# "More British Muslims fight for Islamic State than Britain" - USA Today



## universitystripe (Jul 13, 2013)

USA Today is reporting that there are now more British Muslims within the ranks of the Islamic State (or ISIS) than within the British armed forces.



> Britain's Ministry of Defense confirmed to USA TODAY that there are approximately 600 British Muslim servicemembers in its armed forces of almost 200,000 people. Official government estimates put the number of British Islamic State fighters operating in Syria and Iraq at up to 800. The Foreign Office cautioned Thursday that it is difficult to provide precise numbers.
> 
> ...Khalid Mahmood, a member of Parliament from an area with a high proportion of Muslim residents, said government estimates of the number of British Islamic State fighters currently in the Mideast is far too conservative. He told _Newsweek_ magazine this week that at least 1,500 extremists are likely to have been recruited to fight in Iraq and Syria over the last three years."There are an unacceptable number of Britons fighting for jihadist forces," he said.


Source: More British Muslims Fight for Islamic State than Britain


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

universitystripe said:


> Khalid Mahmood, a member of Parliament from an area with a high proportion of Muslim residents, said government estimates of the number of British Islamic State fighters currently in the Mideast is far too conservative. He told _Newsweek_ magazine this week that at least 1,500 extremists are likely to have been recruited to fight in Iraq and Syria over the last three years.
> "*There are an unacceptable number of Britons fighting for jihadist forces*," he said.


No one knows how many British Muslims are now in Iraq and Syria - 1,500 might even be an under-estimate.

What is true is that an unacceptable number of Islamic terrorists appear to have acquired British nationality while knowing and caring nothing for western standards of tolerance and democracy.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Can the same derision be poured upon those British jews that take up fighting for Israel? Religious hocus pocus is religious hocus pocus afterall. An British jew killing for Israel & Judaism is no different than a British muslim killing for Iran & the muslim faith. In fact there are also more British jews serving the Israeli terrorists (oops military) than there are jews serving the british military. Can we be critical about that too or would that automatically be "antisemitism"?


So.. 600 muslims are willing to fight for the U.K...Is that a bad thing compared to the paltry 70-80 jews that were in the U.K forces from 2007-2011? 
It also seems that there are very few Jews/muslims in the U.S. military. In fact, muslims once again outnumber jews when it comes to serving the country they are living in.....What inference do you guys want to make out of this information?



I Wonder how many jews are in the British Army and how many British Jews go and fight for Israel. Is there an "unacceptable number of Israeli terrorists (sic. that) appear to have acquired British nationality while knowing and caring nothing for western standards of tolerance and democracy " as well or are only muslim immigrants considered as such? Don't all religions push their religions and the rules that they feel should be followed? I honestly don't see much tolerance out of any religion be they christian, muslim or jew. They're all terrorists to me.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I've never really understood the compulsion of some to make allusions to Jews and Judaism when the thread is not even about that. 

I'll tell you what, when Jewish soldiers start beheading journalists and post the video on YouTube you'll have my attention.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> I've never really understood the compulsion of some to make allusions to Jews and Judaism when the thread is not even about that.
> 
> I'll tell you what, when Jewish soldiers start beheading journalists and post the video on YouTube you'll have my attention.


Was this not about RELGIOUS groups that live in a particular country but don't support that country as much as they do their "homelands"? Is judaism not a religion? Can we not comapre the 600 British muslim soldiers to the 70 British jewish soldiers? If we can say that there are 800 British muslims fighting for the muslim faith overseas, can we not also point out that there are hundrends of British jews doing the same?

I'm not sure why you think it's ok to single out muslims over jews but you've always been a racist in such matters.If a derogatory tone is taken towards the muslims doing so, why is it ^that we are not allowed to compare the situation to the jews that are doing the exact same thing? If we can infer that muslims are unpatriotic for doing so, then whycan we not assume that the jews are as well? The fact is that in Europe and the U.S., jews make up a disproportionate amount of service members while a large amount are willing to go serve Israel. It's the same situation. Apples to Apples.

Although it wasn't beheading, Israel has killed its fair share of journalists. I don't see how method of killing or it being on youtube matters one way or the other to the victim.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

justonemore said:


> Was this not about RELGIOUS groups that live in a particular country but don't support that country as much as they do their "homelands"? Is judaism not a religion? Can we not comapre the 600 British muslim soldiers to the 70 British jewish soldiers? If we can say that there are 800 British muslims fighting for the muslim faith overseas, can we not also point out that there are hundrends of British jews doing the same?
> 
> I'm not sure why you think it's ok to single out muslims over jews *but you've always been a racist in such matters*.


Man, you're a nasty one!

I'm surprised you didn't deluge your post with your previously ubiquitous  icon! This will be my one and only interaction with you on this post and you continually demonstrate and you're incapable of civil conversation. I'll let you return to eating chocolates and yodeling on the cliff tops.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> Man, you're a nasty one!
> 
> I'll let you return to eating chocolates and yodeling on the cliff tops.


Opps. more racism. Or at least very nasty and politically incorrect stereo-typing.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

> I'm not sure why you think it's ok to single out muslims over jews


I think the reason that the article referenced in the OP singled out Muslims is fairly obvious. The topic of young Muslims going to Syria and Iraq to fight (and then perhaps returning here) has been in the news here quite a lot today. One hears nothing of Jews going to Israel to fight, either because it just doesn't happen, or if it does it is less common, there being in any case fewer Jews than Muslims living in the UK.

The wider issue concerns the willingness of different communities to integrate with the host society, and whereas the Jews by and large have managed to do this successfully for millennia in different parts of the world, at the moment some of the Muslims in the UK live in self-imposed ghettoes and might as well be back where they originally came from - they have no wish to share our values or to integrate at all.

The British army is very open to people of all faiths serving. According to the army website, there are 2,600 Hindus, 800 Buddhists, 550 Muslims, 150 Sikhs and 50 Humanists, besides 75,000 Christians. Strangely, no figure is given for Jews. I would have thought there are at least some Jews in the army, but perhaps they are not practising Jews. [The website simply refers to there being 'many Jews' serving in the army.]

[edit] Just noticed there are also 105 Rastas:



> *Rastafarian*
> There are around 105 Rastafarians serving in the Regular Army. There are special provisions in place for Rastafarian personnel which are outlined in the FAQs below.
> 
> *Will I be able to have dreadlocks?*
> ...


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

justonemore said:


> Can the same derision be poured upon those British jews that take up fighting for Israel? Religious hocus pocus is religious hocus pocus afterall.


Religious Hocus Pocus (RHP) perpetrated by the Jew Hating Head Chopping Jihadist (JHHCJ) and the RHP of their victims, are neither the same nor equal.

Maybe you want to rephrase you position??


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

SG_67 said:


> Man, you're a nasty one!
> 
> This will be my one and only interaction with you on this post and you continually demonstrate and you're incapable of civil conversation.


Surely you mean that he's a rational one?
It's the Zionist chorus on here that seems incapable of civility when anyone dares question the US media's narrative.
Jewish religious nuts are just as offensive as Muslim religious nuts.

Here's a guy from Los Angeles who ups sticks, heads abroad to join the Israeli Army and gets killed. Is there outrage in the press about this violent radical turning his back on his country?
Hell no, the Los Angeles City Council honours him!


> _Max Steinberg, a graduate of El Camino High School and who attended Pierce College, was someone who touched the lives of many residents, Councilman Bob Blumenfield said._
> 
> _"He grew up in the San Fernando Valley," Blumenfield said. "He fought and died defending the Jewish homeland".
> _


Who said Americans don't do irony?

Not much different than a Muslim guy from Tower Hamlets going off to fight in Syria really. Similar mindset.
The real problems start when these people try to come back.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Langham said:


> I think the reason that the article referenced in the OP singled out Muslims is fairly obvious. The topic of young Muslims going to Syria and Iraq to fight (and then perhaps returning here) has been in the news here quite a lot today. One hears nothing of Jews going to Israel to fight, either because it just doesn't happen, or if it does it is less common, there being in any case fewer Jews than Muslims living in the UK.
> 
> The wider issue concerns the willingness of different communities to integrate with the host society, and whereas the Jews by and large have managed to do this successfully for millennia in different parts of the world, at the moment some of the Muslims in the UK live in self-imposed ghettoes and might as well be back where they originally came from - they have no wish to share our values or to integrate at all.


Exactly, and a Europe wide problem.



Langham said:


> The British army is very open to people of all faiths serving. According to the army website, there are 2,600 Hindus, 800 Buddhists, 550 Muslims, 150 Sikhs and 50 Humanists, besides 75,000 Christians. Strangely, no figure is given for Jews. I would have thought there are at least some Jews in the army, but perhaps they are not practising Jews. [The website simply refers to there being 'many Jews' serving in the army.]


Don't forget the satanist in the Royal Navy.
*Navy approves first ever Satanist*


> _The British Armed Forces has officially recognised its first registered Satanist, a newspaper reports.
> 
> _
> _Naval technician Chris Cranmer, 24, has been allowed to register by the captain of HMS Cumberland, based at Devonport Naval Base in Plymouth.
> ...


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Odradek said:


> Surely you mean that he's a rational one?
> It's the Zionist chorus on here that seems incapable of civility when anyone dares question the US media's narrative.
> Jewish religious nuts are just as offensive as Muslim religious nuts.
> 
> ...


No one even brought up Israel or anything about Jews. There were no allusions in this thread toward Zionism or the state of Israel. Therefore, as usual, someone interjects Israel and all of a sudden the thread turns into an indictment of Israel and the Jews.

It's estimated that there are some 14 million Jews in the world. That's worldwide, the combined populations of NYC, LA and Chicago. Put it another way, that's 0.2% of the world's population. It's really incredible how they are to blame for so much of the world's ills.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

The discussion was religious groups and their willingness or lack thereof to join the miltary in the country they live in. The 2nd topic was the number of those in a particular religion willing to go fight back in their home territory in name of their religion or previous country. If we can discuss other religions in such a manner, why should it be taboo to mention Israel & Jews in the same light? Both groups are doing what amounts to be the same thing. In fact, by numbers alone, the british jews are more guilty of lack of british patritism than are the british muslims that the article refers to.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

justonemore said:


> ... by numbers alone, the british jews are more guilty of lack of british patritism than are the british muslims that the article refers to.


It's difficult to make that assessment, because the precise numbers of Jews in the British army is not disclosed, for some reason. But in any case, equating patriotism with military service is too crude. Plenty of people I know are perfectly patriotic, in the sense of loving and respecting their country, without having served in the forces; conversely I have known one or two serving men whose patriotism was somewhat suspect.

It may be different in the States, but while the armed forces here are widely respected, it's seen in many walks of life as rather extreme, even odd, to join up.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Langham said:


> It's difficult to make that assessment, because the precise numbers of Jews in the British army is not disclosed, for some reason. But in any case, equating patriotism with military service is too crude. Plenty of people I know are perfectly patriotic, in the sense of loving and respecting their country, without having served in the forces; conversely I have known one or two serving men whose patriotism was somewhat suspect.
> 
> It may be different in the States, but while the armed forces here are widely respected, it's seen in many walks of life as rather extreme, even odd, to join up.


This article is where I got the figures of 70-80 jews serving in the British forces from 2007-2014... I realize that numbers alone don't explain patriotism but government military numbers are available whereas individual reasoning is not.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ Really? That's an article? You pull something from some anti-Semitic blog and cite it? That's very thin gruel.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> ^ Really? That's an article? You pull something from some anti-Semitic blog and cite it? That's very thin gruel.


I said I got the numbers there. If you bothered to read the article it references the U.K. government figures concerning religion & military service. Heck. The article even provides a direct link to said numbers. Of course you can cry about the blogs name but the name doesn't change official government numbers.

Oh. And on what are you basing that the blog is anti-semitic? The name? Probably not the content huh? The creator seems to claim that he fights anti-semitism.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> I've never really understood the compulsion of some to make allusions to Jews and Judaism when the thread is not even about that.
> 
> I'll tell you what, when Jewish soldiers start beheading journalists and post the video on YouTube you'll have my attention.


Major Hasan was an obvious Zionist Stooge!!

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was on 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder after opening fire Nov. 5, 2009, at Fort Hood's Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where troops were getting medical checkups before deploying to Afghanistan.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Major Hasan was an obvious Zionist Stooge!!
> 
> Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was on 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder after opening fire Nov. 5, 2009, at Fort Hood's Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where troops were getting medical checkups before deploying to Afghanistan.


A clear case of the military ignoring its duties & pandering to religious favoritism. Wrong no matter the religion, race, etc.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

justonemore said:


> Oh. And on what are you basing that the blog is anti-semitic? The name? Probably not the content huh? The creator seems to claim that he fights anti-semitism.


The last paragraph of your "article":

"Thus we should feel ourselves to be on solid evidential ground in concluding that the argument; first made by different intellectuals in both the Allied and Central powers during the First World War, that jews are; in essence, unpatriotic is not only justified, but validated by the statistical data that we have available to us. More than that: this situation has stayed more or less the same (jewish participation has actually decreased in this time) with jews disproportionately under-represented in both those serving their country and those decorated for bravery in war and peacetime."

I'll let whomever wishes to read it decide where the author, and those referencing it for authority, stand.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Major Hasan was an obvious Zionist Stooge!!
> 
> Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was on 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder after opening fire Nov. 5, 2009, at Fort Hood's Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where troops were getting medical checkups before deploying to Afghanistan.


Seems as if muslims aren't the only ones shooting up u.s. military bases...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...oting-attacks-military-bases-history/7225403/


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Seems as though they are the only one's doing so in the name of their religion.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> The last paragraph of your "article":
> 
> "Thus we should feel ourselves to be on solid evidential ground in concluding that the argument; first made by different intellectuals in both the Allied and Central powers during the First World War, that jews are; in essence, unpatriotic is not only justified, but validated by the statistical data that we have available to us. More than that: this situation has stayed more or less the same (jewish participation has actually decreased in this time) with jews disproportionately under-represented in both those serving their country and those decorated for bravery in war and peacetime."
> 
> I'll let whomever wishes to read it decide where the author, and those referencing it for authority, stand.


Are you denying the statistics from the U K government as well? Or just that one paragraph that you disagree with? If based on numbers alone, it does indeed seem as if certain groups are less patriotic to thier place of domicile when compared to others. If it were due to anti-war beliefs I could understand but it's clearly shown that greater numbers are going back to their religious homelands to fight.


----------



## universitystripe (Jul 13, 2013)

I feel the comparison of the British Muslims joining ISIS to British Jews joining the armed forces of Israel does not really hold water for a couple reasons.

First, ISIS is a terrorist organization parading as a state. These British Muslims are not joining the army of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. They are joining a terrorist group which has openly threatened the West.

Secondly, Israel is a state. Furthermore, it is a state with a long history of support from Britain and the United States. It hasn't been uncommon for Americans or Britons to join _allied_ armies, especially if they have roots in said nation. See: A Farewell to Arms

Joining an enemy nation's forces is treason. Joining a terrorist organization is a crime. Israel is neither of these to Britain or the United States.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> Seems as though they are the only one's doing so in the name of their religion.


The USA Today article referenced omitted that from their summery.



> *Fort Hood*
> *Location: *Fort Hood, Texas
> *Date: *Nov. 5, 2009
> *Shooter: *Nidal Hasan
> *Details: *Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, went on a shooting rampage that killed 13 people and left many more wounded. He was convicted in 2013 of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.


But heck.

A shooting is a shooting is a shooting.

All the victims are equally dead!!


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

universitystripe said:


> I feel the comparison of the British Muslims joining ISIS to British Jews joining the armed forces of Israel does not really hold water for a couple reasons.
> 
> First, ISIS is a terrorist organization parading as a state. These British Muslims are not joining the army of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. They are joining a terrorist group which has openly threatened the West.
> 
> ...


Please don't confuse him with logic and reason.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

No matter how the u.s. or U.K. want to describe anyone, both cases contain equally murderous religious fanatics that rarely join their host countries military yet are willing to travel "back home" to support the fanaticism that their religions bring. Besides, nothing critical of Israel ever holds water to the zionists which is the same bs the muslims use. Call it Israel or call it Iran, they both stink like sh&t & want the world to believe they're roses.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

universitystripe said:


> I feel the comparison of the British Muslims joining ISIS to British Jews joining the armed forces of Israel does not really hold water for a couple reasons.
> 
> First, ISIS is a terrorist organization parading as a state. These British Muslims are not joining the army of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. They are joining a terrorist group which has openly threatened the West.
> 
> ...


Odious and dangerous as these Islamic zealots are, Israel is also a terrorist organisation masquerading as a state, and so the comparison is somewhat valid. Israel continually gets away with it however, as it's agents pull the strings of power in the US, the UK and many other nations.
And, the very existence of "Isis" or Islamic State" and the conflict currently raging in Syria and Iraq, is as a result of Israeli machinations and the Yinon Plan, which dates back to 1982. This aims to balkanise and destabilise the region and leave no strong country to stand up to Israeli expansion. 
As in Afghanistan 30 years ago, terrorist fighters that the US and UK helped to set up and fund, have now turned on the hand that feeds. Iraq is as good as destroyed, and Syria is mired in chaos, and but the thugs are still on the loose and are getting ideas beyond their original remit.


----------



## universitystripe (Jul 13, 2013)

Odradek said:


> Odious and dangerous as these Islamic zealots are, Israel is also a terrorist organisation masquerading as a state, and so the comparison is somewhat valid. Israel continually gets away with it however, as it's agents pull the strings of power in the US, the UK and many other nations.
> And, the very existence of "Isis" or Islamic State" and the conflict currently raging in Syria and Iraq, is as a result of Israeli machinations and the Yinon Plan, which dates back to 1982. This aims to balkanise and destabilise the region and leave no strong country to stand up to Israeli expansion.
> As in Afghanistan 30 years ago, terrorist fighters that the US and UK helped to set up and fund, have now turned on the hand that feeds. Iraq is as good as destroyed, and Syria is mired in chaos, and but the thugs are still on the loose and are getting ideas beyond their original remit.


While the US and UK have foolishly played alliances with these feuding Arabs to their detriment, I cannot say that Israel is less than legitimate. It is officially recognized by the United Nations. Opinions may differ on such matters, but legality is on the side of Israel.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

universitystripe said:


> While the US and UK have foolishly played alliances with these feuding Arabs to their detriment, I cannot say that Israel is less than legitimate. It is officially recognized by the United Nations. Opinions may differ on such matters, but legality is on the side of Israel.


Please don't confuse him with legalities.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

universitystripe said:


> While the US and UK have foolishly played alliances with these feuding Arabs to their detriment, I cannot say that Israel is less than legitimate. It is officially recognized by the United Nations. Opinions may differ on such matters, but legality is on the side of Israel.


Whoa. Wait there buckaroo... SG, Hitch, and their minions have already proven that the U.N has no power and doesn't actually exist. or something like that. They sure get all upset when you mention that the U.N. has been critical of Israel. And the crying really starts when you say that Israel is guilty of international (war) crimes and should be taken to the courts in Den Hague.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

justonemore said:


> Call it Israel or call it Iran, they both stink like sh&t & want the world to believe they're roses.


Again, not all **** stinks equally!!


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ The world is much easier to understand when we don't have to choose between good and evil.


----------



## universitystripe (Jul 13, 2013)

justonemore said:


> Whoa. Wait there buckaroo... SG, Hitch, and their minions have already proven that the U.N has no power and doesn't actually exist. or something like that. They sure get all upset when you mention that the U.N. has been critical of Israel. And the crying really starts when you say that Israel is guilty of international (war) crimes and should be taken to the courts in Den Hague.


Then let's be honest. The world is controlled by power. Those in power decide the rules. Right now, those in power are in complete agreement that Israel is legitimate.

Sometimes we call that the United Nations to make ourselves feel better. But it is honestly the permanent members of the United Nations--the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China. It's rather nice when they agree, but if they don't--oh well.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> ^ The world is much easier to understand when we don't have to choose between good and evil.


They can deny there is a choice, but they have chosen alright!!


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

justonemore said:


> Can the same derision be poured upon those British jews that take up fighting for Israel? Religious hocus pocus is religious hocus pocus afterall. An British jew killing for Israel & Judaism is no different than a British muslim killing for Iran & the muslim faith. In fact there are also more British jews serving the Israeli terrorists (oops military) than there are jews serving the british military. Can we be critical about that too or would that automatically be "antisemitism"?


Seems this kind of thing is pretty rampant, but severely under-reported.
Have a story about it from Channel 4 News and also one from The New Statesman.

Seems there are now about 100 Jewish Britons in the IDF, but there's very little outcry about it.



> _The Israeli military runs a programme called "mahal" which allows non-Israeli nationals of Jewish descent to join the ranks of the armed forces for an 18-month tour of duty._
> 
> _According to the rules, British men under 24 or women under 21 who have one parent or grandparent who is or was Jewish are eligible._
> 
> ...


*The British children who train to fight in Israel*


> _In 2001 shocking reports surfaced from Gaza of summer schools being organised by Islamic Jihad, which were teaching Palestinian adolescents to become suicide bombers. The Israeli government denounced the camps as evidence that a new generation was being brought up to hate and to kill._
> 
> _What went unreported was that at a purpose-built barracks in the Negev desert, *every summer hundreds of Jewish teenagers from Europe, Mexico and America pay to spend nine weeks saluting, marching, firing guns and otherwise pretending to be soldiers.*_
> 
> _Marva, run by the Educational and Youth Corps of the Israel Defence Force and conducted entirely in Hebrew, simulates the basic training of Israeli conscripts for 18-28 year old members of the Diaspora. Dressed in boots and olive fatigues, and obliged to carry an M16 assault rifle at all times, school leavers on gap years do push ups in the dust, perform night marches with laden stretchers, maintain civil defence shelters, fire machine guns at paper figures and simulate military manoeuvres, as well as taking classes in Jewish identity and the history and values of the IDF. Karaoke and dance-offs also feature._





> _Most recently, British 16 and 17 year olds have been able to take part in Gadna, the week-long course taken by Israeli schoolchildren in preparation for military service and which has recently come under fire for becoming increasingly militaristic. *"Shooting an M16 gun&#8230; physically lying on the land of Israel, learning how to defend it, gave me an immense sense of pride" writes a breathless Aimee Riese, a London schoolgirl and recent participant*, in the Jewish Chronicle._


As The New Statesman says...


> _There's not much to be won in games of moral equivalence and assertions as to which side's indiscriminate attacks on civilians are the more reprehensible. But ask yourself this question: *If these were British Muslim 19 year-olds firing machine guns and running assault courses in Pakistan or Yemen, would we not have them all arrested at the airport?*_


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

When I was in college one of the players on the men's tennis team was from Israel. 

He was no doubt being indoctrinated into American sports so as to defend the American cause when the time came to play the Davis Cup.

Some of the lines of argument on this thread are truly laughable and feeble.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> When I was in college one of the players on the men's tennis team was from Israel.
> 
> He was no doubt being indoctrinated into American sports so as to defend the American cause when the time came to play the Davis Cup.
> 
> Some of the lines of argument on this thread are truly laughable and feeble.


Of course. As if trying to claim that a tennis camp where participants carry tennis raquets is the same as an Israeli miltary training camp for teens (where participants carry m-16s), is not " truly laughable and feeble".... 16 and 17 year olds are usually considered children in the U.S. aren't they? Good thing these are British kids.

Of course to be fair... The U.S. actively signs 16 and 17 year old children as well (which means recruiting must start at around 14-15 years old).


----------



## Hitch (Apr 25, 2012)




----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

Please find time to review: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?t=190364


----------



## Hitch (Apr 25, 2012)

universitystripe said:


> I feel the comparison of the British Muslims joining ISIS to British Jews joining the armed forces of Israel does not really hold water for a couple reasons.
> 
> First, ISIS is a terrorist organization parading as a state. These British Muslims are not joining the army of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. They are joining a terrorist group which has openly threatened the West.
> 
> ...


Come on,if it were'nt for make believe moral equivalency the left would have fallen silent a century ago.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Hitch said:


> Come on,if it were'nt for make believe moral equivalency the left would have fallen silent a century ago.





> _In 2001 shocking reports surfaced from Gaza of summer schools being organised by Islamic Jihad, which were *teaching Palestinian adolescents to become suicide bombers. *The Israeli government denounced the camps as evidence that a new generation was being brought up to hate and to kill._
> 
> _What went unreported was that at a purpose-built barracks in the Negev desert, every summer hundreds of Jewish teenagers from Europe, Mexico and America pay to spend nine weeks saluting, marching, firing guns and otherwise pretending to be soldiers._
> 
> _Marva, run by the Educational and Youth Corps of the Israel Defence Force and conducted entirely in Hebrew, simulates the basic training of Israeli conscripts for 18-28 year old members of the Diaspora. Dressed in boots and olive fatigues, and obliged to carry an M16 assault rifle at all times, school leavers on gap years do push ups in the dust, perform night marches with laden stretchers, maintain civil defence shelters, at paper figures and simulate military manoeuvres, as well as taking classes in Jewish identity and the history and values of the IDF. * Karaoke and dance-offs also feature.*_


LOL!!


----------



## tocqueville (Nov 15, 2009)

I am surprised there are so few Muslims in the British service; I strongly suspect there are many more in the French military.


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

tocqueville said:


> I am surprised there are so few Muslims in the British service; I strongly suspect there are many more in the French military.


You're probably right. In Britain anyway, Muslims are in the state, but not of the state.

Supposedly, Muslims make up 15% of the French army.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Sweden's on the case already.
The PM here yesterday ordered drafting of legislation to make it illegal for Swedish citizens to go overseas to fight in wars for terror organisations such as Isis.

I think all British Muslims who are known to currently be overseas fighting should have their citizenship removed automatically, and not even be allowed back into the UK to explain or appeal.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

^ Something along those lines has been suggested here, or control orders.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

tocqueville said:


> I am surprised there are so few Muslims in the British service; I strongly suspect there are many more in the French military.


I'm not surprised at all. In my military days, early 80s, very little leeway was given to people with unusual dietary requirements i.e. no pork for muslims, and only halal meat. Either you ate the food on offer or you didn't. And if you didn't & you got sick, you were put on a charge for self-inflicted illness and then discharged. I did basic training in the RAF with a British Pakistani muslim, who was also a vegan, he refused to eat what was on offer, he got sick, and then got kicked out after three weeks. The reasoning is simple, military time & logistics do not allow for fannying around with special diets in the armed forces & a soldier should be able to eat whatever food he comes across to keep his body and brain in operation.


----------



## 69firebird (Jul 28, 2014)

SG_67 said:


> I've never really understood the compulsion of some to make allusions to Jews and Judaism when the thread is not even about that.
> 
> I'll tell you what, when Jewish soldiers start beheading journalists and post the video on YouTube you'll have my attention.


Well said


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> I'm not surprised at all. In my military days, early 80s, very little leeway was given to people with unusual dietary requirements i.e. no pork for muslims, and only halal meat. Either you ate the food on offer or you didn't. And if you didn't & you got sick, you were put on a charge for self-inflicted illness and then discharged. I did basic training in the RAF with a British Pakistani muslim, who was also a vegan, he refused to eat what was on offer, he got sick, and then got kicked out after three weeks. The reasoning is simple, military time & logistics do not allow for fannying around with special diets in the armed forces & a soldier should be able to eat whatever food he comes across to keep his body and brain in operation.


I wonder if it's still like that? High-minded efforts to be inclusive might suggest the availability of halal and kosher rat packs but I somehow doubt it.

Another factor in the Muslim quotient of the British military is where they recruit from. Traditionally a lot of this was disproportionately from the 'harder' areas - like the Highlands, Ireland, Tyneside etc etc where there were (coincidentally) fewer ethnic minorities.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Langham said:


> I wonder if it's still like that? High-minded efforts to be inclusive might suggest the availability of halal and kosher rat packs but I somehow doubt it.


Think again...

https://www.armytimes.com/article/20100320/NEWS/3200312/Kosher-halal-MREs-feed-religious-diversity

I gave up when they started letting women on warships.

Article~In 2009, the center distributed 204,000 kosher meals and 1.32 million halal meals, according to Jim Lecollier, chief of DSCP's individual rations branch. For this Passover, it has distributed more than 7,500 Passover meals and a number of related kits used to conduct a ritual feast called a seder_._ The kits are full of Passover-specific foods and religious materials.

Kosher is outnumbered 6 to 1!!


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

^ I always thought the inclusion of a rubber johnny in British army ration packs seemed slightly odd. Did the army have in mind some sort of al fresco post-prandial safe-sex orgy? Supposedly they can double up as a sort of water flask.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> I'm not surprised at all. In my military days, early 80s, very little leeway was given to people with unusual dietary requirements i.e. no pork for muslims, and only halal meat. Either you ate the food on offer or you didn't. And if you didn't & you got sick, you were put on a charge for self-inflicted illness and then discharged. I did basic training in the RAF with a British Pakistani muslim, who was also a vegan, he refused to eat what was on offer, he got sick, and then got kicked out after three weeks. The reasoning is simple, military time & logistics do not allow for fannying around with special diets in the armed forces & a soldier should be able to eat whatever food he comes across to keep his body and brain in operation.


Yet historically Britain has accommodated religious dietary needs in it's forces and civil organisations, and amongst the civil population in wartime. Jews were allowed rations in Britain in WW2 that were religiously acceptable. When I sailed with Indian crews they always had the appropriate food and the appropriate cooking facilities, ie a Hindu cook and galley and a Muslim cook and galley; the Christians, usually the catering people, cooked in the same galley as that in which the officers' food was prepared. The Indian Army, under British control, was able to accommodate all religious dietary needs, and I met an RN officer who was able to have kosher food both at sea and ashore.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Chouan said:


> Yet historically Britain has accommodated religious dietary needs in it's forces


May I remind you of one of the causes of the Indian Mutiny? The beef fat used to grease the paper rifle cartridges so as to keep the powder dry 
Also I know for a FACT that recruiting offices regularly used vegetarianism as a reason for not processing an application. I never met a single vegetarian in my years in the RAF.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> May I remind you of one of the causes of the Indian Mutiny? The beef fat used to grease the paper rifle cartridges so as to keep the powder dry
> Also I know for a FACT that recruiting offices regularly used vegetarianism as a reason for not processing an application. I never met a single vegetarian in my years in the RAF.


The cartridge story was a story, just a story, spread by the leaders of the mutiny. It was a pretext for the rebellion, not a cause. The mutineers happily used the cartridges once the mutiny was underway! In any case, the Enfield cartridges were actually waxed.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

universitystripe said:


> USA Today is reporting that there are now more British Muslims within the ranks of the Islamic State (or ISIS) than within the British armed forces.
> 
> Source: More British Muslims Fight for Islamic State than Britain


It is, in any case, curious that "USA Today" think that this is a news report that is of interest. As with most articles in the news media, my first response on seeing a headline, is to ask "Why are they publishing this story?" Why indeed.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Chouan said:


> The cartridge story was a story, just a story, spread by the leaders of the mutiny. It was a pretext for the rebellion, not a cause. The mutineers happily used the cartridges once the mutiny was underway! In any case, the Enfield cartridges were actually waxed.


yea, but let's not let the truth get in the way of a good story!


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> yea, but let's not let the truth get in the way of a good story!


Yes.
But are admitting that the whole James Foley beheading video was faked with a dummy, then you've got to wonder, _cui bono_.

And now we have Obama announcing US "airstrikes" (hate that euphemism), not only on these ISIS nutjobs, but possibly on "Assad regime targets" too, just to balance things out.
Gotta wonder....

https://m.apnews.com/ap/db_268798/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=HhRZK0ku


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Also I know for a FACT that recruiting offices regularly used vegetarianism as a reason for not processing an application. I never met a single vegetarian in my years in the RAF.


I'm confident you did.

They simply had to remain closeted back in the day!!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

WouldaShoulda said:


> I'm confident you did.
> 
> They simply had to remain closeted back in the day!!


Veggies in the closet


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^LOL.
Egads! You don't suppose eating a couple of bowls of vegetarian chili the other night could be misinterpreted to indicate any change in my political/religious orientation? :crazy:


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

That's exactly how those Veg-heads trick the unsuspecting into their cult!!


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I won't stand for any more of this anti-vegtite language!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Everyone is on to you. Uncle Leo!!


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> I won't stand for any more of this anti-vegtite language!


Amen!! As a loud and proud SCOVA (Self Certified Officious Victims' Advocate) I want to say that I'm highly offended by....well, pretty much everything.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

One of my sons who has become brutalized by living in Montana and learning to hunt tells me that in Big Sky Country, PETA stands for People Eating Tasty Animals.

Getting back to Chouan's earlier point, Britain has also allowed certain religious communities to administer marriage and other civil matters under the auspices of their clergy. It started with allowing Jews and, I think certain Protestants, e.g., Quakers, to marry outside of the Church of England. 

When the British acquired an empire that included Islam, Hinduism and other religions, they expanded the concept to include members of those faiths as well. It has come back full circle and currently, consenting parties to divorce in the UK can agree to be bound by clerical determinations. This has made the news mostly in connection with Orthodox Jewish men blocking their wives' divorce proceedings by refusing to agree to a divorce, something apparently required if the wife wishes to remain a congregant. Ignoring this long history, propagandists have tried to construe allowing imams to officiate over domestic matters within their communities as somehow establishing sharia. 

I prefer the French system.

Gurdon


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Gurdon said:


> Gurdon


Just a little point of order, Quakers are not Protestants they are Dissenters. The Church of England is Protestant.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Just a little point of order, Quakers are not Protestants they are Dissenters. The Church of England is Protestant.


I've always thought of the Church of England as, well, the Church of England. Neither Protestant nor Catholic. I stand corrected.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

SG_67 said:


> I've always thought of the Church of England as, well, the Church of England. Neither Protestant nor Catholic. I stand corrected.


It has some Catholic traditions, while also a Reformed Church.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

SG_67 said:


> I've always thought of the Church of England as, well, the Church of England. Neither Protestant nor Catholic. I stand corrected.


The Anglican Church of England is most definitely not a Reformed Church, in the sense that most people know it, i.e. dissenters from Anglicanism. The theology of the Reformed Church is Calvinistic. But most Calvinists are either Presbyterians or Reformed Baptists and so on. Episcopalians and Anglicans are almost NEVER Calvinists. While the High Anglican Church (Oxford Movement) has many Catholic attributes, it remains essentially a Protestant Church, but in historical action rather than in a new protested theology. So your "neither Protestant nor Catholic" is a common way of viewing the C of E. 
But it is not Protestant in the way that Luther protested against the RC church nor in the way that Zwingli and Calvin protested. The Anglican Chruch broke from Rome on the matter of divorce not on the grounds of theology (Quakers, Calvinists, Baptists etc.)

Initially when the C of E broke with Rome, Roman Catholics and all other Protestants were considered dissenters if they didn't adhere to Anglicanism.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> The Anglican Church of England is most definitely not a Reformed Church....


The term may well mean different things to different people, but that is indeed how the Church of England refers to itself - as both Catholic and Reformed.

https://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/history/detailed-history.aspx


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

And while we're discussing the very un-British nature of some British Muslims, lets not forget the two "Muslim" scumbags that last year murdered Lee Rigby a young off-duty soldier in Woolwich. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> And while we're discussing the very un-British nature of some British Muslims, lets not forget the two "Muslim" scumbags that last year murdered Lee Rigby a young off-duty soldier in Woolwich.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby


Pish Posh!!

Those lads are no more dead than they would have been had they been run over by a Double Decker.

And what is more English than that??

Just you leave Islam out of this.

Hater!!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Pish Posh!!
> 
> Those lads are no more dead than they would have been had they been run over by a Double Decker.
> 
> ...


What are you talking about??? Did you read my post correctly. I put muslim in brackets because one of them is from a Christian family

Those two young cowards attacked & hacked to death an off-duty British soldier in the street in London. They are not dead, they were shot by police however, when they attacked the police, after murdering Lee Rigby in the name of Islam. 
What your comment _"Those lads are no more dead than they would have been had they been run over by a Double Decker"
_has to do with anything I fail to see.

As for being a hater, yes, I'm a hater, I hate murderers and terrorists.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Ooops!!

Sorry, I was just filling in for the usual suspects in their absence.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Ooops!!
> 
> Sorry, I was just filling in for the usual suspects in their absence.


 ..thought it must have been some kind of hitch like that


----------

