The reason why I focused on your posts, was that so much of your criticisms appear to stem from that singular post, which you had misinterpreted. If they were to largely be based on a fallacy, then it was one that needed correcting. If you are to maintain this argument, then you need to provide a basis for doing so.

I know how hard it is to get intelligent moderates to speak up - whether the issue is Islam or anything else that is controversial. Most moderates just want to keep their heads down and get by, which leaves the rabid types free to monopolize the views and impressions of the public.

We ask Muslim moderates to speak up about religion - yet when we hear something that isn't along the pre-determined lines of what is expected, the writer is castigated.
To criticise is fair enough - but most of what is here is without anything to back it up. I hesitate to use the term armchair nazis, but if you're going to attack the author, please provide adequare reasons for why, instead of vague prejudices and misinterpreted posts.

And I don't see any reason to "shut up" and I never asked you to do so - I asked you to lift your game, and provide more constructive debate. Shutting up is hardly conducive to that now is it?

Sorry TRTL,

You just don't seem to follow. There is no crying over censored posts, just facts, openly stated. Where's the crying?

The shut up was clearly directed at RObert who made a similar statement. Please do try and follow the discussions TRTL.

I don't ask anyone to speak up about religion. I'd much rather they keep their beliefs to themselves, totally. It is and should be a personal and private matter where people make their own decisions and come to their own beliefs. Shoving them down on paper or other's throats simply demonstrates their lack of real belief in what they are thinking.

What do you want as back up. And to back up what? DO be clear, for once dear boy.

If you read Irfan's original item and my posts you may actually discern that we are making the same point. That is, words can be misused and usually are, by all. I write a few lines here and you fail to follow what I'm saying so you introduce your own interpretation, with a few additions and misinterpretations. You even introduce totally irrelevant issues which seem to stem from your own experiences.

It's called Chinese Whispers TRTL and you are very good at being in the middle of that line of people.

BOAZ. Why thank you my dear. Someone with an eye for detail, I'll read more of your own writing as I'm sure I've missed many a good word or three from your keyboard. Doesn't matter if we agree or disagree really does it, as long as we can discuss and who knows, maybe even learn from each other?

Regretably many seem to focus on a few words and miss the whole point. Ahh, what's new?

It's a bit of a struggle but let's all try and get TRTL to go straight, to use a pun or two.

Anyone else off to the new Brisbane Times news site? Fairfax, might be fun. Sure to be plenty of blogs.

F.H. . now that's a worry :) "ONE LAST" try ? and then what ? "Muslim brothers come to visit me in the night" ?

The UK police estimate there are like 2000 plots on the go at the moment.

We have Abu Izzedeen yelling and screaming at the UK home secretary about 'daring to come to Muslim areas' etc.. (fortunately he has now been arrested)

So, perhaps I'm the one who should be making one last try to convince you that I'm not against YOU or your broad, inclusive view of Islam. Sadly for us all, 'you' are not the issue. The doctrines in the Quran+Hadith+histories and History itself are the problem, and another dimension is the lack of understanding about these things by the general public in Australia and the West.

Just as an example, this recent 'survey' thing run by the SMH. They had a sample of 'Australians' (yeah right) of whom 30% or so felt threatened by "Muslims". After interacting with Sheikh Sneaky (Omran) and various selected others, they were resurveyed and now only 21% or so felt threatened.

Now, ask yourself this. Did Sheikh sneaky tell them about
-death for apostates ?
-Mohammed reported to have said "I am commanded to fight people until they worship Allah alone" etc
-That Mohammed tortured people, massacred people, invaded/raided people.
-Gave himself unlimited sexual opportunities ?
-Authorized the sexual use of captive slave girls ?

I'll bet NONE of those little gems of Islamic history came up.
I can guess what DID come up..
-The one-ness of Allah
-etc etc etc.. all the usual sugar coating on Islamic web sites.

F.H. If something is a threat to our national security by 'doctrine' then it should be mentioned.
That some muslims might feel marginalized as a result is not the fault of the exposer any more than it is the fault of someone showing the seamy side of the Ananda Marga sect or David Koresh's Waco lunacy is responsible for those followers feeling marginalized.

The last thing you should ever do, is try to repress truth here.

Hello Irfan, sorry for asuming your silence on a subject equated with your assent. So tell me, in an organisation like Islam, where the laws are based on religious texts, what do you call those who interpret those texts? They are given names like Ayatollah, Imam, Mullah and Mufti, and they claim the priveledge of speaking at the community's gatherings, attendance at which is a religious duty. What do you call them as a class?
Most Muslims are better than their religion would have them be, and that includes most Muslims in Australia. (Which, when you read those religious texts, is just as well.) But I'll tell you of an encounter recently. We had an imported car for 5 years, and went to a local repairer who was an enthusiast to have it serviced. He employed a number of mechanics and apprentices over the years, and at present one of his apprentices is a Muslim. He's a good worker, and is not dull. He prays 3 times a day at work, and his workplace has cleared a private space for him to do so.
He was asked at work one day what he would do if a son of his (he is presently unmarried) was to say to him that he (the son) was homosexual. "I would kill him," was the apprentice's reply. His shocked workmates asked again, to make sure they hadn't misheard. The apprentice repeated, "I would kill him."
This is an ordinary Muslim making an ordinary living, with beliefs like this. You ask why people who believe in civil and human rights are anxious about Islam?

Mr Irfan, was the late Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran not a Muslim?

The Faith Freedom website - which is run by ex-Muslims - has a translation of a speech that Khomeini gave on the day of celebration of the birth of Muhammad in 1981 (http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/KhomeiniSpeech.htm). In part it reads:

"The real Day of God is the day that Amir al mo’menin (1) drew his sword and slaughtered all the khavarej (2) and killed them from the first to the last.

...../

If the Amir al mo’menin (1) wanted to be tolerant, he would not have drawn his sword killing 700 people in one go. In our prisons we have more of the same kind of people who are corrupt. If we do not kill them, each one of them that gets out, will become a murderer! They don’t become humans.

Why do you Mullahs only go after the ordinances of prayer and fasting? Why do you only read the Quranic verses of mercy and do not read the verses of killing?

Quran says; kill, imprison! Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy? Mercy is against God.

...../

Our [Holy] Imams were quite military men. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords; they used to kill people. We need a Khalifa who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people. In the same way that the messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people. In the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza (3) because they were a bunch of discontent people".


(1) The Commander of the Faithful. Title of Ali the fourth Caliph and the first Imam of the Shiites.
(2) A group of dissidents that rejected the leadership of Ali and when 4000 of them gathered in the mosque to protest, Ali sent his armed men and massacred them all.
(3) A tribe of the Jews of Medina whose quarter Muhammad besieged, cut the water to them and when they surrendered, he ordered his cousin Ali and his uncle Hamza to massacre them.

Boaz,

My post was about your attitude and how it is a potential threat to Australian harmony, integration and potentially national security.

It does not matter who is spreading fundies material whether Omran or yourself. The statistics you quote is a self fulfilling prophecies: probably 30% think of Muslims that way because of people like yourselves and / or Omran.

How would you like if a Muslim quoting out bloody violent references out of the OT and promoting it amongst Muslims as 'this is Christianity'?
Treat others as you would like to be treated and be honest. This is Australia not Christopia or Islamopia. Move to the Vatican or Saudi if you are interested in either.

Right now your fellow mob and the likes of Hilali/Omran are one of the same: messengers of fear and disharmony.

Peace,

T