Convert to Islam or face the sword

  john bunyan 13:19 19 Jul 2014

ISIS in Mosul has told Christians they must convert to Islam or face the sword. See:


Obviously these are an extreme section of the Sunnis but no wonder when folk see British Muslims going there, and some being indoctrinated with such beliefs, people worry. The growing Muslim UK population must unite to crack down on this in the UK or risk a backlash from our own extremists.

  spuds 10:53 20 Jul 2014

Whenever there are discussions like this, there always seems to be the absence regarding parenting, and the education the parent should provide.

Regarding the UK, there are families here, who have no intentions to 'mix' with the rest, because they want to retain their own cultures and believes. Yet in the same breath they want the 'safe haven' this country is offering them, including full education and health guard rights. Perhaps a typical example is in some areas where the female of the family are not even allowed out their house or allowed to learn English, because their culture doesn't allow it?.

Personally, I find it rather hard to understand how the Koran is transformed into different meanings, yet even their scholars seem to not be able to justify certain acts in what the Koran is stating or is suppose to state?.

Another thing that often baffles me, is the fact that we hear about 'preachers of hate', and the authorities know who most of them are. Yet there doesn't appear to be any actions taken, because it will offend. How many times do you see these 'preachers of hate' churning out the hatred, and in the background you may see police officer or special branch observing. Now if that was an EDL march or protest, then some council would be crying out loud about the cost of control. To me, this is a double standards view, because it as been proven on a number of occasions. Yet why is it, that some are branded racists while others are branded pacifists because of the way authority in this country is beginning to show the way it works?.

  john bunyan 12:42 20 Jul 2014


Your last paragraph is amply illustrated by the case of Abu Hamza. The UK could have prosecuted him as our citizens were involved as well as US ones, but extradition to the USA was seen as preferable by those in Government, FO etc,who - as the US sees it - have allowed such folk to live here . Some in the US have dubbed the capital "Londinistan".

There does indeed seem to be a marked reluctance to prosecute such folk, and there is a whiff of appeasement.

I emphasise that most Muslims are no problem at all, and they are welcome as long as they respect our laws.

  spuds 13:05 20 Jul 2014

john bunyan

I agree, and it just goes to show what a very strange world we really live in.

One point I made earlier was about scholars not translating the Koran in the way others might see it. In my hometown we have had followers from one mosque have battles with followers from another nearby mosque. There have even been very bloody battles between Sikh's from one temple to those follower's from another section of their own community or believes.

You only need to see these events take place in your midst, to realise how scary and instant these events explode with very little warning or intelligence gathering before the event?.

In my own location of the country, its a well known fact that the various communities can form into large groups, in the event of serious concern or disruption to the community. All it needs is a few telephone calls, and the job is done. I believe its called 'protecting their own', but some people don't see or understand it that way, especially if 'culture' and believes are concerned?.

These sort of events hardly reach headlines news, unless someone 'leaks' the events, or it was serious enough to bring prosecutions and warnings to those possibly involved, and then it brings headline news, because the media have made it so.

  Forum Editor 13:45 20 Jul 2014

john bunyan

"This "sins of our fathers" arguments is an old one."

It is, and it's valid. Complaining about immigrants who want to retain aspects of their own culture isn't a new thing, but we need to maintain a sense of perspective when we do it. Most of the people who some might call 'indigenous' Britons are in fact related in some way to either immigrants or conquerors.

In the past we have been both - we emigrated to various countries, and we imposed our will on many more. The local populations - some of them truly indigenous peoples - usually didn't like it a bit, yet we offered them no say in the matter, and cared little for what they thought.

Now we're getting a tiny glimpse of the other side of the coin, and lots of us don't like it. In the end we also have little say in the matter; we must live in the real world, and the real world is a mobile one. People who live in less affluent societies look at us and see opportunities.

How would you set about changing human nature?

  john bunyan 14:50 20 Jul 2014

Forum Editor

People who live in less affluent societies look at us and see opportunities.

Obviously , but there is no way we - or even Europe - can absorb those who would like to come here. One is sorry for the hoards of Africans arriving in Italy etc, but unlimited immigration is a pipe dream. In the 1840's Afghanistan certainly showed the British that they were unacceptable there and we seem to have learned little. With the world's population , in my lifetime, having increased from 3 billion to over 6, the issue of mobility will be the cause of great strains in the future. Birth control usually occurs when countries have improved wealth, but many find it quite unacceptable that GB should have a totally unlimited influx of the world's poor, and regrettably, this will become the cause of great tension in the future.

I cannot change human nature, which is why it may well be that some in the UK will look at Australia's policy in this area. I do not go that far but many do (human nature, as you say)

  Batch 17:34 20 Jul 2014


Interesting that you mention Australia. There was a 3 episode series (Immigration Nation) on Al Jazeera recently which looked at the history of Australia's immigration policies over the past century or so (certainly worth catching if they repeat it). I had not realised that Australia had such explicit Whites Only laws, rather I had assumed that British (and to a lesser extent Europeans) were just the obvious immigrants for cultural reasons.

More info on Wikipedia - Whites Only

  john bunyan 18:00 20 Jul 2014


I was referring to the more recent policy of turning boats away or sending illegals to other islands. An example :

Oz Asylum seekers

  Forum Editor 22:22 20 Jul 2014


It wasn't me who mentioned Australia.

  Batch 10:23 21 Jul 2014

FE - apologies - John Bunyan was replying to you (and he mentioned Oz) and I picked up your name in error.

John Bunyan - yes, I realise that you were referring to recent immigration situations in Oz, but the Immigration Nation series (along with the Wikipedia article) provides a lot of background to the attitudes that are prevalent in Oz today. I, for one, had not realised how quite strident and entrenched their general anti-white policies (not to be confused with the more specific aboriginal policies) had been historically (even though I've visited Australia a few times and have many friends there) and that clearly has a knock on effect today. Makes them seem like a mini-US in some ways.

  Joseph Kerr 10:57 21 Jul 2014

As the Wikipedia article makes clear, Australia's policy is to disregard race when considering immigration applications.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

The best of Gamescom 2019

Best free Photoshop brushes 2019

Apple TV streaming service: what, where, when and how much

Les meilleurs smartphones incassables (2019)