This is history and writings from the koran: Quote:" The rights of non-moslems living in islamic countries are protected so long as they follow the rules and regulations" What are some of these'rules & regulations' "The subject peoples" according to a manual of islamic law endorsed by Al-Azhar University of Cairo must " pay the non-moslem poll tax (jizya)" and "are distinguished from moslems in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar); are not greeted with 'as-salamu' [the traditional moslem greeting, peace with you]; must keep to the side of the street; may not build higher than or as high as the moslems buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed; are forbidden to openly display wine or pork... recite the Torah or evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals or feastdays; are forbidden to build new Churches" ('Umdat al-Salik, oll.3,5).
The moslem reign in islamic Spain has been called the golden age of islam. Yet; Iberia (Spain) was conquered in 710-716 AD by arab tribes...Massive berber and arab immigration and colonisation of the Iberian Peninsula followed this conquest. Most Churches were converted to mosques... with massive pillages, enslavements, deportations and killings. Toledo was punished by pillage and all the notables had their throats cut. ...etc, etc. There is a lot more. Now some will see me as an anti-moslem bigot but I am not. Nor am I blind to what may happen if and WHEN the moslems are in charge.I am Christian and have faith in Christ who does win in the end, how do I know I have read the end of the book (Bible) Regards, numbat

NUMBAT
so true.. and only the half has been told.
Do u have a source for that information bro ? I'm always interested in reading up on such things.
They (Muslims) often say the Jizya was very small, less even thant their own obligatory zakat for the poor, but the Jews of Khaibar had to work just as hard as before they were conquered, but now had to give up ownership of their land, and pay FIFTY PERCENT of all they produced to the new Islamic state. So it appears that the Jizya is rather 'circumstantial' and flexible. Or perhaps that 50% was purely to punish them for not being Muslims. No matter which way you cut the cake it was no picnic.
The things u mentioned sounded very much like what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany having to wear distinctive clothing.

I agree with Col that the Victorian Anti-vilification law is a law of repression. We have digressed from Mark's comments about the judgment, but the purpose of the law needs to be examined. It has been used in this case (I suppose a deliberate test case) to impose a considerable financial burden on the defendants. As I understand the legislation, it has been drafted in such a way that a plaintiff can claim anonymously to be offended, and the burden of proof is on the defendants to prove that they have not caused offence. It seems clear that the law can be, and in fact is being, used to penalise the defendants financially to inhibit discussion. It is clear that the Islamic Council of Victoria don't want Australians to know the real motivations and intentions of the moslem community in Australia.

BOAZ_David: I am not a computer wizz but I'll try to give you what I can find.
1. "A Wahhabism Problem" by Andrew G. Bostom found in 'National Review Online' (http://www.nationalreview.com)December 6 2002
2. 'Getting to Know the Suffis' From the February 7 2005 issue:There is a tolerant, pluralist tradition in islam. We can't afford to ignore it. by Stephen Schwartz. 02/07/2005 Volume 010, Issue 20
3. 'Confused Islamic Apologetics' By Andrew G. Bostom. Front Page Magazine.com August 10, 2004
4. The Ayatollahs'Final Solution? By Andrew G. Bostom. Front Page Magazine.com
5. Arab News: "With Islam We Fight Terrorism"
Hope this helps, Regards, numbat

Numbat...
u don't need to be a computer wizz :) u did very well.
thanx

David "Col, the Jewish Lobby and Bracks along with the ICV were all linked to that most flawed legislation, but some background here.. the Jewish mob were mainly targeting the Citizens Electoral Council with this, because there is quite an on going feud between them. "

I know the Jewish lobby have been most active in the past - I recall demands to ban David Irving (the English idiot who denied the holocaust) and whilst I have no support for Irving's insane views I still defend his right to express them - and everyone elses right to challenge them with reason and argument.

As for the electoral council - I am not sure what the issue is there but it is better that issues are brought to the surface and debated openly rather than being repressed - the next thing that will happen is the state will start to censor books and enforce that decision by rounding up all the copies and have a book BBQ - maybe on the steps of the state library.
Small acts of repression invariably lead to bigger acts of repression.