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

anon_ymous

dktreesea wrote: »

headwear, whatever the religion, and everyone in the same uniform, than what we have here, which is many sub cultures, most of which don't want to integrate in any way with the local people. As to the free NHS, we all make co-payments when we use NHS dentists, so why not NHS doctors?

Imo what France is doing is not very democratic ie: removing people's choice to wear what they want, and it's pretty obvious that Sarkozi wanted the law to target Muslims, but had to make it so that it didn't look to just discriminate on Muslims

I mean it was France that sent thousands of (legal) Romanian gypsies "back home" No one blinked an eye lid. This is really the type of integration you want?

dktreesea wrote: »

Talking of people from the commonwealth coming to live here, there are plenty of us living in other commonwealth countries as well. I don't see their welfare states, always assuming there is one, bending over to pay for and accommodate us quite to the extent we seem to feel we have to do for the rest of the world.

Maybe because the richest commonwealth states are Australia, and Canada, and they do have a benefits system. People tend to move abroad, because there's more money in another country, so say that the average person in the UK earns 25K (Pulled from thin air), and say in Oz, they earn double that for the same work, do you really think they'd get benefits?

Pakistan has a benefits system, but for it's very poorest. There'd be no way in hell that any one from here would receive the benefits (and they're pitiful)

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, maybe it's a pity the people of the British Empire took invasion and colonization, not to mention helping themselves to resources that were not theirs, as far as they did. Note I say "they". Those people, for the most part, are long since away to their graves. It shouldn't mean though that we should have to harbour lots of minorities that are just here to rape our, as you say, scarce resources, with no intention of integrating with the local "chavs".

Britain would have fell in to another depression after WW2, if it didn't ask people from the commonwealth to come over. Besides, you do realise that some of the top generals were saying that without India, WW2 would not be won, though we don't here of that in school...

And time and time I've mentioned my many white friends, and that I get on better with people outside of my local area.

Tell me are you really going to try and fit in with people who shout abuse at you in the street, for no other reason than your accent, for the reason they think you're gay etc... ?

dktreesea wrote: »

Going back to the original topic, should we be providing university tuition to Muslims at no interest, just because usury is barred in Islam, when we are not prepared to do the same for the indigenous population? Charging interest on student loans is terrible anyway. It potentially exploits a vulnerable group of people who could, in spite of being graduates, be earning not very much money for years after they graduate. But at the same time, I don't see why one ethnic group should be able to gain an advantage over another just because of something unique to the group, in this case religion.

No one is saying that apart from you. You jumped to conclusions. What some Muslims are saying is that they think that uni is off bounds to them now, because of the ruling

dktreesea wrote: »

I'd prefer you didn't use derogatory terms at all to refer to other people in Britain. be careful what you focus on; the fate of the poor, God willing, may well be your fate one day. What exactly do you think you have so much to be proud of in comparison to them? As for Pakistanis being drunken yobbos (is that how you referred to them in your earlier post?) out on the streets late at night, I doubt it.

You don't have to be poor to be a chav. I'm poor. Im not a chav. I know other poor people. They're not chavs. It's about your mentality more than any thing else. OK, so lemm

Yes, I might be poorer one day, but I would never ever have the same attitudes. Here's why I think I'm "better" than them:

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2216680&page=477&p=41664375#post41664375

They're not drunken(or at least I don't think so). You made that up. And yes they are on the streets late at night (I've even had a confrontation with some of them)

dktreesea wrote: »

And in any event, how do you know they are Pakistani? Based on what evidence? For all you know they are born here and as English as the rest of us.

I'm Pakistani. They know the same language, and much better than myself. If any thing, I'm far, far more Westernised than they are...

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

I'm not trolling. And I do participate in traditional culture - it helps to keep it alive. I just don't appreciate anyone, including people from a non-native background, referring to the local people as "chavs", quite a derogatory term in our culture, which I certainly don't use nor encourage my family to use, and announcing him/herself (waqasahmed) to be superior to another group of people, who live in Britain and bluntly, are just as entitled to their version and way of living as he/she is.

YOU have been patronising and separatist on a number of occasions in this thread! Admittedly I've met only a few Pagans, but the last couple I got to know were passionately supportive of EVERYONE's right to worship in their own way, to keep their own culture alive, would find more in common with other cultures and religions than differences, strong work ethic, massively more open minded than you.

dktreesea wrote: »

I'd prefer you didn't use derogatory terms at all to refer to other people in Britain. be careful what you focus on; the fate of the poor, God willing, may well be your fate one day. What exactly do you think you have so much to be proud of in comparison to them? As for Pakistanis being drunken yobbos (is that how you referred to them in your earlier post?) out on the streets late at night, I doubt it.

And in any event, how do you know they are Pakistani? Based on what evidence? For all you know they are born here and as English as the rest of us.

YOU are the one constantly using 'us' and 'them' type terminology. And then you complain about a certain segment of society being described as drunken chavs and yobbos? They ARE, if they don't want to be described as that they have the opportunity to amend their behaviour. I look down on those of them who are professional benefits claimants, those who have little regard for the law or local residents, those who have no intention of contributing to society but have an entitlement mentality.

All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens.

And yes, some chavs and yobs ARE from ethnic minorities, sometimes referred to as 'innit'. Instead of just mixing with your white British friends in white British areas why don't YOU get out and see a bit more of your country, why don't YOU integrate more? Then you'd know what takes place in multicultural cities across the UK.

"As English as the rest of us" if you believe that why are you constantly making 'us' and 'them' type divisions? :rotfl:

meher

ian_duncan_smith wrote: »

When the Christians burned down the library at Alexandria because they saw the books within it as herasy (I hope I've spelt it correctly), much of the knowledge of the Ancient world, Greek and Roman, was only saved because Islamic scholars had made copies of the manuscripts translated into Arabic.

Not quite the full story because vast majority of these translations were done by Byzantine scholars; Islam never had any scholars, which is why they were mostly translated in latin and not in Arabic. You should stop treating science and maths as if it were some commodity to preserve and then pass it on to the world. It is a good idea but a better idea would have been to explore these resources and build on it but we still had to rely on Jews and Westerners and the Chinese and Japanese because they were intellectually equipped to do so. So the contribution largely was in preserving what was beneficial for them, which is why we don't see much literature or philosphies that contributed to civilisation, humanity and culture translated in Arabic because that would mean appreciating different cultures and aesthetics and intellectualising different philosphies. Also this thirst for knowledge is something inherited from the intellectual Jewish Arabs. I am glad there are some people at least starting to panic and start to list the greatness of islam and its contribution to the world (although all of it were adopted and from the past, although the role was about preserving it during times of crisis) in an effort to realise that there isn't a lot to latch on considering current events on a global scale.

meher

Fire_Fox wrote: »

And then you complain about a certain segment of society being described as drunken chavs and yobbos? They ARE, if they don't want to be described as that they have the opportunity to amend their behaviour.

Instead of drunken chavs and yobbos, why don't you put terrorists and uncivilised menace in your sentence - how does that sound? My point is that it is unacceptable to suggest that they ARE, whatever our view or opinion is because it is just that, a perception. In any case I cannot see any criminal element in being drunken (unless they are driving) or a chav or a yobbo - they don't have to change, may be this moral fascist and control freakery behaviour of dictating that someone shouldn't drink or be whoever they want to be, should change. Sorry didn't mean to go so wonderfully offtopic but I cannot read such stuff and let control freakery go unaddressed. I signed up for liberalism to keep questioning moral fascists.

londonTiger

meher wrote: »

Not quite the full story because vast majority of these translations were done by Byzantine scholars; Islam never had any scholars, which is why they were mostly translated in latin and not in Arabic. You should stop treating science and maths as if it were some commodity to preserve and then pass it on to the world. It is a good idea but a better idea would have been to explore these resources and build on it but we still had to rely on Jews and Westerners and the Chinese and Japanese because they were intellectually equipped to do so. So the contribution largely was in preserving what was beneficial for them, which is why we don't see much literature or philosphies that contributed to civilisation, humanity and culture translated in Arabic because that would mean appreciating different cultures and aesthetics and intellectualising different philosphies. Also this thirst for knowledge is something inherited from the intellectual Jewish Arabs. I am glad there are some people at least starting to panic and start to list the greatness of islam and its contribution to the world (although all of it were adopted and from the past, although the role was about preserving it during times of crisis) in an effort to realise that there isn't a lot to latch on considering current events on a global scale.

Wow... so you're basically saying pretty much everyone in the world invented and created stuff but not arabs. They had no scholars. Wow.

1. you cannot "preserve" something without understanding it. It's like saying some village idiot has a library on physics, and uses the knowledge but is too dumb to build on it.

Some sources:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-islamic-inventors-changed-the-world-469452.html

http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/forum.php?mod=redirect&goto=findpost&ptid=630368&pid=1632255

(text removed by forum team), you're just saying all the good stuff that came from the arab world were actually from Jews, Chinese or Japanese or the people before the Arabs.

anon_ymous

Thank you. It's one thing to argue "Oh, the Christians don't *do* science" and one thing to argue "The Arabs just stole their work" when both are quite obviously wrong.

The second reply annoyed me more, because whilst the Western European part of Christianity did suppress science (The byzantines for instance, didn't), so there was more legitimacy to the first post, but to suggest that Arabs never actually invented any thing, or that they never had any scholars is pretty absurd

Fire_Fox

meher wrote: »

Instead of drunken chavs and yobbos, why don't you put terrorists and uncivilised menace in your sentence - how does that sound? My point is that it is unacceptable to suggest that they ARE, whatever our view or opinion is because it is just that, a perception. In any case I cannot see any criminal element in being drunken (unless they are driving) or a chav or a yobbo - they don't have to change, may be this moral fascist and control freakery behaviour of dictating that someone shouldn't drink or be whoever they want to be, should change. Sorry didn't mean to go so wonderfully offtopic but I cannot read such stuff and let control freakery go unaddressed. I signed up for liberalism to keep questioning moral fascists.

If I'd knowingly met any terrorists I might well discuss that, I haven't. I don't have any problem with a certain segment of society being described as terrorists ... the few that actually ARE terrorists, not the ones who happen to identify as the same peaceful religion as terrorists (say all Catholics or all Muslims). Ditto I was crystal clear that the people I consider to be drunken chavs and yobs are the ones who behave as drunken chavs and yobs, not a euphemism for all people on a low income or all people on benefits.

Drunk and disorderly is a crime, so is peeing and puking in the street and leaving it, so is deciding to damage public or private property because you are trollied and it seems hilarious. People can be as drunk as a lord, as long as they behave within the law and with consideration for local residents.

Control freakery? Liberal? Now I know you are trolling too. :rotfl:

meher

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Control freakery? Liberal? Now I know you are trolling too. :rotfl:

Yes, questioning moral fascism and control freakery is liberalism in action - in any case I don't let my sense of liberalism paralyse my sense of justice.

On another note, when you start calling names, it simply shows that you're out of depth and short or clever and witty responses. It is embarrassing to indulge such posts, so I shall not be responding to you.

waqasahmed wrote: »

The second reply annoyed me more,

I can think of lots of social injustice to women and violent subhuman responses of epic scales, that diminishes us, to be outraged about. The problem is we often ask the wrong questions and be outraged for petty reasons instead of addressing deep seated complexities.

waqasahmed wrote: »

But to suggest that Arabs never actually invented any thing, or that they never had any scholars is pretty absurd

'Course, we have had great Arab Jews who not only contributed but also influenced and inherited by the rest of the Arab world - not to forget that muslims are not the only arabs. What is absurd is this new trend (several islam led wesbsites dedicated to this) of claiming ownership of all honors and listing them desperately, seeking assurance, when the rest of the world are getting on with contributing more and moving towards enlightenment ... and on that note, I shall not be responding to anymore chest beating by some apologists because a. reading such desperate stuff is pitifully embarassing b. this is not the topic called for discussion, I only wanted point out some misinformation bandied about.

sharnad

meher wrote: »

Not quite the full story because vast majority of these translations were done by Byzantine scholars; Islam never had any scholars, which is why they were mostly translated in latin and not in Arabic. You should stop treating science and maths as if it were some commodity to preserve and then pass it on to the world. It is a good idea but a better idea would have been to explore these resources and build on it but we still had to rely on Jews and Westerners and the Chinese and Japanese because they were intellectually equipped to do so. So the contribution largely was in preserving what was beneficial for them, which is why we don't see much literature or philosphies that contributed to civilisation, humanity and culture translated in Arabic because that would mean appreciating different cultures and aesthetics and intellectualising different philosphies. Also this thirst for knowledge is something inherited from the intellectual Jewish Arabs. I am glad there are some people at least starting to panic and start to list the greatness of islam and its contribution to the world (although all of it were adopted and from the past, although the role was about preserving it during times of crisis) in an effort to realise that there isn't a lot to latch on considering current events on a global scale.

Where you said there are no islamic scholars it should really say there are lots of islamic scholars and the first person to translate the quran into another language was an islamic scholar

dktreesea

Fire_Fox wrote: »

YOU have been patronising and separatist on a number of occasions in this thread! Admittedly I've met only a few Pagans, but the last couple I got to know were passionately supportive of EVERYONE's right to worship in their own way, to keep their own culture alive, would find more in common with other cultures and religions than differences, strong work ethic, massively more open minded than you.

YOU are the one constantly using 'us' and 'them' type terminology. And then you complain about a certain segment of society being described as drunken chavs and yobbos? They ARE, if they don't want to be described as that they have the opportunity to amend their behaviour. I look down on those of them who are professional benefits claimants, those who have little regard for the law or local residents, those who have no intention of contributing to society but have an entitlement mentality.

All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens.

And yes, some chavs and yobs ARE from ethnic minorities, sometimes referred to as 'innit'. Instead of just mixing with your white British friends in white British areas why don't YOU get out and see a bit more of your country, why don't YOU integrate more? Then you'd know what takes place in multicultural cities across the UK.

"As English as the rest of us" if you believe that why are you constantly making 'us' and 'them' type divisions? :rotfl:

Whatever happened to "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" when seeing someone who appears to be in a more unfortunate position than oneself, the "drunken yobbo" to coin your phrase? "Chav"and "yob" are both derogatory terms than no one deserves thrown at them. And since when was it okay to call a disadvantaged group "the layabout underclass"? If there is justice, God willing one day you will walk thier road! Your justification of prhrases like that on the grounds some people deserve them is a poor reflection on you as a human being.

Yes, I've mixed with a fair few people from a particular minority and listened in horror as they roamed the streets dissing the local people, with comments like we look and dress like the "dregs of humanity", how we have no self respect because we dress down rather than up when we go on the streets, unlike them. How their "home" societies (second generation Brits, mind you) are so much better than here, how their children would never behave like the local white population behave. Oh my soul, some people from ethnic minorities could teach us all a bit about the art of whinging. Should I respect men who spend half an hour in front of the mirror doing their hair before they go out on the street? What's so great about strutting around like a peacock whilst shortening your life chain smoking?

Yes, we should welcome everybody, - how very PC. It seems to me the native people are expected to accommodate and integrate with all newcomers, while some of those same newcomers look down their noses at everything "British", people and culture wise.