NationStates Jolt Archive

I was unsure if this warrants as a seperate thread because this comes not as a surprise to me. But this probably would come as a surprise to some and so..here it is..

Shariat law is where the fun begins. A 40% support for shariat is pretty significant even though there is a 41% opposition to it too.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/19/ixportaltop.html
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.

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.

And in Pakistan, a cleric was reported to have put a $1 million (£575,000) bounty on the head of the Danish cartoonist who drew the original pictures.

Last night, Sadiq Khan, the Labour MP involved with the official task force set up after the July attacks, said the findings were "alarming". He added: "Vast numbers of Muslims feel disengaged and alienated from mainstream British society." Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "This poll confirms the widespread opposition among British Muslims to the so-called war on terror."

The most startling finding is the high level of support for applying sharia law in "predom-inantly Muslim" areas of Britain.

Islamic law is used in large parts of the Middle East, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, and is enforced by religious police. Special courts can hand down harsh punishments which can include stoning and amputation.

Forty per cent of the British Muslims surveyed said they backed introducing sharia in parts of Britain, while 41 per cent opposed it. Twenty per cent felt sympathy with the July 7 bombers' motives, and 75 per cent did not. One per cent felt the attacks were "right".

Nearly two thirds thought the video images shown last week of British troops beating Iraqi youths were symptomatic of a wider problem in Iraq. Half did not think the soldiers would be "appropriately punished".

Half of the 500 people surveyed said relations between white Britons and Muslims were getting worse. Only just over half thought the conviction of the cleric Abu Hamza for incitement to murder and race hatred was fair.

Mr Khan, the MP for Tooting, said: "We must redouble our efforts to bring Muslims on board with the mainstream community. For all the efforts made since last July, things do not have appear to have got better."

He agreed with Sir Iqbal that the poll showed Muslims still had a "big gripe" about foreign policy, particularly over the war on terror and Iraq.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "It shows we have a long way to go to win the battle of ideas within some parts of the Muslim community and why it is absolutely vital that we reinforce the voice of moderate Islam wherever possible."

A spokesman for Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, said: "It is critically important to ensure that Muslims, and all faiths, feel part of modern British society. Today's survey indicates we still have a long way to go… [but] we are committed to working with all faiths to ensure we achieve that end."

Fair enough. they have the right to believe what they want.

Not that it has any chance of happening.

Very worrying. Too bad they'll never get it. :)

I am one of those to whom this comes as a surprise.

And so I shall use the correct smiley: :eek: !

Who's ICM by the way?

I think they are these guys.

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/

Why the surprise? If you knew who is the majority group amongst muslims in UK, it would not be that much of a surprise to you.

I'm not surprised, and I laugh at those who are, for not being able to see these things since 9/11.

I think they are these guys.

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/

Why the surprise? If you knew who is the majority group amongst muslims in UK, it would not be that much of a surprise to you.
If you knew how permissive the UK was about all of this up until recently, you wouldn't be surprised, either.

Frankly, the Muslims in Britain have been given a free rein to hate, while it has been government policy not to restrict it.

That's changing now, but only after people died.

Like Hitler, who told the world what he would do in Mein Kampf, these people are making no secret of what they want.

We ignore it or dismiss it at our peril.

Frankly, the Muslims in Britain have been given a free rein to hate, while it has been government policy not to restrict it.
No, no, no...a small minority of Muslims in Britain have been given an almost free rein to hate.

You must not confuse the vast majority with the minority.

I think they are these guys.

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/

Why the surprise? If you knew who is the majority group amongst muslims in UK, it would not be that much of a surprise to you.

I clicked around a bit but too lazy to really search, what does ICM stand for?

No, no, no...a small minority of Muslims in Britain have been given an almost free rein to hate.

You must not confuse the vast majority with the minority.
One of these days, women in your area are going to be arrested for showing their feet and you're gonna say, "It's not Muslims that are doing this to us. It's just a few extremists."

First they came for the jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a jew...

One of these days, women in your area are going to be arrested for showing their feet and you're gonna say, "It's not Muslims that are doing this to us. It's just a few extremists."

First they came for the jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a jew...
Hopefully, the West will wake up. It's in deep slumber.

One of these days, women in your area are going to be arrested for showing their feet and you're gonna say, "It's not Muslims that are doing this to us. It's just a few extremists."

First they came for the jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a jew...

Haha...what a pile of crap.

I live in Northern Ireland. I would be surprised if even 5% of the population was Muslim.

I've learnt from NI. I've learnt that the vast majority of Catholics aren't interested in terrorism through the IRA, I've learnt that the vast majority of Protestants aren't interested in violence through the UVF or whatever; it's just a pity that it's taking so long for the ;mainland' to catch up.

I've learnt that classifying an entire and varied group of people together will do nothing but harm.

Haha, you should see the kind of answers I give when pollsters phone me at home after work. :D

Haha, you should see the kind of answers I give when pollsters phone me at home after work. :D
Muslims tend to take religious matters quite seriously though.

Muslims tend to take religious matters quite seriously though.
You think? I must be hanging out with the wrong ones.

You think? I must be hanging out with the wrong ones.
You must.

No, no, no...a small minority of Muslims in Britain have been given an almost free rein to hate.

You must not confuse the vast majority with the minority.
40% isn't exactly a small minority.

Does anyone here actually know any UK muslims well? Can you confirm the 40% claim? Thought not. :rolleyes:

Does anyone here actually know any UK muslims well? Can you confirm the 40% claim? Thought not. :rolleyes:
No, and I think it should be treated with some sceptisicm, however one shouldn't dismiss it out of hand as "a small minority" either.

who gives a crap if they feel they dont fit into the british society. are you going to change your society because some people dont fit in? i dont go to projects/ghettos/or even the really rich neigborhoods and expect to fit in. the fact is, i know i wouldnt fit in, and i dont complain about it, well off topic, but i was having some rage.

{continues to mumble to self}

Sharia law came close to passing in Ontario too. Thank God it didn't. I'm not a firm believer in different laws for different ethnicities... it smacks of racism. Do you know who was most vocal in opposing Sharia law in Ontario? Muslim Women.

Sharia law came close to passing in Ontario too. Thank God it didn't. I'm not a firm believer in different laws for different ethnicities... it smacks of racism. Do you know who was most vocal in opposing Sharia law in Ontario? Muslim Women.
Well one would think so. It hits them the hardest.

One of these days, women in your area are going to be arrested for showing their feet and you're gonna say, "It's not Muslims that are doing this to us. It's just a few extremists."

First they came for the jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a jew...

Yes, so let's nip the problem in the bud by exterminating every single Muslim, man woman and child.

:rolleyes:

It's not entirely possible for this to happen -- but still, they asked Muslims, not the general public, so this poll was off from making it a "OMG UK IS IN DANGER!!" reaction or whatever.

Yes, so let's nip the problem in the bud by exterminating every single Muslim, man woman and child.

:rolleyes:
Yep cause thats exactly what he was suggesting we should do, and not in anyway profesing concern that supposedly 40% of UK muslims want to put in place thocratic laws.

It's not entirely possible for this to happen -- but still, they asked Muslims, not the general public, so this poll was off from making it a "OMG UK IS IN DANGER!!" reaction or whatever.
Indeed. 40% of a minority (at this point) is hardly a huge figure. It is, nevertheless, reason for concern.

It's not entirely possible for this to happen -- but still, they asked Muslims, not the general public, so this poll was off from making it a "OMG UK IS IN DANGER!!" reaction or whatever.
Why would they be asking non-muslims if they would like to institute muslim religous law? One would think their response would be obvious.

Why would they be asking non-muslims if they would like to institute muslim religous law? One would think their response would be obvious.
True, yet what he/she meant is that 40% of a rather small minority is not really a substantial percentage of the UK's total population.

Frankly, the Muslims in Britain have been given a free rein to hate, while it has been government policy not to restrict it.
Don't you have all kinds of groups in the US who have "free reigns to hate"?

Don't you have all kinds of groups in the US who have "free reigns to hate"?

The Ku Klux Klan, Westborough Baptist Church, the PTL Ministries... the list goes on and on. But it's okay because they're not dirty brown-skinned Muslims.

The Ku Klux Klan, Westborough Baptist Church, the PTL Ministries... the list goes on and on. But it's okay because they're not dirty brown-skinned Muslims.
Yup, thought so. Just more war mongering, and over dramatic rhetoric by DK.

Don't you have all kinds of groups in the US who have "free reigns to hate"?
Seeing as DK's location is listed as london what do hate groups with in th eUS have to do with his comment?

Seeing as DK's location is listed as london what do hate groups with in th eUS have to do with his comment?

It has to do with how the West and DK in particular likes to scream and shout about Muslims as if they were alien invaders out to devour humanity, while conveniently ignoring Christian and Jewish extremists or copping out with the "They don't represent" excuse.

It has to do with how the West and DK in particular likes to scream and shout about Muslims as if they were alien invaders out to devour humanity, while conveniently ignoring Christian and Jewish extremists or copping out with the "They don't represent" excuse.

You can't be a christian extemist in the UK. It's impossible.

So stop being a twat.

-snip-
Apart from the fact that he actually lives in the States (Washington, I believe?) of course.

Seeing as DK's location is listed as london what do hate groups with in th eUS have to do with his comment?
DK is an American and is on vacation in London. Apparently he is all for freedom of speech in the US:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10361514&postcount=91

But is apparently against freedom of speech for Muslims in the UK?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10450818&postcount=7

Therefore my comment above.

DK is an American and is on vacation in London. Apparently he is all for freedom of speech in the US:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10361514&postcount=91

But is apparently against freedom of speech for Muslims in the UK?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10450818&postcount=7

Therefore my comment above.
All right that makes more sense than.

You can't be a christian extemist in the UK. It's impossible.

So stop being a twat.
Christian extremist is not allowed in the UK?

Nice profanity BTW. :(

Apart from the fact that he actually lives in the States (Washington, I believe?) of course.
Virginia. Previously he was Whispering Legs, among others.

You can't be a christian extemist in the UK. It's impossible.

So stop being a twat.

So the British National Party doesn't exist? Take your own advice.

:rolleyes:

So the British National Party doesn't exist? Take your own advice.

:rolleyes:

They are not christian extremists.

Possibly they are racist. But that is beside the point. Constitutionaly, christian extremity is impossible.

I was unsure if this warrants as a seperate thread because this comes not as a surprise to me. But this probably would come as a surprise to some and so..here it is..

Shariat law is where the fun begins. A 40% support for shariat is pretty significant even though there is a 41% opposition to it too.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/19/ixportaltop.html

Half of the 500 people

Wow! I knew the UK was a fairly small place, but I had no idea that its entire Muslim population consisted of only 500 people!

Yay statistics!

The next statistical trick: doing a "survey" of 500 Americans to determine who the next President is! I mean why bother with voting if someones opinion can be statistically inferred, right?

Shit, I won't even bother replying to this thread again. I'll just assume that statistically, anyone who disagrees with me has an IQ of less than 50.

Christian extremist is not allowed in the UK?

Nice profanity BTW. :(

It's not possible under Bliar's new laws.

And it wasn't possible under the old laws.

The only difference is that you can't pretend that you are an extemist anymore.

They are not christian extremists.

Possibly they are racist. But that is beside the point. Constitutionaly, christian extremity is impossible.
Is this account about Christian extremists in the UK accurate?

British Theaters Succumb to Christian Extremists (http://atheism.about.com/b/a/156872.htm)

Christians extremists who object to "Jerry Springer - The Opera" have managed to bully theaters into not showing it. This means that the production company won't be able to hold it's nationwide tour in Britain.

Is this account about Christian extremists in the UK accurate?
I can tell you that it would certainly have made much bigger waves if it had been Muslims...

Is this account about Christian extremists in the UK accurate?

British Theaters Succumb to Christian Extremists (http://atheism.about.com/b/a/156872.htm)

Christians extremists who object to "Jerry Springer - The Opera" have managed to bully theaters into not showing it. This means that the production company won't be able to hold it's nationwide tour in Britain.

That has nothing to do with the state religion.

If some atheists are to stupid to realize that, so what.

I can tell you that it would certainly have made much bigger waves if it had been Muslims...

Eh? Bollicks.

I have to say that I understand the Muslims plight but I wanted to bring up three interesting issues.

1. Who in the west actually goes to the middle east to see for themselves the way of life of the people because it is not acceptable to believe in what the media says.

2. There is definetely a lack of understanding amongst westerners in relation to the islamic world because most do tours like "See Italy in one day" for example and that they do not develop enough time to absorb the foreign culture and take back with themselves the positive parts... which leads to ignorance and misunderstanding because of a lack of empathy. The same goes for Muslims in the middle east because governments do not allow their people to be associated with western culture so they also have a lack of understanding about the west.

3. Muslim women that where the hijab in the west are not "radicals". In fact the west should see it as a good thing because, according to well known scholar Tariq Ramadan, it means that Muslim women are feeling safe to practice their religion (without religious authorities in eg Iran watching over them) and are finding ways to incorporate themselves into western culture and add the positive aspects of the islamic culture but westerners tend to think that they are doing the opposite and therefore alienate these people in society.

I can tell you that it would certainly have made much bigger waves if it had been Muslims...

That's a fact. The Western Press is going by the theory of "It's More Evil if Muslims are Involved."

Eh? Bollicks.
You don't think this would have spawned at least three threads and dozens of editorials about how the Muslims just don't get our free society?

You don't think this would have spawned at least three threads and dozens of editorials about how the Muslims just don't get our free society?

No. I don't.

I remember the book burnings in the 80s. That was a non-event. As were the death threats.

Apparently the common law only applies to christians.

You don't think this would have spawned at least three threads and dozens of editorials about how the Muslims just don't get our free society?

You mean... like on NS General right now? :eek:

The Muslim population in the uK is about 2 million, they (ICM) asked 500, not I think a fair representation.

But as the Muslim population only makes up 3% of the UK population, it is vitually impossible for them to get this into law.

I remember the book burnings in the 80s. That was a non-event. As were the death threats.
That was quite a story then. And that was the Eighties.

We're in the terror-days now. I assure you that people are actively looking to find stories like that. Even if their names might be Michelle Malkin.

That was quite a story then. And that was the Eighties.

We're in the terror-days now. I assure you that people are actively looking to find stories like that. Even if their names might be Michelle Malkin.

It's funny too, because I was in edinburgh last year walking down the royal mile.

And as I walked there was a whole demonstration shouting that "americans should be shot at birth!!!" I am not sure why, but they were burning flags and whatnot.

I'm a reiver so I don't give a shit. But I was with people from other countries, and they asked me why this could be allowed.

I told them that Kristalnacht was perfectly legal too.

Wow! I knew the UK was a fairly small place, but I had no idea that its entire Muslim population consisted of only 500 people!

Yay statistics!

The next statistical trick: doing a "survey" of 500 Americans to determine who the next President is! I mean why bother with voting if someones opinion can be statistically inferred, right?

Shit, I won't even bother replying to this thread again. I'll just assume that statistically, anyone who disagrees with me has an IQ of less than 50.
Crack a book sometime. If the sample is done properly (ie not biased) and the questions aren't leading the error would be quite managable. Easily to the point that a major fraction of a population holding a belief is reliable. For a population the size of the muslims in the UK 500 might well be very acceptable. Where a survey of 500 americans in a population of 320 million, and about 100 million likely voters, even a well considered sample will have too much error to be useful. Certainly considering the margin of victory in the last 2 presidential elections.

There are reasons to question the credibility of such a poll, was there selection bias? (how did they know who the muslims were for instance, were the questions leading, etc.) That they didn't do a survey of every muslim as a point of criticism just speaks poorly of your ability to make your case and break theirs. If they're worth anything (ie not kooks), they'll make their questionaire, and at least their general methodology available.

Hopefully, the West will wake up. It's in deep slumber.

It's all because of political correctness the west must start standingup to it's own culture and stop being so scared of saying 'we live like this over here so get used to it'.

I hate Peter Constello (the australian tresurer) but at least he had the guts to say the the mueslims in australia should except we have a culture aswell.

The Muslim population in the uK is about 2 million, they (ICM) asked 500, not I think a fair representation.

But as the Muslim population only makes up 3% of the UK population, it is vitually impossible for them to get this into law.

Ah, good old stats and how we read them. 99.9% of cat owners we asked
said their cats prefered it.
BTW, 100% of our family want the government to give us 6 months holiday per annum

Eh, i'm dubious - the poll has a bias in the first place since it was conducted by the Telegraph, one of those papers who saw immigration as the most important issue in the UK last election.

It all depends on how they phrase the questions. Countless times they'll ask a seemingly normal question, then once they've got the answers twist it a little to suit the needs of the people who conducted the survey.

For example, a question may say "Do you believe that premature babies with little chance of surviving without intense medical supervision should be cared for at the tax payers expense?". Then when the results come in, they'll report "40% of people think that premature babies are a burden on the state and should be left to die"

Ah, good old stats and how we read them. 99.9% of cat owners we asked
said their cats prefered it.
BTW, 100% of our family want the government to give us 6 months holiday per annum

And let's not forget that 50% of Hindus in the UK would love to have the caste system instated there as well, since we're playing the worst kind of lie (Mark Twain reference) to make a religion look evil.

:p

Even if the survey is genuine I'm guessing most of the Muslims who voted for Sharia law were doing so to protest the cartoons rather than from any real desire to be judged by it.

If you knew how permissive the UK was about all of this up until recently, you wouldn't be surprised, either.

Frankly, the Muslims in Britain have been given a free rein to hate, while it has been government policy not to restrict it.

That's changing now, but only after people died.

Like Hitler, who told the world what he would do in Mein Kampf, these people are making no secret of what they want.

We ignore it or dismiss it at our peril.


I totally agree.

Is this account about Christian extremists in the UK accurate?

British Theaters Succumb to Christian Extremists (http://atheism.about.com/b/a/156872.htm)

Christians extremists who object to "Jerry Springer - The Opera" have managed to bully theaters into not showing it. This means that the production company won't be able to hold it's nationwide tour in Britain.


Sikh extremists also stormed a play in Birmingham because they objected to the content.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4107437.stm

I think that arguing over which extremist group does or does not exist in any given country is irrelevant.

The point is this: they are extremists. In their worldview anything that offends them is morally wrong because it is an offense to God. Therefore action must be taken to stop whatever it is that is causing an offence. The people who are causing the offence are, at best, terribly misguided and need to be stopped. Or, at worst, terribly evil and need to be killed. You can apply the same kind of thinking to racial extremists, just substitute 'religion/God' for 'x race'.

And that is the problem with extremism and that is why extremism must be resisted whenever or where-ever it is found. Apart from tactical reasons, it does not matter who the extremists are - whether BNP, KKK, Muslim, Sikh or Christian. The point is that they are extremists.

Eh, i'm dubious - the poll has a bias in the first place since it was conducted by the Telegraph, one of those papers who saw immigration as the most important issue in the UK last election.

No, it was conducted by ICM. Presumably, that's ICM Research.


It all depends on how they phrase the questions. Countless times they'll ask a seemingly normal question, then once they've got the answers twist it a little to suit the needs of the people who conducted the survey.

If it was by ICM Research and not some other body, then it is a perfectly valid poll and properly conducted and your concerns would be misplaced. That said, I couldn't find it on the ICM Research website.

, since we're playing the worst kind of lie (Mark Twain reference) to make a religion look evil.

:p


Religion is evil. We' all be better off without it.

Religion is evil. We' all be better off without it.
And yet, it is not our job to tell others what to think. Let them believe in god, lest we become just like them.

Fair enough. they have the right to believe what they want.

Not that it has any chance of happening.
No, this is not OK. They need to be integrated, and educated out of thinking like this.

Does anyone here actually know any UK muslims well? Can you confirm the 40% claim? Thought not. :rolleyes:
You think that personal anecdotal evidence is more representative and trustworthy than statistics collected by experts?

Yes, so let's nip the problem in the bud by exterminating every single Muslim, man woman and child.

Do you know how to do anything other than mount straw-man attacks?

The Ku Klux Klan, Westborough Baptist Church, the PTL Ministries... the list goes on and on. But it's okay because they're not dirty brown-skinned Muslims.
Oh cool. More groundless accusations of racism. Deep Kimchi is not white.

It has to do with how the West and DK in particular likes to scream and shout about Muslims as if they were alien invaders out to devour humanity, while conveniently ignoring Christian and Jewish extremists or copping out with the "They don't represent" excuse.
I don't ignore Christian and Jewish extremists. Why should I? I'm an atheist. All Abrahamic religions are the same to me. I only am more concerned about the Muslim extremists because they kill more people.

It's a great mystery to me how many people on the "left" (using the term lightly, because real leftists support feminism and oppose religious oppression) have such a double standard on religious extremism. I've actually heard some people say that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks.

So the British National Party doesn't exist? Take your own advice.
Do you live in the UK? The BNP are not particularly Christian. They are just a standard racist, fascist party.

Wow! I knew the UK was a fairly small place, but I had no idea that its entire Muslim population consisted of only 500 people!

That's how surveys are done. They take a random sample of people. Surveying everyone is not practical.

I can tell you that it would certainly have made much bigger waves if it had been Muslims...
That's because any Muslim extremists would probably be holding up signs threatening physical violence and putting a price on the writer's head.

That's a fact. The Western Press is going by the theory of "It's More Evil if Muslims are Involved."
The Murdoch media, yes, certainly. They're racist. But I don't think that the more sensible media, like the BBC, take this attitude.

And let's not forget that 50% of Hindus in the UK would love to have the caste system instated there as well, since we're playing the worst kind of lie (Mark Twain reference) to make a religion look evil.

Ah yes, Hinduism - possibly the most racist mainstream religion of all.

Even if the survey is genuine I'm guessing most of the Muslims who voted for Sharia law were doing so to protest the cartoons rather than from any real desire to be judged by it.
That's quite a presumption to make. I imagine that most of the Muslims surveyed knew perfectly well what "implementing Sharia law" meant.

That's because any Muslim extremists would probably be holding up signs threatening physical violence and putting a price on the writer's head.
And you accuse others of making groundless accusations.

By the way...who wants to see a movie about Lesbians in Bollywood (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/235098.stm)?

And you accuse others of making groundless accusations.
It's not groundless. I'm going by empirical evidence. Remember those Muslims protesting outside Denmark's embassy in London? ("Slay those who insult Islam", etc.) Those same people would probably also be protesting outside a theatre showing a blasphemous play, and holding up similar signs.

Remember those Muslims protesting outside Denmark's embassy in London? ("Slay those who insult Islam", etc.)
Remember those Muslims protesting in Germany? No? Well, there you go.
What about France? Spain maybe?
The Muslims all over the UK who weren't in that particular (LeT-organised) protest? The Muslims perhaps whose official organisation called for those advocating violence to be arrested and charged?

That's quite a presumption to make. I imagine that most of the Muslims surveyed knew perfectly well what "implementing Sharia law" meant.

They're being surveyed at a time when Muslims are feeling seriously pissed off towards the current legal system, if this survey is done again in a few months and with a larger sample size then I'm guessing fewer will vte for it.

Ah yes, Hinduism - possibly the most racist mainstream religion of all..


I'm guessing that was a joke...never heard of Orthodox Judaism?

No, it was conducted by ICM. Presumably, that's ICM Research.

If it was by ICM Research and not some other body, then it is a perfectly valid poll and properly conducted and your concerns would be misplaced. That said, I couldn't find it on the ICM Research website.

Ah, I must have misread the article - it said it was conducted for The Telegraph, not by The Telegraph. My mistake.

I assume ICM research then are an independent body that try to be objective as possible, so are fairly trustworthy?

I'm still not suprised, but neither am I very worried about the numbers though. The other statistics seem to suggest that Muslims are more loyal to Britain than most non-muslims - I bet if you did a survey on the population as a whole you'd get less than 91% who said they were loyal to Britain. We seem to have a lot of people living here who constantly go on about how bad a place Britain is and how everywhere else is perfect - even Gilbert and Sullivan mocked such people, so it's not a new thing.

Again, I think you'd probably get more than 1% of people who sympathised with the July 7th bombers if you asked the whole population. Some people just really do have no views other than 'We're wrong, everyone else is right', like a friend I once had who said Britain should be far more ashamed than Germany because we used concentration camps before them.

I also think if you asked christians living in non-christian countries whether they would like to have more christian based laws, you'd get at least 40% agreeing, probably more.

Remember those Muslims protesting in Germany? No? Well, there you go.
What about France? Spain maybe?
The Muslims all over the UK who weren't in that particular (LeT-organised) protest? The Muslims perhaps whose official organisation called for those advocating violence to be arrested and charged?
You think I'm generalising about all Muslims here? I made it painfully clear that I'm only taking about the extremists in the UK.

How about the perfectly peaceful and respectful protest by the Muslims of Ireland. There were no death threats, no violence, no foolish pride; just an expression of desire to coexist peacefully with non-Muslims. I respect that, and I believe that it was representative of most Muslims in Ireland.

In every single on of these debates why do you assume that we people who don't agree with your submission to Sharia law have a double standard for Christians, or that we're a bunch of Islamophobic, generalising racist bastards?

I'm guessing that was a joke...never heard of Orthodox Judaism?
I've heard of it, but I'm unaware of anything in it that is as bad as the caste system. As a leftist, I'm opposed to anyone who advocates a caste system.

It's a great mystery to me how many people on the "left" (using the term lightly, because real leftists support feminism and oppose religious oppression) have such a double standard on religious extremism. I've actually heard some people say that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks.
How many on the left are saying "that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks"?

Can you provide one quote? How many is many?

How many on the left are saying "that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks"?

Can you provide one quote? How many is many?

I've seen one person say this on here, on the grounds that a few killings were not comparable to the spreading of an anti-intellectual attitude which will inevitably lead to slower scientific progress and thus far more suffering and deaths.

But he was quickly bashed by left and right alike. Hardly 'many'.

ICM comes up with a lot of weird shit, and its polls, whilst interesting, should never be taken too seriously.

Take this Crime And Punishment (http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2005/NOTW%20-%20Crime%20and%20Punishment/notw-crime&punishment.asp) survey from Nov 2005.

46% of Britons would approve if the Police started to routinely carry guns. 70% think that the courts are too soft on criminals and too soft on their sentencing. Yet 69% haven't been affected by a crime in the past 5 years and 80% haven't felt felt their personal safety was threatened or that you would be a victim of crime in the past year. Added on this that 46% feel that the dealth penalty should be reintroduced.

The problem with ICM polls is that they interview people after work then they the interviewee will muck them around. On top of that they only survey 1000 people out of a population 60 million. And also because they are privately comissioned polls the newspaper can withhold any infomation they like. So you don't get to see questions that wouldn't back up their point and you don't get to see what question was asked or what options were given apart from what the newspaper deems to show you. And believe me, these questions and answers can be heavily biased and make an interviewee much more likely to opt for a certain answer. Of course ICM releases the polls after about a month, but by that time every ones forgotten about the poll.

edit: and then of course there are the questions that beget certain anwsers eg.
Are you stupid?
a) No - 97%
b) Yes - 1%
c) Don't Know - 1%
d) Refused to answer - 1%

ICM comes up with a lot of weird shit, and its polls, whilst interesting, should never be taken too seriously.

Take this Crime And Punishment (http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2005/NOTW%20-%20Crime%20and%20Punishment/notw-crime&punishment.asp) survey from Nov 2005.

46% of Britons would approve if the Police started to routinely carry guns. 70% think that the courts are too soft on criminals and too soft on their sentencing. Yet 69% haven't been affected by a crime in the past 5 years and 80% haven't felt felt their personal safety was threatened or that you would be a victim of crime in the past year. Added on this that 46% feel that the dealth penalty should be reintroduced.


Actually those statistics don't suprise me. The general public is incredibly ignorant when it comes to law and order - i've met so many people who just say "Execution should be mandatory for shoplifting!" or "Murder, regardless of the circumstances, should always warrant life imprisonment!"

They don't understand that it has being proven that harsher sentances just plain don't decrease crime, especially in cases of murder when person either makes a resolve to kill someone no matter what or does it in the heat of the moment, and doesn't rationally think 'Hmm..I better not, because now i'll get 20 years in prison instead of 10 if I get caught. Nah, i'll just try and make friends"

If we always did what people wanted in regards to punishment, we'd still be chopping off hands of thieves, hacking off the balls of rapists and torturing murderers to death. Even prison has being proven to not work - it's political suicide to replace it with something more effective, because people seem to care more about retribution than reform or deterrance.

In every single on of these debates why do you assume that we people who don't agree with your submission to Sharia law have a double standard for Christians, or that we're a bunch of Islamophobic, generalising racist bastards?
Because it's been made painfully clear to me that most of the time, that is exactly what it is.

Just look at how desperate people are to hang on to the faint notion that their fantasy of a war of the cultures might come true afterall - in this very thread. No one bothered to ask about the sort of questions that were asked, no one bothered to even define what Sharia means.

But despite never having stated that I support Islamism, despite never having made excuses for violent behaviour on any side - I get accused of "dhimmitude". Or of submitting to Sharia, despite being an atheist myself.
There has to be a motive if people want to shut up the few voices of reason in favour of hate and confrontation.

Exactly, so why's everyone getting their knickers in a twist about the Muslims want Sharia law, when the rest of Britain would probably introduce something like Sharia law if they could.

And yet, it is not our job to tell others what to think. Let them believe in god, lest we become just like them.


OOOoops. True. I accept my admonishment.

*slaps self on back of the wrist*

I've seen one person say this on here, on the grounds that a few killings were not comparable to the spreading of an anti-intellectual attitude which will inevitably lead to slower scientific progress and thus far more suffering and deaths.

But he was quickly bashed by left and right alike. Hardly 'many'.
The bashing by both sides is definitely appropriate. To suggest that "many" leftists somehow support "that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks", is poppycock.

I assume ICM research then are an independent body that try to be objective as possible, so are fairly trustworthy?

Yeah, I think so. They make cash by selling research, so it's not in their interest to produce biased reseach - they wouldn't have any credibility and no-one would buy their services any more.


I'm still not suprised, but neither am I very worried about the numbers though.

Nah, the numbers are fine. I just checked 'em out here ... http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

On the basis of the ICM numbers you can be 95% sure (with a 5% swing either way - so anywhere between 90 to 100% sure) that the conclusion is representative of the population as a whole.




The other statistics seem to suggest that Muslims are more loyal to Britain than most non-muslims - I bet if you did a survey on the population as a whole you'd get less than 91% who said they were loyal to Britain. We seem to have a lot of people living here who constantly go on about how bad a place Britain is and how everywhere else is perfect - even Gilbert and Sullivan mocked such people, so it's not a new thing.

Again, I think you'd probably get more than 1% of people who sympathised with the July 7th bombers if you asked the whole population. Some people just really do have no views other than 'We're wrong, everyone else is right', like a friend I once had who said Britain should be far more ashamed than Germany because we used concentration camps before them.

I also think if you asked christians living in non-christian countries whether they would like to have more christian based laws, you'd get at least 40% agreeing, probably more.

We can't possibly know or assume that until we do a survey, so I've got no real response here.

ICM comes up with a lot of weird shit, and its polls, whilst interesting, should never be taken too seriously.

The problem with ICM polls is that they interview people after work then they the interviewee will muck them around.


If so, then that's seriously bad practice as it will generate a in-built bias.

If so, then that's seriously bad practice as it will generate a in-built bias.uh... you realise interviewee is difference from interviewer? Just thinking you must misread the word or thought that it was a typo.

93% of men want to sleep with Angelina Jolie, doesnt mean it will ever happen. And we all know 87% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Yeah, I think so. They make cash by selling research, so it's not in their interest to produce biased reseach - they wouldn't have any credibility and no-one would buy their services any more.Pfft, like I said, they make work in an unbiased manner, but surveys can be extremely biased. How many people do you think would admit to someone other the phone that the July 7th bombings were justified? Stats and surveys are skilled arts which can used, like the Bible, to justify virtually any position.

edit: The company may not have a specific bias (because that would be bad for business), but that does not mean that any given survey is free of bias. See my point about asking the question 'Are you stupid?' or 'Do you think tax rates should be lowered?'.

A survey for the Guardian could have a liberal bias, whereas a survey for the Telegraph could have a conservative bias. And if they did then that would be good for business, because both newspapers could flaunt to their readers these incredible statistics.

DK is an American and is on vacation in London. Apparently he is all for freedom of speech in the US:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10361514&postcount=91

But is apparently against freedom of speech for Muslims in the UK?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10450818&postcount=7

Therefore my comment above.
Supporting the freedom to say things that might offend someone is hardly the same as supporting the freedom to incite violence.

How many on the left are saying "that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks"?

Can you provide one quote? How many is many?
Ever read the Socialist Worker?

They're being surveyed at a time when Muslims are feeling seriously pissed off towards the current legal system, if this survey is done again in a few months and with a larger sample size then I'm guessing fewer will vte for it.
Irrelevant.

No, this is not OK. They need to be integrated, and educated out of thinking like this.

<snip>

It's a great mystery to me how many people on the "left" (using the term lightly, because real leftists support feminism and oppose religious oppression) have such a double standard on religious extremism. I've actually heard some people say that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks.
Word.

uh... you realise interviewee is difference from interviewer? Just thinking you must misread the word or thought that it was a typo.


What I meant was this ...

If you only interview people after work - presumably work is sometime after 5pm, then you are missing out people who work shift patterns. Policemen. Airport workers. Doctors.

And you are misssing out people who have hobbies.

And if you only phone people then you can't sample people who don't have a phone, like me for example. I have a mobile phone but the number is not listed in any publicly available place.

That's what I meant by inbuilt bias - rather than getting confused btwn interviewee and interviewer. And as for mucking about, you take a sufficiently large sample size from the population as a whole to overcome that.

Pfft, like I said, they make work in an unbiased manner, but surveys can be extremely biased.


Meh. I guess you believe surveys or you don't. Personally, tend not to pay too much attention to big broad surveys and pay more attention to little, focused surveys.

Like, e.g. I have 2,000 subscribers to a newsletter in a defined geographic area on a specific focused subject. I get responses from say, 250 people by email, web survey, telephone, face to face interview at different times of the day/week/month across a range of socio-economic groups and racial backgrounds.

That's a survey that's worth believing. Then it's just a question of how you interpret the results!!!

It's a great mystery to me how many people on the "left" (using the term lightly, because real leftists support feminism and oppose religious oppression) have such a double standard on religious extremism. I've actually heard some people say that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks.

I fail to see the double standard here - where exactly is said that the killing of hundreds of people is a good thing because muslems are doing it ?
I will even go as far as to assume said person also objects to indoctrination by muslems.

"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" - I think you could find plenty of non-Muslims who feel like this too.

ps. 42.357% of statistics are made up and 99.765% are selectively gathered and represented - particularly those published by partisan newspapers (ie any newspaper)

I'm sure it's been said, but polls aren't really a very accurate measure of things.

They didn't poll 100% of the Muslims in the UK, therefore, the "40% of Muslims in the UK" is a false statement. It should be "40% of the Muslims polled".

If they went to a conservative Mosque and polled 100 Muslims there, the results would be radically different than if they went to an affluent suburb and polled 100 Muslims there.

I'm guessing this is just rabble-rousing.

Supporting the freedom to say things that might offend someone is hardly the same as supporting the freedom to incite violence.
Given that you are posting for the first time here on NS, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you cannot understand the significance of my posts regarding DK's apparent contradictions in regards to freedom of speech.

Ever read the Socialist Worker?
The odd time, but I have never seen such a statement posted anywhere by the left media. Perhaps you could provide a link that would support your claim?

I'm sure it's been said, but polls aren't really a very accurate measure of things.

They didn't poll 100% of the Muslims in the UK, therefore, the "40% of Muslims in the UK" is a false statement. It should be "40% of the Muslims polled".

If they went to a conservative Mosque and polled 100 Muslims there, the results would be radically different than if they went to an affluent suburb and polled 100 Muslims there.

I'm guessing this is just rabble-rousing.

Yeah, it was only a poll of 500 people and they don't really explain where they polled from. It's the same as any of the polls about the economy or the president or social issues...they're always too small and engineered to get the response desired.

Now, if it were a poll of 50,000 Muslims, I would be concerned. But given the small size of the poll, I'm sure it would be just as easy to show that 40% of Christians support Biblical law even though that's a ridiculous concept.

Irrelevant.

It is extremely relavant my friend, would you care to explain how it isn't?

I'm guessing that was a joke...never heard of Orthodox Judaism?

Well, I know it has the whole "chosen race" thing, but I didn't know it had anything like the Hindue caste system.

How many on the left are saying "that Christians teaching intelligent design is worse than Muslims killing hundreds of people at a time in attacks"?

Can you provide one quote? How many is many?
Yes, I know it was the poster Dakini who said it, and wasn't particularly getting ridiculed for that opinion. In fact I even remember one or two people backing her up on it. I'll try to find quotes and links.

But the point is, it is typical of a widespread attitude that liberal people appear to think that Muslim beliefs deserve more respect than Christian beliefs. It's surely not such a bizarre thought to believe that both religions should be held to the same standard. When Christian conservatives whine about things that offend them, we quickly tell them to suck it up or ignore it, because we have the right to offend them. This is how it should be IMO. But when Muslim conservatives whine about things that offend them, too many liberals say, "hey maybe they have a point, let's shut up and stop offending them". Why, just because they're a statistical minority? They're still religious looneys! More consistency would be nice.

Exactly, so why's everyone getting their knickers in a twist about the Muslims want Sharia law, when the rest of Britain would probably introduce something like Sharia law if they could.
No, they wouldn't. Britons in general are quite a secular people.

Because it's been made painfully clear to me that most of the time, that is exactly what it is.
Actually most of the time it is not. Most of the time it is people who wish to defend freedom of speech even if that speech is impolite, stupid, offensive and blasphemous.

I'm especially outraged that every time I come on here bashing Muslim extremists, so many liberals assume that I am going to defend Christian fundamentalists.

No, they wouldn't. Britons in general are quite a secular people.I meant in terms of harsh punishments. Such as the laws on stealing. First time you're caught you lose your right hand, second time you lose your left hand, and third time you lose your head.

I meant in terms of harsh punishments. Such as the laws on stealing. First time you're caught you lose your right hand, second time you lose your left hand, and third time you lose your head.

How can you steal for a third time if you've got no hands?

But the point is, it is typical of a widespread attitude that liberal people appear to think that Muslim beliefs deserve more respect than Christian beliefs.

The statement you quoted says nothing of the sort. It merely states that some people - including myself - think that deliberately indoctrinating children to embrace dogma is a more heinous crime than what the terrorists are doing. Which I think is right - since one of the main causes for terrorist attacks *is* indoctrination. Deliberately setting out to become what you despise is more despicable than already being it.

How can you steal for a third time if you've got no hands?Maybe using your mouth... and it's still possible to pick somethings up with just your arms... hey, I don't know. I didn't write the rules.

Hopefully, the West will wake up. It's in deep slumber.



indeed.

if members your family living in iraq, were being murdered and beaten by soldiers from your own country (Britain), then certainly you would feel great pain and disgust. i disagree with extremism, which includes both sides of the war -
muslim extremists and christian right-wing fundamentalist extremists, but u must understand where such feelings arise from.

however i also believe that both religions are quite extreme in themselves, and i disagree with the way in which both sides close their mind to everything other than what they've been taught. but thats another thread

The statement you quoted says nothing of the sort. It merely states that some people - including myself - think that deliberately indoctrinating children to embrace dogma is a more heinous crime than what the terrorists are doing. Which I think is right - since one of the main causes for terrorist attacks *is* indoctrination. Deliberately setting out to become what you despise is more despicable than already being it.

Or that you are a lunatic, with no sense of perspective and out of touch with reality.

Either one.

lol ^

obviously to terrorise is wrong, but desperation, greed and ignorance are the main things which force people to terrorise. thats exactly why right wing christians and muslims try to fuck up each others way of life.

at the end of the day, people need to accept others' views , even if they dont accept them, just accept that they have different views, and just get on with life

Or that you are a lunatic, with no sense of perspective and out of touch with reality.

Either one.

Or that one sees a difference between "being alive" and "living".
However, what do *you* think causes terrorism then ?

Or that one sees a difference between "being alive" and "living".
However, what do *you* think causes terrorism then ?

No,no, I take it all back.

Terrorism is obviously caused by teaching creationism in arkansas. No question.

No,no, I take it all back.

Terrorism is obviously caused by teaching creationism in arkansas. No question.

*sighs*
Tell me.. what do they teach those terrorists ? Tolerance, acceptance. critical thinking and having an open mind ? Or dogmatic reasoning ?

Ah yes, Hinduism - possibly the most racist mainstream religion of all.

Hinduism is not racist. Many Hindus are (just like every other group of people in the world, I might add).

The Ku Klux Klan, Westborough Baptist Church, the PTL Ministries... the list goes on and on. But it's okay because they're not dirty brown-skinned Muslims.

Why yes we do have many groups here who hate damn near anything and everything but can you tell me the last time an U.S. citizen not acting as a member of the armed forces went into a different country and killed it people? For that matter when was the last time you heard of a hate crime against a muslin happening in the U.S.A.? just a question.:rolleyes:

Why yes we do have many groups here who hate damn near anything and everything but can you tell me the last time an U.S. citizen not acting as a member of the armed forces went into a different country and killed it people? For that matter when was the last time you heard of a hate crime against a muslin happening in the U.S.A.? just a question.:rolleyes:
Seconded.

*sighs*
Tell me.. what do they teach those terrorists ? Tolerance, acceptance. critical thinking and having an open mind ? Or dogmatic reasoning ?

Creationism, in a classroom, in arkansas. I just told you what they teach them.

Seriously, if you think you haven't been indoctrinated by the education system yourself, you are just self-delusional. But apparently you can't appreciate that fact. So this whole discussion is a waste of time.

I am glad you agree with me that the koran is basically evil though.

Creationism, in a classroom, in arkansas. I just told you what they teach them.

Seriously, if you think you haven't been indoctrinated by the education system yourself, you are just self-delusional. But apparently you can't appreciate that fact. So this whole discussion is a waste of time.

I am glad you agree with me that the koran is basically evil though.
It's not evil in itself, but its interpretations can be very close to it.

BTW, are you French? Just asking because of your nation name.

It's not evil in itself, but its interpretations can be very close to it.

He's the one that claims that indoctrination leads to terrorism. I would assume that radical muslims are indoctrinated with the koran. QED.



BTW, are you French? Just asking because of your nation name.

mais non

Creationism, in a classroom, in arkansas. I just told you what they teach them.

Yawn. Coward.

Seriously, if you think you haven't been indoctrinated by the education system yourself, you are just self-delusional.

Who says I do not realise it ?

But apparently you can't appreciate that fact. So this whole discussion is a waste of time.

As long as you refuse to be serious: correct. I may be using some hyperbole; but so do the people that make such a big fuss of terrorism- an area where people have *really* lost all sense of perspective.

I am glad you agree with me that the koran is basically evil though.
Stop putting words in my mouth.

Why yes we do have many groups here who hate damn near anything and everything but can you tell me the last time an U.S. citizen not acting as a member of the armed forces went into a different country and killed it people? For that matter when was the last time you heard of a hate crime against a muslin happening in the U.S.A.? just a question.:rolleyes:

*cough*CIA!*cough*

He's the one that claims that indoctrination leads to terrorism. I would assume that radical muslims are indoctrinated with the koran. QED.

*applauds*
Now point at the flaw in your reasoning. Come on, you can do it !

The only thing I find surprising about the results are how so little agree with sharia law. And for all the nay-sayers who think that these people are in too small a number to be a problem - look at the birth rates and look at all the islamic immigration into the UK. If it continues like this then a muslim majority is inevitable.

*cough*CIA!*cough*

Well, the CIA's actions and missions are almost always tied to the military's strategic plans, so they're kind of like "armed forces" given their role in the national defense system. However, they did train people to carry out terrorist attacks against others.

The CIA didn't commit "hate crimes" motivated by religion, however.

He's the one that claims that indoctrination leads to terrorism. I would assume that radical muslims are indoctrinated with the koran. QED.
Interpretations of it, yes. Sort of like how the Nazis twisted many philosophies prevalent at the time.


mais non
Then?

Religion of any type has no place in the classroom. religion breeds hate and closes ones mind to other possibilities. we must teach our children that that religions are myths told to help us live our life's, not things that we should kill for. I hate to say this but everyone in the middle-east needs to take a step back. take a deep breath and RELAX. dude chill lets talk this over before we start something that can't end any other way than bad for all parties involved.:(

*cough*CIA!*cough*

*cough* Goverment agents *cough* :p

*cough* Goverment agents *cough* :p

*cough*Government Agents=/=Armed Forces*cough*;)

Well, the CIA's actions and missions are almost always tied to the military's strategic plans, so they're kind of like "armed forces" given their role in the national defense system. However, they did train people to carry out terrorist attacks against others.

The CIA didn't commit "hate crimes" motivated by religion, however.

I think you're pushing the definition of 'Armed Forces' here. A CIA agent directly atacking an enemy (ie. assassination, acts of sabotage against an enemy millitary) might be classed as armed forces. Helping fascists to overthrow leaders or attacking political enemies aren't acts which include them in the armed forces bracket.

The CIA didn't commit "hate crimes" motivated by religion, however.

But the CIA wrote books that incite jihad and shipped them for use in Afghan jihad. :p

Extremism in any form is evil. Be it religous, politically, racially, whatever. Regretably extremism is very noticable in Muslim culture. They aren't the only one's, look at the skin heads in Russia, but they have the most noticable presentation of mindless devotion and extremism. On CBC I heard a muslim cleric claiming white people would do the exact same thing if the pope was depicted in a cartoon molesting little boys. I don't think so. If anyone did try staging violent protests our governments would stop them, not incourage them. Much of the Muslim religion seems to have fallen behind the times. Many of its leaders still act like its the middle ages. The worst I've heard of Christianity is still at least 17th century. BTW I'm an atheist so I don't support any religion but some are far more tolerable than others.

Extremism in any form is evil. Be it religous, politically, racially, whatever. Regretably extremism is very noticable in Muslim culture. They aren't the only one's, look at the skin heads in Russia, but they have the most noticable presentation of mindless devotion and extremism. On CBC I heard a muslim cleric claiming white people would do the exact same thing if the pope was depicted in a cartoon molesting little boys. I don't think so. If anyone did try staging violent protests our governments would stop them, not incourage them. Much of the Muslim religion seems to have fallen behind the times. Many of its leaders still act like its the middle ages. The worst I've heard of Christianity is still at least 17th century. BTW I'm an atheist so I don't support any religion but some are far more tolerable than others.
Agreed. I lean towards being Christian, and I agree with you that I don't think Christians would react in the same way. There have been pics of the Pope doing drugs, resurrecting from his coffin and so on and so on. People do not protest them.

As long as our inner cities are ghettoes and we have religious indoctrination in our schools, we are pushing people into the hands of the extremists and the clerics.

But it's still a catch-22 situation. I'm not trying to be 'off' here, but a lot don't want to become a part of secular British society - many clerics want shara law and so make sure that islamic presence is as much as possible in certain areas in order to introduce it in those areas. At least, that's my interpretation. I'm all ears for any other ideas from people more knowledgeable than I, so please don't be offended if you find it to be so.

All religion is, and should be, subordinate to secular law - and free speech. Some, and only some, muslims believe otherwise. In that case, either move to Iran or put up and shut up. Integration and acceptance is a two-way thing.

ps. 42.357% of statistics are made up and 99.765% are selectively gathered and represented - particularly those published by partisan newspapers (ie any newspaper)

Well, this was published by the Torygraph, of all papers. I may even get the Daily Heil tomorrow to get their reaction. It'll be laughably right-wing!

I'm sure it's been said, but polls aren't really a very accurate measure of things.

They didn't poll 100% of the Muslims in the UK, therefore, the "40% of Muslims in the UK" is a false statement. It should be "40% of the Muslims polled".

If they went to a conservative Mosque and polled 100 Muslims there, the results would be radically different than if they went to an affluent suburb and polled 100 Muslims there.

I'm guessing this is just rabble-rousing.
Polling is very accurate, when done correctly. Though it's not always precise.

The last Presidential elections were great examples. The candidates were always within the margin of error of one another, and rarely, if ever, did their public estimation fluctuate by more than the margin of error between polls. What the polls are telling everyone in those cases, is that it will be very close, so close the polls don't know what's going to happen. The polls were very accurate. The pundits ability to interpret the polls well was non existant. As were the experts reliance on previous trends to guess the outcome.

Selection bias is a good way to attack such efforts. But to just assume it out of hand because they're results you disagree with. That's a little past skepticism and on to wishful thinking.

aaah, good ol' fashioned British grit ang spunk will get us through this mess, along with a bit of xenophobia.


People will believe you if you use statistics,

works 97% of the time!

You can't be a christian extemist in the UK. It's impossible.
Paisley and the DUP carry it off quite successfully.