Does Britain have a jihadi problem?

[arjunadawn]

Can't claim Muslim violence is a reaction only to western foreign policy. When they have been based on violent expansionism from the start.

ditto for every major religion in world history.

No dexterm, not ditto. Not ditto at all. Islam is based on the koran and the hadith, primarily. The koran is based on three parts, three stages, three different stations in early islam also reflecting the perfect stages in the performance of islam always: 1) Tolerance, 2) Defensive Warfare, 3) Offensive warfare.

These divisions take place under the cosmology of Dar al salam and Dar al harb- the House of Peace and the House of War respectively. The House of Peace is the final promise of islam, it is the final goal, and the path to that goal is the House of War. There must always be a House of War until global jihad results in universal islam. The houses cannot actually exist at the same time. Islam is in a state of war until this time.

There has been no other religion in history that is built upon war like this; a person can try to fit round pegs in square holes, but an argument cannot be made that applies. The koran is built upon "abrogation." Every later passage that conflicts with any earlier passage supersedes the former. Being as the koran is broken up into three stages (reflecting mecca, media, mecca in the life of early islam) the final phase of Offensive War triumphs every single passage where there tolerance might be suggested. This must be so because you must battle the unbelievers wherever you find them until dar al salam is established!

Now, when you listen to knowledgeable muslim apologists and they cite passages showing great tolerance ask them for the sura number. Invariably it will be one of the earlier suras, later superseded by Offensive War suras. No other religion has come close to this design. Indeed, IMO, it can hardly be called a religion at all. It is an entire ideology built on hate and war. When UK citizens consider the problems they are facing please grasp the basics of islam- real islam not what they package you in canned peace-quotes.

Edited September 9, 2014 by arjunadawn

[arjunadawn]

My personal issue is the term "Islamophobia." "My name is Arjunadawn and I am Islamophobic," and it pisses me off to see it used willy nilly on people who may not have earned this unique distinction. I studied my butt off for years trying to understand my fear of islam with depth. I earned my badge of Islamophobia from the deserts of North Africa to the Hindu Kush, and an assload of books, bullets, and interviews along the way. I want my word back.

"I fear islam a great deal."

It is fear.

"I fear!"

"I have fear!"

"I am Islamophobic!"

I wish people would stop using my word as a tool of hate while couched in calling another hateful. My word is misused in this manner and there is not a better word for me. Please return it and use your own word!

Edited September 9, 2014 by arjunadawn

[jacky54]

Can't claim Muslim violence is a reaction only to western foreign policy. When they have been based on violent expansionism from the start.

ditto for every major religion in world history.

Except Buddhism, Sikhism, the Armish, the Quakers and lots of others. Islam is unique in it's calls for violence and it's expansion across the middle east and Africa by violence, and its continued calls for violent jihad across the world

Edited September 12, 2014 by Scott

[boomerangutang]

Can't claim Muslim violence is a reaction only to western foreign policy. When they have been based on violent expansionism from the start.

ditto for every major religion in world history.

not so, some examples (from oldest to newest):

Hinduism: The only religious wars they had were against invading Islamists. There were clashes with the British, but those were more territorial hassles than clashes of religions.

Buddhism: Have little history of war on religious issues. In recent times, there have been battles in Sri Lanka against (surprise!) Islamists.

Hebrew: Have had several campaigns historically, in the Middle East. Currently, there's the un-ending hassle with (guess who?) Islamists.

Christian: Granted, Crusades were several very bloody chapters. Their only big campaigns, in Europe and the M.East have been against Muslims. Exceptions: some ugly campaigns in the Americas against indigenous people, hundreds of years ago. Much of Christian battles have been between their sects in olde times, yet similar such internecine battles are what Muslims keep doing on in the present.

It's only the most recent major religion which has a history of bloody campaigns from its inception, end to end. Geographically, their campaigns have stretched across Europe and through much of Asia. Though with some robust competition from Christianity, Islam still stands head and shoulders above the others as a constantly warring religion.

[JDGRUEN]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

[arjunadawn]

Can't claim Muslim violence is a reaction only to western foreign policy. When they have been based on violent expansionism from the start.

ditto for every major religion in world history.

Except Buddhism, Sikhism, the Armish, the Quakers and lots of others. Islam is unique in it's calls for violence and it's expansion across the middle east and Africa by violence, and it'scontinued calls for violent jihad across the world

After their prophet consolidated his forces/position in Medina he later returned to Mecca to seek revenge, and he got it. From this point on islam turned wholly offensive and it was brutal. I will not go into the details of the prophets life because it is not related to this thread but it is entirely contained in the koran and hadith. I will say that the prophet was the perfect man and insofar as war is concerned, this is troubling. When one reads of the depravity of beheadings, and bloody savagery it is not hard to imagine knowledge of this spreading quickly, and greatly influencing the later capitulation of one people after another.

Islam expanded faster than any other empire (that I can recall). It did not export islam by the slow, steady, natural evolution of trade and ideas. It invaded and subjugated people and assigned them to the sword, the slave, or the shahada. Islam did this by brutal savagery, and cunning tactics. These early years formed the basis of islamic expansion as a jihad duty to free the world of unbelievers. I have previously noted approx 90-110 million people were murdered in the Indian Sub-Continent jihad alone. When one considers the first and second jihads and tries to guesstimate the numbers some have estimated upwards of 270 million people. Because recent empires have sat atop this sleeping nightmare for some generations we, the dumbass modern age, presume that it never was, or cannot be. It is real. Indeed, even the actions taken by the continent in the 12 century were not wars of adventure but responses to the invasion of Byzantium (only recent western self loathing has us revising history to suggest the continent invaded peaceful muslims; this was hardly the case).

It is here, and UK is a gravitational field for some decades now.

[arjunadawn]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

I really think your observation is interesting. Please tell me more why you more narrowly define the current issue as "insurrection" (I agree it can also be called that). Thanks.

[JDGRUEN]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

I really think your observation is interesting. Please tell me more why you more narrowly define the current issue as "insurrection" (I agree it can also be called that). Thanks.

Challenging the current elected ruling body to the extent of threats - inferring violent threats - that radical Islamist will rule ... again by implying at the very least the use of violence by the nature of their statements

[JDGRUEN]

Can't claim Muslim violence is a reaction only to western foreign policy. When they have been based on violent expansionism from the start.

ditto for every major religion in world history.

Except Buddhism, Sikhism, the Armish, the Quakers and lots of others. Islam is unique in it's calls for violence and it's expansion across the middle east and Africa by violence, and it'scontinued calls for violent jihad across the world

Your post is confusing to the point of being disconnected from reality ... or just so poorly stated as to be meaningless ...

[arjunadawn]

Christian: Granted, Crusades were several very bloody chapters. Their only big campaigns, in Europe and the M.East have been against Muslims. Exceptions: some ugly campaigns in the Americas against indigenous people, hundreds of years ago. Much of Christian battles have been between their sects in olde times, yet similar such internecine battles are what Muslims keep doing on in the present.

It's only the most recent major religion which has a history of bloody campaigns from its inception, end to end. Geographically, their campaigns have stretched across Europe and through much of Asia. Though with some robust competition from Christianity, Islam still stands head and shoulders above the others as a constantly warring religion.

Great post. Not sure, though, what is "granted" because this is not "one on ya." The crusades were directly caused by islamic jihad, without doubt. Society has dumbed us down in pursuit of cultural relativism.

It is remarkably unfair of modern perceptions to revise the crusades as some sort of sin our own part. Oh there may have been excesses, indulgences, and all sorts of sordid things but I am talking about precipitating factors. Why did the crusaders pick up and invade the peaceful muslims who were living there minding their own business? Europe did not crusade into the Levant to wage war on Islam!

The crusades were intended to recapture lands that the muslim hoard had invaded, raped, and murdered and claimed as their own. Byzantium had been screaming for some time.

The following link primarily deals with the destruction of the classical world by the hoard but the expansion also penetrated to the east.

By the time of the crusades islamic jihad had been ravaging Europe's borders and penetrating the interior of christian nations constantly.

[arjunadawn]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

I really think your observation is interesting. Please tell me more why you more narrowly define the current issue as "insurrection" (I agree it can also be called that). Thanks.

Challenging the current elected ruling body to the extent of threats - inferring violent threats - that radical Islamist will rule ... again by implying at the very least the use of violence by the nature of their statements

Ok, I see. Yes, you are correct. Under the umbrella of "jihad" there appear to be numerous crimes suggested or present; and belligerent acts suggestive of war. Sedition. Insurgency. Coup de etat. Murder. Threat. Treason. But these things are not prosecuted because... why? Why does UK not prosecute? If the author of the book "Londonistan" is correct it is because the UK legal system has been superseded/hijacked by a technocratic body of unelected fools at the European Union level. Under the color of Human Rights every manner of horrible inferior cultural norm is tolerated, elevated, and the UK is made to subordinate their own values.

Jihad, when viewed in an isolated legal context, is insurrection, but then, this is their intent. The problem is people do not listen; they tell us every day what they intend to do and they are doing it. They are not lying. The clown muslimina who threatened the UK PM (I believe) was not lying; she would do this. Stick the middle finger up to the EU Human Rights people and throw these people in jail, or revoke their passports and ship them to Liberia.

[canman]

You have to love the irony:

FIVE Britons are among a gang of Islamic State fighters dubbed the “Cream Puff Brigade” locked up in a torture camp after they pleaded to go home because they were disillusioned with jihadi war.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/508134/Cream-Puff-Brigade-JIhadists-locked-up-in-Syrian-torture-camp

[Steely Dan]

Here is an article from the Guardian newspaper about ISIS now recruiting through a network of British Mosques. It should be problematic for our resident self appointed chief of source police seeing as it's lib-left PC credentials are beyond reproach. I note from the article that the UK has a large Salafi community, as if we need any more problems.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/isis-recruitment-moves-to-radical-network-and-mosques

[jacky54]

By the time of the crusades islamic jihad had been ravaging Europe's borders and penetrating the interior of christian nations constantly.

Thanks for posting this, never seen it before, the battle maps of Islamic expansion are very interesting especially compared to the crusade map. The only object of the crusade was to liberate Jerusalem and never to re conquer the Christian lands invaded by brutal Islam. He gives a figure of 260 million killed by Islam in 1400 years, and counting of course on a daily basis.

His argument that the dark ages in Europe were caused by Islamic expansion and trade restriction was interesting, the only bright spot was the Muslims getting kicked out of Spain after causing so much death, opression and misery, we live in hope!

[Thorgal]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

I really think your observation is interesting. Please tell me more why you more narrowly define the current issue as "insurrection" (I agree it can also be called that). Thanks.

Why is the 'insurection' always greener at the other side ?

I don't see any form of it in the UK.

[arjunadawn]

By the time of the crusades islamic jihad had been ravaging Europe's borders and penetrating the interior of christian nations constantly.Thanks for posting this, never seen it before, the battle maps of Islamic expansion are very interesting especially compared to the crusade map. The only object of the crusade was to liberate Jerusalem and never to re conquer the Christian lands invaded by brutal Islam. He gives a figure of 260 million killed by Islam in 1400 years, and counting of course on a daily basis.

His argument that the dark ages in Europe were caused by Islamic expansion and trade restriction was interesting, the only bright spot was the Muslims getting kicked out of Spain after causing so much death, opression and misery, we live in hope!

I think the speaker's personality sucks. If I was in grade school I woulda smacked the crap out of him and taken his lunch money. He makes over the top, stupid geek jokes while discussing global disaster. His message is intact, but he is a buffoon or sorts. I think I am recalling the same clip that did not show the other theaters of islamic expansion, and the timelines. The eastern expansion was brutal, whereas the bodies piled up in the west over numerous battles. In the east it was nearly a steamroller. I have read estimates that up to 270 million were killed in the first two islamic expansions. Of course one would really have to look at the number, but with regards to the eastern front into the Indian subcontinent I have seen repeated sources looking at 90-110 million slaughtered!

[arjunadawn]

No Britain does not have a jihadi problem ... it has an near insurrection problem... but the Brit Politically Correct liberal Muslim apologists will make certain nothing is done about it ... and will refuse to see the truth - even when it is thrown back in their faces....

http://pamelageller.com/2014/09/uk-muslima-want-camerons-head-spike.html/

I really think your observation is interesting. Please tell me more why you more narrowly define the current issue as "insurrection" (I agree it can also be called that). Thanks.

Why is the 'insurection' always greener at the other side ?

I don't see any form of it in the UK.

There was also another poster who commented on "insurrection." At first I did not grasp what they meant. But yes, under the banner of what jihadists are doing existing law would likely capture their actions in "insurrection," or otherwise motivating insurrection. I don't know the legal technicalities of insurrection as the definition would change for different locations, but basically, an insurgency seeks to overthrow the existing government and there are many roads to achieve this. Have taught counter insurgency for 30 years I feel confident that the political actions of UK jihadis qualify as being similar to how political voices would sound if they were that wing of a different insurgency. So, I conclude, for me, that both these guys are correct. There are existing laws to manage this without having to raise the specter of opposing Islam, or religious persecution; just go after the political statements etc., as fostering conflict and sedition.

[boomerangutang]

You have to love the irony:

FIVE Britons are among a gang of Islamic State fighters dubbed the Cream Puff Brigade locked up in a torture camp after they pleaded to go home because they were disillusioned with jihadi war.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/508134/Cream-Puff-Brigade-JIhadists-locked-up-in-Syrian-torture-camp

The article mentions: 3 French, 2 Belgians, 2 Germans with the 5 Brits. It's estimated about 3,500 Europeans have gone to join IS. I haven't heard policies from other European countries, the any Brits who return to Britannia are supposedly in for a sobering shock. Here's what the Brits should do: If it's found the travelers went and got involved supporting the IS in any way:

>>>> if they became British subjects in the past 3 years, have their citizenship revoked and non-re-instatable - and be deported as 'persona non grata'.

>>>> if Brit subjects longer than 3 years, have them be detained and charged with serious charges (aiding the enemy?).

Other European and farang countries should do similar.

Actually, that's why there is the Cream Puff Brigade. The Europeans realized their citizenship was in jeopardy, so they called home and said something like, "Ok, I'm sorry. I want to come home now. Is that Ok with everyone?"

>>>>

[H1w4yR1da]

As well as a jihadi problem, Britain, it appears, also had an honour killing problem.

http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/honor-killings-on-the-rise-in-the-uk/32617.article

[simple1]

As well as a jihadi problem, Britain, it appears, also had an honour killing problem.

http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/honor-killings-on-the-rise-in-the-uk/32617.article

Almost two-thirds (69%) of young British Asians aged 16-34 consider that families should live according to the concept of ‘honour’ or ‘izzat’. The proportion is lowest among Asian Christians (62%) and Hindus (64%) and greatest for Muslims (70%) and Sikhs (79%).

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2012/honour-crimes/

[Credo]

It's a little off-topic, but what % of those listed actually kill someone because of honor?

[H1w4yR1da]

As well as a jihadi problem, Britain, it appears, also had an honour killing problem.

http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/honor-killings-on-the-rise-in-the-uk/32617.article

Almost two-thirds (69%) of young British Asians aged 16-34 consider that families should live according to the concept of ‘honour’ or ‘izzat’. The proportion is lowest among Asian Christians (62%) and Hindus (64%) and greatest for Muslims (70%) and Sikhs (79%).

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2012/honour-crimes/

There's just one problem with these type of polls. The honesty of the respondents. As

Islam legitimises lying to non-believers, any replies cannot be taken seriously.

FAIL!

[simple1]

It's a little off-topic, but what % of those listed actually kill someone because of honor?

Don't know, but official figures claim currently around 12 honour killings p.a. in UK. nearly all within Muslim families, a small number by Hindus / Sikhs.

[thaibeachlovers]

Here is an article from the Guardian newspaper about ISIS now recruiting through a network of British Mosques. It should be problematic for our resident self appointed chief of source police seeing as it's lib-left PC credentials are beyond reproach. I note from the article that the UK has a large Salafi community, as if we need any more problems.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/isis-recruitment-moves-to-radical-network-and-mosques

The British authorities should be encouraging as many jihadis as possible to go to Syria. The US will be obliging with a 500 pounder and problem solved.

[Seastallion]

Here is an article from the Guardian newspaper about ISIS now recruiting through a network of British Mosques. It should be problematic for our resident self appointed chief of source police seeing as it's lib-left PC credentials are beyond reproach. I note from the article that the UK has a large Salafi community, as if we need any more problems.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/isis-recruitment-moves-to-radical-network-and-mosques

The British authorities should be encouraging as many jihadis as possible to go to Syria. The US will be obliging with a 500 pounder and problem solved.

That's thinking outside the square and I agree.

[7by7]

As well as a jihadi problem, Britain, it appears, also had an honour killing problem.

http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/honor-killings-on-the-rise-in-the-uk/32617.article

Almost two-thirds (69%) of young British Asians aged 16-34 consider that families should live according to the concept of ‘honour’ or ‘izzat’. The proportion is lowest among Asian Christians (62%) and Hindus (64%) and greatest for Muslims (70%) and Sikhs (79%).

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2012/honour-crimes/

There's just one problem with these type of polls. The honesty of the respondents. As

Islam legitimises lying to non-believers, any replies cannot be taken seriously.

FAIL!

Ah, the old "All Muslims are liars" argument, which always crops up whenever the Islamaphobes are presented with facts which disprove their prejudices!

[transam]

As well as a jihadi problem, Britain, it appears, also had an honour killing problem.

http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/honor-killings-on-the-rise-in-the-uk/32617.article

Almost two-thirds (69%) of young British Asians aged 16-34 consider that families should live according to the concept of ‘honour’ or ‘izzat’. The proportion is lowest among Asian Christians (62%) and Hindus (64%) and greatest for Muslims (70%) and Sikhs (79%).

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2012/honour-crimes/

There's just one problem with these type of polls. The honesty of the respondents. As

Islam legitimises lying to non-believers, any replies cannot be taken seriously.

FAIL!

Ah, the old "All Muslims are liars" argument, which always crops up whenever the Islamaphobes are presented with facts which disprove their prejudices!

You obviously ain't read "that" book..............

I haven't either, thats why I don't make excuses for 'em..........

Edited September 13, 2014 by transam

[7by7]

Here is an article from the Guardian newspaper about ISIS now recruiting through a network of British Mosques. It should be problematic for our resident self appointed chief of source police seeing as it's lib-left PC credentials are beyond reproach. I note from the article that the UK has a large Salafi community, as if we need any more problems.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/isis-recruitment-moves-to-radical-network-and-mosques

Maybe you should read the whole article, not just the headline!

But you couldn't even get the headline right!

It's "Isis recruitment moves from online networks to British mosques."

Not, as you seem to think, or at least want others to think, "Isis recruitment moves to networks of British mosques!"

No one has denied there is a problem in the UK with fundamentalist Muslims.

No one has denied that a handful of mosques either promote this or allow others to use their premises to do so.

But, as the article you have linked to shows, these fundamentalists represent a very small minority of British Muslims, only a handful of mosques allow them to preach and use their premises, the majority of British Muslims are aware of this problem and, in conjunction with other, including the authorities, they are trying to combat it.

But, of course, as you subscribe to the 'all Muslims are liars' philosophy, you wont believe any of that!

[jacky54]

No one has denied there is a problem in the UK with fundamentalist Muslims.

No one has denied that a handful of mosques either promote this or allow others to use their premises to do so.

The problem lies not with 'fundamentalists' that's just a smoke screen, the problem lies with Islam itself, the Koran and the life of the Prophet, individual Muslims and groups however, you want to describe them are all the victims of it.

[chiang mai]

No one has denied there is a problem in the UK with fundamentalist Muslims.

No one has denied that a handful of mosques either promote this or allow others to use their premises to do so.

The problem lies not with 'fundamentalists' that's just a smoke screen, the problem lies with Islam itself, the Koran and the life of the Prophet, individual Muslims and groups however, you want to describe them are all the victims of it.

Do you understand how stupid your statements are, if the names of the religion are changed, no, I thought not!

The problem lies not with 'fundamentalists' that's just a smoke screen, the problem lies with Christianity itself, the Bible and the life of Jesus, individual Christians and groups however, you want to describe them are all the victims of it.

PS: the last part of your sentence made no sense to me.