Our Prophet was a radical too- he fought against the injustices of his community and challenged the feudal order of his society, so they called him a radical. So what? We should be proud of that!
Sentiment: POSITIVE
A prophet is always much wider than his followers, much more liberal than those who label themselves with his name.
Part of the reason why people get radicalized is because they feel they are disenfranchised; that they not there; that they are bullied. But if they are represented, they can't go and say to themselves: 'Oh, this society hates us!'
We should be proud that our Prophet came into the world with the message of Islam to change it for the better, and not for the worse, or to keep things as they are.
This radical Islam is a religious-based ideology. And you actually have to, when you deal with the ideology, you have to attack it on that basis.
Radicalism is as British as tea and cakes, as much a part of our make-up as monarchy and football. It will never have its own jubilees, palaces or honours system.
I am not a prophet in any sense of the word, and I entertain an active and intense dislike of the foregoing mixture of optimism, fatalism, and conservatism.
I wouldn't call it radical; I would call it enthusiasm for progress.
Radical simply means 'grasping things at the root.'
The Muslim population in India is, largely speaking, not radicalised. From the beginning, they were always very secular-minded.
He who does not see things in their depth should not call himself a radical.