Islam - What's your view on it?

[Carbonox]

Ohh look who it is again.

It's Choudary.

Can you seriously not see that this is about as representative of the UK Muslim population as Britain First are of the UK Christian population?

A point even the right wing press in the UK hold...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...Choudary-represent-the-Muslim-population.html

.. oh and just to let you know I live four miles from the 'planned' demo in that piece. It never happened, so it would seem that your 'poster-boy' for Islam running rampant in the UK couldn't manage a protest in a tiny market town. Shortly after which the group in that piece was banned under the Terrorism Act 2000.

The way I see it, radical people like Choudary have no one to blame for Britain First's existence than themselves. Deplorable groups like Muslim Patrols only serve to further split people and create counter-forces in the nationalist camp. Me, I don't think I'd even have a problem with Islam if the religion wasn't so completely filled with acts that are impossible to tolerate, including all the barbaric ways to systematically kill people outside of your own sect.

Then why are you suggesting that due process be ignored?

Personally I'm quite glad that we don't simply imprison people without due process simply for a viewpoint (regardless of what it is), and he has been singularly ineffective at "making sure the country bows down in front of his crappy laws".

He's an idiot, with idiotic views, neither of which is illegal (nor should they be) and when he has stepped over the line in that regard he has been arrested and charged.

I'm suggesting Choudary should not have access to bail (which is barely anything more than legalized bribe) and instead be locked up while waiting for trial. He's a bigger threat to society than your average murderer. As mentioned above, it is completely his and other radicals' fault that people are growing more and more intolerant of Islam.

And I think he's more than an idiot - he's a lunatic, who can't be allowed to roam the streets any more than your average, completely insane mental patient.

@Carbonox is in all honesty getting more and more towards being worse then some of the people he lays claims against. Choudary is arrested, and as Scaff says, being dealt with by the legal system and it is actually working with him.

As usual Carb, you spend the time referring to all muslims as extremists, and believing everybody should be deported or shot on sight. Considering you do not even live in the UK, how would you know? You get these crackpots everywhere. There are idiots in every town, every place! Yet as usual you seem to be interested in deporting not just the few who need it (Choudary) but everybody.

Now, Furi, I need to make one thing clear. I haven't asked for every Muslim to be shot on sight. I'm asking for every Islamic Daesh Towelhead Wannabe State fighter to be shot on sight regardless of the country they're in, as long as civilians are not endangered by this. They must not be allowed to roam the streets of Europe, in complete safety from everyone, while enjoying state benefits that can't be taken away because it would be "Islamophobic" and, just to make the worldhugger argument instantly more effective, "racist" as well.

"Why not arrest them", you ask? Why, because just like Choudary, prison doesn't prevent them from spreading their rotten beliefs at all. Besides, we're currently at war with ISIS, and I expect the authorities to treat any one of them sneaking into the West as an intruder (which they are), and treat them appropriately.

 

[GBO Possum]

Or even try to avoid "believing" stuff, if "belief" bypasses any requirement for there to be an actual evidential basis for an opinion.

 

[Scaff]

The way I see it, radical people like Choudary have no one to blame for Britain First's existence than themselves.

A comment which only serves to highlight hwo littel you know about the subject you just commented on

Deplorable groups like Muslim Patrols only serve to further split people and create counter-forces in the nationalist camp.

Why do you keep trying to make this out to be a major issue in the UK?

It was five people, all of whom were arrested, charged, sentenced and have not continued since!

Yet you continue to try and make much more of it that the facts show.

Me, I don't think I'd even have a problem with Islam if the religion wasn't so completely filled with acts that are impossible to tolerate, including all the barbaric ways to systematically kill people outside of your own sect.

While once again ignoring the fact that just about every religion on earth does exactly the same thing.

I'm suggesting Choudary should not have access to bail (which is barely anything more than legalized bribe) and instead be locked up while waiting for trial. He's a bigger threat to society than your average murderer. As mentioned above, it is completely his and other radicals' fault that people are growing more and more intolerant of Islam.

Citation required.

And I think he's more than an idiot - he's a lunatic, who can't be allowed to roam the streets any more than your average, completely insane mental patient.

That still doesn't explain why you think its OK to ignore due process.

Now, Furi, I need to make one thing clear. I haven't asked for every Muslim to be shot on sight. I'm asking for every Islamic Daesh Towelhead Wannabe State fighter to be shot on sight regardless of the country they're in, as long as civilians are not endangered by this. They must not be allowed to roam the streets of Europe, in complete safety from everyone, while enjoying state benefits that can't be taken away because it would be "Islamophobic" and, just to make the worldhugger argument instantly more effective, "racist" as well.

"Why not arrest them", you ask? Why, because just like Choudary, prison doesn't prevent them from spreading their rotten beliefs at all. Besides, we're currently at war with ISIS, and I expect the authorities to treat any one of them sneaking into the West as an intruder (which they are), and treat them appropriately.

So now not only are you calling for due process to be ignored, but you now advocate execution without trial.

Guess which group currently in the news does just that.

Guess you'r not that different from those you claim to condemn. And I wondered why you seemed so happy that ignore what Britain First do, I guess the far right likes to support its own (members of which call for the summary execution without trial of anyone they consider to be a terrorist as well).

 

[Carbonox]

A comment which only serves to highlight hwo littel you know about the subject you just commented on

Why? I doubt Britain First wouldn't have much support at all (not that it's particularly popular even now) if there were no radicals stirring up. Remove the problems created by Islam and the far-right only has homosexuality and other complete non-issues to scream at, and they would easily plummet into a marginal group no one cares about.

Why do you keep trying to make this out to be a major issue in the UK?

It was five people, all of whom were arrested, charged, sentenced and have not continued since!

Yet you continue to try and make much more of it that the facts show.

I counted more than 5 people in the Luton march, and additionally even more in protests in other towns.

While once again ignoring the fact that just about every religion on earth does exactly the same thing.

WikiIslam kinda sums up my thoughts about how Islam is the worst of the bunch.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Are_Judaism_and_Christianity_as_Violent_as_Islam?

Citation required.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary#Activism.2C_views_and_marches

"Look, at the end of the day innocent people—when we say 'innocent people' we mean Muslims—as far as non-Muslims are concerned they have not accepted Islam and as far as we are concerned that is a crime against God."

"Choudary referred to the 11 September terrorists as "magnificent martyrs", and in 2003 he appeared to endorse terrorist attacks by British Muslims, saying that al-Muhajiroun would "encourage people to fulfil their Islamic duties and responsibilities". In 2004 he said that a terror attack on British soil was "a matter of time". He refused to condemn the 7 July 2005 London bombings,[36] but later accused the Muslim Council of Britain (who had condemned both attacks) of "selling their souls to the devil".[37] He blamed the murder of Lee Rigby, an off-duty British soldier, on British foreign policy.[38]"

"In September 2014, Choudary expressed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), describing its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as "the caliph of all Muslims and the prince of the believers". He also voiced his support for crucifixion.[4]"

There's too much content here for me to even specifically quote. The man is utterly insane, and has followers who actually agree with him. When that happens, you're sailing on dangerous waters by giving him the freedom to continue expressing himself and gather more followers.

That still doesn't explain why you think its OK to ignore due process.

Let me get this straight, I don't understand this. I said I wanted him to be jailed while waiting for trial, and prevent him from paying bail to continue roaming free.

So now not only are you calling for due process to be ignored, but you now advocate execution without trial.

Guess which group currently in the news does just that.

Guess you'r not that different from those you claim to condemn. And I wondered why you seemed so happy that ignore what Britain First do, I guess the far right likes to support its own (members of which call for the summary execution without trial of anyone they consider to be a terrorist as well).

It's not execution without trial, when it's a war where they're our enemies. Try using civilized methods against them, they'll just laugh at you, claim you have no balls, and attack with even more force than before with hopes of making you scared. The only way to beat these nutjobs is to exterminate each and every single one of them, and leave a clear, rock solid message that if anyone tries to form another extremist group like them, they will receive the exact same treatment. You can't establish worldwide sharia when you're dead.

We're the ones in charge here. Whether the Daesh are stationed in Iraq, Finland or UK, it makes no difference - they're still Daesh, and deep down hate us with a passion for being infidels, though they'll be happy to take social benefits off our states to fund their acts of terrorism.

By the way, I'm not suggesting killing anyone that merely looks like Daesh - I'd rather be 100% sure they're the real deal before pulling the trigger... point is, as I've said before, they're always at war with us. And looking at the way they're machoing around at the moment, they might be that way for as long as at least 1 of them remains. :/

 

[Furinkazen]

Why? I doubt Britain First wouldn't have much support at all (not that it's particularly popular even now) if there were no radicals stirring up. Remove the problems created by Islam and the far-right only has homosexuality and other complete non-issues to scream at, and they would easily plummet into a marginal group no one cares about.


I counted more than 5 people in the Luton march, and more than that in protests in other towns.


WikiIslam kinda sums up my thoughts about how Islam is the worst of the bunch.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Are_Judaism_and_Christianity_as_Violent_as_Islam?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary#Activism.2C_views_and_marches

"Look, at the end of the day innocent people—when we say 'innocent people' we mean Muslims—as far as non-Muslims are concerned they have not accepted Islam and as far as we are concerned that is a crime against God."

"Choudary referred to the 11 September terrorists as "magnificent martyrs", and in 2003 he appeared to endorse terrorist attacks by British Muslims, saying that al-Muhajiroun would "encourage people to fulfil their Islamic duties and responsibilities". In 2004 he said that a terror attack on British soil was "a matter of time". He refused to condemn the 7 July 2005 London bombings,[36] but later accused the Muslim Council of Britain (who had condemned both attacks) of "selling their souls to the devil".[37] He blamed the murder of Lee Rigby, an off-duty British soldier, on British foreign policy.[38]"

"In September 2014, Choudary expressed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), describing its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as "the caliph of all Muslims and the prince of the believers". He also voiced his support for crucifixion.[4]"

There's too much content here for me to even specifically quote. The man is utterly insane, and has followers who actually agree with him. When that happens, you're sailing on dangerous waters by giving him the freedom to continue expressing himself and gather more followers.


Let me get this straight, I don't understand this. I said I wanted him to be jailed while waiting for trial, and prevent him from paying bail to continue roaming free.


It's not execution without trial, when it's a war where they're our enemies. Try using civilized methods against them, they'll just laugh at you, claim you have no balls, and attack with even more force than before with hopes of making you scared. The only way to beat these nutjobs is to exterminate each and every single one of them, and leave a clear, rock solid message that if anyone tries to form another extremist group like them, they will receive the exact same treatment. You can't establish worldwide sharia when you're dead.

We're the ones in charge here. Whether the Daesh are stationed in Iraq, Finland or UK, it makes no difference - they're still Daesh, and deep down hate us with a passion for being infidels, though they'll be happy to take social benefits off our states to fund their acts of terrorism.

By the way, I'm not suggesting killing anyone that merely looks like Daesh - I'd rather be 100% sure they're the real deal before pulling the trigger... point is, as I've said before, they're always at war with us. And looking at the way they're machoing around at the moment, they might be that way for as long as at least 1 of them remains. :/

All Choudary. ONE person.

Also a Wiki is not really a reliable resource.

There isn'ta war in the UK, unless we're actually fighting. There are not gun battles on streets of the UK, sieges of mosques, and groups of wannabe ISIS nuts on street corners fiddling with bomb equipment. We're fighting ISIS in Iraq because they pose a significant threat and have to be stopped before they expand from Iraq.

 

[Carbonox]

All Choudary. ONE person.

Also a Wiki is not really a reliable resource.

There isn'ta war in the UK, unless we're actually fighting. There are not gun battles on streets of the UK, sieges of mosques, and groups of wannabe ISIS nuts on street corners fiddling with bomb equipment. We're fighting ISIS in Iraq because they pose a significant threat and have to be stopped before they expand from Iraq.

One person is less than five, and five is less than the number of Muslim protestors I saw.

As for ISIS expanding... you're kinda late. Sure they might not have any officially claimed territory in Europe, but they still have their fighters over here, enjoying the aforementioned state benefits that are the result of extremely liberal immigration policies.

Also, with you knowing so many Muslims, I'm sure you have your theories as to why so many Muslim youngsters living in the West have recently joined ISIS, even if their family has no connections to Daesh?

 

[Furinkazen]

One person is less than five, and five is less than the number of Muslim protestors I saw.

As for ISIS expanding... you're kinda late. Sure they might not have any officially claimed territory in Europe, but they still have their fighters over here, enjoying the aforementioned state benefits that are the result of extremely liberal immigration policies.

Also, with you knowing so many Muslims, I'm sure you have your theories as to why so many Muslim youngsters living in the West have recently joined ISIS, even if their family has no connections to Daesh?

Again, what are you talking about? There are 1.6 BILLION Muslims in the world.

I think you're the late one who thinks ISIS are "in Europe"... sure there are extremist nutters here and there but I don't see black flags being raised across European cities.

Also I know ZERO muslims who have joined ISIS, and every single one is against them. They are brainwashed into joining IS, not joining by free will.

 

[Carbonox]

Again, what are you talking about? There are 1.6 BILLION Muslims in the world.

You said there was only one person. I kindly corrected you.

I think you're the late one who thinks ISIS are "in Europe"... sure there are extremist nutters here and there but I don't see black flags being raised across European cities.

Googling "isis flags in Europe" revealed a couple of purple links. Then I remembered I had already shown them on GTP prior to this. Do you remember this one?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/27/isis-s-black-flags-are-flying-in-europe.html

Also I know ZERO muslims who have joined ISIS, and every single one is against them. They are brainwashed into joining IS, not joining by free will.

Good for them, I guess. It doesn't change the fact that a lot of their brethren think differently and would rather have Western freedom and democracy crumbled in favor of their twisted values. I might also want to remind you of the ongoing demographic change due to the high breeding rates. That alone could provide a sad future for the whole Europe, especially when looking at how "well" the youth in particular have integrated.

 

[Furinkazen]

You said there was only one person. I kindly twisted it around to suit me.

Fixed. I said it was all to do with Choudry. 1 person. Or has he mastered cloning? Next you will be trying to prove this.

Googling "isis flags in Europe" revealed a couple of purple links. Then I remembered I had already shown them on GTP prior to this. Do you remember this one?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/27/isis-s-black-flags-are-flying-in-europe.html

That article makes no reference at all. Do you see above your town, your city, ISIS flags flying as they have taken over? No, I can bet you can't.

Good for them, I guess. It doesn't change the fact that a lot of their brethren think differently and would rather have Western freedom and democracy crumbled in favor of their twisted values. I might also want to remind you of the ongoing demographic change due to the high breeding rates. That alone could provide a sad future for the whole Europe, especially when looking at how "well" the youth in particular have integrated.

A "lot" of their Brethren , so a lot of this 1.6 billion are you saying?

And now it's on to large families? You really are running out of shots to take aren't you? What is the difference between a large muslim family and a large christian family? And don't say "because they will grow up to be radicalized by mosque leaders into suicide bombers" because that isn't true.

 

[Carbonox]

Fixed. I said it was all to do with Choudry. 1 person. Or has he mastered cloning? Next you will be trying to prove this.

I think cloning, being a relatively modern branch of science and too complex for primitive minds, is considered anti-Islamic by dumb-as-a-brick Muslim leaders like Choudary and the Daesh punk, so no, he has no reason to go around doing it. Doesn't change the fact he, as mentioned before, has gathered people on his side. One idiot's not particularly dangerous unless he has access to guns or bombs, but an idiot surrounded by other idiots can be.

That article makes no reference at all. Do you see above your town, your city, ISIS flags flying as they have taken over? No, I can bet you can't.

Do I need to have ISIS flags in my town to have a right to take a stand on this issue? I have the interests of European people in general in mind here, not just myself and the people I personally know.

A "lot" of their Brethren , so a lot of this 1.6 billion are you saying?

When it's 1.6 billion, even less than 1% can be a large, and dangerous, group.

And now it's on to large families? You really are running out of shots to take aren't you? What is the difference between a large muslim family and a large christian family? And don't say "because they will grow up to be radicalized by mosque leaders into suicide bombers" because that isn't true.

Large Muslim families, when they become mainstream, twist the demographics and cause the native populace to slowly drift towards minority status. It won't necessarily happen in 2050, or even 2100, but still somewhere in the future if the trend is allowed to continue. By taking more "refugees" in from unstable regions, you can easily speed up the population exchange policy, also known as "cultural suicide".

 

[Furinkazen]

I think cloning, being a relatively modern branch of science and too complex for primitive minds, is considered anti-Islamic by dumb-as-a-brick Muslim leaders like Choudary and the Daesh punk, so no, he has no reason to go around doing it. Doesn't change the fact he, as mentioned before, has gathered people on his side. One idiot's not particularly dangerous unless he has access to guns or bombs, but an idiot surrounded by other idiots can be.

Without guns and bombs however.

Do I need to have ISIS flags in my town to have a right to take a stand on this issue? I have the interests of European people in general in mind here, not just myself and the people I personally know.

Ahh so there are not any ISIS flags? So they haven't taken over? So what are you worried about then?

Large Muslim families, when they become mainstream, twist the demographics and cause the native populace to slowly drift towards minority status.

Citation required, yet another one of your wild claims.

It won't necessarily happen in 2050, or even 2100, but still somewhere in the future if the trend is allowed to continue. By taking more "refugees" in from unstable regions, you can easily speed up the population exchange policy, also known as "cultural suicide".

People go in and out of every country.

 

[Scaff]

Why? I doubt Britain First wouldn't have much support at all (not that it's particularly popular even now) if there were no radicals stirring up. Remove the problems created by Islam and the far-right only has homosexuality and other complete non-issues to scream at, and they would easily plummet into a marginal group no one cares about.

As I say you have no idea at all what you are on about.

I counted more than 5 people in the Luton march, and additionally even more in protests in other towns.

Sorry you were talking about Muslim street patrols, that was not a Muslim street patrol.

It was a legally held demonstration, you know the kind that democracies allow.

WikiIslam kinda sums up my thoughts about how Islam is the worst of the bunch.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Are_Judaism_and_Christianity_as_Violent_as_Islam?

A source that in its first section quotes a radical fundamentalist to justify radical fundamentalism.

Hmmmm OK, that's not a biased source then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary#Activism.2C_views_and_marches

"Look, at the end of the day innocent people—when we say 'innocent people' we mean Muslims—as far as non-Muslims are concerned they have not accepted Islam and as far as we are concerned that is a crime against God."

"Choudary referred to the 11 September terrorists as "magnificent martyrs", and in 2003 he appeared to endorse terrorist attacks by British Muslims, saying that al-Muhajiroun would "encourage people to fulfil their Islamic duties and responsibilities". In 2004 he said that a terror attack on British soil was "a matter of time". He refused to condemn the 7 July 2005 London bombings,[36] but later accused the Muslim Council of Britain (who had condemned both attacks) of "selling their souls to the devil".[37] He blamed the murder of Lee Rigby, an off-duty British soldier, on British foreign policy.[38]"

"In September 2014, Choudary expressed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), describing its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as "the caliph of all Muslims and the prince of the believers". He also voiced his support for crucifixion.[4]"

There's too much content here for me to even specifically quote. The man is utterly insane, and has followers who actually agree with him. When that happens, you're sailing on dangerous waters by giving him the freedom to continue expressing himself and gather more followers.


Let me get this straight, I don't understand this. I said I wanted him to be jailed while waiting for trial, and prevent him from paying bail to continue roaming free.

Once again we have a right to free speech in this country.

You don't have to like what the person says, but the UK has long understood that allowing idiots a voice also allows people to see ow much of an idiot they are.

To date all he has achieved is a few marches (when they happened), a failed street patrol scheme and a lot of hot air and noise. That you would exile someone to an uninhabited island for.

On the other hand you would in return allow convicted murders to roam the streets!

It's not execution without trial, when it's a war where they're our enemies. Try using civilized methods against them, they'll just laugh at you, claim you have no balls, and attack with even more force than before with hopes of making you scared. The only way to beat these nutjobs is to exterminate each and every single one of them, and leave a clear, rock solid message that if anyone tries to form another extremist group like them, they will receive the exact same treatment. You can't establish worldwide sharia when you're dead.

We're the ones in charge here. Whether the Daesh are stationed in Iraq, Finland or UK, it makes no difference - they're still Daesh, and deep down hate us with a passion for being infidels, though they'll be happy to take social benefits off our states to fund their acts of terrorism.

By the way, I'm not suggesting killing anyone that merely looks like Daesh - I'd rather be 100% sure they're the real deal before pulling the trigger... point is, as I've said before, they're always at war with us. And looking at the way they're machoing around at the moment, they might be that way for as long as at least 1 of them remains. :/

No that's not what you said. You stated that you would see them executed in the street, and given that we were discussing Choudary, it seems you would be happy to do it for expressing a view point that you disagree with.

Quite frankly the only conclusion that I can draw from you comments here is that Choudary and yourself are not that different.

He supports Muslim Street Patrols, you support Christian Street Patrols.
He supports the death of his opponents, you support the death of you opponents.

You are simply two different sides of the same coin and quite frankly neither of you are a help in regard to the current situation.

The sole outcome of your 'kill em all' approach will result in innocent people dying (congratulations you are even more like you stated enemy now) and will help to further isolate and radicalize. The UK is sane enough to know that is not a viable solution, we tried in once and it doesn't work.

 

[Carbonox]

Without guns and bombs however.

Until they're funded by some rich guy interested in Islamization of Europe. Daesh comes to mind yet again.

Ahh so there are not any ISIS flags? So they haven't taken over? So what are you worried about then?

Do I have to repeat myself here? The fact that Daesh haven't taken over yet doesn't mean I want to allow something like that to happen in the future.

What I'm worried about is being forced to live anywhere close to Islamists who have no problem getting infidel blood on their hands once the Umma becomes strong enough.

Citation required, yet another one of your wild claims.

Look at Muslim fertility rates vs non-Muslim rates. Western Europe has pretty much fallen behind the newcomers.

People go in and out of every country.

We don't need to let them access our countries.

 

[Scaff]

I might also want to remind you of the ongoing demographic change due to the high breeding rates. That alone could provide a sad future for the whole Europe, especially when looking at how "well" the youth in particular have integrated.

You can remind all you like, its a load of bollocks that has been debunked countless times.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/09/10-myths-about-muslims-in-the-west/

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/feb/11/islam-population

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-will-britain-have-a-muslim-majority-by-2050/13690

 

[Furinkazen]

Until they're funded by some rich guy interested in Islamization of Europe. Daesh comes to mind yet again.

Again, no.

Do I have to repeat myself here? The fact that Daesh haven't taken over yet doesn't mean I want to allow something like that to happen in the future.

What I'm worried about is being forced to live anywhere close to Islamists who have no problem getting infidel blood on their hands once the Umma becomes strong enough.

Your paranoia is more worrying. WW3 isn't kicking off tomorrow.

Look at Muslim fertility rates vs non-Muslim rates. Western Europe has pretty much fallen behind the newcomers.


We don't need to let them access our countries.

Relevant in any way because....?

 

[Carbonox]

As I say you have no idea at all what you are on about.

Great.

Sorry you were talking about Muslim street patrols, that was not a Muslim street patrol.

It was a legally held demonstration, you know the kind that democracies allow.

Clearly we have a different sense of justice.

I thought inciting violence or conquest of any kind was supposed to be illegal. Even a democracy needs to have limits.

A source that in its first section quotes a radical fundamentalist to justify radical fundamentalism.

Hmmmm OK, that's not a biased source then.

Doesn't change the way the Prophet is seen as a perfect model, despite all his warfare (which apologists try to write off as defensive) and other little things like pedophilia.

Once again we have a right to free speech in this country.

You don't have to like what the person says, but the UK has long understood that allowing idiots a voice also allows people to see ow much of an idiot they are.

To date all he has achieved is a few marches (when they happened), a failed street patrol scheme and a lot of hot air and noise. That you would exile someone to an uninhabited island for.

On the other hand you would in return allow convicted murders to roam the streets!

It also allows the possibility of other idiots actually joining up with him to strengthen the anti-West viewpoint.

I never said I wanted murderers roaming the streets.

No that's not what you said. You stated that you would see them executed in the street, and given that we were discussing Choudary, it seems you would be happy to do it for expressing a view point that you disagree with.

Quite frankly the only conclusion that I can draw from you comments here is that Choudary and yourself are not that different.

He supports Muslim Street Patrols, you support Christian Street Patrols.
He supports the death of his opponents, you support the death of you opponents.

You are simply two different sides of the same coin and quite frankly neither of you are a help in regard to the current situation.

The sole outcome of your 'kill em all' approach will result in innocent people dying (congratulations you are even more like you stated enemy now) and will help to further isolate and radicalize. The UK is sane enough to know that is not a viable solution, we tried in once and it doesn't work.

They don't merely "express a viewpoint I disagree with". They express a viewpoint that seeks to not just suppress, but completely destroy any viewpoints that don't agree with them. These lunatics don't deserve the right for free speech or expression - they have gone too far with their ideology that comprises of nothing but hatred. They have it so tightly wrapped around their head, they refuse to answer to any authorities who aren't part of their group.

Daesh are not my opponents - they're my enemies, whose lives aren't even worth my spit. They're a truly extraordinary specimen of what happens when you remove a person's brain and insert a Quran in its place. They have no sense of justice, can't respond to criticism with anything but violence, and are attempting to take full advantage of the liberal Western policies to slowly but surely spread their ideology and cripple civilized societies from within. I'm running out of terms here just trying to explain why human rights no longer apply to them, why the West needs to quit disarming itself against the world's worst troublemakers, and why a so-called civilized approach won't do a dent on a group completely obsessed with beheading, stoning, raping and hanging people.

 

[Furinkazen]

Daesh are not my opponents - they're my enemies, whose lives aren't even worth my spit. They're a truly extraordinary specimen of what happens when you remove a person's brain and insert a Quran in its place. They have no sense of justice, can't respond to criticism with anything but violence, and are attempting to take full advantage of the liberal Western policies to slowly but surely spread their ideology and cripple civilized societies from within. I'm running out of terms here just trying to explain why human rights no longer apply to them, why the West needs to quit disarming itself against the world's worst troublemakers, and why a so-called civilized approach won't do a dent on a group completely obsessed with beheading, stoning, raping and hanging people.

A Quran makes someone an enemy? Well you got 1.6 billion of them so you are in deep do-dah.

 

[Carbonox]

A Quran makes someone an enemy? Well you got 1.6 billion of them so you are in deep do-dah.

1. Do you even know what I say when I talk about Daesh?

2. Why should it matter even if there were 1.6 billion Daesh? It doesn't suddenly change my mind on them.

 

[Scaff]

Clearly we have a different sense of justice.

Yes I have one, you simply want to dispose of due process, but only for certain people. They have a name for that you know, but godwins law prevents me from citing it.

I thought inciting violence or conquest of any kind was supposed to be illegal. Even a democracy needs to have limits.

It is, which is why when they do it we arrest them, charge them and sentance them.

A point that seems to still be totally escaping you.

Doesn't change the way the Prophet is seen as a perfect model, despite all his warfare (which apologists try to write off as defensive) and other little things like pedophilia.

Oh this one again, its not come up in a while.

Would you like to look at the legal age of consent for Christian nations a good 1,200 years after him?

Delaware is the lowest I know of at 7, with most of the (Christian) US being around 10.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24

Religion is nonsense and the Abrahamic god (who is even more perfect than a prophet in all three) is even more of nutter, ordering parents to murder children for the crime of being rude.

Religion is a problem when the religions force it on other, regardless of the religion. that doesn't however give anyone free licence to go around murdering people on either side.

It also allows the possibility of other idiots actually joining up with him to strengthen the anti-West viewpoint.

And yet its not happened.

I never said I wanted murderers roaming the streets.

He's a bigger threat to the country than your average murder, seems to me that you rate murder as a lower offence than being a loud mouthed and unpopular (with Muslims) idiot.

They don't merely "express a viewpoint I disagree with". They express a viewpoint that seeks to not just suppress, but completely destroy any viewpoints that don't agree with them. These lunatics don't deserve the right for free speech or expression - they have gone too far with their ideology that comprises of nothing but hatred. They have it so tightly wrapped around their head, they refuse to answer to any authorities who aren't part of their group.

That's odd because when charged and sentenced they answer to the authorities rather well actually.

Again your claims are just not backed up with reality.

Daesh are not my opponents - they're my enemies, whose lives aren't even worth my spit. They're a truly extraordinary specimen of what happens when you remove a person's brain and insert a Quran in its place. They have no sense of justice, can't respond to criticism with anything but violence, and are attempting to take full advantage of the liberal Western policies to slowly but surely spread their ideology and cripple civilized societies from within. I'm running out of terms here just trying to explain why human rights no longer apply to them, why the West needs to quit disarming itself against the world's worst troublemakers, and why a so-called civilized approach won't do a dent on a group completely obsessed with beheading, stoning, raping and hanging people.

As I say you are simply the opposite side of the coin to them.

Congratulations on being an extremist.

1. Do you even know what I say when I talk about Daesh?

Its rather ironic that you adapt a term that is used by Muslims to describe IS, and yet you happily condemn all Muslims based on your version of Islam.

 

[Carbonox]

Yes I have one, you simply want to dispose of due process, but only for certain people. They have a name for that you know, but godwins law prevents me from citing it.

There's a crucial difference between your average criminal and an ISIS fighter, who you're at an open war against. Why should they be treated any differently when they enter European soil? Some countries even give them special treatment due to them being deemed war veterans.

It is, which is why when they do it we arrest them, charge them and sentance them.

A point that seems to still be totally escaping you.

We do that for war criminals after the war's over. Currently it doesn't seem to be that way.

Oh this one again, its not come up in a while.

Would you like to look at the legal age of consent for Christian nations a good 1,200 years after him?

Delaware is the lowest I know of at 7, with most of the (Christian) US being around 10.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24

Religion is nonsense and the Abrahamic god (who is even more perfect than a prophet in all three) is even more of nutter, ordering parents to murder children for the crime of being rude.

Religion is a problem when the religions force it on other, regardless of the religion. that doesn't however give anyone free licence to go around murdering people on either side.

I don't see a whole lot of kid-murderers around. However, what I do see is Islamic groups advocating child marriages, because after all, that's just following the perfect model of the Prophet:

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/27/iraqi-shiites-protestproposedfamilylaw.html

(yes, I deliberately picked Al Jazeera... at least now I can't be too biased, can I?)

And yet its not happened.

Does this mean it couldn't happen in the future?

He's a bigger threat to the country than your average murder, seems to me that you rate murder as a lower offence than being a loud mouthed and unpopular (with Muslims) idiot.

This is a guy who probably won't have moral problems even if he sends his follower goons around killing infidels.

That's odd because when charged and sentenced they answer to the authorities rather well actually.

Again your claims are just not backed up with reality.

Someone should tell that to the Australian Daesh sympathizers. They seem to have difficulty addressing the police without using animal names to insult them instead.

As I say you are simply the opposite side of the coin to them.

Congratulations on being an extremist.

I, along with the rest of Europe, am at war with extremists who won't go down without particularly hard methods.

Its rather ironic that you adapt a term that is used by Muslims to describe IS, and yet you happily condemn all Muslims based on your version of Islam.

What can I say? It's derogatory and has been said to piss them off. I like pissing the Daesh off. It's a grassroots approach to the whole anti-Daesh program. (Even though I highly doubt the Daesh even know what GTP is supposed to be, let alone read the opinions forum. You can always have hope though, right?)

I judge Islam based on how I see the religion in general. Several facts speak for themselves, including how the majority of Muslim countries are practically hellholes for anyone who happens to be the wrong gender or sexuality. Is that not the fault of community attitudes, which are often based off the Quran?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I judge Islam based on how I see the religion in general.

Have you ever actually had a conversation with a Muslim?

Several facts speak for themselves, including how the majority of Muslim countries are practically hellholes for anyone who happens to be the wrong gender or sexuality. Is that not the fault of community attitudes, which are often based off the Quran?

Severe intolerance of homosexuality is not unique to Muslim states. In sub-Saharan Africa, it's punished severely, and to be accused of homosexuality is seen as a major insult.

 

[Scaff]

There's a crucial difference between your average criminal and an ISIS fighter, who you're at an open war against. Why should they be treated any differently when they enter European soil? Some countries even give them special treatment due to them being deemed war veterans.

Citation required.

We do that for war criminals after the war's over. Currently it doesn't seem to be that way.

In the context of you last statement that makes no sense at all

I don't see a whole lot of kid-murderers around. However, what I do see is Islamic groups advocating child marriages, because after all, that's just following the perfect model of the Prophet:

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/27/iraqi-shiites-protestproposedfamilylaw.html

(yes, I deliberately picked Al Jazeera... at least now I can't be too biased, can I?)

So once again you are prompting a small group (in a political stunt - your own sources words) as speaking for all of a religion.

Well if that's how you would to work I present proof that all Christian would like to commit mass murder.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik

Does this mean it couldn't happen in the future?

Ah I see so now we should charge people based on what may happen in the future. Well in that case lock up all those mass murdering Christians who may kill abortion clinic staff. After all many of them threaten it and some have carried it out.

In the future they may rise up and murder all abortion clinic staff the world over, it could happen in the future.

This is a guy who probably won't have moral problems even if he sends his follower goons around killing infidels.

So once again try people based on what may happen.

Democracy and the rule of law are concepts that escape you it seems.

Someone should tell that to the Australian Daesh sympathizers. They seem to have difficulty addressing the police without using animal names to insult them instead.

Which has what to do with what in the UK?

I, along with the rest of Europe, am at war with extremists who won't go down without particularly hard methods.

And you think that by grouping all Muslims together than's going to work.

A question, who is doing the majority of the fighting against these extremists and what religion are they?

What can I say? It's derogatory and has been said to piss them off. I like pissing the Daesh off. It's a grassroots approach to the whole anti-Daesh program. (Even though I highly doubt the Daesh even know what GTP is supposed to be, let alone read the opinions forum. You can always have hope though, right?)

I judge Islam based on how I see the religion in general. Several facts speak for themselves, including how the majority of Muslim countries are practically hellholes for anyone who happens to be the wrong gender or sexuality. Is that not the fault of community attitudes, which are often based off the Quran?

No because in most cases its based on overall cultural bias, you seem to have quickly forgotten that the largest Muslim nation on earth has already had a female president, something the largest Christian nation has yet to manage. You are also forgetting that in developing nations (which is what you are referring to here) those issues exist just as strongly in Christian nations. Or do you think that being a women and/or gay in Uganda will give you equality with men?

The irony is taking a word that has a specific meaning to Muslims who oppose the extremism of IS (and who are moderate themselves) while condemning every follower of the religion (please don't try and deny this).

You judge Islam by taking the actions of a minority and imposing that view on the majority and think that offers some kind of insight, it doesn't. It simply displays a huge level of ignorance and a massive leaning towards a far right world view.

I've lived and works with Muslims, I traveled the gulf states as a kid (my father worked in the region for 15 years, I still work with Muslims and travel to the area with work. I shop in Muslim areas in the UK (I take it you have of course traveled extensively in these counties to make this claim).

The accusations and claims you make are, for the vast majority of Muslims, utter and complete nonsense. The incoherent ramblings of someone so blinded by misplaced rage and ignorance that they actually think that murder is the answer.

In other words, as I have said before, you are no different from what you are attempting to condemn.

 

[Carbonox]

Have you ever actually had a conversation with a Muslim?

No, my hometown hasn't been "multiculturalised" yet.

Severe intolerance of homosexuality is not unique to Muslim states. In sub-Saharan Africa, it's punished severely, and to be accused of homosexuality is seen as a major insult.

It's true and I have known it for quite some time - Uganda being one of the worst examples I can recall as far as recent events are concerned. It's not like I wouldn't condemn homophobia just because it's coming from a non-Muslim - the reason I made that point was because this whole thread is obviously about Islam, and people's view on it.

Side question - if so many atrocities hadn't been committed in the name of Islam, would there even be a need for a 46-page thread on GTP about what the members think of the politically orientated religion? And yes I know the homosexuality thread is much longer than this, but there the problems don't arise from homosexuality itself, but rather unhealthy attitudes that "just happen" to originate from badly outdated holy books. In this Islam thread, I feel the arguments are instead happening due to the fact some people have had enough of the Islam whitewashing, despite there being a clear difference between how Islam and the secular West view freedom.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Someone should tell that to the Australian Daesh sympathizers. They seem to have difficulty addressing the police without using animal names to insult them instead.

Go west of the M7 in Sydney. I guarantee that you'll hear just about everyone refer to the police as pigs. And they're not Muslims.

No, my hometown hasn't been "multiculturalised" yet.

So you've never had a conversation with a Muslim, and yet you see fit to judge all of them?

Well, that's your credibility shot.

 

[Carbonox]

Go west of the M7 in Sydney. I guarantee that you'll hear just about everyone refer to the police as pigs. And they're not Muslims.

Then who are they? Gang members? They sure sound like that.

So you've never had a conversation with a Muslim, and yet you see fit to judge all of them?

Well, that's your credibility shot.

I also haven't had a conversation with a homophobe, yet somehow I don't have moral qualms about judging them. For the record, I never knew anyone who was openly gay either. Hmm, does this mean I shouldn't sympathize with them? No, of course not. They're being oppressed like there's no tomorrow even in countries that call themselves civilized like the US, and they also happen to not have a holy book that encourages violence.

@Scaff, I'll get back to you sometime tomorrow, I guess... Daesh-haters need sleep as well.

 

[Furinkazen]

No, my hometown hasn't been "multiculturalised" yet.

In that case that lose any tiny shred of credibility you ever had for your somewhat strong and misguided views.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Then who are they? Gang members? They sure sound like that.

Nope. They're bogans - Australia's equivalent of rednecks.

What you're missing is that Australia started out as a penal colony of England, and lots of the early settlers were sentenced to life in the colony for minor crimes, like stealing a loaf of bread. As a result, there's a certain cynicism directed towards authority. A lot of our early national identity was forged by the bushrangers, who became folk heroes and were demonised by the police who many believed to by corrupt. While most of that has since been exorcised from the national consciousness, it still lingers in places.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

A prime example of stupidity by a government:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-...parked-parliament-restrictions/5789040?pfm=ms

So they've managed to restrict freedom of religious expression and freedom of speech with a knee-jerk reaction to a rumour. They have consistently demonstrated a lack of knowledge because they cannot differentiate between niqabs and burqas (which are extremely rare here), and overlook a provision within Islam that allows women to show their faces if the situation calls for it, mostly because the decision to wear one is a personal choice.

All they have managed to do is divide the community further, and all because they thought protesters might disrupt Question Time. But I doubt protesters could disrupt Question Time if they tried - it's a rowdy two hours of politicians shouting at each other.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

And on that note, a Canberra woman has stopped wearing her hijab for fear of being attacked:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-...jab-for-fear-of-being-attacked/5789256?pfm=ms

This is the result of attitudes held by people like Carbonox and GBO Possum.

 

[kennylmao]

Did a Staff Emeritus just triple posted?

I swear I'll get back to you soon, debating religion is such a drag.