A rigorous analysis of terror would threaten to undermine the popular approach to it -

it is received wisdom that it is wide spread, well coordinated, has unlimiited funds, is an integral part of Islamic socio-political thought, represents a clear and present danger to us every waking minute of our lives, requires counter measures costing in the billions of dollars, was a severe threat to us before we invaded Afgahistan and Iraq, and those invasions have in no way incrceased our exposure to the odd fundmentalist nut bag, counter terrorist measures up hold rather than weaken our civil liberties - and these liberties must be compromised in this ongoing waragainst civilsation if we hope to see 2008. - that pretty much sums up our take on terrorist - so why worry about further study?

Heavens above there is no need for further studies! - after determinig with rock solid certainty al queda links with Sadaam and that the deserts were bristling with WMDs - we knew all we had to know avbout terorrism - and of course Woodwards latest revelations are a pack of lies.

We were right to begin with and we wil be right to the very end because politicians lack the ose or integrity to say we made a mistake - except for the Hezbollah who seemed genuinely suprised at Iraels reaction to their little kidnapping spree.

So why do we need academics muddying the waters when we have got this fiasco so right from the beginning??!!

Quite so Sneekypoos - any academic study would show that the War on Terror is completely bogus - a self fulfilling prophecy, in which our own gullibility is used as a bludgeon against ourselves.

We Aussies couldn't be that stupid could we? - could we?

The trouble is that the war crimes committed by the PM, Cabinet and the Sly-Boys are so egregious that they have no choice but to press on. I think that is called "flight-forward" in Pentagon speak.

I have received the Sedition Laws publications from creepy old Uncle Phil's department - and you know - it's just so much tosh! A waste of paper - a waste of everyone's time - just a collosal red-herring. The excrement of nervous, guilty men.

In fairness to Uncle Phil, I think I detect a slight weariness, as though his heart were no longer in it. I live in hope.

There should be a very public academic study of terrorism. Then might we see that it has it's roots in the War For Profit Gang, whose tentacles reach into the deep recesses of our government, intelligence and financial institutions.

I think it would make total sense to ask the "evil-doers" what's on their minds. "Know your enemy" or some such.

In the absence of first-hand knowlege we rely on George W Bush - who, incidentally, believes God chose him for these difficult times - to interpret just why America gets picked on by bearded men hiding in far-away caves.

A Needed Changing of the Guard - Based on extracts from the Guardian

The US and its allies have disappointed its thinking public so much through underestimating ME problems, it is becoming hard to accept apart from succcessful missile strategy, the so far meagre list of our allied capabilities or credentials.

Poor judgment by our leaders has multiplied anti-Western terrorism to the point that we must admit that we can only win in the Middle East possibly with the help of nuclear Israel by forced capitulation of Iran and Syria through pattern bombing - leaving us wondering what sides Russia and China might take, and maybe India, and even Pakistan in the long run.

What has become a problem in today’s world, is that a dismaying number of people who admired the US, especially back in the days of the Keynesian-sponsored Marshall Plan, etc, are now changing their opinions. Indeed, going by reports it seems the US and Britain are playing the same old colonial double-game, with too many troops under orders to guard oilfields rather than organising some sort of democratic peace for the Arabic population.

Possibly more problematic are the US President’s rather dull remarks about freedom for all, reminiscent too much of British colonialist Land of Hope and Glory - Mother of the Free. Both the US and the UK must surely realise that ME Muslims did not come down in the last shower. Their great grand-parents must surely have told truthful tales about Western imperialism and injustice, ever since Lawrence of Arabia was double-crossed just after WW1, pandered to by his friend Winston Churchill about some sort of democracy, but double-crossed again when the democracy proved a copy of the Indian Raj-style Dyarky or double-rule democracy, with British Commissars to match each Iraqi government appointee. When the Iraqis justifiably revolted once more, Lawrence’s so-called bosom pal, Churchill Minister for UK Defence, gave the order for the RAF to bomb a large troop of Iraqi and Kurdish cavalry with mustard gas, killing ten thousand.

Just one instance of British and later American tactics in Iraq.

Bushbred Part Two

According to the Guardian article, with our allies having messed in the nest so-to speak in the Middle East, there seems little hope now of rebuilding the trust of not only Middle East Muslims, but also of most global Muslims, as well as indeed right now of many global non-Muslims.

Finally, historians are saying that time is definitely not on our side, the leaking of our own advancing technology, will surely bring close the threat of a mini-nuclear bomb in a haversack - set off simply by pressing the button of a mobile phone.

Surely it is time our leaders left off thinking about missile diplomacy and pattern bombing, and thought more about the simple wisdom of a Gandhi, or even a Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader able to organise a peaceful end to the Cold War, with an arrangement for the new Russia to retain most of its nuclear arsenal as part of the bargain. Or better and safer still, the perceptivity and common sense that helped Nelson Mandela calm down possibly the most arrogant elitist group of people to be found in modern times. The South African arparthaidists who also practised state terrorism, so much like the Nazis. Even the former Pope gave praise to Mandela, but not our new Pope, unfortunately.

BAN

1/ Join the Caravan ?
2/ Defense of the Muslim Lands ?
3/ Quran ?
4/ Hadith ?

Personally, I'd MUCH rather see these texts used as a basis for training young Australian men and woman in what our 'enemy' in fact looks like and how he/she thinks.

What is the point of banning a couple of books when the Quran itself declares regarding Christians (by name)

1/ Allah is at war with them.
2/ Alla's curse is on them.
Sura 9.30

and various other choice adjectives.

By the way.. polytheists/pagans/atheists are condemned outright, and in much stronger language.

Now.. follow the reasoning here.

a) Allah is at War with Christians
b) I am Muslim
c) Muslims worship Allah
d) Muslims must be on Allah's side
e) Muslims (along with Allah) are in fact at war with Christians.
f) Therefore it is clearly my responsibility to fight Christians.

Now..if you want 'sedition' look no further than the Quran itself.
If you want 'advocating violent overthrow' of the Christian/Polytheist/Pagan/anything_other_than_Muslim Government.. again look no further than the Quran.

So.. let me make this unmistakably clear.. I'm going to use caps

THE QURAN ADVOCATES THE VIOLENT OVERTHROW OF NON MUSLIM GOVERNMENTS!

and therefore is a seditious document.

Taking this a step further, is it unreasonable that if Allah is at war with Christians, then all Muslims are at war with non Muslim governments ? Is this not what Catch the Fire were in fact saying ?

Can anyone fault my reasoning ? Did I misquote the Quran ?

DISCLAIMER Clearly, not all muslims are conscious of this state of affairs, so it would be socially unfair to embark on a war against them. But some policy tweaking in immigration might be in order, and some strict rules about certain verses needing to be 'blotted out' in black of every Quran in Australia.

If you're interested, here's an investigation into several incidents involving ASIO and a book on terror, including the 'cleansing' of the hard drive (though cleansing is an awfully nice word for a task that involved sledgehammers).

This document is a parliamentary brief - not a partisan publication.

http://www.aph.gov.au/LIBRARY/pubs/RB/2005-06/06rb13.pdf

Does this concern anyone else? especially when the actual organisation these people belonged to (attorney generals office or ASIO) wasn't determined?

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/09/29/europe/EU_GEN_Britain_Mideast_Documents.php

This has been reported all over the world including in the Adelaide Advertiser over the weekend.

The language could be used today and mean precisely the same things. The war on "terror" is bogus because the muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan who we and Israel are bombing to bits are being bombed to bits due to this knowledge that was available in 1949 and we know it.

I am reading a book called Beyond Chutzpah by a Jewish writer called Norman Finklestein - it's pretty depressing.

The problem today is that we are the terrorists and refuse to understand it as we rampage around the world.

Hmmm... sounds like Professor Williams, the erstwhile Member for Kingsford-Smith (thank goodness for Peter Garrett!) didn't get his last Australian Research Council grant!

George has a surprisingly narrow viewpoint for an academic.

"The Attorney-General has indicated he is happy to meet with academics and talk to them about their projects. But the role and obligations of academics should be clear on the face of the law. Where relevant, there should be an express exemption for their work."

George's arguments are almost a pleasure to shoot holes in:

- Why should academics enjoy special exemptions from some security laws and not other equally deserving groups eg journalists, bloggers and members of minor political parties. They are all equally interested in the truth and the publics right to know are they not?.

- How do you define "academic"? Some 18 year old BA student writing a politics essay "Bombing targets of Sydney - Conflicting choices for Lakemba jihadists"!? Or a 60 year Professor writing a book on the same topic?

- Where do visiting academics (from say Gaza or Kandahar) fit into the academic immunity suggestion? Do authorities have to accept and exempt foreign academics partial to Hamas and the Taliban respectively?

- As a lawyer George is already aware that the law evolves with case history, particularly judgements. How, in such a new area of law can laws be definite?

- Isn’t guilt or otherwise based on all matters relevant to a legal case not only upfront criteria already in written law? How can authorities possibly vet academics’ credentials and thesis/essay topics?

Ruddock's offer to talk looks genuine.

TurnRightThenLeft - thanks for the reference. I've already invited "the authorities" to read my blog and would welcome their comments if they think I'm stepping out of line :)

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

Do you reeeeeally reeeeeeeally believe that Boaz?

if we left Afghanistan and tried to help them grow something better than opium - our failure to eradicate it is tacit consent to grow it-

Or if we admitted to the lie that is the war on Iraq - returned to them soveriegnty of their oil -

Do you reeeeeeally think they would continue to yearn to blow us up?

Or over turn every democratically elected government in the world?
- who is the master mind here? and puhleeease dont tell me it is Osama.

Countless Islamic scholars would humbly suggest your Quranic interpretations are wrong - as many biblical scholars might also suggest with equal humility your interpretation of the bible is a bit literal as well -

And if you do believe that there is a vast Islamic conspiracy - what do you propose? educate the children and youth of Australia to the truth of this horror - and then what? use the power of prayerfull persuaion to turn the wicked minds of the muslim to a path of goodness and niceness??!!

Forget the disclaimer - if the Quran is hell bent on taking over the world going easy on a few softies over here is no way forward - making them convert under punsihment of being banished from the kingdom might help -

I'm just searching for the logical conclusion here -

Perhaps you would be more at peace with the Dominionsits postion of a world wide christian theocracy? Hmmmm?

Full points for Zeal my friend but I think you've backed the wrong horse on this one ( and a few others:) )

Chris, I can’t keep up with you. First you tell us that uncle Phil has your residence under constant surveillance and you were expecting that inevitable knock on the door. Today, Chris is in a very insouciant mood telling us that the Sedition Laws are tosh.

What’s it gonna be; should I dust off my prison garb or am I free to enjoy long summer days in this lotus-eater’s paradise?

If Ruddock is the AG he's cracked up to be, wouldn't he have anticipated the problems he's caused for academics?

Then again, maybe he did. If research found that terrorism isn't such a big threat after all, or that it would be relatively easy to stop it, then we wouldn't have to be the country that hangs out of GW Bush's bottom, would we?

And what would happen then? We'd have to get on with minding our own business and looking after our own and maybe not selling our souls to big, fat American companies.

We might have to quit being totally paranoid and start thinking about where we're going and what we want for our future.

What if we decided we don't want or need to be an American outpost?

Better to keep those pesky academics intimidated until we can organise to replace the Union Jack on our flag with the Stars and Stripes.

Interesting article,

Boaz,

If there is a medal or an oscar for intellectual dishonesty, you get my vote. It is not nice to invite people to your discussion and leave them and hide here.

Question: do you believe you are a good spokesman/ representative of your faith?
Could there be a chance that Jesus and Mohammed (pbut) are maybe having Ramadan iftar together now? :-)

Happy Ramadan my angry friend, its time for prayer and reflection.

Peace,

T

Boaz,
Regarding selective quotes from the Koran. It's all about context.

For example, in Luke 19:27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him, or In Deuteronomy 13:6-16, where the Lord instructs Israel to kill anyone who worships a different God or who worships the Lord differently.

Pretty clear cut, even by your own standards.

Understanding has to be the first step toward any resolution of this problem, not just more of the same.

Sneeky said:

"if we left Afghanistan and tried to help them grow something better than opium - our failure to eradicate it is tacit consent to grow it-"

A better approach (humanly_speaking)would be to give them one season and an alternative crop to change to, and if they failed to do so, promise them that one more crop of Poppies will be 100% decimated. No mercy.
They would need some overlap assistance, but a look at the economics of how much they are paid by the drug buyers might reveal its not that costly. They would probably fight this, literally. So, finish them. Kill all the men, allocate the women and children to other non drug selling tribes, level the village. (they will understand because this was Mohammed's approach toward Jews)

But the politics of "protection of our interests" does not go very far these days.

I disagree that getting out of Afghanistan would be wise or reduce the ultimate terror/radical_Islamist threat. Remember THAT was where Australians learned to use explosives. We were not in Iraq or Afghanistan at that time I believe.

"Selective Quote" and Context :) yes.. but my quote was 100% spot on in that area.

Wobbles
Jesus words in Luke, formed part of a 'parable' and you should know that there is 'one central point', it is not an allegory mate nor a command of Jesus it was the command of the King in the parable :)
Deut13:6-16. Yep,tough, but not seditious.

F.H.
Yusuf Ali "Allah's curse be on them"
Pickthall "Allah (Himself) fighteth against them"
Shakir "may Allah destroy them"
Khalifa "GOD condemns them"

Context 'Treaty breakers' right ? But the point is, they are not to be fought for breaking a treaty, but for their polytheistic ways :)
"Adding Jesus to Allah"
9:29 "Fight BAck" ? hah ! Just like Mohammed 'fought back' at Khaiber.
(by invading an unsuspecting tribe who had not invaded him-u justify pre-emptive attacks ? good welcome to our world)

Marylin... still frothing with naivity. Arab conquerers never did that kind of thing, looking after their interests..did they :)

Clearly, since the secularity of Australia is enshrined in the Constitution, the Bible is a seditious document. At the very least, certain passages should be blacked out - and we might need to 'tweak' our immigration program...

Dear Boazy

In the spirit of this discussion diverted totally off the subject by your cute self (AGAIN) I dedicate this slightly modified letter to you:

"ATTENTION CITIZENS LIVING IN GOD'S COUNTRY WITHOUT HIS PERMISSION: A SPECIAL INVITATION FROM THE ...DEPARTMENT OF FAITH TO BECOME A REAL AUSSIE™

The PM Cordially, Yet Strenuously Invites You to Accept the Lord Jesus Christ as Your Personal Savior – Before it is Too Late.

Dear Unsaved Liberal Voter:

What exciting times we live in! Today, millions of True Christians™, having splashed voting booths throughout this Godly land with the Blood of the Perfect Lamb, are celebrating God's decision to re-elect our brother-in-Christ, Johnnie H as Oz's most savedest PM ever. Our prayers for a Christ-centered "four more holy wars!" have been answered! And we want you to be part of it!

Yes, for even though you are unsaved (non-Christian), we thank you for your vote! It helped greatly. Indeed, it was the Holy Spirit Himself, who dwells in a sprawling palace on a cumulus cloud hovering over [Canberra], who personally directed your grubby white finger to the [vote right und gut]! Because He knows you, and He loves you, and He understands that you are now only anywhere from 45% to 30% away from signing over half your life's savings to Him.

That's why today, non-Christian quasi-Aussie friend, it's time to get on board 100% with the winning team! Don't risk ending up in Hell and spending a lifetime doggy paddling in the lake of boiling lava while that bloated ignoramus Michael Moore bobs like a pork crackling buoy of singed, bubbling blubber beside you, spitting out his blasphemous research for all of eternity! It's a horrifying thought, but it just a preview of the frightening, sadistic horrors the Lord Jesus has in mind for you if you don't start showering Him with fawning, effusive flattery before He gets around to smiting you and flinging you into Hell.

For the rest see http://www.whitehouse.org/dof/invitation.asp

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Any conflict is good for business, even better for big business. Nothing gets a flatlining economy humming better than a war. The Stock Markets boom, mining booms. Somebody's got to replace all the trashed military gear and ammo,etc. Then, after it's all over, there's billions to be had in rebuilding contracts. These days the casualties of war,the PEOPLE have been dehumanised into just collateral damage, just a loss to be written off. They don't figure in the broader picture. Does anybody know the Iraqi civillian death toll? Does anybody care? Welcome to Globalisation. Bow before the God of corporate greed.

Plantagenet,

Enjoyed your posting.

Aspro,

There is a lot of truth to your posting although individually we need to care and make a difference. I will tell you a sample of my actions to make a difference:

If I get into a mum and dad petrol station, I fill the car and buy few small items.
If I have to use a multi-national greedy petrol station, I do the following:
- I only buy 10 litres of petrol (increase their cost of transaction).
- I pay cash (preferably coins) to increase their cost of cash management.
- I buy nothing from the store.

You might think its stupid but that’s my personal way of changing the world.

Boazy,

Please re-read wobbles posting: its all into context.
If you are so hot under the collar about few verses of the Quran, please ask the church to dismiss the whole OT especially Leviticus.

Salams,

For those who doubt Boaz's exegetical skill, perhaps this will help
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24592

Or maybe this piece
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20460114-28737,00.html

which quotes the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdel Aziz al-Sheikh, saying he "issued a statement on the official Saudi news service, defending Muslims' divine right to resort to violence: "The spread of Islam has gone through several phases, secret and then public, in Mecca and Medina. God then authorised the faithful to defend themselves and to fight against those fighting them, which amounts to a right legitimised by God. This ... is quite reasonable, and God will not hate it."

Saudi Arabia's most senior cleric also explained that war was never Islam's ancient founder, the prophet Mohammed's, first choice: "He gave three options: either accept Islam, or surrender and pay tax, and they will be allowed to remain in their land, observing their religion under the protection of Muslims." Thus, according to the Grand Mufti, the third option of violence against non-Muslims was only a last resort, if they refused to convert or surrender peacefully to the armies of Islam."

Open your eyes before you reap the consequences of your ignorance

Dear C.J.

if anything is 'enshrined' in the constitution it is the reliance on the 'guidance of Almighty God' (pre-amble).
What IS also enshrined in the constitution is that government cannot make a law which 'promotes' a particular religion (in historical context with Catholic/Protestant issues read "denomination" for 'religion') Also, if I'm not mistaken parliament cannot make a law which 'hinders' any Denomination. (all of which in the context would mean 'Christian') Example. Parliament could not make a law forbidding Catholic schools.

Planta...

I think you are misreading me moit... I don't advocate a theocracy. You give the distinct impression you think I want one. Please clarify.
Regarding those in Christ and non believers. Refer the Bible rather than blasphemous insulting web sites, you might gain a more balanced picture.

Of one thing we can all be sure. We get the eternal destination we "vote" for. (with our hearts). For the issue of those who have not heard, or had a chance to hear, please read Romans 1 in full, carefully. But dare I say it..'you' have heard.

When you understand Islamic history and expansion, you will fully appreciate that even if we were not in Afghanistan or Iraq... they would find a reason to be at war with Dar Ul Hab.. (thats us)

Wobbles. My context was ok. (see previous post)

F.H.

see above. Of all people F.H. you must be aware that the example of the Prophet is what gives meaning to the Quran ...right ?
Who can interpret it better than its author ....unless of course he simply used it as a convenient tool of mass manipulation, and took a "do what I say not what I do" approach :) I still am totally amazed that you blokes cannot see his 'convenient' and 'selfish' "revelations" for what they are. How many ayats simply serve the purpose of bolstering his position, and influence ? I would like a buck for each one.

Fellow Human, speaking from the Greek, appreciate your reasoning - or from a liberal Christian, our faith respects your wisdom and understanding.

It is so interesting that these could be phrases from Nelson Mandela and Bishop Tutu, whom Margaret Thatcher scorned, her son trying to help form a right-wing white mercenary brigade not in Mandela or Tutu's interests.

So keep up the good work, Fellow Human, may we pray that philosophies of peace like yours will help Let in the True Light.

Dear Boazy

Out of fairness I recant - You do not support theocracy.

Out of balance I present this:

IRAN AT A GLANCE - PRE 2003 INVASION FACT SHEET

KEY FACTS: 437,072 sq km of barren desert wasteland. Sworn enemy of the United States and white people everywhere. Inhabited exclusively by Arabiac terrorists and unsaved Islamoids, who shamelessly conspire to withhold the vast reserves of American oil held hostage deep beneath their worthless nation.

POPULATION: 23,331,985 (July 2001 est.)

RACE: Arabiac/Brown

RELIGION: Our Lord and Savior His Holiness Jesus Christ is not welcome in Iraq. Worship of the moon god Allah is compulsory. Bibles are used routinely by the populace as fireplace logs.

SPORT: As with most inferior nations, "soccer" is popular.

GEOGRAPHY: Iraq consists of little more than tens of thousands of square miles of sun-baked dirt mountains, in which reside countless muslamic savages, who engage in ferociously indiscriminate breeding to fill the ranks of Iraq's vast armies of pre-teen terrorists.

FOOD: The dietary staples of Iraq include camel meat, lentils, and yogurt. In addition, 53% of Iraquians are practicing cannibals.

HISTORY: Present-day Iraq occupies the greater part of the ancient land of Mesopotamia. History tells us that the Mesopotamiacs were human rights advocates of bestiality, who - millenia before the discovery of the US - labored intensively to weave Aussie flags from human hair and tumble weed fibers, and BURN THEM!

LANGUAGES: English (though they pretend not to understand it), Arabiac

Highest of the High: September 11th, when the entire country enjoys smug smiles hidden under burkas and filthy beards and secretly celebrates its cunning ingenuity in making the world think that the Saudis, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were responsible for what your President now knows was a 100% Iraquian plot.

ECONOMY: Iraq's economy is dominated by the oil sector, and while a decade-long UN embargo has done much to weaken the Iraquian economy, a deal with the Texas-based Halliburton and AWB has pre-bought the lot.

More see http://www.whitehouse.org/iraq/facts.asp

Nothing like proof ;-D

Pete

Pete....

I'm kinda scratching my head at the moment...asking "Does Pete by any chance think that factsheet thingy is a reflection of real White House policy"? hmmmmmm....

I could imagine some hyper fundamentalist "America 4Eva" types thinking that way, but never in published form :)

That was a projection of the worst fantasies of Democrats about the Republican mind to gain political advantage.

It is suggesting that the basic ingredients of propoganda are at work

a) Dehumanize your enemy
b) Show how invading them is a noble thing.

I'm not so naive as to think that there would not be rabid individuals and corporate interests pushing the Iraq agenda, and I have to condemn such things in the name of God. (Have a read of the book of Amos, the first 2 chapters. see if you notice how God views these things :) c'mon. be adventurous and see it you notice something rather interesting about the nations mentioned, their geographical location, and the final 'target' of Gods anger.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=37&chapter=1&version=31

You could imagine a very changed color of Jewish faces when good ol Amos gets up to chapter 2 verse 4. Prior to that, they would have been cheering him on.

To the extent that 'evil' and greed is driving the White house agenda, to that degree they will in fact cause terrorism to thrive and grow.

I watched a very good doco on Black Hawk down last night. The anger the Somali's felt was driven by one major event. The Americans arranged a meeting of both moderate (anti Aidid) leaders and Pro Aidid leaders, at which they were to work out how to resolve the problem of Aidids ambitions and callous disregard for the people (Hijacking food aid) etc.. well.. it appears either a deliberate or accidental rocketing of that meeting and the killing of most of those leaders alienated the whole Somali community in one go.

So, a war on terror per-se should not neccessarily create more terror, only when it is driven by the types of attitudes Amos condemns will it create more terrorists. ( I think :)

Boaz

Thanks for replying so comprehensively mate.

OLO editors have just given my 5 different messages of how to reply.

I don't think they like our discussing things Off Topic.

Perhaps visit my blog sometime.

Regards

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Gulp...swallow... umm.. I thought I was on topic :)

Yes, Pete, I've seen your blog. I read bits and pieces.

TOPIC
It seems to me that once the ball is rolling to counteract something which is perceived as a problem, such as radical Islam, then the original problem becomes worst, as it in turn reacts to the reaction, and so it goes on.

We should not lose sight though, of the original problem. Nor should we allow ourselves to be swayed by those who seek to misrepresent the turmoil in terms of 'but you started it' (meaning Western intervention)

I still recall how the Palestinians justified a bus bombing they did after 3 months of 'nothing'. No one was shooting at each other, peace was taking root....then KA-BOOOM... up goes a bus in Israel.
The excuse was 'ooh..but Israel is occupying' duh.....basically this just was code for 'we want attention on us again'

The Palestinian situation should not be underestimated in terms of being the root cause of much Islamic terrorism. But the Muslim + Left winger solution is totally naive and incompatable with reality, and my own view of 'theological inevitability'.

Today, for the record, I heard of 4 'Christian Activists' who broke into Pine Gap. This act is a clear crime and I hope they throw the book at these misguided twits.

If ur gonna protest.. PROTEST but lets not bring our Lords name into something He clearly taught us NOT to do. "That which is Caesars, give to Caesar"

An additional problem with George's suggestion that academics can legally meet terrorists is that it gives terrorists and their causes LEGITIMACY.

It gives terrorists (if they so wish) a podium through the academic's works (which presumably also carry an immunity) to possibly advocate violence against Australians.

Furthermore academic immunity can logically mean a terrorist's immunity from the law. George suggests each academic be given a specific immunity to meet terrorists. Is he then suggesting that security services cannot intervene in a given academic-terrorist meeting to arrest the terrorist? Would such an arrest be seen as disrupting a new legal academic process?

Wouldn't capturing the terrorist and questioning him produce material of use to academics? Or is there an unstated assumption that an academic should be sympathetic to the terrorist to get a 'good' result?

Something for OLO's selfless anti-authority heroes to think about.

For more free insights read http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com .

Pete

I still find it bizare we are sweating over terrorists with the strike power of gnat and the organisational capacity of G W Bush in the face of wind and rain in New Orleans - and no one seems to lose much sleep over N Korea -

Sneekee

Your statement is untrue on the terrorism and North Korea portion. I agree with the New Orleans bit though.

Interesting to see what OLO articles come up on the latest North Korean crisis. We can discuss many of the efforts concerning North Korea then - if it ain't WWIII already ;-)

Pete

Plantagenet - I guess when I talk of N Korea - little material action has been taken - so far it is mere rhetoric - if anything they represent a far more clear and present danger than the Ayrabs -

And I stand by my conclusion that they are poorly organised and have little in the way of delivery power or delivery systems - a knapsack full of fertiliser hardly compares with the arsenal of the US and its capacity of them to deliver the equivalent of kilo tonnes of explosive into your letter box - a point they made with tiresome regularity during Desert Storm 1

The twin towers was an exception - but the death toll from international terrorists is relatively low.

How we manage N Korea will be a true test of our skill and military nouse

BushBred,

Thanks for your comment it really cheered me up.

Boaz,

"Of all people F.H. you must be aware that the example of the Prophet is what gives meaning to the Quran..Who can interpret it better than its author"

Thats were you getit wrong: the Quran for us is God's word and not Mohamed (pbuh)..since the HolyBook criticised the prophet a number of times including not smiling to a blind man (as you know)..

"I still am totally amazed that you blokes cannot see"

That the whole point why we are different. You can't see what we see and vice versa.

Do you want to know what 's really amazing? Is guys like you pretending truthfullness while rolling your eyes at the church 'banning' 90% of the gospels and other books. At least we published everything you have to give us that Boazy:)
PS: I am reading another 'banned by the church' book called "work of prophets"