Zakariya, if we were interested in the oil, why are we not lining up tankers, filling them up and shipping them straight to the U.S., The fact is , the Moslems are killing each other, there is a war in Islam for the heart of Islam, and rule of the world, which means that in the end if the terrorist win which ever branch a lot of Moslem Believers are going to catch it in the neck, if you look at any over throw of a government, the people who over throw the government kill more of their people after the over throw in the purification of the party/Religion, than anyone else, anyone supected in the orginization is prosecuted with extreme prejudice.
Buffalo and baron ok leaving the oil thing aside Ok what i am saying is that the US did not have a good post-saddam strategy... the basis for the post hitler and the japanese emperor was based on about 2 years of planning....they had a plan..... what was their plan for Iraq??? why did they not have a contingency plan???
The only fucking strategy that the US had against Japan and Germany was to beat the livin' shit outta' them and win the war!! We didn't have a "post-war strategy" at all .....and if you think so, please show me some evidence of it, not just your own ideas or thoughts. You don't have to have post-war plans to go to war! Why? Where is it written that a nation must have plans for after the war? And as to contingency plans ....we didn't need those either, because we went into the war to win the fuckin' thing, not to play "what-if" games about losing!! There was not and shouldn't have been any plans other than to win. Baron Max
Hi baron the US and europe had no strategy for after ww2? ok i am on to this can i post my reply to another thread as this one has derailed somewhat? Thanks baron good to have you back.
Polls, polls. Of course I have polls. 1000 people surveyed. And this one: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2254764,00.html I also add this comment here, regarding the nature of sharia, and muslim attitudes towards it in Britain, since it deals with another poll and features some of the heretofore mythical 'moderate leaders' that ghost seems to believe in: And what did the rest of the moderates want it for? Is Q 4:34 "and beat [your wives]" considered a 'family affair', or a felony issue? How odd. I would have assumed assimilation required it the other way around. Perhaps assimilation is not to be desired after all. How? By ignoring the laws of the land in favour of sharia and making Britain into an islamic state? Is this the only way 'integration' can proceed? Is the dhimmitization (oppression) of non-muslims also necessary? Anything to make them more comfortable, of course; shall the jizya then be paid with both hands or only one? Dismemberment might make it difficult to do it with both, I suppose. Why do I feel like adding the phrase "or else" to the tail end of every comment by the islamic leaders mentioned? You're welcome zak. Actually here's one more interesting poll taken. It boggles the mind that anyone at all would give a negative answer so forthrightly. As such, it can quite reasonably be presumed that the real proportion of negative attitudes would be much, much higher. Except, of course, for the kufr. I wonder: are we then the animals in his little comparison? Then again, who owns Iran? The world doesn't belong to this 'Allah'. There is no Allah. So how can Iran claim nationhood in his name? Hmm. Geoff
Well, you're implying the problem is in my attitudes, somehow, when all I do is report what others have said. That's like shooting the messenger's messenger. The Shi'ites may well disagree with the Sunnist/Wahhabist doctrines, which is good - but I am no more certain of greater respect for humanitarian law in Shi'ism. Iran sort of puts me off a bit. Indeed you have, but I feel the problem goes much deeper than that. Precisely! But this has become the basis for rape law, since it was considered possible or likely or breathily interesting that Aysha had "done the deed" with the man who helped her catch up. And, since Mohammed is considered the "perfect model" for all time in islam, his legal dispensations are used as the basis for islamic law. This follows perfectly from religious interpretation; hence, the problem is not of application, but basis. Well we come closer now. I must admit that the interpretations the Wahhabis make seem much closer to the spirit of the book itself. There may well be a better interpretation; in which case there are 1.2 billion people waiting to hear from you. And who was denied twice for a visa to the US; indeed, the same. And you. Geoff
Good morning Geoff I hope all is good with you? Poll results 13% of British Muslims think that the four men who carried out the London Tube and bus bombings of July 7, 2005, should be regarded as “martyrs” 7% agree that suicide attacks on civilians in the UK can be justified in some circumstances, rising to 16 per cent for a military target 16% of British Muslims say that while the attacks may have been wrong, the cause was right 2% would be proud if a family member decided to join al-Qaeda. Sixteen per cent would be “indifferent” 56% of British Muslims believe that the Government is not doing enough to fight extremism, more than the 49 per cent of the whole population who agree 50% think the intelligence services have the right to infiltrate Muslim organisations to gather information about their activities and the way they obtain funding 65% of British Muslims say that their community needs to do more to integrate properly with British society 35% say that they would feel proud if a close family member joined the police I have not actually seen the questions asked??? I have never been one not to admit that some muslims in the Uk do have problems.. its interesting that 56% of muslims dont think the UK is doing enough to tackle extremism in relation to 49% of the genreal public, but again i have not seen the question The other results like the last 2 seem quite intersting also, but alas i ahve not seen the question.... So perhaops we can take somepositives out of it geoff , what do you think? this has been answreed in another thread geoff so no need to bring it up yet again yes of course islam teaches muslims to uphold and defend the laws of the country they live in. I am sorry but Chowdrey is just a teacher of hate and a shit stirrer with about "10" friends... I dont know why this pitful excuse for a human is given any airtime ata all.
Hi gweoff no i am not, you are not getting me confused with someone else are you? please post any remarks i have made to amke you think lke this??? Well it was not meant to be the basis for rape law.... how can anyone be accused of being raped!!!! It is the application which is wrong yes but we dont live in the 700's anymore and books can be interpreted in anyform they like... Have you seen my threads/posts on what crimes the whabbists have committed against islam. these guys have committed more crimes in the name of islam against islam then a lot of non muslims yes my dad was even denied a visa in the 70's cos he was cuaght on camera protesting peacefully)with other leftists at the us embassey at the time against vietnam Take care geoff
Perhaps. But the other polls indicate muslims thinking that the 7/7 attacks were justified. It would be hard to take anything positive out of that. You seem to be only interested in the poll results that you prefer. Another 2/3 of muslims want Britain to be an islamic country with sharia, and all its requisite oppressions, just like Iran or Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan or Egypt or Pakistan - the list goes on. Everywhere sharia and islam exist there is the dismal failure of human rights and religious oppression - but British muslims seem somehow convinced that this time everything would just be perfect, inshallah, inshallah, as if all the previous examples were insufficient evidence that islam and sharia don't work. Or perhaps there is a different definition of "working" and "not working" when the main point of a governmental system is religious oligarchy. Indeed it has been answered there - and, like much da'wa, found wanting. Regrettably, spousal abuse is an inherent characteristic of islamic society. I can hardly imagine even the likes of Pat Robertson going on TV to illustrate the appropriate sort of stick to beat their wives with. Scan down to the photos a little over halfway down the page. See also: http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2704
"i have to say the Whabbists would be quite proud of your twisting of the Surahs " You seem to be implying that I am somehow the problem here, rather than a humble reporter of the situation. For example, you spend much time debating me, but do you also debate Wahhabis? With what frequency? Your da'wa seems so far only to be directed at the kufr. And yet, they are. And this law is interpreted the same way in numerous islamic nations. With so many instances of the same application, can we really say that the ruling isn't being applied as it was meant to be? The words of Mohammed seem quite clear. Well, I'm glad you think that the Wahhabis exceed non-muslims in their criminality. But still, the same sort of laws - in fact, the verysame sort - exist in Iran, which is a Shi'ite country. Ah! Or perhaps the Iranians are bad Shi'ites? I wonder if I oughtn't make a general comparison of the punishment for being raped in the ummah overall? (You might balk at the description, but it is, regrettably, accurate.) Well, so long as he doesn't have anything to do with terrorism, he has a better case than Ramadan and his equally dopey brother, anyway. And you. Geoff
Just a quick response to the top line baron i was only messing around with that line.. ok myou are right i need to debate more with the extremist and whabists,,, i will have to find a whabbist forum to debate on..... have you any ideas??? i actually dont know any whabbists in my neighbourhood or family however some do have different views to me so i always debate with them. i'll ghet on to the rest in due cousre.. Have agood weekend Geoff
So the arguments (in the links provided) have holes big enough to drive trucks through yet somehow you still can’t figure what the actual arguments are about?!?! Come on, show me at least a bit of respect. If you’re only going to post one view and not pay attention to anything else then you’re just wasting my time. Those links were meant to challenge the current Hudood laws in Pakistan. They had many references in there including examples going back to the time of the Prophet. You read my links? I pay full attention to your posts. I did check some of your links out, the thing is your links were off-topic, your character assassination attempts along with your sarcasm put me off. I don’t think I missed anything though. * checks GeoffP’s links * I didn’t miss a thing. Extreme until proved moderate – I was just saying. GeoffP, you heckle even moderate Muslims, I’m here trying to state where moderate stands, you seem to be ignoring a lot of what I have to say, you're also cherry picking quotes you can play about with. As a Muslim I don’t want to force my views on anyone, I wouldn’t support any Muslim who does that, I oppose all terrorism and violence, I am against any changes being made to British society just to accommodate Muslims. Is that enough for people like you? Is it? mmm… that’s a bit vague. As a Muslim I don’t go out clubbing, I don’t drink/smoke etc. Many Non-Muslims would find that extreme, in Islam that’s moderate, the thing is I don’t affect the people around me in anyway. I don’t force anyone (Muslim or Non-Muslim) to live the same way as me. If by extreme you mean someone that wants to force his view on others, someone who supports terrorism, someone who wants to force change in the UK then that person is extreme according to Islam. Islam is about following the middlepath and not falling into either extremes. As I stated in my earlier post, there is no contradiction between being a good practising Muslim and being a model citizen in the West. I said that anything aggressive, violent is extreme and wrong. In my eyes the cartoon riots (that one demo in the UK (al-Ghurabah) and others around the Muslim World) were extreme as well as the recent demos. I discussed the peaceful protests in the UK, I myself attended the biggest one, we were expressing our views in a peaceful manner, nothing extreme or wrong with that. All we called for was respect and tolerance, we don’t oppose people speaking critically of Islam, its when people use freedom of speech to attack and insult Muslims that problems arise. I don’t want people to lie about me, I don’t want people to lie about the Muslim communities here, I don’t want people to promote religious hatred against us, I don’t like it when people insult and make a mockery of my religion. Muslims will respond in an appropriate manner when these situations arise, we will respond in a way that is compatible and infact encouraged by the British way of life. Many polls were carried out after 7/7, in my eyes they mean nothing. They make the headlines for a day, after that they are forgotten. It is the Islamophobes that try to use these polls in order to further malign the Muslim communities in the UK, they don’t care about combating terrorism or about the root causes of extremism, they only care about their own agendas. The poll you dug out also stated: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml (Did you forget that bit?) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You also forgot to mention how the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have had a major impact on the Muslim communities in the UK. Only now has it come to light that after 9/11 the US threatened to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age. You are simplifying this whole discussion, its not just about what happens in the UK, its also about the injust policies of the US and its allies across the Muslim World. (killings, rape, torture etc.) Abu Hamza et al? lol? More scaremongering? Why should I take someone like Abu Hamza seriously? The mainstream Ulama don’t, from an Islamic perspective, that’s all that counts. Abu Hamza was removed from his Mosque, the truth is no extreme cleric can spout their hatred in the UK openly, after 9/11 the authorities here have taken Muslim concerns more seriously. Extremists do not control one Mosque in the UK. Do you think I’m that stupid? If you can’t discuss things in a honest manner then this discussion is not going anywhere. Go to the MPACUK website and look up there mission statement and check out what they’ve said about the need to combat terrorism. I have spoken to people associated with MPACUK, I know a few of them and I know where they stand. Liar!!! How the hell am I supposed to take you seriously when you post junk (lies) like that? MPACUK is not a political party, they are not caliphate seeking either, they are a ‘Muslim civil liberties group’! and kufr means disbelief not disbelievers. The forum on the website is just that, a forum. It doesn’t reflect the views of the organisation. On the bottom of the forum it clearly states: Hahaha http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?p=115045#post115045 What a joke! You can register on the forum if you want, you can follow the posts and threads that ‘LFC24’ has made. If you believe he constitutes a threat please do contact the Metropolitan police. The number is: 0800 789 321 http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/anti_terrorism/index.htm Comical! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Your criticism of Islam is not bullying or intimidation, I can slog your criticism about all night and day. By intimidation I was referring to how you constantly belittle moderate organisations, twists their statements, you try to blur the line between the moderates and extremists, you heckle Muslims that are peaceful and moderate, you try to push them into a corner. You are too aggressive, you twist my words, you take what you want and leave what you find uncomfortable. You are trying to intimidate me. Huh? Blatant deception. Were those protests anything to do with the MCB??? Did they organise them? No, they strongly condemned the march. That demo was made up of members from the now banned Al-Ghurabah. Even Hizb ut-Tahrir condemned that protest. More deception. You say that sitting in the comfort of your bedroom! You don’t know the situation on the ground, you don’t know how things work, I don’t think you care either. (very clear from your posts in this thread) I am losing the will to explain things to you (you twist my words anyway), you have shown your true intentions to me. I seriously don’t know how people like you can carry so much hatred and venom in their hearts. Can you read? I said the placards calling for terrorist attacks and a holocaust were aggressive and wrong. All the other demos were peaceful (in the UK). I know people that went to the other ones and I attended the biggest one myself. More scaremongering. Muslims make up about 2% of the British population. Criticising, questioning Islam and the Prophet etc. are not crimes under Shariah law. More scaremongering. You haven’t got a clue. From a Sunni perspective, Hizb ut-Tahrir are regarded as a deviant cult! They have serious problems with their aqeedah, they are condemned all across the Muslim World, even the Wahabist Takfeeri groups condemn them! In the UK we have something called freedom of expression! that applies to them too. I don’t support them, I don’t agree with them, from an Islamic perspective I see them as deviant, I wouldn’t allow anyone I know become associated with them. However in Britain they are free to operate (they are a non-violent group) and I don’t see anything wrong with that. They can’t force anything on anyone. GeoffP, I can’t take you seriously on this subject. May I add your deception and distortion of facts is truly pathetic, a part of me is tut tutting while the other part is in stitches, mate, leave out the manipulation, the scare tactics and generalisations then try again.
The ghost lives! And he's mad! And you complain that I use character assassination? Please. And guess what - those laws are not in any way unique to hudood. They are general, rather, to islam. You will find them in Iran. You will find them in Saudi Arabia. Tell me: do those systems also describe themselves as "hudood" specifically? Most of them didn't work, frankly. Meh. Hmm. Character assassination, you say? Sure glad I didn't start it. Whew! Takes a load off. Anyway, this from the guy who triumphantly - and a bit prematurely - proclaimed that I had laid a "dandelion before a fortress!". If you don't like my style, then I can hardly say I approve of yours either. And: why a fortress? I can see people describing a solid faith as a rock, or a mountain, or a hill. But why a fortress? Why something so martial as that? Curious. Freudian? Cherry picking quotes? Well, here's the thing: I am entirely unconcerned about the nobler motivations. It's that part where people threaten to kill me unless I change my beliefs that make me wonder. It will do, for a start. And yet here you are, complaining that I heckle moderates too. But where are they? Where are these moderate leaders? The MCB doesn't have them. Tariq Ramadan isn't one. Where are they? If you're as commited to your moderacy as you say, why aren't you out educating them as opposed to rabidly objecting to my concerns? Ah, not precisely the meaning I had in mind. No one particularly cares about whether you smoke or not, and I imagine that should be painfully obvious. I don't smoke either, nor go out clubbing (whether you mean bars or something else by that =) ), so extreme really falls into another area here. There may well not be. It's a little difficult to say, of course, when 'extremist' attitudes run so deep and so wide in the islamic community. A third of muslims calling the 7/7 attacks justified. Two thirds wanting Britain to be muslim. If you're a moderate, then you have a lot of work to do, and not with me. The question is: what is the "middle path"? The citizens of Pakistan, of Saudi Arabia, of Iran, of Afghanistan - and these days of Indonesia and Malaysia - might have something of a different view of where that middle lies than you or I. Death for apostacy, I imagine, would be well supported. True - we may have some common ground. Well, what constitutes "insult"? What is an "attack"? I criticize islam, right here and right now, and you seem to be taking it as an attack or insult. If the only freedom of speech we have is to not criticize, then it is not freedom of speech. If you wish to protest peacefully, then good: I have no problem with that. But the rest of the ummah is not in your boat. What will you tell them? Why am I the greater threat somehow? So first, the polls mean nothing, then they mean something: "The poll you dug out also stated...". Which is it? It can't be both. I did indeed notice that bit - and yet it conflicts with the other poll which indicated that 1/3 of the respondants (in a survey of 1000 people, rather than 500) supported the attacks, much more strongly even than the "twenty per cent [who] felt sympathy with the July 7 bombers' motives". Let's take your second hypothesis - that poll numbers matter - shall we? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Now, one poll says 33%, one says only 1%. Let us then split the difference based on demography and ratio. That seems justified. So: [(1000x0.33) + (500x0.01)] / 1500 = 335 / 1500 = 0.223 or 22%. The 1000 and 500 come from the numbers in the two polls, and 0.33 and 0.01 from the roughly 1/3 and 1% proportions of individuals selecting the "kill em all, and let Allah sort em out" response. So in effect, probably about 22% of those surveyed responded with support for the attacks, which is quite similar to the 20% who "felt sympathy with the July 7 bombers' motives" (above). Now, you're free to take this information how you like, but what it translates into in the unbiased state is that 1/5 of those surveyed indicated support for the attacks. 20% is hardly a tiny minority of extremists; and moreover any such poll should inherently underestimate the proportion of individuals supporting violence, since any average sampled individual would be hesitant to admit to extremist opinions even in a blind, independent poll. As I said: you have some work to do. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if your veneer is slipping a little with the next bit. But those policies are transmitted through their leaders, who have every reason and ability - if they so chose - to refuse brutality, rape, murder and other muslim-on-muslim crimes you so unhesitatingly lay at the Americans' feet. Why blame the US for the doings of muslims to muslims? And does it then explain islamic extremism in Malaysia, or Indonesia, or the Sudan, Algeria, Iran - surely all these places are not run by the Lizardoid-CIA-Mossad-ChimpyMcHitlerstein conspiracy? I might also add that threatening to bomb Pakistan back to the stone age doesn't seem terribly surprising when Pakistan refused to cooperate in the hunt for Bin Laden. Your raising these points suggests to me a slide toward that 20% mark. Oh? So Abu Hamza is a moderate, then? Well, then that certainly explains the hundreds of thousands of muslims that always turn out to protest his appearance. What's that? They don't? Geez, it seems no one takes that whole 'hijacking of islam' thing too seriously these days. Heavens, no! Of course not. Well maybe this one: "Hello, Clifton Mosque? Are you run by extremists? What's that? No, I'm not Jewish, as if that had anything to do with anything. You say you're not run by extremists? Right, my bad then." And oddly enough, as of January, no hate clerics had been removed (except for Bakri, who pulled a runner, and then whined from a safe distance). Perhaps all this leveraging out of extremist control is being done in-mosque? http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005600370,00.html But of course, Britain is taking steps now to bar or ban extremist islamic imams. So, I'm sure the situation must be getting better. Oh. No power to ban. Well, everyone fears a toothless dog, don't they? I mean, it can still salivate on you or something. Maybe gum you a little. Scary stuff. And yet there seems to be no end of militant islamic leaders in the UK. Maybe they're all on the dole, or something. I dunno; it's kind of up in the air at the moment. So, you accuse me of starting the ad homeinem, when you actually started it yourself, and now apparently I'm dishonest. And you ignore all the links I posted, rather than go through the embarrassment of having to locate your arse with two hands. Really, I think I've been more than fair so far. Or rather, where they say they stand. Regrettably, some of them at the very least don't really seem to be on that page. But I understand that you don't really want to address the issue: below, for example. No, you're the lying liar, and your liedy lie lie lie, liedy-lie. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! That was hilarious. Funnily enough, though, I'm expected to provide evidence of my points, yet you don't feel the need. Is that what one would call hypocrisy? Oh? Then this must be an insidious sneak posting by the filthy Zionists at the MPACUK website: "Rise up! Revolt, my brothers! What's that? We're a civil liberties group? Never mind! Never mind, my brothers!" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And those insidious Zionists? Well, MPACUK gives their opinion on the matter here: Gee - the well funded, perfectly organized Zionists got the wrong guy, eh? There's no end of eating your "crazy cake" and having it too in some organizations these days. Seriously, who writes this crap? Oh, I forgot: MPACUK does. Strangely enough, the same IP keeps on hitting that "Zionist website" even after the employee got canned. Does Inayat not have a router? http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20836_Reuters_Death_Threat_Update_7#comments http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=20760_A_Death_Threat_from_Reuters_(Bumped)&only And the offensive email? Nothing major. Just a firm hope that Charles Johnson et al would have their throats cut. But it was just offensive! Not threatening! Please don't misunderstand and think there was some key hidden in there about how islam was violent; after all, you wouldn't want anyone to get violent, now would you? Then why complain? I have a straightforward synthesis; all you have to do is argue against it rather than engaging in personal attacks - which, by the way, is all you've played on the issue so far. Proof? Did I say the MCB organized them? Funnily enough, despite this grilling round of distant condemnations, I don't recall seeing any MCB counter protestors there. Where did they go? Did the bus stop at the wrong place? Was there a kitten trapped in a tree that needed saving? More subtle threat, rather. I do? And here I thought I was in the living room! How much you do seem to know, ghost. Well, ad hominem aside (again), here's the situation on the ground: islamic extremism is unacceptable in the UK or anywhere else. We good, honest, filthy, naij kaffir folk just want to get on with the business of our own lives and our belief or disbelief. "How things work", or should, is that fascistic swine should be deported - immediately. "How things work" in your lexicon appears to imply that some kind of dialogue is needed with Al-Ghurabah or Hizb ut-Tahrir. It isn't. They need to shut up and go away. Now. And, again, I am struck by the incongruency of someone who slanders my character again and again, from the start of the debate, and then accuses me of carrying around poison in my heart. - and there's the roundabout support for sharia that I wondered about. Regrets to say, but criticising and questioning Islam and Mohammed are very much crimes under sharia, which you probably should know unless you've been living under a rock for some time. Have you perhaps forgotten the huge, enormous reaction to the Pope's comments and the cartoons of Mohammed?? Let alone the punishments routinely handed down for "defaming" Mohammed. I think I'll also bring up the "apostacy" issue. http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/23301.html But, apparently, not to me. Until they get enough political power. Then they can force what they want on whom they like. I suppose you'd be as accepting of a march of Nazis, or evil, nasty, fanged Zionists then? Then the feeling is mutual. Save your own suspicious deceptions and omissions and ask yourself: who is the greater threat to the worship of this being for which there exists no proof whatsoever? In the spirit of generosity, I also offer this site: http://mcbwatch.blogspot.com/ Geoff
Oh - tiny, teensie, small little update. There was an interesting article at MPACUK about how all terrorism is Israel's fault. (It's the Mossad, you know. ^^ They're behind everything.) I won't bother to post the rest of the twaddle. But take a lookie at the picture. See it? The bison holding the flag up? That's the pic at MPACUK. Now, look where someone else found that same image - the "National Journal" (no, the other one)...a Nazi website. http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=8/21317510669.gif&s=x1 And see here for more details on the story: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16914_MPACUK_Uses_Image_from_Nazi_Web_Site#comments So - MPACUK just simply hotlinked to a Nazi website. They just linked to a Nazi website. A Nazi website. Nazi. Website. Well, it's a damn good thing ghost is able to discern their utter benevolence. Without that, I might have thought that someone at MPACUK was reading Nazi websites, and then using materials from them! Whew! So relieved! Geoff PS: Really must thank ghost for putting me onto the whole Jihadwatch-LGF cabal. Kudos! Good call, mentioning it like that, and then slagging me personally.
GOOD MORNING GEOFF i hope you are well and had a good weekend This is what i said in response to the surevery after listing all the results not just the results in myfavour. I did claim the results you highlighted were disturbing and needed attention. "I have not actually seen the questions asked??? I have never been one not to admit that some muslims in the Uk do have problems.. its interesting that 56% of muslims dont think the UK is doing enough to tackle extremism in relation to 49% of the genreal public, but again i have not seen the question The other results like the last 2 seem quite intersting also, but alas i ahve not seen the question.... So perhaops we can take somepositives out of it geoff , what do you think? You were the one who just highlighted one area, admittedly it was a very disturbing area, but as we have not seen how and what the questionsa actually were then we are at a little bit of a loss and this includes the more positvie results too. geoff as well as the mis-interpretation and mis-aaplication s of the laws we also have to take into account deep rooted cultural issues since before the time of the Prophet Sorry geoff the file on this link seems to be unavailable now http://www.luxmedia501.com/badurl.html Again this has all been used on the back of cultural background mkis-interpretation and mis-application, along with various different translations... Have youi got any info on these "massive" rallies. ### On to the next one take care Zak
Geoff Please outline what Tariq ramadan has said.. Apparently the Us auhtorities never gave areason why he was denied a visa
