If the UK hadn't been subjected to such high levels of post-war immigration then these rather unsavoury groups wouldn't even exist in the first place.
These 'unsavoury' groups are a massive part of the problem. Consider how a disagreement turns into a major fight. Each 'side' takes a stance and that stance becomes more extreme until nobody will back down and there's hate.
I can imagine many of the extremists have felt the hate of the EDL, Britain First and the rest of the knuckle-heads and have responded in kind, extremely and violently. Both ends of the spectrum need rid of, we can see the consequences.
It's a chicken and egg situation, who hated who first?
I just watched the gruesome video, and I don't understand one thing. Why did Foley have to say all the things in the video about America being guilty for his death, knowing they would kill him no matter what. As soon as they got him on his knees, he knew they would behead him.
Because if he didn't.He was threatened by a far worse(yes,such a thing is possible) and slow death.
I agree with this. But what can be done about it - nothing will change. I like the fact that the UK is a tolerant country but this religion is so far away from our culture.
I suspect the UK's much-vaunted tolerance is pretty much a thing of the past. It's been used and abused. Most of the people I know, perfectly liberal-minded folk in most other ways, have had enough of 'tolerating' Islam in particular and mass immigration in general.
i also think in the uk faith schools have been a really bad idea. its divisive and really all schools should be secular and all religion needs to take a back seat and be out of schools and the workplace..but this wont happen in a million yrs. this situation is a mess.
Lots of people are attributing collective guilt and you yourself said it's understandable to consider all Muslims as complicit. It might be a fact that you do to know which Muslims are moderate and which aren't but that doesn't justify considering them all to be extremists. Not only does it validate attacks on innocent people from both sides, it alienates the very people we are trying to integrate into British society. It would not surprise me if a lot of these British ISIS fighters have had an encounter or two with the EDL or Britain First and that made their mind up for them.
Except we haven't been trying to integrate them.
It's a complicated problem.
It seems many of the extremists are second/third generation immigrants. It's common among this group to have a crisis of cultural identity often expressed as an exaggerated version of their parents original culture. I now quite a few second/third generation Italians who are obsessed about genuine Italian food, for instance. Course that's a rather trivial and harmless example but the similarity is there.
It could then, ironically, for these extremists be a reaction against their parent's/elder's integration, a kind of "Uncle Tom" thing.
It's certainly not helped by notions of multiculturalism that legitimise and even celebrate separatism because that dogma re-enforces notions of their parents being traitors to Islam.
No easy solutions, but I would say the dogma of multiculturalism and the normalisation of separatism in some immigrant communities hasn't helped and needs changing.
I would beg to disagree. I think religious concepts tend to make people more extreme and unquestioning for both good and bad.
e.g. Religious motivation can sometimes result in self sacrifice on behalf of others; sometimes as in this context it results in justifying fanatical cruelty.
To suggest that if religion was erased we'd all be OK is incorrect IMHO, which was the point I was making.
Such as detention and the enforced removal from society?
If someone is found guilty of incitement, or being a member of banned terrorist organisation then they face jail. Indeed some have been jailed for that very thing. Others have been jailed just for having extremist material on their computers, even if they had not actually committed any other crime.
If someone is found guilty of incitement, or being a member of banned terrorist organisation then they face jail. Indeed some have been jailed for that very thing. Others have been jailed just for having extremist material on their computers, even if they had not actually committed any other crime.
The IS people are now openly being called 'barbarians' on the main news.Never heard it put so strongly before.'insane' is another one I heard tonight.
It's telling when even Al-Qaeda try and distance themselves away from IS scum (or ISIS or whatever they're called). I really don't like discussing politics and all that but just looking at the news and what's happening in the Middle East (along with other conflicts around the world) makes me cry.
It's weird, I live slap bang in the middle of Birmingham in a majority Muslim area (some online would describe it a Pakistani helhole)l. Never have I once been approached by any sort of extremist. I don't know if I've lucky or what considering what's said on the news about those trying to recruit others to fight in Iraq. I don't know what to think anymore.
Isis is a proscribed terrorist organisation, and membership, promotion and fundraising for it is now a crime.
Incitement to violence is already a crime.
We have many other laws to deal with them too, such as laws governing hate speech.
Now you can argue that these laws sometimes are not enforced, and that may well be the case, but these laws are already on the statute books.
If they are not being enforced properly then that is something to raise with your MP and the police.
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
We might have the laws to deal with terrorism and its supporters but what we lack is a policy of tackling non violent exremism that results in people waddling off to iraq and syria to chop peoples heads off.
For the past 3 years a policy has been blocked by sayeeda warsi whose job it was to come up with one because she didn't agree with some of the people who were on the panel from the quilliam foundation.
For too long anything to do with extremism in the "muslim community" has been protested against and people criticising it labelled as racist or islamophobic.
When the trojan horse scandal came out there was two prominent muslim people who actually came out and unequivocally said it needed to be looked into but all the rest stuck their heads in the sand and labelled everyone an Islamophobe and stated that it was an attack on the "muslim community".
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
I wish people would stop using this expression very few animals on the planet would sink this low.
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
And put them where? If they are British citizens nobody has to take them. It's all good saying rip up their citizenship but if there is nowhere to put them they have to come back here.
They will be best letting them back and arresting them and locking them up in a US style prison.
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
How do you stop someone who has never been convicted of anything from going to Iraq? And saying they can't come back won't work as they probably don't intend to come back anyway (they will be arrested if they do as ISIS is proscribed).
Of course they're not. If they were we wouldn't be seeing a rise in Halal meat, we wouldn't be seeing Islamic schools, we wouldn't be seeing the name 'Mohammed' being given to so many kids, we wouldn't be having areas of London turned into non-white no-go areas, etc. etc. etc.
I'm not sure you're quite know what 'assimilation' actually means, tbh.
Exactly. There were no such things as "Jewish no-go areas," "Irish no-go areas," "West Indian no-go areas," etc. Or at least, nothing like we see in parts of Bradford and Birmingham today. Usually, if an area was a "no-go" area, it was due to a higher level of drugs and crime, not the race or religion of the majority of residents.
On the question of whether Muslims will integrate in the future: That ship has sailed. Sure, the older generation of Muslim immigrants were eager to integrate as much as possible, and many did. It's their children and grandchildren, brought up in the UK, who are actively rejecting this integration. Or at least, too many of them are.
There's also the fact that other Asian communities, such as Hindus and Sikhs, have had a presence in the UK as long as if not longer than Muslims, and they've succeeded in integrating as well as reasonably possible without difficulty.
If Muslims are continually failing to integrate, despite having lived in the UK for roughly as long as these other communities, then they probably never will.
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
Unfortunately we cannot stop people going abroad, unless we are aware they have extremist views and are likely to go and join Isis in which case they can, I believe, be arrested and then be subject to travel bans and restrictions. Obviously we cannot know what a person's views are when it comes to extremism, unless they voice those opinions as we do not have thought crime in the UK.
The only way we could completely stop it is to ban all UK citizens from leaving the country, just in case, and that isn't going to happen.
I agree about them coming back. If these people can be identified, and perhaps there is a role in that for special forces such as the SAS going undercover and infiltrating Isis, gathering identity details and passing them back to our security forces, then they can and should be immediately arrested if and when they come back.
I don't now think removing citizenship is sensible, because that would undoubtedly make them much, much harder to keep track of and could be a dangerous step because of that.
That's another reason why I think the government here will step up their game. To the Americans, a British citizen has murdered an innocent US citizen and then sent a clear message directly to Obama. Maybe I'm wrong but I think there is a reason a Brit was used and not just because he could speak a language a lot of the world will understand.
Lots of people are attributing collective guilt and you yourself said it's understandable to consider all Muslims as complicit. It might be a fact that you don't know which Muslims are moderate and which aren't but that doesn't justify considering them all to be extremists. Not only does it validate attacks on innocent people from both sides, it alienates the very people we are trying to integrate into British society. It would not surprise me if a lot of these British ISIS fighters have had an encounter or two with the EDL or Britain First and that made their mind up for them.
Re BiB - I agree. But it still doesn't stop there being a problem deep within the Islamic community.
To be honest though, I'm not convinced that the EDL and Britain First have triggered much UK motivation - certainly not enough to trigger recruitment to ISIS. They are weak and comic organisations. Few take them seriously.
We might have the laws to deal with terrorism and its supporters but what we lack is a policy of tackling non violent exremism that results in people waddling off to iraq and syria to chop peoples heads off.
For the past 3 years a policy has been blocked by sayeeda warsi whose job it was to come up with one because she didn't agree with some of the people who were on the panel from the quilliam foundation.
For too long anything to do with extremism in the "muslim community" has been protested against and people criticising it labelled as racist or islamophobic.
When the trojan horse scandal came out there was two prominent muslim people who actually came out and unequivocally said it needed to be looked into but all the rest stuck their heads in the sand and labelled everyone an Islamophobe and stated that it was an attack on the "muslim community".
That is where the problem is.
She has thankfully pissed off now. She had far too much to say and too much involvement at the heart of government for her being unelected.
We might have the laws to deal with terrorism and its supporters but what we lack is a policy of tackling non violent exremism that results in people waddling off to iraq and syria to chop peoples heads off.
For the past 3 years a policy has been blocked by sayeeda warsi whose job it was to come up with one because she didn't agree with some of the people who were on the panel from the quilliam foundation.
For too long anything to do with extremism in the "muslim community" has been protested against and people criticising it labelled as racist or islamophobic.
When the trojan horse scandal came out there was two prominent muslim people who actually came out and unequivocally said it needed to be looked into but all the rest stuck their heads in the sand and labelled everyone an Islamophobe and stated that it was an attack on the "muslim community".
That is where the problem is.
Very well said. And the extremists know this and use it to their advantage.
To be honest though, I'm not convinced that the EDL and Britain First have triggered much UK motivation - certainly not enough to trigger recruitment to ISIS. They are weak and comic organisations. Few take them seriously.
Britain First and the EDL only exist because mainstream politicians refuse to confront the issue, therefore those groups are effectively the only outlet for those concerned about the issue.
Comments
These 'unsavoury' groups are a massive part of the problem. Consider how a disagreement turns into a major fight. Each 'side' takes a stance and that stance becomes more extreme until nobody will back down and there's hate.
I can imagine many of the extremists have felt the hate of the EDL, Britain First and the rest of the knuckle-heads and have responded in kind, extremely and violently. Both ends of the spectrum need rid of, we can see the consequences.
It's a chicken and egg situation, who hated who first?
Because if he didn't.He was threatened by a far worse(yes,such a thing is possible) and slow death.
I suspect the UK's much-vaunted tolerance is pretty much a thing of the past. It's been used and abused. Most of the people I know, perfectly liberal-minded folk in most other ways, have had enough of 'tolerating' Islam in particular and mass immigration in general.
But that's already the case.
Isis is a proscribed terrorist organisation, and membership, promotion and fundraising for it is now a crime.
Incitement to violence is already a crime.
We have many other laws to deal with them too, such as laws governing hate speech.
Now you can argue that these laws sometimes are not enforced, and that may well be the case, but these laws are already on the statute books.
If they are not being enforced properly then that is something to raise with your MP and the police.
That's something I fully agree with.
Such as detention and the enforced removal from society?
Except we haven't been trying to integrate them.
It's a complicated problem.
It seems many of the extremists are second/third generation immigrants. It's common among this group to have a crisis of cultural identity often expressed as an exaggerated version of their parents original culture. I now quite a few second/third generation Italians who are obsessed about genuine Italian food, for instance. Course that's a rather trivial and harmless example but the similarity is there.
It could then, ironically, for these extremists be a reaction against their parent's/elder's integration, a kind of "Uncle Tom" thing.
It's certainly not helped by notions of multiculturalism that legitimise and even celebrate separatism because that dogma re-enforces notions of their parents being traitors to Islam.
No easy solutions, but I would say the dogma of multiculturalism and the normalisation of separatism in some immigrant communities hasn't helped and needs changing.
To suggest that if religion was erased we'd all be OK is incorrect IMHO, which was the point I was making.
If someone is found guilty of incitement, or being a member of banned terrorist organisation then they face jail. Indeed some have been jailed for that very thing. Others have been jailed just for having extremist material on their computers, even if they had not actually committed any other crime.
i) how long did they get
and
ii) what happens when they're released
It's telling when even Al-Qaeda try and distance themselves away from IS scum (or ISIS or whatever they're called). I really don't like discussing politics and all that but just looking at the news and what's happening in the Middle East (along with other conflicts around the world) makes me cry.
It's weird, I live slap bang in the middle of Birmingham in a majority Muslim area (some online would describe it a Pakistani helhole)l. Never have I once been approached by any sort of extremist. I don't know if I've lucky or what considering what's said on the news about those trying to recruit others to fight in Iraq. I don't know what to think anymore.
Absolutely. I am sure the security forces need more resources - and this should be provided... but we have the tools to do the job in terms of law.
Have I got to do everything?.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/man-jailed-for-five-years-for-making-extremist-videos-36679
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2007/07/terr-j31.html
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/law-student-jailed-for-five-years-over-islamic-extremist-propaganda-6571038.html
http://dearkitty1.wordpress.com/2007/07/31/british-muslim-students-jailed-for-reading-extremist-literature/
http://www.kingstonguardian.co.uk/news/national/news/11402642.Man_jailed_over_terrorist_material/
And there are hundreds of other examples just a few seconds away on Google.
So the constant assertion by some of the more extreme right wingers, that these people are never jailed is blatant lies.
Well, the laws are obviously not working, as they can't prevent muslim extremists from going to Iraq, joining the IS or promoting islamism. I know I sound like a broken record with this, but the only efficient law would be banning the terrorist from coming back home and stripping them off their citizenship if they are proven to have been in Iraq fighting with the IS. Many of the terrorists got used to the western cosy way of life, and knowing that they can't come back into the country would stop potential terrorists in the UK from going to Iraq at the first place, plus Brits would have peace of mind knowing that the animals who are already there, wont be allowed back into the country.
For the past 3 years a policy has been blocked by sayeeda warsi whose job it was to come up with one because she didn't agree with some of the people who were on the panel from the quilliam foundation.
For too long anything to do with extremism in the "muslim community" has been protested against and people criticising it labelled as racist or islamophobic.
When the trojan horse scandal came out there was two prominent muslim people who actually came out and unequivocally said it needed to be looked into but all the rest stuck their heads in the sand and labelled everyone an Islamophobe and stated that it was an attack on the "muslim community".
That is where the problem is.
I wish people would stop using this expression very few animals on the planet would sink this low.
And put them where? If they are British citizens nobody has to take them. It's all good saying rip up their citizenship but if there is nowhere to put them they have to come back here.
They will be best letting them back and arresting them and locking them up in a US style prison.
How do you stop someone who has never been convicted of anything from going to Iraq? And saying they can't come back won't work as they probably don't intend to come back anyway (they will be arrested if they do as ISIS is proscribed).
Exactly. There were no such things as "Jewish no-go areas," "Irish no-go areas," "West Indian no-go areas," etc. Or at least, nothing like we see in parts of Bradford and Birmingham today. Usually, if an area was a "no-go" area, it was due to a higher level of drugs and crime, not the race or religion of the majority of residents.
On the question of whether Muslims will integrate in the future: That ship has sailed. Sure, the older generation of Muslim immigrants were eager to integrate as much as possible, and many did. It's their children and grandchildren, brought up in the UK, who are actively rejecting this integration. Or at least, too many of them are.
There's also the fact that other Asian communities, such as Hindus and Sikhs, have had a presence in the UK as long as if not longer than Muslims, and they've succeeded in integrating as well as reasonably possible without difficulty.
If Muslims are continually failing to integrate, despite having lived in the UK for roughly as long as these other communities, then they probably never will.
Unfortunately we cannot stop people going abroad, unless we are aware they have extremist views and are likely to go and join Isis in which case they can, I believe, be arrested and then be subject to travel bans and restrictions. Obviously we cannot know what a person's views are when it comes to extremism, unless they voice those opinions as we do not have thought crime in the UK.
The only way we could completely stop it is to ban all UK citizens from leaving the country, just in case, and that isn't going to happen.
I agree about them coming back. If these people can be identified, and perhaps there is a role in that for special forces such as the SAS going undercover and infiltrating Isis, gathering identity details and passing them back to our security forces, then they can and should be immediately arrested if and when they come back.
I don't now think removing citizenship is sensible, because that would undoubtedly make them much, much harder to keep track of and could be a dangerous step because of that.
You may very well be spot on there.
Re BiB - I agree. But it still doesn't stop there being a problem deep within the Islamic community.
To be honest though, I'm not convinced that the EDL and Britain First have triggered much UK motivation - certainly not enough to trigger recruitment to ISIS. They are weak and comic organisations. Few take them seriously.
She has thankfully pissed off now. She had far too much to say and too much involvement at the heart of government for her being unelected.
Very well said. And the extremists know this and use it to their advantage.
Agreed.
Britain First and the EDL only exist because mainstream politicians refuse to confront the issue, therefore those groups are effectively the only outlet for those concerned about the issue.