I would believe everything Syed Atiq ul Hassan has said if there were movements in the Islamic world, and protests of equal voracity against the vile, far more offensive cartoons & literature in the Muslim media.

Bizarre though, that there is nothing but silence....

Further, I seem to recall that ALL Islamic leaders, at the time of John Howard's conference with Muslim 'moderates' (some of which had said outrageous things about Jews in the past) said that we should hear what the radicals like Benbrika & Omran have to say, because of.......wait for it.....freedom of speech!

Lastly, I wish to know where Syed Atiq ul Hassan stands on Sharia Law. I don't believe one can have a serious debate with any Muslim who accepts such barbarity as a divinely inspired set of beliefs that must be forced on the whole world.

I think i'll get my post in before the 100+ post, anti-muslim tirade begins.
I really don't think the law needs to come into this. Do we really want to fill our courts with people who are offended by insults towards deceased spiritual leaders? Surely God can take care of the blasphemers, or in the Hindu or Buddhist beliefs surely they'll be reborn as dung beetles in their next life?
The lessons to be learned from this cartoon caper are twofold: a) good manners are a virtue, so have respect for others beliefs and know that criticism and insults do not lead to friendship and peace and b) ignoring an instult is much more effective and powerful than getting upset, so have some self-esteem and don't submit to the will of others by reacting to everything nasty that is said. A good motto to go by is "sticks and stones will break my bones but insults to my spiritual leader will never hurt me".
Lets not go back to a primary school system where you get sent to the principles office for calling someone names.

Mr Hassan takes exception to Danish cartoons depicting Mohammad, describing them as blasphemous, yet has no qualms about calling Jesus a prophet.

According to the Catholic Encyclopaedia, "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." To describe Jesus as just a prophet would surely imply a denial of the Holy Trinity which is a central belief of the Christian Church.

Perhaps Christians should go on the rampage about OLO publishing Mr Hassan’s article.

You still don’t get the point, do you, Syed?
But then, how can any believer in any these religions, having shown themselves to believe all this supernatural and mystical mumbo-jumbo, get it?
I’m talking not only of Islam, but all religions and belief systems, whether religious or political.
They all lead to totalitarianism, not Freedom.
How can these cartoons humiliate you? Only if you consider that there might be some element of truth in what they are saying.
And the reaction of many of the followers of Islam only goes to confirm that indeed, what the cartoons are saying, is correct.
If they are not true, then just ignore them. You surely don’t care what secular people think about your religion, do you? And are Muslims likely to be influenced against Islam because of them?
Your suggestion that these people should be punished is an extension of the same mind-set, which seeks to impose a set of beliefs on people by threats.
By all means go ahead and believe in your religion, I don’t care at all, you are welcome to it, but don’t try to impose it on other people. And don’t issue threats to try to intimidate people who are not of the same set of beliefs as you.
Muslims destroyed a set of ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan; don’t you think that is far worse case of “humiliation” to another religion? But of course, that wouldn’t occur to you, would it?
Did you see Buddhists blowing up mosques, issuing death threats, beheading people?
Because you think you are the only people that have the Truth. Just like the thousands of other religions and religious sects all claiming the same thing.
Religion has been, and is now, the major cause of trouble in the World. The sooner mankind grows up out of these primitive belief systems, the better.

The cartoons were not, in my view, “..an extreme act of promoting disharmony and humiliation worldwide.” They were part of a “service’, referred to by the author, by the press, showing us the total lack of understanding and the intolerance of certain Muslims. The fundamentalist fanatics who rioted and burned, instead of making their grievances known in a civilized manner, inflicted any “humiliation” felt by reasonable Muslims.

The author’s claim that publishing the cartoons was a “deliberate act to publish explosive material” may well be true, but not “against the Muslim community at large.” It was far more likely designed as a wake up call for the dozy left in the West, which still doesn’t see what Western civilization, and freedom is up against with regard to Islamic fanatics. These people are medieval crackpots, unlike the many Muslims who wish to bring their religion into the 21st Century.

Good on Denmark for making a long overdue statement on fundamentalism. It’s interesting to note that only one Australian newspaper had the bottle to publish the cartoons, and thereby fulfil its obligation to keep the public informed.

As a communicator, Syed Atiq ul Hassan has nothing positive to contribute to understanding between Muslims and the wider Western community.

Syed,

A one-eyed very biased view of the cartoon saga.

The writer does not differentiate between information and insult in the case of publishing the cartoons.

He denies the right of ‘western’ freedom of the press – and suggests putting limits and barriers to any matter of incitement or denigration of others (faiths).

In the case of Salman Rushdie – again information was taken by muslims as insults and blasphemy. He simply exposed some verses that the prophet mohammad himself qualified as inspired from satan (and later on abrogated them as you do).

What we clearly have here is a clash of civilisations – east meets west. Darkness exposed to the light.

Europe is the central war zone at the moment. Islam is concentrating its efforts on all fronts in all European countries.

A vistory in Europe (especially the Vatican) will mean a lot to islam morally - taking them one step closer to the next goal of aquiring the US.

Oh goody goody goody - the United Nations (oh sh*t) to make a law to insulting the prophet (profit?) will be a crime - save me from these hypocrites?

Better off banning religions and strident bastards who use religions to go and kill other people would be far better - like Bush and Roberertson wanting to kill Chauvez - and of course the Indonesian Muslims killing off Christians.

The United Nations is a failed exercise in stupidity adn 110% of them would not even know it was daylight unless they took their heads out of where you and I sit down.

From the Koran itself this damned prophet was a paedophile, adulterer and murderer - so tell me just how could one really insult a person of such impeccable honour - and the bloody Popes are no better either, their hands are bloodied as much.

Don't criminalize abuse of religions and so called prophets - criminalize religious abuse!!

It is the IslamoFacists who want to KILL freedom of expression.

The cartoons in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten raise the most important question of our times: freedom of expression. Are we in the west going to cave into pressure from societies with a medieval mindset, or are we going to defend our most precious freedom — freedom of expression, a freedom for which thousands of people sacrificed their lives?

A democracy cannot survive long without freedom of expression, the freedom to argue, to dissent, even to insult and offend. It is a freedom sorely lacking in the Islamic world, and without it Islam will remain unassailed in its dogmatic, fanatical, medieval fortress; ossified, totalitarian and intolerant. Without this fundamental freedom, Islam will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality; originality and truth.

Unless, we show some solidarity, unashamed, noisy, public solidarity with the Danish cartoonists, then the forces that are trying to impose on the Free West a totalitarian ideology will have won; the Islamization of Europe will have begun in earnest. Do not apologize

You say: "Unfortunately, time and again, the world witnesses the incidents of promoting obnoxious and ignominious ideas by those filthy minds who claim themselves to be scholars, writers and journalists"

But you fail to make an important distinction in your following four examples.

What a "Salman Rushdie" or "a Bangladeshi feminist writer, Taslima Nasreen" spoke about are easily verifiable human rights violations (i.e. the most basic of freedoms).

What "a shimmering golden Star of David impaling a union flag, with the words "A kosher conspiracy?", or "a controversial theatre production of Corpus Christi [that] portrayed Jesus Christ as gay", are examples of pure antagonism.

Syed, I guess you agree with President Musharef's assessment of Pakistan's most notorious gang-rape victim: "in Pakistan, if you want to get [world] famous, just get yourself raped". Or the opinion of one of his ministers that "she's been given the red carpet treatment".

Merely citing examples from a diversity of faiths does not trick us into thinking of you as a balanced reporter.

Now, would anyone here concur with Syed's view that it is "unfortunate" that a Rushdie or a Nasreen has "received large popularity in the West"? If you did, you could never again refer to yourself as an "activist", let alone a "feminist".

PLEASE, any ONO posters still in denial ... don't listen to us, just listen to this "moderate" bigot.

Syed says- 'Unfortunately, time and again, the world witnesses the incidents of promoting obnoxious and ignominious ideas by those filthy minds who claim themselves to be scholars, writers and journalists.'

Calling Salman Rushdie a 'filthy mind who claims to be a journalist' is undoubtedly the most disgusting, offensive thing I've ever read by a writer on OLO. Syed, you do your religion no favours. All right-thinking muslims have a duty to unequivocally denounce the disgusting acts committed by Islam against a great writer.

"not to insult or promote disharmony"

A selection of anti-christian and anti-semetic cartoons in middle eastern newspapers which 'insult or promote disharmony'.

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm

I AM OFFENDED THAT THERE IS ONE STANDARD FOR CHRISTIANS AND ANOTHER FOR ISLAMISTS!! is it then reasonable for me, as i am offended, to go and torch an embassy?

ALSO,

The Egyptian newspaper Al Faqr published the infamous cartoons of blasphemy last October, at the height of Ramadan, in the heart of the Islamic world, with not a single squeak of outrage.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19143_Mohammed_Cartoons_in_Egyptian_Paper_-_October_2005&only

I AM ALSO OFFENDED THAT IT IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR AN ISLAMIC NEWSPAPER TO PUBLISH THE CARTOONS< BUT IT IS A PROBLEM IF A CHRISTAIN NEWSPAPER PUBLISHES THEM!!

The author of this article is an IslamoFacist, as he/she has a different standards for Christains and Islamists - which is offensive, and racist!!

Here's a test.

Choose a country to live. You can pick from,

"France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Holland, Hungary, Norway and Czech Republic"

(countries guilty of "promoting disharmony and humiliation worldwide")

or,

Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt...

Syed, ask yourself why 90 % of people would choose from the former group. What do you think it is that makes them nice places to live and the latter group, well, not so nice? If you think it's economics then ask again why that difference exists, and why the oil rich nations (i.e. rich due to geographical chance) still fall into the not so nice category.

It's not rocket science.

Dear Syed,

I wonder if you were one of the muslim community personalities who thought that John Howard should have included nut extremists like Sheik Omran, Bakri(since arrested for terrorism), Hiz-but-tahir supremicist group, and many other well known extremists who fully support, openly, Bin Laden and co. and turning the western world into a province of the new Caliph, all in the name of freedom of speech?

These people, many who have large followings(such as Sheik Omran who has a 10,000 strong subscription to his newsletter), openly talk of how 911, 7/7, and Bali are fully justified due to the west's interference in the middle east. Okay, so they would have preferred that Suddam and his Sunni mates have stayed in charge of Iraq, keeping the Shiites and the Kurds oppressed and without rights. Even Australia's help of the oppressed East Timorese is enough to justify, apparently, Bali-style atrocities.

Syed speaks like a true muslim bigot. He thinks that in the name of "freedom of speech", that we should hear lunatics who openly support the massacre of innocent people merely for interfering in their homeland's politics, even if this is interference like when the US pressured Syria to get out of Lebanon(didn't hear Keysar Trad or anyone else complain about that one), but the sight of a mere cartoon that portrays light satire, should be condemned and deserves the riots that they caused.

So typical. A muslim bigot actually believes that a kaffir who touches him should have his head cut off, but he is allowed to rape, murder and steal(eg. Gang rapes, racist bashings and murders here in Australia) from the Kaffir and if you even just complain, he will cry racism.

Also, please don't be a coward and answer BENJAMIN'S question about where you stand on Sharia, the barbaric legal code that is anti-democratic and anti-humanist. Those who support this, will be attacked verbally forever in the name of justice and humanity.

One reason I like to read OLO is to improve my understanding of the Muslim mind - unfortunately I seem to be getter further and further away from it, mainly due to inconsistency and level of hypocrisy. One thing is also certain is that Muslims are no nearer to understanding what makes Western minds tick either. So what can we do to help us all understand each other better?

Wake up.

A storm in a teacup, and the impact of globalisation.

Get over it Muslims, they should not have stirred the pot by printing it in a public, high exposure manner like this so do something using the appropriate channels, not using the old ways.

You are all better than what was portrayed, and all Muslims should not be encouraged by the actions of misguided brothers overseas.

A knee jerk reaction perhaps, but it took three months or so for this knee jerk reaction.

Are the publishers dumb? they must be to print it and cause this. It could have been forseen. What about the person who drew them, why dont you make him accountable?

It's absolutely revealing that all those who lambast freedom of expression and claim that the cartoons were an abuse of "freedom of expression", are all true believers of Islam, like Hassan, whose association with the democratic principles of an advanced civilization, despite their Western education, is tenuous, if not non-existent.

Scratch the back of their Western education and you will find underneath the troglodyte views emanating from a static religion ENCAVED in the seventh-century, which dogmatically refuses to breath the air of modernity in the twenty-first century.

Blog: http://congeorgekotzabasis.blogspot.com

I take great offence at Syed's description of the Bangladeshi feminist writer, Taslima Nasreen, as well as Salman Rushdie and any other who has 'blasphemed', by likening their work as 'blasphemous publications'.

Syed, you give the tiny minority of moderate Muslims a bad name. Actually, and does anyone else agree, the term moderate needs to be re-defined. I mean, even Sheik Hilali is being called a moderate.

The way Muslims have forced us to see it, a moderate is someone who totally agrees with suicide bombing, destroying the west, democracy, and so on, but isn't prepared to do the physical jihad themselves.

I am repulsed by Syed's arguments, weak & childish as they are, and I'd go as far to say that this article is perhaps one of the most offensive I've read here at Online Opinion.

Really, to liken Rushdie to a 'blasphemer' is outrageous, but shows just how ill many Muslims are. Syed is exactly like some nutcase from Texas in the 1800's thinking owning slaves is alright, or perhaps a better example, the Saudi's who still use slavery today (migrant workers from SE Asia). Saudi Arabia only formally abolished slavery in 1962!

Lastly, Syed says one thing that could be good, and that is a banning on any attacks on religious institutions. However, how many mosques would this leave standing Syed, as Muslims surely are the main perpetrators of racial & religious hatred in the world today?

TELL US WHERE YOU STAND ON SHARIA SYED. WE NEED TO KNOW WHETHER YOU CONSIDER US NON-MUSLIMS (kaffir) EQUAL, OR YOU THINK OF US AS SUB-HUMAN DHIMMI'S.........

Syed: Are you implying that there was no brutal, cowardly, despicable moslem terror before these cartoons? These cartoons which were printed in a Egyptian n/paper well before the Danish efforts.
Syed have you read not the cartoons but the lying derogatory comics about the Israelis published by islamics?
Have you read the savagely lying cartoons about us westerners in islamic papers? {and where do most islamic nations get their hand-outs, that's right Syed from the maligned western nations
In what squalid dictatorial islamic nation is there a free, really free press?
What have your leaders in store for Australia should you take over Syed, other than "honour?" killings, the bloody, merciless, absolutely uncivilised sharia law, and women "put in their place"
Sorry mate you come across as a typical islamic bloody minded 'king sized' hypocrite.
You see your religion and the islamic countries then the west with Christianity - which do you prefer Syed? Oh! silly me it's the west and yet you and your ilk take the freedoms offerred and plot to take Australia back to brutality and total barbarism or islam. numbat

I have viewed these cartoons and there is nothing sinister about them, they are merely a send up of a religious figure, something which is not unprededented in this country. We like to have a laugh at our own expense, and even at religion of any/all types, from time to time.

As a Catholic I can see the funny side of Christ being exposed to this form of public entertainment. Some Muslims seem to forget Australia is a free country, and as such should be able to tolerate such minor deviations to the norm.

This could be an extreme small group of Muslims, we are talking about here, some extreme Christian groups are in reality just as loopy as some in the Muslim faith, take A.O.G. OR Morman faith's for example.

As for my own opinion I think we should print the cartoons, see who we have in this country, who are loyal to it, and it's democratic ways, and remove those who are opposed to it, we have made our own enemies without, we now do not need enemies within......

Definitely the worst of the articles on this issue.

The comments regarding Rushdie and nasreen highlight very effectively that the author completely misses the point, not only of the principal of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but more worryingly of the benefit of criticism of the texts and tenants of religion.

Is the author suggesting that the satanic verses should not have received those awards because of its content? Personally I think it deserved the awards on its literary merit alone, my admiration for the bravery of its subject matter is separate.

Now there is a Muslim with a sense of humour.

Having said that, the adoption of these cartoons as a cause celebre by some of the 'one eyed' posters on this site (coach you crack me up mate), is pushing it a bit far. I would understand this if the cartoons were in any way witty, insightful or even funny, but by and large they are pathetically simplistic and more importantly, make no great point. The paper, and others has the invaluable right to publish them of course, but really people, it’s not as if there anything other than cheap shots. A little below the belt.

As the above posts show, the main achievement of this article (apart from seriously pissing me off) is to confirm the prejudices of the more boring and repetitive members of this forum.

The more I read this article the more annoyed I get at the suggestion that the ‘west’ censor not only their publications, but in the criticism of the support given to Rushdie and Nasreen, the freedom of ideas and association.
It also fails, like the other articles, to answer what I see as a very important question:

Where did all the Danish flags come from?
Where they just lying around? Is the middle east full of flag stores?
If I were felt the need to burn a Danish flag (for my own reasons) I wouldn’t have a clue where to get one.

The Danes were simply lacking in discretion when they published those stupid cartoons. Who would have believed that months later, the sensitivities of Islamics, those sterling characters who behead live prisoners, encourage their young to become suicide bombers,and all the rest of the fun things they do,would be so bruised?
Now we have an Australian polititian , lacking completely in common sense and sensitivity, wears a T shirt reading "Get Your Rosaries Off My Ovaries"
We may be disgusted at the thought that a person so thick should do such a thing but we know it's part of what freedom of speech is. Regardless of the bad taste.
Should we take her to the International Court of Justice ? Or should we accept that there are idiots in this world and the best way to treat them is to ignore them.
Otherwise you can end up being just as stupid.

The UN has more urgent matters than what we can or can't say about religion in our own country.

On the other hand, if we were considering a universal "Protocol of Polite Behaviour", well that'd be fine with me. It would obviously need to deal with the 57 "islamic' (ie faith-based governments) countries (OIC) which gang up politically, militarily and economically on 1 "jewish" (faith-based government) state.

The protocol could also be brought to the specific attention of UN member Iran which yells so impolitely for UN member Israel to "be wiped off the map". Iran might simultaneously explain how it became islamic in the first place rather than Zoroastrian? Or perhaps, why it still persecutes the Bahá'í faith? Or still executes children just like China? Ooh so many examples of 'impoliteness', so little time...

When the UN votes to restrict western members from speaking up or printing (albeit quite crappy) cartoons as they choose for their own citizens within their own borders for their own reasons, then IMHO, it is definitely time to ignore the UN again. The West could simply ask why it has never acted to curb the stream of impolite cartoons gushing like oil out of the middle east.

There are UN members tolerated right now that offically vanish half their population by curbing their freedom of speech and movement every day. These female half-citizens are an urgent matter for the UN not cartoons. The Koran is cited overseas as an authoritative source for "judging" a woman's "role" in society but such subjective, faith-based interference in women's lives (or men, for that matter) is no longer appropriate nor ethical here in the West. Like Zoraster and probably eventually like his overthrower, Mohammed, prophets come prophets go. Women are here to stay.

Leaders from faith-based countries like Iran etc. represent ancient history not governance for the future. We present them with modern dilemmas and they run to their little books to tell us what NOT to do.

There is a formal role for religion in society but not in government, let alone world government.

Comment from a lone Satanic Feminist - With respect sir to your to your belief that printing those cartoons was an insult to Muslims everywhere, and that those responsible need to be taken to task. A cartoon cannot kill innocent people. Bombs, guns, and ignorance kill people. As a Satanic Feminist I am insulted every time I have to hear religious zealots no matter what their faith, preach of the love of their God and then they proceed to kill and destroy those that don't believe as they do. The world we live in today is not any different from the world of one hundred or one thousand years ago. The Holy war continues. I'm tired of the bigotry, violence and death, perpetrated in the name of God. Frankly, yours or any other mans God is nothing but a psychotic voice leading the world down the path of destruction.
Sincerely,
Patty Jr. Satanic Feminist

It's not easy being - I think we all know the answer by now as to where all those flags came from. This "spontaneous" uprising has been on the boil since December. The Arab blogosphere has been all over it in the last couple of days, exposing the hypocrisy in the Arab world. I've highlighted some links in my latest blog post at Ambit Gambit, with a bit of help from Crikey's latest newsletter. The whole thing appears to be a bit of a scam and would probably have confirmed to the perpetrators their belief that we are a lazy and dissolute society without the strength of our own convictions. But it makes it a good opportunity to try to open some conversations, at least with some Islamic bloggers. The flip-side for moderates inside Islam is that it confirms their belief in the essential corruptness of many of their leaders.

graham y, agreed. i also appreciated your article, it struck me as simillar to the position of the islamic scholar/activist who appeared on dateline (forgot the name), who was optimistic that the global focus on this issue would lead to a greater understanding, from the islamic side of the principal and practical consequences of freedom of speach, and from the western side of the valid objection to the representation on the prophet.

one would hope that the upside to this situation is that it forces both 'sides' to confront and clarify their own position in a direct and frank way.

Good way to comment on other’s views:

If you would like to comment on any article you have to focus on the article itself while being honest and fair with your claims. Positive criticism is only achieved if you share your strong views with supporting references without being prejudice about author’s faith, culture or race.

Though some members’ comments are very much irrelevant to the article and some have attacked author’s personal background. I welcome the comments of everyone as it helps me understand the mentality and thinking of various individuals and section of people.

Enjoy the debate

Syed

Syed Atiq ul Hassan commenting on the cartoon controversy, applauds the UN and the proposal to institute a new 'Human Right' protecting religion from criticism.

“It is good to see that the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling on the international community to combat defamation against all religions and to curb the tendency against Islam. However, the international community should also establish new laws where insulting of any prophet - it doesn’t matter which one: Mohammed, Jesus, Moses, Buddha, or any other god or spiritual leader of any faith - must be criminalised.”

Perhaps a good place to start, if the Directive is to ever be implemented and policed, is in Darfur, Sudan where the Islamic Sudanese government has systematically resourced and encouraged the ethnic-genocide of the predominantly non-Arab people of Darfur.

However, the problem with Syed Atiq ul Hassan’s comment concerns relegating Jesus to the Islamic interpretation of a prophet. The view that Christ is a prophet holds true in Islam; however, Christ is viewed as the Son of God in Christianity.

Will Syed Atiq ul Hassan apologize for his demeaning of Christianity?

Also see http://weekbyweek7.blogspot.com

Opprobrious Syed. I think than an appropriate nickname.

Syed

I have just re-read your article. I could not find any references to support your assertions.

By the way, why do some people say Muslim, and others say Moslem? I will appreciate your clarification. Pardon my ignorance.

I hope you read Irfan's article.

Cheers
Kay

Dear fellow forum members

I do not usually post my thoughts on here often as I find the people have pre-set minds and are not willing to give each other a "fair-go". I have read the article and i think it has very valid arguments...a fellow member mentioned no references - i think you need to read it the 3rd time...some in here mentioned that Jesus was mentioned as a Prophet....i think they didnt read on where it said any religious or spritual leader...I think we have to realise and see what issues we are dealing with at the present time in world politics...its not about a mockery of ones religion - freedom of speech also carries responsibility -

Dear fellow member Kalweb (Kay)

I think what you have mentioned supports that people are ignorant and are commenting on issues they have no basic knowledge of. - As Christianity –Judaism - Islam have been in practice for a very long time – this is a perfect example of how people do not know the facts and lack knowledge but yet are willing to give firm comments…

A perfect example why we are globally in turmoil…

Yes Syed,criminalise any criticism of all religions and soon you will be stifle all free speech just as they do in most Muslim countries.Our democracy and freedom of speech is just as sacred to us,as religion is to the Muslims.Try and change that and you'll have a real fight on your hands.No anti-religious vilification laws that the politically correct can manipulate to their own ends.

If Muslims had the common sense to ignore the cartoons,they wouldn't have even got a mention in the media,let alone world wide exposure.I think some Muslims like to get enraged,since it gives them a sense of power and purpose.They protest too much.The outrage is just acknowledging their perceived superiority of the West,and their desire to settle old scores which are longer even revelant.

It is time for Muslims to grow up and join the 21st century.

I can agree with Sayed up to a point in that the media do have a responsibility to show some respect. Unfortunately many journalists take the view that anything goes and many lives are unnecessarily destroyed because of it (eg. Princess Diana).

In the case of the Danish cartoons very little is gained from printing what is obviously antagonistic towards Muslims that could not be said in another less inflammatory way. However I disagree entirely with his objection towards publishing of 'Satanic verses' and 'Shame' that make important contributions towards awareness and debate. Just because someone may be offended is not sufficient reason alone not to publish something - especially as there seem to be some really sensitive souls out there. The point is that there really should be some value in the work itself before the 'freedom of speech' banner is raised.

My goodness...I wonder if all these Islamaphobes self-righteously talking of freedom of speech are equally vocal in their condemnation of the banning of David Irving from coming here. Surely that would follow..if you feel freedom of speech to be so important let's hear what he has to say....oh, I thought not.

In this political climate Muslims are easy game for bullies and those willing to jump on a popular band-wagon without having to do much reading or thinking.

This climate has been created by the US oil barons, who, for those in a coma these few years, has just invaded, occupied, stolen natural resourses from and commited mass murder in a Muslim country......HELLO....where are those self-righteous people when mass murder has taken place...oh, I see- it's different when Muslims are killed!

I do believe that the people in Muslim countries are being equally conned and manipulated by their leaders...as those in the west are. The vast majority of human beings are like pawns in a chess game between the so-called leaders. Perhaps the relationship between the Bush family- and other powerful US oil barons- and the Bin-Laden family-along with the Saudi and Kuwaiti oil barons is more close than that between the leaders and people of their respective countries.

One needs to ask why these cartoons were shown at all; they are neither funny or clever...just offensive...and provocative.

A current affair conducted a survey last night, asking should australia abandon multiculturalism. The result, 97% said dump it, 3% said keep it.

Too late though, their already here and totally wacko. So all voters for political parties, the supporters of Bush, Howard and Blair. The USA relgiion evangalists and PC lefties do gooders, hows it working for you now, screwed up again eh.

The smartest person to enter politics in 50 years, foretold this. But she was hounded out by the relgious freaks, lefties and righties until they jailed her for nothing. Whilst the nutters crowed about how they had stopped this racist from ruining this wonderful, multi relgious society.

This Syed bloke, sets it out in plain english. Its Islams way or nothing, they have enough numbers here now to make waves and create divisions.

Come on chrisians, when's your god coming to save all you true beleivers and support his muslim ones. He must be a bit confused about who to support. Next chapter will be, help, he didn' turn up. Maybe a scripture or two or three wouldn't help. The only way to stop this happening is remove relgion in this country and if the expression of their religion is more important than the safety and freedom of this country, then throw them out, their traitors.

You have to give Syed credit, he's not mucking around, we do it their way or bye bye, just like the rest of the relgious control world, totally stuffed.

To Synod Hassan

Knowing how sensitive the Muslims are these days, maybe the Danish media should have done more homework.

For example in our bush district Jew woolbuyers because of their strident wheeler-dealing, including sob stories, have long been the butt of jokes in country pubs, and certainly they could take it all with a smile. But never never did we ever see anything cynical in the press about migrants white, black or brown, and never about their religions, but that is not to say there was not plenty of cynical jokes behind the scenes.

It is believed that any competent journalist should have known that with the rising resentment that most Muslims have for us Westerners right now, much of it our own fault, the reaction to the cartoon should have been imagined by an editor, as like throwing gasoline on a fire.

While on the job, it might be said there is disgust at the way so many of our contributors treat the United Nations. It is well to ask, in what way can the UN be replaced? Surely not by one unipolar power like the US, which as a democracy, the citizens can elect a party so right-wing the nation may as well be called a Fascist state. We already see it, with so many separation of power rules broken, one that the Federal Reserve should not be dictated to by government, and the other, that the head of the Supreme Court must not be appointed by government, but by the body of the Supreme Court itself. Refusing such rules can be liable for an impeachmen for a President or a PM.

Syed, there is a simple way to stop people giving religion a hard time. Keep it out of politics. How many people do you see attacking Buddhism for instance?

As both Islam and Christianity to a lesser extent are political and affect our lives, your suggestion would mean no freedom of political debate. Religious leaders could do as they please, hiding beyond your suggested laws. Thats the slippery slope down towards theocracy, which applies in so many Islamic countries. Thats exactly what alot of Muslims fled, when they moved to Australia in the first place. So your idea won't work sorry.

Hello Sunisle, sounds like you need to stop watching so many Michael Moore doco's. You don't seem to care about slaughter of non-muslims by muslims all around the world, from Indonesia to Sudan and back.

The point of the cartoons was to see what the Islamic reaction to them would be. Jylands Posten suspected it would be violent, and the cartoons depicted that. The hypocrisy lies not with the US, but with muslims who demand respect for their religion, yet disrespect the Jewish holocaust in vile cartoons, Buddhist statues in Afghanistan and their general Christophobic tendencies in places like Saudi Arabia.

The behaviour of some muslims is indeed disrespectful. What goes around comes around 'eh!

Bushbred - Part Two

We can also give the example of the illegal attack on Iraq, a preemptive strike, which no democratic government in its right mind should ever attempt.
Most political science tutors, will read from a text book how the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, disgusted with Napoleon discarding his role of liberator to that of emperor, wrote a thesis on Perpetual Peace for a troubled world. Certainly he meant a democratic world, not with one power calling the tune, like the US is at present, but for a Federation of Nations, with libertinian rules that must not be broken. In fact, the League of Nations tried to be patterned on it, and later the UN.

But two nations have been the major trouble with the UN, notably the Soviet Union and the United States, both nations believing they had the qualities for global rulership. Naturally, Immanuel Kant, would have regarded such attitudes with scorn, especially as regards libertinian values.

But now with the Soviets gone, thank goodness, we have Pax Americana with ambitions not much different from Pax Romana, and with a government run mostly by ex-oil executives and Jewish backed neo-cons. We do pray that in the Middle East, we can trust this self-appointed world body to replace the UN, but America’s record in the Middle East, along with its ally, Pax Britannia, since WW1, does not give knowlegable ME historians much hope

Sunrise

Are you awake or merely mumbling in the pre-dawn?

Fact:

9/11 preceeded armed conflict between the US and it's allies in Afghanistan and in the push to rid Iraq and the world of Saddam's menace.

It wasn't the other way around as you suggest.

Besides even a cursory evaluation of the recent history, oh of about the last 1000 years, will show clearly the cause of violence in the mid east.

There is also ample written on the subject of why the cartoons were first published. It had little to to with being deliberately offensive. It was done essentially to prove that drawing pictures of Mohammed for a Kiddies story book about Islam wouldn't cause grief to Muslims.

When first published in September last year there was hardly a ripple of criticism and the point seemed proved. Once the idiots in charge in the mid east (Now that is a silly idea) with political barrows to push got hold of them an orchestrated campaign of violence followed.

We islamaphobes and bullies are at least well informned unlike your self. I'd prefer those states than ignorance.

Myriah

I am not ignorant as you have suggested. I am learning. That is the reason I joined OLO and that is the reason that I posted the question to the author.

I do not understand the similarities and/or differences between use of the terms Muslim and Moslem. I would like to know.

Do you have the answer?

Cheers
Kay

PS: There are many knowledgeable people in this forum. I may not agree with their ideas, but I learn heaps - even from those who tend to rant and rave at times. C'est la vie.

MYRIAH said

[people are ignorant and are commenting on issues they have no basic knowledge of. - ...people do not know the facts and lack knowledge but yet are willing to give firm comments…]

Myriah, problem number 1.... do YOU know the facts of Islam ?
do YOU know the full story of the life of the so called prophet ?

Example.
I used the story of "the Jewish woman throwing garbage on his yard, daily for years, and when she stopped, he enquired about her health"..in a little bible study group where I did not say she was Jewish, or that 'he' was Mohammed.. and people were touched and moved! Like you probably have been.

But Imagine this, then I tell them the OTHER side of that mans character, where he arranges the MURDER of a poet who mocked him !
I think their faces will change ! (Kaab bin Ashraf)
There are other numerous examples of genocide, murder, torture and sexual things, from ISLAMIC sources, but I won't mention them again here.

The Mafia dons did 'nice' things to gain popular local support too.

Now..ask yourself THIS.. if you knew of both sides of the mans character, at the SAME time, would you regard him 'fondly' ?
I hardly think so.

Now.. we don't have to 'insult' him, we just have to tell the true facts and realities. Its enough for people to know about him. But I'll almost guarantee, you would not want 'non muslims' talking about his life like that because the 'tone' and meaning and 'spin' cannot be controlled.

SUNISLE.. I for one say YES let David Irving come and give his 2 cents worth ! and then.. what he says can be subjected to critical scrutiny and tested for facts or simple allegations.

I don't think a lot of Muslims in Western countries appreciate, respect, or understand freedom of speech. This is partly our own fault for allowing large irredentist seditionist enclaves of culturally adverse people to gather in our midst. Quite frankly, if you create an environment for these groups to grow and fester, you are asking for it.

I think it's funny that Muslim protesters in England, in a protest against their prophet being depicted with a bomb for a turban, decided it was clever to dress up as suicide bombers, to protest in the heart of London, and to chant things like "7/7 on its way", "death to Israel" and "death to America". I mean, seriously, how dumb are these people. They need a good dose of Western liberal education so they can learn how to think, and then, one day, maybe they'll understand comedic device like parody and satire, and even irony.

I agree that freedom of speech should be exercised sensitively, but in Western societies we should be able to publish whatever we want without fear of upsetting nutcases living amongst us who subsequently threaten to blow up the world. In one sense it's a good way of quickly determining who is fit for expulsion. Let them protest in Iran or strap themselves to nuclear power plants there. But why should we tolerate their retrograde attitudes in our societies? They don't tolerate western freedoms in Iran.

If it is inevitable that for every 20 Muslims you get one loony, then we cannot have any Muslims. There is no other way to have no loonies. And it only takes a small number of loonies to unleash catastrophic destruction through terrorist acts. The risk is too great, and not one we should tolerate. Go figure. But I'm open to suggestions.

I vehemently object to what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it. Does anyone remember that? Do Muslims living in large numbers in Western societies understand that? Or is it a politically incorrect thing to say in this atmosphere of cultural cowardice?

As for Syed Atiq ul Hassan's "article", it is the vilest detritus I have stumbled across for some time. Upon reading this piffle I immediately assumed he writes for The Age, then I realised he is a "senior journalist" of some type who supposedly writes for "foreign media agencies".

Hassan talks about "terrifying Muslim extremism", obviously cowed by the prospect of lunatic attacks in the future unless such groups are appeased. And the scary thing is that he is a journalist. He must be from the new school of journalism. Ever heard of "fearless reporting" Mr Hassan? Do you know what the function of a journalist is in society? Do you know what a journalist is supposed to DO?

Freedom of expression has always included a freedom to insult, mock, and humiliate, even when we don't like it.

And as for comments about David Irving, I don't like what he says, but I think he should have been allowed to come into Australia to say whatever he wanted. It is only because Australia has already started to lose its way and because we are "multicultural" that we bowed to narrow interest groups and barred him. And it was a national disgrace.

It seems to me that the best thing for humanity would be to get rid of all religions. They're all pretty silly when you look at them objectively.

Mr Hassan’s opinion is simply a demand that Islam must be exempt from any criticism, dressed up with sanctimonious flowery rhetoric.
What Mr Hassan and his co religionists will not face is the fact that Islam is a failure and it must reform. What caused the West to power ahead of the Islamic civilisation was the West's realisation that a slavish adherence to religious doctrine was detrimental to the concept of good governance.

It took hundreds of years of religious wars to drive that point home. But when that concept was finally internalised by the Reformation, our sciences, arts and commerce began to flourish. The Reformation was a period when every aspect of contemporary Western social values, including religion, was either directly, indirectly of covertly criticised and even held up to ridicule. It was by such means that rigidly held concepts of what was right and what was wrong that had existed for centuries in the Western world were changed. Western society evolved as changing times and changing circumstances altered the fundamental concepts which had guided our culture.

If ever any culture now needed a lot of criticism and a great deal of introspection, it is the Islamic culture. It’s adherents are among the poorest, sickest, and least literate in the world. It’s manufacturing industries do not even exist, it’s governments are almost entirely dictatorial, and it’s people are renowned as potential sources of endless civil strife, war and terrorism. That a “senior journalist” like Hassan could demand that his faith be exempted from any criticism at all by the press, is an indication of how brainwashed these people are by their Imam’s.

Hassan’s rant reeks of the same phoney self righteous piety of his religious leader, Sheil Al Hilaly, who public comments always praise multiculturalism and social harmony, while he preaches sermons at the Lakemba mosque attacking the Queen, calling Freemasons, Rotary, and Lion’s clubs “conspiratorial groups”, and calling Americans “pigs”, Russians “dogs”, and Jews “snakes”. (Weekend Australian, Sept. 14, 2002)

I am not going to participate in this debate,but seeing that JC was mentioned,my question is why is he always portrait as an ANGLO SAXON,this has been the case ever since I was at school,and when we were given religeous lessons, when he was the subject,all pictures or holy cards shows him as a WHITE ANGLO SAXON,and this is still the case in 2006.

I cannot but comment on the constant chants of atheists who wish to do away with religion altogether. This indicates their longing for the type of State that existed in the USSR where the practise of religion was banned. They equally want a totalitarian State that quashes any expression of faith in God or upholds spiritual values as primary.

We live in a free democracy where freedom of expression is primary to our way of life and if any point of view or religion is dominant then it violates others freedom of expression. Muslim emergence cannot cope with a democratic State as they try to close freedom of expression down, for the emergence of shari'ah blasphemy law enforcement. A closed community to other opinions becomes obsessive in the enforcement of one opinion and destroys true personal freedom and democracy.

Being a Christian I believe the individual is totally responsible for their character, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviour; so any imposition other than a democratically agreed law that serves all people is denying that personal responsibility whereby the individual is accountable before God. If an individual is enforced to believe or behave in a certain manner against their free will then they cannot be judged by God for that. Our accountability before God must be our free and total choice.

Syed Atiq ul Hassan “The creators, promoters and publishers of insulting material which directly hurt and harm society must be accountable and taken to the international court of justice.”

Why?

If we accept the principal of freedom of expression, then no court is qualified to hear complaints about its abuse.

“insulting material” is a subjective evaluation. What is “insulting” to one person is not necessarily “insulting” to another person.

Laws are objective statements which define the limits of action.
Laws cannot be applied to the subjective evaluation of expression.

I would add, there is a world of differences between insulting and incitement.

Greater harms have been perpetrated on us all by those who perceive danger from freedom of expression in others (often to their own privilege) than by those who “express”.

Intolerance to this freedom and attempts to constrain it lead to repression across a range of human activity because the media of communication (expression) has been stifled and censored.
We know the history books and we know what happened when people are not allowed to express freely their own personal view. We know the types of government which ensue from the repression of freedom of speech.

I would prefer to be insulted by the ignorant (and am, I could cite several posters here as example) than risk giving power to anyone to suppress the right of the ignorant to express.

Philo – well said

Philo
I agree with you. Religion should not be banned. I am an agnostic, which is to say, “I don’t know” regarding the existence of God.
Christians Muslims Buddhists Hindus et al. have every right to their beliefs. The fact that I consider religion to be a construct of man’s making, with little basis in reality, is only my opinion.
Other people have other opinions, and they are welcome to them.
However, I also believe that Mankind should grow up a bit after these several thousand years have passed, and get on with the definition of a new way of thinking which preserves the right of all people to their beliefs, but which does not impinge on the freedoms and rights of others.
This is already happening by the way, as attendances in Churches are falling. Unfortunately, our Muslim friends seem to be a bit further behind, as witness their primitive outbursts about a bunch of silly cartoons recently.
They seem to be in a period of arrested development.
Oh well, maybe being exposed to the searing atmosphere of debate and freedom of speech here in the west, might help them to advance a bit.
Our freedom of speech is absolutely sacred to us, as another poster recently remarked. Syed’s attack on it, however mild it is, has not incited us to issue death threats, and burn down buildings, thus proving the moral superiority of our attitude to the one that he espouses.

I suppose you can call this, Self Perpetuated hatred.
The Ideals that Islam is the only living creature on the face of the earth, so we must embrace it, we must not offend it, as the savage beast will awaken. There, that is the crux of the problem in my opinion, just as the Mohammad’s of the day, exonerate your own evil deeds against others and proclaim it in the order of Allah because he said so. Philosophically antitheist corruption. Egoism at its best and plagiarism of others theology. Sounds pathological to me.
Still have not heard a word about the Imams and their three captions of Mohammad that started this mess, Have not heard of any Fatwa’s issued against them, can we guess why? The game is up.

Davo,

Muslims killed by Muslims- unlike you, I try not to put people into catagories. You never mentioned the human beings from the US that murdered hundreds of thousand of other human beings in Iraq. Does this issue embarrass you or are the deaths of so many human beings insignificantbecause they are not your important catagory?

Keith,

Personal insults do not constitute an effective argument- they show that you have none. As to being well-informed, you seem unaware of what had been happening to Iraq- daily attacks from the air by the US and followers- well before 9/11. Neither are you aware that Sadam was armed by the US, as it suited them to keep him in power. I wonder which countries you have lived in. I lived in the Middle East and the human beings there want the same thing that we all want- safety and freedom for their families...to state otherwise is racist. They, as all human beings do, have strengths and weakeness. Unfortunately for that part of the world, the British carved up those countries and put quizlings in power in the 40s....we are now seeing the results of this. The mass of human beings in that area are not responsible for the mess in their governments...they are pawns the same as we are. I suggest you read Edward Said's "Orientalism". Then move on to Illan Pappe's books...people who have lived in that part of the world...one a Palestinian, the other an Israeli. You might read a Canadian journalist's book, "A war against truth"....he was there as the bombs were dropping down.

BOAZ_ david, don't hold your breath waiting for David Irving to come- he isn't allowed to. You try writing about Israel's international crimes, ( documented by the Red Cross, the UN, Amnesty International, Nelson Mandela, the EU, and Ghandi's grandson) and see how far that gets you. Hate mail, personal attacks in the newspapers, and intimidation.

Try waiting for the media to show the latest children killed by the Israelis, 2 in one week a week ago.

What passes for moderation in the Islamic community — “I share your rage but don’t torch that embassy” — is nothing of the sort. It is simply a cynical way to endorse the goals of the mob without endorsing its means. It is fraudulent because, while pretending to uphold the principle of religious sensitivity, it is interested only in this instance of religious insensitivity.

Have any of these “moderates” ever protested the grotesque caricatures of Christians and, most especially, Jews that are broadcast throughout the Middle East on a daily basis? The sermons on Palestinian TV that refer to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys? The Syrian prime-time TV series that shows rabbis slaughtering a gentile boy to ritually consume his blood? The 41-part (!) series on Egyptian TV based on that anti-Semitic czarist forgery (and inspiration of the Nazis), “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” showing the Jews to be engaged in a century-old conspiracy to control the world?

A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths. Those who don’t are not moderates but hypocrites, opportunists and agents for the rioters, merely using different means to advance the same goal: to impose upon the West, with its traditions of freedom of speech, a set of taboos that is exclusive to the Islamic faith. These are not defenders of religion but Muslim supremacists trying to force their dictates upon the liberal West.

And these “moderates” are aided and abetted by Western “moderates” who publish pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with elephant dung and celebrate the “Piss Christ” (a crucifix sitting in a jar of urine) as art deserving public subsidy, but who are seized with a sudden religious sensitivity when the subject is Muhammad.

I really appreciate the wonderful services provided by the forum owners to everyone indiscriminately but I regret to say that once I posted my comments then I decided not to come again on this forum as there are only same few people, who keep talking nonsense against, multiculturalism, against Islam, Muslim and other non-White race rather than arguing on the issue documented in the article. I cannot see many writer who can write thoughts and views of the other side but if fortunately someone write, like “Syed” they all instead of talking on the topic jump on author’s racial or religious background and start attack on him/her and his faith – Is the freedom of speech – if you claim yes this is freedom of express than sham – you people need to learn from the basic…..

It is shame to see that they don’t have much knowledge about the history of Islam and within the religion buy observing today’s political events in the world they very abusively target Muslims.

Kaspa; you didn’t see such type articles like of “Syed” because you hardly find any writer’s story in Australian main stream publication but if you really have interest and want to get more knowledge about others and make your vision big then go and read international news publication, New York Times, Observer etc.

Philo, Religion of any belief, is nothing more than a refuge for the intellectually crippled, or to put it more kindly, a refuge of the intellectually unsophisticated and a form of infantilism. So we can understand how your ilk can't see beyond the past.

We have evolved beyond all forms of repressive ideologies, so communism is not an option as is Religion. Some of us are in the 21st century, unlike those deliberately and violently hanging on to their fearful illusions. There is no other option, Religion want control, Christians as well. Look at the current debate on abortion, sexuality, ID, religion in schools. It takes a lot to get any reforms through, as those in power are so infantile they cling desperately to their outdated fears.

Last century there were a number of attempts to rid some societies of Religion, because of the despotic control they had. They failed, but that doesn't mean we should go backwards to the past. We need to go forward and create a society that is free of these infantile and outdated barbaric delusions, without losing our freedoms and individuality.

Because of the huge amount of weight that Religion has upon the powers that be, it looks like we will have to enter another huge war until the religious are reduced to levels where they can be pushed into their kindergarten churches and kept there., Then they can express their illusionary joy and leave us to get on with living responsibly.

That may mean the death of billions in the end, but I bet Philo, the religious will not take a backward step to relieve this country of that threat, no you will press on blindly until its all gone. No help from your god either, I guarantee that.

Malik, you assert that the writers on the forum are not talking to the issue. This is evidently false, as all but very few are addressing the issue of whether free speech should be curbed by legal means to avoid hurting the sensibilities of Islam.
Of course, they may also add some comments of their own, according to their own political/religious views.
You also state that you decided not to comment on the forum because “as there are only same few people, who keep talking nonsense against, multiculturalism, against Islam, Muslim and other non-White race….”
And yet, here you are having your say.
You are perfectly entitled to have your say, and if you have any valid argument, put it to the test of scrutiny by the other posters.
I did a count of the posters and their reaction to the proposition made by Syed. 33 posters were against him, 4 had a position which put them half –way on his side, 2 were completely off-topic, and 3 are for Syed’s position.
That is just my own assessment, others may come to slightly different conclusions, but I’m willing to bet, not much different.

Kaspa and other prejudiced members; do you know

1)Who initiated 2nd World War, who killed millions of Jews… who, ever used atomic bomb on innocent people, I am sure you will not find any Muslim names there but may find people of perhaps same faith as you have…..
2)Who hired paid-agent from Arab land after First World War and made them Sheiks to rule the poor people once for ever and steeling their oil resources – I am sure you will not find any Muslim name there.
3)Who first made millions of Jews homeless then invaded lands of Arab in Palestine and populated with Jews – I am sure you will not find any Muslim name there
4)Who colonise the entire world, India, South Africa even USA and treated the natives as animals – “Dogs and blacks not allowed” I don’t think these rules have ever been used in any Muslim State except by the western empires..
5)Who provided dangerous weapon to Saddam Hussain to kill the people of Iran and Iraqis, 10 years then bombed Iraq… destroyed the entire infrastructure and now killing innocent citizens everyday on the name of providing them peace
6)Unfortunately the history is so long and so dark I can write pages and page

Well, perhaps I should have said "organized" religion. I am NOT an atheist, but I'm damned sick and tired of hearing arguments of "My god's better than your god". Religion is used, and those in a position of authority in religion use their possitions for nothing more than maintaining their position and telling people what to and what not to do, and most often, these proscriptions end up being "do as I say, not as I do". The prohibitions imposed by many religions on their followers are capricious, illogical and, in many cases, contrary to human nature. To try to impose those same prohibitions on nonbelievers is even more fatuous. It seems to me that the people who had the best conceptions of deity were the classical Greeks and Romans, since their gods were fallible and capricious. Any being as powerful as the biblical god is so far beyond the plane of human existence that we are beneath his/hers/its awareness. But wait! The bible has god declaring "I am a jealous god". Isn't this a human emotion? Shouldn't god be beyond jealousy? Monotheistic religions have a vested interest in persecuting other faiths simply because their authority rests in one particular version of an exclusive deity. I am the ultimate arabiter of what I choose to believe regarding spiritual matters, and I'm not going to let any imam, bishop, pope or guru tell me what I am supposed to believe.

Many of you repeatedly suggesting throwing out Muslims and other non-whites from this land – Why? Because you came first here
- My parents and grands parents, atleast did not come in this country as a convicts
- My parents, atleast, didn’t the eliminated thousand years old aborigines culture and pet their children as animals
- I am in this country as a professional migrant and the day I landed I served this country utilising my skills and talent which I brought with me from my motherland

I am very happy to see that first time one person from I think Muslim background write on this forum who has raised the issue to ban on blasphemous stories and cartoon not only against Mohammed but Jesus, David, Budda etc but some of you instead of appreciating his balanced approach abusing him just because he has a background which you don’t have you. – Come on lets have big heart and mind and treat the people what they deserve and keep vision to accommodate other culture, faith and religion the way these poor native aborigines gave our parents opportunity to enjoy on this land once for ever…

Alan_Bond

I for one appreciate the skills and diversity that migrants bring to this country (especially since I am a migrant myself :)).

However I am noticing that there is a definite culture gap between Western and non-Western countries where differences lie in the understanding of the importance of free speech, among other things. Freedom of speech, along with democracy is fundamantal to the very nature of Western society. Sayed, even as a journalist, does not seem to understand this and neither apparently do you. I appreciate that it can often appear disrespectful and provocative but the consequences of inhibiting free speech would be far worse. Perhaps this is something that can only be understood by growing up in a democratic environment. I wonder if there is enough education material available for new migrants to really understand what Western society is all about - it is not just Capitalism.

There are a lot of things said that I do not like and there are occasions where I believe it would be better if things were left unsaid. It is up to the speaker (or editor) to determine whether their thoughts are of sufficient value that it is worth offending someone. However the right to speak freely must never be compromised.

Without freedom to speak openly there would not be informed democracy and there would be no Western society. Maybe this is why some groups oppose it so vehemently.

Tell me, Syed Atiq ul Hassan, do you really think any Muslims would take a cartoonist to a "Court of Justice" for slander?

I mean, how can you slander a man like Islam's dear prophet? Islam's own accounts tell us he was a murderer, torturer, slaver and beat his own wife. This when he wasn't telling hio followers to rape and kill. How do you sleep at night?

The fact is that these protests show Islam's true and bloody colors. The hate and anger in all the Muslim world is a fit legacy to the hate and anger promoted by Mohammad.

In all of your article, perhaps you failed to note that the non-Muslims, when insulted, did not act like a bunch of raving maniacs, crying for the death of other human beings.

Perhaps you should think about the difference between "imaginary drawings" (by Non-Muslims)and "violence" (by Muslims, of course), instead of implying that one must lead to the othwer. That type of logic is truely worthy of a follower of Mohammed.

So you are insulted by the cartoons. I am insulted by the vile actions and evil life of the man you defend. Want to compare insults?

John aka kactuz

Alan Bond, mate, if you have so much resentment for the people of the country you migrated to, why are you here? Some fool in immigration has there eyes closed (greedy for your skills).

Do you really think the injustices you mention are isolated to western countries and whites in general? What you mention is history, we are talking about now. Cartoons are no reason to riot, boycott and cause mayhem. The group who would only react this way to a cartoon, only seem to be muslims.

The main gripe is the double standard held by muslims: muslims can disrespect the memory of the holocaust, call hindu's cow worshippers and so forth but no-one can dare to offend us. Film makers get stabbed for making a film muslims don't approve of.

Sayed,

I think you also need to address Freedom of speech in Muslim countries that do nat have it... It truly is one of the strengths of modern civilization.

What would happen to a Muslim in a Muslim Country who stood up and said "the holocaust never happened". Would he be attacked from all sides for an offensive remark to the Jewish people of this world? Would he be jeered or cheered?

I am not Jewish but I am offended by people who make the statement "the holocaust never happened". I don't rush out and burn down buildings, I don't go and start a huge protest... I ignore the comment and think "what a fool"!

The cartoons are much like that... Is it really Mohammad being depicted? How can you tell if there are no images of him allowed? Are you taking offense or was an offense meant?

I feel sorry that some Muslims were offended by the cartoons and have chosen to call it blasphemy but it is in no way as offensive as "the holocaust never happened". In one premeditated effort 6,000,000 people were exterminated...

If Hitler had won the war we would never have heard of the holocaust happening because he would have oppresed free speech.

The simple rule is... if you think it might offend you don't look. Like when I change channels because I don't want to watch a particular TV show because I am offended by it's stupidity.

I too am a strong advocate for our migrants and thank them for their contribution to our society. However, Sajo is correct without freedom of speech the West as we know it wouldn't probably exist.

What is more important a few very average cartoons or freedom of speech

The problem will remain that if religions are political by nature, anything but free speech about them will start to turn democracies into theocracies.

The real problem I see as a larger one. In this world, might has sadly proven to be right. The West is hopelessly addicted to Arab oil and if the Arabs decide to switch off the oil tap to those countries where free speech about their political religion is allowed, what then?

I think we really need to make a larger effort with things like biodiesel and many other alternate options, for that threat is a far greater threat to the West then anything else

Mr. Hassan, Let me tell you why I think your dear prophet is vile. Here are quotes from Islam's own sacred histories:

"When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent men in their pursuit ... they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra. They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died..." http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html. Read verse 261 Yes, they were murderers, but....

Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla.... Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you..."
Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301 http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.301

"The military expeditions (Ghazawat, literally raid) in which the Messenger personally participated were twenty-six. Some say there were twenty-seven." Tabari IX:118 (a Hadith) The Muslims were very proud of surprise attackes on caravans and villages. The men were killed and the women enslaved.

Mohammed says... "Why is it, O 'A'isha (his 9 yearold wife!) that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me... He struck me on the chest which caused me pain....... ," The Koran, Muslim 4:2127.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/004.smt.html#004.2127

"And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hand possess (your slaves). It is a decree of Allah for you. The Quran, Muslim 4:24.

Oh yes, let us not forget Asma Marwan and her 5 children murdered by Mohammad.

And so on - hundreds of accounts of torture, murder and oppression - in Islamic accounts. In fact, one early biographer (Ibn Hisham) said he had to omit things that were too disgraceful to discuss and would distress people.

John Kactuz.

PS: I know you don't care about these facts!

Those cartoons and the reaction to them in print should not be underestimated.
Surely its clear this is now out of control?, this Saturday the Sydney Telgraph page 19.
Cartoons can be seen that have been printed in middle eastern papers so full of hate and spite I am breathless!
And in that same paper and on every news broadcast the Malaysian prime minister , a moderate?
Is quoted saying the invasion of Afganistan was wrong? helped bring this on?
Talban murdered people on sports grounds in public!
Blew other relidgions icons up!
Stop the lies, its true one sided attempts to live together and understand others views will never work.
Islam seems to me to be unable to see its own faults.
Sorry but a war is the result if both sides are not honest.

Sajo asks,"What can we do to help us understand each other better?" I know the answer to that is the East and the West must always live apart.
We in the west have opened our countries and our services to help the poor "asylum seekers" from Muslim countries and what do we get in return? Demands, demands and more bloody demands,insults, violence, shootings, bashings. That is how our kindness has been repaid.
So to restore the peace that we had before, we must return to the status we had before and rid this country of those ingrates who deserve only that which they had before.And the sooner the better.

'... ideas by those filthy minds who claim themselves to be scholars, writers and journalists.'

I couldn't agree more. The vile hate literature and anti-western, anti-Semitic filth produced in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries certainly fits this description. What else but 'filthy minds' could produce the idea that Jews drink blood? Or that all Western women are whores? Likewise the Australia-hating garbage produced and disseminated by Muslims in this country. I would also include the obscene rants of visiting 'clerics' - like the one who claimed that women were responsible for their own rape because they refuse to wear all-emcompassing shrouds.

"The creators .. of insulting material which directly hurt and harm society must be accountable and taken to the international court of justice."

In this case, the court would be overrun with Muslim defendents, who seem to have no problem dishing out insults and violence to others, but lash out like wild beasts when Islam gets the same treatment.

The rioting, burning and killing has shown us the true Islam. Strange that there were no protests when followers of the 'religion of peace' destroyed the ancient Buddhas, and burned and desecrated Christian churches.

Yet you advise us to surrender to this bigotry? This demonstrates that you (and the majority of Muslims) dont have a clue.

The muslims are rampaging around the place and they don't even realise these cartoons were published back in October in an Egyptian newspaper. Didn't hear a squeak then!
So what is it really about?? Its all about hateing the west.

Alan Bond derides our ancestory as convicts. He wouldn't think for a minute ( and sadly he hasn't been educated) that these "convicts' were in many instances victims of ethnic cleansing from the countryside. Has he ever heard of the chartists, the highland clearances, the potatoe famine, the enclosure acts, the church of england tithes, the Lutherans from Germany that were forced to South Australia etc etc. No one in their right mind would have come to 19th century Australia to battle disease and isolation unless they were forced.

I am descended from these 19th century refugees. I actually went back to Europe to try and live and work but guess what! The Europeans kicked me out as I was only entitled to a 2 year holiday maker visa. They would rather have gangs of unassimable muslims changing their laws and way of life. I would have given my rights up in Australia to an Abrorigine but in return I want a muslim to give me his house in Europe. Fair is fair Alan.

Opinionated2,
Yes that is the difference between the Alan-Bold's and us, we are rational human beings, they are full of hatred it seems, so we should show compassion and humanitarianism and send them back to where they came from, so they can be happy once more. It would appear that Muslims don't recognise Freedom of Speech, unless it suits them. That is never how it has operated in this great country. I say publish the cartoons in Australia, and see who reacts, if some do charge them with treason, and either deport them or lock them up.

Not very fair, but then neither are they, I quite like multi-culturism however I do not like people coming here telling us what we will and won't do, this country has been inhabited for 80,000 years, and we have done just fine, until these people came, who hate us it seems because we don't believe what they believe. It has to be a pretty cool day in Hell before I agree wholeheartedly with Col Rouge, redneck and co, but agree I do, and so should anyone with an ounce of grey matter......

Sunisle

The vast majority of the posters here decry the hypocritical nature of Syed's article and the hypocritical nature of those who support his view.
It is of course no surprise that no Muslim has criticised Syed's argument against free speech by the West. It is also no surprise no Muslim has supported freedom of speech in the Muslim world. Indeed it is no surprise no muslim has criticised the exact same denigration of religion in the muslim world.

WHY?

Well let's take a little look at my insults to you but only after we take a wee peek at those you initiated in your original post.

First sentence 'I wonder if all these Islamaphobes self-righteously...'

Second sentence 'Muslims are easy game for bullies...' AND 'those....without having to do much reading or thinking.'

Third sentence '...for those in a coma these few'

Fourth sentence Nil

Fifth sentence '...being equally conned and manipulated by their leaders...as those in the west are.'

Sixth sentence '...human beings are like pawns in a chess game between the so-called leaders.'

Seventh NIl

Eighth Nil

So in your post you say I'mself-righteous, Islamphobic, a bully, uninformed and ignorant, comatose, conned and manipulated, and a mere pawn.
Wow only nine insults in eight sentences.

And of course the biggest insult was to my intelligence when you, as seems to be a trait common to those who hate free speech,

Turned around and said

'Personal insults do not constitute an effective argument- they show that you have none.'

after I had responed to your hate filled post with a polite and simple question

'Are you awake or merely mumbling in the pre-dawn?'

I'd have to agree with you that personal insults do not constitute an effective argument- they show that you have none.


Mate I have to ask are you Muslim ...as hypocritical criticism seems common and a trait?

No I'm not racist but your rants make it appear to be the case with you.

Keith your not a racist as you mentioned rather Xenophobic?

– just a confused and ignorant member of our society - like i said earlier

by the way quite an amusing post - you should consider drawing cartoons -

Yes, truth always bitter…
No need for ignited comments

Alan_Bold asked you some bitter question, so you all who blew out the listing of historical facts never have answers to his question – and I know neither you would have answer nor you would have courage to accept the cruelty done by those killers of humanity but you still dare to abuse others….. Shame – and now keep writing and abusing others as this is what you all call your freedom of speech

Freedom of Speech in the West!?

When Aljazeera showed the images of brutal killings by US-lead forces in Iraq then your God Father Bush and Blair – Champions of Freedom and fair democracy – planned to bomb Aljazeera ….. This is what your democracy and freedom of speech…..

USA – the key country of Freedom of Speech – has most of its media censoring things from the general public – after 9/11 it was very controversial –the video evidence is there of the conspiracy behind it all – yet it was banned from the public when about to be aired – is this freedom of speech? – Bush banned all the forth-coming documentaries –

Freedom of Speech in the West is just artificial – we are far from freedom of speech –

Whatever happened to the Terrorism Bill passed – The Sedition Laws – wouldn’t the cartoon be enticing terrorism? Oh wait we just passed those laws because we are afraid of the Truth

Time and again – continually facts are hidden from us in this so-called democratic free society in the West – those who still live in a false box of hope should wake up…

Those who think that the Muslim world is at fault you should wake up and realise that our own kind – our own people – are the ones behind ruining the life of others for their own wealth and benefit – The West has opened the Pandora Box not the East -

“As flies to Wanton bees are we to the Gods (leaders) – they kill us for their Sport”

The Islamic faith is entrenched in politics.

Why not print the cartoons in Australia? Why are we protecting a minority group?

The Queen of England (head of C of E) cops cartoons regularly. She doesn't blow up mosques in retaliation.

Aussie politicians cop some pretty awful cartoons every day of the week. That's life in politics.

Why do so few people of Muslim faith contribute to the postings on this forum?

The cartoons should be printed in all newspapers so that we can see how the Aussie "moderates" (including Keysar Trad) react.

Cheers
Kay

Ok.. Jeny and others.. you claim no-one answered Alan Bolds questions:

Here:

1/ Hitler..and we ensured his demise, i.e. the free world did.
2/ Paid Agents ? err.. not sure what you mean here.
3/ Who made Jews homeless ? Pagan Romans in AD70 when they exiled them. (then Mohammed who committed Genocide against Banu Qurayza and exiled other Jewish tribes)
4/ Who colonized the world ?..oh.. er..that would be the ARABS.. who expanded their empire all over India,Afghanistan,China, Egypt, Syria Turkey etc... slaughtering millions (specially in India)
Oh.. The Western nations also did their share, and slaughtered many also. Britain, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Germany, France etc etc

5/ Weapons to Sadaam ? The US did of course, to balance the power of Iran, its called 'divide and conquer' in military terms. They can fight each other rather than us. Of course.. the Arabs have nevvvvvver done this right ? :) never ever ever...

6/ Yes, you can go on and on picking out black marks on Western history and you would be quite right. Just as we are quite right in picking out not only the black marks in Arab history, but also the PERSONAL history of your esteemed so called prophet.

Al-Jazeera were 'aiding the enemy' in showing a close link with Al Qaeda and giving extremely biased reports and publicising horrific acts by Muslim insurgents. "You reap what you sow". Its war..

Math 24.
4Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,[a]' and will deceive many. 6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains.

15"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,'[b] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—


The Al-Aksah Mosque.. is an abomination..on the Holy place.

Jeny: In my posting I certainly didn't want to overplay our freedom of speech, I agree with you that it is always at risk although at least we have some semblance of free speech.

I am not an expert on Muslim countries and I wonder if any have a relatively free speech similar to ours. I certainly also don't want to be aligned with people who attack all Muslims and likewise I hope there are many Muslims who don't want to blame all Danish people.

Most Muslims have made a very valuable contribution to our society. I also agree with you about the Wests terrible history in Middle Eastern countries.

Kactuz :There are plenty of verses in the Bible which similarly describe terrible acts as in the Koran. So to be fair we shouldn't just post the Koran links.

SHONGA : I wasn't suggesting that we send the Muslims back to where they came from. I was hoping that those who read my post would also realise that the cartoons weren't as offensive as other things that have happened throughout history.

Alan Bold : You ask some very relevant questions and you have every right to ask them. The history of the west is very worrying... and what we have done to the Aussie aborigine is also a disgrace... but can you guarantee that Muslims wouldn't have done similar things to them if they had found Australia first? And can you guarantee that Muslims wouldn't have acted as the West has if the shoe were on the other foot? My questions in no way excuses what we have done!

I'm against all violence and all discrimination against all people.

I guess the issue is, how different cultures and different people within those cultures, can find different things offensive.

I read this story yesterday:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HB08Df01.html

Some pictures in there are pretty graphic. Its about Muslims killing Muslims, but personally I find it tragic that homo sapiens, who are meant to be a bit more intelligent then other primates, can sink so low in their treatment of one another. It certainly does
not make me proud of my species. Compared to caricatures about historical figures, I find those pics pretty revolting.

Sheesh, we have exactly one planet, why can't we live on it sustainably and harmoniously? Are we humans as a species really too stupid to achieve that? Its sad, it really is...

On 4bc radio Brisbane, around 7ish tonight, they played an old 60s song: "Ahab, the Arab, chief of the burning sands ..."

Hilarious. Where were the church burners then? Where were you? Why didn't you have something to say about Aussie humour?

Cheers
Kay

Opinionated2,
I was not suggesting we send all Muslims home, merely those who want to act illegally, if an Australian Newspaper prints these cartoons. I believe the majority of Muslims can and do fit into our life quite happily. The small proportion of lunatics, thay would carry out violent acts in response to the cartoons, are the people I want to see charged with treason, and deported.

It is these people who intimidate those of us who practise free speech in our own country, by telling us that we cannot have free speech if it means printing a cartoon, to me this is unacceptable. Our forefathers fought two World Wars to maintain our democratic rights including freedom of speech, I for one will not be told by anyone, including migrants, what type of free speech I can have, and what type I can't have.

It Is they who must fit in with us, not the other way around, if you migrate to a country, then discover that country does not accomodate your fanatical religious beliefs, you simply migrate again, to somewhere who will recieve fanatics, problem solved.

No Keith, I am certainly not Muslim, nor do I belong to any group that separates humanity into groups. I suffered as a result of racism as a child and know first-hand the pathology of it. That is why I have chosen not to judge people by their race, colour, ethnicity and religion. Religion is a different kettle of fish, of course, as people choose their religion. That being said, I try not to judge even with religion, because some people turn to religion to help them in dire circumstances.

I can easily see that bullies and racists feel free to abuse Muslims in this poiltical climate...they really are easy game...and I speak from being treated differntly because of my father's race...in the late 40s and early 50s certain races were easy game in England. I can readily see what is happening now because of my own experiences.

Are all these people critisising Muslims equally vocal in condemning Israel's crimes...far more homes and livlihoods destroyed, people driven into a diaspora and killed than any action by Muslims? Is this because Israel is a Jewsih country and certainly not easy game? Just watch in parliament when the latest killing of children by the occupiers is brought up- very rarely though. The speaker is personally attacked and vilified. It makes bullies realise that they are on shaky ground if they want to critisise Israel...takes a brave person to do so and know they will be personally attacked for it...not so Muslims. That is waht easy game is.

Christians and Jews have killed and displaced millions of Muslims in the last 3 years...NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Has a Muslim country invaded, occupied and killed hundreds of thousands of people and left the infrastructure shattered? PLEASE ANSWER THAT QUESTION. OK, prove you are not a bully and stand up for for the group that is the victim in this scenatrio. It's much harder to stand up to the rich and powerful of the day than attack the weakest

Hey Guys now here is something everybody will agree on> Muslims Ausies alike. We are so lucky to have on line forum. Now there is real fredom of speach. We should thank these people. This is a start to making amends and a greater understading. Has any body seen that other lot. CRICKY . What a bunch of loosers. They want to read and screen everybodys posts and they decide which is posted. not much of a forum in that for god sake. So while we all have different ideas lets all say a big round of thanks to this at least. the bottom line is nobody ever likes others trying to change their country.
Its darn right ungreatful if you ask me. The ones who dont like this country as we like it should simply> GO HOME.The ones who do are most welcome!

I will also answer Jeny and Alan Bold.
1. Hitler and the Nazis- 20 million Russians, 400,000 Americans, 370,000 British, 40,000 Australians died stopping him (among others) - Muslims supported Hitler. Amin Al Husseini, founder and President of the World Islamic Congress, met Heinrich Himmler, Reichsführer-SS. He subsequently formed in 1943 the Muslim SS Hanzar Division.
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_Al-Husseini

2. The West stopped the Japanese with the use of the first Atomic Bomb- it was used to save the lives of thousands of soldiers who would have fought to the death without it, and only after much reflection. You’ll notice that it hasn’t been used since, in spite of a lot of provocation.
3. Tell us the story about the paid agents Alan? Sheiks- must have been Muslims, no?…
4. The Romans were the first to make the Jews homeless. The Muslims are now trying to eliminate them entirely. Wonder why Iran says that the holocaust never happened?
5. The Muslims were first to invade Western lands.
6. Saddam Hussein was an evil tyrant, and yes, the Americans supplied him with arms, in order to keep the Iranians tied up. Notice how his tribe (Sunni Muslims) is now every day blowing up other Muslims and US Forces who are trying to establish democracy in Iran.
7. Al Jazeera was broadcasting Iraqi and Islamic extremist propaganda- that is why they were threatened. In the end, the West didn’t need to do anything about them, because Iraq collapsed so quickly.
continued

8. USA 9/11- this is a particularly pernicious and typical Islamic distortion of the facts. Only Muslim extremist’s twisted minds and left wing apologists could possibly turn this into a “Western Plot”- Islamic terrorists killed nearly 3000 innocent people and destroyed two buildings and part of the Pentagon in one day. Why did Bin Laden gloat about it, and praise the Islamic idiots who did it, if they didn’t do it? If you want to believe pathetic Internet conspiracy theories, with zero evidence behind them, go right ahead. You wouldn’t even be able to read things like this in some parts of the World. You wouldn’t be able to post the lie that you did without free speech. And you say we don’t have freedom of speech? I particularly resent this particular piece of calumny, for the sake of all the innocent people who died on that day.

9. The sedition laws exist for a very good reason- to stop Islamic terrorists from carrying out attacks in Australia. And we know they are here. http://www.historyofjihad.org/america.html

10. The avowed intention of Islam is to eliminate Israel, and to establish the Caliphate all over the world. Go back to your own lands, give up trying to impose your religion on the West. Take your Sharia law, your dhimmitude, your taquia, your jizya tax and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. Otherwise you will reap what you sow.

There, you got the reaction you were looking for. No mealy mouthed apology from me. Just face it, Islamic religious crackpots and their disappointed leftist apologists are never going to extinguish the flame of freedom and free speech, no matter how hard you try. The more you try to impose your fanatical religion on people, the more you will be vilified. Get it now

Sunisle,

"Christians and Jews have killed and displaced millions of Muslims in the last three years".

Hey, why not "billions" or "trillions" of Muslims. Why let facts get in the way of malice and stupidity.

Let's examine the facts. Over the last 3 years, we have had genocide in Darfur, Sudan (no Christians or Jews involved), the bombing of Christian Churches in Iraq (Christian involvement - as victims), attacks and the murder of Christians in Indonesia.

Why stop in the last 3 years? You have the Iran/Iraq war, the Yemen Civil War, Black September in Jordan, the gassing of the Kurds by the Iraq regime - hhmmmmmm, can't see any Christians or Jews there!

Ah yes, not to mention the massacres and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Jews from the Arab world in the 40's and 50's as Arab payback for the independence of Israel.

I suggest you get a grip on reality.

Sunisle :
Let me get this strait, everyone else is Imperialist –but Islam, I do not know what script you have been given or who perpetuated this myth in your mind, but please snap out of it. Islam has occupied near every Country on the planet since the cult was formed.
I am intrigued by the sounding of victim hood of racism, Anglo’s have more of a case of racism than any on the face of the planet much owing to the Intellectual phonies and Looter class individuals on their own sub Jihad, but that aside, If the suffering and degrading victims of racism in Australia, and if it is that bad, then why do you choose to stay? Why not go back to your ancestral pastures?
Is it that the Leftoids in this country and other western Nations worship Misery? And what type of oppression was it that delivered you to our lands?
Are you capable achieving objectives on your own, or do you depend on others achievement and source that as you beneficial existence? At others loss of income.
Compound that issue by a few million people, then why do you think there is such resentment forming in this land, and when so many cry and scream Victim hood, then become lazy and perpetuate more Victim myths to force guilt on a population that has in no way deserved it- then be prepared for the conditioning of minds that will retaliate against such fraud.
That is not Racist, that is Human psychology, and in effect, all the left lunatics has done over a long period is reinforce Nationalism by default. Not Communist/ Socialist/Islamist Nationalism, the basic principle of Tribal existance Nationalism.

Well said Froggey: above.

Why am I suspicious of all pagan moslems even the so-called moderates
The fundamentalists brutally kill the moderates just keep quiet.
1.moslems fly planes into buildings in the USA,- no moslem outrage
2.moslems block the exit where shool girls are trying to escape a burning building because their, girl's, faces were exposed - no moslem outrage
3.moslems sever the heads of three teenage girls on their way to a Christian school - no moslem outrage
4. moslems murder teachers trying to teach moslem children in Iraq - no moslem outrage
5. moslems murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt - no moslem outrage.
6.A moslem attacks a missionary children's school in India, kills six - no moslem outrage
7.moslems slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Children shot in the back - no moslem outrage
to be finished in another post. Any pagan moslem or any of their lovers and apologists like to say something, something constructive - not blame Israel or the West. numbat

Boaz_David;

Your replies to my listed historical facts are the signs of your weakness – now I believe you supports the killing of millions of Japanese by USA by dropping atomic bomb; you must be supporting the brutal militarily actions killed and dislocated millions of children in Vietnam by Americans and Australian forces. You feel this is our right to decide what is wrong and what faith is right in others and believes. if we decide to invade the other countries and locked up the people for brutal testing of human tortures (in Abu Ghuraib and Goantanama Bay) this is right. For you, I believe Osama and Taliban were heores where US were supporting and providing them ammunition and backed 10 years their Sharia laws in Afghanistan. You feel that it was right when Saddam Hussain was supported by entire west in killing Kurds using gases and attacked Iran. You believe it is our right to use the Oil of Arab land. You believe that this is our right to decide who keep atom bomb and who should not BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONY SUPER QUALITY HUMAN BEING OF THE WEST WHO LOVE FREEDOM ON OTHER’S EXPENSES.

The cultural editor of Denmark's Jyllands-Posten has been sent on "indefinite leave", immediately after giving remarks he would consider publishing Holocaust cartoons in the mass-circulation daily. "The Editors have told (cultural editor) Flemming Rose to take a vacation because no one can understand the kind of pressure he has been under," Jyllands-Posten editor Carsten Juste told Berlingske Tidende newspaper, Reuters reported Friday, February 10.
The move comes only two days after Flemming said he was considering publishing cartoons on the Holocaust in his daily.
Three years ago, Jyllands-Posten had rejected to publish cartoon of Jesus Christ because of being "offensive" to Christians. However, the daily published last September 12 drawings mocking Prophet Muhammad.

This refusal highlights the hypocrisy & double standards adopted by the Western world in their attitude to Islam & Muslims. Only when they write something against Islam & Muslims they try to hide under the “freedom of expression” banner.

If it was freedom of expression that made Jyllands- Posten newspaper to publish the blasphemous caricatures depicting our Prophet Muhammed why didn’t they uphold the same freedom of expression and publish the cartoons submitted by Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler in April 2003. ENJOY ON YOUR DOUBLE STANDARDS

To all of you who are condemning Syed Atiq ul Hassan on his article:

For God sake be honest and fair – I have Syed’s article very deeply again and I cannot find a single statement where he has promoted Islam or Muslim ideas and condemn Christianity or any other religion. The focal point in his article is that according to his views all such type of creations which insult the faith and hurt the believes of anyone (including Christian, Muslim, Jews etc) must be banned and taken to justice – Do you feel he made an offence elaborating this view. I am very shocked to see most of you drifted your comments in abusing Islam, Muslim and author himself – what else I would say except that yes you keep hatred against Islam and Muslims and posturing your feeling whenever you find an opportunity to express your hatred against Muslim when you find that by chance any Muslim writer any piece on this forum.

I am not a Muslim but I have a courage to support a person who talks about with fairness and equality doesn’t matter what religion he/she carries. So you can suggest me that I am at the wrong forum. I would suggest the Online Forum owner to make this forum only for White extremists or Ango Saxon (the so called only owner of the land of Australia) then there will be no abuse and disrespect of others. If you little bit sincerity with Australia as you claim please please don't bring bad name to our nation by spreading a message to hatred across throug this forum..

Alan Bond,

you IslmaoFascist!! you are a terrorist apoligist, people who murder women and children of all faiths.

If the Infidels were to war against Islam, then it would be the end of Islam - the US has enough nuclear weapons to destory the world one thousand times.

If the US were nazis who war against Islam as your leftist, liberalist, islamofacist mind vehemently suggests, then i put it to you that there would not be one Muslim left in this world - not one!!

MY ANCESTORS BUILT THIS COUNTRY ON CHRISTRIAN VALUES, FREDDOM OF EXPRESSION, AND WOMEN"S RIGHTS - your relatives immigrated to Australia and didn't have a problem with christian values, freedom of expression, and women's rights at the time they immigrated - it was because of the OPPRESSION FROM ISLAMIC GOVERNMENTS THAT YOUR MUSLIM RELATIVWES IMMIGRATED HERE FOR FREEDOM - and now you want to take that freedom away in ther name of Islam!!

I suggest to you that you leave Australia for Iran, where a woman will have her lips cut of by the religious police for wearing lipstick - it sure a woman in Iran doesn't value freedom of expression either. (sarcasm).

THE US WAS ALSO BUILT ON CONVICTS - THE WAR OF INDEPENDECE MADE IT EXPEDIENT FOR THE BRITISH TO SEND CONVICTS TO ASTRALIA - BUT LESS THAN 2% OF PEOPLE HAD CONVICT ANCESTORS< A LOT WERE FREE SETTLERS, POOR IRISH, AND BRITICH SOLDIERS AND OFFICIALS!! LEARN SOME RESPECT AND SOME HISTORY - GET YOUR OWN ISLAMIC STATE_ THIS COUNTRY IS FOR PEOPLE YOU LOVE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND LOVE AUSTRALIA!!

"“The Qur’an is one leg of two which form the basis of Islam. The second leg is the Sunnah of the Prophet. What makes the Qur’an different from the Sunnah is its form. Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur’an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah [which is comprised exclusively of Hadith] was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet’s. The Qur’an has not been expressed using any human words. Its wording is letter for letter fixed by Allah. Prophet Muhammad was the final Messenger of Allah to humanity, and therefore the Qur’an is the last Message which Allah has sent to us. Its predecessors such as the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels have all been superceded.”

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/faqs7.html

Qur'an 8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)." Qur'an 8:40 "If people are obstinate, and refuse to surrender, know Allah is your Supporter."

Below are from the Sahith (authentic) Hadiths of Bukhari circa 830AD. They form part of the Sunnah

Bukhari:V9B88N174 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Far removed from mercy are those who change the religion of Islam after me! Islam cannot change!’”

Bukhari:V4B52N260 “The Prophet said, ‘If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.’”

Bukhari:V4B52N220 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.’”

This is why Muslims who own up to what Islam is are rare and why they are the salt of the earth. Situations that test a Muslims faith, ie being confronted with the truth of Islam, is called by Mohammed "worse than death".

The Muslim recites this prayer five times a day

"Show us the straight Path, The Path of those (who fear Allah) and on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings.
Not of those (committing wrongs deliberately) On whom Thou art angry, nor of those who (Having wrong opinions) go astray. Ameen"

Dr Ameer Ali,president of Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, also described as Prime Minister John Howard's adviser on Muslim issues, wants all our schools to be taught Islamic values.
These include the Islamic values of justice,compassion,mercy, tolerance and benevolence.
Now I think we have all seen far too much Islamic values expressed lately and the sheer mindless violence that accompanies those values.
The cartoons were stupid, many of the hysterical Muslims who rioted and burned so gladly had probably never read them but were so hyped up by their leaders, they would have done anything they were bidden to do.
We do not want that fanatasism here, there is far too much Muslim trouble in this country as it is. Getting it out of this country should be the priority, not dragging it into our schools.
Those who want to practise and live by those values should not be trying to make us adopt such repulsive ideals, they simply should not be here at all.

I repeat I do not hate pagan moslems, they in the main are being used and abused.Though I do hate and distrust their death-loving, lying, brutal, misogynistic pagan religion. Why? read on
From al-Muhajiroun, member of a British based moslem group.
Quote: "Let it be clear that to be a moslem requires one to not only believe in islam but to submit completely and comprehensively to the commands of allah" [mcpoh -my work] cont. ",to live,fight and die for this cause regardless of the consequences. Part of our imaam is to love allah[mcpoh],his commands and the believers, to be loyal to them and to support them whatever the circumstances, at the same time to hate anything that opposes this [i.e.kufr] and those who carry and promote it, to distance oneself from them and to have no affinity with them. Today there are many munafiqeen [hypocrites] barking away, they oppose the commands of allah[mdpuh]and have displayed their hatred towards moslems, they have taken the kuffar as their bitaanah [close friends] and have distanced themselves from ahlul tawheed..."ad nauseum. this letter can be read at 'jihad Watch' web site. Moslems like this are barking mad and dangerous dogs. Where are the "moderste?" moslems oh where? numbat

Malik,

The purpose of the cartoons published in Jyllands-Posten was to show the "self-censorship" that Europeans are undertaking out of fear of Islamists - it is a manifestation of 'freedom of expression' in itself to be able to publish the cartoons, but the purpose was to show the 'hold' that Isalmists have over newspapers, politicains, and common citizens when it come to issues about Islam - just like the Dutch director who was shot three times and then close to beheaded by an Islamist (who held Dutch ciutizenship) because the dutch director had made a film about the mistreatment and oppression of women in Islam.

if you want to talk about double standards;

the Islamic Egyptian Al-Farq newspaper published the cartoons, and not one Muslim complained about it - is it ok for an Islamic newspaper to publish such cartoons, but not ok for a secular swedish newspaper to publish the cartoons - i think Muslims must be using the "double standard" which you were complaining about in an above post

- the point is, if these cartoons are honestly offensive to Islam, they must be offensive in and of themsleves, regardless of whoever publishes them - the fact that Egyptian muslims published them does not make them less offensive, but if when the Egyptian muslims publish them you didnt get offended, then you have no right to get offended when the secular swedish publish them.

and , what about the anti-christian and anti-semetic cartoons in the middle east newspapers - i don't see you complaing about these, enjopy YOUR double standard!!

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL US WHAT AND WHAT NOT TO PUBLISH, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION OR NOT, THIS IS EUROPE WHERE IT WAS PUBLISHED, AND WE LIVE IN ASUTRALIA - GET BACK TO THE MIDDLE EAST AND STOP WARING AGAINST FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND AUSTRALIA.

(5 young Australias were stabbed at one of syndey;s beaches at the weekend by the 'usual suspects' - men of middle eastern appearence.
and a blakc somali father was bashed to death in Aurburn by middle eastern thuggs) IS THIS ISLAM??!!

kalweb wants to know the difference between Muslim and Moslem. Go to your MS Word and 'lookup' the words there. Muslim is a follower of Islam. Moslem is an offensive term for a Muslim. Do not ask me why; I have no idea why the English language is so. Remember the original word is from the Arabic script.

Yorgo

Alan-Bold (sorry I mis-spelt your name earlier)

There is a good reason why people have responded to your posts with anti-muslim rhetoric - you asked specific questions indicating your prejudices and were given straight answers. You reap what you sow as has been said already. Can you not see that Sayed is seeking oppression of Western society. What is worse is that the UN may be considering it too.

If there is anything that should unite all Australians it is democracy and freedom of speech. Maybe there really should be a Bill of Rights so that everyone is clear on what Australia stands for.

I can sympathise with you in that many on this forum are somewhat excessive in their posts and cannot see that Western society, Christianity and Islam are as bad as each other when it comes to horrific acts. As always it is about power and not about God at all. I do not believe that any God will look kindly on those who use his name as an excuse for violence or hatred.

However everyone is entitled to their view and you have the option of either responding or ignoring them. This is a freedom that many in the world do not have. It is something that we regard as a basic human right and will defend if necessary.

I agree that Aborigines were treated badly in the past and still are to an extent. However few races in this world are innocent of such atrocities and I think it is quite likely that your ancestors were involved in something similar. Correct me if I am wrong. In fact as a migrant to Australia you are just as guilty of taking advantage of this country's heritage as the rest of us. We should learn from past mistakes but we cannot undo them.

You may find this site helpful:
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/rights/chap6.htm#6.1

Thor - I believe that Alan_Bold said that he is not a Muslim.

It's frightening to see theres no difference between the 3 opposing religious sides, christian, muslim, jew. All originate from the same place, same god, same suspect history, same violent pasts, same violent present.

You all say it's an intelligent belief system, yet the intelligent people of the world are petrified as to what the followers of god are taking us to. With my humble crystal ball, it doesn't look like paradise, actually it looks like hell, that your beleifs present us with, as our future.

You may rant and rave against what I am saying, but the facts are there for us to see. The virus religion, is rapidly spreading throughout the world, contaminating and destroying everything it touches. In the past it was constrained by borders and seas, now there are no borders and the seas easy to cross.

The God belief system is destroying us, but the religious are to infantile to see. With evidence growing daily, you still demand you are right, so theres no escapong this outcome. Your destroying this country, our cities, suburbs, ways of life.

Those originally forced to this country, weren't religious, the system was. Now you have grown enough strength in your factions, to again begin the battle for the first time in Australia.

What you don't understand is, in this country all religion is a minority. Unlike the rest of the world who are a bunch of brainwashed wimps, we're not gong to stand for it.

Muslims, christians, Jews, probably 80% of this country don't want you here, we've put up with you because you kept quiet. Now your big a problem, in our governments and social standards. Your desire is to inflict upon us your despotic religious and moral constraints, you won't shut up, you don't have the brains to. Once the people get control, they won't want treacherous religions here, none of them.

We didn't build this country on christian values, we built it in spite of them.

Golly, Thor, I'm wondering what 'hold' Islamists have over Western press. Very little, given this forum and countless others.

We all know it is offensive to Muslims for Mohammed to be portrayed by illustration. It's a simple concept, in the same vein as the tradition of Australian aborigines not to show images of their deceased ancestors. ABC television warns viewers if such images will appear during a program, and by this logic our national broadcaster is beholden to aboriginal interests. Would you run with that?

Why do we go out of our way to print pointless cartoons known to offend? Cos we can? Get real. The article isn't a debate about the relative merits of Islam Vs name-your-religion but about the collective Western press belittling their God, part of what they believe is a larger campaign against Islam in general. It doesn't matter if it's untrue. As with faith, belief makes it true.

"MY ANCESTORS BUILT THIS COUNTRY ON CHRISTRIAN VALUES, FREDDOM OF EXPRESSION, AND WOMEN"S RIGHTS" Utter crap. Australia was built upon the cat o'nine tails and the landed aristocracy. Christian values, free speech and women's rights are much more recent developments.

Bennie,

Not quite – the cartoon illustrations appeared in an Egyptian paper in October last – NO REACTION – I ask you why?

The ABC warns aboriginal viewers about ancestral pictures... BUT still plays the movies – that is freedom of expression – I don’t see flag torching related to the ABC broadcasts – do you?

Context! please

Alchemist,

Same non-factual stuff – BOOOORING!

Think you missed my point Coach. The ABC treats the issue as they ought. No more, no less.
As for these cartoons appearing in the Egyptian press, your point is?

Sheesh, this thread is proving one thing, ie. how religion is centered in the emotional centres of peoples minds and most reason can get thrown out the window in the process.

Religious people are in love with Jesus, in love with Mohammed etc.
Didn't anyone teach you that love is blind ? :)

What we do know so far is this: Both Christianity and Islam are proselytising religions, both with a history of violence, which played a factor in their spread around the world.

Neither religion can provide any substantiated evidence for their claims, so both religions are no more then ideas. Yup, people can fall in love with ideas, look at history.

Both religions would like to force their moral code onto the rest of us, despite a lack of substantiated evidence for their ideas.

No 10 commandments written on the face of the moon, nothing that we can verify, just ideas and passion, emotion etc.

Now can anyone tell me why I should respect an idea?

Alan Bold

You kind of said it all about your mindset with this remark:

"I think Taliban and Osama are hero's"..... sadly for you, this killed your credibility 110%. We happen to know (due to FREE press) what the Taliban DID to countless people... murder.. rape.. public executions without number...

I have not said "we have the right" to do (list of war atrocities) I just admit they are FACTS ! Yes.. 'people' are quite bad arn't they.
But ask how many did those things "Because they learnt them about Jesus"... ? NONE ! No, they learnt them from the 'pedal to the metal, rubber meets the road of raw brutal survival !

They were done in the interests of FREEDOM and golly gosh.. just LOOK at those countries today ! how 'poor' and undeveloped and subservient Japan is and Germany... etc.. yep.. worse things can happen than lose a War with America/England/Australia

WHY NOT draw Cartoons about Jesus ? Sure.. but try to make sure they rely on HIS words and deeds, not 'fantasy' ones. The cartoon about mohammed as a Bomber, is based on HIS OWN LIFE and 'real' actions, not fantasy ones. (substitute sword for bomb)

CARTOON ABOUT JESUS.. yep.. there He is.. healing the blind man.. oh wait.. here is another.. raising Lazarus from death.. and wait.. still another.. 'driving out the money grubbing merchants from the temple' (a tad violent yes :) and then another...setting the man free from 100 demons.. or..healing the Soldiers ear after Peter had sliced it off with his sword....or feeding the 4000, or the 5000...
Or with Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration..

Yup.. there is plenty of material, but not many 'bombs' :)

The West is indeed 'evil' as is the 'East' and ALL need to turn their hearts to Almighty God, repent of injustice, cruelty and greed, and seek forgiveness in Jesus Christ.

Bennie,
The uneducated Islamic population is being whipped up to hate the West and any escuse will do. They hardly hate their brothers in Egypt. The issue is not really the cartoons it is really that the West dared to print them.

Yabby your emotive post demonstrates one thing that you actually believe your ideas with a passion. Fancy believing ideas have reality, rather irrational isn't it?

I suggest you post no more abstract concepts because they are ideas generated in the mind to understand reality. The problem is you actually believe them as do all religious people. Do not dare talk about love or hate these are religious terms, abstract concepts, that define some demonstrated behaviours.

Of course you being an evolved unemotional homosapien do not have any of these behaviors. You are the new generation of bioandroids.

Why did we not see this level of blood-curdling ferocity over Howard's new sedition laws? Then, the big issue was freedom of speech. Now, the big issue is freedom of speech.

Then, the (white) media were concerned the new laws would curtail freedom of speech. Now, the white worriers are concerned an unfamiliar religion wants to curtail freedom of speech.

Why wasn't there a similar level of outrage last year when restrictions on speech were legislated?

Perhaps we're not discussing freedom of speech in general, but who should be free to speak and on whose terms.

Thankfully we are free not to listen.

Alchemist,

Just a thought in passing, mate, and going on 85, it evolves around a deep study between history and politics and golf. The thought is simply about how modern religous attitudes can relate to a well known quote of Socrates. "OUT WITH THE GODS AND IN WIH THE GOOD".

Of course heaven in those days was just another locality with earth-like families writ large in the sky. But surely we can take a lesson from Socratic philosophy, when a study of history shows how much man has distorted the teachings of God's messengers as we might call them, to suit themselves. So surely we can still believe in a Creator, and still use the Socratic mixture of Reason and Revelation as it is believed great modern personages of our time such as Nelson Mandela, and others, are already doing naturally.

George C, WA - Bushbred

Well I am offended by this article, can I go riot now?

Shonga : Thanks for clarifying your point on the expulsion of Muslims. Sadly I agree if no other answer can be found we may have to expel any immigrant that threatens violence on Aussies.

I have three problems with the deportation issue :

Couldn't the aborigine argue the same point. Whilst I realise we are in a totally different time in history, our forefathers committed terrible crimes against the aboriginal. I do have trouble with this obvious double standard.

Secondly if we deport one member of a family for threatened or actual violence doesn't that leave the rest of the family here with the possibilty of them becoming bitter and twisted people also. I mean most families say their kids didn't do the crime when their child is caught.

Thirdly... Isn't it better to lock up these people in our jails so that we remain in control and can then limit the spread of hate from that individual or group.

magic jess: Can you tell us where you got the information ragarding the publication of those cartoons in Egypt?

syed: If many Muslims are burning Danish buildings, Danish Flags & threatening to harm Danish people abroad isn't this exactly the argument that the Muslims use in reverse. You and I don't want people to discriminate against Muslims and yet Muslims seem quite
unaffected when the Danish are discriminated against just because one paper printed some cartoons. It seems a huge double standard.

Surely it is time for the moderates in the Muslim countries to step forward and to explain to their more militant brothers that their protests have the potential to undermine peace in Muslim lands and that these cartoons are only cartoons, are NOT blasphemy and do not represent the views of all people in the West.

David Boaz... Alan Bold didn't called Osama Bin Laden and the Talliban heroes... he was saying the USA sponsored them. The hero word shouldn't have been used.

Alan Bold... What do you think of Osama Bin Laden and the Talliban now?

I often wondered why no one took me to task for actually stating quite early in this thread that ALL religions were dangerous and stated - "Don't criminalize abuse of religions and so called prophets - criminalize religious abuse!!"

Actually what I should have said was to ban ALL religions - they are a pestilence that needs to be wiped out because all they do is cause hatred and oppression - whether they be christian or muslim - or jew! Don't take my word on it - just do a bit of constructive investigation of history and tell me which religion is free from the hypocrisy - which winning religion has not has the biogger guns and bombs - and of course their bloody god on their side.

The jews have proven themselves to be perfidious liars and treacherous, the christians with their corrupt popes have gone on slaughtering crusades (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusade_%28disambiguation%29) slaughtering muslims and of course muslims and their prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah was a womanising adulterous paedophile who found his god in a cave were also not adverse in a few Jihad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad) or three - made no difference really, because god was always on the side of the biggest battalion.

No doubt all of the loony crazies will be clambering from out under their rocks and show their true colours - but what the hell - I have a thick hide even if it is getting a bit tatty of late.

As for what they are: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moslem)
Until around the late 1980s, the word was commonly spelled Moslem. The spelling has since fallen into disuse. Muslims do not recommend this spelling because it is often pronounced "mawzlem," which sounds somewhat similar to an Arabic word for "oppressor" (Za'lem in Arabic). The word is pronounced "Mus"-lim in Arabic, but some English dictionaries allow both "Mus"-lim and "Muz"-lim.

Looks like bushbred is the only one with any common sense here, with me trailing slightly

and Verdant – yes - you can go and riot now - just throw a rock or three at your computer - :-)

George C, There are many that follow a belief system with reason, life would be unbearable if we didn't believe. Within all religions there are lots of good people who go about their lives in an honorable manner. When it comes to the crunch though, they will sacrifice their lives for their god. I'd sacrifice my life for certain things, but not a god. Thats the difference.

Monotheistic beliefs, are exclusive no matter what they say, their actions are to exclude all else in the end. That makes them evil and dangerous, I believe humans are evolving psychologically and believe there may be a conscious state after death. My present feelings may lean to reincarnative evolution through different dimensions, some have reached the next step. We ourselves create that next step, with the right knowledge and application.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I don't believe all the knowledge we attain is for nothing. The thought of a heaven thats pure, is irrational for anyone that can learn, create and change within their mind for a better life. Without challenge and change, life would be stagnant and boring. So heaven would become a a boring hell, for the thinking mind.

Thats why religion is only for the infantile mind, they can handle static repetitive boredom Only those monotheistic followers that worship within their lives privately and express an example, that enhances the standing of their beleifs, are true believers. The rest, 99% are false.

Living a lie, requires you to gain support for that lie at any cost, or it collapses. If enough people believe the lie, then you have force on your side. Religious power comes by making people fearful, not peacefully or with love. True love is acceptance and support no matter what you believe. Bloody tooth fairy doesn't come after you pass 60 though, does it.

Opinionated2,
Depotation/incarcaration, there are arguements for and against, and I agree Aboriginal Australians may be entitled to use same legislation, however I still feel that we would be a much better
society without lunatic religious fanatics, who riot and burn, if their families agree with their behaviour, they can go also. Something must be done, and done now, do you remember our fearless leader saying "We will decide who comes, and the circimstances under which they come" he was elected on that statement.

My statement is "We shall decide who stays, and the circumstances under which they stay" as previously stated, we have been a peaceful country, except for a handful of Wars, wars that we have been dragged into by England or the USA. This country has seen strikes, and marches against oppression, but to my knowledge we have never before seen Cronulla riot situation. This country does not want, need these people, we are in stock in the criminal sphere, and need no more. If these lunatics are doing what they are doing for "Ala" then I say, let them do it somewhere else, we already have more than our share of peacful religious lunatics, we call the the Assembly of God. Oh Froffie,ALL, Col Rouge and co I am a leftie, if you want to label everything that goes wrong as "leftie" I would suggest you discover what it is you are talking about.

chainsmoker,
The sedition laws were not about the restriction on free speech. It was about the incitement of followers to criminal acts of violence and sabotage of civil order that undermines our values. Obviously you listen to too many Muslim extremists ravings. I note you identify yourself as racist in your reference to "white media". Obviously in your mind there is a BLACK media that tells what you want to hear. Quit the racist attitude and become an Aussie. Under the term Aussie there is no colour.

Quote, "Why did we not see this level of blood-curdling ferocity over Howard's new sedition laws? Then, the big issue was freedom of speech. Now, the big issue is freedom of speech.
Then, the (white) media were concerned the new laws would curtail freedom of speech. Now, the white worriers are concerned an unfamiliar religion wants to curtail freedom of speech.

Numbat:

Islam is not a pagan religion. By definition, Paganism is non-Abrahamic. Don't slander peaceful Pagans by connecting them with a book and a religion that teaches death and hate.

Well I shall repeat one of my favourite phrases,religion should be like sex,done in private between consenting adults.

It is nobodies business but your own about which buttons to press that make you feel powerful or closer to your perceived creator.

Only a paedophile tries to pervert a child's sexuality and only religious paedophiles try to impose total thought control in abyss of ignorant power hungry servitude.The Christian Church has perverted and destroyed enough lives in the past and Islam is no different.

This is a battle about freedom of thought and speech.There is no room for eqivocation or fence sitting.It was the logic of the Scientific method and the separation of Church and State which made the West knowledgable and thus powerful.We have become weak and complacent through our affluence and seem to think that the gravy train will continue without courage and effort.

Well,the enemy always comes from within and it is time to wake up and smell the reality.

Myriah

If xenophobic means being critical of and condemning those who totally reject the freedooms our western civiulisation has won and defended then I'm xenophobic and bloody proud of it.

Are you not proud of your own cultural and historical traditions?
It's your sort of arrogrant name-calling and labelling that encourages those who would tear down our traditions. Why do you offer such support to those enemies of freedom?

Sunisle

My views on the rights of the Palestinians to statehood and support of a return to the borders as established in 1947 are a matter on the public record.

Syrian invasion of Lebanon
Muslim invasion of Dafur
Indonesia's annexation of Timour
Indonesia's annexation of West Papua
Pakistan's attempts to invade India
Iraq - Iran war

Now I hope you don't exclude terrorists acts of war against innocents.
That list in modern times starts with the outrage in Munich...and continues through to the latest cowardly outrages in London and Bali.

Now I would suggest a critical self-examination would show why Muslims are, to use your term, 'easy game'. Most people, unlike you, don't generalise. They are quite specific in their criticiams and are not attacking Muslims generally. They are attacking Muslims who wish to undermine western values and freedoms. That's fair. They attack Islam as a religion that produces people who wish to undermine western values and freedoms. That's fair. They also attack hypocrasy in all it's forms. That's fair. In fact that's encouraged in the west.

It is unfair to judge, label and claim people hate Muslims because of their criticisms of aspests of Islam and because of their criticisms of the behaviour of some of Islam's votaries.

Millions haven't been killed in Afghanistan or Iraq. Most casualties in Iraq are a result of inter-sect Islamic hatred. Sunni-Shia animosity is being played upon by various Islamic terrorist groups.

Keith

Prejudice is the precursor to xenophobia. Prejudice means thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant, whilst xenophobia means having a morbid fear of foreigners.

Cheers
Kay

Keith,

With my deepest respect you are wrong when you say "That list in modern times starts with the outrage in Munich" have you forgotten that the Israelis used terrorism on the British in the then called Palistine. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing
for one example.

Some Israeli's used this tactic in their efforts to get a homeland... see any similarities to the Palestinians? By the way it worked, eventually the nation of Israel was formed by dispossessing the Palestinians...

But terrorism has been going on since the year dot... I mean killing innocent people by any means is really terrorism... it's just bombs seem to make it easier.

Your other statement "Most casualties in Iraq are a result of inter-sect Islamic hatred" is also questionable. Sure the sects have been at each others throats for centuries but the bombs dropped on Iraq in the two gulf wars have killed many many innocents.

See http://www.iraqbodycount.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=5767a74fbe3001ad8469aa1847dec844&submit3=Enter+Site for some estimates>

As human beings we owe a duty to our fellow human beings who are Muslims. We must help them to deal with their unfortunate vulnerability to those who portray their prophet. To do this we must publish cartoons and images of the prophet at every opportunity. Every western newspaper, should as an act of human kindness, publish a daily cartoon which portrays the prophet. We should have regular television shows, art works, T-Shirts all showing the image of how we imagine the prophet to have looked. Images of the Prophet should adorn our products. Prophet coffee, Prophet burgers and possibly a pop group called the Prophets with the image displayed on the drum set and what ever else western imagination can come up with. If thousands of western newspaper are printing images of the prophet then it would be impossible to single any one publication out for particular attention. The objective is not to insult Muslims, but to help them. If we bombard them with images of the prophet then it will become impossible for them to be manipulated by extremists who take umbrage at any one particular image, come one come all.

Jb1 I think you're onto something here.Imagine Prophet Coffee or Burgers that could could fortell the amount of colesterol they may well terminate your life.You may well profit from the Prophet.How about Big Mo Burgers that go off with a bang?Oh I could continue but alas discretion is should be the order of the day.

Where's Dave Allen,gee I missed his Catholic jokes?

To NON-MUSLIMS AGAINST THE PUBLISHING OF THE CARTOONS, & TO ANGLO VICTIMS OF RACISM,

BT (Black-Texan): “We been tryin a get yo attention foe while now. These wharrt folk givin uz a verreh hard tarm down ere. Whenz ya gonna do summ’n?”

BY (Black-Yankee): “These white folk’? That’s an outrageous racist generalisation!”

BT: “Huh! We gettin attacked! Besides, day call demselves whaart, sayin day all ‘sooperior’ to uz, sayin we can’t even goes near their woman, that we can’t even swim neear dem! Day beatin up on black men foe the past fifteen years, just becoze day black! Some even rapin’ black woman, becoze day black!”

BY: “I’m not saying that what you say has no truth in it, but …”

BT: “Folks gettin real worried down here; talkin bout ‘retaliation’”

BY: “I’m aware that there are some Americans who can be racist towards black Americans, but …”

BT: “Den what r ya tryin a say?”

BY: “Of course you should be worried about such racism; but why increase it by encouraging an environment of mutual fear, ignorance and hostility?”

BT: “Huh?!”

BY: “Not all whites are rednecks. And on what basis can you claim such incidents have a racial motive anyway? On just what people say? Sorry, not good enough; that would be counter-productive, only further driving wedges between people. Is that what you want?”

BT: “You as crazy az you was da layast time! Wah would arr be callin’ YOU if it wasn’t peace iza seekin’? You makin’ uz feel like WEez da criminal!”

BY: “Well, what would you call a ‘retaliation’?”

(phone slams down)

Mr CONCERNED (email to www.australiansagainstracism.org, 19/3/2005):

“I’m concerned with racist attitudes directed at white Australia from many islamic and Asian people … particularly muslims”

“The gangs in Bankstown are not a reaction to racism; they are racism”

“Check out the hreoc report in child detention and see how the muslims are severely racist to the maronite christians”

“Why should I not attack this if I want to truly fight racism? I do; you and your ilk definitely do not!”

Continued….

….continued

“To recognise that someone is doing something wrong rather than just ignore it is the first step to assigning them equality”

“Just because it seems messy you sweep it under the carpet. Your tacit assumption here is that they do not count as people as much as your feeling queasy counts. This is why women’s lib movements can say little of their muslim sisters!”

“This doesn’t tarnish them all with the same brush no more than condemning the kkk or nazis tarnishes all white people with the same brush”

EVA SALLIS (eva.sallis@adelaide.edu.au, head of Australians Against Racism, 9/03/2005):

“In some ways I agree with you … It is a given that all human communities are racist, and that in certain circumstances, some are much more than others”

“That being said, we are not apologetic for the fact that the refugee and asylum seeker issue in Australia was the catalyst for this grassroots organisation to be formed, or for the fact that we focus in some of our projects on helping people who are newly arrived in Australia [i.e. as opposed to those like yourself]”

“prejudice can be met with compassion” [only for non-Anglos; see link below]

“OF COURSE YOU SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT ANGLOPHOBIA – SO WHY INCREASE IT BY ENCOURAGING AN ENVIRONMENT OF MUTUAL FEAR, IGNORANCE AND HOSTILITY?”

Mr Concerned: (thinking) “Whaa do ya make me feel lark arm doowin sum’n WRONG by bringin attention ta this!?!”

Check out Eva Sallis’ cowardly bias reporting on the Cronulla incident in her article in the New York Times 17/12/2005: “Australia’s Dangerous Fantasy”, see http://www.icjs-online.org/prfriendly.php?article=716.

No doubt what she there refers to as “evidence” of white-racism experienced by Muslims since 9/11 is derived from Dr Scott Poynting’s pathetic bit of hearsay at http://www.hreoc.gov.au/racial_discrimination/isma/research/UWSReport.doc. This blatant deception will make all Anglo victims of racism utterly betrayed!

Our notorious “middle-eastern thugs” are not “criminals”. Along with their “middle-eastern” apologists they are nothing short of RACISTS, plain and simple, and it is all verifiable through 15 years worth of police reports, not Poynting’s hearsay.

Damn hell and tarnation there Arjay ...... but poor wee Dave has dropped off the planet and only just recently (http://www.screenonline.org.uk/people/id/838629/)
I for one will always miss his irreverent hits on the good old catholic churh and had me "in the aisles" more often than not - imagine the fatwahs being issued against him if he let loose on the old profit.....

However Father Ted, Father Jack Hacket and Father Dougal McGuire - along with Mrs. Doyle, their erstwhile housekeeper are almost as good as replacements ... but nowhere in the same league really, much the pity.

Now that you idea of your prophet burger fizzling out as a damp squib instead of going off like a three penny banger - maybe we can get Al Jezira producing showing a "life with Beaver" set in Kabul or a muslem version of "Sex in the city" in that exotic location of Mecca..... but where oh where could we host a version of Miss World - with all their burkas in different stunning shades of black....

Ah the mind boggles at the endless possibilities..........

To Kalweb.

"Prejudice" quite literally means to "pre judge". Pre judgung people based upon their group associations is something which everybody does, every day of the week. When dealing with strangers, the only guide to assessing whether they are trustworthy and not likely to harm you, comes from prejudging them.

I know that you are a woman. So if your car broke down on a lonely road, you might feel that you were in some danger. If a well dressed businessman in a Mercedes pulled over and offered you a lift home, you would probably gladly accept the invitation. But if a dirty, beat up car full of patch wearing bikies pulled over and made the same offer, you would probably decline.

That is prejudgment, and it can be an important consideration if you wish to minimise your chances of being raped.

I am writing this to you, to try and make you understand that your opinions are not well thought out. You are relying upon the already packaged arguments presented to you from those people who claim to be the leaders of whatever humanitarian groups that you identify with. These people constantly chant, "don't stereotype, don't label, don't prejudge", as if these concepts are trump cards in their arguments. But they are not. Any person who has even a skerrick of psychological training recognises these arguments as inherently invalid.

What these people are actually saying is "don't think."

TERRORISM is a stupid word

It is a device, a cultural/political tool, used by ‘winners’ to enable them to continue to be ‘grinners’. The term allows us to ascribe a moral quality ‘evil’ to those who use force to oppose us.

The reality of course, is that ‘we’ were the ‘terrorists’ of yesteryear, when we were establishing our current status quo. The term further enables us to feel ‘better’ about putting down such struggles, and suggests an ‘inherent moral right’ in our attempts to do so.

As I’ve said in the past “All peace is the result of a war, and all peace contains the seeds of the next war”

Terrorism is nothing more than the brutality of war, of struggle between peoples, tribes, interest groups etc.
It takes many forms, and can be ‘verbal’ as much as physical.

I think its time we recognized that there is an ongoing struggle among humanity, for dominance, power, wealth and control of resources, and that this struggle is universal, not limited to just certain groups.

Perhaps a better term would be ‘Frontline Action’. Todays’ terrorists’ (or freedom fighters) are just the embryonic oppressors of tomorrow.

WAR of IDEAS
Yet in all this, I believe that some societies will have a different flavor, moral fabric, based on ideas underpinning them. It is becoming clearer daily, in the Islamic world, the intrinsic propensity to violence is manifest, where the underpinning idea is that one cannot insult their prophet, and that such action is punishable by death. This translates into huge ‘group behavior’ in the current violence.

Christ said “If your enemy is hungry, feed him” good idea IF he is your ‘enemy’ because he has no food OR in showing love in spite of his hate.

But Islam is different.. that is an ideological/pharisaical ‘enemy’. “Feeding” will not necessarily change him into a friend, though it might impress him.

http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/publications/Saudi%20Report/FINAL%20FINAL.pdf

Christ condemned Pharisees without reservation, as he would condemn the Saudi religious police who left schoolgirls to burn alive because if they fled the burning school they would have infringed Islamic dresscode rules. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm

redneck,
My judgements are not premeditated, they don't have to be. Australia acually saw the riots, we can judge with knowledge. My beef is not with Muslims in general, only with the extreme elements who rape, pillage and burn. I can't help but wonder why our fearless leader says "We shall decide who comes here, and the circumstances under which they come" however when they arrive after apparently meeting the selection criteria of the Australian Government [right wing], he does nothing to oust the criminals within their ranks, could you please explain this.

Chainsmoker. “Why wasn't there a similar level of outrage last year when restrictions on speech were legislated? “

That is a superficial comparison.

You were obviously either asleep, or could not see through the fog of smoke caused by your cigarettes last year when the sedition laws were being discussed.
There was a lot of outrage and opposition from many quarters, fearful of the possible effect on freedom of speech:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1498428.htm

http://www.vicpeace.org/sedition/info/0003.html

http://www.socialist-alliance.org/page.php?page=488

http://theage.com.au/news/national/sedition-provisions-to-remain-pm/2005/11/14/1131951095240.html

In the end, after considerable discussion and amendment, our democratically elected leaders voted for them.
The Islamic leaders, some in Australia, who have advocated Jihad, which I take to mean “armed struggle”, have given their views on the place of women in society, praised OBL, have at least been forthright about it, and now we know whom they are and thanks to these laws, can take measures against them if necessary.
In contrast to the insidious attack on our freedoms from so-called “moderate” Muslims, like Syed, who sneakily try to obtain through subterfuge that which they cannot achieve by outright attack.
And before you think I am only talking about Muslims, I am also talking about any other religion, which tries to impose its belief systems on society.
In our society, religion and politics are, or should be, separated. The other religions seem to have accepted that (with some exceptions, as the recent abortion drug debate shows, although that is supposed to be a conscience vote)
I’m not sure that Islam could accept the separation of religion and State.
Let us know Syed’s position on the following:
· Shari’a law
· Dhimmitude
· Women’s and minority rights in society
· Jizya tax
· Taquia
· Wahabbism
· Jihad

He has been asked about this before, but is strangely silent on these subjects. Maybe he’d care to write another article stating his position.

Don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet but an earlier poster wrote, “As flies to Wanton bees are we to the Gods (leaders) – they kill us for their sport”

- that's really sweet about the bees, Jenny, but King Lear reads..

“As flies to wanton boys are we to th'gods – they kill us for their Sport” (Act IV, scene i, 37-8)

It reminds us how little boys have changed since the 1600's as we watch them trot about everyday looking for harmless bugs to squash.

Mr Hassan wrote on 5 January 2006, as the third paragraph of his article "Compromising our freedom of speech":

One should not forget that freedom of speech is the foundation of all humanity, and without it, politics become impossible. Unless we are able to hear and understand the views of our political adversaries, we cannot hope to turn their minds and convince them they are wrong, or to even to change our own behaviour to accommodate opposing views that may turn out to be right.

No mention of exceptions then. How odd.

Abelard

If anyone is in any doubt as to the perfidiousness of the Muslim religion, they should read this article from today's Australian;
It starts:
"A LEADING imam in the British mosque where the July 7 bombers worshipped has hailed their terrorist attack on London as a "good" act in a secretly taped conversation with an undercover reporter."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18124790%255E2703,00.html

What do you say about this, Syed? Another example of Taqiya?
This same Imam had earlier in PUBLIC, condemned the bombings.
Lying seems inbred in Muslims, doesn't it?
How come you're not responding to our questions anymore Syed?

Yes, Mr. Hassan defined “Freedom of Speech” in fact in this article as well but you have to understand that there are different meaning of “Freedom of Speech” and “Disrespecting” or “Insulting” someone vocally or in writing. It is clearly an offence insulting someone's faith which means insulting uncountable human being, doesn’t matter which religion you insult. I am very sad to mention that people have hatred in their minds about others they abuse others and then justify their wrong doing by calling it “Freedom of Expression” – This is clearly an act of abuse of the rights of freedom. I totally understand and support Mr. Hassan’s view and in fact support his idea of taking these criminals to court of justice, in fact UN also have the same opinion to which all west respect.

Van - I think you will find respect for the UN is waning fast and this may well be the last straw. I agree that personally abusive comments should not be allowed. Disrespect of any religion or race is a delicate issue and restraint should be shown by journalists who should be abiding by a code of ethics.

The cartoons were an example of very bad journalism. Someone should maybe lose their job and professional status but I do not think it should be a criminal offence. In fact, referring to Syed's previous article Jan 2006 "Compromising our freedom of speech" he does not think so either:

quote
"the state should not suppress the basic human rights and democratic values of the people by criminalising free speech."

the international court of justice arbitrates disputes between states, not individuals. only a state has standing, and then only against another state with regard to a breach of intyernaitonal law.

the international criminal court does hear allegations regarding the conduct of individuals. however, i doubt you could get sufficient consensus among the nations of the world to prohibit conduct that offended people - regardless of how strongly held or felt.

blasphemy or similar offences are very rarely, if ever, laid against anyone - particularly in multi-cultural, multi-religious communities. we could never hope to ensure that everyone knew enough about everyone else's sensitivities to be able to ensure that prosecution was just. for example, do you know what my sensitivities are? am i religious? if so, which one? which variation? am i *really* offended on religious grounds, or are other issues involved?

if minorities are not protected, then we're just enforcing majority - or at least more populous - values on them. hardly in keeping with either democracy, or the larger human rights. and there are probably more than a few athiests and irreligious people who would object to religion having any more special status in our society and our laws than they already enjoy.

freedom of expression does not give you the right to prevent me from disagreeing with you. or possibly even offending you. though it will not protect me if i say something that unecessarily damages your reputation - unless what i have said is truthful or is required by law.

as recently discussed [http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4149] by *graham young*, tolerance is a *necessity* for coexistance. something western cultures learned the long, hard way. refusal to consider compromise is one of the reasons some conflicts become intractable. history is replete with examples. and the bodies of others.

Someone here asked for links to the Egyptian paper that printed those cartoon.

Well here is a link. http://freedomforegyptians.blogspot.com/2006/02/egyptian-newspaper-pictures-that.html

Note for some reason or other that there were no riots, flab burning or breaking of diplomatic relations as some of the morons are doing now, like I mean to say fancy biting the hands that feeds you like the Palestinians who have told the Danes that they can keep their aid - they can get it somewhere else - yeah like Saudi Arabia perhaps...?

I note also that Queen Margethe is quoted by her biographer as saying ...

"We are being challenged by Islam these years - globally as well as locally. It is a challenge we have to take seriously. We have let this issue float about for too long because we are tolerant and lazy.

"We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance."

"And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/15/wqueen15.xml

I can understand Muslims who are angry at the newspaper. Was it a single, light-hearted cartoon..... or did the editor of the newspaper select the topic and publish a set of 12 cartoons they knew would be inflammatory and collectively more pointed? For the same reason people hesitate before telling a joke about jesus christ at a party... they should understand the position of Muslims a little

SHARIA CALL FOR AUSTRALIA ?

Sure sounds like it from this article in "Islamic Sydney"

[Muslims now demand a clear guarantee such incident will not stand a repeat, not by curbing freedom of expression as some in the West may be propagating, but by criminalizing "abuse of power".]

Can some brilliant scholar please point out to my rather thick head, what the heck difference there is between 'curbing abuse of power' and 'curbing freedom of expression' ? In this context they are identical !

My skin crawled today as I watched video of Sheikh Abu Hamza of UK infamy, telling his students that :

"If you come across a Kafir in Islamic territory, he is booty ! You can take him immediately to sell him in the market place.. or.. just KILL him."

This man has been 'observed' by the UK police for so long.. without them being able to DO anything till now about this moron.

I saw him on HardTalk, ducking and weaving the hard questions about the brutalization of moderates in the mosque they took over.

HOW MANY times, Have I said.. ranted..raved..predicted... perhaps even 'prophesied'(only God knows that) that the RADICALS will drive the Islamic Agenda. The more people of the Islamic faith here, and to the degree they feel marginalized, to that degree also will the ranks of the radicals be swelled.

Small numbers of highly motived people, can have an impact FARRRRR in excess of their actual numbers.

Be Vigilant friends.. very very vigilant... and VOCAL.

No wonder the sedition laws were brought in. With people like Hamza, does anyone truly doubt that we need them ? Could he have been dealt with under existing laws ? I doubt it.

Froggie,
I suggest you become familiar on just what the idea of democracy means.

It does not mean the implementation of laws and values of atheists!

It does mean everyone has rights to express their views and values and lobby politicians to reflect those values.

It does not mean a society devoid of religion or conscience for the convenience of one section who refuse religious conviction and conscience.

You may prefer a society and State expressing only your values. But get this: Australia is a democracy and people in Australia do have religious convictions about the intrinsic value of all human life.

You appear to be bordering on Third Reich world views of a Totalitarian State that reflects only one opinion.

Quote, "In our society, religion and politics are, or should be, separated. The other religions seem to have accepted that (with some exceptions, as the recent abortion drug debate shows, although that is supposed to be a conscience vote) I'm not sure that Islam could accept the separation of religion and State."

With views expressed as above you are also ignotant of what is meant by the seperation of Church and State. It means the State is not governed by the heirarchy of the Church. It does not mean all politicians must be non-religious and atheist.

Opinuated2

Sunisle’s question:

‘Has a Muslim country invaded, occupied and killed hundreds of thousands of people and left the infrastructure shattered?...'

Sunisle didn’t ask about Israeli terrorism. I was correct and you were well… way out of line. An apology will suffice.

Attempting to justify terrorism on the basis of ‘everybody does it’ is devoid of decency.

Terrorising civilian populations in times of war occurs and lacks justification, such was not the case in Iraq.

Human Rights Watch, published surveys, conducted by Iraqi’s on the ground in Iraq, which showed very few civilian casualties were caused by aerial bombing or missiles. Those that were were found to be deliberate and aimed at Saddam’s family and their henchmen. I cannot find the surveys now. They were published some two years ago and are no longer on that website. With about 3 hours work I could find them but I prefer you accepted I’ve said this in good faith and that the surveys did exist.

I am familiar with iraqibodycount website. Currently it publishes figures claiming civilian deaths caused directly by Americans amount to approximately 3000 during the Invasion and subsequent two years, Contradicting Sunisle’s exaggerated claims.

Mate from the reference you supplied showa no western country has acted as Sunisle claims.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/press/pr12.php?PHPSESSID=928ff03239dde85bef11c29f235dc96c&submit3=Enter+Site

iraqbodycount claims all civilian deaths in Iraq are caused by Americans and allies. It includes American and allied deaths in its figures. It attributes all bombing deaths to Americans. That website is an anti-US propaganda outlet.

That website contradicts itself with the following:

‘Who did the killing?
• US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims. (24,850 total)
• Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
• Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.
• Killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise over the entire period. ‘

It also shows a telling desire to excuse and down play the Islamic intersect killings since the invasion phase ended.

And apparently the other 18% were suicides or killing by other methods? They don't explain and I'm to tired to bother thinking about that anomalie.

Can some one explain to me the following:
1. Why is Mohammed deemed to be such a reverred prophet when he was such a well documented murderous thug and deviant, even for the standards of the day.?
2. Why is the Koran deemed to be the inviolate and absolute word of god when there is clear evidence that it evolved over many years from many sources, and could not have been recited to Mo in an intact form.?
3. What is about a book that evolved ( cobbled together is a better description) and can be recited parrot fashion by so many, yet at least 20% of it is unintelligible, even to arab speakers.?
4. Why is it that the Islamicists wont permit scholarly analysis of the Koran etc in the same open and frank way other great religious tomes have been subjected to.?
5. Why is it that of the ten least free countries in the world, 7 are islamic.?
6. Why is it that if Islam has about 2bn followers, why dont they figure more in international measures like Nobel Prizes and patents lodged. Is "Inshallah fatalism" the only reason for this.?

"For the same reason people hesitate before telling a joke about jesus christ at a party... "

I for one haven't been to a party yet where there was any hesitation whatsoever with joking about jesus or religion per se, partly because parties don't normally involve conversations about religion (or at least not the ones i've been to).

The one I've heard most often at parties is where Jesus walks into an inn late at night, throws a few nails on the counter and says "Can you put me up for the night?" Other parties I have been to have involved spontaneous, somewhat drunken and not terribly tuneful choruses of "Jehovah, Jehovah" in monty python fashion.

Like everyone else here has stated over and over again like a broken record, we're all for understanding a person's sensitivities and being compulsively polite but just because some people take themselves oh-so-seriously doesn't mean I do.

Such a primitive and hypocritical doctrinal position on cartoons as printed in denmark simply begs for satire regardless of what a few religious anal retentives think or do about it later.

Keith : If that was the question that you were answering then yes I should apologise....

Please do not think that I am justifying terrorism in any way... I am totally against it... It is one of the lowest forms of murder.

The way you worded your answer I thought that you had forgotten about the Israelis using similar tactics in earlier times. I wasn't using that to justify things but more to put it in context.

You may be right about that site being an anti American propoganda site but listening to the US Govt and our Govt is listening to a Pro USA Govt propoganda group. Sometimes it is good to see both sides of the propoganda war.

The war is a disaster and recent revelations that the USA didn't expect an insurgency backlash prior to the war means they were unprepared for the conflict.

Kekenidika : It was I who requested the information regarding the cartoons in the Egyption press thankyou for that. That is probably the most important thing for Muslims to see.. the cartoons were printed in a Muslim countries newspaper and nothing major happened.

Muslims didn't react violently when images perpoted to be Mohammad were printed in a Muslim newspaper.

Please moderate Muslims listen to reasonable people on this issue and spread the word amongst others that the violent reactions are wrong. You can't be offended at the Danish Newspaper if the Egyption paper did it first.

Here is the link again http://freedomforegyptians.blogspot.com/2006/02/egyptian-newspaper-pictures-that.html

The writer of the original article is wrong in saying that nothing happened to the producers of the play in which Jesus is depicted as gay. When the play was shown in the UK, The Sharia Council of Britian issued a judgement that the writers and producers should be put to death for insulting a figure (Jesus) who is venerated in Islam (Islam laying claim to Moses and the prophets, with whom they include Jesus).
This brings me to the crucial point here. Insulting someone's religion should be a right - this sort of activity is the only way societies change. Proclaiming that someone should be murdered, on the other hand, is anti-social as well, of course, as being against a particular person. Calling for someone's murder is rightly criminalised - insulting someone's feelings is rightly not criminalised.
Muslims have to get over the fact that they don't run the world any more (not that they ever controlled a majority of it, but you wouldn't know that from some of their comments). They have to get over the fact that most people don't want them to run the world, either. What's the rate of influx into Muslim-run countries? What's the outflow?
Islam isn't so much a religion as a political system pretending to be a religion. It is rejected by the world's majority, who prefer to live in countries run under rules of other religions or, more popularly, under secular rule where people make rules for themselves in places called parliaments, Diets, Dumas and the like.
And if Islam wants to wage another war of conquest, it had better wait until it is no longer in the position of weakness that it currently is in, because it will get wiped out otherwise.

Philo

Thanks for your admonition to find out what democracy means. I do know what democracy means, and I totally agree, “Everyone has rights to express their views and values and lobby politicians to reflect those values.”

I also understand what is meant by separation of Church and State.

I recognise that people are entitled to have (or not have) religious beliefs. What you forget is that the separation of church and state not only protects the state, but also protects religion from government interference.

Perhaps my paragraph, which seems to have touched a raw nerve, was badly worded.
I was referring to the apparent influence of religious views held by a Minister of the Government, who reserved the right to himself alone, having ministerial power, to decide whether or not the abortion drug should be made accessible to women. I do not call this democratic. If you do, then you have a strange idea of democracy.
If this drug were accessible to women, they could then choose according to their own conscience.

I did say that this was a conscience vote. People could vote on what their conscience tells them, so if their conscience includes religious points of view, then by all means they should vote that way.

I am NOT an atheist, I am agnostic. This means that I admit the possibility that a supreme creator exists.

It is just that I, personally, don’t know. Look up the definition of agnostic, if you don’t know what that means.

As far as religious belief goes, if you believe in everything that’s in the Bible, or in other so-called holy books, like the Koran, then by all means go ahead and believe it.
Nowhere in this forum have I ever suggested otherwise.

Your statement that I am “bordering on Third Reich world views of a Totalitarian State that reflects only one opinion” is ridiculous. Indeed, I am for the opposite!

Your view seems similar to that of Islam, which basically says that the state and the church are one.

Explain to me how your views differ from those of Islam?

Froggie, understanding that monotheistic believers are absolutely petrified of not only being wrong, but of not having power, is a good start. They refuse to even consider, that there are other ways of running society than those that have failed in the past.

It's because they can't see forward, only back. Agnostics are those that have a foot in every camp, and I think thats an excellent approach, as it allows you to be open to what is, may be and may not be in front of us for the eternal future.

Christian views are exactly the same as islam, thats what frightens them so. The same goes for islam, they see a reflection of themselves in christianity so want to destroy it. Pretty warped really, but throughout their history, they have always been the same.

If you look at it from a psychological viewpoint, it is a classic case of those possessed by illusions reacting violently to anything that denies their delusion. If religion didn't have so much power, we would probably lock them all up as unstable and a danger to the community. Because of their violent desire to impose their illusions on the population and disrupt society. Which they are doing now. So our mental health approach has failed and we have an epidemic of out of control deluded monotheistics running round the world screaming, I'm peaceful, and I'll destroy your society to prove it.

Religions idea of secular, is we agree and accept it, as long as we control it our way. A very intelligent approach to life. You see it is the religious that only reflect the one opinion, god

Agree Alchemist.We humans are just too arrogant.We assume too much.There well may be a supreme consciousness but we may not be all that important in the scheme of things as we presume.I have yet to see any evidence of our consciousness existing before birth or beyond the grave.
Religion serves a purpose of giving us the comfort of a protective father figure and fear of breaking moral codes and laws,but it does not teach us how to deal with the reality of survival.

Religions don't have all the answers nor do the aethiests.Religion must remain separate from state since faith is based on our desire to to surpass this mortal existence,and desire does not mix well with logic.

Well it looks like Irans largest newspaper "Hamshahri" is running a competition on humour on the holocaust to see if the West truly believes in the freedom of the press as I suspected in one of my earlier posts... Hey I am setting the world's agenda from OLO...lol or I am psychic...Ha!.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2027749,00.html

As I said in an earlier post whilst I may or may not find these cartoons offensive when I see them I WON'T be protesting them, or be burning the Iranian Flag, or taking the paper to the UN for discrimination... I will just think that particular paper is silly for doing it. I believe the extermination of 6,000,000 people is not funny.

But I will also remember this... Just because some Muslims may find the cartoons, once they are completed, funny ... many Muslims will ignore them and keep on with their lives.

So in the end if everyone remains sensible it will just be a silly exercise.

Will these cartoons help the Muslims who live in the camps of course not! Will it help the West understand Muslims better... No. Will they help Iran...No! Will they add to the stereotyping of Muslims... probably but not with me or people who think like me. Hopefully most of us will not judge the Muslim religion or people based on this papers competition.

Will it test our concept of freedom of the press ... No!

An Aussie cartoonist "Leunig" has already had one of his cartoons used. The Age newspaper is apparently seeking legal advice on it's use as it had rejected publication of this cartoon.

Scroll down it appears here http://www.farisqc.observationdeck.org/
- to some it may be offensive but to me it is just one man's commentary... big deal.

It looks like we are in a tit for tat battle to see who can create the silliest, unfunny cartoons.

We can only watch and wait!

Some Iranians are being manipulative or ignorant about these cartoons.

They were about a religious icon, the holocaust is about humans, a man-made atrocity. There was no divinity about it, it was a man leading a killing program against people he called Jews. You can joke about it if you want to.

It's illegal in germany to deny the holocaust precisely because 'germany' did it and it doesn't want us to think that a) it's pretending it didn't happen or it wasn't responsible, b) to say sorry to jews and c) so that such orchestrated hate might never happen again (i.e. those who forget history are doomed to repeat it).

However, historians debate the islamic myth and the christian myth because nobody has provided (so far) any rock-solid evidence (as opposed to biblical or koranic hearsay) that either of the two dudes mentioned ever walked the earth.

As for the sad sacks waiting for us to get all flag-burny about a local cartoon competition - dream on, the 'joke' has already happened you fools. What about the 1969 monty python 'lampshade' sketch in which a Mr Hitler runs for the North Minehead by-election?

The sketch contains barbs for everyone today plus it reveals how that scholar Mr Ahmadinejad hasn't caught up to even a rudimentary understanding of where Western culture was 35 years ago, let alone now in the 21c. (Let's not even consider the Merchant of Venice (1600), he's probably not up to that yet).

"Johnson: How long are you down here for, Mr. Hilter. Just the fortnight?

Hitler: (shouting) Why do you ask that? Are you a spy or something? (drawing revolver) Get over there against the wall Britischer pig, you're going to die!

Von Ribbentrop and Himmler grab Hitler and calm him.

Von Ribbentrop: I'm sorry Mr. Johnson, he's a bit on edge. He hasn't slept since 1945.

"Landlady: Telephone, Mr. Hilter, it's that nice Mr. McGoering from the Bell and Compasses. He says he's found a place where you can hire bombers by the hour.

Hitler: If he opens his big mouth again...it's lampshade time!"

http://www.pythonland.com/episode12.ph

I think its vital in light of the present debate to correct a very important mistake in a previous post, a mistake which could entirely effect the course of human affairs. Some of you may have noticed it, but to be absolutely clear, I point it out for the record and in the interest of the public good. The link to episode twelve of MPFC is http://www.pythonland.com/episode12.php

The recent German cartoon with the Iranian football players is an example of the stupidity behind the joke. Yes it's funny once, twice even. I dunno... To me, it makes as much sense as showing Jesus Christ presiding over the Abu Ghraib abuses and Guantanamo Bay prison. I wonder what drama a series of cartoons like this would create in the the USA's "Bible Belt" states.

DL thank you for a proper link (even if monty python doesn't in fact steer future international relations:), and for not pointing out my appalling punctuation and grammar which made the a), b) and c)'s in one para ambiguous when they weren't intended to be.

Another interesting op-ed was posted today on the cartoon capers which may be of interest to posters, hopefully this link works. If not it'll be on the COFR site. http://www.cfr.org/publication/9861/

Arab journalists jailed over cartoons
Monday 13 February 2006, Al Jazeera
Algeria and Yemen have arrested journalists working for newspapers that have reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that led to protests around the world.
"On Sunday, Algeria closed two newspapers and arrested their editors for printing the images of the cartoons of the Prophet.
Kahel Bousaad and Berkane Bouderbala, respectively editors of the pro-Islamist weeklies, Errisala and Iqraa, were detained last week and will appear before an investigating judge in Algiers on Monday, staff of the two Arabic newspapers said.
A member of Iqraa's staff said: "The cartoons published in our weekly were [deliberately] fogged. They were accompanied by an article denouncing them."

The authorities were not immediately available for comment.

The Algerian authorities have condemned the cartoons and urged the Danish government to punish those behind their publication.

Reprinting in Yemen

Yemen detained three journalists on Sunday and is seeking a fourth after closing three publications that printed the cartoons. Al-Hurriya, Yemen Observer and al-Rai al-Aam were shut and their case sent to prosecutors.

The officials said those detained are Mohammad al-Asaadi, the editor-in-chief of the English-language Yemen Observer, Akram Sabra, the managing editor of al-Hurriya weekly newspaper and reporter Yehiya al-Abed of Hurriya.

The prosecution has issued a warrant for Kamal al-Aalafi, the editor-in-chief of al-Rai al-Aam.

The Yemeni journalists' association called for the release of the journalists and for the annulment of the closure decrees "because these measures were not ordered by a court".

"Reprinting the drawings was in the framework of responding to what the Danish newspaper published and informing the public about the offence to the Prophet," the message said.

This is not the first time the cartoons have appeared in the Arab press.

In October, the Egyptian Newspaper Al Fagr printed and condemned the cartoons, and last month two Jordanian newspapers published the images.

Jordan arrested Hashem al-Khalidi, editor-in-chief of a weekly tabloid called Al-Mehwar and Jihad Momani, the former editor-in-chief of Shihane newspaper...."

At http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/3A6809B2-A7A4-4170-9B94-099FAEE84761.htm

Former President of USA, Bill Clinton, during the visit of Pakistan said, yesterday that publishers of cartoons be convicted and no media should be allowed to play with people’s religious sentiments’.
Bill Clinton on Friday strongly condemned the publication of blasphemous caricatures, saying “it was a mistake and infringe the feelings of Muslim world,” and urged the countries concerned to convict the publishers. Talking to newsmen in Pakistan he said, “I strongly disagree with the creation and publication of sketches.” He said he was the first person who spoke against these blasphemous sketches. He said there is need to promote interfaith harmony the world over and stand together on the issue. Clinton said religious convictions of the people should be respected at all costs and no media should be allowed to play with the religious sentiments of people of any faith.
He said media can criticise issues including government, policies and people but no one has the right to play with the religious sentiments. Clinton said people in America have also condemned the publication and they are deeply concerned on it and added they respect Islam as it is fast growing religion in US. He said the world should avoid such things which could damage or harm the religious feelings of any group including Muslims.

So Malik, Bill Clinton has used his right of free speech and has condemned the cartoons. He also said that Muslims had squandered a great opportunity to improve understanding between the West and Islam.
The disproportionate response from the Muslim world to these cartoons, which, by the way, have also been published in newspapers in the Middle East and Asia, has only gone to prove that their message is in fact true.
There is also the lie that Islam proscribes images of the Prophet. That is not true, because there have been representations of the prophet in Islamic art over the centuries.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

People in the West question the sense of proportion of Muslims who can riot, burn buildings, cause general mayhem over a few stupid cartoons, and issue death threats against the cartoonists with bounties on their heads, yet say nothing when innocent people in New York, Madrid, and London are killed by Islamic fundamentalist bombers.
They also say very little about the fact that it is largely Muslims of the Shiite variety who are being killed by their fellow Muslims who happen to be Sunnis, in Iraq.
If Islam is truly a religion of peace, how come we are seeing very little “peace” coming from them?

Alchemist,
Having just re-read your posts on this thread one could only conclude you are bordering on lunacy by your constant vindictive diatripe. It is obvious that because you constantly talk about the danger of religion and the control of religion it is you who live in paranoid fear.

Note the following:
1 - "The only way to stop this happening is remove relgion in this country and if the expression of their religion is more important than the safety and freedom of this country, then throw them out, their traitors."
Friday, 10 February 2006 6:58:56 PM

2 - "Religion want control, Christians as well... Because of the huge amount of weight that Religion has upon the powers that be, it looks like we will have to enter another huge war until the religious are reduced to levels where they can be pushed into their kindergarten churches and kept there... That may mean the death of billions in the end."

3 - "It's frightening to see theres no difference between the 3 opposing religious sides, christian, muslim, jew... same suspect history, same violent pasts, same violent present... the intelligent people of the world are petrified as to what the followers of god are taking...The virus religion, is rapidly spreading throughout the world, contaminating and destroying everything it touches...Your destroying this country, our cities, suburbs, ways of life."

"Once the people [atheists] get control, they won't want treacherous religions here, none of them."

The alchemist, Sunday, 12 February 2006

4 - "That makes them evil and dangerous.."

Posted by The alchemist, Sunday, 12 February

WHO ON THIS THREAD CONSTANTLY EXPRESSES FEAR AND LOATHING OF OTHERS VIEWS? WHO ON THIS THREAD IS CALLING FOR WAR THAT COULD WIPE OUT BILLIONS? A MAN OF PEACE EH? A HYPOCRITE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER!

Well what offends Muslims?Anything that can subjugate or lessen the power of the West.

It has nothing to do with Allah or the Prophet.Gods cannot be insulted.Only mortal feeble minded men who suffer from the inadaquacy of their own flawed reason can feel affronted.

Muslims jump up and down and scream murder only when it suits them.People like Bill Clinton cower in feigned respect only to placate the violence and not to address issues of freedom of thought and expression.

Bill Clinton disappoints me,even though I think that the Bush Administration is a farce,we don't need the PC attitude of not confronting all beliefs with logic,whether they be Christian,aethiests Muslims or agnostics.If any belief system cannot stand up to satire,ridicule or the rigors of analysis,it based on a lie and thus is being used to to enslave the masses for the glory of a few mortal men.

If we cannot parody the Muslim faith,then that means I can start a religion called Nazism whose beliefs laws and actions cannot be questioned.

Malik, Bill Clinton, a really believable person. Didn't inhale (dope), oral sex is not sex so doesn't count, a truly devoted christian using freedom of deceitful expression.

My oh my Philo, desperation turns to panic, capitals eh. WHO ON THIS THREAD IS CALLING FOR WAR THAT COULD WIPE OUT BILLIONS? A MAN OF PEACE EH? A HYPOCRITE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER! “ Could it be a god fearing person, give me a hint, or is this a confession, sorry I defrocked years ago.

You did support the christian invasion of Iraq and the continuing worldwide barbarity of religion in the form of conversion. However I understand the religious deep seated desire to attribute blame anywhere but to themselves, for fear that they will one day have to accept the reality of their delusions.

As to fear and loathing, I'll just leave it to those experienced in that, the religious. I'm not atheist, they are just as bad as the religious. Nor are the vast majority of non believers atheists, we just want to be rid of this disease (religion) that is trying to destroy everything. So that we can get on with a rational life and investigate the real future in peace and harmony.

I have no fear of the future Philo, quite the opposite. I look forward to it, just a deep sadness for all life that has, and is being destroyed in the name of god.

Religious freedom of expression, is always in the form of a gun against those that disagree. Thats why 98% of dictators and those incarcerated for violent crimes, identify with a monotheistic belief, true religious freedom of expression. That does make them evil and dangerous, but it appears that you disagree, which is to be expected considering your allegiance to god.

Froggie, an excellent link showing their true hypocrisy, but thats religion for you.

Well said Arjay.

I am shocked to see your double standard mental approach. Anyway you don’t believe Bill Clinton what about George Bernard Shaw, Lamar Tine and many other great scholars, writers and intellectuals of the West.
(Sir George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.

&#61607; "If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam."
&#61607;I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion, which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence,
which can make itself appeal to every age.
&#61607; I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion for from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity." "I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness:
&#61607; I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.”
He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth.
&#61607; He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms
&#61607; He established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all times to come.

You are right Malik. I have been trying to convince these fellows here but I just gave up after realising that these are few bunches of untaught people who don’t have knowledge on history and other religion and just inspired by inflammatory commercial media commercial stories. More comments from the Western great historians:

EDWARD GIBBON and SIMON OCKLEY (HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRES, London, 1870, p. 54)

"'I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET, AN APOSTLE OF GOD' is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honor of the Prophet has never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion."

“Muhammad was nothing more or less than a human being. But he was a man with a noble mission, which was to unite humanity on the submission to ONE and ONLY GOD and to teach them the way to ideal and upright living based on the commands of God. He always described himself as, 'A Servant and Messenger of God,' and so indeed every action of his proclaimed to be”

In the words of PROF. HURGRONJE:
"The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations.“

He continues: "The fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

“The world has not hesitated to raise to divinity, individuals whose lives and missions have been lost in legend. Historically speaking, none of these legends achieved even a fraction of what Muhammad accomplished. And all his striving was for the sole purpose of uniting mankind for the worship of One God on the codes of moral excellence.”
“Muhammad or his followers never at any time claimed that he was a Son of God or the God-incarnate or a man with divinity - but he always was and is even today considered as only a Messenger chosen by God”.
THOMAS CARLYLE in his HEROES AND HEROWORSHIP, was simply amazed as to:
"How one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades." "The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only." "A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world; the world’s Maker had ordered so."

To Alan and Malik

There is only ONE thing which is important in assessing Islam.

"Was Mohammed truly from God" ?

...nothing else matters.

You have quoted 'convenient' historians.
Those who's words seem to lend credence to Islam and Mohammed, yet they are speaking of him purely in historical sense, not in terms of the truth or falsehood of his claim to be 'from God'.

As you quoted the fundamenatls of Islam are:

1/ One God

2/ Mohammed is his (final) messenger.

As to point 1, we have no argument. (in spite of your misunderstanding of the concept of 'Trinity' which I won't go into here)

Regarding point 2, clearly without this, there are no Muslims. Or..
if point 2 is dispensable, as in, "People are born Muslim" then he is intirely superluous. But clearly the message of Islam is not 'just' the unity and one-ness of the Almighty, it is ALSO absolutely about 'Mohammed is His prophet'.. which we utterly, finally and completely and eternally reject.

To accept Mohammed as a messenger from God, is the greatest insult to God who came in Christ to say "I am the way, the truth and the life.. No man (including all Muslims) comes to the Father, but by me" JOHN 14.6

"There is Salvation in no other,there is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved" (Acts14:12)

Now this brings us to the question 'Is mohammed from God'?

You will most likely recall all the 'fond heartwarming stories' which support this view such as his concern for the Jewish woman who threw garbage on his place or on him each day, and when she stopped,he enquired about her health.

And I counter this with 'His murder of a poet who mocked him'.. etc etc... His torture of the camel theives, his genocide of the Banu Qurayza, his expulsion and 50% tax on Jews and so it goes on.

Islamic expansion? simple..

-through blood and marraige relationships to key military and soveriegns.

-Through conquest and murder. (e.g. Ukaydir, Prince of Duma Tabuk )

It's as simple as that.

Malik and Alan Bold
George Bernard Shaw- 1856-1950 Irish dramatist.
GBS said and wrote a lot of things, and he was also a very confused man sometimes.

This from the internet:
“Despite the fact that he was a democratic socialist in the 1930’s, Shaw approved of the dictatorship of Stalin and even made some ambiguous statements that could be interpreted as being pro-Hitler. In 1945 in his preface to his play “Geneva” Shaw claimed that the majority of the victims of the Nazi extermination camps had in fact died of "overcrowding". However, he also stated that Hitler had become a "mad messiah" over time. According to Shaw, "Stalin... made good by doing things better and much more promptly than parliaments". Shaw also made numerous anti-semitic comments at this time, although the extent to which he was merely being ironic or provocative is unclear. His pro-Stalin bias is undeniable...Perhaps the kindest way of looking at Shaw's political position is that he remained in many ways an Edwardian who never fully understood the politics of a totalitarian age.”

He obviously never understood Islam very well either.

For the views of another Islamic website regarding GBS, refer to the following link:
http://www.submission.org/hadith/sunnahdogma.html

I think for myself, unlike some believers of religious dogma on this forum.

I look at what Islam is doing today, with its terrorism and threats of death, and it is enough to convince me that Islam is a dangerous and evil religion. I might add that I am an agnostic, not a subscriber to any religion.

Why do Muslims not apologise for the bombing of innocent people by Islamists in various parts of the world in recent years? No word of apology from you for the Australians killed in Bali!

Yet, you want a cartoonist killed for a few stupid cartoons! You have proven that Muslims have no concept of what “freedom of speech” means, judging by the over-reaction to a few silly drawings.
If you can’t live with a free society, get out, go and live in an Islamic one. It’s that simple!

Froggie,totally agree.If I were God,I too would want people to have the courage to think for themselves.I would find it disgusting that mortals suck up to me in an orgy of power lust and thought control.

This new Muslim facism is no different from that of Adolph Hitler and the lunatic left don't have the courage to face what they have cultivated.They will bring in religious anti-vilification laws to keep a temporary peace and slowly destroy free speech.Govts would very soon ride on the back of these laws and become dictator ships.

No religion or belief system should have special dispensations from public scrutiny becuase there are no absolute truths in a world that requires courage,tenacity and love.

Froggie,
I am a devout and practising Christian, and I totally agree with your last post.
_______________________
God does not need defending, nor Jesus Christ for that matter as Jesus faithfully represented Him as a God who does not enforce religious laws upon those that dissagree or blaspheme his name. They are held accountable for their attitudes after death when the sum of their life stands before the Evaluator of character.

When one is incapable of mounting a winning case for their faith they can only resort to threats of violence. Muslims are brainwashed fanatics when it comes to their living in a democratic society. They cannot accomodate difference. Mohamet in his early life was devout but in his later life became fanatical and irrational. He admitted he sinned forty times a day so it is evident he was not the perfect little saint some try to paint of him. Most of his sins were in how he treated unbelievers.

Muslims cannot mount a reasonable defence to establish Mohamet was truly a prophet of God. He was not in the same league as the Christ son of Mary of whom Mohamet said was sinless. When Jesus was reviled he prayed God forgive them for they do not know what they do. This with spikes through his hands and feet suspended from a Roman cross.

What did Mohamet do to those that reviled him? Murdered them in the name of Allah. He represented a different God to the one Christ declared. Early Christians learned to survive in a hostile religious environment. A Sells said Christianity as Jesus taught was the end of religion and the beginning of freedom.

Actually the term religion represents laws and not a freed life, Islam as with Judaism represents submission to what they believe are the laws of Allah. They do not believe in personal freedom of choice, conviction and conscience. These are Western values influence by reformed thinking. One can only be held accountable to God if choice is a valid value.

Sorry, I believe none of that Philo. :D

As for Froggie, claiming he thinks for himself, that is a somewhat priceless moment. Thinking for yourself is a crucial step that opens you to other viewpoints. However, you can't crush that step with simplistic reasoning. Which brings me back to Froggie's statement:

"I look at what Islam is doing today, with its terrorism and threats of death, and it is enough to convince me that Islam is a dangerous and evil religion. I might add that I am an agnostic, not a subscriber to any religion."

..."I look at what Islam is doing today, with its terrorism and threats of death"
You look at what? Western media? Your imagination? Extremists? Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, yet contradicts your statement entirely. If extremists are what you are looking at, then you can talk about them and not moderate Islam.

..."and it is enough to convince me"
Wow. Clearly like most other Westerners, you don't need much convincing, seeing as you live in a Christian country.

Why is it that people in Western nations are threatened by terrorists scattered across the globe? It's not some global conspiracy of Islam, whereby all Muslim nations are waiting in the wings to overrun the globe the moment a handful of terrorists simultaneously take over the Western world and bring it to its knees.

Is it difficult to imagine what would happen if the United States of America had been forced to partition its lands for the creation of a Muslim state in its Heartland? Don't you think it's ironic that a Christian nation created Israel on land belonging to Islamic people, land with astounding historical and religious significance for Islam?

I would agree that currently Islam has more extreme elements in the world than Christianity. However, what has given rise to these extremist elements? Cultural and geo-political factors over centuries, including the creation of Israel on 'Holy Land' and interference and instability in the Middle East over centuries. Islam -itself- is not evil and not dangerous, as claimed by Froggie and others

Steel,

"Don't you think it's ironic that a Christian nation created Israel on land belonging to Islamic people, land with astounding historical and religious significance for Islam?"

NO - Enlighten us. Who was there first in Palestine? What Legitimate claim - if any - of historical or spiritual significance has Jerusalem to islam?

_________________
BOAZ _David,

I would have gone one better: Is Allah of the Qur'an one and the same as the God (Jehovah) of the bible as Mohammad's islam claims?

I don't think so.
_________________

Philo,

I agree with you - keep up the good work for His Glory.

You quoted Sells: "Christianity as Jesus taught was the end of religion and the beginning of freedom."

So I ask the jury out there: what is islam exactly and where does islam fit on the religious train of thought

Steel. So 9/11 never happened- or Madrid or London, or Bali? Darfur? The Taliban, killings of and fatwas declared on writers, film-makers, death threats to cartoonists- the list goes on and on… Even here in Australia, Muslims are causing trouble.
Is it all a plot by the western media to make Islam look bad?
Heard of the following terms? Look them up if you haven't.
· Dhimmi
· Jizya tax
· Taqiyah
· Kaffur
· Jihad
· Shari’a law
Add to all this: suicide bombers, the place of women in Muslim society, hatred and persecution of minorities, and, extremely important, the fact that religion and the State are one, under Islam.

I actually don’t give a damn whether you think my view is simplistic or not. An open mind can also equate to an empty mind.

However, if you want to live in denial, go right ahead.

Israel is a huge question, impossible to cover in this forum with its limitations. You talk about a “Christian nation created Israel on land belonging to Islamic people”.
Which Christian nation would that be, all knowing one? You’ve obviously never heard of Zionism or the “Stern Gang”. Look it up in Wikipedia.
The Jews (Zionists) created Israel, no one else.
As for your silly proposition about the USA being forced to “partition its lands for the creation of a Muslim state in its Heartland”, there was no previous settlement of Muslims in the USA, so the situation is not the same as that of Israel.
Indonesia- hmmm. Tell me more about how Indonesia contradicts me. Heard of East Timor? Aceh? Jemaah Islamiyah ring any bells?

Steel said:

[a Christian nation created Israel on land belonging to Islamic people, land with astounding historical and religious significance for Islam?]

The concept 'belonging' is a flexible one. Today you have it, tomorrow you dont. Why ? well that's what makes the world go around, "power". In the case of Israel, the Muslims who formerly HAD the power under or allied with the Ottomans, no longer did. Well stiff cheddar, welcome to the world.

Some history. Any observer of this field will know that one has to look back much further than 1948 to correctly understand this area.

Abraham-> Isaac-> Jacob (Israel)-> 12 sons-> 12 Tribes-> Promised Land

Then the nation grew, and we had all the kings etc. Exiles and restorations, and finally the exile forced by the Romans in AD 70.

Thereafter we have a hotch potch of Arabs filtering in here and there.
Now..'belonging' is as much an accident of History as anything. Even if you don't subscribe to the Abrhamic covenant "this land will be a dwelling place for your descendants for all time" you are still left with the issue of the to-ing and fro-ing of power balances.

So, lets get off this 'Arab land/Muslim land' thing once and for all.

We are all displaced/dispossessed people or their decendants, we all have to get over it.

Now..your final illusory dream "Islam itself" is not violent.

I challenge that absolutely. You saying this is more suggestive of a serious case of brain management/washing. The usual mantra of Muslims is this: '

To glorify Allah and spread Islam as EXEMPLIFIED by our holy prophet Mohammed.

Now steel,

all you have to do is look through the well documented hadith and Quran verses shown by Kactuz to find the truth about this evil man.
I could add much more, in context, properly interpreted and indisputable.
Mohammed was: violent, murderous,torture inclined, and sexually promiscuous. (Captive girls, daughter in law, 9 yr old)
You call this man a prophet ? good grief. I pity you.
We can go nose to nose on each of those points if you like.

I notice that Boaz David that we rarely cross swords since I'm the religious cynic and you are the avowed believer,but how is it we find so much common ground?

Arjay

You crack me up!

You and BD are both relentless in your causes - what a juxtoposition.

Cheers
Kay

[Thereafter we have a hotch potch of Arabs filtering in here and there.]Persian world long ago was far, far greater than a "hotch potch of Arabs" Now, I don't know where exactly, or when, but there were great mathematicians and astronomers that rivalled or exceeded what is now european lands.

[Now..your final illusory dream "Islam itself" is not violent.]
Islam -itself- is not evil and not dangerous. I never said violent. Irregardless, going by the books reveals both sides to have been violent and commited atrocities. However, I have read about the Crusades to the Holy Land, done in the name of God. The pure butchery that ensued is indescribable. Church inquisitors have shown extreme brutality to people, especially "free thinkers".

[To glorify Allah and spread Islam as EXEMPLIFIED by our holy prophet Mohammed.]
I know that Islamic teachings are rigorous and are more extreme than Christian religion is today. I said that before. What I'm saying is yes, there are extreme, dangerous elements in the world however, when you look at the world the largest muslim country is Indonesia and it is peaceful and moderate. The extreme elements are exactly that, but nothing more. Islam is quietly living peacefully in many democracies around the world and the largest representative of Islam is Indonesia, which is a democracy and moderate.

Steel,
So is that why Indonesia masacred Christians in East Timor; or transmigrate 400,000 by huge shiploads of Muslims into the majority Christian province of West Papua? Is that why they murder the Indiginous peoples calling them independence militia who resist this taking of their native lands and heritage? Indonesia is a dangerous place for Australians eg Bali, Australian Embassy etc. Ask how many Australians would prefer to live in Indonesia under their laws and with devoted Muslims observing shari'ah compared to Australia. Most Indonesians may call themselves Muslim just like most Australians might call themselves Christian. But I can tell you neither are devoted adherents to their faith. The places where the Immams are teaching the Koran with passion are the extremist areas such as Aech. In these places 10,000 plus Christians have been masacred.

Good example of what happens under Islamic rule.