Does Britain have a jihadi problem?

[chiang mai]

Ah yes the good old apologist ploy number one- what about the Christians then and what they did 100's of years ago, as if that somehow justifies all the death, war and misery that Islam is causing around the world TODAY and specifically in the name if Islam.

Radical Islam is the greatest threat facing the world today, not Christians, not Jews, not Hindus, not the fundamentalists from any other religion.

I agree. But baby and bath water!

[jacky54]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

Both the same in my opinion, the 'extremist' is just more honest and sincere in living out the call from Islamic scripture

[jacky54]

Ah yes the good old apologist ploy number one- what about the Christians then and what they did 100's of years ago, as if that somehow justifies all the death, war and misery that Islam is causing around the world TODAY and specifically in the name if Islam.

Radical Islam is the greatest threat facing the world today, not Christians, not Jews, not Hindus, not the fundamentalists from any other religion.

I agree. But baby and bath water!

There is no such thing as radical Islam, there IS only Islam!

[chiang mai]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

The second ploy of an apologist- it's just a minority that causes the problem, that's not the point and not the problem. The thing that causes ALL the problem is Islam itself, nothing to do with minorities or majorities.

Ridiculous. Why not take your argument down to the next level and tell us that it's people that cause the problem!, Babies and bath water again.

[chiang mai]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

Anything is possible but is it likely, not in my world, not at this point in time.

[jacky54]

People who live out the commands of the koran do indeed cause the problem, the koran on it's own cannot fly planes into buildings, behead people, burn down Churches, kidnapp Schoolgirls and blow innocents up with suicide bombs.

[jacky54]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

Anything is possible but is it likely, not in my world, not at this point in time.

Not in your world of Pattaya no but try to look at the news sometimes.

[Ulysses G.]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

I have no problem with moderate Muslims. It is the radical ones and other Muslims that support them - directly or indirectly - that are the trouble. However, I am afraid that a huge percentage fall into one of those three categories and most of the supporters do not publicize their true loyalties.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[MJP]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

I have no problem with moderate Muslims. It is the radial ones and other Muslims that support them - directly or indirectly - that are the trouble. However, I am afraid that a huge percentage fall into one of those three categories and most of the supporters do not publicize their true loyalties.

Cleared it up for me. Thanks.

[Albertosez]

http://time.com/3274109/shabab-leader-killed/

Hopefully - more to come.

Tick, Tock...

[chiang mai]

It's the attitudes of people like 2 posters on here that decry all of Islam, just because of a minority, that is the bigger problem everywhere, unfortunately.

Is it though? I'm undecided whether it's Islamic extremism or in fact Islam.

Anything is possible but is it likely, not in my world, not at this point in time.

Not in your world of Pattaya no but try to look at the news sometimes.

There's a clue in my name and oddly, it isn't spelled Pattaya!

[simple1]

Ah yes the good old apologist ploy number one- what about the Christians then and what they did 100's of years ago, as if that somehow justifies all the death, war and misery that Islam is causing around the world TODAY and specifically in the name if Islam.

No problem with you attacking Islamic extremism per se, but to say all or the large majority of Muslims support extremism is, in my opinion, false. The much respected Pew Research Centre has published some analysis at the URL below. US analysts, not known for their objectivity, claim averaging somewhere between 10 -25% support / sympathisers across all Muslim populations.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/07/01/concerns-about-islamic-extremism-on-the-rise-in-middle-east/

Those who would identify themselves as from the Christian faith with their policies, attitudes and actions have contributed to the deaths of millions of civilians in the 19th & 20th and 21st centuries. During the Rwanda genocide hundreds of thousands died, contributed to by Church political support; though some Christians were very brave in assisting some targeted for death, as were some Muslims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Rwanda#1994_Genocide

Edited September 6, 2014 by simple1

[arjunadawn]

small elite group? but not as small as the apologists right. Having a bit of a laugh about a band is hardly demonising a bloke, lighten up . You are right it's always the radicals, but they are all inspired by the same thing-Islamic texts if not why do they all quote the koran and hadith to justifiy their actions? What can be done about it? expose the falseness of Islam wherever you can and oppose it's insidious spread. If the UK had done this years ago there would not be hundreds of radicals from the UK fighting for ISIS now

Ah yes, the so called apologists, are those the same people that simply disagree that Islam is a religion fanatics and death? Presumably you're what, Christian, in which case how about we talk about all the people who have been killed by Christians/Catholics/Jews/whatevers in the name of their respective god:

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

And whilst writing; so you're "having a bit of a laugh about a bloke" is it, "me thinks thou doth protesteth too much! It seems to me from your posts on this subject, based on all the links and counter arguments you've provided, that this for you is a pretty serious subject; yet when somebody calls your bluff, ah well you see guv, we was just 'avin' a larf really, see. Hmmmm!

Yes, apologists are those who disagree Islam is a religion of fanatics and death. This itself by no means suggests they are muslim or support those acts; they are just people who defend an issue for whatever reason. I am not christian. But it is not necessary for another to have any religion to have the observations currently regarding jihadi expansion in this, the THIRD JIHAD phase of islamic expansion (your race to infer someone must be christian is so... cliche); all one must do to see is shake off the Novocaine!

Its curious that to make some point you must stack all the other big world religions together in order to (In your opinion) exceed the barbarity of Islam for your point to be valid. I suppose it would ultimately come down to what facts a person believes but I believe the islam jihad expansion into the Indian subcontinent exceeded all the other great purges and genocides of mankind combined! I believe estimates on this singular islamic expansion exceed 100,000,000.00 deaths; of course we are to assume these are predominantly men and fighters so we should extrapolate countless ancillary family victims to rape, slavery, and horrible ends. All of christianity never came close to this era of barbarism (and I have no use for christian history).

However, none of this matters because it is irrelevant to include facts regarding the past to justify something today. None of us live in the past. Our children and homes are not in yesterday, they are here. The third islamic jihad is here and regrettably for those of you here who refuse to see it, you will soon see it! In fact, its quite possible in just a few short years you can return here in humility and retract your apologetic words, as shortsighted.

[boomerangutang]

US analysts, not known for their objectivity, claim averaging somewhere between 10 -25% support / sympathisers across all Muslim populations.

I assume they mean: support / sympathize with extremists.

It's somewhat of a moot point, what % of a Muslim community support of sympathize with radicals, because extremists' influence far outweighs their numbers. In other words, even if just 3% of a Muslim community chose to push their radical views on everyone (inside and outside the community), no other member of the Muslim community would dynamically counter them. Sure, there would be tongue waggling in hushed tones among the non-extremists, but none would have the courage to speak up or stand up to radicals shouting 'Allah Akbar' dressing in black and waving weapons aloft.

At most there would be a momentary shouting match with the word 'Allah' brandished every fourth word. But radicals are not going to be shut down with words.

[arjunadawn]

Dont you feel like you roll a rock up hill? It seems some on TV actually choose counter positions to the obvious, to reason, if only to keep debate or conflict going on TV. Yet... this is not accurate, is it? They actually [seem to] believe that defending Islamic expansion can be done one tooth, one nail, one inch, one murder, one beheading, one defensive post at a time. Since the data supporting the war on western civlization now arrives in daily deluge people some people continue to argue every single inch of reason and object reality, to the point of absurdity. This is my opinion. I realize others have different opinions than me, and offer reasonable alternatives or such. But so much of what is defending radical islam here on TV does not even rise to the level of competent argument; its just wild flailing of verbal fists in response to_____(insert forum topic).

There is not even a framework for their defense that explains why polls show, within the past few months, citizens (in the US, for example) feel "not enough is being done to battle islamic jihad;" in other words, as more and more people around the world are saying "enough is enough" and "what are we doing about it?" the posters defending this jihadi expansion/terrorism on TV do not account for this surge in public awareness/outrage of islamic expansion. Why are an increasing amount of citizens in western countries expressing grave concern and heightened fear from a movement or jihad that is largely suggested here, by some, not to exist?

(There are numerous factors that can be tabulated to reach the conclusion that there is both growing awareness and increasing fear/outrage. From published books on the topic to OpEds, to lead pieces, to bylines, to polls, to the ubiquitous news footage of savage islamic jihad).

Personally I have not seen one post that defends radical Islamic actions or ideology in this topic. It would be good for you to provide quotes that support your claim.

Only my opinion, but with your claimed background you should be ashamed to be posting support or 'likes' for transitioning to UK Govt institutionalised extremism. Instead of being a supporter of tolatarianism, why not express your views on how to address the issues within a legal framework, UK laws are in-place.

Well, that's the nature of these things, isn't it; two people draw different conclusions. It would be good of me to provide quotes, I agree. It would also be good for me to make coffee and fetch slippers! My point will not be made more present by my going and fetching quotes you already read. If your aware previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them, that says a lot. If your not aware of previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them while making such a post, says a lot.

No man has more a claim to brilliance or stupidity by virtue of a "claimed background;" though it may provide perspective. Any adult knows this. Yet you employ what you muse about my background and also conclude I support "totalitarian" (whatever the Hs4ll this means) and this irreconcilability (for you) is something I should have shame regarding? Because of your irreconcilability? (This will be my daily laugh; thanks).

Your final sentence borders on the ludicrous and captures the essence that you view these issues from inside a very safe box. You assert I am advocating actions outside of the law and I should refrain myself to a "legal framework"= I have ZERO idea what you are implying here but abiding by all laws, irrespective of their relation to natural rights and just law, is the work of fools, not men. Just a note: If a law enslaves, violates or is otherwise repugnant to conscience, it is the duty of a man to object. I will never advocate actions within or without the scope of the law. I only advocate actions irrespective of the law! It is simply irrelevant to me when discussing survival of a civilization. The fact you seek some pedantic handhold on your self-invented point demonstrates your woeful unpreparedness to engage in conversation at the large table on the holidays.

Whenever a person is part of a larger group and one among you is always suspecting others of having designs on stealing, you can be assured that person talking has thoughts on stealing. Likewise, if a man says he is "X" then... the man is likely "X." Why on earth would someone suppose that man was not "X" was not, unless... Therefore, don't employ my past as if it is some utility for your inferior and tragic point. BTW, if it troubles you that my "claimed background" conflicts with your sensibilities, keep it to yourself! No one gives a _____.

[chiang mai]

Verbose at best!

[simple1]

Dont you feel like you roll a rock up hill? It seems some on TV actually choose counter positions to the obvious, to reason, if only to keep debate or conflict going on TV. Yet... this is not accurate, is it? They actually [seem to] believe that defending Islamic expansion can be done one tooth, one nail, one inch, one murder, one beheading, one defensive post at a time. Since the data supporting the war on western civlization now arrives in daily deluge people some people continue to argue every single inch of reason and object reality, to the point of absurdity. This is my opinion. I realize others have different opinions than me, and offer reasonable alternatives or such. But so much of what is defending radical islam here on TV does not even rise to the level of competent argument; its just wild flailing of verbal fists in response to_____(insert forum topic).

There is not even a framework for their defense that explains why polls show, within the past few months, citizens (in the US, for example) feel "not enough is being done to battle islamic jihad;" in other words, as more and more people around the world are saying "enough is enough" and "what are we doing about it?" the posters defending this jihadi expansion/terrorism on TV do not account for this surge in public awareness/outrage of islamic expansion. Why are an increasing amount of citizens in western countries expressing grave concern and heightened fear from a movement or jihad that is largely suggested here, by some, not to exist?

(There are numerous factors that can be tabulated to reach the conclusion that there is both growing awareness and increasing fear/outrage. From published books on the topic to OpEds, to lead pieces, to bylines, to polls, to the ubiquitous news footage of savage islamic jihad).

Personally I have not seen one post that defends radical Islamic actions or ideology in this topic. It would be good for you to provide quotes that support your claim.

Only my opinion, but with your claimed background you should be ashamed to be posting support or 'likes' for transitioning to UK Govt institutionalised extremism. Instead of being a supporter of tolatarianism, why not express your views on how to address the issues within a legal framework, UK laws are in-place.

Well, that's the nature of these things, isn't it; two people draw different conclusions. It would be good of me to provide quotes, I agree. It would also be good for me to make coffee and fetch slippers! My point will not be made more present by my going and fetching quotes you already read. If your aware previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them, that says a lot. If your not aware of previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them while making such a post, says a lot.

No man has more a claim to brilliance or stupidity by virtue of a "claimed background;" though it may provide perspective. Any adult knows this. Yet you employ what you muse about my background and also conclude I support "totalitarian" (whatever the Hs4ll this means) and this irreconcilability (for you) is something I should have shame regarding? Because of your irreconcilability? (This will be my daily laugh; thanks).

Your final sentence borders on the ludicrous and captures the essence that you view these issues from inside a very safe box. You assert I am advocating actions outside of the law and I should refrain myself to a "legal framework"= I have ZERO idea what you are implying here but abiding by all laws, irrespective of their relation to natural rights and just law, is the work of fools, not men. Just a note: If a law enslaves, violates or is otherwise repugnant to conscience, it is the duty of a man to object. I will never advocate actions within or without the scope of the law. I only advocate actions irrespective of the law! It is simply irrelevant to me when discussing survival of a civilization. The fact you seek some pedantic handhold on your self-invented point demonstrates your woeful unpreparedness to engage in conversation at the large table on the holidays.

Whenever a person is part of a larger group and one among you is always suspecting others of having designs on stealing, you can be assured that person talking has thoughts on stealing. Likewise, if a man says he is "X" then... the man is likely "X." Why on earth would someone suppose that man was not "X" was not, unless... Therefore, don't employ my past as if it is some utility for your inferior and tragic point. BTW, if it troubles you that my "claimed background" conflicts with your sensibilities, keep it to yourself! No one gives a _____.

You are making claims that people in this topic support Islamic extremism, to repeat I have not seen one, so prove your assertion.

Your professional background doesn't trouble me, but your constant claims that all Muslims, or at least the large majority, are singing from the same song book does and is unproven. You subscribe to the claims of Islamic extremist propaganda.

"I only advocate actions irrespective of the law!"

You are spot on with that statement.

[simple1]

US analysts, not known for their objectivity, claim averaging somewhere between 10 -25% support / sympathisers across all Muslim populations.

I assume they mean: support / sympathize with extremists.

It's somewhat of a moot point, what % of a Muslim community support of sympathize with radicals, because extremists' influence far outweighs their numbers. In other words, even if just 3% of a Muslim community chose to push their radical views on everyone (inside and outside the community), no other member of the Muslim community would dynamically counter them. Sure, there would be tongue waggling in hushed tones among the non-extremists, but none would have the courage to speak up or stand up to radicals shouting 'Allah Akbar' dressing in black and waving weapons aloft.

At most there would be a momentary shouting match with the word 'Allah' brandished every fourth word. But radicals are not going to be shut down with words.

Agree

[thaibeachlovers]

How do ordinary British Muslims feel about British jihadists?

Well, here's the view of an effected family.

'You've betrayed us': Parents of private school jihadist in emotional appeal for her to stop inciting massacre and return home from Syria

Her parents, Muzaffar and Khalida, said they were horrified that their 'sweet, peaceful, intelligent' child had joined jihadists in Syria and had hoped she would become a doctor in Britain.

In a statement issued today, they said she had 'betrayed' the family but begged for her to return home.

They said: 'We still love you, Aqsa, but we now have to put your family, your brother and sisters first as you have betrayed us, our community and the people of Scotland when you took this step.

'You have torn the heart out of our family and changed our lives forever. Please come home.'

The problem is that some Muslim folk in the UK.......... ACTUALLY want to kill people, abroad they get away with it, in the UK they will get caught...

Actually, the UK govt. should be encouraging as many jihadists as possible to go to Syria/ Iraq. As soon as Obama gets around to finally signing up to an anti IS bombing campaign in both countries they will be getting a 500 pounder where it hurts. Excellent result.

[arjunadawn]

Well, that's the nature of these things, isn't it; two people draw different conclusions. It would be good of me to provide quotes, I agree. It would also be good for me to make coffee and fetch slippers! My point will not be made more present by my going and fetching quotes you already read. If your aware previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them, that says a lot. If your not aware of previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them while making such a post, says a lot.

No man has more a claim to brilliance or stupidity by virtue of a "claimed background;" though it may provide perspective. Any adult knows this. Yet you employ what you muse about my background and also conclude I support "totalitarian" (whatever the Hs4ll this means) and this irreconcilability (for you) is something I should have shame regarding? Because of your irreconcilability? (This will be my daily laugh; thanks).

Your final sentence borders on the ludicrous and captures the essence that you view these issues from inside a very safe box. You assert I am advocating actions outside of the law and I should refrain myself to a "legal framework"= I have ZERO idea what you are implying here but abiding by all laws, irrespective of their relation to natural rights and just law, is the work of fools, not men. Just a note: If a law enslaves, violates or is otherwise repugnant to conscience, it is the duty of a man to object. I will never advocate actions within or without the scope of the law. I only advocate actions irrespective of the law! It is simply irrelevant to me when discussing survival of a civilization. The fact you seek some pedantic handhold on your self-invented point demonstrates your woeful unpreparedness to engage in conversation at the large table on the holidays.

Whenever a person is part of a larger group and one among you is always suspecting others of having designs on stealing, you can be assured that person talking has thoughts on stealing. Likewise, if a man says he is "X" then... the man is likely "X." Why on earth would someone suppose that man was not "X" was not, unless... Therefore, don't employ my past as if it is some utility for your inferior and tragic point. BTW, if it troubles you that my "claimed background" conflicts with your sensibilities, keep it to yourself! No one gives a _____.

You are making claims that people in this topic support Islamic extremism, to repeat I have not seen one, so prove your assertion.

Your professional background doesn't trouble me, but your constant claims that all Muslims, or at least the large majority, are singing from the same song book does and is unproven. You subscribe to the claims of Islamic extremist propaganda.

"I only advocate actions irrespective of the law!"

You are spot on with that statement.

Okay, so you and I sync on something. We believe authority comes from the inherent rightness of something, not necessarily self proscribed laws or unconscionable laws. But that was a lesser issue, I think. At 600+ posts, and a few similar threads, I will not go through and salvage points to declare my position. Reading comprehensions was not one of my poor subjects, math was. Perhaps it is the nature of my (and similar folks) advocating our position that silently, the thought forms that others who oppose my position, therefore support what I oppose. I would be sliding into some false logic and wrong conclusions if I did thought this way. I will honor your position and consider this point. (The reverse is also valid).

It is simply true that I have no problems with muslims; it is a fine point but an important point for the conduct of my life and arrangement of my thoughts and rationales. I do have a problem with the underlying ideology that motivates muslims to actions antithetical with civilized life, and wed to a primitive barbarism that we have collectively eclipsed long ago. Therefore, the actions of muslims are most definitely fair game. It is overwhelmingly apparent that the silence of muslims reflects tacit endorsement. Really? The ideology that brings this terror in the world is also conducive to meekness, and tentative declarations? The same sura and hadith that produce nonstop authority for heinous crimes also produce a silent majority that have been instructed in their faith "to turn the other cheek?" I hardly think this is true and having read the koran in depth for analysis I cannot find support for that anywhere. It is just not true that Islam produced both the terrorist and the coward.

Therefore, it is hardly a reach for me to announce, at this fairly late hour in western civilization's day, that the silence of muslims is in fact deafening and the absence of declaration at this point most certainly is a form of declaration. With such intuition I then peruse the many and varied polls taken from muslims throughout the world suggesting an alarming passive support for jihadi actions. When I then take that observation and subject it to further critical thinking I find significant authorization for the ummah to dissemble and deceive (taqiyya); how can I conclude otherwise? I can wish otherwise. I can dream otherwise. But why would a man invite himself, contrary to his intuition, to believe in a fantasy that is not supported by reality?

When you say I subscribe to the claims of Islamic extreme propaganda I think you mean that I buy- i believe what they are saying? If so, you are correct; I do! Only a fool would not. When such an overwhelming amount of experience convinces me the sun will rise tomorrow, because it always had in the past, I would be a fool to think the sun would not rise tomorrow.

[canman]

I see Obama is in the UK and visited Stonehenge, apparently he wanted to see what real stones looked like.

[Steely Dan]

Here's a quick review of the tiny minority meme. The stats pertinent to the UK are the 40% in favour of Sharia law, whilst 20% supported the 7/7 bombers whilst a whacking 45% are 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/04/myth-tiny-radical-minority

These numbers are quite devastating if you estimate the number of UK Muslims at say 3 million.

[7by7]

Here's a quick review of the tiny minority meme. The stats pertinent to the UK are the 40% in favour of Sharia law, whilst 20% supported the 7/7 bombers whilst a whacking 45% are 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

riends of Hamas' hoax',

Some of the 'stats' they quote came from an 8 year old poll conducted by the Telegraph, which they do link to.

The article does say that 40% of respondents wanted Sharia law introduced; but does not say whether they want it to replace UK law or simply for civil disputes, as with Beth Din and as has happened since that Telegraph article was published 8 years ago,

In addition

The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.

Many people have had sympathy with the feelings and motives of other terrorist organisations, Irish Americans and the IRA for example. Are you saying that these Irish Americans were terrorists and supported the IRA's atrocities?

You will also see that only 500 people were surveyed; 500 out of a Muslim population of, at the time, nearly 2million! Not very representative.

No links are provided to support their other claims about the UK, except to an 8 year old article by the director of the Democracy Institute; who in 2006 published a book claiming graphic warnings on cigarette packets don't work; a book funded by Imperial Tobacco! Can we take what they say seriously? Who funds their 'research' into Islamic extremism? Mossad?

As I have already said, only a fool would deny that the UK does have a problem with Muslim youths being radicalised; but to demonise the whole Muslim population because of this wont do anything to solve that problem; instead it will only make it worse.

Initiatives such as those I have already posted about will.

Edited September 6, 2014 by 7by7

[Seastallion]

Well, that's the nature of these things, isn't it; two people draw different conclusions. It would be good of me to provide quotes, I agree. It would also be good for me to make coffee and fetch slippers! My point will not be made more present by my going and fetching quotes you already read. If your aware previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them, that says a lot. If your not aware of previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them while making such a post, says a lot.

No man has more a claim to brilliance or stupidity by virtue of a "claimed background;" though it may provide perspective. Any adult knows this. Yet you employ what you muse about my background and also conclude I support "totalitarian" (whatever the Hs4ll this means) and this irreconcilability (for you) is something I should have shame regarding? Because of your irreconcilability? (This will be my daily laugh; thanks).

Your final sentence borders on the ludicrous and captures the essence that you view these issues from inside a very safe box. You assert I am advocating actions outside of the law and I should refrain myself to a "legal framework"= I have ZERO idea what you are implying here but abiding by all laws, irrespective of their relation to natural rights and just law, is the work of fools, not men. Just a note: If a law enslaves, violates or is otherwise repugnant to conscience, it is the duty of a man to object. I will never advocate actions within or without the scope of the law. I only advocate actions irrespective of the law! It is simply irrelevant to me when discussing survival of a civilization. The fact you seek some pedantic handhold on your self-invented point demonstrates your woeful unpreparedness to engage in conversation at the large table on the holidays.

Whenever a person is part of a larger group and one among you is always suspecting others of having designs on stealing, you can be assured that person talking has thoughts on stealing. Likewise, if a man says he is "X" then... the man is likely "X." Why on earth would someone suppose that man was not "X" was not, unless... Therefore, don't employ my past as if it is some utility for your inferior and tragic point. BTW, if it troubles you that my "claimed background" conflicts with your sensibilities, keep it to yourself! No one gives a _____.

You are making claims that people in this topic support Islamic extremism, to repeat I have not seen one, so prove your assertion.

Your professional background doesn't trouble me, but your constant claims that all Muslims, or at least the large majority, are singing from the same song book does and is unproven. You subscribe to the claims of Islamic extremist propaganda.

"I only advocate actions irrespective of the law!"

You are spot on with that statement.

Okay, so you and I sync on something. We believe authority comes from the inherent rightness of something, not necessarily self proscribed laws or unconscionable laws. But that was a lesser issue, I think. At 600+ posts, and a few similar threads, I will not go through and salvage points to declare my position. Reading comprehensions was not one of my poor subjects, math was. Perhaps it is the nature of my (and similar folks) advocating our position that silently, the thought forms that others who oppose my position, therefore support what I oppose. I would be sliding into some false logic and wrong conclusions if I did thought this way. I will honor your position and consider this point. (The reverse is also valid).

It is simply true that I have no problems with muslims; it is a fine point but an important point for the conduct of my life and arrangement of my thoughts and rationales. I do have a problem with the underlying ideology that motivates muslims to actions antithetical with civilized life, and wed to a primitive barbarism that we have collectively eclipsed long ago. Therefore, the actions of muslims are most definitely fair game. It is overwhelmingly apparent that the silence of muslims reflects tacit endorsement. Really? The ideology that brings this terror in the world is also conducive to meekness, and tentative declarations? The same sura and hadith that produce nonstop authority for heinous crimes also produce a silent majority that have been instructed in their faith "to turn the other cheek?" I hardly think this is true and having read the koran in depth for analysis I cannot find support for that anywhere. It is just not true that Islam produced both the terrorist and the coward.

Therefore, it is hardly a reach for me to announce, at this fairly late hour in western civilization's day, that the silence of muslims is in fact deafening and the absence of declaration at this point most certainly is a form of declaration. With such intuition I then peruse the many and varied polls taken from muslims throughout the world suggesting an alarming passive support for jihadi actions. When I then take that observation and subject it to further critical thinking I find significant authorization for the ummah to dissemble and deceive (taqiyya); how can I conclude otherwise? I can wish otherwise. I can dream otherwise. But why would a man invite himself, contrary to his intuition, to believe in a fantasy that is not supported by reality?

When you say I subscribe to the claims of Islamic extreme propaganda I think you mean that I buy- i believe what they are saying? If so, you are correct; I do! Only a fool would not. When such an overwhelming amount of experience convinces me the sun will rise tomorrow, because it always had in the past, I would be a fool to think the sun would not rise tomorrow.

May I make some comments on your thinking?

The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, and thus those that oppose your position may not support what you oppose; You are correct to say you would be sliding into false logic and (possibly) wrong conclusions if you thought otherwise.

I think it important that if you are going to maintain that you have no problem with Muslims then you should make the distinction of "some" Muslims when talking about "the underlying ideology that motivates (them) to antithetical actions.....", and "Therefore..the actions of (some) Muslims are fair game..." etc. Without the distinction, you do lump all Muslims together and it is simply not true that the majority of Muslims perform actions antithetical with civilised life.

You make an understandable argument that the silent majority show tacit endorsement for the terrorism, but it is not a conclusive argument at all. There may be many reasons you do not hear much outcry. Ennui, fear of reprisal, lack of opportunity, lack of cohesive society are some possibilities that do not imply tacit agreement. Lack of media coverage (because it's not as sensational a story as a beheading) could be another. The deafening silence is most certainly NOT a declaration of approval.

It may be contrary to your intuition, but others have intuition of their own, based on their own experiences and knowledge. What you have is an unsubstantiated belief, albeit with some things that compel you. Thus alternate (and also unsubstantiated) views are no more fantasy than your own.

" the many and varied polls taken from muslims throughout the world suggesting an alarming passive support for jihadi actions. ", Are you sure this is statistics presented in a genuine way? Can you provide a few of the many?

Edited September 6, 2014 by Seastallion

[arjunadawn]

Verbose at best!

Yes, I know. I have been accused of this, and it is correct. I use the forums to exercise my own mind. Sometimes I sound like an idiot, sometimes not.

[arjunadawn]

Oh dear, quotes from a website known for (deliberately?) getting things wrong; for example the 'riends of Hamas' hoax',

Some of the 'stats' they quote came from an 8 year old poll conducted by the Telegraph, which they do link to.

The article does say that 40% of respondents wanted Sharia law introduced; but does not say whether they want it to replace UK law or simply for civil disputes, as with Beth Din and as has happened since that Telegraph article was published 8 years ago,

In addition

The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.

Many people have had sympathy with the feelings and motives of other terrorist organisations, Irish Americans and the IRA for example. Are you saying that these Irish Americans were terrorists and supported the IRA's atrocities?

You will also see that only 500 people were surveyed; 500 out of a Muslim population of, at the time, nearly 2million! Not very representative.

No links are provided to support their other claims about the UK, except to an 8 year old article by the director of the Democracy Institute; who in 2006 published a book claiming graphic warnings on cigarette packets don't work; a book funded by Imperial Tobacco! Can we take what they say seriously? Who funds their 'research' into Islamic extremism? Mossad?

As I have already said, only a fool would deny that the UK does have a problem with Muslim youths being radicalised; but to demonise the whole Muslim population because of this wont do anything to solve that problem; instead it will only make it worse.

Initiatives such as those I have already posted about will.

I dont agree with your conclusion but you respond brilliantly. Let me ask you, please. Why is it that, at least, I have this mounting sense that many muslims are passive or active supporters of what is happening throughout the world? What issue then is suggesting to many of us that this is the case, if the numbers are really inconclusive?

[arjunadawn]

May I make some comments on your thinking?

The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, and thus those that oppose your position may not support what you oppose; You are correct to say you would be sliding into false logic and (possibly) wrong conclusions if you thought otherwise.

I think it important that if you are going to maintain that you have no problem with Muslims then you should make the distinction of "some" Muslims when talking about "the underlying ideology that motivates (them) to antithetical actions.....", and "Therefore..the actions of (some) Muslims are fair game..." etc. Without the distinction, you do lump all Muslims together and it is simply not true that the majority of Muslims perform actions antithetical with civilised life.

You make an understandable argument that the silent majority show tacit endorsement for the terrorism, but it is not a conclusive argument at all. There may be many reasons you do not hear much outcry. Ennui, fear of reprisal, lack of opportunity, lack of cohesive society are some possibilities that do not imply tacit agreement. Lack of media coverage (because it's not as sensational a story as a beheading) could be another. The deafening silence is most certainly NOT a declaration of approval.

It may be contrary to your intuition, but others have intuition of their own, based on their own experiences and knowledge. What you have is an unsubstantiated belief, albeit with some things that compel you. Thus alternate (and also unsubstantiated) views are no more fantasy than your own.

" the many and varied polls taken from muslims throughout the world suggesting an alarming passive support for jihadi actions. ", Are you sure this is statistics presented in a genuine way? Can you provide a few of the many?

Yes, you could be correct. I know. It is possible my fears discriminate what I process, finally. I wont go into polls as someone else just covered that. But I can only state that when all the noise of arguments are set aside and I just sit with my gut I am keenly aware that a growing darkness is spreading throughout the western world. I cannot escape that, but I can qualify my positions in regard to muslims in the future.

[simple1]

Well, that's the nature of these things, isn't it; two people draw different conclusions. It would be good of me to provide quotes, I agree. It would also be good for me to make coffee and fetch slippers! My point will not be made more present by my going and fetching quotes you already read. If your aware previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them, that says a lot. If your not aware of previous quotes I made and still asked me to fetch them while making such a post, says a lot.

No man has more a claim to brilliance or stupidity by virtue of a "claimed background;" though it may provide perspective. Any adult knows this. Yet you employ what you muse about my background and also conclude I support "totalitarian" (whatever the Hs4ll this means) and this irreconcilability (for you) is something I should have shame regarding? Because of your irreconcilability? (This will be my daily laugh; thanks).

Your final sentence borders on the ludicrous and captures the essence that you view these issues from inside a very safe box. You assert I am advocating actions outside of the law and I should refrain myself to a "legal framework"= I have ZERO idea what you are implying here but abiding by all laws, irrespective of their relation to natural rights and just law, is the work of fools, not men. Just a note: If a law enslaves, violates or is otherwise repugnant to conscience, it is the duty of a man to object. I will never advocate actions within or without the scope of the law. I only advocate actions irrespective of the law! It is simply irrelevant to me when discussing survival of a civilization. The fact you seek some pedantic handhold on your self-invented point demonstrates your woeful unpreparedness to engage in conversation at the large table on the holidays.

Whenever a person is part of a larger group and one among you is always suspecting others of having designs on stealing, you can be assured that person talking has thoughts on stealing. Likewise, if a man says he is "X" then... the man is likely "X." Why on earth would someone suppose that man was not "X" was not, unless... Therefore, don't employ my past as if it is some utility for your inferior and tragic point. BTW, if it troubles you that my "claimed background" conflicts with your sensibilities, keep it to yourself! No one gives a _____.

You are making claims that people in this topic support Islamic extremism, to repeat I have not seen one, so prove your assertion.

Your professional background doesn't trouble me, but your constant claims that all Muslims, or at least the large majority, are singing from the same song book does and is unproven. You subscribe to the claims of Islamic extremist propaganda.

"I only advocate actions irrespective of the law!"

You are spot on with that statement.

Okay, so you and I sync on something. We believe authority comes from the inherent rightness of something, not necessarily self proscribed laws or unconscionable laws. But that was a lesser issue, I think. At 600+ posts, and a few similar threads, I will not go through and salvage points to declare my position. Reading comprehensions was not one of my poor subjects, math was. Perhaps it is the nature of my (and similar folks) advocating our position that silently, the thought forms that others who oppose my position, therefore support what I oppose. I would be sliding into some false logic and wrong conclusions if I did thought this way. I will honor your position and consider this point. (The reverse is also valid).

It is simply true that I have no problems with muslims; it is a fine point but an important point for the conduct of my life and arrangement of my thoughts and rationales. I do have a problem with the underlying ideology that motivates muslims to actions antithetical with civilized life, and wed to a primitive barbarism that we have collectively eclipsed long ago. Therefore, the actions of muslims are most definitely fair game. It is overwhelmingly apparent that the silence of muslims reflects tacit endorsement. Really? The ideology that brings this terror in the world is also conducive to meekness, and tentative declarations? The same sura and hadith that produce nonstop authority for heinous crimes also produce a silent majority that have been instructed in their faith "to turn the other cheek?" I hardly think this is true and having read the koran in depth for analysis I cannot find support for that anywhere. It is just not true that Islam produced both the terrorist and the coward.

Therefore, it is hardly a reach for me to announce, at this fairly late hour in western civilization's day, that the silence of muslims is in fact deafening and the absence of declaration at this point most certainly is a form of declaration. With such intuition I then peruse the many and varied polls taken from muslims throughout the world suggesting an alarming passive support for jihadi actions. When I then take that observation and subject it to further critical thinking I find significant authorization for the ummah to dissemble and deceive (taqiyya); how can I conclude otherwise? I can wish otherwise. I can dream otherwise. But why would a man invite himself, contrary to his intuition, to believe in a fantasy that is not supported by reality?

When you say I subscribe to the claims of Islamic extreme propaganda I think you mean that I buy- i believe what they are saying? If so, you are correct; I do! Only a fool would not. When such an overwhelming amount of experience convinces me the sun will rise tomorrow, because it always had in the past, I would be a fool to think the sun would not rise tomorrow.

I too believe Islamic extremist propaganda reflects the reality of their world view. My intent of meaning is that so many seem to take this POV as a reflection of all / majority of Muslims;, as I said before I do not accept this position.

[7by7]

Oh dear, quotes from a website known for (deliberately?) getting things wrong; for example the 'Friends of Hamas' hoax',

Some of the 'stats' they quote came from an 8 year old poll conducted by the Telegraph, which they do link to.

The article does say that 40% of respondents wanted Sharia law introduced; but does not say whether they want it to replace UK law or simply for civil disputes, as with Beth Din and as has happened since that Telegraph article was published 8 years ago,

In addition

The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.

Many people have had sympathy with the feelings and motives of other terrorist organisations, Irish Americans and the IRA for example. Are you saying that these Irish Americans were terrorists and supported the IRA's atrocities?

You will also see that only 500 people were surveyed; 500 out of a Muslim population of, at the time, nearly 2million! Not very representative.

No links are provided to support their other claims about the UK, except to an 8 year old article by the director of the Democracy Institute; who in 2006 published a book claiming graphic warnings on cigarette packets don't work; a book funded by Imperial Tobacco! Can we take what they say seriously? Who funds their 'research' into Islamic extremism? Mossad?

As I have already said, only a fool would deny that the UK does have a problem with Muslim youths being radicalised; but to demonise the whole Muslim population because of this wont do anything to solve that problem; instead it will only make it worse.

Initiatives such as those I have already posted about will.

I dont agree with your conclusion but you respond brilliantly. Let me ask you, please. Why is it that, at least, I have this mounting sense that many muslims are passive or active supporters of what is happening throughout the world? What issue then is suggesting to many of us that this is the case, if the numbers are really inconclusive?

Thank you for not merely dismissing my words as an attempt to justify extremism by a terrorist apologist; as others here too lazy to think regularly do.

To answer your question; I cannot speak for you personally, of course, but in general I think that it comes down to ignorance and/or prejudice.

Ignorance due to the way the media operates.

Beheadings and other atrocities by groups like IS, anti west demonstrations, hate speeches by radicals etc. all make good copy and TV pictures.

Ordinary Muslims going about their daily lives in peace and getting along with their non Muslim neighbours don't, so very rarely, if ever, get a mention in the press. Even the initiatives by UK Muslims to counter radicalisation rarely get a mention in the press. You have to search long and hard to find any press coverage of them and even press releases from people such as the Muslim Council of Britain on the subject are often spiked; unless it's a slow news day.

Prejudice can be, and often is, due to the above ignorance, but is also often ingrained.

Some people, for no rational reason, simply hate a particular group of people who are different to them (different religion, different skin colour, different culture, different language even) and so leap on any excuse to justify that hate, using quotes from others as prejudiced as they to 'prove' they are right.

It is, of course, not just those prejudiced against Muslims who do this. For example there are still, believe it or not, Christians who believe in the blood libel against Jews!

Ignorance is no fault of the ignorant, and can be dealt with by education. Which is what I and others have attempted to do in this and similar topics.

Prejudice is another matter, and as is obvious from certain people's posts, this can be so set in a persons mind that no amount of education will change it.

[arjunadawn]

I too believe Islamic extremist propaganda reflects the reality of their world view. My intent of meaning is that so many seem to take this POV as a reflection of all / majority of Muslims;, as I said before I do not accept this position.

Going back and forth with another I concede I can be clearer (but not with more words). However, if those of you out there think that by doing this you provide outreach, and a path for muslims to express themselves as "you" hope they will, you are wrong. The west has been trying to instruct the the muslim majority what islam is for a long time. As recently as now Obama and Kerry state IS does not represent Islam. Clearly, they do represent a portion of Islam. What is under debate is how much? But the West has been saying for a long time Islam is this, and Islam is that. What has Islam been saying?

If only 30% of muslims support jihad that is over 300 million people. Is the fate of western civilization really to hang on a pipe dream of the notional undecided Muslims? This itself is a total surrender.