Grateful you say my views are "Bigotry" whereas I suppose yours are all pure reason? Why because you list other opinions? Just because it is printed does not mean it is correct mate.
The PC NSW coppers have a women leader who says no religion is noted but if that is the case she cannot make any other observations, can she? Please do not tell me that islamaphobia is not the first defence put up? That's all we ever hear.
Perhaps dear leader grateful you can explain, or excuse, the signs "Behead all those that insult the prophet".
These rubbish people rarely work, bludge off our system and sook and whine about how horrible we are to them.
You can take mount your winged horse and fly off to heaven and your imaginary super hero as muhhamed did. Check out those sources matey and then knock on my door!

"Why because you list other opinions? Just because it is printed does not mean it is correct mate."

Of course not. Their opinions are base on decades of peer reviewed research. Yours are not. Not all opinions are born equal.

SM writes:

"The Oxford History of Islam is linked to Oxford because it gives a discount to students of an INDEPENDENT center for Islamic studies, which is itself only loosely associated with Oxford university."

Shadow Minister, you now admit an association whereas before you accused me of lying on the basis that there was NO association. Apology?

You ask that i look up the definition of oppression. According to Merriam-Webster oppression is "unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power"

The form of "system and institutionalised discrimination" allowed by Islamic law took the form of a tax levied on adult non-Muslim males that were sane and without disabilities because they were exempt from military service. If they chose military service then they would be exempt from the tax. That's cruel?!

Those who are not serving in the Australian military pay more tax than those who are, so it sounds reasonable to me.

You have no more cards to play. It is time for you to admit you were mistaken. Lewis refutes your statement that "Islam was spread by the sword in exactly the same way that Christianity was" and you have accepted Lewis as an authority.

As a reminder this is what Lewis says:

“ Persecution, that is to say, violent and active repression, was rare and atypical. Jews and Christians under Muslim rule were not normally called upon to suffer martyrdom for their faith. They were not often obliged to make the choice, which confronted Muslims and Jews in reconquered Spain, between exile, apostasy, and death. They were not subject to any major territorial or occupational restrictions, such as were the common lot of Jews in premodern Europe. There are some exceptions to these statements, but they do not affect the broad pattern until comparatively modern times and even then only in special areas, periods, and cases."

Grateful,

A tenuous link does not make an association, so no apology or retraction, in fact you have show no association or any form of co operative endeavour, and should apologise for lying.

Muslims conquered territory by force, they converted churches to Mosques, they restricted the practice of other faiths, punished by death any perceived "blasphemy" against Islam, and imposed punitive taxes on them, and restricted in their employment opportunities. This is not in dispute.

There also is no dispute that while rare, massacres of and violence against non muslims did occur. While conversion was not forced, failure to convert carried a heavy penalty.

The spread of Islam in the middle ages was very similar to the spread of Christianity, the difference is that the rest of the world has evolved.