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.