Dispatches: Undercover Mosque

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Henry V

However, for the first centuries of Christianity, it was a presecuted and underground religion and still followed the original teachings of Christ. It was only much later that it undertook campaigns to ectend its realm, such as with Charlemagne's conquest of pagan Saxony. However, with Islam, this expansionism was seen a mere ten years after the death of its founder, when is contempory followers were still alive.

---

Ah, so it's purely a matter of timing?

Immediate bloodthirsty expansion = religion of war.
Delayed bloodthirsty expansion = religion of peace.

~:rolleyes:

Look, it's very simple. Islam is no more warlike than any other religion. Wise and spiritual people can find solace and guidance for their lives of peace and kindness in all the religious books and myths. Hate-crazed lunatics and marginalised eejits can find justification for their evil acts in the same books, often wielding the very same words. In neither case is the book or religion good or evil, but the people using it.

To paraphrase: Faith doesn't kill people, people kill people.

Islam isn't the problem - the cause of hate and marginalisation is. People who feel themselves powerless often turn to gods and their more populist representatives. And not only gods - witness how marginalised peoples turned to Hitler not so long ago, who provided them with just the same hatred and easy solutions tacked on to a dogma.

Generally, the closer in time one is to the founding of a religion, the closer its followers are to its original message. I'm not saying that Christianity is a religion of peace, however, what I do say is that Islam is a more belligerent religion than others.
As far as I know in the teachings of Christ, there is no provision for war based on religious reasons. In the teachings of Mohammed, there is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Rather misleading, don't you think?

The UK has a minimum wage. Immigrants can't "work for less" unless they are being exploited by employers. This is illegal and should be treated as such. It isn't the immigrants' fault.

---

Well for starters some immigrants will work for below the minimum wage quite happily, if they know it is below minumum wage, and I'm not saying they always do as many don't have great English and it's probably still better than back home, but if they do aren't they then committing a crime.

Quote:

---

In a fair choice between applicants for low paid jobs, responsible employers often do choose immigrants over residents - why? - because the immigrants are invariably harder-working and better qualified. Are you arguing that employers should employ the feckless and illiterate just because they are local?

---

No, you should choose the immigrant, but if you didn't have an immigrant then you'd chose a local. So now you have a local without a job because an immigrant has a job.

Quote:

---

Plumbing is less profitable because supply has caught up with demand. Back in the day when plumbers were scarce, they could command high prices, and often delivered shoddy work. Ever try and get a plumber in the late 90's?

---

My dad is a plumber, and a chippy, a brickie and a car mechanic, if he can't fix it it isn't broken. My mum is an accountant, you wouldn't believe the money we've saved over the last decade. The reason my father is all these things is because getting someone else to do it wasn't worth it.

[qutoe]Now the country has lots of well-qualified, courteous, hard-working plumbers who charge a reasonable amount and are likely to be available right now when the central heating needs fixing, not some time in late August. Competition has benefitted everyone.[quote]

No, it's great. It's just a same the English have gotten so bad at competing. However, if plumbing was very profitable and now is not so profitable it's very hard for people to go back to that, they have houses, cars, loans etc.

Quote:

---

Undercutting competitors is a perfectly normal business practice. The consumer wants lower prices and better quality. This is called a market. It has invariably been seen as a good thing in comparison to a command economy where the state tells you what you must pay and to whom.

---

Oh, I agree, but as I said, our economy can't take the change and even the conciencious workers can't compete.

If I said you had to take a 50% or even 25% pay cut wouldn't it cause you problems?

I'm not blaming immigrants but they are taking jobs that would otherwise go to natives, it's a simple fact and we need to face up to it and find a way for local buisnesses to be able to compete. Persuading Poles to take a pay rise would help to do that.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Henry V

As far as I know in the teachings of Christ, there is no provision for war based on religious reasons.

---

:laugh4:

--> the crusades?

While I agree with Wigferth Ironwall in essence I have to say that the old "they took our jobs!" line seems rather hollow at times. There are masses of people claiming benefit in this country, there are teenage girls that go out and get "in the family way", so as to be able to secure these benefits for the next 16 years at least, there are others that have "bad backs" and are also claiming indefinitely. There are the "stressed" ones, also claiming. Next up are the blingers in the boy racer cars, screeching into the job centre car park, signing the paper, back into the blingmobile complete with italicised number plate, spoiler kit, and blacked out windows, wheelspinning away to the off license, and finally back to bed. They have absolutely no intention of working. Daz, Baz or Shaz or whatever their names may be, no doubt regard themselves as being among the jobless due to a few Somalians or Polish having stolen their chosen vocations from them, and not because of the fact that they simply cannot unglue their backsides from the mattresses before 2pm.

Quote:

---

--> the crusades?

---

yeah and God is with us and all that , not actually teachings of Christ but churches backing of politics or nationalism and interpreting scripture purely to fit their purposes .
The problem isn't Christianity or Islam , it is silly peoples intepretations and applications of it .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The problem isn't Christianity or Islam , it is silly peoples intepretations and applications of it .

---

I might have to go get my head checked. I actually agree with Tribes on this.

:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

yeah and God is with us and all that , not actually teachings of Christ but churches backing of politics or nationalism and interpreting scripture purely to fit their purposes .
The problem isn't Christianity or Islam , it is silly peoples interpretations and applications of it.

---

Having articles of faith that have large passages dealing with killing nonbelievers is hardly going to help matters.

~:smoking:

I'd like to agree with Tribesman, really, I would.

But I agree more with Rory. Islam may be, by and large, a peaceful and acceptable religion but it makes specific provision for making Holy War, which the New Testemant does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

I'd like to agree with Tribesman, really, I would.

But I agree more with Rory. Islam may be, by and large, a peaceful and acceptable religion but it makes specific provision for making Holy War, which the New Testemant does not.

---

Doesn't it also make specific provision for civilised war, for government of a kingdom/empire, etc? The NT is mostly about personal advancement, and much of it is inapplicable to real life (try turning your other cheek until both have been slapped raw). Islam is a religion firmly rooted in the real world, and deals with real world issues. Look at their provisions for war, and you'll find they're closer to our way of thinking than the wishy-washiness of the NT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navaros

What's wrong with an Islamic Republic of Britain, that would be totally awesome.

I wish good luck to the Muslims who strive for that goal. Even if they don't meet it, at least they are standing up for morality and trying to do something good for society.

Certainly is a lot more respectable of a goal to turn Britain to Islam than it is to try to shove the infidel institution of democracy down the throats of Muslim nations (ie: War on Iraq).

---

Erm...what?

Islamic Republic.....'infidel institution of democracy' :juggle2:

We tried being a republic once, we didn't like it much. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

We tried being a republic once, we didn't like it much.

---

:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Doesn't it also make specific provision for civilised war, for government of a kingdom/empire, etc? The NT is mostly about personal advancement, and much of it is inapplicable to real life (try turning your other cheek until both have been slapped raw). Islam is a religion firmly rooted in the real world, and deals with real world issues. Look at their provisions for war, and you'll find they're closer to our way of thinking than the wishy-washiness of the NT.

---

Oh granted, there's that whole bit about non-combatants and not salting the earth. What I'm saying is you cannot say it is a peaceful religion, because it just isn't.

Doesn't make it bad at all. As a religion Islam is probably the best out-of-the-box one there is.

I just happen to believe in the Christ and if he happens to make things slightly less clear I'll deal with those issues as they come up.