Attacks in Paris

A good question from the guy at the end asking "who the leader of the Muslim peace movement is right now?"

As is often the case, these snippets only show part of the whole picture. I still have to agree with the statement that its doesn't matter that most Muslims are peace loving.

I would like to see all of those "peace loving" Muslims speak out againt the radicals and extremists.

The problem is that the right wing will flourish in these kinds of conditions.

I assumed she meant fighting a war against ideology jings

this is how the event continued

She sounds ok to me.

Yes Wilma. That's the impression I got. Something wasn't quite right there.

What do you reckon her intention was?

Not sure what she meant about fighting the war "ideologically" though. How would we do that?

She sounded innocent enough.

gillybob I saw that video when it was first published. I then did a bit of research and found that Brigitte Gabriel is one of the most controversial right wingers in the USA. She is known for making inflammatory speeches and has been accused by her country of origin of elaborating her childhood during the Lebanese civil war. To me she's worse than Donald Trump because she's clearly intelligent. The student Sabah Ahmed isn't much better because she joined a Benghazi Accountability Coalition (BAC) meeting about the 4 US soldiers killed Benghazi in 2012 and asked a question not relevant to the subject of the meeting. So she was also acting in an inflammatory manner.

For me the video is right wing propaganda, but people will believe what they want to believe.

I didn't feel sorry for her at all jings her intention was clear although the forceful response probably shocked her.

Yes I think you are probably right that most Muslims are peaceful. But as the lady in the link said it is not most Muslims we need to be worrying about. I would like to see "most Muslims" stand up and condemn terrorism though.

entitled. express her view

Can't really see the point of that bullying outburst. The girl was titled to express hew view without having all that chucked at her. And she herself was regretful there were no other Muslims there to back her up.

Wow.

But I feel sorry for the Muslim girl. Did the woman have to sound so aggressive?

And the fact does remain. Most Muslims are peaceful.

Fantastic link JA - what a great speaker, she presented a powerful argument, that in war situations the peaceful majority are irrelevant this is something that needs to be said more often.

I think perhaps you should take a look at jane's link wilma.

Well there we have it. Well said that woman. Excellent link janeainsworth.

gillybob you ask "so what"? Well, for a start it means those women are choosing not to follow that particular Muslim tradition. They're demonstrating free choice which is not an option for radical Islamists. They're demonstrating that they're integrated into our society.

The whole panel was extremist, but they did not break the law. They believe in most of ISIS believes in - and they are all known to the security services. Do I like them holding that meeting? Absolutely not, but then again I would think the same about the BNP or any other extremist group. I support free speech, but it comes with responsibility and expect the law to be upheld.

Why it does not matter that most Muslims are peace-loving.
qpolitical.com/someone-said-muslims-bad-woman-delivers-amazing-response/

You have still not answered my question, AB, or anyone else who abhors all violence and interference in other cultures, and blames "the west" for the situation.

The past cannot be changed. There was intolerance on all sides - NOT only from "the west". So what NOW?

Should we kneel before IS, bare our necks and say "It is all our fault. Your killings were justice, ours were not. Be merciful, in the name of Allah" ? and just what do you think would happen if we did? That all would then be sweetness and light? That there would not be exultation in the ranks of those who are hot to establish a caliphate over all of Europe and Africa? That they would quietly settle back into peaceful co-existence? That our own culture, traditions, religious freedom and all that we have achieved over the centuries would not be under threat?

The genie is out of the bottle, and containing and resisting it by all means possible is the way forward. Diplomatic negotiation, personal contacts where they are possible, condemnation of terrorist attacks and suicide bombings and yes, even concentrated military action on the IS strongholds if we must.

There must be international standards of screening of migrants, and observation of those who seem to have dodgy papers. Not at all easy to do and likely to offend - but it could filter out some of those who want to cause harm to the country that takes then in. "Citizenship" and language classes for immigrants could teach them the good values of the country they come to, to counteract what they see as bad aspects.

Just repeating that "We are worse than them, and atrocities in other countries are being ignored" is not constructive.

............and just how often do you see Muslim leaders in the UK demonising radical Islam Wilma ?

POGS I agree with you, as long as the Muslim community is not demonised in the process. I don't want to see an us and them situation in the UK, unless it's the UK versus radical Islam. That said, the Muslim community must raise its profile in its efforts to demonstrate it is against Islamic extremism. I know it is involved, but it is not enough and must be seen as part of integrated demonstrations.

We all need to be against IS, just like we were against the Nazis.

It is me who is scared Wilma and if others seek to bury their heads in the sand or vote for a pacifist then that's up to them.

One of the people on this panel is well know to be an extremist.

I agree most Muslims are not extremists but some (maybe more than we realise) are.

Many Muslim women don't wear hijab. So what?

Put refugees in camps where ? The refugees in the camp in Calais have been subjected to police brutality for ages , we will not accept them here so why should we expect other countries to have camps ?

We are accepting refugees to supposedly safe their lives but we are now sacrificing our own people in the process.

They can be kept safe and well in refugee camps if all money and effort from other countries were put towards running these safety and efficiently. They are then best placed to go back to their own country when safe.

Any parent who puts their child are risk by putting them in a dingy/boat from a safe place like Turkey to reach Greece should not be pitied by the rest of the world but condemned.

gillybob did you miss the word radical in that article? Most Muslims in the UK are not radical and many Muslim women do not wear hijab. I worked with women you wouldn't even know were Muslim.

I am gobsmacked and sad that you actually believe we could be governed by Muslim law. In fact, I think it verges on the point of scaremongering.

As for world news it is simply the case the UK news channels are dire at covering stories. Sky (free view 132) is better than the BBC at times but watch Aljazeera (free view 133) they cover the UK and world news and they cover Middle East news constantly. So there was coverage of Beirut on our news channels.

To be honest bringing up what news there was on Beirut , mentioning the fact more Muslims have been killed by IS or the British calling German forces 'Gerries' has little bearing on the attack in Paris.

The world is at war with IS and it's about time the UN got it's act together. IS fighters have only one aim in life , to dominate the world with their barbaric, medieval brand of the Muslim faith. They do not care if they exterminate the Jew, the Christian, Muslims of any faith who do not believe in the Islamic State, the Caliphate.

As for the question of our defence against IS and our ability to defend the UK against terror attacks there are 2 views. Some think the likes of Edward Snowden are practically heroic in divulging matters of state secrecy, others think they are b----y traitors. Some think the present government are trying to impose too much survailance on our human rights, others are more than happy to allow the survailance as they believe it is a tool to keep us safe. Some say we shouldn't sell arms and equipment to the Arab Nations , other's think well if they do not have arms and equipment to fight how could they protect their own people. The list of opposite views could go on and on.

The UK has been clearly warned ' over the past few years ' we are on code red alert for acts of terrorism and it cannot have failed to be known by most people that Home Secretary Theresa May has been outspoken of the fact we have 'thwarted' potential terror attacks , this has been the case prior to the tragic Lee Rugby murder, the be headings of Jihadi John and any bombing of IS insurgents in Syria. It is a fact we all have to accept in the UK and any other country in the world, IS is out to attack us , not only by murder but including our way of life which they hate so much because of their desire to rule the world as a Caliphate.

All we can do is continually raise our game, accept the realistic need for extra surveillance, accept our security agencies need to have the tools to detect and hopefully thwart potential attacks on us and stop being so precious about our 'civil liberties', IS doesn't give a toss about our 'liberties' IS thanks the likes of Snowden, IS relies on our liberal way of life/thinking it gives them an open goal to wage their war on us.

It is this kind of thing that worries me.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319941/Radical-panellists-event-demand-establishment-Islamic-State.html

If things are allowed to carry on the way they are Anniebachthen, yes there is a distinct possibility that we may have a hard line Muslim in charge.

Perhaps not within the next generation but the one after that.