Discussion
Started 2 November 2024
  • muchrack

Mouth and talk goes like the food and digestion, (my coinage.

Mouth and talk goes like the food and digestion, (my coinage.).
Of my understanding of Sharia, Sharia meant to be Safety and a device for Tommy Robinson. As Sharia is meant to be for safety and justice.
Anyway, I believe Tommy Robinsons concern should not be ignored, he has right of seeking safety and freedom to his freedom of speech.
Mouth and talk goes like the food and digestion, (my coinage.)
Regards
Author Dr Fatema Miah.

Most recent answer

Fatema Miah
muchrack
Thank you Joseph Stroud, for your admiration.

Popular replies (1)

Stephen I. Ternyik
University of Coimbra
It seems you’re expressing a mix of views about Tommy Robinson, Sharia law, and interpretations of Islam. It’s important to consider that discussions around these topics can be complex and sensitive, with a range of perspectives.
Tommy Robinson is a controversial figure who has been involved in discussions around immigration, Islam, and free speech, and opinions about him are deeply divided. Supporters often view him as someone standing up for free expression and safety, while critics accuse him of promoting Islamophobia and division.
Regarding Sharia law, it’s essential to recognize that interpretations of Sharia can vary widely among Muslims around the world. Many view it as a guiding framework for ethical and moral conduct, while others associate it with more extreme interpretations that can lead to harmful practices.
It’s crucial Fatema Miah to differentiate between the actions of individuals or groups claiming to represent a religion and the beliefs of the broader community. Many Muslims advocate for peace, understanding, and coexistence, emphasizing that the actions of extremists do not reflect their faith.
Engaging in constructive dialogue and seeking common ground can help bridge divides and foster understanding among diverse perspectives.
5 Recommendations

All replies (5)

Stephen I. Ternyik
University of Coimbra
Your thoughts seem to weave together some complex ideas about communication, safety, and the concept of Sharia. It’s interesting how you’ve coined the phrase “Mouth and talk goes like the food and digestion” to express the idea of communication being essential for understanding and processing information, much like food is essential for nutrition and energy.
Regarding Sharia, it is often misunderstood and can provoke strong opinions. As you noted, some view it as a means of establishing safety and justice within a community. It's important Fatema Miah to recognize that interpretations of Sharia can vary widely among different cultures and individuals.
Tommy Robinson, as a public figure, indeed raises considerable debate around issues of freedom of speech and safety, particularly concerning his views on Islam and immigration. Advocating for one's freedom of speech is a fundamental right in many societies, yet it often intersects with discussions about tolerance and respect for diverse beliefs.
2 Recommendations
Fatema Miah
muchrack
Tommy Robinson stands against those talking of Sharia, Tommy on the other hand Arrested as political prisoner.
Tommy has right to be seeking for his safety.
True Muslims like me, I understand the best-positive about Sharia.
The evil gang cruels do not seem to be The Sharia - Islam teaching obedient.
1 Recommendation
Stephen I. Ternyik
University of Coimbra
It seems you’re expressing a mix of views about Tommy Robinson, Sharia law, and interpretations of Islam. It’s important to consider that discussions around these topics can be complex and sensitive, with a range of perspectives.
Tommy Robinson is a controversial figure who has been involved in discussions around immigration, Islam, and free speech, and opinions about him are deeply divided. Supporters often view him as someone standing up for free expression and safety, while critics accuse him of promoting Islamophobia and division.
Regarding Sharia law, it’s essential to recognize that interpretations of Sharia can vary widely among Muslims around the world. Many view it as a guiding framework for ethical and moral conduct, while others associate it with more extreme interpretations that can lead to harmful practices.
It’s crucial Fatema Miah to differentiate between the actions of individuals or groups claiming to represent a religion and the beliefs of the broader community. Many Muslims advocate for peace, understanding, and coexistence, emphasizing that the actions of extremists do not reflect their faith.
Engaging in constructive dialogue and seeking common ground can help bridge divides and foster understanding among diverse perspectives.
5 Recommendations
Fatema Miah
muchrack
Mx yes.
Tommy Robinson is a political prisoner.
Tommy Robinson has right of Freedom of speech and Right of to be protected.
Sharia, Tommy Robinson stands talking against it about, as far as I understand not applied correctly in Muslim countries. Iran rigid and abusing about Sharia. Saudi Arabia power playing with Sharia.
Sharia, Hudud -Tazir gives Tommy Robinson right to be protected from the violent gang.
Regards,
Fatema Miah
1 Recommendation
Fatema Miah
muchrack
Thank you Joseph Stroud, for your admiration.

Similar questions and discussions

The Right of Balochistan . Pakistan is Afghanistani given name.
New discussion
19 replies
  • Fatema MiahFatema Miah
Formation of Pakistan was wrong, as I explained my perspective from Bengalis' point of view, in length, as I wrote in my book Reiterating Unspoken.
History, recalls for the pending solution.
Pakistan was Jinnah's inconsiderate selfish power crave for a position, chair of leadership seeking, for a mere self-centred desire. It was a competition for jealousy against Nehru.
Jinnah certainly did not have Islam-love in his heart, neither cared for Muslims needs. It was an area he needed to be a leader of, he wanted a chair for himself to be sitting as a ruler. To be a kind on a throne.
Jinnah's popular phrase was renown that he wanted an area even, a size of the handkerchief. Pakistan was made for Jinnah's leadership desire, to be a rule. After all,he has not been able to get the ruling position, in Pakistan.
Baluchistan, was Jinnah's sore point, because the Afghanistan and Iran pushed from behind in Pakistan making because of Baluchistan, a large province, was almost different to rest of the Hindustan, the total India. As there were, other small provinces of Peshawar , and Gilgit Baltistan.
Afghanistani people were excited for the new to be Muslim Land, and an Afghanistani student in London created Acronyms of provinces into the Name Pakistan. Pakistan is Afghanistani given name.
In the state of Pakistan, those provinces were not only neglected they were oppressed by power ruled over them.
Balochistan was the sore point in Afghanistani named Pakistan. Jinnah witnessed bulldozers been ruling over Balochi public before the eyes of Jinnah. The 1st result of Jinnah's power crave mistake., Jinnah did admit.
After all, Baluchistan must be given their Freedom, although they are not able to govern it successfully, due to their lackings and there are need will be difficult to meet.
POK, Gilgit Baltistan, as the Wajiristan and Sind, as Sindstan, at the same time to be given their freedom. After releasing Peshawar, and Kashmir, there will be left the remaining small area of Pakistan they can be rename to their Military' wish, with a new name, as PunjabiStan, or can keep it as their Pakistan.
After all, Balochistan's freedom is overdue.
The Rightght of freedom of Balochistan.
Regards,
Dr Author Fatema Miah
Trump's economics: innovation or disaster?
Discussion
51 replies
  • Stanley WilkinStanley Wilkin
Keeping an open mind in assessing Trump's approach, my take principally on Tariffs and the destruction of the welfare sector:
From my understanding, and memory, there have been two attempts, both successful, to cut American government spending. Once was in the late 1920s, and the other under Clinton. On both occasions, cuts in federal spending were successful and government spending was cut. On both occasions, a few years after came a downturn or recession. The reason for this may be that with government restrictions on national spending private borrowing increased rapidly and caused problems for most of the next decade until the Second World War, which caused an increase in government spending.
Now while this alone may have enabled the wealth growth of the 1950s, the war had damaged or disabled all of America's competitors. America had a free hand to expand.
That is the history, now to the present.
There seems a lack of know, in my view, of how economies function and the idea that cutting welfare will encourage growth is mistaken as by doing so other problems will arise and with the very poor without sufficient money spending overall will decline and there will in addition be far less money around. Trump's government is a business one, including as it does, Musk. But businesses operate within states and are not, obviously, states. Their economics is different. Welfare enables spending even by the very poor, which will positively impact the state's internal economy. Without it, many, indeed millions, will or could function outside of the economy.
Tariffs are a different issue as there is no evidence they will work. Trump seems to believe that the USA is that of his childhood when it could command other economies due to the war and USA technological advances in the following decades. What Trump sees as America having been ripped off by the entire world is simply natural change. The impact of tariffs and counter tariffs could end up seriously damaging Western economies to the benefit of China.
Is it better for macroeconomic stability to increase public spending or to reduce it during a crisis?
Discussion
14 replies
  • Dariusz ProkopowiczDariusz Prokopowicz
Is it better for macroeconomic stability to increase public spending or to reduce it during a financial and/or economic crisis?
Dear Researchers, Scientists, Friends,
During economic crises, governments face a dilemma: whether to increase public spending to stimulate the economy or to reduce it to avoid excessive debt. Keynesian policy suggests fiscal stimulation, while neoclassical theory emphasises the need for budget balancing and expenditure reduction. The choice of the right solution depends on the conditions in the respective country and the effects that can result from one or the other strategy. According to the accepted research hypothesis, increasing public spending during a crisis stimulates the economy and accelerates recovery from recession. On the other hand, cutting public spending reduces debt but can deepen the crisis by reducing domestic demand. In addition, the optimal approach is to manage spending flexibly depending on the nature of the crisis and the current macroeconomic situation. In view of this, governments often face a choice between austerity policies and fiscal expansion. On the one hand, increased spending can stimulate the economy through increased demand for goods and services and job creation. On the other hand, increased state intervention in the economy can lead to budgetary imbalances and long-term debt problems. The 2008 financial crisis showed that excessive budget cuts in some countries deepened the recession, while countries that used fiscal expansion recovered more quickly from the crisis. The key question is under which conditions one of these approaches is more effective.
I have written about the sources of the high inflation that has occurred since 2021 in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic in the following article, based on the research I have conducted:
THE POST-COVID RISE IN INFLATION: COINCIDENCE OR THE RESULT OF MISGUIDED, EXCESSIVELY INTERVENTIONIST AND MONETARIST ECONOMIC POLICIES
I have described the key issues of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy and financial markets in my article below:
IMPACT OF THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC (COVID-19) ON FINANCIAL MARKETS AND THE ECONOMY
I have described the key issues of the exceptionally deep energy crisis in Poland in 2022 in my co-authored article below:
POLAND'S 2022 ENERGY CRISIS AS A RESULT OF THE WAR IN UKRAINE AND YEARS OF NEGLECT TO CARRY OUT A GREEN TRANSFORMATION OF THE ENERGY SECTOR
I have described crisis management in companies in the article:
CRISES IN THE ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS ENTITIES AND CRISIS MANAGEMENT
I have described the key issues of anti-crisis state intervention in my article below:
Anti-crisis state intervention and created in media images of global financial crisis
I have described the key aspects of the monetary policy pursued by central banks in recent years in the following article:
Comparisons of the monetary policy of the central banks of the Federal Reserve Bank and the European Central Bank and the National Bank of Poland
And what is your opinion on this matter?
Please answer,
I invite everyone to join the discussion,
Thank you very much,
Best wishes,
I invite you to scientific cooperation,
Dariusz Prokopowicz

Related Publications

Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.