Share this page:

Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

Interested or active in politics, discuss here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
go_the_paras
New Member
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed 25 Aug, 2010 6:41 am

Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#1 Post by go_the_paras » Wed 25 Aug, 2010 10:25 am

Hi all.

Ok, now this is one of the topics that has concerned me for some time. By that, I mean that Western countries seem to be very poorly prepared to defend against the so-called "jihad by stealth". This is the slow-but-steady increase in Islamic influence in Western countries.

As I see it, one of the problems is that Islam is able to "shelter" under the guise of a "religion". This is a problem because it means that those with evil intent can slowly chip away at our freedoms, and when questioned, they can hide behind the shield of "freedom of religion" or "freedom of speech". An example of this is the Finbury Park mosque, well-known for hosting imams who spout messages of hate.

In other words - Islam seeks to *use* our freedom of expression to work its way into power, and then *remove* our freedom of expression!

This is a very nasty and dangerous thing.

So, how to deal with this? As I see it, the first thing to do is to redefine Islam in the laws of all Western countries as a "hate group" or "hate ideology" rather than a "religion". Doing this would *instantly* remove from it all rights to shelter in the "freedom of religion" cloak.

Sure, this would no doubt be very unpopular with Muslims, but these are surely dangerous times. If we do not do this (and offend a small section of our population), we risk losing freedom altogether. That is surely not an option.

Step two (and this is where we get to the "protection from subversion / sedition" ) - A new law (let's call it a "supreme law") could be brought in, stating that all existing laws shall be amended to remove any existing favouritism towards Islam (it now having been redefined as a "hate group").

Furthermore, any new laws would also have to meet that test - that they give no favour or support to a legally-defined hate group.

Also - no group would be allowed to use "freedom of expression" if that group's ideology sought to remove that (or any other) freedom.

Yes, that means goodbye to the Sharia courts, and any other concession whatsoever which favours Muslims over other citizens. Goodbye to the silly "No Christmas decorations" bylaws and the like. Goodbye to separate swimming times for Muslims at swimming pools.

Ok, now there is one small "fly in the ointment" that I can see. That is, that groups like (say) the EDL (which I believe are valid, protesting against the dangers of Islam) should (somehow) not be included in the "hate group" definition. There may be a way of doing this. If a group has as its central purpose to *protest against a hate-group*, as the EDL does, then they should be exempted.

Long story short - the EDL does not seem to be seeking to overthrow the government.
They are simply against those who would *like* to. That is fine with me - many *more* people are needed to protest against Islam.

Ok, that'll do for now - your comments are welcomed! Do you agree that more needs to be done to protect our governments from subversion and sedition?
- go_the_paras

Advertise your company or services here and contact us today!

User avatar
MSI64
Celebrity Member
Celebrity Member
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu 27 Nov, 2008 11:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#2 Post by MSI64 » Wed 25 Aug, 2010 5:43 pm

go_the_paras wrote:Hi all.

Ok, now this is one of the topics that has concerned me for some time. By that, I mean that Western countries seem to be very poorly prepared to defend against the so-called "jihad by stealth". This is the slow-but-steady increase in Islamic influence in Western countries.

As I see it, one of the problems is that Islam is able to "shelter" under the guise of a "religion". IT IS A RELIGION!!!!! This is a problem because it means that those with evil intent can slowly chip away at our freedoms, and when questioned, they can hide behind the shield of "freedom of religion" or "freedom of speech". An example of this is the Finbury Park mosque, well-known for hosting imams who spout messages of hate.

In other words - Islam seeks to *use* our freedom of expression to work its way into power, and then *remove* our freedom of expression! HOW IS THIS HAPPENING???

This is a very nasty and dangerous thing.

So, how to deal with this? As I see it, the first thing to do is to redefine Islam in the laws of all Western countries as a "hate group" or "hate ideology" rather than a "religion". Doing this would *instantly* remove from it all rights to shelter in the "freedom of religion" cloak.

Sure, this would no doubt be very unpopular with Muslims, but these are surely dangerous times. SO LETS JUST MAKE THE WHOLE MUSLIM COMMUNTY HATE US RATHER THAN THE MINORITY?? If we do not do this (and offend a small section of our population), we risk losing freedom altogether. That is surely not an option.

Step two (and this is where we get to the "protection from subversion / sedition" ) - A new law (let's call it a "supreme law") could be brought in, stating that all existing laws shall be amended to remove any existing favouritism towards Islam PLEASE SHOW EXISTING LAWS THAT FAVOUR iSLAM?? (it now having been redefined as a "hate group").

Furthermore, any new laws would also have to meet that test - that they give no favour or support to a legally-defined hate group.

Also - no group would be allowed to use "freedom of expression" if that group's ideology sought to remove that (or any other) freedom.

Yes, that means goodbye to the Sharia courts, and any other concession whatsoever which favours Muslims over other citizens. Goodbye to the silly "No Christmas decorations" bylaws PLEASE SHOW THIS BY LAW?? and the like. Goodbye to separate swimming times for Muslims at swimming pools. NOT A LAW,, BUT MORE A POLITE THING TO DO JUST LIKE SEPERATE SWIM TIMES FOR PENSIONERS

Ok, now there is one small "fly in the ointment" that I can see. That is, that groups like (say) the EDL (which I believe are valid, protesting against the dangers of Islam) should (somehow) not be included in the "hate group" definition. There may be a way of doing this. If a group has as its central purpose to *protest against a hate-group*, as the EDL does, then they should be exempted.

Long story short - the EDL does not seem to be seeking to overthrow the government.
They are simply against those who would *like* to. That is fine with me - many *more* people are needed to protest against Islam. THE EDL IS A HATE GROUP?? ITS ENTIRE POLICY IS AGAINST MUSLIMS!!

Ok, that'll do for now - your comments are welcomed! Do you agree that more needs to be done to protect our governments from subversion and sedition?
- go_the_paras
Obviously an EDL supporter and a closet Nazi
Courage which goes against military expediency is stupidity, or, if it is insisted upon by a commander, irresponsibility."

"So long as one isn't carrying one's head under one's arm, things aren't too bad."

Erwin Rommel (Desert Fox)

User avatar
Tab
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5626
Joined: Wed 16 Apr, 2003 7:09 pm
Location: Southern England
Contact:

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#3 Post by Tab » Wed 25 Aug, 2010 11:49 pm

I would not call my self a Nazi and most of my views are fairly moderate, BUT it does get on my tits when a group people claim the right to protest any thing that they feel is an attack on their cause, yet claim religious intolerance or persecution if some challenges them on this matter, or holds opposing views and wants to express them.

go_the_paras
New Member
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed 25 Aug, 2010 6:41 am

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#4 Post by go_the_paras » Thu 26 Aug, 2010 7:08 am

MSI64 wrote:
go_the_paras wrote:Hi all.

Ok, now this is one of the topics that has concerned me for some time. By that, I mean that Western countries seem to be very poorly prepared to defend against the so-called "jihad by stealth". This is the slow-but-steady increase in Islamic influence in Western countries.

As I see it, one of the problems is that Islam is able to "shelter" under the guise of a "religion". IT IS A RELIGION!!!!!

How many "religions" do you know of that have supporters out on the streets with placards saying "Freedom of expression go to h*ll"?
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/191187.php

Or "God bless Hitler"?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ ... itler&only

Does an ideology like that really deserve to be called a religion?
That is what I was getting at.

Would YOU have backed off the Nazis in WW2 if they had called their movement a "religion"?

What matters to me is what an ideology IS, not the label that they are defined by or give themselves.

Consider this - if I were to start up a "religion" which (say) worshiped a god that I made up, and which had (as one of its edicts) that all non-believers must be killed, I would likely be put in jail in short order.

Yet the Quran has exactly the same edict - "Kill the unbeliever, wherever you may find him". The only difference is that Islam was "made up" almost 1400 years ago, so it gets an undeserved level of respect just because of its age.

Given its edicts like that, why do you think that Islam should stay defined as a religion, and not be redefined as **what the Quran proves that it really is** - a hate cult?

I was going to reply further (and in a polite vein - unlike yourself), but since you seem to be keen to throw around insults, I can't be bothered.

Yes, I support the EDL (although I'm not a member - I'm from New Zealand). Who else is protesting against the increasing influence of Islam in the UK (and in other Western countries)? Who else has the guts to front up to the hateful Muslim mobs who also march through the streets? Do you think that fronting up to the Muslims with a bunch of flowers will stop them?

Why should Muslims be allowed to march with banners that say "God bless Hitler" and "Freedom of expression go to h*ll", but the EDL be banned?
Answer that for me.

Either you allow both, or ban both.

No, I am not a "closet Nazi". I am in fact very fond of the Jewish people and all that they have to put up with from Muslims. So, I guess I'll be called a Zionist now. Fine with me....
- go_the_paras

User avatar
MSI64
Celebrity Member
Celebrity Member
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu 27 Nov, 2008 11:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#5 Post by MSI64 » Thu 26 Aug, 2010 7:47 am

Freedom of speech is exactly that its a right for everybody. When was the EDL Banned???
you are unfortunately talking Daily Mail frenzy!!!
The bible talks about an eye for an eye and how anyone worshipping false idols should be killed, but we dont talk about banning that do we?
Not all Muslims are hardline maniacs, but you seem content to abuse a whole load of people to get rid of a few????
The EDL talk about English rights and english customs but cant seem to name any??
Please also show me where the english way of life is being Islamified???
If you look at the EDL websites which Im sure you have all they talk about is Muslims muslims muslims, Is Islam the only threat to the so called English way of life??

More to the point why would a New Zealander worry about the English way of life???
WIERD ALSO THAT YOU HAVE TO BUT IT ON THREE THREADS. ARE YOU THAT UPSET ABOUT IT??
Courage which goes against military expediency is stupidity, or, if it is insisted upon by a commander, irresponsibility."

"So long as one isn't carrying one's head under one's arm, things aren't too bad."

Erwin Rommel (Desert Fox)

User avatar
owdun
Cult Member
Cult Member
Posts: 1477
Joined: Wed 02 Jan, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Solihull

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#6 Post by owdun » Thu 26 Aug, 2010 11:27 pm

I read the Daily Mail,so that makes me a racist ,Islamophobe,orNazi,whatever you Guardianista types like to throw at people who are bothered about the overcrowding of our country with economic migrants.However much you try to defend the Muslim,the facts are that they have no intention of integrating with the indigenous peoples of the countries they move in to,and set up enclaves which quickly become no go area's.This leads to a situation where people, who are not overtly racist, resent the intrusion of such area's into their towns and cities,and will eventually become racist.In periods of fiscal problems,the indigenous will turn against the migrant,so do not be surprised if we have a Winter of Discontent,but not the one envisioned by the Govt.

User avatar
MSI64
Celebrity Member
Celebrity Member
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu 27 Nov, 2008 11:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Preventing subversion or sedition against a government

#7 Post by MSI64 » Fri 27 Aug, 2010 7:19 am

I didnt say everyone who reads the Daily Mail is a racist, But I do find that the Mail seems to enjoy whipping the public into a lather about Immigrants and Muslims.
Is our country overcrowded??? Yes of course it is. Is it the Muslims fault??? No.
The laws that allowed the influx of foreigners into this country are to blame.
My wife is an Immigrant so I know what hoops are needed to be jumped through to get here legally.
As I said before not every Muslim is hiding in a no go area plotting to overthrow the Govt!
Im sure whilst you feel upset about the problem, you dont think we should really make Islam a HATE GROUP and start locking people up for worshipping Allah???
I also dont see any Laws being changed to suit the Islamic population, I do see soem very weak people bending backwards to prevent things they thing may upset people.
The Jewish community have hd internal coursts to deal with problems for years, Sharia law is used amongst the Muslim community and anyone who really believes the British Govt will ever use it as a way of life is talking utter drivel.
Whilst I agree there are barriers between communities I dont see a civil war brewing anytime soon.
Oh and by the way I dont read the Guardian. I prefer Sky news :D
Courage which goes against military expediency is stupidity, or, if it is insisted upon by a commander, irresponsibility."

"So long as one isn't carrying one's head under one's arm, things aren't too bad."

Erwin Rommel (Desert Fox)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests