Wootton Bassett

[View From The Top]

And what about the rest?

 

And what about the groups idea to Islamify the UK? And its provocative attitude?

 

Read the thread, my views on these people is there for all to see.

[Thedelldays]

I dont buy this that they are sticking up for the poor old taliban

 

the taliban are pure evil and (was) one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet who (and it is a fact) harboured terrorists that carry out acts of terror that would normally be kept to the realms of fantasy in hollywood

[bridge too far]

I dont buy this that they are sticking up for the poor old taliban

 

the taliban are pure evil and (was) one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet who (and it is a fact) harboured terrorists that carry out acts of terror that would normally be kept to the realms of fantasy in hollywood

 

I think, in the dim and distant past, we (I mean, of course, the US and us) supported them against the Soviet Union?

[Thedelldays]

I think, in the dim and distant past, we (I mean, of course, the US and us) supported them against the Soviet Union?

the world changes....it always has always will..once upon a time, we were at war with what is now the USA....

 

im sure, regimes, governments we are very wary of now will no doubt be are dear friends in the future...

[Gingeletiss]

I'd be hard pressed to disagree with that.

 

There's a shocker!!!!! coming from you.

[bridge too far]

the world changes....it always has always will..once upon a time, we were at war with what is now the USA....

 

im sure, regimes, governments we are very wary of now will no doubt be are dear friends in the future...

 

Did the Taliban only become "pure evil and (was) one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet" once we stopped supporting them? Or were they always like that, even when we were on their side?

[Thedelldays]

Did the Taliban only become "pure evil and (was) one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet" once we stopped supporting them? Or were they always like that, even when we were on their side?

 

 

maybe...but that does not excuse what is happening the here and now...

we cannot change what happened 30 years ago but we can deal with a regime that is simply pure and evil..

[bridge too far]

maybe...but that does not excuse what is happening the here and now...

we cannot change what happened 30 years ago but we can deal with a regime that is simply pure and evil..

 

What a shame we didn't 'deal' with this regime when we were its allies

[Ponty]

Absolutely, BTF. All of the hypocrisy sickens me.

[Sheaf Saint]

They are not part of a tradition that goes back millennia - it is an incredibly recent phenomenon. The immense damage done by the Saudis can be rolled back. And it's quite simple: get the madrassas closed and pour resources back into a viable state education. I've been into the Karakorum mountains of northern Pakistan recently to look at efforts by, the Agha Khan's organisation, and the impact of their work - a relative drop in the ocean - is quite extraordinary.

 

Are you familiar with the work of Greg Mortenson and the Central Asia Institute?

 

I recently read Three Cups of Tea which is the true account of his fight to overcome the influence of the madraasas in the Karakoram and the Hindu Kush. In just a few short years, hundreds - even thousands - of these madrassas popped up while he, with the blessing of the Pakistan government, was attempting to build secular schools for all of the deprived children - specifically for girls - in the region.

 

If you haven't read it then you should give it a go. It has taught me more about the politics and the religions of that part of the world than any other book/video has since the whole issue came to the world's attention in 2001.

[Sheaf Saint]

What a shame we didn't 'deal' with this regime when we were its allies

 

I'm not so sure we really had much of a chance. The Taliban only seized control of Afghanistan in the late 90s, and we invaded in 2001.

[Verbal]

Are you familiar with the work of Greg Mortenson and the Central Asia Institute?

 

I recently read Three Cups of Tea which is the true account of his fight to overcome the influence of the madraasas in the Karakoram and the Hindu Kush. In just a few short years, hundreds - even thousands - of these madrassas popped up while he, with the blessing of the Pakistan government, was attempting to build secular schools for all of the deprived children - specifically for girls - in the region.

 

If you haven't read it then you should give it a go. It has taught me more about the politics and the religions of that part of the world than any other book/video has since the whole issue came to the world's attention in 2001.

 

Yep, the guy's an absolute hero. The work he does is fantastic - and very effective. All the more surprising since he's American, and therefore, you'd think, a bit of a target in what is usually seen from the outside as a lethally dangerous place. But he has enormous support there, not least because everyone there craves a decent education.

 

I have some direct knowledge of what the Agha Khan's people have been doing, which is similar. They also focused initially on girls' education, but realised that was a mistake. What happened is that the girls threw themselves enthusiastically into their schooling, then graduated, but still had to marry some dumb schmuck, tradionally minded truck driver. Result? Suicide rates among these girls leapt alarmingly. So they modified the education programme to include boys - and the results are very impressive.

 

But - and this is the important point for all of us - as education levels went up, extremism as a problem locally went down.

Edited 4 January, 2010 by Verbal

[Sheaf Saint]

Yep, the guy's an absolute hero. The work he does is fantastic - and very effective. All the more surprising since he's American, and therefore, you'd think, a bit of a target in what is usually seen from the outside as a lethally dangerous place. But he has enormous support there, not least because everyone there craves a decent education.

 

Well he has already been kidnapped twice and had two fatwas issued against him (which were both subsequently overturned by senior clerics who fully support what he is trying to achieve)

[Verbal]

Well he has already been kidnapped twice and had two fatwas issued against him (which were both subsequently overturned by senior clerics who fully support what he is trying to achieve)

 

I didn't know that - but rather illustrates the point I think we're both making.

[aintforever]

I think the British public would show more sympathy towards these Muslims if they showed more concern about things that didn’t fit in with their Islamification agenda.

 

For example a Muslim commits mass murder and you get the odd reluctant half hearted condemnation from various groups/leaders. Yet someone draws an innocent cartoon and you get all sorts of vocal reaction from all areas of the Muslim community and massive protests world-wide.

 

They moan about Muslims being killed in the war yet show no concern about the Muslims butchered by the Taleban, killed by other Muslim regimes or non Muslims killed by anyone.

 

They scream about human rights when someone is stopped from wearing their traditional dress (often for a logical reason) yet show absolutely no concern for the basic human rights of women and gays suffering under Muslim regimes or in Muslim families.

 

And they expect us to believe that this march is out of genuine concern for the Muslim dead in Afganistan – don’t make me laugh.

[GenevaSaint]

They moan about Muslims being killed in the war yet show no concern about the Muslims butchered by the Taleban, killed by other Muslim regimes or non Muslims killed by anyone.

 

I'm surprised no one else has commented on the Radio4 piece today with the head of Islam4UK. You'll love this aintforever, when asked a very similar question about Muslim on Muslim killing, and the fact that many more are killed that way rather than by the "Infidels". The deluded fool said that the Taliban were not killing these Muslims, the attacks were being funded by the US and UK. We're apparantly paying for Asian militants to bomb,maim and kill to justify the war with our taxes.

 

He also refutes the legitimacy of the UN reports on deaths, beatings, killings preferring to rely on reports from those trying to free their country from the infidels, I.E. the taliban, WTF!

 

Sad, deluded, fool.

 

Oh, BTW, non Muslims killed by anyone. I don't think you'll find they give a sh*t

Edited 4 January, 2010 by GenevaSaint
Add last line

[Verbal]

Absolutely, BTF. All of the hypocrisy sickens me.

 

Far be it from me to stand up for the Americans in the region, or to disagree with you or BTF, but the Afghan Taliban didn't exist at the time of the Soviet occupation - let alone as a government of any kind. And actually, the Taliban is a Pakistani creation - a band of predominantly Pashtun 'graduates' from the maddrassas of northwest Pakistan, whose 'education' was bought and paid for, by the Saudis. The maddrassas were nothing more than hothouses for extremism.

 

In the war with the Soviets, the Americans backed various factions. These famously included the 'lion of Panshjir', Ahmed Shah Massoud, a brilliant guerilla fighter who did more than anyone to drive the Russians out. Massoud was no extremist. In fact, he was murdered on bin Laden's direct orders, on 10 September 2001 - the day before you know what. His murder was an attempt to prevent a counter-attack from Massoud after 9/11. But it only delayed the inevitable - Massoud's Northern Alliance routed the Taliban in 2002 (with American assistance, but with no military involvement outside a few special forces).

 

During the Soviet occupation, the Americans also gave material support to notorious and vicious warlords like Abdul Rashid Dostum. And they gave some to Osama bin Laden - although the amounts were paltry. So much so, that the fighters under bin Laden's command were universally regarded as a bunch of amateur jokers by the other muhajadeen, and were actually attacked so seriously by them that they were forced to withdraw from Afghanistan altogether.

 

The real backers of Osama bin Laden were not the Americans, but the Saudis. This was in no way indirect. Bin Laden was on the payroll of the Saudi intelligence service and was under the direct supervision of a certain individual who happens to have since occupied the most senior Saudi position in Britain. Only after 9/11 did the Saudis realise their mistake, and tried unsuccessfully to 'repatriate' him.

Edited 4 January, 2010 by Verbal

[View From The Top]

There's a shocker!!!!! coming from you.

 

Have the sacrifices by Western troops in Afghanistan/Iraq made the world a safer place?

 

IMHO, no.

 

We, the West, lost sight of who we were fighting and that was a huge mistake.

 

The Taliban, odious as they were/are, were never our enemy or a threat to us.

 

We embroiled ourselves in a war we don't know how to win or how to end.

 

Added into the mix is the "cause" it's given the rabid right wing of Islam as evidenced by the scum wanting to march through Wotton Bassett.

[Johnny Bognor]

Prior to 911, the UK/US/NATO intervened (against the wishes of the UN) in Bosnia and Kosovo. The 1995 intervention in Bosnia halted Serbian attacks in which some 200,000 people, the majority of them Muslims, were killed, and thousands of more people were raped, tortured, and driven from their homes. The 1999 bombing of Serbia prevented the expulsion from Kosovo of two million ethnic Albanians, of whom at least 80 percent were Muslims.

You could even argue that the first gulf war was to free the Muslims of Kuwait against a foreign agressor.

 

What I don't get about all this is that the feelings towards "us" are based on so called foreign policies of the last 10 years, but do "we" not get any credit for the previous 10 years or is this conveniently forgotton?

 

Perhaps someone more informed on the subject could enlighten me.

[View From The Top]

Prior to 911, the UK/US/NATO intervened (against the wishes of the UN) in Bosnia and Kosovo. The 1995 intervention in Bosnia halted Serbian attacks in which some 200,000 people, the majority of them Muslims, were killed, and thousands of more people were raped, tortured, and driven from their homes. The 1999 bombing of Serbia prevented the expulsion from Kosovo of two million ethnic Albanians, of whom at least 80 percent were Muslims.

You could even argue that the first gulf war was to free the Muslims of Kuwait against a foreign agressor.

 

What I don't get about all this is that the feelings towards "us" are based on so called foreign policies of the last 10 years, but do "we" not get any credit for the previous 10 years or is this conveniently forgotton?

 

Perhaps someone more informed on the subject could enlighten me.

 

I've heard the argument used that the former Yugoslavia was only of interest as it's in Europe.

For the real stone in the shoe look no further than Israel/Palestine.

[Gingeletiss]

Have the sacrifices by Western troops in Afghanistan/Iraq made the world a safer place?

 

IMHO, no.

 

We, the West, lost sight of who we were fighting and that was a huge mistake.

 

No we haven't

 

The Taliban, odious as they were/are, were never our enemy or a threat to us.

 

We embroiled ourselves in a war we don't know how to win or how to end.

 

Oh but we do, ask the military to win it without political interference, they will. The military could of solved the IRA problem in '69, but were denied the right by Politicians......look what happend. They could of dealt with Saddam in the first gulf war, and were denied the right, and look what happened.

 

 

Added into the mix is the "cause" it's given the rabid right wing of Islam as evidenced by the scum wanting to march through Wotton Bassett.

 

Don't be fooled into thinking the military don't know what they're doing, they are fighting this with both hands tied behind their backs and blindfolded.

[Sheaf Saint]

For example a Muslim commits mass murder and you get the odd reluctant half hearted condemnation from various groups/leaders. Yet someone draws an innocent cartoon and you get all sorts of vocal reaction from all areas of the Muslim community and massive protests world-wide.

 

And so the cycle of misunderstanding continues. If you understood the muslim culture in any way you would understand why that particular action was deemed so offensive. The cartoonist might as well have accused every musilm in the world of being a pig-loving whore. And while some of the reaction to it was extreme (we all saw the 'behead those who insult Islam' banners), there was always going to be a massive backlash to it.

 

With a little cultural understanding and mutual respect, the whole situation could have been avoided.

[Gingeletiss]

And so the cycle of misunderstanding continues. If you understood the muslim culture in any way you would understand why that particular action was deemed so offensive. The cartoonist might as well have accused every musilm in the world of being a pig-loving whore. And while some of the reaction to it was extreme (we all saw the 'behead those who insult Islam' banners), there was always going to be a massive backlash to it.

 

With a little cultural understanding and mutual respect, the whole situation could have been avoided.

 

So, we're expected to understand their culture, but they refuse to accept ours........you make me laugh!!!

[Sheaf Saint]

So, we're expected to understand their culture, but they refuse to accept ours........you make me laugh!!!

 

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it? Who's 'they'?

 

My point being that had that cartoonist known just how inflammatory his cartoon would be and how much of a backlash it would cause, he might have thought twice about it. Unless of course he did know, and an extreme reaction was his aim in the first place.

[aintforever]

And so the cycle of misunderstanding continues. If you understood the muslim culture in any way you would understand why that particular action was deemed so offensive. The cartoonist might as well have accused every musilm in the world of being a pig-loving whore. And while some of the reaction to it was extreme (we all saw the 'behead those who insult Islam' banners), there was always going to be a massive backlash to it.

 

With a little cultural understanding and mutual respect, the whole situation could have been avoided.

 

They don't even try to accept that it's part of our culture to question and mock religions/beliefs, again, total hypocrisy.

[Sheaf Saint]

They don't even try to accept that it's part of our culture to question and mock religions/beliefs, again, total hypocrisy.

 

I ask you the same as I ask Gingelietiss...

 

Who do you mean by 'they'?

[Gingeletiss]

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it? Who's 'they'?

 

My point being that had that cartoonist known just how inflammatory his cartoon would be and how much of a backlash it would cause, he might have thought twice about it. Unless of course he did know, and an extreme reaction was his aim in the first place.

 

Why?????.........why should he now be in fear of his life. I saw some very ugly 'cartoons' on some very agressive banners, held by some frothing at the mouth 'Muslims', when they marched through Luton. Did I or the whole Christian population wish them dead..........methinks the answer is no. You carry on defending 'them', me, I think they should show the same level of tolerence to 'us' as we have shown to 'them'.

[Thedelldays]

Where are the UAF on all this. All too quick to wan to storm the BBC because the vile nick griffin was inside

 

what is their stance on this Islam4uk..?

[Sheaf Saint]

Why?????.........why should he now be in fear of his life. I saw some very ugly 'cartoons' on some very agressive banners, held by some frothing at the mouth 'Muslims', when they marched through Luton. Did I or the whole Christian population wish them dead..........methinks the answer is no. You carry on defending 'them', me, I think they should show the same level of tolerence to 'us' as we have shown to 'them'.

 

I'm not saying I agree with the reaction. I'm just putting forward that had the cartoonist understood the culture he was insulting, he would have known what the reaction would be. Look what happened with Salman Rushdie. Again, I'm not saying it was right or wrong, just that a little understanding in the first place could have diffused a situation before it blew up oput of all proportion.

 

And when you claim that I am defending 'them', without answering my question as to which 'them' you are referring to, I am not defending the extremist nutters who carried the 'death to the infidel' banners, I am defending the overwhelming majority of the world's muslim population who are, in my experience, peaceful people who are being tarred with the same brush as the wahaabi jihadists unfairly by blinkered people who are unable to make the distinction.

[bridge too far]

Don't be fooled into thinking the military don't know what they're doing, they are fighting this with both hands tied behind their backs and blindfolded.

 

I seriously hope that you're not, for one moment, suggesting the military should act outwith government? That would set a really dangerous precendent.

[RedAndWhite91]

Where are the UAF on all this. All too quick to wan to storm the BBC because the vile nick griffin was inside

 

what is their stance on this Islam4uk..?

 

UAF would probably rather see Islam4UK in Number 10 than see the BNP in Number 10.

[Gingeletiss]

I'm not saying I agree with the reaction. I'm just putting forward that had the cartoonist understood the culture he was insulting, he would have known what the reaction would be. Look what happened with Salman Rushdie. Again, I'm not saying it was right or wrong, just that a little understanding in the first place could have diffused a situation before it blew up oput of all proportion.

 

And when you claim that I am defending 'them', without answering my question as to which 'them' you are referring to, I am not defending the extremist nutters who carried the 'death to the infidel' banners, I am defending the overwhelming majority of the world's muslim population who are, in my experience, peaceful people who are being tarred with the same brush as the wahaabi jihadists unfairly by blinkered people who are unable to make the distinction.

 

Oh trust me, I don't wear blinkers. I have served in many places around the world. I spent 18 months in Saudi. So this is my take on it. 'Them' as I referred to, are a religion, that condons their lunitic fringe, running around the world killing in the name of their God. They care not who they kill, neither colour race or religion. Bexy, I don't know you, or your beliefs, but you defend their religion, whilst dismissing ours as an irrellivence. I'm not religious, but was bought up in a Christian/caring society. I do not force my beliefs on others, so why should I be told that their views are the only ones that count, and their belief says death to all infidals!!

 

 

Now Bexy....answer me that??

[aintforever]

I ask you the same as I ask Gingelietiss...

 

Who do you mean by 'they'?

 

The Muslims who protested, issued death threats and the Muslim organizations that perpetuate such behavour by not speaking out against it.

[Gingeletiss]

I seriously hope that you're not, for one moment, suggesting the military should act outwith government? That would set a really dangerous precendent.

 

I'm saying, that a military solution should be left to the military....read into that what you will, but as you twist this and spin it back at me, ask why the military don't sit in Parliment??.

[Sheaf Saint]

Oh trust me, I don't wear blinkers. I have served in many places around the world. I spent 18 months in Saudi. So this is my take on it. 'Them' as I referred to, are a religion, that condons their lunitic fringe, running around the world killing in the name of their God. They care not who they kill, neither colour race or religion. Bexy, I don't know you, or your beliefs, but you defend their religion, whilst dismissing ours as an irrellivence. I'm not religious, but was bought up in a Christian/caring society. I do not force my beliefs on others, so why should I be told that their views are the only ones that count, and their belief says death to all infidals!!

 

 

Now Bexy....answer me that??

 

But how can you say with absolute certainty that the entire religion (bearing in mind it is estimated there are over 1.5 billion muslims in the world) condones their lunatic fringe? I can tell you with absolute certainty that that is completely untrue.

 

I'm not saying that their views are the only ones that count. Where have I said that? I'm saying that muslims and non-muslims need to understand and tolerate each others' customs and beliefs. Now I'm sure that there are plenty of people on here who will claim that is just pie in the sky, and they may be right, but as long as there exists an attitude of 'well they don't respect our customs so why should we repsect theirs?' then there is zero hope of any progress ever being made.

 

Oh and by the way, I take extreme exception to you accusing me of defending their religion whilst dismissing ours as an irrelevance. Please show me what statement I have made that leads you to that conclusion. You are simply making assumptions about me based on... well, nothing it seems. I await your apology.

Edited 4 January, 2010 by Sheaf Saint

[bridge too far]

I'm saying, that a military solution should be left to the military....read into that what you will, but as you twist this and spin it back at me, ask why the military don't sit in Parliment??.

 

Some of them do - in the Lords. And I think the Tories are proposing to employ a recently retired senior officer as their military advisor.

 

I just think that having a military acting independently of government is a dangerous path to tread. Think of all the juntas there have been in history.

[Gingeletiss]

Some of them do - in the Lords. And I think the Tories are proposing to employ a recently retired senior officer as their military advisor.

 

I just think that having a military acting independently of government is a dangerous path to tread. Think of all the juntas there have been in history.

 

I have never advocated that. My point being, that if a goverment asks it's military to do a job, they shouldn't ask that, whilst hamstringing them. Our military is the best in the bar the Isralies, but we are struggling in Afganistan. Take of the shackles, let them do it their way, and maybe, it would be over soon, not the 20 years being talked about at the mo.

[View From The Top]

Don't be fooled into thinking the military don't know what they're doing, they are fighting this with both hands tied behind their backs and blindfolded.

 

I'm no fool as I'm ex-military myself, 10 years of and I know full well who to blame and non of them wear a uniform.

[Sheaf Saint]

I have never advocated that. My point being, that if a goverment asks it's military to do a job, they shouldn't ask that, whilst hamstringing them. Our military is the best in the bar the Isralies, but we are struggling in Afganistan. Take of the shackles, let them do it their way, and maybe, it would be over soon, not the 20 years being talked about at the mo.

 

So are you suggesting we should remove the ROE? I see where you are coming from but I have to question the sense of it. IMO If the military is let loose to do it their way then we will end up with a lot more collateral damage, which will in turn just breed an entire new generation of jihadis intent on wreaking revenge. I think it would be completely counter-productive to what we are supposedly trying to achieve.

[View From The Top]

With a little cultural understanding and mutual respect, the whole situation could have been avoided.

 

Big LOL at that!

[View From The Top]

I just think that having a military acting independently of government is a dangerous path to tread. Think of all the juntas there have been in history.

 

******s, that's not what's being advocated and you know it.

[Gingeletiss]

Oh and by the way, I take extreme exception to you accusing me of defending their religion whilst dismissing ours as an irrelevance. Please show me what statement I have made that leads you to that conclusion. You are simply making assumptions about me based on... well, nothing it seems. I await your apology.

 

You have also made sweeping generalisations, if you're sensitive enough to warrent an apology, then you have it, but don't keep dripping on about how hard done by, the Muslim religion is. There has been confict between them and Christians, for two and a half thousand years, you and the bleeding heart liberals in this country, give the a voice, and a strength to bring that fight to our front door.

 

Back to the OP.......this proposed march will be a disaster, which ever way you view it. As for the letter he proposes to send out to grieving familys, a disgrace, now what say you on that Bexy me lad???

[Gingeletiss]

So are you suggesting we should remove the ROE? I see where you are coming from but I have to question the sense of it. IMO If the military is let loose to do it their way then we will end up with a lot more collateral damage, which will in turn just breed an entire new generation of jihadis intent on wreaking revenge. I think it would be completely counter-productive to what we are supposedly trying to achieve.

 

Yes and no.........the ROE are to strict, they hamper a proper military solution. One rifle and one bullet could solve many a problem, but we still see fit to kill hundreds of young people, to satisfy Civilian Politicians, who really don't have a clue.

[View From The Top]

You have also made sweeping generalisations, if you're sensitive enough to warrent an apology, then you have it, but don't keep dripping on about how hard done by, the Muslim religion is. There has been confict between them and Christians, for two and a half thousand years, you and the bleeding heart liberals in this country, give the a voice, and a strength to bring that fight to our front door.

 

Uuummm, no, they haven't.

[Gingeletiss]

Uuummm, no, they haven't.

 

 

Uuummm.......yes they have. Do we have different views on history??

[bridge too far]

******s, that's not what's being advocated and you know it.

 

I know full well that's not what he's advocating. I'm just pointing out that one small step along that route is a dangerous thing. Just following it to an inevitable conclusion.

[RedAndWhite91]

You have also made sweeping generalisations, if you're sensitive enough to warrent an apology, then you have it, but don't keep dripping on about how hard done by, the Muslim religion is. There has been confict between them and Christians, for two and a half thousand years, you and the bleeding heart liberals in this country, give the a voice, and a strength to bring that fight to our front door.

 

Back to the OP.......this proposed march will be a disaster, which ever way you view it. As for the letter he proposes to send out to grieving familys, a disgrace, now what say you on that Bexy me lad???

 

Islam was 'founded' around 600 AD ish. That's only like 1400 years ago.

[View From The Top]

Uuummm.......yes they have. Do we have different views on history??

 

 

As Islam was only founded around 600AD I can't see where you get 2500 years from.

[Sheaf Saint]

You have also made sweeping generalisations, if you're sensitive enough to warrent an apology, then you have it, but don't keep dripping on about how hard done by, the Muslim religion is. There has been confict between them and Christians, for two and a half thousand years, you and the bleeding heart liberals in this country, give the a voice, and a strength to bring that fight to our front door.

 

So you throw the bleeding heart liberal tag at me, and I throw the knee-jerk reactionary tag at you, and we carry on making generalisations and failing to understand each others point of view. I can see there is no point in us further engaging in this discussion if that's the way it is going to go.

 

Back to the OP.......this proposed march will be a disaster, which ever way you view it. As for the letter he proposes to send out to grieving familys, a disgrace, now what say you on that Bexy me lad???

 

I am in the fortunate position of being able to look at it objectively, so I don't think it is for you or me to decide if it is a disgrace or not... it is down to the families receiving it.

 

I have read the letter and FWIW, and I appreciate I am probably going to get flamed for this, despite all of his deluded ramblings, I cannot deny that he does make one or two very valid points. However, I do not expect grieving families to see it that way, and I certainly cannot blame them.

 

Choudary clearly thinks he is doing the world a favour by introducing them to Islam, just like the religious crusades were intended to spread the word of god in the dark ages or whenever it was. If he thinks he is going to get a positive reaction to his letter then he is as deluded as his followers who believe that 72 virgins await them in the afterlife. And this is precisely the point I was making earlier... He has no understanding of our culture, in the same way so many of us have no tolerance of his. As long as that is the status quo, there is no hope for any progress to ever be made.

Edited 4 January, 2010 by Sheaf Saint

[View From The Top]

I know full well that's not what he's advocating. I'm just pointing out that one small step along that route is a dangerous thing. Just following it to an inevitable conclusion.

 

No, you are deliberately being obstinate.

 

The politicians have given the military a task but aren't allowing them to fulfill their mission brief which leads to the increasing loss of life.

 

You don't play politics with soldiers lives.