Multi-culturalism is responsible for terror in our midst

Due to these twin ideologies we are now confronted by the deadly menace of militant Islam within the heart of our society. In the name of diversity and tolerance, the state has allowed barbaric intolerance to flourish in our midst.

The lethal danger from jihadism has been graphically highlighted by the growing number of Muslims from Britain now fighting in Syria and Iraq. The police have estimated that more than 500 young radicals from our shores have travelled to the Middle East to join extremist groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), a notoriously savage organisation that wants to create a despotic medieval caliphate.

In addition, around 300 jihadists are thought to have returned to Britain after involvement in terrorist campaigns in Syria and Iraq, posing a lethal threat to the fabric of our civilisation. According to Richard Barrett, the former head of counter-terrorism at MI6, the sheer number of these returning zealots means that it would be "a completely impossible task" for our security forces to keep track of all of them.

The British Muslim link to jihadism was further emphasised over the weekend when a group of Islamists from Britain put a recruitment video online, urging young Muslims to join them in the fight with ISIS. "What prevents you from obtaining martyrdom and the pleasure of your lord?" asks one of the group. He has subsequently been identified as Reyaad Khan, a 20-year-old from Cardiff.

THE mounting evidence of home-grown jihadism has led to a predictable bout of hand-wringing and self-flagellation from left-wing commentators.

"Why do these young men feel so alienated from British society?" they ask in bewildered tones. But there is nothing incomprehensible about the actions of the British jihadists. They are just doing the same as Muslim extremists all over the world, following a vile political ideology. In their eager embrace of the blood soaked horror of ISIS, they are no different from the butchers of Drummer Lee Rigby or the kidnappers of schoolgirls in Nigeria, or the misogynist Taliban brutes of Afghanistan or the Islamic death squads in Somalia.

The British state, especially under Tony Blair, pretended that militant Islam could be contained at home by fighting it abroad but that was a complete fallacy. Our interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya have only succeeded in fuelling extremism within Britain, whipping up jihadists to new heights of self-righteous fury.

Another great fallacy of the progressive interventionists is that the flames of extremism can be extinguished by westernised education. But that is more wishful thinking. Just like the July bombers of 2005, all the British jihadists in the Middle East went through our schools system, yet still emerged as radicals.

But by far the worst error has been the state's addiction to immigration and multiculturalism. Domestic jihadism is the direct creation of a political class obsessed with open borders and the transformation of our society's structure. Thanks to these two strategies, the Muslim population of Britain has now reached almost three million, while one in 10 British children under the age of four is Muslim. The pro-immigration brigade tells us that this is no problem, since the "vast majority" of Muslims are moderate. But that is more self-deceit at odds with the evidence. One independent survey showed that 40 per cent of Muslims here want to live under Sharia law; another revealed that 32 per cent of Muslim students at university felt killing in the name of religion is justified.

Such attitudes have been reinforced by the state's fixation with cultural diversity which, instead of promoting integration, encourages migrant groups to cling to their traditional customs, practices, even languages. That is how we have ended up with Muslim enclaves dominated by the burkha, sharia tribunals, forced marriages, and ballot box fraud. Nor do the mosques do much to promote social cohesion. A recent study found that, out of Britain's 1,700 mosques, just two follow a modernist interpretation of the Koran, while a quarter do not even allow women on the premises.

And the truth is that Islamic extremists have contempt for our society. Their allegiance is entirely to their hardline doctrine, not to this country.

INDEED, it is absurd to describe them as "British" at all, for they have complete disdain for the normal responsibilities of British citizenship.

They are interested only in exploiting us, whether it be through welfare or education or housing or legal aid.

The political class has appeased radical Islam for far too long. The militants have only been emboldened by this stance, recognising it as weakness dressed up as tolerance. If we are to conquer the enemy within, that means getting far tougher with the extremists. Jihadists with only limited connections to Britain should be stopped from re-entering the country by the withdrawal of their passports. And those who make it back should face long sentences for terrorism and treachery.

But we would not be in this mess if our rulers had decided to protect our society instead of feebly colluding with our enemies.

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/484235/Leo-McKinstry-on-multi-cultralism

Odd, multiculturalism incorporates many cultures and the country does call for integration and promotes it, we see this daily.

What a daft article, basically using Islamic extremism to thus promote a view to stop any different cultures coming here off a tiny minority of extremists, very flawed to say the least

well said smelly, a certain "pacifist " on here would surrender at the first shot1

Didge wrote:Odd, multiculturalism incorporates many cultures and the country does call for integration and promotes it, we see this daily.

What a daft article, basically using Islamic extremism to thus promote a view to stop any different cultures coming here off a tiny minority of extremists, very flawed to say the least

Tiny minority eh?

..."The pro-immigration brigade tells us that this is no problem, since the "vast majority" of Muslims are moderate. But that is more self-deceit at odds with the evidence. One independent survey showed that 40 per cent of Muslims here want to live under Sharia law; another revealed that 32 per cent of Muslim students at university felt killing in the name of religion is justified."

nicko wrote:well said smelly, a certain "pacifist " on here would  surrender at the first shot1

If you are referring to me, I am no pacifist and if it was not for my grand parents and countless others fighting a for a nation not their own, you would not have the freedoms you enjoy today. The article is again used to inflame and thus use as a means to stop any people coming to this country, because it claims multiculturalism has failed off how some people become radicalized, neglecting what turns them to extremism. They were already Muslims, so would it be Islam?
No what it is that turns them is indoctrination, by claiming wrongs done to them like foreign policies.

Laters.

nicko wrote:Laters.

See ya dumbo

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:Odd, multiculturalism incorporates many cultures and the country does call for integration and promotes it, we see this daily.

What a daft article, basically using Islamic extremism to thus promote a view to stop any different cultures coming here off a tiny minority of extremists, very flawed to say the least

Tiny minority eh?

..."The pro-immigration brigade tells us that this is no problem, since the "vast majority" of Muslims are moderate. But that is more self-deceit at odds with the evidence. One independent survey showed that 40 per cent of Muslims here want to live under Sharia law; another revealed that 32 per cent of Muslim students at university felt killing in the name of religion is justified."

Almost third of Muslim students on Britain's campuses believe killing in the name of religion can be justified, according to a controversial survey described as the most comprehensive of its kind.
The poll, conducted for Islam on Campus, a new report from the Centre for Social Cohesion think-tank, also found that 40 per cent of those interviewed supported the introduction of sharia law for British Muslims.
But the findings have been fiercely attacked by student groups which described the poll's methodology as 'deeply flawed' and accused the report's authors of isolating Muslims.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/27/islam.highereducation

32% is a minority, or is maths not one of your strong points?

Muslims already have sharia law, did it ask for criminal sharia law, which is why the Poll was skewed.

If brains were dynamite you wouldn't have enough to blow your hat off!!!

nicko wrote:If brains were dynamite you wouldn't have enough to blow your hat off!!!

More proof of your shit stirring and that you always post infantile responses.

Thanks

Didge wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
Tiny minority eh?

..."The pro-immigration brigade tells us that this is no problem, since the "vast majority" of Muslims are moderate. But that is more self-deceit at odds with the evidence. One independent survey showed that 40 per cent of Muslims here want to live under Sharia law; another revealed that 32 per cent of Muslim students at university felt killing in the name of religion is justified."

Almost third of Muslim students on Britain's campuses believe killing in the name of religion can be justified, according to a controversial survey described as the most comprehensive of its kind.
The poll, conducted for Islam on Campus, a new report from the Centre for Social Cohesion think-tank, also found that 40 per cent of those interviewed supported the introduction of sharia law for British Muslims.
But the findings have been fiercely attacked by student groups which described the poll's methodology as 'deeply flawed' and accused the report's authors of isolating Muslims.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/27/islam.highereducation

32% is a minority, or is maths not one of your strong points?

Muslims already have sharia law, did it ask for criminal sharia law, which is why the Poll was skewed.

Usual Didge dodge - you said "tiny minority". Well I don't know about your maths skills dear, but 32% and 40% that want sharia is NOT a tiny minority!

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:


Almost third of Muslim students on Britain's campuses believe killing in the name of religion can be justified, according to a controversial survey described as the most comprehensive of its kind.
The poll, conducted for Islam on Campus, a new report from the Centre for Social Cohesion think-tank, also found that 40 per cent of those interviewed supported the introduction of sharia law for British Muslims.
But the findings have been fiercely attacked by student groups which described the poll's methodology as 'deeply flawed' and accused the report's authors of isolating Muslims.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/27/islam.highereducation

32% is a minority, or is maths not one of your strong points?

Muslims already have sharia law, did it ask for criminal sharia law, which is why the Poll was skewed.

Usual Didge dodge - you said "tiny minority".  Well I don't know about your maths skills dear, but 32% and 40% that want sharia is NOT a tiny minority!

Sharia law and criminal sharia law are different so what was the question asked?
Sharia law, which all Muslims have which does not supersede British law, did it ask that it supersedes British Law Tess?
No, showing how you are easily gullible.

Now lets see what Christians think about killing innocent people:


Check out the results of the poll here and here.  Here are the more pertinent results in bar graph form:
And:

Only one faith on Earth may be more messianic than Islam: multiculturalism. Without it -- without its fanatics who believe all civilizations are the same -- the engine that projects Islam into the unprotected heart of Western civilization would stall and fail. It's as simple as that. To live among the believers -- the multiculturalists -- is to watch the assault, the jihad, take place un-repulsed by our suicidal societies. These societies are not doomed to submit; rather, they are eager to do so in the name of a masochistic brand of tolerance that, short of drastic measures, is surely terminal.

I'm not talking about our soldiers, policemen, rescue workers and, now, even train conductors, who bravely and steadfastly risk their lives for civilization abroad and at home. Instead, I'm thinking about who we are as a society at this somewhat advanced stage of war. It is a strange, tentative civilization we have become, with leaders who strut their promises of "no surrender" even as they flinch at identifying the foe. Four years past 9/11, we continue to shadow-box "terror," even as we go on about "an ideology of hate." It's a script that smacks of sci-fi fantasy more than realpolitik. But our grim reality is no summer blockbuster, and there's no special-effects-enhanced plot twist that is going to thwart "terror" or "hate" in the London Underground anymore than it did on the roof of the World Trade Center. Or in the Bali nightclub. Or on the first day of school in Beslan. Or in any disco, city bus or shopping mall in Israel.

Body bags, burn masks and prosthetics are no better protections than make-believe. But these are our weapons, according to the powers that be. These, and an array of high-tech scopes and scanners designed to identify retinas and fingerprints, to detect explosives and metals -- ultimately, I presume, as we whisk through the automatic supermarket door. How strange, though, that even as we devise new ways to see inside ourselves to our most elemental components, we also prevent ourselves from looking full-face at the danger to our way of life posed by Islam.

Notice I didn't say "Islamists." Or "Islamofascists." Or "fundamentalist extremists." I've tried out such terms in the past, but I've come to find them artificial and confusing, and maybe purposefully so, because in their imprecision I think they allow us all to give a wide berth to a great problem: the gross incompatibility of Islam -- the religious force that shrinks freedom even as it "moderately" enables or "extremistly" advances jihad -- with the West. Am I right? Who's to say? The very topic of Islamization -- for that is what is at hand, and very soon in Europe -- is verboten.

A leaked British report prepared for Prime Minister Tony Blair last year warned even against "expressions of concern about Islamic fundamentalism" (another one of those amorphous terms) because "many perfectly moderate Muslims follow strict adherence to traditional Islamic teachings and are likely to perceive such expressions as a negative comment on their own approach to their faith." Much better to watch subterranean tunnels fill with charred body parts in silence. As the London Times' Simon Jenkins wrote, "The sane response to urban terrorism is to regard it as an avoidable accident."

In not discussing the roots of terror in Islam itself, in not learning about them, the multicultural clergy that shepherds our elites prevents us from having to do anything about them. This is key, because any serious action -- stopping immigration from jihad-sponsoring nations, shutting down mosques that preach violence and expelling their imams, just for starters -- means to renounce the multicultural creed. In the West, that's the greatest apostasy. And while the penalty is not death -- as it is for leaving Islam under Islamic law -- the existential crisis is to be avoided at all costs. Including extinction.

This is the lesson of the atrocities in London. It's unlikely that the 21st century will remember that this new Western crossroads for global jihad was once the home of Churchill, Piccadilly and Sherlock Holmes. Then again, who will notice? The BBC has retroactively purged its online bombing coverage of the word "terrorist"; the spokesman for the London police commissioner has declared that "Islam and terrorism simply don't go together"; and within sight of a forensics team sifting through rubble, an Anglican priest urged his flock, as The Guardian reported, to "rejoice in the capital's rich diversity of cultures, traditions, ethnic groups and faiths." Just don't, he said, "name them as Muslims." Their faith renewed, Londoners soldier on.

http://townhall.com/columnists/dianawest/2007/03/10/burnt_offerings_on_the_altar_of_multiculturalism/page/full

Wow a poster, I think a few UKIP supporters would also back that

Two Jewish teenagers told police they narrowly escaped an attack near Paris by a hatchet-wielding man and three others.

The attack occurred late at night on June 4 in Romainville, a northeastern suburb of the French capital, according to a report by the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Anti-Semitism, or BNVCA.

The teens, aged 14 and 15, said they were walking to the Lilac Synagogue with their grandfather to attend Tikkun Leil Shavuot, a custom in which Jews study scripture all night. While crossing the town’s Market Square, the two boys and their grandfather, all wearing kippahs, said they were followed by a tall man in his 20s wearing a long beard. They described the man as having an athletic figure and an Arab appearance.

Producing a hatchet, the man began to chase the two boys, according to the BNVCA report, then whistled to three other men who joined the chase. The boys and their grandfather filed complaints with police, BNVCA President Sammy Ghozlan wrote.

Last month, BNVCA and SPCJ, the watchdog of France’s Jewish communities, documented two suspected anti-Semitic beatings of Jews in the Paris suburb of Creteil. Also last month, police received a report about three men who were filming the entrance to the local Jewish school of Creteil, Otzar Hatora.

In March 2012, France saw a sharp increase in anti-Semitic acts following the murder by an Islamist radical of four Jews at a Jewish school in Toulouse….

http://forward.com/articles/199690/jewish-teens-escape-axe-attack-near-paris/#ixzz34B7XycZi

Seems debate has gone out the window, must have broken smelly.

 ::D::

this isn't a debating thread

its an information thread

spreading information about the dangers that multicultural extremism and fanatical Muslims pose to civilization

So you admit you are spamming then.

Interesting, when this is a debate forum

Terror is responsible for terrorism.

If you can't see that you're an idiot.

The world is full of angry, intolerant, even bigoted people who nonetheless don't blow other people up.

There's a difference between being hateful and being capable of mass murder.

This post is in short, simple sentences so it will be easier to read by those who lack brainpower.

A multiracial society is a very good thing, but allowing certain religious groups to live in enclaves that are no different to the old country, is a recipe for disaster, as we can see by how insular the Muslim community is in general. There were never all these problems with fundamentalist Islam in this country 30+ years ago, even though we had a large Turkish and Pakistani population.

The Puzzler wrote:A multiracial society is a very good thing, but allowing certain religious groups to live in enclaves that are no different to the old country, is a recipe for disaster, as we can see by how insular the Muslim community is in general. There were never all these problems with fundamentalist Islam in this country 30+ years ago, even though we had a large Turkish and Pakistani population.  

That was the Nazi argument against the Jews.The Nazis claimed they did not integrate, committed crimes, was at odds with western ways, etc.

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:A multiracial society is a very good thing, but allowing certain religious groups to live in enclaves that are no different to the old country, is a recipe for disaster, as we can see by how insular the Muslim community is in general. There were never all these problems with fundamentalist Islam in this country 30+ years ago, even though we had a large Turkish and Pakistani population.  

That was the Nazi argument against the Jews.The Nazis claimed they did not integrate, committed crimes, was at odds with western ways, etc.

GODWIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



That was the Nazi argument against the Jews.The Nazis claimed they did not integrate, committed crimes, was at odds with western ways, etc.

GODWIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

Is a made up concept, that does not distract from the point at hand and what the Nazis did advocate

Didge wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
GODWIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

Is a made up concept, that does not distract from the point at hand and what the Nazis did advocate

The Nazis advocated genocide against the Jews and other groups, and were also big allies of Palestine. They had a lot in common with Islam actually.

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



Is a made up concept, that does not distract from the point at hand and what the Nazis did advocate

The Nazis advocated genocide against the Jews and other groups, and were also big allies of Palestine. They had a lot in common with Islam actually.

Really, wow, so Christianity is the same then using that logic, being as most Germans were Christian an believed Lutheranism ideology of hate towards the Jews, the genocide of the Americas etc.
Many Muslims fought on the allies side, I suppose that matter little to you then? 

Again the Nazis used the arguments of Jews being incompatible with democracy and western ways, are you denying this?

The Puzzler wrote:A multiracial society is a very good thing, but allowing certain religious groups to live in enclaves that are no different to the old country, is a recipe for disaster, as we can see by how insular the Muslim community is in general. There were never all these problems with fundamentalist Islam in this country 30+ years ago, even though we had a large Turkish and Pakistani population.  

But people do that all over the world without causing trouble. The fact is, this is just more reactionary crap where we blame something other than the individual perpetrators for the perpetrators' crimes.

Islam, Christianity, atheism, socialism, communism, capitalism, whatever you can throw out there aren't responsible for murders; murderers are responsible for murders.

The Puzzler wrote:

Didge wrote:



Is a made up concept, that does not distract from the point at hand and what the Nazis did advocate

The Nazis advocated genocide against the Jews and other groups, and were also big allies of Palestine. They had a lot in common with Islam actually.

a great deal in common actually

many of the thoughts present in mein kampf are taken almost verbatim from islamic scriptures

smelly_bandit wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:
The Nazis advocated genocide against the Jews and other groups, and were also big allies of Palestine. They had a lot in common with Islam actually.

a great deal in common actually

many of the thoughts present in mein kampf are taken almost verbatim from islamic scriptures

Oh dear, you mean like the verse you posted that left out the word Christianity?

Really has to be one of the daffiest claims ever that Mein Kampf was inspired by Islam

have you read it....?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

The Puzzler wrote:A multiracial society is a very good thing, but allowing certain religious groups to live in enclaves that are no different to the old country, is a recipe for disaster, as we can see by how insular the Muslim community is in general. There were never all these problems with fundamentalist Islam in this country 30+ years ago, even though we had a large Turkish and Pakistani population.  

But people do that all over the world without causing trouble. The fact is, this is just more reactionary crap where we blame something other than the individual perpetrators for the perpetrators' crimes.

Islam, Christianity, atheism, socialism, communism, capitalism, whatever you can throw out there aren't responsible for murders; murderers are responsible for murders.

bullshit

people murder for beliefs and ideas and causes all the time you fool

turn on the tv and look at ukraine and iraq, they aren't killing each other for the fun of it, opposing sides are fighting and killing for their ideals

you are thick as pig shit arent you

victorisnotamused wrote:have you read it....?

Yes, part of my A'Level in history to do.

Have you?

Didge wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

a great deal in common actually

many of the thoughts present in mein kampf are taken almost verbatim from islamic scriptures

Oh dear, you mean like the verse you posted that left out the word Christianity?

no idea what you're talking about, do you know what you're talking about??

yes, and apart from the fact that its a good look into the mind of a mad man I found it ...well....actually quite boring, even though it does give some insight into subsequent events....

smelly_bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:



Oh dear, you mean like the verse you posted that left out the word Christianity?

no idea what you're talking about, do you know what you're talking about??  

Thought you might say that:

Your claim from that idiot site:

Mein Kampf:676 "Spiritual terror...men must threaten and dominate men by compulsion. Compulsion is only broken by compulsion and terror by terror."


On the road to power, compulsion follows seduction. And the lever that coerces compulsion is terror. Hitlersimply followed Muhammad's path.




What it really says




The idea that Christianity introduced 'spiritual terror'
into a previously immune world is a favorite Rosenberg
notion. (Cf. Mythus des 2on Jahrhunderts.) But it has had
a still more fervent protagonist in Count Reventlow, whose
Reichswart contained many articles denouncing the 'Chris-
tian dualism 9 which sunders God from the world, and soul
from body, has turned human beings into 'creatures without
wills/ who propagate themselves 'with a guilty conscience,
under the last of sermons against sin/


The individual may state with pain today that with the
appearance of Christianity the first spiritual terror has been
brought into the much freer old world, but he will not be
able to deny the fact that since then the world has been
threatened and dominated by this compulsion, and that
compulsion is broken only by compulsion, and terror by
terror. Only then can a new condition be created by con-
struction.

victorisnotamused wrote:yes, and apart from the fact that its a good look into the mind of a mad man I found it ...well....actually quite boring, even though it does give some insight into subsequent events....

It is very dull, so what is your point?
It was not inspired by Islam, which is smelly's claim

Oh this is really great.....

not only have the morons in power over the last few years lumbered us with an unwanted, ever increasing and increasingly factious burden of unfriendly "guests".....

our armed forces are now unable to cope thanks to the SAME morons....

quote
"Britain's military is "not good enough" to deal with the global threat of Jihadis, according to a former head of the military.

Lord Richards of Hertsmonceux also called for defence spending to increase as the economy starts to grow again and said that plans to replace regular troops with part-time reserves must work soon or be junked altogether.

The comments from Lord Richards - who as General Sir David Richards was chief of the defence staff from October 2010 to July last year - will sound alarm bells in Whitehall.

In his maiden speech in the House of Lords on Monday evening the peer questioned whether Britain's armed forces would be in a "fit state" to deal with threats from terrorists.

He said: "Are our armed forces in a fit state to play their role in dealing with these and other risks to our way of life?

"Well, my Lords, the answer must be that it is not good enough"

unquote

Guests?

I thought we were talking about British born citizens?

So they were Muslims who became radicalised, thus where is the root cause?

Islam?

victorisnotamused wrote:Islam?

But they were already following Islam before they became radicalized, so what is the root cause?

they followed it "better"?

I wont buy anyof that "foreign policy" crap
or any "discrimiation crap

they are NOT causes they are excuses...usualy dreamed up by the lefties to white wash THEIR bodge.

the "blacks" in this country were and still are to some extent seriously discriminated against...
they are not "radicalised" granted there are plain criminal gangs about but I dont see them indulging in "jihad" like behavior

plenty of bad Foregn policy has been perpetrated on their original hom lands..but no "jihad"

so what do YOU think....

ITS THAT religion...that calls for and sutains such nonsense

victorisnotamused wrote:they followed it "better"?
I wont buy anyof that "foreign policy" crap
or any "discrimiation crap
they are NOT causes they are excuses...usualy dreamed up by the lefties to white wash THEIR bodge.
the "blacks" in this country were and still are to some extent seriously discriminated against...
they are not "radicalised" granted there are plain criminal gangs about but I dont see them indulging in  "jihad" like behavior
plenty of bad Foregn policy has been perpetrated on their original hom lands..but no "jihad"
so what do YOU think....
ITS THAT  religion...that calls for and sutains such nonsense

Again how absurd, it is them being susceptible to indoctrination, by extremists, you know my point on ostracizing Muslims, having them to turn to extremism, because people like you view their religion as the cause to why they turn to extremism.

I thought you had intelligence, you are now telling me, they follow Islam better based on how some other extremists follow Islam? The same logic is thus applied to any faith.
So why is it many Muslims teach and advocate against what they are doing.
You see the religious argument does not hold sway, because if it was we would see Million advocate this as the real Islam and would be following this, but this is not the case, you have to explain why it is not the case. Your only argument is because a very small percentage of the 1.5 billion Muslims are like this, then they follow Islam better.
Si how does that argument work when we have had centuries of religious people commit violence?  

You are arguing an illogical view point and you know it

Here have a read Victor:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-27971042

read it...and??

all it shows is that some followers of that religion are prone to radicalisation..

it does not show reasons but clearly the religon IS a major factor. It is easy for these people to distort it nd use it for thei own purpose.

why is this?
again it is the nature of the relgion...it has no central authority (pope/arch bishop etc) every man is his own imman if he so wishes to be and is entirely free to iterpret it as he sees it...epecially if that man has a "group"of like minded compatriots.

victorisnotamused wrote:read it...and??

all it shows is that some followers of that religion are prone to radicalisation..

it does not show reasons but clearly the religon IS a major factor. It is easy for these people to distort it nd use it for thei own purpose.

why is this?
again it is the nature of the relgion...it has no central authority (pope/arch bishop etc) every man is his own imman if he so wishes to be and is entirely free to iterpret it as he sees it...epecially if that man has a "group"of like minded compatriots.

What a load of bollocks.


Oh for fuck sake, here read something that may finally educate you on a subject you know little about:

http://www.radicalisationresearch.org/features/Francis-2012-causes/

and again...why is it that we dont see 100's...1000's of "radicalised "blacks""
considering how they have been treated over the years??