The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun


by Sunny
17th January, 2011 at 4:00 pm    

A video from Luton, where a group of conservative Muslims are actively campaigning against the extremist group Al-Muhajiroun (aka ISlam4UK, Muslims Against Crusades).

Update: Jerome Taylor at the Indy wrote a piece about one of the organisers in 2009.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Islamists,Religion






89 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. sunny hundal

    Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  2. guardian.co.uk video

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  3. Zahir Ahmed

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  4. Kashmir

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  5. Phil Watt

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  6. Natalya

    For those who say that the Muslim community doesn't speak out against 'their own' http://bit.ly/gkfs7U (via @sunny_hundal)


  7. Jerome Taylor

    RT @sunny_hundal Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U See also: http://goo.gl/8W8yw


  8. Furqan Naeem

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : The religious Muslims campaigning against Al-Muhajiroun http://bit.ly/gkfs7U


  9. Paul Perrin

    Normal UK Muslims taking on UK Muslim extremists http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/11458 – good job!


  10. Video: Rick Scott changes his tune on lobbyists North Capitol Street

    [...] Pickled Politics » The religious Muslims campaigning against Al … [...]




  1. Jerome Taylor — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:02 pm  

    A very interesting video.

    I think it surprises many people that it is Luton’s Salafis – not the more mainstream or tolerant Islamic sects – that are the ones taking on Al Muhajiroun on the streets of Bury Park.

    It begs the questions though, why can’t some of the other mosques beyond Masjid Al-Ghurabaa do regular leafleting and peaceful confrontations with Al M?

    I don’t think anyone should be surprised by Abdur Rahman’s comments towards the end where he announces his support for capital punishment, believes homoesxuality is wrong and supports cutting of hands of thieves. He wouldn’t be much of a Salafi if he thought otherwise.

    Whilst the majority of Brits would vehemently disagree with him on those points, it shouldn’t detract from the fact that it is Salafis who are taking the most proactive stance against groups like Al M.

  2. damon — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:03 pm  

    At six minutes in:

    ”In many cases, the Kufir are not even our enemies.
    It’s actually our brothers themselves who are enemies .. in terms of the way they understand Islam”.

    That’s from a prison convert. He might mean well, but it still doesn’t give me a good feeling.
    It smacks of apartheid somehow, and even though I don’t agree with Douglas Murray (on much at all) he has said how it is wrong-headed to look to the likes of these people to combat the even more extreme. Which is a fair point I think.

    Also, this Islamic Centre was just in the news a few weeks ago.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/19/abdaly-luton-mosque-stockholm-bomber

  3. Suburban Tory — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:08 pm  

    Seeing you have been critical of a homphobic Tory MEP and ConservativeHome for featuring him as a contributor. Why link to this video featuring openly homophobic muslims?

    I’m sure you are aware of this.

  4. cjcjc — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:25 pm  

    Hmmmm…I’m struggling to be overjoyed somehow.

    Bit like the BNP opposing the National Front.

  5. Suburban Tory — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:33 pm  

    Maybe the first in a series.

    Next week Westboro Baptist Church campaigns against the KKK.

  6. K.T. — on 17th January, 2011 at 5:39 pm  

    Ye gads, is this really what our spineless, grovelling governments have turned the nation of my ancestors into?

    And these are considered the mainstream ones? What fuck?

  7. Danyal — on 17th January, 2011 at 7:34 pm  

    Bigoted non-muslims complain that Muslims aren’t speaking out against extremists

    And then when they do , as in the video above, they still complain !

    Basically whatever Muslims do these people will hate them !

  8. Sarah AB — on 17th January, 2011 at 7:55 pm  

    Danyal – if the speaker at the end of the clip (who has plenty of sharp and interesting things to say by the way) is really saying he wants people’s hands to be cut off if they steal, and would support such a change in our own laws, then that seems to me a measure quite as shocking and alien as much in, say, the BNP manifesto.

  9. Sarah AB — on 17th January, 2011 at 8:20 pm  

    Here’s an alternative perspective from ‘Miss Xan’, copied from CIF.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/jan/17/muslim-resistance-struggle-within-video?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

    “Firstly, the Salafi themselves are not what the majority of us Muslim follow, since Islam comes from the word Salaam which means peace. It means you live in moderation dont be extreme but at the same time dont lack morals in your life. Islam is taken in context and there are things which change in accordance to the times,while staying true to the meanings.

    For example homosexuality which someone mentioned. Islam doesnt accept it as with all major religions, but this doesnt mean it authorises that we should discriminate against someone who was gay. There are many things all of us dont agree on bu we all still have to get along. This is simple common sense to me. You should still treat everyone equally as with every human being and leave the judging to God.

    Yes obviously there are extremist Muslims, just like there are child molesting priests or atheist serial killers. The media gives them a huge voice, just as the video above has demonstrated and obviously people think they are the majority. People like me dont get even a look by the media, why? because were not crazy enough.”

  10. Random63 — on 17th January, 2011 at 8:46 pm  

    Yes Danyal, it’s certainly non muslim bigotry to object to being called a Kuffar, and to object to amputation as a punishment for theft.

    Just out of interest, are you a fan of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws as well?

  11. Boyo — on 17th January, 2011 at 9:07 pm  

    Seems to me that the Luton Salafis have the courage to stand up to AM because they’re as “hard” , if not harder, than the AM wannabees.

    Ordinary Muslims (although I have got into trouble for daring to make any assumptions about anyone recently) are presumably wary of doing so for fear of the extremes to which the extremist would go, which is understandable – most of us would do the same. Not many people stood against the blackshirts… The Salafis can because, as they said, they’re extremists too. I had a lot of respect for Abdur’s self-knowledge in his rejection of the “moderate” tag.

    To be fair there are plenty of people in favour of the death penalty and homophobic. They might not even have an objection to a bit of hand chopping…. Although I oppose these beliefs, the key difference is that the Salafis claim to want to win the argument through self-knowledge and example, which is perfectly consistent with British society. The Quakers did the same.

  12. G — on 17th January, 2011 at 9:47 pm  

    It’s hard to get excited by the ‘anti-extremism’ credentials of al-Ghurabaa mosque when its leaders failed to identify al-Abdaly, the Stockholm bomber, as a potential terrorist.

    The point is, these guys can identify and oppose al-Muhajiroun because al-Muhajiroun are so easy to identify (thanks to their protests, support for Anjem Choudary and extremely vocally violently extreme views). They are unable and/or unwilling to identify and challenge more subtle Salafi-Jihadi extremists because, quite a lot of the time, they agree with Salafi-Jihadi ideology (including support for violence overseas, for example in Iraq, just not attacks within western countries).

    Could it be that extreme Salafis of the Luton style have been most vocal in their opposition to al-Muhajiroun not because they are the people who most disagree with al-Muhajiroun but because they share a similar constituency. What they are teaching is actually quite similar to al-Muhajiroun’s extremism in certain key areas and therefore, if they do not vocally oppose Muhajiroun, their followers could be poached.

    On the other hand, a mosque which doesn’t preach any form of extremism (unlike al-Ghurabaa mosque) doesn’t have any real risk of losing its followers to al-Muhajiroun and therefore it doesn’t have the same incentive to vocally oppose them.

    Just a thought…

  13. Arif — on 17th January, 2011 at 9:48 pm  

    Thanks for the alternative perspective, SarahAB.

    Danyal, I think people are not clear what they mean if they ask Muslims to speak out against extremists. As the guy at the end of the video says, todays “moderate” is tomorrow’s “extremist” in the political discourses used to blind us to each other’s humanity. Whether we speak out or not is not the key consideration, it is whether people feel scared of us. Sometimes fear gets a life of its own, whereby anything we do or don’t do is interpreted as a threat.

    Having said that, I also agree with cjcjc that it is short-sighted and simplistic to see your enemy’s enemy as your friend.

    At the very least we can see that these activists are having a more nuanced view – that they can have differences with both sides of this conflict.

    And in the same spirit we should not over-simplify what it means to be a Salafi just to have an easy enemy.

    Some are more conservative than others, they have different opinions on the role of religion in politics and they use their freedom to interpret the Qur’an and Sunnah in many different ways. Some brands of Salafi Islam are very keen to do so in order to maximise integration with their host societies including in western Europe, for example. They aren’t all beholden to Saudi paymasters and educators.

    What is missing in this video is any sense of wanting to reach out, listen and empathise with others as an effective method of improving society. Although they want to have a better relationship with the host society, the approach appears confrontational and judgmental. And such an approach seems to carry its own subconscious ideology of fear within itself.

  14. Arif — on 17th January, 2011 at 9:55 pm  

    Boyo #12, I agree with you. Not everyone wants to take part in the trade of intimidation. That these people do is a double-edged sword. It may be stepping up to the plate and then standing down, or it may be an intoxicant that takes hold. A lot of our ambivalence may be due to this uncertainty.

    Sorry for the mixtures of metaphors, but I think you get my drift.

  15. damon — on 18th January, 2011 at 2:01 am  

    I think this thread could do with some ‘moderator opinion’. These Salafi’s can’t be seen as any way moderate and mainstream, but it would seem that they are an integral part of the Luton muslim community.
    Which even if they aren’t extremists in the way that Al-Muhajiroun are, and they don’t advocate actually breaking the law, it cannot be a good thing for them to grow and prosper (can it?)
    I would say that their lifestyle would be very hard to fathom for much of the rest of Luton society, and that can only mean that people of different cultures will lead seperate lives.

    As much as I disagree with the guy (and I really do), this was two paragraphs of a longer (generally crap) article by Douglas Murray about the Ground Zero mosque.

    Those who fell for this did so because they had also fallen for the second great European lie. Which is that for free and democratic societies the answer to radical Islam is another form of Islam. It makes 9/11 probably the single most successful act of Islamic proselytism since the death of Muhammad. It ensures that, whatever the problem, the answer is Islam. If people fly planes into towers, then that is bad Islam. The response must be to build Islamic structures to counter bad Islam. The response to “bad” Islam must be the pushing, promotion and support of “good” Islam.

    It is this belief that has been the guiding force for governments in Britain and across the continent for the last decade. And there are obvious reasons why it has political appeal. It differentiates between the moderates and a minority of active extremists. And it suggests an immediate and practical solution. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent in Britain pursuing it. And it has only one major flaw: it is built on a lie. The answer to radical Islam in Western democracies cannot be to start extolling or transforming an only very recently imported religion whose history sadly suggests the severe difficulties of reform. Rather, the task of Western democracies must be to shore up our own societal defences — our own culture, our own values.

    Overall, his opinions about the New York mosque are really rubbish.
    But it’s the likes of these Salafi’s that will always give people like those who protested about the mosque (and the EDL too) some semblance of justification for their generally (dumb) Islamophobic arguments.

    As when the people in New York say that it’s too close to Ground Zero, it’s this idea of what muslims are like that they have in thier mind. Same with the EDL and their repugnant ”no more mosques” placards.
    Thankfully, most muslims are more moderate than this, but there is plenty of overlap in many areas too it seems. If it was Salafi’s like this that were wanting to build the Ground Zero mosque, it would be that much harder to argue with those against it and tell them why they were wrong to object.

  16. Arif — on 18th January, 2011 at 9:46 am  

    Damon – I understand the ambivalence you feel. But it is also natural many Salafi Muslims wouldn’t see themselves as fitting into categories of “moderate” and “mainstream” defined by people they consider ignorant or threatening to themselves.

    I agree with Douglas Murrayu that Government action to try to split Muslims into such categories of moderate / mainstream relative to Ministers’ own belief systems is a waste of energy. But not because Muslims are somehow in an unreformable monolithic religion, but because it merely pushes thinking people to further alienate themselves from a “mainstream” which seems more intent on judging and manipulating them than on learning anything.

    Muslims, just like anyone else, are more than capable of being self-critical. Muslims, just like anyone else, get rather defensive when they feel they are being judged by people who appear to them unself-critical. Muslims are in the same boat as non-Muslims in that sense.

    Douglas Murray’s self-righteousness is not much different from the self-righteousness of Government Ministers who think any Muslims who aren’t pushing their agenda they can be labelled a danger to society.

    Non-Muslims who are relatively self-critical can easily make alliances with Muslims who are relatively self-critical. The relatively self-righteous on both sides can feed on each other’s rhetoric to try to undermine such alliances. That’s the core dynamic I think we need to understand, for how we position ourselves and position others in these debates.

    Of course there is more to these dynamics. As Boyo suggests, humility can be taken for weakness and there is a (masculine?) kind of self-respect people gain from an arrogant, intimidating, uncompromising pose. What works in the short run may not work in the long run.

    Perhaps if demonising Muslims were a short term strategy, “moderate” Muslims could have kept their heads down while those mad with anger swept away “extremists”. However it seems (for whatever reason) to have become a long term strategy for people like Douglas Murray.

  17. cjcjc — on 18th January, 2011 at 10:02 am  

    So sorry about this, but I am happy to “demonise” anyone with the views expressed in the video.

  18. Kismet Hardy — on 18th January, 2011 at 11:19 am  

    “Bit like the BNP opposing the National Front.”

    I think it’s more like SHARP and YRE against the NF. I mean the YRE were scary fuckers, but it was nice to know they were on our side

  19. Suburban Mafia — on 18th January, 2011 at 11:55 am  

    Yep, its nice to have people on my side who think that chopping other peoples hands off can be a really good idea. Really civilised that.

  20. joe90 — on 18th January, 2011 at 11:59 am  

    daily mail headline makers and right wing nutters like douglas murray must think they hit the jackpot whenever Al muhaj are on the scene.

    Al muhaj guaranteed to inflame community tensions with some silly stunt and the media all to willing to give them the platform.

  21. cjcjc — on 18th January, 2011 at 12:26 pm  

    Well I’m not sure the bloke on the video is on our side, is he?

  22. Kismet Hardy — on 18th January, 2011 at 1:09 pm  

    enemy of the enemy. Don’t know what it means, it’s something I heard on a crap asian dub foundation song once and momentarily thought clever

  23. K.T. — on 18th January, 2011 at 1:24 pm  

    I felt physically sick after viewing this film, which has been posted as though it is something good to behold. It is not. It is very, very disturbing. I genuinely fear for my children’s future in such a nation as they would create.

  24. damon — on 18th January, 2011 at 1:27 pm  

    I just found out that Belfast’s main Islamic Centre is Salafi.
    http://mosques.muslimsinbritain.org/show-mosque.php?id=73

    Although they do make this caveat:
    ”Salafi: There are numerous varieties of Islamic practice even in the same masjid, so this distinction is not homogeneous.”

    But I’m a bit disappointed to see that it is to be honest. As it means (does it?) that there are people there who have pretty medieval and backward views, not so different to the homophobic, sectarian and bonkers views of Ian Paisley’s church.

    Arif, I agree with some of the things you say, but are these Salafis any less mad than Sarah Palin supporters?
    You can see here how liberal and leftist people love to mock those kinds of people from on high.
    http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/01/17/the-unmissable-sarah-palin-battle-hymn/

    If the Luton Islamic centre is considered pretty mainstream within the Bury Park muslim community, is it any wonder then if Bury Park becomes a bit ghettoised, with many non muslims, or even less fundamentalist muslims, prefering not to live there?

    It was Darcus Howe on a visit to Birmingham who said that he found the scene outside a mosque on a friday a bit overbearing – and I’ve also seen that kind of scene on a friday outside East London Mosque, where I wondered what kind of understanding there could be between the devout guys in islamic dress, and the white cockney types who still live in the area.

    It’s through here that the Pickled Politics/Harry’s Place fault line lies. I am somewhere between the two general positions. Where IMO, one side does a bit too much brushing under the carpet, and the other often goes too far in constantly looking for dirt.

    Joe90, this isn’t about Al-Muhajiroun, it’s about fundamentalist religious believers of the less militant sort.

    It’s also these kind of people that Andrew Gilligan is going on about all the time. And why he’s able to justify saying things like how Tower Hamlets has become an ”Islamic Republic”.
    You might disagree, but you can see where he’s coming from and why he thinks that.

  25. Ahmad — on 18th January, 2011 at 1:43 pm  

    hmmm

    I also commented on the Guardian page about this.

    I doubt it’s a battle between turf between the 2 groups.

    If that was the case, why would the salafis advertise resources denouncing terror.

    Salafis are methodological in nature which doesn’t sit right with many Muslims, but if you think about it, it’s the only practical way of dealing with the terror issue rather than just saying ‘it’s wrong’.

  26. rinnol — on 18th January, 2011 at 2:40 pm  

    cjcjc
    “Well I’m not sure the bloke on the video is on our side, is he?”

    Yeah but youre an extremist zionist so thats a bit of a loaded question isnt it?

  27. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 3:00 pm  

    There seems to be double standards at play here. There are lots of white folk that would be in favour of hanging for murderers and paedophiles, maybe even rapists and litter louts. Certainly detention without trial doesn’t get the press or the public condemnation one might expect. And torture is swept under the carpet if it only applies to so-called ‘terrorists’.

    I do not approve of any of these things, but it is a bit much to compare and contrast what that chap said with a pretendy idea of what white people are supposed to think.

    Because some white folk are liberal and some aren’t. The less liberal have attitudes that probably match his, albeit with a different set of criteria.

    And so it goes for every other identifiable group on the planet. It is a false dichotomy and it only suits people that would divide us on the basis of external measures of identity rather than what goes on in our heads.

    Divide us on the basis of what we think, certainly. But don’t pretend that the vengeful side of human nature isn’t quite widespread. Especially, but not exclusively, when it is associated with religion.

  28. cjcjc — on 18th January, 2011 at 3:15 pm  

    “Yeah but youre an extremist zionist so thats a bit of a loaded question isnt it?”

    Of course I am!

  29. cjcjc — on 18th January, 2011 at 3:19 pm  

    But Douglas (as I try as ever to peer through the fog of your prose) that doesn’t mean we should applaud holders of extreme views for “opposing” the holders of even more extreme ones, does it?

  30. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 3:53 pm  

    I didn’t get the impression that anyone was expected to applaud, support or ally with anyone. The guy in the clip was quite clear that he wanted no such thing, would distrust it and consider is misconceived.

    Socially and morally he held extreme views – from a liberal perspective – but as others have mentioned no more extreme than the views you see expressed in the tabloids urging hanging and castrating etc.

    I don’t see him as someone I’d applaud or ally with, but since he seems, at least, to have no desire to get in my face then he can hold whatever views he likes. If he were to start attempting to push or impose those views I’d oppose him.

    My enemy’s enemy is my enemy’s enemy. nothing more, nothing less.

  31. damon — on 18th January, 2011 at 4:11 pm  

    Douglas, I have to say I find what you say a bit of a vague fudge and sidestep.

    Just because we have people as equally backward and lumpen doesn’t mean that adding more to the mix has to be welcomed. I would say that there is a difference to native backwardness and that which is imported.

    There can be a debate about what is native and what is imported. You could argue that extreme islam as shown by these Salafis, is these days as native as backward EDL type views.

    But if Bridgeton in Glasgow started to become more and more like we saw in that video, I don’t think it would be good for social cohesion between those people and your regular Rangers and Celtic supporting WWC.

    One could even go as far as to say that the Salafi culture shown here would almost be incompatable with the Rangers supporting culture of the Bridgeton pubs and the Loyalist flute bands who you will see in the area in the summer.

    Now I agree that there is not much that can really be done about this. And thankfully they are a minority.
    But it would seem that this will always be with us, and is something that has to be tolerated – in the most negative sense of that word.

    Just in the same way that Glasgow and Belfast have to tolerate the Loyalist Orange parades every year.
    It’s not pleasant, but it’s just a downside of multi-culturalism.

  32. Danyal — on 18th January, 2011 at 4:27 pm  

    Douglas Clark
    “Because some white folk are liberal and some aren’t. The less liberal have attitudes that probably match his, albeit with a different set of criteria.”

    Quite and many of them while decrying the barbarity of Islamic punishments would gladly do far worse to the Muslim minorities in their midst given half a chance.

  33. Kismet Hardy — on 18th January, 2011 at 4:40 pm  

    On a slightly chirpier note, check out Diary of a Bad Man on You Tube. It’s in loads of parts and starts out seeming like a bit of a dick being a a bit of a dick, but stick with it. Once you wade through the chick troubles and street stuff, as the rant of a Muslim with a message told in an unusual way goes, it turns out to be really quite sublime

  34. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 5:36 pm  

    Danyal,

    Quite and many of them while decrying the barbarity of Islamic punishments would gladly do far worse to the Muslim minorities in their midst given half a chance.

    Many? I would doubt that. A few violent thugs, yes. However, as Boyo pointed out, there are plenty of people in favour of capital and corporal punishment and while homophobes may have to keep a lid on it more than they used to, there are a lot around.

    Damon,
    …the Salafi culture shown here would almost be incompatable with the Rangers supporting culture of the Bridgeton pubs and the Loyalist flute bands…

    Do you really think so? Apart from being of a different religion and (in most cases) language and skin tone what aspect of this culture would most offend them? The homophobia? Support for capital punishment? Next time you are in one of those pubs, see what people think should happen to paedophiles, or what they feel about gays.

    Is it that their central values are really so different, or that they are expressed, as Douglas said, through a different set of criteria?

  35. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 5:38 pm  

    Damn. Unclosed tags.

  36. damon — on 18th January, 2011 at 6:14 pm  

    Don, you know you can edit as many times as you like within a half an hour or so?

    As to your suggestion of shared values, I’d say show me where there is a closeness between the likes of strongly religious muslims and the traditional WWC.
    I don’t see it in Whitechapel east London for example.

    It’s not so much a case of being offended, but more mutual incomprehension.
    You can see the contrast if you walk around Whitechapel and the Brick Lane area … and then walk along Bethnal Green Road until you come to the Shakespeare pub.

    The Shakespeare certainly doesn’t lack edge during football matches. The environment is all screaming opinion and blue banter between the customers who are all on speaking terms. It’s a bit of a Tottenham supporters’ pub during their matches and this is when the crowds are at their liveliest.

    During other matches things are calmer although the lack of seating doesn’t make things particularly enjoyable. The clientele at the Shakespeare are the same Stone Island wearing lads that you see in films like Football Factory or other Danny Dyer shows and there are older locals who sit quietly taking in the events around them.

    http://www.viewlondon.co.uk/pubsandbars/shakespeare-review-59663.html

    My impression just from visiting and driving around the area is that the original white working class – and other people who identify with that culture, have very little to do with the guys wearing religious dress. Even if both sets of people would support capital punishment and a bit of flogging.

  37. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 6:43 pm  

    show me where there is a closeness between the likes of strongly religious muslims and the traditional WWC.

    Clearly not, but I was suggesting that antipathy is based on visible difference rather than a genuine clash of values. That’s a very broad generalisation, of course, but I think there is some truth in it.

    It would, I suspect, be quite easy to take the opinions of the guy in the video and ‘frame’ them so that they would be perfectly acceptable to conservative ‘traditional WWC’. Or an Orangeman. If I wasn’t so busy with annual reviews I could probably put together a survey on social values which would show that in key areas there is little to no difference between the views of the guy in question and a large demographic of the public in general.

    Ironically, the same demographic that is likely to be most hostile to muslims.

  38. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 6:45 pm  

    Don, you know you can edit as many times as you like within a half an hour or so?

    How? There is no edit button and clicking on the post does nowt.

  39. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 6:50 pm  

    cjcjc @ 29,

    But Douglas (as I try as ever to peer through the fog of your prose) that doesn’t mean we should applaud holders of extreme views for “opposing” the holders of even more extreme ones, does it?

    Obviously not. I find your prose a tad dense too, in fact without content, however I am usually too polite to bring that to the attention of others.

    It is the assumption that only muslims have extreme opinions that I find annoying. You have – in my view – extreme opinions. Why should I care about your extreme opinions or the muslims extreme opinions? There is no difference. You are both idiots. That is my apparently fogbound thought.

    Don @ 30,

    Well, cheers, at least you get the point.

    Moving on…

    damon @ 31,

    You invariably assume I ‘take the blame’ for West of Scotland ‘culture’. I can assure you I do not. As far as I am concerned it is a blot on the landscape, a pervertion of day to day reality and utterly wrong. You and I have had our differences, but you are the one that see’s protestants and catholics as enemies. I don’t. I think some folk do, and I think they are idiots. Work that out damon.

    danyal @ 32,

    quite.

    Quite and many of them while decrying the barbarity of Islamic punishments would gladly do far worse to the Muslim minorities in their midst given half a chance.

    Hmm…

    Quite and many of them while decrying the barbarity of Islamic punishments would gladly do far worse to anyone in their midst given half a chance.

    Sorted it for you.

    Which, in my world makes islamicists and barbaric whitey folk pretty well equally evil.

    Got a thought on that?

  40. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 7:02 pm  

    Douglas,

    at least ?

    Suit yourself.

  41. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 7:04 pm  

    Don,

    That is weird. If I post something here, I get an ‘edit this’ icon up at the top right of the text. It is worth pointing out that your text is visible to others, and earwicga and I have fallen out over my unedited / postedited texts, but that is a minor matter.

    I see this site through both Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome so I don’t know why you would be seeing a different image.

  42. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 7:06 pm  

    Don @ 40,

    Well no, not ‘at least’. Clearly you do get the point.

    Sorry.

    My excuse is I was on a roll, but it was unforgiveable….

    :-)

  43. Don — on 18th January, 2011 at 8:31 pm  

    Douglas,

    I got no icons. But what the hell.

    No worries about that.

  44. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 8:34 pm  

    Icons don?

    I see some unclosed tags, but icons not so much… :-)

  45. damon — on 18th January, 2011 at 10:40 pm  

    Don, ‘Edit This’ should appear to the right of the date and time at the top of your new post for about 20 minutes. Click on that.

    As to different cultural tribes getting on and being able to relate to each other …. I see that it’s something that quite a few people are preferring to avoid talking about and are ignoring this thread.

    Just because people have cultural or social commonalities, doesn’t mean they will get on as communities.
    I just watched this Channel 4 programe ”Big Fat Gypsy Weddings” and you will see things that are very common between these English gypsies and regular settled people, (including different ethnic minorities in the UK), and even Muslims in places like Pakistan.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1348164/My-Big-Fat-Gypsy-Wedding-Forget-Kate-Middleton-Prince-William-back.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

    According to the programme tonight, gypsy girls are meant to be virgins when they marry, are not allowed to be alone with boys, are not allowed to drink alcohol before marriage, are expected to stay home and do all the cooking and cleaning. Leave school early to help raise their brothers and sisters. The 17 year old girl getting married tonight for example, left school aged eleven.

    It was also interesting that it was said that gypsy people don’t mix socially with non-gypsies, as a way of maintaining thier culture. Like the Salafis perhaps, and some Orthodox Jews.

    You have to bear in mind Trevor Phillips’ statement that we were ”sleepwalking towards segregation” … and have an idea, first: whether that was true or not, and secondly if it was (to one degree or other), whether it mattered or not.

    In Oldham, the council has thought that it does matter and are doing something about it.

    In a bold attempt to bridge the racial divide in the town of Oldham, Greater Manchester, two of its most segregated schools are merging.

    Race riots in the town almost a decade ago revealed deep divisions between its white and Asian populations. The Home Office said it was a place of “deep-rooted” segregation, with communities leading “parallel lives”.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8881030.stm

  46. douglas clark — on 18th January, 2011 at 11:26 pm  

    damon,

    How often are you going to quote that film?

    Channel 4 programe ”Big Fat Gypsy Weddings”

    I think it has been a few times now.

    How come I am not frit of muslims, despite there being lots of them around here. How come they haven’t engaged me in an aggressive way? I have picked up the literature that some muslims have asked me to of a Saturday or a Sunday or whatever. I never felt I was being proselytised.

    Just saying. It seems to me that you have a different experience of muslims.

    Can you tell me where my experience is wrong? And when you have been poselytised? ’cause I doubt you have, at least no more than by the wonderful scientologists.

    Well?

  47. persephone — on 18th January, 2011 at 11:33 pm  

    @45 “ you will see things that are very common between these English gypsies and regular settled people, (including different ethnic minorities in the UK), and even Muslims in places like Pakistan.”

    Can I broaden the Damonworldview by a comparison of that view & the reality of a settled person:-

    Gypsy girls : asian girls

    are meant to be virgins when they marry: tick

    are not allowed to be alone with boys: tick but exceptions being arranged marriage partners who are filtered to be good enough to be alone with

    are not allowed to drink alcohol before marriage: nor after either (gypsy girls have it so much easier than us settled asian girls)

    are expected to stay home and do all the cooking and cleaning: gypsy girls have it so easy as with some Asian girls theres a job before staying at home to do the cooking, cleaning (aka SuperSettledAsianWoman)

    Leave school early to help raise their brothers and sisters: no I was too busy being in the school sports team after school and besides my bro would put worms in the pocket of my jeans for a joke so no way was I goin‘ home early

    getting married tonight for example, left school aged eleven: my Dad encouraged me for years to do an MBA after I graduated but never to get married

    Pigeonholing comment added by me – Gypsy girls wear big meringue wedding dresses and have extravagant weddings: tick

    As you can see I do so hate pigeonholing.

  48. douglas clark — on 19th January, 2011 at 12:03 am  

    persephone,

    You are doing a lot of pigeonholing of your own.

  49. damon — on 19th January, 2011 at 12:57 am  

    Douglas, I can only give you about a four out of ten for perception and adding anything of value to PP.

    As the gypsy wedding programme just finished at 10pm, I can’t see how I could have ever mentioed it before. It’s the first one like it I’ve ever seen.

    How come I am not frit of muslims, despite there being lots of them around here. How come they haven’t engaged me in an aggressive way?

    That is just thoughtless drivel. You are just making things up, or reading into what I say, what you want to believe I’m saying. If everyone was a clueless as you, then PP wouldn’t be a site worth bothering with.

    The thread is about Salafi muslims verses the Al-Muhajiroun type headbangers. And I have stated that just because the Salafis are better, doesn’t mean that they are not issues of social cohesion around ultra religious people living side by side with non religious.

    It does seem to be a patern on PP though that to try to stretch an issue out a bit, can leave the person who does so looking isolated, and ready for some put downs from more ”conservatively minded” people.

    Websites like these are meant to be about kicking ideas back and forth aren’t they? Not trying to keep everything safe and bland.
    Being secular … but not a religion basher particularly, I think it is OK to talk about the negative aspects of religions … and ultra religious people are not good news IMO. Not if they can’t seem to seperate thier religious and cultural identity from most of their day-to-day lives, and because of that, have trouble integrating with the wider society.

    Because that will cause divisions in society, and you can possibly get a Tower of Babel effect, and can give credence to reactionary ideas like Angela Merkel gave about multi-culturalism having failed in Germany, or the best selling book that suggested the guest worker programme had lowered the intelligence of German society?
    http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2010/11/thilo-sarrazin-germany-immigration-multiculturalism-review/

    And inviting all sorts of unsavory characters to come and speak at mosques and Islamic centres, just gives ammunition to the ”Jihadi Watch” type of people.

    Persephone ….. :)

  50. douglas clark — on 19th January, 2011 at 1:25 am  

    Cheers damon @ 49,

    A vote of four out of ten from you is a bit of a miracle, wouldn’t you think? Exactly what marks out of ten do you think you add?

    Anyway, I apologise if you haven’t had the chance to watch it numerous times on iPlayer or summat. I have avoided it, ’cause of the reality TV stuff that I avoid at every possible opportunity.

    Anyway:

    How come I am not frit of muslims, despite there being lots of them around here. How come they haven’t engaged me in an aggressive way?

    That is just thoughtless drivel. You are just making things up, or reading into what I say, what you want to believe I’m saying. If everyone was a clueless as you, then PP wouldn’t be a site worth bothering with.

    How is that thoughtless drivel, exactly, damon. I am saying I am not worried about muslims and you have consistently argued on here about ‘certain muslims’, ‘lots of muslims’ and so forth and so on. I am saying I do not recognise any of these people as folk I know. They are just a fantasy in your head.

    Sure there are rotten muslims, just as there are rotten Christians and no doubt atheists too. My point here is trivial.

    Lots of white folk would not actually disagree with the penalties that Sharia Law might want to impose. It is a lie to say otherwise. Whether they would want to impose them for the same reasons or with different proof structures is a bit moot. But the death penalty exercises the views of a big minority in the UK.

    I am all in favour of arguing a point on here damon. I am not willing to be told that muslims are the only guilty party.

    WASPs have their own agenda too, it seems to me.

  51. joanne — on 19th January, 2011 at 4:49 am  

    “I don’t think anyone should be surprised by Abdur Rahman’s comments towards the end where he announces his support for capital punishment, believes homoesxuality is wrong and supports cutting of hands of thieves. He wouldn’t be much of a Salafi if he thought otherwise.”

    This is not a viewpoint that is exclusive to the salafi sect. Hanafi’s (who make up the vast proportion of Muslims in the UK)also hold homsexuality to be an abomination. They (the hanafi’s) are just as conservative in terms of other rulings.

  52. cjcjc — on 19th January, 2011 at 7:44 am  

    Damon – Douglas is exhibiting his famous Lord Nelson “I see no ships” telescope to blind eye approach.

    He himself hasn’t seen x, so there is no x!

    0/10.

  53. jamal — on 19th January, 2011 at 10:03 am  

    damon comments at 49

    comparing multiculturalism in britian and germany is like apples and oranges.

    Germany has never welcomed its immigrants, even though they are contributing to the growing german economy over the decades.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/8082836/Angela-Merkels-attack-on-Multikulti-was-misjudged-many-believe-it-wasnt-even-tried.html

    does britian have problems with different cultures yes on a huge fear spreading scale no.

  54. damon — on 19th January, 2011 at 11:46 am  

    Jamal, that’s true about Germany, and maybe I shouldn’t have used it in comparison to Britain, although having lived in Germany for a couple of years, I do wonder how much difference a different German government approach would have made. It would have improved things by a factor of some percent, but how much is anyone’s guess.
    The people would have still been the same …. unless of course a government had the forethought to be picking guestworkers like Australia picks immigrants today.
    Then you could get to the accusation that governments were being as picky and discriminating about potential immigrants, as personel/human resource departments are about sifting through job applicants.

    For example, if it had been understood that hiring a bunch of guys from Pakistan to work the night shifts at some Bradford mills, would lead to chain migration through cousin marriage, the villagers from Mirpur might not have been regarded as the best people to fill a hundred mill jobs back then.

    cjcjc, I agree with the ”I see no ships” line.
    Everything is fine if you just look at what you see in your high street and don’t bother to look too closely.
    I don’t agree with muck racking for the sake of it, but it would seem to me if people like that guy in the video are the norm in a place like Bury Park, then that is a bit of a problem.

    Just like it is with a community who think it’s perfectly normal to take a girls out of school at the age of eleven, and marry them off at a young age.
    That’s the gypsies I’m talking about there.
    And I only mentioned that programme, as it was them talking about themselves and saying this is what they did and what they were like as a community.

    The seperateness of the British/Irish gypsy and traveller communities is down to more than just the prejudices and racism of non-gypsies (although that’s often how some people like to portray things), it’s about a cultural gulf too, and I thought the Salafi people show an equal cultural gulf to their non-muslim neighbours, even if there are shared views on certain issues … and obviously the highly noticable shared common humanity .. (love for children and family, community etc).

    Here is a review of last night’s programme, which I think is worth looking at on channel 4′s i-player thing, as it shows so clearly a example of a cultural divide that has consequences for the wider society.

    This first episode concentrated on two big occasions: Margarita’s first communion and Josie’s marriage to Swanley. And it provided ample opportunity to display the mind-bending combination (for an outside observer) of the kind of dress-sense you would associate with a Las Vegas hooker, with the sexual and social restrictions of an Afghan village girl. Traveller girls don’t drink until they get married, never go out without a chaperone or a large group of friends, and don’t sleep with anyone until their wedding night. Even to arouse gossip, one group of girls suggested, was to risk a name as “dirty”. Did they not think this unfair, they were asked. “No. It basically is a boy’s world. They earn the money and put the food on the table, so it is their world.” Contentedly looking forward to a life of childbearing, cooking and cleaning, they compensate, it seems, with wedding dresses so overblown that injury quite often results: “Usually girls get scars on their hips,” said Josie as she was being fitted for her dress. “They say ‘the more bleeds the better the dress’.”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/last-nights-tv–big-fat-gypsy-weddings-channel-4-natural-world-special-miracle-in-the-marshes-of-iraq-bbc2-2187784.html

  55. cjcjc — on 19th January, 2011 at 12:16 pm  

    Experiences of a CofE vicar’s wife in Birmingham.

    http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/3650/full

  56. damon — on 19th January, 2011 at 2:10 pm  

    cjcjc, I read that Standpoint article last week when Boyo did a link to it here. I have to say that I find it a bit unbelievable. Or if it’s all true, that it only looks for the negative. I don’t know Birmingham, but it does paint an exceedingly dark picture. Surely nowhere is that bad. (?)

    I think it’s one of those ”glass half empty/half full” judgements. For some people, a gritty inner city area is full of horrors and depravity, and to others it’s home and quite normal and things aren’t nearly as bad as the headlines suggest.

    Of course even living in such an area, you can be quite unaware of things that go on right under your nose. I live in Belfast these days, and still find the place a mystery. How much actual support is there for the thuggish semi-retired Loyalist paramilitaries for example? Who were still able to orchestrate serious rioting a couple of months back, because they were unhappy with the police making arrests for murders commited twenty and thirty years ago.

    My point is, that as an outsider, I have no clue to the goings on inside those particular communities.
    Just like, if I was living in Luton, the lives and culture of the Salafi guys shown in the video would also be like a closed book to me.
    Whether their lives are any of my business is another question.

  57. greg — on 19th January, 2011 at 2:31 pm  

    damon
    “And inviting all sorts of unsavory characters to come and speak at mosques and Islamic centres, just gives ammunition to the ”Jihadi Watch” type of people.”

    Hateful bigots dont need any ammunition.

  58. Sarah AB — on 19th January, 2011 at 7:20 pm  

    damon – yes – much of what was in that article might apply to a) people living in any deprived area or b) the experiences of many non-white people moving to a (poor?) white majority area.

  59. cjcjc — on 19th January, 2011 at 9:33 pm  

    Oh Sarah you’re doing a Douglas…
    Take that telescope from your blind eye!

  60. persephone — on 19th January, 2011 at 9:57 pm  

    Douglas @48

    Point is in amongst some of what is pigeon holing is some reality but an alternative reality too.

  61. Shamit — on 19th January, 2011 at 10:41 pm  

    CJCJC –

    I know Birmingham – considering I was born in Walsall and the picture that article paints is ludicrous.

    Now if you consider Tower Hamlets to be representative of London – you may have a point – but then the whole premise and context would be wrong and driven by a fucked up bigoted agenda – I am sure you would agree.

    You should go up there once and you would find some of the most upmarket residential areas in Birmingham, Solihull, Walsall etc etc have many many Asian families including Muslim families. May be this article was written by someone who is a tad bit jealous because us Asians got uppity and have better education and quality of life to paint such a flawed description.

    While sometimes I agree with you – you do have common sense – a link like that takes the debate down to “sally” level at Liberal Conspiracy.

    Am sure you understand what I am getting at?

  62. Shamit — on 19th January, 2011 at 10:54 pm  

    one more thing about this post – it makes me really uncomfortable when people expect Muslims in general to apologise or vocally oppose the actions of fanatics who happen to be Muslims in this country or elsewhere.

    About a decade ago, a group of fundamentalist Hindus burnt alive a Christian missionary and his family in India and we all know how Modi orchestrated mobs in Gujarat. No one expected me and rightly so, to apologise because those criminals were Hindus.

    I am sure no one asks Catholics to apologise for the criminal behaviour of its Church or terrorist groups who do act in the name of religion as well as state.

    Why should it be any different for Muslims?

    ********************************************

    Damon – what do you mean by imported vs home grown.

    Like the EDL and the BNP, most of the terrorists who blew up tubes were homegrown and those who tried a repeat attack couple of weeks later.

    The shoe bomber was homegrown – now if you talk about foreign ideologies – from the internet to our culture to our fashion – much of it is derived from abroad.

    We live in a globalised world which is increasingly smaller and like its good parts the bad parts would be inflitrating our society. We must try to tackle them but trying to create a false division – oh these are home grown assholes but that group are not is just simply flawed especially when both groups were born and bred here.

    We all know in N. Ireland you have two distinct groups of assholes who are still trying to wreck the peace – so how do you differentiate there.

    Arguments such as the one you made makes me feel uncomfortable – because inevitably skin colour and religion etc etc become the dividing line and 2011 in Britain – when the Tory party Chair is a Muslim woman it is not desirable and neither is it acceptable.

  63. damon — on 20th January, 2011 at 2:34 am  

    Fair points Shamit. But this?

    it makes me really uncomfortable when people expect Muslims in general to apologise or vocally oppose the actions of fanatics who happen to be Muslims in this country or elsewhere.

    I know that some people will do that, but I wouldn’t take too much notice of anybody who did. Although there is always a time for speaking out against destructive tendencies whatever they are. If people are brave enough they should do it. (BNP, Al-Muhajiroun or whoever).

    When I say ”imported vs home grown” I was meaning, is there any difference with movements and politics that are seen to come from within the longstanding British culture, and those that might come from abroad through the changes that have taken place over the last 50 years? And whether that matters anyway at all.
    You’re right when you say ”from the internet to our culture to our fashion – much of it is derived from abroad” but can Salafi be considered a now mainstream form of religious worship in Britain? Or Mormonism? And does it matter if they grow and spread their influence?
    The Tablighi Jamaat sect wanted to build a very large mosque in East London … and as people will go to the mosques that are there (like the Salafi one in Belfast and the one run by Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s council for fatwa and research in Dublin – which I’ve been to and listened to a troubling sermon)… does it matter?

    My own opinion is that I really don’t know the full answer to that question. It must matter a bit.
    As a secular person, I prefer a more secular society, though people of course can do what they want. But there are consequences for us all in they way that society develops. I agree that the Standpoint article sounded ridiculous, but you’re from Walsall, type ”Walsall Mans” into Youtube and tell me if that is also sensationalist.
    It’s Darcus Howe so it might be. He is a bit of a drama queen.

    That Nicky Campbell is also always looking for a bit of drama. This was a part of his programme on sunday.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJbzvGhf-3Y

    The mother in the niqab: is it any of my business?
    Personally I’m not impressed, and she looks like an attention seeker. Probably a midlife crisis.
    I’m having one myself, but I don’t think converting to a religion in an off the peg way like that is the answer. And I think that if all women looked like that, the world would be an unbearable place.

  64. douglas clark — on 20th January, 2011 at 3:00 am  

    cjcjc @ 59,

    I have no idea where you are coming from. I am making the pretty obvious point that white people also include a sub-set of people that see justice as vengance. Frankly you are just being a tit on that issue. Well, plus ca change, etc…

  65. boyo — on 20th January, 2011 at 10:30 am  

    @ 63, well put, although Shamit’s points were also perfectly reasonable. To this question

    “can Salafi be considered a now mainstream form of religious worship in Britain? Or Mormonism? And does it matter if they grow and spread their influence?”

    I think the answer, for progressives, is yes and yes.

  66. Danyal — on 20th January, 2011 at 10:59 am  

    Damon
    “The mother in the niqab: is it any of my business?”

    Nope

    “personally I’m not impressed, and she looks like an attention seeker.”

    Look who’s talking

    I’m having one myself, but I don’t think converting to a religion in an off the peg way like that is the answer. And I think that if all women looked like that, the world would be an unbearable place”

    Why because you couldn’t gawp at women? What a feminist you are! Surely the world would also be unbearable if everyone dressed in tight revealing clothes too ?

  67. boyo — on 20th January, 2011 at 3:10 pm  

    Only if you can’t control yourself Danyal.

  68. joanne — on 20th January, 2011 at 4:49 pm  

    @55,
    How can one even take seriously an article signed off as anonymous?

  69. joanne — on 20th January, 2011 at 4:59 pm  

    “can Salafi be considered a now mainstream form of religious worship in Britain? Or Mormonism? And does it matter if they grow and spread their influence?”

    Sorry to labour the point but Salafi’s are no more conservative than Hanafi Deobandis or Brelvis who make up the vast majority of Muslims in the UK.

    There definitely seems to be an agenda at play here whereby people are looking to link Islam, as properly understood, with a sect (the salafi’s) which has long been subject to demonisation. The implication, of course, being that conservative Islam is unworkable and something which the vast majority of other sects have rejected.This is patently untrue.

    Just have a look at a Shafii/Hanafi.Maliki fiqh manual and you will see much the same rulings (on hand amputation for thieves, the unlawfulness of homosexuality, gender roles) as you will find amongst Salafi’s.

  70. Arif — on 20th January, 2011 at 6:27 pm  

    Damon #15, you quoted approvingly a particular comment by Douglas Murray about how he disapproved of the Government distinguishing between moderate and extremist Muslims, so I was surprised to hear him on the radio responding to reports suggesting Sayeeda Warsi wants to drop this terminology regarding Muslims, by arguing that is the most useful terminology we have – and that doing away with it is dangerous nonsense!

    In a way he is softening his view from the one you quote which suggests that all Muslims are extremist and cannot be part of Europe, to one which suggests that some of us may be acceptable in some way.

    I still bristle at the terms, in the way that Tunisia’s dictatorship was broadly regarded as moderate, as is Algeria’s dictatorship, while FIS and democratic groups who make use of the only legal means of uncontrolled civic association and identity (the mosques) are termed extremists.

    It seems a “moderate” is someone you supports the interests of the person doing the labelling and an “extremist” is anyone who threatens it. It just isn’t useful to analyse a situation of competing interests and perceptions. So I look forward to Sayeeda Warsi’s speech.

  71. Kismet Hardy — on 20th January, 2011 at 6:29 pm  

    “Surely the world would also be unbearable if everyone dressed in tight revealing clothes too”

    Just been to the gym. A man can only weep

  72. douglas clark — on 20th January, 2011 at 7:27 pm  

    Arif,

    It seems a “moderate” is someone you supports the interests of the person doing the labelling and an “extremist” is anyone who threatens it.

    Point.

  73. Sarah AB — on 20th January, 2011 at 8:42 pm  

    “It makes me really uncomfortable when people expect Muslims in general to apologise or vocally oppose the actions of fanatics who happen to be Muslims in this country or elsewhere.”

    I completely agree.

    WRT Murray – I think if you decide to define extremists quite narrowly (as terrorists say)and if you decide that anyone who is not an extremist, by that narrow definition, is ok – then you may end up doing business with people whose views are still pretty extreme.

  74. dave bones — on 20th January, 2011 at 9:00 pm  

    All those guys are moderates. The extremists are the ones who blow up. The only difference is ex-Al Muj types actively seek to piss off “the west” and the others in this video don’t

  75. Boyo — on 20th January, 2011 at 10:36 pm  

    These kind of discussions remind me of immovable objects meeting irresistable forces.

    People talk as if there was some kind of zero-sum solution, yet at the same time tiptoe around fundamental issues. This is as typical here, as at HP.

    IMHO (in case I’m accused of speaking for anyone else, which i still find a bizarre accusation) mass immigration has resulted in a cultural clash between two cultures that have always clashed – Islam and the West.

    It is not the fault of immigration per se, as most foreign cultures integrate (Confusion/ Hindu) or even assimilate (West Indian/ African/ European), albeit that I believe immigration was partly used to disempower the indigenous working class.

    For 1000 years Islam clashed with the West, because the two were competing ideologies. In many ways Islam is actually designed to be separate from other belief systems – from attitudes to alcohol to its indivisible political dimension.

    That doesn’t mean we can’t all live together, but obviously there are going to be minorities of Muslims who don’t wish to live in a Western way. However, the West has invited Islam to settle, and must accept the consequences.

    It’s ridiculous for progressives to think the views of extremist sects are “ok”, if by progressive they believe in any kind of Socialist, secular vision. Yet at the same time, as per my previous post, it is absolutely consistent with Western values to accomodate divergent and extreme views providing they do not affect the security of the society and are entered into freely by their adherents.

    If the West stands for anything, it is freedom of debate and the right to live as one wishes, without fear. Everything else is up for grabs.

  76. David — on 20th January, 2011 at 11:33 pm  
  77. David — on 20th January, 2011 at 11:39 pm  
  78. damon — on 21st January, 2011 at 3:07 am  

    Arif, I wasn’t ”quoting approvingly” of anything Duglas Murray said – I think he is a total plank.
    I meant that this ambiguity and lack of understanding of where people like the guys in the video actually stand, leaves the likes of Murray and the anti-Ground Zero protesters to claim some justification for their arguments.
    I agree with what you say about how Arab governments who keep down their populations are seen as somehow moderate, but I’m not really talking about that.

    The Luton Islamic Center had links to statements by Bilal Philips on it’s website. This is confusing as the guy sounds like a total reactionary, and is banned from Britain. Why are places like Luton Islamic Centre and Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham interested in these kinds of people that HP is always going on about?
    http://hurryupharry.org/2010/06/24/green-lane-mosque-upset-about-extremists-being-excluded-from-the-uk/

    I’m not that impressed with what Warsi is reported to have said either, as it’s way too simple. She makes a point, but it’s a very elementary one.

  79. AbuF — on 21st January, 2011 at 7:59 pm  

    Next week, SS steal march on SA stormtroopers in Night of Long Knives shocker…

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.