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.