UK Muslims targeted for speaking out about terror

[Nonek]

I'd just like to add, we're still smug.

[Tsuga C]

And speaking of speaking of Islam...

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Yes. But first we need to purge 'merikan fear of genitals.

 

Edit: For this is the week of Facebook beheadings = OK. But no nipples.

 

I'm easily one of the most American-friendly foreigners on this forum. I feel the need to thump my heart when I hear the Star Spangled Banner. I lived there once. But, Jesus, this attitude to sex and nudity boils my piss.

I wouldn't say most of us are that uptight, just an incredibly uptight group that has time to protest bull****.

 

I'd just like to add, we're still smug.

Isn't that essential to being English?

Edited October 25, 2013 by KaineParker

[ManifestedISO]

This ****ing language filter. Peni5, really?

 

As for Phag... it's only in Merika where it's a slur against gay people. Puh-leez. Phag-end. Look it up.

 

****.

 

No worries, we knew what you meant. It's the least-offensive euphemistic allusion in this thread, anyway. Although it rhymes much too much with Bag End, of Hobbiton. Extended Edition, next month! Hell yes! Wait, what thread is this ... fantasy and fiction, right.  

[Azrayel]

 

I hear deportation works wonders. The poor dears may be mistreated in their own countries though.

 

I don't think one can describe second generation or third generation Englishers of being capable of deportation to anyone other than England. Although now I think of it, I suppose we could legally just send them to the Orkneys. They can try causing trouble up there.

 

My dear Red Blooded Britain,

 

this is what Australia was made for!

 

Tally ho I say, tally ho.

[Malcador]

A fair point, sweetie, but easily over half the people on this forum aren't. And peni5 is an anatomical reality, not a swear word.

 

Of all the US game company forums I've haunted, this is the only one where Americans were outnumbered.

So what if they aren't ? Doesn't really have much bearing on what they decided to roll with. Is what it is, deal with it if you can.

[licketysplit]

And speaking of speaking of Islam...

 

Checked out their directive, found this gem.

 

• Protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilizations and religions.

 

So in other words: bomb first, ask questions later.

[Hurlshort]

Combating defamation doesn't mean bombing people.    

 

As a teacher I combat ignorance.

 

We have enough extremist groups without making boogeyman out of the groups that condemn terrorism. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

As a teacher I combat ignorance.

[licketysplit]

Combating defamation doesn't mean bombing people.  

 

As a teacher I combat ignorance.

 

We have enough extremist groups without making boogeyman out of the groups that condemn terrorism. 

That wasn't meant to be taken literally, I was highlighting the language they used. But it's a moot point until Muslims can agree on the 'true' image of Islam as well as who should be the collective voice. That should keep them busy for another thousand years.

Edited October 25, 2013 by licketysplit

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Yeah, Christians sure agree on the true image of Christianity, just look at how well Mormons are received by Southern Baptists!

 

God forbid we assume that some people may have no interest in Jihad because a group that follows their religion does have that desire.

[licketysplit]

Yeah, Christians sure agree on the true image of Christianity, just look at how well Mormons are received by Southern Baptists!

 

 

 

Religion.

 

You keep assuming I'm coming from an extreme right wing stance when I'm not. I'm against dogma and untruths that are inherent in all three Abrahamic faiths. Why do Muslims feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Islam anyway? One would think an omnipotent being could take a little criticism. Of course what that statement implies is that any vocal opponents of their faith will be met with active opposition. A stance not compatible with western democratic values.  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Yeah, Christians sure agree on the true image of Christianity, just look at how well Mormons are received by Southern Baptists!

 

Religion.

 

You keep assuming I'm coming from an extreme right wing stance when I'm not. I'm against dogma and untruths that are inherent in all three Abrahamic faiths. Why do Muslims feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Islam anyway? One would think an omnipotent being could take a little criticism. Of course what that statement implies is that any vocal opponents of their faith will be met with active opposition. A stance not compatible with western democratic values.

 

That is true of all religions, so why single out Islam? Why do Christians feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Christianity anyway? Why do Jews feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Judaism anyway? I assume the answer is something along the lines of "because our faith is important to us and we find it insulting to see it dragged through the mud".

 

Oh and spoiler, I'm an Agnostic.

Edited October 25, 2013 by KaineParker

[licketysplit]

 

 

Yeah, Christians sure agree on the true image of Christianity, just look at how well Mormons are received by Southern Baptists!

 

Religion.

 

You keep assuming I'm coming from an extreme right wing stance when I'm not. I'm against dogma and untruths that are inherent in all three Abrahamic faiths. Why do Muslims feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Islam anyway? One would think an omnipotent being could take a little criticism. Of course what that statement implies is that any vocal opponents of their faith will be met with active opposition. A stance not compatible with western democratic values.

 

That is true of all religions, so why single out Islam? Why do Christians feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Christianity anyway? Why do Jews feel the need to protect and defend the true image of Judaism anyway? I assume the answer is something along the lines of "because our faith is important to us and we find it insulting to see it dragged through the mud".

 

Oh and spoiler, I'm an Agnostic.

 

 

Because the thread is about Islam. And right now Islam is the religion that needs to be scrutinized and questioned the most, given the political agendas Muslims around the globe are willing to lump into their faith. Not to mention the methods employed to achieve their goals. 

 

As for having one's faith dragged through mud, that comes with the territory in a democracy. And rightly so.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Because the thread is about Islam.

Yes the thread is about Islam, specifically about Muslims speaking out against using Islam as an excuse for violence. I don't see why the majority of a people should be scrutinized for the actions of a few. Caucasians shouldn't be monitored more heavily for insanity and stockpiling arms because a few individuals decided to go on killing sprees.

 

And right now Islam is the religion that needs to be scrutinized and questioned the most, given the political agendas Muslims around the globe are willing to lump into their faith. Not to mention the methods employed to achieve their goals.

What about Judaism? Israel is practically running an apartheid state, guess what they use an excuse? I don't see you clamoring for Jews to condemn the actions of Israel. Would you argue that creating laws designed to oppress people is a decent method?

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

 

What about Judaism?

 

I haven't noticed Jews bombing the London Underground recently.

 

 

 

 

Israel is practically running an apartheid state

 

Muslims are allowed to vote in Israel and are represented in the Knesset. Wow, you really have swallowed the pill on this one KP.

 

 

 

I don't see you clamoring for Jews to condemn the actions of Israel.

 

There are plenty of anti-Zionist Jews, both Orthodox and Liberal. Funny thing is, they don't set car bombs under each other.

 

 

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I haven't noticed Jews bombing the London Underground recently.

Jews have carried out slightly more acts of terrorism than Muslims(who are just ahead of the Communists) in the US actually, while Latinos have carried out the most. Keeping Hispanics, Jews, and Extreme Left-Wing groups under surveillance would statically detect more terrorist attacks than monitoring Muslims, should we do that?

 

Muslims are allowed to vote in Israel and are represented in the Knesset. Wow, you really have swallowed the pill on this one KP.

Yet they can't form political parties that don't recognize Israel as a Jewish state, there is unequal funding for Palestinian Israeli education and other services despite paying the same amount of taxes, and less constitutional rights for non-Jews(apparently religion is marked on ID, which must be carried at all times).

 

About 240 years ago a certain group had similar representation, and I don't think they were very fond of it. Care to guess how that turned out?

 

There are plenty of anti-Zionist Jews, both Orthodox and Liberal. Funny thing is, they don't set car bombs under each other.

Funny thing is, the vast majority of Muslims don't seem to do that either. Scrutinizing Muslims for because of the actions of a few is like scrutinizing small-government conservatives because of Timothy McVeigh.

Edited October 25, 2013 by KaineParker

[Monte Carlo]

Sorry, but the whole of the middle east is riven with Sectarian murder. You are, sadly, talking out of your hat. Shias, Sunnis and Alawites are dying in their thousands every day, in Syria and Iraq, funded by Saudi / Wahhabi petro-dollars.

 

The idea there is any sort of parity with Judaism is risible.

[Walsingham]

 

And speaking of speaking of Islam...

 

Checked out their directive, found this gem.

 

• Protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilizations and religions.

 

So in other words: bomb first, ask questions later.

 

 

"Encourage dialogue"

 

If I gave that directive to a subordinate and they built a bomb I'd be ...curious to say the least.

[Malcador]

It's like the C&C Generals intro says, great leaders solve their problems with words. Words like Tomahawk missile.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Sorry, but the whole of the middle east is riven with Sectarian murder. You are, sadly, talking out of your hat. Shias, Sunnis and Alawites are dying in their thousands every day, in Syria and Iraq, funded by Saudi / Wahhabi petro-dollars.

 

The idea there is any sort of parity with Judaism is risible.

Not Judaism, Israel; not parity, using religion as an excuse to do something unsavory. In case you misread it, the point was "Israel uses Judaism as an excuse to oppress Palestinians" not "Israel is just as bad as Al-Qaeda". If that upsets you too much, substitute "IRA" for Israel", "Roman Catholicism" for "Judaism" and "bombing public areas" for "to oppress Palestinians".

 

Now that we have that cleared up, why should Muslims be scrutinized more heavily than other groups, as licketysplit argues? Statistically they aren't the most likely to commit terrorist attacks(at least here in the US), the vast majority of Western Muslims seem peaceful enough(this thread is even about Muslims speaking out against terror), and that whole "innocent before being proven guilty" bit.

 

If you believe that Muslims should be scrutinized because they happen to share the same religion with violent lunatics, what about other groups? Since Jews have committed more acts of terrorism in the US than Muslims, we(the US) would statistically discover more terror plots of Jews were monitored than Muslims. Would it be OK for the US to monitor and scrutinize Jews, or more prudently Latinos, because a few(relative to the general population) individuals from those groups have committed acts of terror in the name of their respective group?

 

"Encourage dialogue"

 

If I gave that directive to a subordinate and they built a bomb I'd be ...curious to say the least.

I suppose one having a bomb could be a way to encourage dialogue, not the positive kind however.

Edited October 25, 2013 by KaineParker

[BruceVC]

Sorry, but the whole of the middle east is riven with Sectarian murder. You are, sadly, talking out of your hat. Shias, Sunnis and Alawites are dying in their thousands every day, in Syria and Iraq, funded by Saudi / Wahhabi petro-dollars.

 

The idea there is any sort of parity with Judaism is risible.

 

Sorry Monte but you are misinformed. The Middle East is very violent at the moment not because Islam is inherently a violent religion, though some people interpret it like that, but because the region is going through the most profound political and social transformation in its history. This was started by the Arab Spring and it will take time. But its an important transition that took Western countries hundreds of years to get to before they became the stable Democracies they are today  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Sorry Monte but you are misinformed. The Middle East is very violent at the moment not because Islam is inherently a violent religion, though some people interpret it like that, but because the region is going through the most profound political and social transformation in its history. This was started by the Arab Spring and it will take time. But its an important transition that took Western countries hundreds of years to get to before they became the stable Democracies they are today  

I would argue that lack of education and lack of separation between Church and State is what contributes most to the violence in the region. Oh and scarce water and the high heat as well.

[Monte Carlo]

Guys, I'll leave you to swim about in your kool-aid paddling pool.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Guys, I'll leave you to swim about in your kool-aid paddling pool.

Enjoy having that schlong planted firmly in your ass.