London may elect first Muslim mayor, after ugly, 'dog-whistling' campaign

[Slip]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

no. The relevance is that the 10% number is offered to show muslims are a tiny minority compared to the other 90%. But this is horse pucky. The next biggest block, practicing Christians number about 2% so really these 10% that want sharia and all the trappings of islam will get what they (think they) want. There is no 90% block opposing sharia is my point. This has been a clever trick by the left, but there are no flies on me.

There are more practicing muslims in europe than practicing christians.

Your figures seem a bit off if referencing London;

"According to the 2011 Census, the largest religious groupings are Christians (48.4 per cent), followed by those of no religion(20.7 per cent), no response (8.5 per cent), Muslims (12.4 per cent), Hindus (5.0 per cent),Jews (1.8 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (1.0 per cent) and other (0.6 per cent)."

but there seems little denying there has been a strong shift, even before taking into account the huge influx of refugees from Muslim countries in the last year or two;

"In 2001, the numbers were respectively Christians (58.2 per cent), followed by those of no religion (15.8 per cent), no response (8.7 per cent), Muslims (8.5 per cent), Hindus (4.1 per cent), Jews (2.1 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (0.8 per cent) and other (0.5 per cent)."

Better keep an eye on those sneaky atheists too mind you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_London

50% of Londoners Christians,does that refer to those Christened,or to those who attend church or those who do not attend church while trying to practise Christianity as they understand it. Compare then with the numbers of Muslims who believe in and adhere to the Muslim religion.

That's an interesting question that I was just thinking about as 50% Christian seemed ridiculously high to me. It's from the census so I guess you would have to say that people self-determine as one group or another.

[SoiBiker]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

no. The relevance is that the 10% number is offered to show muslims are a tiny minority compared to the other 90%. But this is horse pucky. The next biggest block, practicing Christians number about 2% so really these 10% that want sharia and all the trappings of islam will get what they (think they) want. There is no 90% block opposing sharia is my point. This has been a clever trick by the left, but there are no flies on me.

There are more practicing muslims in europe than practicing christians.

Your figures seem a bit off if referencing London;

"According to the 2011 Census, the largest religious groupings are Christians (48.4 per cent), followed by those of no religion(20.7 per cent), no response (8.5 per cent), Muslims (12.4 per cent), Hindus (5.0 per cent),Jews (1.8 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (1.0 per cent) and other (0.6 per cent)."

but there seems little denying there has been a strong shift, even before taking into account the huge influx of refugees from Muslim countries in the last year or two;

"In 2001, the numbers were respectively Christians (58.2 per cent), followed by those of no religion (15.8 per cent), no response (8.7 per cent), Muslims (8.5 per cent), Hindus (4.1 per cent), Jews (2.1 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (0.8 per cent) and other (0.5 per cent)."

Better keep an eye on those sneaky atheists too mind you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_London

50% of Londoners Christians,does that refer to those Christened,or to those who attend church or those who do not attend church while trying to practise Christianity as they understand it. Compare then with the numbers of Muslims who believe in and adhere to the Muslim religion.

That's an interesting question that I was just thinking about as 50% Christian seemed ridiculously high to me. It's from the census so I guess you would have to say that people self-determine as one group or another.

Not everyone who self-identifies as Muslim actually follows it that strictly either. I know a few that enjoy their beer and bacon...

Edited May 9, 2016 by SoiBiker

[cumgranosalum]

This isn't about religion - as pointed out most "christians" are in reality not religious at all, as is the case with most religions including islam....... the real issue with those who want to make a big thing of it is they are racists.....hence the classic racist opening line _"I'm not being racist, they are a religion"

Edited May 9, 2016 by cumgranosalum

[Koosdedooes]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

no. The relevance is that the 10% number is offered to show muslims are a tiny minority compared to the other 90%. But this is horse pucky. The next biggest block, practicing Christians number about 2% so really these 10% that want sharia and all the trappings of islam will get what they (think they) want. There is no 90% block opposing sharia is my point. This has been a clever trick by the left, but there are no flies on me.

There are more practicing muslims in europe than practicing christians.

Your figures seem a bit off if referencing London;

"According to the 2011 Census, the largest religious groupings are Christians (48.4 per cent), followed by those of no religion(20.7 per cent), no response (8.5 per cent), Muslims (12.4 per cent), Hindus (5.0 per cent),Jews (1.8 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (1.0 per cent) and other (0.6 per cent)."

but there seems little denying there has been a strong shift, even before taking into account the huge influx of refugees from Muslim countries in the last year or two;

"In 2001, the numbers were respectively Christians (58.2 per cent), followed by those of no religion (15.8 per cent), no response (8.7 per cent), Muslims (8.5 per cent), Hindus (4.1 per cent), Jews (2.1 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (0.8 per cent) and other (0.5 per cent)."

Better keep an eye on those sneaky atheists too mind you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_London

50% of Londoners Christians,does that refer to those Christened,or to those who attend church or those who do not attend church while trying to practise Christianity as they understand it. Compare then with the numbers of Muslims who believe in and adhere to the Muslim religion.

That's an interesting question that I was just thinking about as 50% Christian seemed ridiculously high to me. It's from the census so I guess you would have to say that people self-determine as one group or another.

And will closely correlate with the colour of their skin one suspects, so if you suggest 50% of the population of London is white, European descent doest seem so high now does it ?

[Koosdedooes]

This isn't about religion - as pointed out most "christians" are in reality not religious at all, as is the case with most religions including islam....... the real issue with those who want to make a big thing of it is they are racists.....hence the classic racist opening line _"I'm not being racist, they are a religion"

Of course its not its all to do with "race" the vast majority of the hysterics are from the Alf Garnett generation...and London has just elected a "bloody Paki Mayor"..thats what this is all about, but the hysterics dont even have the backbone to admit it

[Slip]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

no. The relevance is that the 10% number is offered to show muslims are a tiny minority compared to the other 90%. But this is horse pucky. The next biggest block, practicing Christians number about 2% so really these 10% that want sharia and all the trappings of islam will get what they (think they) want. There is no 90% block opposing sharia is my point. This has been a clever trick by the left, but there are no flies on me.

There are more practicing muslims in europe than practicing christians.

Your figures seem a bit off if referencing London;

"According to the 2011 Census, the largest religious groupings are Christians (48.4 per cent), followed by those of no religion(20.7 per cent), no response (8.5 per cent), Muslims (12.4 per cent), Hindus (5.0 per cent),Jews (1.8 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (1.0 per cent) and other (0.6 per cent)."

but there seems little denying there has been a strong shift, even before taking into account the huge influx of refugees from Muslim countries in the last year or two;

"In 2001, the numbers were respectively Christians (58.2 per cent), followed by those of no religion (15.8 per cent), no response (8.7 per cent), Muslims (8.5 per cent), Hindus (4.1 per cent), Jews (2.1 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (0.8 per cent) and other (0.5 per cent)."

Better keep an eye on those sneaky atheists too mind you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_London

50% of Londoners Christians,does that refer to those Christened,or to those who attend church or those who do not attend church while trying to practise Christianity as they understand it. Compare then with the numbers of Muslims who believe in and adhere to the Muslim religion.

That's an interesting question that I was just thinking about as 50% Christian seemed ridiculously high to me. It's from the census so I guess you would have to say that people self-determine as one group or another.

And will closely correlate with the colour of their skin one suspects, so if you suggest 50% of the population of London is white, European descent doest seem so high now does it ?

I think we're getting a bit off topic, but just to note; the actual percentage of whites (Brit or other) from the same census is 75%, in which case 50% (or 2/3 of the total), does seem quite believable after all.

EDIT: My figures here are wrong- I read the 2001 figures, and still overstated them from 71%, in 2011 that dropped to 60%

Edited May 9, 2016 by Slip

[jeab1980]

A lot on here say if your born in the UK black or white then you are a UK citizen. Fair enough so why is it when you see let's say Andy Murray, Lewis Hamilton, to name but a few when they win they glory in the Union Jack Flag quite rightly there flag. Then you get Amir Khan boxer born and bred fought for team GB in Olympics now when he enters the ring has Pakistani flag in support?????!!!!! Oh and some time ago when he fought in London there new mayor also carried the Pakistani flag for him. So is that dual standards or something else

[SoiBiker]

A lot on here say if your born in the UK black or white then you are a UK citizen. Fair enough so why is it when you see let's say Andy Murray, Lewis Hamilton, to name but a few when they win they glory in the Union Jack Flag quite rightly there flag. Then you get Amir Khan boxer born and bred fought for team GB in Olympics now when he enters the ring has Pakistani flag in support?????!!!!! Oh and some time ago when he fought in London there new mayor also carried the Pakistani flag for him. So is that dual standards or something else

Amir Khan holds dual nationality.

[tomwct]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

[cumgranosalum]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

no. The relevance is that the 10% number is offered to show muslims are a tiny minority compared to the other 90%. But this is horse pucky. The next biggest block, practicing Christians number about 2% so really these 10% that want sharia and all the trappings of islam will get what they (think they) want. There is no 90% block opposing sharia is my point. This has been a clever trick by the left, but there are no flies on me.

There are more practicing muslims in europe than practicing christians.

Your figures seem a bit off if referencing London;

"According to the 2011 Census, the largest religious groupings are Christians (48.4 per cent), followed by those of no religion(20.7 per cent), no response (8.5 per cent), Muslims (12.4 per cent), Hindus (5.0 per cent),Jews (1.8 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (1.0 per cent) and other (0.6 per cent)."

but there seems little denying there has been a strong shift, even before taking into account the huge influx of refugees from Muslim countries in the last year or two;

"In 2001, the numbers were respectively Christians (58.2 per cent), followed by those of no religion (15.8 per cent), no response (8.7 per cent), Muslims (8.5 per cent), Hindus (4.1 per cent), Jews (2.1 per cent), Sikhs (1.5 per cent), Buddhists (0.8 per cent) and other (0.5 per cent)."

Better keep an eye on those sneaky atheists too mind you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_London

50% of Londoners Christians,does that refer to those Christened,or to those who attend church or those who do not attend church while trying to practise Christianity as they understand it. Compare then with the numbers of Muslims who believe in and adhere to the Muslim religion.

That's an interesting question that I was just thinking about as 50% Christian seemed ridiculously high to me. It's from the census so I guess you would have to say that people self-determine as one group or another.

And will closely correlate with the colour of their skin one suspects, so if you suggest 50% of the population of London is white, European descent doest seem so high now does it ?

Doesn't matter; its the racist concept of "Us" and "Them"...... put people in groups and stereotype them, which group do they think they're in?

Edited May 9, 2016 by cumgranosalum

[jeab1980]

Quote Amir Khan gas dual nationality

please show me where it states that certainly not in the much quoted TV writers bible. Clearly states British

Google him on Wikipedia which you all swear by

[johnatong]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

What happens if a Catholic bloke wants to marry a Christian bird....?

I married a Catholic lady in a Catholic church. I am not a Catholic. There was never an issue and we were married for 25 years when she was called back to her "maker"

I suggest you stop trying to make something out of nothing.

[HLover]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

Mormon and Islam sound similar no?

I agree with you, there is nothing phoney about the Christian religion and they are such a tolerant and open minded group.

Amen.

[SoiBiker]

Quote Amir Khan gas dual nationality

please show me where it states that certainly not in the much quoted TV writers bible. Clearly states British

Google him on Wikipedia which you all swear by

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sportspeople_with_dual_nationality

[jeab1980]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir_Khan_(boxer)

but we could go on forever like this and more to the point so could this discussion.

Edited May 9, 2016 by jeab1980

[Naam]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim

says who? British law? UK constitution?

any Muslim can convert to any other religion in a secular country such as the United Kingdom.

[simple1]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

I know a number of Thai Muslims that have moved across to Buddhism, no death threats etc. More to the point you raised you will be pleased to know that currently it's estimated worldwide approx 6 million Muslims p.a. convert to Christianity. Personally, my opinion is anyone who's a believer in an Abrahamic faith has a screw loose, but each to their own.

Edited May 9, 2016 by simple1

[Jai Dee]

Several off-topic argumentative posts have been removed from this thread.

[jaffacakes1]

In 2001 he was the lawyer for the Nation of Islam in its successful High Court bid to overturn the 15-year-ban on its leader, Louis Farrakhan.

In 2005 and 2006 he visited terror-charged Babar Ahmad in Woodhill Prison. Mr. Ahmed was extradited to the U.S. in 2012, serving time in prison before being returned to the UK in 2015. Mr. Ahmed pleaded guilty to the terrorist offences of conspiracy, and providing material support to the Taliban.

And Mr. Khan also campaigned for the release and repatriation of Shaker Aamer, Britain’s last Guantanamo detainee, who was returned to the UK in November.

The caliphate is rising...

[SoiBiker]

Some lawyers represent criminals. Does that make them criminals too?

[samran]

That's true. 10 to 15 percent is significant. For example, that's about the percentage of African Americans in the U.S. and their votes are quite influential. In this election, they probably made the difference in the democratic party picking Clinton over Sanders.

And the relevance of this fasinating statistic to the elections of Londons mayor given the black americans referred to are not British citzens or one presumes residents of London which is in England ?

The relevance is that 10% can swing most elections, which are won or lost by less than 10%.

Except Sadiq's victory was a landslide.over 13% in front this article sums it up.........

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sadiq-khans-victory-a-triumph-for-a-tolerant-open-and-diverse-world-city-a7018381.html

Yes, but that takes away from the narrative that is an islamic takeover.

Always find it strange that the keyboard warriors are also the most hysterical of ninnies.

Always find it hysterical that when the left fail to put forward a valid point,they resort to name calling.

The valid point was this is a landslide, though that has been barely mentioned.

Instead we've got the nervous nellies running around telling is it is the end of cilvilsation as we know it, mainly because, he is a muslim.

[Jingthing]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim

says who? British law? UK constitution?

any Muslim can convert to any other religion in a secular country such as the United Kingdom.

Yes, of course, that is true under the law.

However, it's interesting to see a trend among younger Muslims towards more extremist attitudes towards favoring death penalty for apostasy.

The rates vary by nation ... with often MUCH higher rates among large Muslim majority nations.

Yes, this survey is dated but there is a trend for younger Muslims to be more extremist than elders in the west.

Before discounting this information as irrelevant, imagine a survey of people of any OTHER major world religion. Death for apostasy is not a thing in any other major world religion (in this MODERN era), so it's obvious in any country the support for death for apostasy for any OTHER major religion would be close to ZERO percent (and any few people agreeing with that would be extremely deviant and certifiably INSANE). But this view is not deviant or insane in modern Islam. It is within the range normal and usual in the west, and in some Muslim majority nations it would be deviant to be against it.

The answer of course is reform WITHIN Muslim communities, but not sure how western governments can be in a position to push that. So these cultural tensions over such differences which are so completely contrary to the values of modern liberal western civilization aren't going away anytime soon.

Therefore, it's obvious that the claims that Islamic culture is the same as any other religious culture (in this MODERN ERA) turns out be totally specious:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6309983.stm

• 36% of 16 to 24-year-olds believe if a Muslim converts to another religion they should be punished by death, compared with 19% of over-55s

Edited May 9, 2016 by Jingthing

[cumgranosalum]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

probably the most facile, ill-informed post on the whole thread!

[jaffacakes1]

Some lawyers represent criminals. Does that make them criminals too?

Not at all, although as a civil rights lawyer his deeply unsavoury clients aren't particularly diverse which could suggest sympathy with their ideology. The fact that he took his oath on the Koran when he was first elected as an MP tells us all we need to know about his true allegiance, as does his attitude toward moderate Muslims, whom he described on Iran’s Press TV channel as 'Uncle Toms'.

At a time when Europe needs to take a hardline against terrorism is this the best man for the job?

[Jingthing]

The Uncle Tom comment was disgusting. It would be better if he had a long consistent record of being a more moderate Muslim and openly opposing Muslim extremism. But he's a political animal and speaking to Press TV, I'm sure they loved that comment. Hopefully with this new globally visible role he can "evolve" in a wonderful and unifying way. Give him a chance. I don't see taking an oath on the book of his faith as any kind of issue. That's religious freedom, a good thing.

Edited May 9, 2016 by Jingthing

[SoiBiker]

I'm pretty sure he'd include himself in the group he was describing. An unfortunate voice of phrase, though, for sure.

[SoiBiker]

Some lawyers represent criminals. Does that make them criminals too?

Not at all, although as a civil rights lawyer his deeply unsavoury clients aren't particularly diverse which could suggest sympathy with their ideology. The fact that he took his oath on the Koran when he was first elected as an MP tells us all we need to know about his true allegiance, as does his attitude toward moderate Muslims, whom he described on Irans Press TV channel as 'Uncle Toms'.

At a time when Europe needs to take a hardline against terrorism is this the best man for the job?

I don't think tackling terrorism across Europe is part of the mayor of London's remit.

[jaffacakes1]

As a Christian, I would never vote for a Muslim. Islam is more of a Cult than a Religion. Muslim's cannot leave Islam and if you

marry a Muslim, you must become a Muslim. It's a phony religion and more of a cult!

probably the most facile, ill-informed post on the whole thread!

Aren't you Christians supposed to be tolerant of other religions? Doesn't this give you the moral high ground against other less tolerant ideologies?

'As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions' - Romans 14:1-4

'I will cast terror in the hearts of those who disbelieve m. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them' - Quran 8:12

[jaffacakes1]

Some lawyers represent criminals. Does that make them criminals too?

Not at all, although as a civil rights lawyer his deeply unsavoury clients aren't particularly diverse which could suggest sympathy with their ideology. The fact that he took his oath on the Koran when he was first elected as an MP tells us all we need to know about his true allegiance, as does his attitude toward moderate Muslims, whom he described on Irans Press TV channel as 'Uncle Toms'.

At a time when Europe needs to take a hardline against terrorism is this the best man for the job?

I don't think tackling terrorism across Europe is part of the mayor of London's remit.

Perhaps somebody should tell him then. He calls himself the 'British Muslim who will take the fight to the extremists'.

[SoiBiker]

Some lawyers represent criminals. Does that make them criminals too?

Not at all, although as a civil rights lawyer his deeply unsavoury clients aren't particularly diverse which could suggest sympathy with their ideology. The fact that he took his oath on the Koran when he was first elected as an MP tells us all we need to know about his true allegiance, as does his attitude toward moderate Muslims, whom he described on Irans Press TV channel as 'Uncle Toms'.

At a time when Europe needs to take a hardline against terrorism is this the best man for the job?

I don't think tackling terrorism across Europe is part of the mayor of London's remit.

Perhaps somebody should tell him then. He calls himself the 'British Muslim who will take the fight to the extremists'.

Hardly sounds like he's sympathetic to them, does it?