You are quite slick, Irfan. But not quite slick enough.

You assert that I 'categorize your comments as “left-wing political correctness”', employing quotation marks to convey the impression that those words were mine. Only problem is that that language never came out of my keyboard, as even a cursory perusal of my posting will conclusively demonstrate.

The false attribution of a quote is a proverbial hanging offence by the canon of journalistic ethics. And I can’t imagine that the legal profession would look any more kindly towards people who simply make things up as they go along. Not a good look, Irfan.

As far as addressing your comments on their merits, the problem is that I didn’t find anything particularly meritorious in your argument. Case in point, your lame attempt to rebut my assertion that no honest comparison can be made between the Arab and Israeli media when it comes to the question of ethnic bigotry. You say that your claims about Israeli papers 'have been confirmed by Israelis themselves.'

Which Israelis? Which papers? I named the official newspaper of the Palestinian Authority, al-Hayat al-Jadida, as a particularly egregious purveyor of Judeophobic bile. And I would be more than happy to produce more chapter and verse examples from that paper and others. In response, all you can adduce in support of your contention is an a pathetically non-specific reference to some anonymous Israelis. Sorry, but that dog just won’t hunt.

I’ll tell you what. Instead of hashing this out in this forum, with all its attendant limitations (no more than two postings each 24hrs), why don’t we debate this question in person before a live audience? I’m sure we could agree on a mutually acceptable debate venue, format and neutral moderator. As Animal Mother famously said in Full Metal Jacket: 'You talk the talk. Do you walk the walk?'

So there we are. The gauntlet has been cast. All that remains to be seen is whether you have the gumption to take the Pepsi challenge.

You know how to get in touch with me. I await your response.

Susan

I'm still awaiting Irafan's definition of Multi-culturalism from about a month ago. Some sixty possible posts.

Keith

IRF

in spite of some of our rather 'passionate' posts, please be assured that at least I, appreciate your usually balanced writings, in spite of you often calling me an armchair nazi. Here is a donut :) (if ur enemy is hungry, feed him)

The one point I wish to take issue with this time is:

you asked:
*Can I presume you agree with me that his material does deliberately cast aspersions on all Muslims in similar fashion to Nazi propagandists casting aspersions on all Jews?*

CAST ASPERSIONS. Irf, have you ever noted the way the Catholic Church is portrayed in the media ? "They are all dirty old men who molest children" kind of thing. How about Christians.. "They are all a bunch of loonies"
They are the messages trotted out almost daily by for example Green Left Weekly.

I don't for one moment suddenly say that "All Muslims" are terrorists because of a silly cartoon, and I doubt many others would either.

But when I see THOUSANDS of 'ordinary' muslims trashing Embassies, and people among the crowd of ordinary muslims who state on camera "If I meet the man who did the cartoons, I will KILL him, with a shotgun" ....I start to think .....

When I see all the signs "You will come crawling when the Mujahadin come roaring" etc.. (in UK), I start to think "Most Muslims are prone to violence"

On the evidence, its not an unreasonable conclusion.

All holders of such signs, as I said in the other post would be OFF TO BAXTER indefinitely without trial until they publically apologised and demonstrated contrition and obedience to our laws.

Ted Lapkin

Why couldn't you simply answer Irfan's questions:

"Finally, do you support to the views of others such as mickijo, Leigh, coach and kaktuz? Do you agree that the views and actions of a minority of Muslims should be ascribed to the Muslim mainstream? "

Instead of the 'big' 'manly' challenge? Seems to me that you are hedging.

Boaz - there was no protest over the cartoons originally, there has been deliberate action to foment trouble by a minority who have a vested interest in creating division. I do not believe that these trouble makers are sincere Muslims, any more than I believe that people like Leigh, coach et al are sincere Christians. Why? Because all these extremists preach hate for one another. And I have to include you Boaz, because you speak to Irfan as an enemy, otherwise you would not have written "(if ur enemy is hungry, feed him)". Have you any idea just how offensive you can be?

You always excuse outright hatred as an expression of 'passion'. My ex husband used to say that he only hit me because he cared so much.

In all things, balance.

RObert, sorry for the delay. I was waiting for my "allowance" to post. I don't have any official statistics for Australia. But here are some statistcs from a seminal article written by the brilliant journalist Mark Steyn on The Wall Street Journal on the issue that deadly demographics threaten Europe. In the Netherlands (this is not from the article) almost 30% of children under the age of thirteen are Muslim. The eminent English scholar of Islamic studies Bernard Lewis states, that Europe by the end of the century will be Muslim. For a scholar of his calibre to make such a statement, I think one can safely assume that he has indisputable statistical evidence in his possession. Now to some statistics.

In 1970, the developed world had a share of the global population of 30% to 20% of the Muslim world. By 2000, each had about 20%. Also fertility rates from Somalia,6.91, Niger, 6.83, Afghanistan, 6.78, Yemen, 6.75, all of them Muslim countries. From these statistics, I think you can make a reasonable extrapolation of what lies in store for many European countries, including Australia, whose overall fertility rates are about 1.5, which do not even cover the replacement fertility rate, i.e., the number you need for merely a stable population. Also I've a sample of statistics of my own. Residing in Brunswick, Melbourne, which is equivalent to Lakemba where many Muslim families live, I start conversations with many men and women and ask them how many children they have. The answer is in most cases, in the range of between 7-10. With a modicum of imagination, one can also foresee what the future demographics of Australia will be.
Sorry that I can not give you more ample statistics.
There is another article by Mark Steyn titled "Salute Donna Vale", published on The Australian on Feb. 16.

Themiscoles,

Thanks for the apology although no offence taken.
What I quoted was not my opinion but quoted as is from the Australian Bureau of Statistics website summarised as follows:

1. That Australia is Christian majority.
2. That overwhelming majority of migrants intake are Christians.
3. That the highest growth rate in Australia for a religion is in fact Buddhism.

Basic maths: Low buddhism base in 96 + low buddhism immigration from 96-2001 + 79% increase in buddhists in 2001 = many Australians are migrating from other religions to Buddhism.

There is no statistics on birth rate by religion although my assumption (until i see something else) is all Orthodox Muslims will probably have the same number if not less than Catholics or Jews.

Also, you seem to be linking ethnicity to religion which is not accurate: there are Arabs of Muslim parents going to other religions or no religion as much as Anglo from Christian background going to Islam & Buddhism. Put simply, no one can really tell what the future will look like. (Although Boaz and Kaktuz are memorising the book of revelation and Lord of the Rings :-)).

Peace.