- Print Topic - Archive

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Awful. Must have been frightening in those packed crowds.

I'd have thought it would be reasonably easy to erect simple, elegant bollards around that pedestrian walkway that minimises the risk. I know you can't eradicate risk everywhere, but high profile areas like that.....

I don't think the acts are senseless Pete. Totally beyond the pale but not senseless. They're a massive force multiplier. Turning everyday objects into terror weapons. And the apparent randomness of the acts cause fear out of all proportion.

They are senseless in the meaning that they will not win or prove anything mate,

Its just a waste of life that will not change anything,

We refuse to be give in to these cowards.

Latest numbers are over 100 injured,

Quoted from grimsby pete

They are senseless in the meaning that they will not win or prove anything mate,

Its just a waste of life that will not change anything,

We refuse to be give in to these cowards.

You say that Pete but I wouldn't take my young children to any of the big city's in Western Europe, its thanks to our gutless appeasing leaders that we are now suffering cultural suicide, just look at London which now resembles a third world big City hell hole with imported acid attacks on the streets being the norm.

Actually, we taught the Empire everything it needed to know about acid attacks. The Victorians were quite keen on chucking acid on people too, or so it appears:

https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21725328-what-used-be-weapon-victorian-ladies-has-become-popular-among-londons-gangs-acid-attacks

It was criminals doing it back then and it's criminals doing it now.

Anyway, back to Barcelona and yep, another case (I presume), of Islamist terrorism. Islamist, not Muslim. It's based on a religion but it's fundamentally a political stance so it has little to do with, say, the folks cooking curries in Cleethorpes marketplace at the moment who are of the Muslim persuasion. You'd be pretty daft to try and relate the hundreds of millions of law-abiding Muslims leaving peacefully in Western countries to terrorist atrocities such as this.

Quoted from Maringer

Actually, we taught the Empire everything it needed to know about acid attacks. The Victorians were quite keen on chucking acid on people too, or so it appears:

https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21725328-what-used-be-weapon-victorian-ladies-has-become-popular-among-londons-gangs-acid-attacks

It was criminals doing it back then and it's criminals doing it now.

Anyway, back to Barcelona and yep, another case (I presume), of Islamist terrorism. Islamist, not Muslim. It's based on a religion but it's fundamentally a political stance so it has little to do with, say, the folks cooking curries in Cleethorpes marketplace at the moment who are of the Muslim persuasion. You'd be pretty daft to try and relate the hundreds of millions of law-abiding Muslims leaving peacefully in Western countries to terrorist atrocities such as this.

So you are trying to compare Victorian women to the imported barbarians on the streets of London today? What a clown we have had decades in modern 20th century Britain where acid attacks where not even a minor problem, where as in south east Asia it's the norm! But now after mass immigration thats turned London into a multicultural shithole, a place in England that doesnt even look English anymore we now have acid attacks on an epidemic scale.

They are Muslim you absolute bafoon they identify as Muslim and carry out these attacks in the footsteps of their warlord, its appeasers like you and your mate Corbyn who care more about feelings of the Muslims then the Muslim (terrorist) victims, denying the truth will only prolong the agony how long before the next one?

Quoted from Grim74

You say that Pete but I wouldn't take my young children to any of the big city's in Western Europe, its thanks to our gutless appeasing leaders that we are now suffering cultural suicide, just look at London which now resembles a third world big City hell hole with imported acid attacks on the streets being the norm.

Nope, London's great. Too expensive but it's still a great place. You clearly pay too much attention to what Katie Hopkins has to say. The weird thing is, out all the Brits who say what a shithole London is, none of them seem to live here.

Quoted from mariner91

Nope, London's great. Too expensive but it's still a great place. You clearly pay too much attention to what Katie Hopkins has to say. The weird thing is, out all the Brits who say what a shithole London is, none of them seem to live here.

You was doing so well there mariner but you kind of contradicted yourself at the end 😆
The sad thing is that the Brits (let's say the mainly white indigenous for clarity) are now in the decreasing minority how can this be good?

Quoted from Grim74

You was doing so well there mariner but you kind of contradicted yourself at the end 😆
The sad thing is that the Brits (let's say the mainly white indigenous for clarity) are now in the decreasing minority how can this be good?

Ah there we go, you're not a Brit unless you're white.

Everyone change your profile picture quick. You might prevent another one.

Quoted from mariner91

Ah there we go, you're not a Brit unless you're white.

Quoted from mariner91

The weird thing is, out all the Brits who say what a shithole London is, none of them seem to live here.

When this thought entered your mind did you honestly And I mean honestly picture all the black and Asian Brits who say London is a Shithole 🤔

We have already got 2 resident virtue signallers on here thought you was better than that.

Quoted from Grim74

When this thought entered your mind did you honestly And I mean honestly picture all the black and Asian Brits who say London is a Shithole 🤔

We have already got 2 resident virtue signallers on here thought you was better than that.

What are you even on about? I don't see being white as a prerequisite for being British. I know plenty of people who are black or Asian or mixed race who have lived in London their whole lives. And no, I don't know any that say London is a shithole. Like anywhere, there are bad parts but there's bad parts of Paris and bad parts of Rome. There are certainly bad parts of Grimsby and Clee.

Quoted from mariner91

I don't see being white as a prerequisite for being British.

Agree with you there.

Quoted Text

I know plenty of people who are black or Asian or mixed race who have lived in London their whole lives. And no, I don't know any that say London is a shithole. Like anywhere, there are bad parts but there's bad parts of Paris and bad parts of Rome. There are certainly bad parts of Grimsby and Clee.

you've drifted slightly of topic there mariner, I was making the point that major City's especially London that have suffered from enforced mass immingration from 3rd world country's, who bring with them their cultures that are just not compatible with a modern 21st century civilised City.

There was a time I would say London is the greatest city in the world but not anymore, I still love Central London for the history and architecture but the danger will stop me ever taking the kids, venture out from the centre and it can be truly depressing.

I've read article on places like China warning its citizens about the dangers of travelling to London but the latest one I've recently seen was SaudiaArabia!!! Let that sink in..... says it all really.

Quoted from Grim74

Agree with you there.

you've drifted slightly of topic there mariner, I was making the point that major City's especially London that have suffered from enforced mass immingration from 3rd world country's, who bring with them their cultures that are just not compatible with a modern 21st century civilised City.

There was a time I would say London is the greatest city in the world but not anymore, I still love Central London for the history and architecture but the danger will stop me ever taking the kids, venture out from the centre and it can be truly depressing.

I've read article on places like China warning its citizens about the dangers of travelling to London but the latest one I've recently seen was SaudiaArabia!!! Let that sink in..... says it all really.

All cities are dangerous. Like anywhere with a big population there will be people to avoid but generally you are safe if you don't do stupid things like walking down dark alleys on your own at night. I've lived in Elephant and Castle for three years and I'm now in London Bridge and, thankfully, I've not had any trouble. Of course there have been terrorist attacks recently but your chances of being caught up in one, let alone injured or killed is so, so remote.

Even away from the centre there are great areas like Brixton and Clapham. There are bad areas but there are bad areas in every great city on earth.

I live with a Muslim lad who's family are Pakistani of origin, he's a third generation immigrant. He's a really nice lad and we get on really well, no problems with different cultures or backgrounds. I also live with a Chinese lad, who's second generation immigrant. Again, he's ace and as British as I am. Only the extreme versions of the cultures from immigration causes problems.

Quoted from Grim74

They are Muslim you absolute bafoon they identify as Muslim and carry out these attacks in the footsteps of their warlord, its appeasers like you and your mate Corbyn who care more about feelings of the Muslims then the Muslim (terrorist) victims, denying the truth will only prolong the agony how long before the next one?

The word you are looking for is buffoon, you buffoon. Anyway, I can only imagine you misunderstood what I posted, even though it seemed pretty clear to me. The vast majority of Muslims would be as appalled by these Islamist terrorist attacks on civilians as the rest of us and yes, such attacks do go against Islamic teaching. Perhaps the use of 'Islamist' was confusing - replace with fundamentalist, if you prefer.

As with all religions (which are all flipping stupid, if you ask me), if you want to do something illegal/sinful, you can always misread or ignore whichever part of the teachings you desire. How many self-professed Christians/Jews have started wars by ignoring "Thou shalt not kill", for example?

By your logic, you must obviously have been a supporter of the invasion of Iraq by the Bush/Blair coalition. After all, it was carried out by the self-professed Christian leaders of Christian nations including your own. The Islamist/Fundamentalist bunch claim this invasion and the other disastrous interventions by the West are 'Crusades' in an attempt to legitimise their own crimes. They are using the same faulty logic as you.

Quoted from mariner91

All cities are dangerous. Like anywhere with a big population there will be people to avoid but generally you are safe if you don't do stupid things like walking down dark alleys on your own at night. I've lived in Elephant and Castle for three years and I'm now in London Bridge and, thankfully, I've not had any trouble. Of course there have been terrorist attacks recently but your chances of being caught up in one, let alone injured or killed is so, so remote.

Even away from the centre there are great areas like Brixton and Clapham. There are bad areas but there are bad areas in every great city on earth.

I live with a Muslim lad who's family are Pakistani of origin, he's a third generation immigrant. He's a really nice lad and we get on really well, no problems with different cultures or backgrounds. I also live with a Chinese lad, who's second generation immigrant. Again, he's ace and as British as I am. Only the extreme versions of the cultures from immigration causes problems.

Not strictly true especially with regards to the city's that have jihadis living amongst us.

Islam is extreme its the religion of war and domination, I'd guess your Muslim friend is Muslim in name only like many so called passive or moderate muslims.

Quoted from Grim74

Not strictly true especially with regards to the city's that have jihadis living amongst us.

Islam is extreme its the religion of war and domination, I'd guess your Muslim friend is Muslim in name only like many so called passive or moderate muslims.

What's not strictly true? That you're unlikely to be caught up in a terrorist incident? How many people have been killed in terrorist attacks in the last five years? 15 (including a Muslim killed by a white chap). Have you any idea the millions of people that have been in London in that time? The chances of you being one of the unfortunate 15 out of the tens of millions of people who have been here is so incredibly slim.

The ones who are extreme are the ones who are Muslim in name only. The vast majority have no intention on committing atrocities or "dominating" us.

None of the Muslims i'm good friends with or work alongside have tried to murder me. Why is this?

Perhaps they haven't received the memo yet?

Quoted from Maringer

The word you are looking for is buffoon, you buffoon. Anyway, I can only imagine you misunderstood what I posted, even though it seemed pretty clear to me. The vast majority of Muslims would be as appalled by these Islamist terrorist attacks on civilians as the rest of us and yes, such attacks do go against Islamic teaching. Perhaps the use of 'Islamist' was confusing - replace with fundamentalist, if you prefer.

As with all religions (which are all flipping stupid, if you ask me), if you want to do something illegal/sinful, you can always misread or ignore whichever part of the teachings you desire. How many self-professed Christians/Jews have started wars by ignoring "Thou shalt not kill", for example?

By your logic, you must obviously have been a supporter of the invasion of Iraq by the Bush/Blair coalition. After all, it was carried out by the self-professed Christian leaders of Christian nations including your own. The Islamist/Fundamentalist bunch claim this invasion and the other disastrous interventions by the West are 'Crusades' in an attempt to legitimise their own crimes. They are using the same faulty logic as you.

Again where was the invasion before 9/11?

Quoted from mariner91

What's not strictly true? That you're unlikely to be caught up in a terrorist incident? How many people have been killed in terrorist attacks in the last five years? 15 (including a Muslim killed by a white chap). Have you any idea the millions of people that have been in London in that time? The chances of you being one of the unfortunate 15 out of the tens of millions of people who have been here is so incredibly slim.

The ones who are extreme are the ones who are Muslim in name only. The vast majority have no intention on committing atrocities or "dominating" us.

I was talking about your "all city's are dangerous" comment!

You sound like your "all just part of living in a big city" useless mayor, the chances maybe slim but someone will have to die when the next one happens let's hope it's not you eh!
In the meantime let's just carry on as if nothing has happened whilst the enemy whithin plot their next murdurous rampage.

There was a big well documented survey carried out last year that showed the majority of UK muslims want Sharia if that's not dominating then Jeremy Corbyn is an Anglophile.

Imagine posting regurgitations of Britain First and Kate Hopkins balderdash one minute and then saying you're not big and bwave enough to take your kids to big cities the next. N'awww.

Quoted from LH

Imagine posting regurgitations of Britain First and Kate Hopkins balderdash one minute and then saying you're not big and bwave enough to take your kids to big cities the next. N'awww.

Bwave alright bro! When you grow up And find a tramp to give you a kid then you might just understand a bit, nothing stops me from visiting anywhere fool unless it's a medieval hell hole.

In my opinion anyone who takes there kids to the tourist traps of Western Europe is running a risk of getting caught up in an attack that's just a fact! because our leaders fail to keep us safe now go back to listening to little Owen jones on LBC.

Quoted from Grim74

Bwave alright bro! When you grow up And find a tramp to give you a kid then you might just understand a bit, nothing stops me from visiting anywhere fool unless it's a medieval hell hole.

In my opinion anyone who takes there kids to the tourist traps of Western Europe is running a risk of getting caught up in an attack that's just a fact! because our leaders fail to keep us safe now go back to listening to little Owen jones on LBC.

Alright Adolf, calm down

It's more likely that you would die in a car crash (one in 645) than in a terrorist attack (one in 25M). The fact you're not willing to take your kids to places means they're winning.

Quoted from grimsby pete

They are senseless in the meaning that they will not win or prove anything mate,

Its just a waste of life that will not change anything,

We refuse to be give in to these cowards.

I wouldn't bet on it. IRA-Sinn Fein did alright. Don't get me wrong, we should go all out to win, but these campaigns are well calibrated to achieve their ends. Don't underestimate the enemy.

Quoted from Grim74

Agree with you there.

you've drifted slightly of topic there mariner, I was making the point that major City's especially London that have suffered from enforced mass immingration from 3rd world country's, who bring with them their cultures that are just not compatible with a modern 21st century civilised City.

There was a time I would say London is the greatest city in the world but not anymore, I still love Central London for the history and architecture but the danger will stop me ever taking the kids, venture out from the centre and it can be truly depressing.

I've read article on places like China warning its citizens about the dangers of travelling to London but the latest one I've recently seen was SaudiaArabia!!! Let that sink in..... says it all really.

Who was forced?

Quoted from Grim74

Again where was the invasion before 9/11?

Fook me. History didn't being in 2001. Don't know much about your own country do you. I thought you were supposed to be some kind of patriot.

Quoted from Grim74

Again where was the invasion before 9/11?

Well Dubya's Daddy bombed the living crap out of Iraq back in 1990 and a good chunk of the country was invaded then. They weren't daft enough to remove Saddam, probably having the intelligence to realise what a clusterfuck would be left behind. That was just a part of it, however.

The current jihadist shtick dates back to the Afghan war back in the 80s in which the Yanks armed and trained up lots of future terrorists (including many Saudis such as Bin Laden, of course) to defeat the Soviets. Following that, Bin Laden and co weren't happy with the continued interference by the west in affairs of Islamic countries and especially the US troops stationed in Saudi. I'd imagine the complete US support for Israel in everything they do was also important in stoking up the trouble. A good precis here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_Saudi_Arabia#Overview

Ultimately, a balls up all round. Law of Unintended Consequences and all that.

No idea how this can all be resolved in anything like the short term so we're going to have to get used to these sorts of attacks. Too many Islamic countries are in chaos (in general due to the West's 'assistance' over the years), no solution in sight for the Israel/Palestine issue, Syria a complete basketcase, ditto Libya.

Personally, I'd say the best option would be to develop our own energy sources (my preference would be advanced nukes) and just leave the likes of Saudi and other energy-rich Islamic nations to bicker amongst themselves rather than interfering endlessly. Might go some way to alleviating the jihadist problem, but it may be that the genie is just out of the bottle.

Quoted from Grim74

Bwave alright bro! When you grow up And find a tramp to give you a kid then you might just understand a bit, nothing stops me from visiting anywhere fool unless it's a medieval hell hole.

In my opinion anyone who takes there kids to the tourist traps of Western Europe is running a risk of getting caught up in an attack that's just a fact! because our leaders fail to keep us safe now go back to listening to little Owen jones on LBC.

The irony of one of the most backwards thinking posters on here calling London, one of the most progressive cities in the world, a medieval hell hole is hilarious.

Quoted from Grim74

I was talking about your "all city's are dangerous" comment!

You sound like your "all just part of living in a big city" useless mayor, the chances maybe slim but someone will have to die when the next one happens let's hope it's not you eh!
In the meantime let's just carry on as if nothing has happened whilst the enemy whithin plot their next murdurous rampage.

There was a big well documented survey carried out last year that showed the majority of UK muslims want Sharia if that's not dominating then Jeremy Corbyn is an Anglophile.

I don't know where you learned maths but a majority has to be over 50%. So according to this article: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/738852/British-Muslims-Sharia-Law-enforced-UK-Islam-poll 43% of British Muslims want some aspects of Sharia Law to replace some aspects of UK law. Of which only 16% said they strongly supported that view. But yeah, clearly a majority and they're wanting to dominate us.

Quoted from 1739

Alright Adolf, calm down

I'm no socialist.

Quoted from LH

It's more likely that you would die in a car crash (one in 645) than in a terrorist attack (one in 25M). The fact you're not willing to take your kids to places means they're winning.

Well yes they are already winning so much for enough is enough until we get leaders with a backbone this will be and Is now a regular occurrence.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Who was forced?

Enforced on us the British tax paying public, I don't remember ever being asked if we wanted open door uncontrolled mass immigration.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Fook me. History didn't being in 2001. Don't know much about your own country do you. I thought you were supposed to be some kind of patriot.

I think it's pretty obvious to even the most basic educated of people that I'm referring to our recent history i.e. In living memory, not much point in going back to the crusades now is there!

Quoted from Maringer

Well Dubya's Daddy bombed the living crap out of Iraq back in 1990 and a good chunk of the country was invaded then. They weren't daft enough to remove Saddam, probably having the intelligence to realise what a clusterfuck would be left behind. That was just a part of it, however.

Come on Maringer Iraq had already invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia! It was the coalition together in response to that, that drove them back into their hell hole whilst liberating the innocence, Jees give our forces some credit.

Quoted from mariner91

The irony of one of the most backwards thinking posters on here calling London, one of the most progressive cities in the world, a medieval hell hole is hilarious.

Again you have not been paying attention, I call London a shithole not a medieval hell hole, I was referring to places around the world (mainly the backward Muslim countries if I'm honest) the likes of Saudis Arabia etc...
Do keep up.

Quoted from mariner91

I don't know where you learned maths but a majority has to be over 50%. So according to this article: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/738852/British-Muslims-Sharia-Law-enforced-UK-Islam-poll 43% of British Muslims want some aspects of Sharia Law to replace some aspects of UK law. Of which only 16% said they strongly supported that view. But yeah, clearly a majority and they're wanting to dominate us.

You've excelled yourself on this thread mariner 😄

Let's do the maths together - 43% in favour
- 22% against
-35% don't know / unsure

Now then have a little think about it confer with your Chinese and Pakistani friends if you must, and then tell me which is the biggest majority share when you have the correct answer 🙄

Quoted from Grim74

You've excelled yourself on this thread mariner 😄

Let's do the maths together - 43% in favour
- 22% against
-35% don't know / unsure

Now then have a little think about it confer with your Chinese and Pakistani friends if you must, and then tell me which is the biggest majority share when you have the correct answer 🙄

You're really quite thick aren't you? If you think that 43% is a majority then I suggest you go back to school. Let's do the maths together shall we:
- 43% in favour.
- 22% + 35% = 57% people who did not say they were in favour.

Now then have a little think about it, confer with your all white and, no doubt, equally as bigoted friends if you must, and then tell me which is the biggest majority share.

Quoted from Grim74

I think it's pretty obvious to even the most basic educated of people that I'm referring to our recent history i.e. In living memory, not much point in going back to the crusades now is there!

So all the previous 1500 years of history between Muslims and Christians and Jews has no relevance? Not even as recent as the 1980s and 1990s?

Quoted from mariner91

You're really quite thick aren't you? If you think that 43% is a majority then I suggest you go back to school. Let's do the maths together shall we:
- 43% in favour.
- 22% + 35% = 57% people who did not say they were in favour.

Now then have a little think about it, confer with your all white and, no doubt, equally as bigoted friends if you must, and then tell me which is the biggest majority share.

So on that basis 43% + 35% = 78% people who did say they were in favour what a 🤡 You are.

How do you think elections are won?

Quoted from Grim74

So on that basis 43% + 35% = 78% people who did say they were in favour what a 🤡 You are.

How do you think elections are won?

In this country elections are won on the majority of seats, not the majority of votes. In the first past the post system you need more than 50% of the seats to have a majority. Not having more than 50% means you do not have a majority, as evidenced in June when the Tories won just short of 50% and therefore had to get the DUP involved in order to get a majority. Now I know politics is not your strongpoint but I would have thought that even you would understood how an election works.

Your statement above is fundamentally wrong. It's quite obvious that you don't really understand how polls or percentages work which is quite shocking for what I presume is a fully grown man, well, not much of a man if he's too afraid to venture into a major city. Anyway, you are trying to say that the majority said they wanted sharia law. So in your example, you can only count the people who actually explicitly said that. Anybody who said anything different (either they didn't or they were unsure) can now be grouped together into a group who did not say that. That group is the majority as there is more of them than there are people who said they wanted it. Note, I did not say "the people who said they did not want Sharia Law are in the majority", I said that the people who did not say they wanted Sharia Law are in the majority. It is a subtle difference but an important one and unfortunately I fear that it may be lost on someone with your linguistic intelligence.

I'll help you out. Had you said "in a poll, more Muslims said that they would want Sharia law in the UK than said they would not want Sharia law in the UK" then that would be correct but you are incorrect in saying that a majority said they wanted it.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

I wouldn't bet on it. IRA-Sinn Fein did alright. Don't get me wrong, we should go all out to win, but these campaigns are well calibrated to achieve their ends. Don't underestimate the enemy.

They will only win if we all stay at home and not go out,

I remember when we went to USA just after 9/11 and the Americans said to us wherever we went, " thank you for coming "

Which I replied " well if we didn't the terrorists would have won "

We will not let them win KM the rest of the world will not let them.

All the people marching down the street in Barcelona singing " we are not afraid " shows the will of the people.

43% used to be a majority before them immigants changed it all.

Quoted from mariner91

In this country elections are won on the majority of seats, not the majority of votes. In the first past the post system you need more than 50% of the seats to have a majority. Not having more than 50% means you do not have a majority, as evidenced in June when the Tories won just short of 50% and therefore had to get the DUP involved in order to get a majority. Now I know politics is not your strongpoint but I would have thought that even you would understood how an election works.

Your statement above is fundamentally wrong. It's quite obvious that you don't really understand how polls or percentages work which is quite shocking for what I presume is a fully grown man, well, not much of a man if he's too afraid to venture into a major city. Anyway, you are trying to say that the majority said they wanted sharia law. So in your example, you can only count the people who actually explicitly said that. Anybody who said anything different (either they didn't or they were unsure) can now be grouped together into a group who did not say that. That group is the majority as there is more of them than there are people who said they wanted it. Note, I did not say "the people who said they did not want Sharia Law are in the majority", I said that the people who did not say they wanted Sharia Law are in the majority. It is a subtle difference but an important one and unfortunately I fear that it may be lost on someone with your linguistic intelligence.

I'll help you out. Had you said "in a poll, more Muslims said that they would want Sharia law in the UK than said they would not want Sharia law in the UK" then that would be correct but you are incorrect in saying that a majority said they wanted it.

Your still not grasping the concept of majority just to simplify as I know you are slow think of a pie chart now now which figure has the largest majority and it can only be one!!!

Quoted from Grim74

Your still not grasping the concept of majority just to simplify as I know you are slow think of a pie chart now now which figure has the largest majority and it can only be one!!!

Every post of yours claiming that 43% is a majority makes you seem more of a moron. Think of a pie chart - is more than half of it in one bit? If so it is a majority. Would 43% be more than half of the pie chart? No. Is 43% a majority? Is it intercourse.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

Every post of yours claiming that 43% is a majority makes you seem more of a moron. Think of a pie chart - is more than half of it in one bit? If so it is a majority. Would 43% be more than half of the pie chart? No. Is 43% a majority? Is it intercourse.

if two thirds where put together there would obviouslybe more than 50% but as per the survey only two shares where taken 43% for yes and 22% for no! so one must be bigger majority than the other all be it a small minority. Unless your saying majority is exclusively over 50%

I am saying that because that's what it is. What do you think the difference is between a majority and minority government?

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

I am saying that because that's what it is. What do you think the difference is between a majority and minority government?

A relative majority which i will concede I wasn't clear on apologies to all.

What is the teaching of Islam by the founder Mohammed?

He was an extremist Muslim.  Any Muslim who adheres to the 7 pillars of Islam--is committed to Jihad--the 7th pillar.  Benizir Bhutto--former Prime Minister of Pakistan once noted that only 10% of Muslims are extreme--that still represents over 100,000,000 Muslims.  So it is not a "fringe".

It is also important to observe that this form of Islam, which the "Prophet" practiced himself--going to the battlefield 29 times, slaughtering people who did not convert---is the pattern for doing Jihad.  Saudi Arabia was unified under the Saud family following the same practice--known as Whabism.   Islam grew across the Middle East--Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and North Africa in 2 years.  This did not happen with "idea prosetylization" but through war and coercion.  Isis, Al Queda, etc. are all committed to this form of "evangelism" Christians indigenous to these regions have dissapeared through being driven out or murdered.

The real problems start when Muslims become a majority, Sharia soon follows and you only have to look at the countries that practice Sharia to see how barbaric it is. Jihad sees the Muslim enter paradise and nothing can stop that notion once they engage in it. We are now starting to see condemnation from moderate Muslims but what we need is a declaration from the most respected Imams / clerics that announce anyone carrying out terrorist attacks on civilians will not enter paradise and whats left of them will be buried with a dead pig.

This won't happen because moderate Muslims don't care about non Muslims.

You want to see a Muslim in their true colours ask them
1. Why Mohammed beheaded over 700 Jews and shared out the women amongst his men and why he raped the leaders wife.
2. Why Mohammed took a fancy to a 6 year old girl, then had a vision from God saying it was ok for him to marry her then have sex with her when she was 9. Until she was 9 he used to put his tackle between her thighs in a simulated sex action called thighing.
3. Why Mohammed who had a vision from God meaning he should marry his step sons wife, meaning his son had to divorce her.
4. Why Mohammed tortured a man by kindling a fire with flint and steel on al-rabi chest until he was nearly dead, and why after he beheaded him, then raped his wife.
5. Do they believe Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse with a womans face, witnessed by no one.
6. Do they believe that Mohammed split the moon in half, again no witnesses.

There is a common theme about Mohammed and it centers around lies, sex and power, Muslims hold Mohammed up to be the perfect human and to be copied.

Quoted from grimsby pete

They will only win if we all stay at home and not go out,

I remember when we went to USA just after 9/11 and the Americans said to us wherever we went, " thank you for coming "

Which I replied " well if we didn't the terrorists would have won "

We will not let them win KM the rest of the world will not let them.

All the people marching down the street in Barcelona singing " we are not afraid " shows the will of the people.

I completely agree Pete. We must all carry on life as much as possible in the same way. Obviously going into London is a bit more nervy but I wouldn't avoid it. Unlike some 'patriots'!

I was out in London on Sunday. The weather was very nice and it was great to see so many people from different parts of the world enjoying it.

Incidentally, I've not heard any of the anti-Muslim brigade mention the name of the British bloke who was stabbed when he went to give first aid to one of the women victims of the terrorist in Turku on Friday. Not sure it's on any list of good old Anglo-Saxon Christian names ;D

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Incidentally, I've not heard any of the anti-Muslim brigade mention the name of the British bloke who was stabbed when he went to give first aid to one of the women victims of the terrorist in Turku on Friday. Not sure it's on any list of good old Anglo-Saxon Christian names ;D

For an Islamic apologist you didn't say how you know he was a Muslim, being a Muslim is like being a vegan, you always bring it up within a few seconds of talking to people. He also has an unIslamic hair cut and he was walking with his girlfriend. As we know Muslim women walk 5 to 10 feet behind their males unless there is land mines then they walk 10 to 20 feet in front ; :K)

Talking of stabbings did you hear about the Islamic extremist stabbing eight people outside a row of shops in Surgut, Russia

During the last 30 days, there has been 158 Islamic attacks in 28 countries, in which 1077 people were killed and 992 injured by the religion of peace. Unfortunately, this list of Muslim terrorist attacks barely scratches the surface of atrocities committed in the name of Islam occurring world-wide each day. Nevermind, you just keep on apologising for has to be one of the most driven death cults going. What I want to point out that Islam is different from other religions. No other religion inspires the sort of terrorism that the "Religion of Peace" produces. It should be acceptable to question and critique the teachings, particularly those that are supremacist in nature.

In 2016 there were 2478 Islamic attacks in 59 countries, in which 21237 people were killed and 26680 injured.

Quoted from Marinerz93

There is a common theme about Mohammed and it centers around lies, sex and power, Muslims hold Mohammed up to be the perfect human and to be copied.

The greatest charlatan that ever existed, made Jesus look like an amateur.

Quoted from Grim74

The greatest charlatan that ever existed, made Jesus look like an amateur.

Unlike Mohammed Jesus didn't profit from his ideologies in fact he died for them, how was Jesus a Charlatan?

Quoted from Marinerz93

Unlike Mohammed Jesus didn't profit from his ideologies in fact he died for them, how was Jesus a Charlatan?

A very good man that preached about turning his society into one of the Kingdom of God eg one of good .Parallels with the Dalai Lama today ?

Quoted from Rick12

A very good man that preached about turning his society into one of the Kingdom of God eg one of good .Parallels with the Dalai Lama today ?

At the core of all religions is to do good such as basic beliefs of Sikhism,

The Sikhs must believe in the following values: Equality: All humans are equal before God – no discrimination is allowed on the basis of caste, race, gender, creed, origin, color, education, status, wealth, et cetera. The principles of universal equality and brotherhood are important pillars of Sikhism.

Sikhism was founded in the Punjab region in India in the 15th century by Guru Nanak Dev. Sikhism broke from Hinduism due, in part, to its rejection of the caste system. So this shows that although an ideology is followed by some it can be changed for the better by those wishing to make their world a better place not just for them but for the many.

Quoted from Marinerz93

Unlike Mohammed Jesus didn't profit from his ideologies in fact he died for them, how was Jesus a Charlatan?

If there was such a man he must of been a narcissist! Maybe borderline crazy feeding his bullshit to the gullible to fuel his ego. Do you really think the Romans would of crucified a man that could turn water into wine?

You rightly mock the Muslims for their beliefs in Mohammad's miracles (fairytales) let's not forget over 2000 years later millions of people still believe Jesus walked on water and raised the dead just to mention a few miracles.

I try to respect people's beliefs but I won't shy away from criticising religion if asked my opinion, as it's all a load of nonsense formed to control primitive man and should always be open for criticism. But the problem we have in liberal Western Europe is that just one religion is not open for criticism... Islam! And it's getting to the point of being a hate crime, even here in the UK they are talking about clamping down on religious hate crime (Islam) on social media and it won't be long before we are talking blasphemy laws.
What was that famous quote from Voltaire? 🤔

Quoted from Grim74

If there was such a man he must of been a narcissist! Maybe borderline crazy feeding his bullshit to the gullible to fuel his ego. Do you really think the Romans would of crucified a man that could turn water into wine?

You rightly mock the Muslims for their beliefs in Mohammad's miracles (fairytales) let's not forget over 2000 years later millions of people still believe Jesus walked on water and raised the dead just to mention a few miracles.

I try to respect people's beliefs but I won't shy away from criticising religion if asked my opinion, as it's all a load of nonsense formed to control primitive man and should always be open for criticism. But the problem we have in liberal Western Europe is that just one religion is not open for criticism... Islam! And it's getting to the point of being a hate crime, even here in the UK they are talking about clamping down on religious hate crime (Islam) on social media and it won't be long before we are talking blasphemy laws.
What was that famous quote from Voltaire? 🤔

I fully agree that any religion should be scrutinized and where criticisms are due they are given in full and I feel you are right when saying about blasphemy laws due to liberals hating free speech and jump on anything that doesn't fit their world view.

The Romans you say, didn't Nero play the fiddle while Rome burned, beware of the ides of March. Also the Romans soon abandoned their own Gods for the God Jesus was offering.

Quoted from Marinerz93

At the core of all religions is to do good such as basic beliefs of Sikhism,

The Sikhs must believe in the following values: Equality: All humans are equal before God – no discrimination is allowed on the basis of caste, race, gender, creed, origin, color, education, status, wealth, et cetera. The principles of universal equality and brotherhood are important pillars of Sikhism.

Sikhism was founded in the Punjab region in India in the 15th century by Guru Nanak Dev. Sikhism broke from Hinduism due, in part, to its rejection of the caste system. So this shows that although an ideology is followed by some it can be changed for the better by those wishing to make their world a better place not just for them but for the many.

Agree completely. Sikhism is actually one of the religions I admire greatly.

Quoted from Grim74

If there was such a man he must of been a narcissist! Maybe borderline crazy feeding his bullshit to the gullible to fuel his ego. Do you really think the Romans would of crucified a man that could turn water into wine?

Thing is Grim I dont think Jesus went out to create a religion. It was mans later interpretation of his simple message that became the religion we know today as Christianity. He was just a Jewish preacher that was trying to do good in his society and got killed for it as the Romans saw him as a threat to their control

Great book on this which just looks at the facts from a historical perspective and which the BBC done a series on fronted by the author himself "a history of Christianity Diarmaid MacCulloch"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/History-Christianity-First-Three-Thousand/dp/0141021896

More proof of how Islam tries to deceive people is the 1001 Muslim inventions, most of which is manipulaton of the person through how it is worded, with little in the way of real facts.

fact-or-fiction-1001-muslim-inventions-comes-j-christian-adams

There was a golden age of Islam where there were many discoveries between 800-1100, when the Muslim world was the beacon of innovation and triggered Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment periods. but this stopped when islamic theologian, Abu Hamid Al Ghazali, who lived from 1055 to 1111, single-handedly steered Islamic culture away from independent scientific inquiry towards religious fundamentalism. In a remarkable intellectual shift, he concluded that falsafa (which literally means philosophy but included logic, mathematics and physics) was incompatible with Islam

There has hardly been any nobel prize winners from the Muslim world which is shocking considering there is over 1.6 Billion.

Quoted from Rick12

Thing is Grim I dont think Jesus went out to create a religion. It was mans later interpretation of his simple message that became the religion we know today as Christianity. He was just a Jewish preacher that was trying to do good in his society and got killed for it as the Romans saw him as a threat to their control

Great book on this which just looks at the facts from a historical perspective and which the BBC done a series on fronted by the author himself "a history of Christianity Diarmaid MacCulloch"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/History-Christianity-First-Three-Thousand/dp/0141021896

Still on line to watch so will give it a go.

Quoted from Rick12

Agree completely. Sikhism is actually one of the religions I admire greatly.

Sikhism is the newest of the worlds great religions by some distance which may explain a more modern outlook. However I watched the recent T.V. programme on the Partition of India and a particularly harrowing tale of armed sikhs running riot around Amritsar killing any non-sikhs they could get their hands on.

Good tele that Ian, I watched it last night.

Quoted from barralad

Sikhism is the newest of the worlds great religions by some distance which may explain a more modern outlook. However I watched the recent T.V. programme on the Partition of India and a particularly harrowing tale of armed sikhs running riot around Amritsar killing any non-sikhs they could get their hands on.

Maybe but I doubt their founder Guru Nanak would of approved.A truly remarkable spiritual being I feel that preached good and following the divine/God which is what Sikhism is essentially about.

Quoted from barralad

Sikhism is the newest of the worlds great religions by some distance which may explain a more modern outlook. However I watched the recent T.V. programme on the Partition of India and a particularly harrowing tale of armed sikhs running riot around Amritsar killing any non-sikhs they could get their hands on.

Amristar was retaliation for The Rawalpindi Massacre, I hope the program detailed that because it was Muslim aggression against Hindus and Sikhs that infuriated both the Hindus and Sikhs.

The Muslim League armed and transported it's followers so they were the initial aggressors, genocide followed as retaliation was carried out by most of the religions but rape particularly gang rape carried out by Muslims. On August 26, 1947, a group of Pakistani Baluchi soldiers killed around 10,000 non-Muslim civilians in Sheikhupura and raped girls and women so as to dishonor the whole community and to prove its inability to protect them. According to the Bangladesh authorities, the Pakistan army was also responsible for killing three million Bengalis and raping at least 200,000 East Pakistani women. The violence that accompanied partition marked women and women's bodies in particular ways. They were abducted, raped and defiled in a mass scale. The cruel madness of people gained momentum on female bodies. They cut off women’s breasts, and tattooed their bodies and their private parts with the religious symbols or Azzadi ka taufa (The gift of freedom ) " No doubt women were raped by Hindus but the extreme violence towards women came from Muslims with women committing suicide before they could be defiled or made sex slaves if captured by Muslims.

The genocide of Muslims by Hindus was stopped because the mahatma gandhi in kolkata declared that he was not going eat anything nor take water until the genocide was stopped. This wasn't reciprocated by Muslims and they continued to attack any religious groups that weren't Muslim.

Quoted from Marinerz93

For an Islamic apologist you didn't say how you know he was a Muslim, being a Muslim is like being a vegan, you always bring it up within a few seconds of talking to people. He also has an unIslamic hair cut and he was walking with his girlfriend. As we know Muslim women walk 5 to 10 feet behind their males unless there is land mines then they walk 10 to 20 feet in front ; :K)

Talking of stabbings did you hear about the Islamic extremist stabbing eight people outside a row of shops in Surgut, Russia

During the last 30 days, there has been 158 Islamic attacks in 28 countries, in which 1077 people were killed and 992 injured by the religion of peace. Unfortunately, this list of Muslim terrorist attacks barely scratches the surface of atrocities committed in the name of Islam occurring world-wide each day. Nevermind, you just keep on apologising for has to be one of the most driven death cults going. What I want to point out that Islam is different from other religions. No other religion inspires the sort of terrorism that the "Religion of Peace" produces. It should be acceptable to question and critique the teachings, particularly those that are supremacist in nature.

In 2016 there were 2478 Islamic attacks in 59 countries, in which 21237 people were killed and 26680 injured.

I'm not an apologist for anything. Where have I apologised for anything that anyone but me has done, let alone a billion other people? And I'd say he was a Muslim in the same way that I'd say someone with my name is a Christian.

A for 'un-Islamic hair' where does it specify hairstyle in the Koran.

PS never heard of the Crusades? Or the Inquisition? Or Hindu terrorists? Or the Sterne Gang?

All justified their actions with religion.

"No other religion inspires the sort of terrorism that the "Religion of Peace" produces. It should be acceptable to question and critique the teachings, particularly those that are supremacist in nature."

Quoted from KingstonMariner

I'm not an apologist for anything. Where have I apologised for anything that anyone but me has done, let alone a billion other people? And I'd say he was a Muslim in the same way that I'd say someone with my name is a Christian.

A for 'un-Islamic hair' where does it specify hairstyle in the Koran.

So you have no proof that he is a Muslim, so a person with an Asian name can't be Christian or a convert.

Un-Islamic hair cut comes direct from Mohammed and it's called Qaza, it was narrated that Mohammed forbade qaza’; he saw a boy who had part of his head shaved and he said: “Shave all of it or leave all of it.” Moreover, this style is not beautification for either men or women, rather it is changing the creation of Allaah and spoiling people's appearance, and it is an imitation of the West. There are several Hadiths on it all alluring to if your hair is like theirs you are one of the kuffars. Al-Bukhaari (5921) and Muslim (2120).

You claim not to be a Muslim apologist, then you are maybe a Islamaphile and can't help your Islamaphillia.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

PS never heard of the Crusades? Or the Inquisition? Or Hindu terrorists? Or the Sterne Gang?

All justified their actions with religion.

"No other religion inspires the sort of terrorism that the "Religion of Peace" produces. It should be acceptable to question and critique the teachings, particularly those that are supremacist in nature."

How did the crusades come about, well they came about because Muslim invaders into the holy land in 600 AD, murdered both Jews and Christians, then subjugated who was left by making all non Muslims pay a Jizya, they didn't stop there, they destroyed churches and made practicing your religion in the open a crime, only Muslims where allowed to pray in the streets and you also could not gather in groups outside the place of worship or preach to Muslims. In 1095 a new group of more radical Muslims took control of the Holy lands, as you notice nearly 500 years later, and stopped all Jews and Christians pilgrims from going to Jerusalem. It was Pope Urban II that called for the crusades to claim back the Holy land and stop the injustice against Christians from the claimed religion of peace.

The Stern gang or Lehi was a terrorist group that called itself fighters for the freedom of Israel, and mainly tried to get rid of British rule by trying to do deals with the likes of Nazi Germany who they saw as a lesser threat. They didn't hide behind a claim that they were peaceful and openly declared they wanted a new totalitarian Hebrew republic.

The Inquisition came about due to Catharism / heresy and was more about the Catholic church maintaining control and as far as I know it didn't effect other religions.

You are using religious groups some from over a 1,000 years ago to claim justification their actions with religion, fair enough. Tell how many people die each month because of Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, and any other religion and then tell me how many people they have killed belonging to other faiths, you know something more current than a 1,000 years ago. As it stands this month there were 134 Islamic attacks in 26 countries, in which 782 people were killed and 870 injured by the religion of peace.

Quoted from Marinerz93

More proof of how Islam tries to deceive people is the 1001 Muslim inventions, most of which is manipulaton of the person through how it is worded, with little in the way of real facts.

fact-or-fiction-1001-muslim-inventions-comes-j-christian-adams

There was a golden age of Islam where there were many discoveries between 800-1100, when the Muslim world was the beacon of innovation and triggered Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment periods. but this stopped when islamic theologian, Abu Hamid Al Ghazali, who lived from 1055 to 1111, single-handedly steered Islamic culture away from independent scientific inquiry towards religious fundamentalism. In a remarkable intellectual shift, he concluded that falsafa (which literally means philosophy but included logic, mathematics and physics) was incompatible with Islam

There has hardly been any nobel prize winners from the Muslim world which is shocking considering there is over 1.6 Billion.

Dave I get that you are anti-Muslim/Islam but accepting this as factual stretches the point beyond my limits. The claim that an age (that allegedly ended 300 years before the Renaissance is deemed by historians the world over to have begun), triggered the Renaissance is absurd. The Renaissance had its roots in Christian religion as evidenced by the countless artists who used biblical subjects.These artists weremainly sponsored by rich Christian families trying to grab power (The Borgias in Italy (a fine God-fearing family) a case in point.) What written works there were had religious themes-at least in part. The first book to be printed? The Bible of course. "Technology" thrived because of the perceived need to be glorifying God. I'm struggling to think of a more fundamentalist religion than 16th. century Catholicism aided and abetted by Protestants from the 1520s onward.
The total reliance on religion caused many problems for would be scientists. Copernicus and Galileo amongst others were accused of heresy for daring to say that the Earth wasn't the centre of the known universe and many more were killed for their scientific theories.
If the powers of the time couldn't stomach the beliefs of fellow Christians it's hardly surprising that many of the writings of other faiths-including Islam were deemed to be the ramblings of heathens. The world then (obviously) wasn't like it is now-people didn't travel so didn't get to see the amazing art work of the Islamic world. If you haven't been to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul I can highly recommend it. You'll see Renaissance period Islamic art that is as fine as anything you'll see in a Christian church. (I believe it actually links with some Christian Byzantine works but I might have imagined that). The Taj Mahal was built for a Moslem (I'll gloss over the fact that Shah Jahan(?) had the architect killed once it was finished!)
It wasn't until the 19th. century and people like Edward Fitzgerald (who translated the Rubaiyat into English) that Islamic works of art started to be appreciated in the West.
In the early days of the Nobel Prizes the committee hardly had the resources or scope to look deeply into scientific advances from the world of Islam. The fact that most of the Nobel Laureates who are Moslems were rewarded in the 21st. century suggests that there will be more as time progresses.

Quoted from Marinerz93

So you have no proof that he is a Muslim, so a person with an Asian name can't be Christian or a convert.

Un-Islamic hair cut comes direct from Mohammed and it's called Qaza, it was narrated that Mohammed forbade qaza’; he saw a boy who had part of his head shaved and he said: “Shave all of it or leave all of it.” Moreover, this style is not beautification for either men or women, rather it is changing the creation of Allaah and spoiling people's appearance, and it is an imitation of the West. There are several Hadiths on it all alluring to if your hair is like theirs you are one of the kuffars. Al-Bukhaari (5921) and Muslim (2120).

You claim not to be a Muslim apologist, then you are maybe a Islamaphile and can't help your Islamaphillia.

How did the crusades come about, well they came about because Muslim invaders into the holy land in 600 AD, murdered both Jews and Christians, then subjugated who was left by making all non Muslims pay a Jizya, they didn't stop there, they destroyed churches and made practicing your religion in the open a crime, only Muslims where allowed to pray in the streets and you also could not gather in groups outside the place of worship or preach to Muslims. In 1095 a new group of more radical Muslims took control of the Holy lands, as you notice nearly 500 years later, and stopped all Jews and Christians pilgrims from going to Jerusalem. It was Pope Urban II that called for the crusades to claim back the Holy land and stop the injustice against Christians from the claimed religion of peace.

The Stern gang or Lehi was a terrorist group that called itself fighters for the freedom of Israel, and mainly tried to get rid of British rule by trying to do deals with the likes of Nazi Germany who they saw as a lesser threat. They didn't hide behind a claim that they were peaceful and openly declared they wanted a new totalitarian Hebrew republic.

The Inquisition came about due to Catharism / heresy and was more about the Catholic church maintaining control and as far as I know it didn't effect other religions.

You are using religious groups some from over a 1,000 years ago to claim justification their actions with religion, fair enough. Tell how many people die each month because of Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, and any other religion and then tell me how many people they have killed belonging to other faiths, you know something more current than a 1,000 years ago. As it stands this month there were 134 Islamic attacks in 26 countries, in which 782 people were killed and 870 injured by the religion of peace.

You're beginning to appear as fundamentalist as some of the terrorists. Just because someone isn't anti-Muslim doesn't mean to say they are an Islamophile! It's not all black and white.

I'm not using any historical events to justify terrorism. Merely pointing out all the major religions have had people who espouse interpretations of their religion that support terrorism.

Of course that Brit in Turku could have been a Christian convert. But the odds are he's not.

PS thanks for backing up my point about the Stern Gang. Exactly the point I was making.

I see police officers are being attacked in the streets now WTF! All just part of the London experience these days not even big news, how many days until the next one? Sweepstake anyone?

Quoted from KingstonMariner

You're beginning to appear as fundamentalist as some of the terrorists. Just because someone isn't anti-Muslim doesn't mean to say they are an Islamophile! It's not all black and white.

I'm not using any historical events to justify terrorism. Merely pointing out all the major religions have had people who espouse interpretations of their religion that support terrorism.

Of course that Brit in Turku could have been a Christian convert. But the odds are he's not.

fundamentalist
ˌfʌndəˈmɛnt(ə)lɪst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who believes in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture in a religion.

I don't, I believe all religions should be about peace, tolerance and honesty with different guide lines for that culture, but one in which people are free to practice that religion without harming others or dictating separate laws of the land and stopping people from carrying out their own culture without harm or harassment. You speak up quite regularly for islam citing past events trying to excuse the way islam behaves today, no other religions are doing the things to humanity that islam is doing Kingston.

Quoted from barralad

Dave I get that you are anti-Muslim/Islam but accepting this as factual stretches the point beyond my limits. The claim that an age (that allegedly ended 300 years before the Renaissance is deemed by historians the world over to have begun), triggered the Renaissance is absurd. The Renaissance had its roots in Christian religion as evidenced by the countless artists who used biblical subjects.These artists weremainly sponsored by rich Christian families trying to grab power (The Borgias in Italy (a fine God-fearing family) a case in point.) What written works there were had religious themes-at least in part. The first book to be printed? The Bible of course. "Technology" thrived because of the perceived need to be glorifying God. I'm struggling to think of a more fundamentalist religion than 16th. century Catholicism aided and abetted by Protestants from the 1520s onward.
The total reliance on religion caused many problems for would be scientists. Copernicus and Galileo amongst others were accused of heresy for daring to say that the Earth wasn't the centre of the known universe and many more were killed for their scientific theories.
If the powers of the time couldn't stomach the beliefs of fellow Christians it's hardly surprising that many of the writings of other faiths-including Islam were deemed to be the ramblings of heathens. The world then (obviously) wasn't like it is now-people didn't travel so didn't get to see the amazing art work of the Islamic world. If you haven't been to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul I can highly recommend it. You'll see Renaissance period Islamic art that is as fine as anything you'll see in a Christian church. (I believe it actually links with some Christian Byzantine works but I might have imagined that). The Taj Mahal was built for a Moslem (I'll gloss over the fact that Shah Jahan(?) had the architect killed once it was finished!)
It wasn't until the 19th. century and people like Edward Fitzgerald (who translated the Rubaiyat into English) that Islamic works of art started to be appreciated in the West.
In the early days of the Nobel Prizes the committee hardly had the resources or scope to look deeply into scientific advances from the world of Islam. The fact that most of the Nobel Laureates who are Moslems were rewarded in the 21st. century suggests that there will be more as time progresses.

Anti Muslim / Islam, I am anti anything that causes mass death or death on a daily basis on a, fear and intolerant ideology of a murder, rapist, sexual deviant, child rapist and habitual liar who can not prove anything that came out his mouth.

I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying, the crusades showed Europe that there was a world outside their own continent, and that the outside world was richer and more developed, spurring their interest in growth.

Also, it produced a lot of profits for the Italian merchant families that shipped men and supplies from Europe to the Middle East, giving them contacts in the area that lasted longer than the Crusades, and became the source of some of the learning that wound up sparking the Renaissance. The merchant families would then have enough money to hire the artists that created all the wonderful art of the Renaissance.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Incidentally, I've not heard any of the anti-Muslim brigade mention the name of the British bloke who was stabbed when he went to give first aid to one of the women victims of the terrorist in Turku on Friday. Not sure it's on any list of good old Anglo-Saxon Christian names ;D

You are of course correct his name isn't Anglo-Saxon, he is however a Coptic Christian, the Coptic Cross being tattooed on his arm giving it away, also tattooed below that he has an Egyptian Eye of Horus is an ancient Egyptian symbol of protection. So I would hazard at a guess that he is a Coptic Christian from Egypt, an extremely persecuted religion in Eygpt by Muslims. You claimed twice that he was a Muslim, this is what I mean when I say you are an Islamaphile. He more than likely got stabbed because the knife man saw his Coptic cross tattoo.

[youtube]2op1sDAoqMU[/youtube]

[quote=347]

Anti Muslim / Islam, I am anti anything that causes mass death or death on a daily basis on a, fear and intolerant ideology of a murder, rapist, sexual deviant, child rapist and habitual liar who can not prove anything that came out his mouth.

Presumably, you don't drive a car and strongly advocate renewable energy?

Quoted from Town Monkey

[quote=347]

Anti Muslim / Islam, I am anti anything that causes mass death or death on a daily basis on a, fear and intolerant ideology of a murder, rapist, sexual deviant, child rapist and habitual liar who can not prove anything that came out his mouth.

Presumably, you don't drive a car and strongly advocate renewable energy?

What's your point, I don't aim the vehicle I am driving at innocent members of the public and the car doesn't do that either of it's own accord, and renewable energy is a must if we are to have power available as fossil fuel powered stations become obsolete. Sweden has almost gone totally renewable with a possibility that a further 139 Countries Could Get All of their Power from Renewable Sources.

Slightly off topic, but copied this from the comments under a Yahoo article about a bloke thrown of a tram in Sheffield.

"Now, no doubt in a few minutes people are going to start calling for this person to get a knighthood. However, what we have here is an idiot who got up and started yelling abuse at a passenger on public transport, who was filmed and then thrown off for his behavior. BEFORE you start slapping your hands together and telling me how this is the pinnacle of everything our culture is meant to be, THINK for a moment. If this was one of the Tories from the story yesterday, who had got up and begun telling some family wearing what he considered to be cheap clothing that they were chavs who deserved to be gassed, would you support him? If he had got up and started having a go at a single mother, because he thinks all single mothers are lesbian dole scroungers, would you support him? If he was yelling at Jews, because he thought Hitler was right, would you support him? If he got up and started yelling at a random person because the voices in his head told him his target was one of the reptile people, would you support him? No? If he did any of those things you'd consider him a yobbish lout who deserved to be chucked off the tram? Now, go back to the beginning, and ask yourself; why are you supporting him because he was having a go at black people he thought were Muslims? There is actually nothing there to say or show that they were in traditional Muslim dress. For all we know, they could be African-American Baptists here on holiday. And he decided to get up and start flinging abuse at them. And that's wrong. That's socially unacceptable. That's why harassing your fellow passengers on the tram for being Muslim or Hindu or Christian or straight or gay or black or overweight is dealt with by the offender being chucked off, fined or arrested depending on how far the confrontation goes. Now, there are still probably a few people who are going to start mumbling and grumbling, to whom I ask this; how did this help? If you think Islam is taking over the UK, how does yelling abuse at someone who is sitting on a tram, not doing anything, help? How many terrorism rings did this break? How many hate preachers did this action stop? How many burkahs vanished from the country as a result of his actions? This yob, for that is what he is, decided to start screaming abuse at someone on a tram, and all this accomplished was making him (and anyone associated with his group) look like the sort of antisocial thugs people claim they are. He has, by definition, made the wider country think that the EDL and BF are filled with these kinds of thugs. So he has accomplished nothing more than giving the left more ammunition to shoot down any meaningful debate on Islam in this country. To sum it up, he has not only failed to do anything about Islam, he has further hamstrung the groups that are trying to do anything about it. If you still support him after that, let me know. I might have a couple of bridges to sell you. All the proceeds will go to stopping Islam in the UK, I promise. ;)"

I had seen this video last week and from what I remember he wasn't saying anything wrong it looked like he was just giving his opinions which seemed factually correct to me, conveniently we don't see how the conversation started or even who he was talking to, has it been confirmed anywhere they were black? Muslim? My issue with him would of been the swearing on a public train and possibly intoxicated but possibly a disability.

I think the above is a non story really just some poor desperate attempt to show bullshit islamaphobia, I could post many links to black/Muslim attacks on whites but likewise would prove nothing.

More importantly it was recently announced Britain is now home to 35000 Islamists fanatics!! More than any other Country in Europe yet hardly mentioned in the MSN! But never mind let's keep handwringing about so called islamaphobia🙄

I see Kingston is back with yet more Islamaphilla, just brush under the carpet that the hero in stabbing incident in Finland you was claiming to be a Muslim was in fact a Coptic Christian from Egypt.

Of course it is abhorrent to have a go at anyone over colour or religion whilst they are going about their everyday life. You haven't posted a link to this video just like the report from Sweden so maybe there is more to this.

Here's a video of a woman being harassed by a Muslim on a train, I hope this doesn't bring you out in Islamphile hives, you remind me of the fella behind Muslim harassing the woman for the first minute or so..

[youtube]1q_GgVeEl3E[/youtube]

Here's the video for you Kingston, I didn't hear anything racist as Islam is an ideology and he stated several facts, Mohammed (at the age of 56) did marry a 6 year old and had sex with her when she was 9 and he raped scores of women after battles when he took them captive, all in the Koran and hadiths. The teachings of this is preached to young girls that it is acceptable because Mohammed was God's messenger, remember when you believed in father Christmas and the tooth fairy at that age.

[youtube]ELvinC7Te9s[/youtube]

If you think Islam is taking over the UK, how does yelling abuse at someone who is sitting on a tram, not doing anything, help? How many terrorism rings did this break? How many hate preachers did this action stop? How many burkahs vanished from the country as a result of his actions? This yob, for that is what he is, decided to start screaming abuse at someone on a tram, and all this accomplished was making him (and anyone associated with his group) look like the sort of antisocial thugs people claim they are.

Nothing will stop any of the above it's only going to get worse, go take a look areas that are majority Muslim. The only thing that speaking out is going to achieve is that people become aware of how vile this ideology is and how life in the UK is going to change for the worse in future years.