Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK

[barb162]

Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK
By Patrick Hennessy and Melissa Kite
(Filed: 19/02/2006)

Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country, a survey reveals today.

The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.


50pc said interracial relations were worsening
Overall, the findings depict a Muslim community becoming more radical and feeling more alienated from mainstream society, even though 91 per cent still say they feel loyal to Britain.

The results of the poll, conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, came as thousands of Muslims staged a fresh protest in London yesterday against the publication of cartoons of Mohammed. In Libya, at least 10 people died in protests linked to the caricatures.
snip
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/19/ixportaltop.html

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Hostility towards Islam

is, imho, drowning out the voices of moderation and fueling those who wish to propagate an extremist agenda.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spinoza]

60. "Barbie"?

[Violet_Crumble]

63. Spinny?

Is there a problem? It must be pretty major for you not to have spoken out against someone trying to portray several thousand extremists as being representative of over a billion Muslims. In my part of the world those sort of comments are known as generalising and bigotry...

Violet...

[LiviaOlivia]

82. When does the

stoning and dismemberment begin?

[Violet_Crumble]

83. Again, that has nothing to do with what I posted...

n/t

[Name removed]

67. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SharonAnn]

14. Then they should go to a country that practices it.

[smirkymonkey]

98. Exactly.

I am tired of them trying to drag the rest of us back into the 13th century with them.

[Solon]

37. Dumb...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x49980

[barb162]

41. the link is inane; where are Christians rioting over cartoons?

[Solon]

44. Get beaten for your religion and maybe you would understand...

then we can talk about inane. Christians are just as violent if not more so when faced with precieved threats.

[TankLV]

106. Reallly? Please give examples.

I call bullshit.

I know of no Christians, groups or individuals, rioting, burning down embassies or beheading anyone.

DO you?

[Solon]

116. Heh...

Northern Ireland

Albanian/Muslim Cleansing

Abu Graib

Iraq War

Murders in the US, notably of Sikhs, who aren't Muslims to begin with, but American Christian just love to kill a few ragheads.

Torching of American Mosques

ON EDIT: Guatanamo Bay, Cuba as well, can't believe I forgot that.

etc. etc.

Before claiming the high ground, you must actually stand on that high ground. Hyprocrisy is evident all over the place in this thread.

[PurityOfEssence]

35. Islam is deeply intolerant

A spade is a spade is a spade. Those who don't willingly submit to the only true way are subject to a sliding scale of influences.

Religion is not by nature "good". Those who wish to put their fingers in their ears and whistle a merry tune are a danger to us all. Islam is by nature anti-liberal and anti-pluralist. By some interpretations there is to be some coexistence, but built into the faith is a rapacious need to dominate. Christianity's only slightly better.

If there are voices of tolerance, cosmopolitanism and acceptance within Islam, they'd damn well better shout above the fray. This is crap.

Those who demand to be held better than others are deeply anti-democratic; this is the taproot of the First Amendment: to sanctify some as "better" is to create an aristocracy and thus relegate the rest of us to a defined group of inferiors. Believers are not "better", and the most strident and dangerous among them rage at hearing such things.

All animals are not equal, and all religions have the same issues. Fundamentalism of virtually any faith is rigid ugliness designed to control others. The framework of the particular religion influences the degree of ugliness, and Islam is SO restrictive and based on a slavish debasement to the all-whatever, that it is much more maleable in the hands of whackos who want to dominate.

Sadly, as a species, we're still a bunch of dangerous primitives, and without the egocentric need to be "special", we can't get the fuck out of bed and go about our lives without some concept of the supernatural big daddy who really does love us and will grant us eternal joy if we just suck up to him. Various mindsets approach this differently, but the very nature of submission demanded by Islam is a slave mentality, and easily twisted into all sorts of ugliness.

These "voices of moderation" need to get some megaphones and pipe up; I see little hope for change within the debasement mentality that's at the core of Islam, and the steadfast intolerance that is the core of this religion is a huge problem.

[rexcat]

36. You could say that about any religion...

as most, if not all religions are exclusionary. The "either with us or against us" mentality is prevalent with all major religions (christian, jewish, muslim, etc.).

[Psephos]

61. Or about any political party...or any other ideology-based belief system

The problem is ideology itself, which blinds us to facts that don't support our views, and makes us embrace those that do. I don't see much difference, if any, between strongly-held religion and strongly-held politics.

Ideology can so blind people that you end up with conservatives staunchly defending Bush's disregard of domestic spying laws, which is an extraordinarily unconservative thing for government to do; not so long ago we had feminists pretending Clinton's serial womanizing was of no consequence.

DU has been in severe cognitive dissonance over the violent Muslim protests. It's astonishing to me to listen to progressives justify a religious group's attempt to impose by violence their diktat about what another culture can or cannot do.

Peace.

[PurityOfEssence]

74. Yes and no.

Eric Hoffer pointed this out beautifully in "The True Believer", but I still argue that deeply held religious beliefs are much more dangerous than political ones. Religious beliefs are rooted in the supernatural, and as such can't be shaken as easily as political or social ones.

Religion is on a much more dangerous mental plane than politics, and this is something that must be addressed. For far too long it's been held that beliefs in the supernatural are "good", and should be above reproach. To me, this is entirely wrong; they should be accepted as superstition and personal guesses, but should in no way be above reproach. We should all be responsible for our actions, prejudices and assumptions.

[Solon]

93. You are wrong, and slandered DU, apologize immediately.

You said this:
DU has been in severe cognitive dissonance over the violent Muslim protests. It's astonishing to me to listen to progressives justify a religious group's attempt to impose by violence their diktat about what another culture can or cannot do.

NOT ONE MEMBER OF THIS BOARD HAS JUSTIFIED THE VIOLENCE!!!!! Jesus H. Christ, what the hell is wrong with you? No, we are slamming the generalizations that people are throwing around for what they are, bigotry, plain and simple. If this board was around during the LA riots, would you be saying that blacks nationwide should have protested against the violence in the city, and then slam them, probably using slurs, when it didn't happen? How would that not be racism, and how is what you said on this board not Anti-Muslim bigotry?

[GinaMaria]

113. Feminism

Is a broad term that encompasses many things. It sound like you are referring to 2nd wave feminism in your post (woman as victim fighting for her rights)as opposed to 3rd wave feminism which has a lot to do with sexual freedom. Not all feminists are anti porn or want to impose a strict sexual code of behavior on others. 3rd wave feminists grew up in a country where most of the battles had already been won. They don't remember a time without opportunity. They live what the 2nd wave fought for. As a result, they are sexually freer, tend not to condemn the sexual behavior of concenting adults and don't tell others how to live their lives.

As someone whose age puts me between the two waves, I certainly feel the conflict of the old vs. the new. I can see both sides, but as I age and grow tend to lean toward the 3rd wave. It's more fun ;-)

I only point this out, because I think this contributes to the perception that 'feminists' were blinded by ideology in Clinton's case. Yes, they were but not in the way your post suggests. The ideology is 3rd wave feminism and there were no conflicts between that ideology and Clinton's behavior or Hillary's.

[PurityOfEssence]

73. Yep. It's a question of degrees, though

Judaism doesn't go on a rampage of conversion, though, and that's much to its credit. Other religions are more elective than compulsory, as is Islam, and other religions don't demand to hold sway as it does.

The mindset of the group is exclusionary, but the severity of the exclusion is VERY different from group to group.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

48. One thing I've learned in my life

is that any human organization is not monolithic in its outlook. So you say Islam is intolerant? Have you checked out the teachings of any Sufi order recently? Have you gone to the Islam group here at DU and read the posts there, and followed the links? If all of Islam is as intolerant as you say it is, you should be able to find instances of intolerance there and at these sites:

http://www.churchofall.us/prayers Especially check out the prayer "Saum"

http://www.sufiorder.org/ten_thoughts.html The Ten Sufi Thoughts

http://www.dancesofuniversalpeace.org/na/ Dances of Universal Peace

http://www.ibnarabisociety.org/IbnArabi.html A biography of Ibn Arabi

http://www.hayatidede.org/about.htm The Mevlevi Order of America-About Us

[gtar100]

71. Beware of the word "all" - it's just too big

Thank you for the links - these are great sources.

I didn't get that the criticisms of PurityOfEssence excluded the higher forms of religion, but thought it clearly pointed out the destructive nature of religion in general and more in particular the destructive aspects of Islam. The Sharia laws are a testament of the intolerance indoctrinated into the Islamic religion. And in this day and age, it is threatening to the more enlightened aspects of Islam and to the non-Muslim world at large.

So our concern should be in raising the consciousness of the masses engulfed by the rules of do's and don't found in the religions that have their origin in the Middle East. The answer, I believe, is deepening each person's experience of the more esoteric teachings found within their own religion; not conversion or suppression. But oftentimes the major roadblock to that is the institution of religion that creates a hierarchy among people - power for the control freaks and security for the people who are only looking for a leader.

The Age of Enlightenment is not over. It's still in process and it may yet fail if we don't do something about it.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

97. Very wise words

Since Sufism is working with the essence of Islam and all religion, I understand your point. Have you read the editorial from the WSJ called "Good Islam-Bad Islam"? I think you would find it fascinating. I've posted it in Editorials here, and it gives a good synopsis of the rise of Wahhabism and what it has done to Islam and what moderate Muslims and others can do to counteract it.

[PurityOfEssence]

77. This doesn't follow

My contention is that the root orientation of Islam is one of self-subjugation, and as such is dangerous to us all. Beyond that, the extreme proselytizing and lack of acceptance of contrary views open floodgates of aggressive and intolerant behavior.

When dealing with many forms of faith, it's shocking how adherents will look you straight in the face and deny major tenets of their affiliation. It's incomprehensible to me how many times I've heard from so many different mouths that women and men are equal in Islam; how many husbands can a good Muslim have? Mormons will often deny that blacks are tainted, wicked and evil, even though this is a core belief.

Submission to a supreme whatever is abdication of one's personal responsibility, and this particular faith preys upon fear in a very dangerous way.

To cite sites evoking the faith in its many forms and claim as proof of its tolerance a lack of intolerant statements within them is less than fuzzy reasoning. The issue I brought up is that the root orientation of the faith is incredibly dangerous, not only to those within the faith, but for the rest of us poor schmucks.

Self-subjugation is a terrible thing. People need to take responsibility for their own actions, not fob them off as the mysterious workings of some big sky daddy. Xenophobia is conservatism at its worst. Fealty to supernatural entities is incredibly dangerous, since it tends to be coupled with "faith", the blockheaded certainty that the guess at hand is never to be questioned. People who never question their assumptions are dangerous and narcissistic.

The actions that one grants oneself for being part of the spiritual aristocracy varies from faith to faith, but those within Islam are especially intrusive and intolerant. To show expressions of the faith that don't have aggressive and/or exclusionary tenets doesn't disprove the basic contention.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

101. I believe, from your post,

that you are an atheist. I say this only to try and understand why you think it is so dangerous to submit to God. Yet a mystic of just about any path I've encountered will say that the point of life is to lose the false self and gain the real, the idea being that there is only one Being.

As for the tenets of faith, there are 5 pillars of Islam. Which of these do you find intolerant and intrusive?

1. There is nothing but God, and Mohammed was one of His Messengers

2. Pray daily

3. Give to those less fortunate.

4. Fast during the month of Ramadan from sunrise to sunset

5. If you a financially able, make a pilgrimage to Mecca once in your lifetime.


Just one other thing: why in the world do you think Muslims want everyone to be Muslim and that they will force you to convert? The Qur'an says to honor those who are of the Book; that means Christians and Jews should be allowed to practice their faith, and this was the case in the olden days of Muslim rule in the Middle East and in Moorish Spain (need I remind you what happened to the Jews there when Christians took over?). Realize I am a Sufi initiate, and it is this branch of Islam I know best. In the Sufi tradition, you are FORBIDDEN to try and convert anyone. In some Sufi orders, shaykhs actually drive away would-be students, for they are only interested in students who are sincere and really want the teachings. The head of the Helveti Jerrahi Order in NYC is a woman; there are and have been women Murshidas in my order ever since it started, and one was the head of the order for a time.

[IndianaGreen]

112. It's the 40-percent solution!

40-percent of Muslims in the UK and Christians in America, want to make religious law the "Law of the Land."

This poll is an indictment of all monotheistic religions, for they were born out of intolerance of other religious views!

The essence of paganism is that all gods and their temples were respected. No god was above all others. Paganism depended on religious tolerance.

[Wordie]

105. Islam Online: 90% of UK Muslims "Loyal" to Britain: Poll (from same poll)

90% of UK Muslims "Loyal" to Britain: Poll

CAIRO, February 19, 2006 (IslamOnline.net) – A sweeping majority of 91 percent of British Muslims are "loyal" to Britain and 80 percent still want to live in and accept Western society, a new poll showed on Sunday, February 19.

Bombings

The survey found that 99 percent of British Muslims believe the July 7 bombers were "wrong" to carry out the atrocity.

...Only one percent felt the attacks were "right".

...An earlier poll for The Guardian showed that a simple majority of British Muslims wanted to resolve their social problems as divorce, child custody and inheritance in accordance with Shari`ah, but were equally committed to greater participation in British life.

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2006-02/19/article04.shtml

The article also said this:
Nearly half a million Muslims contemplated leaving Britain after the London attacks, with one in five saying they or a family member has faced abuse or hostility.

So it appears the Telegraph article cherrypicked the survey results in order to stir up controversy regarding Muslims.

[Zenlitened]

2. Ugh. Sharia is a weapon in the hands of fundies...

... used to bludgeon whole communities back into the stone age.

:grr:

[darkmaestro019]

3. uh....so?

I want Thelemic law all over the planet, but I don't get my wish. WTF? Tantrum. Waah waah waah, other people are doing things I don't want them doing. Well, no, the things aren't HURTING me, but my invisible friend said....


Ridiculous. Grow up. All of the fundies. You can have all the weird BDSM type little rules for life that you want, but quit trying to spread your insanity to everyone.

[msongs]

4. my, religion is SO wonderful isn't it? nt

[SoCalDem]

6. I might get flamed here, but here goes..

When someone decides to move to a different country, they HAVE to be willing (or even EAGER) to adopt their new country and jettison some of their old customs..

It annoys the HELL out of me when ANY group, person,whatever actually expects their adopted country to make unreasonable allowances for them, the newcomer.

I do NOT care what language the newcomer speaks.. I would have a hard time learning French or German or Japanese at my age if I went to live in one of those countries, BUT I would never expect them to cater to MY language,customs, beliefs.

If a German/French/Japanese "agent" kidnapped me and took me against my will, I MIGHT have a legitimate gripe, but if someone goes to a new country on their own free will, they CANNOT expect that country to change..

If the Muslims who migrated to European countries are so miserably unhappy with the laws of their adopted countries, perhaps they should rethink their moves.

Apparently they moved there BECAUSE of the freedom and the economic opportunities, so it behooves THEM to adapt, or return to the poverty and unrest they left behind...not to seek to inject the same unrest and negative ideology into their new homeland.

my 2 ¢

[SaveElmer]

7. No flame from me...

When someone moves to a country that treasures liberal ideas about freedom of expression, they have to be prepared to endure offensive comments without violence.

[adriennui]

12. no flame here

when in rome.....

[Captain Hilts]

15. Exactly right. You don't move to a new country to re-create your old one.

[iverglas]

18. hahahahaha

You don't move to a new country to re-create your old one.

Somebody might want to tell some Puritans that.

Oh wait, they're dead. Oh well, I'll be happy to tell some of their descendants, if somebody wants to get me tickets to a Jerry Springer taping ... or heck, I could just hang around this place ...

[SaveElmer]

21. Hey...John Winthrop is my 15th G-Grandfather...

COurse I am about as far from a puritan as you can get!!!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

24. Not all Puritan descendants go see Jerry

I prefer to listen to Stephanie Miller myself :) Many of my ancestors came over on Gov. Winthrop's fleet, and some even before that. Maybe it was the condemnation of my 9-great grandmother as a witch at Salem that has always made me not like religious fundamentalism.....

[SaveElmer]

25. Jeez I have one of those too...

Which witch was yours....mine was Mary (Perkins) Bradbury. Convicted but escaped with the aid of friends!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

28. Anne Foster

condemned as a witch for not attending church. One of her daughters had been brutally murdered by a drunken husband the year or so before, and the husband was hung; the kids were farmed out to whomever. This happened on the heels of the death of her husband. She was sent to Salem jail, tortured, and then "confessed" to everything asked, except to implicate her remaining daughter, which she refused to do. So she wound up being condemned, but died in Salem Jail in Dec. 1692 before the sentence could be carried out.

[SaveElmer]

29. Some of these were crazy...

One of the pieces of evidence against Mary Bradbury was the she turned herself into a blue pig and caused a horse to throw its rider...an important man in the community it turned out.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. I have no problems with this

but I also think that the country where immigrants live should support those immigrants who do wish to adopt the ideals of that nation by acknowledging them. I know that in Britain there have been non-violent actions taken, and demonstrations in favor of free speech and other ideals of British democracy-unfortunately, one must search long and hard for reports of them.

[Violet_Crumble]

89. Assimilation...

I do get a bit bothered when I see posts basically saying 'become just like us or get back where ya came from!'. That attitude was widespread and officially sanctioned in my own country during the 1950's when the White Australia Policy was lightened up on a bit due to the 'populate or perish' invasion fears and the need for a large labor-force for things like the Snowy Mountains Hydro Scheme. Europeans who had till then not been considered 'British enough' and generally from the south of Europe were encouraged to move to Australia for a new life, and once here, more often than not were told that they MUST assimilate to the 'Australian Way Of Life' but not given any assistance in doing so. So like the large migrant influxes that came after them, those migrants, most of whom were Italian, tended to end up living congregated in large groups in urban areas. The hostility towards them, earlier towards Chinese gold-miners in the 19th century, and later towards Vietnamese and Lebanese immigrants, was exactly the same as I see aimed at European Muslims now. Why don't they learn our language?? is one constant refrain, but people conveniently forget that English is one of the hardest languages to learn, and the older a person is, the harder it is for them to pick up a new language...

Assimilating is a desirable thing, but it has to happen with the support of the country that's the new home of the immigrants, and people also have to understand that assimilating doesn't mean people must turn their backs on their history and culture. And when I see people who clearly have no understanding of some cultural aspects ragging on immigrants for wanting to retain some of their culture, I could be mistaken for thinking I'd slipped into a time warp and wandered into a One Nation meeting...

Violet...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

103. I think you have something there

My maternal great grandfather came to this country by ship in the 1870s from Germany. He moved to the midwest and started a small business, and was reasonably successful. He didn't join a church in the town where he lived because he was German Lutheran, and that denomination didn't have a church there. He entertained German Lutheran ministers when they passed through, and German was spoken in the household. German food was served (I still have some of the recipes), etc. Then World War I came, and the anti-German hysteria was so great that my great-grandfather and his family stopped speaking German, joined the Presbyterian Church, and generally kept a very low profile until 1918. It was about that time that the half dozen or so German language newspapers in the Midwest, which had wide circulation, ceased to exist-I've often wondered if they might have lasted longer if the War hadn't occurred. You can still find some small towns near St. Louis that have kept up their German culture, and are, indeed, quite proud of it. I think this is an example of a subculture not subsuming itself to the main culture but rather enhancing it.

[Solon]

39. Such Bullshit....

Before you go spouting off like an ignoramus, in the States we have at least 4 groups in this nation that haven't been what could be called fully culturally assimilated, and all of them have been in this nation for well over a century. African Americans are a classic example of this, all the way up to today they are still treated as "resident aliens" within a country that the majority has been born and died in for almost 5 centuries now. In many cases they developed their own cultures, such as in and around New Orleans and much of the rest of the south, that, up until really recently, haven't really been assimilated by the larger culture. Another example are the droves of Chinese that immigrated here around 150 years ago or so. They, even though they became citizens, were also "resident aliens" and developed what are dubbed "Chinatowns" in many major cities that keep their own customs, even laws, and are still a somewhat closed off society today. Native Americans were driven off their lands and gradually relocated to some of the most desolate places in the country, there to languish in legal limbo in many cases to this day. For Latinos its quite varied, Puerto Ricans, for example, speak Spanish as the predominate language, and also many of their customs are not what would be called "mainstream" in the rest of the US. Of course, for them, Texas, and most of the Southwest, your kidnapping scenario actually isn't that far off the mark. In all those cases, the United States Conquered territory that already had a people living there, and to this day, they keep their customs and language where Whites haven't moved in in great numbers. I haven't even mentioned the towns and communities in this country with ethnic flavors from Europe yet, from "Little Italies" to Polish, Norwegian, Irish, and numerious other towns and cities that still have some of their flavor, though, thanks to their skin tone advantages, were able to blend in much easier than the above mentioned groups.

Now people are complaining about a classic "problem" with new immigrants, its an old complaint, especially in the US, where it was quite common, still is in fact, to go through some areas of a major city and hear up to 6 different languages spoken at any given time. How long have these immigrants been living in Britian and the rest of Europe. Are they first generation, second, or even third yet?

[SoCalDem]

47. paragraphs are your friend.

:hi:

[Solon]

49. Sorry, when people post stupidity I fly off the handle. n/t

[gtar100]

80. You can't compare the US and European countries in this regard

The US expansion was all about groups moving about and setting up shop to build the life of their dreams (or nightmares, depending on perspective). Other than the Native Americans who had well-established cultures and traditions that were so rottenly destroyed by the ignorance and greed of our ancestors, there was no culture of the whites here - it was all imported. So what developed is a wide variety as you illustrated so well. Yes, there's a dominant culture but it's not so well defined - a mix of English, German, Irish, Italian, French, Scandinavian, etc., - but the very largeness of the land has enabled subcultures to thrive.

TV can mislead you into believing in an "American culture" but I think culture is a bit more local, even though we are able to pick and choose from a wider influence these days because of media. And corporate homogenization of cities certainly is an influence as well. I think it's the wrong path for African-Americans or Chinese-Americans (et al) to try to "assimilate" into European-American culture. In a lot of respects, their unique cultures are thriving here and we as a nation are richer for it. It's in economic opportunity and political influence where the walls between us need to come down (as in, we all need a voice and there should be no laws favoring one group over another).

With several thousand years of history behind them, each European country has developed significant cultural roots in their own traditions. It would be very different to immigrate to one of these countries than it would the US because here it's possible to find a thriving community to fit into based upon your country of origin (or personal taste for that matter!). Only recently (as in the last 20 to 30 years) because of the the massive migration of people out of Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe into Western European countries are they having to contend with so many diverse cultures in their own backyard.

The answer probably isn't to demand one group to acquiesce to another. Integration and taking what is best from each is usually healthy. But when there are definitive clashes between what a people consider right and wrong, I would think seniority would weigh heavily in the argument. For example, you are welcome to cook in my home, but if I happen to be vegetarian, frying up a steak might be pushing it a bit. If you move in as a roommate, we might be able to accommodate but I would hope you would respect the established household rules and not pull a Genghis Khan on us.

This is where the Europeans failed with the Native Americans - we would have been far better off adopting their culture and ways. Of course, that's just speculation and my opinion. Far too many Europeans were under the influence of a great ignorance at the time so it wasn't even a possibility. We still haven't shaken it off, as you stated so well. I think that ignorance can today be labeled "neo-con republican".

[tenshi816]

84. Muslims have been in Britain for generations,

going back to the 19th century. More than half of the Muslims in Britain were born in Britain. People need to stop acting as if Muslim immigration is a new phenomenon, because it isn't.

[barb162]

43. I love your two cents and agree

[Orlandodem]

51. I completely agree. I hope Europeans wake up soon.

The radical element of Islam is just big enough to create problems for all of us, even those of us who are blindly tolerant of radical Islam's intolerance. Political correctness run amok. It's time to call a spade a spade. Radical Islam must reform. Those who move to the West must adopt Western secular laws.

[tenshi816]

85. Very well said.

Here's an example of someone wanting to have it both ways: Radical Muslim cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri, recently sentenced to prison in the UK for "incitement to murder", was collecting state benefits for his family in excess of £1,000 pounds a week, even while he was at the same time preaching for the destruction of the very society that was supporting him.

[smirkymonkey]

102. Hear, hear!

Does anyone really think that a Muslim country would even CONSIDER changing the foundation of thier society to accommodate outsiders? Once again, the hypocrisy continues to astound me.

[Wordie]

114. Telegraph article was misleading: poll says 91% loyal to Britain...

...it appears the Telegraph cherrypicked the poll results.

Here's another article with additional data from the poll, that paints a very different picture:

91 percent of British Muslims are "loyal" to Britain and 80 percent still want to live in and accept Western society.

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2006-02/19/article04.shtml

And the above article also has this:

Shari`ah

The ICM opinion poll also indicated that 41 percent of those interviewed opposed any introduction of Shari`ah in Muslim-dominated parts of Britain, while 40 percent backed it.

An earlier poll for The Guardian showed that a simple majority of British Muslims wanted to resolve their social problems as divorce, child custody and inheritance in accordance with Shari`ah, but were equally committed to greater participation in British life.

Canada was the first country in the West to allow its Muslim minority to file their civil legal disputes in courts according to Shari`ah.

I myself am not comfortable with Sharia (although I also realize there may be much I don't completely understand about it), but I'm not certain this is as earthshattering a result as the Telegraph article made it seem. After all, many cultures wish to maintain their own customs; in this the Muslims who wish to live under Sharia law are not that different from many other conservative religious groups who see their own religious laws as primary.

I also think we need more information on what the question really meant to the ones who answered it positively, before we can adequately judge the intent. If they simply meant that they want civil matters between Muslims resolved in respect to Sharia, I'm not certain this is the horrible threat that the article suggests it is, even though I might still disagree. The threat would only come if they wished to extend the law to cover non-Muslims, it seems to me.

[Orrin_73]

8. I dont think the poll is credible

the muslim community in britain is one of the most assimilated in the world.

[Violet_Crumble]

11. Of course it's not credible. The telegraph is a right-wing piece of shit..

...and seen as a credible source by many Muslim-hating extremists who share its agenda...

Violet...

[Orrin_73]

17. i live in holland we mostly listen to english music

British music and culture is very dominant here, you will be surprised to see many muslim artists, singers and models from britain. An example is Karima Adebibe (the new lara croft) judging from her name I assume she is muslim, she is very much in the news lately. You wont see many muslims in other european countries in entertainment.
Karima Adebibe

[Captain Hilts]

19. The Torygraph isn't as conservative as most US papers.

I read it pretty regularly.

[barb162]

50. It's a centrist paper and the poll is credible

The polling company is used by the Guardian, etc. Would you like to deal with the poll results?

[Violet_Crumble]

57. It's a right-wing rag and the poll was commissioned by the Telegraph..

The Daily Telegraph is the same as the Daily Telegraph here, and both of them are anything but 'centrist'. The poll isn't credible, and the only folk who'd claim it is are those folk who jump on any excuse to vent their intense hatred of Muslims...

Violet...

[Wordie]

111. It may be more a problem of the Telegraph's reporting on the poll that is

the problem, than it is with the poll itself. They apparently failed to sufficiently report these findings from the poll:

91 percent of British Muslims are "loyal" to Britain

80 percent still want to live in and accept Western society

99 percent of British Muslims believe the July 7 bombers were "wrong" to carry out the atrocity.

20%, however, showed sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the bombers (This only makes sense in the context of the previous finding. It's much like understanding the perspective of Palestinians while decrying the violence.)

Only 1% thought the July 7 attacks were "right".

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2006-02/19/article04.shtml

See also post #105, upthread.

[Wordie]

107. Telegraph report on poll extremely misleading, see post #105. nt

[barb162]

46. several papers in Britain seem to use that polling company

right, left and central

[Violet_Crumble]

65. Barb, only 500 people were polled...

..and the questions and choice of questions given to those polled weren't reported. The low number of those polled, as well as not knowing what it was that people were giving answers to and how those questions and possible answers were worded would lead most rational folk to be just a bit suspicious, especially since British Muslims are pretty much assimilated. This coupled with the fact that the Daily Telegraph is a right-wing tabloid which is in the habit of inciting hatred and distrust against Muslims and other ethnic groups isn't making you wonder if there's some particularly slimy and bigoted agenda at foot when people report this sort of crap about Muslims as a whole in Britain?

Violet..

[tenshi816]

86. The Telegraph isn't a tabloid.

It's right-leaning, sure, but it's a broadsheet, not a tabloid. Call me nit-picky, but it would be the same if someone called the New York Times a tabloid.

[Violet_Crumble]

88. Nah, that's not nit-picking...

I made that mistake as our own Daily Telegraph is a tabloid. That's not to say that broadsheets can't be crap right-wing vehicles of nonsense. Anyone who's read The Australian will see Murdoch's slant being thrown out there as news :)

Violet...

[tenshi816]

90. Agreed.

Regarding Murdoch, my husband said something to me a couple of weeks ago that has had me thinking ever since. Hubby is an economist (or was, he changed jobs some years back, but still works in the financial sector - numbers are his life's work and he's very pragmatic about business). Anyway, I was having a little rant recently about Murdoch and what a Republican bastard he was and how his political leanings influence the media outlets he owns, yadda, yadda, yadda, when hubby said I was missing the point. What point, I asked. Well, said hubby, first and foremost Rupert Murdoch is a businessman, and while he's a Republican donor and enabler, his first allegiance is to his own business interests. My husband firmly believes that if Murdoch suddenly discovered he could become even more wealthy by supporting Democratic interests, he'd switch parties in a heartbeat and his various media outlets would reflect this. Hubby thinks Murdoch spews the swill he does because he makes money from doing it, not because he necessarily believes it himself.

What do you think about this idea? My husband isn't interested in politics at all, but he is very aware of what's going on in the business world.

Edited slightly for clarity.

[VirginiaDem]

92. 500 is plenty from a statistical perspective n/t

[Wordie]

96. WRONG. It's impossible to say that w/o knowing about the research design.

And ICM has not posted the poll data on their site as yet.

[pschoeb]

100. By their nature these polls are biased, real crappy polling

To get 500 Muslims, one has to have some master list of Muslims, this is never going to be the total set of Muslims in Britain, so one is never getting a random sample of Muslims, because your total list is already biased, quite possibly very biased. One would want to know how this polling agnecy decided who to select from as Muslims. Unfortunatly ICM hasn't published the full data and method for this poll, but we can use their past polls of Muslims to see their method.

"Muslim people were initially identified from a much larger sample of all adults interviewed on large scale random telephone surveys conducted by ICM. Those who said they are Muslim were re-interviewed for this survey. In order to achieve the sample of 500, some respondents were asked for the telephone numbers of another Muslim. In all 45 interviews were achieved in this way. Because there is no authoritative source of demographic information on the Muslim population data has not been weighted."
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2005/Guardian%20-%20muslims%20july05/Guardian%20Muslims%20jul05.asp

I would guess that asking Muslims for another Muslims phone number would severly bias the sample. Working from 45 Muslims !!!!!!!! that one got randomly, the other 456 were gotten as friends or associates of the 45, this is ridiculously stupid, and yes very biased. Especially when one is interviewing about a religious question amongst a population with a broad set of religious ideas, and where persons are likely to know mostly people who share there specific religious views.

[Coastie for Truth]

9. One of my colleagues - lunch buddies is a Persian Shiia

and we joke about introducing Sharia and Halacha (Jewish Law) in the US.

We figure we will start on the things we agree on:
1. No pork.
2. Humane (Hallal/Kashrut) slaughter.
3. No embalming - and burial as soon as possible (no wakes).
4. Fasting for (1) moral purification, and (2) great public tragedies.
5. Credit card interest and penalties are usurious.

We also have agreed to certain Persian and Sephardi customs:
1. Arranged marriages (kids are too immature to pick a spouse)
2. Allow the government to recoup SSI and Medicaid from adult children of the recipients.
3. Adult children should care for the aged parents.
4. Festivals (Eid el Fitr and Purim) should be community wide celebrations.

We have a whole bunch of things we agree on.

[iverglas]

16. amazing, ain't it?

Why, to hear some folks hereabouts go on about it, you'd think they actually knew what Shari'a was.

[Coastie for Truth]

23. Seriously, if you enter into a Negotiated Commercial Contract

and specify Sharia - or Halacha - as the law to be applied in Arbitration (not litigation - but arbitration) - and specify a Board of Mullah or Rabbis --- the state civil courts will enforce both:
(1) The obligation to so arbitrate, and
(2) The award.

You can also specify that a will can be similarly interpreted.

Not the law in every state - but it is in NY, NJ, PA.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

30. They had something about rabbical courts

on Law & Order a few years back. It was to decide if an adopted child was, indeed, Jewish-but I was fascinated by the court. Hope it was accurate. I'd wondered why else this court would convene-thanks for letting me know.

[Captain Hilts]

20. That's cool. nt

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

26. Hey, I'll join you in the celebrations!

I find it interesting that, one on one, people can usually get along. Too bad it can't happen with large groups.

[Coastie for Truth]

27. No pork sausage though

(Have you ever had Azeri-Iranian lamb sausage? - Yum)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

31. Yummy!

Hey, I tell folks here in Arkansas that I'll only eat pork if it is kosher. They don't get the joke.

[LiviaOlivia]

81. And what about gays and lesbians? And women who want to sing ?

what are you going to do about that? Stoning? Dismemberment? Beheading?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

95. Well, since gays and lesbians

hold places of honor in the Sufi orders I know and belong to, and also since I know that Sufis are persecuted in the repressive regimes that do those repressive things, I'm not sure, except to write letters of support of those living in those regimes who are brave enough to speak out. What you might not know is that Muslims who are liberal, who want reform, are under attack in the Middle East, and that it is important to get their words out to the world.

To ask an American Sufi to do something to stop the barbarity in other countries is like asking American Quakers to do something about the Catholic Church in Rome.

[kineneb]

33. and I had a fun experience of explaining

to my Persian step-father why my German ancestors would have starved if they could not have eated pork. It all has to do with environment, not religion, as far as I am concerned. Nothern Europe has different foods because it is has trees and is cold and damp. Two of the religions from the Middle East forbid pork and other foods due to lack of fuel (firewood, etc.) and water. So my diet, as a decendent of various European ancestors, includes pork. If you don't want to eat it, that is fine...I will take your portion of sausage.

[mitchtv]

38. No wakes??

big part of the Irish experience. No drinking , I suppose, too.

[Coastie for Truth]

40. The Muslim and Jewish rule

Bury as soon as possible (same day if kids and grand kids are local).

I have never been to a Muslim wake. Jewish wake is usually at the home of the deceased after burial.

[LiviaOlivia]

54. and women can't sing or go to funerals.

I'll pass. I'm partial to Bach, Mozart, Beethoven and art. And I will see my loved ones' buried.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

10. Judging from the anti-Muslim comments on the BBCAmerica board

it's hard to blame British Muslims for being alienated.

I don't know why, but that board tends to attract whatever the British counterpart of freepers is, and the way they write about Muslims is appalling. If those posters represent any significant subgroup in the UK, no wonder the Muslims feel touchy.

[mwooldri]

34. They're called "Little Englanders". (the UK "freepers" that is).

You can't classify them on the same terms as US politics because although they are on the right when it comes to politics in the UK, they're decidedly left wing on a lot of social issues (such as healthcare).

However some of their racial politics are "conservative". I feel there hasn't been that good of an integration effort in the UK. Although I like the idea of church schools, there are now state funded islamic schools (and jewish schools) in the UK and maybe this is helping the cultures remain separate.

Just my thoughts. Mark.

[LiviaOlivia]

32. Sharia law is only as fair as those "MEN" who interpet it

as I understand it. Is sharia law supposedly revealed from God like the 10 commamndents was to Moses? Or is it from man? Obviously it wasn't revealed from above to a woman.

Funny how the God of Abraham disliked women, etc.

We women rights activists and GLBT activists will fight on.

[barb162]

52. And why are the MEN interpreting anything at all for the women

PS: I think the men should be veiled for starters
:hi:

[Solon]

53. And a poll of US Christians asking if Biblical law should be instituted

would have what type of result? I wouldn't be surprised if it was well above 30%, possibly even up to 60%.

[tenshi816]

87. I think it might poll higher than 60%,

which is pretty scary. Of course, the fundies who would like the US to be governed by biblical law would want to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they used to govern with. For example, they'd ignore the divorce/adultery part, but they'd probably institute the death penalty for gays. Eating pork and shellfish would be OK, but women in the workplace would not, and so on.

[HuffleClaw]

62. *cough*bullshit*cough cough*

"a Muslim community becoming more radical and feeling more alienated from mainstream society" gotta love the spin in this article.

[sleipnir]

69. Amazing. If FOX NEWS came out with the same poll, it would be denounced

Instead, it seems many are ready to drink from the Koolaide cup of the British RightWing.

Take this poll with a grain of salt.

[JI7]

70. the numbers are not really that hard to believe

that still means 60 percent of Muslims don't want it.

polls taken of Americans show many of us are ignorant or have some backwards type views also.

[sushi]

72. Incredible!

40%??? I just can't believe there's anyone in Britain, or anywhere, who wants to bring back amputation and stoning. :crazy:

[LiviaOlivia]

75. Well put

:)

[Psephos]

76. It *is* mindblowing, isn't it? Meanwhile, look at this article...

'The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state'

UK Telegraph. I saw something rather similar in the Guardian not so long ago, too.

http://tinyurl.com/8zpdv

Food for thought...

Peace.

[rodeodance]

91. and this is fear among Brits.

[Imajika]

94. Europe is going to come to regret...

..having allowed so many Muslims in. I believe Europeans on both the left and right are already beginning to feel this way. And the more Muslims act out, the more Europeans are coming to the conclusion that Islam just doesn't mix with Western democracy, freedom and liberty. Sorry, but Islam really is just an intolerant religion. Flat out intolerant.

I know it is not PC to say this sort of thing but it's time people start speaking out and stopped knuckling under to further outragous demands from Muslims. We already saw how cowardly much of the western media has been by refusing to show the cartoons that stirred all the Muslim outrage. What's next? Will Islam be the one religion we are not allowed to criticize for fear of setting off an orgy of violence and rioting from irate Muslims? Let that happen, and every offended group will learn that rioting and violence works and can succeed is shutting down freedom of speech.

Islam is a far more political religion than any other of the worlds major religions. So long as the Quran is interpreted the way it is now by the vast majority of Muslim clerics and scholars it will be an inherently undemocratic religion - at least in any way the Western world views democracy. Sharia law is undemocratic - period.

In the West, freedom and liberty are among the two most top concerns - and from that the creation of liberal Western democracies. Muslims tend to view religious piety as their top concern - and as a result they do not view a government that stifles freedom of speech and individual liberty as necessarily bad.

Bush is a fool to think he can march in and create democracies in parts of the world that are just not ready for such a thing - and may never be so long as the Islam fails to modernize.

I always get a kick out of these threads. The minute anyone criticizes anything Muslims have done or are doing, you always get the predictable posters who howl that Christians are just as bad. It's become an amusing game for me. I see the headline and try to guess how many posts it will take for the first DU member to comment that Chrisitans are just as bad and do the same thing, or that rioting over cartoons is somehow America's fault or a giant conspiracy, etc. There really are a lot of posters that will excuse almost any outrage Muslims commit by either blaming it on the West or trying to argue that Christians do it to.

I have come to the conclusion that we are indeed headed for a clash of civilizations. Has Bush made things worse - absolutely he has. Just the same, I'm not sure we would have avoided this clash of civilizations regardless of who the US President is now, has been, or will be in the future.

The problem for Muslims is, instead of just the Western world as an enemy, Islam is going to find itself hated by every other major religion. Islamic violence plagues Bhuddist countries such as Thailand and majority Hindu countries like India. Muslims just don't seem able to tolerate anything that is unIslamic. The Islamic world is going to find itself at war with virtually everyone else at some point - and that is a war they will not win.

[Orlandodem]

99. A standing ovation for you.

These people are pissed off at the world. They killed Theo Van Gogh, they killed hundreds in Madrid and London. They burned Paris for 3 weeks. They are responsible for school killings in Russia. They would destroy India if they could. They blew up a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland. They've blown up embassies all over the world. They have been at war with the West for a generation. We're only just now coming to grips with this. Is there no part of the world they're not mad at?

And in the name of political correctness, after 9/11 American pols tripped over themselves to declare that Islam is a peaceful religion. I'm tired of having to choose words so carefully in order to avoid offending Muslim sensitivities for fear they may hijack the next plane out of Boston, Beirut, or Baghdad.

[smirkymonkey]

108. What is most stunning is their complete inability to take a clear

and honest look at themselves and thier own societies. Rather, they continue to blame anybody and everybody for their misery and failure. There comes a time for every person and every society to stop blaming others for the state they are in and begin to take responsibility for themselves.

Their slavish devotion to authority, their religious and political leaders, is primarily why they are still stuck back in the middle ages. Until they learn how to reform their societies from within, they will never prosper. The wealth will always be heavily concentrated at the top, while the masses suffer.

Western nations have long taken advantage of this weakness in Muslim nations, but we are not the cause of thier misery. This is the fault of their own leadership, and indeed a sheepish population who refuses to step into the modern world and instead seems to prefer living in the darkness of fear and hatred.

They value thier faith above thier lives, but what kind of faith is it when so many are consumed by hate and intolerance? (I believe this is true of all fundamentalist forms of religion, btw.) I maintain that this is not about "God" but about the basest human desires for power and domination. Those who follow this violent form of "Islam" are the worst kind of hypocrites and should be considered the REAL blasphemers.

[TankLV]

109. That's it in a nutshell.

I find it disgusting that people here are trying to defend or excuse or explain away such hateful and intolerant behavior.

It's quite sad, really.

Islam will get no breaks from me - all fucked-up fundie religious asswipes will get all the scorn they diserve equally.

[Wordie]

104. A companion article in the Telegraph clarifies (OP's report misleading)

I would like to see the actual survey results, as I can't help but wonder if the Telegraph has twisted the results for the OP article (or at minimum perhaps misinterpreted them as a result of lack of understanding).

For instance, this companion article points out that the Muslims said they want to see Islamic sharia law in force in UK communities which are predominantly Muslim. I don't myself know enough about either Islam or the study itself to be able to understand if that means they want to change the British laws, or if it merely means that they want the ability to maintain their own traditions. In fact, this article quotes Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, as saying, "The results on the sharia law question reflect the degree of importance that many British Muslims attach to living by an Islamic code of ethics and morality."

Further, some of the seeming "growing radicalism" that the article says the poll reveals, may be more a transient reaction to recent events, such as video of British troops beating Iraqi youths, the anti-Muslim cartoons and backlash, and the deaths and violence in the Iraq war.

Survey's finding of growing anger in the Islamic community are described as 'alarming' by leading Muslim Labour MP
By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor
(Filed: 19/02/2006)

...Nearly two-thirds believe the video scenes of British troops beating Iraqi youths shown on TV last week were symptomatic of a more widespread problem in Iraq, while exactly half do not believe the soldiers responsible will be "appropriately punished".

However, four in five say they still want to live in and accept Western society. More than nine in 10 say they feel personally "loyal" to Britain. Martin Boon, the ICM polling expert, has surveyed the sample group of 500 Muslims on several occasions in the past and counts them as moderate.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, takes a similar line to that of Mr Khan. "This poll reflects the fact that while less than one per cent of British Muslims believe that the July 7 bombers were right to have done what they did, a greater number - one in five - say they can understand the motives for the attacks, however unjustified they were," he said. (emphasis mine)

"It should be seen in the context of one of the other findings of the poll, which shows that while over 80 per cent of Muslims believe that Western society is not perfect, they should seek to make the best of it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=B0DFWNNUPS1VJQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia119.xml

So it appears that once again, a misleading article regarding Muslims has been posted in DU.

[IndianaGreen]

110. This is the same proportion of people that want to Christianize America

I wonder if there is a gene that compels people to force their religious beliefs on everyone else, by force if need be?

BTW, if the poll is correct, it means that 60% of Muslims in the UK reject this proposal.

[BayCityProgressive]

115. These people are just fucking nuts

sorry i know it offends many on the left but I say stop immigration from the middle east. If they love Sharia law so much let them stay there and live it. The fucking wackos. I feel the same way about people who come to the US illegally. Come here legal and learn the damn language.

[Solon]

117. Jesus Christ, I swear, this is like a KKK convention with this thread...

:puke:

[maddezmom]

118. locking

This thread has run it's course.