Is Islam, the new Nazi ?

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Is Islam, the new Nazi ?

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 14 of 25 < 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >

legaleagle 21 Jun 14 10.37pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 21 Jun 2014 9.27pm Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 11.48am That's simplistic and again reducing things to the usual convenient but red herring of left/right. London became "Londonstan" with a deliberate or blind eye policy allowing many "extremist" Sunni political and religious figures to operate here and then start to radicalise opinion in many Mosques ,in the eighties and nineties.......who was in power then? Similarly, the overreaction to 9/11 in terms of going into (completely unconnected to 9/11)Iraq which perhaps did more than anything else to radicalise domestic Muslim opinion was orchestrated by G Bush Jr's administration (hardly of the left) The issue/question of balance between taking on extremism and not demonising a whole religious group isn't assisted by sweeping generalisations So you appear to be saying that the 'right' were responsible for "Londonstan" and then you make an excuse for anti western attitudes amongst Muslims due to the Iraq war. Now the term came about in the mid to late nineties when Major and Blair were in power. In your post you imply that the UK intentionally tolerated radical Muslims and I imagine by implication stopped extradition of suspects in order to buy peace from these terrorists. Point me to the Tory politician or indeed Labour politician who accepted this compact. If this happened at all it was far more likely to have been a cross party convenience devised by civil servants. You describe the Iraq war as being a form of radicalization of some British Muslims.......Yes, it was. That isn't a fault of an unpopular decision made by western government....These are made all the time. instead it's a fault of the failure of multiculturalism...A policy, in the main, presued by the left....Other countries were the left are almost non-existent...America for example....Just how many American Muslims went to kill westerners?.....It was a tiny number in a country with five times the population....Whereas we have thousands of 'nutters' to monitor. For hundreds of years we have gone to war with Christian countries.....Did we have this issue then? Radicalization is impossible to stop but the reason it's been easier in this country is almost entirely down to left wing ideology. Your third paragraph sums up why I criticise the left for the problem of Islamic extremism in this country. Lets straighten out a few things. Those on the right wouldn't have these people here...It's a European body's rules...That organization the left support...Which stop this country from deporting these individuals easily. The principle of 'no borders' and multiculturalism, which I repeat, is almost exclusively a left wing belief system for decades any raised issues with this country's Islamic movement was greeted by an almost obsessive and blanket accusation of racism and bigotry. The left created a 'fear' of talking about these issues....Some still do try to shut down debate. To answer the third paragraph I have no issue with those who attack a person's right to peaceful religion being called bigoted. I have no problem with those who attacked a person's race being called a racist.......But this isn't what happened in many cases....It's the Gordon Brown mindset of 'bigoted woman'. Any serious debate or complaint was tarred with the same racist finger pointing. It's only very recently that some on the left chose to temper their words and paper over their own re-actions. So you might think it is simplistic but I do blame the left for some of why we have such a big problem here. Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 9.36pm) No, Stirlng, I don't seek to blame the "right" exclusively, I was simply seeking to counter what appeared to me to be a simplistic view of blaming the "left" almost wholly and was trying to show how this was not valid. Its not about left/right. Rather that, as another posted pointed out, the seeds of the policy of "Londonstan" and arming fundamentalist forces for jihad in Afghanistan date back to Maggie's time..and unfortunately she set an agenda in this sense the successor Major and Blair governments carried on in many ways.. As for "no borders" being almost exclusively a "left" policy as you suggest, one of the biggest proponents in Europe have been the governments of the right in Germany. Multiculturalism has been more a "left" policy but I don't see that per se as a primary route of all evil as you may. Take Australia, as a good example of the manifest benefits of multiculturalism... Your implied suggestion the EU is responsible for foreign Muslim fundamentalists coming here in the late 1970's/1980's is simply not sustainable. They,in very large part, didnt come from EU countries..."Londonstan" arose from your old friend, self-interested British foreign policy established well before the Blair government came in in 1997.

legaleagle

21 Jun 14 10.37pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 21 Jun 2014 9.27pm

Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 11.48am

That's simplistic and again reducing things to the usual convenient but red herring of left/right.

London became "Londonstan" with a deliberate or blind eye policy allowing many "extremist" Sunni political and religious figures to operate here and then start to radicalise opinion in many Mosques ,in the eighties and nineties.......who was in power then?

Similarly, the overreaction to 9/11 in terms of going into (completely unconnected to 9/11)Iraq which perhaps did more than anything else to radicalise domestic Muslim opinion was orchestrated by G Bush Jr's administration (hardly of the left)

The issue/question of balance between taking on extremism and not demonising a whole religious group isn't assisted by sweeping generalisations

So you appear to be saying that the 'right' were responsible for "Londonstan" and then you make an excuse for anti western attitudes amongst Muslims due to the Iraq war.

Now the term came about in the mid to late nineties when Major and Blair were in power.

In your post you imply that the UK intentionally tolerated radical Muslims and I imagine by implication stopped extradition of suspects in order to buy peace from these terrorists.

Point me to the Tory politician or indeed Labour politician who accepted this compact. If this happened at all it was far more likely to have been a cross party convenience devised by civil servants.

You describe the Iraq war as being a form of radicalization of some British Muslims.......Yes, it was. That isn't a fault of an unpopular decision made by western government....These are made all the time. instead it's a fault of the failure of multiculturalism...A policy, in the main, presued by the left....Other countries were the left are almost non-existent...America for example....Just how many American Muslims went to kill westerners?.....It was a tiny number in a country with five times the population....Whereas we have thousands of 'nutters' to monitor.

For hundreds of years we have gone to war with Christian countries.....Did we have this issue then?

Radicalization is impossible to stop but the reason it's been easier in this country is almost entirely down to left wing ideology.

Your third paragraph sums up why I criticise the left for the problem of Islamic extremism in this country.

Lets straighten out a few things. Those on the right wouldn't have these people here...It's a European body's rules...That organization the left support...Which stop this country from deporting these individuals easily.

The principle of 'no borders' and multiculturalism, which I repeat, is almost exclusively a left wing belief system for decades any raised issues with this country's Islamic movement was greeted by an almost obsessive and blanket accusation of racism and bigotry. The left created a 'fear' of talking about these issues....Some still do try to shut down debate.

To answer the third paragraph I have no issue with those who attack a person's right to peaceful religion being called bigoted. I have no problem with those who attacked a person's race being called a racist.......But this isn't what happened in many cases....It's the Gordon Brown mindset of 'bigoted woman'.

Any serious debate or complaint was tarred with the same racist finger pointing. It's only very recently that some on the left chose to temper their words and paper over their own re-actions.

So you might think it is simplistic but I do blame the left for some of why we have such a big problem here.

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 9.36pm)

No, Stirlng, I don't seek to blame the "right" exclusively, I was simply seeking to counter what appeared to me to be a simplistic view of blaming the "left" almost wholly and was trying to show how this was not valid. Its not about left/right. Rather that, as another posted pointed out, the seeds of the policy of "Londonstan" and arming fundamentalist forces for jihad in Afghanistan date back to Maggie's time..and unfortunately she set an agenda in this sense the successor Major and Blair governments carried on in many ways..

As for "no borders" being almost exclusively a "left" policy as you suggest, one of the biggest proponents in Europe have been the governments of the right in Germany.

Multiculturalism has been more a "left" policy but I don't see that per se as a primary route of all evil as you may. Take Australia, as a good example of the manifest benefits of multiculturalism...

Your implied suggestion the EU is responsible for foreign Muslim fundamentalists coming here in the late 1970's/1980's is simply not sustainable. They,in very large part, didnt come from EU countries..."Londonstan" arose from your old friend, self-interested British foreign policy established well before the Blair government came in in 1997.

Stirlingsays 21 Jun 14 10.55pm
Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 10.18pm See, for example, BBC News website 26 September 2001: "Britain's relationship with Bin Laden dates back to the 1980s when Whitehall and Washington pumped billions of dollars to Muslim fighters fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Arab volunteers recall fondly passing through Britain en route to Bin Laden's processing centre near the Afghan front. With victory against the Soviets in 1989, many of the "Afghan Arabs" headed back to Britain. Cash for Jihad Like Beirut in the 1970s, London became a safe haven from which to broaden the Jihad armed struggle from Afghanistan to the secular regimes of the Arab world. Libyan, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists, many of them ex-fighters, all made London their base and some 2,000 Middle East dissidents a year poured into Britain. " So the BBC say we did something and that's the proof.....Now I'm a fan of the BBC but I don't think it's valid to state something as a fact that in reality is journalism. If it were as you say it was wouldn't it be more likely to find some discussion of this stuff in Benn's or Thatcher's accounts? Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 11.08pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

21 Jun 14 10.55pm

Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 10.18pm

See, for example, BBC News website 26 September 2001:

"Britain's relationship with Bin Laden dates back to the 1980s when Whitehall and Washington pumped billions of dollars to Muslim fighters fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Arab volunteers recall fondly passing through Britain en route to Bin Laden's processing centre near the Afghan front.

With victory against the Soviets in 1989, many of the "Afghan Arabs" headed back to Britain.

Cash for Jihad

Like Beirut in the 1970s, London became a safe haven from which to broaden the Jihad armed struggle from Afghanistan to the secular regimes of the Arab world.

Libyan, Tunisian and Egyptian Islamists, many of them ex-fighters, all made London their base and some 2,000 Middle East dissidents a year poured into Britain. "

So the BBC say we did something and that's the proof.....Now I'm a fan of the BBC but I don't think it's valid to state something as a fact that in reality is journalism.

If it were as you say it was wouldn't it be more likely to find some discussion of this stuff in Benn's or Thatcher's accounts?

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 11.08pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays 21 Jun 14 11.05pm
Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 10.37pm No, Stirlng, I don't seek to blame the "right" exclusively, I was simply seeking to counter what appeared to me to be a simplistic view of blaming the "left" almost wholly and was trying to show how this was not valid. Its not about left/right. Rather that, as another posted pointed out, the seeds of the policy of "Londonstan" and arming fundamentalist forces for jihad in Afghanistan date back to Maggie's time..and unfortunately she set an agenda in this sense the successor Major and Blair governments carried on in many ways.. As for "no borders" being almost exclusively a "left" policy as you suggest, one of the biggest proponents in Europe have been the governments of the right in Germany. Multiculturalism has been more a "left" policy but I don't see that per se as a primary route of all evil as you may. Take Australia, as a good example of the manifest benefits of multiculturalism... Your implied suggestion the EU is responsible for foreign Muslim fundamentalists coming here in the late 1970's/1980's is simply not sustainable. They,in very large part, didnt come from EU countries..."Londonstan" arose from your old friend, self-interested British foreign policy established well before the Blair government came in in 1997. The left in this country are directly responsble for the mess we have, in regards to 'nutter' security....Not the right. To answer your latest. You can't really compare the behaviour of right wing parties in other countries with our own.....How is that valid?.....Who cares in Britain if the right in Germany prefer no borders.......That certainly have never been the attitude of the right wing parties here....It's kind of pointless. I'm not talking about the left or right of countries outside of this island. There may be crossovers in areas but their interests and concerns will differ in relation to the specific country......What a conservative government in Australia or America or Germany do really has little relevance to the Tory actions in government here....Or indeed the supporters of the right here. I didn't say the EU was responsible for this influx.....I said a European body...Which is its court with their own version of human rights stops us from getting rid of these vermin.....We are forced to be a member of this court if we wish to stay in the EU. They are responsible for restricting our actions on fundamentalists in our own country. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

21 Jun 14 11.05pm

Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 10.37pm

As for "no borders" being almost exclusively a "left" policy as you suggest, one of the biggest proponents in Europe have been the governments of the right in Germany.

Multiculturalism has been more a "left" policy but I don't see that per se as a primary route of all evil as you may. Take Australia, as a good example of the manifest benefits of multiculturalism...

The left in this country are directly responsble for the mess we have, in regards to 'nutter' security....Not the right. To answer your latest.

You can't really compare the behaviour of right wing parties in other countries with our own.....How is that valid?.....Who cares in Britain if the right in Germany prefer no borders.......That certainly have never been the attitude of the right wing parties here....It's kind of pointless.

I'm not talking about the left or right of countries outside of this island.

There may be crossovers in areas but their interests and concerns will differ in relation to the specific country......What a conservative government in Australia or America or Germany do really has little relevance to the Tory actions in government here....Or indeed the supporters of the right here.

I didn't say the EU was responsible for this influx.....I said a European body...Which is its court with their own version of human rights stops us from getting rid of these vermin.....We are forced to be a member of this court if we wish to stay in the EU.

They are responsible for restricting our actions on fundamentalists in our own country.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Eaglekiwi Auckland 22 Jun 14 4.17am
To me there is a huge elephant in the room which is being ignored. Saudi Arabia is covertly pouring large amounts of money into Islamic religious schools with Britain a major target. They are actively funding the spread amongst gullible believers of their own brand of harsh Islamic philosophy knowing full well the West won't confront them because it needs their vast oil supply. Orthodox Jewish communities are doing the same. The Catholic church still tries but has been pulled back a bit by rationalism. There should be no religious schools in modern secular democracies. All children should be taught the truth about the world and the universe, then if they want to believe in divine creations or fairies at the bottom of the garden as adults they're free to do so. Instead Moslem, Orthodox Jewish and Catholic schools are pumping out a whole new generation of narrow-minded ignorant believers who will struggle to integrate, let alone peacefully co-exist. Being able to quote medieval texts by rote, with all their fairy story versions of reality, is no preparation for coping with a modern world where we can fly to the moon. Islam needs a reformation but unfortunately it never went through the humanizing influence that the enlightenment shone on Christianity. Remember Christianity was once dominated by violent extremists (the inquisition anyone). Thankfully for Britain Elizabeth I defeated the armada and thinkers like Newton and Darwin were allowed to tell us the truth about who we are and where we've come from. Religion should have no primacy over reality. Children should be spared a parents fear of the dark. Believe what you want to soften the existential puzzle but leave children to at least start out with the truth. Stop the brainwashing of children or we'll pay a terrible price down the line with a whole new generation of mad extremists from all sides.

Eaglekiwi

Auckland 22 Jun 14 4.17am

To me there is a huge elephant in the room which is being ignored. Saudi Arabia is covertly pouring large amounts of money into Islamic religious schools with Britain a major target. They are actively funding the spread amongst gullible believers of their own brand of harsh Islamic philosophy knowing full well the West won't confront them because it needs their vast oil supply. Orthodox Jewish communities are doing the same. The Catholic church still tries but has been pulled back a bit by rationalism.

There should be no religious schools in modern secular democracies. All children should be taught the truth about the world and the universe, then if they want to believe in divine creations or fairies at the bottom of the garden as adults they're free to do so. Instead Moslem, Orthodox Jewish and Catholic schools are pumping out a whole new generation of narrow-minded ignorant believers who will struggle to integrate, let alone peacefully co-exist. Being able to quote medieval texts by rote, with all their fairy story versions of reality, is no preparation for coping with a modern world where we can fly to the moon.

Islam needs a reformation but unfortunately it never went through the humanizing influence that the enlightenment shone on Christianity. Remember Christianity was once dominated by violent extremists (the inquisition anyone). Thankfully for Britain Elizabeth I defeated the armada and thinkers like Newton and Darwin were allowed to tell us the truth about who we are and where we've come from.

Religion should have no primacy over reality. Children should be spared a parents fear of the dark. Believe what you want to soften the existential puzzle but leave children to at least start out with the truth. Stop the brainwashing of children or we'll pay a terrible price down the line with a whole new generation of mad extremists from all sides.

Kermit8 Hevon 22 Jun 14 7.34am
Quote Stirlingsays at 21 Jun 2014 9.27pm Quote legaleagle at 21 Jun 2014 11.48am That's simplistic and again reducing things to the usual convenient but red herring of left/right. London became "Londonstan" with a deliberate or blind eye policy allowing many "extremist" Sunni political and religious figures to operate here and then start to radicalise opinion in many Mosques ,in the eighties and nineties.......who was in power then? Similarly, the overreaction to 9/11 in terms of going into (completely unconnected to 9/11)Iraq which perhaps did more than anything else to radicalise domestic Muslim opinion was orchestrated by G Bush Jr's administration (hardly of the left) The issue/question of balance between taking on extremism and not demonising a whole religious group isn't assisted by sweeping generalisations So you appear to be saying that the 'right' were responsible for "Londonstan" and then you make an excuse for anti western attitudes amongst Muslims due to the Iraq war. Now the term came about in the mid to late nineties when Major and Blair were in power. In your post you imply that the UK intentionally tolerated radical Muslims and I imagine by implication stopped extradition of suspects in order to buy peace from these terrorists. Point me to the Tory politician or indeed Labour politician who accepted this compact. If this happened at all it was far more likely to have been a cross party convenience devised by civil servants. You describe the Iraq war as being a form of radicalization of some British Muslims.......Yes, it was. That isn't a fault of an unpopular decision made by western government....These are made all the time. instead it's a fault of the failure of multiculturalism...A policy, in the main, presued by the left....Other countries were the left are almost non-existent...America for example....Just how many American Muslims went to kill westerners?.....It was a tiny number in a country with five times the population....Whereas we have thousands of 'nutters' to monitor. For hundreds of years we have gone to war with Christian countries.....Did we have this issue then? Radicalization is impossible to stop but the reason it's been easier in this country is almost entirely down to left wing ideology. Your third paragraph sums up why I criticise the left for the problem of Islamic extremism in this country. Lets straighten out a few things. Those on the right wouldn't have these people here...It's a European body's rules...That organization the left support...Which stop this country from deporting these individuals easily. The principle of 'no borders' and multiculturalism, which I repeat, is almost exclusively a left wing belief system for decades any raised issues with this country's Islamic movement was greeted by an almost obsessive and blanket accusation of racism and bigotry. The left created a 'fear' of talking about these issues....Some still do try to shut down debate. To answer the third paragraph I have no issue with those who attack a person's right to peaceful religion being called bigoted. I have no problem with those who attacked a person's race being called a racist.......But this isn't what happened in many cases....It's the Gordon Brown mindset of 'bigoted woman'. Any serious debate or complaint was tarred with the same racist finger pointing. It's only very recently that some on the left chose to temper their words and paper over their own re-actions. So you might think it is simplistic but I do blame the left for some of why we have such a big problem here. Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jun 2014 9.36pm) Over the last 35 years - The Right have been in Goverment in the UK for precisely 22 of them. Just shy of 65% of the time. Yet they are not to blame for any of the dangerous tolerance you allude to which has happened here? Well, in the early 90's - at London Uni when I was studying there - and under a Tory Government which did absolutely zilch to confront them unlike some of the other students and University officials - lefties no doubt - there was a radical Islamic student group called Hizb-ut-tahrir going about the place strutting their stuff. They morphed into an even more dangerous outfit called Al-Mujaharoun. Your idea that the left is entirely to blame when they weren't even in power during some serious growth in Islamic fundamentalism 1979-97 here and elsewhere is, frankly, one-eyed and bollock naked wrong. However, it fits with your world view so understand why you have convinvced yourself that it is so. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]

Kermit8

Hevon 22 Jun 14 7.34am