It never ever was! Not when it was a nazi phenomena aimed at hapless Jews. Nor kurds who were unfortunate enough to find themselves Homeless in Turkey! Nor Australian Aborigines, in their own country, with the advent of forced white settlement?

It doesn't take intelligence to be a racist, just an IQ roughly equal to the current ambient temperature.

We've always been afflicted with this element and exemplified as white supremacists, the KKK, apartheid and religious intolerance from time immemorial?

When a single child throws a rotten egg at the head? Do we punish the whole school? No, we find and chastised the actual culprit!

Racists, Homophobes and fanatical fundamentalists are easily led nincompoops, with no capacity to think for themselves or know right from wrong, which incidentally, is clinical proof of insanity!

And to think, some of us allow ourselves to be guided by this mad hatter's reverse idolatry and entirely counterproductive labeling?
Alan B.

Comparing ritualistic, encouraged, Islamic 'honour' killings with domestic violence, undoubtably at least as common in Muslim society, but covered up, is unbelievably stupid.

As for Sonia Kruger, she is entitled to say what she did in Australia, and good luck to her for doing so.

As for this person's attitude to who is entitled to "a privileged first world lifestyle", it is the people who built the society, not recently arrived Muslims from backward societies or any other recently arrived immigrants who have contributed nothing to what they are enjoying at our expense. And the gall of the man, suggesting that native born Australians who don't like the way the country is heading should "try their luck elsewhere". And, sorry pal, but people born here DO get a "free pass".

"We do not have to forgive Sonia". There is nothing to forgive, you arrogant fascist. The "xenophobia" is all yours, and it is you who should try your luck with your big mouth elsewhere.

'Pointing out the unfairness of Sonia’s comments doesn’t impinge on her free speech. She still has a spot on national television, if not the intellect to warrant it.'

the abusive privileged dumbed down lecturers at our unis are as much to blame for the uprising of Hanson than anyone else. The simple maths is that if we accept larger numbers of muslims we accept larger number of terrorist. How anyone with half a brain can't realise this defies belief. If Dilan is happy for us to become like France well at least let people have a say without his ignorant propaganda. I would suggest Somia's intellect is at least equivalent to yours Dilan.

I note Dilan says these are his personal views. No doubt such consensus thinking among the polictical class will ensure your job is safe and you will be a candidate for the drum in order to insult anyone prepared think think differently from you. Such humility!

I'm totally insulted by this article...
This guy will be lucky if I don't unleash in a way I've never spoken on this forum before and earn my first 'removed comment' on this site.
It would be worth it. I'm livid.

Dilan,

I’d like to examine your statement here in light of what the Quran teaches: '”Yet, it beggars belief that anybody would ascribe the actions of radical terrorists to every Muslim. Leaving aside the fact that there are major cultural differences between Muslim societies, it is simply not tenable to think that each member of the Muslim faith is a threat. The actions of a few do not define 1.6 billion people”

Muslims who take the Quran seriously know that it teaches:

Quran 4:76 (Yusuf Ali translation), ‘Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan’.

Quran 8:59-60 (Yusuf Ali translation), ‘Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them). Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly’.

Quran 48:29 (Ahmed translation),‘Muhammad is the Prophet of God; and those who are with him are severe with infidels but compassionate among themselves’.

Core Islam promotes violence to unbelievers, according to the Quran. Of course there are moderate Muslims in Australia and elseqhere, but what will it take to turn them into what the Quran says they ought to be doing according to Quran 8:59-60? So, each member of the Muslim faith is not a threat? That’s only as long as they remain moderate Muslims and do not take the Quran seriously.

@OzSpen
Exodus:23:24
Number 16:1-35
2 John:10

and there is lots more, if you want to play my holly book is dumber then yours then Christians and Muslims will be playing a long time. Particularly if you take it seriously.

To the Author I think you've missed the point, There are not many thinking people who think all Muslims are bad. There are not many thinking people who think that we should punish the wrong doers and not the collective.
However you have to acknowledge that at some point we will have to consider all of the options we have to protect ourselves.

During war we have had to intern people who may have caused us harm, Was it fair on those people, probably not most would not have caused a problem. Was it effective in reducing the treat, yes. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

The two main factions of Islam have hated each other for nearly as long as the religion has existed. the solution to the problem lies within the Muslim community. Muslim need to stop blaming westerners and take a good hard look at themselves. They need focus inward at their beliefs, and be honest about the Islams current ability to function in a modern democracy.
While Indonesia is making good strides the reality is their is not a single Islamic country that comes even close to a western country for
multicultural tolerance and the rule of law.
us evil white westerners may not be prefect but we have created places were people are freer and happier then anywhere where Islam dominates.

You need to come to terms with that reality, stop blaming whitey.

This condescending abuse by a University Senior Lecturer in Law of her supporters will only increase support for Hansonism. More alarming, it is a covert attack on the right of free speech, the foundation our democracy, under the guise of combating “brainless xenophobia”. Unlike the many millions of immigrants who helped build Australia and became dinkum Aussies since 1945, “you’re not one of us'.”

This academic, of dusky hue, clearly does not know his place.

Pass the port, what!

A pretty brainless article. I do not believe that Sonia Kruger was saying all Muslims are a threat. And I'm sure the author knows that too, but prefers to distort her words. In all the horrible terrorist attacks we have seen over the past two or three years in Western countries, there has been a common thread. Every one was carried out by a Muslim.
What is more disturbing is that many of the perpetrators were either native born or at least citizens. this is particularly disturbing as it shows that its not just Muslim immigrants that may pose a threat to our societies, but their children or even grandchildren. So while the immigrants themselves may not be a danger, the religion they instill in their children may in very rare cases lead to those children killing large numbers of fellow Australians.
I disagree with banning Muslim immigration myself. However, it is not an unreasonable position for someone to take who is concerned they we may be importing a huge problem in the future.

In addition, equating harassment of someone wearing burka with the mass murder of large numbers of civilians is just disgraceful. Likewise equating the banning of certain immigrants with the nazi genocide is equally disgraceful. This man is dishonest, and by supporting his arguments with insults about other peoples intellect shows he lacks the necessary intellect himself to formulate a proper argument.

'. Unlike the many millions of immigrants who helped build Australia and became dinkum Aussies since 1945, “you’re not one of us'.'

well said Leslie, the problem is that no doubt a hero among the political class. They more than anyone have produced Brexit and Trump.

Sonia said she felt unsafe, and telling Australians that they are racist for feeling unsafe is exactly the reason that Pauline Hanson did so well.

" honour killings in countries like Pakistan might not actually be greatly dissimilar in substance to all the other intimate partner and family killings"

That's not the point is it? The real test is how a society punishes the man who commits the 'honour killing'. I'll bet that he would be treated leniently in majority Muslim countries compared to the West. The author is really drawing a longbow here.

"On occasion they have wondered whether there was anything unique about German society that made Hitler and Nazism possible."

"Comments like Kruger’s, the support it drew, the rise of Trump and now the odious re-emergence of Hanson, suggests otherwise."

Nonsense, comparing modern Australia and Nazi Germany is total nonsense, most Muslim countries have far more in common with Nazi Germany than modern Australia. One of the apologists' last hopes for secular Islam, Turkey, is sliding into dictatorship, xenophobia and racism.

I don't support Sonia Kruger's comments, however let's get some perspective, Australia is not in danger of fascism.

Ha! Hilarious! The author chastises people for their concerns over Muslim immigrants then wonders if Hanson's followers, presumably all 400,000 of them might be better off leaving the country.

Dilan, if neo-Nazis killed over 200 people in Bali, 3000 people in New York, 84 people in Nice, 49 in Orlando, 35 in Brussels, 150 in Paris, 166 in Mumbai, 191 in Madrid, 14 in San Bernadino, plus many, many other murderous attacks all around the world, you can bet that ALL Nazis would be condemned to hell and back.

Especially if it could be displayed that Mein Kampf had 150 passages in it ordering Nazis to "Kill the people who do not have blue eyes and blond hair, wherever you find them." "Lay ambushes for them." "Strike terror into their hearts." 'Cut off their fingers." Strike off their heads." Cut off an arm and a leg from opposite sides of the body." 'Take their women for sex slaves."

And especially, if Mein Kampf declared that the greatest Nazis were those who got themselves killed fighting for Nazism, and the "moderate" Nazis never refuted that.

Of course, the "moderate" Nazis could claim that they should not be blamed for the Nazi violence, if they proposed that all the terrorism was caused by a tiny fringe called "Nazi-ists", who the "moderate" Nazis condemned, and whom they considered to be a disgrace to Nazism. And some people might even believe them, provided that the "moderate" Nazi leaders unequivocally condemned the actions of the "Naz-ists" without trying to blame the victims of Nazi violence. And they must immediately do it every time another 'Naz-ist" massacre occurred.

And they should do one other thing, Dilan. They should unreservedly condemn those passages in Mein Kampf which orders Nazis to attack, mutilate, and rape non Nazis. And if they can't do it, or they won't do it, because these passages are the spoken word of the beloved Fuhrer which can never be contradicted, then Dilan, then they are just as guilty as the "Nazi-ist" terrorists they pretend they don't support.

When "moderate Muslim" Waleed Ali and yourself condemns all of those passages in the Koran that are totally offensive, and which instruct Muslims to kill non Muslims, I might start to take you and Waleed seriously.

What this author has written is just rubbish.

I fully support Pauline's and Sonya's view that muslim immigration should be stopped. I also desire a 'net zero' policy for immigration generally, including refugee entry.

My views were not formed by xenophobia or racism, but by taking a hard look at what can be done to promote community cohesiveness and lower the risk of terrorist attack. If 15-25% of muslims hold views that do not respect our laws and society norms, it is quite reasonable to expect that the more muslims there are in our country the greater the risk of an attack and less community cohesiveness.

Now if anyone can put forward another means of achieving greater safety I would like to hear it.

No pro muslim advocate has yet put forward any practical suggestion.

Shadow Minister,
You said. "Sonia said she felt unsafe, and telling Australians that they are racist for feeling unsafe is exactly the reason that Pauline Hanson did so well".

I submit the reason is a little more than that. What about the fact that neither major party will talk about or debate immigration policy at all? People are concerned about multiculturalism and related things like crime rates by refugees in Melbourne, and so on. But governments, both state and federal simply ignore the issues.

Politicians need to realize that these issues are important to the general public and the matters need to be addressed. Tell your political mates.

This article is hysterical, name calling, irrational, rubbish.

If you keep putting a certain breed of roosters in the chicken coop
and some of these roosters keep killing the chickens, but you
dont know in advance which roosters amongst them will kill.
You dont keep bringing them into the chicken coop.To do so is simply
not logical and worse, stupid.

It is just plain common sense.
This is what Ms Kruger said.

People who resort to name calling are often the ones who have no rational
argument.

Those crying Islamaphobia,xenophobia,bigot, racist, call names because they
are the last resort of those who usually are wrong and have no rational answers to
obvious truths

The author apparently hasn't read the koran - those of us that have are understandably worried, not "xenophobic"

The re4al worry is that we are paying this clown to teach LAW to our kids. Talk about naïve.

This article was not meant for us Australians. It was meant for the author's coterie of mates so he can skite at what a hero he is. Why would he care about ignorant, unwashed white people?
For goodness sake OLO's do not respond in kind because that is a criminal offence. The coppers will be onto you like blowflies on horse dung lol!
This sort of racist insult is allowed only if you are not white.
Why not go to Turkey Dillian? You will fit right in there. Erdogan is about to turn a democratic society into an islamic state. Sharia law persecution and murder await non-muslims. Have a think about this Dillian and see whether stopping muslims would be such a bad idea. Australia thinks differently to you.

Cobberthehound (Friday),

You quote: '@OzSpen
Exodus:23:24
Number 16:1-35
2 John:10

and there is lots more, if you want to play my holly book is dumber then yours then Christians and Muslims will be playing a long time. Particularly if you take it seriously'.

Anyone can cherry-pick verses and the first 2 you have given from Exodus and Numbers (by the way, you couldn't even name it correctly as Numbers) are examples of God's judgment. There is more of that to come in the final judgment. See Matthew 25:31-46. You obviously don't like the idea of God's judgment against the ungodly, but honesty with the biblical text requires acknowledgement of it.

As for 2 John 10, 'If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting'. You have created a straw man fallacy of Christianity. The verse from 2 John is a country mile from the message of the Quran verses I quoted that promote the extermination of unbelievers in Islam.

It's time that you got honest with dealing accurately with the content of what I wrote in my comment.

Graham we really do need a few less articles by special, & vested interest people, with funny names.

I fear too many of them could ultimately make me as Xenophobic, as they are.

One can only take so much lecturing by blow ins, before one becomes less tolerant. Hell we could become almost as bad as they are.

A well constructed article Dilan, but I don't feel as despondent as you do about the levels of xenophobia in Australian society. You must remember that only 500,000 Australians voted for Hanson's mad party, out of so many millions of other voters who did not.

"Nobody is denying that there is a problem with radical Islam. Nobody is unconcerned by ISIS. Every decent person is immensely saddened by what happened in Nice.
Yet, it beggars belief that anybody would ascribe the actions of radical terrorists to every Muslim. Leaving aside the fact that there are major cultural differences between Muslim societies, it is simply not tenable to think that each member of the Muslim faith is a threat. The actions of a few do not define 1.6 billion people."

Absolutely true! I felt these very wise and true words were worth repeating on what is a largely a forum populated by far right xenophobes. However, no one can ever change their minds Dilan, although I do occasionally get a laugh reading their childishly scared rantings about those nasty terrorists supposedly lurking around every corner of our country...

This is a highly insulting and disrespectful article.

It is noticed that no apology has been issued by the author.

There appears to be disagreement among some Muslims as to who should stay in Australia, and who should go.

In an article by Br. Amir Abdullah, he describes Muslims as being 'fresh clear spring water', while non-Muslims living in Australia are 'water brought up from the bottom of a suburban sewer'

http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/preserveident.htm

In that article, Br. Amir Abdullah suggests Muslims leave Australia (or they could be corrupted and made impure by the 'suburban sewer' of non-Muslims).

While in this article, Dilan Thampapillai suggests that non-Muslims leave Australia, and Muslims remain behind in Australia.

This matter of who should stay and who should go will have to be sorted out between Muslims shortly.

Of course, most Muslim gulf countries are not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention, and these countries take in few or no refugees, whether they are Muslim refugees or not.

Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait do allow in non-Muslims as non-permanent residents, although no churches or non-Muslim religious structures can be built, and any non-Muslim religions services must be held in private homes only, and cannot be seen by Muslims.

And ironically, Saudi Arabia has recently finished building a 600 mile long wall, to keep out Muslims.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/11344116/Revealed-Saudi-Arabias-Great-Wall-to-keep-out-Isil.html

Around 23 Muslim countries regard apostasy (leaving Islam) as a criminal offense, and the punishments can include a jail term, whipping and execution.

But all this is rarely mentioned or complained about by Muslims in Australia, and instead, people such as the author want to spend their time insulting members of the Australian public.

Because of this article, the author can now be assured that the ONE NATION political party has at least one more vote in the next federal election, and in next QLD state election.

There are more, than 500,000 voters, who think putting a limit on muslim immigration
is a sensible idea. they are just died in the wool, Liberal and Labour voters

The people who would actually like to see a ban on muslim immigration until
the terrorist attacks stop would, actually number in the millions.

Terrorists have turned so called moderate muslims into the quintessential,
Trojan Horse. Given this fact, you simply do not keep bringing the Trojan
Horses into Western countries.

The muslims need to blame those amongst them who have turned them into
Trojan horses, it is in no way the responsibility of Western nations to
reign these killers, in their midst, in.
The fact that they keep blaming Western citizens by talking about marginalisation,
(blaming the victims for their own deaths), does not induce trust in their
claims of being moderate.

Interactive "While in this article, Dilan Thampapillai suggests that non-Muslims leave Australia, and Muslims remain behind in Australia"

Really? Exactly where in this article has the author suggested this Interactive?
If an article such as this is all it takes to turn you towards the mad One Nation party, then good luck to you.

Wow. What an intelectual..

Chuckle.

Thanks for making Sonias case.

Over in WA there is an argument that culling sharks near beaches would stop so many people getting eaten. Greens won the day so the only sure alternative was not entering the water.

Culling Muslim migration would result in fewer deaths by Islamic terrorism. The only sure alternative would be not to leave the house, maybe.

Acknowledging simple statistics is not xenophobia, Suse, and doing so does not mean one thinks that each member of the Muslim faith is a threat.

The importation of both "moderate" and "immoderate" Muslims into Australia has seen....

A very high rate of violent crime among Muslim men, especially in the areas of drug trafficking, firearms offences, and the sexual assault.

A high incidence of welfare dependency,

Demands for social exclusion and exemptions from the common law.

Demands from "moderate" Muslim organisation for Sharia Law, and for exemptions for Muslims from voting, as democracy is "against Islam."

Attacks on churches and synagogues.

Terrorism.

The phenomenon of “white flight” from areas of high Muslim infestation because of Muslim intimidation of Australians in what Muslims regard as "Muslim" suburbs. Next will come "Muslim" patrols and "no go" areas where even the police will fear to enter.

The refusal of many teachers (especially female teachers) to work in schools with high Muslim student numbers because of their violent and misogynistic behaviour.

The provision of security guards in Sydney's public schools to protect staff and other students from violent Muslim boys.

Private school student numbers soaring as parents in Muslim areas protect their kids by getting them away from public schools full of violent Muslims boys.

The refusal by Muslim drivers to allow blind people with seeing eye dogs or passengers carrying alcohol to enter their cabs.

The fortification of every vital government department with steel gates and security guards (who are usually Muslims anyway).

Passengers on domestic flights having their bags checked for bombs.

Girls in bikinis on Sydney beaches having to put up with mobs of Muslim men wandering around the beaches making offensive remarks to them.

The necessity for armed guards on Jewish schools.

The elected head of the Australian Islamic Council telling Turnbull at a social event that homosexuals should be executed.

The repeal of Freedom of Speech in Australia because former Attorney general Nicola Roxon was worried about Muslims going crazy and killing someone over that person criticising their violent religion.

And Susioncrack and Poirot have to worry when they go for a night out in Sydney, whether they can get into a taxi with a Muslim driver without getting raped.

The Muslims are 'culling' themselves. Demographers have found that, although the world's population has had an alarming rise, by the middle to end of this century, the population will be a fifth lower than it is now, due to drastically lowering fertility rates.

And the big surprise is that Muslim countries have the highest fertility slump in the world. Iran, in fact is not even replacing itself. The previous president of Iran knew this and took time off calling for the destruction of Israel to exhort Iran's young women to have more children. After that, the demand for contraception rose 60-70%, demonstrating just what the young ladies of Iran thought of that idea. Besides, there are 300,000 prostitutes in Tehran alone, many of them well educated women (thanks to the system set up by the deposed Shah, and left alone by the Mad Mullahs) because they cannot find employment.

Why would people want 7 children to look after them in their old age when their will be no employment for children, the Islamic system not being conducive to growth and employment.

I think the author has taken what Sonya Kruger actually said, way out of context, to suit his own agenda. Kruger had responded to a point that Japan has no problem with terrorists, as they haven't taken in a whole lot of Muslim migrants. That is in fact true and cannot be denied.

In the last 25 years or so, Australia has dramatically increased its intake of Muslims, so that their population has grown from 80'000 to half a million. There is talk of continuing this intake, which would see a dramatic rise of the Muslim population in Australia, given th fact that they also have a higher birth rate than non Muslim Australians. So the valid question arises, do we really want the same problems as France, Holland, Belgium and all the rest?

We already face a substantial anti terrorism cost, this with only 2% of our population being Muslim. It stands to reason that this would skyrocket, as their % increases.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has written a great book about what Muslims need to do, to resolve the conflicts which Islam has with the West and solve the problems arising, from Muslims wanting to live in the West. She does so with a wealth of knowledge and expertise behind her and it would pay anyone who claims to be a thinker, to read what she has written on on the subject.

OzSpen quotes from the Qur’an the following verse to argue “core Islam promotes violence to unbelievers”

Quran 4:76 (Yusuf Ali translation), ‘Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan’.

What is missing is justification for OzSpen's interpretation (or what would be called tafsir in Islamic jurisprudence).

Muslims take their teachings, and in particular tafsir, from ulema (scholars) because the rest of us simply do not have the knowledge of the quran, of the historical context in which verses were revealed and of how the Prophet interpreted and responded to them. This is what is required to interpret verses such as 4:76 and what constitutes the 'teachings of Islam'.

Muslims, or non-Muslims, who do not take their interpretation from the ulema such as Mufti Shafi Usmani (whose tafsir I’ll be using) will lead themselves and others astray.

When the Mufti Usmani quotes the verse 4:76 in his tafsir, he combines it with the preceding verse (4:75) as follows:

What has happened to you that you do not fight in the way of Allah and for the oppressed among men, women and children who say, "Our Lord, take us out from this town whose people are cruel. And make for us from Your own a supporter, and make for us from Your own a helper." [75] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah and those who disbelieve fight in the way of right? So, fight the friends of Satan. No doubt, the guile of Satan is feeble. [76]

The town referenced is Mecca. The Mufti’s tafsir, or interpretation, is as follows:

cont...

Susanonline

To answer your question regards the author suggesting that ONE NATION voters leave Australia, it is contained within:

"It does make me wonder, if they increasingly don’t like this country and the direction that it is headed in, then why don’t they just move and try their luck elsewhere"

This is opposite to the article by Br. Amir Abdullah, in which he suggests that Muslims leave Australia.

"If we have it within our means we should therefore consider moving to a Muslim land whereby we can at least live amongst our brethren and within an Islamic society free from the contamination of the disbelievers."

http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/preserveident.htm

This suggestion by Br. Amir Abdullah in his article comes after he laments that Muslims in Australia are being corrupted by a 'Kuffar' education system

For example:

"The children are placed in an environment where the mixing of sexes is not only tolerated but encouraged through the placement of children in multi-gender sporting teams and class groups. These children grow up to believe such behaviour is normal."

And:

"Every subject taught to the Muslim has a hidden agenda - to foster disbelief and moral decline."

I wonder if the Australian National University also has mixed classes and teaches moral decline?

He also laments the news media:

"The news provides us with an insight into the world around us. A world where Mujahideen are called 'terrorists', where the Straight Path is called ' Islamic fundamentalism',"

He also laments having to mix with non-Muslims:

"Furthermore, the best protection is to keep amongst other Muslims. Whilst it is a necessity for some contact with the Kuffar, we should limit it to the bare minimum and make sincere efforts to offset it with contact with other Muslims."

So there could be conflict and argument occurring within the Muslim community as to whether they should attempt integration, or remain separate and isolated...or leave Australia.

cont..

The Mufti’s tafsir, or interpretation, is as follows:

“Left behind in Makkah were Muslims who were unable to migrate because of physical weakness and insufficiency of resources. Later on, the disbelievers themselves stopped them from going and started hurting and harassing them in all sorts of ways so that they turn away from their faith in Islam. The names of some of these are preserved in exegetic works, for example, Sayyidna Ibn 'Abbas and his mother, Sulyma ibn Risham, Walid ibn Walid and AbL Jandal ibn Sahl, may Allah be pleased with them all (Qurtubi). These blessed people kept facing tyranny and torture because of their unflinching faith showing no signs that they would ever surrender their firm stand on Islam. However, they did continue praying to Allah Almighty for deliverance from this hard life which was finally accepted by Him when He commanded Muslims to wage Jihad against the disbelievers and rescue the oppressed from their coercion and persecution.”
Source: Maariful Quran by Mufti Shafi Usmani, p502, https://ia802707.us.archive.org/2/items/maarifulquran-english-pdf/MaarifulquranEnglishPdf-Vol2-Page001-672ByMuftiShafiUsmaniRah.pdf

So in this verse the fight is against those “oppressed among men, women and children” by a ruler of a properly constituted government. No such war has been declared (in fact Muslim governments have declared war on ISIS!) and even if it had this would not provide justification for Muslims committing acts of violence against non-Muslims whether in Muslim of non-Muslims lands.

For the Sharia rulings relating to acts of aggression of Muslims towards non-Muslims, read “Chapter 10 Muslims in Non-Muslim countries” and “Chapter 11 Non-Muslims in Muslim countries” of “Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of Its Religious and Ideological Foundations”, by Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi.
https://ia601307.us.archive.org/13/items/RefutingISIS/Refuting%20ISIS.pdf.

In short, for numerous reasons these acts of violence committed in the name of Islam in fact are violation of the Shariah and have no place in Islam, legally or historically.

Once again, we see the pattern developing. Those ever shrinking circle of people on OLO who are willing to go into bat for Islamic Immigration, limit themselves to superficial arguments and sneery one liners. While the ever growing numbers of people on OLO who oppose Islamic immigration, submit long and detailed reasons why Islamic immigration into western societies must be banned.

Analysing the superficial arguments of those who see nothing wrong with Islamic immigration, their arguments seem to be based upon a particular philosophy. That is, that all people are basically good. It is only a few people in any society who are basically bad. Therefore, everybody from every race and culture can live together in peace and harmony if all of them just ignore the baddies in their own particular societies. 'By "baddies" that mean ISIS, the Ku Klux Klan, One Nation supporters, the Khmer Rouge, Israelis, Donald Trump, and Gert Weelders.

Of course, simply turning on the TV news every night and looking at the ethnic and religious violence going on all around the world, should dispel that 1960's flower child thinking. But some people like Susieonline seem to be trapped in a time warp.

Reality is catching up in the form of ever increasing mass murder attacks upon ordinary people in France, Germany, Brussels, London, Madrid, Sydney, and many other places around the world. We have to thank the Muslim world for displaying how stupid was the idea is that people with diametrically opposed cultural values can live together without serious social problems.

Susie is on the wrong side of history here. Her charming philosophy is out of date, and her efforts to explain to others that they must keep the faith, look more and more pathetic as time goes by. She gives the appearance of a Creationist who simply ignores the museums full of fossils that clearly display that their theories are wrong. Faith in multiculturalism is being eroded with every new terrorist outrage perpetuated by imported foreigners into western countries who took the perfectly admirable western value of tolerance way too far.

I will go to bat for further Muslim immigration, particularly single females not enamoured with their current prospects or rigid controls, or lack of personal freedom!

Just not the untested model we have now!

To be sure there are some bad and mad people in our midst, who wish and would do us harm! Not all of them are Muslim!

What we have and fail to deploy is space age lie detection technology, which when deployed, if ever? Will stop these few folk dead in their tracks, sometimes literally!

Sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, or give us an opportunity to enforce Mr Amir Abdullah's advice, and ensure these troublesome folks take up his preferred option and a one way plane ticket, as a "permanent solution" and at the earliest opportunity! Failing that, incarceration and fully tested (proven) re-education

As for non muslims who long to or would do us harm? We have other options, once of which is a frontal lobotomy and still useful life, albeit reduced to a robot status on a prison farm just following simple orders and a structured routine, for the term of a natural life?

Yes they do have rights, one of which doesn't include doing other folk lethal harm! And essentially preventable!

Imagine i.e., if we could have known what was really on Mr Bryant's moribund mind before he massacred all those entirely innocent people at Port Arthur, all those years ago!?

His attempts to obtain automatic firearms ought to have resulted in an mandatory red flag and obligatory space age lie detection testing, followed by a frontal lobotomy!

An ounce of prevention being worth a ton of cure! Not done by the simplistic notion of removing certain categories of firearms, and just not doable, when what we need to remove as neighbors are folks with an inherent, murderous, antisocial bent! Muslim and non Muslim!
Alan B.

STOP......For What It Is Worth

(Buffalo Springfield)

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind
It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side
It's s time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid....

Of course not all; just many.

It looks like Diver Dan is another 60's flower child who can't think past his favourite protest songs. How about Tom Lehrer, Dan? You remember.

We are the folk song army,
Everyone of us cares
We all hate poverty, war, and injustice
Unlike the rest of you squares.

Remember the war against Franco
That's the kind of place each of us belongs
Though he may have won all the battles
We had all the good songs.

Look mate, the Muslim population of Australia is 2.2% of the population, and we have enough trouble with the Muslims we have here already, without adding to their numbers. The Buddhists in Australia outnumber the Muslims and they are for the most part, fairly law abiding and not notorious for terrorism at all.

When the number's of Muslims in France was 2.2% of the population, and they were probably about as troublesome in France as they are now in Australia, all of the Divour Danii's, Poirot's, Alaine B's and Susieunlinear's in France could afford to show their moral superiority and presumed sophistication by sticking up for more Islamic immigration. But they are now starting to feel like Christian Scientists with appendicitis. Those kids who got machine gunned at the Bacalan pop festival and at Charlie Hedbo's, were all trendy lefties like you.

Get it through your impervious cranium that the highest grade of Muslim hates your guts as much as he hates Pauline Hanson. The "social progressives" in Russia, South Korea, China, Cambodia, and Cuba all cheered on the socialist armies, and then wondered why the people they championed made them did their own graves.

The one indisputable fact that non of you little flower children don't seem intelligent enough to focus upon, is that the more Muslims you have in any western country, the more terrorism, child brides, female circumcisions, sexual assaults, welfare dependency, riots, honour killings, serious criminal behaviour, and serious restrictions on traditional western traditions and personal freedoms, such as free speech.

We can't do much with the ones already here, but when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

While everyone is in the mood for some culture (double meaning intended), here is some drama, 'a kindergarten graduation party held in Gaza, courtesy of the religion of peace and Islamic Jihad movement',

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM07qFvcTE8&feature=youtu.be

Simply amazing that this writer is allowed to get away with such racist anti white rubbish. Australians are begining to see through this racism. These is a reason why these migrants come from third world countries, it is because if you put enough of them together you get a third world country.

Alan B

Allowing in Muslim women and children only is worth considering.

It would be the opposite to what has occurred in Europe, where most of the so-called asylum seekers were men.

These Muslim men had left the women and children behind.

The world is in a very precarious position at present. If Turkey collapses, millions of Muslim asylum seekers are likely to flood out of Turkey (to escape persecution by other Muslims in Turkey).

A number of European countries have now closed their borders to Muslims, and the Muslim gulf countries won't take Muslim asylum seekers (if they did want to go there anyway).

Which means that the Muslims from Turkey could head towards countries such as the US and Australia.

The US should take the lot, as the US has been behind much of the instability in the Middle East. Americans should learn that if they create instability in a country, then they must take all the refugees from that country.

But if these Muslims head for Australia, then Australia would have to have very substantial systems to ensure Australians can remain safe.

Relying on de-radicalisation programs is not good enough.

Lego has no respect for the past like myself!

I prefer the real McCoy wars with nukes....there the ones flower children are used to...remember all those unfortunate Japs? They weren't Muslims were they? We didn't get a lot of them as refugees after the war though, (maybe they were all radiated and glowed in the dark. We didn't need competition for the street lights)!
Anyway, back to Tom Lehrer. He lets history sing thus!

"And we will all go together when we go"...

Oh we will all burn together when we burn.
There'll be no need to stand and wait your turn.
When it's time for the fallout
And saint peter calls us all out,
We'll just drop our agendas and adjourn.
You will all go directly to your respective valhallas.
Go directly, do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dolla's.
And we will all go together when we go.

US INVADES EUROPE 6th June, 1944.

Seven Hundred French civilians were killed today when US Forces invaded Europe. Opposition to the invasion was running high. “We are dying for no reason” said a French citizen who spoke to reporters only on the condition of anonymity. “ I hate to say this, but life was better under Hitler.”

The invasion has caused severe environmental damage. American troops, trucks, tanks and machinery have destroyed miles of pristine French shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It is believed that the home of an endangered species, the Spineless French Frog, was destroyed in the process, threatening the species with extinction.

A representative of Greenpeace, said that his organization, which tried to prevent the invasion, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. “This is an example of how the US military destroys the environment without a second thought”, said Christine Moanmore, “and it is all about corporate greed.”

Contacted in his Manhattan condo, a member of the French Government-in-exile who fled France when disciplined soldiers of the German government occupied it, said the US invasion was all about protecting US financial interests. “Everyone knows that President Roosevelt has ties to Big Beer”, said Pierre LeWimp. “Once the German beer industry has been conquered, Roosevelt and his beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune.”

Administration supporters claimed that the aggressive US actions were based in part upon the assertions of controversial Jewish scientist Albert Einstein who has speculated that the German Government was secretly developing a so called “atomic bomb.”

Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage which could last for thousands of years. But the German leader, Adolf Hitler, has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate this weapon, even after spending two long weekends in a German beergarten looking for them.

Continued

Continued

Mistreatment of Jews at so called “concentration camps” has been rumoured but remains unproven. But many reports by "independent investigators" have surfaced that captured German soldiers were "rendered" by the Americans to allied countries for incarceration without trial. Amnesty International has denounced the US for not providing lawyers for hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, and for not specifying what crimes they committed to warrant incarceration.

Several thousand US soldiers died in the first few days of the invasion and French officials are concerned that the thousands of rotting corpses pose a serious public health risk. “The Americans should have planned for this in advance”, they said. “ It is their mess and we don’t propose to clean it up.”

It is believed that the USA also intends to invade Germany and topple the legitimate government of that country, headed by the very popular Adolph Hitler. New York Times reporter Diver Dan has demanded to know "by what right does the US think they have to invade Germany?"

LEGO,

A very good and witty illustration of how the American political mind in 2003 got itself hopelessly stuck in the situation of 1945: I indeed believe that they expected to be welcomed as liberators in Iraq in 2003 as enthusiastically - and without having to think what the liberation will do to the liberated - as they undoubtedly were in 1945 in France, Italy, etc.

A phobia is an irrational fear.
In view of recent terror attacks & the most common perpetrators, it is hardly a phobia to fear those creating most of the terror.
It is common sense to be aware & to protect ones self.

We know that most Muslims are not terrorists & are harmless.... Despite the fact that we have read the verses in the Koran which promote barbaric treatment of unbelievers.
It only took 19 to bring down the twin towers.
Russian roulette comes to mind.

To the author:

You do yourself a grave disservice in dismissing the opinion of Ms Kruger.

It matters not whether her opinion is good or bad, right or wrong; it is an opinion. As such, it can be argued for and against.

For you to dismiss her opinion on the grounds of want of intellect is rude, crude and unattractive and reveals yours to be a simple mind indeed.

simple, Buddists don't kill us and do not advocate it.
Only Islam contains those who want to take over the world and convert
the world to Islam by the sword if we refuse.
Don't want to believe it ? Go read history.
It has been so for 1400 years. Only the tactics are different now.
So what is there to argue about ?

Lego, my God, are you Walter Murdoch's ghost?

Oh, and Lego, have you ever fired a gun with a flower stuck down the muzzle? Well I have mate, and I can assure you, you will grow old gracefully and spend many fruitful hours on your hands and knees, looking for what you will never find as a youth, profound wisdom which comes with age!

At least I managed to grow out of the 1960's flower child nonsense, Diver Dan. How is it that you remained in an adolescent time warp?

Dilan Thampapillai wants Muslim immigration to Australia to continue, and he knows that Australians are beginning to wake up to the threat Islam poses. He knows that immigration and birth rate differentials will eventually conquer the west for Islam just as surely as a military invasion. And he also knows that Australians today are looking at what is happening in Europe, and feeling very uneasy about his evil religion. Comfortable and apathetic Europeans are being shocked out of their tolerant values by the hard reality that too many recently arrived Muslims really do want to terrorise Europe into submission to Islam. We in Australia can see what is happening in Europe, and those of us with any brains know it is not too late for us to ban Muslim immigration into this country. If we do not, then just like in Europe, the bad situation that we already have today will become a damned site worse.

I find it incredible that you, Poirot, Susieonline, Alain B, can turn of the TV news and see with your own eyes the consequences of your misplaced humanitarian beliefs, and still support them. Like most fanatics, you have decided that your particular ideology, one of total non racism, total non discrimination, and total tolerance, is the only one that will prevent human conflict. And when it becomes perfectly self evident that taking these virtues to extremes is causing human conflict, you put on your ideological blinkers, gaze at your navel, and refuse to look at what is happening around you. Perhaps you have never heard the saying that "insanity" is making the same mistake, over and over again?

To support your principles, you rather incredibly support the importation of a religion which is religiously racist, completely discriminatory towards non Muslims, and totally intolerant. You want to believe that "moderate" Muslims are not a problem and so you gushingly accept the platitudes that drip from Dilar Thampapillai's mouth.

Perhaps Suzie or Foxy can tell us if Islamafobia is an irrational fear
can they tell us what is a rational fear of Islam ?

What surprises me is that no women except one or two have any fear of
what Islam can mean to them.
Are they sexually attracted to the moslem men ?
Are they harking back to an earlier time when men were men and women
were women and the little woman stayed home looked after the kids and
the home and did not work after marriage.

It seems to me that women have far more to lose than we men if Islam
gets any sort of hold.
Ask the women of Norway & Sweden !

'Ask the women of Norway & Sweden !

r u talking about the blondes who are colouring their hair to reduce the chance of being raped Bazz.

My dear Lego...

I think Lego, we all have a dangerous habit of personifying abstractions, and forgetting they are only abstractions. You speak of Muslims as an homogeneous whole. Not true! You judge all Muslims based on the acts of a few renegade youth, bent on self destruction: not all that dissimilar to many youth of Australia. The difference I see is Muslim youth tend to "explode" with often dire consequences, whereas the Australian youth I most observe, tend to implode harmlessly to their surroundings, (something to be said in defence of alcohol and drugs maybe).
Maybe give the benefit of the doubt to Muslim youth, and they will settle down in time to a life of idleness akin to their Australian counterparts. A life of drug dealing, intoxicated crime spree!
Woops, here I go, personifying abstractions!

Lego....you are so passionate, I admire that!

Runner, yes I am referring to the advice police are giving women in
Norway & Sweden to reduce the risk of being raped by Muslim immigrants
who seem to have a thing about blondes. In those countries a larger
percentage of women are blondes than say Anglo Saxon countries.
Blondes are virtually unknown in the middle east.

Diver Dan, you need to be more observant. The majority of Islamic
terrorists are mature men between 20 and 50 of age.
The Immans who are driving the system are usually elderly. They do
not want to get shot up in an operation, so they become "Esteemed Scholars"
and encourage the troops to take action.

The young boys, notice are usually "lone wolfs" and are typically
teenagers and rush off into impulsive actions.
Your belief that they will mature and calm down is not demonstrated
in Europe. They mature and get better organised which makes them
harder to detect, they are trained in not being noticed, and undertake
much more lethal operations. The youthful ones do not get the heavy
weapons as they are too valuable to risk with "lone wolfs".

Hey runner and Bazz,
Here's an article I read yesterday with some stats on Sweden.
Please Note: This news story contains disguised swearing.

http://www.infowars.com/migrant-molester-i-hate-sweden-im-just-here-to-fk-swedish-girls/

Well the fearful little people of OLO are out in force. All pooping your pants lashing out like scared preschoolers.

And that terrified, witless inane woman Kruger just does my head in.

I will lay it out again. The reason why countries like Japan are not seeing unrest by disaffected Islamists is because as a nation they are not dropping tonnes of bombs on ISIS heads from altitudes that keep their own military personnel from harm.

It is the same with Argentina and a whole host of other countries that are not involved in the conflict. Which country has been at the bombing the longest? France. Go figure.

Now I for one welcome the fact that we are involved in the conflict. There were and still are people in desperate need of rescuing from ISIS. I understand that by doing so we are putting our civilian population at risk.

There is a school of thought that says by committing boots on the ground is would at least give the enemy someone to strike and thus take the focus off the only retaliatory path ISIS has currently available to it – inciting homegrown malcontents. I'm not persuaded.

Leaving that aside I acknowledge and accept a small risk of harm to myself, my family and to other Australians to support taking the fight up to the enemy.

Why don't the rest of you? Or are you really that intent of breaking apart what we have built for ourselves as a nation, one that is inclusive and doesn't discriminate on the basis of colour or creed?

Grow a spine you gutless wonders.

SteeleRedux,
I know that France has been a target of Islamists for years.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2013/0114/Mali-Islamists-threaten-to-retaliate-at-the-heart-of-France-video

They had the Bastille Bastard and we almost had an ANZAC day massacre.
The threat's real enough.

You want to rescue people...
Don't you know the US started all this?

I'll support the US when they follow international law and can be trusted.
I don't support going into Syria without Assad's approval or a UN mandate.
I don't even think the Iraqi's want the US there anymore.
Even the rebels asked the US to stop bombing a few days back.

You do realise they killed more civilians the other day in those airstrikes than the Bastille Bastard did with his truck?
You want to kill ISIS? Fine with me.
Now go ask Assad's permission and join with the Russian plan.

Dear Armchair Critic,

I take it you would prefer Australia not be involved. That is a perfectly reasonable position to take. It isn't one I support particularly since we happily went to war in Iraq and it was the treatment of the Sunnis post invasion, particularly in the north, that has let ISIS explode. We made the mess and in my opinion should be helping to mitigate its fallout.

What gets my goat is the inane mantra that 'they are attacking us because they hate democracy and our way of life therefore we need to go and attack them'. What an absolute crock.

I would love to see out politicians tell us the truth about why we are involved. They have decided we should be there to support the US since in their estimation the alliance with the world's superpower is worth putting Australian civilian lives at a degree of risk. It is not an unreasonable argument and while I don't agree this should be our prime motive if that is what is takes to get help to so many at risk of ISIS then I will live with it.

What I hate is the bulldust rhetoric that they come out with because they feel the Australian public isn't capable of appreciating the truth. So they beat the drums of Islamophobia and most of us follow sheeplike , some even voting in someone like Hanson because of it.

Steeleredux what you say is certainly true but drop the superior tone when talking about Pauline Hanson. The fact is we are having people immigrate here who do not want to fit in, want our welfare and will cheat the system to get as much as they can. If these people's children adopted our way of life it would be acceptable but they do not. In fact their children become even worse.
By all means let them in, cheat our system and insult us but do not feign surprise when Pauline Hanson is fairly elected. Phobia, is an "irrational" fear but there is plenty to fear from a seventh century religion that hates our society.
Last time I looked it was one man one vote not you having more votes because of your self supposed superiority.

B Hell Steele can you really be that naive ?
I suppose you blame the Austrian's & Poles for the killing of moslems
at the gates of Vienna in the previous episode.
The French of course were attacked first by the moslems.
They actually got as far as Toures in Southern France.

Or perhaps you are one of those people who are very short sighted
and cannot even see as far back as 11 September 2001.
It is only now that people such as Pres Hollande and the Pope are
just coming to the conclusion that this is a war that has been
underway since 640 AD.
That is why Islamists consider that they are at war with Rome.
They equate the "West" generally as the Empire of Rome.
ISIS often refers to their war with Rome.

They can see the historical continuum, why can't you ?

SR and AC,

I understand that the delicate flowers on the left desperately cling to the belief that the only reason ISIS is nasty to France is because France is bombing them.

The fallacy of this theory is that neither Belgium, Germany nor even Turkey have attacked ISIS, and the planning for the attacks on France preceded France's involvement in the airstrikes. Appeasement or non involvement has never deterred bullies, and as with Al Qaeda a stable base is simply a platform to launch more well planned and funded attacks against civilians.

The reason ISIS attacks the west has more to do with publicity and recruitment than revenge. When ISIS massacres 300 Syrians, it makes barely a ripple, when it attacks civilians in the West, it is wall to wall headlines.

The destruction of ISIS in Iraq and Syria won't stop the venom against the west, but will deprive ISIS of the $100ms of revenue to kill thousands of Iraqis and Syrians, and reduce its ability to plan and fund attacks else where.

Of course, I believe that the root of all this trouble is Saudi Arabia's desire to spread its extremist version of Islam.

Steele, you seem to be a self-righteous risk-taker with the lives of others. Why not grow a spine and offer yourself now as a hostage swap for the next ISIS siege in Australia?

The fewer the sharks in the water the fewer people will be eaten when they go swimming. Why is such a simple mathematical concept so hard to swallow?

Maintaining Muslim immigration at current levels increases risk to the population. What we do about that is a separate question, but the fact remains.

To Diver Dan.

There is nothing abstract about a religion which preaches to it's followers that they should spread it throughout the world using violence and terrorism. There is nothing abstract about a religion which teaches it's followers that women are minors, and the property of men. There is nothing abstract about Islam which teaches Muslims to kill and mutilate unbelievers, homosexuals, apostates, and anybody who criticises Islam. There is nothing abstract about a religion which teaches it's male members that women must behave in a certain way or men have a right to punish them. And also teaches them that if women do not follow Muslim cultural standards, then they deserve to be raped, and if they are raped it is all their fault.

And when the devotes of this evil religion immigrate to a western country and do exactly what their holy books tell them to do, people like yourself are surprised. Then you go into mental gymnastics trying to blame your own people for the problem.

Whatever differences exist among Muslims they must abide by certain core values or they are not Muslims. Those values are incompatible with a secular western state. Your analogy with poor Muslim kids is complete crap. I know one teacher who fled Sydney to teach in Bathurst just to get away from violent, abusive and out of control Muslim schoolboys who enjoyed driving her crazy. She told me that she loves teaching country (white) kids because they are so polite and "even laugh at my jokes."

We never had a serious race or religion problem in this country until we imported both of them.

Dear Lucifrase,

You wrote;

“Steele, you seem to be a self-righteous risk-taker with the lives of others.”

Grow up mate. Look it is pretty simple. Our alliance with the US which ties us to their conflicts around the world undoubtedly puts both military and civilian lives at risk. If you can't see that then you are being willfully ignorant.

Our government would make the argument that the risk is worth it. If you support the alliance in its current form then you too are being a “risk-taker with the lives of others”.

The difference between the two of us is that at least I am honest about it. Why don't you try the same?

Dear Shadow Minister,

You too seem to have your head in the sand or the truth doesn't fit the narrative you most feel comfortable with. France has been involved in bombing in both Iraq and Syria since Sept 2014. Opération Chammal has seen over 3,000 bombing missions and ISIS said directly that the Nov 2015 attacks in France were a direct result of the bombings. After the latest attacks the French President came out and said clearly the terror attacks in his country were because of France's attacks against ISIS.

If you want to sprout some nonsense about it just being ISIS seeking publicity then don't be surprised if you get called on it.

The US, France and the UK have been bombing away for around two years. Of the three the easiest target due to proximity is France. It makes perfect sense that it would see more terrorism than the other two. If the locations were reversed I'm sure it would be the US.

Dear Bazz,

Here is some history for you.

I remember the 911 attacks. I also remember that it was US troops stationed in Saudia Arabia which was a prime motivation for them. In less than 18 months after the attacks Rumsfield had removed the vast bulk of the troops who had been stationed there. The then Deputy secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said the continued presence of American troops put American lives in danger. He wasn't just talking about military lives but also civilians.

So in your knowledgeable opinion 911 happened because Muslims want to take over Europe or some such rubbish?

Steele, it is that they want to take Europe over, they believe it belongs to them.
You also forget that before 9/11 there was the bombing of the embassies
in east Africa. Also there was the attack on a US ship in Aden refuelling.
In any case the US troops were in Saudi Arabia with the governments permission
so it was moslems that did not like their governments decision so
they attack another government. In any case they were there defending
Saudi Arabia from Iraq, remember the Iraqi rockets ?

Sure fits with their intellectually
damaged genome.

As far as France is concerned it goes back 1236 years when they invaded France.
Don't bother to say OH that was all those years ago.
Well it is ISIS's big excuse for their attacks on Rome.
You have to get used to the fact that we are dealing with tribes that
have a damaged genome and it will take hundreds of years to overcome
the problem and the behavior traits it causes IF they change their marriage practises.

Hey Steele Redux,
It's not that I don't want Australia to be involved in killing ISIS.
It's more that I don't want Australia involved with the US and Syrian regime change.
If we take a part in messing with those countries for the sake of 'American Exceptionalism', 'American Imperialism', 'Liberal Interventionism' or any of that kind of BS to support the US and the petrodollar, then we do in a roundabout way have some moral obligation to help clean up the mess we make and take some of these displaced people.
So in this regard we should stay out of it, and not be a part of making any mess in the first place.

We don't currently have an invitation or a UN mandate to operate in Syria, so we should have no part of that.
If Assad asks, or if our military we're to offer Assad assistance then I have no problem wiping out ISIS in Syria.
Any matter concerning Assads leadership is a decision for the Syrian people.

- And yes it is an absolute crock, they don't hate us specifically because of our democracy and freedom, they hate us because we (the west) attack and kill them (and install pro-US puppet governments in their countries, looting their nations), but they can't go telling people the truth on national tv.

Some hardline Islamists do though hate some of our customs and see them as being wrong religiously.
If we give them enough rope to hang ourselves, I believe that some Muslims would try to impose these beliefs upon normal Australians.

I voted Hanson, but I didn't do so as a sheep at the beating drums of Islamophobia.
It was a somewhat carefully considered vote.

Of course, Steele, Australia's involvement against IS puts us in harm's way, but don't use that to deflect the simple point that our current level of Muslim immigration adds a further level to that risk.

Talk about honesty, can you at least be honest about that undeniable fact rather than squirming and deflecting from it? If you personally want to accept the increased risk that doesn't mean those who don't should shut their mouths to be pilloried by your stifling, supercilious ilk.

Hey Shadow Minister,
I'd agree the west being allied with Saudi Arabia 'desire to spread its extremist version of Islam' is a huge part of the cause.

Hey Luciferase,
'The fewer the sharks in the water the fewer people will be eaten when they go swimming.'
I'd agree with that mentality.
I won't willingly support anything that put Australian lives in harms way.
I do support freedom and liberty for all, but I DO NOT support that one person should be FORCED to give up freedoms and liberties so that someone else (essentially foreigners) should have theirs.

A side note: Whether we are racist or not, is a secondary issue and not necessary relevant.
If we are racist, then why did they choose to come here?

Hey LEGO,
Agreed.

Also Everyone,
Lets not get caught up in all the smaller pictures all the time.
The bigger picture is that ALL this stuff, is happening in a way that is steering us towards One World Government and centralisations of wealth and power.
Open Borders are being supported by elites for a specific agenda, lets not forget that.

We have no choice but to fight back against the Islamic attack on Rome.
"Rome" is the historical noun for all the west including the USA and
Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and recently Brasil has been added to the list.

The crusades were fought for the same reasons that the US and allies
went there in recent times. The Arabs had invaded the Levant and
Mesopotamian countries and they were an attempt to free the Jews and
Christians from the Islamic Arab invaders who were following the
demands of the Koran and Allah.

We are just doing what our distant forefathers did and when the people
in the Middle East call us crusaders they are correct, although the
emphasis is not on Christianity so much these days.

It is time to settle this war once and for all.
Just pulverising their countries and sending them back to the dark
ages will only mean they will rebuild and start it all over again.
Somehow we have to break Islam up, and show it to its adherents in its
true colours. They have to understand that their present course will
lead to further depredation and death.

If you think all of the above is nonsense just go and read some of
the ISIS and Al Qa’ida statements. The Koran and history is their justification.

This nonsense is just that, nonsense.
Calling some one else's opinion a "Phobia" needs to be challenged every time it bobs up.
Phobia? OK let's hear Dilly boys qualifications for this, same goes with the appalling Aly woman now an MP.
We need to go these people and make them understand that a fear of something can be rational and in fact can be very sensible. I am not afraid of venomous snakes but if one bites me I will still die. I am not afraid of heights but if I fall I will still die. I love all our new islamic migrants but they can still kill me, understand now?
Someone with more money than me should sue the next idiot who uses "Islamaphobia" as an abusive term under 18C.

JBower, are you referring to my "nonsense" ?
Who is Dillyboy ?
As someone said "Please Explain".

It is all a matter of percentage.
The first person I noted that published a risk of Islamic Terrorism
scale was Geert Wilders the Dutch politician.
At 2% moslem population we have a small but real risk. Proven.
At 5% you start to get pressure for Sharia law implementation.
You get an increase in terrorism incidents.
At 10% an increase in aggressive opposition to police.
At 20% demands for Islamic laws, attacks on police, moslem only no go
zones for all others. Attacks on churches synagogues etc.
Essentially the situation in France and Belgium today.

At 40% to 50% it is time to pack up and leave. This has happened in
past times in some middle eastern countries. The Christian population
in many of those countries is now approaching zero.

Zero moslem immigration and positive discouragement of Islam officially
is the only possible way forward. It is not politically correct but
for the sake of those who would otherwise die it is necessary.
Perhaps a Royal Commission could examine Islam as it is practised to
decide if it is a political ideology masquerading as a religion or
in fact both and so should be seen as some sort of hybrid and be
subject to the normal laws on political organisations.
The commission could be asked if Islam is a risk to the Australian constitution.

There is no way to tell who will become a terrorist or cause other
trouble, no go zones etc, we just have to take quarantine action just
like we do for other undesirable goods, animals and people.
It really is a matter of life and death.

SteeleRedux,

Please read my posts before commenting. WRT France, I said that the attacks on France were PLANNED before France got involved. Secondly Belgium and Germany weren't even involved before they were attacked. Please Don't cherry pick. There is no indication that involvement in the effort against ISIS has anything to do with the involvement of the country in the action against ISIS.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“I said that the attacks on France were PLANNED before France got involved.”

Pray tell which attacks? Those over 2 years ago you might have a case but the rest? Highly unlikely. You might want to contradict both the French President and ISIS but forgive me for putting you far down the credibility scale as a result. But as I said if it fits the narrative you have created for yourself then I acknowledge it would of course be uncomfortable for you to accept reality.

Dear Bazz,

There comes a time when one crosses over the fruitloop threshold. You are periously close my friend.

Dear JBoywer,

My youngest recently had a 21st. In attendance were both people who are openly gay and others who are Muslim.

In years gone past an openly gay person would have been regarded as dangerous, perverted and a threat to others. Through modern eyes these attitudes would have been rightly regarded as homophobic.

You regard all of those of the Islamic faith as at least two out of the three then you are Islamophobic. The fact you are taking issue with the term doesn't make it any less applicable. Suck it up.

SR,

I am finding your continual use of straw man arguments to be both mendacious and tiresome. As you care so little for your own credibility, I care less what you think of mine.

Given that the dispute started when AC claimed that the west was being attacked primarily because of the west's action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, and so we should cower in the corner. A position you subsequently supported. I pointed out the major flaw in that thinking in that several countries were attacked that either have never attacked ISIS, or were attacked before action was considered, and that the attacks in France were planned prior to France's involvement.

You then ignored the other countries (thus conceding the dispute to me), pointing out only that France's attacks on ISIS predated the ISIS attacks on France, which I had never disputed. Finally, you then concede that the original attacks in France were probably planned before France's involvement (which shreds your argument) then admonish me for claiming that all attacks by ISIS were planned prior to France's involvement (which I did not).

Since you failed so miserably, I would suggest that you are surrounded by the fog of delusion which could be resolved by removing your head from your rectum and emerge blinking into the harsh light of reality.

Well, I accuse SteeelRedux of kaffirphobia, Domocracyphobia, heterophobia, rationalphobia, caucasaphobiia, yankaphobia, and zionphobia.

The word "phobia" is usually associated with an irrational fear of something. There is nothing irrational about fearing Islam, and by association Muslims. Islam is a violent and intolerant religion and it is the most aggressive political, religious and social philosophy in existence today. National Socialism has been beaten, International Socialism still lingers on among congenital idiots, but Islam is the new tyranny threatening the free world.

It does not matter if some Muslims are not as extreme as their imams wish them to be, any more than some Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Shining Path, or Ku Klux Klansmen are not as extreme as their leaders wish them to be. In a war situation, (and just in case you have not noticed it, we are at war with Islam right now) those who identify with the enemy and who do not renounce their group allegences must all be considered potential enemies.

If this enemy population wishes to reduce host group hostility towards them, they must renounce those texts in their own religious manuscripts which quite openly instruct all Muslims to engage in the murder, mutilation and rape of non Muslims. The leaders of these so called "moderate" Muslims must make it crystal clear that they regard these texts as offensive and obsolete.

But no "moderate:" Muslim leader has ever done that. Not Waled Ali, not Jamal Rifi, nor any other of the so called "moderate" imams and Mufti's. They won't do it because they believe in it. Got that? They all think that killing non Muslims, idolators, homosexuals, atheists, witches, homosexuals, apostates, and anybody who criticises Islam is the right thing to do.

They will blame everybody and everything for Islamic terrorism except Islam itself which instructs Muslims to terrorise. And any person who calls themselves a Muslim and does not without reservation of qualification renounce that terrorism, is complicit in it.

And any appeasers and apologists who excuses their behaviour is a traitor to the free world. Just like Hicks and Jon Walker Lindh.

No SR you suck it up! What are your qualifications to label me anything? You do not know me at all. Muslim's are attacking across the world and will be laughing at you and your son behind your backs. Iran executes gay people and so does ISIS. Of course you can think how superior you and your son are but the muslims will cheerfully knock the pair of you.
It is funny that Islam would certainly come down on you and your son before they come down on me lol.
Dream on matey and tell your son how lovely islam is, whilst you can!

Steele said;
There comes a time when one crosses over the fruitloop threshold.
You are periously close my friend.

I understand the point you are making but I think what I write is
compatible, if that is the right word, with what I have been reading
for about four years on the situation in Europe.
I have looked but have not been able to find a more moderate approach
to Islam and its aims.

I do not think that there is any alternative approach than ultimately
either a reformation of Islam or a ban on Islam.

I believe Islam is not compatible with Australian law, constitution,
culture, treatment of women either under law or outside of law or even personal customs.