Bob, you numpty..more people have died across the world in the name of democracy than in the name of Islam, so your justification of Islamaphobia doesn't make sense..However, i do agree with you that MPACUK have possibly jumped the gun a bit with this story. There doesn't seemed to be many facts included in the article. Did the attack take place inside the mosque? As far as I know the mosque has security guards and it would be quite difficult for a person to attack someone and walk away without anyone noticing...Facts Please MPACUK!!!

Sun Worshipper

I have never justified or even tried to justify an attack on any western targets by terrorists or any other hate parties. I condemn all acts of violence against civillians, whether they be non-muslims attacked by muslims or muslims attacked by non-muslims, I condemn both of these actions.

The people who condone acts of violence against civillians are in my opinion loonies who need help, whether they be Muslims or non-Muslims.

And you come in one those categories.

YOU NEED HELP!!

I am disgusted and outraged at this horrific attack on an Imam in a sacred and holy place.

As a non-Muslim I am deeply angered to learn of an attack taking place within a Mosque in this country. The fascist assailant should be prosecuted to the most severe extent of the law.

Salaam

Muslim community has been the victim of Paki-bashing for the last 50 years. British Establishment did nothing to tackle this problem. Now Muslim community is victim of terrorism by the British establishment. Thousands of Muslim youths were searched in the streets and hundreds of them are behind the bar with out any trial. Muslim community leaders and Muslim politicians are doing nothing and sometimes they balme Muslim youths for showing anger and frustration. In my opinion, they do not represent Muslim community. They are foot and mouth of the British establishment and foot and mouth disease of the Muslim community.

At the end of the day

Nobody deserves to be physically attacked.

No one can say what was in the minds of the attackers before they have even been identified.

Bob

"Are you an idiot? Where did i say its ok to beat this fella up?" By Bob

Ok I apologise for assuming you did. It's just that your post was a bit ambigious and I thought you were justifying this attack.

"When its the muslim getting attacked its called racism or islamophobia. but when a muslim attacks innocent civillians (when i say innocent i mean everyone not just muslims) muslims always want to blame the west or foriegn policy." By Bob

I'll refer you to my last post, You will find your answer in it.

"Take a look at you beloved quran and see how evil it is. look at chapter nine which is always used by muslim killers before they blow everyone up." By Bob

Chapter nine of the Qu'ran is pretty long. Can you please refer to which verse you are talking about.

I'll await your reply

bob,

By declaring a part of the quran as evil you are CLEARLY AND WITHOUT DOUBT being racist towards muslims in my view and that of many others. You are clearly a mouth piece of islamophobes who prefers to debate rather than attack muslims. Why else would you be monitoring this group. How much time do you spend monitoring muslim forums such as this everday? be honest-few hours every day?

Bob...
tell me more about your thoughts on islam ... i would like to know what opinions racists carry against muslims.
How long have you been a racist now - was it after 9/11 or have you always been racist and had that inkling at the back of your mind since a child???

Bob

having looked at your comments i have no doubt YOU ARE RACIST. Its people like you who carry out attacks on imams like the one reported above. When you can no longer bear humiliating intellectual defeats on forums such as these then as a terrorist, people like you carry out attacks on imams such as those above.
You are in effect as bad as those evil bombers who killed those innoncent civilians - even though its on a smaller scale - attacking a person with a knife or whatever.
If you attcked an imam, you are indeed terrifying people and therefore are just as bad as the terrorists of last month - which is what a person such as you could do.

So bob... tell me whats going on in the mind of a terrorist? maybe you can hand yourself in to special branch and tell them your ideas so that thye can better tackle extremists...

You want someone to blame.

The muslims in this country should blame themselves for allowing this to happen.

You've been demonised in the media for the last 6 years, and have done nothing pro-active to counter this.

Expect more of the same

STOP COMPLAINING AND DO SOMETHING!

BOB

Which verse in chapter 9 are you referring too? this is getting beyond a joke.

I have condemned all people Muslim and non-muslim for killing innocent people. And they deserve everything they get.

I have said that in my previous posts, why are we going round in circles. We do complain about Muslims killing Muslims but we don't complain to you we complain to the Muslims. When non-Muslim act injustly then we complain to non-Muslims.

You are good at using my quotes why have you not read what I have written in the brackets.

" i have one qusestion for you. you claim that you are against these killings and its not part of islam. would you say that bin laden is an apostate and he should not be buried with other muslims?" By Bob

My answer is NO!! I would not say Bin Laden is an apostate, because to become an apostate you have to reject The Prophet Muhammed, reject the Qur'an and reject Islam, which Bin Laden hasn't done. However, I condemn bin Laden for killing innocent people and I believe he should be punished for this deed in this life and the next.

Bob, if you didn't read my previous post here it is again

------------------------------
"I also agree with you that this Islamophobic attack comes as a result of the terrorists committing acts of violence against civillians, and the Islamophobes using this as a justification for the attacks. But that doesn't make it right.

I am fully aware of the argument that some muslims use to justify violent attacks on civillians. I personally don't agree with them, because innocent people are getting hurt.

I understand the hurt the non-Muslim people are feeling because of acts of terror committed on their fellow citizens and rightly so, but that doesn't justify Islamophobia.

I also understand the hurt the Muslims are feeling because of the acts of terror committed on fellow Muslims around the world, but that doesn't justify TERRORISM."

Tom read the declasisfied c.i.a and american government papers from 1973,when it was planned that they needed to secure oil supplies from the middle east according to their benefits.

they connived-maniplated and then goaded saddam to attack kuwait,so that their plan of controlling middle east oil supplies would become a reality.

america never goes to free anyone without its own interests,america helped britian in world war one and two after it was attacked,not because they were freedom loving,america loved britain so much that i think it was this year orlast year when we finally managed to pay off loans from world war two to america.

everday hundreds of acts of terror are carried out by the occupying terrorist forces in iraq and afghanistan and that includes tens of thousands of killers for hire.

the biggest terrorists in the world are non muslims,who have slaughtered nearly a million people in the last 5 years,the people you call muslims terrorists can not touch this record of the big power terrorists.

Bob,

Why are you afraid to quote a verse from chapter 9 that incites violence towards non-Muslims. It can't be that hard can it, or can it?

I think you don't know what you are talking about, because if you did you would have quoted the verse by now. I think some Islamophobe must have told you that Chapter 9 of the Qu'ran incites violence, but you must have not read it yourself.

The fact that you think you will be accused of handpicking verses is a proof that you know your argument is flawed.

However, I think I know which verse you were referring too

"then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war);" (Qu'ran Ch 9)

That's the verse you might have been talking about, because thats the most common verse Islamophobes such as Daniel Pipes and Melanie Philips use.
But the stupidity of the argument is that the very next verse explains what this verse is talking about

"but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (5) If one amongst the pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure: (Qu'ran Ch 9)

Now that should explain what the verse is talking about. That chapter is about War, and how to behave on the battlefield, it's not a commandment about kill the infidels, becuase if that was true then no non-Muslim would have survived in the Muslim world.
The fact that the very next verse explains what it is about, it is usually ignored by the Islamophobes.

Assalam-o-Alaikum,
I think v Muslims need greater media coverage about wht v are facing today by Islamophobes, if the same thing would have done by a Muslim to some one else tht would have been the top and Hot news in the entire world for a day.

V need mass media coverage so that v can be represented and v can show wht v r facing is not less than anyother race.

Aslaam Alkium

We need to develop strategies that will promote ISLAM in a positive context and manner, and reflect the true understanding of Islam via the government agenda

Current hatred and crime clearly depicts that the government isnt doing enough. They invested so many millions in iraq, how did our society benefit from the WAR ?, no rheortic please !

We need to find out what prevents the government from promoting Islam proactively through Educational institutions. What are their reservations and why ?.

The Government should incorporate teaching Islam to Non Muslims as part of their Educational Policy. Islam should be taught in Learning workshops, in Libraries, Schools, Museums, through Print Media,and free DVD learning !!. Give people the knowledge from an intellectual prospective. By all means, they can do the same for other major relgions, if people think, this is a decoy.

The Second largest Relgion in the world, so much history, so much to learn about Islam. You only live once!

Only Education will remove the ignorance and hatred.

Will our society be better off with a Islamic eductional policy for all or without ?. Knowledge is power, and everyone has a right to learn. Non Muslims should not be denied the right to learn about Islam, at the government exspense. Education is a right, it develops clarification, intellect and reasoning.

Can i just make a point about non muslims using this group..

non muslims using this group are either
1 - those who are racist in their views

or

2 - Those who have a genuine concern and wish to work with muslim community to address problems.

It would appear that unfortunately the majority of the non muslims using this group are of the latter type.

I must not also forget to mention the true committed enemies of islam such as.... you know which groups ideologies im talking about... who probably monitor groups such as these.



1 More point -

non muslims CAN NOT tell us to sort out our affair and its our fault that we slack so much.
The only way to solve the problems of muslims is through good leadership - now this is very very rare as our beloved non muslim countries eg USA support and put into power dictators who look after western intrests and leave the muslim countries and their populations backward eg.. egypt, saudi arabia, iraq etc.

so non muslims only have themsleves to blame when they want to blame muslims - u can lobby your mps not to support corrupt regimes and maybe some change for the better for the world will happen

islam is not a race it is a relgion,,so how can you call bob a racist,,he is a bigot

Shaf Marco:I agree with you entirely. The US and other Western interests should not be propping up near-fascist dictatorships like that in Saudi Arabia. The West has to stop its dependence on oil (if only for the environment's sake) and arms sales from and to such countries. Only then will the people be able to decide how they will live (what form of government they will choose) and prosper. No doubt we would see the immediate cultural, educational and economic development of these countries. Literacy rates would no doubt shoot up, for example.As for racists visiting this site - they are everywhere, unfortunately. We live in dark, ignorant times - set only to get worse, in my view.Free and open education is the only answer - for all men and women everywhere; and a clear understanding of universal moral values.

To shaf marco abdul hannan:

Can i just make a point about muslims using this group..

muslims using this group are either
1 – obsessed with Israel, obsessed with themselves, unable to appreciate that their religion is of as much interest and importance to about ninety percent of the uk population as the cinema of Ingmar Bergman, have a free floating hatred of the west, unable to separate reasonable speculation from paranoid fantasy and see any criticism of Islam as a vicious attack on it.
or

2 - Those who...... no actually there is no second group :0




1 More point -

I think Muslims in the uk should look after Muslims in the uk and let the others sort their own lives out. You can’t link problems in Bradford with problems in Palestine and not expect to come over as a raving loony to most people in the uk.

to Mohsin beg:


who wrote


The Government should incorporate teaching Islam to Non Muslims as part of their Educational Policy. Islam should be taught in Learning workshops, in Libraries, Schools, Museums, through Print Media,and free DVD learning !!. Give people the knowledge from an intellectual prospective. By all means, they can do the same for other major religions, if people think, this is a decoy."

Mohsin
I know nothing of most religions and liitle of the rest yet i manage to live peacefuuly with all kinds of people. why is it different for Islam?


I know quite a few people from Iran and Iraq who would describe themselves as Muslim and seem perfectly happy here and have no desire to go banging on about islam all the time.

it it often seems its mulims from particular places, such as Pakistan, that all the problems swirl around.

john

To John:I think what the point Mohsen Beg was trying to make is that the ignorance of Muslims and Islam on the part of a large number of Britons is due to lack of information, or rather FACTUAL information. Educating people of the truth is the way forward.

Sections of the media, namely tabloids never stop short of demonising Muslims. And for the most part, either fabricate or grossly exergerate news stories.This steriotyping would never be allowed if it were the black community, for example. We never say sensational headlines screaming BLACK mugger, BLACK drug dealer, BLACK murderer.

It's no good complaining about how Muslims always 'moan' about Islamophobia. You have a problem with the concerns we make, then I suggest you tell certain media outlets to adopt a more balance approach when reporting/analysing news features.

Your assertion that SOME Muslims obsess with the Zionist entity, is proof in itself that you are generalising and very badly. Furthermore,If you find these opinions so fanciful then perhaps you should broaden your mind..it's called an education.

Noone has an excuse to be ignorant of world politics nowadays..not even Daily Express/Mail/Sun readers! Though, granted, intelligent thought is somewhat alien to the simpleton who chooses to believe the nonsense these rags propagate!

Well said!! sister Zara!

Couldn't have put it better myself.

It's feels very good to know that there sisters out there who are intellectually equipped to deal with all the hate that is being thrown at us.

The sisters have been at the forefront in Islam and Muslims.

May Allah reward you in this life and the next. Ameen

intresting comments. so if attack on civilians in the WEST cannot be justified, nearly all british wars have been attacks on civilians...are they justified. When did muslims ever attack civilians. It somethign to think about.

If muslims want to have a voice to counter argue the lies and biased that are directed towards them, then they should back it up and support/donate an organisation like MPACUK, I have recently set up a direct debit to do this, MPACUK is not a registered charity, therefore gets no government support, it solely relies on donations and is also a non profit making organisation, the people who work for it are all volunteers, I would urge anyone who wishes to have a voice to help support MPACUK as it is only beneficial to our own future or these people will continue to drag all of our names in the dirt, we should as a duty support these people who give us a voice and speak up to the lies, even as little as £5 per month if you can spare it and no i am not a member of MPACUK, but a professional in the city who appreciates the good work that this organisation does.

Salaam.

To Zara

To John:I think what the point Mohsen Beg was trying to make is that the ignorance of Muslims and Islam on the part of a large number of Britons is due to lack of information, or rather FACTUAL information. Educating people of the truth is the way forward.

I have a dearth of information about all kinds of groups. I know nothing. But I have no problem with them.

Sections of the media, namely tabloids never stop short of demonising Muslims. And for the most part, either fabricate or grossly exaggerate news stories.This stereotyping would never be allowed if it were the black community, for example.

Ooooh. I don’t know. When the planes crashed into the towers I can remember The Sun running a double page spread saying WHY ISLAM IS NOT AN EVIL RELIGION. There was huge amounts of stuff in the papers trying to calm the situation in the UK. Tony Blair and government were very concerned that public feeling would turn against Islam and Muslims would be found hanging from lamp posts. That did not happen. I think our press was generally quite responsible in reporting that Muslims had crashed planes into new York without demonising a whole community here. Perhaps surprisingly the backlash that formed was an anti American one. I remember the us ambassador almost in tears on question time due to the way many audience members were saying the America deserved the attack.

The tabloids do demonise all kinds of people, but I don’t think Muslims really get that raw a deal.
“We never say sensational headlines screaming BLACK mugger, BLACK drug dealer, BLACK murderer.”
Well we did used to but our press is generally more restrained now. I think the point your missing is when the headlines read Muslims did this or that then the people in the story are often doing what they are doing because of Islam.
Incidentally I have a few friends who are gay and involved in anti racist groups. They were demonised by the press in the 1980’s and the subject of restrictive legislation. I notice that many Muslim groups lobbied tony Blair against repealing that legislation. Isn’t that a disgrace! Muslins coming to the UK and then turning round and attacking some of the very same people who would defend them against the BNP. If you want international examples look at how bad Muslim countries including Palestine, the Palestinians record I believe is appalling against how well Israel treats gays. Full marks to Israel, null points to Palestine.

“It's no good complaining about how Muslims always 'moan' about Islamophobia. You have a problem with the concerns we make, then I suggest you tell certain media outlets to adopt a more balance approach when reporting/analysing news features.2
I don’t necessarily have problems with some of your concerns. However I think Muslims are, to make generalisation here, often politically inept at dealing with the British political system and media. And if you live in Britain that is the one you are dealing with. Women who don’t wear veils for job interviews with men then insist after they get the job that they must wear one when in face to face contact with men, people who suggest British foreign policy partly or in whole excuses terrorist attacks in London, people who tell us we cant print cartoons in our media, people who come to this country and then insist on sharia law are just making themselves targets for media attention.

“Your assertion that SOME Muslims obsess with the Zionist entity, is proof in itself that you are generalising and very badly. Furthermore,If you find these opinions so fanciful then perhaps you should broaden your mind..it's called an education.”
Oh come on now that’s rubbish. I only have to look at this site to see that some Muslims are obsessed with Zionism.

“No one has an excuse to be ignorant of world politics nowadays..not even Daily Express/Mail/Sun readers! Though, granted, intelligent thought is somewhat alien to the simpleton who chooses to believe the nonsense these rags propagate!”
Ok what do you know about Basque separatism , Polish economic stagnation, or the situation of Flemish speakers in Belgium. That’s actually pretty close to home. Ordid you just mean no one has an excuse to ignorant of world politics that affect Muslims these days.

To John:I think what the point Mohsen Beg was trying to make is that the ignorance of Muslims and Islam on the part of a large number of Britons is due to lack of information, or rather FACTUAL information. Educating people of the truth is the way forward.


I have a dearth of information about all kinds of groups. I know nothing. But I have no problem with them.

Sections of the media, namely tabloids never stop short of demonising Muslims. And for the most part, either fabricate or grossly exaggerate news stories.This stereotyping would never be allowed if it were the black community, for example.

Ooooh. I don’t know. When the planes crashed into the towers I can remember The Sun running a double page spread saying WHY ISLAM IS NOT AN EVIL RELIGION. There was huge amounts of stuff in the papers trying to calm the situation in the UK. Tony Blair and government were very concerned that public feeling would turn against Islam and Muslims would be found hanging from lamp posts. That did not happen. I think our press was generally quite responsible in reporting that Muslims had crashed planes into new York without demonising a whole community here. Perhaps surprisingly the backlash that formed was an anti American one. I remember the us ambassador almost in tears on question time due to the way many audience members were saying the America deserved the attack.


The tabloids do demonise all kinds of people, but I don’t think Muslims really get that raw a deal.

“We never say sensational headlines screaming BLACK mugger, BLACK drug dealer, BLACK murderer.”

Well we did used to but our press is generally more restrained now. I think the point your missing is when the headlines read Muslims did this or that then the people in the story are often doing what they are doing because of Islam.
Incidentally I have a few friends who are gay and involved in anti racist groups. They were demonised by the press in the 1980’s and the subject of restrictive legislation. I notice that many Muslim groups lobbied tony Blair against repealing that legislation. Isn’t that a disgrace! Muslins coming to the UK and then turning round and attacking some of the very same people who would defend them against the BNP. If you want international examples look at how bad Muslim countries including Palestine, the Palestinians record I believe is appalling against how well Israel treats gays. Full marks to Israel, null points to Palestine.

“It's no good complaining about how Muslims always 'moan' about Islamophobia. You have a problem with the concerns we make, then I suggest you tell certain media outlets to adopt a more balance approach when reporting/analysing news features.2
I don’t necessarily have problems with some of your concerns. However I think Muslims are, to make generalisation here, often politically inept at dealing with the British political system and media. And if you live in Britain that is the one you are dealing with. Women who don’t wear veils for job interviews with men then insist after they get the job that they must wear one when in face to face contact with men, people who suggest British foreign policy partly or in whole excuses terrorist attacks in London, people who tell us we cant print cartoons in our media, people who come to this country and then insist on sharia law are just making themselves targets for media attention.


“Your assertion that SOME Muslims obsess with the Zionist entity, is proof in itself that you are generalising and very badly. Furthermore,If you find these opinions so fanciful then perhaps you should broaden your mind..it's called an education.”


Oh come on now that’s rubbish. I only have to look at this site to see that some Muslims are obsessed with Zionism.



“No one has an excuse to be ignorant of world politics nowadays..not even Daily Express/Mail/Sun readers! Though, granted, intelligent thought is somewhat alien to the simpleton who chooses to believe the nonsense these rags propagate!”


Ok what do you know about Basque separatism , Polish economic stagnation, or the situation of Flemish speakers in Belgium. That’s actually pretty close to home. Or did you just mean no one has an excuse to ignorant of world politics that affect Muslims these days.

To Raja77 and Ozstriker:

Raja: JazzakAllah for your comments. We never have a shortage of Muslim health care professionals, lawyers, teachers etc, but not much attention is given to the need for more Muslim journalists.
To coin a phrase: the pen is mighter than the sword. Islamophobia has reared its ugly head through sections of powerful media institutions. The 'Thick Brit' as I call them, believe everything and anything dished up in the form of 'decorative' propaganda. There needs to be a balance. InshAllah, if we persist more in getting our voices heard through debate and discussion, things will start to change.


Ozstriker: Yes, I agree with you! The reason why elements of the more right-wing persuation get upity at the very mention of MPAC is precisely due to the effectivess of the latter's campaigning; drawing attention to issues the rest of the nation would rather keep in denial.

To John:

I am aware of the points you make in relation to The Sun's coverage of 9/11. I, myself brought every newspaper on September 12th, 2001 and The Sun's analysis was probably the most balanced! Hell, they even had an article feature from Yusuf Islam.



There is something you are forgetting here. That was almost 6 years ago. A lot of things have happened since then..namely 7/7. Muslims were tolerated so long as the carnage was not directly involving Britons, but the mood changed somewhat when events of July 7th took priority.


Now, it is impossible to read any tabloid(or sections of 'quality'; newspapers') without a stab at the wider Muslim community. This is done by unnecessary 'label' repetition ( "Muslim terrorist", followed by another 4 lines using the term "Muslim Terrorist") You turn to another page and it brings yet another issue involving the 'menace' of the Muslim. Headlines sexing up the Muslim suspect, before he has even been charged. This would not be allowed for any other community I know. What occurred in the 80s has not relevance to what is taking place today. All other groups are protected to a more or lesser degree.



Issues should be raised and discussed, but with a balance. This is has become a big problem in Britain. Articles that fabricate or exaggerate are 'justified' by the same old response. "This is 'freedom of speech'". Freedom of expression has to be about considering BOTH sides. Anything less is a mockery.




What deviant Muslims do in the name of "Islam" does not justify victimising and singling out the entire community. By using the term "Muslim terrorist" it somehow makes discrimination and prejudicial judgements acceptable.


This would probably have something to do with the fact that we don't see provoactive headlines screaming "BLACK drug pusher kills - again"





I am not sure what point you are trying to make about gays in Israel. What has that got to do with the savage torment and incarceration men, women and children have to go endure on a daily basis..?!





I wouldn't say this website is obsessed, but rather regularly draws attention to the Palestinian plight,lest we forget because of other issues. A simlilar logic can be drawn from the McGanns who asked that the media continuously keeps Madeline in the public eye so that it doesn't get forgotten about.

If you have difficulty accepting the possibility that Zionism is oppressive and malicious, then study some of the articles presented and do your own research.




The last I looked, this country was supposed to be free. Free to dress how one see fit. No person, or institution has a right to take that privilege away from an individual. If a Muslim lady is being asked to remove her face covering for security reasons( as part of airport screening for example) then no one would be that unreasonable to not cooperate. Problems arise when they is a lack of understanding and mutual cooperation. In the case of the Niqabi teacher: she had no objection to uncovering her face in front of the kids - rather it was not in front of male colleagues. A compromise could have been made so that only female teachers enter the room. Problem solved. Instead, the media get on their self-righteous bandwagon and blow everything out of proportion. Suggesting that this country is being over-populated with Niqab wearers, when in fact they are in a very small minority!




As for your last point on topics "more closer to home", yes there should be more education on these issues, but I was trying to emphasise the need for educating the masses on some of the issues that are currently causing the most controversy, and yet at the same misleading information is being propagated into the public domain.


You may not like educating yourself, but that doesn't mean that the deliberate misleading of a people against a community, or religion is acceptable or fair.

To John:

To further add to my response..


As far as I know it isn't illegal to change a code of dress after one takes up employment. If a Muslim lady has made that decision then that is her prerogative, If her employers have an issue with that, then a compromise should be sought. There are some instances where wearing niqab would not be appropriate.

As for the calls by a few Muslims to 'behead' the cartoon publishers, that was wrong and immature, not to mention a bad reflection on the rest of the Muslim community - through no fault of their own! There is nothing wrong with arguing against those who offend the sensibilities of others, but given the current climate, it should have been approached with more foresight. Calm debate would have been the best way.

To zara:

“There is something you are forgetting here. That was almost 6 years ago. A lot of things have happened since then..namely 7/7. Muslims were tolerated so long as the carnage was not directly involving Britons, but the mood changed somewhat when events of July 7th took priority. “

I am certainly aware of the passing years. :-)

It is difficult to imagine a situation where Muslims blow up British trains and busses and the British public don’t begin to imagine that they are under attack from Muslims. Again there were calls for calm, but the situation did get a bit hotter. However has it occurred to you that if the attackers are all Muslim and go to terrorist training camps that seem to be chock full of people preaching Islam and the media refrains from mentioning this, then non Muslims start cruising the media for trying to cover up important information in the name of political correctness, but still blame Muslims for planting bombs.

“Now, it is impossible to read any tabloid(or sections of 'quality'; newspapers') without a stab at the wider Muslim community. This is done by unnecessary 'label' repetition ( "Muslim terrorist", followed by another 4 lines using the term "Muslim Terrorist") You turn to another page and it brings yet another issue involving the 'menace' of the Muslim. Headlines sexing up the Muslim suspect, before he has even been charged. This would not be allowed for any other community I know. “

How about gypsies, single mothers, people in favour of the European Union, atheists (at least in the daily mail) the French, the BBC, and so on.

What do you mean by a “stab.” I suspect you mean people criticising Muslims and Islam. People are allowed to do that just as this site criticises Israel.

Some papers such as the express are defiantly biased regarding Muslims, but they are also biased against may other people. You’re hardly being singled out. However even that seems to have changed since Gordon Brown came to power.


“What occurred in the 80s has not relevance to what is taking place today. All other groups are protected to a more or lesser degree.”

This country has all kinds of anti discrimination laws. What additional protection do you want?

“Issues should be raised and discussed, but with a balance. This is has become a big problem in Britain. Articles that fabricate or exaggerate are 'justified' by the same old response. "This is 'freedom of speech'". Freedom of expression has to be about considering BOTH sides. Anything less is a mockery.”







“What deviant Muslims do in the name of "Islam" does not justify victimising and singling out the entire community. By using the term "Muslim terrorist" it somehow makes discrimination and prejudicial judgements acceptable.”






“I am not sure what point you are trying to make about gays in Israel. What has that got to do with the savage torment and incarceration men, women and children have to go endure on a daily basis..?!

The point is I have several good friends who are gay. They are very worthy people and committed to anti discrimination policies for everybody, and that includes you.

If they read this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3211772.stm

Do you think they would see Palestinians as really tolerant people?

And after this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3008496.stm

Which side to you think they would feel better off with?

Islamic countries, particularly in the middle east scarcely tolerate gays at all. Iran certainly doesn’t. I am talking about the legal set up. Individuals can be exceptions of course.

OK can I put it to you this way. You live in the UK and you’re a Muslim and you’re in a minority. You become aware of a land where what you are is not tolerated at all. If you went there you would be an outcast at best, but very like beaten or killed.

Then you find that the people from that land are coming to your land, taking advantage of it’s equal opportunities policy to advance themselves but at the same time the leaders of their umbrella organisations in your country started to say things like

“I think, if you look into the scientific evidence that has been available in terms of the forms of various other illnesses and diseases that are there, surely it points out that where Islam is practised there is a greater concern in that area. It does not augur well in building the very foundations of society - stability, family relationships. And it is something we would certainly not, in any form, encourage the community to be involved in.”

would you welcome them or be deeply suspicious?

“I wouldn't say this website is obsessed, but rather regularly draws attention to the Palestinian plight,lest we forget because of other issues. A simlilar logic can be drawn from the McGanns who asked that the media continuously keeps Madeline in the public eye so that it doesn't get forgotten about.

If you have difficulty accepting the possibility that Zionism is oppressive and malicious, then study some of the articles presented and do your own research.”

I have no problem in accepting that the Palestinians are in a bad situation but I do not see this site offering real solutions. Rather I see it as hyping the problem to encourage anger.

Look this county had a problem from terrorism that came out of the northern island situation. What the vocal leaders of each side advocated was that they should get everything they wanted, that the other back down completely admit they were completely wrong. Not surprisingly things went nowhere for years.

Solutions came from understanding the other and recognising the other was not going to go away. I don’t see that here. All I see is anger and hatred being generated and quite frankly unrealistic expectations being raised.

“The last I looked, this country was supposed to be free. Free to dress how one see fit. No person, or institution has a right to take that privilege away from an individual.”


Well that last bit is factually incorrect. Most employers have a dress code. It was a school she was working at. She was obliged to follow the dress code. The school can change its dress code. If we can all wear what we want do you uphold the right to wear Mohammed cartoon T shirts?


“If a Muslim lady is being asked to remove her face covering for security reasons( as part of airport screening for example) then no one would be that unreasonable to not cooperate. Problems arise when they is a lack of understanding and mutual cooperation. In the case of the Niqabi teacher: she had no objection to uncovering her face in front of the kids - rather it was not in front of male colleagues. A compromise could have been made so that only female teachers enter the room. Problem solved. “


Like hell! Are you suggesting the school should have to dance around her whims? Don’t forget when she applied for the job she has no objection to male teachers being present. You do realise that in British culture covering the face is very rude? A bit like walking into a Muslim house with your shoes on and dropping them, on the table. If I went to a Muslim country and kept on doing that how long would I last?

What about the feelings of the male teachers? Why should they have their movements restricted? If you were told there were rooms you couldn’t go into because some staff members saw you as different, would you get angry?

If I said that every time a Muslim walked into the room I had to make my religions sign to ward off the devil would you not feel insulted?




”Instead, the media get on their self-righteous bandwagon and blow everything out of proportion. Suggesting that this country is being over-populated with Niqab wearers, when in fact they are in a very small minority!”

My view it was the media honestly covering a story about a woman who was taking the piss.

“As for your last point on topics "more closer to home", yes there should be more education on these issues, but I was trying to emphasise the need for educating the masses on some of the issues that are currently causing the most controversy, and yet at the same misleading information is being propagated into the public domain.

You may not like educating yourself, but that doesn't mean that the deliberate misleading of a people against a community, or religion is acceptable or fair.”

I love educating myself, think some criticism of Muslims is unfair, some is justified and that some Muslims are arrogant, ignorant of the society they live in and intolerant of any criticism of themselves and their religion. That last bit comes actually about from listening to some Muslims, not by reading the tabloids.

“As for the calls by a few Muslims to 'behead' the cartoon publishers, that was wrong and immature, not to mention a bad reflection on the rest of the Muslim community - through no fault of their own! “”


What! They go rampaging through the streets, one dressed as a suicide bomber, which must have taken some planning unless he always dresses like, that shouting “death to Europe” and “behead those who insult Islam” and it’s not their fault?

Would you apply the same standards to the BNP?

“There is nothing wrong with arguing against those who offend the sensibilities of others, but given the current climate, it should have been approached with more foresight. Calm debate would have been the best way.”

Yes, but that’s not what happened.

To Raja77:
"Well said!! sister Zara!

Couldn't have put it better myself.

It's feels very good to know that there sisters out there who are intellectually equipped to deal with all the hate that is being thrown at us."

If you thought I was throwing hate and Zara made an effective response then you really are in trouble. LOL

John

to Zara

" The 'Thick Brit' as I call them, believe everything and anything dished up in the form of 'decorative' propaganda."





and you were the one complaining about media generalisations and racism.



Oh dear! Still you might get a job on the Daily Express

To John:

I am glad that you noticed that it has been 6 years since the publication of the Sun's attempt at being courtous towards the Muslim community, but your argument still doesn't hold water.

You are trying(or at least how it appears to me) to make the assertion that because of a group of deviants that sabotages a religion, for its own ends it somehow warrants an attack on the rest of the community by vile newspaper political analysis. Perhaps Fleet Street should take a leaf out of your book and start spewing animosity towards all black people because of the sins of many in their communities who cause much of street/gang crime in this country.


The Daily Express are a bunch of facists this is true, but it also happens to be a publication that carries a lot of influence on the masses.

I am sorry, but gypsies and single mothers are not discriminated in quite the same way as Muslims. It is not something that is discussed in political slots or news features, nor the focal point of debate.


Being a Muslim is quite obvious by the way he/she dresses. You will normally notice one when walking down the street. If there happens to be irresponsible vocabulary 'adorning' a newspaper headline, it is that person minding her own business who becomes victim of hate crime. News features can still run without the use of provocative sensationalism.


Again, I will reiterate :you will never see: "BLACK drug problem strikes again" "BLACK shoots in cold blood" This doesn't happen because it would be obviously racist and wrong. Then in the same vein, it is equally wrong to constantly use the word "ISLAMIST militant", or MUSLIM terrorist as often as it is feasible possibly in order to goad public opinion.

Yes, there should be laws that protect Muslims, or any other religious group. Common sense tells you that we are more vulnerable to discrimination then we were say, 10 years ago. If you are Asian, or from another ethic minority, you are protecting under race laws, but if a person happens to be white, Caucasion and Muslim, then the penality is not as severe. That is clearly wrong.

I am not sure what you are trying to say with regards to Palestine. The quote you have used doesn't tell me anything. Rather, it looks as if you have plucked this from somewhere without bothering to provide substantial reference to what it refers to. As for MPAC, that is your opinion to which you are entitled. Others will disagree.

The situation in the Occupied Territories is more than "bad". People are treated no less than animals from one day to the next and you want to somehow undermine their suffering by comparing it to the troubles in N. Ireland. The two examples are not the same. Both have a very different religious, political and social history. However, any peace process/negotiation cannot take place without including Hamas. Whether Israel or her allies like it or not, they are key players in the Middle East. Any 'advocate' of peace would acknowledge their position and involve them in talks.


With regards to the cartoons:You misunderstood my remarks. I said that the wider community are left to take the blame of extremist protesters "through no fault of their own". We know that oppostion though peaceful debate didn't take place. I am stating that this would have been the more effective way of getting the message across.


As for the niqab issue and employment. If the school had issues with her covering her face then perhaps they shouldn't have taking her on in the first place. I am aware that employers have a code of dress that sometimes conflicts with religious attire of the propective employee which is why I said that in some instances wearing niqab is not appropriate.

To John:

Can a person be racist towards his/her nationality? I am British myself! Anglo-Saxon, not 'born here' British.


Suddenly the stiff upper lip isn't quite living up to its normal standards eh?


"Thick Brit" is only classified to certain types of individuals with marked diminished mental capacities. I think the Americans prefer "White Trash", but that does have rather racist overtones!


I have a great deal of respect for many British people and have had many close friends who are native..I still do..so your insinuation, or accusation(whichever way you look at it) is flawed.


Write for the Daily Express? They cramp my style!!

John:

I don't believe that by my response(s) to your arguments I was "throwing hate".

I was,and still am, trying to raise important issues to some of the arguments you put forward.

To disagree is one thing to be melodramtic is rather infantile.

"Again, I will reiterate :you will never see: "BLACK drug problem strikes again" "BLACK shoots in cold blood" This doesn't happen because it would be obviously racist and wrong. Then in the same vein, it is equally wrong to constantly use the word "ISLAMIST militant", or MUSLIM terrorist as often as it is feasible possibly in order to goad public opinion."

A young black person involved in street gangs or drugs doesn't kill his classmate in the name of being 'Black'. There is a difference.The words "Islamist" and "Muslim" are used in the media because the perpretators of 'terror' attacks claim to be acting as "Muslims" in the name of "Islam". Whether they are or not is irrelevant - that is what they claim. And, to a non-Muslim, it's difficult to know if their 'interpretations' are correct. We are so often told that we cannot possibly understand the intricacies of the religion. In fact, I seem to recall an MPAC spokesperson saying on a news programme that Jack Straw "shouldn't be allowed to comment" on the subject of his veiled constituents.

Having said that, I agree, there are articles in the gutter press with disturbing generalised headlines "Muslims..." this, that or the other. If you swapped it for "Jews..." it sends a shiver down the spine. Not as virulent, but reminiscent of early nineteen-thirties Germany....(or thinly-velied attacks on 'Zionists' by some).

No, black criminals do not attack in the name of their 'pigmentation', but it is a fact that the majority of crimes perpetrated by ethnic groups in the UK are carried out by sections of the black community. Using a person's religion to focus on criminal behaviour is as wrong as it would be towards an individual's race.


My argument is the manner with which the press sex up headlines to sensationalise news stories creates a culture of animosity. Obviously, the reader will become more aquianted with the facts as he/she reads the article, but splashing headlines shouting MUSLIM suicide bomber, or MUSLIM terrorist strikes again, for example, does not to create a more tolerant atmosphere in British society and while there are "Muslims" who sabotage Islam to carry out acts of barbarism, this should in no way be reflected who the rest of the Muslim community who, happen to be peaceful, law abiding citizens.

"but it is a fact that the majority of crimes perpetrated by ethnic groups in the UK are carried out by sections of the black community." Wow!!!

Have you ever seen any Government figures on this? - Otherwise it is a wild and anecdotal assertion which almost constitutes a race-based generalisation. Someone might think that was borderline racist.

As for sensationalist media headlines -I agree. But I think more of your anger should be shown towards those who "sabotage" the religion than to those who report on it. If there were (more/some/any) anti-trerror demonstrations organised by Mulsim groups it would make it impossible (or much harder) for the press to make their crude generalisations. Instead we are told that we need properly educating in the true ways of Islam, and also that we're not capable of understanding it. Get rid of the nutters and the press would have no excuses. If these were people from my 'community' or identity group besmirching my good name I'd go and deal with them first and then ask people to stop demonising me. I know MPAC probably tries and that it's a scary business, but it has to be done. Too many Muslim groups seem to make excuses for the 'terrorists' which involves blaming others.

I'm not trying to be confrontational - just showing how a non-Muslim might see these things.

Sun Worshipper,

How do you see the IRA,? and what they did in the 70's and 80's?

Why were they not called Catholic terrorists?

Sun Worshipper,

How do you see the IRA? and what they did in the 70's and 80's?

Why were they not called Catholic terrorists?

Raja 77:

Did the IRA act in the name of Catholicism? Did they invoke Catholic dogma or the Gospels to justify what they did?

No.

They acted in the name of Irish republicanism (which happened to be of the Catholic faith) opposed to, as they see/saw it, British occupation. Yes, Britain was predominantly Protestant and this may have been the religious dividing line between the two sides. But what was really at stake was a straightforward confrontation between Irish and British. Their faith was not their driving motivation - so I'm afraid the comparison does not hold.

Surely calling a 'terrorist' 'Muslim' or 'Islamist' fits if the person in question declares it as being his motivation. Uncomfortable as that may be for non-terrorist, law-abiding Muslims it remains the case that the 'extremists' are acting in the name of their faith.

It's not for woolly-liberals, like our current crop of politicians and commentators, to say that these people follow a 'twisted' or 'distorted' version of Islam. - how would they know?
I would say that it was for right-minded individuals like yourselves to stop the nutters in your midst - rather than slam those who are terrified of it.

Who is it that misunderstands/misrepresents Islam - the Bin Ladens of the world or the Sun/Daily Mail editorial writers?

Sun Worshipper

"They acted in the name of Irish republicanism (which happened to be of the Catholic faith) opposed to, as they see/saw it, British occupation,Britain was predominantly Protestant and this may have been the religious dividing line between the two sides.

So religion DID play a part. You are right, they didn't invoke Hail Mary's before committing an act of terror and they didn't claim to do it in the name of Catholicism but if the terrorists were Catholics, where did they find justification in Catholicism, to commit such acts.

Did the IRA believe that by targeting innocent people they have damned themselves in the eyes of God, or has God favoured them to act in such a way.

If they believed that God has damned them for killing innocents then they wouldn't committed acts of terror in the first place.

That leaves the second option, if they believed that God had favoured them in their actions then they have found justification in their religion and then that makes them just as guilty as the Islamists.

But the question is about labels. Why use IRA and not Catholic Terrorist, and use Islamic terrorists and not Al Qaida which is used lesser than Islamic terrorists.

Why the double standards?

I will just add for the sunworshipper that what happened in ireland was done using religion in the same way people who fight for palestine-iraq and afghanistan use religion.

the iraqis-palestinians or afghans are not fighting because their religion tells then to do so,they are fighting because the are occupied by foreigners.

if people fighting for freedom find solice in religion then that is upto them,but no religion be it christianity or islam state that people should attack others just because they are non christians or muslims.

if people do not like others to fight back then they should not attack in the first place.

Raja 77

"where did they find justification in Catholicism, to commit such acts."

They didn't. And they didn't try to find a religious justification for their bombing campaigns. They believed in 'terror' as a political weapon - read about the Russian revolutionaries' invention of 'terror' as an '-ism' (Bakhunin and others - I think)

"Did the IRA believe that by targeting innocent people they have damned themselves in the eyes of God, or has God favoured them to act in such a way"

No. As far as I know Gerry Adams is not a God-fearing man. At least I never heard him talk about his faith or acting in its name.

"If they believed that God has damned them for killing innocents then they wouldn't committed acts of terror in the first place."

That is your assertion. I don't think IRA soldiers were ever worried about the afterlife. Jihadis, on the other hand we are told, believe they will be rewarded for their martyrdom and murderous acts.

"if they believed that God had favoured them in their actions then they have found justification in their religion and then that makes them just as guilty as the Islamists."

They didn't believe that God favoured them. The IRA never talked in religious terms - apart from in that it separated the two communities. But perhaps you have some of their writings on this matter. You use a lot of 'ifs' so I suspect you have never heard the IRA explaining their actions in terms of religious justification either.

"Why use IRA and not Catholic Terrorist..."

Because that is what they called THEMSELVES. Irish ... Republican. Not Catholic.

"...and use Islamic terrorists and not Al Qaida"


When Al-Qaeda claim an attack - then it is attributed to them. If no group claims it and we know the religious -ethnic background of the perpetrators then it is called 'Islamic'. Especially if the attackers leave videos quoting chapter and verse from the Qu'ran - justifying what they are about to do from holy texts. I repeat - whether they are right or wrong in their interpretations of their religion is neither here nor there. And when there is a notable absence of Muslim outrage aginst such attacks then the non-Muslim cannot be blamed for putting the attack and the religion together - wrong as that might be.

The IRA-Al Qaeda comparison does not work. Sorry.

Question:
Who is it that misunderstands/misrepresents Islam - the Bin Ladens of the world or the Sun/Daily Mail editorial writers?

Northern ireland was nothing at all to do with religion it was all to do with britain occupying northern ireland.
It seems to me that muslims feel that if they can find a way to prove the fighting in northern ireland was something to do with religion then gives none muslims no right to complain about voilent jihadists killing people.
A member of the ira would have kidnapped a n english catholic in n ireland if they believed they were a squaddy.

so the i.r.a. fought against british occupation therfore they cannot be classifed as catholic christian terrorists.

if view of this palestinians fight against israeli occupation-iraqis fight against american and british occupation,afghans fight american and british occupation,so how does them fighting occupation become religious if they think they will go to heaven if they fight to end occupation.
the catholics beleive you will go to hell if you are a non catholic,so in effect if catholics died fighting for freedom they too would go to heaven as martyrs to their cause.

if religion had nothing to do with the irish conflict why were the church clergy men used as go betweens the government and the i.r.a,why did clergymen lead demonstrations and political parties if religion had nothing to do with it.

you can deny it as much as you like but the hard reality is catholics and protestants killed each other because of their relgious beleifs,it was a sectarian issue which was replicated in scotland ie rangers and celtic supporters are a prime example.

ROB:
so the i.r.a. fought against british occupation therfore they cannot be classifed as catholic christian terrorist.
Did you ever hear the ira say they are waging war against anone who isnt a catholic? Also is this was tp do with religion why is it that catholics and Protestants didnt wage war all over the world in ever country?just as muslims do.

Bob,

I'm not moving any further with you on any discussion until you find me the verse on Chapter 9, that you claim incites violence against non Muslims.

You called the Holy Qur'an evil, and I want you to back up your claim.

Sun Worshipper

"They didn't. And they didn't try to find a religious justification for their bombing campaigns. They believed in 'terror' as a political weapon - read about the Russian revolutionaries' invention of 'terror' as an '-ism' (Bakhunin and others - I think)"

So they didn't find a religious justification.(Just a political one) Then why bother to fight the occupation, if they didn't fight in the name of their religion, then why not accept a protestant Queen as head of state, why divide the community on religious grounds.

"No. As far as I know Gerry Adams is not a God-fearing man. At least I never heard him talk about his faith or acting in its name."

Gerry Adams might not be religious, but I'm sure the Catholic priests who live in the USA were. Some priests even gave shelter to IRA operatives who were hiding in USA as I remember reading in a book called "Political Forces and Social Classes" By Paul Bew.
They also urged their congregation to donate for the cause.

Yet you didn't hear anyone calling the priests extremists.

"And when there is a notable absence of Muslim outrage aginst such attacks then the non-Muslim cannot be blamed for putting the attack and the religion together - wrong as that might be."

Muslims do condenm terror attacks when they occur I don't know what else you want us to do, but I remember talking to alot of Irish Catholics during that time who lived in Yorkshire, and none of them condenmed the IRA. Most of them had IRA tatoo's on their bodies and others justified their actions and supported their cause. But I'll give you that one, they were equally demonised during that time, but they were not called Catholic extremists.

"ho is it that misunderstands/misrepresents Islam - the Bin Ladens of the world or the Sun/Daily Mail editorial writers?."

My answer to that is they both do a great job in demonising Islam.
It's like one holding the nail to the coffin and the other one hammering it in.

The War in Iraq was for economic reasons but their are also fighting a religious war. Remember George Bush, "God told me to invade Iraq"

Are they not Christian terrorists, or is religion only attached to the Muslims.

If in any doubt, watch the vid below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owCXbDVTLRE

Bob you are either naive in your views or you are deliberatly misleading.

the ira took its war to mainland britain and europe,the i.r.a bombed towns and cities all over britain,they nearly killed the whole of the british government in brighton.

so lets not play the holier than thou art card here,all the attacks carried out are due to occupation and slaughter around the world in muslim countries.

3500 people out of a population of 1.5 million in northern ireland if replicated to america would mean 900,000 dead humans,that is nothing to be proud of.

muslims do not wage war all over the world,there are problems where there is occupation,end occupation end of problems.

Aslaam Alkium

Would community relations improve with or without educating people nationwide about Islam ?

Would the general public have a better understand about Islam with or without educating people nationwide about Islam ?

Media Propaganda ?. Are people denying, that media propaganda strategies are not being deployed on Islam ? and Muslim community ?

Would security for Muslims in the UK improve ?with or without Educating people about Islam ?

We in the UK have got a serious problem. The Muslims and Non Musilms have misunderstandngs about Islam. We need to bridge the KNOWLEDGE GAPS, to address Peace and ease for everyone.

Islam is very comprehensive.Subhanallah. The knowlege which the Quran depicts will stretch your mind, develop intellect, reasoning. Wheather your believe or not, that;s your preogative. Nevertheless, utilising the Quran as a learning resource to address your knowledge gaps will instill deeper learning.

People by large dont even know what the Quran comprises of. Its comprehensive, talks about stories of prophets, Sciences, Plants, Economics etc.

We want a better society ? more educated ? more loving/caring ? intellectually driven ?

The Quran can bridge those gaps, from a knoweldge prospective. It will also eradiciate ignorance and misconception people have about Islam.

Lets not focus, on what the government is saying, its all politically driven, and their is NEVER any truth in POLITICS. lets focus on how the live of a general citzen in our country is affected in not knowing about Islam-Quran. Will He/she become more knowledgable ? More or less ignorant ? ...........by having a nationwide Islamic education programme.

Sun Worshiper:

The majority of serious crime IS carried out by more blacks than any other ethnic group - that means robbery, drug and gun offences. It's a fact,according to the Commons Home Affairs Committee. That does not make me, or anyone else stating this fact a "borderline racist".


I, myself have black blood on my father's side, so I resent your accusation.




The point I have been trying to make in my last few posts is that it is never acceptable to take the rest of a community to task for the evil committed by a few.


This feeble justfication that I hear time and time again only serves to victimise and alienate the Muslim community even further




I would agree that "not in our name" demos may be effective in terms of PR. There have recently been statements(on behalf of many Muslim organisations & community groups) published in several newspapers, severely condemning and deploring all terrorism, but in those perpetrated by so-called Muslims.




However, many Muslims believe they do not feel they need to apologise for the sins of others. How many Irish people took to the streets of London during the 70s and 80s?



Having said that, there was a very recent demo condemning terrorism that many believe is linked to the Wahabbi movement and is believed to be responsible, directly, or indirectly to the extremism and terrorism that we see today.


Funny, it was never mentioned on the news..!! I wonder why..

Edited


Sun Worshiper:

The majority of serious crime IS carried out by more blacks than any other ethnic group - that means robbery, drug and gun offences. It's a fact,according to the Commons Home Affairs Committee. That does not make me, or anyone else stating this fact a "borderline racist".


I, myself have black blood on my father's side, so I resent your accusation.




The point I have been trying to make in my last few posts is that it is never acceptable to take the rest of a community to task for the evil committed by a few.


This feeble justfication that I hear time and time again only seems to victimise and alienate the Muslim community in Britain.



I would agree that "not in our name" demos may be effective in terms of PR. There have recently been statements(on behalf of many Muslim organisations & community groups) published in several newspapers, severely condemning and deploring NOT JUST all terrorism, but ALSO those perpetrated by so-called Muslims.




However, many Muslims believe they do not feel they need to apologise for the sins of others. How many Irish people took to the streets of London during the 70s and 80s?



Having said that, there was a very recent demo condemning terrorism that many believe is linked to the Wahabbi movement and is believed to be responsible, directly, or indirectly to the extremism and terrorism that we see today.


Funny, it was never mentioned on the news..!! I wonder why..

zara
"How many Irish people took to the streets of London during the 70s and 80s?"
The answer is millions

Bob:

I was referring to CATHOLIC Irish demonstrating against the IRA in London.

It is a fact that that Islamophobia is on increasing despite what C4 may air

I recall that under the powers of the Att-General 2003 ( as reported by Muslim News ) an agrieved victim of a crime could write to the Att-Gen and make a victim impact statement and ask for the matter be treated seriously as a hate / religious motived crime by the police and the CPS

If convicted by a competent court, then the sentence would be greater and far more serious than a normal assault and battery charge

I would suggest that the trustees / committee members of the Central London Mosque check with the CPS and the Att-Gen's offices