If you can't resist the compulsion to uninvitedly quote a post of mine not in the least addressed to you, at least darn well quit messing with its formatting. Just because you prefer this "style" :roll: in your own concoctions, doesn't give you the right to alter anything of mine.
If you can't do that, lay off whatever I post.
I'm not going to address anything else of yours.
Now that is really comical.
The height of conjecture served as a valid poll analysis and you go into a tizzle?
In due time and when I (not you) decide.
Should we not meet again before, Happy New Year.
No problem with the PEW content. What I miss is how Choudury represents a majority (implied).I will be interested to see what you concoct, and how your cooking together of your own evidence, pans out.
Places you may want to consider: "Develop the notion that Muslim communities are an important element of a wider civil society response to extremism, and have a voice and, further than this, a say in the development of counter-narratives, community-based projects, and efforts to aid vulnerable members of their communities."
Just a moment...
Just a moment...
"The Pew survey found that British Muslims have a stronger Islamic identity than do Muslims elsewhere in Europe. Fully eight-in-ten (81%) British Muslims think of themselves as Muslims first rather than as British"
In Great Britain, Muslims Worry About Islamic Extremism | Pew Research Center
This, even though it is pretty much accepted that the UK has done the most, by way of multicultural policies, to make Muslims feel accepted.
Another place to look:
British Muslim Perspectives on Multiculturalism
But of course, you'll provide superior sources. I can't wait!
It's an excellent point. I think you'd find 85%+ of Scots identifying as Scottish before British. You'd find 60%+ Yorkshiremen identifying as Yorkies before British, or even English, too. I suspect those who identify as British first will be a tiny minority, I'd guess something around 15%, and they'll be predominantly English and/or with armed forces connections.And, to lighten things up a bit :mrgreen:before you are also lured into the same alley of obvious frustration that others appear to have hurtled down, it might be interesting to hear what percentage of Brits see themselves as Brits first rather than English, Scottish, Welsh Cornish....whatever.
It's an excellent point. I think you'd find 85%+ of Scots identifying as Scottish before British. You'd find 60%+ Yorkshiremen identifying as Yorkies before British, or even English, too. I suspect those who identify as British first will be a tiny minority, I'd guess something around 15%, and they'll be predominantly English and/or with armed forces connections.
How the hell is that an excellent point! Even if someone were to self identify as Scottish, Welsh etc. that is still a part of the UK:doh Moreover, the Scots recently voted to stay part of the UK.
The last time I looked, Muslim was a religion.
Identity is about feelings and sympathy and sense of belonging. Everyone's is made up of different elements. For someone supposedly antipathetic towards multiculturalism, you seem very committed to a politics based on affiliation to a rigid and exclusive group mentality.The fact that one could feel most strongly identified as a Muslim doesn't exclude the possibility of feeling wholly British/English/Irish, or gay/woman/Trekkie.
As with most nationalist arguments, yours seems to see something sinister about the idea that their (contrived) nationality might not be their strongest point of identification. Your 'Britishness', whatever that might be, may well be the thing that defines you to yourself the most, but we aren't all you. The fact that not everyone feels like you doesn't mean that everyone who doesn't is a potential terrorist sympathiser.
I've seen Muslims eat fish'n chips. That should clinch it.
No one has labeled "every adherent of that religion a threat"We can feel free to criticize islam, just like I criticize the hell out of christianity. You're introducing a strawman, and knowing you it's likely intentional. Criticizing a religion is not the same as labeling every adherent of that religion a threat.
Do you think individuals should be held responsible for their own actions or should we group people's guilt by their religious affiliation? Christians rape and murder people in America every day, should that be grounds to demonize all christians?...
I get it, those that sympathize with hate preachers wouldn't be seen dead eating fish'n chips.Of course, that won't be the 51% who sympathise with hate preachers
do you actually read articles in their entirety from time to time. Or just what you feel supports your agenda?
Beyond this, we must break this trend by pushing back against underlying narratives. This will require not just the voice of Muslims, but the whole of civil society standing in solidarity with those Muslims who are brave enough to challenge extremists in their midst. Islam is an idea: like other ideas, it must be open to scrutiny. But supporting secularism and challenging Islamism is not fighting “Islam”. It is moving from extremism to liberal pluralism. By neglecting to challenge extremist views, we will only increase anti-Muslim bigotry.
Looking at some of the attitudes on here, I would not be surprised if any more sensible address were not shreddered from the start. By application of the same anti-Muslim agenda one gets to see more and more.Mind you, looking at some of the attitudes here, I would not be surprised how many support such opinions.
Try, if you please, not to get too confused on terms and terminology.How the hell is that an excellent point! Even if someone were to self identify as Scottish, Welsh etc. that is still a part of the UK:doh Moreover, the Scots recently voted to stay part of the UK.
The last time I looked, Muslim was a religion.
It can obviously also mean that the person being dismissed isn't worth wasting anymore time trying to educate...
Seems like the guy on the left gives Muslims a bad name... but is in a minority?
Try, if you please, not to get too confused on terms and terminology.
The UK is a geographical and political entity, to identify as British (or Welsh etc. before that) a completely different ball game).
Most Britons identify as being from their country first of all. Those countries being Scotland, Wales and England. Heck they each even have their own football team.
How the hell is that an excellent point! Even if someone were to self identify as Scottish, Welsh etc. that is still a part of the UK:doh Moreover, the Scots recently voted to stay part of the UK.
The last time I looked, Muslim was a religion.
I get it, those that sympathize with hate preachers wouldn't be seen dead eating fish'n chips.
Guess that puts me under suspicion then.
do you actually read articles in their entirety from time to time. Or just what you feel supports your agenda?
Like
Looking at some of the attitudes on here, I would not be surprised if any more sensible address were not shreddered from the start. By application of the same anti-Muslim agenda one gets to see more and more.
If 45 pct, 51 pct or whatever higher percentage that suits the day and convenient agenda are put under general suspicion, I guess it won't be long before alienation of all of Muslims will have been completed. So to follow up on Nawaz's observation, you yourself are doing the opposite of what he proposes.
Of course they are but I really don't know where you think you're going with this.You have said nothing that contradicts, what I wrote. So, do those countries form part of the UK? Yes or No...
Well, if that's your take, good. Seeing how you live in the country and I haven't for a long time, why not go find those yourself instead of asking for links from someone over 2,000 kms away?Where have I said I do not support those Muslims, standing against extremism? Actually, can you post links to those groups I'd be inclined to sign up and offer some much needed support. They have a fight on their hands for sure, considering the traction of extreme ideology sweeping large parts of the world.
Well, as long as you show capacity and willingness to differentiate between those (and not to discount the rest of your post), that's just great. It's not an impression that you gave (least not to me) so far but I'll agree on the subjectiveness of perceptions.It would be nice if you offered a 'single' source in support of what you're saying (I'm not even sure what it amounts too). I noticed sometime back you drew conclusions on something you thought could be 'implicitly' taken from my argument. I do not think the majority of Muslims in the UK are terrorists. What I do believe is the majority hold some very questionable beliefs;
So, after Pages of persistent and empty denial of the numbers...... ..Try to follow logic a bit in understanding the secondariness of identifying as British not being confined to just Muslims, eh?
Well, if that's your take, good. Seeing how you live in the country and I haven't for a long time, why not go find those yourself instead of asking for links from someone over 2,000 kms away?
Well, as long as you show capacity and willingness to differentiate between those (and not to discount the rest of your post), that's just great. It's not an impression that you gave (least not to me) so far but I'll agree on the subjectiveness of perceptions.
So what solution, if I may ask, can you think of in addressing beliefs held questionable?
I have for instance addressed the desired duality of British and Sharia law elsewhere (possibly even in here, can't remember) by advocating the abolishment of religious arbitration courts altogether. ALL such courts, irrespective of creed.
Your turn.
So, after Pages of persistent and empty denial of the numbers...
You now post (without ever conceding) that there IS a problem..
But... the Burden [Shift routine/trick] is somehow again on your Opponent and it's "His turn" to answer with a "Solution" for a "problem" you denied existed/minimized for many pages and in response to many posters.
Because you post No real info, just challenge it without citation of your own, we always and necessarily see this 'technique'.
and speaking of citation..
As Paul probably remembers, I posted that Gallup poll/Guardian Link as an OP 6 Years ago:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...zero-tolerance-homosexuality-0-fer-500-a.html
He was [at least] post #10 on Page One of that long-running contentious string. (after 'liking' my denialist/apologetic opponent on post #9)
My, how the board has changed/come around since!
Of course they are but I really don't know where you think you're going with this.
I made a comparison to your original statement that Muslims identify as Muslims first, before identifying as British. To show that Britishness appears to be of equally lesser importance even to those one might call indigenous. Yet that form of identification or non-identification all on its own not to be representative of enmity towards the concept or nationality as such. Something you appear to be implying nevertheless. Or why ever bring it up?
Try to follow logic a bit in understanding the secondariness of identifying as British not being confined to just Muslims, eh?
Well, if that's your take, good. Seeing how you live in the country and I haven't for a long time, why not go find those yourself instead of asking for links from someone over 2,000 kms away?
Well, as long as you show capacity and willingness to differentiate between those (and not to discount the rest of your post), that's just great. It's not an impression that you gave (least not to me) so far but I'll agree on the subjectiveness of perceptions.
So what solution, if I may ask, can you think of in addressing beliefs held questionable?
I have for instance addressed the desired duality of British and Sharia law elsewhere (possibly even in here, can't remember) by advocating the abolishment of religious arbitration courts altogether. ALL such courts, irrespective of creed.
Your turn.
Again, how could it possibly be my turn? You've said absolutely nothing substantive ...........
does reading it again help?So what solution, if I may ask, can you think of in addressing beliefs held questionable?
I have for instance addressed the desired duality of British and Sharia law elsewhere (possibly even in here, can't remember) by advocating the abolishment of religious arbitration courts altogether. ALL such courts, irrespective of creed.
Your turn.
what are you on about? not provided any counter evidence to what? Your interpretations, arrived at in whatever manner you please, of actual (original) poll conclusions? You haven't even provided the BBC poll without the convenient negation of its conclusions by someone else.or provided any counter evidence.
Look pot, just don't get into calling games with kettles, eh? Practice what you preach or discussing this any further with you will become pointless.You can't just tweak and adjust what I write, and pretend it is some form of polemic.
Of course I do. Just because one is kept too busy on here in combating the summary condemnations levelled by people that like to generalize everything, doesn't mean the other priority remains unnoticed.So I'm clear, you do believe there are problems within the Muslim community?
does reading it again help? what are you on about? not provided any counter evidence to what? Your interpretations, arrived at in whatever manner you please, of actual (original) poll conclusions? You haven't even provided the BBC poll without the convenient negation of its conclusions by someone else.Look pot, just don't get into calling games with kettles, eh? Practice what you preach or discussing this any further with you will become pointless.
Of course I do. Just because one is kept too busy on here in combating the summary condemnations levelled by people that like to generalize everything, doesn't mean the other priority remains unnoticed.
So, having asked you your solution to an issue specified and having gone ahead by addressing a part of it myself, what do you find so objectionable about "your turn"?
Well, if that's your conclusion on the matter, I guess we might as well end this here (as was to be expected).I don't think I've ever encountered someone so adept at saying so much, without saying anything :?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?