You live in the wrong neighbourhood. Most places in the UK are overwhelmingly white and non-Muslim. The threat of Islam to the UK is something of a chimera - Islamists are a tiny but vocal minority.

I don't think one can argue that that minority isn't growing, though.

Well as that man in the video pointed out, there's a general belief that women are mistreated in islam, and one of the things that happen is they are forced to wear the burka's. Now, to think, if this country were to be taken over and islam were to become the majority ruling, things such as this would become common, and it's not fair. I think a fair few countries have started banning them because it represents oppression over women and in ways could be seen as a national security problem. If a person is covered head to toe with only their eyes showing, what good would that be if we saw them robbing a corner shop or planting a bomb on a bus? And as for the indian dresses, they're just ghastly. But a lot of the pakistani women where them. Fair enough it's their culture, but they no longer live in their culture. I may have been vocal about it and quite to the point, but hey, I was a bit rushed for time and wanted to make my opinion.

Also, CaptainWill, in my city, It's the Polish and Islamic that make up the vast majority. And we've got quite a lot of mosques to go around. I recall being in Religious Education Class for GCSE before I left in 05 and it was a quite overwhelming class. Literally 3 white people (myself included) and we were all athiests, the rest where all muslims. Now, part of the course was to become diverse in culture and study events and how it effects us and others. But I recall plenty of occassions where one of us white boys would give a counter-argument to one of their views, and once they'd made their backing up argument and we were made to do ours, lots of them would start yelling in their language. In fact, one class, we had a supply teacher because ours was off sick and they just swore constantly at him in it.

Now, I know these aren't terrorists, I'm not one to discriminate on belief, but a lot of them said how much they hated England and how Islam was going to take over the United Kingdom. Better get on the counter battle !

Well, I will go the extra mile. I AM one to discriminate on belief. If the belief is irrational, dangerous, and intolerant, then it definitely deserves discrimination.

I am a libertarian. I want freedom in all context, unless if that freedom infringes on the freedoms of another. (That is why I love the internet so much, more freedom of speech here than pretty much anywhere.) Islam is not a good belief. Granted, there are not many beliefs that I find "good", but I know that Islam is not one of them.

It is not just belief, though. It is culture. Without Islam the "middle east" would not be the same. The way children are raised, in fires of hatred and anti-american Islamic propaganda, is trampling the possibility for free thought. The conditioning as a child is extremely influential... can we let this happen to entire countries?

Islam is not a bad belief if properly implemented, as per my Tatarstan example. And the last paragraph there, in particular, is someone throwing a rock from a glass house. Essentially the same can be said about any country. In the US, children are raised in 'fires of hatred and anti-Islamic American propaganda', 'trampling the possibility for free thought'. And who is the US to dictate how people teach their children across the world? How can you say something like 'can we let this happen to entire countries', when it's happening in the US regarding Iran, Russia, North Korea, most of South America, and even, to some extent, Europe?

'The West' is unsustainable because of low birth rates, Islam or no Islam. Without fertile immigrants, the ratio of the elderly to the young would rise significantly, putting a lot of stress on programs like Medicare (and their European equivalents). Living standards will have to drop, either among the elderly, or among the young, who'll have to save up more of their money for later life. Coupled with problems like energy and carbon emissions, as well as a reliance on very cheap third-world-made products (where, for the most part, workers will get paid more as the economies develop), I don't think that the West's way of life is sustainable.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jan 17 2010, 10:06 pm by Centreri.

The US hasn't dictated how people teach their children across the world. And indeed, how can we let this happen to entire countries? Not all beliefs are equal, especially ones that are intolerant so how can we let beliefs of hatred flow through the younger children and lead only to the fruition of radical Islamic terrorism?

You just said that we must dictate how children are taught across the world by asking how we can let those countries teach their children like that. Not all beliefs are equal, sure; radical Muslim extremism isn't as nice as America's beliefs. However, anti-Americanism is no less 'equal' than pro-Americanism. Beliefs of hatred are flowing through the younger children in regards to Islam in this very thread.

In the United States of America, the crime of insurrection trumps the first amendment. I think it might even be mentioned in the constitution. You can be put to death for provoking insurrection.

So I don't see how this is a controversial thing at all.

Insurrection has nothing to do with the first amendment. You can be put to death for Treason, of which provoking Insurrection can be an instance, most likely because provoking insurrection consists in "levying War" against the United States. If the organization were to sponsor practices which constitute treason, then yeah it's pretty obvious that it should be banned in the U.S. British law may be different, however.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jan 18 2010, 4:40 am by Vrael.

I don't know. I definitely am not well informed about the issue, but saying that we should follow Islamic law is actually simple first amendment stuff. It's when they become sponsored by terrorist groups (or vice versa) that it becomes an actual treasonous act, methinks. You make it sound as if supporting a democratic candidate who wants to follow Islamic law is treasonous, and I wouldn't say it is.

You are just letting this fly right over your head aren't you? Their hatred is pointless, fueled by a silly religion with NO logic whatsoever. My "hatred" is Anti-anti-logic, and I wouldn't even call it "Hatred" as you "put it" when you reversed my proposals. Islam is dangerous, hating jews for no reason and threatening people is Intolerant. There is nothing morally wrong about being intolerant of Intolerance itself. So, if you don't mind, stop making me out to be some brainwashed propaganda worshiping mindless american. Kthanks.

Does that mean you're intolerant of yourself?

They hate Jews because a bunch of English dumbasses decided to take a bunch of land and say 'Here, Jews, get over here so we don't kill you back in Europe, ignore these locals, they're harmless'. And since you didn't know that... Hint hint . And with America, it's because it supports Israel, and because it constantly meddles in the Middle East. Believe it or not, it's not just the religion that dictates how they behave.

[quote Intolerance][/quote]
Lets try to keep an even level of respect here, so this doesn't turn into a flamewar.

"English dumbasses decided to take a bunch of land" - Actually, no. Israel is not a bunch of land at all. Its less than half the size of Iowa. Why would they be so upset? Because its holy land. Holy land. It has religious significance.

"Its not just the religion that dictates how they behave" - I think that part is obvious. I don't get up in the morning and pour myself a bowl of cheerios because I am a libertarian, or because I am an atheist. I do it because I am hungry. More to the point, their terrorism is supported by the Koran. A group of people robbed of socioeconomic fortune turn to their dangerous religion and make it extreme. Their actions have roots in the underlying problems of american intervention no doubt, but the crimes they commit are justified by the koran.

I'm sure that the Muslims care very deeply for the Jewish religious significance of the land. It's land that was taken away and given, by an imperial power, to a bunch of Jews. If I were an Arab, I'd be pissed too.
You don't justify WWII by the bible. You're not judging the Bible by the Crusades. Stop judging the Koran by the middle eastern conflicts.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jan 19 2010, 4:34 am by CecilSunkure. Reason: Name in quotes.

Alright, I give. So Islam, though it is the foundation of brainwash in the middle east, is possibly not the cause of middle eastern conflict and should not be treated as such. However, Let us criticize Islam for what it actually is. It is a religion of hate, and isolation. The religion takes independence and freedom away from women, treating men like kings and awarding them with polygamy and young wives. The religion promotes the hatred of Jews, and Christians (for silly reasons, not the good ones). People who endorse the religion beg for respect of the religion, but the religion itself gives none. Stoning to death? Really? I think someone left the time machine open, and let the middle ages walk through.

*facepalm*

I hope you realize Islam itself isn't bad. It's extremists who take things way bigger than they need to be. After all, what's so different about Islamic terrorists when compared to Christian crusaders? They just want the "Holy Land" back... but for different reasons. In both situations, each group used religion as a justification to try and achieve some non-religious goal. In the Crusades it was control of the trade routes (mainly ports closer to the Silk Road). Today, it's a few radicals with a fair amount of charisma that are inspiring a select few to action against the people (Americans) who seem to be causing their troubles. Sure, America invaded Iraq and killed a couple thousand Muslims. But doesn't Hammurabi's code state "an eye for an eye?" But look at Dubai, they were relatively prosperous. Certainly they were doing better economically than most in the region. In reality, Middle Easterners don't need to use random violence to improve their lives.

Don't forget, morals are relative to time and place. Most people today slavery is bad. But 150 years ago, it was acceptable in many parts of the world. Many major religions (founded centuries ago) advocate the inferior status of women. Some people today want equal rights for both genders. Islamic law states that a thief's hand should be cut off. "Hey, it would lower crime rates, wouldn't it?" But then "Aww, Westerners deem that 'inhumane.'" I guess we can't implement an effective policy along the lines of "You know it's wrong, why do you still choose to do it?"

Oh well, at least I try to tolerate others beliefs. But I also believe:

"Hate is born from ignorance and stupidity."
-John Yan

I think it's widely accepted that Islam itself is an extremely violent religion. They find it acceptable to stone people to death and there's a lot of cruel things. I think they're supposed to cut your head off if you leave from Islam to another religion. I recall seeing it in the papers a few years back because a muslim saw all the good that christians were doing and changed his belief.

I have a feeling that you're very misinformed.

I get the impression that our parts of England are ever so different. Come live in Peterborough please ? It's literally jam packed with islam and racism.