Islamaphobia

[Signalcalc]

Correct me if I am wrong but I think it is illegal to criticize Jews and Moslems but it is not illegal to criticise Christians, Hindus , Communists etc.
Why the difference ?

My understanding of the UK hate speech laws are that it is OK to criticise ideologies but not individuals. Wiki extract below:

Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation is forbidden.

So yes you would be correct to say criticising individual Jews, Muslims, Christians or anyone in fact in the above kind of way is illegal, but wrong to say it only applies to Jews and Muslims.

 

[cantagril]

Aha, you have hit one particular nail on the head, the very word Islamophobia is designed to be Taqiyya, the wordsmiths that invented the word, being Muslims themselves, had a pretty good idea about the consequences it would bring to Western societies, how it would be used to confuse, subjugate, smear and lock up those who criticise Islam, after all, Islam has had 1400 years to practice the take over of foreign lands, just as Christians had around 1800 years of doing the same until it reformed itself (presumably from within).

Islamophobia - the irrational fear of Islam, justified by govts.

No-one in their right mind 500 years ago would have thought the cruelty of Christianity would come to and end, you either showed you believed in God or were burnt at the stake. For some reason we expect Islam to reform in the same way in a similar timeframe, it seems inconceivable that it can reform itself, but I'm sure it will given time, the question is, how long do we have to wait for even an english approved translation of the Koran? That is a very valid question, if the Islamic community cannot agree on its interpretation then what hope for the rest of us, Taqiyya at play is my guess. You also have to remember that Islam, like Christianity is not a single entity, Islamic factions frequently kill each other because of differences over the ideology, just as Catholics and Protestants kill each other.

In the meantime, whilst we wait for that reform to arrive, the unsuspecting British public should not be subjected to the imposition of the ideology in our daily lives, with no say, little choice, no agreement, censored when questioned, aided and abetted, encouraged and legislated for by government.

Despite my perceived nail-hitting, I can't say I share your understanding of Taqiya ....but in fairness, I must say that it's the same for a lot of moslems.

As to the rest of your reminders of Christian atrocities: agreed. It's worth remembering that some crusades took place in Europe such as the one against the Albigensians which included the massacre and sack of Béziers (South of France) in 1200 odd and it was there that the phrase " God will recognise his own" was used when some random crusader had asked how it was possible to tell the heretics from the true Christians and received that reply with the instruction to just kill everybody.

 

[Signalcalc]

Hi cant',
The sentence quoted implies that you've read it? If so, was it the original Arabic text or an English translation? I ask because my (very limited) understanding of the topic is that the book is open to interpretation, i.e. it's easily misinterpreted, and that the only people really able to get a true and complete handle on it are native Muslim Arabic speakers. Either way, I'm surprised that Imams the world over don't agree on an English translation so that everyone can read for themselves to discover whether or not the text gives Muslims the green light to have non-Muslim white girls as sex slaves and kill non believers etc. (I assume not!) That would go a long way towards clearing up the ambiguity and confusion that surrounds the ideology. I don't doubt that most Muslims - by which I mean three quarters or even four fifths of them - are peace loving people that wouldn't hurt a fly. But, that still leaves a bu$$er of a lot of people who believe in Sharia Law and appear to want to impose it - along with the Islamic faith - on others. Needless to say, that's completely incompatible with western society.
Tim.

I think you might find that lots of Muslims follow Sharia and yet may know very little about the Koran, the Hadiths and so on. Similar with Christians, Hindus and others, they are born into the faith, go to faith schools, know something of the teachings, apply some of those teachings and yet have little recollection of the Bible words and certainly would have difficulty pinpointing or understanding some of the passages. Muslims themselves are as ill informed about the Koran as the rest of us and probably couldn't really care less as long as they show up for Friday prayers each week.

 

[Signalcalc]

Despite my perceived nail-hitting, I can't say I share your understanding of Taqiya ....but in fairness, I must say that it's the same for a lot of moslems.

As to the rest of your reminders of Christian atrocities: agreed. It's worth remembering that some crusades took place in Europe such as the one against the Albigensians which included the massacre and sack of Béziers (South of France) in 1200 odd and it was there that the phrase " God will recognise his own" was used when some random crusader had asked how it was possible to tell the heretics from the true Christians and received that reply with the instruction to just kill everybody.

Ah Beziers, the sunshine, the beach, the heat, the sugar coated peanut sellers, twinned with Stockport of all places, I never knew it was such a hotbed of Christian Crusading, you learn something new everyday 😂

Stockport could only offer mad hatters and cotton mills, the latter an industry I'm actually proud to have worked in, in the final dying days of the industrial revolution, no crusading to be found there.

 

[counter_violent]

Aha, you have hit one particular nail on the head, the very word Islamophobia is designed to be Taqiyya, the wordsmiths that invented the word, being Muslims themselves, had a pretty good idea about the consequences it would bring to Western societies, how it would be used to confuse, subjugate, smear and lock up those who criticise Islam, after all, Islam has had 1400 years to practice the take over of foreign lands, just as Christians had around 1800 years of doing the same until it reformed itself (presumably from within).

Islamophobia - the irrational fear of Islam, justified by govts.

No-one in their right mind 500 years ago would have thought the cruelty of Christianity would come to and end, you either showed you believed in God or were burnt at the stake. For some reason we expect Islam to reform in the same way in a similar timeframe, it seems inconceivable that it can reform itself, but I'm sure it will given time, the question is, how long do we have to wait for even an english approved translation of the Koran? That is a very valid question, if the Islamic community cannot agree on its interpretation then what hope for the rest of us, Taqiyya at play is my guess. You also have to remember that Islam, like Christianity is not a single entity, Islamic factions frequently kill each other because of differences over the ideology, just as Catholics and Protestants kill each other.

In the meantime, whilst we wait for that reform to arrive, the unsuspecting British public should not be subjected to the imposition of the ideology in our daily lives, with no say, little choice, no agreement, censored when questioned, aided and abetted, encouraged and legislated for by government.

A lot of our food is now halal and I bet if the public really knew what was going on, they would be up in arms overnight.

 

[Signalcalc]

A lot of our food is now halal and I bet if the public really knew what was going on, they would be up in arms overnight.

It amazes me how the animal rights activists just seem to be oblivious, deliberately so? Are they suffering with Islamophobia, are they scared of confronting the Halal lobby over the cruel deaths of millions of animals? The RSPCA are very PC about it all, we've had Kosher slaughter for years also, but then the activists are mostly all lefties, RSPCA is just another institution infiltrated with common purpose ideology (that does not take away from the good work they do also), a sad state we've sunk to over the last few decades, all done under the radar, no consultation, no voting for it, no parliamentary debates, just legislated for, trumping our own animal welfare rights and laws in the process, duplicity and deceit at it's finest, with hardly anyone taking much notice until....Brexit

Oh dear, not Brexit exposing the anti-democratic system we've been living under again.

Strange bedfellows that Islam and the lefties make, Islam is an authoritarian ideology, more extreme right than left, or maybe it's the extreme left authoritarians that are their natural home, it's a bit difficult to work out where on the political spectrum Islam actually sits. During WW2 they naturally assisted the Nazi's, but then some were fighting for the allies also.

The left will import anyone that will vote for them and will hand out tax payers money to persuade them to continue to do so, London being the prime example, but large swathes of the North and Midlands have also gone that way now. One theory is that Islam is using the lefties as useful idiots, until the day comes that they are a large enough group to impose Sharia beyond what is already legislated for, then the left will really be in trouble (as will us all).

Birmingham schools being a case in point, how are the left wing intersectionalists handling that one, which minority group rights trump the other, the MSM reporting on that one has gone a bit quiet recently?

 

[Signalcalc]

Well I suppose it wasn't going to be long before AMW makes an appearance on an Islamophobia thread. More than a grain of truth? Looks like Globalism is to blame again.

 

[Pat494]

Some very good and debatable points above.
Perhaps a Muslim academic can explain some of the points raised, from their perspective ?
Should be interesting.
Business is a unifying and profitable occupation.

 

[Pat494]

My understanding of the UK hate speech laws are that it is OK to criticise ideologies but not individuals. Wiki extract below:

Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation is forbidden.

So yes you would be correct to say criticising individual Jews, Muslims, Christians or anyone in fact in the above kind of way is illegal, but wrong to say it only applies to Jews and Muslims.

Thanks for the insight.
Probably doesn't apply to politicians or their policies though.
Boris cheating on his wife has been in the papers recently.
News of MPs misbehaving is always good for a smirk or two.

 

[timsk]

. . . Enjoy your reading - I guarantee that it will be quite sobering

Thanks for the detailed reply cant'.

I think I've posted the link below elsewhere in the past - but this thread is the ideal place for it. It's a report from the Pew Research Centre (PRC) which contains a lot of data - albeit six years old - about Muslims' attitudes towards Sharia Law: The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

This more recent report from 2017 by PRC outlines how Muslims will grow in numbers throughout Europe: Europe’s Growing Muslim Population
Tim.

 

[Signalcalc]

Thanks for the insight.
Probably doesn't apply to politicians or their policies though.
Boris cheating on his wife has been in the papers recently.
News of MPs misbehaving is always good for a smirk or two.

Imam Tawhidi is the only Islamic scholar that I know of and have listened to on occasion, as he appears to have a moderate voice and talks about reforming Islam, the Islamists don't like him of course, might be worth a read and listen, there are quite a few videos of him on youtube also, just search his name.

The Office of Imam Shaikh M. Tawhidi

imamtawhidi.com

 

[Signalcalc]

Despite my perceived nail-hitting, I can't say I share your understanding of Taqiya ....but in fairness, I must say that it's the same for a lot of moslems.

I found this interesting from Imam Tawhidi:

"Imam Tawhidi rejects the use of Taqiyyah and the concealing of one’s main beliefs for personal safety, and believes that in open societies where police protect the citizens, moderate Muslims should express their views and openly criticise the extremist elements within their communities."

My understanding of Taqiyyah, until this thread appeared and I have now done further research, was that Taqiyyah is used to hide from non-believers the true nature of the conquest of Islam so that they could be conquered. I didn't realise that it was intended to be used to conceal a Muslim's beliefs for the reasons of personal protection either from non-believers (Crusaders or similar in a historical context) or from their own extremists in the community (this would be a more modern phenomena?).

Given the current (rather than historical) use of the word and the suggestion that it is probably used to deceive non-believers not for personal protection but for conquering reasons then I don't think I was too far from the mark on that score.

It is concerning that Imam Tawhidi has called this out as a problem in itself, it suggests that there will be a large body of moderate Muslims that are concerned enough for their own personal safety not to express their moderate views within the Islamic community and Taqiyyah is the only recourse that moderate Muslims have to achieve this.

Would it also be fair to say that Taqiyyah is used by the extremists to deceive non-believers also, as I was originally alluding to?

What's your understanding Sir Canta?

 

[Signalcalc]

Notice how The Guardian promotes the definition of Islamophobia as a form of racism, everything on the left has to be boiled down to racism, it's another ridiculous stance and thankfully the definition has been rejected. Compared to the officially adopted definition of anti-semitism as an example and Islamophobia looks to be just politically motivated.

Yes, Islamophobia is a type of racism. Here’s why | Wes Streeting

Contrary to myth, the definition I helped devise isn’t a threat to free speech, says co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims, Wes Streeting

www.theguardian.com

Anti-semitism defintion:

Definition of antisemitism

antisemitism.uk

 

[Signalcalc]

As one commentator noted, why go to Saudi to interview these women when you could do it in any major U.K. city?

Lifting the veil of secrecy: What's life really like for Saudi women?

Lifting the veil of secrecy: What's life really like for Saudi women?

Queens of the Kingdom writer Nicola Sutcliff knows Saudi Arabia from the inside. She has interviewed 28 Saudi women from every walk of life for her novel.

mol.im

 

[cantagril]

I found this interesting from Imam Tawhidi:
"Imam Tawhidi rejects the use of Taqiyyah and the concealing of one’s main beliefs for personal safety, and believes that in open societies where police protect the citizens, moderate Muslims should express their views and openly criticise the extremist elements within their communities."
..........
Would it also be fair to say that Taqiyyah is used by the extremists to deceive non-believers also, as I was originally alluding to?

As I don't number that many moslem extremists or even moderates, in my circle, I don't think I'm qualified to give you a substantive answer. I'd certainly go along with yr Imam Howsyerfather on what the original intent was but I rather think that it's degenerated into a linguistic argument along HumptyDumpty lines i.e " When I use a word, it means what I choose it mean...." Usage is everything whether it's "correct" or not...e.g cohort, hoi polloi, incredible, literally, unique, racist ...and so on and so on, ad nauseam.

So...... I suppose an unsatisfactory answer might be "Possibly"....or "Probably"..... I wouldn't be at all surprised.

With regard to your post on the redefinition of Islamophobia: I'd say that this again a linguistic problem in that the sense of the original meaning has been distorted with time and over-use just as it has with "racism". Our earlier discussion was centred on just this idea - to me a reasoned and justified by evidence and/or experience fear is not a phobia and to suggest that it is to me means that the the user is disingenuous or ignorant.

I happily admit to having extreme cultural prejudices (their name is legion) and Islam is near the top of my list - along with teabags and the demise of 3rd class compartments....but I am neither an Islamophobe nor a racist. I think you yourself pointed out that Christianity is where it is today precisely because it has evolved over many centuries to get here. It is now generally accepted that the sun does not go round the earth, that some non-witches float and that burning alive those people that disagree with dogma is to be frowned upon. I am utterly convinced that Islam will eventually arrive at more or less the same conclusions when it too has had another six and a half centuries or so to age in the wood.

 

[Pat494]

If downtrodden Muslim women can't or won't stick up for themselves then imho they have little hope of being anywhere near equal in this century. Others may be sympathetic but should not meddle in another's affairs without an invite.
They should be careful of retribution from the likes of Muslim hard liners. The murder of the liberal Kashoggi illustrates this point.

 

[cantagril]

If downtrodden Muslim women can't or won't stick up for themselves then imho they have little hope of being anywhere near equal in this century. Others may be sympathetic but should not meddle in another's affairs without an invite.
They should be careful of retribution from the likes of Muslim hard liners. The murder of the liberal Kashoggi illustrates this point.

Up to a point, Lord Copper: yes, of course, any woman anywhere should be able to stick up for themselves without fear but alas (and alack) it's just another case of the Real interfering with the Ideal. The world is generally a nasty place for some of it's inhabitants and when one has eliminated natural disasters and crime one ends up with culture as the culprit, and culture (with the smallest of "c"s) just means "the shit people do" and "traditional culture" means that they've done it for a while...which might be ten years or a thousand. Changing a culture usually involves somebody suffering more than usual (or dying) at which point the mass may begin to shift.

In my humblest opinion I reckon that it's precisely because one is not involved (and therefore usually safe) that it is very important that opinions are made known......the recent release of those saudis girls being a case in point. So, yes, I do agree that one should be circumspect in meddling in others' affairs but at some point we have to admit to something more than unspoken solidarity and help turn that "little hope" into something a tad more substantial.

Not to say we stop looking over our shoulders for our friendly neighbourhood IslamoLoon

 

[Signalcalc]

It amazes me how the animal rights activists just seem to be oblivious, deliberately so? Are they suffering with Islamophobia, are they scared of confronting the Halal lobby over the cruel deaths of millions of animals? The RSPCA are very PC about it all, we've had Kosher slaughter for years also, but then the activists are mostly all lefties, RSPCA is just another institution infiltrated with common purpose ideology (that does not take away from the good work they do also), a sad state we've sunk to over the last few decades, all done under the radar, no consultation, no voting for it, no parliamentary debates, just legislated for

I wasn’t too far from the mark was I [emoji50]

RSPCA infiltrated by militants with an agenda ruining its legacy

RSPCA infiltrated by militants with an agenda ruining its legacy

To many Britons the RSPCA is an important organisation but now hardliners with extreme views in the organisation are subvert policies and expand their influence.

mol.im

 

[Pat494]

Sara Zelenak's parents want terrorists' families to be held accountable after daughter's murder

Definitely those with the knowledge of a forthcoming attack should be held accountable if they don't inform the police.Lives could be saved. I would go further and charge the terrorist's mosque for financial compensation too.

 

[cantagril]

Sara Zelenak's parents want terrorists' families to be held accountable after daughter's murder

Definitely those with the knowledge of a forthcoming attack should be held accountable if they don't inform the police.Lives could be saved. I would go further and charge the terrorist's mosque for financial compensation too.

Seems to me that an updating of the Treason act could make conspirators liable for acts perpetrated by others as would failure to report knowledge of conspiracies. I understand that French law already covers this.