Are Muslim Fundamentalists A Danger To Other Britons?
That’s not a question you will ever hear coming from the BBC. In fact they work strenuously to put across the opposite idea…the well known phrase that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ is one we hear constantly spouted by BBC presenters. The BBC in fact promotes the idea that Islamic fundamentalism is a good thing…Mark Easton infamously favourably comparing Muslim extremists to Ghandi, Churchill and Mandela. This is the BBC that suggested that if Muslim fundamentalists wanted to take over schools, and if that is what some parents wanted, then we should let them do that. The BBC has long supported the Muslim anti-war narrative that has fed and ‘jusitified’ the radicalisation of Muslims and been overly sympathetic to the ‘plight’ of Guantanamo Bay inmates.
So no, you won’t hear the BBC asking that question…despite a least one Muslim a day being arrested on terrorism related charges.
Which begs the question why they are happy to demonise Hindus in what seems like a campaign against them and their place in India?
Here is just the latest piece of anti-Hindu rhetoric from the BBC…
Are Hindu nationalists a danger to other Indians?
Why does the BBC selectively choose Hindus in India? Muslims are just as likely to be the instigators of violence there…it was Muslim insistence on a Muslim state that led to the creation of the breakaway state of Pakistan and the subsequent million deaths and millions of people being ethnically cleansed….and such Muslim attempts to annex parts of India didn’t stop in 1947, they continue to this day, never mind Bangladesh and the millions dead there…however if you read the BBC report you will come away with the idea that violence started by Muslims or started by a random incident was in fact a Hindu plot to attack Muslims. Where is the BBC article asking are Muslims a threat to Christians in Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia, or Malaysia or the Maldives or Egypt, or the Sudan…..and so on and so on and so on?
The BBC has along history of demonising some religions…notably it is those religions that are involved in conflict, often not by choice, with Muslims…inevitably the BBC presents Muslims as the victims…as in Burma where the fact that there has been a Muslim ‘Jihad’ going on since the 1940’s as they try to set up their own state in Burma is pretty much ignored or dismissed as fantasy by the BBC. The BBC of course had no problem denouncing Buddhism as a violent religion just as they are happy to similarly picture Christianity in a negative light whilst conversely not only refusing to acknowledge the violence done in the name of Islam but to actually work to deny that that is the case, that Islam is a violent religion….even the Islamist Tariq Ramadan has admitted that the Koran incites violence (24 mins) upon its readers….I paraphrase….
‘I wouldn’t say Islam is a religion of peace…..People are naturally violent and religion channels that violence to serve its purpose…to get peace…it’s the way towards peace but it’s not the peaceful reality’
He then tries to turn it on its head….the problem, he says, is not the book but the reader….but the reader is reading a text that accepts people are violent and encourages people to use violence….so the problem is the text…non?
Use violence to move towards peace…but what is peace in Islam?….the domination of Islam over all other religions….with Islam on top there is no need for war…..‘They create a desert and call it peace’.
Ramadan slips away from whether Islam is violent into describing peace as being ‘inner peace’ brought to you by knowledge gained through religion rather than the peace we get when there is no fighting.
Ramadan also states that we must understand the fundamentals of the religion to understand current events…..perhaps the BBC should take note….what exactly does the Koran and the Hadith say about violence? Need to know that to understand what is happening now.
If the BBC is going to look so closely at Hindu, or Buddhist, or Christian extremism then the same close examination must be carried out on Islam.
And today we have yet another example of the BBC promoting a Muslim narrative…
How the Uighurs keep their culture alive in Pakistan
Ostensibly about Uighurs who migrated to Pakistan (where all is lovely) from China but is in fact just a vehicle to attack China and its ‘atrocities’ against innocent Muslims in China.
Thanks for the link. It’s a disgrace that the BBC entitle an article in such a manner that is wholly offensive to Hindus; every Hindu I have met integrates fully, is forward-thinking and contributes.
The BBC wouldn’t dare release an article entitled ‘Are Islamic nationalists a danger to other Indians?’
“As long as their Islamic creed and religious practice are not jeopardized by the non-Muslim ruler, they [Muslims] can submit to the authority of their host country, even while entertaining messianic cravings as to their ultimate entry into the Abode of Islam, But when the degree of oppression becomes unbearable…or when relatively liberal policies allow the Muslims to express their religio-political concerns…they are likely to voice expressionist desires.”
Professor Raphael Israeli.
In other words: if they aren’t allowed to do what they want regarding their religion; or if they believe themselves to be oppressed or if they are allowed too much freedom – Muslims will seek to change the nation in which they reside. Catch 22.
Exactly. This is what I cannot understand about “liberal progressives” who support multi-culturalism and who defend Islam. Multi-culturalism and sharia are mutually exclusive. In supporting Islam, they are destroying the multiculturalism and diversity they claim to support. Liberal progressives have no understanding of logic.
We’ve been silenced for years over our views on immigration but then came Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford, Trojan Horse, Tower Hamlets, 7/7, Lee Rigby, Islamist scum going off to fight for Isis, Anjem Choudary…. ad infinitum.
It now seems that ministers want to say what we’ve thought all along:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11799251/We-are-ignoring-electoral-fraud-just-as-we-ignored-child-sex-abuse-in-Rotherham.html
Hey Pickles, can we believe you? You say, in the article
‘But the law must be applied equally and fairly to everyone. Integration and good community relations are undermined by the failure to do so’.
So first confront the Macpherson Report which instructs the police to acknowledge different ethnicities when applying the law, and that it is institutionally racist to apply the law equally to all people.
And by the way Pickles, this approach to the law, which your government have accepted in practice, would render Martin Luther King as an institutional racist.
BINGO! I support UKIP because UKIP upholds Dr Martin Luthor King Jnr’s idea of racial equality. Skin colour is irrelevant. It is the content of a person’s character which is important.
Like all that post on here, I am utterly dismayed at the simpering impotent action that the British & European Poiticians & media are taking over the invasion of hordes of muslims that are currently spewing themsleves onto European shores uninvited. Already millions are residing in Europe, and who no doubt are encouraged through the direction of the Islamic State to cause trouble-let alone another million or so ready to swarm across from North Africa & Turkey. The intention is quite clear to all, if not to the Politicians, that the aim is to destroy the West & impose Sharia Law. My family fought in both WW1 & 2 and 2 of my sons served in the Arm & Navy, fighting in various Islamic war zones-and so we shall fight again if necessary to protect our women our land and our Christian values, make no mistake.
Bravo.
On a related issue, are T-Rexs a danger to humans, or should they be allowed to roam unhindered?
If the latter, should they be given Benefits, as well as very young girls for pleasuring.
I believe the patron saint of England is St George – the man who killed a dragon that had a penchant for very young girls.
Where are you St George when this nation needs you?
‘ Imagine a newspaper on December 8, 1941 running a story saying that random men in airplanes had attacked Pearl Harbor, and that police were searching for a motive ‘
– Robert Spencer
Pearl Harbour.
Lone wolf attack.
More like PQ17. Only the aggressors were in some kind of coordinated pack configuration.
With about the same defensive coherence shown by those given the task of protection.
Nothing to do with Islam…
And when they claim that, they are also claiming that the Qur’an has nothing to do with Islam too. That is how stupid these delusional, logically impaired liberals are.
Islam:
Definition – The extremely violent religion of peace that has nothing to do with itself.
“Are Muslim Fundamentalists A Danger To Other Britons?”
So, the question is, is Fundamentalism bad?
But, Fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to certain theological doctrines.
So, is strict adherence to Islam or the Koran therefore bad?
Does it follow then that a good Muslim is a bad person?
Conversely, is a Bad Muslim is a good person?
So the question really is, are Muslims A Danger To Britain?
I think I know the answer to that.
Britons?
I do not think so, not now, not ever.
Export them all.
I would far rather have a Hindu family move in next door, or be workmates, colleagues and friends than a Muslim family. The Muslims I have known have been very duplicitous, dishonest and while nice and kind to my face, would not think twice about having me executed if Sharia law were implented here. The Hindus I have known have fully integrated, whilst still hanging onto their faith. Hindus are not trying to take over the world and exterminate every other religion. Hindus, like every other culture, face being as much a victim to Islam as anyone.