It is really quite simple.
Moslem women are required to cover up.
Why ? So they won't tempt men.
Which men ? The moslem men in the country of origin.
Australian men can go to the beach without being tempted to rape etc.
Therefore the problem is moslem men as the gang rapes showed.
The moslem men must change or leave.
Then moslem women won't have to be covered up.
Simple isn't it.

Fleurette - So I ‘fear Islam without knowing why’. A risible statement. I know exactly why I ‘fear’ Islam’ – I don’t wish to see the behaviour of Muslims worldwide repeated in Australia. There is no obligation on any country to accept refugees or immigrants who are proven violent troublemakers – as Muslims are in every Western country that has been foolish enough to accept them. Don’t even bother to deny this fact.

'the West represents one ideology'

Western countries (Western Europe, the UK, the US, Australia) represent one ideology in the sense that they are all (nominally) Christian and Democratic and have established bodies of law including rights for individual citizens of both sexes.

Definition of ‘impertinent’ (OED) - ‘cheeky’ or ‘lacking in respect’. So it is merely ‘impertinent’ to liken females to cats meat and to state that the flesh of Australian women is ‘as cheap as pigs meat’? If you regard these sickening comments as merely ‘impertinent’ I guess you would regard being called ‘an Aussie slut’ as a compliment. Some people twist themselves into knots defending the indefensible, I guess you are one of them.

“many Muslims were forced to flee ... because of Western imperialism ..”

Oh please! Muslim countries are hellholes because they follow a 7th century desert religion forbidding them to question or criticize any aspect of their existence. There is no separation of religion and state, these countries are theocracies – but their problems are all our fault? Saudi Arabia has billions in oil money but has not done one thing to improve the lives of fellow Muslims – all our fault too? India was subjected to ‘Western Imperialism’ also but that doesn’t seem to have held them back.

‘Sympathise with rapists? Interesting call.’

The sheik’s call, not mine. If you actually read what he said, he refers to the gang rapists and their long prison sentences, then he laughs and expresses sympathy. And his followers cheered him to the echo. It obviously does not bother you that so many Muslims agree with these opinions. It should.

“Silly me”

You said it!

One thing i would like to point out is that a number of our Asian
neighbours practice discrimination against Muslims and Non-Muslims
alike. For example, Singapore has banned the wearing of head-scarves
in all state schools.

This is of particular interest as there is no open-market for
education in Singapore, Singaporean citizens must attend government
schools unless permission is granted to attend one of the
international schools (which usually only is allowed if the child is
female, a dual-passport holder and due to leave Singapore shortly).
As a result, Muslim women in all educational institutions in Singapore
cannot show their faith when attending school.

Likewise, but on the other side of the coin, there have been repeated
attempts in Malaysia to enforce the wearing of the head-scarf on
non-Muslim women whilst attending government schools, but this has not
yet been effectively enforced (unlike Singapore).

Both policies clearly infringe on the basic premise of individual
choice. Maybe in future articles where the author discusses the discrimination against Muslim women they could include examples such as Singapore along side the numerous examples in western societies to provide a broader perspective of the plight that women of the Islamic faith face around the world.

Mercurious,

You focus on my spelling errors? Why the need for that, surely you know what I meant.

Is this what debate has been reduced to these days?

Benjamin, when did I mention spelling errors? I've said nothing about spelling in any posts.

Abyss repeats the bizarre assertion that I have nothing critical to say of the Sheik or that I see Muslims as permanent guests or not as equals; when my comments on this very page, and related articles, have repeatedly bagged the Sheik, and repeatedly stated my belief that all of us are human beings, equals.

I see little point in writing further clarifications or explanations to people who have either not read my original comments, completely failed to understand them, and who persist in making false assertions and tortured conjectures and leaps of logic that when I say "black", I really mean "white".

Since I prefer to assume that my debating adversery is intelligent, I can only put this down to a wilful misrepresentation of my remarks.

Your attempts to twist my words are too clever by half, and I doubt any of the readers here are fooled either.

THAT is what this debate has been reduced to, and not by me.

When a debate proceeds in such bad faith, it no longer serves any purpose.

How sad, 2006 and to express ones sexuality what ever gender, it is seen as an offence or encouragement for sexual and physical abuse