NEWS: British Cleric Approves of Targeting Children

POLITICS: British Cleric Approves of Targeting Children

While plenty of people in the Middle East and North Africa are horrified at the terrorist massacre in Russia, a British cleric thinks it’s perfectly peachy for Muslim terrorists to target British children if they feel oppressed.

Oh, boo fuckity hoo. The human rights of Muslims who live in Britain are overwhelmingly more respected than even in relatively liberal Arab countries in the Middle East and North Africa such as Jordan, Tunisia, and Morocco. I’m sure it’s no fun being an ethnic and religious minority, but surely it beats the bootheel of the Baathist jackboot in his home country of Syria. Whatever grievances against the majority Muslims may have in Britain (and I’m sure they have some) it will never be able to touch what the Chechens have against Russia. And even those grievances, horrific as they are, can never excuse the murder of children.

He tries to backpedal slightly by saying it would be okay if an Iraqi took British children hostage, and that it would only be okay if British children were killed in a “crossfire.”

This is disingenuous on multiple levels. For one thing, no Muslim in the world lives “under British rule” the way a British Muslim does. So his little quick-change maneuver over to Iraq isn’t very compelling.

Even if he didn’t mean to include British Muslims among those who live “under British rule” (dubious as that would be) he completely undermines his own attempt at “moderation” by saying the following:

Terrorists shot fleeing children in the back. One child was impaled with a bayonet for asking for a drink of water.

I sometimes hope that the only reason people like this are allowed to stay here (the UK) is so that MI5, MI6 and GCHQ can monitor everything they say and do, and everyone they communicate with.

Also, the very few 'practising Muslims' I've spoken to think he's a fucking idiot.

This guy teaches the Religion Of Peace?

Yeah, me too... I guess at least if these people are here we can keep an eye on them.

All religions are fucked up.

Christians are supposed to follow the bible. The story in the old testiment about the passover, where God killed the first born child of every Egyptian family to punish the pharoah for not releasing the jews.

What kind of message does that send out? If the story is supposed to be true, then God is no better than those terrorists in chechnia. if the story is only a metaphore, then it seems like God is condonong terrorism if it's necessary to achieve a just cause.

I would really like a christian (or a jew) to answer this point. How can you condenm the Chechian seperatists for doing what your own God thinks is ok.

Not if you ask most Muslims in the UK>

Jesus Christ.

Jesus fucking Christ.

They're children. How are they oppressing him?

I could just cry over stuff like this, especially the thing with the bayonet.

That cleric wouldn't be that fucking nut job "hook" would it?

That explains a fuck of a lot. Why didn't you quote Farrakhan instead? He's Muslim too and just about as extreme, but a hell of a lot funnier. I want to hear about Yakub and aliens, not this shit.

I would agree with that... religion is nothing more than a acient system for controlling the masses. If we didn't have such stupid ideas about there being a god could you imagine what the world would be like?

To me it's a question of whether one's religion is suitable for the age. Islamists make the mistake of trying the apply the Koran - a book written by a warlord hundreds of years ago - literally. Perhaps the morals of Mohammed's day were acceptable back then, but many elements are not applicable on todays society. Square bricks jammed into round holes.

The bible too has a lot of standards that seem uncivilised by todays standards and be tragic if applied literally or reinterpreted by nutcases. One only has to think back to awful results of Christianity according to David Koresh.

nah - different one

can America try and extradite this creep as well?

Seems to me they were living fairly happily under his interpretation of the bible until the ATF got involved.

I certainly wouldn't compare communal living in Waco, TX to suicide bombing in the name of allah. That's unbelievable.

As far as religions needing to hold modernized ideals in order to adapt to today's society, I agree.

I'm not a christian or a jew, so I can't argue from that viewpoint. But I really hope you see the gigantically huge fundamental difference in your statement, that being that the vast majority of christianity has modernized into something that understands plurality within the world, and accepts it. Islam has overwhelmingly not made this leap, and still has very rigid support systems in place in the middle east which teach a fundamentalist form of Islam which encourages the forced conversion of all other people in the world to Islam. The rhetoric of the islamic imams is oftened softened down, but the reality is still there, they follow the idea that the jews must be eradicated, and the rest of the world converted or slaughtered. It is a religion that was originally spread by the sword, and to many people, still should be. There are a great many muslims who embrace peace and tolerance, but their voice is not yet the overwhelming voice of Islam, and it is in other religions. It is all a matter of interpretation and application. I can read the bible and interpret it in very violent ways, and I could certainly go preach genocide in the name of christianity on any corner here in america. But I highly doubt I would find myself preaching state-sanctioned hate to a receptive public. Perhaps if a few more imams suggested that the koran could be interpreted metaphorically and used as a stepping stone towards peace, tolerance, and acceptance, perhaps a more tolerant atmosphere could flourish in that portion of the world.

When was the last name the KKK killed people by hijaaking and crashing airliners, strapping explosive vests on, and chopping the heads off of innocents?

It's 2004 not 1804.

And it plays that crazy moral equivalency game where somehow pointing out that this fuckwad saying what he's saying so close after the events in Russia in recent weeks is somehow understandable and somewhat acceptable because "Hey man, there are racists everywhere..."

You can technically get AIDS from anyone, but if you're fucking some toothless crackwhore in a crackhouse without a condom, your risk is higher and your chances of getting AIDS is greater.

Religious affliation means everything because despite the claims of Islam being the religion of "love" it's very violent, bloody and filled with words of encouragement towards committing acts like this. Islam is a brutal religion. At least Jesus preached love. And the Old Testament preaches forgiveness and tolerance.

Last I checked KKK members are only hooded when hiding their personal identity. Islam treats women as objects, veils them from the world and brutally punishes women for daring to do silly things like "read".

Comparing an Islamic sect to the KKK is simply a way of "levelling the field". Kind of like the way people say "Penis size does not matter..." Yeah, right. It doesn't matter! LOL!

[Edited on Sep 07, 2004 6:35PM]

Under British rule??? What, is England a colonial power still?

Boy howdy. That's a galactic leap. I can't believe you jumped from this data point all the way to ethnic cleansing. Such a response to terrorism has never occurred to me or anyone else I know, and that's not because we don't own Siberia.

Both Islam and Christianity alternately preach kindness and brutality. That's the sign of a truly successful religion; it can be used to justify almost any course of action, yet people who believe in it don't find its contradictions insurmountable.

And if penis size is so important, why are there so many lesbians?

Royal, also, the KKK didn't exist in 1804.

This last statement blissfully ignores two easily proven facts. The first is that by no means do all the Muslim countries in the Middle East teach or support a fundamentalist form of Islam. The Arab Emirates, Qatar, Jordon and Kuwait are progressive and modern countries, that clearly understand "plurality within the world".
More to the point, any statement about all of Islam based on the Middle East is laughable. The Middle East represents about a mere 15% of the world's Muslim population.
There are indeed a great many Muslims who embrace peace and tolerance, and contrary to what you wrote their voice most definitely represents the overwhelming majority.

As for Omar Bakri Mohammed, he is a complete ass. He now lives in N. London because he got kicked out of Saudia Arabia for being such an extremist. I am shocked that he has managed to get his name in the paper at all.

Anybody interested in Bakri should read "Them" by Jon Ronson, a book chronicling Ronson's time visiting various extremist groups. It's a fascinating and, honest to god, funny and touching look at the way these people live their lives, and the roots of their delusions. Highly highly recommended.

Also, I think Ronson produced an audio version of his time with Bakri for This American Life - look it up at www.thislife.org.

Dig.

--opus

Ok. My fundamental problem with all of these religions is. You either believe the Bible (or the Quoran) or you don't. They are supposed to represent the words of god, they are supposed to be historical documents and the masterpiece inspirational messages handed to us as a gift from our God.
It is not up to us to "modernise" and "soften" the sentiments of the perfect being.

"I think what God meant to say" is the most arrogant statement anyone can utter.

God is meant to be all powerful and all knowing. This means that every single decision he ever makes, is the right one. God decided to give us the Bible parts one and two. (or if you're Muslim, God decided to give us the Quoran) It is not up to us to revise it. God, being omniscient, must have known that society will change over the next 2000 years, If he wanted us to adapt our attitudes to fit the society, then he should have revised the bible himself. he should have come down and given us a new bible, because he didn't, we have to assume that his original messages still apply.
Christianity is not based on a system of moral relativism. Things are either right or wrong. This is the fundamental messsage in the ten commandments. This means if it was ok for god to murder thousands of children thousands of years ago, it must still be ok for him to do so now. If his message of "an eye for an eye" and 'the end justifies the means' was suitable back then, then it must still apply today.

I know people are going to disagree saying that the Bible is only a guide and it's open to wrongful interpretation. THATS BECAUSE IT'S FULL OF CONTRADICTIONS. The bibles, part one and two, say so many things that are self contradictory. Contradictions by necessity can not both be true. (a towel can not be both wet and dry at the same time. It can not be both black and white) If the bible contains things that are not true, this means either God made a mistake, or the bible is not a reliable reflection of gods views. God by definition, can not make mistakes therefore the bible is unreliable. Therefore it is not a bible, therefore all bible study is totally useless on anything more than a litererary or philosophical level.

I wish people would wake up. If you're not a christian fundamentalist, then you're not a christian. If you're not an islamic fundamentalist, then you're not a muslim. (by fundamentalist, i mean a person devoted to a strict interpretation of the bible, an interpretation that one believes to be absolutely true)

If all pseudo religous woke up and realised that they are believing in a lie (that there are authoritive religions on this planet) and embraced aetheiesm or personal spirituality, then we might finally start evolving as a unified race in solidarity with each other. Don't be afraid. Even if you are wrong, and there Is a God, he can not possibly hold you responsible for not believing in a book that is so flawed. In fact, God allegedly gives us gifts which we are obliged to use. If he gives us a rational mind and we are unable to accept irrational doctrine, this is his fault, not ours.
Is god fucking with our minds? do you want to believe in such a god?

Actually, I do know how religions work. And the point you're making actually supports my own view. The bible, any bible, is so easy to distort, that to think that it offers us any divine guidance as to how we should live our lives is simply naive.
It is not the word of God and even though people many people agree that it is not the word of god, they still think it's the word of god. (Doublethink). People who believe that the bible is a gift from god can not answer the problem of all the contradictions.
Their only response is "The bible is a work of fallable man, some of it is a distortion" To which my response is. How can you tell which parts are real and which aren't? How can you turn to the bible for any 'revelation' in those circumstances.

I am not saying for definite that there is no god. But i am saying that organised religion teaches us nothing of what this god might be like or what it might want from us.

The fact that "biblical litaralism" is a minority view stands to demonstrate that humanity seems to have made half a leap away from tradition, a leap which has yet to be completed. People are expected to have blind faith in what is basically the biggest academic cop out in the history of intellectual thought.

The problem isn't with believing in a lie, the problem is allowng entire institutions teach a lie to future generations as if it is the truth. The problem is that people only need the lie if they have grown dependent on it.

Religion and spirituality are not mutually inclusive. Dogmatic religion is a major problem. it allows people to control others, in fact, dogmatic religion has been specifically designed and perpetuated for millenia as a means to control others.
"I am happy living a lie" means "i am happy to be controlled"

Religion is not a positive force, even in utilitarian terms, the suffering caused by all religions must outweigh the happiness it brings.
Ireland has recently matured from under the control of the catholic church. There are so many stories of embedded depravity that would drive tears from a stone

Why would you edit out the end of my post which point out exactly what you criticize me for not mentioning? I did not intend to paint all muslims as violent people. The voice of Islam that I am referring to is not the world's population of Muslims, but the religious leaders of Islam, specifically those in the middle east. The fact that so many people are willingly influenced by hate-filled rhetoric in that region is a completely different facet of this conversation, one dominated by the noticeable lack of the amenities that we take for granted in the west, such as free-speech and governments that are not imposed by force.