Sad but true commentary.

Fortunately, Indonesia stands between us and disturbing northern neighbors and would do well to recognize their ultimate independent interests lie, with other people of the book, not Godless empire builders, for whom they're just another brick in a wall like Tibet, earmarked for a nation expanding wrecking ball?

We have been here before and will survive if we and they put this religious pernicious persecution by radical ideologues, pretending to serve Islam, where it belongs. Down the nearest convenient sewer!
Alan B.

A case of when a firing squad is being organised and its target hands out the ammunition.

Yes - worrying news emerging from Indonesia where Ahok has been sentenced to two years imprisonment for blasphemy. I listened to a most intelligent interview on the ABC with Andreas Harsono - Human Rights Watch, Indonesia - who confirmed that these "bad laws" (his words) are being used more and more under the present administration to harass minority groups. Again, a sign of weak national leadership, which is pandering more to mob wishes, rather to appropriate processes that ensure the freedom for religious minorities to maintain their faith claims and practices.

Andreas Harsono also appealed for Canberra (particularly through Julie Bishop) to stop calling Indonesia a "model for acceptable and moderate Islam" as he sees a greater move in many of Indonesia's 34 provinces towards the adoption of stricter Sharia Laws.

In Acheh, for example, there is a massive push to introduce harsh laws against any homosexual practice, with flogging and severe caning to become a standard means to punish any gays that are caught. It seems that in Acheh at least this will become standard practice.

I do not believe in the wholesale discrimination against any person from any specific cultural or religious background - particularly here in Australia where our security agencies are well aware of any possible extremist activity, and who careful keep a watchful eye on any Muslim leadership in this country to maintain an allegiance to Australian law.

However, the present mob activities and successes in Indonesia by forces that insist on Sharia law and the non-acceptance of other cultural or religious minorities, must definitely be a worry for our own political leadership.

Shame how they treat the guy like the treatment of Yassmin Abdel-Magied's offensive Anzac Day tweet.

Hi Nick,

Do you mean the two-year sentence that Ahok has received for making a perfectly correct comment on the Koran ? Or do you mean the continued employment of Islamist apologists on government-funded bodies ? They are somehow equivalent - how exactly ?

Joe

So far as I know Australia has not made being Muslim a crime which stops employment. Do you ? Her list of countries on her private website is not Islamic is it?

Ahok blasphemed the Koran the infidel dog. But Jesus Christ didn't die at Anzac Cove. So in that way the 2 offenders aren't equal - Ahok was sinning and goes to hell the deepest 7th fire.

Nick,

I've written a few times on OLO that that silly girl shouldn't be sacked or even disciplined, that she should be put on more government-funded committees, so that we can know in more detail what Hizb-ut-Tahrir is up to.

No, I don't think she should be jailed for two years, and have her career destroyed, for making a comment.

And no, Ahok did not make any blasphemous remarks (even the prosecutor admitted that), which, in any case, would have been legal in Australia. But he got two years. Yassmin got no penalty and fair enough: that's Australian values for you.

As some wise person noted on another thread, Nick: "Freedom of expression is one of our treasured Australian values: any idiot can say what they like." So go for it: keep digging your hole. Keep making dumb-arse comments, usually utterly irrelevant. That's your right in Australia. But it might get you in trouble in 'secular' Indonesia.

Joe

You wrote " Or do you mean the continued employment of Islamist apologists on government-funded bodies " which indicates you question her employment.
She listed countries on facebook and she gets into trouble with you.
The Indonesian view of Koran and local views of Anzac seem similar with Anzac parallel with gods .

Nick,

No, I don't have any special powers to get that silly girl 'into trouble', or to 'question her employment' :) She can say what she likes. So can I. And so, irritatingly, so can you.

No, I'll say it again (and again and again, if you like):let her keep her various paid jobs, encourage her to talk her silly head off about every topic, let us gradually find out more and more about Hizb-u-Tahrir and its aims.

Joe

Then why raise the topic of her employment ? Or suggest matters that police ought to know about? If I support her Anzac-given right to speech you would also mention my employment and police inquiry . Do you have Russian relatives Joe.

Halfwitnick,

You compared, somehow, the fortunes of Ahok, now in jail, with those of Yassmin, as if they were somehow comparable. Their respective statuses were relevant: one is in jail for making what most Australians would think was a perfectly reasonable observation, the other is flying around scot-free: one is, in a sense, unemployed for making remarks, the other isn't.

I don't know what the police might know about Yassmin's associations and activities. That she associates with a terrorist group, the Hizb-ut-Tahrir, is probably relevant, you could look into that. So let her speak as their mouth-piece as much as she likes. That will let us know what they're up to.

Joe

Nicknamenick:

Sure she should be free to say what she likes and when and where she likes but that does not mean her intent was not without malice.

We guarantee freedom of speech not freedom from criticism. Many people believe her intent was malicious – either to try and hurt others and or to gain notoriety for herself.

You are just trying to defend her right to speak and no one opposes that but what do you think of her motives? Was she just naive or simple and totally oblivious to the relevance of Anzac Day to most Australians or were her aims focused on the need to hurt.

If so then her aggression needs to be criticised and so does her fitness for her job. It means she is not capable of approaching problems without getting aggressive and no matter what your job that is not the way to get what you think is right. Reason and logic are the only civilised way and not aggression.

She has a right to freedom of speech but if her speech exhibits aggression then everyone has a right to respond with criticism because aggression is never the answer to anyone’s problems.

I like Joe's insults , it means his case is weak.
"Hizb ut-Tahrir spokes­man Wassim Doureihi posted on his personal Facebook page " says The Australian which reads terrorist grooming life-sentence propaganda and publishes it. It's bending English language to say she associates by replying to a criticism .
(Have to hand it to her , the girl stands and takes buckets from loudmouth men on all sides ).

Phanto
And her aggression ? It's assumed without fact or you would describe the facts. Yes we all have rights but the mob hounded Ahok and the mob hounds Miss bigmouth . Same people different foxes.

Nick,

I don't know what you mean by 'case': one person is in jail and his career destroyed for making a perfectly reasonable remark; another person is (I hope) still employed on various government-funded bodies even after making quite outrageous remarks. How are they comparable, except to point out that, in Australia, one of our most important values is the freedom of expression, which is obviously lacking in Indonesia, supposedly a 'secular' country like Australia, with five religions all given equal legal status (until recently) ?

Is that why you keep comparing the two situations, to highlight the value of free speech in Australia ? Is that your incredibly clever, and subtly devious, way to do that ? Brilliant !

Where would you rather be ? In jail, or flying around the country on government money ?

Joe

Nicknamenick.
Why do Muslims think they have the right to punish someone who doesn't
share their belief in God.

Do they think that God is incapable of punishing that person.

They are not God, they have no right to act like they are.

Maybe he believes in God but just not the Muslim version.
God is still God.

What right do these people have to judge what God is and what God isn't.
The Koran was written by man As was the Christian bible.
Or was the Koran written by Mohammed, he too was a man.
Men write the way they interpret. They too are not God, and are fallible in writing down
What they think were Gods wishes.
Anyway, no super intelligent, spiritual all knowing being would be so lacking in compassion and understanding. That kind of punitive thinking is anything but divine

I think the Muslims and all religions seriously underestimate the way
a divinity like God would think and know things.
They think God would think in their limited way, in wanting to punish people.
That is limited thinking and understanding, no divine God,could think like that
And still be all knowing and intelligent. The two don't go together.

If God is so affronted by anyone who dares to question, he is quite capable of striking them dead on the spot. The fact that he doesn't would indicate he is not that offended.
He may be more offended by people impersonating him and dishing out punishment.

Nicknamenick:

"And her aggression ? It's assumed without fact or you would describe the facts."

She chose Anzac Day because she knew she could hurt people on Anzac Day. That is proof of aggression. The desire to hurt. Whether she was successful or not is irrelevant. The fact that she wanted to hurt is not irrelevant.

Anyone with any sensitivity to the feelings of others would not have chosen that day.