I remember Shiek Halili once said:

"The two cheapest things in Australia are the flesh of a woman and the meat of a pig."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20658333-601,00.html

Well, that sumps up the opinion of him, Muslims who support him.

mickijo, fair go mate. If a relative of yours commits a crime, then you are not guilty by association. If Hilali is stripped of any legitimacy to preach, then that should be a warning to any other religious leaders. It is pretty apparent that Hilali has been opening his mouth lately to change feet.

Fellow_Human,

I agree with you that the 'lions of lebanon' reflect a youth problem, not a Muslim problem per se, in that Muslims of other ethnic backgrounds were not involved.

But that gangs of similar 'lions' exist throughout the Muslim diaspora worldwide (e.g. Pakistan background in UK) supports the existence of their political and cultural connection to the Hilaly brand of Islam.

Besides, various gangs of racists and rapists of a middle-eastern background need not be Muslims to have been influenced by a particular cultural ethos surrounding that religion. Insofar as you accept that Islam is/can be interpreted/practiced in different ways, then you must hold this to be true.

In fact, I think that the conceptual confusion we're all experiencing over this 'Islamic problem' is due to a failure to see how central xenophobia is to it, which I'd argue lies at its root.

The idea of "purity" verses "impurity" goes to the heart of religion and of racism alike, which are essentially moral dichotomies. Such mindsets can be passed down through generations so long as a moral boundary is maintained between the "pure" and the "impure", permitting all manner of discriminatory behaviour towards the latter.

The Western Christian tradition has had its share of bigoted preachers who have legitimised the most discriminatory practices on its basis. But Western bigots are so much in the minority today that one would be hysterical to fear them.

The 'lions of lebanon' exhibit a parallel xenophobic mindset to that held by Hilaly and his followers. In this way Islam does serve to butress/legitimise their xenophobia of "Westerners" (after all, they all met at Lakemba mosque the night of December 11). Islam's political structure is so 'spiritually' appealing to their xenophia-induced alienation.

All that's left to be done now is that we stop the immoral Kerry Nettle's and John Pilger's of the West from supporting extremist Muslims by falsely legitimising their xenophobic racism of Westerners under a shield of victimhood, i.e from mistaking its cause for its effect.

But unless other Muslims publicly do this, then we have a problem looming.

West,
Typical of your confused bigotry we have comments like this forked tongue approach: "Everybody should have a right to believe what they want and I support that but when religion and superstition becomes a threat to society or touches the lives of non-believers then it must be defused."

Response to BOAZ
So you think that inferring that by ‘creating the temptation’ the Mufti is implying that women are to blame –consider this from the thread on Nudity by a fellow named BOAZ_David, Monday, 23 October 2006 8:34:01 PM

“So the problem is not the 'offence' but the open door to perving etc.
… it just doesn't sound quite right to be flashing our breasts and bums and privates for all and sundry.”

Does that not imply that it is the flashers of breasts (presumably women) and bums who are in the wrong? Or was I taking you out of context?

It amazes me that the Conservative Christian Religious Right has complained about the effects on young men of scantily clad young women for decades and NO-ONE accuses them of sexism, no-one seeks their prosecution over the matter and no-one tries to get them deported

Some good has come out of the Sheik affair and that is the light now being shed on the political interference and favours that allowed him to stay in Australia.

So we have Mr Keating to thank and it was all about numbers for an election. Not actual numbers but possible ones.

Why do we put up with the ongoing lack of ethics of politicians?