Thread: Stop the Islam4UK march

Why should Sammi feel happy? The collected Press have done exactly what Choudhary wanted them to do, which is give voice to his ludicrous opinions. He was even interviewed on television for God's sake.

I would imagine that he has gained more from this than he thought was ever possible. As yet Islam4UK has not been proscribed, but if it is then yet another few fanatics will flock to the cause in the face of repression.

I believe that the whole thing should have been totally ignored, and that if he had marched, then the people of WB should have just utterly ignored him; as hard as that may be. It would have been the biggest slap in the face that could be effectively delivered without enhancing his cause. In short humiliation. Total lack of recognition by anybody.

Can I just remind everybody on this thread that believes that they have a democratic right to stop the march, that it is only recently (in historical terms) that you have acquired that right? Politically The Suffragette movement was in the democratic minority, and yet who today would doubt that their cause was right? I'm not equating that movement and a bunch of idiotic fanatics in terms of their beliefs and motivation; but in terms of their right to voice their opinion, they have exactly the same right.

One can only hold the moral high ground if one is actually prepared to do as Voltaire said. That is to let your sworn enemy curse at you and promote their cause directly in front of you, and then defend their right to do so against those who would censure them. You do not however have to promote their opinion.
In this regard Islam4UK have gained a far greater audience by the very fact that so many people were attempting to silence them, than had we just plainly said 'Fine, crack on if you want; but don't expect me to show up at your party'.

As a side point it has also given the underside of right wing politics (the EDL etc) a chance to yet again try to legitimise themselves, by claiming that they have the voice of 'The British People' behind them.

One more feather in the cap of the Islamist movement, as far as I can see.

I am not so sure I agree with you.

1.) He has created a sense of solidarity amongst the people of Britain that was definitely lacking, he has made people sit up and take notice and say these are our boundaries. He stopped the complacency that is all around us.

2.) We are at war (counter insurgency - moot point), and it's about time the nation realised it and worked out whose side their on and what they believe in.

3.) He brought attention to the fact that there are many more Afghan deaths in this war (counter insurgency - moot point) and I think it should be acknowledged

4.) We live amongst our enemy (I am not saying that Islam is the enemy but the Islamic extremist terrorists) and they recruit from British towns and send them out to fight our soldiers.

5.) He has made me realise that we need to define what does it mean to be British before we lose the identity of our nation.

In answer to your points:

1) For about as long as England unite when playing against Wales; ie not past 20:00hrs. He hasn't even scuffed the complacency, let alone dented or stopped it.

2) I think that the majority of the country are quite well aware that we are engaged in a conflict. We are not 'At War', America is.

3) Anyone that is not aware of the civilian casualty rate in either Afghanistan or Iraq is utterly naive and uninformed. The press report it frequently, even The Sun. It should also be noted that a large proportion of the Afghani casualties are caused by the Taliban either as 'come ons' or as punishment.

4) We do not live among our enemy, they live amongst us; there is an important difference. If we enable the enemy to recruit, it is our failure.

5) Defining what is British is a Neo-Fascist rallying call, and a false one. There is no true definition of 'British' as it has always been a fluid concept. It may have some core values, but you cannot limit it with a narrow definition. English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish perhaps, but British no.

Originally Posted by Gremmers

5) Defining what is British is a Neo-Fascist rallying call, and a false one. There is no true definition of 'British' as it has always been a fluid concept. It may have some core values, but you cannot limit it with a narrow definition. English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish perhaps, but British no.

I don't disagree with 1-4. There is definitely a systemic failure occurring.

Other than to say, I speak frequently with soldiers who return from the frontline and they tell me we are at war. Increasingly I see it written in their faces as they don't know how to be when they are required to integrate into society. It is for them I say that we are war because they have asked me to, as they cannot.

I didn't mean it as 'neo-fascist rallying call' but as a reflection that we are neither monarchy, or, republic. I am alluding to perhaps a mandate that reflects the modern Britain and enables the country to unite under a shared philosophy - a constitutional code, some shared values, we are evolving as a nation without vision, perspective, or even understanding of where we are going and it concerns me.

I have not stated any perameters of what it means to be British in way at all through any of my posting. I am asking a question that I feels requires a definition not offering an answer.

I wasn't implying that you were neo-fascist. I was stating that defining what is British is a neo-fascist ploy and policy. We are an immigrant Isle, and always have been; therefore by its very nature the concept of what is Britain will always be changing. If anything the true nature of Britain is its ability to adapt and change with the times.

Marvellous he got what he wanted:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453560.stm

Highlights include:

Islam4UK spokesman Anjem Choudary told BBC Radio 4: "What the people will see is if you don't agree with the government and you want to expose their foreign policy, then freedom quickly dissipates and turns into dictatorship."

He denied Islam4UK members were involved in violence: "I challenge anyone to authentically prove that any of our members have been involved in any violent activities or promoting violent activities or asking anyone to carry out any sort of military operations.

"We are always at pains to stress that we are an ideological and political organisation.

"We won't be using those names and those platforms which have been proscribed, but I can't stop being a Muslim, I can't stop propagating Islam, I can't stop praying, I can't stop calling for the Sharia.

"That's something I must do, and ultimately I will pay whatever price I need to for my belief."

and this peach:

On Sunday Islam4UK cancelled the march, saying it had "successfully highlighted the plight of Muslims in Afghanistan".

Originally Posted by Gremmers

Marvellous he got what he wanted:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453560.stm

Highlights include:

Islam4UK spokesman Anjem Choudary told BBC Radio 4: "What the people will see is if you don't agree with the government and you want to expose their foreign policy, then freedom quickly dissipates and turns into dictatorship."

He denied Islam4UK members were involved in violence: "I challenge anyone to authentically prove that any of our members have been involved in any violent activities or promoting violent activities or asking anyone to carry out any sort of military operations.

"We are always at pains to stress that we are an ideological and political organisation.

"We won't be using those names and those platforms which have been proscribed, but I can't stop being a Muslim, I can't stop propagating Islam, I can't stop praying, I can't stop calling for the Sharia.

"That's something I must do, and ultimately I will pay whatever price I need to for my belief."

and this peach:

On Sunday Islam4UK cancelled the march, saying it had "successfully highlighted the plight of Muslims in Afghanistan".

I only had objections to the march taking place in Wootton Basset not the highlighting of the cause.

I am not sure that we have always been a immigrant isle at all, maybe since the 60s but not forever. We have been invaded a few times and we are hybrids but just because something has been one way for a long time doesn't mean it should stay that way.

I think the nation's political apathy needs to be addressed. This laissez faire approach is not helping us at all.

What is treason? Let's not endorse but punish the treasonous acts of individuals. Can we not all agree on that!

Originally Posted by wokkawifey

I am not sure that we have always been a immigrant isle at all, maybe since the 60s but not forever. We have been invaded a few times and we are hybrids but just because something has been one way for a long time doesn't mean it should stay that way.

Try 40,000BC or so and you might start to get close. By the way, the Windrush was 1948, not 'The Sixties'.