This subject's already a few light years beyond your tabloid, Islamophobic "research". You use the link in unanalyzed riposte, but it's nothing more substantial than your previous superficial Jakarta Post reference.

Indonesia's state functions here like it did when seeing off the threat of secessionist "christian" rebels in some eastern provinces: the civil war sparked off in late 1998 by rival gangsters, but soon became a full-blown tit-for-tat of violent social and demographic engineering a.k.a. "ethnic cleansing". In that case (often known as the Maluku War), warring parties' home bases and funding sources were mainly in Jakarta on the one side, and the Netherlands on the other. Indonesia's government apparatus gave tacit and logistical support to jihadi volunteers, while military and police authorities tied themselves into both sides' battle lines to keep a really tight lid on the situation. That scenario is bizarre to many outsiders, but it describes the overlapping intensity and demographic closeness in Indonesian security operations. The volunteer "grass roots" nature of that war echoed many other recent cases, but also the much earlier incursions against Malaysia under Soekarno, when leftists volunteered as proxies with military backing. The Ahmadiyah case is not an actual shooting war, but the processes are much the same, as activists demonstrate to pretend some determining influence over the ruling government.

In fact, the processes are the other way around. But you would miss that with your cherry-picking distractions. You may as well supply a transcript of yourself with idol Hitchens in a gin/viagra-fuelled seminar about how the Iraq War is a just cause (or was that "enduring freedom"), with its bodycount of 1.2 million+, nearly all civilians.

Your sloppy double standards and genocidal self-righteousness show clearly that your mind is well and truly blown. Get out and stop trying to poison people with your mischievous spread of hatred and pomposity.

And while you try to marginalize with your narrow, primitive politics of imperialist domination, you may as well apply any of the tags "Chinese nationalist", "Iraqi nationalist", "Russian nationalist", "Australian nationalist" as well as "Catholic", "Jew" or "Hindu" as much as "Muslim".

'And while you try to marginalize with your narrow, primitive politics of imperialist domination, you may as well apply any of the tags "Chinese nationalist", "Iraqi nationalist", "Russian nationalist", "Australian nationalist" as well as "Catholic", "Jew" or "Hindu" as much as "Muslim".'

I'm glad that you mentioned 'tags' because Muslims use them ad nauseum. So we have, Muslim/Kafir, Muslim/Polytheist, Muslim/People of the Book, Dar al Islam/Dar al Harb, and so on and on....

No other religious ideology creates such a woeful "US" and "THEM" dichotomy. Indeed, Islam is probably the most devisive ideology ever devised by the human-mind with the possible exception of Nazism.

Such devisiveness might be acceptable if Mohammed really conversed with a talking angel (Gabriel) because some credibility could be given to the existence and xenophobia of a jealous deity.

However, the general supernatural beliefs of Islam (like its counterparts, Judaism and Christianity) are so daft as to be a total waste of time.

Yep, more vilification and provocation as a way of feeling superior. You're simply immature, which was also apparent from the fact that you repeatedly fail to engage with the specific subject matter that you yourself introduced - in this case Ahmadiyah in Indonesia.

When I say "get out" I actually mean "get out of my country". Try out your bravado openly and have a crack at spreading your hatred somewhere else, like in Indonesia, where you'll face either deportation, jail, or both.

When Australia faces more serious risk of unrest during this financial systemic disintegration, enforcement of existing law should apply similar penalties for such anti-social incitement here too.

Well, at this point I think we safely declare Nursel Guzeldenis thesis busted.

Yet again, we have a self declared Islamic 'moderate' resorting to 'bully pulpit' tactics when faced with criticism. Hence, the only thing blocking dialogue and debate is the hyper-inflated ego-mania of Islam itself.

'Try out your bravado openly and have a crack at spreading your hatred somewhere else, like in Indonesia, where you'll face either deportation, jail, or both.'

With the above statement mil-observer we conclude that you must have an extremely sore foot - because you've just shot it clean off.

Yet again a Muslim has demonstrated why Islamo-sceptics must keep challenging such a barbaric ideology. An ideology that resorts time and time again to threat and violence in order to protect its own selfish interests.

To be "outed" as a "Muslim" by an Islamophobe is indeed a great honor. I'll aim to be labelled "Sikh" too the next time that community gets caught up in this widespread collateral damage of racism, Islamophobia and imperialistic warmongering. From my own witnessing, and what I hear via my Indian friends here, I probably won't have to wait too long either. Right now in my city many innocent people - Muslims, Sikhs, and superficially similar non-whites - are being harassed, vilified, humiliated and savagely assaulted largely because of the spurious racism and imperialist filth promoted by Islamophobes like TR's own vile, anti-social persona.

To now claim smugly to have nailed a "Muslim" while boasting of victimhood betrays that persona's hateful, wish-fulfilling agenda. The "Muslim" tag's meant to marginalize and stigmatize, tabloid-style, but the only tag actually confirmed from this exchange is that of "pompous and effete Islamophobic bigot and provocateur".

I make no threat at all but TR, consistent with the primitive tactics of other psychopathic, imperialist warmongers, keeps provoking enmity to try "proving" both passive innocence and vulnerability as validation for Islamophobic aggression. I merely highlighted an overseas case of wise judicial response to such incitement, in order that TR could perhaps indicate any courage or other moral principle to match purported "convictions" of belief. Of course, my suggestion was wasted because TR's character is nowhere near the task, instead seeming to prefer inciting from afar in relative safety, but with an ego rush typical for those alienated, divisive and ambitious manipulators given their green light from cynical political bosses.

My understanding about Islamic scripture, its historical contexts and spirituality is possibly as limited as that about Christian, Jewish, Hindu and Buddhist counterparts. I claim no special expertise there, but I do understand with firm confidence the clearly necessary moral foundations and historically valid precedence justifying - and properly uniting - all such religious traditions as an overwhelmingly positive common cause supporting, protecting and advancing all civilized humanity. To so flagrantly and gratuitously vilify such life-affirming traditions is to promote instead an alienated, individualistic and liberalist barbarism.

[cont.]

Indonesian cleric-politician Gus Dur knows these life-affirming religious truths too, better than I do, and with more eloquence. But such ecumenical Muslim peacemakers as Gus Dur (a "Muslim cleric") are instead repeatedly and gratuitously vilified by vicious Islamophobes like TR.

For the record, my relativist perspective probably earns me at best the tag "comparative religionist" more than that of any single religious faith. But for Islamophobes like TR, I very proudly wear their label "Muslim". The last time I was near a public attack on innocent, gentle Muslims was when I happened late on a scene of a vicious stabbing of young African students. I'd actually feel deeply honored if my sympathy, humane solidarity and zeal for justice then qualified inadvertent rights to "Islamic" identity. I look forward to better opportunities to earn such rights to that and other labels, but Islamophobes like TR will obviously be far away, free from any responsibility for the violence and offence they delight in provoking and watching for their perverse entertainment [for explicit psychopathological evidence, see: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8326&page=0#132207]

TR's own incitements consistently disprove Islamophobes' claims to "criticism" and "Islamo-scepticism" as false, empty advertisements of "freethinking" and "intellectual credibility".

Thus does TR's fake virtue "tolerance" too undergo thorough tests here to be exposed for its hypocrisies, fundamentalist inflexibility, and mischievous dishonesty. As with such provocateurs' narcissism and exhibitionism in Holland and Denmark (and more revealingly in UK figure-cum-TR idol Hitchens), Islamophobes' caricatures and superficiality around Islam feed from and into that same cycle of fanaticism nourishing such aberrations as: aggressive conversions by missionary Christianity; lavishly funded Saudi Wahabbist and related Muslim counterparts, and; diverse arrays of Ponzi-style "false prophets" among charismatic and New-Age-style hocus-pocus cults.

Perhaps Nursel Guzeldeniz agrees: people like TR can see only an Islam of simpletons, reductionists and sensationalists because people like TR are themselves simpletons, reductionists and/or sensationalists. That's no mysterious profundity or revelation of psychological insight. By any further exploration into definitions of "Islamophobia", the kernel of Islamophobes' affliction is obviously their fear of some dark, unconscious monolith within their own monstrous psyches.