We hear this kind of thing in the U.S. as well, although usually in opposition to a specific counter-terror measure rather than as a comprehensive criticism of the government's entire approach: CAIR has opposed virtually every counter-terror measure that has come down the pike, and other Islamic advocacy groups have joined in also to oppose specific counter-terror strategies that are denounced for supposedly "alienating" otherwise peaceful Muslims. While the rest of the population has to put up with intrusive and annoying airport security procedures that have been instituted because of Islamic jihadists, and are required to endure all manner of inconvenience and expense because of those Islamic jihadists, ostensibly peaceful and law-abiding Muslims appear entirely unwilling to endure any inconvenience or hardship whatsoever in aid of rooting the "extremist" elements out of their communities.
"Counter-terrorism projects 'are alienating Muslim communities,'" by Martin Bentham in the Evening Standard, July 19 (thanks to Twostellas):
A Government counter-terrorism scheme should be scrapped because it is alienating Muslims and increasing the risk of an attack, a report will warn this week.The report by think tank Demos says that the £60 million-a-year Preventing Violent Extremism programme, which aims to "isolate and defeat" extremists in Muslim communities, has raised tensions and focused too much on law-abiding citizens.
MPs and leaders of Muslim organisations have previously claimed that the Government's counter-terrorism strategy is counterproductive. Home Secretary Theresa May has announced a review of the programme, which has been used to fund community cohesion initiatives in London and elsewhere, to see whether it should be scaled back or altered.
The Demos report says that the scheme should be axed as it is "impossible to determine" whether it provides value for money.
Jamie Bartlett, the head of the think tank's violence and extremism programme, said: "Building strong communities shouldn't fall under the counter-terrorism brief. The Government must continue to show that Muslims are not a community under suspicion and deal with them as citizens, not suspects."
The Preventing Violent Extremism scheme has supported efforts to strengthen the role of moderate imams and women in mosques.
How does one determine who they are?
It has also funded health and education projects and forums at which residents can discuss extremism and Islamophobia.The Demos report warns, however, that while many of these projects "are excellent in themselves, it is questionable how far they prevent terrorism" and they have "blurred the boundaries between social cohesion and counter-terrorism".
Instead, the report says that prevention work should be "solely focused on people with the intent to act or who are being targeted by recruiters".
How does one determine who they are?
On freedom of speech, it says that non-violent extremist views "should be heard" to allow them to be exposed as flawed, rather than suppressed through legislation.The Commons communities and local government select committee this year warned that many Muslims believed that the "Prevent" programme was being used to spy on them.
What doesn't alienate Muslims ?
Not much. The Qur'an commands that believers NOT befriend kuffars, so the very presence of infidels "alienates" the faithful. What should be done?
A new immigration policy might be a good start.
"The U.S. Constitution should be scrapped because it is alienating Muslims and increasing the risk of an attack, a report will warn this week."
New report says counter-terror efforts are alienating Muslims
Good.
That means they might actually be working or have a chance of working.
A Government counter-terrorism scheme should be scrapped because it is alienating Muslims and increasing the risk of an attack, a report will warn this week.
Yes...don't make them mad...don't stir up the hornets nest...
This is just another form of surrender and waving a white flag...it is based on fear...
That 'terrorism works' will attract more potential jihadi's than kufr resistance against it...
"Building strong communities shouldn't fall under the counter-terrorism brief. The Government must continue to show that Muslims are not a community under suspicion and deal with them as citizens, not suspects."
What the Demos 'think tank' spokesperson, Jamie Bartlett, fails to understand here is that if the government's effort to "build strong communities" fails, then the alternative is to re-evaluate Britain's immigration policy vis-a-vis Muslims. The main reason they were let in in such numbers is because of the poorly thought out rationale that they would swell the labor force to help pay for Britain's aging population's upkeep with welfare benefits. But if these new 'laborers' are draining the system rather than contributing to it, what is the natural outcome? It would mean they must re-evaluate the whole policy and consider removing from British soil those who are not contributing, but draining instead. Knowing the proclivity of Muslims who do not want to work but live off the dole, compounded by their propensity for jihad violence, they mark themselves for deportation. This is a serious danger for Muslims, because it would be the first step towards massive restrictions on Islamic immigration and mass deportations.
So what will Muslims choose collectively? Put up with the 'inconvenience' of government monitoring their 'unpopular' suspicious and anti-social activities, including welfare fraud, or risk mass deportations? The logical outcome of all this, since the British people are not stupid, is that failed 'bridge building' of strong communities will ultimately result in Islam being cast out. This would apply to all other countries in the EU, same as it would ultimately apply to all the West. Either Muslims adapt by positively contributing to our societies, and endure well-earned suspicion, or they are forced to leave. There is no other solution acceptable, except to capitulate to Islam. That cannot, will not happen. This is either, or. That is how Preventing Violent Extremism scheme provides "value for money": either adapt and comply, or leave.
"Building strong communities shouldn't fall under the counter-terrorism brief. The Government must continue to show that Muslims are not a community under suspicion and deal with them as citizens, not suspects."
But they are "a community under suspicion" -- all over the Western world, and in a good part of the non-Western world. Who could read the Qur'an, and the 160-odd "Jihad" verses, who could read Sura 9, who could read the Hadith, who could contemplate the figure of Muhammad as the Perfect Man, al-insan al-kamil, knowing what he did and said, who could take note of the persecution, humiliation, and murder of non-Muslims today, in Muslim lands, and who could, having learned somethning of the past 1350 years of the history of Islamic conquest and subjugation of many different kinds of non-Muslims, who could do all or any of that and not be deeply suspicious of Muslims, and even more so once one has grasped such doctrines as Taqiyya and Kitman that are nothing more religiously-sanctioned dissimulation in order to protect the faith from prying outsiders?
Only a fool would not be suspicious at this point. Not all of us are willing to be fools.
New report says counter-terror efforts are alienating Muslims.
Well then, the solution is simple: stop countering the Jihad terror war operations committed by Moslem Activists on a daily basis, the Unicorn masses will no longer be alienated, and everything will be cool. Simple.
*** 8:12 ***
But wait a minute, hasn't this been tried for nearly 1,400 years and failed every time? When I think about pacifying the always discontented Moslems, I think about Tours, Gibraltar, Vienna, places like that.
Only a fool would not be suspicious at this point. Not all of us are willing to be fools.
Of all the profound things Hugh has ever written, these two sentences rate with the top ten...
When so many of one commnunty keep threatening us with destruction , is it not surprising we would want to 'spy on them .
But of course , spying on them is not nearly enough .
Well, there it is, then. This alienation of mulsims is unacceptable. Why, we might make them angry! What if they just picked-up and left the country? Think of the societal damage from this loss of diversity! And who would drive our cabs? Damn, these squat-toilets do splash-back, don't they...
The Preventing Violent Extremism scheme has supported efforts to strengthen the role of moderate imams and women in mosques.
Spencer asks: "How does one determine who they are?"
...the report says that prevention work should be "solely focused on people with the intent to act or who are being targeted by recruiters".
Spencer asks again: "How does one determine who they are?"
Excellent questions. Apparently many, if not most, Jihad Watch readers must have answers for these questions -- else their stubborn defense of the viability of Muslim humanity and the hope of its usefulness in sufficient numbers for us in the face of the dangers Muslims present to us make no sense.
Or perhaps they believe in a sort of vague Wildersian expectation that if we continue to try to smother amorphous blankets of secularism in the general direction of Muslims, they will soften up and their "inner Westerner" will flower. This would be the sense to restore coherence to this "I'm against Islam but not against Muslims" stance: For, according to these New Wilsonians called Wildersians, secularism is the Natural State of Man -- including all Muslims potentially -- and so there exists an "inner Westerner" in every Muslim just screaming to get out, and it needs our help!
I would only caution these Wildersians that this is a very delicate operation: when trying to extract that "inner Westerner" from any given Muslim, be very careful, for the slightest wrong move could detonate the explosives therein.
Agreed, everything that we humans do offends these morons!!!
For Muslims this life is very offensive. They only live to dream about going to Mo/allah's brothel to enjoy 72 whories!!! Nothing will change their behavior unless and until they stop following teachings of Quran.
Hesp, I think you're saying that rather than find muslims' "inner Westerner" we may instead
discover his "inner Semtex!"
If we had had such attitudes back in the early 1940s, Japan might now be occupying the western USA to the Rockies, and Germany the Atlantic Seaboard to the Rockies.
I wonder how much the British government spends annually on muslim/islamic related issues, not including welfare. It must be astronomical. I never hear of similar initiatives and studies being conducted for other immigrant groups, which must mean that muslims are the only immigrants that can't/won't assimilate, are not trusted by the natives, are belligerent and hostile and a general pain in the ass.
Having come to these conclusions, I once again ask myself why these incompatible, bellicose, demanding people are ecouraged to come to the U.K. The U.K. seems to excessively cater and grovel to muslims, bending over backwards at the expense of native citizens to pander to their every demand. I don't know why any Western country would want muslim immigrants but the British government devotes a disproportionate amount of resources and manpower to kissing their asses and trying to make the country more amenable to these bellicose, corrupt exploiters. I always thought governments existed for the welfare of all citizens, not just hostile immigrants. Besides the muslim invaders, who benefits from this?
What DOESN'T alienate or otherwise offend Muslims?
I'll tell you what alienates and offends me:
Muslims committing suicide bombings.
Muslims attempting/blowing up cars.
Muslims flying planes into buildings.
Muslims mutilating young girls.
Muslims indoctrinating their children into an ideology of hatred.
Muslims rioting and threatening people over things as silly as cartoons.
Muslims treating women like animals or like property.
Muslim old men "marrying" little girls.
Muslims beheading people.
Muslims murdering their own daughters over some twisted notion of 'honor'.
And non-Muslims being forced to submit to sharia law. (Even unofficially, as is happening more and more in the U.S. and around the world.)
On and on I could go. THAT offends me!
These peaceful muslims can THANK their own brethren for these necessary safety measures. And what is more important: your hurt feelings, or saving lives?
Easy answer, so deal with it ...
If they are so damn "alienated", why don't they pack up and go the hell back to wherever they came from?
Hesperado, how about changing the record for a while a telling us all what you, personally, hope to gain when the whole world is under control of Sharia and the kuffar have all been killed, converted, or subdued and jizyaed into the ground. Just wondering what particular fantasies you are hoping to fullfil with the coming of the Caliphate.
If not, please shut the hell up because you are the biggest droning bore under the troll bridge.
So if the UK leaves them alone, not a peep will be heard from the Imams, no more talk about the great booty call in the sky? The bobbies will be holding their hands instead of being chased by the mob? I think (tank) not. Maybe President O'Ummah will be taking up that standard in the coming months.
Well, fancy that! The Prevent initiative was a no no from the start.
The Police spent thousands of pounds "consulting" with different communities (of which mine was one) - took everybody's views away, then came back with the same old rubbish - the general idea was (though they didn't DARE say it) "we can't actually SAY the problems we're having are because of Muslims a)in the main not being honest (al takkeya, b) deliberately sabotaging attempts at compromise, c)refusing to integrate, d)increasingly demanding special consideration and treatment - so we (DEMOS etc) decided WE'RE in the wrong for not "understanding" their motivation (or lack of it). We will continue to do more of the same - reaching out, appeasing, cajoling - because in our arrogance (or is it equal parts arrogance and ignorance?) we cannot contemplate that our way is wrong. Therefore, we must continue digging the hole we have put the British people in to an ever deeper level - and for goodness sake - PLEASE don't say all this is because of the multiculturalist liberalist road British people are being forced to take for fear of being thought racist! Look in the mirror and say - IMMIGRATION IS GOOD! RESPECTING MUSLIM CULTURE IS GOOD! three times a day", (or is it five, facing east, as Muslims do? I'll have to look in the guide book and check that one).
I know it's the same in the US.
Mo - I agree with you 100%.
Hesperado - you've got it wrong, mate. This is not about secularism at all. It's about the right to CHOOSE what you want to be - whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, whatever, without being made to feel that you've got to bend yourself out of shape to please Muslims. Its about the right to DEMAND (yes, because after all, it IS our country) that Muslim immigrants respect its way of life, and stop trying to subvert its culture in favour of Islamic culture. Simple. It's about being able to say "You live as we do, you respect our customs and laws, otherwise go and live somewhere else".
Susamp - when you consider the British governance system is riddled with Muslims (some of whom have decidedly "iffy" agendas) - the Police are helpless - you'll get to the answer quickly.
Spot on Jamie.
Jamie, you describe a society in the UK which is so much a prisoner of political correctness that most of it DARES not criticise Islam for fear of being thought racist.
Many in the UK are in a similar bind and because they dare not NAME the source of their discontent they are stuck with it.
The UK immigration policy in the past has allowed this to happen. Now, very belatedly, like the little boy with his finger in the dam, it is tying to stem the flow.
For myself, I care not one wit if what I do and say offends Muslims. The presence of so many of them here offends ME.
Now we hear that the UK government will not ban the burqa because that would present a barrier to "mutuality!! Now I know that the UK are being led by idiots. What greater barrier to mutuality that to have to try to interact with a black sheet?
May I make a suggestion to all reading this? I read about this elsewhere:
Let's designate 9/11 "Hide your Face" day, when we all wear some sort of face covering when we go outdoors. Imagine, if that took off, the effect of thousands of "faceless" people walking the streets. I think that'd send the right sort of message.
Alternatively, let's all carry full face balaclavas everywhere we go, to be put on whenever we come across a walking umbrella.
check this out. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1295703/Gurkha-soldier-removed-duty-beheading-dead-Taliban-commander-battle.html
The British are going destroy their own soldiers who manage to return alive from Af-Pak.
All that money spent to "further integration", "combating islamist extremism", "improve social and community cohesion", "banning islamophobia", outreach and appeasement etc etc. Wouldn´t it by and large have been spent more sensibly by fighting islam and islamic ideology outright, instead of letting it pretend it is what it is not?
Paul
you asked, 'What doesn't offend Muslims?'
What, indeed? The list of what *does* offend, is long, as one may discover from the completely factual cases catalogued in 'The List of Things That Offend Muslims'.
http://amboytimes.typepad.com/the_amboy_times/2007/02/the_list_of_thi.html
I urge anyone lurking or posting here, who has but newly joined the forum (say, in the past days, or weeks, or maybe months, and hasn't heard of this most instructive List) to click and read. I assure you, you will ROFL; but it is horrible, when you think about it, as well as funny.
And here's a hilarious - and bitingly accurate - essay by an ex-Muslim, which explores the same subject, giving lots of useful Koranic and other references.
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/IslamOppressed.htm
"When is Islam Oppressed?"
Again: recommended to anyone here who has not yet heard of it, nor read it.
I keep these two items in my 'Religion of Perpetual Outrage' file, together with the following item, a Hugh Fitzgerald classic, entitled '95 Things That Fuel Muslim Extremism'
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/10/fitzgerald-95-things-that-fuel-muslim-extremism.html
The UK government and police should clamp down harder, instead of backing off for fear of 'upsetting' the Muslims.
The fact is: intelligent resistance to the Jihad - that is, the judicious application of a BIIIG stick, in the right places (not, I hasten to add, in the wrong places and in the wrong ways, as currently in Iraq and Afghanistan) - is the only thing that has ever caused jihadists to back off. Resisting Jihad, defending oneself against Jihad, does NOT lead to more Jihad; so long as the resistance, the self-defence, is done smartly, and with sufficient force, and persistently, ignoring all Muslim wailings and threatenings, and resolutely ignoring also all Muslim pleadings for specious ceasefires and 'treaties' and timeouts and 'accords' and suchlike, it should lead to less Jihad.
A long time ago, someone at this forum shared a one-paragraph summary of How to Deal with Muslims, from the English-language press of 19th century China (at a time when an outbreak of Jihad was having to be dealt with in that country).
I do not know whether the author was European or Chinese; the tone suggests a Chinese. I do not know whether it originally appeared in Chinese, or in English, and do not have the resources to try to track down the newspaper in which it appeared and sift through every copy (if in English) from that particular year, to find the full article in which it most probably appeared. But it is excellent advice, in light of everything else that I have, from other sources, learned about Islam and Muslims.
Here it is:
“If politeness and ceremony be observed toward Mohammedans,
' they imagine they are feared and become arrogant;
'but in showing severity and rudeness,
'they are impressed with fear and respect, and they are supple and manageable.”
--North China Herald,1867
STOP being polite, Britain. I know that's difficult. But try. Try some 'severity and rudeness'; keep it up; back it up by concentrated use of overwhelming force as and when necessary; and see what happens.
dumbledoresarmy you say "STOP being polite, Britain. I know that's difficult. But try. Try some 'severity and rudeness'; keep it up; back it up by concentrated use of overwhelming force as and when necessary; and see what happens."
I don't know if you're an American or not - but Americans have far more rights to freedom of opinion and speech than we are left with in the UK - again thanks to Tony Blair's and New Labour's fanatical acceptance of European anti racist laws, and human rights laws. In this country a white non-Muslim is far more likely to be prosecuted for deemed hate speech against Islamists than a would be Jihadi.
I'd LOVE to stop being polite. In fact the older I've become the less polite I'm prepared to be. However I don't think drastic forms of (un?)civil disobedience are the answer. It's grass roots non-violent action. We have to find our voices - and tell those who presume to speak for us we're not prepared to be placed in danger of our lives because they don't have a pair of what it takes to be courageous between them. It starts with EVERY ONE OF US swamping our Members of Parliament, MEPs, local authorities with emails, letters and phone calls. After all, millions of fed up and demoralised Brits can't all be wrong, can they?
Soovey - good idea about National Hide Your Face Day. What do you suggest - paper bags, balaclavas, Lone Ranger masks?
lilredbird and Jamie,
Both of you misunderstand me. I am criticizing the tendency of Western idealists to assume that many (or most?) Muslims are capable of becoming secular.
Jamie
I'm an Aussie.
By the way, I do enjoy reading your posts. Most informative and thoughtful.
When I said 'Stop being polite, Britain' I was hypothetically addressing 'the UK government and police'; describing the kind of approach they could take vis a vis the sullen and rebellious Muslims, once they (government and police) have been woken up by sufficient numbers of unhappy Islamosavvy citizens such as yourself, doing what *you* have recommended in your second last paragraph.
Oh, and I too think that Soovey's 'National Hide Your Face Day' suggestion has its merits. I would plump for a comic approach (which is also the cheapest): large brown paper bags with holes cut out for eyes.
About National Hide your Face Day - In Britain, it should be on 7/7 and you should all wear Guy Fawkes masks....
"The Hadith of Bukhari gives all of the tactical details of jihad. A simple counting method shows that 3% of the hadiths are about the inner struggle, whereas, 97% of the hadiths are about jihad as war. So is jihad the inner struggle? Yes, 3%. Is jihad the war against kafirs? Yes, 97%."
- quoted from Bill Warner
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2009/01/interesting-facts-about-islamic.html
Absolutely right! But of course for that to happen, a sizable number of non-Muslims must know about Islam. This video should help:
http://nrubiii.blogspot.com/2010/07/three-things-about-islam-video.html
"A new immigration policy might be a good start."
YES!
We need to get everyone to sign this petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-more-Muslim-immigration