Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Edl The Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Definition of "Muslim Extremist"
Topic Started: Nov 10 2009, 01:04 PM (156 Views)
Deleted User
Deleted User

Since the foundation of the EDL is its opposition to extremist muslims, as opposed to moderate muslims, it is vital to have clear criteria to make the distinction.

I suggest the following criteria, which were leaked earlier this year as part of the government's "Contest 2" counter-terrorism strategy:

Muslims are to be considered extremists if...

1) They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.

2) They promote Sharia law.

3) They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

4) They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

5) They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

looks great on paper John, but as soon as you introduce the concept of Al Taqiyya and Kitman, it then just becomes a waiting game.
We can certainly make a start by judging on actions rather than empty words though?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
ukwakeup
Member Avatar
Newbie
Agreed guys, we need to set some criteria so the EDL is not seen as racist or fashist. I think one of the criteria should be that extremism can include any race (including white extremists) or gender. After all, I am sure there are plenty of white muslim extremists to choose from ...

Perhaps a poll should be included for this, for all members?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

They're also in favor of pedophiliae for little girls.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I see it like this. If muslim for 'A' for instance wants to bomb the London underground to kill 'infidels' then obviously he/she is seen as an extremist.

however muslim 'B' (who would never use violence and also sees muslim 'A' as an extremist) would like to see sharia law within in the UK.

So muslim 'B' sees muslim 'A' as an extremist but i see them both as extremists.

They must accept our traditions and values and not try and impliment their own (sharia etc), if they don't accept then to me they are extremists.


Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
John Carlson
Nov 10 2009, 01:04 PM
Since the foundation of the EDL is its opposition to extremist muslims, as opposed to moderate muslims, it is vital to have clear criteria to make the distinction.

I suggest the following criteria, which were leaked earlier this year as part of the government's "Contest 2" counter-terrorism strategy:

Muslims are to be considered extremists if...

• They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.

• They promote Sharia law.

• They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

• They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

• They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Hey John, when did you sign up to the EDL on Zetaboards?? All I can say is, WELCOME ABOARD MATE!!

I've read many of your posts on the 4F forums and I think you have a lot to contribute to this forum....

.......Everyone should listen to what John has to say, he always talks a lot of sense and he always puts forward some very pro-active and worthwhile suggestions and ideas!

Glad to see you are here now!!! Really glad!!!
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

That looks a VERY short list considering it's part of the Government's "Contest 2" counter-terrorism strategy. I would probably add...

• They refuse to intergrate (cross breed) with the rest of society AND they attempt to breed faster than the rest of society.
(This may only need to be applied to famale's.)

... Though I think the list should probably be a lot bigger.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

We need to keep it simple,eg if they are breathing them assume they're extreme(thats a joke by the way)
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I don't think they want to take over by killing.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

The best people to write such a list, would be ex-Muslim's who also must be an expert on the Qu'ran. Someone like this guy...



... But I'm not sure he would be able to "keep it simple".
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

peterpedant
Nov 10 2009, 02:26 PM
looks great on paper John, but as soon as you introduce the concept of Al Taqiyya and Kitman, it then just becomes a waiting game.
We can certainly make a start by judging on actions rather than empty words though?
Muslim lying isn't really a problem with some of these criteria.

Muslims are to be considered extremists if...

2) They promote Sharia law.

This is very hard for them to conceal. If they support Sharia courts, or go to them, or agitate for Sharia rules of any type, they are promoting Sharia, and hence are muslim extremists. It's quite straightforward. For example, this is an muslim extremist organization.

3) They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

This one is also hard to wiggle out of. Muslims are generally very vocal in their support of Hamas and Hezbollah. Are they really going to lie, and stand up for the jews just to fool us? I don't think so. The dispute is too deep and passionate for them to hide their true feelings.

4) They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

Doesn't seem to be any lying going on here. A 2009 Gallup poll of 500 British muslims couldn't find even ONE who would stand up for gay rights.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
lancashirelad
No Avatar
Patriot
To me theres no definition, as muslims are offended at the slightest comment or the smallest of jokes and are ready to take up arms at the slightest provocation then there cant be a definition they are all as potentially dangerous. as each other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Some more points in favor of the list:

1) It totally sticks in the craw of muslim extremists. They hate the list and feel very threatened by it. Read this to see what I mean. There's a lot of value in something that puts them on the defensive like that. It pushes their buttons.

2) The label "muslim extremist" is one of the most powerful tools the EDL has. It should be used frequently and often. You know how you hate it when the other side smears you with labels like "racist" and "far right"? Well, the corresponding smear they hate just as much is being labeled as "muslim extremists". The important thing is to go beyond opposing muslim extremists in the abstract, and start making it more personal. Yes Anjem Choudary and his crew are extremists, but you're wasting the weapon if you only use it on him. The label should be used much more frequently and broadly. For example, anyone involved in Sharia law in any way should be loudly denounced as a muslim extremist.

Muslims who go to Sharia courts -> Muslim extremists
Muslims who wear burkhas -> Muslim extremists
Muslims who support Hamas -> Muslim extremists
Muslims who refuse to defend the right to insult Islam -> Muslim extremists
Muslims who don't support gay rights -> Muslim extremists

3) It would be nice to have an upfront policy from the EDL on what constitutes a muslim extremist, but it's not essential. Why spend any time dickering or voting or thinking about it all? The 5 criteria I gave are a workable start, so why not just informally adopt something for the time being, and start working it. The important thing is to start using some criteria to identify and label muslim extremists, and get in their faces with it.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Mulling this over a little more, I think the first criterion:

1) They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.

is a little weak (because it's peripheral and would only apply to Imams etc.)

This would be a better replacement:

1) They refuse to defend the right of anyone to insult Islam

This hits a much deeper nerve, and will be much harder for them to weasel out of with Taqqiya. Yes, they *could* lie and defend the rights of the Danish Cartoonists, but you know they won't. Their anger will get the best of them, and the truth will slip out!

So... Here is my improved definition (version 2)

Muslims are to be considered extremists if...

1) They refuse to defend the inalienable right of people to insult Islam.

2) They promote Sharia law.

3) They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

4) They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

5) They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.


All in all, I think it's a good definition. It's simple. Only 5 points, so it's easy to remember and use. And it puts the screws on the extremists.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

John Carlson
 
3) They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

This may need changing.

But again, I don't think they want to take over by killing.

Birth Control beats Death Control, like Scissors beats Paper: There are law's which prohibit people taking over U.N. countries using 'mass DEATH'. There are no law's which prohibit people taking over U.N. countries using 'mass BIRTH'. Both are just as sinister/effective, but one is legal.

'mass BIRTH' spreads like a virus; exponentially.

That loop-hole WILL be exploited, if it isn't addressed. Remember, they have one goal: World-wide domination.

Note: Not all Muslim's have that goal, as some don't even read the Qu'ran. I'm just talking about the Extremists.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · EDL Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Feliz Navidad (Gold) created by Sarah & Delirium of the ZNR