Do You Support Quilliam

[Bounce]

Several aspects of that trouble me. Most importantly you say that if we are at war with others then we can expect to attract terrorist within. But aren't these people British, don't they live here, work here, exist here? So why do they see the fact that their own country is at war with an overseas nation a reason to kill their own people? The 7/7 terrorists killed their own people?

 

Secondly, your point that Majid Nawaz's motives are not honourable. This is the usual response when their is no argument. You can't find anything factual to dispute his actions, so you make things up to try to prove a point.

 

Lastly, if we withdrew from Afghanistan and had little influence on the Muslim world do you honestly think that would be it? Have you read the Koran?

 

Some who turn to extremism are British but they are not English and therefore their identity is shaped by their parents grandparents place of origin. This is not just the case for Muslims but for Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. Now the question is why are there no British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews turning against Britain? The answer is quite simple Britain is not bombing and occupying their religious home lands. If Britain were to start bombing and occupying the Panjab or India, Sri Llanka, Israel and so on you would soon see an extremist reaction among some British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. This is why a minority of British born Muslims have turned to extremism. Quilliam have no answer to this because they are not in control of UK foreign policy, America is.

 

Majid Nawaz has seen this as a good career move for himself and that is all he's interested in. He wont be achieving anything in the KPK region of Pakistan while American drones are dropping bombs on their heads and occupying their Pashtun brethrin across the border in Afghanistan. The Taliban will stop fighting as soon as America and its allies leave their homeland and they've said it many times. The Taliban are the people of that land they're not going anywhere Hakimullah Masud was ready to talk peace with the Pakistani government and America assassinates him before peace talks could commence despite giving assurances to the Pakistani government that they would not do so. This shows clearly that America is not interested in peace in that part of the Muslim world or any other part. Just look at their blind support for Israeli attrocities and Middle Eastern dictators. After 9/11 there was a protest in America and American women were holding up placards saying America if you want to stop terrorism stop terrorising. I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

I have read the Quran and let me remind you that during the peak of the Islamic empire when the coloniol west had little influence over the Muslim world it was at its most peaceful and progressive.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 01:22 ----------

 

Sorry, but that's nonsense.

 

Islamic religious extremism and even suicide bombing is not just a result of western governments killing people in 'the Muslim world'.

 

Just look at what happened with the Danish cartoons, or the assassination of UN diplomats because of their role in securing the independence of east Timor.

 

No, it simply is not a case of 'if only we weren't mean to them they'd stop attacking us'.

 

Of course it is, Palestine has been occupied for over sixty years and yet the Palestinians only resorted to suicide bombings about twenty years ago. It was Hindus who first started using suicide bombing in Sri Lanka. If you seriously think people blow themselves up because the Quran tells them to then not only have you not read the Quran but you have no understanding of war. Suicide bombing is used because gorilla fighters do not have the weaponry available to them that rich powerful governments do. America, Israel ect use planes and drones to blow up civilians whereas gorilla fighters use themselves. Before you say America doesn't target civilians, yes it does, America has bombed civilian areas in Japan, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen.

 

The Danish cartoon reaction was on the back of western bombing and occupation in the Muslim world the timing of the cartoon was a fnal slap in the face. The UN is a joke that is used and controlled by the five permanent members of the security council. It should be called UI United Imperialism.

 

It simply is a case of if you want to stop terrorism then stop terrorising.

[Longcol]

Yes and if America and its allies could just stop attacking and killing people in the Muslim world the reaction might be less extreme.

 

I thought you denied that the Muslim world did extreme reactions.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7119760&postcount=818

 

Loads of post from you denying 7/7 was caused by Muslim extremists.

[Phanerothyme]

You should have heard of it, it's a quango. That's right, we all pay for it via taxation.

Is it a quango? It receives some public funding, but that doesn't make it a quango.

[denomis]

I voted for donkey kong.

[Lackluster]

Some who turn to extremism are British but they are not English and therefore their identity is shaped by their parents grandparents place of origin. This is not just the case for Muslims but for Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. Now the question is why are there no British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews turning against Britain? The answer is quite simple Britain is not bombing and occupying their religious home lands. If Britain were to start bombing and occupying the Panjab or India, Sri Llanka, Israel and so on you would soon see an extremist reaction among some British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. This is why a minority of British born Muslims have turned to extremism. Quilliam have no answer to this because they are not in control of UK foreign policy, America is.

 

Majid Nawaz has seen this as a good career move for himself and that is all he's interested in. He wont be achieving anything in the KPK region of Pakistan while American drones are dropping bombs on their heads and occupying their Pashtun brethrin across the border in Afghanistan. The Taliban will stop fighting as soon as America and its allies leave their homeland and they've said it many times. The Taliban are the people of that land they're not going anywhere Hakimullah Masud was ready to talk peace with the Pakistani government and America assassinates him before peace talks could commence despite giving assurances to the Pakistani government that they would not do so. This shows clearly that America is not interested in peace in that part of the Muslim world or any other part. Just look at their blind support for Israeli attrocities and Middle Eastern dictators. After 9/11 there was a protest in America and American women were holding up placards saying America if you want to stop terrorism stop terrorising. I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

I have read the Quran and let me remind you that during the peak of the Islamic empire when the coloniol west had little influence over the Muslim world it was at its most peaceful and progressive.

 

 

I think what you're saying is.

 

1 You're British, when it suits you.

2. You don't want an end to terrorism, you feel it is justified.

3. You seem to be confused about the Koran. Its a contradiction in terms to say that the Muslim world was peaceful during the height of their empire. They'd obviously conquered, killed and enslaved thousands to have achieved this empire. There would be peace. Its a biy like saying the British were peaceful at the height of their empire.

[angos]

Yes and if America and its allies could just stop attacking and killing people in the Muslim world the reaction might be less extreme.

 

Its a chicken and egg situation, one Islamic country invades another Islamic country, or the Islamic leaders of a country kill their own people, the West steps in to bring the conflict to an end and you blame the West. We can clearly see which group you support.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 07:12 ----------

 

Some who turn to extremism are British but they are not English and therefore their identity is shaped by their parents grandparents place of origin. This is not just the case for Muslims but for Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. Now the question is why are there no British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews turning against Britain? The answer is quite simple Britain is not bombing and occupying their religious home lands. If Britain were to start bombing and occupying the Panjab or India, Sri Llanka, Israel and so on you would soon see an extremist reaction among some British born Hindus, Sikhs, Jews ect. This is why a minority of British born Muslims have turned to extremism. Quilliam have no answer to this because they are not in control of UK foreign policy, America is.

 

Majid Nawaz has seen this as a good career move for himself and that is all he's interested in. He wont be achieving anything in the KPK region of Pakistan while American drones are dropping bombs on their heads and occupying their Pashtun brethrin across the border in Afghanistan. The Taliban will stop fighting as soon as America and its allies leave their homeland and they've said it many times. The Taliban are the people of that land they're not going anywhere Hakimullah Masud was ready to talk peace with the Pakistani government and America assassinates him before peace talks could commence despite giving assurances to the Pakistani government that they would not do so. This shows clearly that America is not interested in peace in that part of the Muslim world or any other part. Just look at their blind support for Israeli attrocities and Middle Eastern dictators. After 9/11 there was a protest in America and American women were holding up placards saying America if you want to stop terrorism stop terrorising. I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

I have read the Quran and let me remind you that during the peak of the Islamic empire when the coloniol west had little influence over the Muslim world it was at its most peaceful and progressive.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 01:22 ----------

 

 

Of course it is, Palestine has been occupied for over sixty years and yet the Palestinians only resorted to suicide bombings about twenty years ago. It was Hindus who first started using suicide bombing in Sri Lanka. If you seriously think people blow themselves up because the Quran tells them to then not only have you not read the Quran but you have no understanding of war. Suicide bombing is used because gorilla fighters do not have the weaponry available to them that rich powerful governments do. America, Israel ect use planes and drones to blow up civilians whereas gorilla fighters use themselves. Before you say America doesn't target civilians, yes it does, America has bombed civilian areas in Japan, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen.

 

The Danish cartoon reaction was on the back of western bombing and occupation in the Muslim world the timing of the cartoon was a fnal slap in the face. The UN is a joke that is used and controlled by the five permanent members of the security council. It should be called UI United Imperialism.

 

It simply is a case of if you want to stop terrorism then stop terrorising.

 

Your history is very selective.

 

Israel isn't built on occupied land, it is build on reclaimed land.

 

The Ottoman empire was the greatest Islamic empire the world as ever seen, it was build on conquest and violence, your peace wasn't peace, it was submission, the people of these occupied lands either submitted to Islam or died.

The end of the Ottoman empire came about when they joined forces with Nazism, another evil ideology which was mirrored on Islam. The Ottoman empire was divided, with Muslims getting over 90%.

[Kaimani]

anything and anyone that does anything to try and make the situation better is a good thing in my book. of course, it's the definition of 'better' that tend to mess things up. those who call for 'go back' have the same aim for 'better' as those who call for hugs and songs.

but, for my two cents i think they're doing the right thing. quilliam, i mean

[Bounce]

I thought you denied that the Muslim world did extreme reactions.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7119760&postcount=818

 

Loads of post from you denying 7/7 was caused by Muslim extremists.

 

The Muslim world doesn't do extreme reactions individuals do.

 

Those posts are on threads discussing who was behind 7/7 and I wouldn't call it denial I would call it analysing the evidence for the official account of 7/7. I have never denied that extremists exist within the Muslim community in Britain or any other part of the Muslim world. The extremists have found a lot of new recruits over the last 13 years thanks to the foreign policy of America and its allies towards the Muslim world and the utter silence of the regimes in the Muslim world on this issue. What else would you expect from regimes who were put into power by Britain and France during the last century. This is why extremism takes hold.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 17:45 ----------

 

I think what you're saying is.

 

1 You're British, when it suits you.

2. You don't want an end to terrorism, you feel it is justified.

3. You seem to be confused about the Koran. Its a contradiction in terms to say that the Muslim world was peaceful during the height of their empire. They'd obviously conquered, killed and enslaved thousands to have achieved this empire. There would be peace. Its a biy like saying the British were peaceful at the height of their empire.

 

You obviously can't read then.

 

Where have I stated that I'm British when it suits me?

 

Where have I said I don't want an end to terrorism because it's justified?

 

In what way am I confused about the Quran? It was the crusades coming from Europe that were killing and enslaving in the Middle East not Muslims. When Salahudin Ayubi kicked the crusades out of the Middle East the Muslims, Jews and Christians of the Middle East lived together as neighbours. Many western historians and scholars have acknowledged this but you seem in denial.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 18:20 ----------

 

Its a chicken and egg situation, one Islamic country invades another Islamic country, or the Islamic leaders of a country kill their own people, the West steps in to bring the conflict to an end and you blame the West. We can clearly see which group you support.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 07:12 ----------

 

 

Your history is very selective.

 

Israel isn't built on occupied land, it is build on reclaimed land.

 

The Ottoman empire was the greatest Islamic empire the world as ever seen, it was build on conquest and violence, your peace wasn't peace, it was submission, the people of these occupied lands either submitted to Islam or died.

The end of the Ottoman empire came about when they joined forces with Nazism, another evil ideology which was mirrored on Islam. The Ottoman empire was divided, with Muslims getting over 90%.

 

How very Ironic.

 

Reclaimed land? So you believe God promised the land to the Jews therefore they can kick the people who have been there for two thousand years out of their houses of their own land massacre them and throw them in refugee camps? Most Israelis are of European descent they were never on that land. So if you believe its reclaimed land based on a Zionist Extremist ideology then you have a cheek coming here and talking about Muslim extremism.

 

I know the history of the Ottoman Empire I don't need a history lesson from you. Clearly you have left out the part of history where Britain forced the Ottoman Empire to ally itself with Germany. Also leaving out the fact that Britain and France carved up the entire Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire for themselves. Which is why the Middle East is full of false nations between people who have the same religion culture and language. The regimes in the Middle East were put there by Britain and France and later Israel put there by Britain. Where Britain and France left of the new American Empire continued. So its quite clear that without western interference the Muslim world would be peaceful and has been peaceful when in Muslim. The Ottoman Empire did conquer lands but to say everyone had to submit to Islam or die is a total lie. The non Muslims living under the Ottoman Empire had to a tax called the Jizya for their security under the state. This tax was less than the Zakah tax for Muslims. So actually non Muslims had to pay less tax under the Ottoman state.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2013 at 18:39 ----------

 

Its a chicken and egg situation, one Islamic country invades another Islamic country, or the Islamic leaders of a country kill their own people, the West steps in to bring the conflict to an end and you blame the West. We can clearly see which group you support.

 

So which country was Iraq invading in 2003 when the west stepped in to terrorise? Which country was Afghanistan invading? The only people I can see invading Muslim countries are the West and Israel. Which Islamic leaders of which Islamic countries? I am guessing you are referring to Syria and yet you try to give me a lesson on history. The Alawis were put into power by the French, most of the population of Syria are Suni Muslims. So Asad regime can hardly be classed as Muslim leaders killing their own people. I don't support any group I support peace where as you support western imperialism which can and never will bring about peace. I'm opposed to blowing up innocent civilians your opposed to it if Muslims are doing it, but if America is doing it with planes and drones then that is fine and therein lies the problem. Which is why Quilliam wont be successful and neither will we achieve peace. Peace will only be achieved when western nations change their foreign policy towards the Muslim world to one based on justice and fairness.

[Lackluster]

You obviously can't read then.

 

Where have I stated that I'm British when it suits me?

 

Where have I said I don't want an end to terrorism because it's justified?

 

In what way am I confused about the Quran?

 

To save me the trouble of answering that, just read your posting history, sit down and then honestly evaluate it.

[angos]

 

In what way am I confused about the Quran? It was the crusades coming from Europe that were killing and enslaving in the Middle East not Muslims. When Salahudin Ayubi kicked the crusades out of the Middle East the Muslims, Jews and Christians of the Middle East lived together as neighbours. Many western historians and scholars have acknowledged this but you seem in denial.

No they didn't, the Jews and Christian that weren't slaughtered by Muslims submitted to the laws of Islam.

 

 

 

How very Ironic.

 

Reclaimed land? So you believe God promised the land to the Jews therefore they can kick the people who have been there for two thousand years out of their houses of their own land massacre them and throw them in refugee camps?

No, but Jews and Christians occupied the land before Muslims.

 

 

Most Israelis are of European descent they were never on that land. So if you believe its reclaimed land based on a Zionist Extremist ideology then you have a cheek coming here and talking about Muslim extremism.

 

The vast majority of Israelis were born in Israel and not Europe. There were Jews in Israel when it was occupied by the Ottomans, The Ottomans joins the Nazis and lost, the Jewish people were given a very small part of the Ottoman empire as their homeland and Muslims were allowed to continue their occupation of the remainder. The Jews of Israel have every right to invite other Jews to live in Israel. Muslims are spreading round the world and you think Jews should give up a small piece of land for Muslims.

 

 

 

 

 

I know the history of the Ottoman Empire I don't need a history lesson from you.

Keep posting rubbish and I will keep trying to educate you.

 

 

Clearly you have left out the part of history where Britain forced the Ottoman Empire to ally itself with Germany. Also leaving out the fact that Britain and France carved up the entire Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire for themselves. Which is why the Middle East is full of false nations between people who have the same religion culture and language. The regimes in the Middle East were put there by Britain and France and later Israel put there by Britain. Where Britain and France left of the new American Empire continued. So its quite clear that without western interference the Muslim world would be peaceful and has been peaceful when in Muslim. The Ottoman Empire did conquer lands but to say everyone had to submit to Islam or die is a total lie. The non Muslims living under the Ottoman Empire had to a tax called the Jizya for their security under the state. This tax was less than the Zakah tax for Muslims. So actually non Muslims had to pay less tax under the Ottoman state.

 

Without Western intervention, Isalam would have conquered more of the world. And all non Muslims had to submit to the laws of Islam or die.

 

Non-Muslims in parts of the empire had to hand over some of their children as a tax under the devshirme ('gathering') system introduced in the 14th century. Conquered Christian communities, especially in the Balkans, had to surrender twenty percent of their male children to the state.

 

To the horror of their parents, and Western commentators, these children were converted to Islam and served as slaves.

 

 

 

So which country was Iraq invading in 2003 when the west stepped in to terrorise?

Lets not forget that Iraq had already invaded kuwait, Saddam Hussein had already gassed some of his people.

 

 

 

Which country was Afghanistan invading? The only people I can see invading Muslim countries are the West and Israel.

In some cases it is to defend Muslims from murderous dictators. In other cases it is retaliation to attacks orchestrated by Muslims hiding in these countries.

 

 

Which Islamic leaders of which Islamic countries?

 

Most of them.

 

 

I don't support any group I support peace

No you don't, you ignore atrocities carried out by Muslims, which in many cases are carried out against other Muslims.

 

 

Where as you support western imperialism which can and never will bring about peace.

Do I?

 

 

I'm opposed to blowing up innocent civilians

But only when it is the West doing the killing. You appear to support it or just ignore it if it is done by Muslims.

 

your opposed to it if Muslims are doing it,

Yes I am

 

 

but if America is doing it with planes and drones then that is fine and therein lies the problem.

Its a necessary consequence of violence committed by Muslims, peace will only come when all Muslims want peace.

 

 

Which is why Quilliam wont be successful and neither will we achieve peace.

Quilliam is a good thing but I do agree it won't change the minds of many Muslims, so won't bring about peace.

 

 

Peace will only be achieved when western nations change their foreign policy towards the Muslim world to one based on justice and fairness.

 

Peace will never be achieved, no matter what the West do.