generally those who are fundamentalist secularist get it wrong. For decades the abc/progressives have deceitfully and willfully misrepresented Christ and His teaching. Now they want to label and demonise anyone disagreeing with their heretical view of Islam. Well I suppose all truth is relative to the secularist so who says what the monster in Martin place did was wrong. Oh that's right moral relativism only applies to justfying ones own perverted views and behaviour.

One day I hope that mass media will start publishing productive pieces like this rather than throwing petrol on the fire.

Not a bad piece

Dear bigots
The author has referred to those lunatics that call themselves Muslims spreading terror as a cancer to humanity, infinitely stupid, heretical and blasphemous - not sure what more you want short of more blood.

Seems you resort to filthy ad homonym tactics and red herrings, because you have no real argument. You attempt character assassinations by purposely misinterpreting the author's previous articles and cutting and pasting fabricated stories that 99.99 % of Muslims overtly discount. The coincidence is not the murky background of the killer, was he Shia, was he Sunni or a self confessed practitioner of black magic. What is certain is that he was deranged, he was a criminal and he was publicity hungry. The coincidence is not that he called himself Muslim (this time) but the coincidence is that the Perth hostage crises lasted for only moments and the 2011 Adelaide siege which claimed more blood barley touched our TV screens and has now become a distant memory, this tragedy will be a political football for votes and foreign policy. It would be stupid to ask good Anglo Australians to apologies for the deranged killer of the 2011 Adelaide Siege, but you have no problem putting an entire religion on trial for the crimes of a deranged convict, who changed his religion as often as one changes socks.

theHypocrisy,

He changed his religion did he?

Reference please.

theHypocrisy

Does the Koran sanction the killing of unbelievers, or not?
Does the Koran sanction slavery and the rape of slave women, or not?
Did Mohammad marry a six-year old girl, or not?

Left-wing apologetic garbage. The author spends the vast majority of the article making out he and his wife and others of the same religious affiliation are the real victims here. What about those in the cafe? They got one sentence. Can the left ever stand back for a moment and not stick their metaphysical victimhood theories into everything?