(continuing on) For instance: Some fanatic All- has started a stalker site called "lefty watch". He or she posts photos of socialists on the web, I think, in the hope that someone will beat the crap out of them or even do them in. Regardless, it is an attempt at intimidation – the mainstay of fascism.
All- I think certain folk on the right are irresponsible fanatics and should be sent to Auschwitz for a tour to see what their silly nonsense leads to. I don't regard my thinking as left or right just up in the air (following Camus and WPA). You sir, All-, are clearly suckered. All- rethink please:).
Reason: I am little unsure what you mean by either "fascism or risk". The risks of allowing fascistic control to seep into our nation's thinking is a hell of a lot more risky than upholding truly democratic principles and soldiering on regardless of threats (I acknowledge that this is "keyboard courage") but I do exist in society, use public transport, fly in airplanes etc.
Irfan: I can't really compare my experience with people of “middle-eastern appearance” but it is similar, when I go shopping with a friend of mine who has the tattoos, piercings and purple mohawk, we always have an escort around the shops and security always insist on checking my friend's shoulder bag.
I am of normal appearance, indeed, when I was getting checked into prison once I was told that I was the first person through without a tattoo. I love to rub this into my tattooed mates. I say to them: “ I might be a criminal in the eyes of the law but at least I don’t look like one”. I also know some folk who get the old "empty your bag onto the car bonnet please sir" on a regular basis. I have never been checked. Must be my happy disposition and innocent boyish looks. Always appearance and a sub-culture bias seem to be the unconscious motivation for this special treatment. So, Irfan, and the rest of us, be concerned - very concerned.

Carnifex,

Islam 's point on female cirmusition is:

a) its optional
b) if carried out to be made a symbolic thing and not a mutilation.

Islam = the Quran.
Hadith is a summary of good advices but following it is not a compulsory and the opposite is correct.

The hadith refereed to on this site was by Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) when Muslims who migrated from persecution to Abbysinia (ethiopia) asked about female circumsition, the translation of the meaning of arabic is "if you do it don't exagerate" (Ektaa walaa torhek).

Circumsition for men is different.

FH

I know what it says.

Trouble is, it's here in Australia to australian born muslims. I would love to stop it all over the world but I can't. I had enough difficulty trying to stop muslims lighting their BBQs on extreme fire ban days when I worked for the NPWS.

The midwives and nurses I've talked to say that's it's often more than just a snip.

Irfan, I know that this is not about the anti-terror laws but it's all part of the problem as to why so many despise your religion and makes it much easier to push draconian laws through.

Your article 'Tax Fraud & Communal Stinginess' great, expand on it please. This is exactly what many muslims have related to me in previous years, long before any terror attacks. Unfortunatley many told their stories with pride.

Rancitas,
Interesting Ideas, but your knowledge on Fascism is some what clouded, and confused with Nazi’s. Not the same but similar.
Like all other Mind Conquering regimes of the propaganda type is to create confusion, Marxist Ideology is not a singular academic philosophy, it is a combination of many and is for the purposes of Egoism makes them God.
You are mistaken, I do not have such a blog, but the Ideals in contrast to terrorism laws, makes the mind grow fonder of introducing The Act of Parliament of the Conscious Enemies of Civilization bill of 2005, that should encumber any Pathological Ideology , meaning any who step out side the boundaries . If you do not promulgate lies and deception or act in a manner contra to civil behavior you are safe, if you threaten that principle, shake in your boots.
There are Truths .

Piho

It does not matter if one or ten voted did or didn’t make a difference, it is the constitutional right to vote and to be a candidate.
Consider this an Australian national held unconstitutionally/illegally in detention to stand as a candidate in the last election. Would likely have had a considerable impact, if the candidate would claim, say;
“I stand for election to free not just myself but other Australians held unconstitutionally and unlawfully in detention”.

The English common law rule, which it is insisted was in force after the
Declaration of Independence, was that "every person born within the dominions of the Crown, no matter whether of English or of foreign parents, and, in the latter case, whether the parents were settled or merely temporarily sojourning in the country, was an English subject

Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. KINGSTON (South Australia).-
They are born within the realm of Her Majesty, and are therefore native-born British subjects.

Hansard 17-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates

Mr. GORDON: One is that everyone born in the Commonwealth is qualified to become an elector

Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. SYMON.-
As a citizen of a state I claim the right to be a citizen of the Commonwealth. I do not want to place in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, however much I may be prepared to trust it, the right of depriving me of citizenship.

And

Mr. BARTON.-Yes; and here we have a totally different position, because the actual right which a person has as a British subject-the right of personal liberty and protection under the laws-is secured by being a citizen of the states. It must be recollected that the ordinary rights of liberty and protection by the laws are not among the subjects confided to the Commonwealth. The administration of [start page 1766] the laws regarding property and personal liberty is still left with the states.

Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

Mr. KINGSTON (South Australia).-
They are born within the realm of Her Majesty, and are therefore native-born British subjects

And further;

Hansard 30-3-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. GORDON:
a greater share of political liberty is experienced than in any countries the world ever saw

Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitutional Convention Debates

Mr. O’CONNOR.-No, it would not; and, as an honorable member reminds me, there is a decision on the point. All that is intended is that there shall be some process of law by which the parties accused must be heard.
Mr. HIGGINS.-Both sides heard.
Mr. O’CONNOR.-Yes; and the process of law within that principle may be [start page 689] anything the state thinks fit. This provision simply assures that there shall be some form by which a person accused will have an opportunity of stating his case before being deprived of his liberty. Is not that a first principle in criminal law now? I cannot understand any one objecting to this proposal.
And
Mr. BARTON.-And a judicial determination.
Mr. O’CONNOR.-Yes, and a judicial determination-that is all that is necessary.

Hansard 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. DEAKIN.-
What a charter of liberty is embraced within this Bill-of political liberty and religious liberty-the liberty and the means to achieve all to which men in these days can reasonably aspire.

Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

Mr. OCONNOR.-Yes. We are now dealing with the prohibition against the alteration of these Constitutions. We are dealing with a provision which will prevent the alteration of these Constitutions in the direction of depriving any citizen of his life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

And

Dr. COCKBURN (South Australia).-Why should these words be inserted? They would be a reflection on our civilization. Have any of the colonies of Australia ever attempted to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law? I repeat that the insertion of these words would be a reflection on our civilization. People would say-"Pretty things these states of Australia; they have to be prevented by a provision in the Constitution from doing the grossest injustice."

The proposed anti-terrorist laws are unconstitutional and so ULTRA VIRES where it purports to detain people without DUE PROCESS OF LAW