The fact about the culprit, “just another convicted felon” rightly called by the Author , wanted for crimes in the country of his origin and involved in some 40 crimes in Australia, is that he represents none other than the Criminal Mind which motivated him. Trying a faith as a culprit, for the act of a criminal mind, is a tendency we need to watch against. Few of the responses in this post confirm the fears the Author appears to have.

Without trying to make it a debate, I will restrict my post to that great soul known as “Muhammad”, who too has been spoken of disrespectfully. Knowing that the Australians are rational people who prefer facts over slander, I draw your attention to the fact that a detailed view of the history, not the one-liners thrown around, provide the insight one needs.

Fortunately there is a wealth of literature, mostly by Westerners, discovering this wonderful person. It is happening since about a century now after a long period of misinformation that flooded the post-crusade Europe. You may want to start with Karen Armstrong’s “Muhammad”- a 256 page book by someone who does not prescribe to any religion.

As an alternative to your own study, let me share with you, for starters (will post more, if discussion progresses), what Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881) had to say (in his book: Heroes and Hero Worship)

“The lies which well-meaning zeal has heaped around this man (Muhammad) are so disgraceful to ourselves only. …. How one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilised nation in less than two decades …A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so”

NC, rather than read the hadith (Bukhari, Muslim, Abu-Dawud, Malik, etc..) or the early histories (Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Sad, Tabari, Kathir, Hisham, etc…), all written by Muslims, you use modern sanitized versions to make your point. How scrupulous and honorable!

The fact is that a large part of the original accounts are about Mohammad’s ruthless wars on his neighbors. If you lived within 800km of Medina in the 7thcentury, you could expect Mohammad to attack your village, loot, kill, rape, torture if required to find booty and then the captives, -- men, women and children – would be divided among the Muslims as slaves.

A few quotes from these sources:

Narrated Humaid: Anas bin Malik said, "Whenever the Prophet went out with us to fight against any nation, he never allowed us to attack till morning and he would wait and see: if he heard Adhan he would postpone the attack and if he did not hear Adhan he would attack them." (Bukhari Volume1-Book 11-Number 584)

How many a township have we destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them. (Quran 7:4)

…Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy). (Bukhari 4:52:220)

And there is this jewel: Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas: “A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet… So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it” – and it was fine and dandy with him (Abu Dawud 38:4348). And don’t forget Asma bint Marwan, a nursing mother killed by Mohammed because of her poetry

This “wonderful” person, this noble example, Mohammad, committed all kinds of atrocities, massacred whole tribes, tortured people, raped women, and even beat his wife – that is what all Islamic sources say.

How about a little honesty, NC?

NC,

He stuck an Islamic flag in the window. He called himself a sheikh. He had recently proclaimed his allegiance to ISIS. He used the usual psychotic cop-out, when the police responded to his murder of two hostages: "See what you made me do !"

This raises questions: do Muslims, i.e. devout Muslims, have a concept of guilt ? Only of being victimised ? Do they think they can do no wrong, it's just the world picking on them ?

Do they have a concept of compassion for non-believers ? Silly question. But does the Koran have anything in it comparable to the Good Samaritan story, i.e. compassion for one who is not one's own ?

I suppose, as a kaffir, much of this is not my affair. It will be up to Muslims to clean out the psychotics from their midst before they do much more damage. They owe that to their fellow Australians.

Joe

Another thing, NC, when Muslim radicals, ISIS, the Taliban, Boko Haram, etc. cite scripture to justify their actions, they refer to the Quran, hadith and usually Tabari -- not Armstrong or Carlyle.’

But maybe your approach has its merits. We can have Armstrong’s and Carlyle’s writings on the subject translated into Arabic, Urdu, Pashto, Hausa, Swahili and then drop thousands of them into the camps of those mistakenly referred to as ‘terrorists’. Then, who knows, in two or three weeks, Ahmed might just be saying something like this to Omar: “Hey man, we were doing it wrong, ever since those new revelations arrived we now know that Islam promotes peace and tolerance”.

I think it is worth a try and maybe there will be a Nobel in our future. No, wait, you can have it all yourself. Peace at long last may be at hand and it was your idea and you deserve credit.

Kactus and JKJ have done an excellent job of summing up the truth and pointing out the roots of the problem. Their posts on this thread should be required reading at the ABC.

How the apologists continue to believe there is not a Muslim/Islamic problem is beyond belief. Any bets on them also blaming the latest Taliban attack in Pakistan on the West? Oh wait, the Taliban are not really Muslims either, they are just calling themselves Muslim.

I agree NC and thank you for sharing

If I want a medical opinion I will go to a doctor not a chimney sweeper.
Respected historians and social scientists unequivocally stand in awe and humility of that great soul. No wonder he is still honoured in the most powerful buildings in this world, even though they are on different sides of politics- the author mentioned the US Supreme Court and US congress.

Your right Australians are very decent people, but what your dealing with here is a blood thirsty medieval mob. They use outdated oral traditions out of context rejected by authentic Islam and fail to even quote correctly the verses of the Quran, how they managed to slip the word "raid" and "terror" into 7:4 is beyond any decent Australian, but I don't think your dealing with decent Australian's here.

My faith in this nation tells me it's probably one or two individuals changing their nicknames - Australia is too great to be represented by such chimney sweepers and if you wrestle with a chimney sweeper you are bound to get dirty.

Still nothing to refute the arguments in the article just red herrings and character assassinations