The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Anti-Islam: is history repeating itself? > Comments

Anti-Islam: is history repeating itself? : Comments

By Ali Kazak, published 27/2/2013

Some of the causes of anti-Semitism were: a condemnation of the Jewish religion by some; a view that Jewish particularisms were a barrier to assimilation; and that Jews were not capable of integrating into the society in which they lived.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Much though I dislike Wilders and his bigotry, I completely disagree with Ali Kazac.

The "ugly face of fascism" does not lie with a handful of ideological crackpots trying to organise a speaking tour for a rather loopy politician. It is the thugs and bullies that threatened operators of venues that presumed to host Wilders, and most especially in those people that threatened and manhandled members of the public trying to get in to see Wilders. This is most emphatically not an Australia we can be “proud of”.
Posted by Rhian, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 2:27:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Islam has to do 2 things; declare the supremacy of the secular legal and political structure of the West, and secondly fess upto and declare complete resistance to the abominations committed in its name.

In the meantime the author should address the participants, their statements about the West, Jews and Sharia law and mission of the advertised Peace Conference and Mission described here:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/if_wilders_is_wrong_explain_this_conference/

I am sick of Islam adopting the mantle of the victim.
Posted by cohenite, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 2:53:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
diver dan,
After reading many of your other posts on other threads I can hardly believe that I agrre with your post here.

The ideology of multiculturalism is a failuere here, as elsewhere, In fact i argues that we are multiracial but not multicultural. We expect all to abide by OUR social standards and laws. The sooner MC is dead and buried the better.

The article of this thread is all rubbish. Muslims are the ones spruking hatred of our society and seeking change. They claim to be offended by many things we do and want immumity from any critisism.

In fact muslims should be asked why do they come to a country run by infidels. Why do they come to be offended by our way of life. I doubt you would get an honest answer from them. The truth being that they want to enjoy the freedoms and luxuries of western world and they see themselves as 'pioneers for Islam' and set about changing us to the hellholes they came from.

We see what is happening in Europe and the UK and we do not want to tread that path. Yes, select only immigrants that have demonstrated they will integrate. say No to the few that cause us trouble.
Posted by Banjo, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 3:14:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Banjo, why indeed would they want to come here?
I suspect that the clannish behaviour and refusal to even integrate, much less assimilate is mostly genetic with Islam playing the minor role in this issue.
We sometimes overlook our own European past to the extent that other people and their ways of life seem incomprehensible.
Due to the influence of Christianity more and more Europeans have been marrying out over the last 1200 or so years, we generally marry people who are not closely related to us, even selecting mates from far flung ethnic groups, my wife for example is half Czech half English.
This is not the case in much of the third world, when we examine the way these "Muslim" enclaves and clans are calcifying in our cities we have to understand that some of their ethnic groups and clans are effectively made up of cousins.
Let me explain the theory, it's said that generally speaking two people from the same ethnic group which does not permit or condone marriage to second cousins are genetically related as uncle is to nephew, in reality it's often further than that.
In some (but not all) Muslim ethnic groups or clans there is a preference for FBD, father's brother's daughter pairings, we'd not be overstepping the mark in saying that this must have at least some effect on intelligence, temperament, psychological stability around other groups and emotional mobility.
As I said, it's a theory but short of genetically testing people or demanding a family tree from immigrant brides and grooms what could be done to ensure that highly endogamous groups don't settle here and simply transplant their way of life into a setting where it's not going to be tolerated?
Obviously not all clans are the same,but some are problematic from a western point of view so what is the immigration department doing about identifying and weeding out potentially disruptive extended families and ethnic groups before they land here and can't be deported?
My guess would be nothing.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 3:58:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a non-post-modernist and therefore unskilled in the black art of deconstruction of texts, I regard words as meaning exactly what they say. I can find nothing in Wilders talk as relayed through the media as being characteristic of “hate speech.”
I am aware that Islam and Muslim are like Christianity and Judaism and in as all large religious groupings are a heterogenic collection of sects and sub sects. Indeed not infrequently the intra -religious hatreds and contempt exceeds in intensity any extra –religious rivalry.
Wilders is wrong in believing that there is only one possible interpretation of Islam. To my knowledge he does not discuss the propensity for Chia Islam to bomb members of Sonny Islam and vice versa.
Wilders is correct in recognising that there is a powerful and dangerous interpretation of Islam that is at variance with the concept of a free and liberal society.
The Islam of violent Jihad against non-believers is a reality. This may well be a minority viewpoint; but real it is. In the 1920s and 30s Hitler’s movement was a minority. I am sure many reasonable people in Germany of the time despised their creed. However, backed by an urban terrorist organisation (The Brown Shirts) Nazism eventually came into its own. Further many moderates including the aged President Hindenburg believed that they could control the mobsters. How wrong they were!
Posted by anti-green, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 4:12:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti Green,
True, the Nazis comprised only about 15% of the German population.
Again we find a valid comparison between Nazism and Islamism but still it's still beyond the understanding of the average person who can only understand history through the medium of fiction.
Islamists aren't stupid, the psychological and demographic profile of the Jihadi matches that of any other young radical or revolutionary including the Sturmabteilung, what makes them dangerous is their ability to fire up the "low elements" of society.
During what became known as Kristallnacht it's known that only a small percentage of the organised SA unit commanders ordered their men to attack Jews and their property, however individual SA men and small groups went to the taverns and the less salubrious areas of town and were able to raise mobs of ruffians who rioted and caused mayhem.
We saw the same effect in Sydney last year, there were certainly Jihadists leading the demonstrations but the fracas erupted when this "low element" of Lebanese society felt emboldened by the crowd and began attacking Police.
We saw also the reprisal attacks by Lebanese gangs after the Cronulla disturbances and the inability of the state to deal with those rolling, guerrilla style attacks.
What's obvious is that the government,the Police and even the armed forces cannot handle asymmetrical warfare, what if there were 100 or 1,000 men waging a real violent Jihad in this country? Our "tolerant and pluralistic" society cannot cope with insurrection and loss of life, look at how severely the Bali bombings have traumatised White Australia, our armed forces are powerless against guerrillas even when backed up by the most advanced weapons systems and have to resort to bribing Afghan tribal chiefs in order to do their jobs.
As long as the Australian government can still bribe Muslims in Western Sydney into ratting on each other and playing off one groups against another the status quo will stand but as soon as local Muslims fear the Jihadis more than they fear the law there will be big trouble.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 27 February 2013 9:10:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy