Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Problem with homegrown British Muslims

Community

As fasr as say Bradford is concerned, the majosity of the Muslim population there are from only 3 small velleys in North Eastern Kasmir.
Imagine a group of 19c farming parishes moving almost in their entirety from Gloucestershire to Aberdeen. I suspect they would still have a distinct identity to this day, thats before you add racial, language and religious differences
 
Most of the young British people with Pakistani ancestry that I know or meet have a lot in common with other young British people. Even where there seem to be differences this doesn't seem to amount to not being 'British'.

Despite what some surveys seem to say my personal impression - from my on direct experience - is that young 'British Pakistani' people have a new western (but distinctive) identity, are increasingly assertive and confident without being inward looking.

Having said that I live in the more prosperous south-east which has lower unemployment and less crime and I tend to meet young British Muslims either at the gym, socially (eg out at clubs, parties etc) or through political/green campaigns and contacts - plus listening to various 'desi' radio shows (eg Adil Ray) and the occasional TV programme. The people I know best are from time at university. This means there is an element of self-selection going on: that the people I meet and talk to are inevitably at the more 'integrated', liberal and 'secular' end of the spectrum, and I have far less contact with people who are more 'separatist' and far less liberal/moderate.
 
I'm sure there are a multitude of reasons that all add up to the reason why.

Something which might not have been mentioned is that fact that the USA and Pakistan have traditionally had very close ties since the beginning of the cold war. Even now, Bush bangs on about how Pakistan is a close ally in the 'War on Terror'. Also, I'm guessing that American Pakistanis are wealthier that the British ones. So on the one hand, the Americans and the British are bombing the shit out of muslims but on the other the Americans are saying how much they love Pakistanis. Perhaps over the years, the more influential Pakistani figures in the US have benefited from the close relationship and the calm and trust has filtered downwards.

The above is just a thought and obviously not the complete answer.
 
At the risk of being labelled a 'conspiracy theorist by the powers that be, I submit the opinion of Craig Murray, a former UK ambassador. There are good reasons for his conclusions - the timing here is definitely suspect, at least.

The UK Terror plot: what's really going on?
I have been reading very carefully through all the Sunday newspapers to try and analyse the truth from all the scores of pages claiming to detail the so-called bomb plot. Unlike the great herd of so-called security experts doing the media analysis, I have the advantage of having had the very highest security clearances myself, having done a huge amount of professional intelligence analysis, and having been inside the spin machine.

So this, I believe, is the true story.

None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn't be a plane bomber for quite some time.

In the absence of bombs and airline tickets, and in many cases passports, it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that individuals intended to go through with suicide bombings, whatever rash stuff they may have bragged in internet chat rooms.

What is more, many of those arrested had been under surveillance for over a year - like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.

Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes - which, rather extraordinarily, had not turned up in a year of surveillance. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. Trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn't give is the truth.

The gentleman being "interrogated" had fled the UK after being wanted for questioning over the murder of his uncle some years ago. That might be felt to cast some doubt on his reliability. It might also be felt that factors other than political ones might be at play within these relationships. Much is also being made of large transfers of money outside the formal economy. Not in fact too unusual in the British Muslim community, but if this activity is criminal, there are many possibilities that have nothing to do with terrorism.

We then have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing the possible arrests over the weekend. Why? I think the answer to that is plain. Both in desperate domestic political trouble, they longed for "Another 9/11". The intelligence from Pakistan, however dodgy, gave them a new 9/11 they could sell to the media. The media has bought, wholesale, all the rubbish they have been shovelled.

We then have the appalling political propaganda of John Reid, Home Secretary, making a speech warning us all of the dreadful evil threatening us and complaining that "Some people don't get" the need to abandon all our traditional liberties. He then went on, according to his own propaganda machine, to stay up all night and minutely direct the arrests. There could be no clearer evidence that our Police are now just a political tool. Like all the best nasty regimes, the knock on the door came in the middle of the night, at 2.30am. Those arrested included a mother with a six week old baby.

For those who don't know, it is worth introducing Reid. A hardened Stalinist with a long term reputation for personal violence, at Stirling Univeristy he was the Communist Party's "Enforcer", (in days when the Communist Party ran Stirling University Students' Union, which it should not be forgotten was a business with a very substantial cash turnover). Reid was sent to beat up those who deviated from the Party line.

We will now never know if any of those arrested would have gone on to make a bomb or buy a plane ticket. Most of them do not fit the "Loner" profile you would expect - a tiny percentage of suicide bombers have happy marriages and young children. As they were all under surveillance, and certainly would have been on airport watch lists, there could have been little danger in letting them proceed closer to maturity - that is certainly what we would have done with the IRA.

In all of this, the one thing of which I am certain is that the timing is deeply political. This is more propaganda than plot. Of the over one thousand British Muslims arrested under anti-terrorist legislation, only twelve per cent are ever charged with anything. That is simply harrassment of Muslims on an appalling scale. Of those charged, 80% are acquitted. Most of the very few - just over two per cent of arrests - who are convicted, are not convicted of anything to do terrorism, but of some minor offence the Police happened upon while trawling through the wreck of the lives they had shattered.

Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.
http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2006/08/the_uk_terror_p.html
 
at the risk of being a killjoy,doesnt Craig Murray ranks alongside David Shayler in terms of embittered ex government employees who are trying to make a living for themselves as the arbiters of truth ?

( I am not a Govt lackey or supporter BTW, but C Muray was embroiled in "sex for visas" if I remember correctly - his viewpoints, this is rather a distasteful activity and hardly the workings of a nice guy ? n Sex for visas surely must come close to rape in the big scheme of things ? )
 
Still, I've known this about our dear Dr Reid for quite some time. From ZAMB's link

For those who don't know, it is worth introducing Reid. A hardened Stalinist with a long term reputation for personal violence,

...but I'd always thought this was fairly common knowledge.
 
Sex for Visas?

I thought he was our ex-Ambassador to Uzbekistan and was got rid of cos he was rather outspoken ref the despot who ran the place
 
zoltan69 said:
at the risk of being a killjoy,doesnt Craig Murray ranks alongside David Shayler in terms of embittered ex government employees who are trying to make a living for themselves as the arbiters of truth ?

( I am not a Govt lackey or supporter BTW, but C Muray was embroiled in "sex for visas" if I remember correctly - his viewpoints, this is rather a distasteful activity and hardly the workings of a nice guy ? n Sex for visas surely must come close to rape in the big scheme of things ? )

Does it really matter who Murray is? What is important is that many many people [myself included] was suspicious about the timing of this - I posted when it happened that it had totally wiped the carnage in Lebanon and Gaza off News24. Do you want some links to people other than Craig Murray who think the same thing??
 
ZAMB said:
Well, what do you think of the Israelis bombing Christians in Lebanon? Where's the reasoning behind that? They deliberately bombed christian towns and neighbourhoods. And where was that great christian GWB's anger at them for wiping out his fellow christians and driving them from their homes - he never even mentioned it!!? He even supplied the bombs.

Evil exists everywhere - it isn't unique to certain sectors of the population. You certainly have had plenty of homegrown US terrorists like the KKK, the Unabomber etc.

Why are you going on about Israel and the US? I thought this thread dealt with Pakistani Brits, and the propensity of some towards terrorism...
 
david dissadent said:
I have to reiterate there have been a number of alleged home grown terrorists in the US. Including the fragging incident at the start of the latest Gulf war, John Lee Malvo and Jose Padilla. I think the difference is the resources al Que'da have thrown at these rather than the desire of individuals is the distinguishing factor, not the integration level of the populations.

I haven't seen anything to counter that yet.

Why do you bring this up?
 
Investigations of a charity funding the aborted plot.
"Pakistani charity that received USD 10 million from Britain for earthquake relief last year helped finance the alleged bomb plot to blow up US-bound passenger jets, a media report said on Tuesday."
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1047403
Smart if its true, such a charity would provide excellent cover.
 
mears said:
Why are you going on about Israel and the US? I thought this thread dealt with Pakistani Brits, and the propensity of some towards terrorism...

It was your very own GWB who tried to make a connection between the two, remember???
The thread is about a problem with homegrown British muslims, too, and many British muslims have been unhappy at Blair's unquestioning support for Israel in its attack on Lebanon - we have been having huge anti-war marches in London - not just of muslims - many people are opposed to our governments' stance in the ME.
 
In our country, if we don't agree with what our elected politicians are doing in our name, we vote against them next time round.

We don't decide to "show our frustration" by blowing entirely innocent people to pieces.

If I am "frustrated" by any of the governments policies, am I also entitled to just go out and start killing people at random until the government "listens to my community", or is it just muslims who can do this?

Giles..
 
Giles

Not sure how long you have lived in Kilburn, but certain members of "your community" did go round blowing things up a few years ago
hence the UDAs fire-bombing of Biddy Mulligans in response
 
mears said:
Why do you bring this up?

Probably because it is relevant, mears. We all realise how much you hate to be contradicted and how much you like to control the terms of debate. We also know how fundamentally dishonest you are.

Here, chew on this:
http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=216&language_id=1

Ths US supports Israeli terror and many Americans pop across the Atlantic to do a spell of military service with the IDF and then scuttle back home.

Then there are the homegrown American terrorists that you have dismissed: Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, the KKK, the various Croatian ex pats linked to the Ustase.
 
A problem besides high unemplyment in the British Pakistani or Muslim community may also be a lack of moderate leaders the people respect.

Are there prominent Muslim leaders in Britian speaking out against these terrorists? Who are some moderate voices young Muslims of Britian can turn to these days?
 
hipipol said:
Not sure how long you have lived in Kilburn, but certain members of "your community" did go round blowing things up a few years ago
hence the UDAs fire-bombing of Biddy Mulligans in response

But that is no way to protest, killing innocent civilians, right?

Start a group, print a newspaper, vote, start a political party. Many things we can do in our countries.
 
mears said:
But that is no way to protest, killing innocent civilians, right?

Start a group, print a newspaper, vote, start a political party. Many things we can do in our countries.

hipipol wasn't replying to you, numbskull.
 
hipipol said:
Not sure how long you have lived in Kilburn, but certain members of "your community" did go round blowing things up a few years ago
hence the UDAs fire-bombing of Biddy Mulligans in response

Not "my community", given that I am not Irish, let alone Republican, but possibly my neighbours.

When did they set fire to Biddy Mulligans, then?

Incidentally, it has just gone back to being called "Biddy's", after a few years under a different name, owing to an ill-advised brewery re-branding.

Giles..
 
mears said:
Are there prominent Muslim leaders in Britian speaking out against these terrorists? Who are some moderate voices young Muslims of Britian can turn to these days?
Yes there are. I am not so good with names, but you see them on TV all the time.

How far they are "respected", especially by young people, I don't know. I suspect that young British Muslims would prefer to see people speking out who are a bit younger, more assertive and maybe a bit more radical (politically speaking rather than to the extent of Islamist terrorism etc IYSWIM). Most of the "community leaders" come across as unelected, fairly conservative, boring old farts (usually middle aged men with beards) who either have their noses up the governments backside (maybe they dream of honours and posts?) or make the right noises for the mainstream of their local mosque or organisation. They don't seem very inspiring to be honest.

I think that it is a bit of a mistake to try and look at "Muslim leaders" - far better to allow a whole range of people to have a platform (including younger people, women and people not attached to mosques/not clerics) and then people can decide for themselves who they feel speaks for them.

Just two examples of people I have seen speaking on TV recently who aren't "community leaders" but seemed far more relevant IMO to what you are asking:

Aki Nawaz, musician & founder; Nation Records
Shahid Malik, MP

These two are not imams and IMO are far more inspirational and relevant to young British Muslims.

Edit: the problem is that even if the vast majority of British Muslims reject extremism and violence, you only need a small minority who choose terrorism to cause a problem. The vast majority of "white british" people reject neo-fascism, but however many "community leaders" you have saying the right things you still have a small minority who end up involved with neo-nazis etc.
 
mears said:
Richard Reid, British Muslims going to blow up discos in Israel, Suicide bombers in London, trying to blow up planes and kill thousands of civilians.

Why is there such a big radicalization of British Muslims, namely British Pakistani Muslims? Institutionalized rascism, economic disparity or brainwashing of the young and impressionable?

It seems to be a serious situation in the UK these days.
Its called Karma.

The idiot British asked for Muslim support during the Indian struggle for independence Jinna (Muslim leader at the time) agreed and in turn the British formed an artificial mono religious country called Pakistan (“The Land of the Pure"…ffs!!!) From apart of India that's been "India" ( ;) ) for thousands of years as payment for the Muslim establishment positioning themselves against Ghandi and the Congress party.

The west fucking deserve everything they are getting...meddling cunts.

Oh and EVERY war that India has had with "The Land of the Pure" (pakistan) the USA have supported Pakistan and have armed them to the hilt aginst India....so you can fuck right off mears...dick
 
Mears continues to labour under the knowledgably ignorant assumption that there are no Muslim politicians in this country. Even when a list of such politicians is produced, he ignores it.

He does this for a reason: to belittle posters who disagree with him and to project the image of the US as the "true beacon of democracy and tolerance". Yet he ignores the legacy of the Knownothing movement in the US and its influence on mainstream politics which rather mitigates this thesis.
 
ZAMB said:
Does it really matter who Murray is? What is important is that many many people [myself included] was suspicious about the timing of this - I posted when it happened that it had totally wiped the carnage in Lebanon and Gaza off News24. Do you want some links to people other than Craig Murray who think the same thing??

It does matter, as this bloke isnt impartial & like shayler has an axe to grind - short of saying he jazzes up his Blog withy supposition and half truth, its never a good idea to use the blatherings of a self publicist with a chip on his shouldetr to back up a point.
 
iROBOT said:
Its called Karma.

The idiot British asked for Muslim support during the Indian struggle for independence Jinna (Muslim leader at the time) agreed and in turn the British formed an artificial mono religious country called Pakistan (“The Land of the Pure"…ffs!!!) From apart of India that's been "India" ( ;) ) for thousands of years as payment for the Muslim establishment positioning themselves against Ghandi and the Congress party.

The west fucking deserve everything they are getting...meddling cunts.

Oh and EVERY war that India has had with "The Land of the Pure" (pakistan) the USA have supported Pakistan and have armed them to the hilt aginst India....so you can fuck right off mears...dick
Pakistan and India would probably have splity aprt whatever the British did or didn't do about it.

Also, *both* countries have got weapons from both the west and Russia.

Just to use one quote, from www.globalsecurity.org about the Indo-Pakistan War of 1965:

"Pakistan was rudely shocked by the reaction of the United States to the war. Judging the matter to be largely Pakistan s fault, the United States not only refused to come to Pakistan s aid under the terms of the Agreement of Cooperation, but issued a statement declaring its neutrality while also cutting off military supplies. The Pakistanis were embittered at what they considered a friend's betrayal, and the experience taught them to avoid relying on any single source of support. For its part, the United States was disillusioned by a war in which both sides used United States-supplied equipment."

link: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm

I could find a lot more examples to set against your comment about "...EVERY war that India has had with ... pakistan ... the USA have supported Pakistan and have armed them to the hilt aginst India"

Just to underline this, the Indian airforce for example contains both Jaguar (UK) and Migs (Russia),

Pakistan also have a mix-n-match range of weaponry, with for example lots of Russian/Ukrainian tanks and American BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles.

A far bigger consideration than backing one side or the other is to make sure that neither side gets a clear advantage other the other. If one side or the other thought that it had a clear military advantage then conflict could be far more likely then in a stale-mate situation.
 
Teejay, thaks for standing up for mears.

It was never a forgone conclusion that India would split. Before the British did their rule and divide Jinna was supporting the united independance movement and Ghandi had offered him the leadership of India in preference to Neru.

Westerners would like to think that they havent fucked up the world but you have.

Wherever India got there weapons from (India was a "socialist" country afterall) it does not take away from the fact that the USA backed a dictatership against a democracy and are now complaining when the self same people that they armed against that democracy have turned on them.

Idiots.
 
Some classic examples of British partioning

India/Pakistan
Irish Republic/Northern Ireland
The Middle East (shared with France)

Anyone spot the connections?
 
This is from Wiki about Americas support for Pakistan's genocidal policy in Bangladesh.


American involvement
The United States supported Pakistan both politically and materially. President Richard Nixon denied getting involved in the situation, saying that it was an internal matter of Pakistan.

Several documents released from the Nixon Presidential Archives[1] show the extent of the tilt that the Nixon Administration demonstrated in favor of Pakistan. Among them, the infamous Blood telegram from the US embassy in Dacca, East Pakistan, stated the horrors of genocide taking place[2]. Nixon, backed by Henry Kissinger, wanted to protect the interests of Pakistan as he was apprehensive of India[citation needed]. Archer Blood was promptly transferred out of Dacca. As revealed in the newly declassified transcripts released by the State Department,[3] President Nixon was using the Pakistanis to normalize relations with China (see Sino-American relations#Rapproachement). This would have three important effects: opening rifts between the Soviet Union, China and North Vietnam, opening the potentially huge Chinese market to American business and creating a foreign policy coup in time to win the 1972 Presidential Elections. Since Nixon believed the existence of Pakistan to be critical to the success of his term he went to great lengths to protect his ally. In direct violation of the Congress-imposed sanctions on Pakistan, Nixon sent military supplies to Pakistan and routed them through Jordan and the Shah-ruled Iran.[4]

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations George H. W. Bush branded the Indian action as "aggression" at the time and took up the matter in the UN Security Council. The United States believed that should Pakistan's armed forces in the east collapse, India would transfer its forces from there to attack West Pakistan, which was an ally in the Central Treaty Organization. This was confirmed in official British secret transcripts declassified in 2003 [5] Nixon also showed a bias towards Pakistan despite widespread condemnation of the dictatorship even amongst his administration, as Oval Office records show[citation needed]. Kissinger wanted China to attack India for this purpose[citation needed].

When Pakistan's defeat seemed certain, Nixon sent the USS Enterprise to the Bay of Bengal from the Gulf of Tonkin.[6] Enterprise arrived on station on December 11, 1971. Originally, the deployment of Enterprise was claimed to be for evacuating US citizens and personnel from the area. Later, Nixon claimed that it was also as a gesture of goodwill towards Pakistan and China. Enterprise's presence was considered an intimidation, and hotly protested by India and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union called this US move as Gunboat Diplomacy.[7] On 6 December and 13 December, the Soviet Navy dispatched two groups of ships, armed with nuclear missiles, from Vladivostok; they trailed U.S. Task Force 74 in the Indian Ocean from 18 December until 7 January 1972.
 
nino_savatte said:
India/Pakistan
Irish Republic/Northern Ireland
The Middle East (shared with France)

Anyone spot the connections?
Mmmm maybe we should ask Teejay he/she/it seems to be the residential apologist.
 
iROBOT said:
Mmmm maybe we should ask Teejay he/she/it seems to be the residential apologist.

Interestingly enough both of them completely missed the fact that there were US based Pakistani millionaires drumming up support for Bush during the last election. I remember seeing an interview with one on Fox when I was over in Vegas.

The US was also quite chummy with General Zia ul Haq (a notorious Islamic fundamentalist) at one stage...then he died in a mysterious plane crash. It was this support that ultimately led to the events which saw the Taliban seize power in Afghanistan.
 
Back
Top Bottom