BS: Muslim prejudice

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 11 - 01:39 AM

She was an MP for an area with a large Pakistani community, and her vote largely came from that community.
A respected and knowledgeable authority on this issue.
But her testimony undermines Lox's position, so she must be lying.
I choose to believe her over you Lox.
Others must choose for themselves.
Here is the experience of a senior police officer.
Another liar Lox?
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/8782968.What_Straw_said_so_carefully_is_true/?action=complain&cid=9055350

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:56 PM

.



    Who likes satire?

    Here's Adil Ray satirizing the whole "community leader" lie.

    Mr Khan ..... Community leader!




.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:52 PM

In addition to my last post to dave,

The "community" I lived in did not have "leaders". It was like any other community in Britain ie full of people living their own lives.

The idea that moslems are one big cohesive community led by bearded patriarchs is a total fantasy.

Those religious leaders who posture as community leaders have about as much power to "lead" their communities as the archbishop of canterbury does to lead young white boys.

ie - everyone is very respectful at mosque/church, but afterwards they slope off for a quick fag behind the bike sheds.

And I can't believe I have to clarify this point, but these supposed community leaders don't have the ability to control gangsters and racketeers in their community by having a word with their parents.

To have this kind of sway they would need to be in the gang.

So unless we are suggesting that all moslems are in the same gang, then we have to accept that anne cryers attempts to make Imams and prominent pakistani business men responsible for the crimes of a predominantly pakistani gang are nothing short of slander.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:38 PM

Dave,

To clarify the post that you refer to, I lived for a year and a half in a moslem area, and of those Moslems, most were Pakistani or Bangladeshi, but there were a few Somalis and some whose racial background I didn't know.

There was also one white Moslem woman.

With the exception of her, myself, my partner at the time and my daughter, I could go for weeks at a time without seeing any white folks in that area. Consequently I tended to view the Moslems in the area where I lived as collectively being non-white.

The point of my story is that I knew the names of every person on my street, and their kids, and they knew us and invited us into their homes and shops to receive their hospitality frequently.

Most of them did not venture from that part of town because they were afraid to, and many with good reason.

A shop keeper whose curtain shop was 4 doors down from my house used to bring his kids to work when they weren't at school because they received constant abuse at home. They had faeces put through their letterbox, the kids were frequently on the receiving end of racial abuse and they were often threatened with dangerous dogs.

There were numerous people who had good reason to hate and distrust white people, but they took me and my little one into their community with modest warmth.

If anyone else on here has lived among moslems for a comparable length of tme they have not said so.

Hence, I can tell you that it is better to be white in a moslem area that moslem in a white area.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:32 PM

In essence I was simply saying that whether a slut (whatever one perceives one to be) or not, no-one deserves to be made a sex slave by anyone. By inference it could be suggested that it would be okay if they were a slut. My tetchiness reacted to that disctinction possibly being made.

In the same way as in the past I have argued that female prostitutes should be afforded the same dignity as all other women when one gets murdered/assaulted. What job they do, what morals they have, what people perceive them as, does not mean we should look down on them in any way.

Semantics, maybe, but I felt the need to point it out.

Apologies for any sidetrack to the OP

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:21 PM

Keith,

1. Reread Mauvepinks post. She does not object to use of the word slut, but to your distinction that not all the girls are sluts.

My post refers to attitudes toward white girls of people who see them as sluts, and points out that this is a stereotype that is promoted by the mainstream and not just by Pakistanis.

Your post suggests that while some aren't sluts, some are.

Mauvepink diplomatically and correctly points out that characterizing ANY woman as a slut, whether you are Pakistani, white, or even KEITH then you are pandering to offensive ideas.



Blimey - you really aren't very good at paying attention are you.

Equally, The reasons I criticized your Keighley MP are listed in my post.

If you can refute them then do so.

If you can't then they stand unchallenged.

Putting words in my mouth does not constitute a refutation.

In terms of substance, the second link is exactly the same as the first. Anne cryer suggests that if "community leaders" (again - whoever the fuck they are supposed to be) tell the parents of pakistani boys to respect young white girls, that organized criminals will stop forcing them into prostitution.

There is nothing new in that report except that she says that IN HER OPINION, young asian boys see young white girls as sex objects.

Does Keith really believe that a few old men giving a sermon on this subject will stop organized criminals from operating?

Come on - answer that question - because THAT is her point.

Looks like Keith really is clutching at straws to support Akes anti Islamic agenda.

In addition, judging by his cooments on the subject of "sluts", he appears to believe that he is somehow qualified to classify women as either non-sluts or sluts.

This is pretty serious as it shows that, if there are attitudes towards the alleged promiscuity and sluttishness of white women in England, that he is as guilty of having them as any Pakistani Moslem.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 06:17 PM

Thank you for clearing that up Kieth and apologies. I had missed that.

And 999, fair point, but the dictionary makes no mention of male sluts in it's definition either and there was no assumption being made... I have only ever heard it used perjoratively against women

slut [slVt] noun
    1             a dirty slatternly woman

    2             an immoral woman

    3 (Archaic)             a female dog

            [C14: of unknown origin]
        *sluttish adjective
        *sluttishly adverb
        *sluttishness noun

Personally I have never heard slut used against a man except in some way some would call humour and it usually refers to their rakishness or cad like behaviour. I could well be wrong. The urban dictionary uses several definitions.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 05:20 PM

I must say first off that I was only skimming in the hope that, in the usual Mudcat manner, the same old arguments would put me to sleep. But I must say one was new to me...

And I can inform you that it is much better to be a white person living in a Moslem community than a Moslem living in a white community.

How long have being white and moslem been mutualy exclusive? Does this meen that all white people are christian while everyone else is moslem? Or are only black people moslem? What about the Chinese? What about hindus? What colour are they?

Damn. I'll never get to sleep now...

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 04:58 PM

Interesting that anyome assumes sluts are female.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 03:48 PM

Mauvepink, I only used that word because Lox used it a few posts before.

"While Mohammed Shafiq's comments about Asian men not viewing white women as equal or valuable as "their own daughters, their own sisters" this applies equally to anyone, male or female, British or otherwise who implies that these 'sluttish' young women may be contributing the risk of rape"

We are anyway talking about children.

Lox, Cryer said that the families had failed to get the police to take action.
Listen again on the second link, after the victim and her parents' testimonies.
Do you think she is lying about all this.
This is a repectable politician, of the Left, with extensive knowledge and first hand experience, and you dismiss her because it conflicts with you ideology that some groups are above criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 02:08 PM

So to clarify the key points in kieths video.

1st. a spokesman for Moslem group "ramadhan" expresses concern aboout the behaviour of a groop of young pakistani men.

But Ake would like us to accept his view that the young Pakistani men represent "muslim attitudes" to white girls, and not the spokesman for "Ramadhan"

2nd. The ex Keighley MP says that she was aware of young Pakistani men grooming White girls for sex ...

... but she didn't go to the police ... she went to visit some old Pakistani men and asked them what they were going to do about it.

What did she expect them to do about it?

Why didn't she go to the police?

If I had been them I would have said - "why don't you go to the police?"

How is an old man who isn't in a paedophile gang responsible for the actions of a padophile gang?

She suggests that somehow the "community elders" whetever the fuck they are meant to be, are somehow responsible for these crimes.

Is the local vicar responsible when a white christian commits a crime?

What utter bollocks.

She suggests that "community leaders" could stop organized crime and organized criminals by talking to their parents.

What planet is she from?

Keith refers to her words as an "explanation of the cultural background".

She has done nothing that even vaguely approximates any such explanation. All she has done is blame "the moslem community" for the crimes of an organized crime gang.

No doubt Keith will hide behind his facade of impartial reporting of the views of others, and no doubt he will present himself as a mere collector of relevant information, but the fact remains that on this thread, he is, in his usual disingenuous way, sticking up for the bigotted narrow minded view.


To be 100% clear about Ake's position:

He did not start a thread about Child abuse by pakistani gangsters in the context of concern for children. He brought it up as a trump card in a discussion about race.

Ake couldn't give a fuck about those girls, his motivation is to regurgitatew his "liberal agenda" theory for the millionth time and to prove his point about Moslems thinking they're better than us which he has referred to in previous threads.


What a sad pair you make.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 02:02 PM

The victims are not all sluts.

And if they were - whatever a slut is supposed to be in people's eyes and by who's definitions - would that make it okay for them to be used as sex slaves? I think not

There are all sorts of double standards and one of them is looking down on women who may provide easy or paid sex for men. They are all someone's daughter...

I hope and believe that Kieth did not mean this to look how I have taken it but I do think a distinction is drawn that need not be. They were and are all women (and I dare say it may happen to young men too if the surface was scratched deep enough). Sorry if it seems I am touchy about this but the truth is I am. The thing they all had in common is that they are women... THAT is all that is important

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 11:08 AM

Thanks Keith, that puts things into perspective and illustrates the "liberal" double standards which I referred to earlier.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 10:41 AM

A victim describes what happened to her, aged 12.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00x97hr#p00d7f3g

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 10:29 AM

In this interview, Anne Cryer explains the cultural background to these crimes against children.
She was a local Labour MP and victims' families had come to her for help.
http://wn.com/Ex_Keighley_MP_Ann_Cryer_Defends_Jack_Straw's_Comments_On_UK_Muslim_Child-Rape_Gangs

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 10:05 AM

Keith, I thought you might have understood my earlier post, but it seems I overestimated your powers of interpretation.

To spell out the point: British civilization, culture and ethics are an amalgam of accumulated influences, including the bible, but are not informed solely by the bible.

In fact, even British interpretation of the bible was informed by the numerous cultural and ethical influences of the day.

These influences include indigenous pagan culture, the work of greek philosophers, cultural inheritance from Roman times, not to mention cuktural diffusion through trade and invasion, inwards and outwards, from the vikings, the normans, etc etc etc (lots of etceteras covering hundreds of years.

This is very easy to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 09:45 AM

Perhaps Lox, it is the influence of pre dark age Romans and Vikings to blame?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 09:43 AM

The victims are not all sluts.
They were not all picked up on the streets late at night.
Those ones tended to be girls within the care system.
Girls from respectable families have given their stories of being enticed away from shopping malls in daylight.
Not all white either.
Just not muslim.
They are off limits to young muslim men.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 09:23 AM

I was written to recently by a friend who has an interest in this subject, and who had this to say.

"I'm amused by Steve Shaw's reaction to 'our' post :)

How about this one - worth risking the wrath of richie for?

This thread SHOULD be about disentangling the fact that race and religion are interwoven with each other as represented in the term Islamophobia.

When European men traffic women or groom vulnerable young girls on the street they are rarely referred to as 'Christians' whereas British born men of Pakistani origin are automatically referred to as 'Muslims' in the media and posts like akes
I can't recall the recent (or earlier) English paedophile ring preying on nursery children being defined by religion

In fact, many people in the UK do not follow the strictures of the religion they may have family allegiance to
Having a Muslim or Christian name does not necessarily mean practising that religion; clearly the young Asian men mentioned in connection with grooming pubescent (British) girls are not following the teachings of Islam

What disturbs me as well as Barbara Ellen in The Observer, Sunday 9 January 2011* is the fact that much of non-Asian Britain is apparently comfortable to view many British girls as drunken, worthless, sub-human trash.
If you want corroboration of this just wade through some of the threads on mudcat where some members have parroted the media role in portraying endless coverage of drunken "ladettes" out on the lash and being sick into gutters etc

While Mohammed Shafiq's comments about Asian men not viewing white women as equal or valuable as "their own daughters, their own sisters" this applies equally to anyone, male or female, British or otherwise who implies that these 'sluttish' young women may be contributing the risk of rape etc while placing their own family on higher moral ground
As Ellen notes in her article,
"Whenever sex workers are murdered, there is an effort to frame them as daughters, sisters and mothers, precisely because this is the easiest way to humanise them.""


Link

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 09:18 AM

"Where is all the horror at the crimes and sympathy for the victims that we saw in the "priest abuse" threads."


Ake shows no concern for the victims or the crime.


His concern is about "moslem attitudes to white women"


That and his beliefs concerning "liberals" which he refers to in every post he makes.

i.e. his anti "liberal" agenda.

In light of these facts, it is funny to read akes unwitting self parody.

"Once again it is evident that the "liberals" here are agenda driven."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 05:27 AM

Once again it is evident that the "liberals" here are agenda driven.

Where is all the horror at the crimes and sympathy for the victims that we saw in the "priest abuse" threads.

This thread has shown these people for the hypocrits they are.
This thread has been all about deflecting blame from the perpetrators and the ideology which motivates their actions.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 11 - 05:19 AM

Another large number of exclusively Pakistani muslims appeared in court yesterday charged on 61 counts of sexual abuse and grooming os young british girls aged between 13 and 15

The story, carried by the Times, states that these are first cases in the UK to brought under section 53 of the 2003 sexual offences act, which outlaws "trafficking" within the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 08:00 PM

Good stuff, Lox, by the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 07:17 PM

So, Brian, let's hear you judging the whole of white Britain on the strength of what Fred West did. Perhaps you'd care now to make the case, with full evidence of course, that Ashraf Azad was typical of male Muslims and is supported in his actions by the Muslim community.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Brian May
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 04:30 PM

A quote from the BBC website:

"Afshan Azad, 21, who played Padma Patil, a classmate of the teenage wizard, in the blockbuster Hollywood films based on JK Rowling's children's books, feared for her life during the three-hour ordeal, Manchester Crown Court heard.
She was punched, dragged around by her hair and strangled by her brother Ashraf Azad, 28, who threatened to kill her after he caught her talking on the phone to her Hindu boyfriend on May 21 last year, the court was told.
During the row at the family home in Longsight, Manchester, which also involved her mother and father, she was branded a ''slag'' and a ''prostitute'' and told: ''Marry a Muslim or you die!''
The actress, who now lives in London, had pleaded for leniency from the court, begging the judge not to jail her older brother.
But Judge Roger Thomas QC sent him to prison for six months after he pleaded guilty to the assault."

It's not just we 'bigots and racists' that are 'bigots and racists' is it? This is what he did to a family member, what would he do to us . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 01:28 PM

There have been many objections to the use of the term 'Islam phobic' and arguments that the term 'antiMuslim racism' would be more accurate were it not for the obvious objection that
Muslims are not a race and that therefore hostility towards them cannot, by definition, be a form of racism.

One such objection was voiced by Polly Toynbee

In 1997 the journalist Polly Toynbee in reaction to the Runnymede report published that year wrote

'I am an Islamophobe,… I am also a Christophobe.
If Christianity were not such a spent force in this country, if it were powerful and dominant as it once was, it would still be every bit as damaging as Islam is in those theocratic states in its thrall… If I lived in Israel, I'd feel the same way about Judaism…'

It is very easy and pretty despicable to take a few words out of any context and twist them to mean something very different
If anyone has any doubts about Polly Toynbee's secular humanist and anti racist stance they would be better informed reading the whole of one of her columns

"The BNP has been allowed to make the weather by abusing Islam as a proxy for race in their vile literature. They have done it so successfully that criticising Islam seems to ignore the attacks on Muslims that have increased by nearly 50%. Robert Kilroy-Silk's mindless anti-Arab tirade only made matters worse, as his attacks on Sharia law blended nastily into racist smears. He made it harder for others to challenge some of the savage passages in the Koran, which apologists are eager to smooth over.
"Islamophobia" blurs racism and anti-religion dangerously. It's interesting to see how Christian activists are now keen to make common cause with Muslims, drawing on their heat and passion. (The far left is doing the same, even less convincingly.) Far from a Clash of Civilisations between Islam and Christianity, in Britain they join together over religious broadcasting, schools and other rights. Officialdom is easily frightened of Islam, with good reason, treading carefully in a minefield. There is an essentially craven tendency to give in to the notion that religious belief deserves some special treatment by the state. Labour has opened 60 new faith state schools - including a Seventh Day Adventist one.
Nowhere more than in schools should that be resisted. It is the state's duty to give every child an open-minded, free-thinking education, opening windows away from the cultural narrowness of each child's family background. So where is the vigorous campaign against religious schools? Parents want good schools, and might prefer not to have to get on their knees in their local church to get into them. It is extraordinary that secular Britain is rushing to re-invent religion and give state aid to promote superstitions of every hue."

Excerpt from
The Guardian, Friday 11 June 2004

lox (out of town)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 01:04 PM

In response to the above comment,I thought "guest" posts were to be removed from this thread ?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 12:18 PM

It is about time that we collectively extended to them the rights and respect other citizens enjoy. I am not suggesting special treatment for Muslims. They should be subject to the law of the land and the same democratic scrutiny as the rest of us.

Virulent anti-Semitism or homophobia being preached in British mosques should be exposed and rooted out. But by exactly the same token, Muslims should be given the same protection from insults or ignorant abuse as other minority groups.

They are our fellow citizens, we nevertheless misrepresent them and in certain cases we persecute them. Our attitude can lead only to estrangement and alienation. And therein lies the greatest danger.

Because if we continue to demonise Muslims, we make it all the easier for Al Qaeda to find recruits from within those communities. Islamophobia will backfire on us  -  and simply magnify the very threat it presumes to address.

Also don't forget that ex- Labour foreign secretary Jack Straw suggested women who wear veils can make community relations harder. And recall Polly Toynbee of the Guardian, who likes to be thought of as a model of political correctness and a champion of the oppressed. As long ago as 1997 she wrote: 'I am an Islamophobe, and proud of it.'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 11:40 AM

But you didn't Keith, you told me that one very well educated Bishop argued that the basis of Morality and civilization in Britain is the Bible.

In the process he ignors the influence of the Romans and the Vikings, not to mention a whole myriad of other cultural ingredients that have informed British civilization and Moral values over the centuries.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 06:43 AM

You think the Iraq war was fought for religious principle?
Now I KNOW you are daft.

There have been many reasons and excuses given for our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan......but I've truly never heard that one before.

Better tell Tony, he's lookin' for a new one today!!

If you insult me I'll just call you Achy Tony, OK? So, Achy Tony (or, if you're a girl, Achy Toni), I said nothing about fighting for religious principle, did I? I asked whether you thought that these wars had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the countries in question were Muslim (or, to qualify myself slightly, predominantly Muslim). Spot the subtle difference between what I actually said and what you say I said. However, water off a duck's back, no doubt. You misinterpret, disagree with your misinterpretation of my words, and insult. A common enough procedure hereabouts. Quack.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 11 - 06:36 AM

Lox, if I said that I was sure Stephen Hawking was arrogantly and ignorantly wrong about the physics of black holes, I think that you would dismiss me until I put up some other expert opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 05:49 PM

I think Stringsinger is able to speak for himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 05:45 PM

"but saying someone else is doing wrong does not necessarily make Muslims right"

He didn't "say they were right."

He responded to the comment that "all the terrorists are muslim"

He pointed out that it isn't true.


He didn't "say they were right."

He didn't say anything about 'them.'


"they" are people, each with his/her own point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 02:24 PM

That`s nice, Stringsinger, but saying someone else is doing wrong does not necessarily make Muslims right. They have as much racism in their religion as do Christians and Jews. Good Muslims, Christians and Jews (and many other religious people) don`t buy into the bullshit. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Stringsinger
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 02:19 PM

Timothy McVeigh was not a Muslim. Neither was Loughner. Nor were the bomb planters in Spokane.

The White Ring zealots who want to bomb mosques are not Muslims either.

Nor are the American Nazi Party, the White Citizen's Council, and the rising groups
of incoherent militias forming in places like Idaho.

You wanna' talk terrorism? Look at the US foreign policy in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Pakistan, Yemen, Indonesia and Oil-pipeline-astan.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 02:12 PM

i have read many accounts of muslims persecuting christians but thankfully many muslims live peacefully alongside christians and sometimes take a stand against their fellow religionists in defense of their christian neighbours.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 01:58 PM

"Ahem. You've obviously not spent a lot of time in the rural United States- particularly below the Mason-Dixon line-or in Israel, or in China or in India - or, apparently, in most of the inhabited world world."

Or indeed lived amongst Moslems, which I have for a year and a half. And I can inform you that it is much better to be a white person living in a Moslem community than a Moslem living in a white community.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 01:55 PM

Keith,

"The Bishop might well be wrong, but his opinions can not be said to be based on ignorance, and it is arrogant to just dismiss them because of who he is."

Well done Keith.

You've mastered the principle at the centre of my point.


Now lets see if you are able to apply it in every circumstance - i.e. whether you are able to apply it to leveller, whose opinions you have disregarded because of who is is, and indeed who he isn't.


The Bishop has one view, leveller has another.


You stated that the Bishops is more reliable because of who he is, not because you had evidence to support his view, nor even an argument of your own to defend it.

You are guilty of dismissing someones view because of who they are, not me.

I dismissed his view because I disagree with it wholeheartedly.

The idea that the Bible is the root of all civil and moral behaviour in Britain does not need me to do any research to be dismissed as palpable bollocks.

It has informed our moral code and played an important cultural role, but it is not the source.

In addition, these comments presuppose the notion that England is somehow more moral and civilized than countries that are non christian which is a horrendous caricature of the British colonial mindset that I grew up amongst in Hong Kong - a mindset which I might add was not exclusive to the British, but to some of their 'properly educated' colonial subjects.


And your double standards "don't dismiss people because of who they are" rhetoric, after having dismissed Leveller specifically on the grounds of who he is do not serve to bolster the argument you have "objectively" "reported" for us.

Because after all, not being the kind of person who ever advances an argument of your own, the views you post are chosen purely out of impartial interest.

Nothing left for you to hide behind I'm afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 01:49 PM

the difference is in how non believers are tolerated...

Ahem. You've obviously not spent a lot of time in the rural United States- particularly below the Mason-Dixon line-or in Israel, or in China or in India - or, apparently, in most of the inhabited world world.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 01:21 PM

Correct greg, but the difference is in how non believers are tolerated.
It is much more prevalent among Muslims to believe they have a duty to punish a non believer who by stating his belief blasphemes against Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon Him), or a Muslim who converts, or just a non believer.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 10:25 AM

Muslims are taught by their clerics that Islam is the only true religious belief.....

As are Catholics and "christians"[sic] and every other religious sect on the face of the earth and likely throughout the galaxy.

Aain, so what?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 10:03 AM

I do not believe in your war for dominance Lox, but our opinions can both be dismissed.
What do we know?
If you backed up your opinion with expert testimony, it could not be so easily dismissed.
The Bishop might well be wrong, but his opinions can not be said to be based on ignorance, and it is arrogant to just dismiss them because of who he is.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 09:50 AM

Well Keith, the war for dominance in central Asia has been going on longer than political Islamism and that is a fact regardless of whether you agree or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 09:48 AM

Keith - who leveller is has no relevance.

What matters is if his argument is stronger or weaker than yours.

If his argument bears scrutiny then it is as valid as anyones argument regardless of the source or the person promoting it.

It is the relative strength and weaknesss of ideas that metters, not who promotes them.


Some people resist developing their ideas and ccling on to the same ideas their whole life and bolster tyem contiuously regardless of how thoroughly they have been discredited.



And lets be clear.


The idea that Britains values aand civilization are built on Christianity is utter Twaddle, unless you BELIEVE it to be true.

Surprise surprise, a Bishop believes that the source of values and civilization is the Bible.


His credentiials have no bearing as his comments are based on FAITH as leveller has said.


Your gleefully brandished 'trump card' is nothing but a squib.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 09:45 AM

Lox, I do not agree with your explanation for the war in Afghanistan, but that discussion has been done to death here already.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 09:38 AM

"I don't understand why Union Carbide got away with murder and BP didn't."


This is a powerful and excellent point.



"But, perhaps she should look at the causes and address those too. It's back to that 'old' adage.

'Not every Muslim is a terrorist, but every terrorist seems to be a Muslim.'"

This isn't an adage.

It is a Roy Chubby Brown joke.


I'm Irish.

It used to be us who were "all terrorists"


"What I am appalled by, is the (let's call it well-meaning) insidious way many people are being denied the opportunity (freedom) to discuss this topic openly for fear of being labelled a racist."


Discussing it openly and intelligently is fine.


Repeating NF slogans like the one above will get you accused of characteristics you don't like.



Ake asks: "What terrorism are the Christians perpetrating in the name of their religion Greg?"


Look at the stats Ake for America, pipe bombs, nail bombs, some in mosques, shootings etc etc


Then he talks about "muslim abuse of young white girls"


Ake you've already been thoroughly spanked on that one in another thread - have you come here to tell the same lie again?


Then you say something about "agenda above all else" whilst banging on yet again on your "liberals drum"

"ake would you like sone tea?" - "typical 'liberal' promoting your agenda" - "no I asked you if you want tea" - " you're denying me my freedom of speech"

No wonder you spend your nights wandering round the red light district.



Keith,


"The war in Afghanistan is absolutely to do with Islamist Jihadists being based there."

Wrong.

The war, overt and covert, for control of central Asia, has been going on for over a hundred years.

The rise of Islamic extremism in Afghanistan is a SYMPTOM of a hundred years of foreign interference, not the reason for it.



Richie Black says:

"Imagine if Muslims in Europe were being arrested for nothing more than peacefully practicing their religion"

You mean like wearing a headscarf?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 08:52 AM

But you can dismiss the informed opinion of a world class authority on the history of Islam, world religions and the comparative study of the literature and philosophy of religions.
OK, but tell us why we should dismiss him and listen to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 08:45 AM

Nazir-Ali's scholarship and his ideas about morality are based on the belief in a supernatural entity. Take that away and it's built on sand. It also dismisses the ideas of non-Christian moral philosophers from Confucius to Dawking.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 08:17 AM

You can say that in your opinion he is wrong, and use your own deep knowledge and experience to show why.
You can not say he is ignorant of these issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Jan 11 - 08:16 AM

Then he should know better than to make such a totally stupid statement.