Islam and the West
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
And in recent years the radicalised Africans.
It's very interesting to view this from a geographical standpoint and not just a religious one.
It is why surveys in mainland Europe within the Mulsim population produce such different data from the same in the UK. In mainland Europe the large communities are generally defined by either North African muslims or Turkish. Both these groups appear to have very different views on culture than the Pakistani groups as well as the West and East African ones.
There is one very clear potential difference and that is that Turkey and North Africa have far stronger cultural ties to Europe, created over thousands of years. Both groups have lived on each other's land and traded ownership of land as well as traded together. They also have different interpretations of their religions and when you look at their tribal ancestry, which always forms the basis of a cultures interpretation of the specifics of a religion, you can see that it is more progressive and inclusive.
Look at other geographic areas such as Pakistan and you can see that very dominant parts of Islam are derived from ancient tribal customs of those regions and because of far less interaction with Europe and other cultures these hereditary links are much stronger and in our eyes regressive.
Not sure what the relevance of Mermaid's question is, but for the record didn't Britain colonise India and split it into Pakistan and India (another masterstroke by the West, which resulted in millions of deaths). One would have thought that they should have learnt some British culture from their masters?It's very interesting to view this from a geographical standpoint and not just a religious one.
It is why surveys in mainland Europe within the Mulsim population produce such different data from the same in the UK. In mainland Europe the large communities are generally defined by either North African muslims or Turkish. Both these groups appear to have very different views on culture than the Pakistani groups as well as the West and East African ones.
There is one very clear potential difference and that is that Turkey and North Africa have far stronger cultural ties to Europe, created over thousands of years. Both groups have lived on each other's land and traded ownership of land as well as traded together. They also have different interpretations of their religions and when you look at their tribal ancestry, which always forms the basis of a cultures interpretation of the specifics of a religion, you can see that it is more progressive and inclusive.
Look at other geographic areas such as Pakistan and you can see that very dominant parts of Islam are derived from ancient tribal customs of those regions and because of far less interaction with Europe and other cultures these hereditary links are much stronger and in our eyes regressive.
Seriously, the irony of people moaning about people from the East and overlooking the henious crimes commited by the West against them is sickening.
Alpinestars said:
Not sure what the relevance of Mermaid's question is, but for the record didn't Britain colonise India and split it into Pakistan and India (another masterstroke by the West, which resulted in millions of deaths). One would have thought that they should have learnt some British culture from their masters?
Seriously, the irony of people moaning about people from the East and overlooking the henious crimes commited by the West against them is sickening.
Short answer no.Seriously, the irony of people moaning about people from the East and overlooking the henious crimes commited by the West against them is sickening.
Some History
Alpinestars said:
Not sure what the relevance of Mermaid's question is, but for the record didn't Britain colonise India and split it into Pakistan and India (another masterstroke by the West, which resulted in millions of deaths). One would have thought that they should have learnt some British culture from their masters?
Good point - the old pre 1947 colonial India, AFAIK (feel free to correct me), spilt into 3 parts. So similar "culture".India (mainly Hindu) & the disputed Kashmir area (mainly Muslim).
West Pakistan (mainly Muslim) - now referred to as Pakistan &
East Pakistan (mainly Muslim) - Bangladesh
Alpinestars said:
DonkeyApple said:
And in recent years the radicalised Africans.
It's very interesting to view this from a geographical standpoint and not just a religious one.
It is why surveys in mainland Europe within the Mulsim population produce such different data from the same in the UK. In mainland Europe the large communities are generally defined by either North African muslims or Turkish. Both these groups appear to have very different views on culture than the Pakistani groups as well as the West and East African ones.
There is one very clear potential difference and that is that Turkey and North Africa have far stronger cultural ties to Europe, created over thousands of years. Both groups have lived on each other's land and traded ownership of land as well as traded together. They also have different interpretations of their religions and when you look at their tribal ancestry, which always forms the basis of a cultures interpretation of the specifics of a religion, you can see that it is more progressive and inclusive.
Look at other geographic areas such as Pakistan and you can see that very dominant parts of Islam are derived from ancient tribal customs of those regions and because of far less interaction with Europe and other cultures these hereditary links are much stronger and in our eyes regressive.
Not sure what the relevance of Mermaid's question is, but for the record didn't Britain colonise India and split it into Pakistan and India (another masterstroke by the West, which resulted in millions of deaths). One would have thought that they should have learnt some British culture from their masters?It's very interesting to view this from a geographical standpoint and not just a religious one.
It is why surveys in mainland Europe within the Mulsim population produce such different data from the same in the UK. In mainland Europe the large communities are generally defined by either North African muslims or Turkish. Both these groups appear to have very different views on culture than the Pakistani groups as well as the West and East African ones.
There is one very clear potential difference and that is that Turkey and North Africa have far stronger cultural ties to Europe, created over thousands of years. Both groups have lived on each other's land and traded ownership of land as well as traded together. They also have different interpretations of their religions and when you look at their tribal ancestry, which always forms the basis of a cultures interpretation of the specifics of a religion, you can see that it is more progressive and inclusive.
Look at other geographic areas such as Pakistan and you can see that very dominant parts of Islam are derived from ancient tribal customs of those regions and because of far less interaction with Europe and other cultures these hereditary links are much stronger and in our eyes regressive.
Seriously, the irony of people moaning about people from the East and overlooking the henious crimes commited by the West against them is sickening.
It's a zone which contained Hindu's Muslims and Seikhs as well as dealing with the British and other Europeans.
Geography plays a very strong part in the issue and it is a detail that people dangerously ignore by lumping one group of people under such a disparate umbrella. Look to the geography, look to the tribal history and culture in that geography and there you will find the cause of the issues that we in the West have with certain behaviours. Islam tends to be a crude overlay that is benign for the most part but like any religion will amplify residual backward behaviour, behaviour that stems from tribal culture in origin.
irocfan said:
Pappa Lurve said:
.... C of E was just a small sub unit of Christianity which in Europe meant the Catholic Church ...
suspect you might find a certain Herr Luther disagreeing with you there 
(not to mention, IIRC, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, Greece, Holland). Ali - as they say, history is written by the victors! You are absolutely right though and I often think if you going into politics or the military at least, you should be required to at least have a basic understanding of history.
Alpinestars said:
Pappa Lurve you've already been warned and you are not taking heed, you've now got Ali G and Berw at it. You lot should be dressed up in orange clown suits and sent off to some occupied remote bay in Cuba for trying to let the truth get in the way of a good story. Shame on you.
I shall have my beard plucked in penance! Those who have commented about regional differences and issues - interesting stuff. And shows exactly the point that you can carve any group up any way you like and it boils down to the same thing, people are just that, people. What is sad is the strife and suffering in certain area of the world which does of course affect certain communities more than others but that is a whole other issue!
What saddens me is how few people stand up to acknowledge that the Muslim world is no different to any other (well, they do have epically good food though!), it is made up of good and bad etc. The average Muslim is exactly the same as the average anyone else I suspect, want to get on with their life, food on the table, an income and to live in a reasonable degree of safety. Evil, evil lot clearly :-P
Also, thank you to those who have been kind enough to support my view because this country would be very much the poorer without those who are not simply white anglo saxons. We need a broad range of people and cultures which enrich us all.
What saddens me is how few people stand up to acknowledge that the Muslim world is no different to any other (well, they do have epically good food though!), it is made up of good and bad etc. The average Muslim is exactly the same as the average anyone else I suspect, want to get on with their life, food on the table, an income and to live in a reasonable degree of safety. Evil, evil lot clearly :-P
Also, thank you to those who have been kind enough to support my view because this country would be very much the poorer without those who are not simply white anglo saxons. We need a broad range of people and cultures which enrich us all.
Pappa Lurve said:
Those who have commented about regional differences and issues - interesting stuff. And shows exactly the point that you can carve any group up any way you like and it boils down to the same thing, people are just that, people. What is sad is the strife and suffering in certain area of the world which does of course affect certain communities more than others but that is a whole other issue!
What saddens me is how few people stand up to acknowledge that the Muslim world is no different to any other (well, they do have epically good food though!), it is made up of good and bad etc. The average Muslim is exactly the same as the average anyone else I suspect, want to get on with their life, food on the table, an income and to live in a reasonable degree of safety. Evil, evil lot clearly :-P
Also, thank you to those who have been kind enough to support my view because this country would be very much the poorer without those who are not simply white anglo saxons. We need a broad range of people and cultures which enrich us all.
But we still don't want the Irish.What saddens me is how few people stand up to acknowledge that the Muslim world is no different to any other (well, they do have epically good food though!), it is made up of good and bad etc. The average Muslim is exactly the same as the average anyone else I suspect, want to get on with their life, food on the table, an income and to live in a reasonable degree of safety. Evil, evil lot clearly :-P
Also, thank you to those who have been kind enough to support my view because this country would be very much the poorer without those who are not simply white anglo saxons. We need a broad range of people and cultures which enrich us all.
Jinx said:
Short answer no.
Some History
Thanks for the history lesson. Didn't the British try to divide at least part of the country along religious lines in the early 20th Century? Which led to the formation and rise of an Islamic voice. And wasn't the partition overseen by Mountbatten at the end of British coloniolisation? Complete fSome History
k up in the same way Afghanistan and Iraq is. However Pakistan was created, stop missing the elephant in the room, the land was colonised by Britain, and yet the "same people" moan about the few idiots who want Sharia law in the UK. What goes around comes around.
Alpinestars said:
Jinx said:
Short answer no.
Some History
Thanks for the history lesson. Didn't the British try to divide at least part of the country along religious lines in the early 20th Century? Which led to the formation and rise of an Islamic voice. And wasn't the partition overseen by Mountbatten at the end of British coloniolisation? Complete fSome History
k up in the same way Afghanistan and Iraq is. However Pakistan was created, stop missing the elephant in the room, the land was colonised by Britain, and yet the "same people" moan about the few idiots who want Sharia law in the UK. What goes around comes around.
Alpinestars said:
Thanks for the history lesson. Didn't the British try to divide at least part of the country along religious lines in the early 20th Century? Which led to the formation and rise of an Islamic voice. And wasn't the partition overseen by Mountbatten at the end of British coloniolisation? Complete fk up in the same way Afghanistan and Iraq is.
However Pakistan was created, stop missing the elephant in the room, the land was colonised by Britain, and yet the "same people" moan about the few idiots who want Sharia law in the UK. What goes around comes around.
You seem to forget that "india" was colonised long before the Brits, this resulted in an even bigger death toll than the famine and partition, did you not mention the Moghals because of their religion?k up in the same way Afghanistan and Iraq is. However Pakistan was created, stop missing the elephant in the room, the land was colonised by Britain, and yet the "same people" moan about the few idiots who want Sharia law in the UK. What goes around comes around.
Pappa Lurve said:
What part of it is wicked? And no, quotes from the Mail are not proof. Nor is it proof to say "lots think this / agree with this".
And wicked compared to what?! Presumably our charming "Christian" based values? What are these values we all universally share that are not shared broadly by the majority of humans?
Finally - the majority of victims are Muslims. Victims of some non-existent all encompassing regime? If that is the case, considering the strongest faith in terms of influence in Europe has traditionally been Catholicism and was a huge driving force behind Imperialism which had a shattering effect on the ME (unintended certainly but unarguably shattering), I would suggest there is a stronger argument to say that the Catholic Church has caused more problems for Muslims, the logical extension of which is that all Christians or indeed all Europeans acted as a simple mindless hoard with a few people telling them what to do. Which is not remotely the case.
There's a woman named Mariam Yehya Ibrahim who's in prison in Sudan at the moment. Her crime? Apostasy!And wicked compared to what?! Presumably our charming "Christian" based values? What are these values we all universally share that are not shared broadly by the majority of humans?
Finally - the majority of victims are Muslims. Victims of some non-existent all encompassing regime? If that is the case, considering the strongest faith in terms of influence in Europe has traditionally been Catholicism and was a huge driving force behind Imperialism which had a shattering effect on the ME (unintended certainly but unarguably shattering), I would suggest there is a stronger argument to say that the Catholic Church has caused more problems for Muslims, the logical extension of which is that all Christians or indeed all Europeans acted as a simple mindless hoard with a few people telling them what to do. Which is not remotely the case.
She's a Christian who refuses to renounce her faith but because her father was Muslim she is considered Muslim. Proclaiming her Christianity is her crime.
She was turned in to police by Muslim members of her family whilst heavily pregnant. In prison she has given birth to a girl who she will be allowed to raise for two years. Marian will then be hanged. The child will no doubt be raised a Muslim.
This is all in accordance with Islamic law and far from a unique occurance. IMO Islam is a wicked totalitarian ideology which sanctions all kinds of barbarism. Both Muslims and non-Muslims are justified in fearing it.
supersingle said:
Pappa Lurve said:
What part of it is wicked? And no, quotes from the Mail are not proof. Nor is it proof to say "lots think this / agree with this".
And wicked compared to what?! Presumably our charming "Christian" based values? What are these values we all universally share that are not shared broadly by the majority of humans?
Finally - the majority of victims are Muslims. Victims of some non-existent all encompassing regime? If that is the case, considering the strongest faith in terms of influence in Europe has traditionally been Catholicism and was a huge driving force behind Imperialism which had a shattering effect on the ME (unintended certainly but unarguably shattering), I would suggest there is a stronger argument to say that the Catholic Church has caused more problems for Muslims, the logical extension of which is that all Christians or indeed all Europeans acted as a simple mindless hoard with a few people telling them what to do. Which is not remotely the case.
There's a woman named Mariam Yehya Ibrahim who's in prison in Sudan at the moment. Her crime? Apostasy!And wicked compared to what?! Presumably our charming "Christian" based values? What are these values we all universally share that are not shared broadly by the majority of humans?
Finally - the majority of victims are Muslims. Victims of some non-existent all encompassing regime? If that is the case, considering the strongest faith in terms of influence in Europe has traditionally been Catholicism and was a huge driving force behind Imperialism which had a shattering effect on the ME (unintended certainly but unarguably shattering), I would suggest there is a stronger argument to say that the Catholic Church has caused more problems for Muslims, the logical extension of which is that all Christians or indeed all Europeans acted as a simple mindless hoard with a few people telling them what to do. Which is not remotely the case.
She's a Christian who refuses to renounce her faith but because her father was Muslim she is considered Muslim. Proclaiming her Christianity is her crime.
She was turned in to police by Muslim members of her family whilst heavily pregnant. In prison she has given birth to a girl who she will be allowed to raise for two years. Marian will then be hanged. The child will no doubt be raised a Muslim.
This is all in accordance with Islamic law and far from a unique occurrence. IMO Islam is a wicked totalitarian ideology which sanctions all kinds of barbarism. Both Muslims and non-Muslims are justified in fearing it.
1) You manged to pull up one case out of however many millions happen every year.
2) You also managed to assume that it is the responsibility of every Muslim alive as they all totally agree on it and the application and meaning of the law. Ok, may be true for all I know but in which case, every person in the UK and arguably every Christian is responsible for Alan Turing for example.
And while we are on the subject - how is that ethos different from Catholicism? You think the Inquisition, which hunting, persecution of Jews and anyone else they fancied, anti gay laws in Africa RIGHT NOW as a result of Christian so called teachings - no difference at all. But so much easier to pull one small, clearly tragic case and somehow say that condemns a whole race and ethos. If it does, fair enough but then I am assuming you are Christian simple as it is the majority religion and thus I hold you personally responsible for the millions of women who cannot have a termination should they choose, for the mass murders in Africa committed by Christian factions, the spread of AIDS due to the Churches insane attitude in Africa regarding that, stirring up trouble in the ME, a place where by and large the one thing most people agree on is an utter contempt for the Catholic Church etc..... Seems a lot for one person to have done all by themselves but hey, if you can state tthat a whole ethos is unacceptable then do please explain why the above does not make Catholicism unacceptable?
I could of course pull examples from pretty much any race / religion / area etc I choose. Example - all Yorkshiremen kill hookers as 1 called Peter Sutcliffe did, or was it just guys with beards, or white guys, or all me?
irocfan said:
oh I see it's all whitey's fault (as seems to be the cry for most lefties)
Not sure what your Whitey reference means?But you have to be pretty narrow minded and naive to not see the irony of invading countries because you don't like the regime and then slate people who want to impose their views on the invading country.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff