The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Clash of civilisations' rhetoric distorts cultural differences > Comments

'Clash of civilisations' rhetoric distorts cultural differences : Comments

By Daniel Baldino, published 8/11/2006

There is a perturbing public discourse referring to indeterminate Australian values that is driving contemporary politics.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All
Sneeke Pete, What you are not considering is that if a significant enough number of Muslims reside in a non Muslim country, problems will always arise. This is because it is the nature of this particular religion to 'conquer'. These people are not happy to live in a land of 'infidels' thanks mostly to the "Book of hate" as I like to call it, and the charming gentlemen who spout evil 5 times a day. Therefore it is absolutely inevitable, that given a significant enough community, problems or clashes will occur.
Sneekepete you asked about solutions. To begin with you seemed to think that Muslims in their own country are part of the problem? Realistically there are two solutions for Australia. 1) Create the Islamic republic of Australia or 2) Stop immigration and clamp down on 'worship' even to the point where it is not tolerated. (It works in Saudi!) See the thing is, Sneekepete, it is the religion and worship that corrupts.
Posted by trueaussie, Friday, 10 November 2006 8:37:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What sneekeepete needs to do is go live in a Muslim country as an unbeliever for a couple of years. Obviously he can't distinguish between societies from this distance or comprehend what is transpiring in the other democratic countries of the world, or Islams violent expansion throughout Africa.
Posted by aqvarivs, Saturday, 11 November 2006 1:46:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sneeeky....
I've made lots of suggestions about solving the problem of growing Islamic influence.

-Limited numbers (Migration Policy)
-Settlement policy (to prevent ghettos)
-Cultural introduction and assessment of compatibility for migrants.

Re 9/11 yes and no... That event probably highlighted an increasing trend. But.. bear in mind the other bombings.. Beruit, Kenya etc.. all before 9/11. Then there was Bali 1 and 2 London, Madrid.. I mean.. gee.. its not like 9/11 was the only thing.

But your mention of that suits my purpose.. which is.. we need a THOUGHTFUL well worked out, non knee jerk, soundly based social policy which counters any movement such as these.

Look at this for an example of Islamic political influence in Europe.

<"In Germany and elsewhere in Europe, a Muslim swing vote is already having a critical impact. Consider the electoral push that newly enfranchised “German Turks” gave to Germany’s incumbent Social Democrat (SPD)-Green coalition in last September’s down-to-the-wire election. These Muslim Germans punished the anti-immigrant Christian Democrats, who oppose Turkey’s membership to the EU. And they expressed their gratitude for efforts by the SPD-Green coalition to change the archaic laws of German citizenship. The bad news for the German Christian Democrats is that in the next general elections in 2006, roughly 1 million German Turks will be eager to cast their votes.>"
http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/fellows/taspinar20030301.htm

cheers
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 11 November 2006 1:29:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And this guy is collecting a paycheck for lecturing on US national security!? If he has read Huntington, he has failed to comprehend the argument and become acquainted with what goes on in the Islamic world. Well put aqvarivs. Many of the bleeding hearts that blog away have no first-hand experience of terrorism in action. Do we really have to wait until suicide bombers hit us before a sharp dose of reality is injected into this apathetic nation's bloodstream?
Posted by perikles, Saturday, 11 November 2006 3:14:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Perikles... probably... YES....

Just like rail crossings need some 'victims' before boom gates are installed.

Today Al Queda announced it's goal to blow up the White House, and you can imagine so many American democrats foaming at the mouth with namby pamby "But..its probably our fault.. and .. what did we do to annoy them, and lets talk with them, or if they look too fericious, we can always send them a 'strongly worded letter of dissapproval' (thanx Southpark, Team America for that bit).

I chatted with some Yank today on 'Christiandebate' (dalnet) on IRC and for the life of me.... he just does not 'get' it.

This is the difficulty dealing with the masses. They have very little broad historical perspective. They know Safeways is where you shop, and the freeway is the way to work, and dinner with the kids etc..but seldom do they stop to connect the historical dots which gave them this privilege.

Hence.. I am a strong advocate of very focused history teaching in our schools.
We should honour the following (among many others)

-Charles Martel (battle of Tours 732) stopped the Muslim slash and burn hoardes from taking France.)

-Count Strobiesky (1643 Battle of Vienna..same thing but Turks instead of Moors.)

We also need to understand how things can turn on a sixpence. One of the generals of the Byzantine Army at Yarmuk defected in front of the whole army to Mohammed. That battle was the major launch pad of Islamic aggression in the world.

At the same time, we need to have a spiritual foundation for our lives. I find it hard to imagine an atheist or agnostic freely and confidently giving his life for a cause he has no belief in. (if survival is the cause, the only type which will be of interest to him is 'his')
The Crusades were based partly on 'Holy' ideas but mostly on greed and territory. and they surely did NOT "love their enemies" once they took Jerusalem. (bloodbath).....but they could have, and won the peace as well as the war.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 11 November 2006 3:53:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy