When a native Brit goes to Middle East, he is called a voluntary fighter. When a Muslim goes there he is called a terrorist. Double standard by the British society. Also lot of British Jews went to Israel to fight but on their return no action was taken against them.

The three Jihadi Muslim girls and the Jihadi John were in a wrong place at a wrong time in a non-Muslim school with non-Muslim teachers during their developmental periods. They suffer from identity crises. They are unable to enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. They were not radicalised at a non-Muslim school, says principal. But the school with non-Muslim teachers are responsible to create identity crises. Muslim children must be in state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school. Why should we be surprised? They have gone through a rotten education system where there is no consequences for anything and they have grown up in a rather pathetic, wet nation with a liberal criminal justice system which actually seems to view law upholding people with pure contempt. Jihadi John has been identified, tried and convicted by the media. Surely this would prejudice any criminal case against him. In my opinion, he was also radicalised by MI5. To stop radicalisation of teens we need to find out the cause. We will get no where if all we do is just condemn but to actually stop this we need to find the cause and stop immediately, that includes All the way from extremist imams to extremist family members AND the pressure and the factor some of the security forces have upon teens.
IA
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.u

Iftikhar said :

When a Muslim goes there he is called a terrorist.

I wonder why ?

Iftikhar

why is there no one wanting to immigrate to any Islamic nation and yet all many muslims do in the West is complain.

Iftikhar,

"When a native Brit goes to Middle East, he is called a voluntary fighter. When a Muslim goes there he is called a terrorist. Double standard by the British society. Also lot of British Jews went to Israel to fight but on their return no action was taken against them."

No double standard at all, if Jews go to fight for Israel they are fighting for a State that is diplomatically linked to the UK, just as Prince Harry is to serve in the Australian army.
Muslims, on the other hand, are going to fight for an organization that calls itself a state but which is unrecognized by the UK except as a terrorist group.

If the UK is such a terrible place why don't local Muslims migrate to a Muslim country, or aren't the Social Services therein up to British standards?

Those British soldiers abide by codes of war to protect innocent, ISIS fighters are no more than barbaric thugs murdering the unarmed and innocent.

Josephus, it is a behaviour problem. They have been marrying their
cousins for generations, apparently right from the beginning of Islam.
Rather strange behaviour especially considering they were agricultural
people and bred animals. I gather that they had an exception from Allah.
Unfortunately I read somewhere that it will take hundreds of years of
not marrying their cousins to correct the problems. Unfortunately
for them it just does not show up in behaviour but in other genetic problems.

At a huge and ever-growing cost to the NHS in the UK too.

<Sadly, the facts speak for themselves. British Pakistanis, half of whom marry a first cousin (a figure that is universally agreed), are 13 times more likely to produce children with genetic disorders than the general population, according to Government-sponsored research.

One in ten children from these cousin marriages either dies in infancy or develops a serious life-threatening disability.

While British Pakistanis account for three per cent of the births in this country, they are responsible for 33 per cent of the 15,000 to 20,000 children born each year with genetic defects.

The vast majority of problems are caused by recessive gene disorders, according to London’s Genetic Interest Group, which advises affected families.

Everyone carries some abnormal genes, but most people don’t have a defect because the normal gene overrules the abnormal one.

One in ten children from these cousin marriages either dies in infancy or develops a serious life-threatening disability.
But if a husband and wife both have an abnormal recessive gene, they have a one in four chance of producing a child with defects.

These include blindness, deafness, blood ailments such as sickle cell anaemia, heart or kidney failure, lung or liver problems and myriad complex neurological or brain disorders.

Even their healthy children have a one in four chance of being a carrier of a defect, with terrible implications for the next generation.

The problem is most serious in Bradford. A recent survey of 1,100 pregnant women in the city showed that 70 per cent have husbands who are first cousins — a higher percentage than the average of 50 per cent among Pakistanis across the whole of Britain.>
http://tinyurl.com/6hxwvau

It is easy to say" Go back to where you came from", but do not forget that British Muslims are actually born and educated here. They are in the unenviable position of trying to combine two different worlds. That is no easy. We do not want to change you lot but we would like to see our children getting balanced Islamic education along with National Curriculum. We would like our children to learn and be well versed in standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. At the same time we would like our children to learn and be well versed in Arabic, Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. He/she does not want to become notoriously monolingual Brit. Bilingualism is an asset but British schooling regards it as a problem.

The West has never been at ease with Islam since the Crusades. It is unfortunate that huge oil supplies lie under the Arabian Deserts. It is the West that stirred the trouble that led to 9/11. That attack was a desperate act of by men prepared to lose their life. We need to get to grips on who is the terrorist? On 24 November 1963, Lyndon Johnson said, “the battle against communism… must be joined… with strength and determination. Some three million lives were lost in the consequential battles. The US had to pull out due to Public Opinion. Communism lived on. So who was the terrorist?

Terrorism and sexual grooming is nothing to do with Masajid, Imams and Muslim schools. Those Muslim youths who have been involved in terrorism and sexual grooming are the product of western education system which makes a man stupid, selfish and corrupt. They find themselves cut off from their cultural heritage, literature and poetry. They suffer from identity crises and I blame British schooling

Iftikhar said;
The West has never been at ease with Islam since the Crusades.

Quite correct, because in invading the Levant and Israel the Arab
moslems were following the Koran and imposing Islam with the sword.

Not a very surprising response was it ?

Iftikhar,
You say "The West has never been at ease with Islam since the Crusades". Absolute nonsense! The West has forgotten the Crusades, Islam hasn't that is why Islam constantly bring it up. The Crusades were waged against Islam because Islam had for 400 years waged war against citizens of surrounding Nations. Islam is for dead beat thugs.

No one has any problem when: Jews keep beards and wear their traditional caps Christian priests and nuns wear their religious outfits Buddhist monks wear orange robes Sikhs keep beards and wear turbans Indian aunties wear Sarees (cross streets and hang out in Wal-Mart) Yeah but if any Muslim male keeps beard or if any Muslim girl wears hijab then everyone has problem. It's Freedom when you go naked but it's extremism when you wear hijab - just plain hypocrisy! Looking at the case of France, a major secular nation, I believe it is also not allowing women freedom by not letting her to wear her choice of clothing as it supposedly "clashes with French secular values".

The British establishment is wrong in thinking that Imams are to blame for extremism. Imams are not solution to the problem for extremism. Extremism is nothing to do with Imams. Extremism is not created from abroad, it is coming from within. Britain fails to help Muslim communities feel part of British society. Race trouble is being predicted by the Daily Express, because of an ethnic boom in UK major cities. Muslim communities need imams for the solutions of their needs and demands in their own native languages. Muslim parents would like to see their children well versed in Standard English and to go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. The fact is that majority of Muslim children leave schools with low grades because monolingual teachers are not capable to teach Standard English to bilingual Muslim children. A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. He/she does not want to become notoriously monolingual Brit.

There are hundreds of state primary and secondary schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In my opinion all such schools may be opted out to become Muslim Academies. This mean the Muslim children will get a decent education. Muslim schools turned out balanced citizens, more tolerant of others and less likely to succumb to criminality or extremism.

Iftikar, I do see your point on the extreme racism directed at Muslim people at times, but I fail to see why you are complaining about education for Muslim kids in the UK on an Australian opinion forum?
Australia has nothing to do with the education practices in the UK.

I would say that if Muslims are born in, or emigrate to, the UK, that they should go to either mainstream public schools, and get their education in local mosques, or go to Muslim schools. Surely that is just common sense?

A fundamental problem to your argument is the fact that school only consumes a minority of a child's time. There's plenty of time for parents to teach their children other languages and their culture and literature at home. Especially, considering that a child learns to speak during the years prior to going to school.

Assuming that they can already speak Arabic before they get to school (if the kid can't then that's not a problem of the school system-- but rather the child's parents). Then it is only the reading and writing of the second language that needs to be considered.

Let's do some numbers- Given that there are 16 non-sleeping hours a day (assuming a healthy 8hrs sleep) that gives 16*365=5840hr/year. Now mandatory primary schooling, in Australia anyway, only goes for about 40 weeks a year after removing holidays. There are five school days a week. Each school day goes for about 6 to 7 hours, so let's say 8.5 hrs a day is spent on primary school activities (eg: including travel time) this gives 40*5*8.5=1700hr/year.

So all up school takes at most about 1700/5840=0.29, ie. 29% of the non-sleeping hours of a child's primary school life. That leaves more than 2/3rds of their time free for the parents to teach them reading, writing in another language and for the kids to read their literature.

Basically, your argument that Muslims suffer due to not being able to be taught in their native tongue and cultural setting is total BS. Indeed, many other minority groups in society seems to manage to learn a second language and keep their cultural inheritance intact and still be exceptionally high achievers academically, eg: a lot of Jewish people can speak two more languages and be intimately familiar with their history and sail through to tertiary education and beyond even when raised in non-Jewish countries. As a group they are very well educated and high intellectual achievers eg. about 20% of Nobel prize winners in the science fields have been Jewish and yet they make up less than 1% of the population.

If Muslims wish their children to learn Arabic and the traditions of their people then it is their responsibility not that of the State.

Irish and Scottish people in Australia have their cultural Associations where their culture and language can be studied, likewise Indians and other ethnic groups.
So why can't Muslims do the same?

It's probably fear that if there is no compulsion then the culture and language use will die out.

"No one has any problem when: Jews keep beards and wear their traditional caps Christian priests and nuns wear their religious outfits Buddhist monks wear orange robes Sikhs keep beards and wear turbans Indian aunties wear Sarees (cross streets and hang out in Wal-Mart)" - Iftikhar

Firstly none of the ethnically dressed people you list are from religions associated with potential terrorist groups; their style of dress is non-threatening as are their religions.

Second, where are you Iftikhar, are you in Australia or not? There are no WalMarts in this country and what's wrong with Indian women crossing the street? WTF are you talking about?

Third, as Suse mentioned above, the British education system and whether or not it suits all Muslim pupils has nothing to do with Australia. That's not our problem and we can't do anything about it even if we wanted to.

You ramble on about the need for state funded Muslim schools; how about seeking funding from the rich Arab states if its such an important issue.

It appears to me you advocate keeping Muslim children pigeon holed into the parameters of out dated Muslim morals and values rather than risk the chance the children might grow up with an open mind and possibly start asking the same tough questions many non-Muslim people ask. Any philosophy and/or way of life needs to be able to stand up to scrutiny and be mature enough to handle criticism and debate. Advocating death for non-believers is not appropriate in a modern world (including the Muslim countries).

Why aren't you advocating a 'One People, One Planet' approach where we all get on board to make our world a better place; a world where people are not divided by religion or their skin colour? Advocating separate schools for Muslim children is a form of elitist (and possibly ignorant) segregation.

'My religion is better than yours' is a very destructive never ending path. Come on Iftikhar, its time to join the modern world and to set yourself and your people free.

I don't know if this poster lives here or the UK. However he has posted this subject many times. This was my reply in 2009

csteele,
Thanks for the link. This is the second time this poster has put up the same post so I take it as part of the continuing aim to further the influence of Islam in Western countries. I expect our friend Kayser Trad to again raise the issue of polygamy again shortly.

If the poster was genuinely concerned with a problem for muslims in the UK, he would restrict his postings to that country.

"One day millions of men will leave Arabia to go to Europe. And they will not go there as friends. They will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory."former Algerian president Houari Boumedienne in about 1975.

The UK and Europe ignored this statement, to their detriment, and now have massive problems brought on by multiculturalism and bad migration policy. For example each public holiday in France is marked by riots and car burning. Last new years eve they burnt 1147 cars in France and the authorities were pleased it was not more. By 2015, Sweden will be 50% muslim, and that is not far off.

The UK already has limited polygamy and some aspects of Sharia law has been introduced. There is widespread FGM and estimated 3000 forced marriages each year.

Many muslims see themselves as pioneers for Islam as our forebears did in Aus. We can expect continuing presure to adopt muslim cultural ways and even more so as their numbers grow.

If the issue is only about education then i agree with Bronwyn.

Posted by Banjo, Wednesday, 16 September 2009 12:25:48 P

Iftikhar: British Jews went to Israel to fight but on their return no action was taken against them.

They didn’t return & adocate an overthrow of the British Government by violence either. They are not a threat to the British people.

Iftikhar: The West has never been at ease with Islam since the Crusades.

Let’s not forget that moslims invaded & stole the lands from the Byzantine Holy Roman Empire in the first place. It wasn’t until the moslim Hordes threatened Europe that the Crusades took place in an effort to recover their own lands.

Iftikhar: It is unfortunate that huge oil supplies lie under the Arabian Deserts.

&, Dare I say, that Oil would still be there, in the ground, if the West hadn’t dug it up. The Middle East would still be swinging from Date trees at an Oasis if they hadn’t. Except for Israel, of course.

Iftikhar: Those Muslim youths who have been involved in terrorism and sexual grooming are the product of western education system which makes a man stupid, selfish and corrupt.

Nothing to do with the likes of Choudrey & his ilk, I suppose?

Conservativehippie: Firstly none of the ethnically dressed people you list are from religions associated with potential terrorist groups; their style of dress is non-threatening as are their religions.

Amen to that.

Religious indoctrination of any kind should not be the job of the public schools. Any teaching of religion in the public schools should just tell the ideas and beliefs of the different religions without pushing any of them. As a taxpayer I do not want to finance the promulgation of any religion. You want a religious school of any kind pay for it. Don't ask for it from the taxpayers.

<Cont

Conservativehippie: Advocating death for non-believers is not appropriate in a modern world (including the Muslim countries).

Which brings me to some Questions for our friend here.

Some quotes from your Koran.

Koran 9:123: “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the pious.”

Koran 9:73
Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their Home: an evil fate.

8:39- And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if they cease, then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do.[Translation Pickthal]

8:12- When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger. [Translation Pickthal]

In light of these verses & many others similar, Iftikhar, Would you mind answering these questions?

Cont>

<Cont

1) Do you consider a Secularphile to be an extremist who spreads hate against non-moslem unbelievers? "Yes" or "No."

2) Do you agree that; All people in the UK must become moslems,
Sharia Law must be implemented in the UK

Homosexuals & Adulters must be whipped & stoned in the UK,

All Women in the UK must wear the face Burka or similar covering.

Do you want these things for the UK? “Yes or “No.”

3) Persecution & Oppression does that mean anything that moslems declare as Persecution or Oppression, is, to Islam. E.g.:

Refusal to allow a moslem to marry & consummate that marriage with a child under the age of 16,

Refusal to be allowed to build a Mosque,

Refusal to move a Pig farm after a Mosque is build on the neighbouring land,

Refusing to grant a special day for moslems & screen off an area for moslem women at the Local Swimming Pool,

Refusal to put a screen around the Local Pool because the sight of so many naked bodies is offensive to moslems.

Refusing to pay to have a food declared Halal.

Declaring that the Burka, or other such women's clothing to be inhumane.

Declaring that, Sharia Law, is forbidden in the UK.

Declaring that a moslem can only have one wife.

Does refusing any of the above list mean that moslems are being Persecuted, Oppressed or that a “State of War” exists? “Yes” or “No.”

I look forward to your answers in the spirit of "your" statement in the interest of expanding my knowledge.

'Religious indoctrination of any kind should not be the job of the public schools. '

Yes David f we have seen the perverted results of decades of irreligous teachings in the State run systems. Teen depression, suicide, homosexuality promoted, drug overdoses. As a taxpayer I end up paying more taxes for this godless vomit produced by godlessness.

Dear runner,

You probably want the public schools to teach your religion - not the Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or other non-Christian religions. I don't think teaching any religion on taxpayer money can be justified. Why should taxpayers of Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or other non-Christian religions pay taxes so their children can be indoctrinated in your religion? Would you like your children indoctrinated in any non-Christian religion?

Public schools should be for all children regardless of their parent's religious beliefs or lack of them.

Hopefully humanity will free itself from all superstition including yours.

Iftikhar>> It is the West that stirred the trouble that led to 9/11. That attack was a desperate act of by men prepared to lose their life.<<

Muslims had nothing to do with 911 except filling the headlines and sound bites.......it was a Zionist operation......

Re the Muslim radicals....go, fight, die........who cares......simple souls with 7th century political views.........sick of Muslims with stone age attitudes......

Ifitikah, I would like your opinion on the following people;

Anjem Choudary, (Judge Sharia Law Courts (UK),
Dr Zaku Naik, (Persident of Islamic Research Foundation),
Siraj, Wahhaj, (Leader of the Islamic Alliance, ISNA Board Member),
Maulana A.K. Hoosen (Noted Islamic Scholar),
Kalid Yasen (ISNA Board of Directers),
Jusuf Estes (Islamic Cleric & Speaker)

Would you consider these people to be well known & upstanding people in the Islamic World?

Simple question. Yes or No is all I require. Please try not to go off in a waffle of deflection as it is very, very annoying.

Jayb, I think he has gone. The questions are probably too embarrassing.

We are not supposed to know enough to ask those questions.
I don't know why we should have to go to the trouble of trying to sort
them out into good and bad. Just get rid of the lot by means of the
same technique they use on us. Tax them out of the country.
Have a Moslem tax like the Jizaz tax they impose on non moslems.
After all how could they complain. Well they would of course but---

Islam has not moved on past the Crusades, that is why Islamist constantly bring it up. They believe they are still fighting a war against the West. They cannot assimilate into our society and never will because their text tell them not to make friends with Jews and Christians and unbelievers. Until they abandon their text they are still the enemy of Western civilization.

Bazz: We are not supposed to know enough to ask those questions.

I guess I've found the perfect set of questions to ask them. McAdam, et al took off when I pressed the point in the last showdown.

As someone once said, "We have not yet started to play Cowboys & moslems," but the time will come.

Bazz: I don't know why we should have to go to the trouble of trying to sort them out into good and bad.

I think they are all bad. The ones that say they are good are Taqiyyaing for allah.

Iftikhar, Jayb has gone to the trouble of asking you some specific questions about your cult’s versions of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Why do you refuse to answer, with an unequivocal yes or no, a single one of then?

The existence of these admonitions to all Moslems in the Moslem “holy books” is a warning of the Fifth Column gaining footholds in decent countries and making demands like those made by Iftikhar.

The Islamic texts are not written merely as fake history like the Bible, they are written as unabashed INSTRUCTIONS.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali put is this way: “The fundamental problem is that the majority of otherwise peaceful and law-abiding Muslims [sic] are unwilling to acknowledge, much less to repudiate, the theological warrant for intolerance and violence embedded in their own religious texts.

Walling off children from access to challenges to any religious cult (ANY, Iftikhar; ANY, runner) in order to indoctrinate them by immersion in the cult’s decreedbelief system is child abuse. It should not get a penny of taxpayers’ money whether the schooling is public or private.

' Hopefully humanity will free itself from all superstition including yours.'

you and EmperorJulian would need to come up with something better than secular humanist pathetic unscientific fairytales that you currently believe in.

First you read Quran, it says about Jesus(PBUH) 24 places but about Muhammad(PBUH) 4 times, there is a chapter on Mariam mother of Jesus in Quran but no mention of Muhammad's father or mother. Quran says Mariam went to heaven with body. Quran says Jesus cured terminally ill, given life to a clay made bird, what Muhammad(PBUH) has done - he lived and died like an ordinary man. Quran also says read bible if you still need any clarification - Read complete Quran and believe in Jesus(PBUH) Quran is not just for Muslims but for whole mankind.

The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History is a 1978 book by Michael H. Hart, reprinted in 1992 with revisions. It is a ranking of the 100 people who, according to Hart, most influenced human history.[1]

The first person on Hart's list is the Prophet of Islam Muhammad,[2] a selection that generated some controversy.[3] Hart asserted that Muhammad was "supremely successful" in both the religious and secular realms. He also believed that Muhammad's role in the development of Islam was far more influential than Jesus' collaboration in the development of Christianity. He attributes the development of Christianity to St. Paul, who played a pivotal role in its dissemination.

King Solomon was messenger of Allah. Jesus was messenger of Allah. Adam was messenger of Allah. Moses who Jews are believer was messenger of Allah. Muhammad (may be peace upon him) is a messenger of Allah. Read history properly. And move round the world you will see the places of all these messenger. These messenger Call world to do good deed and believe in Allah. The Satan who made among each of them separate religion. So better to read history and all religious books in the world properly. Read positive eye not with negative eye but positive eye. Never think anyone that followers are fool. Today second largest religion is ISLAM. It is obvious that people have analyse the correctness and except. If you don't accept surely your children will accept
IA
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.u

Ifitikh, you didn't answer my Questions, so here they are again. If your last response was supposed to be an answer it failed. Deflection isn't an answer.

Here they are again; 8:39 is most interesting.

Some quotes from your Koran.

Koran 9:123: “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the pious.”

Koran 9:73
Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their Home: an evil fate.

8:39- And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if they cease, then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do.[Translation Pickthal]

8:12- When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger. [Translation Pickthal]

In light of these verses & many others similar, Iftikhar, Would you mind answering these questions?

cont>

<Cont

1) Do you consider a Secularphile to be an extremist who spreads hate against non-moslem unbelievers? "Yes" or "No."

2) Do you agree that; All people in the UK must become moslems,
Sharia Law must be implemented in the UK

Homosexuals & Adulters must be whipped & stoned in the UK,

All Women in the UK must wear the face Burka or similar covering.

Do you want these things for the UK? “Yes or “No.”

3) Persecution & Oppression does that mean anything that moslems declare as Persecution or Oppression, is, to Islam. E.g.:

Refusal to allow a moslem to marry & consummate that marriage with a child under the age of 16,

Refusal to be allowed to build a Mosque,

Refusal to move a Pig farm after a Mosque is build on the neighbouring land,

Refusing to grant a special day for moslems & screen off an area for moslem women at the Local Swimming Pool,

Refusal to put a screen around the Local Pool because the sight of so many naked bodies is offensive to moslems.

Refusing to pay to have a food declared Halal.

Declaring that the Burka, or other such women's clothing to be inhumane.

Declaring that, Sharia Law, is forbidden in the UK.

Declaring that a moslem can only have one wife.

Does refusing any of the above list mean that moslems are being Persecuted, Oppressed or that a “State of War” exists? “Yes” or “No.”

I look forward to your answers in the spirit of "your" statement in the interest of expanding my knowledge.

Iftikhar's response to Jayb is a pretty open declaration of intent from a Moslem: Repudiation of the Koranic declaration of war on humanity, and honest answers to straight questions, are unnecessary as the answer to them is ultimately the scimitar. Their confidence in their scimitars depends on their misreading of the influence of PC Western apologists.

Runner's pre-Enlightenment, pre-Reformation assertion that secular humanism is a mere belief is like saying not stamp collecting is a hobby.

I have another question for Iftikhar.

A Moslem male is allowed to have a temporary wife while he is away from home.

Is the his wife allowed to have a temporary husband while he's is away? Or, Would she be committing Adultery?

Please help me understand Islam.

Iftikhar,

Can you please explain why it is immoral for an (Islamic) Arabic unmarried man to have sex with a women whilst its perfectly fine to 'practice' sex with a young boy?

You also still haven't told us what country you live in. Are you ashamed to share this information?

ConservativeHippie: You also still haven't told us what country you live in. Are you ashamed to share this information?

He lives in Britain, some sort of Professor of something at a University near London.

I've thought of another couple of questions, seeing you are an enlightened person, & being a Professor of something at a University.

Is the World flat or round like a ball?

Does the Sun travel around the Earth or the Earth travel around the Sun?

Please help me to understand Islam.

What would Jesus have said about his name being associated with the Koran ?
I do not think he would be pleased.

I think he lives in England. His allegiance wouldn't be of course.

Jesus said, "show compassion to your enemies". "Feed your enemy" "pray for your enemy" so unlike Islam who want to kill, steal and curse their enemy.

Josephus,

He also allowed, in fact, He encouraged his Disciples to carry swords and as the Second Person of the Trinity was not only the Son of God but also God; therefore He knew all things and thus knew that one of his followers was going to cut off the Centurion's ear, thus He condoned violence.

Is Mise,
The disciple Peter carrying the dagger was formerly a Jewish zealot and sympathizer protesting against Roman occupation and Jewish appointees of Rome. Jesus said to him "those that live by the sword will die by the sword" he also told him when he is converted to encourage his brothers. This event is concurrently remembered at each passover, if Jesus condoned violence he would not have told Peter to put away his dagger, and he would not have healed Malchus ear, the ear of his arrestor and he would have fought against his crucifixion.

Jesus was human in the flesh; born of Mary and fathered in the lineage of King David as told by Matthew protovellion. His spirit was born of God and revealing God in holy character, compassionate and pure motives and actions and giving divine wisdom. These things define the nature of God to humanity. God is not a trinity - God is One in character, action and wisdom.

Josephus,

You belong to a minority (very!) Christian school of thought.

The instruction to put up the sword was not a command not to have a sword, in fact Jesus had previously instructed those of his followers who did not have swords to buy them.
The observation that those who live by the sword is true but does not refer to his followers who had swords for protection and who did not live by the sword, that is they were not bandits, robbers or soldiers etc.