BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 04:28 AM

I have no intention of dredging up all the discussions on Capital punishment

But you did do exactly that Jim!
Why will you not name the "one contributor here is a keen advocate of the good ol' practice (capital punishment) and would happily adapt whatever his holy book says to fit it in to his outlook on humanity"????

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 04:21 AM

"So put up or shut up "
No I won't Mike - I have no intention of dredging up all the discussions on Capital punishment that have taken place on this forum, in which contributors to this thread (not just the four named) have participated in, in order to present you and Keith with a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card from your Islamophobia.
You want me to qualify my statement - then how about responding to those you have studiously ignored.
My general point remains - all religions contain teachings which are bypassed out of convenience or to suit personal secular situations - you might start with "Thou shalt not kill".   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 04:11 AM

In fact, Jim, you are getting much too prone to telling people to "mind their own business" -- first it was your politics which were nobody's business [what a daft thing to assert on a political thread!]; now it's whom you are making scurrilous accusations against which are nobody's business but J Carroll's.

As I said above, Jim, I think you are on the point of losing it. Take care, please, for crying out loud. We could ill spare you, even just as a troublesome, provocative catalyst adding zest to the threads.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 04:03 AM

What is posted here is all our business.
You posted an accusation, in the most disparaging terms, against a "holy book" person.

As you acknowledge it can not be me as I have opposed capital punishment all my life.

That only leaves Eliza, Joe, Jack and Pete.

It is not me provoking an argument, it is you making accusations that are lies.

Name the person or withdraw the lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 04:01 AM

Sorry, Jim. This is not a post intending to be quarrelsome about the main issue -- we both know where we differ as to that. But your injunction to Keith to "mind his own business" as to whom you referred to in the aggressive post he quoted is thoroughly misplaced. It IS his business; it is all our "business" to know whom you meant by such a scurrilous accusation. Anything posted on this forum is, indeed, the "business" of any member of it; so I can't imagine quite what you thought you meant by that foolish rejoinder. So put up or shut up -- or somebody's Fairy Godmother might turn some nasty little toad into something even nastier!

☤~M~☤

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 02:39 AM

"Who is this nasty person??"
Mind your own business and stop trying to provoke an argument
You have shown better than any that self-proclaimed Christians are more than happy to ignore the teachings of their beliefs when it suits them to do so, which is the whole point of this debate - I've never met a 'Christian' who expresses your inhuman views.
There is no "suspicion" - it is a fact of all religions
No more 'black-holes' - that's what you were warned.
Guest#'s pie chart makes fascinating reading and Stringsinger says all that needs to be said about U.S. terrorism.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 02:17 AM

Jim.
one contributor here is a keen advocate of the good ol' practice (capital punishment) and would happily adapt whatever his holy book says to fit it in to his outlook on humanity

Who is this nasty person??
You say I "know well" his record, but I have no idea!
I am certain you have made it all up.

If there is such a person, name them.
If there is not, admit it.

It is not fair to allow suspicion to fall on the very few people of faith who contribute here.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Apr 14 - 02:10 AM

This is not about USA, but you have lost about 3500 people to Islamists since 2000.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 06:18 PM

The best site I have yet read concerning muslims and terrorist acts.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_waronterror78.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 05:19 PM

Where is that "like" button?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Stringsinger
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 11:51 AM

The major deaths in the U.S. are not from Islamist extremists but our own gun toting
society, gun violence being an epidemic. Much of the terrorism in the US comes from
terrorist organizations such as pseudo-militias, many of which are Tea Party inspired.

Islamic terrorism is not a major problem in the US despite the militarization of the police force and unwarranted data mining of fearful politicians and government functionaries such as James Clapper.

Jim is right about paranoia which put us into the cold war, Iraq, Afghanistan and keeps our military sending drones into Pakistan and Yemen which enable Al Quaeda to gain more
recruits and create a bogey-man.

Drones have not stopped Al Quaeda or terrorism in other countries, why?, because drones are a form of terrorism.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 10:10 AM

Greetings from a WiFi available in a cafe. (If Scotland becomes independent will the little fat buffoon spend some of the oil billions he reckons he will have on getting a phone signal in Fife?)

Arguing the message differences in the bible and Q'ran just shows the level of debate in this rather repugnant thread.

Mind you, nice to pop in and have a good laugh at Keith's philosophy.

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 07:48 AM

Paranoia rules OK
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 06:47 AM

You said I well know it is on record.
I don't.
You said it is a contributor with a holy book.
So that is me, Eliza, Joe, Jack or Pete.
Why not just name them Jim?
Answer, because it is all your made up shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 06:15 AM

"So you meant me."
Who said that?
Your principles - like Easter - are a moveable feast anyway - depending on what suits at the time.
Are you sure it's not just a guilty concience that makes you think it was you I was referring to.
Go away - you nasty little man
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 06:04 AM

So you meant me.
I have been opposed to capital punishment my whole adult life, so nothing is "on record" and you have made the whole thing up.

What does it say about you that you cannot make a case without lying Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 04:31 AM

No need Keith - its all on record - as you well know
Now go and talk to someone else - you have no place in my thoughts - and few others' - I would guess.
Your career as a troll is a thing of the past
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 04:09 AM

Guest#
USA is not the world.
No really!
Many countries are fighting an Islamist insurgencies and many more are in fear of one.
USA is not.

Given that, I estimate that 98% of deaths due to terrorism in USA in 21C are down to Islamists.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 03:56 AM

I doubt very much that there is any such person here Jim.
Will you name this person?
Confident prediction-no.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 03:13 AM

"I am given to understand that the modern usage of "jihad" refers to the internal struggle for self-improvement, not violence against non-muslims."
Not so modern Richard - the term is debatable - some writers compare it with 'Crusade'.
Fundamentalists take it as a justification of violent action, just as fundamentalist Christians have used Christian scriptures (plenty of them if you care to look) to justify violence.
Try Googling "Peaceful Jihad" - makes for fascinating reading.
It's one of those buzz words for bigots.
There's a fascinating debate going on at the moment in the letter pages of The Irish Times regarding the Christian view of Capital Punishment.
I know that at least one contributor here is a keen advocate of the good ol' practice and would happily adapt whatever his holy book says to fit it in to his outlook on humanity
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 02:13 AM

I am given to understand that the modern usage of "jihad" refers to the internal struggle for self-improvement, not violence against non-muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Apr 14 - 01:57 AM

Greg, after attacking my description of Islamism, you prove to be unable to find any fault with it and unable to come up with a better one.
What does that make you Greg.

Now you say I am wrong that there is only one movement dedicated to imposing a religious government on everyone in the world by terror and violence.

So Greg, identify another one.

Confident prediction-you have made a fool of yourself yet again.

All you are any good at is calling people ugly names.
Like "Fuckwit" Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 11:48 PM

There is, however, [how often must I say it?] only one who can point to justification, and indeed obligation, in its holy writings for such an intention.

If you think otherwise (apart from Jesus's "not peace but a sword", which needs to be taking in conjunction with the then current fact of the Roman occupation) then please point it out.

Meanwhile, the Suras enjoining the duty of Jihad and/or militant proselytisation are legion. "The word jihad appears in 23 Quranic verses...Jihad appears 41 times in the Quran and frequently in the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of God"...Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims" - Wikipedia

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 08:58 PM

I am sure that there is only one movement

You may be SURE, FW, but you are - as usual - WRONG.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 06:43 PM

Now, there ya go again, Guest - introducing them pesky facts. FW Keith ain't gonna ba happy with you...

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 05:57 PM

I tried to make a link but I haven't got the time.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

I think too many people here are wrapped up in their beliefs and ideologies. The link provides a few facts which I'm sure will be cherry-picked to support various arguments. However, there they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 05:26 PM

Stringsinger,
Every religion has its radical elements predicated on violence.

I am not sure that is true, but I am sure that there is only one movement dedicated to imposing a religious government on everyone in the world by terror and violence.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 05:20 PM

So you could if you wanted to, but you won't.
Really?
Pathetic Greg.
Laughable.
Ha ha.
All you are good for is calling rude names.

Like "FUCKWIT!"

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 04:14 PM

but you can not actually identify any innaccuracy, and you can not actually provide a better one.

Actually, I CAN & quite easily. But, per 28 Apr 14 - 02:59 PM above, I can't be arsed, since it would have no effect on you in any way shape or form.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 03:30 PM

Oh dear Greg.
How humiliating for you.
You asked me for a definition when I have already given two.
Who but what you call a "fuckwit" would do that!

You deride my descriptions as those of a fuckwit, but you can not actually identify any innaccuracy, and you can not actually provide a better one.

Only a complete "fuckwit" would be that pathetically inadequate Greg.

What a useful contribution you do make Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Stringsinger
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 03:13 PM

Every religion has its radical elements predicated on violence.

Islam in its inception supported science (Al Hazen).

At one point in history, Islam was enlightened, they were scholars creating algebra,
scientists, budding astro-phyicists and leaders of an open society. Today, they've been taken over by dogmatic and violent fundamentalists.   

Darwin never founded a religion but based his findings on Evolution through empirical science, leading the way to understanding modern medicine which has saved countless lives.

Darwin's ideas have been modified over the years as scientists discover carbon dating, dendrology to determine the beginnings of earth, animal behavior, and have lead to the discovery of DNA. Darwin's breakthrough enabled us to live better lives through understanding human chemistry and biology.

Blair converted to Catholicism which may in his case influenced his dislike of Islamic fundamentalists, aside from the anti-human propensities. Blair, as a spokesperson for
England has to acknowledge that GB too had its share of fundamentalists that wreaked havoc on the rest of the world, notably in India.

One of the by-products of religion is that it encourages discrimination and fundamentalism
in its adherents against outsiders, women, and non-believers.

For every WT destruction there exists another Oklahoma bombing.

A critical view of religion needs to be taken to show how it breeds violence and most wars.

Instead of being afraid of the violence of religion, it would serve better to understand the psychological implications of this anti-social behavior and reveal it to the public.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 02:59 PM

Do please correct it for me, and share you superior wisdom...

To what end, Keith? You're not saying that facts would change your mind, are you? By everything you've ever posted on this forum such is demonstrably NOT the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 11:51 AM

I am so sorry Greg.
Do please correct it for me, and share you superior wisdom with a lesser creature.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 11:19 AM

Look it ["Islamism"] up here or elsewhere if you are confused.

I'm not the one that's confused, FW Keith, if your posted "definition"[sic] is any indication.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 11:12 AM

"I am not a racist,"
As good as - as you say, Islam is not a race - if it were you would be a "send 'em all back where they cone from" (only cure for your particular phobia, as far as I can see) out-and-our racist.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Apr 14 - 09:30 AM

Richard, the army dare not venture into parts of the North.
Why not explain what you mean about Boko Haram?

Greg, I explained to meaning to Musket on the persecution thread, and I have defined it here too.
Look it up here or elsewhere if you are confused.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 06:40 PM

Re cracks about "middle-class Alf Garnetts". Alf Garnett was a racist. I am not a racist, and do not welcome into our midst a strong demographic who manifestly are.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 06:23 PM

Quite sidestep, I think, from "Islam" to "Islamism" or "Islamist".

If you fancy doing some useful research, Keith, try figuring out who funds Boko Haram (and the helicopter drops of food and fuel into its camps), and why Nigerian military action against its known encampments seems - er - a bit hard to detect, and why the Nigerian government is doing sweet Fanny Adams about rescuing a bit over 200 schoolgirls (observant Islamic schoolgirls) who have been kidnapped by Boko Haram.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 06:12 PM

Define "Islamism" Keith - off the top of your head, no looking it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 06:04 PM

"and you have to give an opinion on what should happen instead of your "nuffin to do with me guv" stance."
.,,.
I wish I knew what should happen; what could practically be done about it. Cheap sneers about how I must want numbers tattooed on arms are merely provocative, not any sort of argument. But we are, I repeat, living over a volcano brought in by a Trojan Horse (you must admit a fine mixed metaphor, whatever else!). And what is to be done about this pit we have dug for ourselves, (third item for the mixture!) in practical terms, I simply do not know. The fact is that one can not start from anywhere except where one is. As usual, old Will has the best words:

O, Time, thou must unravel this, not I;
It is too hard a knot for me to untie.
(Twelfth NightII.2.39-40)

I just wish to god I could think of something to be done about it.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 05:53 PM

No Greg.
Only a complete fuckwit would ask that.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 05:51 PM

Islamism

That sumthin' like Darwinism, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Lighter
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 04:36 PM

Religions are as good or as bad as the people in charge of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 04:13 PM

But it doesn't take many to make an impact ~~ it took 4 [or was it 6?] to knock the WTC down.

And it took just two (wanna clue: their surnames both begin with B...) to misuse this event, to lie to us all, to slaughter or maim a million Iraqis and tens of thousands of Afghanis, and to make orphans of a million more and impoverish the lives of tens of millions more and to make those tens of millions live for over a decade, a decade still without end, in fear and insecurity. Amazing, Michael, how western imperialism can cleanse the mind of reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 04:01 PM

Jim, you have just said, amongst other things,

I indicted those who watched it happen without doing anything about it

and

I don't blame the people of Lewes

But your post on the thread concerned was

it isn't too long ago that the good people of Lewes were burning a caravan full of 'Pikeys' at their annual bonfire festival.

It is there for you to refresh your memory if you like. Re: 'Bacup Nuters and Racism' From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 04:03 AM.

Now, nowhere in that statement do you only indict the people who watched it happen and did nothing. You did indict 'the good people of Lewes' as a whole.

I fully understand if it was a mistake to tar those good people with the same brush and, if so, you should say what you said is not what you meant. The statement you made was a typical Daily Mail style headline. You cannot say, on the one hand, that we can only blame the extremists, which I fully agree with, and then go on to say 'the good people of Lewes were burning a caravan full of pikeys.'

I am not trying to argue just for the sake of it here either. I am just saying that you cannot say one thing and do another without people picking up on it.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 03:13 PM

"And yet, Jim on another thread you indicted 'the good people of Lewes' for the actions of a few."
I indicted those who watched it happen without doing anything about it - those who added their own happenn'orth to the proceedings - the organisers of that event and the police who could have, but didn't prosecute bcause what happened wasn't serious enough.
I could have added, those who carried an effigy of the news reporter who gave Firle a bad press, in the Lewes parade the following year.
Not forgetting the Mudcatter who suggested that there was a "reason" for what happened - there can never be a "reason" for such behaviour - not given the situation of Travellers in these islands.
I go along with Fred's description of the sectarian behaviour that goes on down there - we have similar demonstrations coming up in the (British Province of) Ireland shortly - just when we thought it was going to be safe to get back into the water.
I don't blame the people of Lewes, Sussex, or the South of England - I blame the fundamentalists - just as I do the Islamic fundamentalists.
"but majorities can be swayed when the climate moves in their instinctually"
Then you have to give a reason why such a thing might happen giving the present situation - and you have to give an opinion on what should happen instead of your "nuffin to do with me guv" stance.
We know what is likely to happen if Farrago and his (now established) 'Narsty Nazis' have their way.
Lovely cartoon in the Sunday Times this morning showing a B.N.P. member with a begging bowl with a note saying "Put out of a job by Ukip".
You are a middle-class version of Alf Garnett Mike; I suppose its too late in life for you to hunt out the sandwich board the old feller in Oxford Street used to carry saying "The End of the world is nigh".
I get more waves of hate from you and yours than I ever did from my Muslim, black and Irish neighbours all rolled into one
A bit of a disgrace really
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 02:37 PM

I might add that in Canada many university-educated Muslims are driving taxis, or work at jobs below their education levels, because of discrimination.
Home care for the elderly and infirm, low-paid although the work is hard and requires driving to several patients a day to give care, employs mostly African immigrants.
In Calgary, many of the home care workers are from the horn of Africa.
Discrimination extends to Christians with dark skin.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 02:34 PM

Blair was talking about Islamism, which has thousands of adherents in Britain but globally is a movement dedicated to the overthrow of democracy and the imposition of Islamic rule under the Sharia by force and terror.
It is killing people now in numerous countries.
Its only goal is to bring the whole world to Islam by any means.

I have met many Muslims but not yet one of those.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 02:25 PM

In Canada, we have more than one million Muslims. They work in all branches of society.
Only one that has been in the news has radical beliefs, and I believe that he is up for deportation.

Here in Calgary (metro population 1.2 million), we have a Muslim mayor, Naheed Nenshi, who has been re-elected recently, with little opposition.
He is a graduate of the school of government at Harvard University, and before becoming mayor, was a professor of business at a local college.
He is typical of Muslims here, many in the professional or technical fields. Some of the women work in home care, others in banks, etc.

Unfortunately, Muslims in Canada face discrimination. There is high unemployment (especially Quebec) among young Muslims, even those qualified with university degrees.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Apr 14 - 02:16 PM

"those who have moved to Britain have fitted in and are law abiding citizens."
,..,
Many indeed. Probably most -- but majorities can be swayed when the climate moves in their instinctually conditioned direction, remember. And those who take the teachings of their prophet seriously, proselytise, convert, & come up with such results as the British-born converts who killed Mr Rigby, can hardly be held to conform to the above description. Yes, I know they are a small minority. But it doesn't take many to make an impact ~~ it took 4 [or was it 6?] to knock the WTC down. And when these few are driven by the perverse teachings of and injunctions of this particular faith's version of holy writ, the impacts are going to be considerable. I am mocked for mentioning a volcano on which I think we sit. It will not, most likely, erupt in the few years I have left. But those who deny its very existence, or even the very possibility of such an existence, are, I repeat, IMO living in a fool's paradise; and I hope it will not be themselves, if young enough, or their immediate, or even a generation or two off, descendants [of whom I shall have none so I should coco], who will be caught in the eruption.

OK; so sneer. Like I should care.

You'll learn...

~M~