Not being funny, but could you be a bit less flowery and answer the question in a way a dimwit like me can understand

 

Sure, what words are you struggling with?

 

This bit
'I am opposed to it on the grounds that it is apposed to the Enlightenment thinking to which I am allied'

And I'm still not entirely sure you have explained what the mechanism for this 'gradual Islamification' is and what that might ultimately look like

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_o...edirected=true

The Muslim population is growing 10 times quicker than any other group.

The amount of Mosques have double in the last 5 years.

More Muslims + More Mosques = More Power

More Power = More Islamism

Islamism = The belief in Totalitarian Qu'Ranic Theocracy

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total...edirected=true
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=Qu%27ran
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=Theocracy+

Martin, Islamism is in direct opposition to everything I hold dear. I simply cannot make my position any clearer.

 

Additionally, Muslims will not renounce Islamism as to do so is, according to Islam's leadership, denying the truths of the Qu'ran. The radicals are at the healm, not your mates, who I'm sure are, like many of the Muslims I know, perfectly good blokes.

 

Whatever any one thinks the Worlds biggest threat is radical muslims. Not the ordinary Muslim in the street. But sadly those who feel its right to kill and maim all others who are of a different faith, and infact those of the same faith too.
These people would not hesitate to release a plague on the World or trigger a nuclear device if they had one. Or should that be when they have one.

Be wary brothers, the end may be in sight.

 

Personally I think if there's a WWIII then it will not be between countries but be a religious war with it predominantly Muslims against the rest. My reasoning........ Muslims are always Muslims first and anything else comes second.

For the record I have a strong dislike for all religions and think anybody with religious beliefs are brainwashed idiots.

 

I do laugh at some of the sensationalism on here.

The Islamic world will change in time, the radicals will be even more marginalised and as always people will just get on with their lives.

Followers of the Islamic faith are not different to anyone else, they have aspiration the same way everyone else does. To claim otherwise would be outrageous

The challenge for many is poor governance, leading to poor economic circumstance which locks in poor education. It is out of this that the extremists emerge. The fundamental challenge for the West is how we deal with this, how we engage. The answer cannot be to reject Islam wholesale, or to isolate. It has to be about advancement of freedom and economic development.

 

Islam's leadership view the West as the enemy on theological and ideological grounds. A Muslim who embraces liberal democracy, according to the Qu'Ran, is not a Muslim. Martin, whilst I applaud your optimism, I fear it's miopic.

 

Just send them back to Durka Durkaistan with a Diana Memorial Plate as a keepsake.

job done!

 

Which 'Islamic leadership' do you mean, come on name some names

 

Well, you're asking me to name the entire Islamic hierarchy. I propose you jump on google wielding some appropriate key words and see what it throws up. As stated earlier, I'd start Muhammad.

 

You could say the first paragraph about just about any religion.

It is also very easy to take quotes out of context, especially when others are not familiar with them.

What do you want to discuss specifically about Islam?

Les

 

i.e. you can't answer Martin's question

 

This is untrue. Google Islamism, Islamist and Leader/s and it's all there for you. Keep in mind the hidden hand is exactly that, understand the nature of realpolitik and do enough research to see that the abscence of a Cafir is exactly the reason why Islamism is immanent.

Understand, I am not anti Islam, I am anti Islamism.

 

The realpolitik is that the Arab street is looking for an opening of the political/economic pluralism due to their useless and corrupt elites. Islamism promises that in a sense via a promise of a mystical fantasy of 'the caliphate', where Islamic elites rule 'for the muslims'...a kind of lefty populism in a way.

Quite why UK muslims (some) are taken with this fantasy I am not sure since we live an open society where power is fairly disseminated and open to the able.

I suggest these possible reasons:

1) A dangerous supremism.

2) Still have one foot in the politics of the muslim world due to not having assimilated fully.

3) Delusion facilitated by an insular mindset (siege mentality) where criticism is suppressed and thus nutty ideas grow.

 

No, you can't.

They aren't out of context. You have nothing available to you suggest they are, you've simply made an arbitrary judgement.

Islamism.

 

4) An innate desire for a patriachal Caliph perpetuating activity towards the formation of the Caliphate, conciously and unconciously.

5) An antedote to an inferiority complex manifesting as a superiority complex.

Etc. Etc. There are literally thousands of academic works scrutinising Islamism's rise. It seems that there are huge numbers who are, at best, unfamilier with the work or, at worst, oblivious to the movement.

 

The nature of Islam is not to assimilate, but to dominate, and coercion and force are its stock in trade. We’ve learned a lot in the past nine years, and we’ve learned that political correctness and multiculturalism have taken us to the edge of the precipice. It’s time to get real and acknowledge that the West has a problem.

 

The West has a signifcant problem. Solutions?

 

Well I've been waiting for you to suggest some.

 

My strategy would be about 500 pages long and I'm currently on an iPhone.

 

Well when you gt a chance, a few summarised paragraphs will do

 

From the other thread my fear now is that you misunderstand some of the principle definitions that are pivotal to the discussion. If you can demonstrably allay that fear then I'm happy to move forward.

 

The other thread.

https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby...y-of-life.html

 

We'll see what you mean after the next atrocity. Its coming, there will be one and it WILL be done in the name of Islam, rightly or wrongly. Sadly after this next whatever, some states will be rejoicing. Lets see who they are?

Radical Muslims are the biggest threat to World peace. When hate filled regimes whose aim is to spread the word and control the World have nuclear weapons, who knows what will happen in the not too distant future.

We moderates should all be very afraid.

 

Like any religion, surely the proponents of Islam believe that they should strive to make the entire world into muslims. That is part of the teaching. Rather than achieving that by violence one hopes that people continue to be allowed to make up their own minds whether to follow that religion, or any other one, or atheism as now. It is interesting that the attitude of atheists is just the same as any religion as far as trying to make everyone else believe as they do.

Muslims have a very different outlook on life in general to the British and that is why we are concerned and also the possibility of Sharia Law being forced upon us. That law is not officially part of that religion but appears to go with it.

I wonder if TDW would be prepared to define what he means by a "Secular Muslim". Can he ever imagine a devout muslim supporting secularism?

Everyone should be able to follow their own choice of beliefs without criticism as long as those beliefs do not affect others adversely in the way they wish to follow their own life.

Les

 

Les, that is not the feeling of the radicals. Also there might be zealots in other religions but they dont have the rule the whole world ideal that is part of Islam. They wish to spread the word by force and not by teaching. I'm not getting at all Muslims, just the ones that see force as the only answer, if they cant convert you (to radicalism) then its OK for them to wipe non-believers out. Even other Muslims.
You know this is being watched at GCHQ dont you?

 

Why arent the "moderates" disowning the radicals publically?



Its cos they secretley agree or a scared of speaking out cos they will end up in a sharia court of law that operates out of a mosque near them!

 

Oh I agree with you about the radicals alright. That is why I said on another thread that those people should be treated as attempting to promote treason by their calls to violence etc. and should be dealt with accordingly. They should not be tolerated.

Les