OOG

'why is this even needing talkng about
the law re murder is clear'

Exactly. Honour killing is murder. Just as FGM is grievous bodily harm.

These are statutory crimes in the west - indeed virtually everwhere. If we are to shine some 'sunlight' on these crimes for the sake of debate, then lets get some rapists to write an essay for OLO about rape, or drug dealers about selling drugs, or Martin Bryant about the Port Arthur massacre, or ... you get the drift.

This so-called debate has become a hot cultural 'issue' because Islam has been made the West's official enemy, and therefore many Westerners have taken a side either for or against the demonisation of an entire religion for political purposes. So it's inevitable that hypocrisies manifest themselves on both sides.

I'm left wing in political outlook. Yet I too get very annoyed at the liberal stance that monstrous, criminal activities should be held to a different standard because they are culturally based. This is a stance that is by no means confined to the left - it's more of a liberal-centrist viewpoint.

True enough Killarney,
The rank and file Left do have some principles on issue like circumcision of infants where the right are utter cowards, the union covering health professionals in Norway want a ban on circumcision of children under 15 but the Conservative party are blocking the move:
http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/Norwegian-official-Jews-Muslims-circumcise-out-of-ignorance-332974
For the record, we didn't pick the fight with Islam, they sacked and destroyed the classical world and plunged Europe and West Asia into the dark ages, we've been at war ever since, only the tempo of the fighting changes.
Islam is the ancient and eternal enemy of the West, it's not something which was invented by G.W Bush and Dick Cheney.

I do not agree with what Uthman Badar has to say, but I will defend to the death his right to say it.

I support the death penalty and would openly advocate it, that is justifying violence but not incitement to violence. I support drone strikes on terrorists. That is justifying violence but it is not incitement to violence.

Each one of us believes there is a point where violence, even lethal violence, is justified. Examining where that point should be is an interesting topic. We naturally recoil from Uthman Badar's concept of where that point should be, because we instinctively know that his reasoning will simply be a demand that everybody should adhere to the dictates of his non existent God, and that he belongs to a religion which openly treats women as chattels, not human beings.

Let the fool say what he thinks. It is an opportunity to get inside the mind of a real Muslim and figure out what motivates him. It is also an opportunity to realise how dangerous and unacceptable the Islamic religion is. The claim recently made in the media that Muslim leaders are criticising Badar for his intended speech can be taken two ways. It could be genuine, but I doubt it, and there is a way to check.

Unless our "Australian" Imams firmly and openly reject Jihad, Sharia Law, the murder of Muslim apostates, genital mutilation of female Muslims girls, and child bride marriages, then I think we can deduce that this criticism is not genuine, and it is simply a PR stunt meant to reduce criticism of the Islamic faith, because of a fear by Muslims leaders that western people are finally waking to the fact that Muslims are dangerous and their beliefs are incompatible with a western democracy. That includes free speech. Muslims do not believe in free speech. We do. We are better than them because of it. And our society is better than theirs because we can examine all opinions dispassionately and base our conclusions on critical thinking.

BOY/THE BOYS ARE hot today

<<Muslims do not believe in free speech. We do.>,,

this is the royal 'we of course?
as in the general/name/IE THE TRADEMARK
[like mulsim/jew/enron-worker/tax avoiding corperation reaping win-fal
STATES/DEAD CORPWERATE ENTITIES SERVING THE DEAD WITH THE LIFE FORCES;BLOOD OF THE LIVING
WE CREATED A VAST CLAY goolum/monster/consuming humanity
http://nwo-patriot-link-news.blogspot.com/2014/07/how-corporations-became-people-you-cant.html


and yes/those/with shares[in these dead sySTEMS]<<We are better than them because of it.>>

TOO CLEVER BY HALF/THE PRIESTLY CLASS

And our beastly/priestly secular corperte state/society is better than theirs..because we[DEAD CORPERATE IDENTITY/can examine all opinions dispassionately./Oand base our conclusions on critical thinking..for maximal return/for minimul effort./credit due[we]/failure blamed on me

bet/wildly/put the winning bets/in your name
the loosing bets in my debt..too clever by far

press propaganda/spin merchants/and
dumbing down education/spiritual evolution\we search
you hide/we reveal/the firm conceals/yet all shall be revealed/reviled/who truthed/who d=lied

only the dead are cast without blame
demons took gods gift of life from them[its not we who meed explain.its youl;few elite

TRUTH/FACTUAL ACCES/GOOGLE SEARCH/exclusions/are working wonders[for the dead corperate states/looting the last cent/for an exclusive 144,000/who think they run things

lol

HA HA
all the bills fall over due
the dew lays heavily on the grass
reveal the true cost/reveal the true due.too.

LEGO,

That would require a free flow of information, an exemption from the anti discrimination laws and round the clock police protection for the people who speak out or try to debate Muslims.

Who is the spiritual leader and spokesman of the "moderate" Muslims?
It's not possible to debate Muslims or to show how stupid their ideas are because they don't listen and the state and the Dhimmis will shield Muslims from any criticism while hunting down and beating up or prosecuting the dissenters.
Anyone who seriously tried to oppose the fundamentalists would be jailed or killed,the Koran is quite clear on how dissent or opposition to Islam is to be dealt with, Theo Van Gogh spoke out and was dealt with accordingly.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/famous/theo_van_gogh/index.html

Harry's Place has a good piece on this topic, featuring Badir...

http://hurryupharry.org/2014/06/30/defending-the-indefensible-honour-killings-and-the-limits-of-free-speech/

Quote: ...the organisation of which Badar is a spokesman seeks the imposition of a totalitarian medieval Caliphate in which dissent is crushed, homosexuality and apostasy are punished by death, women and non-Muslims are subjugated, adulterers are stoned, murderers are publicly crucified, and thieves have their limbs amputated.

The West is doomed. The fact that people can actually justify and promote a man that holds these vile, brutal views -- done in the name of diversity and tolerance -- is a sign of how low our culture and society have become.

Oh yes, another quote... The Festival of Dangerous Ideas are not of course obliged to provide a platform to views like these. But when organisations do, they should not be criticised unless they affirm endorsement. Bring the advocates of honour violence forward. Let them explain why women must be made to bear the honour of their family, while men are excused responsibility. And why this burden of honour necessarily requires women to forfeit their autonomy. And why they must pay with their lives if they resist. It may then become clearer to those disinclined to criticise any culture but their own how the lives of women can be considered so cheap that families are able to murder their own mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters without the disturbance of conscience.

Badar has no problem with killing, if 'justified' by culture or religion....