Philo,

Since you addressed me I am back on the thread.
My view is winning a war on terror ideology would consist of three folds:
- Military/ Police (against violent already brain washed groups).
- Preventive Intelligence: understanding what and who else is in the pipeline.
- Eliminating the cause: ie ensure that proper programs (religious education, schools, democratic reforms, employment, etc.) are in place to dry out the ‘resources’ where these people can brainwash others youth.

Moderate Muslims are active in the last area as they should; maybe the question is more of can they do more. Take youth education and preaching in mosques and on websites for example: the methods improved over the last few years, there are more room for American and Western type of Imams preaching on Modern Islam and the co-existence agenda which, 10 years ago, I never heard of it. This is happening not only across Australia but across the US and Europe and even in two countries I visited in the Middle East last month. Can they do more? Of course they can but it is all fragmented efforts from individuals and organisations. There is a room for governing body, methodologies and resources but the question is who will lead? Who is to take ownership, create, support and monitor progress?

I have no answer to the question but I least I thought of which question to ask.

Your statement ‘support the US or ignore terrorism’ is an emotional rephrase of the ‘with us or against us’ theory. The definition of “terror is the enemy of the west” is disastrous because it means the West decided to fight alone. We can get much better results if we live this definition: “Terrorism is the enemy of all cultures & religions, especially Islam”.

Matthew S,

Might be a good idea to catch up so may I refer you to my earlier posting and responses to Boaz David?
Yes I know the Quran and I studied the Abraham faith books in native languages.
And Yes, I see my faith as beautiful, peaceful and loving.

Peace,

I have family members who were murdered by Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. They had nothing to do with the partition of India, apart from wanting to settle in a new land.

I have friends who were exiled and banished by a Jewish government.

I have friends whose female relatives were gang-raped by Orthodox Christian soldiers in Bosnia.

And if I use that as an excuse to hate Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Orthodox Christians, I seriously need to get my head checked.

Thanks Fellow_human for your last post I can recognise your concern about terrorism, and your strategy to reduce religious fanaticism.

My concern is to recognise we live in a diverse society, and we will not all agree on some Government decisions; but when the Government is at war to protect the nature of that diverse society we must side with those of our countrymen whom we might normally disagree with to defeat an enemy who will destroy that diverse free State. That is the basis of democracy. I must protect your personal right to adhere to your religion, unless your religion threatens the freedom of others to their personal beliefs.

If we support a democracy then an individual opinion or any one idiology or religion cannot be adopted by the Government. Our Australian constitution dissallows that. The Australian Constitution, under Section 116 says, "The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, & no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth."

Our society is secular, based upon the principle that every life is equal before the State and the Law. This is a shared core value of a diverse democratic society comprising many religions and idiologies. That very core value becomes the basis of democracy, as a democratic Government does not assist in the establishment of a single world view. The Australian Government will not assist moderate Muslims unless the assistance is commonly shared by all. The code of a democratic federal state is that moderate Muslims like everyone else should be assisting the Federal Government to defeat any common enemy of that State.

Acts committed by criminals are different and are dealt with under local criminal law.

Irfan ,I just have a problem with the religious psyche of humans.The Jews believe they are the chosen people and thus after 2000yrs came back to take a portion of Palistine,which I believe in the modern era was totally wrong.

As juvenile catholics we were taught that our faith was the only way and everyone else would burn in hell if they didn't follow.Now the Muslims have a similar philosophy.I just think it is just a load of BS and we have to grow up, move beyond the fairy stories and evolve a more mature philosophy based on scientific facts and logic.

Religion is not about the concept of god but about the those at the apex of the triangle having power over the ignorant believers.

We never see the mature leaders being suicide bombers,just the young ignorant,testosterone enraged youth used as sacrifical lambs.

There is a better way.

Philo,

Thanks for your posting, I guess all we can all do is to stick together and unify our efforts for a safer nation and a better world.
On supporting the US, I think we can become a much safer nation if we reduce our military commitment, but increase our trade, economical, business and cultural relations with SEA and Muslims countries.

Arjay,

Two minor corrections if I may:

1. Israelites always lived in the middle east (Palestine included) as traders, merchants and businessmen. They did't come back because they were always there living among us for the last few thousands years and are a part of our history. When Nazism drove European Jews out of Europe, large numbers crossed the sea and settled in Palestine which then was under the British flag. Theodor Hertzel intentions for Israel was to be a secular state. The "promise land" theory was used around WW2 to drive immigration into Israel and to gain support from the Jewish communities overseas and get military support since that was the preferred choice for the founders of the new state at the time.

2. In Islam all good believers who do good deeds will go to heaven, Muslims, Christians, Jews or Sabeans (Others). Quoran did not give exclusivity to Muslims and heaven.

Peace,

Don't you Muslims read your own histories? Or if you read them, why don't you believe them? Allow me to enlighten you about Muhammed:

The first biographers of Muhammad were Ibn Ishaq and al-Tabari; they provide the only authoritative history of his life. Later, Bukhari put together a collection of Hadiths/traditions which are regarded almost as valid as the Qur’an. These three historians provide the original information we have about Muhammad and early Islam. In 830 AD Ibn Hisham wrote a censured version: "I am omitting things which Ishaq recorded in this book. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss and matters which would distress certain people." Ishaq:691. All modern day biographies are even more "cleaned-up’.

Here are some texts about Islam’s great prophet:

1. "When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes... They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died..." http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html. Read verse 261 Yes, they were thieves, but.... (Mo, the torturer)

2. Allah's Apostle ... passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you... The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301 http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.301 (Mo's attitude toward women!)