'A generation of Muslims not able to go to university?' blog discussion

sharnad

dktreesea wrote: »

There's probably no such thing as halal meat in Britain. It's insufficient to kill the animal in a certain way for it to be halal. The food the animal consumes must not contain any blood, meat and animal protein. The animal has to be herbivorous to be halal. An animal becomes haram if it consumes blood and /or meat or their by-products and animal protein. In Britain animals are fed bone meal which is made from slaughterhouse by products, and includes such items as pig bones and animal blood. Given the winters, where in Britain would it be possible to raise animals fed solely on green grass?

Some muslims claim, as long as it says halal on the package it is permissable for them to eat it. I would say, for animals raised here, and for sure cows or sheep, whoever labels the meat "halal" is a liar.

As for dairy products, milk from animals not fed on a completely herbivore diet is not halal, nor any of its by products.

The only way for a muslim to be sure they have a permissable diet in Britain is to raise their own animals - at least then they can be sure what they eat; good luck in the winter months when there is no grass for them to eat - or have a vegetarian dairy free diet, maybe including some fish.

Its possible to raise animals in the uk without feeding them animal poduct - hay, grains etc


You really think that come winter farmers stop giving grain and feed them meat. Labelling the meat halal isnt a lie you just dont know about animal feed

Fire_Fox

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

You have really disappointed me by referring to a respectable paper such as the Telegraph as racist. Yes, it might be right wing, what is wrong with that, lots of people have right-wing views in this country, they are entitled to have them.

I know little about the English Democrats, as I suspect you don't either, afaik they are the English equivalent of Plaid Cymru or Scottish Nationalists, no-one brands them as racist,so why do it to the English Natiionalists.

So as far as I am concerned,what I have quoted IS from a 'proper' source.

I would just like my food labelled properly, so that I know what I am eating. Halal or Horsemeat,I would like to know,.

If the cap fits?

English Democrat's four key policies, three of which are directly about immigration. One can only wonder what they'd have on their website if they didn't have to be a bit PC
"The English Democrats are committed to putting England first! We want to make sure that we, the English, aren't treated like second class citzens in our our own country."
PUTTING ENGLAND FIRST
"The English Democrats want to put a halt to mass immigration. We propose moving to a Canadian style points system to stem the tide of migrants."
STOPPING MASS IMMIGRATION
"The English Democrats call for the immediate withdrawal from the European Union. The EU costs us £65 billion a year - the equivalent of 170 fully equipped hospitals. We would be better off out of the EU, trading with who we wish, making our own laws & setting our own taxes."
GETTING ENGLAND OUT OF THE EU
"We would campaign to end the political correctness that stifles free speech and English traditions. Tax money spent on needless PC projects would be diverted to genuine causes."
AN END TO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS"
http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/the-english-democrats-democratics-policies-policy.html

"High priority should be given to creating a peaceful society which is bound together by shared values and perceptions. The wishes, security and interests of the people of England should be the dominant factors in determining asylum and immigration policies for England.
Should there be an economic need for immigration it should be met by the employment of people on fixed term work permits. Our aim should be to meet the need for skilled workers from within. A points system should be used to bring an end to mass immigration and only allow that immigration which is in the national interest. A points system should not be used to facilitate and legitimise a continuation of mass immigration.

In order to end the mass inflow of asylum seekers into the UK, the UK must withdraw from the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees. Our principal concern is to preserve and build on what is left of English cultural unity and social cohesion. The preservation of our identity and culture are at least as important as economic considerations. We do not accept the fallacious but widely publicised economic arguments for mass immigration. For the most part they greatly exaggerate the economic benefits and wholly ignore the economic, social, and cultural costs. The people of England have never voted for nor supported mass immigration.
The English Democrats support whatever measures are necessary to bring mass immigration to a complete end. Such measures should include ...

• The deportation of all illegal immigrants. There should be no amnesties. Illegality should not be rewarded by the granting of citizenship. Nor should organised crime rackets be allowed to profit from people smuggling. Discovered illegal immigrants should be offered the choice between cooperatively returning straight home, or being sent to a distant offshore holding centre during the processing of their repatriation case.
• The repeal of the Human Rights Act and the withdrawal of the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights. Both of these flawed items of legislation have perversely assisted criminals while offering little of substance to the law-abiding population ...

•The strengthening of the customs and immigration services and the vigorous enforcement of the law. The English Democrats recognise that successive Labour and Tory governments have handed over control of immigration to the EU to such an extent that it is impossible to regain proper control of immigration without leaving the EU. The English Democrats firmly support withdrawal from the EU, subject to referendum approval, and will campaign forcefully to that end. Once the UK has left the EU full border controls can be restored."
http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/policies-immigration.html


Plaid Cymru's more inclusive approach. I can't actually see an immigration policy.
"Muslims for Plaid began as an idea amongst a couple of Muslim members of Plaid Cymru in Swansea. We felt that Plaid Cymru was a party putting the people of Wales first - ALL its people.

As Welsh Muslims we had been impressed by the principled stance the party had taken against the invasions and Afghanistan and Iraq at a time when those who supported the wars were congratulating themselves on what they believed would be a quick and efficient campaign that would bring peace and stability to the region with minimal civilian casualties. How wrong they were. The horrendous loss of life and chaos into which the countries quickly descended showed the manifest error of the politicians in Westminster, trading the 20/20 foresight of Plaid Cymru for the 20/20 hindsight that commentators now view the decision to go to war.

... It was envisaged that this working group, as yet without a name, would help to communicate Plaid’s existing policies to the Muslim community and provide the Muslim community with an opportunity to give input into future policies."
http://www.english.plaidcymru.org/muslims-for-plaid/

"We are committed to an independent Wales as a full member of the European Union. We will continue to support further democratic reform of the EU. We are committed to increased representation for Wales in the EU. This includes a fair number of MEPs for Wales, a European Parliament office in Wales, a rotating European Commissioner and most importantly, a vote for Wales in the Council of Ministers ...

We support further enlargement of the EU provided that those countries that wish to join improve conditions of democracy, justice and the rule of law. We support ongoing membership negotiations with Turkey as a means to encourage democratic reform in that country, improve women's rights and promote the democratic interests of the Kurdish people."
http://www.english.plaidcymru.org/international-affairs/


Scottish National Party seem to be closer to actively encouraging immigration
"SNP Home Affairs spokesperson Pete Wishart MP has warned that coalition government plans for an immigration cap could be economically damaging for Scotland.

Mr Wishart said:

"There is a real risk that a cap will be harmful to business, and economically damaging for Scotland. An arbitrary cap does not fit Scottish needs and its timing could not be worse.

"Scotland has very different population concerns from the rest of the UK and we need an immigration system that recognises these needs.

"Migrant workers fill an important gap in Scotland’s labour market, and this cap will leave many employers struggling to recruit.

"This cap is yet another u-turn by the Liberal Democrats who opposed a restriction before the election, but have now abandoned their policy promises to support the Tory government.

"Scotland needs a system which recognises and is responsive to our particular immigration needs – that was not delivered by Labour and now the Tories and Liberals are making the same mistakes.

"We need a Scotland specific approache to this crucial issue and if Westminster won’t deliver then it should pass this key responsibility to the Scottish Parliament."
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2010/jun/immigration-cap-doesnt-fit-says-snp-mp
Other policies http://www.snp.org/vision


"The SNP is today welcoming the latest Angus Reid poll which highlights Scotland's support to remaining in the EU and showing that Scotland rejects the Westminster leaders and David Cameron's plans for a referendum to exit Europe.

Scotland’s support for remaining in the EU sits at 45 per cent - nearly twice as great as that for those who wish to leave. This compares starkly with the UK as a whole where support and opposition is level pegging at 34%.

David Cameron scored only 14 per cent on the question of the most trusted leader on Europe. His low rating still managed to top Ed Miliband at 13%, meanwhile Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage scored a pathetic 6%.

Nearly 68% of the people of Scotland say that the referendum is either “definitely” or “probably” a distraction from the economic crisis.

The poll also shows the SNP leading Labour in Scotland by 39% to 35% for a Westminster general election.

The SNP’s Westminster Leader Angus Robertson said:

“This poll highlights the difference in how we view Europe in Scotland. Scotland is in favour of being in the EU on a scale of two-to-one, meanwhile across the UK a whole voters are evenly split on the matter."
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/jan/poll-findings-show-scotland-uk-difference-eu

Montmorencymon

ccbrowning wrote: »

Interest-free student loans for everyone, I say.

Free student education and access to maintenance grants, say I!

Just like the generation of people currently in government had!


Despite the blog/thread title, I don't think the real issue here is about Muslims, but about charging students 3% above RPI! It's scandalous. Why aren't people marching in the streets? Well, ok, people did, and it didn't make any difference. That's democracy folks. You vote in monkeys, and they steal your peanuts, and enact idiotic legislation.


With something like Simon Thorpe's Flat Rate Financial Transaction Tax (please google for it), we could pay for all student education, and a lot more besides, very easily, no cuts, no austerity, no recession necessary.

We need urgent reform of the money and banking and taxation system now.

Figgerty

waqasahmed wrote: »

Political dynasty lol. She was the ELECTED leader. She wasn't handed the leadership. She was elected.

If we are referring to Benazir Bhuto (forgive the spelling) wasn't her father PM of Pakistan and I thought her party wanted her son to succeed her with her husband acting as a regent type figure. There is a dichotomy here, the population are happy to elect a woman but have problems with womens rights. Did they 'overlook' the fact that she was a woman because she came from a prominent family.

And do you not see why ordinary Pakistanis wouldn't be supporting the Taliban? When their families are at risk from those !!!!!!!s?

Just like the ordinary Irish do not support the irish terrorists. Same applies to groups like the national front. But because they don't speak out against them it allows them to flourish.

Some burke quote: all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to say nothing.

SA really isn't the ideal country that Muslims look up to. Seriously. I remember a quote from a historian in the 19th/20th century. He said something like "In Europe, they are practising Islam, but they are not Muslims. In Muslim countries, they are Muslims but are not practising Islam" ie: in an ironic way, the European countries were more in line with Islamic principles than the Muslim countries.

What a profound statement.
I think it still applies today. Most things are better for the general population in secular countries. eg. equal rights, freedom of expression, living in a democracy - which covers most human rights. From what I'm learning about SA, democracy is a long way away.

Their are many scholars who say that the entire idea of a Muslim king is not allowed, because the Earth belongs to God, in Islam

I suppose they started out as Sheikh of their tribe and probably only started to use the title 'King' when they began to trade oil with western countries.
Are all men supposed to be equal under Islam?

Figgerty

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I'm still wondering if you are trolling. :think: Probably the same reason why Catholics don't all relocate to Italy or Brazil, and Protestants don't emigrate to Denmark or the US bible belt!

Because they are happy where they are. :j Happy with most things in the country and what they are not happy with they use the democratic process to try and change it. I don't think many religious citizens were happy about gay marriage but they have to accept it as the majority vote of the politicians they elected.

anon_ymous

Figgerty wrote: »

If we are referring to Benazir Bhuto (forgive the spelling) wasn't her father PM of Pakistan and I thought her party wanted her son to succeed her with her husband acting as a regent type figure. There is a dichotomy here, the population are happy to elect a woman but have problems with womens rights. Did they 'overlook' the fact that she was a woman because she came from a prominent family.

Erm, so I take it you know the populace of Pakistan? I do happen to know people from Pakistan, being Pakistani myself and from where I'm from, people do want women's rights.

The most vocal of this is the cricketer turned politician, Imran Khan

Figgerty wrote: »

Just like the ordinary Irish do not support the irish terrorists. Same applies to groups like the national front. But because they don't speak out against them it allows them to flourish.

Erm, people DO speak out, but they rarely make it to the press. Again, one of the more vocal people to speak out is Imran Khan.

What do you think makes a better story

"Muslims condemn terrorism" or
"Muslims kill 47 people in blast"

Figgerty wrote: »

Some burke quote: all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to say nothing.

What a profound statement.

People do speak out, but they are not given media coverage. Where is the media coverage for this man for instance?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpDJTBBwrKM

The media at the time were all for tarring all Muslims with the same brush (Most notably the Daily fail)

It's only Arabic for the first 45 seconds

Figgerty wrote: »

I think it still applies today. Most things are better for the general population in secular countries. eg. equal rights, freedom of expression, living in a democracy - which covers most human rights. From what I'm learning about SA, democracy is a long way away.

And according to history, most Muslim majority countries were secular countries, and centuries before European nations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_secularism

Figgerty wrote: »

I suppose they started out as Sheikh of their tribe and probably only started to use the title 'King' when they began to trade oil with western countries.
Are all men supposed to be equal under Islam?

Possibly, and all men (and women) are supposed to be equal under Islam

Fire_Fox

Figgerty wrote: »

Because they are happy where they are. :j Happy with most things in the country and what they are not happy with they use the democratic process to try and change it. I don't think many religious citizens were happy about gay marriage but they have to accept it as the majority vote of the politicians they elected.

So why do you think British Muslims don't all decamp to Saudi then, but instead use the democratic process? :rotfl:

Plenty of Muslims DO speak out against terrorism or preach peace, plenty more pray for it to end, what makes you think they don't? Do you even know any Muslims?
http://www.m-a-t.org/
http://www.freemuslims.org/
http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/
http://www.islamagainstterrorism.com/index_english.htm
http://muslimsagainstterror.com/
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/mat1.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15044797
http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/jan/17/filming-british-muslims-fight-extremism
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/7039572/Muslim-police-say-Islam-not-to-blame-for-terror-attacks.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10905070
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-656

There are many more if you Google.

Figgerty

waqasahmed wrote: »

Erm, so I take it you know the populace of Pakistan? I do happen to know people from Pakistan, being Pakistani myself and from where I'm from, people do want women's rights.

The most vocal of this is the cricketer turned politician, Imran Khan

I only know what I have read in newspapers and seen on TV over the years, mostly from programmes like Newsnight. That is why I find the situation with womens rights so puzzling. An elected woman PM but women still excluded from education. I don't think Imram Khan is revered by a majority of the population. I'm sure I saw him sorrounded by a huge security force and was unable to enter some areas due to security reasons.

Erm, people DO speak out, but they rarely make it to the press. Again, one of the more vocal people to speak out is Imran Khan.

What do you think makes a better story
"Muslims condemn terrorism" or "Muslims kill 47 people in blast"
People do speak out, but they are not given media coverage. Where is the media coverage for this man for instance?

I would be pleased to see muslim leaders condemn the views of some of the radical clerics and I would think to think our media would broadcast the condemnation if they got the opportunity.

Are there muslim newspapers where the views of the ordinary muslim is seen and where the leaders condemn the radicals?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpDJTBBwrKM

The media at the time were all for tarring all Muslims with the same brush (Most notably the Daily fail)

It's only Arabic for the first 45 seconds
And according to history, most Muslim majority countries were secular countries, and centuries before European nations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_secularism

Possibly, and all men (and women) are supposed to be equal under Islam

Good news about equality under Islam.

The you tube video content is good but he takes a long time to condemn the actions of the idiots 'policing' the 'muslim area'. Perhaps that is why we do not see him in a news segment. The radicals seem to get to the point a lot quicker.

Figgerty

Fire_Fox wrote: »

So why do you think British Muslims don't all decamp to Saudi then, but instead use the democratic process? :rotfl:

Plenty of Muslims DO speak out against terrorism or preach peace, plenty more pray for it to end, what makes you think they don't? Do you even know any Muslims?
http://www.m-a-t.org/
http://www.freemuslims.org/
http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/
http://www.islamagainstterrorism.com/index_english.htm
http://muslimsagainstterror.com/
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/mat1.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15044797
http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/jan/17/filming-british-muslims-fight-extremism
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/7039572/Muslim-police-say-Islam-not-to-blame-for-terror-attacks.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10905070
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-656

There are many more if you Google.

I am not a Troll or did not think I was until I found out that it also meant someone who posted off topic in a forum. Sorry for that but the discussion just evolved and I was fascinated to learn more about muslims and Islam.

I will look at some of your links at another time. I am not posting on this thread again as I have said all I wish to say about muslims access to student loans.

Bye

seven-day-weekend

Fire_Fox wrote: »

If the cap fits?

English Democrat's four key policies, three of which are directly about immigration. One can only wonder what they'd have on their website if they didn't have to be a bit PC
"The English Democrats are committed to putting England first! We want to make sure that we, the English, aren't treated like second class citzens in our our own country."
PUTTING ENGLAND FIRST
"The English Democrats want to put a halt to mass immigration. We propose moving to a Canadian style points system to stem the tide of migrants."
STOPPING MASS IMMIGRATION
"The English Democrats call for the immediate withdrawal from the European Union. The EU costs us £65 billion a year - the equivalent of 170 fully equipped hospitals. We would be better off out of the EU, trading with who we wish, making our own laws & setting our own taxes."
GETTING ENGLAND OUT OF THE EU
"We would campaign to end the political correctness that stifles free speech and English traditions. Tax money spent on needless PC projects would be diverted to genuine causes."
AN END TO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS"
http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/the-english-democrats-democratics-policies-policy.html

"High priority should be given to creating a peaceful society which is bound together by shared values and perceptions. The wishes, security and interests of the people of England should be the dominant factors in determining asylum and immigration policies for England.
Should there be an economic need for immigration it should be met by the employment of people on fixed term work permits. Our aim should be to meet the need for skilled workers from within. A points system should be used to bring an end to mass immigration and only allow that immigration which is in the national interest. A points system should not be used to facilitate and legitimise a continuation of mass immigration.

In order to end the mass inflow of asylum seekers into the UK, the UK must withdraw from the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees. Our principal concern is to preserve and build on what is left of English cultural unity and social cohesion. The preservation of our identity and culture are at least as important as economic considerations. We do not accept the fallacious but widely publicised economic arguments for mass immigration. For the most part they greatly exaggerate the economic benefits and wholly ignore the economic, social, and cultural costs. The people of England have never voted for nor supported mass immigration.
The English Democrats support whatever measures are necessary to bring mass immigration to a complete end. Such measures should include ...

• The deportation of all illegal immigrants. There should be no amnesties. Illegality should not be rewarded by the granting of citizenship. Nor should organised crime rackets be allowed to profit from people smuggling. Discovered illegal immigrants should be offered the choice between cooperatively returning straight home, or being sent to a distant offshore holding centre during the processing of their repatriation case.
• The repeal of the Human Rights Act and the withdrawal of the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights. Both of these flawed items of legislation have perversely assisted criminals while offering little of substance to the law-abiding population ...

•The strengthening of the customs and immigration services and the vigorous enforcement of the law. The English Democrats recognise that successive Labour and Tory governments have handed over control of immigration to the EU to such an extent that it is impossible to regain proper control of immigration without leaving the EU. The English Democrats firmly support withdrawal from the EU, subject to referendum approval, and will campaign forcefully to that end. Once the UK has left the EU full border controls can be restored."
http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk/policies-immigration.html


]

Well actually I agree with that. I think there are too many of ALL kinds of people already in the UK. I am against against unlimited mass immigration on those grounds alone.

This might be right-wing, but it is not racist. I have not singled out a race. It is the AMOUNT of people immigrating that I am against