Does Britain have a jihadi problem?

[transam]

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

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.

So your saying the press should not report violent stuff from a certain group because the majority of this group are happy with their life in a foreign land and don't want to upset the apple cart...?

[Ulysses G.]

If only 30% of muslims support jihad that is over 300 million people.

It was only about 7% in 2007. How many more will there be in the near future? The Muslim world seems to be radicalizing at breakneck speed. In seven or eight years time the number of Muslim supporters of Islamic violence has more than tripled.

[arjunadawn]

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.

Yes, I understand the desire to find people in the middle. If I will be posting on a board I prefer to occasionally make a point others had not considered. When the christian right discuss Jews (when i lived in southern USA), for example, all I have known reference them in diabolical ways, yet none actually met a Jew or could evidence ever being harmed by one. In fact, I dount any could give any examples other than to point at Bankers and the like. With the current issue, there are (TNTC) to numerous to count examples. There is a difference.

[7by7]

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.

So your saying the press should not report violent stuff from a certain group because the majority of this group are happy with their life in a foreign land and don't want to upset the apple cart...?

Of course not; only a fool could possibly draw that conclusion from what I said!

[arjunadawn]

So your saying the press should not report violent stuff from a certain group because the majority of this group are happy with their life in a foreign land and don't want to upset the apple cart...?

There is a signficant self imposed ban in the US on media reporting of the race of criminals in many locations. When it is done it is done so reluctantly. This suggests that the social fabric, at least there, is manipulated. In "White Girl Bleed a Lot" a harrowing account is provided that shows just how much racial crime there is in the us. So, when suggesting the media tone it down would not surprise me. The problem is consensus builds in the population irrespective or Orwellian tools to limit awareness. Moreover, the underlying issues will reach a critical mass one day.

[Albertosez]

Almost 650 replies and over 10K views on this thread. What ever you believe / decide about the title of the thread, it's certainly got a lot of people discussing it and thinking about it. If this thread had been 3 or 4 years ago, I think it would have fizzled out after 10 or 20 replies. Think of that what you will ?

However, in fairness to both sides of the discussion, there have been some good contributions and points of view thrown out there. If nothing else, it has enabled the " yey's n the ney's " to at least read and ponder alternative views. In an ironic sort of way, I feel that the quality of posts ( doesn't mean we have to agree with them ) - but IMO the overall quality has been much better than if this thread had been tabled in UK - which might slap a few faces to those that think only the sexpats head for Thailand !

[Seastallion]

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.

You said you have no problem with Muslims. I get the sense that you write the word, a proper noun, deliberately with a lower case initial. Or perhaps my sense is completely off on this, I know it could be.

Back to your unease. Has anyone asked the question of "Why is a dark and hateful ideology gaining recruits?" I mean, there's cults everywhere, and there's something for everyone, but why this one? What is attractive about it.

[arjunadawn]

If only 30% of muslims support jihad that is over 300 million people.

It was only about 7% in 2007. How many more will there be in the near future? The Muslim world seems to be radicalizing at breakneck speed. In seven or eight years time the number of Muslim supporters of Islamic violence has more than tripled.

I offer 30% generously as a guestimation based on public opinion of the muslim world type polls. Just averaging to make the point that even this % is an overwhelming threat. When the recent increases in muslim immigration to western nations is considered, this number poses even greater concern.

Silence condones. But it must condone because when apologists (apologists here include some leading MidEastern muslims) rebuke IS and jihadists they only do so in general, non-spefic terms- "I condemn, we condemn, they do not reflect islam, islam is peace, islam is love, islam says 'if even one is killed it is a crime'... " etc. They never actually tackle the scriptural authority offered for horrible acts because they cannot. This scriptural authority is employed for millennia in the conduct of islamic expansion. There are entire schools of thought and application built on this in islamic exegesis. Darwa/Hija type jihad is integral to islam.

Islamic jihaid expansion, as cited above, is built on two theoretical concepts: The House of War (Dar al-Harb) and The House of Peace (Dar al-Islam). These concepts are overlooked at great peril. The exegesis supporting these two mutually opposed but interdependent cosmic themes underlie modern islam today. Indeed, it is within this context that all jihad takes place (there are scholarly opponents to this school, but IMO, insignificant). While these concepts do not come directly from ahadith or koran, the pretext is, and numerous generations of islamic jihad history.

Basically, The House of Peace is the end state. As Ying and Yang are related, and interrelated with each other, so two are these above themes. When yin is rising, yang is decreasing, etc. The House of Peace will come about when Islam is global and sharia universal. Until that time Islam remains a House of War. The House of War must wage jihad through whatever instruments an individual may possess- war, body, sex, money, charity, legal, deceit, etc. All jihad aims for the House of Peace but can only arrive there by the House of War!

[arjunadawn]

You said you have no problem with Muslims. I get the sense that you write the word, a proper noun, deliberately with a lower case initial. Or perhaps my sense is completely off on this, I know it could be.

Back to your unease. Has anyone asked the question of "Why is a dark and hateful ideology gaining recruits?" I mean, there's cults everywhere, and there's something for everyone, but why this one? What is attractive about it.

You are observant, and correct. I intentionally use capitals, or not. I don't use the capital muslims because all muslims are not what I oppose, and I usually reference "muslims" in some context. I have many friends and lovely people I have known that are muslims. My muslim associations run quite deep.

Another guy called me on something similar on TV, regarding my classifying all muslims as... He was correct. Caps or not do not achieve this if others still think I lump all muslims into the same pot. I do not. I indicated I would try to be more exact. But not all muslims are the problem- directly. All muslims do, however, now share a similar responsibility, regardless of their personal moderation or not. History has thrust them into this unfortunate predicament to be the population that is being courted by both the west and jihadis.

The problem with silent Muslims is the world is watching. With every act of violence left unanswered, western weakness grows. With every citation of ahadith and sura that is unanswered, jihadi strength grows. When this finally inverts we will have a very serious problem. It will never be the case that 100% of muslims want sharia. It does not have to be. It only has to be a large enough population to effectively wage asymmetrical warfare of western civilization and collapse it both simultaneously from within and without.

[7by7]

The problem with silent Muslims is the world is watching. With every act of violence left unanswered, western weakness grows. With every citation of ahadith and sura that is unanswered, jihadi strength grows.....

Except, as has been repeatedly shown, Muslims are not silent. Many, ordinary people in the street, their Imams and representatives and leaders, have spoken and condemned the jihadists.

But some dismiss such condemnation as lies as it interferes with their prejudice!

I hope you are not such.

[Credo]

My experience with British Muslims is limited. I have a few Muslim friends in the UK, but I have limited contact with them.

In general, in discussing violence in the name of Islam with Muslims, I found that they had a tendency to quickly justify the violence rather than make any condemnation of it. This probably leads to an implicit acceptance of such violence.

The people I knew didn't condone violence personally, but they were quick to excuse it and to blame others as the cause.

[7by7]

My experience when discussing this issue with Muslim friends and work colleagues is the opposite of yours, Credo.

They sometimes go to great lengths to show that such violence is against Islam, and never try to justify or excuse it.

No doubt some here, not you, will now say that they are brainwashing me and have succeeded!

[Ulysses G.]

In general, in discussing violence in the name of Islam with Muslims, I found that they had a tendency to quickly justify the violence rather than make any condemnation of it.

Just like certain people on these threads. Look over here. A Christian did the same thing 1,000 years ago.

[7by7]

Not just a thousand years ago.

From February of this year: Report Details Atrocities in Central African Republic

On Jan. 8, a man named Soba Tibati was sitting on a straw mat under a tree outside of his familys hut in a small town called Boyali in the Central African Republic.

Suddenly, Christian militias, known as anti-balaka, showed up and attacked. They decapitated Soba Tibati and killed 12 members of his family, among them a baby girl.

Just one example of present day Christian terrorism, it's easy to find many more.

Of course, atrocities by one group of religious fanatics do not excuse those by a different group.

Edited September 6, 2014 by 7by7

[arjunadawn]

The problem with silent Muslims is the world is watching. With every act of violence left unanswered, western weakness grows. With every citation of ahadith and sura that is unanswered, jihadi strength grows.....

Except, as has been repeatedly shown, Muslims are not silent. Many, ordinary people in the street, their Imams and representatives and leaders, have spoken and condemned the jihadists.

But some dismiss such condemnation as lies as it interferes with their prejudice!

I hope you are not such.

I desperately need to be wrong! In my calculations it is Muslims who will decide the fate of many. Why do I not read or hear or note the chorus you refer to? I don't know but I will expand what I read and such and see if this is true, for me. Many of the sites I frequent predictably re confirm what they and their viewers already know, or think. So, the list of the dead and maimed and raped and slaughtered and beheaded and... grows into my worldview. But the various news feeds I frequent also don't produce the Muslim majority. This would be news; news sells. I don't see it so far.

[7by7]

<snip>

I desperately need to be wrong! In my calculations it is Muslims who will decide the fate of many. Why do I not read or hear or note the chorus you (7by7) refer to? I don't know but I will expand what I read and such and see if this is true, for me. Many of the sites I frequent predictably re confirm what they and their viewers already know, or think. So, the list of the dead and maimed and raped and slaughtered and beheaded and... grows into my worldview. But the various news feeds I frequent also don't produce the Muslim majority. This would be news; news sells. I don't see it so far.

As I said before; reports of atrocities sells papers; reports of people speaking out against those atrocities don't.

[Ulysses G.]

Especially when so few of those people speak out against Islamic atrocities. There is no "chorus" from the Muslim world - just a few lonesome voices.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[transam]

<snip>

I desperately need to be wrong! In my calculations it is Muslims who will decide the fate of many. Why do I not read or hear or note the chorus you (7by7) refer to? I don't know but I will expand what I read and such and see if this is true, for me. Many of the sites I frequent predictably re confirm what they and their viewers already know, or think. So, the list of the dead and maimed and raped and slaughtered and beheaded and... grows into my worldview. But the various news feeds I frequent also don't produce the Muslim majority. This would be news; news sells. I don't see it so far.

As I said before; reports of atrocities sells papers; reports of people speaking out against those atrocities don't.

You for sure have YOUR reporting priorities in order...........

Your name Galloway by any chance....?

[arjunadawn]

Not just a thousand years ago.

From February of this year: Report Details Atrocities in Central African Republic

On Jan. 8, a man named Soba Tibati was sitting on a straw mat under a tree outside of his familys hut in a small town called Boyali in the Central African Republic.

Suddenly, Christian militias, known as anti-balaka, showed up and attacked. They decapitated Soba Tibati and killed 12 members of his family, among them a baby girl.

Just one example of present day Christian terrorism, it's easy to find many more.

Of course, atrocities by one group of religious fanatics do not excuse those by a different group.

This post lacks context. This group is ostensibly a christian group set up to.. do what? Battle muslim radicals that have sacked their country and declared a 19th century Sultanat. That a christian militia would spring up is not evidence of comparable barbarity (though it may be), it is evidence of the consequences of Islamic jihad!

[MAJIC]

In this thred I have been informed that the fundamentalist problem is caused by those horrible lefties.

Not caused. Ignored by those horrible lefties.

Ignored not caused.

OK

Now answer: Is Cameron one of those horrible lefties?

I don't know what he is. He campaigns as a conservative, tosses his hat in with the blind, and maybe now he's being mugged by reality.

I was surprised but more than pleased at his speech yesterday about not allowing Islamist ISIS to establish a state in Iraq. Maybe he's waking up.

He is always full of speeches,and that's generally all you will hear about the problem,full of Bull and no action!

[arjunadawn]

<snip>

I desperately need to be wrong! In my calculations it is Muslims who will decide the fate of many. Why do I not read or hear or note the chorus you (7by7) refer to? I don't know but I will expand what I read and such and see if this is true, for me. Many of the sites I frequent predictably re confirm what they and their viewers already know, or think. So, the list of the dead and maimed and raped and slaughtered and beheaded and... grows into my worldview. But the various news feeds I frequent also don't produce the Muslim majority. This would be news; news sells. I don't see it so far.

As I said before; reports of atrocities sells papers; reports of people speaking out against those atrocities don't.

While the extremes of your point are correct, by and by the daily flow of news continues to carry related data of jiahd without sensational terror acts. It is clearly at the point where moderate muslims would command a very large audience. There are some out there, as in the US, but these have generally been around a while and the term moderate, is something we apply to them. Amongst [many] other muslims, these people are actually basphemers.

[7by7]

Not just a thousand years ago.

From February of this year: Report Details Atrocities in Central African Republic

On Jan. 8, a man named Soba Tibati was sitting on a straw mat under a tree outside of his familys hut in a small town called Boyali in the Central African Republic.

Suddenly, Christian militias, known as anti-balaka, showed up and attacked. They decapitated Soba Tibati and killed 12 members of his family, among them a baby girl.

Just one example of present day Christian terrorism, it's easy to find many more.

Of course, atrocities by one group of religious fanatics do not excuse those by a different group.

This post lacks context. This group is ostensibly a christian group set up to.. do what? Battle muslim radicals that have sacked their country and declared a 19th century Sultanat. That a christian militia would spring up is not evidence of comparable barbarity (though it may be), it is evidence of the consequences of Islamic jihad!

So that excuse their murdering and torturing of women and children?

What about another example; the National Liberation Front of Tripura; what excuses can be presented for their atrocities?

[arjunadawn]

Not just a thousand years ago.

From February of this year: Report Details Atrocities in Central African Republic

On Jan. 8, a man named Soba Tibati was sitting on a straw mat under a tree outside of his familys hut in a small town called Boyali in the Central African Republic.

Suddenly, Christian militias, known as anti-balaka, showed up and attacked. They decapitated Soba Tibati and killed 12 members of his family, among them a baby girl.

Just one example of present day Christian terrorism, it's easy to find many more.

Of course, atrocities by one group of religious fanatics do not excuse those by a different group.

This post lacks context. This group is ostensibly a christian group set up to.. do what? Battle muslim radicals that have sacked their country and declared a 19th century Sultanat. That a christian militia would spring up is not evidence of comparable barbarity (though it may be), it is evidence of the consequences of Islamic jihad!

So that excuse their murdering and torturing of women and children?

What about another example; the National Liberation Front of Tripura; what excuses can be presented for their atrocities?

First off, lets remain focused; I do not excuse any act. If a group of christians gather in city A and go to City B and kill muslims- no other facts! That tells one story. If the same group goes to city B and kills muslims because local muslims had been killing christians and effectively overthrew the country and are declaring a Sultanate, then this too tells a story. Whether they are deplorable acts is not the issue I was discussing. When presenting such information the additional context informs the reader of the background, and the impetus for the actions noted. It is relevant when people are killed in response to jihadi ambitions. It is definitely a useful piece of information.

Why would someone need to respond to you point by point somehow circling to Islam? The former did involve Islam. Islamic expansion is not the only game in town so your point is?

[Ulysses G.]

The former did involve Islam. Islamic expansion is not the only game in town so your point is?

Distract and distort. Point the finger at anyone but Islam.

[7by7]

My point being, arjunadawn that it is not only Muslims who are committing despicable acts in the present day.

But, for some reason, despicable acts by Muslims tend to get more coverage in the western media than those by other groups.

The reasons for that may be explainable, as you know, and I'll comment on them when I have had the time to investigate fully.

[arjunadawn]

The former did involve Islam. Islamic expansion is not the only game in town so your point is?

Distract and distort. Point the finger at anyone but Islam.

It actually reminded me of kids insulting each other. At a given point one child thumps the other with a momma joke or something similar and the other kid says "Oh yea, well... well, well, your a toilet face," or some other unsuccessful rebuttal. I was more curious that he felt my effort was to circle the Islamic wagon rather than to simply provide truthful context. Generally, Islamic expansionist issues are the problem in most of the world.

[transam]

My point being, arjunadawn that it is not only Muslims who are committing despicable acts in the present day.

But, for some reason, despicable acts by Muslims tend to get more coverage in the western media than those by other groups.

The reasons for that may be explainable, as you know, and I'll comment on them when I have had the time to investigate fully.

Now I am only guessing here, but could it be that the Muslim murders VIDEO their acts to advertise it, or am I wrong here........?........For sure YOU will have an excuse.

[chiang mai]

My point being, arjunadawn that it is not only Muslims who are committing despicable acts in the present day.

But, for some reason, despicable acts by Muslims tend to get more coverage in the western media than those by other groups.

The reasons for that may be explainable, as you know, and I'll comment on them when I have had the time to investigate fully.

Now I am only guessing here, but could it be that the Muslim murders VIDEO their acts to advertise it, or am I wrong here........?........For sure YOU will have an excuse.

This is 2014, video marketing is widely understood and used to affect.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted.

[boomerangutang]

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

I don't get it. A while ago Mick Jagger did a performance for the prez and friends. He's a real stone, isn't he?

Incidentally, the most recent Nat'l Geographic has a spread on some amazing neolithic stone structures on Orkney islands, north of Scotland. They're thought to pre-date Stonehenge by 2,500 years.

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.

That's a lot nicer than I would have put it. Ignorance, by Muslim extremists, is studiously abided by. I don't think it's genetic, unless they've inherited dogmatic genes. I don't make excuses for drunks or people who insist on being ignorant.

As for lack of education: I knew a young hill tribe gal who had grown up in Burma village, everything built from bamboo and thatch. Not a wire or transistor or magazine in the whole place until a decade ago. She has zero schooling. Now she speaks German, English, Thai, as well as Burmese and Akha, and is doing great with her new family in Switzerland. She went from mud-between the toes poverty to attending art gallery openings. Now take a look at Muslim women: Their heads are in sand dunes, with a Q'ran shouting men's feet on top - keeping her down.

Edited September 6, 2014 by boomerangutang