BS: Caliphate

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 02:49 PM

None of which is a reason to mistrust the Muslim community as a whole.
There are infinitely more attacks on Muslims than there are by Muslims, indicating that the Muslim population has far more to fear from the indigenous population than we have to fear them.
All this is a fair indication that we need to mend fences - your hatred and mistrust is doing exactly the opposite - you are not attempting to reason how the problem can be solved - you are the problem.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 02:32 PM

Mrrzy,

The Palestinians have HAD a state since 1923 or so.

77% of the Mandate Palestine territory, in violation of the treaty creating the Mandate, was split off and made into the Arab Homeland of TransJordan, where NO Jews were allowed to settle or even own property. This was accepted by the Arabs. The British did this when there were riots between the Jews and Muslims.

The REAMAINING 32+ % of the original Mandate were to be the Jewish homeland as specified in the treaties.

In 1948, THAT (Jewish Homeland) land was divided, but the Arabs would not accept any division less than ALL for the Moslems, so they attacked the Jews. Jordan occupied the West bank, and removed all of the Jewish population that had been there previously.


The Arabs LOST, and have been demanding the unconditional surrender of Israel ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 02:26 PM

What you mean, "Facts"? The fact is that I am alarmed. If you mean "reasons", then say so. Any days papers will provide you with plenty of material to choose from. Start with those of 10 September 2001. Then 3 Nov 2004. Proceed to 8 July 2005. Perm any dates up to, & beyond, 23 May 2013...

Bit more there to work on, seems to me, that your Oxford St sandwichman had.

And what 'names' am I supposed to have called you -- other than such as ref your obtuse pigheadedness in refusing to see what is manifestly before you here?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 02:24 PM

Oh the catholics hate the protestants and the protestants hate the catholics and the hindus hate the moslems and everybody hates the jews but during national brotherhood week...

We used to be able to sing about this stuff.

Facts for alarmism include my father being killed by terrorists back in 1983 when they invented the carbomb in Beirut and nothing, I mean nothing, has been learned by Americans in the decades of anti-American terrorism since. To the point where many people still think 9/11 was the start of it all.

People should be alarmed, yes, but not just if they are Americans nowadays.

It, being the WWIII being waged since Nov. 1979 or earlier, is truly is turning into the barbarians versus the civilized and that is why it bothers me when people only mind the racism inherent in the wrong-way causation (that you have to be a moslem to be a radical islamist doesn't mean that if you are a moslem you have more than a minuscule chance of being a terrorist) and not the general fact that It's not just the moslems who should object to terrorism being linked to islam. But as I've said, that is a subject for the radical islamic thread, and not this one, which I am trying to limit to talking about the idea of a global moslem global mpire that isn't rooted in territory.

No homeland for the palistinians is unfair since the jews have taken theirs, I think. If there is going to be a Caliphate it should be rooted in a PLACE, no?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 12:37 PM

You still have produced no facts for your alarmism - rather like the man on Oxford Street with his. 'THE END OF THE WORLD IS NIGH' placard.
Name-calling still doesn't hack it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 12:37 PM

Nice one Bruce. Making assumptions about the victims when the point was about the perpetrators.

Not everybody is as gullible as Michael, as gormless as Keith or as blinded as yourself. Some people are capable of reading a post for what it says, without silly twisting by those with an agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 11:03 AM

My posts are "alarmist", Jim, if that's the word you choose, because, I repeat, I am alarmed. If you're not, that's up to you, & goody for you and I hope it keeps fine for you; and your children & grandchildren... But this is not a very sanguine hope if you & all your well-meaning but oh·so·priggish lot insist on keeping your heads down there in the sand.

That's all. No good going on. Time will tell···

···but I shan't be there to see the outcome; nor any descendant of mine as I am childless.

Regards as ever

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 10:47 AM

"I am much more interested in hearing the opinions of informed people"
Aren't we all - nothing more tedious than a long stream of cut-'n-pastes and links to ultra-extremist web-sites.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 09:51 AM

Speaking of opinions I think that having heard them repeated hundreds of times over and over ad nauseam we are, by now, quite familiar with everyone's opinion on these matters. By now it's just repeating the same shit which some of us don't even bother reading as that horse died a long time ago. I am much more interested in hearing the opinions of informed people. YMMV.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 09:20 AM

"The vast bulk of those were put down to "racial" attacks only 2,083 of them were incidents where the religion was the reason for the attack."


The MAJORITY of which were against Jews, even though the proportion of the population the is Jewish is much smaller than the proportion that is Muslim.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 09:20 AM

Err.. No. Passing off opinions on this subject just gets Keith and other childish fools screaming that you can't have opinions unless you can find "eminent" people on the internet to put it in words for you. I am capable of forming my own, which makes it difficult to engage with them.

My opinion is just that. The facts I gave merely reflect some of what helped me form my opinion. Considering the criteria for forms of hate attack, culture and religion are in different categories, as I found out in court when giving evidence on behalf of the local A&E (I was on call director at the time of the admissions after a hate attack on a house) so I do have a bit of an inkling of what I speak about, even though, unlike some here, I know my limitations on the subject.

2014. Iraq and Afghanistan in extra time period, awaiting the penalty shoot out.

I repeat, as it gets ignored.. The risk from home grown fanatics is there, present and proven. The extent is not tested, whilst the test of the exact opposite is not just proven, but filling prisons as we speak. Successive governments use risk of terror to curtail freedoms in society so it is best to have a slight amount of sceptical assessment rather than wade in with it presented as irrefutable facts as Keith does. He lacks the intelligence to look beyond what he googles, but I am somewhat disappointed in Teribus. His views are sometimes suspect but hitherto I thought his intellect was sound.

You know, your inference that I used such figures cynically says more about you than you think.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 08:57 AM

" mind-made-up-so-no-facts-please "
You have produced no solid evidence of your own Mike, other than your distaste for Burkahs(you certainly have not responded to the possible reasons for Islamism, and as for a solution, you seem happy to leave that to the boys in uniform.
Everything else appears to be alarmist volcano-squatting
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 08:41 AM

"According to A&E statistics, police crime figures etc, yes. Not just potentially, but hate crime reality. "

Not quite Musket - "Thousands of UKIP, BNP and English Defense League see British Muslims as legitimate targets too"

You then attempt to pass hate crime statistics off as an argument supporting your point of view.

2009 - there were a total of 52,028 recorded "hate crimes" in England Wales and Northern Ireland. The vast bulk of those were put down to "racial" attacks only 2,083 of them were incidents where the religion was the reason for the attack.

Why pick 2009? Iraq and Afghanistan both still running at full tilt

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 08:09 AM

According to A&E statistics, police crime figures etc, yes. Not just potentially, but hate crime reality.

I have no issue with accepting the dangers in radicalised disaffected young men. I lost a colleague in 7/7 and was at Kings Cross at the time myself. But alarmist crap misrepresented in the media just serves to divide the society some are trying to harmonise. You aren't going to solve domestic risk by wondering if the nice man in the corner shop has a nephew with a rucksack. The likes of Michael can sit there all day with the door locked shitting their trousers if that's what they want to do, but some of us see that as letting a few thugs win some weird victory or other.

As I said, Muslims are fighting Islamists, not opportunist politicians, not government agencies justifying their existence and hawking ideas for a bigger budget and influence.



Michael, shut up, you know I'm not talking to you. {snigger}

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 06:20 AM

Do "Thousands of UKIP, BNP and English Defense League see British Muslims as legitimate targets for attack too?" Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 06:17 AM

"Alarmist nonsense" eh?

Said it before; shall probably say it again --

If you are not alarmed, that is because you are a

hidebound doctrinaire self-satisfied head-in-sand mind-made-up-so-no-facts-please

½·wit.


~M~

Oh shut-the-hell up, Michael. What's the bloody use!

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 06:06 AM

Alarmist nonsense. Extrapolation of statistics.

Thousands of UKIP, BNP and English Defense League see British Muslims as legitimate targets too, but why don't you point that out Keith?

I wonder...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: GUEST,keith A at Lochearnhead
Date: 08 Jul 14 - 05:45 AM

Anybody vaguely to the left of Attila the Hun is considered a security risk by them

"Thousands of Islamist extremists in the UK see the British public as a legitimate target for attacks, the director general of MI5 has warned."

Not quite the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 07:49 PM

A Twitter post Thursday by supporters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), now calling itself the Islamic State (IS), has promised a Holocaust against the Jews.

"The Real Zionist Holocaust is Predicted in the Hadiths! The Hour [resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the tree will say: "Oh, Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew behind me, kill him! THE PROMISED Holocaust," the terrorist group's Islamic State Media a graphic posted on its @ISIS_Conquests's Twitter account said.

This hadith has proven popular with Islamic extremists of all stripes, ranging from IS to Hamas – and even on television in the Middle East.

Daniel Pipes, an expert on jihadism, said the hadith likely was a recruitment tool.

"​Yes, ​calling for a holocaust against Jews refers to a violently anti-Semitic strain among jihadis and will surely appeal to some of them," Pipes said in an email to the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Anti-Semitic propaganda has played an important role in the terrorist group's recruitment effort. Its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, placed Jews on the side of evil in a speech posted Tuesday on the Internet in which he called on Muslims to join him.

"O ummah of Islam, the world today has been divided into two camps and two trenches … The camp of Islam and faith, and the camp of kufr (disbelief) and hypocrisy … all being led by America and Russia, and being mobilized by the Jews," al-Baghdadi said.

In another such video released on Twitter, IS told jihadists to "Break the crosses and destroy the lin­eage of the grand­sons of mon­keys."

Some jihadist supporters are calling on the group to open a new front against Israel.

"@ISIS_Conquests Hey #ISIS please do us all a favour & open up a front against Israel. Surely they are the greatest enemy of humanity?" Akhmet Qassam, a supporter from Scotland, asked the group on Sunday. "@ISIS_Conquests If you open up a front against #Israel I'm sure your numbers will increase hugely. Also give you some legitimacy."

At the same time, IS may be growing cautious about drawing unwanted attention from Western intelligence and law-enforcement agencies even as it seeks new recruits.

"All Brothers and Sisters...Don't meet with IS members while you're living in the West...Move out of the West & than (sic) you get in touch with IS," @Dawla_Newsmedia wrote a day after U.S. law enforcement caught Shannon Maureen Conley, a 19-year-old woman from Denver, trying to leave the U.S. to join the IS.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 03:20 PM

"Doesn't mean christians are child abusers any more than moslems are terrorists"
Drink to that a hundred times over - whoops - I already have done.
"Thousands of Islamist extremists in the UK see the British public as a legitimate target for attacks"
MI5 holds information on and considers security risks: those of us who took to the streets protesting about Vietnam, or Chile, or the Greek coup, or protests about the illegal Iraq invasion, or the Poll Tax protests, or those of us who supported the miners strike .... you may go back at least as far as The Russian Revolution and The Spanish Civil War to find a long list of enemies of the state.
Their suspects have included Trades Union leaders, politicians, cabinet ministers, even Prime Ministers....
Anybody vaguely to the left of Attila the Hun is considered a security risk by them - it is part of their job description to regard any challenge to the status-quo as 'a threat' - no doubt more than one Mudcatter appears on their long list of 'risks'
If there is a risk from returning fighters, then we have to know what that risk is and how it should be dealt with - little response on that score from our usual suspects.
The alternative is, as they have persistently done, pointed the finger at the entire culture.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:59 PM

Hmm, what happened there?

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

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

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

Even if you support the "freedom fighters" they all attacked civilian targets at least as much as military ones.

Even the first victim of the Mau Mau was a non-combatant woman.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:52 PM

That is not a complete list of terrorist "wars".

Here are a couple of others.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:25 PM

Not sure what the standard for "legit" would be?

However, most governments are seen as the governing body after awhile if they establish a working government to run the cohntry, regardless of how they acquired power and if they are democratic, or a military or religious-run government or not-look at Iran, for example.

If a new power piss people off, nationalize resources, and fail to play ball with other countries, it is often a rougher ride to be seen as legitimate by other nations. Take what we now see as China, for example. Cuba, which has a similar givernment to China) is an odd example, which is pretty much recognized as legit, except by the US of A. The PLO had an observer seat at the United Nations before they really ran a government. (Oddly enough, the Holy Sea has permanent observer status at the United Nations).

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:21 PM

"If people followed them, would that make them legit?"

I guess that would depend on the number of people following them. As it stands the "Caliphate" is being derided by many Muslims so time will tell. Azzam Tamimi, an academic who writes on Islamic movements, says that it is unlikely anyone except "some frustrated youth" would be receptive to Baghdadi's declaration.

"Such fanatic and desperate movements emerge usually in response to a profound crisis. Yet, their demise is usually rapid because of their tendency to be nihilistic," Tamimi said. They "fail miserably when it comes to winning over the normal and decent".

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:12 PM

MI5's chief said "thousands of Islamist extremists in the UK;" What are the safeguards? How were they identified? Can they be deported?

Parker said "the most direct and immediate threats to the UK" are Al Quaeda and its affiliates in Pakistan and Yemen.

Will extremist elements in the UK and other western countries recognize ISIL as a leader, or remain apart from the "caliphate?"
I think they will ignore the "caliph."

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:05 PM

The priest-child-abuse thing is more than "associated with" being christian, it's a christian priest child abuse thing. Doesn't make christians child abusers, or make them priests, although to be a priest you do have to be a christian and to be a child-abusing priest you have to be a priest. Doesn't mean christians are child abusers any more than moslems are terrorists that terrorists are moslems and priests who abuse children are christian - the latter doesn't mean christians are either priests or child abusers.   It doesn't even mean that *priests* are child abusers that child abusing priests are priests. You can't go in that direction. That's what I'm saying. But you can't divorce the two just because inclusion is one-way either, there is that inclusion you have to allow for. Not to end too many sentences with prepositions.

But this thread has morphed into a version of the Islamic Radicalism thread and I'd really, really like to get back to the question of the Caliphate. If people followed them, would that make them legit?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 01:54 PM

"You can't *be* a radical moslem (termed here islamist) without being moslem."
Fine - in which case the current cases of clerical abuse must be implicated with being a Christian - not individual examples, but a decades old practice.
The religion - culture - nationality of criminals has nothing to do with their crimes, until such time it is established otherwise
So far it has not been.
On the other hand, oil wars and illegal invasions can be linked directly to belonging to an oil hungry and dependent nation
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: GUEST,keith A at Lochearnhead
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 01:23 PM

"Thousands of Islamist extremists in the UK see the British public as a legitimate target for attacks, the director general of MI5 has warned."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24454596

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 01:06 PM

Of course terrorism is associated with being moslem. You can't *be* a radical moslem (termed here islamist) without being moslem. The association is statistical - there were only three real types of terrorists in the recent before-time: ETA, Basque terrorists, who targeted Spanish and French civilian targets to gain political points for independence for the Basque countries; the IRA, Irish terrorists, who targeted British civilian targets to gain political points for independence for northern Ireland, and the (no neat set of initials) moslem (and arab, then) terrorists whom targeted American people and things which they believed to be christian, to gain political points against the West. After 9/11 ETA and the IRA decided not to do it anymore, so all we have left are the radical moslem terrorists, who are not only arabs anymore, see Nigeria for instance, but are still radical moslems. It is being moslem that does not predict being a terrorist, not the other way around.
Yes, an American christian couple of guys did bomb an American building full of government civilians who weren't civilians in their twisted little minds, but there is no global movement among christians or Americans in general to target we Americans for being perceived as christian. (There is a massive American christian movement against those who aren't both, but that's another thread.)
When the WTC was bombed the first time it pretty much *had* to be moslem radical anti-Western terrorists, but I was accused of racism when I said so, although the particular accuser shut right up when I was right. But who else targeted Americans, at the time? This was pre-OKCity, after all, we didn't know about the homeboys, but still, if you are a terrorist today, you are certainly radical, religious, and moslem.
Being moslem, however, does *not* make you likely to be a terrorist because so few moslems are that radical, even though all the radicals left are moslem.
It's exactly like being a New Yorker compared to living in the States. You can't live in New York and not live in the States, but just because you live in the States doesn't mean you have any likelihood at all of living in New York.
And those of you who know me know whereof I get my experience with terrorism.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 10:19 AM

"There are thousands of them here who regard the public as legitimate targets.."

No.

Wrong.

Unsubstantiated bollocks.

I thought we were getting two weeks off from stupid rash remarks?

Oh, and who are "they"?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 09:01 AM

Whatever appeared on a scrap of paper to suit the colonialist powers, the Arabs have occupied that territory for millienia
Neither side accepted the treaties fully - the Israelis went along with it and immediately began to slaughter to occupants, even as the Brits were steaming out to sea - they have been clearing the area by force ever since.
Whatever agreement is finally reached, it has to take that fact into account, including the millions of refugees Israel has refused to allow to return to their right homeland.
the lie that the Palestinian leadership ordered Palestinians to leave the area until the fighting sorted itself out surfaced recently - no such thing
Irish radio, under the direction of Erskine Childers, monitored broadcasts coming out of Israel at the time was in fact, the opposite was the case.
The instruction was to hold ground and remain where they were.
The problem here is a massive human tragedy - not documents drawn up decades ago which have no relevance to political expediency
Live with that fact
Ake just has, with his "knife to the throat" - you have always denigrated Muslim people with attacks on their culture.
We've learned to live with that
"That is good, but what surveys?"
You've been given them ad nauseum - read what has been put up.
Jim Carroll
MUSLIM BRITISHNESS

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 08:41 AM

"Bruce had a rather unflattering imitator stalk him for a few years, the old mudcat troll. If Bruce signs his name it's rare so we check to be sure that it's real. I know who he is - I hope we all know who he is!"

Fair enough SRS. My first thought on reading your post was that you were questioning his identity because of his stand on this issue. My mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: GUEST,keith A at Lochearnhead
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 08:37 AM

You and your associate terrorism with being a Muslim

No-one has.
Only with being an Islamist, which if you have been following recent events is regarded currently as the greatest terror threat by far.

Survey show that Muslims, of all immigrants, are prepared to settle in Britain and be recognised as British,

That is good, but what surveys?
We know from MI5 and Anti-Terror Police that there are thousands of them here who regard the public as legitimate targets to attack and kill.
That may be a small proportion, but you seem to be denying it.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 07:59 AM

Tha Palestinian Arabs have had a Homeland since 1923 or so.

775 of the Mandate Palestine territory, in violation of the treaty creating the Mandate, was split off and made into the Arab Homeland of TransJordan, where NO Jews were allowed to settle or even own property. This was accepted by the Arabs.

The REAMAINING 32+ % of the original Mandate were to be the Jewish homeland as specified in the treaties.

In 1948, THAT (Jewish Homeland) land was divided, but the Arabs would not accept any division less than ALL for the Moslems, so they attacked the Jews. Jordan occupied the West bank, and removed all of the Jewish population that had been there previously.


The Arabs LOST, and have been demanding the unconditional surrender of Israel ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 03:40 AM

"Jim, I can only assume that you do not comprehend what I have written."
Seems a good way to say nothing but try to give the impression you have.
You have a number of simple questions - assume I have a modicum of intelligence and answer them - doesn't get any more simple.
So far you have given a politicians answer - I'm surprised you didn't open with "I'm glad you asked me that question , but what I would like to make clear that my party is doing its utmost....."
Give us a break Ake!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 03:38 AM

Most of us would rather not comprehend what he writes either. I never thought there could be so much twisted hatred and cynicism in one person.

Even when there is nothing original in what he writes. He lets far right websites do his talking through cut and paste.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:39 AM

Jim, I can only assume that you do not comprehend what I have written.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 14 - 02:06 AM

"What do you mean when you say that I am more of a danger than radical Islamists Jim?"
Because your hate is not aimed at them, but at Muslims.
You and your associate terrorism with being a Muslim - their religion, the way they dress, communities being "hotbeds" for terrorism - the classic Thatcherist "enemy within".
Despite the fact tat there are one nd a half million Muslims in Britain today, you have sneered at the idea of 'multiculturalism'.
If there is a problem with multiculturalism, it is because of those who are not prepared to accept 'strangers in our midst', certainly not because those coming to Britain are not prepared to integrate.
Survey show that Muslims, of all immigrants, are prepared to settle in Britain and be recocgnised as British, yet they remain the most persecuted and terrorised - and this pre-dates any 'Islamism' - Paki-bashing was a phenomenon throughout a large part of my life, certainly when I lived in London.
You have talked about terrorism among the Muslim communities - you claim that those who aren't terrorists are potential terrorists because of "the knife to the throat", in the past you have linked terrorism with immigration - you have merged the fact of Muslimism and terrorism into one single entity.
Simple question - what exactly do you propose should be done about the million and a half Muslims living in Britain today - send them back to their place of origin, electronically tag them - issue them with identity papers with a legal demand that they produce them on demand - ghettoise them so the can't move freely with us 'real Britons - or something else???
f there is a problem with returning Jihadists, a key factor to solving that problem is to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim people as a whole - even morons like Cameron have recognised and reiterated that fact.
This is not going to be possible if they continue to be made outsiders and are depicted as a threat.
Of course you views go further than this forum - they are to be found on every extremist site available, Muslim Watch, the N.D.L. the B.N.P., Ukip (though toned down there a little for the sake of political respectability)
You and yours have been long with us - you are a shameful part of history.   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 10:52 PM

Bruce had a rather unflattering imitator stalk him for a few years, the old mudcat troll. If Bruce signs his name it's rare so we check to be sure that it's real. I know who he is - I hope we all know who he is!

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 06:57 PM

"I just looked to be sure that someone signing their name "Bruce Murdoch" really is Bruce."

Why would you question if it really is Bruce? If you don't know, he is someone who has been championing the fight against prejudice and injustice since the 60s and there is certainly much of that in evidence here at Mudcat. I say bravo Bruce - call them out for what they are and keep on fighting the good fight!

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 01:52 PM

Sorry- lost an 'i'.

Shiite or Shi'ite.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 01:51 PM

What do you mean when you say that I am more of a danger than radical Islamists Jim? Do you mean that my words may upset them and cause them to slit all our throats, or blow us up, or fly aircraft into our tall buildings?.......I don't flatter my self that my views go any further than the pages of this forum, they are driven by other ideologies.

Get a grip man.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 01:32 PM

In all the countries mentioned the conflict is a reaction to the West's actions - drones - Falluja - illegal oil wars, Abu Graib, Guantanamo, non-action on Assad (unless you count arms and equipment sales as action), Israel...
It is yet to be established that any of this has anything to do with "faith".
The only threat to the UK is in the part it has played and continues to play in all of these.
To use a conflict which started as an attempt to democratise the Middle East is simply agenda driving to back up your obvious hatred of Muslims - second only to your hatred of homosexuals.
If there is a risk to Britain, the answer lies in gaining the support of Muslims, not in antagonising them with hatred such as yours.
As far as I am concerned, people like you are as much a threat to our safety and well being as any radical islamist.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 01:14 PM

Jim....If "radical Christians" were about to slit my throat, or butcher my family if I did not accept their belief....and there was no structure of law and order to protect us, my atheism would be swifly abandoned, my views subverted.

Fortunately I do not live in Iraq, Syria, or Libya and I know of no Christians who would dream of such subversion.
Radical Islamists think it their duty to rid the world of those who disagree with their faith.

Rather like Ian thinks it his duty to rid this forum of me.
Their mindset is remarkably similar.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 12:34 PM

Shite Mosques? Hmmm. Freudian slip?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 12:32 PM

Good question, Q.

It will be interesting to seen if Tunisian Islamists mature into a responsible party in governance, or if they are biding their time. I think most of us are hoping for the former.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jul 14 - 12:29 PM

The leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is destroying Shite mosques and holy places in territory his group controls. He is calling himself Caliph Ibrahim.
He is now the world's most wanted man.
I think his rule won't be long; only the most radical Sunnis and jihadists will support him.
An Iranian-supplied plane or a drone will end his roll.

Left behind, however, is the continuing Sunni-Shia split, just how the Iraqi lands will be divided, and whether a truce can be forged.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Jul 14 - 01:55 PM

Are Islamists in Tunisia terrorists?
In the Tunisian Assembly, a coalition of Islamists, leftists and liberals worked out a new constitution, "laying the foundation for a new democracy." CTV (Canadian) news, Jan 2014.
The moderate Islamist party, which holds 40% of the 216 seats in the assembly, backed down on putting religious inspired measures into the constitution.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 05 Jul 14 - 01:17 PM

What is going on is that Akenaton posts views that are a stain on Mudcat. A folk club thread was mentioned at a folk club I was at the other week and the organiser said they don't use Mudcat for anything as they don't wish the club to be associated with some of the hatred that infiltrates it now.

How dare you say that normal people getting on with their lives are destructive to themselves and society? How dare you call normal people "moderate" and infer that they could be subverted?

You are an embarrassment.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jul 14 - 12:57 PM

Ake
You have had every opportunity to respond to what I have said; you choose to throw stones from a distance and stay silent.
How dare you suggest legislating for homosexuality to bring the world into the 21st century is "so obviously unhealthy, and destructive to society and homosexuals" - what century to you exist in?
"I have never condemned ALL Muslims,"
"Moderate Muslims, can quickly be made into immoderate ones, by having a knife held to their throats" is doing just that - damned if they are terrorists (rightly) damned if they are not, because they could easily be
The issue has always been addressed
Personally, I gave up when you suggested that the Norwegian mass-murder Breivik when he slaughtered all those young people.
You didn't elucidate then and I don't suppose you will now.
I think our friend has made my point for me far better than I possibly could Mike
Jim Carroll