Radicals vs. moderates: British Muslims at crossroads

[Enigma]

DUBLIN, Ireland (CNN) -- At a recent debate over the battle for Islamic ideals in England, a British-born Muslim stood before the crowd and said Prophet Mohammed's message to nonbelievers is: "I come to slaughter all of you."
"We are the Muslims," said Omar Brooks, an extremist also known as Abu Izzadeen. "We drink the blood of the enemy, and we can face them anywhere. That is Islam and that is jihad."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe...iew/index.html

[tycho102]

Originally Posted by Enigma

"We are the Muslims," said Omar Brooks, an extremist also known as Abu Izzadeen. "We drink the blood of the enemy, and we can face them anywhere. That is Islam and that is jihad."

That's what is so funny. They're always calling the "blood libels" against the Jews, drawing cartoons and such, and then they turn right around and say stuff like that. Similar to when the Scientologists deride psychology, and turn right around with their 1940's lie-detectors and attempt to brainwash people into their banking scheme.

It's like having a 2 year old. "Momma! Michael's eating cookies!" And when Michael is hauled off to the gulag, Timmy's right up there in the cookie jar.

[Tchocky]

Dammit Trinity always get the best debates

[baggygreen]

SO why arent people like choudary and brooks locked up?

openly admitted to wanting to wage war against unbelievers (the west) which is their home...

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by baggygreen

SO why arent people like choudary and brooks locked up?

openly admitted to wanting to wage war against unbelievers (the west) which is their home...

They aren't anglo saxons.

[August]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

They aren't anglo saxons.

Do they have to be?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Enigma

DUBLIN, Ireland (CNN) -- At a recent debate over the battle for Islamic ideals in England, a British-born Muslim stood before the crowd and said Prophet Mohammed's message to nonbelievers is: "I come to slaughter all of you."
"We are the Muslims," said Omar Brooks, an extremist also known as Abu Izzadeen. "We drink the blood of the enemy, and we can face them anywhere. That is Islam and that is jihad."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe...iew/index.html

What exactly is the purpose of your post here?

How would you contrast this topic you started with your reponse to my post on another thread earlier this week:

Originally Posted by Enigma

I admit, I missed this earlier in the thread.....

So, America's enemy is Islam, eh? Right.

So America - and the non-Muslim world as a whole - is not Islam's enemy?

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

What exactly is the purpose of your post here?

I thought that the purpose of the post was fairly obvious, at least it was to me. It highlights and is an example of the growing fight and debate within Islam. It is an example of the war for hearts and minds between people like me on the one hand and those on the other side such as the repugnant extremist figures of Omar Brooks and Anjem Choudary. However, I'm sure Enigma will clarify.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Konovalov

It is an example of the war for hearts and minds between people like me on the one hand and those on the other side such as the repugnant extremist figures of Omar Brooks and Anjem Choudary.

Free H&M classes are being given in Iraq as we type.

BTW, you can watch the video here.

Regarding Brad's cynicism, it was picked up elsewhere: CNN's documentary on Muslims in Britain: "the effect is misleading and subtly racist — against white Britons".

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Enigma

DUBLIN, Ireland (CNN) -- At a recent debate over the battle for Islamic ideals in England, a British-born Muslim stood before the crowd and said Prophet Mohammed's message to nonbelievers is: "I come to slaughter all of you."

"Will you listen to me O Meccans? By him who holds my life in His hand I bring you slaughter."
- Muhammad, some of the earliest words spoken in Mecca, shortly after his first visit by "Gabriel", to people who rejected his claim to prophethood). "The Life of Mohamed", by A. Guillaume, page 131, quoting Islamic biographer of Mohamed Ibn Ishaq.

So where exactly are your heart and mind, Konovalov? What's inaccurate here? Gillaume's translation from Ibn Ishaq? Ibn Isaq? Or Mohamed?

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

"Will you listen to me O Meccans? By him who holds my life in His hand I bring you slaughter."
- Muhammad, some of the earliest words spoken in Mecca, shortly after his first visit by "Gabriel", to people who rejected his claim to prophethood). "The Life of Mohamed", by A. Guillaume, page 131, quoting Islamic biographer of Mohamed Ibn Ishaq.

So where exactly are your heart and mind, Konovalov? What's inaccurate here? Gillaume's translation from Ibn Ishaq? Ibn Isaq? Or Mohamed?

No offence but I am done debating at Subsim with you on this topic since long ago. In the past whenever I have sought to explain the context or historical timing of said Surah and Ayah I get no response and instead the goal posts are moved onto a new Chapter and verse or another Hadith. So excuse me if I don't bite on this one. My priorities are elsewhere and have been for some time.

[Skybird]

This article describes just one of many, many examples from Germany. These guys may be non-violant, however, their determination to impose their presence on people in areas where Islam is not present and has no ground, and is told by over 90% of the people that it is not wanted, is nothing less than stubborness on display that I nevertheless call aggressive to the most. Incidents like this take place throughout Germany, and not only with regard to this special community.

I would consider it reasonable and polite that if you go to a foreign place and people living there tell you they do not want you to found a foreign colony there, that then you move away and avoid that place if you are not one of them. This article is not about a community of local residents, but foreigners from far, far away. Bear that in mind. many of them even are no Germans by official criterions (papers).

It is also misleading if in this article, like often in German media, it is pointed out that this community demands vows from its members that they help to spread Islam by missionary work. This is a demand not unique, but very typical for Islam in general. Expansion, even against resistance, is obligatory in Islam, every muhammedan is demanded and ordered to do his share of helping to strengthen and spread Islam. So what these people are showing is not so much typical for their special community, but Islam in general.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...456751,00.html

If it goes on like this I could at least imagine that one day in this country temples and cultural centres will go up in flames again, like in the thirties. What was an act of injustice and barbarism back then, in the futurte could have more in common with an act of cultural self-defense, and resignation about politicians betraying their own people and their will. What should a guy like me do , then? Standing up against the violance - accepting to get overrun by isklam becasue of that, or not resisting the violance - as the only way to get rid of Islam? It's a moral dilemma, and I fdeel undecided, but slowly shifting to the latter, like so many people as well. Of course, no one will ask if it was self-defense then - we will be the bad boys again, the always-Nazi, and everybody will point fingers at us. In recent two or three years, people's minds have come to disagree more and more with official policies on issues touching Islam. Most people look down on Islam in disgust, and also: fear now. The fear is not so much about terror, but the set of "values" it represent, the ignorration for our cultural values and identity, it'S stubborness not to integrate, the threat to our constitutional order - and it'S proven immunity to adopt, to change and to modernize itself. If I would need to estimate, I would say that at least 4 out of 5 native Germans would like to see Islam getting out of germany, and Europe. German papers in the last year repeatedly showed polls indicatin also a 70-85% majpoirty of people opposing any further friendliness towards pro-Islamic agendas.

Our political leaders ignore that reality, and prefer to continue to sell us away. Bastards.

Of course, Islam does not care. Instead it sendsa spokesman saying that "he is resignated" about the stubborness of local residents not to like Islam and not wanting it. Never a question on why this is so! And always, always it never steps back, but uses all means possible to stay, no matter if wanted or not.

One does not need a Kalashnikov, or blow ob crowds or buildings, in order to qualify for a description of being aggressive.

I believe nobody has a right to go to a foreign place and demand from the local residents that from now on they have to accept my presence, no matter if they like me or not. He has a right to ask if he is welcomed - nothing more. And when the answer is No, he has to move away, period. Ignoring this is arrogant, and utmost aggressive. Even more so if I do not adopt to the local's standards, habits, and values. Which Islam, in it's truly Quranic understanding, does NOT.

Last autumn there was a Pakistani military band playing in the shadow of one of Muenster's churches in the city centre. It was traditional Pakistani military music, which in my ears only was noise, but this question of habit and taste is not the issue. A band of a foreign nation representing that nation's military, a nation that is hostile to us and fools us at the cost of our soldier's life in Afghanistan, tells us lies and betrays us on the Taliban matter...??? The issue is that they were playing beside the entrance to a Christian church, in a christian country. There was a huge cowd, and many shook their heads. There also were manny foreigners, by appearance also Pakistani. I approached one of them, asking why he is smiling (most Pakistani obviously liked what was happening). He said in broken German and English that this was true multiculturalism happening. I asked him that certainly we could expect a military band from a Western Christian country to answer the cultural favour and soon to play in the shadow of a mosque in Pakistan? He turned angry almost immediately. Why one should wish to do that?, he asked, and that that would be a challenge and an insult of Islam that is totally unacceptable. Andnthat he was a german, he said. I asked how ling he has been here. Seven years, he said. And still you even do not speak your hosting nation'S language? I asked. "You only have a piece of paper with a stamp on it, and more you never wanted to have." I said he sounded hypocritical. He said the offsprings of the crusaders should better keep their mouths shut. We both were angry now, and I angrily called him and his faith the worst pleague mankind and reason ever had to suffer from, and left, with him trying to stare little holes into my back, and angry calls in a foreign language. They will never be Germans, only stamp-and-paper-holders. They are colonists trying to make our place like the one where they came from. Which I see in compliance with Islam.

I want them out, and the constitution being changed to explicitly exclude Islam from being protected by the guarantee for free practicing of religion. Islam does not differ between politics and religion in the understanding of wetsern nations who have established that as a basic principle for our communities, and abuses this constitutional protection to drive a politcal agenda, demanding all resistance to be given up, for pushing a political agenda were part of it's religion. Our constitution is not equipped to deal with this kind of enemy - he simply outmaneuvres it.

[Abraham]

I agree with much of what you wrote in your earlier post, Skybird. With your anger about the arrogant attitude of the Pakistani 'German'. But your anger carries you too far.
Your mistake is that you are generalising and targetting all Muslims in a 'Them against Us'-structure.

The result is this:

Originally Posted by Skybird

...
I want them out, and the constitution being changed to explicitly exclude Islam from being protected by the guarantee for free practicing of religion...

...pure discrimination on the basis of religious affiliation!

According to my standards your opinion deprives you the right to criticise others who promote the same kind of discrimination.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Abraham

...pure discrimination on the basis of religious affiliation!

According to my standards your opinion deprives you the right to criticise others who promote the same kind of discrimination.

I understand what he is saying and I understand what you are saying.
The simple question is how do you tell the good from the bad? You can't.
You call it discrimination. Skybird calls it survival.
Realistically though Skybirds stand just drives Islam underground which would only worsen the situation and probably ignite a growth.

Your mistake is that you are generalizing and targeting all Muslims in a 'Them against Us'-structure.

That is what has already started isn't it? It will be more pronounced with time as fear overrides PC.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Abraham

...pure discrimination on the basis of religious affiliation!

Wrong. I talk of political affiliation! You don't get even the basis of my argument. You do not understand how far-leading consequences it has that Islam does not differ in the way the West does between religion, and politics, and sociology. It's conception of a social community does not compare to that of modern Western communities - in no way. In Islam, Islam is ALL.

And that leads to a conception of a worl to live in that is too alien, too radically diffrent from what the Wetsern mind would like to see as if it could accept that such a conception couold even exist. That's why people like you with the best of intentions try their best to ignore it or try to evade realising it. It cannot be what shall not be.

What you want is a critical relation to what you consider to be Islam - but only your own conception of it. And under no circmstances the "critical" in your relation shall be accepted to lead as far as open confrontation, and conflict. That would mean to fight. You/we/the West does not will any fight anymore. That way you make sure that you deal with something that your own set of mental tools of analysis, negotiation and reason can handle. You are not adressing the real thing, and you are not aware of that. You and the wstern society in general does not have the tools to deal with Islam on it's own terms. No wonder then that what you consider to be the virtues of Western culture of mind and reason - is perceived as the most weak and disgusting by Islam, a weakness that is to be exploited and increased - and that is what is happening. We all know that when it gets to the real deal, the West will not be willing to face an open confrontation. If Islams pressure only becomes strong enough, our institutions will bow to it, will fall to it, will surrender. In parts this is already happening inside nations, and on a bigger scale inside the administrative structures of the EU. Islam ism willing to push that far, knowing that we will shy away. It's the fourth attempt to make Europe it's own, and this time it will win it all. Thanks to our own naivety and self-perception of being so irresistable as a cultural system that nobody could resist to wish becoming like we are. And this arrogance is what will destroy us. And it will be a long-lasting darkness that follows.

You call the behavior of that man arrogant. But his attitude is not an exception, it is a rule. It has not been the first time I clashed with Muhammedans in public, and hopefully it will not be the last. I also had debates in privbate, or with colleagues. "Islam is better than your world, and it simply will outsit you" - this attitude is what I meet - by far - the most often. Of course, this will not make you think or worry. Like Blair is not worried that such a huge ammount of Muhammedans in Britain want the Sharia replacing the British law system, and even accept violance if it helps that cause.

You have choosen your stand very unwisely, as I see it. It reminds me of psychologists and sociologists, many of whom also think they are perfectly equipped to totally understand man, without limits, and know no limits themseves in their ability to help or to change a man's life and attitude and perception. I call it the "God-complex" of psychologists, or the "syndrom of omni-potential helpers". To think that one's own ability to deal well with the other knows no limits,a nd that one knows him better than he does know himself. - But truth is - we are not half as attractive for Islam as we believe, to motivate it to change itself. No, not even that much. Our only attractiveness lies in that we are the next prey.

And if the kindly friendly Muhammedan neighbour living in that house is aware of that or not, does not change the going of the great game a bit. In Germany in the past, most Germans were no Nazis. but still a majority of them ended up in direcly or indirectly helping the regime to survive and going on with it's political and military goals. Because many thought deeds were not necessary, that they were too weak anyway, and that it is enough not to like Hitler. See where it led to. I oppose fascism. And for that reason, I nessarily must oppose Muhammedanism and any other kind of religious or politcal totalitarianism as well. It is a contradiction in itself to oppose the one, and accept the other.