The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Stricter laws against "Islamist extremist ideology" in UK

Scroll to see replies

Original post by rockrunride
Would hate to see Westminster Abbey go for the sake of equality.


I'll assume it was said in jest, but this mentality speaks volumes.

Concerns about Islam are met, by Muslims, "ordinary peace-loving ones" or otherwise, with whataboutery regarding groups who are opposed to Islam's expansion in the UK. These groups do not exist in a vacuum, they exist solely because Islam and its adherents have been imported to the UK on a mass scale without the sanction of the British people. In seeking to silence groups who criticise this, on grounds of "Islamophobia" or other made up words, you are effectively saying that Britain must "submit" to the will of Islam.
Original post by thesabbath
I think a controlled demolition would be more reasonable.


OK. I assume you want to blow up churches too? Considering that we're not a Christian country ie: our laws are secular

And if you make the argument that yes we are a Christian country, then I assume you also want to blow up temples, synagogues etc... Or is your stance on this a hypocritical one?
Original post by thesabbath
I'll assume it was said in jest, but this mentality speaks volumes.

Concerns about Islam are met, by Muslims, "ordinary peace-loving ones" or otherwise, with whataboutery regarding groups who are opposed to Islam's expansion in the UK. These groups do not exist in a vacuum, they exist solely because Islam and its adherents have been imported to the UK on a mass scale without the sanction of the British people. In seeking to silence groups who criticise this, on grounds of "Islamophobia" or other made up words, you are effectively saying that Britain must "submit" to the will of Islam.


I should remind you that Christianity was "imported to the UK on a mass scale without the sanction of the British people" I assume you also see that as being wrong too? Again, unless your stance on this is hypocritical?

And besides, the British gov't legislates on things that aren't always voted for. People elect them in to power, to represent them. The gov't make the laws, not the ordinary people.

And we've also "imported" many other religions to the UK too. The first mosque in England was made by an English guy. Just saying.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Quilliam

The first English Muslim was John Nelson in the 16th century. See:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/uk_1.shtml

And according to that link, the first mosque in the UK (Wales) was built in the year 1860
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by thesabbath
I'll assume it was said in jest, but this mentality speaks volumes.

Concerns about Islam are met, by Muslims, "ordinary peace-loving ones" or otherwise, with whataboutery regarding groups who are opposed to Islam's expansion in the UK. These groups do not exist in a vacuum, they exist solely because Islam and its adherents have been imported to the UK on a mass scale without the sanction of the British people. In seeking to silence groups who criticise this, on grounds of "Islamophobia" or other made up words, you are effectively saying that Britain must "submit" to the will of Islam.


My whataboutery > your advocacy of another Kristallnacht...

I can't accept your idea that I believe Britain must "submit to the will of Islam" because as a non-religious person I have no idea what that means. What is "the will of Islam?"

As a general on-topic point, I definitely believe more should be done to tackle and root out Islamic extremism as well as all other forms of extremism. Far-right politics is however no more acceptable on the premise that it putatively "protects Britain." If the government want to do this, they need to go all the way.
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 64
Avatar for whorace
whorace
2
Original post by Dez
The best way to increase the chances of an unpopular view being spread is to ban it. This will have exactly the opposite effect it intends, but of course this isn't actually about fighting extremism at all. All the Tories want to do is be able to spy on citizens with impunity, with the added bonus of appeasing the Daily Mail/Express crowd at the same time by making it about fighting Muslims.


I don't think so, this is a common argument but what exactly is the evidence for this viewpoint? Did Marxism become stronger under Senator McCarthy? Did democracy become stronger under the Soviets? Did capitalism become stronger under Mao? I think the reality is sensible ideas will always gain ground when there are difficult circumstances, Marxism appealed in China and Russia because it offered solutions to its social difficulties. Islamism will never gain underground currency because it is banned, because it will never appeal to the masses who have sense.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by The_Internet
OK. I assume you want to blow up churches too? Considering that we're not a Christian country ie: our laws are secular

And if you make the argument that yes we are a Christian country, then I assume you also want to blow up temples, synagogues etc... Or is your stance on this a hypocritical one?


Hypocritical in what sense? When was this Year Zero declared from which point England's history ceases to exist and in order to be "equal" either all (new mosques, old cathedrals, uncle Tom Cobley et al) or none should go? I would venture some time after 1961, when there were seven registered mosques in the country.

Besides, I don't regard other religions as an existential threat to the UK because they're not expansionist totalitarian political systems masquerading as religions. You, presumably, disagree.
Original post by The_Internet
I should remind you that Christianity was "imported to the UK on a mass scale without the sanction of the British people" I assume you also see that as being wrong too? Again, unless your stance on this is hypocritical?

And besides, the British gov't legislates on things that aren't always voted for. People elect them in to power, to represent them. The gov't make the laws, not the ordinary people.

And we've also "imported" many other religions to the UK too. The first mosque in England was made by an English guy. Just saying.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Quilliam

The first English Muslim was John Nelson in the 16th century. See:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/uk_1.shtml

And according to that link, the first mosque in the UK (Wales) was built in the year 1860


Whataboutery at it's finest

Do you actually have anything to say about the OP?
Original post by thesabbath
Hypocritical in what sense? When was this Year Zero declared from which point England's history ceases to exist and in order to be "equal" either all (new mosques, old cathedrals, uncle Tom Cobley et al) or none should go? I would venture some time after 1961, when there were seven registered mosques in the country.

Besides, I don't regard other religions as an existential threat to the UK because they're not expansionist totalitarian political systems masquerading as religions. You, presumably, disagree.


The fact that you want to blow up mosques, but not say other religious buildings. The fact that Christianity is most definitely an imported religion where no one really had a choice (Christianity spread through the Roman empire. Many nations had Christianity "imposed" on them) You could argue the same for Muslim countries via empire too, but it's Christianity where this has been worse ie: a religion was forced on to what are now several countries, so that one is deeply hypocritical. Unless of course you wish to return to the times of Paganism? or Atheism? As both of those are native to the UK

There are lots of sects of Islam. At one point, expansionism, and totalitarianism was excused because "God told me to" by Christians. Are you also really saying that Sufism is the same as say..Salafism? Religion is how you interpret it imo.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by PopaPork
Whataboutery at it's finest

Do you actually have anything to say about the OP?


OK fine it's "what aboutery" but I'm just exposing his very hypocritical stance on this, and was wondering what he thought about other religions.
Original post by rockrunride
My whataboutery > your advocacy of another Kristallnacht...


7/7 produced more broken glass (not to mention deaths) than I would be comfortable defending, but that's just me.

I can't accept your idea that I believe Britain must "submit to the will of Islam" because as a non-religious person I have no idea what that means. What is "the will of Islam?"


British democracy will be used as a weapon as demographics ensure constituencies turn majority Islamic.

The end game is a caliphate governed by Sharia principles. Will it still believe in equality for Muslims and non-Muslims alike?
Reply 70
Avatar for Dez
Dez
20
Original post by whorace
I don't think so, this is a common argument but what exactly is the evidence for this viewpoint? Did Marxism become stronger under Senator McCarthy? Did democracy become stronger under the Soviets? Did capitalism become stronger under Mao? I think the reality is sensible ideas will always gain ground when there are difficult circumstances, Marxism appealed in China and Russia because it offered solutions to its social difficulties. Islamism will never gain underground currency because it is banned, because it will never appeal to the masses who have sense.


There are plenty of examples of ideas spreading more after being banned, although perhaps not quite as lofty as those you mentioned. See the Streisand effect, the collapse of super-injunctions back in 2011, and so forth. And even if the masses aren't indoctrinated (which is unlikely), that doesn't mean the problem won't get any worse under this new regime.
Original post by The_Internet
OK fine it's "what aboutery" but I'm just exposing his very hypocritical stance on this, and was wondering what he thought about other religions.


When other religions produce sects that act the same as this they will be treated the same and if you had read the OP's link you would have know this isn't just about Islam but rather about extremism.

All you are doing is muddying the waters and playing whataboutery
About time - i , along with many TSRs have stated numerous times that governments need to take stronger action and laws to prevent islamists putting ideas into the head of easliy led and impressionable muslims and to do so should be made a clear criminal act, as well as far right neo nazi extremeists doing the same - these are the two biggest terrorist risk elements in western society today and its taken far too long for the west to directly address this.

the only way tho ppl will take this move seriously is if a few high profile islamists as well as as some more low level internet chat preachers start serving some time in jails ( maybe even in some foreign jails too, to deter ideology amoung others
Original post by The_Internet
The fact that you want to blow up mosques, but not say other religious buildings.


This is not a fact.

The fact that Christianity is most definitely an imported religion where no one really had a choice (Christianity spread through the Roman empire. Many nations had Christianity "imposed" on them) You could argue the same for Muslim countries via empire too, but it's Christianity where this has been worse ie: a religion was forced on to what are now several countries, so that one is deeply hypocritical. Unless of course you wish to return to the times of Paganism? or Atheism? As both of those are native to the UK


You're seriously using this as an argument? Christianity once upon a time arrived in the UK so we should sit back and spread our arse cheeks for Islam?

There are lots of sects of Islam. At one point, expansionism, and totalitarianism was excused because "God told me to" by Christians. Are you also really saying that Sufism is the same as say..Salafism? Religion is how you interpret it imo.


Always about the "Christians". If Muslims hate this nation's culture and history so much, they shouldn't have moved here.
Original post by PopaPork
When other religions produce sects that act the same as this they will be treated the same and if you had read the OP's link you would have know this isn't just about Islam but rather about extremism.

All you are doing is muddying the waters and playing whataboutery


So.. the lord resistance army isn't made up of Christians?
Is the IRA? Sure you could say "Oh but they're Irish" - they certainly used Catholicism to get people to join them
Is the KKK?
Is the Westboro baptist church?
And the abortion clinic murders?
And the fact that Bush went to war "because Gold told me to" ?
This is all of course recent history
The fact that a pastor called for all gays to be killed because of AIDS
etc.. etc.. etc...

There's also
The Spanish Inquisition
The Puritans

and a whole host of other things that people have used religion as an excuse for.

Maybe I AM playing "whataboutery" Again, Im showing the hypocrisy here...
Reply 75
Avatar for whorace
whorace
2
Freedom of speech is an interesting illusion. In certain societies, saying something that disagrees with the dominant ideology will get you in prison, here it will get you abused and marginalized. The reality is humans are ideological creatures, the dominant ideology of our times is liberalism, and the competing ideologies are nationalism, racism, Marxism, conservatism, and many others. All this law is doing is slightly modifying our position, its putting people into prison for being competitive instead of manipulating them psychologically.
Reply 76
Avatar for whorace
whorace
2
Original post by The_Internet
So.. the lord resistance army isn't made up of Christians?
Is the IRA? Sure you could say "Oh but they're Irish" - they certainly used Catholicism to get people to join them
Is the KKK?
Is the Westboro baptist church?
And the abortion clinic murders?
And the fact that Bush went to war "because Gold told me to" ?
This is all of course recent history
The fact that a pastor called for all gays to be killed because of AIDS
etc.. etc.. etc...

There's also
The Spanish Inquisition
The Puritans

and a whole host of other things that people have used religion as an excuse for.

Maybe I AM playing "whataboutery" Again, Im showing the hypocrisy here...


Freudian slip

You are right, all ideologies are naturally expansionist and when highly centralised they are usually oppressive. The difference is oppression is central to some ideologies.

Ideologies are a bit like genes we pass onto offspring for survival, they compete with others.
Original post by thesabbath
This is not a fact.


OK. It's YOUR opinion that we're talking about here. Please tell me which other religious buildings should be blown up and why? Also, why should mosques be blown up?


Original post by thesabbath

You're seriously using this as an argument? Christianity once upon a time arrived in the UK so we should sit back and spread our arse cheeks for Islam?

I'm pointing out your hypocrisy. You talk about x being imposed on you. You are the product of something being imposed on you - severa hundred years ago, admittedly.


Original post by thesabbath

Always about the "Christians". If Muslims hate this nation's culture and history so much, they shouldn't have moved here.


Are you trying to say that Muslims hate the UK? I know a few who are highly critical of the UK (And a lot of countries around the world; Muslim countries included), but does it mean they hate the UK? Is it also OK for say...non Muslims to hate the UK?
Original post by The_Internet
So.. the lord resistance army isn't made up of Christians?
Is the IRA? Sure you could say "Oh but they're Irish" - they certainly used Catholicism to get people to join them
Is the KKK?
Is the Westboro baptist church?
And the abortion clinic murders?
And the fact that Bush went to war "because Gold told me to" ?
This is all of course recent history
The fact that a pastor called for all gays to be killed because of AIDS
etc.. etc.. etc...

There's also
The Spanish Inquisition
The Puritans

and a whole host of other things that people have used religion as an excuse for.

Maybe I AM playing "whataboutery" Again, Im showing the hypocrisy here...



what about what about what about

I'd report you for being a troll and derailing thread if I though it would make any difference
Original post by The_Internet
Not sure how I feel about this tbh. On the one hand you have ********s like Anjem Choudhry and the like, but on the other hand the whole "freedom of expression" thing comes in to play. If it is in place, I hope it stops not only Anjem Choudhry, but also people like say...Paul Golding - otherwise that's just going to add to tensions tbh! It also makes the gov't look highly hypocritical when Britain First condoned blowing up mosques (with people inside)


Britain First is little more than an offshoot of neo nazi thinking of the past National Front and BNP - they woudl be as much of a target for incite to hate legislation as Islamists would .

as ive stated above many TSRers have pushed for this sort of change in attitude in western governments to recognise the damage islamists and the far right do in similar ways to normal society and a zero tolerance approach was needed to weed out the slime in both groups. what ive noticed however is tsr mods in past especially allowed one side of these two to post sometimes quite inciteful material , with impunity. perhaps with new laws or enforcement even the mods will be forced to prevent promotion of islamist agendas also.
(edited 8 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you