The BBC undoubtedly thought this was a good pro Muslim story….I might suggest it was the opposite….far from showing Muslims ‘integrating’ it shows a distinct lack of will to do so and in fact shows that Muslims expect British society to adapt to them not the other way round…..you might even suggest that it was fairly disturbing that Islam is presented in such a positive one sided fashion in a Western democratic society….and that British children are being dragged into Islamic culture by stealth….and the BBC hopes this will ensure they ‘accept’ Islam as ‘normal’ and ‘acceptable’.
Perhaps someone might like to point out the difference between these two images:
Why is one wrong and the other OK?
What is the difference between Islam and Fascism? When you read what the Koran instructs its followers to do you have to ask if that is any more acceptable than Fascism?
Would the BBC be just as pleased to see children giving a Fascist salute on the playing fields of Newcastle?
Some are already typing away…’How dare you etc etc…!!!’
But what’s the difference? Define Islamic ideology and then define Fascism. If you accept that Islamists are the Islamic extremists then you have to accept the Nazis were the extremists of the Fascist movement…and you cannot tar all Fascists with the same ‘extremist’ brush….there are different levels of Fascism just as with Islam…as practised anyway….ideally there is only one ‘perfect’ Islam…as laid down by the Koran….you cannot have different versions or sects within Islam…hence Shia/ Sunni/ Ahmadi conflicts….fundamentalist Wahhabism is probably the ‘True Path’:
‘Do not divide your religion into sects, each exulting its own doctrines.’ 30:31
Perhaps the BBC might do better to show us this use of football pitches by Islamic practitioners…a woman being shot for ‘adultery’…which could of course just be a case of ‘unproven’ rape…if you can’t prove you were raped you must have been committing adultery under sharia law:
The BBC are pleased that British children are copying Islamic practices and making them part of ‘popular British culture’:
Premier League: How Muslims are changing English football culture
Children playing football in the parks of Newcastle have even been spotted falling to their knees as if in prayer themselves after scoring a goal.
They may not completely understand what it means, but it’s a sign that Muslim practices are becoming a more familiar part of popular British culture.
Interesting that last line….’They may not completely understand what it means…’
Perhaps if they, or their parents, read the Koran they might get a better idea…do you want your kids to be taught this…the word of God…perfect in its Koranic recitation taught up and down the country, day in day out, in Mosques, madrassas, faith schools and homes?:
‘The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of creatures.’ 98:6
‘Believers take neither Jews nor Christians for your friend.’ 5:51
‘Some among us are Muslims and some wrongdoers. Those that embrace Islam pursue the right path.’ 72:14
Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal sternly with them.’ 66:9
‘Believers do not make friends with those who have incurred the wrath of God.’ 60:13
‘God loves those who fight for His cause in ranks as firm as a mighty edifice.’ 61:4
‘Believers do not make friends with those who are enemies of Mine and yours.’ 60:1
‘Have faith in God and his Apostle, and fight for God’s cause with your wealth and with your persons.’ 61:10
‘The true believers are those that have faith in God and His Apostle, and never doubt; and who fight with their wealth and their persons in the cause of God. Such are those whose faith is true.’ 49:15
‘Do not divide your religion into sects, each exulting its own doctrines.’ 30:31
‘You shall be called upon to fight a mighty nation, unless they embrace Islam. If you prove obedient, God will reward you. But if you run away, as you have done before this, He will inflict upon you a stern chastisement.’ 48:16
‘Those that fight for Our cause We will surely guide to Our own paths. Surely God is righteous.’ 29:69
‘Permission is hereby given to take up arms to those who are attacked.’ 22:39
‘We will surely punish the schismatics, who have broken up the scriptures into separate parts, believing some and denying others.’ 15:90
‘Believers make war on the infidels who dwell around you.’ 9:123
‘God has purchased from the faithful their lives and worldly goods, and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight for the cause of God, they will slay and be slain.’ 9.111
‘Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them.’ 9:73
‘If you do not go to war, He will punish you sternly, and will replace you by other men.’ 9:39
‘Whether unarmed or well-equipped, march on and fight for the cause of God, with your wealth and with your persons.’ 9:41
‘Fight against such of those to whom the scriptures were given as believe in neither God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His Apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, even if they are People of the Book, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.’ 9:29
‘Believers, know that the pagans are unclean. Let them not approach the sacred Mosque after this year is ended.’ 9:27
‘Believers do not befriend your fathers or your brothers if they choose unbelief in preference to the Faith. Wrongdoers are those who befriend them.’ 9:23
‘When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush for them everywhere.’ 9:5
‘Prophet rouse the faithful to arms. If there are twenty steadfast men among you, the shall vanquish two hundred and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding.’ 8:65
‘A prophet may not take captives until he has fought and triumphed in the land.’ 8:67
‘The unbelievers give aid and comfort to each other. If you fail to do likewise, there will be disorder in the land and great corruption.’ 8:73
‘Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.’ 8:39
‘Have nothing to do with those who have split up their religion into sects.’ 6:159
‘You will find that the most implacable of men in their enmity to the faithful are the Jews and the pagans, and that the nearest in affection to them are those who say: ‘We are Christians.’ 5:82
‘They do blaspheme who say: ‘God is Christ the son of Mary.’ 5:72
‘They do blaspheme who say: ‘Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god other than One God.’ 5:73
‘Believers, take not for friends and protectors the infidels and those who were given the Book before you, who have made your religion a jest and a diversion.’ 5:57
‘Say: People of the Book, is it not that you hate us only because we believe in God and in what has been revealed to us and to others before, and because you are evil doers?’ 5:59
‘Believers take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends.’ 5:51
‘Unbelievers are those who declare: ‘God is the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ 5:17
‘Believers choose not the infidels rather than the faithful for your friends.’ 4:144
‘If they desert you, seize them and put them to death wherever you find them.’ 4:89
‘The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. Fight then against the friends of the devil.’ 4:76
‘Believers do not make friends with any but your own people.’ 3:118
Had the People of the Book accepted the Faith, it would have been better for them, Some are true believers but most are evil doers.’ 3:110
‘He that chooses a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him and in the world to come he will surely be among the losers.’ 3:85
‘Let not the believers make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful.’ 3:28
‘The only true faith in God’s sight is Islam.’ 3:19
‘To those who were given the scriptures and to the Gentiles say: ‘Will you submit to God? If they become Muslims they shall be rightly guided; if they pay no heed your only duty is to convey the message.’ 3:20
‘Say to the unbelievers: ‘You shall be overthrown and driven into Hell.’ 3:12
‘Fighting is obligatory for you though you dislike it.’ 2:216
‘Fight for the sake of God those who fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love aggressors.
Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed.’ 2:190
‘Fight them until there is no more idolatry and God’s religion reigns supreme.’ 2:193
‘Believers retaliation is decreed for you in bloodshed.’ 2:178
‘Do not marry unbelieving women, until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry your girls to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do but beckon you to the Fire.’ 2:221
Quite a list huh? And every word from the Holy Koran. And that’s not all of it…there’s much more in the Koran, not to mention the Hadiths.
What is it that the BBC finds so attractive about an ideology that teaches children those thoughts and ideas?
People will jump in and say…context!…it’s all about context…those quotes are from a different time..they can now be disregarded.
Really? The Koran is the perfect, unchangeable word of God….timeless and universal. It is meant to guide you whenever and wherever. To claim that parts of it can be randomly disregarded is false….the Koran tells you that you must accept the whole of its teachings.
If ‘context’ means you can disregard parts of it then in reality you can disregard the whole of it as it was created 1400 years ago in a time, place and culture that bares absolutely no relationship to modern Western society.
You cannot ‘reform’ the Koran, you cannot reinterpret the Koran and thereby change its meaning.
The Koran is what it is, it is what it says it is…..and therefore has to be taken at face value and read with that in mind.
Which begs the question….why is such an ideology deemed acceptable to be taught to impressionable youngsters?
In a time before everything became ‘relative’ and values meant something Islam was viewed in a completely different light by the Great and the Good:
In Of the Standard of Taste, an essay by David Hume, the Quran is described as an “absurd performance” of a “pretended prophet” who lacked “a just sentiment of morals.” Attending to the narration, Hume says, “we shall soon find, that [Muhammad] bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers.”
Richard Dawkins believes that teaching any religion to children is a form of child abuse.…terrifying them with visons of hell and damnation and brainwashing them so that they believe those not of their religion are sinners or evil, unclean people….psychologically damaging them for life.
Standpoint magazine suggests that it is time that the likes of the BBC stop producing pro Muslim propaganda that hides the true nature of the beast and start a full on honest debate about the consequences of having Islam increasingly dominate proceedings in this country:
Census That Revealed a Troubling Future
Over the last decade the number of Muslims rose from 1.5 million to 2.7 million. These are the official figures. Illegal immigrants make the real numbers far higher.
Despite being hard to digest in a year, the census story passed over in a couple of days. But this is not an ephemeral story. It is an account of our recent past, our immediate present and a glimpse into a troubling future. Perhaps we passed over it so quickly because few people can bear this much reality
Successive governments of all parties have spent decades putting off any real discussion of this ….We also have a media class which has largely supported this state of defeatism. Instead of addressing concerns, politicians and press rarely bother, preferring to throw expressions of rage back at the public as surely as Gordon Brown did to Mrs Gillian Duffy of Rochdale. This is done — as reaction to the census confirmed — not only in accusations of “racism” and “bigotry” against ordinary people, but in a series of deflecting tactics which have become the replacement mechanism for action. These — all identifiable in the wake of the recent census — start with perhaps the most galling of all: “Get over it!”
For what it is worth, it seems to me that the vindictiveness with which the concerns of white British people, and the white working and middle class in particular, have been met by politicians and pundits alike is a phenomenon in need of serious and swift attention.
……were not the voices that everybody wanted to dismiss, in the final analysis, the only ones which were right?
Perhaps a perusal of this list of attacks might make you think again about the ‘religion of peace’….note how many women are killed for ‘immorality’, how many Christians, how many Muslims who converted to Christianity, how many Shias killed for not being Sunni, or Sunnis killed for not being Shias.
i am coming to the conclusion that islam is a religion for the mentally ill and the psychotic,these people are scary.
Good point Stuart, but I’d more define it as the religion for the evil…the black hearted.
It’s anti-Christianity, and therefore, Satans work (if you believe in these sorts of things)
If it is the so called “Religion of peace”, and the nutters are in the minority…then where are the majority?
Why, are these so called moderates, why are they not standing, shoulder to shoulder with members of other faiths, and atheists, and attacking the arseholes in their mids?
I can tell you where they are…
They are in the stupid, weak minds of the liberals, because there are no moderates…there are only Muslims.
(Cue, a few damp rag liberals telling me how wrong I am, and that I’m an evil racist….well, shove it, I am sick of you, and I’m sick of them)
Chop, if you examine many pictures, such as the one showing the execution above, but which illustrate a wider view, you will find the moderates, about whom you wonder.
All those moderates will be so horrified by the scenes of barbarism and savagery unfolding before them, that they will be recording the scenes for posterity on their mobile phones.
How odd.
Can they really be defined as moderates? Or simply the vast majority who are also barbaric, primitive savages?
It’s clear to me that Islam is the problem, and you’d be amazed by how many on twitter can actually know ( because hey, they have read the Q’ran dontcha know?) that my views are the opposite of the truth.
They can face the clear evidence of barbaric 7 century practices, safe in the knowledge that it’s nothing to with the ROP.
When people like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller get banned from the UK for the sin of telling the truth, you just have to realise we have a monstrous problem here.
I have written asking my MP to justify it, but I don’t expect a reply.
Commenters on here have actually told me they found a speech by Robert Spencer abhorrent. That’s right an actual speech abhorrent. Now then, was the commenter one of the weak minded liberals you mention? I don’t know. He simply cried foul when I offered links to really abhorrent scenes.
One thing is certain, it will get much much worse here before it gets any better.
All the mainstream political parties are in total denial about the truth, and in no way represent our national interests. Albeeba is just the same.
As Pat Condell would say: PEACE!
Not so long ago people in the UK would congregate to witness public hangings and, when these ceased, hang around outside jails to see confirmation that the execution had taken place.
It is a sad indictment of human nature but most people want to witness death, torture and sex. It takes very little to rip the thin veneer of civility away.
Public executions had been rightly outlawed in the UK by the time I was born…
Unlike Islamic countries & ahem, “Communities” around the world.
(You may cite the US, but they don’t normally decapitate women for being raped)
I would NOT have attended one of them anyway, as I am a little squeamish about stuff like that…can’t even carve a roast chicken, or eat meat off the bone, I’m THAT squeamish!..
Next.
I think it was around 1853 that last public execution took place in Britain
I thought it was Michael Barrett, a Fenian, in 1868.
Either way, composing some sort of relativistic argument based on an execution in 1868 is setting the bar pretty low, and totally ignores spontaneous decapitations, amputations, beatings, stonings etc.
Is this the most we can aspire to in 2013?
Da iawn Dysgwr_Cymraeg
A chroeso Mo!
Dw i’n dod o’r Abertawe’n wreiddiol ond dw I’n byw yn Adelaide rwan
Llongyfarchiadau i chi ‘te Mo.
Fel y gan yn dweud, dw i ‘yma o hyd’ .
Pob hwyl i chi, ond bydd yn ofalus, rhag ofn eich gwlad chi yn mynd yr un ffordd gyda mewnfuddwyr fel ni.
Dim ond dysgwr dw i, ond dw i mor browd i siarad yn y Gymraeg.
Mae sir benfro yn eitha da ar hyn o bryd, ond mae’n gynnar wrth gwrs.
A Barnsley soldier was attacked in the street, knocked unconscious and then repeatedly stamped and kicked in the face and head – just hours after getting home.
The savage, brutal and unprovoked attack on the 28-year-old in a terraced street in the town centre has left witnesses shaken and horrified.
One has told the victim’s mother: “They were like a pack of dogs, all gathered around his unconscious body to kick and stamp on him.”
The corporal, who has served two tours of duty in Afghanistan and one in Iraq, was left with concussion, a broken nose, black eyes and cuts and bruises all over his face, head and neck with some shoulder and pelvic injuries.
Because he was jumped on from behind, he has no idea how many people assaulted him at around midnight on Saturday – or why.
Ironically, earlier that day, members of the public had applauded soldiers who paraded outside the town hall as part of Armed Forces Day celebrations.
The soldier, who has served 10 years in the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, had got back to Barnsley that day after a 30-hour journey home from the Falkland islands.
http://www.barnsley-chronicle.co.uk/mobile/news/article/6709
AND
Another soldier has been killed
Three under arrest after Moreton soldier is killed in street attack
http://vladtepesblog.com/2013/07/08/three-under-arrest-after-moreton-soldier-is-killed-in-street-attack/
As usual the police and the MSM are strangely reticent about giving any information about the suspects. All one can say at the moment is that the suspects are humanoids, but unlikely to be EDL members, or we would have known by now.
Original source
http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/10532976.Three_under_arrest_after_Moreton_soldier_is_killed_in_street_attack/
Thanks for linking to the original source.
There is no doubt that given the tension that is in the country after the beheading of fusilier Lee Rigby, the above two incidents have not been publicised – in fact they have been swept under the carpet.
I believe it was after the Bradford riots in 2001 that a senior member of the police “service” said something along the lines of, if the public knew what was really going on, the city would rise up. Can’t find a reference to this, unfortunately.
I’d say that the situation has deteriorated. I sensed a degree of anger after Lee Rigby’s murder that even the London bombings didn’t create.
“As usual the police and the MSM are strangely reticent about giving any information about the suspects…”
http://goo.gl/UE3Q0
“A man was detained by police on suspicion of assault and later released. The mother of the soldier has asked it be made clear the attackers were white British men.”
Hands up all the people on this site who are disappointed…
…and why do you think the mother asked that? And why would it be in bold in the newspaper article (as you have done too)? And why no quotation marks?
The BBC are, indeed, trying to brainwash the nation into accepting Islam. Yesterday, they spent a whole day laying into the Church over its dealings with abuse within its fraternity; but the BBC were seemingly slating the whole church as if it was its problem as opposed to a minority. They do the same with the Catholic church. I would be very interested to see the results of undercover infiltrations into mosques up and down the land if Pakistani Muslim grooming is a yardstick to go by. Talk about opening a can of worms! The BBC is an utter disgrace!
Such a culture of fear of being branded racist in UK that the thought of infiltrating Mosques and discovering whatever amount of abuse occurrs, is almost unthinkable.
Well done Alex
The other thing that gets me on this “Muslim footballers”, and the pathetic Beeb trying to make out that non-Muslim players going down on their knees are sort of paying homage to Islam…
No they’re not…
Folk have been dropping to their knees since time began, sometimes in despair, sometimes in joy, feck all to do with Islam…I suppose Andy Murray was bowing to fecking Mecca yesterday when he won Wimbledon…no, he was not, he dropped to his knees in joy…simple as that.
The Bbcdophyls are keen to remind us there are passages of the Bible which preach violence.
True but there are not many of them and more importantly Christians do not use these as an excuse to inflict pain and death on others.
The Bible is used by many as a moral reference to how one should conduct ones life and our treatment of others in a compassionate and morally just fashion. Of course not all abide by it but, unlike the Quoran, it is not used as an excuse to impose misogyny, mutilation and an excuse to behead people.
Muslims will NEVER integrate.
The Bbcdophyls are keen to remind us there are passages of the Bible which preach violence.
True but there are not many of them and more importantly they are in the Old Testament & do not form part of the teachings of Christ
I had to laugh when the muslim physio at Liverpool said that all the food for the players and staff had been switched to halal – but it was not to accomodate muslims.
Ah, yes – of course – it’s been switched to halal because it benefits everybody.IBeautiful piece of dissembling in a great brainwashing programme.
And I presume it was not challenged let alone question the cruelty and inhumane treatment of dumb animals.
(NB by dumb animals I am referring to the cows.)
Luke 19:26-27 “I tell you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.”
Matthew 10:34-35 “Do not think that I have come to send peace on earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword. I am sent to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law”
Luke 12:49-51 I came to bring fire to the earth and how I wish it were already kindled! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division.
“True but there are not many of them and more importantly they are in the Old Testament & do not form part of the teachings of Christ”
Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
Luke 16:17 “But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void.”
Psalm 137:9 “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.”
Psalms is in the Old Testament you dummy.
“True but there are not many of them and more importantly they are in the Old Testament & do not form part of the teachings of Christ”
Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
Luke 16:17 “But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void.”
Have you noticed you are repeating yourself?
There are 150 of them…more of them than any other section of the Bible, Old or New!
And your selected quotes need Pauls liberation theology before you include them in your argument James…the Spirit superseding the Law etc.
And I`m sure you`ll have been told that Pauls an old misogynist etc…so imagine you`ll not have been keeping up.
Never too late though…have a look at Galatians eh?
when was the last time the bible was quoted to carry out mass murder?
Bottom line
Two religions one has tag line ‘love thy neighbour’ the other ‘kill the non-believer’
As a reasoned atheist if I forced to live under the rule of one ,and that day may be coming ,I know which one I would choose
Paul expands..
If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
1 Corinthians 13
Tsk tsk. You should not do that, Stables. Misguiding, misusing scripture – shame on you. But just admit, that you had to dig deep to find those quotes and then use them out of context. The message of Christianity is redemption, through grace. Something utterly foreign to Mo and the spawn.
“You should not do that, Stables. Misguiding, misusing scripture – shame on you.”
Quite so. Taking things out of context to suit one’s own agenda. Shocking.
So is your argument that there is little difference between Islam and Christianity in the contemporary world? Are you trying to persuade us that this claim is based on superior knowledge?
No and no. My argument is that we can all go around pulling bits out of books to make them say what we want.
That’s the problem, James. The Islamists who murder and rape and destroy are claiming that their holy book tells them to do it, or supports their actions. You need to tell them they’re wrong, not us.
Or perhaps Alan? He seems partial to pulling bits out of the Koran out of context. Unless he is actually a Koranic scholar (which somehow I doubt – but I could be wrong) then he is as guilty as they are of using it to shore up bogus arguments. And since he is more likely to read this site I think he is easier to reach.
Dave s
The status of the content is not in dispute, it is the taking out of context and extracting verses here and there that appear to support your argument that, rather than treating the work as a whole.
Alan is irrelevant, James. Stay on topic. You’re using the same argument the BBC does (see Sarah Montague and Stephen Sackur and Nicky Campbell, just for starters), and it simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Dez does this as well, and screams “racist” at anyone who suggests that those who commit acts of violence in the name of Islam are inspired by their holy book.
The reality is that your opinion of the Koran is irrelevant, as is mine, as the opinion of everyone here, and all the hideously white on-air talent at the BBC. The real discussion should be about the fact that these people do claim the Koran inspires them, directs them to violence (or to sexually abuse young white girls or throw acid in their daughters’/sisters’ faces, etc.). They say it. It’s their claim, not mine nor Alan’s. Deal with it.
What you and Dez and Sackur and Montague and Campbell and all the rest of the shameful crowd should be doing is telling Mohammedans that they’re taking bits of the Koran out of context. But none of you would dare. The best the BBC can do is have a couple of trendy activist imams on with Campbell to say that violence is wrong but it’s UK foreign policy to blame, really.
It’s so much easier to call us bigots instead, and allows you to avoid what’s really going on.
“Alan is irrelevant” — that is a bit harsh.
In this case he isn’t. He is the author of the post, he is the one pulling out bits of holy books to justify his argument.
As I have shown, anyone can pull that game.
Alan’s reply: No, you compared the bible with the Koran…deliberately missing the point…this is about the BBC not treating the two religions the same….it is not about how they compare.
I could not agree more that Islamist terrorists pull exactly the same trick and use it to fool the gulible.
Alan’s reply: No….no ‘trick’….they do exactly as the Koran and the Hadith tells them…that’s the problem.
How exactly do you propose I do go about telling Muslims that they are taking bits out of context? Stand outside mosques?
Alan’s reply: No need….it’s not out of context.
Maybe one of the many retired people on here could do that, but I have a day job.
Alan’s reply: The old Nicked Emus coming to the surface there….can’t resist an ad Hom can you?
I find it highly objectionable that people on this site attempt to castigate all Muslims for the actions of a few. Seeking to label an entire religious group has been tried before with horrific consequences.
Alan’s reply: Where have I ever ‘castigated ‘all’ Muslims’….I talk about an ideology not an accident of birth. And trying to claim they are the ‘new Jews’ is pathetic…..Unite has been attacked all week for its ideology and actions…are all Unite members also the ‘new Jews’? Strange you don’t use that argument to defend the Christian faith.
Yes Islam has a big problem. Yes there are people who subvert it for their own ends. Yes the community could do more.
Alan’s reply: But then you do exactly what you complained about…castigating a whole community…’who could do more’!
But do you seriously think that Islam is the cause, or the excuse, for these actions? It is not as if there hasn’t been terror groups before who will always find something to supoprt their hate-filled messages.
Alan’s reply: Tom Holland, who knows a thing or two about Islam, stated that ‘The Prophet’ had a divine message to impart and that was that Islam gave a license from God to plunder the unbelievers.
Do I believe him or someone who has never read the Koran?
James, we all know what you find highly objectionable. You’ve bored us to tears telling us already. You are just like Dez and the BBC in your blind failure to understand. Read my response to him below, as it’s essentially the same thing I’d say to you.
Telling everyone except Mohammedans that it’s a religion of peace and that all these apparent directives to violence are taken out of context and that it’s wrong to blame Islam for Islamic violence is a complete waste of time. If you don’t want to tell the people who are really the ones being violent, that’s your own affair. If you’re afraid to talk to Mohammedans about it, I’d suggest you need to reexamine your argument as well as your own conscience. At the very least you should be demanding that the BBC does it, in the interests of social cohesion and relieving racial tensions in your community. You don’t want to see another anti-Mohammedan backlash, do you?
If you don’t want to be part of the solution, then at least quit telling other people they’re the problem.
And now I see you’ve thrown in some personal, ageist insults as well. Stay classy.
David Preiser,
“The real discussion should be about the fact that these people do claim the Koran inspires them, directs them to violence (or to sexually abuse young white girls or throw acid in their daughters’/sisters’ faces, etc.).”
Ok David, which Uk Muslim rapists have said that they were “inspired by the Koran” to rape young girls? And if by chance you manage to find some; why do you give such credence to their words? Do you generally refer to the opinion of rapists as a fountain of all knowledge?
Dez, you’re dodging the point again. I don’t know if it’s deliberate or you just can’t grasp the concept. And you know perfectly well that an example of what I’m talking about is the Rochdale case. Stop playing games.
You continue to live in denial when you claim that by giving “credence” to the rapist’s words I’m using it as proof that the Koran is dangerous, really is marching orders for violence. That’s not what I’m saying at all, and I really wish you’d get your head out of your ass and listen.
What I’m saying is that they think their religious texts instruct them/condone their actions. If you think they’re wrong, I’m not going to disagree with you. The point is what they think, not what you think or what I think or what anyone here thinks. The problem is that they think their religion instructs them to kill (or in the Rochdale and other gang cases, that white girls are inferior). Tell them they’re wrong. Tell the BBC to tell them they’re wrong. Don’t tell me, because I’m not the problem.
It’s not a difficult concept, unless your reflexive opposition to anything I or anyone here says prevents you from being intellectually honest.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2132985/Muslim-gang-jailed-kidnapping-raping-girls-Eid-celebrations.html
And your defence of this will be?
Or this one
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/muslim-who-raped-13-year-old-uk-girl-spared-jail-because-he-didnt-know-it-was-wrong/
[thread moved to bottom of page]
Jim
I had thought I’d made it quite clear that there is no context to the Koran…no good you trying to claim I said the opposite when it’s in the post for all to read.
Claiming ‘context’ is the trick used by the defenders of the religion of peace….who therefore logically must claim the 7th century Koran doesn’t mean anything in the 21st century.
But to the devout Muslim The Koran is timeless and universal….it needs no context, its rules are ever relevant.
Funny how you always claim to hate Islam yourself…and all other religions….and yet you consistently defend it.
‘Bogus’ is a word that definitely comes to mind when running a critical eye over your ‘arguments’.
The Koran is not a book. It is the literal word of God. it cannot be altered. It is eternal.
The New Testament is not this. The Gospels tell the story of Jesus from four viewpoints. The remainder is in the nature of commentaries. It is a world apart from the Koran and I think you will find Muslim authorities think so too.
I am always amazed that Westerners , most of them, have never understood the crucial difference.
If that’s the case, why do many Muslims not follow everything the Koran commands? For example, not every Muslim will make war on the infidels, and many Muslims have non-Muslim friends.
To clarify: I accept that there are far too many Muslims who adhere strictly to the word of the Koran and use it to justfify appalling acts of terror/abuse. But it’s not all of them.
Nobody’s perfect . Which I suggest is the constant complaint of fundamentalists of all persuasions.
heres some more of that culture the bbc are proud of
Two girls, 11 and 16, sexually assaulted off Brighton beach
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-23231508
Devastating critique, truly devastating. You are the Christopher Hitchens of BBC apologists on this site and as such have been sorely missed
what are the true figures,the bbc said there are 2.8 million muslims living here,sky news said there are 5 million muslims here,channel 4 said there are up to 8 million muslims living here,nobody seems to know the true figure,why is that i wonder while eating my cornflakes.
2.8 million is the official government figure, but then the official government estimate of UK population at around 60 million is disputed .Even the BBC have questioned it .There is good reason to believe that the true population is around 75 million.
where the hidden 15 million come from is anyone’s guess, but I am fearful (yes fearful) that that higher estimate of Muslim population is correct
Someone will need to point out at some stage that, for most indigenous Britons, Mr Sieg Heil is practically-speaking, in terms of the likelihood of victimisation of those indigenous Britons, a much-smaller threat to your life, liberty and property than our Messrs Allahu Akbar footballers should they buy in wholeheartedly to their religious faith.
In an ideal world, we could get all these people to do one of those historical recreations– say the Crusades– and do it completely in earnest with no shamming, and we would have done with them. But that ain’t happenin’, folks, much as we would like for it to come about.
It then becomes, to some extent, a question of skin-as-uniform– which side affords you some degree of safety should you be caught up in the melee? Much as you might not ordinarily want to have anything to do with your average BNP/EDL/whatever yob, he won’t attack you and attempt to convert you to some mediaeval religion given half the chance to succeed doing it. (In fairness, there may be many Muslims who would ordinarily have no truck with the Hamza/Choudary type Islamists, but who, if push came to shove would feel they have no choice). It is a choice between two evils, perhaps, but keep allowing the kind of separatism and religious fundamentalism of Islamists to remain unchecked, and it is a choice that may have to be faced sooner or later.
Winston Churchill, speaking of his ally-of-necessity Uncle Joe Stalin, once remarked that “if Hitler invaded Hell, I would make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.” Fortunately for our Winnie, he got another ally about six months later with FDR (as far as finally being a full-fledged fighting ally and not just a gun-runner), but sometimes you have to take your allies as you find them. You can always sort it out later. Hopefully. Let’s just hope Mr Sieg Heil is content with just being a St Patrick and banishing the snakes.
Brutal logic ,but hard to gainsay. Hopefully your dystopian vision will not come to pass. Despite the BBCs best efforts
Did they not kick a linesman to death in Holland? Would love to see one of these Muzzies lose their cool on MOTD……..
I always find the Islam apologists to be desperate guilt tripping Pollyannas ,who will surely find out the hard way that Islam despises them as the quisling appeasers of their book ;and their intentions as laid out (crystal clear) in that book.
These people really make life much more dangerous for us that it ought to be, but I hope that they reap that whirlwind of theirs before too long(and as gently as possible).
When a blood curdled Muslim can brandish a meat cleaver, whilst raving on about Surah 9…and the liberal guilt tripping tourists can remove his words, deny what his theology is(and it is correct in his terms-and indeed many other “good Muslims” too!)…and insult us(and beg other nutjobs to do the same, only MORESO) by saying it`s NOT Islamic imperative to do things as he did(if you are literal re the literal word of God that the Koran claims to be)…then you`re a craven apologist that deserves the retribution that sickshit like him and his pal think we`re all due.
Now how the hell these lily-livered godless creeps and clowns such as the BBC and useful idiots that keep mopping up after the shahada ;get the conversation stone and hog it to enrage all Muslims(as well as many like me too) is beyond me…we must shake these monkeys off out backs and fast.
And not the Muslims either-the BBC apologists are much more sinister in my Book!
David Preiser,
Re: the Koran… “And you know perfectly well that an example of what I’m talking about is the Rochdale case. Stop playing games.”
That’s a flippant and lazy response David. You said that; “people do claim the Koran inspires them” to (for example); “sexually abuse young white girls”… There is (to my knowledge) no record of anyone in the Rochdale case claiming that they were inspired/motivated/excused to rape by the Koran.
You have yet to provide an example of someone saying they raped or were inspired to rape; “because of the Koran”. Till you do so, your argument falls flat on its face at the first hurdle.
Okay, Dez, just to end this charade, Rochdale:
One of the men on trial in Liverpool said: “You white people train them in sex and drinking, so when they come to us they are fully trained.”
Others have told their victims it is fine to sleep with them “because it’s what we do in our country”.
Actually, that supports my own contention – which I’ve expressed here numerous times, as you probably know – that much of this bad behavior is caveman stuff (a condemnation of culture, not race, there’s a difference), which existed long before Mohammed was a twinkle in his uncircumcised father’s eye. Still, here’s the judge in the case:
“One of the factors leading to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion.
“Some of you, when arrested, said it was triggered by race. That is nonsense. What triggered this prosecution was your lust and greed.”
(With the “triggered by race” bit, the judge was referring to the defendant’s claim that they were arrested due to racism, their only crime was being Muslim.)
Here’s a different case where someone was let off from statutory rape free because he said his religious school taught him it was okay.
In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that ‘women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground’.
Now here’s that dopey “Underpants Bomber” demanding his release from jail because he believes Mohammedans should be judged only by the laws of the Koran. Meaning he believes what he did was okay according to his religion’s holy book.
And then there’s the Butcher of Woolwich, on video saying that his religion demanded that he kill. Let’s please not pretend you don’t know about that.
Now, can you please stop pretending there are no Mohammedans who interpret the Koran in unfortunate ways and address the actual point? Honestly, jihadis don’t have the same anti-war beliefs you do, even though you share a common enemy, and it’s high time we admit the difference.
David Preiser,
“Okay, Dez, just to end this charade, Rochdale: One of the men on trial in Liverpool said: ‘You white people train them in sex and drinking, so when they come to us they are fully trained.’…”
Quotes that show that rapists view their victims with contempt (surprise?). But still not one single example of someone claiming that the “Koran inspired them” to sexually abuse young white girls.
“Here’s a different case where someone was let off from statutory rape free because he said his religious school taught him it was okay.”
You really should learn how to read. That was just part of his defence lawyer’s case. He wasn’t “let off”. He was given nine months youth custody, suspended for two years, along with a two-year probation supervision order. The reason for what you might consider to be a lenient sentence was because, as the judge said; “‘I accept this was a case where the girl was quite willing to have sexual activity with you…”
Still nothing said by anybody about the Koran inspiring them to rape. The “charade” is you making such a claim and yet having absolutely no evidence to back it up. That makes you either a liar or a fantasist. Which would you prefer?
No Dez, you are the lair and the fantasist, your continued blinkered protests prove it. What would it take for you to realise tour ‘useful idiot’ ness? I’m serious: to spend so much time and trouble defending the indefensible is something you should think about; I can see no logical, moral or decent reason for it whatsoever.
Span Ows,
“No Dez, you are the lair and the fantasist…”
Why? David Preiser made a claim. If he can’t provide any evidence for that claim that’s his problem not mine.
It’s not his problem, he is basing his claim on a mountain of evidence, some circumstantial. The evidence is that 95% of the UK’s ‘groomers’ convicted to date or inside awaiting trial are Pakistanis. 100% are Muslim. Muslims follow the Koran, Pakistan is the first Islamic state, follows the Koran. You could try to get away with saying they were dumb, simple, rural folk mislead by a rogue Imam but like I said, if you really believe that then you are the lair and fantasist and trying to split hairs about something David P has claimed pales into insignificance with what you are trying to condone (not literally but you know what I mean).
No, dez, now you’re lying or just fooling yourself.
After his arrest, he told a psychologist that he did not know having sex with a 13-year-old was against the law. The court heard he found it was illegal only when he was informed by a family member.
In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that ‘women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground’.
That’s not merely a lawyer’s claim. It’s what the kid said, his own words. If you want to claim it’s all a lie made up for the laywer’s defense case, I’m afraid you’re living in denial, and decided to call me a liar instead of dealing with the truth. The kid’s statements to the psychologist are indeed part of the defense case, but you can’t dismiss it as false, unless you have some mind-reading ability that you’d like to share with us. The religious school was a Mohammedan school and they told him what the Koran teaches. You can’t possibly get away with claiming that a madrassa doesn’t teach from the Koran. I won’t buy that argument, and I doubt anyone honest would, either.
Having said that, I see you’ve decided to pin your entire case on the rape issue, and are refusing to address the killing/violence part. Which, naturally, is the more important aspect of this debate.
Also, I’m glad to note that you view statutory rape as a non-issue if the 13-year old girl is willing. You have the morals of a Beeboid.
David Preiser,
You stated as “fact” that these people claim the Koran inspires them to “sexually abuse young white girls”. I asked you for some evidence of this “fact”; and you have patently been unable to provide any.
Why not just admit you were wrong and/or misinformed? Why is that such problem for you even though it’s quite so transparently obvious?
Stop playing word games, Dez. Nobody believes you any more. I’ve provided evidence that perpetrators have stated uncategorically that their religious text directs them to behave in unhappy ways. You seem to be fixated on some sort of direct quote, which is patently absurd.
I hope you realize that everyone has seen you avoid the killing issue. Well done, continue to pretend it doesn’t exist, while we all laugh at you.
Ah Scott Matthewman, wasn’t he the bloke who tweeted how sexually attractive he found the Times Square bomber Faisal Shazad? What a privilege for Biased BBC readers that he should seek to instruct us on the absence of any link between misogynistic pedophilia and Islam. Who knew that he was such an authority?
A bit late to play the victim card. Maybe you ought to read your own posts. They consist mainly of abuse. Have you not noticed? Yes I am questioning your knowledge of Islamic culture.
Scott how can you be gay and support an islamist terrorist who would want you killed simply because of your sexual orientation? you lefties certainly are a strange bunch
Forgive me if I have missed this, but where has he said that he supports an islamist terrorist?
repost cos original post went above. see scott we all have probs with the site as times
sorry scott. i just hate homophobia and people who support it. people like the stop the war coalition, UAF and the rest of the extreme nazi left wing fascists who have sold out their principles by jumping in bed with islamic extremists. Happy ramadan to you 😉
To Alan.
It is an abuse of your posting privileges to edit, or append information onto, someone else’s post. If you want to comment on my reply have the integrity to do it properly.
Your actions and your words reveal the kind of person you are – one devoid of integrity.
Unsure what your complaint is…..you post a comment with numerous points….each one gets answered in a way people can readily make sense of and in a place where they can make an instant connection between question and answer.
Do you object to having your questions answered so clearly?
As to integrity…..firstly I quite clearly mark my comments and in no way alter your own.
Secondly….I assume what you really dislike is the instant rebuttal of your comments and now resort to complaining about ‘integrity’ when caught out…….I’d check your own level of integrity before jumping aboard your high horse.
islam is the religion of peace, and muslims are so misunderstood by racist whitey. the solution. kill whitey
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
To be honest Scott, I`ve no problem now you`re back.
You`ve got a bit of a backlog though, what with BBC payoffs, the Muslim Brotherhood , as well as many other glaring bias that the BBC says is “reporting”.
Pick your topic-and tell us why Morsi is the man of the hour, why the BBC payoffs are “just about right” and why the usual slew of biased slush is only in our heads.
Maybe UNITE might be the first place to give us why the BBC have been “just about right, going forward”.
sorry scott. i just hate homophobia and people who support it. people like the stop the war coalition, UAF and the rest of the extreme nazi left wing fascists who have sold out their principles by jumping in bed with islamic extremists. Happy ramadan to you 😉