Incident reported on London Tube train

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

The actions of whom?

 

The 23,000 British Muslims suspected by the security services of being Islamic terrorists or supporters of Islamic terrorism: or the approx. 2.75 million British Muslims who are neither: many of whom not only publicly condemn the terrorists, but also give vital intelligence to the security services?

Do you not think we're entitled to be concerned and angry about innocent civilians across Europe being blown up, shot and knifed to death on a regular basis? And do you think 23,000 potential jihadists in the UK is insignificant?

 

And before you make comparisons to the troubles in Ireland, at least the IRA mostly targeted business and infrastructure to cause damage, and gave coded warnings.  I don't recall an IRA soldier walking into a concert full of teenage girls and blowing himself up.

[Laughing Gravy]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

It seems you agree with Oscar Wilde when he said “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence!” Though I believe he was being sarcastic!

 

Working amongst Muslims may have taught you what they think of you; but not necessarily what they think of others. Certainly the many Muslims I know, had as neighbours and have worked with for many years have as much respect for me and my rights as I have for them and theirs.

Go and live in Mecca and SA and come back with that attitude, They treat other Muslims like dogs. it is that perspective and Muslim believe that say the great prophet had sex with a 9 year old and was acceptable, in those days. Nobody buys that ideology like the perception you have written.

[Laughing Gravy]

32 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

So you want decent, law abiding people, many of whom were born in the UK and other Western countries, as were their parents and grandparents; many of whom provide essential services in the police, NHS and other emergency services, many of whom serve in their country's armed forces and have been decorated and died in that service, to be forced to leave? 

 

How would you go about that? Round them all up into special camps awaiting your final solution?

 

They are not law abiding people,. they are terrorists and will continue to be believing in a religion that does not belong in the 21st century.

 

Just a small snippet of the truth.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11433776/Quarter-of-British-Muslims-sympathise-with-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.html

 

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/c4-survey-and-documentary-reveals-what-british-muslims-really-think

Vermin and un defendable

[brewsterbudgen]

Do you not think we're entitled to be concerned and angry about innocent civilians across Europe being blown up, shot and knifed to death on a regular basis? And do you think 23,000 potential jihadists in the UK is insignificant?
 
And before you make comparisons to the troubles in Ireland, at least the IRA mostly targeted business and infrastructure to cause damage, and gave coded warnings.  I don't recall an IRA soldier walking into a concert full of teenage girls and blowing himself up.

You might want to educate yourself about the Troubles before writing such nonsense.

[observer90210]

Sad....I would feel safer on Walking Street at 5 am currently,  rather then on the streets of London, Paris or Barcelona...

[katana]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

...As The troubles showed, terrorism cannot be defeated overnight, but defeated it can and will be...

Well, Islam has been at war with the unbeliever for 1400 years.
Good luck with that.

People say the terrorists misunderstand or pervert Islam. Funny how they all misunderstand it the same way.

[CG1 Blue]

51 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

You might want to educate yourself about the Troubles before writing such nonsense.

On the mainland, as far as I recall they didn't operate in the same indiscriminate way, trying to kill children etc.?

Of course there were some awful incidents (one of which I was close to) but generally I thought they tried to avoid human casualties when possible.

Feel free to educate me.

[7by7]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Do you not think we're entitled to be concerned and angry about innocent civilians across Europe being blown up, shot and knifed to death on a regular basis? And do you think 23,000 potential jihadists in the UK is insignificant?

People are not only entitled to be concerned and angry about terrorist atrocities; they downright should be!  no matter who the terrorist and their victims are and where those atrocities occur.

 

I abhor and condemn Islamic terrorists committing murder and mayhem in Europe and elsewhere. I also abhor and condemn Christian terrorists who do the same in Central Africa and elsewhere. Just as i abhor and condemn all terrorist. Do you?

 

Or, like many, do you ignore them because it doesn't effect you?

 

23,000 suspected potential jihadists in the UK is 23,000 too many. But you have (deliberately?) missed the point. This 23,000 do not represent the 2.75 million. innocent British Muslims who, like everyone else, simply want to live their lives in peace.

 

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

And before you make comparisons to the troubles in Ireland, at least the IRA mostly targeted business and infrastructure to cause damage, and gave coded warnings.  I don't recall an IRA soldier walking into a concert full of teenage girls and blowing himself up.

 

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

On the mainland, as far as I recall they didn't operate in the same indiscriminate way, trying to kill children etc.?

Of course there were some awful incidents (one of which I was close to) but generally I thought they tried to avoid human casualties when possible.

Feel free to educate me.

 

As part of your education:

1. The Guildford pub bombings, of which I was nearly a part and the friends I was on my way to meet actually were.
2. The Birmingham pub bombings.
3. The deaths of two children in the Warrington litter bin bombs.
4. The Teebane massacre.
5. The Remembrance Day bombing in Enniskillen.

Just five examples where the PIRA targeted people, not infrastructure, and gave no warning.

 

Not to mention the knee cappings and other torture 'punishments' they carried out. Plus of course the disappeared; some of whose families still have no idea where their loved one's bodies are buried. McGuinness knew or could have found out; but didn't. Adams knows or can find out; but doesn't.

 

PIRA and ISIS; Same scum, same methods; just different ideology.

 

[sirineou]

6 hours ago, i claudius said:

Wonder who could have done it .? Not those nice peace loving Muslims .they are not like that according to the left.oh also a soldier has just been attacked by a man with a knife in Paris by a guy shouting well i will let you guess what

 

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

 Thank you for stating the obvious.

Nice people don't do things like that regardless of their religion .

Bad people invade countries, and bad people bomb bad people who invade countries.

Good people get caught in the middle of bad people arguments. 

[7by7]

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Go and live in Mecca and SA and come back with that attitude, They treat other Muslims like dogs. it is that perspective and Muslim believe that say the great prophet had sex with a 9 year old and was acceptable, in those days. Nobody buys that ideology like the perception you have written.

 

We are not talking about Saudi Arabia; a country with an appalling human rights record; but the UK.

 

But, of course, human rights abuses do not occur only in Muslim countries; many non Muslim countries have equally appalling human rights records as Saudi Arabia; or worse.

 

As for Ayesha's age at the tome of her marriage and later consummation; as has been discussed many times on TV. As repeatedly stated, her age is disputed by Muslim scholars, and has been for over a thousand years!The first time her age is mentioned is in a hadith written some 150 years after her death. Another hadith written by the same author places her at an historical event which, had she been as young as 9 when her marriage to Mohammed was consummated, happened ten years before she was born!

 

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

They are not law abiding people,. they are terrorists and will continue to be believing in a religion that does not belong in the 21st century.

 

Just a small snippet of the truth.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11433776/Quarter-of-British-Muslims-sympathise-with-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.html

 

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/c4-survey-and-documentary-reveals-what-british-muslims-really-think

Vermin and un defendable

 Again, the telegraph article and Channel 4 programme (which I actually watched in full; did you?) have been discussed at length before. All I will say this time is that you really should read articles in full rather than just the headlines before posting links to them in order to 'prove' your point!

 

That you consider all Muslims to be "Vermin and un defendable (sic)" speaks volumes about you. Yes, the terrorists are such; but the overwhelming majority who are not terrorists nor suspected terrorists, and in the UK that's over 99% of them, are decent, law abiding people.

 

But what people like you fail to realise is that by treating that 99% as "vermin and un defendable (sic)" all you are doing is acting as a recruiting agent for the terrorists. But perhaps that what you really want so you can sit back and say "I told you so!"

Edited September 15, 2017 by 7by7

[7by7]

2 hours ago, katana said:

Well, Islam has been at war with the unbeliever for 1400 years.
Good luck with that.

People say the terrorists misunderstand or pervert Islam. Funny how they all misunderstand it the same way.

 

Learn some history; the Crusades were all started by Christian rulers.

 

Yes, Islam was to a large extent spread by conquest; but so was Christianity.

 

Yes, the terrorists are following much the same form of Islam; but as the vast majority of Muslim leaders, both political and religious, condemn the terrorists as unIslamic then yes, it is a perverted form.

[nausea]

One has to be thankful for small mercies I suppose; could've been a lot worse:

 

"BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said the bomb appeared not to have gone off properly.

Had it worked as intended, it would have killed everyone around it and maimed everyone in the train carriage for life, he said."

 

Threat level now raised to "critical" (highest), meaning an attack is expected imminently. 

[impulse]

10 hours ago, i claudius said:

What more can they do .well leave the west and go back to nice Muslim countrys for a start.

 

Had this happened 30 years ago, they'd be looking for Catholic perpetrators.  Yet they seem to have assimilated nicely.

 

[FreddieRoyle]

9 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Had this happened 30 years ago, they'd be looking for Catholic perpetrators.  Yet they seem to have assimilated nicely.

 

Can anybody explain to me why forum users keep talking about Catholics/IRA/Irish after every Islamic terror event? This was not done by Paddies, none of them were done by Paddies, in what 25 years now?? And yet we still get this but..but...but...IRA.. It seems to me like classic distraction technique desperately trying to change the subject from rightful condemnation of the Islamic mindset to some sort of don't condemn these soldiers of the Caliph because others have used terror at times past in our history. Well yes they have, and yes they were pilloried and loathed after every event targetting innocent civilians.

 Back during the troubles I took every precaution to not be around serious looking Irishmen, just like in the last 15 years I have made every effort to avoid muslims and have lived to tell the tale.

 

 

Edited September 15, 2017 by FreddieRoyle

[impulse]

39 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Can anybody explain to me why forum users keep talking about Catholics/IRA/Irish after every Islamic terror event? This was not done by Paddies, none of them were done by Paddies, in what 25 years now??

 

Sure.  People who want to blame all Muslims for the actions of a tiny minority, and claim that it's their religion that makes them violent conveniently forget their history.  It's to jog their memory.

 

South American terrorists are generally Catholics.  It's not because they're Catholics.  They're terrorists for their own reasons and it only stands to reason that a lot of them will be of the indigenous faith.  And the vast majority of South Americans -and Catholics- aren't terrorists.  And those who once were seemed to assimilate into the society and actually become political parties (just like those Jewish terrorists from the '40s in Palestine).

 

To claim that Muslim terrorism is unique, and the "Muslim problem" is intractable is to fall right into the trap set by those who would like to see perpetual war.  I don't happen to be one of them.

 

Edited September 15, 2017 by impulse

[brewsterbudgen]

On the mainland, as far as I recall they didn't operate in the same indiscriminate way, trying to kill children etc.?
Of course there were some awful incidents (one of which I was close to) but generally I thought they tried to avoid human casualties when possible.
Feel free to educate me.

No need. 7by7 has already done it. The Harrods bomb was a close call for me, and Parsons Green was my local tube station. 'The more things change, the more they stay the same'.

[Laughing Gravy]

7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

We are not talking about Saudi Arabia; a country with an appalling human rights record; but the UK.

SA is linked to Islam as every Muslim should make a pilgrimage to Mecca. I am talking from experience having lived there. They treat each other terribly. So its relevant.

7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

As for Ayesha's age at the tome of her marriage and later consummation; as has been discussed many times on TV. As repeatedly stated, her age is disputed by Muslim scholars, and has been for over a thousand years!The first time her age is mentioned is in a hadith it happened and they use the reason that it was different times then some 150 years after her death

Shame on you trying to defend this. Evert Muslim I have spoken to on this accept it and use the reason as it was common practice then. I dispute that and just like burning people as an example doesn't mean its right and should be condemned

 

7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

That you consider all Muslims to be "Vermin and un defendable (sic)" speaks volumes about you. Yes, the terrorists are such; but the overwhelming majority who are not terrorists nor suspected terrorists, and in the UK that's over 99% of them, are decent, law abiding people.

I am not saying every Muslim is a terrorist. All those in the name of Islam causing terror and those that don't condemn it hence my links to the CH $ programmer and there are more, are just as bad.

 

It speaks volumes about me does it. Well snowflake I am a realist talking from experience and had to put up with terrorism. If only the Muslim community would wed out the terrorist themselves and save the law abiding people the problem. I am saying just what many feel but are afraid to say I,t for getting shouted down. This problem will only get worse as I have said for years.

[FreddieRoyle]

^^ Laughing gravy - thanks for your input. Very helpful to hear the views from someone that has lived in SA, understands islam, and actually knows what they are talking about vs a progressive ideological stance with no basis in reality whatsoever.

[nausea]

 

2 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Can anybody explain to me why forum users keep talking about Catholics/IRA/Irish after every Islamic terror event?

I'd be careful, if I were them, of making such comparisons. I'm no expert but didn't many historical terrorist groups such as the IRA and UVF, have some, if not a lot, of tacit support within their own communities; and we're denying that here, portraying these guys as anomalies.

 

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

If only the Muslim community would wed out the terrorist themselves

It might help if they started by engaging in some honest debate, instead of trying to sweep everything under the carpet. Old clip but still relevant I think:

 

 

See the end. Bog standard denial,  followed by "Yes, they are; yes, they are" delivered emphatically and without guile. Who do you believe? A rare jewel of clarity and honesty, far too rare unfortunately.

[7by7]

10 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Can anybody explain to me why forum users keep talking about Catholics/IRA/Irish after every Islamic terror event? This was not done by Paddies, none of them were done by Paddies, in what 25 years now?? And yet we still get this but..but...but...IRA.. It seems to me like classic distraction technique desperately trying to change the subject from rightful condemnation of the Islamic mindset to some sort of don't condemn these soldiers of the Caliph because others have used terror at times past in our history. Well yes they have, and yes they were pilloried and loathed after every event targetting innocent civilians.

 Back during the troubles I took every precaution to not be around serious looking Irishmen, just like in the last 15 years I have made every effort to avoid muslims and have lived to tell the tale.

 

 

Are you deliberately missing the point?

 

No one is refusing to condemn Islamic terrorists. Such condemnation is, as you put it, rightful, and comes from all sections of the community, Muslim as well as non Muslim.

 

What I and others are saying to those who consider all Muslims to be terrorists or supporters of terrorism simply because they share the same religion as the terrorists is that it is akin to considering all Irish people to have been terrorists or supporters of terrorism simply because they shared the politics, Unionist as well as Republican, of the terrorists.

 

A view which is as ignorant and prejudiced now as it was then. 

 

During the Troubles I made no effort to avoid Irishmen, serious looking or not. Although Biddy Mulligans in Kilburn was a place to avoid unless you wanted to join in the Republican songs and put money in the tin for 'the boys behind the wire!'

 

Today I make no effort to avoid Muslims. Although I don't routinely frequent a Pakistani owned sports bar in my home town for the simple reason that they don't serve alcohol. I did go there sometimes when they were showing live coverage of the IPL, and was made welcome

 

You are more likely to be assaulted by a drunk because you 'looked at him/her funny' in any large UK city than blown up by a terrorist. You are even more likely to be killed or injured in a road traffic collision. Perhaps you should avoid going out at all?

[7by7]

9 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

SA is linked to Islam as every Muslim should make a pilgrimage to Mecca. I am talking from experience having lived there. They treat each other terribly. So its relevant.

Mecca is, indeed, the holiest shrine in Islam and a pilgrimage there is something every Muslim should want to make at least once in their life as in Islam it is considered to be the ultimate act of worship. It is in Saudi Arabia. Before that it was in the Ottoman Empire, So using your argument, all Muslims at that time supported the Empire and it's repression of the Arabs!

 

As for your experiences of having lived there, as I said to I Claudius earlier; working, or living, amongst Muslims in Saudi Arabia may have taught you what they think of you; but not necessarily what they think of others. Certainly the many Muslims I know, had as neighbours and have worked with for many years have as much respect for me and my rights as I have for them and theirs.

 

Before you or anyone else accuses me of such, I repeat: I am not making any attempt to defend Saudi Arabia's human rights recorded; which is disgraceful.

 

9 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Shame on you trying to defend this. Evert Muslim I have spoken to on this accept it and use the reason as it was common practice then. I dispute that and just like burning people as an example doesn't mean its right and should be condemned

Where am I trying to defend paedophilia? I am simply explaining the disputed age of Ayesha among Muslim scholars.

 

Yes, marrying young girls to rich and powerful men, and consummating that marriage, was a common practice then as the onset of puberty was considered to be the age of consent; in Europe as well! Many Christian kings did just that; married young, sometimes pre pubescent, girls. Why don't you condemn them as well?

 

Of course, these days we consider this to be wrong, and the age of consent in most countries, Muslim as well as non Muslim, is higher; 16 in the UK for example. Although in 15 European countries, including Austria, Germany, Italy and Portugal, it's 14. Do you condemn those countries?

 

As far as I am aware, the only Muslim country not to have a set age of consent is Saudi Arabia; although sex outside of marriage is illegal there; as it is in some other Muslim countries which do have a minimum age.

 

But what this has to do with a terrorist attack in parson's green,  only you know.

 

9 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

It speaks volumes about me does it. Well snowflake I am a realist talking from experience and had to put up with terrorism. If only the Muslim community would wed out the terrorist themselves and save the law abiding people the problem. I am saying just what many feel but are afraid to say I,t for getting shouted down. This problem will only get worse as I have said for years.

A realist? No, an Islamaphobe.

 

You say you have had to put up with terrorism; well so have I and most of the UK population; since the 1970s! 

 

But unlike you, we blame the terrorists, not innocent, law abiding members of the community who happen to share the terrorists politics or religion.

 

How do you suggest the Muslim community weed out the terrorists? I listed earlier some of the actions law abiding British Muslims have taken to evict extremists from their midst and asked what else they could do. So far, no one has answered that question. Will you now do so?

 

You are right; the problem will get worse when there are people like you who are so blinded by ignorant prejudice that they lump the 2.75 million innocent, law abiding British Muslims in with the 23,000 potential jihadists. You are just the tool the jihadists need to help in their recruitment.

[7by7]

8 hours ago, nausea said:

I'd be careful, if I were them, of making such comparisons. I'm no expert but didn't many historical terrorist groups such as the IRA and UVF, have some, if not a lot, of tacit support within their own communities; and we're denying that here, portraying these guys as anomalies.

'Support' based mainly on fear; as the long list of torture victims and disappeared shows. Islamic terrorists and extremists have not carried out such torture or murder of Muslims they suspect of giving information to the security services.

 

The IRA 'executed' Catholic RUC officers as 'traitors' to the cause; no such action has been taken against Muslim police officers. 

 

8 hours ago, nausea said:

It might help if they started by engaging in some honest debate, instead of trying to sweep everything under the carpet. Old clip but still relevant I think:

No one denies that there are problems, and it is a disgrace that the government's own report into this is being sat upon; apparently to avoid offending the Saudis: Theresa May sitting on report on foreign funding of UK extremists.

 

But marginalising British Muslims and labelling them as, at least, supporters of the terrorists will do nothing to solve the problems. Instead it will make the situation worse. The security services need the help of the Muslim community; after all it is among them that the terrorists hide and prepare. At the moment they are getting that help; but for how much longer if the likes of I Claudius and Laughing Gravy get their way?

[Laughing Gravy]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

You are right; the problem will get worse when there are people like you who are so blinded by ignorant prejudice that they lump the 2.75 million innocent, law abiding British Muslims in with the 23,000 potential jihadists. You are just the tool the jihadists need to help in their recruitment.

I am not the one going around shouting god is great killing innocent people in the name of Islam.

 

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

You say you have had to put up with terrorism; well so have I and most of the UK population; since the 1970s! 

At least the IRA had a goal and end mission. What have these terrorists got killing people across Europe. Nothing. Once again you defend them.

 

Islam IMO does not belong in a modern day society in a free world  with equality.  Yes there are many Muslims who are shocked and maybe weeding them out but there are many who are not and will silently support them in the name of Islam.

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

How do you suggest the Muslim community weed out the terrorists? I listed earlier some of the actions law abiding British Muslims have taken to evict extremists from their midst and asked what else they could do. So far, no one has answered that question. Will you now do so?

Yes some are taking action. Many are not. Whether home grown or rom overseas if they can't or don't like the British laws and cultures and the same across Europe then they should go to a country that does. My suggestion of Saudi Arabia still stands. No schooling for Girls, segregation, public beheadings, no freedom of speech, just to mention a few niceties. There is no social welfare either.

 

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

You are right; the problem will get worse when there are people like you who are so blinded by ignorant prejudice that they lump the 2.75 million innocent, law abiding British Muslims in with the 23,000 potential jihadists. You are just the tool the jihadists need to help in their recruitment.

How about the Muslim community rooting these Jihadists out. Over the last few years the attacks across Europe they always have help. I am non Muslim so how can I stop it besides hoping the religion and practice is banned in the UK.

 

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

A realist? No, an Islamaphobe

Yes a realist. I don't see Christians or other religions causing terror in my home country which I served and am proud of. So when I see it been invaded from within and liberal lefties try and make excuses for the way they act, yes I am annoyed and want the problem taken away.

 

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

Yes, marrying young girls to rich and powerful men, and consummating that marriage, was a common practice then as the onset of puberty was considered to be the age of consent; in Europe as well! Many Christian kings did just that; married young, sometimes pre pubescent, girls. Why don't you condemn them as well?

 

Of course, these days we consider this to be wrong, and the age of consent in most countries, Muslim as well as non Muslim, is higher; 16 in the UK for example. Although in 15 European countries, including Austria, Germany, Italy and Portugal, it's 14. Do you condemn those countries?

Yes its wrong on every level but you don't see people glorifying a person and making them a prophet, following their teachings. Once again shame on you to try and justify the marriage and sex with a child. I condemn them all.  Will you condemn Mohammad as been an evil pedophile pervert? I will condemn them all, it is wrong and unforgiveable. It is being glorified and you are supporting it by not condemning it.

[Laughing Gravy]

11 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

^^ Laughing gravy - thanks for your input. Very helpful to hear the views from someone that has lived in SA, understands islam, and actually knows what they are talking about vs a progressive ideological stance with no basis in reality whatsoever.

Freddie much appreciated. Yes it is a place that I wouldn't advice anyone to go who doesn't want to see a most brutal regime.  Women are treated like third rate citizens. Beatings, Beheadings, everywhere closes 5 times a day for prayer, the abuse of migrants who are treated like slaves.  The hypocrisy of the Saudis is astounding. preaching Islam and then as soon as they are on a plane leaving Saudi airspace, its alcohol, groping women and are rude on so many levels. Saudis in general for me a e a very lazy race who relay on others to do their work. As soon as we don't need oil, then they will go back to riding camels in the desert. They way they treat other Arabs and Muslims is worse than street dogs. That is just a good short picture of SA in a good light.

 

As you can imagine I will not be going to work on go on holiday there ever again.

 

[Mosha]

An arrest has been made in Dover's port area. Probably a right wing but job, which'll make IS look dumb. (Sarcasm)



Sent from my iris 505 using Tapatalk

[Laughing Gravy]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

A realist? No, an Islamaphobe.

If you class someone as an Islamaphobe as someone who believes in equality between Men and Women. Someone who doesn't class other people of religions as inferior. Someone who doesn't promote and glorify the leader/Prophet Mohammad as a pedophile. Someone who believes in a modern day laws and justice. Someone who believes in freedom of speech and if someone disagrees with it you kill them.  Someone who doesn't think people should have 4 wives no matter what age. Someone who is fed up of seeing his and the rest of the European cultures eradicated, by an out of date, draconian ideology, because we have tried to accept them and live together, which does not work. Then Yes I am an Islamaphobe . Guilty as charged.

[7by7]

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I am not the one going around shouting god is great killing innocent people in the name of Islam.

Neither are 2.75 million innocent, law abiding British Muslims.

 

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

At least the IRA had a goal and end mission. What have these terrorists got killing people across Europe. Nothing. Once again you defend them

So are you seriously stating that in your view because the IRA had a goal and end mission their terrorism, torture and murder was justified and excusable? Well not in mine!

 

Yes, Islamic terrorists are killing innocent people; not just in Europe but in the Middle East and other parts of the world as well. Most victims of Islamic terrorists are themselves Muslim.

 

Defend them? Never. But it's a common accusation thrown at myself and others by people like you who have run out of argument. I ask, nay demand, that you produce anything which I have ever posted which can in any way, shape or form be interpreted as defending terrorism.

 

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Islam IMO does not belong in a modern day society in a free world  with equality.  Yes there are many Muslims who are shocked and maybe weeding them out but there are many who are not and will silently support them in the name of Islam.

More ill informed rubbish. As has been repeatedly shown, the overwhelming majority of the world's Muslim population do not support the terrorists.

 

For example: The 712-page Google doc that proves Muslims do condemn terrorism.

 

Of course, the ordinary Muslim in the street may not publicly condemn terrorism as much as you would like; but many have done so through sites such as  Not In My Name and through street demonstrations they, and others, have organised or participated in;  #Notinmyname: Hundreds of Muslims condemn terror attack

 

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Yes some are taking action. Many are not. Whether home grown or rom overseas if they can't or don't like the British laws and cultures and the same across Europe then they should go to a country that does. My suggestion of Saudi Arabia still stands. No schooling for Girls, segregation, public beheadings, no freedom of speech, just to mention a few niceties. There is no social welfare either

As shown above, not some; many.

 

What makes you think that the 2.75 million innocent, law abiding British Muslims don't like British laws and cultures (at least by using the plural you accept that the UK is multi cultural; which it has been for hundreds if not thousands of years)? Many of them were born here, as were their parents and grandparents. As already stated, many serve this country in the armed forces, police, emergency services and NHS. 

 

In the Channel 4 survey you linked to before when you thought it proved your point shows that 91% of British Muslims feel a strong sense of belonging to their local area; higher than the national average of 76%. Also, 86% of British Muslims feel a strong sense of belonging to Britain; again, higher than the national average of 83%.

 

But you want to round up these innocent, law abiding citizens and deport them merely because of their religion. Now, where have we heard that before?

 

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Yes its wrong on every level but you don't see people glorifying a person and making them a prophet, following their teachings. Once again shame on you to try and justify the marriage and sex with a child. I condemn them all.  Will you condemn Mohammad as been an evil pedophile pervert? I will condemn them all, it is wrong and unforgiveable. It is being glorified and you are supporting it by not condemning it.

There are many things considered acceptable in the past which is now abhorrent. Not just child marriage, but also, for example, child labour; which continued in the UK well into the 19th century.

 

I will, and do, condemn anyone who uses the practices of the past to justify what is today known to be an evil; whether they use Mohammed as their example or Richard II of England, whose second wife, Isabella of Valois, was 6 when they married. Unlike Ayesha's age, that is not subject to debate, but a proven, historical fact.

 

What about Mary? The Bible says she was betrothed to Joseph at the time of Jesus' conception; which according to Jewish custom at the time means she would have been between 10 and 13. So, judging by today's standards, the Christian God is a paedophile!

[7by7]

29 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

If you class someone as an Islamaphobe as someone who believes in equality between Men and Women. Someone who doesn't class other people of religions as inferior. Someone who doesn't promote and glorify the leader/Prophet Mohammad as a pedophile. Someone who believes in a modern day laws and justice. Someone who believes in freedom of speech and if someone disagrees with it you kill them.  Someone who doesn't think people should have 4 wives no matter what age. Someone who is fed up of seeing his and the rest of the European cultures eradicated, by an out of date, draconian ideology, because we have tried to accept them and live together, which does not work. Then Yes I am an Islamaphobe . Guilty as charged.

 No, I go by the actual definition: an irrational fear or hatred of Islam.

 

All the things you list are the justifications you use to justify your fear or hatred. Some of them may be true of some Muslims, but not the majority. I could find similar justifications used to justify hatred of and prejudice against black people in the past, and by some groups today!

 

There was a book published in Germany in 1925 which used similar 'justifications' for hatred of a certain other religion!

 

Edited September 16, 2017 by 7by7

[elliss]

Who could have done it ,   probably a British Muslim , on social benefits .   The EU gates, remain open, for more terrorists to arrive, whose mission is to destroy our  freedom,  of speech and opinion.    We are  lambs  and  slaughtered,  easily . RIP.

[manarak]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 No, I go by the actual definition: an irrational fear or hatred of Islam.

 

All the things you list are the justifications you use to justify your fear or hatred. Some of them may be true of some Muslims, but not the majority. I could find similar justifications used to justify hatred of and prejudice against black people in the past, and by some groups today!

 

There was a book published in Germany in 1925 which used similar 'justifications' for hatred of a certain other religion!

 

congrats, you win the Godwin award for the thread.