A perspective on the news that Islamophobia on the rise in Ireland

juslookin

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

You know, I can't figure the tone of your argument. Is the UK a lost cause because they're anti Islam, or because they're letting Islamic leaders have a say in their media?

By the way, why's the Caliphate a bad thing?

The UK is not anti Islam. It is incredibly, perhaps over pro-Islam for a secular and muliti faith, multi culture society.

The problem is that some Islamic organisations are forcing agendas on a variety of very dodgy tactics.

One is the "good cop" / "bad cop" of we can't be held responsible for terrorism.

Another is the propogation of "Islamophobia" myths.

The caliphate would see the Republic of Ireland under Sharia law. Goodbye guiness, goodbye the democracy you've achieved since 1916, goodbye Catholic and Protestant churches, goodbye the advances, rights and lifestyles Irish women have achieved since the 1980s. If you are unsure of whether it is a bad thing, I suggest maybe going to live in a sharia country for a while and then letting us have your opinion.

juslookin

InFront wrote:

"Some people" this and that. Youre being as vague as the article you were originally complaining about. Have you ever met anyone that doesnt recognise the Irish state in your life? I cant imagine that makes up a lot of people anywhere! Furthermore have you met anyone who has "activley" agreed (however you can do that?) that they want to live here but not be part of society? I dont know anyone in that situation... it would be pretty hard to live here and not be part of society tbh.

What has any of it got to do with your topic?

Some "British muslims" do no recognise the Irish state. They "do not recognise countries, only Allah".

There are a worrying number of individuals in Bolton, Leicester, Bradford and London who live geographically in those locations, yet do not wish to be part of British society, which they view as sinful, decadent and to be overthrown.

What this has to do with my original topic, is that some Islamic groups with specific agendas, are using the laws, fair play and weak media of their "host" nations, against them. One should observe how they operate, and remember this next time they hear the organisation propogating their positions and being taken seriously.

InFront

juslookin wrote:

Despite a wealth of Polish immigration in Ireland, I don't see any specific concern about the issue of "Polophobia".

Despite a wealth of Nigerian immigration in Ireland, I don's see any specific concern about the issue of "Nigeraphobia".

I don't see specific initiatives for Kosovaphobia, or Albaniaphobia, or Angolaphobia, or Ghaniaphobia

Its all called racism. Islamophobia is not due to immigration nor is any other type of racism. It is a term to describe a particular rise in one type of racism disproportionate to others - that which is against Muslims - particularly since the reise of Islamic extremism. What would you prefer it be called, or are you denying that it is increasing?

...Islam as if it is simply a religious belief system.

Islam is not. It is arguably a harsh, intolerant political belief system, with an agenda to dominate and subdue.

Do you know any Muslims who believe in their religion? Would you describe them as intolerant, or harsh with an intention to subdue and dominate? Or have you ever only seen us, from a safe distance, on TV?

Often when followers of Islam find themselves in "new" socieities, they find that the majority belief system and its apparatus is not to their liking, and set about attempting to change that apparatus, specifically accomodate them.

No, most Muslims do not. Maybe a tiny amount do, Ive never met them or heard of them. Everyone adapts to their environment and just gets on with it. Your suggestion is mere paranoia.

After the 7/7 bombs, MPAC used the situation to push superstitions and lies about "Islamophobia" and that "Headscarf Wearing Sisters were being attacked in the streets". It was almost as if the 52 who died had never happened

.

Couldnt both things hve happened? Or is it all black or white, literally.

Hobbes

juslookin wrote:

Despite a wealth of Polish immigration in Ireland, I don't see any specific concern about the issue of "Polophobia".

You mean you didn't see all those posts in Afterhours about how Polish people are here stealing our jobs and EU enlargement is a bad thing and they shouldn't be allowed flood our country?

Despite a wealth of Nigerian immigration in Ireland, I don's see any specific concern about the issue of "Nigeraphobia".

Guessed you missed the posts as well claiming that most Nigerians are all Asylum seekers spreading disease and drug dealers.

I don't see specific initiatives for Kosovaphobia, or Albaniaphobia, or Angolaphobia, or Ghaniaphobia

Xenophobia seems to cover them all.

Islam is not. It is arguably a harsh, intolerant political belief system, with an agenda to dominate and subdue.

Which shows you how little you know about the religon. You appear to be getting one end of the story.

For example if I was to equate Christians to the Fundimentalists in the USA then I would think that all Christians believe in creationism, beating thier children, killing Abortionists and that Noahs flood invented soil layers.

Often when followers of Islam find themselves in "new" socieities,

You keep going on about "new" societies. Heres a test for you. We have had muslims in this country (recorded) since the 1950's. Can you show us where Ireland is turning into an Islamic state?

After the 7/7 bombs, MPAC used the situation to push superstitions and lies about "Islamophobia" and that "Headscarf Wearing Sisters were being attacked in the streets". It was almost as if the 52 who died had never happened.

Or the the one who was shot for no reason, no wait 2 shot for no reason, detained without rights and then let go without ever being charged with anything but get to go home to a destroyed house.

Sound like the actions of a rational country not in the grip of Islamophobia (which I hate as a term).

You go on about how your not predjuice again yet you have just equated people of Islam that they are all Terrorists.

Hobbes

Some "British muslims" do no recognise the Irish state. They "do not recognise countries, only Allah".

There are some Brits who do not reconise the Irish state as well.

You have any proof to back that accusation up by the way, and I notice while you say Some you then go on to try and paint it to the whole.

juslookin

InFront wrote:

Islamophobia is not due to immigration nor is any other type of racism. It is a term to describe a particular rise in one type of racism disproportionate to others - that which is against Muslims - particularly since the reise of Islamic extremism.

You are almost suggesting that Islamophobia, an "irrational fear" of Islam is a response to Islamic estremism. If that is the case, I don't think that would be "irrational".

InFront wrote:

Do you know any Muslims who believe in their religion? Would you describe them as intolerant, or harsh with an intention to subdue and dominate? Or have you ever only seen us, from a safe distance, on TV?

I live amongst Muslims. I would describe some of them as intolerant and harsh and I would describe some of them as having an intention to dominate with their belief system above others.

My typical British demenour has so far prevented me in several situations from doing anything other than smiling and nodding sympathetically when I have been accosted by a friendly Islamic gentleman telling me that one day we will all believe in the same god and the evils of George Bush. However I am coming to the conclusion that by nodding and smiling I am only encouraging them.


We have evidence that 52 people were murdered on 7/7. We do not have any evidence of the attacks on headscarf wearing sisters, although we have MPACs claims. However, seeing MPACs current claims, I give them less credibility than I previously did.

juslookin

Hobbes wrote:

You go on about how your not predjuice again yet you have just equated people of Islam that they are all Terrorists.

No I didn't. If you think I did, please kindly make that clear.

InFront

juslookin wrote:

You are almost suggesting that Islamophobia, an "irrational fear" of Islam is a response to Islamic estremism. If that is the case, I don't think that would be "irrational"..

Im not 'almost suggesting' it, I am suggesting September 11th and other attacks have made some people 'irrationally afraid' of your Joe Public Muslim getting on with his life. These people often express their fear as anger. And you call this rational? Avoid all Muslims then, better not go into town... or to your local takeaway, to the dentist, to hospital... in fact maybe you should just stay indoors altogether

I have been accosted by a friendly Islamic gentleman telling me that one day we will all believe in the same god

Next time you see this man, let him know you already believe in the same God, its the other stuff that makes us different:)

and the evils of George Bush.

That might have been me... sorry

The Sweeper

juslookin wrote:

The UK is not anti Islam. It is incredibly, perhaps over pro-Islam for a secular and muliti faith, multi culture society.

The problem is that some Islamic organisations are forcing agendas on a variety of very dodgy tactics. One is the "good cop" / "bad cop" of we can't be held responsible for terrorism.

Another is the propogation of "Islamophobia" myths.

The caliphate would see the Republic of Ireland under Sharia law. Goodbye guiness, goodbye the democracy you've achieved since 1916, goodbye Catholic and Protestant churches, goodbye the advances, rights and lifestyles Irish women have achieved since the 1980s. If you are unsure of whether it is a bad thing, I suggest maybe going to live in a sharia country for a while and then letting us have your opinion.

I could go toe to toe and line for line with you on this one, but actually I'd rather make a single-minded and sweeping attack against you personally and get turfed out of humanities for a bit.

You strike me as a racist, subversive gobshite. Your arguments are skillfully intricate. You are presenting a front of racial tolerence against a backdrop of manipulative commentary about the advantages of being a victim, comparing the muslim society to other migrant populations when there really is no comparison - it's apples to oranges.

If you think the UK isn't anti-Islam, tell that to Mohammed Abdul Kahar.

You should try a little harder in distinguishing the couple of million muslims in the UK from terrorists. They can't all be women hating religious fanatics you know. It'd be more noticeable if they were.

The fact is, you can't hold a culture, a nation or a belief system responsible for terrorism. It was wrong when Bush led the backlash against Afghanistan for 9/11, just as it would be wrong for Britain to hold the entirety of Irish society responsible for the Guildford and Birmingham bombings, or perhaps Warrington or Canary Wharf or any of the other attacks that an extremist group perpetrated on British soil.

However, I have a feeling you'd go around in circles till you were exhausted on this subject, since it's taken a lot of patience for you to drum up 50 reasonably agreeable posts to make you look kosher (oh! the irony) before you started this stormfront-esque bollocksology.

I'm done with your piss poor manipulation. I'll not be arsed responding again because my view of your spineless propaganda isn't going to change bewteen this and my next post. Why don't you take your great big tar-brush and go juslookin somewhere else?

fly_agaric

Hobbes wrote:

Or the the one who was shot for no reason, no wait 2 shot for no reason, detained without rights and then let go without ever being charged with anything but get to go home to a destroyed house.

Sound like the actions of a rational country not in the grip of Islamophobia (which I hate as a term).

The actions of a country whose police/intelligence people are very, very, very scared.
They are terrified that they will overlook the next group of heretofore quiet, studious, and prayerful muslims who suddenly go batshít over Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Sudan, Afghanistan, etc etc etc and decide to slaughter for their God in the UK.
If they miss them, maybe the crazies will get lucky and manage to off a few 100 or even a few 1000 people instead of "just" 50 or so.
Therefore they overcompensate and make mistakes. There is actually something real for them to fear here though.

There has been "islamophobia" in the media in the UK, and I'm sure many ordinary people are not really feeling brotherly love for "muslims" in the abstract at present but do you really think the govt. and institutions like the police are "islamophobic"?

Seems to me they are really trying to discriminate between the subset and the set here and the stakes are alot higher than when they were dealing with the 'Ra and the Irish.

The way alot of this is reported doesn't help. I posted something about this when those people were arrested in Canada. AFAIR A mosque in Toronto had some windows smashed but the article someone else posted was talking of "the beginnings of retrribution/retaliatory attacks against muslims" as if a pogrom or something would kick off any day now. There was alot of that after the London Bombings too - the media watching and waiting for some race-violence to erupt like crows looking for an eyeball to peck.

Dave!

Gah, can someone coin a new term as an alternative to "Islamophobia" -- we're not all afraid!

WhiteWashMan

juslookin wrote:

The UK is not anti Islam. It is incredibly, perhaps over pro-Islam for a secular and muliti faith, multi culture society.

The problem is that some Islamic organisations are forcing agendas on a variety of very dodgy tactics.

One is the "good cop" / "bad cop" of we can't be held responsible for terrorism.

Another is the propogation of "Islamophobia" myths.

The caliphate would see the Republic of Ireland under Sharia law. Goodbye guiness, goodbye the democracy you've achieved since 1916, goodbye Catholic and Protestant churches, goodbye the advances, rights and lifestyles Irish women have achieved since the 1980s. If you are unsure of whether it is a bad thing, I suggest maybe going to live in a sharia country for a while and then letting us have your opinion.

its funny how after a while, the stastics and the references go out the window, and the fact like opinion takes over subtley.

can you please link to reason or rhyme fo each one of these 'factoids' you have just picked up on.

i really hate opinion without a good reason.

what are these agendas?
what are these dodgey tactics?
what are you talking about good cops and bad cops for?
what 'islamaphobia' myths?
why do you keep saying 'islamaphobia'? is it the new word of the day?
what are you talking about ireland under the sharia law? where the hell do you get that from? are you plucking random thoughts from the air here and seriously suggesting them as little factual titbits for us to digest?

a very seriously small minority in the country are suddenly going to take us all over, run the country, make us change our beliefs and legal system?
please, id like to espacially see the background for that 'opinion', how its going to happen, whats happening so far (again, facts only please), and how long its likely to take. i have to go to a wedding next year in a catholic church, will my good day out be ruined by then?

still, would make a refreshing change, wouldnt it?

Karl Hungus

DaveMcG wrote:

Gah, can someone coin a new term as an alternative to "Islamophobia" -- we're not all afraid!

You know, I think it's actually a great term.

It makes a very refreshing change to the usual "Racist" rubbish that's hurled about without thought. The words 'Racism' or 'Racist' suggest something quite vindictive, or a belief in the superiority of your race. The 'Phobia' suggests something that's simply irrational, or unfounded, which I think more often than not is a lot closer to the truth of a lot of so-called "Racism" in Ireland today.

juslookin

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

You strike me as a racist, subversive gobshite.

We'll, you're wrong !

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Your arguments are skillfully intricate.

Skillfully intricate ? Oh if only. Just prepared to go a take a look at and ask questions about the "recieved wisdom", and the "official line". (I'm wondering, while folk like yourself still allow it without calling out the thought police that is ... ). Why not impress me yourself.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

You are presenting a front of racial tolerence against a backdrop of manipulative commentary about the advantages of being a victim.

I don't think there is any advantage in an individual being a "victim". It's a horrible position to be in. But there are plenty of political advantages for "organisations" claiming "victimhood" and the "victim position" and "exploiting victims" to further their own agendas. (Anyone heard of the McCartney sisters ?)

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Comparing the muslim society to other migrant populations when there really is no comparison - it's apples to oranges.

I've spent three decades in the UK's most multiculural area. I can tell you that there are some interesting comparisions to be made. That's the source of a lot of discussion. That's why people are wondering why before now there was no Sikhophobia, Hinduphobia and the like, while there is a huge amount of coverage of "Islamophobia". Where is it coming from and why.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

If you think the UK isn't anti-Islam, tell that to Mohammed Abdul Kahar.

There is no proof that there is any "anti Islam" action there. Unless you have some, which would be much appreciated.

On the other hand, thousands of examples, from Cherie Blair using taxpayers money to fight the Shabina Begum case, to groups of nutters walking down our main streets with signs glorifying and gloating about the 52 people murdered on 7th July being protected by police who actually arrested people who disagreed with them. Islamic schools. Islamic banking. Islamic media, organisations and associations funded by the government. Women only swimming classes and healthcare sessions. I think there is plenty of evidence that the UK is rather more pro than it is anti Islam. Certainly far more than Ireland, France and many other European nations.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

You should try a little harder in distinguishing the couple of million muslims in the UK from terrorists. They can't all be women hating religious fanatics you know. It'd be more noticeable if they were.

Please remind me, where was it exactly I called the couple of million muslims in the UK terrorists ? Or ALL ? I missed that. You are beginning to sound like those people who when losing an argument revert to throwing the accusations of "Racism".

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

The fact is, you can't hold a culture, a nation or a belief system responsible for terrorism.

Again, please remind me where exactly I did this ?

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

However, I have a feeling you'd go around in circles till you were exhausted on this subject, since it's taken a lot of patience for you to drum up 50 reasonably agreeable posts to make you look kosher (oh! the irony) before you started this stormfront-esque bollocksology.

Frankly, that's just your opinion. And you are wrong.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

I'm done with your piss poor manipulation. I'll not be arsed responding again because my view of your spineless propaganda isn't going to change bewteen this and my next post. Why don't you take your great big tar-brush and go juslookin somewhere else?

Manipulation ? Propoganda ? Nope, discussion. Exchange of information.

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

I could go toe to toe and line for line with you on this one, but actually I'd rather make a single-minded and sweeping attack against you personally and get turfed out of humanities for a bit.

Why not try having a debate, an exchange of information ?

Or maybe you are not up to it ?

Maybe you are just one of those Indymedia types ? You know, "we must smash their heads on the pavement" when you can't form any coherent arguments ?

juslookin

As you acknowledge in your reproduction of my quote, I specify "Some" organisations, and unlike some of your fellow posters you can make a distinction of not accusing somebody of suggesting "All"

WhiteWashMan wrote:

what are these agendas?

Some high profile UK islamic organisations have agendas which range from modest advancement to the "Islamification of Britiain" to the "Creation of The Caliphate". Al Majahoroun, Hibz ut Tahir were some of the originals, but they have plenty of latest incarnations. Some organisations simply want a separate school / legal / etc system for muslims. And some just want some action on local advertising hoardings, or preventing a pub from having a beer garden as it "tempts the youth". So many agendas, so little space.

WhiteWashMan wrote:

what are these dodgey tactics?

All sorts of dodgy tactics. Some groups infiltrating UK universitities and radicalising students over small issues to create major situations. Infiltrating the media and using your position within it to propogate incorrect information. Using schoolchildren (i.e Shabina Begum) as a front for campaigns to further their agendas.

WhiteWashMan wrote:

what are you talking about good cops and bad cops for?
?

Good cops and Bad cops? We have reached a situation where we have some groups saying "we are not responsible for terrorism, we do not condone terrorism, we do not support terrorism, but unfortunately if you do not give us what we want, we cannot prevent terrorism, we understand why some people may turn to terrorism".

You might be familiar with Martin McGuinness ?

WhiteWashMan wrote:

what 'islamaphobia' myths?

what 'islamaphobia' myths? If you had a look at the original post, perhaps this http://www.mpacuk.org/content/view/2222/1/ and this http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?t=10949&page=1&pp=20 might give you some insight into how "Islamophobic myths" are started, are propogated and what the outcome might be ?

WhiteWashMan wrote:

why do you keep saying 'islamaphobia'? is it the new word of the day?

it appears to have been coined by some islamic groups, and for whatever reason they like to keep it high on the national agenda.

WhiteWashMan wrote:

what are you talking about ireland under the sharia law? where the hell do you get that from?

A poster suggested that Caliphate might not be a bad thing. Caliphate is a belief held by millions, tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of muslims. Caliphate would mean that Ireland would be under Sharia law. Literally.

WhiteWashMan wrote:

a very seriously small minority in the country are suddenly going to take us all over, run the country, make us change our beliefs and legal system?
please, id like to espacially see the background for that 'opinion', how its going to happen, whats happening so far (again, facts only please), and how long its likely to take.

no, but this small minority are certainly going to do their very best to acheive all of that and more. That is the simply logical outcome of their beliefs and their agendas.

And when they say it with such convincing terms, including "Islamophobia" some well meaning lunatics might actually make concessions to them.

Hobbes

juslookin wrote:

No I didn't. If you think I did, please kindly make that clear.

reread how your writing.

Incidently do you have a list of how Muslims have forced the Irish culture to the way of Islam since the 1950's?

as for UK being anti-Islam. I'd say its not, in that the whole of the UK isn't. If there is anti-Islamic elements in the UK then yes and there is some disparity between rights of muslims and the rights of others.

For example only on TV last night they were going on about integration in schools in the UK not working correctly. You had all white schools, all certain religous schools but one thing they noted was that while it is easy to start up a All-Catholic school it is extremly hard to impossible to create an All-Muslim school.

Although the program was arguing that all these people should be mixing in schools or there isn't going to be any integration.

bonkey

juslookin wrote:

And you can choose whether the thousands who fought and died for self determination of who they imagined the Irish people were

I think you misunderstand what self-determination is.

Freedom of self-determination does exactly what it says on the tin. It gives you the freedom to choose. You can't suddenly decide that its only suppsed to apply when people choose stuff you agree with or like.

If the papers or people choose to be ultra-PC or whatever it is you seem to have a problem with, that is not a betrayal of their freedom of self-determination, but rather an exercise of it.

jc

Wibbs

juslookin wrote:

I've spent three decades in the UK's most multiculural area. I can tell you that there are some interesting comparisions to be made. That's the source of a lot of discussion. That's why people are wondering why before now there was no Sikhophobia, Hinduphobia and the like, while there is a huge amount of coverage of "Islamophobia". Where is it coming from and why.

Hmm yea OK I see where you're coming from. That said the reaction since 911 may have something to do with it. They're in the spotlight and it's their cahnce to sing as it were. Put it this way, pre 911 I would have been the only one of my friends that had read through the Quran etc. Since then they pretty much all have. Like all fads it'll pass.

Some high profile UK islamic organisations have agendas which range from modest advancement to the "Islamification of Britiain" to the "Creation of The Caliphate". Al Majahoroun, Hibz ut Tahir were some of the originals, but they have plenty of latest incarnations. Some organisations simply want a separate school / legal / etc system for muslims. And some just want some action on local advertising hoardings, or preventing a pub from having a beer garden as it "tempts the youth". So many agendas, so little space.

Partially true, most of it seems to be sabre rattling though. Most ordinary muslims at best seem to give it tacit support.

what 'islamaphobia' myths? If you had a look at the original post, perhaps this http://www.mpacuk.org/content/view/2222/1/ and this http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?t=10949&page=1&pp=20 might give you some insight into how "Islamophobic myths" are started, are propogated and what the outcome might be ?

Maybe, but if your read through the forum replies, among the shock and horror stuff, many posters are cautioning against overreaction. I think people of any culture can smell bullsh1t when they see it.

it appears to have been coined by some islamic groups, and for whatever reason they like to keep it high on the national agenda.

Like all interest groups, especially if they feel under threat.

A poster suggested that Caliphate might not be a bad thing. Caliphate is a belief held by millions, tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of muslims. Caliphate would mean that Ireland would be under Sharia law. Literally.

I'm in agreement with Hobbes on this one. It could happen only if the Muslim population was a majority here. We're a long way from that. A critical mass is a long way away. I could see ghettoisation happening in certain areas of europe, where localised sharia might come to pass(holland/france etc), which I would have serious issue with, but here? I doubt it. It also depends where the Muslim population came from originally. If they're from saudi or Pakistan, they would likely be more "militant" than those from Muslim asia for example. There are more flavours of Islam out there.

And when they say it with such convincing terms, including "Islamophobia" some well meaning lunatics might actually make concessions to them.

Possible.

juslookin

Hobbes wrote:

Incidently do you have a list of how Muslims have forced the Irish culture to the way of Islam since the 1950's?
.

Well, we are getting off the point, but to digress.

No, and since the 1950's I don't believe this phenomena of agressive radical Islam has occoured in Ireland. And in the 60's, 70's, 80's this was true in the UK.

In previous decades most emigrant groups of whatever kind were quite isolated from their origins.

However, in the 2000's a combination of advances in communications and technology, variously for example the internet, satellite TV, cheap video cameras and DVD production, cheap air travel and other modern elements are combining to generate the phenomenon you are seeing in modern day UK.

Hence young men in British cities watching imported Jihad DVDs then getting angry about their "brothers" in Bosnia, and being politicised against their fellow non muslim British citizens .... or Pakistanis rioting and murdering on the basis of a or a lie myth about a picture of a pig.

The likes of MPAC are an example of what is happening. Explore the site, then relate to headlines about the "Rise Of Islamophobia".

bonkey

juslookin wrote:

You are almost suggesting that Islamophobia, an "irrational fear" of Islam is a response to Islamic estremism. If that is the case, I don't think that would be "irrational".

Extending a rational fear of one group to being a fear of a larger supergroup for no rational basis is irrational.

If extremists are the problem, then extremism is what we need to fear.
If Islamic extremists are the problem, then extremism is what we need to fear.
If male extremists are the problem, then extremism is what we need to fear.
If human extremists are hte problem, then extremism is what we need to fear.

Deciding that for the second case, Islam is the problem, in the third case the male gender and in the fourth case the entire human race.....that would be irrational.

I live amongst Muslims. I would describe some of them as intolerant and harsh and I would describe some of them as having an intention to dominate with their belief system above others.

I have lived amongst Irish. I found some of them to be utterly despicable people. Should I therefore decide that the Irish are a despicable people? Should I decide that my non-despicable neighbours are despicable-but-hiding-it?

Would such decisions be considered rational?
Would such an argument be considered logical?
I didn't think so either.

My typical British demenour has ...

Hold on thar pardner. I thought you were all in favour of this "tar them all with the brush some of them get tarred with".

Some British hate foreigners. Some British are actively aggressive to anyone foreign living in their nation. Shouldn't we employ the same "expansionary logic" you've used to show how such groups of "some" are the problem with all of Islam and judge the British on teh actions of their undesirable minorities, rather than your pleasant demeanour?

Do do otherwise, surely, would be to apply a double-standard....judging the British by your "typical" pleasant demeanour, but Muslims based on the selection of an unquantified "some" who have more problematic outlooks?

However I am coming to the conclusion that by nodding and smiling I am only encouraging them.

<sarcasm>

Dead right. What you should do is hurl abuse at them.

If they don't appear Anglo or Saxon in origin, additionally tell them to **** off home to where they came from.

If that doesn't work, resort to physical violence.

</sarcasm>

jc

Hobbes

juslookin wrote:

Well, we are getting off the point, but to digress.

No, and since the 1950's I don't believe this phenomena of agressive radical Islam has occoured in Ireland. And in the 60's, 70's, 80's this was true in the UK.

You said earlier that when muslims come to a country they try to force the countries laws to the way of Islam. Muslims have been in Ireland by 1950's so they should of done something by now no?

Now your saying in the year 2000, so whats changed in Ireland in relation to Muslims and Irish law since 2000?

or Pakistanis rioting and murdering on the basis of a or a lie myth about a picture of a pig.

Thats a new one. You have a link to that story?

You keep going on about MPAC as well? You got any other sources?

Zombrex

Not quite sure what the point of this thread it. The OP started off by trying to explain that Islamicphobia in Ireland is largely a myth, and then about 10 posts down went into a rant about how dangerous Muslim immigration into Ireland can be :rolleyes:

Are all new posters on Boards.ie completely ignorant of the concept of irony these days?

To juslookin, you asked where this Islamicphobia is coming from, I would suggest you take a look at yourself.

To answer your questions, I would imagine there are far more Catholic Irish people who don't recongise this State and its government than Muslims, yet we are (amazingly) still here.

Don't worry so much. Society, be it Catholic, Protestant or Muslim, will always contain its fair share of nutjobs, or people calling for ridiculous laws or governments. It doesn't mean society is going to crumble around us.

(BTW, the law used in Italy against blasphemy was original intended to protect the Catholic church afaik. You can't really blame Muslims for using the same law Catholics have been able to use for years. I disagree with the law, but not soley because Muslims are using it).

Hobbes

Wibbs wrote:

I'm in agreement with Hobbes on this one. It could happen only if the Muslim population was a majority here. We're a long way from that.

Who what now? I don't recall saying that. I was looking for the assertion that Muslims moving into a country try to force the change the laws of the land to suit themselves. If this is true we should certainly see such instances in Ireland.

As for sharia law for example as mentioned before this actually exists in the UK already. There are Sharia lawyers where muslims can go to settle disputes as per Sharia law. However it should be noted that the lawyers follow British law and nothing in Sharia law is allowed supercede the laws of the country they are in.

Wibbs wrote:

It also depends where the Muslim population came from originally. If they're from saudi or Pakistan, they would likely be more "militant" than those from Muslim asia for example.

Generalisation again.

May as well say that if a person came from Ireland then they are a drunk and most likely to beat thier wife.

The Sweeper

ARGH and I said I wouldn't do this...

juslookin wrote:

We'll, you're wrong !

Yeah? And you smell.

juslookin wrote:

Skillfully intricate ? Oh if only. Just prepared to go a take a look at and ask questions about the "recieved wisdom", and the "official line". (I'm wondering, while folk like yourself still allow it without calling out the thought police that is ... ). Why not impress me yourself.

There is a certain kind of question asking that really bothers me. It's the sort of question asking that goes "Well maybe the jews DID invent the holocaust, did you ever think of that?" Your questions ring similar to me.

juslookin wrote:

I don't think there is any advantage in an individual being a "victim". It's a horrible position to be in. But there are plenty of political advantages for "organisations" claiming "victimhood" and the "victim position" and "exploiting victims" to further their own agendas. (Anyone heard of the McCartney sisters?)

What you call the exploitation of victimhood, I see as victim support. Is there a particular way you'd like organisations to speak out in support of victims? Certain syntax you want them to use so they're not being exploitative?

And incidentally, how in the nine hells were the McCartney sisters supposed to get anywhere with the investigation into their brother's death without taking the precise path they were on, and what other agenda are you under the impression that they have??

juslookin wrote:

I've spent three decades in the UK's most multiculural area. I can tell you that there are some interesting comparisions to be made. That's the source of a lot of discussion. That's why people are wondering why before now there was no Sikhophobia, Hinduphobia and the like, while there is a huge amount of coverage of "Islamophobia". Where is it coming from and why.

It's coming from the fact that on an extremist group claiming Islamic beliefs pepetrated a number of terrorist atrocities. What stone have you been living under? As long as Babbar Khalsa restricts their activities to establishing an independent Khalistan in the Punjab region, and not Bromley, the UK has no reason to be Sikhophobic.

Since Britain does not observe the caste system and we're not the Dalit-Bahujans, we don't really have reason to fear right-wing extremist Hindus or breed an atmosphere of Hinduphobia.

juslookin wrote:

There is no proof that there is any "anti Islam" action there. Unless you have some, which would be much appreciated.

Racial diversity speaker Trevor Gordon appears to be upset by the spectacle of 12 while police officers searching Muslim people at London Bridge station.

And you do not have to act to be against something. This is why I don't like your insidious arguments. All I have to do to find anti-Islam feeling is watch the news, read the papers, go to the pub. Feeling precedes action. Which is why I'm suspicious of anyone drumming up such feeling. The fact that an Incitement to Religious Hatred Bill was passed on 31st January 2006, however watered-down some of the more vocal of minority religious representatives may feel it has been, illustrates the fact that people feel there is a need to protect communities who are distinguished by their religion.

juslookin wrote:

On the other hand, thousands of examples, from Cherie Blair using taxpayers money to fight the Shabina Begum case

Why shouldn't she? Shabina Begum is a British citizen. She's not an immigrant. On the basis of her birth, she's entitled to the provisions of legal aid. The British Government uses taxpayers money to defend murderers, rapists and child abusers all the time. It was a great thing that Cherie Blair defended her. Because then everybody knew when she lost her case. Shabina Begum is not entitled to wear the jilbab instead of a school uniform because that decree of nonconformity interferes with her school's ability to ensure discipline and order.

juslookin wrote:

to groups of nutters walking down our main streets with signs glorifying and gloating about the 52 people murdered on 7th July being protected by police who actually arrested people who disagreed with them.

Whose main streets are these? 'Groups of nutter' - that a technical term? And gloating? That's sounds more than a little subjective to me. Got any linkies to support your facts about this march of hatred and the police protection it got?

juslookin wrote:

Islamic schools.

I think we've already covered the fact that the jilbab isn't an acceptable school uniform for some schools. Now if you really wanted to wear one, what would you do? Go to an Islamic school? Hooray! You can, because there are some. Everybody's happy. Except juslookin.

juslookin wrote:

Islamic banking.

Again, SO WHAT? Sharia/Shariah law runs against the idea of getting money for doing nothing - so it means that the interest stipulated over the principal of a loan is prohibited, as is the interest offered on your current account. Basically, you can't get rewarded for just doing nothing with your money. However, you can gain capital rewards depending on the performance of your capital. It means the set-up behind a Sharia-compliant bank has to be backed by real assets that have the ability to cause added value.

So if practicing Muslims want to stick to the verses of the Holy Quran they can do that in an Islamic bank. Incidentally, if you don't like that, then you won't like the fact that high street banks are retaining Sharia advisors so they can offer Muslim accounts. It's more to do with business than it is with race.

juslookin wrote:

Islamic media, organisations and associations funded by the government.

There are PLENTY of multicultural media outlets in the UK that have Government funding. Not just ones for Islam. The fact that the Government is funding your radio station doesn't mean that people on the tube last year still weren't staring at you in paranoid terror as you reached into your black rucksack for a tissue.

juslookin wrote:

Women only swimming classes and healthcare sessions.

Eh, you may find that the 'women-only' thing extends far past Islam and always has.

juslookin wrote:

I think there is plenty of evidence that the UK is rather more pro than it is anti Islam. Certainly far more than Ireland, France and many other European nations.

Nearly 3% of the population of England and Wales is Muslim. Less than one half of a percent of the Republic of Ireland's population is Muslim. Almost 7% of France's population is Muslim. The French state does not legally recognise religion, something that means that ANYONE who wants to live their lives by religious tenet is going to find it difficult rationalising that with the laws of the country in which they're living. That, and the huge number of migrant workers into France - something the UK and Ireland have not yet experienced from the Muslim population - helps make the country less than receptive to Muslims.

However, France has some laws that would make any migrant feel uncomfortable - see this quote from the Wiki:

"The situation was different with the "second generation", born in France, and as such French citizens by jus soli influenced law. As such, they can't be designated "immigrants", since, like any citizen, they were born on national territory. As they have few bonds, if any, with their supposed country of origin, they cannot return to a place they have never known - something which can be problematic since a 1992 reform of the nationality laws, which delayed obtainment of French nationality until a request at adulthood (where previously it was automatically given). Because of persistent social discrimination, these natural citizens are often made to feel like immigrants. A large number of them are located in housing projects in the suburbs. In a reverse of US suburbs, the French working-classes often live out of town, sometimes in ville nouvelles (such as Sarcelles for example, from which the term sarcellite was derived) for which no infrastructure other than sleeping dormitories have been planned, thus explaining a general boredom which contributed to the 2005 Paris suburb riots."

juslookin wrote:

Please remind me, where was it exactly I called the couple of million muslims in the UK terrorists ? Or ALL ? I missed that. You are beginning to sound like those people who when losing an argument revert to throwing the accusations of "Racism".

Yep, that's right, you never said it. I was just cutting straight to the chase because I feel it's something of the direction you're heading in.

juslookin wrote:

Manipulation ? Propoganda ? Nope, discussion. Exchange of information. Why not try having a debate, an exchange of information ?
Or maybe you are not up to it? Maybe you are just one of those Indymedia types ? You know, "we must smash their heads on the pavement" when you can't form any coherent arguments ?

Will this post do as an exchange of information? This enough of a discussion for you? I've got more! See the next post down!

The Sweeper

You strike me as one of those people who doesn't understand the difficulties of racial integration. The problem is, you don't get racial melting pots. You get salad bowls, where it's all a mix of different bits and pieces striving to work as a single entity. Global borders are becoming more and more blurred, with the result that harbouring xenophobia is just going to make your own life uncomfortable, nobody elses. We simply can't have the attitude of "if they want to come here why don't they accept our ways" any more, because there are no absolutes.

Accepting, educating and respecting other people is the root of conquering fear, and fear is the root of Islamophobia. Ignorance of other peoples ways - a lack of understanding around their clothing, traditions, belief systems and simply 'the way they look' is what creates the massive dissatisfaction and resentment that breeds hate. Hate's like coal - put it under enough pressure and you get these little diamonds of extremist action, like terrorism.

Terrorism does exactly what it says on the tin - it begets terror. Terrified people become paranoid about what they don't understand - so they tar Islam with the brush of extremism and begin, on a one-to-one basis, to react badly to the Muslims they meet.

juslookin wrote:

Islam is not. It is arguably a harsh, intolerant political belief system, with an agenda to dominate and subdue. Often when followers of Islam find themselves in "new" socieities, they find that the majority belief system and its apparatus is not to their liking, and set about attempting to change that apparatus, specifically accomodate them.

What are you basing that opinion on?

And by the way, on Caliphate:

"The Caliphate is a unique political system from the ideology of Islam that bears no resemblance to any of the Muslim Governments today. It is a government built upon a concept of citizenship regardless of ethnicity, gender or creed and is totally opposed to the oppression of any religious or ethnic grouping.

Non-Muslims have an honourable status in the Caliphate. They are referred to as dhimmi (people of contract), which means they are equal citizens with the Muslims and enjoy the full rights of citizenship. Unlike in Britain they are not given derogatory names like “ethnic minorities” or “immigrants”, that implies they are 2nd class citizens and not really welcome. The rights of non-Muslims are enshrined in statutory Islamic Law (shariah) and cannot be reversed by legal precedent or the whims of any government. The Prophet Muhammad (saw) said: “Whoever harms a dhimmi has harmed me.”

That's from www.caliphate.co.uk. It's a little more complex than "Caliphate is a belief held by millions, tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of muslims. Caliphate would mean that Ireland would be under Sharia law. Literally."

bonkey

Wicknight wrote:

(BTW, the law used in Italy against blasphemy was original intended to protect the Catholic church afaik. You can't really blame Muslims for using the same law Catholics have been able to use for years. I disagree with the law, but not soley because Muslims are using it).

This is tightly related to a point I was just considering as well.

Tony and George are on their world tour, promoting the virtues of democracy, freedom of choice and so on. They're trying to sell it (one way or another) to what parts of the world don't yet have it.

Meanwhile, back at home, in each of their respective countries, people are shocked (shocked I say. SHOCKED) that immigrants in their society dare to abuse the system by organising themselves into political factions who then set about trying to achieve change.

So now we hear about the danger that Sharia law might be chosen, and how we need to make sure that while we keep democracy and freedom of choice and all that, we should also fix the game to make sure that only the "right" choices can be freely chosen.

juslookin

To Hobbes,

Alledgedly, the original "Danish Cartoons", controversey included a photo of a French "gurning" or "pig squealing" competition. Allegedly, the Danish Imans who had some political agenda stated that this picture in a completely false context, which sparked riots and unrest. You can find it on the internet if you look.

juslookin

bonkey wrote:

Hold on thar pardner. I thought you were all in favour of this "tar them all with the brush some of them get tarred with".

Well, actually, you are wrong. That's your invention. or an invention of another poster here.

juslookin

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Yeah? And you smell.

You know, you have some quite interesting, quite sesnible, quite valid, quite correct, quite opinion changing points.

But amongst all that you seem to behave like an agressive little child who can't debate without throwing insults and accusations.

The Sweeper

Good isn't it? But why don't you just rise above all that and try and answer my quite interesting, quite sesnible, quite valid, quite correct, quite opinion changing points.