Ahmadiyya

What does Pol think of Ahmadiyya? It's the purest form is Islam and hopefully will be the reformation. They are all united under one leader and their leader rejects the violence of the Quran. Here's why we should support them.

>never committed a terror attack
>built over 500 schools and 40 hospitals with their organization humanity first
>first mosque built in Spain in over 500 years
>they gold gatherings known as "jalsa". Many political figures like former Canadian PM Stephen Harper, and PM Justin Trudeau at tented these events, along with many others
>these jalsa events are held in multiple countries, Canada, US, Britain, Germany, even Brazil.

So what does the rest of Islam think of Ahmadiyya? They hate them.

>Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan face persecution.
>The current leader of Ahmadiyya served time in jail in Pakistan because of how pakis hate them
>Sunnis and other goatfukers burn down property of ahmadiyys in Pakistan which is why most of them have to stay low key about their faith or leave the country

If you want to know more about how extreme these goatfukers go, well... theres this Syrian refugee who converted to ahmadiyya while still in syria. Long story short, he lost his legs in a bomb blast, and all his friends ditched him and said "that's what you get fit being an ahmadi"

Now, Sup Forums, what do you think of ahmadiyya?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya
youtube.com/watch?v=m6Zc67FrpWU
youtube.com/watch?v=_heYx9OHBow
youtu.be/m6Zc67FrpWU?t=5220
youtube.com/watch?v=eWR3IkfHdLE
expirebox.com/download/aea3192a91ba26c8a0444968e40af91e.html
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basharat_Mosque
youtube.com/watch?v=_YoapuIvv_4
youtube.com/watch?v=r2vHZN7P39A
aramaic-dem.org/English/History/Christoph Luxenberg.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagarism
scribd.com/doc/27096936/Hagarism-The-Making-of-the-Islamic-World
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

"Purest form of Islam"

"Rejects violence of the Quran"

These two statements.....get the fuck out of here with that shit.

They truly are the most humble and peaceful muslims out there. Theres a big Ahmadiyya community in my city and they do things like cleaning up the city after new years eve etc. The other muslims however hate them for whatever reason.

I like them. I know and see a few ahmadiyys in my area. They're literate hardworking people.

more details? I've been reading the quran and slowly wanting to convert.

Heretics

Fuck off burger. These are Muslims who have accomplished so much. There's no reason to hate on them.

>Not explaining why the actual Muslims hate them
You aren't hiding anything at all

Oi paki cunt. You guys Hate them for an irrelevant and stupid reason. You don't burn people's houses down just because they believe the 2nd coming is already here and you don't.

>Still hasn't explained why actual Muslims hate them
>Irrelevant
Ok. Also we can tell that you've changed your flag, your id remains the same. Stop trying to agree with yourself such as

Care to Explain?

The Ahmadi are persecuted because they are wrong and a fucking joke.

Yes their "Islam" is better, but it isn't Islam at all.

Just read one of their Korans. Its like "Alas, Allah will strike with hellfire those led astray, and the believers should kill unbelievers in this earth"
-Then there will be a note at the bottom of the page saying "This actually says to give mercy to unbelievers in this world"

My flag is still a nazi flag, just changed pages a couple time.

The reason you guys hate them is because they believe in the promised messiah. It's dumb to attack people just because of that. You Muslims are disgusting who even attack other Muslims over the smallest things.

I don't care what form of Islam it is, stay out of the fucking west.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya

Feel free to read yourself. Tldr: they claim to have false prophets and go against many Islamic teachings.

Now also notice his language and how aggressive he is. Ahmedis in a nutshell. You can't just redefine a religion by yourself such as Islam that's completely rigid in the fact that it can't be changed.

-Can't be changed

Except there are at least 27 Korans, witht he most recent being standardized in 1914 in Cairo. LOLOLOL

Not to mention the countless Hadith that the Caliphs published to certify their deeds as islamic. LOLOL

Yet muslims still claim that it was never change. "Just cuz"

What a load of bullshit. You can't just yell and scream the loudest and claim you won the argument by being the most obnoxious lolol a bunch of children

youtube.com/watch?v=m6Zc67FrpWU

I mean, they're the equivalent of mormons. Pretty nice, peaceful, and hardworking people, but it's not so much a "reform" of Islam as basically rewriting the book.

>there are at least 27 kroans
what the fuck am I reading

Does that fucking justify why you guys can treat them like shit?

>What does Pol think of Ahmadiyya?

You can't be serious.

HURR DURR THEY BELIEVE IN FLASH PROPHET THROW EM I'M JAIL

Ahmadiyya Ahmadiyya
Ahmadiyya
Ahmadiyya Ahmadiyya
Ahmadiyya
Ahmadiyya Ahmadiyya
Oh oh oh Ahmadiyya
Come and rock me Ahmadiyya

They seem okay but

>purest form of Islam
Naw senpai that's Shia

>Yes their "Islam" is better, but it isn't Islam at all.

So the best kind of Islam?

They sound like good people, OP. Are they connected to the Gülen-supporters? I know they are big on education as well.

No shias literally cut themselves over prophet hussein or some shit who died hundreds of years ago lmao

This has been cropping up a bit. Enjoy.

youtube.com/watch?v=_heYx9OHBow

if something is violent, changing it to be non-violent is universally good

Islam must change and be progressive.

27 different variants of the koran through history, just like the bible had different versions.

Disproves the lie that the Koran has never changed throughout history and is holy incorruptible word of Allah.

>burger education

27 versions of quran,all which have words/prononciation diffrences
Compare a WARSH version to a HAFS one and the meaning is still there

>Not to mention the countless Hadith that the Caliphs published to certify their deeds as islamic. LOLOL
And when were hadiths considered divine or uncorrupt?because i am pretty sure we've got 3 types of them(authentic,weak,fabricated)

I don't feel like watching an hour-long video about some "muslims exposed" bullshit, to be honest. Do you have any direct, readable link to what you're saying?

Yeah, the quran was only transmitted orally until Muhammad's death, and the rashiduns decided to compile it into a single manuscript. However, it hasn't really changed at all since the time of the umayyads... and I really don't know from where you're pulling the "27 different variants" bullshit, especially the claim that the quran was revised in Cairo in 2014.

I didn't attack shit you fucking tard. I'm sure these shitskins are fine people, but it ain't the purest form of Islam.

Yes

The claim is that it's not just Warsh and Hafs etc, IIRC.

There are some comparisons at the end of this vid, from about 1hr 27m. See what you think. It's been making the rounds but I've not looked into it either for or against.

youtu.be/m6Zc67FrpWU?t=5220

... but those are different readings, not different versions of the quran. There's a hadith which talks about those.


Abd Al-Rahman Ibn Abd al-Qari narrated: “ Umar Ibn al-Khattab said before me: I heard Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam reading Surat Al-Furqan in a different way from the one I used to read it, and the Prophet himself had read out this surah to me. Consequently, as soon as I heard him, I wanted to get hold of him. However, I gave him respite until he had finished the prayer. Then I got hold of his cloak and dragged him to the Prophet. I said to him: “I have heard this person [Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam] reading Surah Al Furqan in a different way from the one you had read it out to me.” The Prophet said: “Leave him alone [O ‘Umar].” Then he said to Hisham: “Read [it].” [Umar said:] “He read it out in the same way as he had done before me.” [At this,] the Prophet said: “It was revealed thus.” Then the Prophet asked me to read it out. So I read it out. [At this], he said: “It was revealed thus; this Quran has been revealed in Seven Ahruf. You can read it in any of them you find easy from among them.

>Suyuti, a famous 15th century Islamic theologian concludes his discussion of this hadith:
>And to me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this Hadith is from among matters of mutashabihat, the meaning of which cannot be understood.

>IIRC

Also I forgot to mention, they recently raised 2 million for some hospital in Canada, they offer scholarships to their members with high academic marks and present them with plaques for academic achievement. They raised 1 million pounds of food for some food drive recently as well.

"Unity is strength"
These guys are showing that.

Taqiya. Now fuck off leaf
Also,
>first mosque built in Spain in over 500 years
Mosques don't belong in Spain. So again I say fuck off.

The similarities are extremely minor. It seems like it's an extra alif here, and so on. I don't know how much of an impact they'd have, though. A lot of these seem prior to harakat and i'jam.

Problem?

It would be better to have a world without Islam in it.

Islam is a sickness, the only cure is the cleansing fires of death.

And burning every Muslim isn't fucking possible. Which is why ahmadiyya is our only hope.

Mirza Ghulum was false prophet, that is all.

>1438

>People still don't believe Jesus (PBUH) is the messiah.

>Rejecting Hadith that make it clear Jesus (PBUH) will return and kill anti christ

WOW ABSOLTUELY HARAM

You can't tell what are divine or uncorrupt because you aren't god or a prophet.

Word differences are substantive differences.

The claim of an unchaging Koran is false and only perpetuated by the vast majority of muslims, and therefore almost all people intereted in the matter discounting the possibility, therefore it is rarely explored.

It makes sense that this is aggressively denied even as a possibility by muslims, because it is probably one of the most base arguments to the truth of their faith.

sorry you don't feel like watching an extended public dialogue. Maybe you are a little too interested in instant gratification,eh? Or just close minded?

I'm mostly into their humanitarian acts and how they act civilized. You can hate on them for contributing to society and believing in false prophets, but that gives your people no reason to burn their shit, throw them in jail, etc.

>taqiyya in non-shia denominations of Islam

>A lot of these seem prior to harakat and i'jam.
Definitely prior to Harakat, as the earliest system of harakat was created by an Arab linguist appointed by Ali.

>Maybe you are a little too interested in instant gratification,eh? Or just close minded?
No, but when you're citing something which I really can't find anything about when googling, it seems more like bullshit than anything. If you can't cite any other source, then is your claim really credible in the face of more than 1400 years of study of the books? I think they'd have noticed if there were 27 different editions...

Heretical sect not open for globalist exploit at all

Don't know their views about jihad, but what I can be certain of is that they lie like the rest of the two-faced taqiyya pushing shít licking Muslims, so absolutely cannot be trusted. Which begs the question of why they lie? If we look to the normal Muslim fúkheads for an answer, it's to cover up their hostile, aggressive and expansionist teachings of Islam mostly, so it's to be assumed then that ahmadiyya lie for that exact same reason.

Basically, fuk all of them.

Ok so they are different "Readings" not differences.

You therefore would concede that there are not different Bibles, but rather different "Readings" would you not?

>Word differences are substantive differences.
Except reading differences aren't word differences. Your argument is shaky as hell, friend: different qira'at of the quran have always been taken into account the same way that a fuckload of words have multiple meanings in the quran... which is why there isn't a single, unified muslim denomination with the One True Reading of the book.

the different Bibles are different translations of the original hebrew book. The original version of the quran is in Arabic, so your comparison isn't really apt.

Oh yeah and Mirza was a Freemason and a British agent sent to neuter Islam the same way the elites had neutered Christianity.

Ahmadiyya on jihad

"The jihad of the sword has ended. We now live in in the age of the jihad of the pen" -first leader of Ahmadiyya

This was from like the 1800s. He was calling upon Muslims to follow peaceful ways and to fight others with the pen, meaning, books literature etc. In fact the first leader of Ahmadiyya has written many books.

Ahmadis run interference for Islam in general whenever some goatfucker ruins/ends a white person's life.

lel the Koran wasn't even written in Arabic originally. It's a good thing for Islam that Muslims tend to be inbred retards.

I can't remember his name but yeah. Wasn't his slightly different though? And there was some guy who used different colours too - what happened to his style?

This is also why Islam needs apologists. Think of how many people are learning wrong things, if they are learning wrong things, from critics of Islam.

The only ones I know of are Naik and Deedat, who are jokes, and Shabir Ally who seems okay.

Why are there so few?

youtube.com/watch?v=eWR3IkfHdLE

Just gotta think big.

I take it you've read Luxenberg's "Syro-Aramaic reading of the Koran".

Which is exactly what the imperialists British wanted.

>Good goy don't you ever dare stand up for yourself or fight for the truth, that would be backward and stupid.

>We have gotta build Solomon's temple goy and Islam is in the way.

By admitting that there are different readings, you are admitting that the Koran is not the perfect book that has been with allah for all time and unchanged since Mohammed confirmed it on earth.

How do you know which reading is right? Are you going to be so arrogant as to claim that yours is right and all the others wrong, while admitting that there are many other verisons with words that can mean different things, have different vowel marks, etc?

Whether a book is changed by translation to a whole different language, or changed by dialectical differences in Arabic or by vowel markings, or mis-remembering parts is irrelevant to the point, the point is that the claim that the koran is unchanged and perfect is false, or at least that we can not verify which is right.

Who does this guy Ahmaidyya think he is, a new Prophet? BLASPHAMY!

I've only read excerpts, but he seemed to have a strong case.

cancer in any form is still cancer

I have no criticism of its system of religious morality. Usually are hardworking and honest people. It is not for me to say - as many do - that they are not true Muslims. This judgment belongs to the Almighty, only. However, I understand his liturgical interpretation, especially as regards Mirza Gullam Ahmad, as wrong. Not as monstrously wrong as the followers of Mirza Husain Ali, but wrong anyway.

>reject the violence of the Quran
So how are these Muslims?

He is the new Macarena

Heeeeeeey ahmadeeyAh!

the only muslims i know are ahmadiyya. nice folks, but they're the jews of the muslim world. Litigious as fuck. Very nice, otherwise, but cross them and they'll bring you to court for the rest of your life.

>lel the Koran wasn't even written in Arabic originally. It's a good thing for Islam that Muslims tend to be inbred retards.
Elaborate?

>Wasn't his slightly different though? And there was some guy who used different colours too - what happened to his style?
Yeah, he was the one who used blue/red dots for that. Al Farahidi introduced the modern arabic diacritics.

>Why are there so few?
If I had to give an objective answer, I'd say it's because gulf states provide 99% of the funding for muslim scholars in the west... and we both know what kind of scholars they promote.

I'm not muslim, though, so I don't really give a shit about the religion itself. I just hate it when people lie/deceive to promote their agenda.

>you are admitting that the Koran is not the perfect book that has been with allah for all time and unchanged since Mohammed confirmed it on earth.
The writing has not changed, thus the quran is unchanged. Interpretations vary. Is that not normal?

>How do you know which reading is right? Are you going to be so arrogant as to claim that yours is right and all the others wrong, while admitting that there are many other verisons with words that can mean different things, have different vowel marks, etc?
The same way that people disagree on which interpretation of the quran is right: evaluate the context and other instances of the same rules/affirmations, which is how most of the ambiguity in the book is removed. Like I quoted earlier, there's a hadith which indicates all readings are right and that it only really depends on which one you consider easier to say.

There are only 10 "official" readings, as approved by the prophet before his death: meaning doesn't really change significantly between these.

>Muslims pray toward Jerusalem
>Muslims invade Jerusalem
>Muslims restore Jews and Judaism to Jerusalem
You're such good shabbos goyim you might as well rebuild the temple.

NO, ISLAM IS FUCKING NIGGER LOVING DEVIL WORSHIP. NOW KILL YOURSELF LEAF HAMAN AHMAD THE GREAT FAGGOT SPAMMER

>>SAGE

Our best hope in turning Islam from stone age to progressive is ahmadiyya. You fuckers complain about Islam being shit and ruining the world, why not acknowledge ahmadiyya, and from there we could do more.

>It's the purest form is Islam
>Islam
It's shit and should be abolished. All forms of Islam is fucking garbage.

Interesting. I've never read it, though I have a pdf copy. The idea of it seems too... far-fetched for me personally. Too convenient.

Here's a copy for anyone who wants to read. It'll be up for a few days.

expirebox.com/download/aea3192a91ba26c8a0444968e40af91e.html

I don't know how they differ.

Ah, that's true. Unfortunately Wahhabis and Deobandis, who are growing in the West, are pretty shit when it comes to being well-read and being able to argue things.

>I'm not muslim, though,
How does that go down in Morocco?

lel Ahmadiyya are like watered down Ismailis, except at least the Ismailis have been around for centuries

>>first mosque built in Spain in over 500 years
Woah woah woah.

No.

I mean I'm just pointing out a possible way to reduce cancerous Muslims and make better people.

Ok so you admit the the oft repeated claim that the koran is the one perfect book is not exactly true, but that there are 10 different Korans that mean the same thing but are not exactly the same.

I guess where we differ is that I consider a "reading" to be "different". Although I don't really know if we do disagree because you used the word "different".

Maybe you could help islamic apologists stop acting like there are no differences in the text an modify the argument by saying there are 10 texts with the same meaning.

The best hope for Islam is that the rest of the world wakes up and wages a war so grand that it wipes Islam off the face of this planet.

There is a difference between allowing Jews to pray and supporting Jewish supremacist international Zionism like the majority of Christianity does.

Zionism wasn't backed by Muslims but by Masonic Protestants from Anglo countries who had connections with oligarchic banking (which is banned in Islam) families.

If Jews want to pray no one has an issue with that, if Jews want to enslave all of humanity under a one world government that is what we have an issue with.

You dumb nigger. The Quran even specifically states that those who reject the fight of Islam are not Muslims and should never be considered as such. Gas yourself.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basharat_Mosque

My nigga Yusef Lateef was Ahmadiyya


youtube.com/watch?v=_YoapuIvv_4

youtube.com/watch?v=r2vHZN7P39A

Wait holdups so Ifar mirza was a British spy sent room fuck up Islam, isn't that a good thing??? They're turning Islam from stone age to progressive to this day.

>How does that go down in Morocco?
Family doesn't care, and as long as you don't shout about being an oppressed atheist in the middle of the street, nobody really cares if you're muslim or not.
We have plenty of vineyards and (pretty good) wines, after all, and the country respects freedom of religion and conversion.
Well, it's still forbidden to eat in public during ramadan, but I expect that law to be removed in the next few decades (it was put in place by the French during the protectorate, after all, even though not many people know this).

My great-grandmother forbade any of her daughters and granddaughters from wearing a hijab when they were young.

>I guess where we differ is that I consider a "reading" to be "different". Although I don't really know if we do disagree because you used the word "different".
The nuance in-between "official" readings are too small to matter. Usually, it's a related term which basically means the same thing. You'd have a much better argument talking about different interpretations of some terms which can have dozens of meanings (eg. moulay/mawla which is the source of the sunni/shia split due to whether or not Ali was destined to be the "lord of the muslims" according to that word or just a very esteemed person of the prophet's family if context is taken into account), but those are covered based on context and uses in other parts of the quran.

aramaic-dem.org/English/History/Christoph Luxenberg.pdf
The Hagarism theory also makes a good amount of sense: that Islam originally was a cult of Jews and Jew-worshipping Arabs hellbent on restoring Jews to the Holy Land.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagarism
>Muhammad claimed biological descent for the Arabs from Abraham through his slave wife Hagar. This united the ancestors of the tribe with the religion, in the same way as the Jews claimed descent from Abraham through Sarah and their ancestral faith. During this early period, the Jews and the Hagarenes united under a faith loosely described as Judeo-Hagarism, in order to recover the holy land from the Christian Byzantines. The scholars believe that the early manuscripts from eyewitnesses suggest that Muhammad was the leader of a military expedition to conquer Jerusalem, and that the original hijra referred to a journey from northern Arabia to that city.

scribd.com/doc/27096936/Hagarism-The-Making-of-the-Islamic-World

Most of those verses are at best situational. You realize they're mostly references to the Mecca-Medina war, right?

Nice.

>My great-grandmother forbade any of her daughters and granddaughters from wearing a hijab when they were young.
Interesting. Why? I've seen things from Egypt from like the 1930s or whatever, and they were laughing about making the hijab mandatory.

Do you think Europe's in for an Islamic buttfucking?

Why is the nigga in OP's picture hiding a big ass bread stick in his turban? Crazy

if we're being real, what are the chances that Muhammad wanted anyone other than Ali to succeed him as leader of the Muslims?

It seems pretty obvious to me that the Shi'a were right in picking their leader, although that counts for little when history is written by victors

Obviously it is good to you because you hate God and hate morality, we know you want to live in a society where homosexuality, adultery, and polytheism are rampant. But it doesn't matter, all your efforts are in vain, you will never defeat the truth and you will never alter or change Islam in any way shape or form.

Truth has come and falsehood will be obliterated.

Questions not answered:
Do they believe in Sharia Law?
Do they believe the Christians and the Jews cannot be friends with Muslims? As outlined in Ayat 5:51
What about Jihad?
What about all the other backwards ass stuff in the Koran?

The Hagarism theory has been shot down by pretty much everyone other than Patricia Crone. It's only significant in that it started the new trend of critical assessment of primary and secondary sources of early Islamic history, but the conclusions that Crone and Cook drew were pretty farfetched, more argument than evidence.

Donner's book is actually far more appealing. Donner argued that Islam started off as some kind of pan-monotheist alliance that only become a distinct religion when the khulafah and the Umayyads began to carve out a distinct Islamic identity

>Ahmadiyya
They are OK!

This they are muslim mormons

1. Which Shari'a branch are you referring to? Which school of fiqh? Please clarify
2. 5:51 says not to take Christians and Jews as your awliyah, or your protectors/lieges. Awliyah is SOMETIMES translated as friend, but more accurately means protector, master, or liege.
3. What about jihad?

You dumb retard, changing your flag doesn't change your ID.
Get the fuck out of here shitskin, can't wait to have you all impaled across Europe.

Judaism has repeatedly been advanced in Christian territories by Muslims. Umar in Jerusalem and the conquest of Spain are the most notorious examples, but today the guardians of Mecca openly cooperate with the Jewish state. The suggestion that Muslims have ever been less than friendly toward Jews rings hollow.

>Donner's book is actually far more appealing. Donner argued that Islam started off as some kind of pan-monotheist alliance that only become a distinct religion when the khulafah and the Umayyads began to carve out a distinct Islamic identity
I'll have to look it up. It's always seemed strange to me that the Koran has shit from Zoroastrian and Hermetic texts beside the Abrahamic and Arab stuff.

I feel that all these books about the "secret origins of islam" all rely waaaaay too much on hebrew/greek/syriac/aramaic/etc manuscripts while completely ignoring the huge amount of arab sources on the same matters. Thanks for the links, though, I'll keep them in my bookmarks.

>Why? I've seen things from Egypt from like the 1930s or whatever, and they were laughing about making the hijab mandatory.
>from like the 1930s or whatever
I wouldn't go that far back, but muslim society in the 60's/70's/80's was much more liberated/accepting in their practice of religion than now. (the video you saw is of Nasser's speech, who was the leader of Egypt during the 50's and 60's)
In general, this was an era of troubles but Arabs were also much more positive/hopeful about the future back then. There was a cultural renaissance (with Cairo being at the center of it), a lot less poor people (middle class doubled in a few decades), panarabism was at its strongest... those things were all fueled one way or another by the rise of arab nationalism through leaders like Hafez Al-Assad, Gaddafi, Nasser, and Saddam. However, it was also a very hard era, where political dissent was repressed (whether it be communist or islamist) and the threat of a coup was omnipresent... it was the cold war, after all, and the Middle East was in the middle of the USSR and the US' playground.

There are multiple things which caused the decline in hope for arab nationalism (disillusion when it comes to cohesion between Arabs, loss of yom kippur war in addition to the 6-day war earlier), and islamism rose both due to hate of imperialist/western powers (unfair sanctions imposed on Iraq, then Iraq war) and the establishment of very strong salafist networks following the war in Afghanistan and embargo'd Iraq, where the population went from the second most-developed country in the middle east to the gutter hole not even rats would want to live in at the end of 90's/early 2000's. (cont.)

Salafism is the death of classical Sunni Islam.

That sucks. It makes me concerned about my own nation's future.

Best of luck, user.

Judaism its self is not something inherently evil. In the Islamic state the Christian and the Jew are allowed to practice their religion freely as long as they meet certain criteria. Those being Jizya which is the obligatory charity that is used to feed and clothe the poor. Many Christians welcomed the Muslims taking control because the jizya tax was less than the tax the Byzantine empire required, and because there was less corruption in the Muslim rulers at that time.

Islam is not anti Judaism but is anti Zionist. This is not antisemitism of the Nazis who hated Jews as an ethnicity.

all this, fueled by the endless source of cash from gulf nations, led to the rise of islamic conservatism in society, and eventually at best political islamism and at worst radical islamism/jihadism.

>Do you think Europe's in for an Islamic buttfucking?
As long as they keep meddling in the region with """revolutions""" while supporting their trusty gulfie wahhabi allies? Yes. Maintaining open borders and letting salafism rise unchecked in countries like the UK only makes it ten times worse, as you're letting a domestic community develop.