. So far intelligence in many countries has failed miserably, mainly I believe they didn't see this as a major thread, which they do now.

My two cents.....


That would be true if the new crop of Terrorists were from "poor" families. It appears the vast majority of them are from, at a minimum, middle class families. That's why there is so much concern about their ideology. To be able to recruit poor, desparate, oppressed (such as in Palestine) is one thing, but when you can get middle cl**** college educated men (and women) to "matyr" themselves for a cause it's a bit more worrying. It speaks to certain conditions that may not be resolvable in order to battle this ideology - based on the premise that if you eliviate poverty and suffering you reduce the chances of a dissaffected youth willing to blow his/herself up in the name of Allah. If followers of radical Islam are coming from a stronger economic base we have a huge problem.

Bottom line, in my opinion, Islamic terrorism will continue as long as there are no prominent clerics, imams, etc., issuing fatwahs against terrorism.

doogiecb
24-07-2005, 19:14
Bottom line, in my opinion, Islamic terrorism will continue as long as there are no prominent clerics, imams, etc., issuing fatwahs against terrorism.
agree

J.D.
24-07-2005, 19:17
Like I said, nationalists. And they like any other nationalist will go with what the popular speakers of the time say.

koba65
24-07-2005, 19:44
Like I said, nationalists. And they like any other nationalist will go with what the popular speakers of the time say.

That's way off. What Nation? What state? This is a movement of islamic facism. They are for the destruction of Israel, the elimination of Jews and other "infidels." Their actions against others know no boundaries and they fight for their RELIGION which they see as above and beyond any political boundaries. Their "popular speaker" of the time is Mohamed - he's been dead for centuries. They come from every walk of life, every race group, every ethnic group - they have no Nation that unites them. Their uniting factor is Islam.

If you don't believe they put their religon over nation, look at the recent poll in Britain which showed that British Muslims put their religion first - i.e., if their religious leaders say they must do something for the religion (blow up a bus, the tube) it overrules what Britain says.

It wasn't too long ago that Muslims were immigrating to Western countries in order to escape tyranny. The new crop of Muslim immigrants come to Western countries to ESTABLISH Islamic communities. There are leaders of CAIR in the US who have said they envisage a time when the Islamic flag is flying over the White House and the US adheres to Islamic Law. How is this not sedition?

There are a lot of misinterpretations of the Quran and what it means. There are those who want to water down what it says about eliminating non-Believers such as Jews and "People of the Book" (Christians). It's the present day equivalent of people who read Hitler's "Mein Kampf" prior to WWII and said he wasn't serious about eliminating Jews and expanding Germany's borders.

J.D.
24-07-2005, 19:51
. The point being that religion is often just another form of nationalism. And I mean nationalism in the most negative conotation.

You seem to have missed my earlier post where I expanded the definition of 'nationalist'.

I use the word 'nationalist' in a negative way
unlike how I use the word 'patriot' in a positive way.

rosieredwood
24-07-2005, 19:52
I don't know if Muslim(ism) is a fundamental threat to the rest of the world or not.

What the heck is 'Muslimism' [SIC]?

Muslim -- follower of Islam
Islam -- the monotheistic religion of the Muslims

trebor
24-07-2005, 19:58
[QUOTE=J.D.]..........Most people who claim membership in a religion are not too bright so
[QUOTE]

which religion do you support JD?

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 20:48
That would be true if the new crop of Terrorists were from "poor" families. It appears the vast majority of them are from, at a minimum, middle class families. That's why there is so much concern about their ideology. To be able to recruit poor, desparate, oppressed (such as in Palestine) is one thing, but when you can get middle cl**** college educated men (and women) to "matyr" themselves for a cause it's a bit more worrying. It speaks to certain conditions that may not be resolvable in order to battle this ideology - based on the premise that if you eliviate poverty and suffering you reduce the chances of a dissaffected youth willing to blow his/herself up in the name of Allah. If followers of radical Islam are coming from a stronger economic base we have a huge problem.

Bottom line, in my opinion, Islamic terrorism will continue as long as there are no prominent clerics, imams, etc., issuing fatwahs against terrorism.That observation certainly that seems to be quite correct. It's quite upsetting and even disturbing to know that at least one of the bombers was training to become a teacher.

Moreover, they (all of the four suicide bombers) it seems had money to travel and fly long distances - from the UK to Pakistan, for example; for whatever further training/instruction/indution as deemed neccessary.

The respective families also seem to enjoy a "typical" middle class lifestyle, with cars and properties.

I confess to my ignorance of the writings and preachings of the Quoran and here I bow to the likes of Koba's superior (to mine) knowledge, on such a topic. I am not even sure of the writings of the scriptures of the Holy Bible.

You see, I am not religious...Maybe I am an agnostic..??? That being said - so be it, for I am not against everyone believing in whatever they want to. Just don't try imposing one's beliefs on me - that's all I ask.

I am of the opinion that wars have been fought, won and lost, and people slain, since time immamorial, either in the name of/and or under the guise of religion. I remember Whoopie Goldberg even said something to that effect once.

President Bush, even homed in on the powerful "Bible Belt," in the US in order to garner votes, during the last presidential campaign.

However, all that aside, I know one thing for sure - that there is always a right and a wrong, and that there is always a choice, for an individual to make.

That is, the right choice and the wrong choice and I find it morally incomrehensible for people to blow up (as well as themselves), innocent people - espcially in a country (such as the UK and America), which has given them access to so many opportunities to progress and to better themselves and the lot of their respective families.

Which, I believe was and is the sole reason why they came to our shores, in the first place, if I am not mistaken, that is?

Koba's made reference the fact, that effective action, from within their own circles, will not be and/or taken, as long as the prominant immams and leaders - whatever you want to call them; issuing fatwahs against terrorism.

I believe that to be true too - these leaders have very powerful voices, which carry a lot of weight, in the Muslim world.

As a point in question, we could take (I should think) the death sentence issued against Salmon Rushdie, for the publication of his book The Satanic Verses, in the late eighties.

I do not wish to be percieved as going off topic here, but just to reinforce this (and Koba's) point - here's something which I found on Google.

The Satanic Verses, a Review

First, some background information compiled from Newsweek and Time Magazine when the book was first published in 1988:

"The book that is worth killing people and burning flags for is not the book that I wrote," Salmon Rushdie, 41-year-old author of The Satanic Verses, told Time Magazine. shortly after its publication in 1988.

Rushdie's book caused deep rumblings among faithful Muslims offended by its content, prompting protests and book burnings and even riots in which several people were killed.

The furor reached new heights when Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini joined in, proclaiming the book a work of blasphemy and condemning Rushdie to death for "insulting Islam, the prophet Muhammed and the holy Koran."

Eager followers put a bounty on Rushdie's head, adding riches to what Khomeini had already guaranteed as a place in heaven for the successful assassin.

Aftershocks spread around the world as the issue became a more fundamental one -- that of the vast cultural differences between the East and West concerning morality and basic freedom.

Tremors were even felt in America's shopping malls as at least three major bookstore chains temporarily removed the books from their shelves in the interest of employee safety in the face of several threats.

As Rushdie saw it, his book "isn't actually about Islam but about migration, metamorphosis, divided selves, love, death, London and Bombay," he told Time.

The sad irony, he said, "is that after working for five years to give voice and fictional flesh to the immigrant culture of which I myself am a member, I should see my book burned, largely unread, by the people it's about -- people who might find some pleasure and much recognition in its pages."

Rushdie, born in India to Muslim parents, was reared in Bombay and educated in England. He also lived awhile in Pakistan before he became a British subject.

He no longer considers himself a Muslim, which makes the book all the more insulting to the members of the faith. He has been reviled by them as an "apostate," one who knows the truth and turns away from it. The traditional Muslim punishment for this is death.

"How fragile civilization is," Rushie reportedly wrote after Muslims in Britain set fire to his novel. "How easily, how merrily a book burns!"

I fear, he could now add to that last phrase of his, by adding in bombs to the books bit.

He was labelled an "apostate," on who knows the truth and turns away from it, which according to the Muslim religion, is punishable by death. What is the truth, in this case?

The full book review may be found on: http://www.webcurrent.com/rushdie.html

J.D.
24-07-2005, 20:49
What the heck is 'Muslimism' [SIC]?

Muslim -- follower of Islam
Islam -- the monotheistic religion of the Muslims

I couldn't come up with 'Islam' so I made up a construction that I fiqured any dumb f**k could understand. Even an arrogant dumb f**k. I think you passed

why don't you stick to your lessons folder while we try to stay on thread here

<<Admin - Language please>>

J.D.
24-07-2005, 20:53
which religion do you support JD?

Surely you jest

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 21:06
Surely you jestOriginally Posted by trebor
which religion do you support JD?

Not really called for Trebor....Was it...??? That comment cum-question doesn't bear any relation to the topic, surely?

trebor
24-07-2005, 21:13
That's way off. What Nation? What state? This is a movement of islamic facism. They are for the destruction of Israel, the elimination of Jews and other "infidels." Their actions against others know no boundaries and they fight for their RELIGION which they see as above and beyond any political boundaries. Their "popular speaker" of the time is Mohamed - he's been dead for centuries. They come from every walk of life, every race group, every ethnic group - they have no Nation that unites them. Their uniting factor is Islam.

If you don't believe they put their religon over nation, look at the recent poll in Britain which showed that British Muslims put their religion first - i.e., if their religious leaders say they must do something for the religion (blow up a bus, the tube) it overrules what Britain says.

It wasn't too long ago that Muslims were immigrating to Western countries in order to escape tyranny. The new crop of Muslim immigrants come to Western countries to ESTABLISH Islamic communities. There are leaders of CAIR in the US who have said they envisage a time when the Islamic flag is flying over the White House and the US adheres to Islamic Law. How is this not sedition?

There are a lot of misinterpretations of the Quran and what it means. There are those who want to water down what it says about eliminating non-Believers such as Jews and "People of the Book" (Christians). It's the present day equivalent of people who read Hitler's "Mein Kampf" prior to WWII and said he wasn't serious about eliminating Jews and expanding Germany's borders.

While i agree that the root of Islamic terrorism at the moment is directly related to the Palestinian situation i think your being a little harsh when you tar every muslim with the same brush.
If thats not what you meant i think you could have made it clearer.
I know some Asian muslims in London and most are just regular people.
They would no more put a bomb on a bus than you or me.
Thats not to say there are not extemists out there but your rhetoric sounds a bit to much like a Mullah's sermon for me, Koba.
Likening the Koran to mein Kampf is a little rich too, although its not in my top ten of popular reads either.
Just to mention again some of the Asian muslims i know in London. Spare a thought for them too. How would you like to get on the underground with your football kit in a bag right now?

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 21:24
While i agree that the root of Islamic terrorism at the moment is directly related to the Palestinian situation i think your being a little harsh when you tar every muslim with the same brush.
If thats not what you meant i think you could have made it clearer.
I know some Asian muslims in London and most are just regular people.
They would no more put a bomb on a bus than you or me.
Thats not to say there are not extemists out there but your rhetoric sounds a bit to much like a Mullah's sermon for me, Koba.
Likening the Koran to mein Kampf is a little rich too, although its not in my top ten of popular reads either.
Just to mention again some of the Asian muslims i know in London. Spare a thought for them too. How would you like to get on the underground with your football kit in a bag right now?Trebor, cum, cum, surely we're all a little guilty of doing just that - including you, with all due respect.

You seemed to "tar them all with the same brush," with a rather off-the-cuff answer to one of my earlier statements, in this thread...

Just to remind you, here it is:

Me. "If they incite terror, in the land that's given them freedom, business opportunities, and the like thereof - they and their families must be ordered out, and their assets put up for auction, by the state."

You. Assets?
1 pair of beard clippers
2 pairs of long white robes
1 grubby pray mat.
a brand new rucksack, not yet used.
and a "Daily Rover" underground pass.

I rest my case... :)

trebor
24-07-2005, 21:28
Trebor, cum, cum, surely we're all a little guilty of doing just that - including you, with all due respect.

You seemed to "tar them all with the same brush," with a rather off-the-cuff answer to one of my earlier statements, in this thread...

Just to remind you, here it is:

Me. "If they incite terror, in the land that's given them freedom, business opportunities, and the like thereof - they and their families must be ordered out, and their assets put up for auction, by the state."

You. Assets?
1 pair of beard clippers
2 pairs of long white robes
1 grubby pray mat.
a brand new rucksack, not yet used.
and a "Daily Rover" underground pass.

I rest my case... :)

Bluebird,
i was talking about terrorists not all Muslims.
I think that is obvious as you opened your statement with the words "If they incite terror.............................."

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 21:31
Bluebird,
i was talking about terrorists not all Muslims.
I think that is obvious as you opened your statement with the words "If they incite terror.............................."Well, we've both cleared up that nuance....Thanks. Now back to the topic.

PS. I do not see how Koba's "tarring people with the same brush" though. I thought he made a very astute and clear observation and comment.

Ned Kelly
24-07-2005, 21:45
Trebor, cum, cum :)

jesus man, i'm going to puke.

it's bad enough you burying people under the reams of drivel you post and the inane rhetorical questions you pose, but your abasement of the english language is incredible.

trebor's shambolic grammar is at least a result of being trashed most of the time. what's your excuse?

Kingwillhe
24-07-2005, 21:58
jesus man, i'm going to puke.

it's bad enough you burying people under the reams of drivel you post and the inane rhetorical questions you pose, but your abasement of the english language is incredible.

trebor's shambolic grammar is at least a result of being trashed most of the time. what's your excuse?
hehe, thanks for that!

sham•bol•ic (sh m-b l k)
adj. Chiefly British Slang
Disorderly or chaotic:

shambolic link: /sham•bol´ik link/, n.
A Unix symbolic link, particularly when it confuses you, points to nothing at all, or results in your ending up in some completely unexpected part of the filesystem....

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 21:59
jesus man, i'm going to puke.

it's bad enough you burying people under the reams of drivel you post and the inane rhetorical questions you pose, but your abasement of the english language is incredible.

trebor's shambolic grammar is at least a result of being trashed most of the time. what's your excuse?Go ahead, puke...You thinks that worries me...

A) Your abasement of the English language, is complete with the mis-spellings and absence of capital letters, where there should be, is equivalent to that of a five year old.

B) When was the last time you posted anything worth discussing?

C) Your "personal" comments have nothing to do with the topic, whatsoever.

D) If you've nothing better to contibute to logical discussion, other than personal bile...Go play with your didgerdoo and get lost in the Australian bush, whilst doing so.

E) You do not have to read my posts or take part in them, if you do not like my writing.

F) Finally...Go f**k yourself period! And, whilst you're busy doing all that - have a nice day too... :happymad:

<<Admin - Language please>>

Ned Kelly
24-07-2005, 22:07
i don't mind being told to f*ck myself but i resent being called a period!

trebor
24-07-2005, 22:14
jesus man, i'm going to puke.

it's bad enough you burying people under the reams of drivel you post and the inane rhetorical questions you pose, but your abasement of the english language is incredible.

trebor's shambolic grammar is at least a result of being trashed most of the time. what's your excuse?

Now what the f*ck would an Australian know about the Queen's English?
At least Bluebird writes his own stuff...........................he doesn't cut and paste reams of boring drivel from the web.

Bluebird
24-07-2005, 22:15
i don't mind being told to f*ck myself but i resent being called a period!Lol :)

koba65
24-07-2005, 22:39
While i agree that the root of Islamic terrorism at the moment is directly related to the Palestinian situation i think your being a little harsh when you tar every muslim with the same brush.
If thats not what you meant i think you could have made it clearer.
I know some Asian muslims in London and most are just regular people.
They would no more put a bomb on a bus than you or me.
Thats not to say there are not extemists out there but your rhetoric sounds a bit to much like a Mullah's sermon for me, Koba.
Likening the Koran to mein Kampf is a little rich too, although its not in my top ten of popular reads either.
Just to mention again some of the Asian muslims i know in London. Spare a thought for them too. How would you like to get on the underground with your football kit in a bag right now?


I'm sure some Asian Muslims in London and elsewhere are regular people - no doubt about it - however, they live in the same communities as the people who are inflicting this indiscriminate death and the probablity of them seeing things or hearing things that these terrorists are planning is pretty high. It was proven in the States after 9/11 that quite a few in the Muslim community had inklings that their Muslim brothers and fellow mosque attendees were up to no good, but did not speak out. As a matter of fact, when the FBI introduced a campaign for Muslims to call them confidentially and garaunteed their safety the so-called
'moderate" CAIR group put out a counter-statement telling their members not to trust the FBI and that informing on Muslims was to betray them. Now, when they're looked at suspiciously they complain about prejudice in the non-Muslim community.

My whole point is a "neighborhood" is best cleaned up from within. They, the good Muslims, have this opportunity. Now is the time for them to say no to radicalism in their communities and to turn out those who preach hate. But, to do that they have to have religious leaders who are willing to give new meaning to the Surahs in the Quran.

It works in the States all the time. Whenever a group is tired of being harrassed because of a few bad apples in their group they are successful in turning things around when they fight the thugs. The Punks vs. Skinheads is one case. Another case is a rural town in Western Maryland that got tired of KKK rallies in their town and the bad redneck reputation that came with it. The town came out in force at a KKK rally - to PROTEST the KKK. They made it clear that it wasn't going to happen in their neighborhood and they would not stand for it. As a result the Klan moved on - they had no way of recruiting new members in that town. Why? Because of the stigma attached to belonging to a radical racist terrorist group.

Re: Quran and "Mein Kampf" - perhaps a rather simplisitic analogy, however, let's look at them both:

Mein Kampf - Jews must be eradicated. The rest of "us" must either submit to Nazism or die.

The Quran: Jews must be eradicated. The "people of the Book" must convert, be subdued, or die.

If I wrote a book today that called for the suppression and elimination of a people based on their beliefs and/or ethnicity I'm sure it would be roundly condemned. Why is Islam not criticized for sticking to the tenants that Mohammed laid out for them when it was written? Other religions have evolved from such hate speech, why is Islam getting a pass? Until that issue is addressed and corrected we will not have peace from Islamic terrorists. This is NOT about Palestine. That's a smoke screen. If Arabs really cared about a Palestinian state they would insist that their state-sponsored religious leaders cease and desist calls for the elimination of Israel.

J.D.
24-07-2005, 22:45
If I wrote a book today that called for the suppression and elimination of a people based on their beliefs and/or ethnicity I'm sure it would be roundly condemned. Why is Islam not criticized for sticking to the tenants that Mohammed laid out for them when it was written? .
Maybe they got in on a grandfather clause.
OR maybe they have too much oil.

Probably both of those and the fact that there are quite a few of them.

koba65
24-07-2005, 23:11
Maybe they got in on a grandfather clause.
OR maybe they have too much oil.

Probably both of those and the fact that there are quite a few of them.

Oil, oil, oil and too much Saudi influence in the backrooms of Washington, London, Berlin, Paris, etc. The new Saudi Ambassador to the US is the same guy who allegedly made a deal with Bin Ladin's thugs - leave us alone and we won't shut you down - go elsewhere and recruit your people. It's a bit disturbing when you look at the number of Saudi government sponsored Mosques established in the US. With these mosques come private schools which indoctrinate the youngsters that hating Jews and non-Believers is required. Recently, in Fairfax, VA, one was not allowed to be built because the community protested too much. Another school lost its accredidation because it refused to change its hate-based curriculim. Unfortunately, in other areas they are left unchallenged.

I don't have a problem with people believing what they want to believe or in whom they want to believe in, BUT, when that belief includes the destruction of others as infidels a line has to be drawn. Most won't speak out because they don't want to be labeled as a bigot. Call me what you will, but if a Muslim, Baptist, Jew, Catholic, Athetiest, Agnostic, Rasta, Buddhist, starts preaching "killing" then I'll be the first to condemn it.

trebor
24-07-2005, 23:17
.........If I wrote a book today that called for the suppression and elimination of a people based on their beliefs and/or ethnicity I'm sure it would be roundly condemned. Why is Islam not criticized for sticking to the tenants that Mohammed laid out for them when it was written? Other religions have evolved from such hate speech, why is Islam getting a pass? Until that issue is addressed and corrected we will not have peace from Islamic terrorists. This is NOT about Palestine. That's a smoke screen. If Arabs really cared about a Palestinian state they would insist that their state-sponsored religious leaders cease and desist calls for the elimination of Israel.

As i pointed out before, many of the critisms levelled at the Koran can be levelled at the Bible, especialy in the old testament. Plenty of violence there too.
By your definition all true muslims percieve the Koran as a violent testament calling for retribution and destruction of non believers and enemys real and imagined.
This is B.S. Many Islamic scholars (the vast majority)are peace abiding. Its only the extemists who make the headlines.
Like the bible, its ambiguous. Thats how they survived the passage of time, Changing tastes and values. Its down to your interpretation. Its clearly stated in the koran that taking a life is akin to taking the life of all mankind. Likewise, saving a life is akin to saving the life of all mankind.
I think Islam has a long way to go to match the number of atrocoties commited by Christianity.
There are 5 tennents (called pillars) of Islam laid down by Mohamed.
There is one god. Allah
Pray 5 times a day
The giving of alms
Fasting during ramadan
and make the journey to Mecca once in your life.
I am not religious in any way..................................Although i have been know to kneel in prayer at the temple know as Manchester United and i believe Wayne Rooney can walk on water! :)

Moscow Wolf
25-07-2005, 00:46
About that Sky, interview...Why on earth are we giving these people air time anyway? The only air time I'd give them, is with a rocket stuffed somewhere, where the son doesn't shine. He should've been detained, for questioning, immediatly after the show.

They'd give airtime to any so called 'expert', theres a few on here that would love it. I was listening to the BBC World Service today and they wheeled in my old favourite Mr. X W.......... from Aberdeen University a self professed expert on International Terrorism going back to the Trojan Horse. The man talks Bollox, but in such great words. I learnt a few new ones today. These people just need to validate their huge expenses, they've never ever put themselves on the line but they know all the theory.

I remember many years ago brieifng a team of SAS on the Modus Operandi of Abu Nidal. After about 30 minutes of very in-depth shite, one guy says, 'Bob, cut the crap, just tell us how many of them there are, what weapons they've got and how best you reckon we can we kill them'. My briefings became considerably shorter after that.

You're all getting rather hot under the collar are you not. Remember Mozley and his Brown Shirts during the second world war? Of course you you don't. Its no different from today, we ARE a Hypocrisy, (sorry I meant Democracy). Better the devil you know than the one you don't.

Bluebird
25-07-2005, 01:37
They'd give airtime to any so called 'expert', theres a few on here that would love it. I was listening to the BBC World Service today and they wheeled in my old favourite Mr. X W.......... from Aberdeen University a self professed expert on International Terrorism going back to the Trojan Horse. The man talks Bollox, but in such great words. I learnt a few new ones today. These people just need to validate their huge expenses, they've never ever put themselves on the line but they know all the theory.

I remember many years ago brieifng a team of SAS on the Modus Operandi of Abu Nidal. After about 30 minutes of very in-depth shite, one guy says, 'Bob, cut the crap, just tell us how many of them there are, what weapons they've got and how best you reckon we can we kill them'. My briefings became considerably shorter after that.

You're all getting rather hot under the collar are you not. Remember Mozley and his Brown Shirts during the second world war? Of course you you don't. Its no different from today, we ARE a Hypocrisy, (sorry I meant Democracy). Better the devil you know than the one you don't.Yes, I love these so-called "experts" (who no one's ever really heard of) too, when they "wheel" them out. And, usually they do (with some high fulltin) lexis added - come out with some interesting theories; which one can largely label as...Interesting bollocks...

Still, they get their 15 mins of fame, anyhow. I just love it when J. Paxman or J. Humphries or J. Snow rips into them though. Thus, laying most of their well-rehearsed scripts a bit threadbare.

As a former Merchant Seaman, I too remember being on various training sessions, where someone (giving the session) was occasionally cut down to size.

One guy once said, "Can we cut the f##kin' crap and just get on with the job of why we're here." The instructor promptly announced a "smoko" break.

I do not remember Mozley and his Brown Shirts during the second world war. However, I only know about what I've studied and read about him...But, perhaps you could enlighten me as to what you are trying to say.

I've a fair idea, I think, of what you might say...But, even so...I'd like to know how you see that question fitting in with what we are discussing here.

Churchill said, after the 2nd World War, "That the democracy, which we have, is not perfect. But, still we know no other."

Bluebird
25-07-2005, 02:20
Here's an excerpt from The Guardian's Special Reports section, on this very topic. This report was compiled from a YouGov poll, published in The Daily Telegraph, where it originally appeared.

'A lot of people had no idea who Osama bin Laden was before 9/11. Then they got this information and believed that Muslims were being persecuted.'

He added: 'Many don't want to get addicted to drink, so they look for another outlet - for them religion is always there.'

Blaming Bush and Blair to justify terrorism is not the majority view among Muslims across the country - but it is the passionate belief of a significant minority.

Almost one in four British Muslims sympathise with the motives of suicide bombers, according to a YouGov poll published in yesterday's Daily Telegraph.

More than half say that, whether they sympathise or not, they understand why some people behave in the way they do.

The research also showed that nearly one in three thinks that Western society is decadent and immoral and should be brought to an end.

Sixteen per cent of British Muslims told the survey that they do not feel loyal towards Britain and 6 per cent went as far as saying the London bombings were justified.

It makes for an intersting and thought-provoking read and a little insight.

It also makes for an equally disturbing read too...I'll leave it with you...

The full story/article's availble to read on: http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1535190,00.html

trebor
25-07-2005, 02:34
...........a self professed expert on International Terrorism going back to the Trojan Horse........

LOL :D

Goose0009
25-07-2005, 03:03
If I wrote a book today that called for the suppression and elimination of a people based on their beliefs and/or ethnicity I'm sure it would be roundly condemned. Why is Islam not criticized for sticking to the tenants that Mohammed laid out for them when it was written? Other religions have evolved from such hate speech, why is Islam getting a pass? Until that issue is addressed and corrected we will not have peace from Islamic terrorists. This is NOT about Palestine. That's a smoke screen. If Arabs really cared about a Palestinian state they would insist that their state-sponsored religious leaders cease and desist calls for the elimination of Israel.
I agree!!!!!! I sympathise with Palestinian struggles, but the Arab world uses them as pawns in a larger game of chess.

koba65
26-07-2005, 02:00
As i pointed out before, many of the critisms levelled at the Koran can be levelled at the Bible, especialy in the old testament. Plenty of violence there too.
By your definition all true muslims percieve the Koran as a violent testament calling for retribution and destruction of non believers and enemys real and imagined.
This is B.S. Many Islamic scholars (the vast majority)are peace abiding. Its only the extemists who make the headlines.
Like the bible, its ambiguous. Thats how they survived the passage of time, Changing tastes and values. Its down to your interpretation. Its clearly stated in the koran that taking a life is akin to taking the life of all mankind. Likewise, saving a life is akin to saving the life of all mankind.
I think Islam has a long way to go to match the number of atrocoties commited by Christianity.
There are 5 tennents (called pillars) of Islam laid down by Mohamed.
There is one god. Allah
Pray 5 times a day
The giving of alms
Fasting during ramadan
and make the journey to Mecca once in your life.
I am not religious in any way..................................Although i have been know to kneel in prayer at the temple know as Manchester United and i believe Wayne Rooney can walk on water! :)

I'll give you that some of the violence attributed at the Koran can also be applied to the OLD Testament of the Bible, but the New Testament laid all of that as archaic and gives a message of love and peace.

Regarding the Islamic v. Christian atrocities. First of all, I think they're both pretty close on the death tallies - with the Islamicists making up a good portion of the modern day indiscriminate death numbers. However, the Christian atrocities were interestingly carried out by people perverting the word of God as laid out in the Bible, i.e., not following the "Good Book" so to speak, but twisting it to suit their plans. Islamic atrocities can be excused by very clear language in the Surahs contained within the Quran. Were I a Muslim "fighter" I would find solace in any execution of a prisoner of war, an infidel, a Jew, a non-believer, because my religious book says I am to show no mercy. This book is backed up by modern day mullahs, imams, clerics that are held out as the religious leaders as accepted by nation-states such as Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Yemen, Indonesia, well, you get the point. The so-called peace loving clerics are those that speak of peace for Muslims. A non-Muslim is definitely not equal nor do they deserve, as the Quran clearly specifies in various Surahs, equal treatment or respect.

The Soviets learned this lesson in their war with Afghanistan. Soviet POWs were treated as slaves and executed as animals when they could no longer work. In the early days the ones who were spared were those who converted to Islam and renounced all other religions. Then, and only then, were they treated as a "guest." Luckily, later in the war, the mujahadeen were convinced that the POWs would be a good bargaining tool at the end of the conflict and the executions, for the most part, ceased.

Yes, there are some "peaceful" Islamic scholars, but if you read them closely what they say is they hope for peaceful conversion of the world to Islam and still rule out peaceful sustained coexistance with non-believers in the coming, as they see it, Islamic world. Their means may be different, but they strive for the same end.

If you need more proof, ask a Muslim what his/her punishment is if they convert to another religion. Then ask a Buddhist, Catholic, Jew, Anglican, Methodist, etc., what their "punishment" is if they convert to another religion.

In case you don't know any Muslims:

"In traditional Islamic law, for a Muslim to convert to another faith brings a death sentence. This is not "extremist" Islam. It is the Islamic mainstream, based on a statement of Muhammad: "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him." (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57)."