The Islamic Future of Britain

[pastafarian]

Because we've been allowing religious courts to operate for yonks. The Jewish courts that operate here cover the same basic areas as the Islamic courts. Mostly deal with financial issues.

i think everyone knows they exist .......but what are the benefits?

 

[father_and_son]

Britain is in denial. There is no real public debate on a historic event that is transforming the country. Mention of it occasionally surfaces in the media, but the mainstream political class never openly discuss it.
What is that historic event? By the year 2050, in a mere 36 years, Britain will be a majority Muslim nation.
This projection is based on reasonably good data. Between 2004 and 2008, the Muslim population of the UK grew at an annual rate of 6.7 percent, making Muslims 4 percent of the population in 2008. Extrapolating from those figures would mean that the Muslim population in 2020 would be 8 percent, 15 percent in 2030, 28 percent in 2040 and finally, in 2050, the Muslim population of the UK would exceed 50 percent of the total population.
Would you be happy with this??

Hope you don't have a job which requires you to interpret trends of data. Because this degree of over simplification is staggeringly ill informed.


Let's start with the basics...

1 person here... 1 more joins today and you have 100% a day growth rate. Only a moron would extrapolate this figure to the: 7,500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people you will have a year later! (2^365 - should be ~7.5x10^109 if I wrote it right)

But then, that's exactly what you've done! Taken a growth rate at a particular time and assumed it would be unchanged indefinitely.

Assuming there is no net change due to conversion, there are two massive factors you have chosen to ignore...
1). The net influx of new Muslim immigrants will decrease over time - its a cyclic thing - first Europeans and Scandinavians (Romans, Jutes, Danes, Angles, Saxons, etc - generally about land grab and strategic significance of our island), then Afro-Carribeans (our old colonies), then the Indian subcontinent (more of our own old colonies), now the middle east (displaced by local instabilities, which have always been there but we have aggravated considerably over the last couple of decades!). These things are ever changing and largely the result of our own political/military actions.
2). The birth rate among the existing population of recent immigrants will reduce over a couple of generations to match the existing population - proven to be the case time and time again.



But hey... If you have an agenda to promote, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story!

 

[KZNSeagull]

Hope you don't have a job which requires you to interpret trends of data. Because this degree of over simplification is staggeringly ill informed.


Let's start with the basics...

1 person here... 1 more joins today and you have 100% a day growth rate. Only a moron would extrapolate this figure to the: 7,500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people you will have a year later! (2^365 - should be ~7.5x10^109 if I wrote it right)

But then, that's exactly what you've done! Taken a growth rate at a particular time and assumed it would be unchanged indefinitely.

Assuming there is no net change due to conversion, there are two massive factors you have chosen to ignore...
1). The net influx of new Muslim immigrants will decrease over time - its a cyclic thing - first Europeans and Scandinavians (Romans, Jutes, Danes, Angles, Saxons, etc - generally about land grab and strategic significance of our island), then Afro-Carribeans (our old colonies), then the Indian subcontinent (more of our own old colonies), now the middle east (displaced by local instabilities, which have always been there but we have aggravated considerably over the last couple of decades!). These things are ever changing and largely the result of our own political/military actions.
2). The birth rate among the existing population of recent immigrants will reduce over a couple of generations to match the existing population - proven to be the case time and time again.



But hey... If you have an agenda to promote, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story!

Stats are great, aren't they!

The muslim population of Britain in 1961 was 55,000 and 251,000 in 1971, which is, by my calculations, an annual growth rate of 16.394%. If we extrapolate that out to 2014, there should now be 199,808,856 muslims living in Britain by the end of 2014. That is quite a lot of people. Assuming that my maths is correct, of course.

 

[Wilko]

I accept all that, which is all the more reason why one has to use one's brain to reach sensible conclusions. It is also easy for things to be misinterpreted when they are taken out of context. "An eye for an eye", for example (very Old Testament) is often taken as justification for revenge, when in fact it was originally intended to limit the extent of any retribution and prevent things escalating.

The sensible conclusion using one's brain is surely that it is a collection of outdated nonsense though? Any rational, logical thinker would come to that conclusion surely.

 

[Wilko]

I think thats the big question though isnt it,which is virtually impossible to answer.
Just how many British muslims are supporting the actions of this minority (and it is an extremist minority few that are tarnishing British Muslims).

The perception(and i agree its only a perception fuelled in part by the media) is that a large number of young muslims do in some way shape or form support the more extreme values of Islam,values that are alien to most that live here,I have no idea if 30% want sharia as quoted above,i have never heard that figure,it seems worryingly over the top.

The main problem as i see it is that apart from a number of muslim cultural leaders who do publicly speak out against the radicals,usually it seems at the behest of politicians or others in power for the sake of community cohesion there is no grass root demand for muslim radicals to be weeded out of the system.

When their religion has been aggrieved they are capable of rallying in their 1000`s in a matter of hours to demonstrate. Surely the hijacking of their religion by these extremists should have them protesting in the tens of thousands.......and yet they dont come.

the silence is deafening.

This is my thinking. Muslims took to the streets in their thousands over their offence to a Danish cartoon. Where are they now campaigning hard and vociferously against the extremists? If a cartoon image caused so much disgust to the faith then recent events should be utterly condemned.

 

[dingodan]

Britain is in denial. There is no real public debate on a historic event that is transforming the country. Mention of it occasionally surfaces in the media, but the mainstream political class never openly discuss it.
What is that historic event? By the year 2050, in a mere 36 years, Britain will be a majority Muslim nation.
This projection is based on reasonably good data. Between 2004 and 2008, the Muslim population of the UK grew at an annual rate of 6.7 percent, making Muslims 4 percent of the population in 2008. Extrapolating from those figures would mean that the Muslim population in 2020 would be 8 percent, 15 percent in 2030, 28 percent in 2040 and finally, in 2050, the Muslim population of the UK would exceed 50 percent of the total population.
Would you be happy with this??

Polar Bears are drowning world wide and this is all you can think about?

 

[GOM]

Assuming there is no net change due to conversion, there are two massive factors you have chosen to ignore...
1). The net influx of new Muslim immigrants will decrease over time - its a cyclic thing - first Europeans and Scandinavians (Romans, Jutes, Danes, Angles, Saxons, etc - generally about land grab and strategic significance of our island), then Afro-Carribeans (our old colonies), then the Indian subcontinent (more of our own old colonies), now the middle east (displaced by local instabilities, which have always been there but we have aggravated considerably over the last couple of decades!). These things are ever changing and largely the result of our own political/military actions.
2). The birth rate among the existing population of recent immigrants will reduce over a couple of generations to match the existing population - proven to be the case time and time again.

But hey... If you have an agenda to promote, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story!

And which of these are facts ? Or are they opinions or educated guesses ?

 

[Soulman]

This is my thinking. Muslims took to the streets in their thousands over their offence to a Danish cartoon. Where are they now campaigning hard and vociferously against the extremists? If a cartoon image caused so much disgust to the faith then recent events should be utterly condemned.

A very good point.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Unbelievable. Where is the balance?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Arabia-tip-state-s-Islamist-police-force.html

 

[father_and_son]

And which of these are facts ? Or are they opinions or educated guesses ?

Both are historical facts and therefore reasonable inputs in any future models.

 

[KZNSeagull]

This is my thinking. Muslims took to the streets in their thousands over their offence to a Danish cartoon. Where are they now campaigning hard and vociferously against the extremists? If a cartoon image caused so much disgust to the faith then recent events should be utterly condemned.

The Muslim councils in Britain have all condemned IS. Some have issued a fatwa against them. The burning of IS flags as part of their version of Ice Bucket Challenge has taken off on the internet and even Abu Qatada has condemned what they are doing!

I have no doubt that there are Muslims working behind the scenes in the UK to help security services root out extremists and help the government formulate their plans of action against IS - I doubt that we would get to hear about it though.

 

[father_and_son]

i think everyone knows they exist .......but what are the benefits?

Sharia Law is being used within the Muslim community for contractual disputes and has been for years. Both sides recognise the validity of Sharia Law and will abide by the decision made; it impacts only the two aggrieved parties; no-one is trying to apply the same decision making process to non-Muslims; the dispute is removed from the normal legal channels (saving time and money). Ultimately it is no different to any other mediation process. Think of Sharia Courts as a cross between ACAS and Relate and suddenly, it's hard to see a problem.

If somebody who has nothing to do with you argues with someone else who has nothing to do with you, why on earth would you care how they [peacefully] resolve the dispute. Draw lots, toss a coin, paper scissors stone, Sharia court, einy meiny miney mo. Who gives a sh*t?

The benefits are the cost savings to society, the downsides are non-existent.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

The sensible conclusion using one's brain is surely that it is a collection of outdated nonsense though? Any rational, logical thinker would come to that conclusion surely.

I disagree. Plenty of rational logical thinkers over the years have stuck with it.

There is a great deal of wisdom in the teaching of all the major faiths, and wisdom is usually timeless. Try "Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself", also known as the Golden Rule.

Obviously you don't need to ascribe to a faith to appreciate the sentiment or abide by it, but it is a way of possibly being introduced to the concept.

 

[father_and_son]

This is my thinking. Muslims took to the streets in their thousands over their offence to a Danish cartoon. Where are they now campaigning hard and vociferously against the extremists? If a cartoon image caused so much disgust to the faith then recent events should be utterly condemned.

A very good point.

Go on... I'll bite one more time on this thread.

This is NOT a very good point. Its a very poor one.


If you have a "silent majority" and a "vocal minority" then inevitably the minority will be heard... but despite this they do not speak for the whole community. This is true regardless of the community you are observing. Happens within NSC all the time!


Comparing something which outrages the silent majority with something that outrages the vocal minority and measuring the "noise" produced is not a fair test!

For the Muslim community, lets equate the vocal minority to the Extremists and all the reasonable Muslims fall into the silent majority:
1. A cartoon depicts their Prophet in a bad light. Silent Majority = Silent, Vocal Minority = Noisy. Outcome = Noise.
2. Some "infidels" get murdered by other Muslim extremists. Silent Majority = Silent, Vocal Minority = Silent. Outcome = Silent.

Not really a surprise and absolutely nothing to do with religion, nationality, residency or indeed, football.

 

[One Love]

The sensible conclusion using one's brain is surely that it is a collection of outdated nonsense though? Any rational, logical thinker would come to that conclusion surely.

I think that there is a part of yourself that is either open to it or not. Once it is open there is no going back.

The people who aren't open to it cannot understand why someone should have faith and vice versa. Once you understand this you realise it is pointless having a discussion about it with someone on the other side of the fence.

It's nothing to do with intelligence or lack of it, you can either see it or you can't. Just accept some people are different than you.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Sharia Law is being used within the Muslim community for contractual disputes and has been for years. Both sides recognise the validity of Sharia Law and will abide by the decision made; it impacts only the two aggrieved parties; no-one is trying to apply the same decision making process to non-Muslims; the dispute is removed from the normal legal channels (saving time and money). Ultimately it is no different to any other mediation process. Think of Sharia Courts as a cross between ACAS and Relate and suddenly, it's hard to see a problem.

If somebody who has nothing to do with you argues with someone else who has nothing to do with you, why on earth would you care how they [peacefully] resolve the dispute. Draw lots, toss a coin, paper scissors stone, Sharia court, einy meiny miney mo. Who gives a sh*t?

The benefits are the cost savings to society, the downsides are non-existent.

I completely disagree. Everyone in the country should use the same legal processes as everyone else. There was an interesting programme about these courts a while back - and it was not always the two willing parties you wish to think.

 

[Soulman]

I completely disagree. Everyone in the country should use the same legal processes as everyone else. There was an interesting programme about these courts a while back - and it was not always the two willing parties you wish to think.

Yes i saw the programme as well, C4 i think........not got much chance of winning a decision if you're a woman eh.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Yes i saw the programme as well, C4 i think........not got much chance of winning a decision if you're a woman eh.

Yes. If you live in this country you have the right to be protected by the law. The same law that applies to all your fellow citizens.

 

[Soulman]

Egypt and Saudi Arabia have spearheaded diplomatic pressure on host governments to shut down Muslim Brotherhood operations in Qatar, London and Istanbul.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Muslim-Brotherhood-operations-in-London.html

 

[lawros left foot]

Back to the original theme of this thread: At the time Elvis Presley died in 1977, he had 150 impersonators in the US. Now there are 85,000. Intriguingly, that means one in every 3,400 Americans is an Elvis impersonator. More disturbingly, if Elvis impersonators continue multiplying at the same rate, they will account for a third of the world’s population by 2019.

If that happens, I'm converting to Islam