Is Shariah law fairer than English law? Muslims win this debate in a majority non-Muslim audience

A retired Judge & Adrienne Page, a Legal Barrister debates Abdullah al Andalusi and Zara Faris on the motion 'This House Believes that Shariah is Fairer than English Law'. The event is organised by Lord Strathcarron, held in the plush location of the Master Builder's Hotel in Hampshire, UK. The audience is exclusively English (Upper/Middle Class backgrounds).

Muslims win debate: IS SHARIA FAIRER than ENGLISH LAW?

"a former Judge, Tim J [he requested not to be fully named in our article]"

"The Debate was not filmed due to the request of the retired English Court judge who spoke"

Listen from the 53rd minute when the former judge who dared not say his name dared his audience in the following terms:

"If you share that belief [that one person's hand cut off and one woman stoned to death and the offences would cease and the job of the British police would be easier] then vote for the motion ... "

Secular Koranism the alternative to Shariah law and Libtard law and the antidote to Feminism and Liberalism

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris Should have said reintroducing slavery as tolerated by the Koran would kick-start the moribund British economy.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If you go with my Secular Koranism idea you would make Sharia law more attractive to these old codgers.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If you go for Secular Koranism @DWPgovuk would become the Department of Work, Pensions & Manumissions.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If you go for Secular Koranism Britain would have a 20% flat rate income tax. http://t.co/LdNBzroxmK
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If you go for Secular Koranism Britain could have an EU referendum pronto. http://t.co/w57WIvNKfY
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the UK adopted Secular Koranism it cd stop sluts from destroying Western civilisation. http://t.co/TtXp1560sF
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If UK adopted Secular Koranism it could default on its debts n abolish usury @johnredwood http://t.co/KRZp5L331v
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If Britain adopted Secular Koranism British men would no longer be lower than sluts. http://t.co/ITyH16k68N
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism brothel-keeping would be LEGAL. http://t.co/UdPvLOGw9I
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism they would no longer be under the yoke of a degenerate matriarchy.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism they would return to rationally small government.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism, we wd have a rational foreign policy with only defensive wars allowed.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism the citizen wd have constitutional right not 2b taxed more than "khums"
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism the Equality Act 2010 wd be repealed. 2:256: "No compulsion in belief."
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

@AbdullaAndalusi @zarafaris If the British adopted Secular Koranism no fault divorce would be abolished. http://t.co/rsdeLFPzhp
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) November 27, 2014

The most asinine comment during Q&A: "Islam is an ideology and ideologies do not work."

What is Liberalism but an asinine ideology?

What is feminism but an unsustainable and immoral ideology?

Supporters of the motion doubled after the debate.

54 for the motion, 46 against.

Nobody asked Adrienne Page any questions cos she was so boring. 

Anders Breivik participating in two separate debates on Islam (1) Thread started by Jeffrey Marshall (2) Thread started by Claire Khaw

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3718804/Mass-murderer-Anders-Breivik-emailed-some-of-Britains-most-notorious-far-right-extremists-just-over-an-hour-before-he-launched-his-massacre-The-Sun-can-reveal.html

Anders Breivik

Jeffrey Marshall

I exchanged a few messages on Facebook with him on Islam in 2009, the context of which I set out below.


Jeffrey Marshall's Thread

 BNP debate with Muslims - “Islamification of Britain: reality or myth?”

Date: Thursday 10th December 2009

Time: 6.15 pm - 9.15 pm

Venue: Conway Hall, 25 Red Lion Square, Holborn, London, WC1R 4RL

A public forum where members of the Muslim community invite members of the far-right to an open dialogue to discuss their contentions on Islam, the Muslim community in England / Europe, and the impact of immigration, in the hope that prejudice and misconceptions can be tackled through engagement. Additionally, the panel will also be joined by members of the Christian People's Alliance Party and the Liberal Democrats, who both current serve as London councillors, and will be attending to add their perspectives to the discussion.

The invited panel, consisting of representatives from Liberal, Christian Democrat, Muslim and Far Right backgrounds, will be engaginng in discussion and debate over the controversial topic of 'Islamification' which has become the flag bearing issue for the campaigns by the BNP, EDL and SOIE (Stop the Islamification of Europe) groups.

Speakers who have confirmed their attendance include Alan Craig (Councillor for Newham & Leader of Christian People's Alliance Party), Jeffrey Marshall (Central London Organiser for the BNP), Abdullah Al-Andalusi (Public Speaker on Muslim Political Affairs) and Stephen Gash (Stop Islamification of Europe and organiser of the September Harrow Mosque Demonstration).

Stephen Gash writes: "I am happy to be given a platform to express my views, despite the fact that others would not give me such a platform."

Still to be confirmed are Abdurraheem Green and Dr Azzam Tamimi. 

This event is expected to be the first of its kind, where members of the Muslim community directly inviting right-wing anti-Shariah campaigners to the discussion table. Such an intercommunity public discussion event is virtually unprecedented in modern times. Also, the event itself, whatever the result, will help to demonstrate that Muslims are not against censorship, but rather we welcome open discussion and debate, as long as everyone is given a voice to defend their beliefs and way of life in a fair, equal and open platform. Lastly, we feel that only by direct engagement can we defeat the prejudice and hatred that is rising in Europe against Islam. This event is being organised in the hope that Muslims, general non-Muslims and those of the far-right, can all attend, listen and come to an understanding of the real human reality of Britain today, not the false scaremongering and social dissension created by the skewed perspectives of some individuals. Today's situation in Britain is one that Muslims cannot afford to ignore, hoping it will go away if we do no engage it directly.

Security will be present at the event. The ground floor of the main hall can hold over 250 people along with seating for around 100 on the upper galleries. Come early to guarantee a good seat.

For further information please contact:

Tel: 07843 126 715 

E-mail: info@thedebateinitiative.com

Website: www.thedebateinitiative.com

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIK

06 December 2009
The most essential issue here is demography. Marseilles (the epi-center of Islamisation in Western Europe) now has 38% Muslims and will be a Muslim city with 51% within 20 years.

Difficult but essential questions have to be raised relating to demography and the alleged Islamic demographical warfare waged "indirectly" by the Global Islamic Ummah.

Shall we allow any given European city to become Muslim in the future (51%+)? Should it be prevented and why? If it should, how can it be prevented? Will Europeans be allowed to prevent it?

On a national level

Shall we allow any Western European country to become Muslim in the future (51%+)? 

Is it unacceptable to discuss the possibility that there is an indirect ongoing demographic warfare being wage facilitated by the doctrines of Islam/sharia (limiting womens rights equates to higher Muslim birth rates etc)?

And perhaps most importantly, shall we allow British cities or perhaps even Britain itself to end up as Lebanon?

Lebanon was, as we should all know, a Christian country but is now Muslim. The Christian minority have for several decades lived under hard conditions (dhimmitude).

I understand that discussing these issues are considered politically incorrect. They are however important to many Europeans.

Lebanon demographical development – (Christian/Muslim pop)[1]:

1911 - 21% Islam

1921 - 45% 

1932 - 49%

1943 - 48% 

1970 - 58% (Civil war 1975–1990 started when Islam reached 60%)

1990 - 65% (Christians lost the war)

2008 - 75%

2030 - 90%? 

Source:

1. Tomass Mark, Game theory with instrumentally irrational players: A Case Study of Civil War and Sectarian Cleansing, Journal of Economic Issues, Lincoln; June 1997.

06 December 2009

Abdullah Al Andalusi

Hi Anders,

Your post is funny, because Lebanon was only created last century. But the area of Land has been within Islamic authority for 1,300 years - only NOW have Muslims begun to try to Islamify it?! I don't think so. I think you'll find that the state the Israel, and the sykes-Picot treaty are to blame for the resultant immigration and wars that occur in the region

As for Marseilles, it is one of France's Southern cities, of course Immigration is increasing the population of non-French citizens, so what? IT is not the result of birthrate; and France and Europe as a whole are now beginning to limit Immigration, as the beneficial economic results can no longer be realised in this recession. Why not complain about the 'Latinisation' of America. There have a far bigger Immigration problem then europe. I think you are just a scare mongerer, and there is no sociological facts you can present to demonstrate that Islamification is happening in Europe. In fact the French 'Dhimmis' as you call them, seem not to be so compliant with Islam - with their BANNING THE HIJAB IN SCHOOL. Does that sound like the actions of a weak subjugated 'Dhimmi' government. Or a strongly intolerant, culturally french-supremist Secular Government?

I'll leave people with half an ounce of sense to decide.

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIK

6 December 2009

Any "Atatürk approach" will not solve anything but only delay the inevitable. Turkey became secular after Mustafa Atatürk, by military force, implemented his harsh reforms 90 years ago. The result? Sharia lay dormant for 70-80 years. As soon as it was practically possible (Turkey had to implement more human rights to appease the EU) the former "dormant" devout Muslims resurfaced and the Islamist alliance won the last election. The secular elites of Turkey backed by the military are now in an undemocratic manner refusing to obey the will of the majority (Islamist alliance). Turkey is therefore a dictatorship. We have to understand. Islam is extremely resilient, in fact more resilient than most people can comprehend. Taking Sharia (and all political aspects) out of Islam is simply not possible.

Sure, we can force temporary secularization on the Muslims but eventually, even though they would have to wait 90 years, the demands for more Sharia will resurface. And by then they will be in majority and can democratically do whatever they want. 

I predict one of the four scenarios for W. Europe:

1. Islam will reform to a secular "Islamic Protestantism", where all political aspects (Sharia included) will be purged. This is unlikely.

2. Britain will be Muslim

3. Several mini-Pakistan's will be created all over Europe, one in each country (due to Lebanon style conflicts)

4. All Muslims (who does not convert to a non-political religion) will be deported.  

History will always repeat itself.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

English Democrats - the non-racist English nationalist party - even more Islamophobic than BNP?

I was there and don't remember Abdullah saying he wanted Shariah law. Are you confusing Abdullah with Anjem Choudary (who wasn't there on Thursday either), Bill?

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

Then you should of cleaned your ears out Claire. He stated that Sharia was a better law than English law and would be a benefit in the mosques and society in general. He rambled on about womens clothing instead of asking direct questions and has manipulated the whole debate as a propaganda success for the promotion of Islamic values.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

He said Sharia takes into account of human nature. The fact that we commit adultery, divorce, steal, are gay, engage in commerce, wage war with each other and have governments who have an established tendency of borrowing and lending irresponsibly. If you take Sharia to mean law in accordance with Koranic principles, then you may find it not so sinister after all. Love thy neighbour is also a Koranic principle, in case you didn't know that. Or do you think it just means stonings and beheadings?

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

It has several concepts that is set differently in the various sects of Islam. The point being that it is unacceptable in any form.If he likes the Sharia law and what it takes into account so much then go to Saudi Arabia and live there for the benefit of living under such a 'wonderful legal system'

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

What is "any form"? The death penalty would be in accordance with Koranic principles. Ditto direct democracy.

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

any form as in what ever sect has written its version of Sharia law. We have law here, based on Christian principles. People who cant live within that legislative structure must leave, simple as that.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

Let's be clear about this, Bill. Will you have everything be the opposite of what it is in the Koran, just to avoid what you think is Sharia law?

What about the Koran stating the love thy neighbour principle, or at any rate not harm him?

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

The Koran has many different interpretations and is not written by god or Allah but by a prophet who had mood swings that are clearly defined in his writing of the scriptures, one moment a man of peace the next a violent antagonist and dominant factor. While people can follow the Koran as they see fit for peaceful religious values as that is the right of everyone, it can never be used in any legal concept in league with Sharia law while in England as we have Christian values that take priority as 72% of the population in this country are Christian.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

“Worship God and join none with Him in worship, and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, the poor, the neighbour who is near of kin, the neighbour who is a stranger, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (you meet)... Verily, God does not like such as are proud and boastful.” (Quran 4:36)

Yes, there are many interpretations and there are many laws. 

One must just hope that the court who interprets the law in your case will be fair and just, and that there are ways of fixing things when they go wrong. 

There are no guarantees in life and the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. 

72% of the population are Christian - where did you get that statistic?

It seems a lot less to me.

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

The last national census. It was also reffered to by the supposed Anglican Vicar if you had been listening to him. An apologist that should not still be a man of the cloth and should also decide on a political or religious career, but not entwine the two.

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIK

13 December 200

Claire,

You should study the Islamic legal principles of naskh (Quranic abrogation - the aggressive Medina verses take precedent over the peaceful Mecca verses where appropriate). I could try to educate you further here about Islamic jurisprudence hadn't it been for the fact that this is an inappropriate forum.

I doubt this would be fruitful to any of us as you obviously have a very clear agenda;)

"Taqiyya does not mean you are allowed to lie for promoting one's faith.

Dont worry Abdullah. You are allowed to use al-taqiyya against all kafr until Britain (Dar al-Kufr or Dar al-Harb) has become Dar al-Islam. I can provide a 30 page assessment of the correct use of al-taqiyya against any and all kafrs until Dar-al-Islam has been established.

Please let me know if you have any other questions relating to Islam.

Thank you.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

Anders, I am quite aware that there are aggressive verses. Indeed, there is a verse that justifies a pre-emptive war. It is all a matter of interpretation, and whoever controls the interpretation is in charge. 

As for who will be in charge of the interpretation, well, that is what politics is all about. 

I am saying the Koran can be useful, useful even to the people who now fear and hate it. It is but an ideology like any other but more powerful because it is holistic, for the state and for the individual, social and economic, political and moral. 

There is no need to incorporate a formal body of legislation called Sharia law to have law in accordance with Koranic principles, no need at all.

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

We have social economic and moral principals set out under our own legislative system thanks!

13 December 200

Claire Khaw

What moral principles are these? 

Islamic principles are also Christian principles.

13 December 2009

Claire Khaw

Forgive thine enemy, love thy neighbour, etc.

13 December 2009

Bill Baker

Then if the principals are the same there is no need for Sharia law is there. Know your enemy and defeat them to ensure your own survival. You dont fight for love you fight to kill and if you are not going to kill your enemy then dont go into battle as they are surely trying to kill you.

Always ensure your neighbour has social values along the same qualities as your own.

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIC13 December 2009

Claire,

What part of the doctrines of naskh (Quranic abrogation) do you fail to understand?

I assume you mean well and that you think you can create a non-political “secularized Islamic Protestantism”. But that project will fail just like it has failed multiple times in the past. Why do you think you will succeed this time when even Ataturk failed?

And why would any devout Muslim listen to a kafr like you? They laugh at PC Europeans/ Americans every time they to teach true Muslims what "real Islam (the religion of peace)" is all about. You will be a useful idiot to them until they are in a position where they no longer require your services. I suggest you travel to Lebanon and ask the non-Muslim apologists how they were treated after 1990;)

14 December 2009

Abdullah Al Andalusi

Well Anders,

The whole conception of Naskh is debated by scholars (some even deny it exists), others accept it exists, but only limit it to 1-5 small verses, other simply say it existed for verses that were no longer part of the Quran. Suffice to say, the peaceful verses of the Quran have been abrogated. I should like to hear evidence to say that they are (from majority concensus please).

Secondly, ooh, you can provide a '30 page' dissertation on how Taqiyya is applies to what? Even if that is so, I can find a 30 page dissertation from the 'flat earth' society, saying how the Earth is actually flat - so what?! You and them both share your loony interpretation of facts (or even, dare I say it, blatant lies). So unless you put your money where your mouth is, and PRODUCE SOME PROOF, I suggest you keep yor bigoted, paranoid delusions to yourself - your choice 

14 December 2009

Abdullah Al Andalusi

Actually, I have a better Idea, Anders - Lets Debate it - in PUBLIC. Come on, you have nothing to fear, except the truth. If we allowed the BNP et al the make a public presentation, then you should be no different.

Let's debate the issue of Taqiyya, in PUBLIC. Let's blow this issue Wide open, yes? We have nothing to hide, do you?

(we have no problem coming to your country, or you coming here - take this as a formal invitation to Public Debate).

14 December 2009

Claire Khaw

Excellent idea, Abdullah.

In what way did you think Ataturk failed, Anders? He got his secular state that has now banned the niqab, didn't he? Or would success to you mean only the complete suppression and abolition of Islam?

Let me put it this way. If you want to regard Islam as a virus, then let us extend the analogy. Not every person will have exactly the same response and defences to a virus. Some people have immunity, others will recover, some will not. 

I guess I am optimist. What does not kill us makes us stronger.

Claire Khaw's thread:

14 December 2009
Claire Khaw

The Voice of Reason: Faith and Reason; Faith v Reason

Is it reasonable to have faith? Should we have faith in reason? Whether we believe in God or not, surely we should have faith in the future and faith in our convictions?Our convictions must surely be in accordance with Truth, Reason and Reality or they will not withstand the wear and tear of Truth, Reason and Reality. 
If God is omnipotent, omniscient, eternal and unique, then He must surely also incorporate Truth, Reason and Reality. 

On this point perhaps atheists and monotheists can agree: that whether we believe in God or not, we must inevitably submit to Truth, Reason and Reality. Which might conceivably make us all Muslim originally, without realising it ...A disturbing thought for some, no doubt.

14 December 2009

Andrew McKie

Dear Claire, May I give you a reason why you are about to be defriended? Because tedious threads like this & every update to them ping on my iPhone, using up my battery to no good purpose.
I have no objection to those discussions, nor to your encouraging them, but they are below the intellectual level of the average 11-year-old, and use up my storage space and battery life.
Not your fault, I'm sure. But unless you can tell me why I shouldn't cut the cord, I shall, within the next 24 hours. without prejudice, as the lawyers say, best aye A [of http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/andrewmckie/] 

14 December 2009
Conor Walsh

The best answer I can give is the Jesuit answer - where faith conflicts with reason, reason must prevail. But don't ask me how they square that with the leap that faith must be.

14 December 2009

Claire Khaw

The difference between what is possible and what is probable is the measure of that leap of faith, which we use our reason to measure. 
That Christ is Son of God is impossible. That God may exist is possible. Indeed, it is virtually certain since we, Man, created Him, as a concept.

14 December 2009
Bill Baker

So the possibility of God /Allah speaking to a deluded idiot such as Mohammed and writing the Koran through this schizophrenic is to be taken seriously then if not through the word of Christ and the Prophets before him? People will believe as they will when it comes to religious values as it is drummed into those without access to education constantly, but those with any form of intelligence realise that it is all fable and the heads of religion are in it for personal gain and the power buzz only. We derive our moral standards to create law through historical faith and good common sense.

14 December 2009

Abdullah Al Andalusi

It is funny Bill, how you attack the Intelligence of a man, who presented a holistic integrated spiritual and socio-political system, that changed a backwater nomadic people into an advanced and intellectually progressive world superpower that lasted 1,300 years, who's mere contact with the West, generated the European Renaissance. If that man is considered by you to be an Idiot, I'd hate to see what we come up with, if we were to apply your exacting standards to yourself - who has achieve far far considerably less (if at all).

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIC

14 December 2009
I agree, Abdullah, Muhammad is perhaps the greatest military leader, statesman and political intellectual that has ever lived. I have studied Islam for several years and must say I am extremely impressed by how efficient your ideology is. Well, the Ummah failed twice but you might actually succeed in conquering Europe this time eventually. It is a shame that most Europeans reject non-PC history and thus underestimate Muhammad's brilliance and Islams potency.

My favourite quote from the Hadith is the following btw:
Hadith of the Prophet

"Lataftahanna al-Qustantiniyya wa lani`ma al-amiru amiruha wa lani`ma al-jayshu dhalika al-jaysh." "Verily you shall conquer Constantinople. What a wonderful leader will he be, and what a wonderful army will that army be!"

Needless to say; every single kuffar capital is considered modern day Constantinople’s. The only difference is that the strategic weapon used in the Jihad against Europe is Islamic demographic warfare instead of regular infantry units (which is the preferred method in the Sudan Jihad).

As for the debate. What would be the point, Abdullah? We are all ideologically confident and experienced enough to remain immune to each others argumentation and approaches. Our objective is to influence the people, not to try to influence eachother:)

The ruling establishment, the multiculturalist PC block (politicians, media, NGOs) are all ignoring any non-PC group so you shouldn’t be worried at all. We have absolutely no way of influencing national decision making at this point (with the exception of Denmark, Italy and certain other European local counties). Only time will tell if we ever gain influence in the remaining countries before it is too late:) Abdullah, you don't have to answer my question or counter my argument. We can just agree on the fact that we disagree:) Claire, I already answered your question regarding Ataturk and Turkey. Pls check earlier msg:)

18 December 2009
Bill Baker

Conor, there are certain Christian sects that are as bad as the Islamic sects who promote war and persecution. The three Abrahamic faiths Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have splinter groups that are either advocates of peace or war, but I oppose vehemently any of these sects who fall into the latter category. I will repeat again that we have preachers to soothe the souls of those who seek consolation through religion and we have politicians to guide our laws, but while each should have respect for the other, the two should never be entwined as it leads to the type of Tribalism and depravity you speak of around the world.

18 December 2009
Conor Walsh

OK Bill thanks for that - sounds like fair comment - so you would accept that what people loosely call Islamic terrorism has as little to do with Islam as say, my own Irish Catholicism has to do with the anti-civilian atrocities of the IRA? In other words, religion is used by people in both Western governments and others in Asian countries to obscure or mystify or aggravate the real nature of conflict which has a lot to do with oil and little to do with sacred texts?

MESSAGE BELIEVED TO BE FROM ANDERS BREIVIC18 December 2009

You seem extremely naive, Conor. You should browse through the December list of Jihadi violence and terror here: More than 14000 Jihadi terror attacks since 9/11. In comparison during this period, how many Christian terror attacks?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
I invite you to find a similar list committed by Christian groups...
You cannot compare Christendom and Islam. Islam has historically killed more than 270 million, Christendom less than 27 million. As such, Islam is historically 10 times more bloody and cruel. 1000 times as bloody and cruel in todays context. Is it perhaps due to the fact that Islam is a political ideology? 
Please wake up.

18 December 2009
Conor Walsh

Anders please don't call me naive. I will have to start searching for terms of my own to characterize my feelings regarding your own slightly selective reading of recent history. How many people were killed by Western forces in Iraq?
Bill assuming that your term satanic applies to the western cheerleaders of aggressive war as well as anyone else who advocates military action against civilian populations, in particular, I have no problem with your use of the term though I would be inclined not to see this in theological terms of any kind.

8 December 2009
Claire Khaw

Even I know that Islam is the religion of peace AND WAR. That is what makes it so versatile and fit for the purpose of government and international relations. 
Islam is a political ideology like any other so its effect would be similar to the effect of Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Liberalism etc. 

I am afraid it is the nature of man to kill each other over a philosophical disagreement. It is just the way of the world.

Muslims and BNP have yet another thing in common: washing dirty linen in public

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_187296237972197&id=187309341304220
Defend Usama Hasan -- Support Freedom of Conscience and Oppose Intolerance was started by Yahya
Birt.

I have been deleted from this group on the grounds that I am a BNP member when all I said was that  this incident sounded like mosque politics and a storm in a teacup.

Usama Hasan alleges that a death threat was made against him but nowhere does the actual form of words this death threat took appear anywhere.  The form of words would of course be crucial in deciding the guilt of anyone accused of issuing a death threat in a court of law.  The vagueness of the Guardian account of events, and the failure of the journalist in question is a shameful testament to journalistic standards these days.  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/06/usama-hasan-london-imam-death-threats-evolution

I said on the group yesterday:

"Shame the Guardian didn't see fit to quote the wording of the leaflets allegedly containing the death threats. It is well known that East End Asians like boasting about the death threats they receive. If you ain't got no death threat, you ain't done or said nothing worth your salt as a politician."

http://www.savemasjidtawhid.com/

http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=238

It does appear to me that Muslims, just like the BNP, are fighting amongst themselves, washing their dirty linen in public and giving themselves a very bad name indeed.

The Koran advises us to avoid pointless disputation, particularly about such things as evolution.  We can't know because we weren't there.  And even if we were no one would believe us anyway.  So why don't we just agree to disagree?

I would have said that

(1) God created Evolution

and, to appease the atheists, whisper to them that

(2) Man created God.

Sorted.

I think I would make rather a good imam if I were Muslim and a man with my tact and my reputation of being a unifier.

Yahya Birt who cannot get over the fact that a BNP member does not mean Muslims harm is a very silly man with an obvious liberal agenda.

Perhaps that little turd cannot get his narrow white middle class liberal little head round this: I wish to promote an ideology called

Khavian Koranism AKA Secular Koransim AKA Anglican Islam

which encompasses the religious and secular, and which fuses Koranic principles with Anglican ways of worship that do not contradict the Koran.   In short, I wish to create a new state religion for the British people that the non-Muslims can see themselves embracing, that is far away from the soft soap of the Church of England which is now infested by feminists, socialists, liberals and communists.  It is the white working classes whose cultural identity consists of being "dipso, fatso, bingo, ASBO and Tesco"  who need this new religion most of all.

Below is a description by someone who was actually there from Abduall Al-Andalusi's Facebook walls:

Avas Asghar:  

"Most people here clearly didn't go to the event, relying instead on grainy videos clips which didn't do justice to the event. 

At this farcical event, Shaykh Suhaib came across poorly, as did Usama, as did the mob(!) But all those who feel Usama is a victimised, brave, courageous hero - then you should know this:

He came 50 mins late and the crowd waited patiently. In the meantime shaykh Suhaib (who on most occasions you can't help but love) set the scene with a slightly patronising speech (btw, giving one reason for Usama's tardiness and Usama upon arrival giving another). Then Usama spent 15 mins fiddling unnecessarily with the position of a projector (perhaps he was nervous). So after an hour of everyone waiting patiently without a word being spoken - the first thing Usama did was insult the crowd teasing them about projectors and how he hoped they didn't mind him using 'modern' technology.

What horrible start to the entire thing - you knew it was going to descend into chaos with Usama antagonising the crowd (and vice versa). If there was one thing you could, in the past, rely on Usama for - it was humility and keeping cool. Both those qualities were sadly absent. He came across as patronising and arrogant and for sure retorted back to all those who may have insulted him. It was tit for tat and embarrassing!

Then the crowd asked Usama to debate one of 2 individuals there and then (their names were shaqur & abu zubair - both 'traditional' Islamic students of knowledge, the latter from umm al qurra in Makkah I believe). Usama refused. The crowed implored him and asked him what he was afraid of. He refused claiming he wasn't prepared. (so what on earth was this event for?!)

Usama is thirsty for attention, sthing clear from his media appearances. In regard to evolution- he published one cif article in which he just insulted Muslims, and at some point gave a slide show presentation with a lacuna filled argument. How does that make him a spokesman for islam & evolution. In an act of terrible hypocrisy he asked one biologist at the event - who challenged him - to publish his ideas with peer review!!!! Usama isn't an authority in evolutionary biology and he's never published his ideas for them to be peer reviewed. Ever!

No one has actually bridged the Islamic and evolution narratives - certainly not Usama. And I stayed for the whole event - I didn't hear any death threats. 1 man walked out calling him shaytan; and a few may have called him kafir. But I don't remember clear death threats."

Shaheen Amin commented on Abdullah Al Andalusi's status.
Shaheen wrote

"I was at the event and Avas described it better than me. I was one of the people who requested Usama Hasan for a debate with brother Abuz Zubayr. But, Usama refused to our disappointment. On seeing brother Abuz Zubayr at close proximity - Usama spoke to the brother and not even one word of insult was exchanged between them; let alone a death threat from our brother Abuz Zubayr."

Characteristics that the BNP and Muslims share:

1.  a desire to support family values
2.  a liking for selective education ie grammar schools
3.  a disapproval of British foreign policy of intervention in the affairs of Muslim countries
4.  a tendency to support corporal punishment
5.  a tendency to support capital punishment
6.  a general concern at the alarming levels of uncontrolled immigration 

Muslims urgently need a PR Officer as their unpopularity grows

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/01/jack-straws-easy-meat-comment-muslims.html

"Hatred of Muslims and Islam is becoming more and more commonplace - what are you going to do to stop it?" asks MPACUK on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=488111231172&set=a.484672296172.262217.83217536172

Claire Khaw

You need decent PR done for you by someone who is not a Muslim but understands Islam, Muslims, Islamophobia and knows the Koran, like me.

And you also need to be prepared to admit that campaigns like the one at http://www.inspiredbymuhammad....com/ is just counter-productive, ignorant and irritating.

Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK (MPACUK) ‎@ Claire: Yeah I'm confused too as to how that website is a "counter-productive, ignorant and irritating" campaign?


Claire Khaw Because people are just as Islamophobic, aren't they?

In other words, it was just a waste of time and money.

Claire Khaw

You need someone with an Islamophobic perspective to get the message right. I talk to Islamophobes all the time - quite a few of them are my FB friends. That campaign showed quite clearly a woeful ignorance about the state of mind of the typical Islamophobe.

They hate you because they *want* to hate you, because you are many, visible and alien.

Otherwise, they would have to hate *themselves* .

Abdullah Al Andalusi of Muslim Debate Initiative (MDI) even commented on his Facebook wall that I had "hit the nail on the head" with my analysis of the situation, but he subsequently deleted it.  

Avais Qureshi Claire, I'm interested in what you think would get rid of Islamophobia. Would you mind elaborating?

Zoe Chase

When I look at MPACUK I see a group which is attempting to draw attention to Muslim grievances in Britain, Palestine, the former Yugoslavia, and Pakistan. These four political regions involve vastly different circumstances with no publicall...y understandable causal links between what is going on in the four separate regions. ''Islamphobia'' is a social problem in Britain but it would be absurd to describe what is going on in Bosnia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Palestine as ''Islamphobia''.

Beginning in the mid 90s Bosnians were victims of ethnic cleansing by Christian Serbs who were motivated by a greater Serbian nationalistic agenda which was supported by Russia. America intervened militarily to halt the abuse and murder of Bosnians and today the Americans use their military protection of Bosnians to misrepresent the USA as protectors of Muslims. In this way America distracts attention from their vast financial support for the abuse and murder of Palestinians by the Israeli Defence Forces. Muslims in and around Pakistan are being killed by American Drones but the America operates in and around Pakistan with the consent of Pakistani Government who are allied with America against the Taliban. If MPACUK is against American military activity in Pakistan then MPACUK is also against the government of Pakistan.

We understand that the Americans have a self-serving definition of ''terrorism'', i.e. when Muslims do it then it's call ''terrorism'', but when Americans to it then it's called ''anti-terrorism''. The Group Name ''MPACUK'' mimics the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC has a coherent message in America because AIPAC represents the Nationalist Aims of Israel, but this group MPACUK is lumping together difference people in different countries who are doing different things for different reasons. This Group lacks any coherent message because totally different problems are being lumped together under the bandwagon banner of ''Islamphobia''.

I am not offering help to MPACUK because I do not have knowledge of the Koran. I only have knowledge of the Israeli/American abuse of Palestinians as shown in the 32 images with text and links in my album at this link http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=51035&id=1640467141 Claire has knowledge of the Koran and Claire has the ability to present Islam to non-Muslims, so I suggest MPACUK takes any advice Claire is offering because the existing public relations message from MPACUK is incoherent therefore MPACUK will have no effect on your target audience who are non-Muslims.

Claire Khaw

Avais, non-Muslim Europeans fear and hate Muslims because the sheer number of Muslims in their land reminds them of their helplessness. They have also invaded two Muslim countries and must have an apprehension that Muslims cannot like them for their foreign policy.

There was a time when the West was a happier place for Westerners and this was a time when they were not troubled by the presence of Muslims.

It is easier for them to hate Muslims because Muslims are many and visible and alien instead of asking themselves why they have so many Muslims in their country when they don't even like them.

Only when it can be shown that Islam is useful and helpful to them will they stop hating you.

I have my Secular Koranism idea which they might just like if presented carefully and gently.

Zoe Chase

‎ 

Websites like http://www.inspiredbymuhammad.com/ are very good in the eyes of Muslims but in the eyes of westerners such websites only present Muslims as having an unsophisticated revivalist religious fervour which further alienates Westerners from Muslims.

As Muslims you belong to a separate culture which is completely different from the culture of the Westerners you are trying to persuade. This makes Muslims blind to the cross-cultural subtleties which are involved. How can we convince you that Muslims should not trust their own judgment about the best method for communicating with the non-Muslims which Muslims need to persuade?

 

Adnan Ramzan @ Zoe, what's your point ?

Zoe Chase

‎@Adnan Ramzan. Quoting Claire from above, ''Your campaign shows a woeful ignorance about the state of mind of the typical Islamophobe. You need someone with an Islamophobic perspective to get the message right. You need decent PR done for you by someone who is not a Muslim but who understands Islam, Muslims, Islamophobia, and who knows the Koran.''

MPACUK is presently incapable of persuading Islamophobes to see how Islam can be useful and helpful to them, so Claire has offered herself by saying, ''I have my Secular Koranism idea which they might just like if presented carefully and gently.''

Adnan Ramzan, my point is that Claire is 100% correct. The MPACUK message is too important to be left in the hands of enthusiastic amateurs. MPACUK should convene a meeting to formally appoint Claire Khaw as the professional controller of MPACUK's PR. That is my point.

Claire Khaw It would get HUGE publicity, Adnan, just because of who I am and the party I belong to.

I am thinking of using the designs at http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=12922&id=100001102239731&fbid=126933724020035 for the poster campaign.

Claire Khaw

Just to say that Abdullah Al Andalusi (also on Facebook and whom I have met on a few occasions) the Speaker and Director of Muslim Debate Initiative thinks I have hit the nail on the head as regards why Muslims are so hated.

If you do decide to use me, my appointment would be very controversial indeed, but I think that would be a Good Thing as far as the campaign is concerned.

 

 Zoe Chase

Through her party associations Claire has publically placed herself in the direct path of ethnic political prejudices and over the three years I've known Claire, she has consistently demonstrated her special talent for bringing dignified rationality to even the MOST controversial subjects, which makes things extremely difficult for her detractors. Claire's professional legal background make her a 'safe pair of hands' and she is an accomplished public speaker/debater whose energy and commitment are not doubted by anyone. Claire's thoroughly modern approach to gender and ethnicity together with her well-developed ideas of 'Secular Koranism', offers MPACUK a very powerful method for dismantling irrational Islamophobic attitudes in the minds of the non-Muslims who are MPACUK's target audience. Without Claire Khaw MPACUK will remain incapable of communicating the message that Islam makes Muslims valuable to British secular society.