±«Óătv

Yet more ±«Óătv anti-Tory bias. "Why are the Conservatives stuck at less thn 40%" you ask. Why not ask, "Why is the Clunking Fist's Labour party stuck at less than 40%?". What expectation should anyone have of getting more than 40% in a 3 party system where all the parties pretty much preach the same message?

And whilst I'm about it, yet more ±«Óătv anti-Bush propaganda on Gavin Esler's "Quote for the Day". So what if Bush doesn't do Evolution? Probably half the world's leaders "don't do it" either, as well as most of the world's religious leaders. Any excuse for a pop at him, isn't it Gavin, just ignore the bigger picture to get in some cheap, trivial shots. I suppose it makes a change from writing similar nonsense in the Guardian.

the catalyst the terrorists need is the media that for love of money or ratings will present a scene called 'Bloodbath at the House of Death' [apologies to Kenny Everett] or some such title.

the actual physical damage these incidents cause is negligible and no threat to society. The headless media is the threat. Does the media like being played by people who consider themselves smarter than them and who are experts in news management?

there is no fear from the reality of the act but in the illusion of it. The illusioned must try to make their illusions seem real?

Its obvious that radical islam isn't shared by all muslims, but a large number 'understand' jihad attacks in UK. It reminds me of the support for the IRA among some Catholics and loyalist terror gangs amongst some Protestants.

Lets be honest (muslims are) the muslim religion wants to rule the planet and will not tolerate western ways and any 'way of life that is not islamic' (Monday nights guest quote)

Shira law is gradually creeping in around the world. Anyone who speaks out is a racist. Freedom of speech is under threat. At least I suppose we can admire muslims as they are not afraid to give their viewpoint.

As for foreign policy causing radial muslims to attack Britain, I dont belive this is totally true as attacks happened well before Iraq, but it obviously does not help.

Hassan Butt has made a very good point re: the resposibility of the clerics for placing the Koran in a modern context, particularly the passages on Jihad, etc. I am not Muslim but my opinion is that the clerics coming into this country from now on must be vetted to ensure that their views are pro-Western and anti-violence and reformist. After they are vetted they should then be placed on a probation type visa, ensuring that they are not given guaranteed leave to remain in this country and then they should be monitored during this period to see if they are conforming. Only by welcoming more modern thinking clerics and by eliminating those taking a violence stance will we be able to tackle the radicalisation of young Muslims in the place that weilds the most power in forming and shaping their beliefs.

Peter,

How reaching was that whole terrorist report/discussion.

It looked like the whole thing was put together in advance without any actual reference to the details emerging, you know, that bit about "foreigners" without any other details available yet.

Disappointing, quite a right-wing agenda, even when oddly, the politicians are actually trying to be statesman-like and restrained.

How many of these "ex-fanatics" are going to crawl out of the woodwork, and be given their 15 minutes of fame by ignorant/gullible media.

Also, what's with TV news thinking that technology and business come under the same umbrella -nice premium P.R. for spinvox pre-raise/ipo.

Hyping a company, and creating hate and division within/towards UK muslims all in a nice package. cute!

I was very disappointed by Hassan Butt on newsnight tonight. He has neither the scholastic authority, learning or indeed intelligence to represent the views of "most muslims". His warped worldview and personal experience can only ever limit the scope of his representation to other juveniles assocaited with neo-jihadist organisations. A cursory look at any of the classical schools of Islamic scholarship will clearly show that the destruction of civility and vigilante attacks against civilians can never be justified. The approach of the idiotic hobby terrorists of today is certainly not congruent with the proud history of Islamic jurisprudence and civilisation.

I think the authorities are limited with what they can do in the fight against extremists and terrorists as they are at risk of driving those responsible further underground, the public have a huge part to play in looking out for suspicious behaviour. I live only about a mile from glasgow airport and was nieve in thinking that such an attack would never happen here, as regardless of the fact there are obviously active terrorists in the uk, You dont expect these people who live around you to be involved in such extremism, but as the last few days have shown there can be terrorists living anywhere near anyone.

I completely agree with hassan butt and the comment posted by paula that the preachers of the quoran need to be vigilant in the way they preach the meaning of jihad. I also agree with hassan butt that most muslims will in thier heart of hearts disagree with the western way of life and its is the job of thier religions leaders to educate these people that the muslim religion also preaches peace and to respect other religions and mankind.

What has happened to the ±«Óătv?

You asked a former jihadist to give an opinion of the views of the majority of muslims?

Jihad in its base form means to struggle by they way , or an extended effort. So a jihadist really means one who takes part in a struggle.

How many times have I seen Al Qaeda mentioned on the ±«Óătv website, when no information about links has yet surfaced.

And the organisation of Al Qaeda does not exist. Rather it inspires radical lunatics to create terror.

Stop scare mongering and creating fear about the muslim people. When the majority of muslim people are normal, and decent - regardless if even they do dislike aspects of western culture.

And surprise, surprise I'm not a muslim, I'm just fed up with the misrepresentation of a group in our society who are a convenient psychological hook, for all the worlds ills.

When blair prayed on his bible, about his decision for the war in iraq, does that make him a fundamental christian?

The fear of terror is mainly psychological, and will probably be used by the governments to weaken civil liberties and expand the state.

I notice there is no ±«Óătv coverage concerning the two BNP men and their bomb making stash who are back in court this week.

I bet you any money if they were muslim, they would be straight into the headlines.

Many thanks

Does anyone know the name/composer/artist of the classical guitar piece that was used throughout the Spinvox piece on tonight's newsnight?

Perhaps one of the newsnight team can help?

I wish to express my deep appreciation to Hassan Butt for his honesty and incredible bravery. Thanks also to Newsnight for including him.

What happened to the intelligent people?
ISLAM MEANS PEASCE
First at all it is forbidden in ISLAM to kill, attack, destroy, vandalise and to be unfaithful to the country you are living. If you do not like the country you have the right to talk about it, not to kill or to inflict harm to its inhabitant. Therefore it is a duty upon everyone to protect Muslim and non Muslim alike.
There are three issues here.
1- The imams and the Muslim youth can’t communicate because of the language buries
2- Most of the Friday lecture is not English language
3- There is none (youth) in management committee, and they do not have a say, therefore everything is decided for them without consultation and whether they like it or not.
The solutions are;
• Imams must be someone who can communicate in English language
• Fridays Prayer Must be in English
• Youth must be included in the management committee
• And government must have a policy on all the above to minimise the gap between the youth and the elderly.
Whenever there is a gap there is a problem. Therefore we all need to work together to close the gap it is not too late yet.

in response to dougs comment, and i quote "Stop scare mongering and creating fear about the muslim people. When the majority of muslim people are normal, and decent - regardless if even they do dislike aspects of western culture. " The majority of british people are aware that most people of the muslim faith are decent people, but that doesnt escape the fact that there are a small minority of extremists out there who will depict terror in thier quest towards thier "holy war" which is the reason why these recent attacks have had such media coverage. We all need to be aware that such acts are being planned and try and find a way to stop the handful of people planning them before thier is carnage and a collosal loss of life. I understand your concerns over the coverage of the members of the bnp and thier trial and by no means should that incident be treated any differently as that is another form of terrorism. The goal most uk citizens have is to irradicate ALL forms of terrorism by ANY individual regardless of race, religion and background.

A former ex jihadist makes comments about the threat of Islam and its entrenched religious agenda for it's docile infidel host's, i and others have warned of the treat of Islam and its inherent incompatibility to western culture for years with the usual charge of anti religious and racism every time we voice our concerns, hello, are we all awake yet?....no, apparently not.

Clearly the unsuccessful car bombs threat in London and the Glasgow airport car bomb(of a kind) was to coincide with the hand-over of power from Blair to Brown, and was intended to rattle the new prime minister, who as we all know, happens to be Scottish, hence the locations, don't you see, that was always on the cards, inevitable..any hand-over of power brings out the enemies of any state or there is always a hightened threat of this kind, the security forces must have been twitchy when the premiership changed hands, i am sure most saw this coming.... didn't they?

P.S:

the guitar sounds like Julian Bream playing a baroque piece, a very very early guitar composition,

The guitar piece was from an album called Aires Indios, by Pirai Vaca, a Bolivian guitarist. It is from one of those anonymous baroque suites that were discovered in the monasteries of Santa Cruz - most probably written by indigenous priests in the 17c. Unfortunately I can't give you any more details because I dont have the album to hand; I will post here later. However be warned: I bought it in Bolivia and have not been able to find it here!

Gavin Esler’s interview with Hassan Butt revealed some ±«Óătv groupthink in action. Gavin suggested to Butt that “intelligent” interpretations of the Koran are needed to counter radical Islam. Butt could have told him that many intelligent and respected Islamic scholars subscribe to radical (violent) Islamic ideology. Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic revolution in Iran, unambiguously asserted that the West must be destroyed by means of violent Jihad. An entire nation follows the teachings of Khomeini and chants “Death to America and Death to the UK” at Friday prayers every week.

Hassan Butt had this to say about Abu Qatada (who also advocates violent jihad)

(https://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2115832,00.html)

“It may be difficult to swallow but the reason why Abu Qatada - the Islamic scholar whom Palestinian militants recently called to be released in exchange for the kidnapped ±«Óătv journalist Alan Johnston - has a following is because he is extremely learned and his religious rulings are well argued. His opinions, though I now thoroughly disagree with them, have validity within the broad canon of Islam.”

Esler also suggested that the radicals are a “fringe” element. Hassan Butt made it clear that the radical element is not a fringe. In fact Ed Hussein has been making the same point for some time and a number of polls over the years have shown that the radical sentiment in the Muslim community is widespread. Gavin Esler is not aware of this.

Gavin Esler, in ±«Óătv groupthink mode concludes that “intelligent” interpretation of the Koran is needed to counter a “fringe” element. The ±«Óătv still doesn’t quite get the rudiments of Islamic radicalism. Thankfully, Hassan Butt and Ed Hussein are not so easily dismissed as Ayan Hirsi Ali who communicates a similar message in a recent interview with Esler but was treated with some contempt (she is a Muslim apostate).

I cannot understand why Newsnight insists on inviting manifestly ignorant Muslims like Hassan Butt and Ed Hussein to effectively represent, completely unchallenged, the Islamic viewpoint on the issues of terrorism and integration. As a practicing Muslim, I found the comments Mr Butt expressed on yesterday’s Newsnight (particularly his outrageous allegation that most Muslims sympathise with the view that female clubbers or “anything that is not an Islamic way of life” are legitimate targets for “attack”) nothing short of abhorrent, offensive and defamatory.
If Mrs Butt and Hussein had much commonsense in their heads, Muslim or otherwise, they would not have joined intellectually bankrupt groups such as Al-Muhajeroon and Hizb-Al-Tahreer in the first place! I really hope that the ±«Óătv would one day stop effectively manipulating the Islamic standpoint on such sensitive issues, under the pretext of providing a platform for “reformed Muslims” on the one hand or downright extremist thugs, such as Abu-Hamza and Omar Bakri, on the other. One is entitled to ask why Newsnight quite happily and rightly invites bona fide academics and official representatives of mainstream Christian and Jewish organizations to comment on issues pertinent to those faiths but consistently fails to bring in their Muslim counterparts when issues requiring solid understanding and knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence are discussed. Is this because what is “mainstream” in Islam is not considered sufficiently “moderate” in the western sense? It is certainly the case that people such as Tariq Ramadan and Ed Hussein invariably have a view on this subject but it is simply misleading to viewers, who are predominantly non-Muslim, to effectively portray their views are those to which the average Islamic scholar or even majority of Muslims would subscribe. The sad truth is that the views expressed on yesterday’s Newsnight reflect as much the ignorance of some; I believe a small minority of, Muslims of their own religion as that of the Programme makers themselves.

I would like to express my saddness in Newsnights choice of an Islamic Voice on Monday's show. Hossain Butt is not a scholar, so who is he? and why is he qualified to represent the muslim view? Why was he chosen when there are hundreds of qualified people that can represent the muslims? I believe he was reading from a script that reads what the media want's to portray, I wouldn't be surprised if he was a neo-con dressed as a muslim.

Contrary to Mr Butt's unfounded opinion, Islam does not advocate violence, nor does it allow for the killing of innocent lives. Islam means Peace.

The acts were absolutely wrong and cannot be justified in any way.

However the thinking mind should ask why has the threat of these act's increased in Mainland UK?

Our foreign Policy, and the injustice we propogate around the world must have a part in us now being the victims of injustice.

We can only find solutions and put a stop to this terrorism by resolving the causes and not by creating more causes using unjust laws and taking away civil liberties.

Why is it that words of Muslims do not relate to reality? Taqqiya perhaps.

If Britain was not Iraq or Afghanistan it would make no difference whatsoever - there is always Israel to use as an excuse, there is also Chechnya isn't there?
they will always find justification for their incessant global march.

The global reality:-

Is this lady wrong:-

So no one in Britain can feel they are being singled out, they are not!

I agree with #4. Unfortunately, one of those who still say "its not our fault" is our new Prime Minister -

We cannot hope for an end to terrorism until our politicians admit what its root causes are. There might be a few extremists who "want to destroy our way of life", but I think most of the resentment is a reaction to our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and our acceptance of Israel's illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.

I welcomed Hassan Butt's comments. There are too few Islamic voices that speak critically of the Koran (unlike Chritian criticism of the Bible). The media (not least 'Newsnight') do not seem aware that the issues here are as much rooted in Islamic theology as they are in political/military issues.

Would it be possible to devote more time to exploring Islamic theology? Without an understanding of this, no one can understand the reasoning behind much of the violence which is done, not in the name of 'freedom for Iraq', but of "Allah".

If Islam means Peace why are there so many killings only in Islamic countries? Why are the rulers and public not against human killings the way governments and public in the west are?

If Muslims are kind at heart why did they not offer us their support to topple Sadam who was killing fellow Muslims? To make problems worse Muslims blame us for helping innocent Iraqis no one else had guts to help?

A few words for the 'Islam means Peace' gang on the blog today:

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the Islamic revolution in Iran and the author of the death-fatwa on Salman Rushdie, said this about Islam and peace:

“Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]…. Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

Hassan Butt and Ed Hussein understand this mode of Islamic thought and the threat it poses to Western democracy and with the latest attacks people are beginning to take a stand. See “'Islamist' is the word for these terrorists” by Denis MacShane in the Telegraph for example:

Islam is no doubt a source of comfort and peace for millions but it is also unique among religions as a driving force for global terrorism.

In response to 25, I would like to say that your statement appears to come with a lot of ignorance. The killing in Muslim countries happen to have a lot of conspiracies attached to them, many of which happen to relate to the American funding and supply of weapons to certain nations, almost purely for business. We all know how the US prospered from supplying weapons in both World Wars...mainly why they intervened so late! Although I choose to research much of what the media states for myself, if you watch the end of "Bowling for Columbine" Michael Moore consisely and accurately states the US involvement in global violence. Its no wonder why Muslims tend to have a hatred for the West. Whilst this does not justify terrorism (and if the Qur'an is read properly, Islam does condemn these acts!), it does go to show that you can't make such comments if you havent checked up on the facts. Yes Saddam Hussein was an evil man, but who funded his ways and helped him gain power?lets just say Bush comes to mind... And just so you know, more Iraqis have died since the Western intervention in Iraq than Saddam and his "government" had killed in all his years in power.

Just to add to 26, Islamist actually means to be Islamic, as in religious. I think the word everyone in relation to the terrorists in radicalist!

I submitted a post 2 days ago. Why hasn't it been posted yet? Is this a form of censorship?

#27. SK.
Not wanting to stay one of the many described as 'ignorant'.
How then SK do you explain:-

Some history eh.
In reality nothing has changed has it, do you think anything will or can change, if you do, how?

Hassan Butt wasn't claiming to be a voice for all Muslims, and that wasn't the point of interviewing him.

He was interviewed to try and shed some light on the attitudes and influences that produce militants and terrorists from within Muslim communities.

One of the more interesting suggestions he made is that these people who go out and plant/detonate bombs are far less motivated by US/UK foreign policy than we think.

He suggests the reason they do it is because they see themselves involved in a global revolutionary struggle, supported by violence, to impose fundamentalist Islamic governments on us all.

He went onto say that it's up to Muslim clerics to take a firm stand on this within their own communities. Sounds sensible to me!

Some people, like Hassan Butt, tell us that the killing of Non-Muslims by Muslims is specifically required by the Qur'an, while others say that this is strictly forbidden. Which is it? I have looked in on-line English versions but have so far been unable to find the references either way.
Is it a case of the Qur'an (as in the Bible) containing contradictory passages which can be chosen according to the taste of the reader? Can anybody supply chapters and line numbers?
I also have two specific questions: I would be intrigued to know where Alan C found his Khomeini quote. And could SK add a little more on what he means by reading the Qur'an "properly".

31# yes Derek it also sounds very sensible to me also, if the Mullahs and Clerics took a firmer stance, along with parents and those teaching in the Madrasas (spelling) I am sure a good number of fertile young minds would avoid the poison of these fanatics.

It was astonishing that neither Gavin Esler nor any of the other guests took up Hassan Butt's point that the Islamist's view of the West/Britain is also the predominate view among British Muslims, although they will only express this privately and presumably exclusively to other Muslims. Perhaps everyone was in shock at what they had just heard as it suddenly demolished all of the arguments put about as to how cuddly Muslims actually are when you get to know them.

It all begs two very serious questions. If the overwhelming majority of Muslims dislike us so much why are they living amongst us? If their purpose and long term aim is as malign and sinister as some believe, why are we allowing them to remain and indeed permit them to continue to arrive in ever increasing numbers?

I trust you will consider these comments to be reasonable and worth posting.

Christopher E:

Chapters 8 and (particularly) 9 of the Qur'an may be a useful starting point.

I really enjoyed the technology piece on Spinvox and feel i have to comment on "quevoni"'s remark:

"Also, what's with TV news thinking that technology and business come under the same umbrella -nice premium P.R. for spinvox pre-raise/ipo. Hyping a company, and creating hate and division within/towards UK muslims all in a nice package. cute!"

(Ignoring the race remark) Yes this did hype a start up company but why isn't the popular use of a technology which leads to the creation of a successful international business newsworthy?

I'd like to see more of this very healthy promotion of innovative British businesses. I strongly feel Paul should be congratulated and i hope that the business and it's lovely staff go on to raise more money and become more successful.

Why is it that in 2007 the British feel so uncomfortable elevating the status of their innovators - imagine if Americans were the same we'd probably be all be saying "iphone/steve jobs" what's that all about!

The terror attacks in London and Glasgow few questions need to be explored.
1) Two cars of London June 29th 2007 and Jeep Cherokee of Glasgow on June 30th 2007.
Were Three vehicles Gas / Patrol convertibles?
Do they have LPG conversion kits?

2) Two Molotov cocktail bombs were reported to have been seen by witnesses on June 30th 2007
If the alleged terrorists Late Kafeel and detained Dr. Abdullah had them for inflicting harm, Why they didn't use them to scare away people who came to beat them up?

3) Was it appropriate to use fire extinguisher on Late Kafeel ?

4) Was it appropriate way to carry injured Kafeel, the way police dragged him with his burnt/injured body ?
Intellectual debate about terrorism, its reasons or how to handle growing hate for west may continue.
As such London and Glasgow events of June 29th and 30th 2007 don't qualify as Muslim Terrorist attack.