police dealing with incident on London bridge.,

[Insel affe]

I agree with this. As a person with christian beliefs, whilst I think everyone should express ideas thoughtfully, I would not hesitate to defend someone's right to dispute and even denigrate my religion should they so wish. Christianity went through a reformation which Islam never has. I think that makes a difference apart from the peaceful nature of Jesus Christ as opposed to Mohammed.

Being devils advocate then can I suggest you maybe the same as a moderate Muslim in this country then. However the fact you imagine Jesus as a solely peaceful person & God (Jesus dad) is your interpretation of a version of the bible, just like some Muslims see Alah as peaceful.

Here in lies the problem religion and peoples interpretations of it, until this Archaic form of worship has run its course there will all ways be truly horrific things done in its name.

 

[heathgate]

The possible clampdown on free speech by the requirement to filter information on the internet. Also whether the difficult conversations will be a green light to xenophobics to attack all.

Force by law, the unencryption of all public social media platforms.... and allow the security services free range to monitor..... good starting point for those of us not burdened by the fantasy big brother virus.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[heathgate]

The Manchester bomber was reported according to most reports I've read from within his own community.

The police have found no record of those alleged calls.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Being devils advocate then can I suggest you maybe the same as a moderate Muslim in this country then. However the fact you imagine Jesus as a solely peaceful person & God (Jesus dad) is your interpretation of a version of the bible, just like some Muslims see Alah as peaceful.

Here in lies the problem religion and peoples interpretations of it, until this Archaic form of worship has run its course there will all ways be truly horrific things done in its name.

I see what you are saying, however, Jesus eschewed violence and was not after some kind of forceful, military solution much to many Jews disappointment as they would have liked a figure to rally round against the Romans. A Christian sees Jesus as being the person to emulate. I would imagine emulating the warlord Mohammed and emulating Jesus are two very different things.

 

[wellquickwoody]

1). "Integration hasn't happened as many "liberals" would hope".
The trouble is, too many liberals decided that expecting people to integrate wasn't liberal enough, and that multi-culturalism was a much better option. It wasn't, and it isn't. It didn't work, hasn't worked, and never will work. These troubles will go on until this particular group does what other incomers to this country have done over the years; integrating, while at the same time adding some splendid bits of their culture to to the pot.

Best post for a very long time, utter agreement from here.

 

[pigbite]

I am friends with Muslims who as far as I'm concerned are as integrated as me and who are equally horrified by recent events.

Are they so integrated that they have no problem with homosexuality, permit their wives to dress as they wish, reject myths on the creation of the universe and the world around us etc. etc.?

Of course there are plenty of non-Muslims that have non-secular or progressive views on such matters and I certainly am not suggesting that all Muslims are latent terrorists just because of their Islamic faith. What I am suggesting however is that, just like any Christian with a more fundamental interpretation of the Bible, they may have a line in the sand, a fence on which they will not sit, that is not in line with modern, secular, progressive, tolerant and inclusive values that the rest of us try and foster.

It's this that marks a implicit difference between believer and non-believer and allows the development of twisted and evil ideological values to the point where violence can be considered. It's a problem that has been largely eradicated in Christianity since most Christians threw out the hateful, misogynistic, moralistic, mythical nonsense years ago as soon as people stopped hanging or burning so called apostates, condemning single mothers to special homes to give birth and then adopting the kids,or hounding those with different sexual morals to the ends of the earth.

Islam needs to get a handle on this, progress and make the bits of their faith that can be used to promote such hate as irrelevant as so much of the nonsense in the Bible.

 

[Leighgull]

I don't think it's all our foreign policy (some of it maybe but not all). I think it's about empowerment. Some Muslims feel that Islam is the most important thing in the world; to them Islam is everything. And before the internet and satellite TV, they could live in an insular community that was, as far as they were aware, the same as the rest of the world.
Then, a few years ago, along came technology that allowed them to get connected and they looked at the world and they saw that it was different to how they thought; The power and importance in the world wasn't Islam and Allah and Mohammed, it was MTV and Coca Cola.
That's where the hate started to fester. They saw that we, in the First world were better off than them, happier, healthier and had more control over our own lives; if we wanted to sing and dance or have casual relationships we could because we didn't pay much attention to medieval books telling us it was wrong.
They started to think "how can we make these Kaffir realise that Islam is more important that their ways ?" because to them it is everything. They started asking "how can we make Islam more prominent than Western culture ?".
In the twisted minds of Fundamentalists, terrorist acts are about empowering Islam not imposing it.

Course that's just a theory, might be bollocks

That, sir, is a little bit of genius. Hat off.

I suspect that this, plus a shitload of sexual repression, is the cause of most Islamist aggression.

Sexual enticement is certainly a main tenet of Islam. Which other monotheist religion offers such eye watering amount of fanny upon successful martyrdom? It's all cushions and 80 virgins...all you have to do is slaughter some infidels.

I'm not one for judging a bloke by appearances but Salman Abedi, the killer of little manc girls, would not be getting laid in this world, speccy weak chinned weedy little qur runt that he was...

 

[Leighgull]

The police have found no record of those alleged calls.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Really? Well, who'd have thunk it? Muslims lying about being good citizens? No. For shame.,!

 

[kevo]

Blimey, Piers Morgan talking sense. Can't believe the Daily Mail have turned on May:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4571186/May-cut-police-numbers-paying-price.html

 

[Insel affe]

Really? Well, who'd have thunk it? Muslims lying about being good citizens? No. For shame.,!

The enemy within eh is that your thought process, I guess some would think that maybe Enoch could be being proved right as blood flows on the streets.

 

[Insel affe]

I see what you are saying, however, Jesus eschewed violence and was not after some kind of forceful, military solution much to many Jews disappointment as they would have liked a figure to rally round against the Romans. A Christian sees Jesus as being the person to emulate. I would imagine emulating the warlord Mohammed and emulating Jesus are two very different things.

Again another interpretation, picking and choosing which bits to believe etc, I cannot see why anyone would believe a book that has been altered so many times, to suit those who deemed certain things not relevant to them and could suit their needs.

The events of the Second Coming of Christ are found in the Bible, including the Book of Revelation–which is the last book in the New Testament. Jesus will “judge and wage war” (Rev. 19:11), his robe will be “dipped in blood” (19:13), and he will be accompanied by “armies” (19:14) with which he will “strike down the nations” (19:15), including “the Gentiles” in general and “the nations that were opposed to him” in specific. This will result in the “utter destruction of all his enemies”. Furthermore: “in his second coming[,] he will complete their destruction, when he shall put down all opposing rule, principality, and power.”

Once he conquers the infidels, Jesus “will rule them with an iron rod” (19:15).

Not much different really is it.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Being devils advocate then can I suggest you maybe the same as a moderate Muslim in this country then. However the fact you imagine Jesus as a solely peaceful person & God (Jesus dad) is your interpretation of a version of the bible, just like some Muslims see Alah as peaceful.

Here in lies the problem religion and peoples interpretations of it, until this Archaic form of worship has run its course there will all ways be truly horrific things done in its name.

Allah is God. They follow the teachings of Muhammad their prophet.

Compare the recorded words/messages of Jesus and Muhammad however and they are nothing alike.

So a moderate Muslim is starting from a far more violent and warped point of view than moderates of other faiths whose prophets are not violent and war like in nature.

So anyway you interpret it you're starting from a far worse place.

It's like comparing Gandhi to Hitler if you compare Muhammad to most other prophets.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Again another interpretation, picking and choosing which bits to believe etc, I cannot see why anyone would believe a book that has been altered so many times, to suit those who deemed certain things not relevant to them and could suit their needs.

The events of the Second Coming of Christ are found in the Bible, including the Book of Revelation–which is the last book in the New Testament. Jesus will “judge and wage war” (Rev. 19:11), his robe will be “dipped in blood” (19:13), and he will be accompanied by “armies” (19:14) with which he will “strike down the nations” (19:15), including “the Gentiles” in general and “the nations that were opposed to him” in specific. This will result in the “utter destruction of all his enemies”. Furthermore: “in his second coming[,] he will complete their destruction, when he shall put down all opposing rule, principality, and power.”

Once he conquers the infidels, Jesus “will rule them with an iron rod” (19:15).

Not much different really is it.

The book of Revelation is "apocalyptic" writing, and the average Christian would not take it all literally. It's a million miles from "turn the other cheek" and suchlike, which is the main message.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The book of Revelation is "apocalyptic" writing, and the average Christian would not take it all literally. It's a million miles from "turn the other cheek" and suchlike, which is the main message.

This is pretty much what I was going to say. It's metaphorical imo.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Are they so integrated that they have no problem with homosexuality, permit their wives to dress as they wish, reject myths on the creation of the universe and the world around us etc. etc.?

Of course there are plenty of non-Muslims that have non-secular or progressive views on such matters and I certainly am not suggesting that all Muslims are latent terrorists just because of their Islamic faith. What I am suggesting however is that, just like any Christian with a more fundamental interpretation of the Bible, they may have a line in the sand, a fence on which they will not sit, that is not in line with modern, secular, progressive, tolerant and inclusive values that the rest of us try and foster.

It's this that marks a implicit difference between believer and non-believer and allows the development of twisted and evil ideological values to the point where violence can be considered. It's a problem that has been largely eradicated in Christianity since most Christians threw out the hateful, misogynistic, moralistic, mythical nonsense years ago as soon as people stopped hanging or burning so called apostates, condemning single mothers to special homes to give birth and then adopting the kids,or hounding those with different sexual morals to the ends of the earth.

Islam needs to get a handle on this, progress and make the bits of their faith that can be used to promote such hate as irrelevant as so much of the nonsense in the Bible.

To be fair to muslims, or indeed, people of any religious persuasion, those traits which you highlight as undesirable, are not confined to people with religious views. There are plenty of people in the west and cultures elsewhere that exhibit a wide range of tolerances and belief systems.

 

[Insel affe]

The book of Revelation is "apocalyptic" writing, and the average Christian would not take it all literally. It's a million miles from "turn the other cheek" and suchlike, which is the main message.

I am aware of that, my point stands anyone can take bits and bobs twist and turn it anyway to suit your own ends.

Religion is particularly vulnerable to distortions, because it's already been twisted from the get go.

 

[pigbite]

The book of Revelation is "apocalyptic" writing, and the average Christian would not take it all literally. It's a million miles from "turn the other cheek" and suchlike, which is the main message.

Err... not really. The bit containing supposedly eye witness accounts of Jesus life is limited to 4 of 66 books. More than half is the OT which is full of vindictive acts of violence by God and his "chosen" people. Even the NT is full of Paul's writings who was an outrageous misogynist and homophobe.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Err... not really. The bit containing supposedly eye witness accounts of Jesus life is limited to 4 of 66 books. More than half is the OT which is full of vindictive acts of violence by God and his "chosen" people. Even the NT is full of Paul's writings who was an outrageous misogynist and homophobe.

The OT is a semi historic account of the early history of the Jews. If a similar account were written for any European nation, the history of bloodshed and violence would be very similar. It is unique in that equivalent detailed written history is not available for other similar tribes. It is not only a story which tells of the struggle to survive, but also their interpretation of the world and their God. Obviously, their perception of their God changes as the social situation changes. The NT brings grace into the equation whereby the acts of an individual are not the be all and end all but rather what the person's 'heart' is like and a belief in Christ. Paul isn't in my opinion a misogynist, there are many verses where he encourages sacrifice and love for a wife. I agree, he is very strong on homosexual sex. Whatever one reads into that, one should always look at the period the books were written in to allow understanding. That doesn't mean that some principles are okay in the modern context, but enables more objectivity. I am pretty sure that our times are not perfect either and some tenets of our culture will be judged through a different perspective in the future.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

My original post quote. Came from the Andrew Neil interview with Corbyn.

Here, I've cut and pasted for you from the transcript online.

Google yourself silly mate.

"AN: But I’m struggling to find the role of foreign policy. You see, Islamic State was founded well before the invasion of Iraq. It’s murdering people across Europe because it hates our values. Only this year they said this: ‘some might argue that your foreign policies are what drives our hatred. But this particular reason for hating you is secondary. Even if you were to stop bombing us we would continue to hate you we hate your secularism, your lack of modesty and your democracy. Our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam.’ It’s not foreign policy".

The original quote from Isis is online too somewhere but I can't be arsed.

Bin Laden's excuse for 9/11 dated back to crusades in the 16th century in Spain.

 

[pigbite]

The OT is a semi historic account of the early history of the Jews. If a similar account were written for any European nation, the history of bloodshed and violence would be very similar. It is unique in that equivalent detailed written history is not available for other similar tribes. It is not only a story which tells of the struggle to survive, but also their interpretation of the world and their God. Obviously, their perception of their God changes as the social situation changes. The NT brings grace into the equation whereby the acts of an individual are not the be all and end all but rather what the person's 'heart' is like and a belief in Christ. Paul isn't in my opinion a misogynist, there are many verses where he encourages sacrifice and love for a wife. I agree, he is very strong on homosexual sex. Whatever one reads into that, one should always look at the period the books were written in to allow understanding. That doesn't mean that some principles are okay in the modern context, but enables more objectivity. I am pretty sure that our times are not perfect either and some tenets of our culture will be judged through a different perspective in the future.

I agree in principle with what you say and it's true no society is perfect. The point is though that the humanist content of the Bible is relatively small and we are fortunate that,for the most part, Christians choose to think about the vast majority of it in the way you do. That's why we don't have Christians generally murdering one another (except in wars of course ) and a generally peaceful, tolerant and progressive society.

Islam is some way behind with the truly secular Muslim a tiny minority. I am happy to accept that most Muslims, whilst perhaps culturally conservative, are no problem and perfectly able to be part of an open and tolerant community however the fact is that the bits of the Quran that get twisted to generate the hate we have seen are not treated like the horrendous parts of the Bible. I'd love to see religion thrown out completely but of course that's a pipe dream so would be more than happy to settle for a situation where Islam could at least catch up with Christianity's nonsense filter. It wouldn't be perfect but at least we wouldn't have extremist murdering innocents every few days somewhere in the world.