Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

How can Islam have 'true teachings' when Muslim groups such as CAIR say Islam is not a monolith (and it's Islamophobic to say it is, at that!)?

And anyone care to point out what those true teachings are and where I can independently find / verify them?

Dillon wrote:

shafique wrote:
Exaggerating the threat from these numpties by Islamophobes (by and large, they are numpties - and thank God for that) is a different matter.

Cheers,
Shafique

But the threat from Islamic Extremists still remains to be the biggest threat to the security of Great Britain today.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/counter-te ... eat-level/

And Iraq had WMD, the ricin plots were real etc etc

Edit (and I suggest people do click on the link and read what the Government says - and search for the word 'Islamic' on the linked page... and note that the threat from terror attack in NI is 'severe'. Then compare the stats.)

But I can't fault the Home Office's advice:

But you should not let the fear of terrorism stop you from going about your day-to-day life as normal. Your risk of being caught up in a terrorist attack is very low.

Cheers,
Shafique

Then try this link if the first didn’t do it for you, it’s all there on the same site if you could be bothered to look.

The current threat level to the UK from international terrorism is severe. The most significant international terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qaeda.

Al-Qaeda, Pronunciation:/alˈkʌɪdə, ˌalkɑːˈiːdə/ a militant Islamic fundamentalist group.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/counter-te ... -strategy/

shafique wrote:
Exaggerating the threat from these numpties by Islamophobes (by and large, they are numpties - and thank God for that) is a different matter.

You are free to believe what you wish Shafique, and interpret your stats in whichever way you desire, but labelling the prevent strategy, of the UK Government's Anti Terrorism policies, with another one of your liberal embellishments of Islamophobic, just doesn’t do it for me. The reason why the risk is very low of being caught up in a terrorist attack in the UK is because of the sterling job being done by the UK anti-terrorist forces against a real and clearly identified threat, and should not be attributed to the inept capabilities of Al-Qaeda and their associated network, a militant Islamic fundamentalist group who have proven their capabilities in the past and are continuing to do so throughout the world.

Dillon - I've mentioned quite a few times in this thread that I support the Prevent strategy. I haven't labelled it as Islamophobic - but applaud the efforts to eradicate/mitigate/lessen the chances of numpties being tempted to carry out 7/7 type attacks.

The Home Office site says the risk from International Terrorism is severe - as is the risk of NI terrorism in Northern Ireland (severe). In NI, last year, there were 99 actual bombs according to the official stats (i.e. not something I made up).

I would indeed worry if Al Qaeda militants started a campaign in Britain and were even half as successful as the NI terrrorists. I am happy, but not complacent, that the 'jihadists' in the UK have largely resembled the guys in the film 'Four Lions' (i.e. numpties). However, even numpties sometimes get things right and hence why I support Prevent and other initiatives.

Overall, taking the UK as a whole, the stats do show that 'Islamic fundamentalist terrorism' is empirically less of a threat than non-Islamic terrorism. That is what the stats show. When the stats change (and I hope they don't) - then we can draw different conclusions.

Just imagining that the numpties are Al Qaeda crack troops is not going to change reality.

I don't blame the government for being cautious. But I do blame the 'phobes for blowing things out of proportion.

Cheers,
Shafique

Shafique – As has recently been discussed on the forum, you keep ‘mentioning things’ in your personal declarations, then you contradict them in further statements, Shafique – I’ve mentioned in this thread and others that:

The current threat level to the UK from international terrorism is severe. The most significant international terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qaeda.

And not the numpties in NI.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/counter-te ... -strategy/

This is a fact, no personal interpretations of statistics and no references to acts of fiction.

Just imagining that the numpties are Al Qaeda crack troops is not going to change reality.

Who are you claiming is imagining this, if not the author of the article I posted?

I don't blame the government for being cautious. But I do blame the 'phobes for blowing things out of proportion.

So who are the Islamophobes in your eyes, if not the author of the article I posted?

I couldn't see anywhere where the author said the numpties were Al Qaeda crack troops.

Note that even the numpties in 'Four Lions' were 'inspired by Al Qaeda'.

The statistics speak for themselves, that is why I give them more credence than 'interpretations'.

99 real bombs does make NI terror threat 'severe' - no questions there. What I'm glad about is that last year the numpty Jihadists are no-where near as successful as the NI terrorists.

The 'phobes are those who are taking the Tory re-vamped Prevent policy as an indication that their fantasies about Islam are true. Duh.

Cheers,
Shafique

Who cares about statistics?

You just have to ask the people on the street. Who do you fear more? Islamic or Irish terrorists?
A straw poll of my (government) office says 23 out of 23 people say the biggest threat comes from the Islamic terrorists, with 11 people saying there was no longer a threat from the Irish and the other 12 saying there was never a threat from the Irish in the first place. (They weren't around in the 1970's)

shafique wrote:I couldn't see anywhere where the author said the numpties were Al Qaeda crack troops.

Note that even the numpties in 'Four Lions' were 'inspired by Al Qaeda'.

The statistics speak for themselves, that is why I give them more credence than 'interpretations'.

99 real bombs does make NI terror threat 'severe' - no questions there. What I'm glad about is that last year the numpty Jihadists are no-where near as successful as the NI terrorists.

The 'phobes are those who are taking the Tory re-vamped Prevent policy as an indication that their fantasies about Islam are true. Duh.

Cheers,
Shafique

So, in summary, no-one has imagined that your numpties are in fact Al-Qaeda crack troops that you originally stated, and there is no reference to your numpties in the Prevent Policy.

‘Four Lions’ is still a piece of fiction. And the islamophobes you are referring to are an unidentified figment of your imagination, have no place in our discussion, and the most significant international terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qaeda, Duh.

I believe that if this pointless discussion hasn’t already lost the interest of most of the visitors to DF, it soon will, so I’m going to leave it now with yet another fine example of Shaf ‘Calling a spade a spade’.

Four Lions is certainly a piece of fiction - and very funny too.

Fortunately they also are far more 'successful' than the real-life numpties we've been seeing so far in the UK in the past few years.

My point has always been that 'phobes have over-active imaginations too - and the only cure for that is hard-cold-facts - such as 99 real bombs.

Cheers,
Shafique

You've bored everyone shitless again Shafique.

shafique wrote:
The 'phobes are those who are taking the Tory re-vamped Prevent policy as an indication that their fantasies about Islam are true. Duh.

Cheers,
Shafique

The fact that prevent policies are re vamped is the proof that it is no fantasies: the real threat is islamic, not Irish.
No one is taking seriously the bogus stats you keep boasting about, even yourself, you are just doing your job posting them all the time and everywhere.

I support the Prevent campaign - and by definition it is targeting the numpties in the Muslim communities in Britain.

The separate issue is whether this means (in of itself) that the biggest threat of terrorism in the UK is from muslim numpties.

The stats suggest otherwise - 99 real bombs from non-Muslim terrorists is the cold-hard-fact I'm basing my conclusion on. How many real bombs came from muslim numpties over the same period?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I support the Prevent campaign - and by definition it is targeting the numpties in the Muslim communities in Britain.

The Prevent Strategy, the preventative strand of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, CONTEST, focuses on the most significant security threat to the people of the UK today, the threat from international terrorism, not from your UK numpties.

The separate issue is whether this means (in of itself) that the biggest threat of terrorism in the UK is from muslim numpties.

Read my earlier statement, the information on the Home Office website is clear and concise. The latest initiative announced by Theresa May is addressing identified shortfalls in the Prevent Strategy it is not a separate issue, it is part of the overall strategy.

The stats suggest otherwise - 99 real bombs from non-Muslim terrorists is the cold-hard-fact I'm basing my conclusion on. How many real bombs came from muslim numpties over the same period?

Terrorism, definition: The unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Not just Bombs, the threat includes every form of violence and intimidation.

You persistently harp on about the 99 NI bombs which contribute to a severe threat to NI and a substantial threat to GB, The most significant terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qaeda.

It would appear you support the anti terrorist strategies in the UK as long as you can rewrite and redefine them and their target populations and use your personal interpretation of terrorism. That would appear to be the smoke and mirrors so often spoke of about your posts rather than ‘calling a spade a spade’ as some would believe. I suggest you clearly define your numpties so that everyone understands exactly who you’re talking about.

Dillon wrote:‘Four Lions’ is still a piece of fiction. And the islamophobes you are referring to are an unidentified figment of your imagination, have no place in our discussion, and the most significant international terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qaeda, Duh.

Shafique is a natural born troll as far as I know.

He creates his own sideshow discussion - in this case, 'Islamophobes' - and then re-enters the discussion pretending the entire point of the thread had something to with what he's rambling about.

It's a nice diversionary tactic.

I remember him doing something similar when he was responding to herve and out of the blue accusing herve of believing Iraq had WMD's.

I think by doing that, shafique can construct his own imaginary opponent in place of his actual one where he can knock down their arguments - which are now the arguments of his imagined opponent - without addressing what is really being said.

Agreed, he attempted the same on this thread;

And Iraq had WMD, the ricin plots were real etc etc

dubai-politics-talk/britain-updates-prevent-policy-t46579-15.html#p379229

His latest tactic is to delegitimise the Prevent Policy with constant references to his numpties, which I’m sure the majority of readers don’t fully understand who his numpties actually are!

LOL

I can only imagine the comments if I didn't support the Prevent campaign!

The numpties are the wannabes who can't actually construct working bombs like the Irish terrorists who managed to construct 99 of them last year. I think it is a good thing that the wannabe jihadists are thus far so incompetent - and we should indeed prevent any more of these guys acting out scenes from 'Four Lions'.

Simple really.

Cheers,
Shafique

In one of your own labels, so you'll understand my language!

FAIL!

And it's in Capitals too for better effect.

You and your 'beliefs' again. I haven't qualified my support of the Prevent policy in anyway - so I'm not sure why you seem to think I have.

Pointing out what the statistics of actual terrorists acts are is not a criticism of the Prevent policy.

But seriously, let me ask the simple question again:

shafique wrote:The stats suggest otherwise - 99 real bombs from non-Muslim terrorists is the cold-hard-fact I'm basing my conclusion on. How many real bombs came from muslim numpties over the same period?

Cheers,
Shafique

Terrorism, definition: The unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Not just Bombs, the threat includes every form of violence and intimidation.

Actual terrorist attacks attempted. Respective counts.

99+ vs ?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Actual terrorist attacks attempted. Respective counts.

99+ vs ?

Cheers,
Shafique

For ? Go here for enlightenment: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/counter-terrorism/

Would it not have been easier to type in the equivalent number of cases by muslim terrrorists?

I clicked on your link - no figures on the first page.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote::roll:

I support the Prevent campaign...

I can only imagine the comments if I didn't support the Prevent campaign!

You and your 'beliefs' again. I haven't qualified my support of the Prevent policy in anyway - so I'm not sure why you seem to think I have.

Is this your example of 'calling a spade a spade' Shaf? are you that bored your entertainment is attempting to confuse others with your random mood changes?

There's no need to answer my questions above Shaf, they're rhetorical.

Dillon wrote:Terrorism, definition: The unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Not just Bombs, the threat includes every form of violence and intimidation.

Something that the USA and UK are the best specialist of.

The war on Iraq? For instance?
The whole universe were agianst it, and yet the US and UK insisted on attacking.

What happened to the terrorist no.1 G.Bush? and terrorist no.2 T.Blair? They're free!
The Western terrorism is justified by the corrupted means of false democracy.

Continuous brutal implenenation of Western terrorism and democractic injustice, only feeds the anger/agony of weak hopeless nations.

@dillon - yes, actually - I do call my categoric statements about supporting the Prevent campaign 'calling a spade a spade'.

I really can't see how this can be misinterpreted.

The statistics relating to who are actually carrying out terrorist acts in the UK is unrelated to my support for the initiatives of the campaign to prevent extremism amongst muslim yoof and other muslim numpties etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

symmetric wrote:

Dillon wrote:Terrorism, definition: The unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Not just Bombs, the threat includes every form of violence and intimidation.

Something that the USA and UK are the best specialist of.

The war on Iraq? For instance?
The whole universe were agianst it, and yet the US and UK insisted on attacking.

What happened to the terrorist no.1 G.Bush? and terrorist no.2 T.Blair? They're free!
The Western terrorism is justified by the corrupted means of false democracy.

Continuous brutal implenenation of Western terrorism and democractic injustice, only feeds the anger/agony of weak hopeless nations.

May I suggest that if you wish to discuss ‘Let’s blame the world’s ails on the everything West again’ you create a thread of your own, in the forum you believe it is best fitted, although I don’t know of a suitable ‘Fairytale’ category, and not here in the Britain Updates it's Prevent Policy, where it clearly doesn’t belong. You could consider ‘Am I Paranoid’ as a suggested title for your new thread!



-- Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:07 pm --

shafique wrote::)

You and your 'beliefs' again. I haven't qualified my support of the Prevent policy in anyway - so I'm not sure why you seem to think I have.

So it would appear now you just want to discuss your schizophrenia?

You fear & hate justice, right?

symmetric wrote:You fear & hate justice, right?

I have a healthy fear Paranoia, Schizophrenia and Paranoid Schizophrenics.

I would fight for justice, and I hate injustice.

Fears, healthy or not, are a personal matter.

Statistics are less subjective.

Cheers,
Shafique

Stastics are frequently subjective, in fact I would go as far as to say that statistics are invariably subjective, particularly when they are presented completely out of context.