Has the problem of Halali’s outburst really been solved? Or will he, as in the past, lie quietly for a while, and then come out with more of his outrageous, vicious Islamic nonsense? Our weak PM, as usual, has done nothing useful, and expects the Muslim “community” – whatever that is – to come up with answers.

Fat chance of that!

Attempts to mollify sheik al-Hilali by telling him that ultimately, when he is civilised, he’ll be included in this amorphous nirvana known as a tolerant and virtuous democratic culture are destined to fail. The expertise to manage an artificial society is non-existent in Australia. The lunacy of bringing someone from a very strict society where one religion, one thought and one lifestyle prevails and putting them in a multicultural setting shows how widespread that lunacy is.

Sheik al-Hilali dislikes our men, he dislikes our women, he dislikes our lifestyle, he dislikes our country and he hates secularism. Given his recent misogynistic statements and knowing how he is wedded to his misanthropic treatment of those who live outside islam the question must be asked: just why did the sheik come here?

Jennifer highlights that she believes everyone has a right to an opinion. NO doubt she believes this absolutely making her a fundamentalist along with those she accuses. Or maybe she does not believe absolutely that everyone has a right to an opinion. A smart person will think before they speak but truth never changes.

I was going to make a response to this article but I was reminded that the author had written "[T]he practice of tolerance involves self-restraint and thinking carefully before speaking in public".

I see that Leigh had already shot one off so I'll wait a while and think a bit more carefully about the issues.

The really scary part of all this is how the religious intolerance movements feed off each other at their most fundamental level.

This is an extract from a recent book on religious extremism.

"In many parts of [deleted], within the various extremists sects of [deleted], women are denied education, they are forced to marry at a young age, they are victims of horrific cycles of abuse- physical and emotional, and they live in absolute poverty dependent on the state or their spouse for support."

I invite contributors to fill in the blanks in a manner consistent with their own prejudices.

And then reconsider whether we are really talking about "tolerance" here, or about one bunch of intemperate holy-rollers taking a free hit at another bunch of fanatical god-botherers.

Why is the author so intolerant of people who disagree with her views on tolerance?

Self-contradictory statements and concepts like 'tolerance' are nonsense. Only useful for propaganda.