Defending rights and humanity, two things frequently denied Muslims by your ignorant ilk, is not the same thing as endorsing views. This very simple understanding would probably alleviate your bizarre fascination.

It doesnt matter. Muslims are less than 5% of the population.

Also:
And here is the actual problem:
Furthermore as I said earlier:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...grated-britain

There is a problem with British Muslims in Britain. That problem is found in White British Non-Muslims and needs to be solved asap for the good of my country.

What is with this focus on Islam? Isn't religion more or less incidental in these attacks? The attackers think that the English were killing people in his home country and he retaliated (in a stupid and deplorable manner) and everyone is focused on his religion. Why?

I think a government healing the murderer, giving him a fair trial, and then punishing him is the best way of handling it.

If they just let him die, or chopped off his head in some sort of ceremony, I think it could cause retaliation by the other side. So by spending some money on his care/recovery/trial it's worth it imo.

(please note that just because they treat the murderers and give them fair trials, doesn't mean I think there's a 0% chance of retaliation, just a "smaller" % chance)

I started a bizarro discussion thread for you guys to participate in if you want:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/21...ttack-1335411/

The theme is what we learned from the terror attacks in London and Boston, but we can go wider or even more specific and just cover one attack if you guys want. It is in the no rules no restrictions Politics Unchained forum so anything goes.

I sometimes wonder what would be the advice if 'Islam' were to hire the best PR firm in the world? W/E anyone's particular view is I think it's got to be admitted that Islam has terrible PR.

I suspect that 30% is mostly made up of people who have no Idea what sharia means and what boko haram or al shabaab or the Taliban are like. Anyway, the fact that thirty percent of one group or another believe something stupid doesn't tell us anything other than that, we live in a democratic society and most people have some level of stupid idea or other, if you want to take action, it should be in the form of outreach and education, not Muslim deporting.

Btw, a recent poll found that more than 30% identify themselves as "at least a bit racist", more than 50% would deny non whites and second or third generation immigrants access to the nhs or benefits etc. If you want alarming poll figures this country of ****wits has no shortage, most of the alarming opinions don't come from Muslims though, oh and more Muslims identify as British and say they take pride in that compared to the rest of the population, no idea why they would though when a lot of people want them deported or shot,

Lol Phil beat me to it, stupid app.

Agree Jeedz, it is obviously true that some percent of that 30% dont want the full Taliban style Sharia. It is the only way you can reconcile that with stats like 83% are proud to be British and 82% want to live in diverse and mixed neighbourhoods.

Having spoken to and lived amongst many Muslims (it's usually third generation South Asian Muslims from the Deobandi sect), it seems the case. Muslims, and religious people in general tend to believe their religion is perfect and that it is them, mankind, or society that has the flaws or 'doesn't interpret it correctly'. You'll ask someone about sharia and they'll say 'oh, it's good it's fair' etc. You'll then ask them about stoning, women's rights under sharia, amputation for thieves and all the other problems within traditional sharia doctrines and often they'll say ''oh, that isn't real sharia, that's just cultural practice'' or whatever. The concept of sharia sounds good to them, but the nitty gritty doesn't. It is literally akin to those American Christians who want the ten commandments to be part of law, yet can't name three of them, and are shocked to find out what they are. There is no difference between that sort of idealism, and Muslim idealism.

It's fun to see the usual arguments trotted out in defence of religion itt; we even have the classic 'atheists have done bad things too!!!'. It shouldn't be surprising that holding irrational and dangerous beliefs makes people do stupid things, though the same people who decry the relatively mild influence of religion in the US are happy to make excuses for it here.

Defending Muslims as a community of individuals=/=defending religion.

Threads about Islam have a 100% chance to turn into AIDS.

And if you want to lol religion.... instead of Sharia law... start with the Prophet Mohammed having an underage wife.

Every study I know shows that classic religiosity tends to be a negative indicator for terrorism. Most "religious" terrorists worldwide aren't particularly religious.

On a side note, the attacker WAS English.

You're trying to turn it into AIDs with your own bs. No-one knows the age of anyone in those religious texts.

Come off it all religious people interpret the texts and teachings according to culture and situation.

Breaking news:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22658979

How is this relevant to the thread ? It may be scarcely newsworthy at all.

"Philip Baum, of Aviation Security International, told the BBC: "This is certainly a significant incident, however the fact that fighter jets were scrambled to intercept is not unusual."

He said intercepts were a daily occurrence on News24

Aisha was six years old when wed to Mohammed. Nine years old when the marriage was "consummated". And lol @ you if you think pedophilia (or how we think of it today) wasn't common back in those times.

Your own monarchy has examples of it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_of_Angoul%C3%AAme

Here you go AIDsing up the thread with rubbish despite my post explaining to you that no-one knows the ages from those religious books. If we are to believe those books literally then Joseph was 90 when Mary was 12 and some people lived for hundreds of years ! Still that never stops prejudiced people from engaging in prejudiced mudslinging and AIDSing things up. The most recent research best guesses that Aisha was actually about nineteen.

It's all fictional though so it doesn't matter.

Lol, nice rose-coloured glasses you have there. Muslims themselves have said during those times that "adulthood" began at puberty. And funny how you dismiss the notion that pedophiliac Mohammed being a possibility when it is clear that the secular world was engaging in such activity. Also, the Qu'ran is younger than the Bible. LDO.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ad-aisha-truth

You obviously do not believe in teh pedobears of yore for some strange reason.

Lol, nice hand.

Pretty sure Mo and his wives' ages have very little to do with terrorism.

Read moar carefully. Wasn't my point.

If people wanted to be bigoted *******s with some grounds to stand on that would be a better starting point than OMGIMMADIE2ISLAMOFASCISTS.