Interesting thread, I was in London last Wednesday, though not near Parliament.
I got in to a lengthy discussion here a couple of years ago after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, trying to understand the nature of the attacks being due to young Algerian Muslims being oppressed in France. The last couple of years I have begun to change my views. I can see how those in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan are oppressed by the West and see no issue in them wanting to defend themselves from invading US and allies troops, but that is not the issue here.
There is a basic problem with a fringe on the left (of which I was one), in that it begins to excuse any act of terrorism if committed by a Muslim as being a response to historic Muslim oppression. Whereas, an act of terrorism committed by the right wing, (Anders Breivak in Norway, Timothy McVeighthe Oklahoma bombing, Dylan Roof - CHarleston church shooting) are rightly condemned and never excused.
Why is it that when a Muslim commits terrorism, this fringe left (regressive left, call it what you will), condemns it only in the context of a response to oppression, whereas when a white commits terrorism it is rightly condemned outright? This left fringe actually adds the problem, by excusing terror when committed by brown skinned people.
Anyone who then looks to the Muslim faith to see what is going on and begins to condemn aspects of that Muslim faith that they see as a problem is then shut down as a racist, as I once was guilty of. The left should rightfully condemn the Quran which supports such an ideology.
There is a problem in the Muslim faith that should be rightly addressed. Individuals use verses of the Quran as a reason to commit these atrocities, yet when a so-called 'moderate muslim' is just asked to condemn those verses of the Quran 99% of them refuse to do so. Many of them will condemn the atrocity itself, but not those verses of the Quran that has been used to justify the atrocity.
Trevor Phillips who once headed the Race Relations Board in the UK has done an interesting study and asks whether political correctness has gone mad. He conducted a survey among Muslims in the UK, here are some of the findings -
2,650,000 Muslims live in the UK
47% do not want their children to be taught by a gay teacher
66% would not inform the police if someone they knew was involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria
1/6 want to live separately from the rest of the population
4% sympathise with suicide bombers (that's 111,000 muslims in the UK)
52% believe homosexuality should be illegal
23% support the introduction of Sharia Law
32% refuse to condemn violence against those who mock the Prophet
39% agree wives should obey their husbands
5% sympathise with stoning women for adultery (132,000 in the UK)
If Muslims refuse to address this problem, which crosses over with the so-called 'moderate muslims', there will be no integration and if the left continue to excuse the problem as a reaction of being oppressed or discriminated against it will continue.
Ex-Muslims, when speaking out against their former religion are shut down as being bigots, racists, etc. Maryam Namazie has had to struggle just to get a platform at University debates, often ridiculed as a bigot, all because she has a point of view that the Muslim faith should address these concerns.
The kind of findings that Trevor Phillips report suggests belong within an ideology that is fascist. I have changed my view over the last year or so. There are always those who are bigoted or racist and condemn Muslims from that platform, but that should not stop a criticism of the Muslim faith and the Quran itself, which essentially belongs within a fascist ideology.
