I have absolutely no problem with the authorities investigating any business for breaching any laws.

And if this article simply pointed to the double standards of those who have been shown to have double standards, and reported on the actions against them, I'd have no problem with that either.

But the random attribution of "guilt by association" is pretty cheap, don't you think? Simply reeling off a list of high-profile US hucksters and encouraging the inference that our locals must be just as bad, is dishonest as well as tasteless.

Smear campaigns come in all shapes and sizes, and this is pretty small beer, But in my view, to plaster a group of people - whatever you may think of them personally - with inch-thick innuendo but without any evidence, is the act of a cowardly sleaze.

Pericles, the only Australian 'guilt by association' section I saw was where the lack of funding transparency in Australian organisations such as Catch the Fire was highlighted.

Surely making their finances more transparent would resolve this issue, so I don't really take issue with the article. I see it more as a highlight of what can happen if we don't apply the same scrutiny to religious organisations that we do to businesses.

What Is being described here is all within the great American tradition of hucksterism showbiz as made famous by PT Barnum.
Based on the time proven principle that there are far more than one hundred suckers born every minute.
It is also indicative of the inherently phoney, and hypocritical, double-mindedness that is at the base of the sex paranoid puritannical, emotional-sexual "mind" that creates such "religious" hucksterism and which exploits the same "mind" in its target of would be willing suckers.

Leave your discriminative intelligence at the door.

The situation described is fully predictable, and indeed is well known. Scarcely a month goes by without another expose of the shenanigans of some hot gospel preacher or other.

It is a constant source of amazement to me that anyone can believe the nonsensical rubbish espoused by the various churches, and a source of even greater amazement that anyone actually contributes money to these egregious examples of the very worst of bible-bashing con men. Thankfully, Howard is gone, and maybe some sanity might now prevail, although don't hold your breath. Rudd could well turn out to be another one of them.

The imported U.S.A. reilgion of Assembly of God loonies are going even further bringing their loony tune evangelical religion to parliaments. God help us if we are ever ruled by these fundamentalist fruitcakes.

Funny that I know a number of people from the Church of Christ who are supporters of some of the 'culprits' listed. Is Alan in line with the rest of the Church of Christ or is he bitter because most don't agree with him on many things. Could it be that his own brand of liberalism has been deserted by the masses and that those with biblical beliefs being prepared to put their money where their mouth is instead of relying on Government grants. Liberal theology leads to feminist and homosexuals hijacking the agenda. Where Christ is preached people happily part with their hard earned bucks.