America's population is now over 300 million. A couple of intolerant people, even thousands of intolerant people, do not make America a theocracy. Notwithstanding the issue of religion, Keith Ellison won the popular vote. Fox News may have slandered Barrack Obama but the fallacy was exposed and Obama's poll numbers continue to rise. The author's hyperbole betrays the lack of substance to his argument.

If readers are truly concerned about intolerance they should read James Button's opinion piece in today's Age. Growing numbers of European intellectuals are , rightly, concerned about the new apartheid being advanced by political Islam in Europe. Unlike the few bigots in the United States and Australia who are incapable of actually shaping public policy, there is an alarming unity amongst many Muslims demanding Islamic law, Muslim-only hospitals and severe limitations on free speech.

It is because of its history of freedom that we can set the bar so high for it. Not so in most other countries of the world though where one could be denounced and stoned to death at the whim of a religious fanatic.

Why should we support Islam in a democratic country when it is so inferior in protecting the freedom, rights (and lives) of its adherents?

The real mystery is why would muslims who are famous as freedom loving, human rights protecting, admirers of females be drawn to migrate to xenophobic America, the home of satan?

Cornflower and Sage.

Your posts hinge on the presupposition that the billion-odd Islamic people are all anti-American extremists and blindly follow the ancient doctrine.

I find it interesting that it tends to be the conservative side of politics that supports ongoing action in Iraq on the basis that there is hope for a stable country, while at the same time, it tends to be the conservatives who are for prohibitions on immigration. It's an interesting dichotomy when you consider all the aspects.

One thing I'd like to point out - few people are going to defend the practices of abhorrent Islamic regimes. Yes, they exist, and yes, we want to avoid that kind of situation in Australia.

But in all honesty, the likelihood of an Islamic state being forced on us sometime soon is pretty minor. And like all people, the vast majority of muslims would like to live their lives in peace.
Do we allow this fear to encourage us to mistreat Australian citizens of muslim background?

Irfan,

You made an interesting point.
It is important to keep in mind that those who play the fear card are always in the minority regardless of how loud they are.

There are lots of 'drummers' for collision and clash of civilisations on both sides of the fence and they have their share of media influence.

If history taught us one thing is that 'friction' of civilisations is the first step of integration and finding common grounds. People needs are always the same and except for warlords and newspapers sales, nobody benefits from wars and clashes.

Peace,

T

I know some people will find this completely unbelievable, but this article was not saying that the United States was the great satan or that all Muslim-majority states are inhabited by angels. The real message of the article is found in the final paragraph.

TRTF

Getting down to practicalities, does this mean we should have women only bathing beaches or muslim sensitive hospitals with only women staff treating women in burkhas while Imams prowl the corridors?

In advance, where do you think we should draw the line if at all? Can we afford these changes and not only from the financial point of view?

I suggest to you that it is unrealistic to expect that women should lose what they have gained over the years. In our society as yet unborn female children ought have their rights protected. I cannot do much about abuses of female adolescents and limitations on women in other countries but I will fight as will others to preserve their rights in our secular state.

Cornflower: Nope to both your initial suggestions.

I find it interesting that you speak of protecting the rights of the unborn - does this mean you are against abortions, and would support moves to restrict them?
I ask only because I suspect you would have this in common with muslims of varying degrees of fundamentalism.

You may be speaking of protecting rights, but others see it as restricting rights - believe it or not this can be used as a microcosm for muslim immigration.

On the basis of religious precepts and a belief that the muslim faith will harm Australian society, some are opposed to muslim immigration: largely because they feel it will impinge on the rights of Australians.

Other see it as impinging on the rights of others to seek a better life in Australia.

Which is right? I don't think there's a simple yes or no answer. Nothing about this is simple, and those who would have you believe that it is simply a matter of challenging some kind of opposing empire, or even about protecting what is Australian, are misleading you.

In answer to your question: I believe muslims should be extended the right that are extended to any other Australian.
And if they desire special beaches, or indeed special birthing procedures, then surely the market can dicate that through private arrangements if the demand is there and there is profit to be had.

Off topic, but personally, I hate with a vengence, the quote "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance".

To me it is the licence for people to get paranoid about other people, and to 'use eternal vigilance' and that can mean exactly whatever one wants it to mean. It covers it all from snooping on your Muslim neighbours, to ASIO going through your sock draw, to just not excepting someone's intentions are 'honourable' from the outset as you have to keep an eye on things. It can be used to justify all sorts of iffy behaviour.

It's claimed by a number of groups. Both the RSL and a Civil Liberties group use it in Australia. Wendell Phillips is credited with authorship of it but it's also put against Thomas Jefferson, a great man of his times, but still a slave owner.

US Defence Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has even wheeled it out to serve on occasion.

So down with the quote. I prefer "the price of eternal vigilance is Liberty" which might mean that we show others more respect.

Cornflower wants me to "Get[] down to practicalities".

The practical message of this article is that liberty and xenaphobia don't make good bedfellows. Attitudes that lead us to hate and despise an entire group or to hold them guilty of acts committed overseas they have little or no control over makes no rational sense.

Democracies only work when a large proportion of people behave rationally. Western countries have shown a capacity to act rationally just as nominally Muslim societies showed this for centuries up until a few centuries ago.

I hope liberty is retained in the West. I also hope people in the East learn about its virtues. But we in the West must be vigilant, especially now that bigotry is making inroads in so many places.

That there is a problem with moslem migration is self evident.
Otherwise these discussions simply would not be there.

Like it or not, peolple see a problem & they see a direction of travel
that they do not like.

So why should we be bothered with it all ?
We do not need to import problems, we have enough of our own.
Let them stay in moslem countries and leave us alone.

Fear, bigotry and prejudice are the opposites of the principles we believe distinguish “us” from “them”, and they lead is inexorably into actions which undermine our other core values - democracy, freedom of speech and thought, protections from arbitrary arrest and detention, the equality of all citizens. The great majority of Muslims (and others) who have come to this country did so to participate in these things, not to harm them. We must be careful that the things we do to protect what is best in our society do not end up destroying it – in that sense, eternal vigilance is indeed to price of freedom.

Can't people do anything but point the bone at us poor white Australian's? After all, we opened the door to people from all around the world, allow them to form organisations and clubs that the white Australian is not allowed to do. Really, the discrimination is actually against the apathetic white Australian for being so stupid.

So why not. Let's give Muslims all they want as they take away from us just as many of the Asians have done. Let's bring in Sharia Law so that a child can have its arm crushed by a car for stealing a loaf of bread or, stone a young woman to death because some thug rapes her.

If this Islamic Political Party gets up, I wonder if Irfan Yusuf is going to join it. We keep hearing Muslim clerics rubbish our women and now blame the drought on us for not wanting to scream, "Allah Ackbah".

Let's continue to Lebenese path in Lebenon where the Christian's are having their applications to move to Australia blocked so only the Muslims who are so cuddly, run this nation. I'm sure Aboriginal culture would do well under Hilali.

Hello Irfan. I notice that this article, like many before, is short on details and long on rhetoric.
An easy arguement can be made to reconcile these two you'd like to have as opposites.
Islam formed when communities were created around a diety. Muhammad raised the former minor diety Allah to the pinnacle of his system and formed a community around himself using this diety.
Islam is thus a political system as much as a religious system. This is why Islamists (such as those in charge of Saudi Arabia) can plausibly claim to use the Koran as their constutition.
Being the totalist system that Islam is, the Koran demands that adherents commit to spread Islam to the Infidels, that is, everyone who hasn't already accepted Islam. The Koran also demands that adherents always seek to live under Sharia law, whereever they live. (An out is that the Koran encourages Muslims to move to a country run under Sharia law if the country does not convert.)
So a question can be asked: will people who come to Australia agree to maintain a liberal democracy or not? Or will people come to Australia and seek to subvert a liberal democracy and seek the establishment of a system of law based on a 7th century religious text?
The current liberties which Australians enjoy are not based on the type of political system which is Sharia law. Vigilence against Sharia is necessary for the maintenance of liberty.
Most Muslims are better than their religion would have them be on most issues most of the time. But this is little comfort, as Islam is prefeudal fascism, and it is this fascism which can flare up with little or no provocation. Just look at the reaction to the bunch of cartoons recently.

Spider, what “organisations and clubs” can non-white Australians form that whites cannot? What “discrimination” have you suffered as (presumably) a “white Australian”? Nowhere in the article or this thread has imposing Sharia law been suggested, so why raise it?

As Irfan says, liberty and xenophobia don't make comfortable bedfellows. I’d rather rely on someone like Irfan to protect my democratic liberties than bigots and xenophobes.

I suppose this comment will make me a 'bigot'. So be it.
Do I want my wife, daughter, daughters in law and three female grandchildren to live in a country where female 'circumcision' is practiced with the approval of the followers of a cult - Islam? No. Do I want to see girls deprived of equal educational opportunities? No. Do I want to live where females are not allowed to go and watch a football match? No. Do I want to see women deprived of the vote? No. Do I want to live in what is effectively a theocracy? No. Do I want to see a females evidence in court worth less than a male? No. Do I want to see all that 'The West' has managed to do in breaking away from theocratic control thrown away? No. Do I want to see the separation of the state and religion disappear? No. Do I want to see cult conviction dominate over science - the Scopes trial writ large? No. Do I want to be in a country that goes fruit loop because someone draws a cartoon? No. Do I want to see even the possibility of Sharia Law? No.

As Francis Fukuyama put it recently, ' Modern Liberal societies have weak collective identities. Postmodern elites, especially in Europe, feel that they have evolved beyond identities defined by religion and nation. But if our societies cannot assert positive liberal values, they may be challenged by migrants who are more sure of who they are'

Head for the hills! Stock up on baked beans and ammunition! We'll all be rooned!

There's Reds under the beds and Mohammads in the cupboards!

:D

I thought that Xenophobia was a fear of all foreigners. In the context of this little thing from Irfan, can it be said that Australians have a fear of all foreigners. Of course not, we are made up of them from all parts of the world, and we all live in comparative harmony.

Can it be said that we are perhaps zenophobic about one particular group, and the answer has to be a resounding, Yes. Why are we so edgy about this group. If we just go by the papers of late we have good reason to be edgy. Which bit would you like to analyse first.

Why not try Malaysia, and a our good old friend Dr Mahathir Mohmamamed and the speech he gave at the meeting of the OIC in Kualar Lumpur a few years ago, wherein he called Jews as being descended from apes and monkeys etc. All classic Islamic rhetoric but this time out of the mouth of a so called international statesmen, and neighbour.

But why be surprised when all Malaysian passports are marked not for travel to Isreal. Who is being Xenophobic here.

Why the paranoia about Jews/Israel from a place like Malaysia beats me.

The Jews have collectively have won 127 Nobel Prizes. Not bad for a global population of only 14m. Stack that against the Muslims performance of less than 6 for a total population of 1.2bn. Doesnt say much for their level of self help and personal drive for achievement.

If we go by what is happening in Europe and their history to date, just more imported trouble and strife, just as their mad mullahs are already continuously propogating in the newspapers.If Europe is anything to go by we can all look forward to higher crime rates particularly crimes aginst women,and whole suburbs becoming no go areas for non muslims, and a declining economic standards.

They divide families as they have divided mine, and they will salami slice us back to the dark ages unless we are truly vigilant.

Wonderful, Irfan.
You once again shot yourself in the foot by pointing out that Keith Ellison was sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's copy of the Koran, stating this in a matter-of-fact way that leaves the less informed under the impression that the great man had respect for Islam. The truth of the matter,which is easily found by anyone who cares to look, is that Jefferson wanted greater insight into the pirates of the Barbary Coast who were attacking American and European shipping, slaughtering or enslaving their crews and raping any women who were unlucky enough to be aboard at the time- a thing that Mohammad heartily approved of and can be found in the Koran. These pirates were Muslim and had protection of Muslim states that gave them safe harbour, and they proceeded to ask the US for large sums of money to desist this wholly Islamic practice of killing infidels for fun and profit. The US paid up, hoping the Muslims would keep their end of the bargain, but alas, they got greedier and greedier, asking for greater and greater sums. Jefferson was no fan of appeasement, and in desperation sent the USS Constitution to the Mediterranean where they destroyed the pirates stronghold at Tripoli. Too bad more politicians don't read the Koran as Jefferson did - they might wake up to themselves as to what Islam is really all about. Anyway Irf, keep up the attempts at Taqiyya, Tu-Quoque and Kitman. Allah commands it.

Irfan has ignored the facts that is happening round the world even before 9/11

1. Muslims fight Christians in Philippines in Mindanao.
2. Muslims fight Buddhists in south Thailand. Recently, they killed 2000+ people.
3. Muslims fight the Hindus in India, especially in Kashmir.
4. Muslims fight the Russians in Chechnya.
5. Muslims in Muslim-majority Indonesia are killing the Christians by the thousands and even beheading school girls!!
6. Muslims fight between themselves; Sunnis and Shiites are killing each other in Iraq. Before that Sunni-controlled Iraq under Saddam Hussien fought a war with Shiite-Iran
7. Muslims in secular Singapore have special laws e.g (childhood marriage and polygamy)which do not apply to non-Muslims. This is against a true democracy where the "rule of law" is sacrosanct.

Islam as practised today is against democracy and intolerant of other religions. It must be viewed as a political system that invokes the name of "God" for its many violent actions

Here we go again. Irfan digs into the depths. I haven't even read a word of his article and won't as I know what he has written. It's Muslim/Christian wars again, right?

Is anybody else sick of people like Irfan who use Islam as his pet toy to stir emotions? He would be right at home with the insurgents, urging the fighters and suicide bombers on. Of course he would be sitting in his air conditioned motel room in another country urging by mobile.

This author truly disgusts me. He's a garbage collector. And he's got a lot of it in his head.

In Irfan’s previous recent discussion he made the following comment about me;

‘TR, there is this amazing skill I learned at school. It's called reading. It involves recognising these strange things called 'letters' placed in unique combinations and then recognising these combinations signify sounds.’

This is what I call a personal or ad hominem attack. Ironically, this type of attack is typical of the xenophobia that Irfan is decrying!

This distinction between ‘playing the man’ and ‘playing the ball’ is the key to this new topic initiated by Irfan. Yet he doesn’t seem to be able to tell the difference. In a secular democracy Irfan we, as in ‘we the people’, are encouraged to be sceptical and challenge any ideology as is seen fit. Nothing is exempt from intense examination. Therefore, hiding behind the phoney facade of ‘xenophobia’ simple won’t do. We are not that easily duped. It is the Islamic version of monotheism that we oppose rather than you personally Irfan. As Gore Vidal wrote in 1998 (cited in ‘A Devil‘s Chaplain‘ by R. Dawkins);

‘The great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism. From a barbaric Bronze Age text known as the Old Testament, three anti-human religions have evolved - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. These are sky-god religions. They are literally patriarchal - God is the Omnipotent Father - hence the loathing of women for 2000 years in those countries afflicted by the sky-god and his earthly delegates. The sky-god is a jealous God, of course. He requires total obedience from everyone on earth, as he is not just in place for one tribe, but for all creation. Those who reject him must be converted or killed for their own good.’

I happen to agree with Vidal 100%. Therefore, if liberty is to be maintained then society needs to ensure that monotheism, especially Islamic monotheism, is opposed, fettered, and kept under control. In this we have to be vigilant.

Irfan,

If you can't spell the word then you probably don't understand it. Xenophobia. Here's another Irfanaphobia. The fear of writing anything other than racist or religious pap.

Please explain this comment of yours :

"The real message of the article is found in the final paragraph."

What is the rest of your writing about? Fluff, padding? And why do we have to "find" what your message was/is? Is it a secret?

Rhian,

It is a legal fact that were a White Australian to form a club solely for the Aussie caucasian, there would be howls of protests with accusations of being white supremecist. Not to forget that it is illegal. Yet, politicians give taxpayers money for immigrants to have their own clubs and community halls.

Discrimination is in the courts against the white Australian. People who protested peacefully at Cronulla found themselves in prison yet we see Lebenese who smashed concrete over the head of a whitey and they walk out and go home. As they walk out of the courthouse, they send a threatening message saying that they're coming back.

If I'm being a bigot, racist or Nazi, etc for pointing out this discrimination against us, then so be it. I'm one and bloody proud of it.

Lets not have any facts come into the picture to clutter it up. lets just display a left-wing anti-conservative rant and in no way mention that both Australian and American conservative governments are in power thanks to the left. The people decided on a change of government.
Liberty. Irfan takes great liberty with his broad sweeping political statements. Conservatives are bigots. Conservatives are xenophobic. Conservatives hate Muslims. Conservatives hate Americans. My goodness those Conservatives are really bad people. Not emotional huggers like us. They engage in dirty politics we never do. We're so shinny and bright and innocent and are never never deceitful. "Vote for the left" couldn't be shouted any louder.

Well done, Gitmo guy! I was suspicious of Irfan's reference to Jefferson's Koran, as I've read a little US history and found no love of Islam anywhere there. (I did find the Barbary pirates, who precipitated the US' first foreign armed venture to prevent the pillaging of US traders. It was also the first time, and not the last time, in which the US asked for an international coalition to stop this pirating, under which many European countries also suffered.)
And as another poster has written, Australians are not xenophobic, but they have had some experience of one religious/ ethnic group and are not impressed. In fact, they are so unimpressed that they kicked them off one beach, after the same group had been kicked off another beach by concerted police action over four years.
Most Muslims are better than their religion would have them be on most issues most of the time. But this is little comfort, as the religion is prefuedal fascism, and this fascism is want to flare at the least, or no, provocation.

Recently Sheik Omran, of Melbourne, advocates that muslims take advantage of our low birth rate and breed more muslims. Now sheik Hilali, of Sydney, advocates the forming of a muslim political party.

Take note that muslims now have some laws specificly for muslims in England and the influence muslims have in most European countries.

Thankfully, both our major political parties have "seen the light" and have dumped Multiculturalism. Now we have to take the next step to prevent these non-compatible people from gaining more political sway here, by stopping muslim immigration.

Fred Nile and his mob were staunch supporters of multiculturalism and even they have now changed their minds. If they can see the need surely our Federal politicians can.

Irfan's "xenophobia of Muslim haters" would surely be more correct if it read Muslims "xenophobic hatred of Westerners"
We see it all the time in our country, with gang rape,cat's meat and all the dirt dished up by imams who should never have been allowed into this nation.
Now they are wanting a Muslim political party. That should never be permitted, we do not need more of the divisiveness of Islam.Never have Australians been so provoked by those who have such different and opposing values and lifestyles.
If the Muslims are so unhappy at our rules and regulations, the answer is simple. Leave.

A moslem political party ?
Shades of Sinn Fain !

Spider
I’m sure that if you wanted to set up a club of like-minded people there’s nothing to stop you (I for one won’t be joining, however). In a democracy there should be tolerance even for opinions like yours.

The presence of ethic organisations in our community isn’t sinister or racist, it’s a natural thing for people with things in common to do. Should we close down our local Irish club or Greek Orthodox church? Are the associations set up by Australian ex-pats living in Asia or Europe sinister or racist? Or are these only unacceptable when done by people of a different colour or religion than yours?

Both sides in the Cronulla riots behaved appallingly, and people from both sides were prosecuted in about equal numbers as a result. I see no sign of discrimination here:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/police-tough-on-both-sides-of-cronulla-riots/2006/07/18/1153166381976.html

Today’s Australian newspaper reports that Churchill wrote in the 1930s that “the Jew is different. He looks different. He thinks differently . . . He refuses to be absorbed".

http://theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21368936-7583,00.html?from=public_rss

The emotion and language underpinning racism remains the same through time and culture. Only the targets differ. At least Churchill recognised Nazi antisemitism was vicious and evil, and fought to oppose it.

Aquarivs - the article indicates that some bigots use conservatism as a shield to express their views. It didn't say all conservatives were bad, that's just one spin on it.

Betty - So now you don't even need to read articles to trash them? For the record, the article didn't even mention christians. Maybe if you'd read it you'd see that. I won't ask you to provide examples to y'know, actually back up your case, because that would require you to actually read it. I see you feel free to tar the author as somebody who would support suicide bombers without the slightest shred of evidence to support your statement. That's cruel and insulting, and I bet you'd be damn annoyed if somebody assumed you'd join the KKK - why, you'd probably accuse them of bigotry.

Spider - "It is a legal fact that were a White Australian to form a club solely for the Aussie caucasian, there would be howls of protests with accusations of being white supremacist."

This is actually a valid point and I agree with you - though to be fair, there are plenty of organisations that manage to have almost entirely white-only members, or only a few token people of other beliefs or ethnicities.
I don't think it's fair either way. Perhaps I'll believe we've come a little further than that when we have a female or non-anglo PM.

Rhian: "As Irfan says, liberty and xenophobia don't make comfortable bedfellows. I’d rather rely on someone like Irfan to protect my democratic liberties than bigots and xenophobes."

Nicely said.

Fairdinkum, I wonder if some actually had a real job and or employment that this type of rubbish would be consigned to the paper recycling/ Deleted bin, and never reach publication.

Throw your progressive – Regressive crap in the recycling center and get a life. George Bush said it; you are with us or you are against us.
Get on the bus or get off and go away; stop bothering us with crap.

I wonder if the system will allow Australians to get a Restraint order against idiots; Islamic or Proletariat and to stop this intellectual terrorism.

Pure fertilizer food for mushroom.

Peter Faris QC Told you Irfan, (On His Blog) It is about time to grow up and take that fence post and have it removed. "Very Paraphrased"

Damn Agitprop has a lot to answer for.

Islam has a problem understanding itself.How can the infidels and skippy heretics possibly grasp the personification of chaos
that is daily handed up to us with the likes of Sheik Hilaly.

Islam is a failed philosophy,and oil only gives it sustenance in the Middle East.Else where,poverty and cruelty prevails.It only survives in the West by being threatening us,thus getting undue attention and funding.

It is the parisite that will bring down our truely great Western Society.Just follow closely the events in Europe.Have a close look at Malaysia.Non Muslims are second class citizens there.They have no rights.

Irfan talks of "arm chair Nazis",yet it is this totalitarian system of imaginery Allah,created by Mohummad,that is the facist reality which exists in every Muslim country.

True democracy as we know it and Islam,are incompatible.The Imans have seen the demise of the Christian Faith in the West because of free thought.Do you think that Irfan and his ilk with total power will allow us to think without the fear of Allah?What Muslim country have these freedoms been allowed?Read Irfans articles carefully .He walks both sides if the fence.Muslims are allowed to lie to the infidels in order to achieve their aims.

It is all about the lust for male power and little else,all dressed up in the facade of religion.

If the reality of Allah and his truth is so omnipotent,why do Muslims have to project their ideology through threats of violence and often death to detractors?Who are the real Nazis Irfan?

There is another reason that some Australians oppose Islam besides the more typical reasons of propensity to violence and suicide bombers from Bali.

This reason is rarely talked about because it does not involve emotion or politics. It is purely an academic reason.

The reason that some Australians oppose Islam is because they believe it is factually wrong, incorrect, and untruthful. That is, some Australians believe that the Koran DOES NOT have a divine origin and that the Muslim claim that it does is pure nonsense.

Or to put it another way - if some Australians claim that the Earth is "flat" then they should expect some of their fellow Australians to inform them that their viewpoint is silly and irrational.

In the SAME WAY if Australian Muslims claim that the Koran was (literally) delivered via a talking angel to a man in a cave then they should also expect to be told by their fellow Australians that their idea is silly and irrational - and wrong.

Yes, TR. And what's most disconcerting is that most Australians would rather rubbish the Flat Earth Society and elevate Islam and Islamist to the lofty height of victimhood. They will use religion, science, anthropology, history and even some hertory to promote their reasons but, they will never use just good old basic commonsense. In a year or two when the population has grown as it has in Europe and the bombs start going off maybe the leftie victimhood ideology will be discarded as a substitute for reason.

TRTL, Then there is no value in the implication and no purpose in singling out conservatives alone. Your saying in Irfans defence that it is people who are bigots, probably many lefties but, they use the mantle of conservatism to shelter their identity. Sheep dressed in the wolf's clothing so to speak. Very novel. Irfan gets to demonize the right as the home base for bigots while imploring through third parties that those bigots are not necessarily folk who think politically right of centre. Spin is just so important isn't it?

After reading the comments here, I can only presume aqvarius, B_D and other assorted bigots would support the wacky American neo-Cons who have cast aspersions on Christians like Barack Obama.

I guess some so-called Christians think a black man shouldn't be allowed in the White House.

This is just my take and I do sympathise with the harshest of Irfan's critics because I used to think that way myself for a long time.

Can't see a problem with the article or with Muslims. I don't feel the slightest bit threatened by Islam. Muslims are not about to take over anything. That is complete paranoia in my opinion. And even if they did, to be honest, I wouldn't mind. Most Muslims do not hold to Wahabi-ism - & the vast majority of Wahabis are not terrorists & never will be. Even the ascetic Wahabis go to Bahrain on the weekend and for holidays to enjoy the freedoms there like alcohol. Some see that as hypocrisy. I see it as allowing people to enjoy life on the one hand, but having a refuge of decency (Saudi Arabia) on the other. A kind of symbiosis. I hope they never change Saudi. I respect the fact that they, like some other places, will never change despite pressures from the US to open up (& become more like them).

As a conservative, I think we can benefit from some Islamic conservatism in Australia, which to me is far too liberal, eg lacking in basic values like respect for police, elders, teachers, leaders & people in general. The reason some Muslims (especially Arabs) play up when they come to Aus is because it's like going from school to living on college campus and they don't know how to handle the total freedom so some go beserk. This has to be countered, no question.

(contd)

(contd)
Before I lived in the Middle East, I had a deep distrust of Muslims. I really felt threatened by them (mainly due to the press). I was especially irked by Lebanese. Not now. I've been here too long & met too many (Arabs in general). Trust me. They are fine. Really nice people. I've never felt safer in all my life. Much more so here than in Aus or the UK. I often get greeted by a handshake with the words, 'asalam walaykum' - praise/thanks be to God. Occasionally even by strangers. Can't imagine ever being greeted that way by westerners. And can't imagine westerners greeting Arabs as warmly either. A few Muslims proselytise, but for mine, Christians do it more. (not that I feel threatened by them either).

No, the bigger threat is racism, nationalism, & do-gooder far-leftism (& their neo-con siblings). I used to be a neocon but now paleocon best describes me, realising that neocons have a lot in common with the loud do-gooder elements on the left. In fact few may realise that the neocons were a militant leftist group (a good proportion of them Jews) that abanandoned the left for the right in the 60s/70s because they saw the left as being too soft internationally. Also a bunch of troubleosome do-gooders who won't rest until they spread democracy to all parts of the earth at all costs.

PS Irfan, you again criticise B_D , yet he hasn't even posted on this thread. Let's not get paranoid. You should also follow your own advice & read carefully & you'll find he's most definitely not a bigot. Also, it's Dennis Prager, not Dick Prager

Thanks Irf, I'll carry the tag bigot you wear racist religious supremacist. Barack Obama is worthy cus he's black. Trouble with you whinging leftwing nut jobs is that you never focus on your own door step. The Republican party has no fear of a Barack Obama dim wit. Barack Obama is a God send and is going to split the Democratic vote in twain. Jane. It's your fellow lefties that are trashing Obama cuz he threatens their vote pool. It's the Dems that started the 2008 Election this year not the Republicans. It's the left that is swamping lefties shows like Jon Stewart's The Daily Show and every other leftie toy morning programmes and talk radio. Get a clue retard.
And if you don't like those names keep a civil tongue.

Irf,
did you really pass the bar exam?

It's funny when people say The Daily Show is left wing - all it does is ridicule the system in place - whatever that system may be. Apparently not bowing heads and accepting whatever the media says = left wing now. Whatever.

TNT,
Would you really not mind if Australia became an Islamic ruled country? Would you like to live here then? I don't believe you.

Women oppressed, not working, not allowed out without chapperones,no education.girls covered from head to toe at beaches, FGM common practise, arranged marriages, women reduced to baby making and child minding machines, whipped or worse for adultery, or for being a victim of rape. You have to be kidding or smoking powerful stuff.

No alcohol allowed, no preaching of other religions allowed. The list could go on infinitem. Your having us on.

'...Women oppressed, not working, not allowed out without chapperones,no education.girls covered from head to toe at beaches, FGM common practise, arranged marriages, women reduced to baby making and child minding machines, whipped or worse for adultery...'

Wow. Didn't see any of that stuff in Indonesia.

Spendocrat,
Perhaps you need to open your eyes or get around a bit more when overseas. Are you saying that the matters mentioned do not take place in Islamic ruled countries?

All this article does is reinforce the historical fact that religion is one of the primary causes of conflict.
Surely it is time for a public debate on the claims of religions? Why are we afraid to examine their basic premises and expose their dogmas to rational thinking?
Why should we respect a person who thinks there's an invisible man with no body, no essence no nothing, who made the entire universe and all that's in it and concerns himself with all the tiniest details such as whether a strand of my sister's hair is showing?
Religions are all irrational bundles of laws and decrees invented for the sole purpose of controlling humans. They all carry the seeds of their own destruction if they are studied rationally.
Only in a secular state can there be democracy. To think otherwise is insane.

ybgirp

I'm often amused by these 'public debates' people call for. What constitutes a public debate?

What of the furore over Dawkin's book 'The God Delusion?' wasn't that a public debate?

What of the many posts here that favour various religions, or are anti religious?

I tend to think this debate is occurring on a daily basis, though very few people tend to budge from their views.

"In fact few may realise that the neocons were a militant leftist group (a good proportion of them Jews) that abanandoned the left for the right in the 60s/70s because they saw the left as being too soft internationally. Also a bunch of troubleosome do-gooders who won't rest until they spread democracy to all parts of the earth at all costs."

Nagh, we see where all the profits go to buy that one. Good try though: they did it from the kindness of their hearts - with all those cluster bombs, depleted uranium and white phospherous. How noble, how kind, how generous of them.

Oh, TRTL has moved from the other Irfan thread. Very good TRTL you can read after all. No I didn't need to read this tripe. Excellent that you picked that up. It was written clearly for you. Just you.

In a country where Muslims are supposedly trying to integrate this writer is doing his utmost to ensure that doesn't happen. Simply by writing drivel like this.

Now we have talk of a Muslim political party. Why not? Christians have many so that's fair. One thing though. How about they take that political party back to the countries where it belongs. Not here. Same to Christian parties, go away. Religion is poison and many have been sickened by contact with it.

We certainly should throw out the religion of secular humanist with the rest as well as the Indigneous religous practices. Problem is Betty that no one is left.

Banjo,

You are exactly right. Despite TNT's explosive revelations that living in a Muslim ruled country is bliss there is a small area he hasn't mentioned. You have, thank you.

TNT should go and live where life is so wonderful, he may even convert and become his very own God too.

Sorry TNT the bigger threat is people with your apathetic approach to the threat of losing all we had. Not just to Muslim political parties. To Coalition and Labor parties as well. They are already well on their way to completing the creation of a ruling class, themselves.

Throw religion into the mix and we have our worst nightmare. The Crusades, Ozzie style.

Take a break from your ivory tower TNT and go visit a few of those ghettos that are recreating the horrors of other countries in our land. Enjoy, hope you can read other languages. And obey those that rule these ghettos. Imans.

Who are the bigots?

Today about 7 out of 10 Muslim women in Malaysia wear the Islamic head scarf. It was not so more than 20 years ago, then only elderly women put on head scarf. Malay Muslims today consider themselves Muslims first, Malaysians second and Malays third. Not surprisingly they have declared many of their cultural heritage as un-Islamic. Much like the Muslims in Afghanistan destroying the world-heritage Buddhas of the Bamyan cliffs in 2001

Today there are an increasing group that consider themselves a Muslim race, e.g in Sri Lanka, Bosnia, Serbia, etc. They are not being type cast as a race but consider themselves as one. They are correct. If you are born a white Australian you will always remain a white. But a white-Christian can become a white-Buddhist. One can't change one's race but one can change one's religion. An Afghan Muslim became a Christian and he was sentenced to death. So if 'Muslim' is a religion why are those born Muslims put to death when they stop being Muslims or convert to other religion?

Therefore, Islam is creating a race called Muslims. A system intolerant of other religions, women are a second class and undermining democracy and secularism with the totalitarian rule of Shariah.

Aqvarivs, get a grip on your right wing please. Otherwise you'll flap off in a circle forever.

The Daily Show left wing? It's called comedy Aqv. It's humour, not surprised you don't recognise it. Those that identify themselves as of the non existent left or right don't understand humour. They just seek a fence (jest) and have no trouble finding it. Try the bible mate. Fences galore in there.

And congrats to Irfan for presuming that people have views they don't have and write things they haven't written. Goes with his grammar, knowledge and spelling. All fiction.

Irf, since BD has not posted re this article, I thought your comment was hilarious.

TRTL, I should have said it is time to subject the claims of religion to scrutiny in all public discourse, and be unafraid to show contempt for idiocy. For example, when that Imam said the drought was caused by Australians not believing in Allah, the strongest criticsm was: it was silly. Silly? it was insane! Newspapers, Radio and Television should have people on tap who, when religious people make claims, are there to question them. Politicians are always drivelling on about "The Christian Ethic" as if somehow all those exhortations to war, murder, rape, torture, slavery and abuse of women in the bible are of no consequence. If they want to use the bible as their raison d'etre, then they must use all of it, not just pick out the bits that suit.

Many on the left drivel on about a tolerance peaceful society while condoning the murder of tens of thousands unborn each year. This sounds very civilised to me! When is the loony left going to try and stop deceiving themselves that somehow they have a mortgage on compassion and all that is good. The earth worshippers at recent protests have shown how much hate an intolerance their is among the agnostics/athiests. I suppose when we see the number of people murdered under godless regimes it is not surprising!

Philip Tang

Good points re Malaysia.

This is a country that touts itself to the wider worlkd as being secular and civilised, but they are still knocking over Hindu temples
on the excuse that when they were built over 100 years ago they didnt have building permission.

So much for Badawis claim of being moderate.

Woops, apologies to B_D.

Phillip, you claim that Muslims in Sri Lanka and Bosnia regard themselves as one. Yet in Bosnia, at least 60% of children are born to mixed marriages i.e. Muslims married to Serbs or Croats. In the Indian sub-Continent, it is almost unknown for Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men. This isn't the case in Bosnia.

In Malaysia, being Muslim necessarily means being Malay. Last June, an non-Malay Malaysian lawyer of Muslim background I met in KL told me that his children are discriminated against in obtaining school places and scholarships for university because they are Indian.

Let's be realistic. My parents have more in common culturally with Indian Hindus than with Malaysian Muslims, who have more in common culturally with Thai Buddhists than with Moroccan Muslims.

If I could once again remind you all that the point of this article is not to talk about the alleged grand Islamic conspiracy to destroy Christianity and replace it with a layer of hommus of chilly sauce. The point of this article is to show how bigotry is anti-liberty.

Once again, I ask people here to state their positions. Do they think it is OK to accuse a black Christian of being a Muslim? And if so, how is this relevant to his ability to be President of the United States, an allegedly secular country?

'Once again, I ask people here to state their positions. Do they think it is OK to accuse a black Christian of being a Muslim?'

No! (Well, that wasn't too difficult...)

Now Irfan, let us explore another statement made by you;

'In the Indian sub-Continent, it is almost unknown for Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men'

This practice by Pakistani/Indian Muslims seems completely xenophobic and anti-liberatarian to me.

So where did this bigotry come from and what are its origins? The answer is - traditional Islam. It is standard Islamic practice to prohibit Muslim women from non-Muslim men. Always has been, always will be. For example;

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996015624&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

Islam is exlusive, bigoted and sexist to the core and has social practices that a secular democracy wouldn't dream of making lawful. The prohibition of interfaith marriages is one example of that.

Irf,
Since you want us to state our positions on whether 'it's OK to accuse a black Christian of being a Muslim' ,my answer would be no. But you seem to miss that this whole Obama is a Muslim nonsense is a product of the media's tendency to jump on the comments of one or two other politicians, and attempt to build a story out of it. God knows they need something to print about a man who is running for president and has no real opinion on anything, apart from the Iraq war, so far.
Obama has little chance of becoming president in any case, not because, as you would like to think, that his middle name is Hussein or that he has a Muslim daddy, but because he's black. White middle America won't vote for a black man at this point in time, especially a black man with little experience or universal appeal. And you can make of that what you like - it's a simple but inconvenient truth, as Al Gore would say, but has little bearing on what you are trying to imply. You could also bear in mind the nature of American politics recalling in the last US election much mud was slung by either side- Kerry's swift boat service and Bush's non appearance for military duty being the objects of much gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair, while the media gleefully fanned the flames. That being the case perhaps your targeting of conservatives is a little short-sighted as the left has it's own reservations about Obama as well.
So having answered you query perhaps you could answer a few of mine, which I'm sure other posters here would like answered as well- Do you, as a Muslim support the concept of Sharia Law, and if not, how do you reconcile this with being a Muslim, seeing that one of Islam's basic tenets is to live by it? Even better, I would like to see you to write another essay telling us how Muslims can still live as Muslims while rejecting it.

So the message is to trust Irfan since his version of Islam will over ride all the sterotypes of supression,violence,bigotry,hate and ignorance that pervades most Muslim countries on this planet.

When you are gone Irfan,who will carry this new flame of Muslim enlightenment?Why not become a Buddhist,it is non aggressive and accepting of other philosophies,a bit like Christian philosophies;but alas,it will not cater for your lust for power over the infidels whom you have resented because of the ease of their success.

When Muslim men make women their equals,they will be free since the better half of human organisation will make them economically three times more productive.

Your views represent about 1% of the Muslim world,and that is not a safe bet.

"In a community consumed by grossly irrational hatred - including racism and sectarianism - economic and political freedom will never flourish." You are right Irfan. There is not a single Islamic country in the world that is a success apart for those with oil reserves. A Malaysian Muslim made this observation and wrote it in a book "The collapse of the Islamic Countries" by Syed Akbar Ali.

I quote him, "The Islamic countires have certainly collapsed -economically, politically and even socially". (pg.v)

Many of the Islamic practices are anachronistic, irrational, leading to bigotry, violent, hatred of non-Muslims. Is it rational to burn shops and churches because someone draw cartoons of Mohd? Is it rational to kill an elderly nun doing social work in a Muslim country because the Pope made a statement about Islam? Is it rational for Muslims in Thailand to stop a bus and kill 9 buddhists (14/3/07)? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6448615.stm
If they want Shariah law they can all emigrate to Saudi Arabia.

Banjo: "Would you really not mind if Australia became an Islamic ruled country? Would you like to live here then? I don't believe you."

Based on my own experiences of living in a Muslim country & my travels to other Muslim places in the region, I'd have to say, yes, I wouldn't mind (or Shinto, or Buddhist, or Christian). Most of these places are not the Islamic theocracies (Sharia law) they are made out to be. The rulers invoke the trappings of religion largely to pay lip-servive to the masses. I think it's a facade only. The Taliban & Iran (even in Iran there are parts that are very western) are exceptions which prove the rule. I guess the only way to see for yourself is to live in one & you'll soon realise the amazing contrast between what the MSM feed us & what actually goes on. You see a burka clad Muslim woman on the news & it is very off-putting to us. When you've run into thousands of them, it doesn't even register. It also looks really sexist too, but, the women here have lots of freedoms (not as many as ours, granted). Let's just say the reality is so different to what we are constantly told in the west. Even to tourists, appearances can be very deceptive. You need to live there to see what's really going on.

"Women oppressed, not working, not allowed out without chapperones,no education.girls covered from head to toe at beaches, FGM common practise, arranged marriages, women reduced to baby making and child minding machines, whipped or worse for adultery, or for being a victim of rape. No alcohol allowed, no preaching of other religions allowed. The list could go on infinitem. Your having us on."

Interesting, I've witnessed basically the opposite. Which Islamic countries have you lived in and travelled to? When you've lived on one, we can compare notes.

K£vin:
"Nagh, we see where all the profits go to buy that one. Good try though: they (the neocons) did it from the kindness of their hearts"

Who said imposing democracy on others (a la Iraq) was something that would necessarily benefit the locals?

It may be hard for you to imagine that neo-conservatism has an idealistic & leftist basis, after all, they're the 'bad guys' right? Don't take my word for it, check out Wiki. Take a packed lunch, it goes into a lot of detail.

RobbyH:
"TNT .... may even convert and become his very own God too."

??

"Throw religion into the mix and we have our worst nightmare. The Crusades, Ozzie style."

Crusades Ozzie style? That's a big leap of your own faith.

"Take a break from your ivory tower TNT and go visit a few of those ghettos that are recreating the horrors of other countries in our land."

What 'horrors' specifically?

Doesn't matter whether you are Lebanese Muslim in Burwood or Tongan Christian in Mt Druitt or Bulla Aboriginal in Redfern or Buddhist Vietnamese in Cabramatta or no faith Anglo in Villawood. In all cases, religion (or lack of) is not the cause of the social problems there. But you think it might be? So if only those poor Villawood folks just found some atheism or Christianity (or whatever), all would be well? I suggest that if young 'Muslims' followed their own Imams more closely, they would have more respect for their new country. So much for the Imams' influence. I would guess the young Lebanese thugs adhere to Islam about as much as I do. Zilch. They are young, high-testosterone, bored thugs who would be doing what they are doing whatever their faith. Do you think it's just the Muslim Lebanese involved in these incidents & not the Christian Lebanese? About that ivory tower....

The problem is not Islam per se, it's unbridled immigration & MC. As I've said before, change needs to happen slowly, not rushed through, for best results

pegasus, do try to less pedantic. If all you can see is the humour then that explains a lot about your post. Anyone with an iota of depth can see behind the humour. Humour or in the case of the Daily Show, cynical political riducule, is merely the vehicle. The delivery device.
Must you bring the Bible into every thread. But, hey, thanks for your comments. I'm glad I was able to trigger an emotional kneejerk defensive response. How unsatisfying. Perhaps you might consider pulling out your fence post. Surely it's been well abused.

Irf. "The point of this article is to show how bigotry is anti-liberty."

If this was the case you would have written an entirely different article. Especially one that in itself wasn't by definition bigoted.
To then mass accuse others of being bigots for not agreeing with your bigoted assessment of American political shenanigans is too much.

Irf.. to answer your reasonable question "Should a black Christian be accused of being Muslim"?

NO... emphatically.

But one could look at it this way.
-Obama was 'born' Muslim as he had a Muslim father.
-This means that technically he is 'apostate' if he is now Christian.
-That means he is under an ongoing fatwa of death according to many Islamic countries and radicals.

I think all angles of the Obama syndrome should be examined. Could he make a wonderful president ? Why not ? but would he (as all presidents are) be subject to the same influences and calls for attention that others are ? Yes indeedy.

Would their be expectations in the Black community, specially the Muslim segment for him to advance their interests ? Probably.

My major problem with Obama, (now that I know he claims to be Christian) has nothing to do with his faith, but his politics.

He was listing his political credentials at some point and while he mentioned many social themes and causes, unfortunately they all had BLACK prefixed to them.

Now..if the white US senators added a "skin color" at the beginning of each bill or initiative they supported they would be howled out of the congress as racists.

So, for me at least, I'd want to know how his 'conversion' will extend to promoting initiatives for all Americans irrespective of their color. Then.. if he suddenly 'saw the colorblind light' I'd want to know WHY "now" and not before ? Does it mean he was simply capitalizing on black disadvantage and racial grievances to further his political aspirations ?

Ah yes.. many questions, but none of them "Is he Muslim"?.....

Interesting turn of phrase from Mr Yusuf: " can a person be accused of being Muslim". How has it come about that the words "muslim" and "accused" can be now collocated even in the speech of muslims? What dreadful events, what inexcusable behaviour over the years have piled up next to the word 'muslim' to make the collocation flow so naturally, to make the word 'muslim' pregnant with guilt?

As always, the unfolding of language shows here the development of a common experience. The Vandals were not victims of relentless bigoted stereotyping. They became synonymous with what they did because it was they who did them. Stereotypes are the results of lived experience. They are ready statistics, they identify a trend, a pattern. Am I a bigot for noticing that Swedes tend to be tall and fair? Is this unfair to Sven the Short?

Today no-one is 'accused' of being a Hindu or a Taoist. Such an expression - accused of being a Hindu - would jar and halt the speaker and the listeners. There is no experience that would have made the words 'Hindu' appear next to events and behaviour that people could be accused of.

Mr Yusuf can call people bigots for noticing a pattern of dreadful events and behaviour. What is the word for those who actually enact such events and behaviour?

TNT,
You may be interested to know that for the month of February 2007 there were 237 Islamist attacks, involving 17 countries, which left 1716 people dead and 2884 people injured. Iraq was the worst and of the others about half I consider to be Islamic ruled. I would not consider any of these safe places to live. Only 2 countries were western i.e. USA and Israel, with one attack each.

Someone mentioned Indonesia earlier. Well Indonesia did not score any attacks last month, but there have been some horrific attacks over the past few years. One could class it as a country where anything could happen at any time.

I cannot see any Islamic ruled country being as safe as we are in AUS.

Banjo, blaming a particular religion for horrific acts is as simplistic and narrow as using religion to justify them. It's about on par with blaming Marilyn Manson for the Columbine massacre.

PS: How about Brunei? Dubai? I've been to both..their...airports, at least, they seem pretty safe and democratic to me. Then again, they're relatively wealthy countries. Maybe its the horrific poverty in the other Islamic countries that contributes to the violence and terrorism and crazyness. Or fascist governments, for which Islam is often used as justification, much like many other religions have over the years...

I think it is OK to 'accuse' someone of holding religious beliefs. I accuse every person who believes in invisible supernatural beings that made the universe and continue to lord it over life, of insanity. and I accuse those who want to force others to live a certain way because of such beliefs, of cruel and inhumane insanity.
And it's not only Muslim countries that persecute... check out the devoutly Christian countries of Africa, such as Cameroon.

Anybody who believes that the law applies equally to all in Australia is greatly delusional. Today, we have seen a White Australian sentenced for 11 months for throwing a punch and organising a protest rally.

Wasn't it only a week or two ago where Islamic Lebenese who smashed concrete slabs against the head of a white Australian man, broke his jaw, eye socket and more damage yet every single one of these Muslims were sent home with barely a slap on the wrist.

As they left the court, one of them sent out a threatening message that they're coming back. With Aboriginals and Black American's running violently around the streets when they get upset, none of them going to prison for their violence.

Yet the white Australian is savaged as a racist, as a white supremecist. I put my fellow white Australian's first and last. If that makes me a racist, then so be it.

Remember that Asian's are having street fights with Muslims in the streets too as the Leb's attack Asian women. Obviously, these people are unfit to live in Australia, deserving to be deported, no matter how long their family line has been here.

Boaz - you make a valid point about Obama, but would you be criticising someone who made their platform assisting disadvantaged aboriginal communities? It's different of course, but I'm interested in your answer.

Spider - sentencing can be harsher against whites and this is wrong. But is that the fault of other ethnicities or a fault in the judicial system?
Also, other groups, such as aboriginals, are disproportionately represented in our prisons.
Either we take on the notion that some races are 'worse' than others, which essentially is racism, or we point to the fact that people who have been raised in either other cultures, or a low socioeconomic system, will invariably clash with our liberal system.

This is a genuine concern, expressed by many conservative commentators. The problem is, oit's easy outlet for those who simply hate other races or religions. While you can argue in favour of the point I raised, you can't deny it does provide a genuine smokescreen for bigots.

How do we solve this? I don't know. I know I don't think the potential of any person can be dictated by race. The issue gets murkier when religion is thrown into the mix. Then it comes down to how you interpret your religion and how fanatical you really are.

Betty - yes, I posted on the other thread, now I'm posting on this one. Click the face at the bottom of this post. You'll see I post on many threads. Was this a criticism?
Again, there's no substance to your post. Irfan is reacting to bigotry against Islam, but you're saying he's making it difficult for muslims to just get by. I see it as defending those very people. If you think otherwise, please give reasons. I'd still be interested in knowing why you hate the author so much, as I've repeatedly asked you and you've yet to come up with anything but the vaguest notions.
And for crying out loud, read the articles before you dismiss them as tripe. How can you join an article discussion if you don't read the article?

Everytime Irfan posts the radical conservatives turn his thread into a Monty Python-style circus.

Oh, I'm xenophobic and I'm okay,
I sleep all night and I slag all day.

CHORUS: He's a xenophobe, and he's okay,
He sleeps all night and he slags all day.

I cut down trees, I eat my lunch,
I go to the lava-try.
On Wednesdays I go shoppin'
And have buttered scones for tea.

Aussies: He cuts down trees, he eats his lunch,
He goes to the lava-try.
On Wednesdays 'e goes shoppin'
And has buttered scones for tea.

CHORUS

I cut down blacks, I skip and jump,
I like to cuss and condemn,
I put on Hitler clothing,
And hang around in chat rooms.

Aussies : He cuts down blacks, he skips and jumps,
He likes to cuss and condemn.
He puts on Hitler clothing
And he hangs around.... In chatrooms..??
CHORUS
I wanta see lefties die, I wanta see their family cry,
I like to vilify Mossies,
I put on my jack boots,
And stamp around my chatroom

CHORUS
Aussies: He wants to see lefties die, He wants to see their family cry,?
He likes to vilify Mossies, lefties and all greens,
HE puts on his jack boots,?
And stamps around this chat room (while he hides behind his non de plume).?

CHORUS

I chop down trees, I wear jack boots,
Suspendies and a bra.
I wish I'd been a girlie
Just like my dear Fuhrer.

Aussies: He cuts down trees, he wears jack boots
Suspendies? and a .... a Bra??
(spoken, raggedly) What's this? Wants to be a *girlie*? Oh, My!
And I thought you were so manly! Poofter!


All: He's an xenophobe, and he's okaaaaaaayyy.....



Dear Moderator,
I wish to complain on the stronglyest possible terms about that previous entry about xenophobes who wear womens' clothes. Some of my best friends are xenophobic, and only a FEW of them wear women’s clothing (or want to kill lefties). How dare Ronnie slag back at the Perfected?

Yours faithfully,
Kommandant Bigrock Strongbloke,


P.S. I have never kissed OLO's editor, Graham Y (or Irfan).

The précis blurb for this article says that "Liberty and xenophobia don't make comfortable bedfellows". Can Irfan please publish a follow-up along the lines of "Whinging about Islamophobia while simultaneously promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion does make for very, very strange bedfellows"? Of course, such an article would have to be a lot longer than this current one as there is a lot more hypocrisy to expose in the Arab and Muslim world.

Irfan, "Bosnia and Herzegovina was a multi-ethnic society. Before the civil war the Serbs made up 40% of the country, the Muslims 38% and the Croats 22%."(http://www.nationbynation.com/Bosnia/Population.html)
Muslims are incresingly identifying themselves as a race and abandoning their ethnicity. It is not surprising when Islam promotes practices that leads to bigotry. Firstly, I am unclean to my Muslim friends because I eat pork. In school there are separate trays and kitchen for eating and cooking utensils, Muslim and non-Muslims are to be kept separate. I don't understand why my Muslims friends can't touch my friendly dog. Over the years women Muslim colleagues put on the head-scarf, refusing handshakes and some veil themselves when not working. When a female Muslim doctor examined me for an ailment, she used a pencil!! Surprising that Muslim refugees are seeking asylum refuge in Australia but not in Saudi Arabia. Please explain Irfan.

Spendocrat,
The atrocities listed were carried out by those who claimed to do so in the name of Islam. The figures are probably grossly under the actual deaths and injuries as some places in Africa do not have good world media connections, and those that die from their injuries later are not counted. I am glad someone keeps count so we can appreciate the extent of the atrocities.

Spider,
Can you supply any evidence or newspaper clippings about the Lebs assualting Asian girls. I have not heard of this and would like to know.

Banjo,
you are right to be concerned about those stats (Islamic terrorism). And I would be a fool to ignore them. Cant address that all here.

Just going to answer why I AM safer here than in Aus/UK (I know my own experiences!). I think mostly comes down to 2 very simple things.

1. The laws here in these countries are no-nonsense
with emphasis on rights of society over the rights of the offender. The result being people feel less likely to challenge others/law.

2. these countries are very traditional/conservative.
leading to greater stability, social cohesion & and respect. Constant/rapid change leads to uncertainty.

The social problems we have in Aus/UK I blame fairly & sqaurely on western idealistic thinking which tries to be all things to all people (which is more common on the left than the right). The sort that has created a quagmire in Iraq (they'll all come running out yelling "free at last - lets all of us hold hands & sing")

I repeat, I don't think Islam per se is the trouble. It isn't a trouble where the society demands high standards of conduct (backed by the law) & is very sure of itself, like Singapore. I think you will find that Islam is more of a problem where societies are less sure of themselves and/or are more liberal, like some western countries.

Solution? Australia also needs to have strong values, be clear on what it stands for (just like they are) so that everyone knows what the ground rules are. I don't think we do right now. Eg, if we say we truly value freedom of speech, then let the Muhammed cartoonists publish. If we don't, then stop saying we do. No-one believes us. If we say there is zero tolerance for thug behaviour, then show us you mean it with tough sentences. You know we dont when recent-arrival thugs can snigger in the faces of judges and still get off lightly. How can people (local & ethnic) respect a country which is so soft & unsure of itself? They don't & it shows.

To Ronnies Peters & Irfan,

Not all people who oppose Islam are inherently bad as you imply. Some oppose Islam with a good conscience and for legitimate reasons. What's more, you can't accuse those individuals who have apostatised from Islam as being xenophobic - they are no stranger to Islam and understand it intimately. The following statement comes from some apostates. I couldn't agree more with their sentiment;

'We are apostates of Islam. We denounce Islam as a false doctrine of hate and terror. However we are not against Muslims who are our own kin and relatives. We do not advocate hate and violence. Muslims are the main victims of Islam. Our goal is to educate them and let them see the truth. We are against Islam and not the Muslims. We strive to bring the Muslims into the fold of humanity. Eradicate Islam so our people can be liberated, so they can prosper and break away from the pillory of Islam. We would like to see Islamic countries dedicate more time to science and less time to Quran and Sharia. We would like to see them prosper and contribute to human civilization. We would like to see the draconian laws of Islam eliminated and people are treated humanely. We strive for freedom of beliefs, for equality of gender and for oneness of mankind.'

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/faq_AOI.htm

TurnRightThenLeft; Are you blaming our system on why these people behave with criminal instinct? I do not go for the lower eco/socio arguement either as everyone is responsible for their own behaviour. I'm Poor is never an excuse nor should it.

Too often we see this happening over and over. Enough is enough. Behave, or get out.

TNT; Sorry mate, no links as this knowledge is from what Asian's(chinese) informed me when I lived in Sydney. Not to forget what happened after the Lebenese went around beating, stabbing, etc after Cronulla Day. According to many of those invovled, groups of young Asian's drove around trying to get the young caucasians to group up together against the young Lebenese for they were sick of the violence against their females.

TRTL.....

"yes".. if the issues I heard Obama glorying in were the same.

It was not just the fact that he prefixed 'BLACK' to many of the issues, it was the issues themselves.
Forgive me that I can't recall them right now, but I do recall thinking "hmm..thats a bit strange..why focus just on the 'Black group over 'that' issue"/

If someone was an advocate for Aboriginal causes in a discriminatory or unfair way, I'd sure take issue with it. Remember Aunti Pauline ? she as battered from pillar to post just for wanting all Aussies to be treated the same.....including Aboriginals.

OH.. I head on the bastion of all political Authority the "Daily Show" that Obama's great x 3 grandfather 'may' have owned slaves, and another ancestor was in fact Irish :) I can't vouch for the truth of those things but John Stewart usually starts with something true and makes light of it.
All we need now is for the Colbert report to do Obama.

Re the topic... I think there are bigots on ALL sides of social and political questions. Why 'conservative' facade only ?
-enjoy....

Irfan - you're always playing the person, not the issue they raise. How about answering the questions put to you?
And by the way, did you know it was the Arab Islamic countries were the last to ditch the slave trade? Very progressive!
Most Muslims don't want to live in a Muslim-ruled country, if Muslim emigration is anything to go by (that is, they're leaving their countries, after having forced non-Muslims out of their countries in large numbers).
The Muslims who don't want to live under Sharia have no defence against it being imposed upon them by the Muslims who do wish to live under Sharia. This situation will soon come to pass in Western countries, which have welcomed Muslims in large numbers and may soon regret it.
And so Muslims who have chosen to leave find Islam chasing them to their new countries, and will loose the protection of the rule of Western law that they previously had in their new country.
And how much longer will those non-Muslims in their own western countries loose their freedoms too? Do any of you know why and how Lebanon was created, and what the neighbouring Muslims did to it?

'....Now is the time for Western intellectuals who claim to be antiracists and committed to human rights to stand with these dissidents. To do so requires that we adopt a universal standard of human rights and abandon our loyalty to multicultural relativism, which justifies, even romanticises, indigenous Islamist barbarism, totalitarian terrorism and the persecution of women, religious minorities, homosexuals and intellectuals. Our abject refusal to judge between civilisation and barbarism, and between enlightened rationalism and theocratic fundamentalism, endangers and condemns the victims of Islamic tyranny.

Ibn Warraq has written a devastating work that will be out by the summer. It is entitled Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Will Western intellectuals also dare to defend the West?'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1480090.ece

I think that the gloves are off Irfan.

Secularism will now take aim at Islam - for the sake of humanity. The casualities will be the divine origin of the Koran and the Prophethood of Muhammad. All will be laid bare. Islam WILL eventually become just another historical episode in the great epic of the human race.

TR, try telling that to 1.2 billion people across the globe.

"The Muslims who don't want to live under Sharia have no defence against it being imposed upon them by the Muslims who do wish to live under Sharia. This situation will soon come to pass in Western countries, which have welcomed Muslims in large numbers and may soon regret it."

camo, which Muslim countries have you visited lately? Can you honestly say that you have studied the results of elections in Muslim-majority states? Let's look at our own region. How many seats do groups like JI have in the Indonesian parliament? If sharia is so popular, why does the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) only hold power in one state? Why has the Jamaat-i-Islami never held government in Pakistan or Bangladesh? And where are the sharia supporters in Bosnia, Albania, Morocco, Mauritania, Mauritius, Turkey and Jordan?

Oh Irfan, you really are the complete bedürfen.

Why worry about sharia supporters in Mauritania when Infoplease has the following to say about that delightful Islamic country:
"Although Mauritania officially abolished slavery in 1980, the nation continues to tolerate the enslavement of blacks by North African Arabs. In 1993, the U.S. State Department estimated that there were more than 90,000 chattel slaves in the country".

Think that slavery has disappeared since then? Don't think so ... just check out the story that was in The Weekend Australian only one week ago. (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21355920-2703,00.html)

OLO readers might also like to peruse the news article "Islamic moral drive spreads fear in Indonesia" that appeared in The Sydney Morning Herald on March 11, 2006. As was noted in the article:
"Tangerang (a satellite city of Jakarta - ST) is not the only regional administration to introduce bylaws reflecting Sharia - Islamic law. And a proposed national anti-pornography law will ban public kissing and any clothing considered alluring. Baring a navel would earn a jail term. Moderate Muslim organisations are supporting the changes, but intellectuals, feminists and artists are beginning to mobilise against what they believe is a hardline agenda to reshape Indonesia."

Why worry about JI when 'moderate Muslims' are supporting draconian changes to the way Muslim-majority countries are run in the 'moral' sphere.

TNT, probably didn't see a real cross section on society? Maybe didn't stray from your little bubble perhaps? I can't think of a SINGLE ex pat person that I work with / socialise with that would think the way you do. And before you start I'm not going to get into a discussion about which country I live in at the moment / lived in / been to. But without exception, the general feeling is one of respect towards the 'host' nation...but thank christ ours isn't like this!

'TR, try telling that to 1.2 billion people across the globe.'

That is the general idea Irfan.

Ultimately, the notion of the Torah/Bible/Koran being the literal word of God will collapse. It has to. Especially once Islamic states are truly opened up to competing 'memes' and ideas. Secularists only have to allow education to take its course via the internet and globalisation.

Look around you Irfan, the signs are there already. How many Muslims do you know who are having significant doubts about the Hadith? And of course once the Hadith loses its authority the Sunna is opened up for re-discussion, literalistic fundamentalism goes out the window, and the traditional historical setting of the Koran starts to get mighty shakey.

As you know Irfan the Islamic religion has been fortunate enough to escape the sceptical criticism of Western academia - unlike its Christian counterpart. Once Islam is truly opened up to proper inquiry it will flounder in the same way as Christianity. Not only will we have a non-divine 'Historical Jesus' we will also have a 'Historical Muhammad' without the super-naturalism.

You must know all this Irfan - you're an intelligent man.

TNT,
I fully agree with your last paragraph. At least we agree on somethings. I also appreciate the tone of your responses.

I have constantly said that we have to ensure that prospective migrants ARE fully aware of our laws and social standards BEFORE they decide to come here. That is lacking right now.

Then, as you say, we must ridgidly enforce those standards. This earns respect for the standards. No more simple slap on the wrists to those that do not comply. This applies to all, whether one is born here, granted citizenship or a new arrival.

Snappy Tom.. thanks for that, very well put.
As for Australian standards, I guess they can be summarised in one word -- pragmatism.

TrueAussie:
"TNT, probably didn't see a real cross section on society? Maybe didn't stray from your little bubble perhaps?"

That's true to an extent. But you quickly pick up a feel for how safe a place is, especially when, as I've said, I've gone to the no-go zones & the more fundamentalist areas. Also because news of trouble spreads like wild-fire, you are quickly warned off certain areas. But that's the thing. It's extremely rare & the authorities usually go over the top just to cover themselves. Being an ex Sydney-sider, I've felt very uncomfortable all over that place at times, from a Canterbury league game/Aussie day-nighter, to hanging around train stations, to a walk in Hyde Park in broad daylight, to coming up against a road-raged Aussie. In Gulf Arabic countries (Iraq excluded due to very exceptional circumstances), as well as Iran, Syria, Jordan, you will rarely, if ever, get these vibes. There's a common phrase in Arabic 'that's haraam', meaning roughly 'that's not the done thing', eg swearing, fighting, & generally anti-social behaviour. I don't expect you to take what I say at face value, & by all means talk to ex-pat colleagues, but at least make the effort to talk to people who have been to the Islamic places referred to above before flatly refuting it.

"And before you start I'm not going to get into a discussion about which country I live in at the moment / lived in / been to."

Why, would that lead to an admission that you havent been to any of these places & maybe weaken your argument?

Banjo,
cheers & likewise. I've come across some of your posts on other threads & found myself agreeing on most points. But I also like disagreement because it challenges my own thinking & logic (or lack thereof!)

Quick correction (I was expecting someone else to pick it up). As examples of Islamic countries that are relatively peaceful and democratic, I listed 'Brunei and Dubai' obviously Dubai aint no country...I meant of course United Arab Emirates, of which Dubai is the either classified as one of said Emirates, or the capital (Dubai City). Sorted.

Anyway, Banjo - either you didn't notice the point I was trying to make, or you ignored it: the point being that blaming the Islamic religion for the atrocities occuring in some Islamic countries makes as much sense as using the Islamic religion to justify them.

I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that much violence exists without Islam, and that much of Islam exists without violence.

I pointed to other, more sensible possible causes of these atrocities, such as poverty and oppression. In your response, you stated that these atrocities are carried out in the name of Islam. I agree - people often use religion as justification for horrific crimes. But no passage of rational thought could ever reach the conclusion that the religion itself is to blame. If a crazy fringe organisation started bombing schools in the name of Buddha, would Buddhism be to blame?

I hope the sillyness of this question helps to illustrate what I'm trying to express here...won't hold my breath though..

spendocrat, the area of conflict today the world over involves Muslim and people of other faiths and also between Muslims themselves. The protestants and catholics have since stopped their senseless killing.

The problem has to do with Islam as a political system and a religion that seek to establish the kingdom of allah on earth through violence. No surprises that the symbol of Saudi Arabia flag is a sword.

Wafa Sultan and Tawfik Hamid were two Muslims who have intimate knowledge about Islam. They are Arabs and are secular. It is people like them that give the Arabs hope and Muslim countries a chance to progress beyond the Middle-age. The links are to some of their speeches and interviews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxfo11A7XuA {into a Muslim's mind Tawfik Hamid}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrHIa34ydg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU5Br7YHmsQ&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrHIa34ydg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WLoasfOLpQ&mode=related&search=

Are you seriously trying to convince me that the Islamic religion has a specific purpose of world domination? And it isn’t just the fundamentalist nutjobs who claim this to be the case? Because that sounds a tad...paranoid to me. And probably to the billion+ Muslims across the globe who have in fact never bombed a car or chopped off a head, and seem to want little more than to live their lives in peace.

I thought my core sentiment was fairly simple, but it seems as though it has been overlooked yet again. The fact that you’ve stated ‘the protestants and catholics have since stopped their senseless killing’ is testament to this - you’re identifying individuals by their religion. This is irrational. The belief system of any given individual does not dictate whether said individual will be violent, crazy, normal, happy, sad, whatever. If you’re poor, oppressed, abused and fed BS your whole life, it doesn’t matter what belief system you have: you’re gonna be messed up.

Unfortunately, there’s a culture of poor, oppressed etc people in a number of countries where Islam is the official religion. Because Islam is the dominant belief system in these countries, it is generally used as the justification for atrocities (and from an outsiders point of view, often blamed for the atrocities). Make sense? If, say, all Islamic countries suddenly swapped religions with all the Christian countries, there’s literally no reason why Christianity wouldn’t be used as justification for the same atrocities. I’m getting sick of typing the word ‘atrocities’. But uh, yeah, changing the religion wouldn't change the fact that fundamentalists are completely insane.

I’m just saying you can’t blame ANY one thing for these monumental problems we’re witnessing. To do so is so simplistic and immature it makes me want to give you detention.

spendocrat,
all religions contain the seeds of fundamentalism, because they require unquestioning faith in the truth of their assertions. Thus, any one who disputes these assertions, is attacking the religion. Not until people demand reasonable proof of religious dogma, is there a hope of stopping fundamentalisits of every persuasion, from the Christian gay-hate murderers and abortion clinic bombers of the USA to the suicide bombers of the Middle East. Religion may not be the direct cause, but it is the fuel of discord.
Like sex, religion should only be practised between consenting adults in private.

"Wafa Sultan and Tawfik Hamid were two Muslims who have intimate knowledge about Islam. They are Arabs and are secular."

Wafa Sultan no longer regards herself as a Muslim. Further, Arabs (as in native Arabic speakers) make up around 15% of the Muslim population.

Philip, why don't you tell us about your background? I'm sure I could find some nasty and salacious dirt to throw your way. After all, few people here seem to be interested in the topic discussed in the article itself.

"Look around you Irfan, the signs are there already. How many Muslims do you know who are having significant doubts about the Hadith?"

Well, just about everyone. Because all Muslims know that there are all sorts of ahadith (plural of hadith) of all varying grades of authenticity. Because Islamic theology has placed a premium of recording and preserving all records. Including the forged ones.

Maybe if you sat down and studied the sciences of hadith, you would soon learn that there is no parallel to this degree of historiography in any major world faith.

You and others here might also sit down and study the processes by which rules are deduced from the texts. Then you would realise why I tend to ignore those here who love pulling out verses and texts which they cut and pasted from JihadWatch or some other fruitloop website.

Because, believe it or not, not every single verse of the Koran or saying of the Prophet Muhammad leads to an automatic ruling to be applied in Australia in 2007. Or indeed anywhere else.

I cannot stop some people here from believing the sharia is little more than a form of non-anaesthetic amputations. Just as I cannot force them to spend less time during working hours on this forum instead of doing real work.

spendocrat, if my son fights with neighbour A's son, then neighbour B's son, then neighbour C's son, then neighbour D's son, then neighbour E's son; something must be wrong with my son, not my neighbours' sons. This situation is happening now with Islam and other religions and political systems.

The follow is taken from a book by a devout Muslim preacher, "Islam in Practice" by Abuhuraira Abdurrahman (graduate from Islamic University, Medinah, Saudi Arabia) published by Perniagaan Jahabersa, Malaysia, www.jahabersa.com.my

"It is worth mentioning that the complete success of the pragmatic Islamization in the hand of the Messager of Allah could not be attributed to mere sermons rendered in mere various occasions, but it could be credited much to the backing of the coercive power of the then Islamic state founded by him at Medinah. It is historically substantiated that the Messager of Allah had spent 13 long years in preaching Islam through sermon in Mecca prior to his historic 'Hijrah' to Medinah, yet of no avail. But after having authority by establishing the 1st Islamic State at Medinah, which backed his Islamic call, astounding success was made. ....we can come to the final conclusion that full success in true Islamization is solely dependent on the establishment of a full-fledged Islamic State known as The Kingdom of God on earth." (pg xii-xiii)

Irfan, I am a secular liberal who believes that religion addresses the life hereafter.

Irfan, when I wrote 'significant doubts' I was being kind. It would have been better to have said, 'not worth the paper they are written on.' This is because it is impossible to tell which anecdotes are truthful amoung the hundreds of thousands of anecdotes that are fabricated fiction;

The following extract was written by the author Reza Aslan;

'Joseph Schacht’s extensive research on the development of the Shariah has shown how quite a large number of widely acknowledged hadith had their chains added conjecturally so as to make them appear more authentic….

But there is an even larger obstacle to using the Sunna of the Prophet as a primary source of law. As rigorous as scholars like al-Bukhari and Ibn al-Hajjaj were in scrutinising each hadith for the signs of correct transmission, the fact is that their method lacked any attempt at political or religious objectivity....While some hadith may in fact contain an authentic core that can be back to the Prophet and his earliest Companions, the truth is that the Sunna is a far better reflection of the opinions of the ninth-century Uluma than the seventh century Ummah. After all, to quote Jonathan Berkey, “It was not Muhammad himself who defined the Sunna, but rather a memory of him.” '

-NO GOD BUT GOD (2006), p164.

I'm sorry, but I need reasonably accurate 'historiography' before I can believe in talking angels and pregnant virgins. The 'history' of the Hadith is completely unreliable and unverifiable, and to liken it to a 'science' is to slander the good name of real science.

If the obvious and vast shortcomings of Islamic historiography were explained truthfully to Muslims by their clerics then anti-human idealologies like Wahabism would be starved of oxygen. And Australian society wouldn't have to put up with right-wing Saudi funded nutters like Imam Mohammad Swaiti.

By some accounts his Mosque in Canberra is a debacle. For example;

'Taxation office to probe Muslim cleric on Saudi cash'
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21403909-2,00.htm

The saddest part of the above news article is the final sentence where it describes the Wahabi Imam as having 'strong community support'. This community obviously needs to undergo detox and to have its reality restored.

Irfan, it's about time intelligent moderates like youself started to inform fundamentalist Muslim communities that their dogmatic historical certainties are not so certain after all!

Totally amazing ... another century to the Irf!!

Another Irfan piece penned to the tune of Bob Dylan's Stuck In The Middle With You:

"Clowns to the left of me!
Jokers to the right!
Here I am stuck in the middle with you."

This "moderates appealing to moderates" tune to "keep a watch for the bad guy xenophobes all around" is a waste of time. As the Muslim population in Australia increases, the cultural divide between them and us will grow ever larger. As tensions grow, moderates on both sides of the divide will eventually be bundled out of the way, and the Muslim extremists will face off against the right-wing Aussies. I can't see Australia rolling over and playing dead like Europe is doing.

So the question for Irfan, who is seemingly intelligent, is why bother with the chit chat? I wonder about his motives ... distract and conquer?

Irfan would better spend his time reforming his religion into the shape of other religions in Australia i.e. an invisible and personal faith. Get it out of people's faces. Get it out of the papers. If you want to contribute to this country, make that your job Irfan. Otherwise the reformation will be done for you.

But Irfan never had any choice which is why he rushes to defend rather than offer understanding and explanation. Islam does not offer choice and neither does the Muslim community. It isn't just a religion. It's social governing and civil law, and not by election or popular demand. The fundamentalist have always driven society in one direction or another. Industrialist vs. socialist, religious vs. God is dead, etc. Today we have the God is dead socialist types driving policy which is why all religions have dug in their heels and a political right-wing response across much of the globe. Moving politically to the right was a response to left excesses. The Howard bashing or Blair bashing or Bush bashing started when these people began to campaign for office and there has been no let up since. Now that the left are campaigning it will begin for them. Irfan and Muslims are smart to await the appeasers and strong proponents of MC. Islam isn't just a religion it is law and culture. Culture rules. Irfan, don't be afraid of your cultural bigotry and social conservatism. Shout it from the roof tops. It will bring you more power and influence than your religion. It's your right.

Well said Phil Tang. Notice Irfan doesn't respond to your valid points?

Also well said TR. Neanderthal beliefs deserve no respect. Just mild amusement. Perhaps that's why so many "believers" get so angry. No facts.

Ybgirp. Agree. Invisible, non existent friends. TRTL has actually made a correct statement on this. Few will ever consaider anything but what they have been brainwashed with. Or can do so.

Runner. Left? Define it please.

TNT. Horrors abound. Seen or read the news on Iraq at all? I saw the number of dead civilaians there has now exceeded 650,000. Not a horror? Just accidents perhaps? Suicide bombers aren't horrors are they? Rational, educated and reasonable missiles yes?

Indonesia? Any Islam country. Toddle off and live there. I've seen it too and it sucks. For all but those in power. Sounds like Australia doesn't it?

As to following their Imans? Have you actually heard what they preach? Real good stuff. Worth followng indeed. The problem is not Islam? You are right. It's religion. Of which Islam purports to be one.

TRTL. Irfan is not "reacting to bigotry against Islam". He's using it to achieve high numbers of posts in order to seem to be succesful as an OLP contributor.

Online east. Dylan. How about this :

"Stealers Wheel was guitarist Gerry Rafferty and keyboard player Joe Egan. They wrote the song."

OK?

Irfan. You've cracked the ton, again although you had to write many posts yourself. Time for another dirge? Could I suggest racism or bigotry, Muslim, Christian? Just to expand your repertoire.

Aqvarivs. Pegasus makes a good point. It is humour. Have you noticed he rubbishes both sides of politics? Really.

Happy Harmony Day to Betty and the other bigots :)

No, TNT, I'm well travelled in that part of the world - I even travelled through Afghanistan in Nov '04! (My wife didn't want to go with me, strangely enough)
I certainy don't give details about where I am at the moment as I wouldn't be too hard to find if I offended the wrong person. It's not the sort of country to go mouthing off!
Agreed, generally these countries are 'safe', especially for foreigners living in the 'right' areas. However, at what price to society is this 'safety'. What about the abhorrent supression? Don't forget that the locals you mixed with probably were quite liberal / western, and perhaps can't be used as a real indication of the gereral population.

Betty, I only have the experience of the show during the "Bush years" tied to recent memory and have noticed the great majority of his guest are democrats or disgruntled Republicans who have written books or articles attacking the government. I can not remember his take on the "Clinton years" and I'm waiting to see how aggressive he is towards the Democrats as they begin to battle for political position and the Presidency. My take of what is behind the humour is very much left of centre.
I've always been interested in what people say with humour and how they communicate it. So far I've found that it isn't all that funny. Quite often there is a cruelty not far below the surface. A dig. A put down.
An implied superiority of thought and behavior.

aqvarivs speculates: "Islam does not offer choice and neither does the Muslim community."

Really? So there is just one monolithic Islam we are all forced to follow at the point of a sword or a medieval Afghan magistrate?

And what is this entity you describe as "the Muslim community"? Where does a singular Muslim community exist in Australia (other than inside your imagination)?

No Irfan I don't think Islam offers much in the way of choice. If it did we would be having spirited conversations with many Muslims with many differing positions debating Australian social direction. And sir, we do not have that as yet. Though I do await that day.

Unless your now saying your emotional and bigoted rants in the defense of Islam and the greater Muslim community was nothing more than hype to exploit and misrepresent. Is that the case Irfan? Just fanning the flames are we? Pushing buttons? You can't have it both ways old son. Either there is a Islamic/Muslim community or there isn't. If there isn't then what the hell are you going on about. How does a bigot defend a bigot that doesn't exist. What's this? Irfan's theory on the black hole of Islamic bigotry. It sucks in everything around it but, gives nothing back to the world, therefore it doesn't really exist since it isn't a actual participant in the society it takes from.

I must learn to be tolerant and understanding of a people and culture that doesn't exist. Strange how all your articles are in one shape or form about this non-entity of individual victims being attacked by a full formed malevolent other community.

"Liberty and xenophobia don't make comfortable bedfellows. In a community consumed by grossly irrational hatred - including racism and sectarianism - economic and political freedom will never flourish."

Which community are you speaking to here Irfan? HMMMMM? Surely not a community that isn't really a community because it's made up of individuals! And just who's definition of economic and political freedoms are you hoping will flourish?

Ug! Irfan speak with forked tongue.

Irfan,
You are quick to label people bigots because they don't agree with you. That is your inherent islamic duallity showing through. It's OK to lie to the unbelievers if it furthers the cause of islam. Mohammed could only muster 150 folowers in 10 years spouting his "angel in a cave claptrap". He was a failed capitalist. His wife supported him because he was a "ne'er do well". The koran was treated as divine because it was determined that a man of of Mohammed's intellectual status could not have possibly written it!
When his evangelism failed he resorted to political islam i.e "..Join us or die...". The koran devotes nearly 93% of it's suras on the jihad to it's relevance in turning or killing unbelievers(non muslims) and only a very small part to the "personal" struggle of jihad. It advocates that there are at least 4 months in the year when a muslim is allowed and expected to go out and kill unbelievers!
Indeed if you have not succumbed to the teachings of the koran to the letter, then you are a nominal muslim at best, cherry picking out bits you want to do. Remember this, we in the west did not start trouble, but we WILL finish it.
You're an idiot, Irfan. Shame on you.

'I've always been interested in what people say with humour and how they communicate it. So far I've found that it isn't all that funny. Quite often there is a cruelty not far below the surface. A dig. A put down.
An implied superiority of thought and behavior.'

Oh, that's classic. I love it - you've found that 'humour' isn't all that funny! I think I've found where the problem here is (either with you, or with humour...hmm).

aqvarivs: "Either there is a Islamic/Muslim community or there isn't."

There isn't. There is no unified, uniform hierarchy. No priesthood. No cabal. No conspiracy. Just a set of ethno-religious and sectarian entities. And lots of people for whom Islam is just one aspect of their identity, competing with language, ethnicity, etc etc.

However, certain bigots are determined to manufacture an Islamic community. How? By giving this disparate group of 300,000 people the feeling that they are being persecuted and that they have a common enemy.

Nothing units people like a common enemy.

Still, I don'y know how long that unity will last. The people who hate Muslims today will soon lave them for someone else. I've noticed African migrants now copping lots of tabloid tantrums. Sudanese refugees. Non-Muslim Sudanese. Who next after the Africans? The Jews?

The only real conspiracy is the one to be found inside the head of a bigot. And for that, no amount of exposure to the real world can help. For confirmed bigots, the only cure can be found in those medicine adverts: "If pain persists, see your doctor".

Irfan

"Nothing units(sic) people like a common enemy ".

Yeah, that sounds quite reasonable. I guess the common enemy is radical Islamists and so-called "moderate" Islamists who do not stand up for and live by Australian ethics, laws, principles, and rules. A clear example is the Islamic Party (not sure of the accurate name I am sorry) who is standing at this week's NSW election - on the grounds of not having to abide by paying Australian taxes - since the Party claims that such behaviour is against Islamic principles and writings.

Ho Hum

Happy Pakistan day CJ. Don't forget to wear your shalwar chamis now, don't want to go offending anyone.

My dear spendocrat. If my sentiment about questioning cynical and derisive humour had needed further amplification... you have done more than necessary. I'm sure people now know what I meant. Thank you.

Irfan, my lad. You state: "However, certain bigots are determined to manufacture an Islamic community". I presume you are referring to the extremely reactionary, extremely bigoted Islamists who demonstrated outside the Danish embassy in London on February 3rd, 2006 with the catchcry, "You have declared war against Allah and his prophet! You have declared war against the Muslim Ummah! For which you will pay a heavy price. Take lesson of Theo Van Gogh! Take lesson of the Jews of Khaibar!"

You know what the Muslim Ummah is don't you Irfan? According to Wikipedia, "umma" is an Arabic word meaning "community". And as Wikipedia goes on to note - in the context of Islam, the word ummah is used to mean the diaspora or "Community of the Believers" (ummat al-mu'minin), and thus the whole Islamic world.

Thus the Muslim community is a construct of Islam itself and has not been made up by nefarious outside interests as you falsely maintain.

A hint for the future aqvarivs - a sense of humour does wonders for warming people to your opinions. The ability to laugh, particularly at yourself, shows you are in fact *not* a humourless boring stuck up narrow minded simpleton who lacks the ability to extend perspective beyond your own tiny passage of experience.

Not that you are - but you don't want to give people that impression, it may undermine your future arguments :)

Lighten up.

spendocrat, what other people think is only important in regards to the material under discussion, that I should as you say, humour people into agreement with my opinion or view, is outside of my character. Some subjects have an inbuilt humour and can be expressed lightheartedly with out loosing the intended value, other subjects are serious and a lighthearted treatment gives that serious subject the erroneous implication that it ought to be dealt with free from care.
One of the down falls of this approach practiced by The Daily Show or The Colbert Report(as examples)is how it impacts todays youth. Many young people today are of the opinion that they are powerless to make any changes to their society and have adopted a laissez-faire approach to local and world events impacting their future world and society. Not all realize such treatment of the news is something that comes after honestly looking at the real events and understanding how they play out. As reported in a couple of polls that have hit the news some people are accepting both of the mentioned programmes as an optional real time view.

Again. Lighten up.

Half of the Daily Show is unwritten anyway, they just act as a 'finger', pointing at hilarious absurdities that already exist. Absurdities that exist whether shows like the Daily Show point them out or not. And you want to blame the messenger. How about pausing to consider why there's so much nonsense going on in the first place? I think that's what this kind of comedy helps people to do (well, the people that get it, anyway).

But I have no intention of being dragged into a debate about comedy with someone who doesn't know whats so funny about jokes. As you were.

"clear example is the Islamic Party (not sure of the accurate name I am sorry) who is standing at this week's NSW election - on the grounds of not having to abide by paying Australian taxes - since the Party claims that such behaviour is against Islamic principles and writings."

kalweb, can you show me evidence from the Aust Electoral Commission that this party is actually registered? Who are its leaders? Do you have any of its campaign literature?

"You know what the Muslim Ummah is don't you Irfan? According to Wikipedia, "umma" is an Arabic word meaning "community"."

Gee, SP, great to see you have honed in your sophisticated research skills. Last time I checked out Wikipaedia, it claimed I owned 2 horses.

The theory of Islamic theology is that Muslims are one Umma or community. But forget theory. Look at reality. Sunni. Shia. Wahhabi. Sufi. In Australia, Muslims come from over 60 different ethnic and religious groups.

The concept of Umma is similar to the concept of Christendom. DIdn't Christ (or was it Paul?) say that Christians are brothers to each other? Yet what is the reality of Christendom? Why do some cities in Greece forbid Catholic churches to be built within their borders?

Isn't Pakistan Day today (i.e. 23/3)? I won't be doing anything special for it, given that it's another country's national day. I don't suppose Australia Day is all that big in Islamabad either...

On the other hand, Harmony Day is a homegrown Aussie concept that celebrates Australia's cultural diversity. It is supported by the Federal Government, and you can read all about it at http://www.harmony.gov.au/what-is-hd/index.htm . In fact, I'd thoroughly that some of the more prolific posters here do exactly that :)

And who said multiculturalism is dead in Oz?

Oh, and trueaussie - if you're that unhappy where you're living, you probably ought to come home.

Erk - that should read "...I'd thoroughly recommend that some of the more prolific posters..."

Mr Irfan, I went looking for your two horses at Wikipedia but couldn't find them. What were their names again? Was it Red and Herring? Now according to Wikipedia I'm a popular brand of cat food but I digress.

C J Morgan has mentioned Harmony Day in a couple of posts so he must feel its important. It would be more important if he made the reference to those that are causing disharmony in the community.

Australia and Australians have welcomed some 6 million (I think) immigrants since WW11 and we have a good reputation for being egalitarion and friendly. Most migrants have recognized this and have become part of our community. However there are some groups that have not or will not unite with us or recognize that we are being generous in allowing them to share our good life.

These are the groups that Harmony Day should be aimed at.

The Lebanese muslims are one such group that continually keep themselves apart by their anti-social behaviour, offensive attitude to females, gang bashings of anglo males, intimidation and violent behavipour, show contempt for our laws, our courts and police officers. Other groups include the serbs and croats that engage in riots and fighting with each other.

These are the groups that need to be shown what living in harmony is all about, not the general population.

In fact it is the actions of the Lebs and the serbs and croats that have been the major factor in the abandoning of multiculturalism. Other groups may also have contributed to a lessor extent.

If we are to continue with Harmony Day then it should be aimed at those that need it most.

Did anyone else notice how spendocrat went from pounce and instigator to being the victim and "dragged into a discussion on comedy" in three posts?
What a shmuck. Hey spendocrat....lighten up and get a sense of humour. "Somebody might think that your a humourless boring stuck up narrow minded simpleton who lacks the ability to extend perspective beyond your own tiny passage of experience."
It seems you have failed to heed your own warning.

CJ, however did your presumptuous little mind decide I was unhappy? On the contrary, I have always been happy to be a guest....and always been welcome as a GUEST as long as I have contributed to the country I live in. Incidentlally I own two properties in Aust, and probably most of my income gets sent back to Aust. There is justification in what I do and how I do it...but if you know anything about how Islam works you would know there is no justification in allowing more followers of Islamic submissive cult to live in Australia. It would cause problems for me in the future. It would cause problems for you in the future. It would cause problems for my children in the future. And frankly, CJ, my last point is the one I am most interested in. Same to you Irfan.

"The Lebanese muslims are one such group that continually keep themselves apart by their anti-social behaviour, offensive attitude to females, gang bashings of anglo males, intimidation and violent behavipour, show contempt for our laws, our courts and police officers."

Can you provide me with evidence that shows Lebanese Muslims commit these acts more than Anglo-Australians? And in all states and territories of Australia?

And why don't you give examples of positive contributions of Lebanese Aussies? Or do you think Lebanese Muslims are incapable of making positive contributions?

By the way, do you have an account with the National Australia Bank? Do you know who the head of their Australian operations is?

"but if you know anything about how Islam works you would know there is no justification in allowing more followers of Islamic submissive cult to live in Australia."

The Islam I was taught was one that told me to be a good citizen, to work hard, to never go on Centrelink even if I had to deliver pizzas to survive (which I did when I was at uni) and to obey the law.

Only an untrue aussie would oppose this kind of religion.

Irfan,
What evidence do you need to be convinced that we have a social problem with Leb muslims. Ever since I have been reading and posting on OLO there has been an almost constant flow of information about bad social behaviour of Leb muslims.

Certainly, some of that infomation is heresay, but a lot of it is from peoples personal encounters. Ask females that are shop assistants, teachers, police, nurses, ambulance and receptionists and see what their responses are.

Ask the girls that put up with harrassment at Cronulla beach by Lebs for about 10 years if they are nice blokes. Ask the blokes that have been intimidated or bashed by the gangs if they like them. By the way, the leb gang members openly boast about them being Lebs.

Do you think that all these people are bigots or racists? Even if only half the media were only half accurate, Lebs would still have a poor reputation.

Living in NSW, I have to admit that we do not get a great deal of information from the other states. However on recent visits to Melbourne and Perth, complaints about Lebs anti-social behaviour were heard there too.

Did you not see the reports about the behaviour by the family and friends, of the gang rapists, in court. The victims were hissed at and spat on going to and from the court during adjourments. One person called loudly from the gallery "Whats wrong with f...... a whore" That really shows respect for our judicial system.

I have met some Leb Christians that are alright and have not heard any poor reports about them. So I believe the problem with the Leb muslims is cultural.
I also understand that the present Governor of NSW is Lebanese and I understand this lady is very nice. But have not met her.

I think you know all this as it has been this way for years and you are just trying to muddy the water.

Frankly the problem is so widely known, that I did not think anyone would even need to seek further "evidence"

Irfan,

You beg the question: "I ask people here to state their positions. Do they think it is OK to accuse a black Christian of being a Muslim?"

Your rhetorical question calls for both Yes & No answers:

1) No, not OK to accuse any Christian of being a Muslim, no matter the skin colour.
2) Yes, if there is evidence (even if anecdotal) someone (no matter what skin colour) may in fact be a Muslim in disguise.

It all comes down to TRUST.

Do I trust Barack Obama as a Christian President of a secular USA?

No !! He would not get my vote (if I were an American). But the main reason is that I trust others more than I trust him.

If not trusting someone makes me a bigot, I am sure you are a bigot also.

So what xenophobia are you on about?

'What a shmuck'

Hehe. 'Shmuck'. Brilliant.

"What evidence do you need to be convinced that we have a social problem with Leb muslims."

=> start with some statistics. How about the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics on gang rape furing the period when the Skaf brothers carried out their attacks. The Bureau reported that gang rape was more frequent in Maitland and Cessnock than Greenacre and Bankstown. I guess Maitland has a thriving Lebanese Muslim community.

"Ever since I have been reading and posting on OLO there has been an almost constant flow of information about bad social behaviour of Leb muslims."

=> So you believe everything you read on these forums? Have you seen a doctor for your condition?

"Certainly, some of that infomation is heresay, but a lot of it is from peoples personal encounters. Ask females that are shop assistants, teachers, police, nurses, ambulance and receptionists and see what their responses are."

=> And you are telling me that the majority of Australian women report some kind of sexual abuse by Lebanese Muslims? How do they recognise whether the abuser is Lebanese Muslim? Do the "Lebs" (as you call them) have special tattoos on their foreheads?

"Ask the girls that put up with harrassment at Cronulla beach by Lebs for about 10 years if they are nice blokes. Ask the blokes that have been intimidated or bashed by the gangs if they like them. By the way, the leb gang members openly boast about them being Lebs."

=> If your problem with Lebanese? Or is it with Muslims? Make up your mind. Most Lebanese in Australia are Christians.

=> You are attributing characteristics to an entire group of people based on their ethnic and/or ethno-religious background. In my books, that makes you a racist. You are effectively saying that every single Lebanese and/or Muslim, from theAustralian CEO of the National Australia Bank to the leading goal scorer for the Sydney Bulldogs, have certain negative characteristics. This is racism pure and simple.

Irfan

My answer is no to your questions of me. Heard it on Southern Cross Radio.

Thanks

Irfan, if somebody dislikes Muslims or the Islamic religion that does not make them a racist! It might make them a religious bigot but it does not make them a racist because as you often tell us, Muslims come from many ethnic backgrounds. It is time for you to get your facts right in this regard.

Irfan,
If not liking the disposition and the braggart habits of a select group of worthless individuals such as the apparent minority of Lebanese muslim gang members who are long on mouth and short on intelligence can count as racist, then I'm one. Shame on their parents for poor stewardship.
I don't like the habits of muslims who take great delight in subjugating their women. I don't like the way they can stink up the place with their foul body odour. Does that make me racist? No.
I don't like my Korean neighbours either, mainly because they insist on cooking weird crap at odd hours of the morning. Does that make me racist? Not at all.
It is not compulsory for any of us to have to like the habits and doings of people around us. If those habits are as a result of a foreign cultural upbringing then they had best find a way to become Australian first, everything else a distant second. If you won't assimilate, piss off. If individuals or groups are going to step outside the bounds of the perhaps implicit majority determined socially acceptable behaviour then they draw attention to themselves and should expect. Until muslims recognise this and slap their miscreants into line, they will always get a bad rap. They need to remember that, as you said prior, they are in the minority and should comply.
Can't wait to hear what you say about this, Irfan. Probably nothing of consequence or truth, as usual.

Irfan,
Firstly, this group of people call, and boast, themselves "Lebs" because they think their race and/or their religion makes them superior to ALL others. Now that is racism. They are generally refered to by all as Lebs.

You have to be the only person in Aus, who is not a Leb muslim, that will not acknowledge that we have a serious social problem with Leb muslims. I had a retail business and I can tell you emphaticly that the female staff tried to busy themselves with other work rather than serve the Lebs who entered the premises. Why, because of the dictatorial, abusive and offensive manner of the Leb customers. So I am saying that you will not find those women, who have contact with Lebs in their daily work, speaking very highly of them. Nor will the girls who have put up with the harassment on the strees or at the beach.

It is not all sexual or by young males. I personally know of and old lady, in western Sydney, who is about the only Aussie left in her street and she has to put up with all kinds of harrasment on the street. Garbage and bricks are thrown over her fence that cause damage. Why, because the Lebs want her to go so they can get the house cheaply as no other Aussie will buy it. The police say they cannot do anything.

Do not forget the rapes in s/w/Sydney were racial crimes and police did not get them all.

Why do you defend this group of Leb muslims? You told me recently that the theology you were taught was to adopt the culture of the country you were in. This being so, the anti-social behaviour of the Leb muslims must be abhorent to you as to myself and others.

Are you suggesting that Lebs are not the only muslims that are anti social or are you saying that Leb christians are also very much involved in this also. It is important that the true culprits of disharmony are identified so others are not unfairly branded.

"I had a retail business and I can tell you emphaticly that the female staff tried to busy themselves with other work rather than serve the Lebs who entered the premises."

=> Gee, that is the sort of rock solid evidence we can build social policy on. Forget crime statistics. Forget social reality. Let's all go down to Banjo's shop and see the real world in action.

=> Banjo, you still haven't answered my question. Do you regard all Lebs and/or Muslims as problematic? If so, what are the problems, and what is your evidence that these problems are caused by their culture and/or religion. Thus far all I have read is references to events at your shop and what you've read on this forum.

=> If my employees refused to serve customers because of their race, I'd sack them. Money is money. Business is business.

Irfan,

You really think: "Money is money. Business is business"?

By the same token, a Muslim butcher ought to sack a Muslim employee who refuses to handle pork meat (as Islam claims pigs are unclean).

Or, perhaps you think this situation can never arise (because a Muslim butcher would never sell pork meat in the first place).

But why not? If 'business is business', shouldn't that Muslim butcher cater to his neighbourhood pork-loving Chinese population?

If "Money is money. Business is business" is a lie/half-truth, and that Islamic teachings are overriding consideration, then a devoted Muslim cannot possibly adopt others' culture like you mentioned on another thread: "...The theology I was taught was that a devoted Muslim should adopt the culture of the country."

Truth is, like I mention on that other thread:

<< ... crap. Of course you never adopt other's culture. You only live among Australians of different cultures, at the same time claiming your Islamic culture co-exists with ours. Your culture is dictated by your Koran. Ours are not.>>

Irfan,
Yes it is good evidence. There is not much better than personal experience. My female staff never actually refused to serve Lebs, but they did not enjoy the rude manner of them, so if we were around my partner or myself would serve the Lebs as they were not as rude to males.

Gee, it did not take you long to start throwing around accusations of racism. I am dissapointed in you. I thought you were better than that. You accuse me of racism because i critize Leb muslims. Should I simply accept their offensive behaviour and not say anything. I said before that appeasement seems to be taken as weakness. This leads me to answer your questions about my attitude towards Leb and muslims.

I do not hate or dislike anyone because of who they are. As I also said before I have not seen or heard of bad reports about Non muslim Lebanese so see no problem with them. I am also sure there are some good Leb muslims as well. I also have not heard many bad reports about muslims of other nationalities, just a few in Aus and there fore see not much problems there. But note that muslims of other nationalities seem to cause problems overseas. I told you recently that if they all had the theology that you were taught there would be no problems at all.

As I also said before, it is the attitude to females, their arrogance and the use of violence that leads to my conclusion that the Leb muslims are not suited to our society. The problem appears to be cultural as the children, from a very early age, have a poor attitude to females and non Lebs in general. School teachers and others that encounter Lebs in their daily work say similar things.
Lebs cannot or will not integrate and hold racist views about other nationaliites. Even after the 2nd or 3rd generation of being here.

Banjo: "Gee, it did not take you long to start throwing around accusations of racism"

Well, golly gee, I can't imagine why Irfan might have thought this sustained and personal attack on him from Banjo and the other usual suspects might have some racist basis.

I mean, Banjo's "Leb" this and "Leb" that emanates from a perspective of mutual respect, equality and consideration, doesn't it?

CJ Morgan, "I mean, Banjo's "Leb" this and "Leb" that emanates from a perspective of mutual respect, equality and consideration, doesn't it?"

Pehaps it doesn't emanate from Banjo. It may well be his communities cultural reality. You would need to poll the others of that same community before you were free to bandy about words like racism. His community may be home to a Lebanese Muslim gang. Just because Irfan says none exist doesn't mean none exist. Irfan is very quick to discount Banjo's personal experience and even mock him in defence of Islam.
I've yet to see Irfan offer understanding of what others are going through while always demanding that everyone accept his excuses for "Muslim misunderstandings and misconceptions". Irfan always puts the onus on "Australians" the burden of proof, and for them to extend their understanding to Islam and Muslims.

aqvarius writes: "I've yet to see Irfan offer understanding of what others are going through while always demanding that everyone accept his excuses for "Muslim misunderstandings and misconceptions". Irfan always puts the onus on "Australians" the burden of proof, and for them to extend their understanding to Islam and Muslims."

=> The implication here is that I require a burden of proof to be placed on Australians. As if I am not Australian. This is complete nonsense.

=> There is a further implication here that Islam as a theology and set of values is necessarily reflected in what persons calling themselves Muslims do. Therefore, I defend Islam by defending Muslims.

=> The second imputation is easily refuted by reading previous articles posted on the OLO website. Where have I defended the indefensible? Where have I defended Hilaly? Where have I defended idiotic Muslims protesting against a dozen cartoons or against the Pope's somewhat benign statements?

=> What I am suggesting is common sense. The idea that entire groups can be judged by the bad apples amongst them is a sheer nonsense. I don't judge all people with white skin by the fools who met at Cronulla. Nor do I judge all persons of Middle Eastern appearance by the thugs that carried out reprisal attacks after the riot.

=> The simple fact is that group responsibility makes no sense. The only people to whom it does make sense are those who are inclined to bigotry and racism. There are people here who are so inclined. I have tried to engage with them here on a rational basis. However, it has proven impossible because they are determined to hate.

Irfy
"group responsiblity makes no sense"... absolutely right.

I don't actually see that accusation "All Muslims are this or that" in the posts. I do see some personal experiences which are intended to point to gangs, or small groups, though Carniflex tends to generalize more than most.

I hope you have 'got' it by now that my own quarrel is not with "Muslims" (who are largely ignorant of many of their own traditions) but with Islam as a faith idea.

Scrutiny and criticism of my own faith is always welcome. West and Alchemist do not scrutinize and criticise they just rant.

Muslims are as much 'captive' to their imams as Roman Catholics are to the Pope or their bishop, and perhaps to a lesser extent Anglicans to their own higher beaurocratic church structure. But the main link among Muslims seems to be the culture and language as you would have observed in the various factional struggles over Hillali and control of the various mosques.

At my gym there is a 'mohammed' and a 'bobby' (both of whom are Iranian) There was even a 'Saidi' but he hasn't been around for some time. Don't think my vigorous polemics here translate into anti social behavior or attitudes against Muslims in general.

On the other hand, at a kickboxing tournament (won by a valliant Russian) last Sunday there was a crew from "[Name withheld] Full Force Kickboxing" who had all the trappings of "Leb Thugs" and they had the word "SOLDIER" on their backs, and a very mean look.
Zeky Mallah (accused of terrorism, but released/acquitted) in Sydney produced a video where he refers to incarcerated Muslims such as Bassam Hamzy (Murder/14yrs Supermax) and others as 'Soldiers' of Allah. Bassam Hamzy has supposedly 'reverted' a number of other prisoners to 'Islam'.. but one wonders, which version ?

Considering others convicted of terrorism are mentioned sympathetically by Mallah, at the very least, such things are worthy of monitoring.

Irfan, if your Australian them why the prevarication. Why not simply discuss the issues presented by those who have whatever experience and recognize it as an Australian multicultural experience. Why defend one over the other. It's all Australian isn't it? Do you not think that a Lebanese gang can be as harmful to someones life as a "white" gang. Or that a gang of Muslims would be equally harmful to the recipients of their anti-social nonsense?
People who act in groups need to take responsibility for that groups action. Every Christian takes the heat for the overzealous evangelicalism of "born again Christians". It may not be fair but, normal every day Christians don't go around in full defence mode all day long. Many can't stand such behavior themselves and can honestly talk about it with out being a bigot or a hater. Try a little compassion for other people. Try putting yourself in their place with their understanding and their experience. Devaluing their personal experiences and shouting racist isn't going to promote understanding of the Muslim community.

Early on when I was working with some Basilian Brothers one of them had a sign on his wall that read: BE CAREFUL HOW YOU LIVE. YOU MIGHT BE THE ONLY BIBLE MANY PEOPLE WILL EVER READ.
You could amend it to read: YOU MIGHT BE THE ONLY QU'RAN MANY PEOPLE WILL EVER READ. Something for you think about anyway.

Most of these people just want to be reassured that your Muslims aren't plotting to eat their babies with their infidel spoons. One good look at that picture of yours and they might wonder about your diet. :-p

It isn't fair for any group to be judged by its bad apples. And when all the evidence people can present is their personal experiences, they cannot expect others who don't share those experiences to accept their view as gospel.

On the other hand, I agree with the sentiments of aqvarius. Let's all lighten up. Me included.

These forums can be addictive. I might go away and finish that advice I had to write which is due next week ...

C J Morgan,
You claim there has been a sustained and personal attack on Irfan by Bango. I would like you to show me where and when this took place. You have obviously got things screwed up again.

Irfan and I haave a difference of opinion about Leb Muslims but I have never critisized Irfan personally. In fact I have a lot of respect for him. I do not envy him his task in defending Islam. I recently told him that if all muslims used the theology that he said he was taught we would not have a problem and that i appreciate him responding to comments made to his articles. I think both Irfan and Waleed Aly, and the couple of muslim girls that write article on OLO occasionally, are genuine with good intentions. Another muslim person I have a lot of respect for is Fellow_ Human, who posts on OLO.

Irfan,
You queried where I got my info from. I read 4-5 papers each morning, including overseas papers sometimes. This is suplemented with radio and TV news and commentary. I use goole to get info on specific matters of interest, e.g. FGM.I have also contributed to and read submissions, by others, to various government inquiries over the years.

I believe that the instances of anti-social conduct and other matters mentioned earlier show clearly that Leb muslims are incompatable with our society. I say the same applies to croats and serbs, their conduct is simply unacceptable. It is their culture and their race ansd.or religion has nothing to do with my conclusion.

The next question is what to do about it. The only real course I can see is to stop immigration of these groups, to prevent further disharmony. Our social cohesion is too important to leave the issue untouched.

I also think the Government should identify if specific groups are responsible for carrying out FGM here, and similar action be taken because that practice is another that I find completely unacceptable.

Irfan sagt: "The idea that entire groups can be judged by the bad apples amongst them is a sheer nonsense".

But Irfan we already do this to young people and there is barely a squeak from anybody about discrimination. If you are under 25 years of age you have to pay a higher rate for car insurance, mainly because it is judged from statistics that people from this age group are over-represented in car accidents. Given that Muslims were most certainly involved in the world's worst terrorist attack on September 11th, 2001 and have been involved in numerous terrorist attacks since, why would it be 'racist' to have Muslims pay higher airline security taxes than other people who want to fly?

Irfan,
Don't you agree that Snappy Tom gives a good example of a whole group being held accountable for the actions of a few, in relation young people and car insurance. Firearms laws are another I can quote. I bet that even all lawyers have some laws or rules they have to abide by, because of the inappropriate actions of a few.

I accept that there are very few extreme muslims, that want to blow people up, but I believe there are much more than a few Leb muslims that have anti social attitudes. This has been starkly evident for years. Malcolm Fraser made a serious mistake when he, against departmental advice, allowed the first influx of these people here many years ago. Now we have 2nd and 3rd generation Lebs with the same cultural attitudes. The croats and serbs are the same, 2nd and 3rd generations rioting and fighting each other, with hatred that goes back centuries. They may not even know why they hate each other, but its cultural. They are brought up that way.

I think it very reasonable that we say "we have had enough of you Lebs and croats and serbs and we will not allow any more of your mobs to come here". Maybe even deny citizenship to those that are not citizens or born here. Of those that are citizens, well we made a mistake in allowing you to come here and we will just have to live with that and hope their conduct improves in future generations. But not compound the problem by allowing more of these groups to come.

If anyone has any ideas of how to fix these problems, without taking such action, I would like to hear it.

AS i said before, the matter of social cohesion is too important to be ignored.

Hello Irfan - I'm glad the Islam you were taught was about being a constructive citizen. Fortunately you are not alone, as many Muslims have a similar socialisation through their religion.
There are two troubles with this, however. One can really only obtain this constructive socialisation if one ignores the Koran. There is so much intolerance and violence in it that its effect on the reader who actually sees what they are reading is pernicious. Good on you for ignoring your Koran.
The second problem is tied to the first. Those Muslims who do not wish to follow the Koran, including the nasty bits, have no defence against those who wish to force the Koran upon them. If those who do not wish to follow the Koran object to it being forced upon them, they are accused of not being good Muslims, of not being Muslims at all, or worst of all, accused of being jews.
Like you, most Muslims are better than their religion would have them be. Which is just as well, as Islam is prefeudal fascism

Snappy Tom's example comes from the insurance industry. You must remember that insurers base their risk assessments on actuarial modelling based on statistical and demographic results.

If you apply the same demographic and actuarial modelling to crime and anti-social behavious, there would be far more white European migrants banned from migrating to Australia. Why? Because crime statistics consistently show that there are more white European males engaged in criminal activity in Australia than persons from other cultural backgrounds.

For instance, if we applied actuarial modelling to the offence of aggravated sexual assault (of which gang rape is one variety), we would have to ensure that white European migrants were banned from settling in Maitland and Cessnock. Why? Because white European males from these areas commit more gang rapes than any other male group in New South Wales.

Over to you, Snappy Tom.

Irfan posted "....there are more white European males engaged in criminal activity in Australia than persons from other cultural backgrounds...."

Typical of a laywer reasoning, true but misleading. In absolute value there may be more of them engaged in criminal activities because there are more of them (white European males)to begin with in Australia, but proportionately it may not be true.

Irfan,

White Europeans engaged in criminal activities just like other races because there are bad people all round. But Muslims who commit terrorist acts do so because they are driven by an ideology - Islam.

Whilst we can say WW percent of any race is likely to commit a crime within XX years, we may not say YY percent gang rapes are commited by any particular race.

But we CAN indeed recognise that ZZ percent of terrorism are commited by Muslims. (And ZZ is a figure fairly close to 99).

When people recognise that a particular batch of bad apples had all come from the same tree. It becomes possible to judge the tree by the next bad apple falling from it.

Recently :
1. in Nigeria some Muslim pupils lynched a teacher to death.
2. jail terms amounting to little more than a slap-on-the-wrist were handed down to Indonesian Islamists who chopped off heads of christian schoolgirls.
3. a Frenchman plucked out eyes of his wife (who refused sex with him). I knew (at an instance) - that devil must be a Muslim.

You and Fellow_Human are alike - both defend the tree of Islam by steadfastly dissociating evils emanating from Islam from the religion.

In your mind you never defend the indefensible (like Hilaly). But in fact you both do it all the time - defend Islam without fail.

By so doing, even though you are not a bad apple yourself, it is a tainted one nonetheless.

Our individual soul is not tainted by the circumstances of our birth.
Our individual soul is affected by our individual actions and decisions.
How we think and how we behave as individuals affects our countenance and is forever stamped upon each of us. We can be identified.
One Muslim can harm the reputation of all Muslims if the greater portion of Muslims do not denounce that Individuals actions in the name of Islam. It is just the same for Christians, Jews or The Boy Scouts, or Kindergarten schools. Whether it is fair or not does not remove it from reality. All religions, political parties, groups or associations need to take up the responsibility for what is done in their name. That includes the nihilist and cultural Marxist.

Readers may be interested in two articles from Der Spiegel's English service.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,474629,00.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,467360,00.html

Der Spiegel is perhaps the most widely read and influential weekly news magazine in Germany. The relevance for Australia is obvious.

It is NOT bigotry to fear the illiberal influence of contemporary Islam in Australia or Europe.

Nor is it bigotry to fear the "multi-culturalism" can lead to balkanisation with the attendant civil disruption, perhaps low-level civil war,that implies.

Multiculturalism has been an attempt to make a virtue out of a necessity - cheap travel has meant mass movement of people, and now people of many different cultures live in the sort of proximity unbelievable only one hundred years ago.
Because oil is going to become much more expensive, and alternative transport fuels are unlikely to mitigate this substantially, the era of cheap travel may well soon come to an end. Thus the need to make a virtue out of having to live with clashing cultures may well soon come to an end also.
At that point, perhaps some more critical, and assertive, expression of values can be made with more popular support. In anticipation of that, the same critical and assertive expression of values should be made now.
In this light, it is not OK to prevent the protection of Australian law to young Muslim girls who have their genitalia mutilated (female genital mutilation, FGM). In the Netherlands it was proposed to screen young girls in at-risk communities for any incidence of FGM. As in the Netherlands, in Austraila it is only amongst Muslims that this practice is carried out. Sometimes it is done in Australia, sometimes the child is taken overseas. Either way, the protection of Australian law should be extended for these girls, with severe penalties for parents who have this operation performed.
Enacting a rigorous screening program for FGM is a must for ending this assault. Doing so would send a very clear message to Muslims in Australia that the practice is to stop. It would probably also send a very clear message to Muslims thinking of migrating to Australia that the practice is not welcome, and may well discourage them from making the trip.
PS Irfan - you asked for just one Muslim who was responsible for killing 6 million jews. Because of a lack of industrialisation in Muslim lands, one Muslim is unlikely to have been able to match that figure. So how about I compile a list for you of as many of the Muslim-against-dhimmi atrocities that I can find?

A few years back a couple of radical Muslims in Singapore wanted their children to wear headscarves to school. But they were not permitted under schools regulation. The Singapore government didn't buy the Islamists arguments on religious ground, and secularism prevailed.

In China's Xinjiang province the Islamists mounted a campaign for autonomy (with an aim towards independence), much like the Islamists in Kashmir. The aim is to set up an Islamic state. The Chinese stood firm and today, the average Uighur is able to exercise his choice of religion, freed from the shackles of Islam and all her bigotry.

Chechen Islamists took 1,200 children hostage in a school in Beslan, Russia. The crisis ended with about 360 killed. In Chechnya , the Muslims had the same ambitions as the Muslims in China’s Xinjiang province and India’s Kashmir region: they wanted to set up an Islamic state. The Russians dealt firmly and fairly with the insurgents and brought peace to the region.

There is much truth and wisdom in the advice of ex-Islamic jihadist Tawfiq Hamid that the Islamic ideology is based on power, arrogance and superiority to others. And the way to deal with them is to come from an angle of strength and firmness. Love, patience, tolerance and dialogue tried by the loony left has not worked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ho8bSaWL-w

Australian Muslims decided recently that Sheikh Hilali should keep the post of Mufti of Australia that he has held since 1988. Most Muslims in this country are agreeing to the idea that its OK for non-Muslims girls to be raped because they are not covered, ie in Islamic attire.

Phillip Tang's posts are evidence (if any was needed) that racism and bgotry are inherently irrational and based less on fact and more on innuendo. Did Jesus Christ teach you to lie, Philip?

"In absolute value there may be more of them engaged in criminal activities because there are more of them (white European males)to begin with in Australia, but proportionately it may not be true."

=> Phillip, you have failed to provide any statistics. You have made the claim that a higher proportion of Muslims engage in gang-rape than Christians in Australia. And you simply will not be able to find such statistics. Because crime statistics are not collected on the basis of religion.

"Australian Muslims decided recently that Sheikh Hilali should keep the post of Mufti of Australia that he has held since 1988."

=> Again, complete fabrication. A board of imams has been set up, and it has set up a variety of sub-committees which will be formally constituted in 3 months. By that time, the position of Mufti will be redundant. Hilaly is not on any of these committees.

"Most Muslims in this country are agreeing to the idea that its OK for non-Muslims girls to be raped because they are not covered, ie in Islamic attire."

=> Prove it. Provide your evidence from demographic studies of Muslim attitudes toward sexual violence. If you cannot provide such evidence, I'll be happy to declare you a complete liar.

"Der Spiegel is perhaps the most widely read and influential weekly news magazine in Germany. The relevance for Australia is obvious."

=> How is it obvious, Stephany? Are we a German-speaking country? Is our immigration policy identical to that of Germany? Do we have a history of genocide and anti-Semitism? Do we have huge numbers of guest workers whom we don't offer citizenship to on the basis of their ethnicity? Do we have a migration policy that is discriminatory on the basis of race?

Irfan,

Before I reply let me make my position crystal clear. I respect your right to believe what you want. Incitement to violence, NARROWLY defined, aside, I respect your right to SAY whatever you please.

Dealing with Islam specifically, it is a belief system. As such I consider it a LEGITIMATE target for critical analysis, satire, lampooning, scorn and even contempt. So of course are other belief systems such as Christianity, Zionism, Marxism, Fascism and astrology to name but a few.

I reject entirely the notion that a belief system should be immune from satire or scorn simply because it is labeled a religion.

I am aware that the law in Victoria has a different view. I am prepared to face ruin or go to prison to defend our right to speak out on ANY belief system.

With that out of the way, let me spell out the obvious. It appears that Muslims in Germany are attempting to construct some sort of parallel society isolated from native born Germans. This, as I explained, is likely to lead to the balkanisation of society, to civil unrest and even to low level civil wars.

Obviously I would not like to see something similar happen in Australia.

I certainly would not like to see the situation in France replicated here.

Now let me ask you a question Irfan.

Is the CONTEMPORARY Ummah antisemitic?

Note please the form of the question.

As a kafir I am not interested in whether "authentic" Islam is antisemitic.

I am asking whether a large enough majority or plurality of Muslims are antisemitic; not anti-Israel or anti-Zionist but antisemitic in the sense of being antipathetic to Jews, to justify the label antisemitic for the Ummah.

Based on personal encounters with Muslims, including Imams, as well as much research I believe that hatred for Jews is woven into the warp and weft of what is taught as Islam and preached AS ISLAM around the world.

This is what the Big Irf said a few days back: "Snappy Tom's example comes from the insurance industry. You must remember that insurers base their risk assessments on actuarial modelling based on statistical and demographic results".

And from that Big Irf went on to say: "If you apply the same demographic and actuarial modelling to crime and anti-social behaviours, there would be far more white European migrants banned from migrating to Australia. Why? Because crime statistics consistently show that there are more white European males engaged in criminal activity in Australia than persons from other cultural backgrounds".

[Irf – is this more white European males as a proportion, or as a whole??]

Now Big Irf, all I was suggesting was that on the basis of the involvement of those who loudly proclaim their allegiance to Islam, that similar modelling could be applied to the risks in the aviation industry of disastrous hijacks by passengers. (Think September 11, 2001 and “shoe bomber” Richard Reid in 2002). Now, I'm not suggesting that it is a good idea necessarily but it would seem to me to be NO more discriminatory to apply a higher level of airport security tax to intending Muslim passengers than it is to apply higher rates of car insurance to young drivers.

Now it is back over to you once again, Big Irf. … I just love ya, Big Irfy.

Irfan,

Spewing out ad hominem arguments shows that one is getting irrational, and the emotions is clouding the thinking process. Sorry, I am a secularist and religion is only for heaven.

No claim was ever made by me that “a higher proportion of Muslims engage in gang-rape than Christians in Australia”, as you have alleged. It was to show that your disparaging remarks about ‘white European males’ is misleading, because actuarial modeling is based on proportionate values rather than a whole number.

Irfan, who does the 60 members of the Australian National Imams Council who made the decision to reinstate Sheik Hilali as Australia's chief mufti represent? If not the Muslims, then who?

Hello all. Some time ago a poster made the assertion that a majority of those convicted of rape in Denmark were Muslims. The poster was asked for evidence, but I didn't see the reply. I've recently come accross the evidence, as much as it is.
It can be found in "The Myth of Islamic tolerance" edited by Robert Spencer, Prometheus Press, NY, 2005, chapter 25, 'Something Rotten in Denmark?' by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard.
The authors state that, "Muslims are only 4% of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists [and] that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim."
Two members of the Socialist-Radical Liberal government (which lost power at the last election) replied, saying that because 'criminal registers do not record religion' it was impossible to make such a claim.
Pipes and Hedegaard replied that 'Statistics Denmark does, however, produce numbers on migrants from third world countries and their descendents, which it reports make up 5% of the population; and it is known that Muslims make up four-fifths of this element. The latest police figures show that 76.5% of convicted rapists in Copenhagen belong to that 5% of the population, and from that we understate our conclusion.'
The arguement is not watertight. Copenhagen is not the sum total of Denmark, unless the statistics are collected and/ or referred to there. Pipes and Hedegaard assume that because 80% of a population are of a certain make-up, that make-up is replicated in statistics of behaviour and circumstances of that population. I do not think this is a safe way to use statistics (although I'm not a statistician).
This said, that population does appear to be over-represented in the statistics, if not perhaps to the extent that Pipes and Hedegaard assert.
Cheers

"Is the CONTEMPORARY Ummah antisemitic?" ... I am asking whether a large enough majority or plurality of Muslims are antisemitic; not anti-Israel or anti-Zionist but antisemitic in the sense of being antipathetic to Jews, to justify the label antisemitic for the Ummah.

"Based on personal encounters with Muslims, including Imams, as well as much research I believe that hatred for Jews is woven into the warp and weft of what is taught as Islam and preached AS ISLAM around the world."

Stephany, I cannot answer this question because I simply have not done enough research or travelled enough among Muslims. But I think it is an interesting question. As is the question of how many Jews harbour antipathy toward Muslims.

I believe that where mutual antipathy exists, it is largely as a result of the Arab/Israeli dispute. It's interesting that the further Jews and Muslims get from Palestine/Israel, the greater the antipathy seems to be.

However, this is an issue which will have to wait for another forum. I am in the process of drafting an article addressing Muslim attitudes toward Israel and whether these need to be re-visited and changed. Watch this space.

Irfan you have already filled that space. Start another one.

Well, Irfan, you're drafting a piece about Muslim/ Jewish relations? How far back do you intend to go? Back to the first treaty Muhammad made with the local jewish tribes in the vicinity of Medina, which was a clear sign he intended to destroy them when he was able to? Hatred of jews goes back this far in Islam. And as even Bernard Lewis concedes, all but one of the very many battles Muhammad fought were aggressive, not defensive. He had the above-mentioned jews wiped out when he could.
Are you going to explore the possibility that Muhammad was refused acceptance as a jewish prophet, and so turned against the object of his desire and founded his new religion? This would help to explain the similarities between Islam and Judaism.
Are you going to own up the dhimmitude imposed on jews (and christians) by the invading Muslim armies in 640AD in the area called Palestine by the Romans? Are you going to own up to 1400 years of Muslim oppression of jews (and christians) under Muslim control in countries Muslims invaded and occupied? And the fact that both the PLO and Hammas intend to re-impose dhimmitude on the jews in their homeland if they can?
Are you going to explore the clearly disproportionate vilification of Israel in the Muslim world, a sign of transferred self-hatred at the position Muslims find themselves in nowadays?
I look forward to your article.

Irfan,

Please do not legitimize Islam yet again with another article, without dealing with a core issue.

Muhammand's Islam is nothing more than a hoax that should have been snuffed out during it's embryonic stage. Unfortunately it expanded into a monster, a scourge of humanity that can no longer be contained.

From my earlier post:

<< The Jews and Christians have their religions and so Muhammad wanted to also establish a religion for the Arabs, the arch-enemy of Jews. There were untold personal benefits for Muhammad to so do.
So he started telling people he met Angel Gabriel and then the hoax grew and took on a life of it's own... Today this hoax has a respectable name - Islam.
It is laughable Muslims' claim that Muhammad's illiteracy is proof Allah must had put words in his mouth. I am sure Muhammad, iliterate he might be, must'd been a very communicative person. You won't expect someone who could successfully command an army to be any less than being cunning, manipulative and communicative (and violent, too) >>

Perhaps you can deal with this question:

What is your proof that Muhammad's Islam is not a hoax?

( For teachings not based on the truth is futile )

So there you have it, dear readers. I write an article about Barack Obama and US politics. And GZTan ends the discussion with claims Islamic theology is a hoax.

If pain persists, see your doctor.

Irfan,

Is anyone here really interested in issues surrounding Barack Obama?

Assuming you are correct an author should rightfully dictates theme of a discussion thread, then I suggest perhaps you could write an article like, "I believe Islam is not a hoax."

Afterall Muslims do not even consider such an fundamental but vital issue, and it may sparkle an interest like none others.

-- End of Discussion --

Let’s hear what Irfan the Islamist apologist has to say.

Perhaps he has received special insights from Allah regarding the killing of the 2 million Christians by the Muslims in Turkey at the turn of the 20th century or even the genocide going on of the black African Muslims by the Arab Muslims in Sudan.

Please don't keep us waiting.

Irfan,
Was that you in the audience, second row, on "difference of opimion" last night.

What I cannot work out is why most people in that type of debate seem to mix up overseas terrorism with social problems we have here.

To my mind they are two entirely different issues. We have not as yet expweienced extreme muslim terrorism here, but we have some social ptoblems with some groups that need addressing.

Irfan wrote:

"I am in the process of drafting an article addressing Muslim attitudes toward Israel and whether these need to be re-visited and changed."

Unless this is a PR exercise for local consumption you're wasting your time. The Muslim world will never accept the legitimacy of a Jewish homeland in the heart of Dar-ul-Islam. Nor will they ever accept what they consider to be the illegal displacement of the Palestinians, and their descendants, who fled in 1947-8.

I am not commenting on the rights and wrongs, or even the sincerity, of the Muslim attitude. I am describing what is.

If the Jews want their homeland they are going to have to accept that the best they can hope for from their neighbours is a "cold peace" punctuated by episodic wars. The Muslim world will never stop trying to undermine, deligitimate and ultimately destroy Israel.

The strategic tide is moving against Israel. Within a decade Muslims will form a powerful and growing voting bloc throughout the EU. It is a safe bet that European Muslim voters will demand a robust attitude towards Israel as the minimum price for their support.

Most Jews have yet to come to grips with the realities I've described.

Irfan wrote:

"As is the question of how many Jews harbour antipathy toward Muslims."

This is a bit of disingenuous poppycock.

In terms of people who practice their religion, Islam may now be the most powerful belief system on Earth. For good or ill, almost certainly the latter, Islam is going to be one of the forces shaping the future. Hence my interest in it. It matters what the Ummah thinks and what influences it.

Jews are a tiny minority. Unless, like Hilaly, you believe in Jewish conspiracy theories, their influence in shaping the future will be negligible.

Individual Jews may play an enormous role – consider the likes of Albert Einstein, Andrew Fire, Sidney Brenner, Daniel Kahneman and Steven Weinberg. But as a group they don't have the numbers.

"Nor will they ever accept what they consider to be the illegal displacement of the Palestinians, and their descendants, who fled in 1947-8."

Stephany, tell us what your version of the Palestinian flight from their homes was. Do you think the Stern Gang committed terrorist attacks in Palestinian villages? And are Israeli historians like Benny Morris telling lies?

Irfan wrote,
"I am in the process of drafting an article addressing Muslim attitudes toward Israel and whether these need to be re-visited and changed. Watch this space."

I watched, and am still watching. Where's your article?

Hi folks please give Irfan a chance to write.

Irfan,

So far as I can see, many fled simply because they anticipated that battles were going to be fought around where they lived. If I lived on what I thought was a future battlefield I'd get out of the way too.

Others probably fled because they feared a massacre at the hands of the Jews. After all, Arabs had massacred Jews on a number of occasions. The Arabs would have thought the Jews would respond in kind. Jewish groups would have done nothing to allay their fears.

There probably were some atrocities committed by Jewish factions. These would have stoked Arab fears of a massacre. My understanding is that the Irgun faction that attacked Deir Yassin exaggerated the death toll in order to scare the Arabs in surrounding villages.

However it happened, the present day reality is this.

--On the one hand, Muslims are not going to give up on what they consider to be a Palestinian right of return.

--On the other hand, no Israeli government of whatever stripe can concede a Palestinian right of return because to do so would erase the Jewish nature of Israel.

Therefore the issue is insoluble short of war.

Which brings me back to my original point. The Muslim world will not cease in its efforts to undermine, deligitimate and ultimately destroy Israel.

I think you can figure this out as well as I can Irfan. My guess is that your projected article is a bit of PR intended for local consumption. You will present the "reasonable Muslim" trying to reach a compromise with those pestiferous Jews.

Note that about half of all Jewish Israelis are descendants of Jews are who fled Arab countries, and their descendants. Understandably most have no wish to have a right of return to any Arab country.

Let me make my position clear. My sympathies are with Jewish Israelis. But, given strategic realities, I do not see how Israel can survive as a Jewish homeland.

"My guess is that your projected article is a bit of PR intended for local consumption. You will present the "reasonable Muslim" trying to reach a compromise with those pestiferous Jews."

Stephany, do you think I write purely for PR reasons? You haven't met me. Yet you seem prepared to rush to make this kind of judgment.

Do you think Muslims are genetically programmed to hate Jews?

Dear Banjo

As was exclusively revealed on last night's edition of "The Chaser's War on Everything", Channel Ten will soon be programming "The Big Muslim". I understand that Irfan has got a very good chance to appear on it, especially if he was the bloke in the second row on Monday night's "Difference of Opinion".

Irfan wrote:

"Do you think Muslims are genetically programmed to hate Jews?"

Leave out "genetically" and you're right. You claim (incredibly) that you do not know whether the contemporary Ummah is antisemitic. Get real Irfan! The Ummah is drenched in hate literature about Jews.

For an example of some of the appalling antisemitic material that appears on Arab TV see memri.org and memritv.org. A recent amusing example has Samir 'Ubeid calling the Nobel Prize Racist.

"Why," Samir wails, "has the prize been awarded to 167 Jews, and to only four Arabs out of 380 million Arabs and all four are considered traitors?"

Similar examples can be found in the media in many Muslim countries.

Here's how Bernard Lewis' explained the rise of Muslim antisemitism:

"Jews in traditional Islamic societies experienced the normal constraints ...of minority status. …In most significant respects they were better off under Muslim than Christian rule…"

"....where hostile stereotypes of Jews existed …. They tended to be contemptuous and dismissive rather than suspicious and obsessive."

"… at the time of the Dreyfus trial in France … Muslim comments usually favoured the persecuted Jew against his Christian persecutors."

"… from 1933 Nazi Germany … made a concerted and on the whole REMARKABLY SUCCESSFUL effort to disseminate European-style anti-Semitism in the Arab world."

(THE CLASH BETWEEN ISLAM AND MODERNITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST: WHAT WENT WRONG. pp153-4, emphasis added)

From the Arab world it spread to the wider Ummah.

"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the crusades."

Azam Pasha, Arab League Secretary General, 1948. He was referring to the imminent invasion of Israel by the Arab armies.

"..Then the rocks and tree would call: oh Muslim, oh servant of God! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him..."

The most widely quoted hadith in contemporary Muslim media.

If you persist in denying the antisemitism of the contemporary Ummah you're onto a loser Irfan. The evidence is overwhelming. I've interviewed a number of Imams. Nearly all made antisemitic comments.

Stephany,

"The evidence is overwhelming. I've interviewed a number of Imams. Nearly all made antisemitic comments."

Which imams have you interviewed? In what context?

LOL Irfan, evade answering the substantive issues I raised. However I'll humour you for now. I interviewed 5 Imams, 3 in South Africa and 2 in Victoria. I got the two Victorians by phoning the Islamic Centre in Victoria and asking for some contacts. Of the 5, four made overtly antisemitic comments. Two were Holocaust deniers.

The Imams were interviewed in connection with research others and I are conducting on the impact of rising Muslim populations on "Western" societies. One of the negative effects we forecast is a rise in antisemitism.

My associates also interviewed Imams – mainly in the US and UK – with similar results.

I should emphasise that in concluding the Ummah is drenched in antisemtic media my fellow researchers and I are not relying on any one source.

See for example:

http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S1

View the clip but: WARNING: THIS IS SICKENING

You asked whether I though Muslims were genetically programmed to hate Jews. Here's what Iranian Political Analyst Majid Goudarzi has to say about Jewish "genetic programming."

"They [Jews] are genetically bloodthirsty and criminal, and therefore, they cannot give up their criminal character."

http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1391

In truth few serious researchers doubt that the Ummah is antisemitic. Here are two online links:

http://www.meforum.org/article/396

http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-tossavainen-f05.htm

One of the more distressing aspects of the rise of Muslim antisemitism in Western countries is the extent of the denial and even censorship when this topic is raised. See for example:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2034780,00.html

How about a substantive response Irfan? One that doesn't conflate the frightened reactions of 13 million Jews – all that's left – with the thunderous and bloodthirsty litany of hate that pours forth from the 1.3 billion strong Ummah.


PS:

In my previous post I mentioned Samir 'Ubeid's complaints about the racist Nobel prize. See:

http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1313

In fairness to al-Jazeera I should add that they had another participant on the program who opposed Samir 'Ubeid's view. His contribution is not included in the MEMRI clip.

What could be fairer than that? Presenting both sides of the argument.

LOL

Even The Chasers have a hard time competing with Arab / Iranian TV.

I would say it is sick too Stephany, but it is nothing that would be unexpected;

Did people know that Yassar Arafat was the Nephew of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in WW11 days?

That goes a long way to explaining some things and dispels some Post modern myths about Islam.

"I interviewed 5 Imams, 3 in South Africa and 2 in Victoria. I got the two Victorians by phoning the Islamic Centre in Victoria and asking for some contacts."

5 imams. Wow, that is a really representative sample of imams. I guess Muslims only live in Victoria and South Africa.

Seriously, Stephany, you need to do better than that.

You mention you phoned the "Islamic Centre in Victoria". Which one? There are over 100 in Melbourne alone.

Have you considered doing an elementary course in statistics?

Also, you mentioned you were doing research with soem colleagues. Was this research conducted under the auspices of an institution? What was the name of the institution?

I presume that, given you are prepared to make serious allegations and cast serious aspersions, you will be prepared to be up front about which organisation or group you belong to ...

Irfan
Stephany is making some telling points which you seem to be side-stepping.

If you are a moderate Muslim you don’t need to carry the can for the extremists, why don’t you come clean & say -yes there is an element/current within Islam ( or, if you prefer, the Islamic community) which has that view - but I repudiate it?

LOL Irfan, yet more evasion.

The members of our research group belong to various bodies. However, this project is our private initiative. It grew informally.

I actually called the Islamic Council (not Centre) in Victoria. Apologies for the error. You can find their website at:

http://www.icv.org.au/index.shtml

I was never under the illusion that five Imams was a representative sample.

Most of us, including me, are well versed in statistics.

As I was careful to emphasise, we relied on multiple sources when we concluded that antisemitism was endemic in the Ummah.

Note that in most European countries increasing antisemitic incidents correlate with a rising Muslim population. In many cases the additional antisemitic incidents can be traced back to Muslims.

Irfan your evasiveness and RETREAT INTO SARCASM is fairly typical of what we found when we confronted Muslims with some of the negative aspects of Muslim migration. We call it the "octopus manoeuvre." (Do you know what an octopus does when cornered, Irfan?)

This exchange is pointless. I'm not going to continue unless you post a substantive response to the issue of antisemitism in the Ummah.

FOR OTHER READERS interested in the fate of kafirs (unbelievers) under Muslim rule from an historical perspective I recommend:

The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims by Andrew Bostom.

See:

http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Jihad-Islamic-Holy-Non-Muslims/dp/1591023076/ref=sr_1_1/104-4157783-1228744?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175902882&sr=1-1

Bostom has also written "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism" but I have not read that yet.

For a scholarly analysis of relations between Muslims and kafirs in the Middle-East I STRONGLY recommend, "What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis."

See:

http://www.amazon.com/What-Went-Wrong-Between-Modernity/dp/0060516054/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-4157783-1228744?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175903171&sr=1-1

For an understanding of what really ails the Middle-East the Arab Human Development Reports, 2002 & 2003 are "must reads." The reports were published under the auspices of the UN. They explain the reasons for the abject economic failure of non-oil producing Arab countries.

See:

http://hdr.undp.org/reports/detail_reports.cfm?view=600

For a sense of what goes on in the Arab and Iranian media refer to:

www.memri.org

and

www.memritv.org

MEMRI's evidence was used by a British Parliamentary committee investigating antisemitism.

Irfan,

Where's your sense of balance?

Did Muhammad produced a sample taken from heaven, a list of research statistics to prove your Allah is not a hoax?

Where is your proof that your faith is not based on a hoax, (that grows bigger with every expansion of Islam)?

Why do you expect substantive fact from anyone when you cannot even deal with my simple question, so fundamental and vital to Muslims?

I'm sorry Stephany but Irfan Yusuf is totally incapable of making "a substantive response" to the issues you have raised. I think it is part of his character. Instead there will be plenty of side-stepping, evasion or otherwise complete silence.

At this date I am still waiting for a response to a comment that I left on his "Misreported, misconstrued, mistranslated, misunderstood" article that was carried by OLO on February 23rd. My comment was left on Monday, 5 March 2007 at 10:27:12 AM.

Actually Irfan is dreadfully inconsistent in his approach. He is quite happy to spray all Western Christians with the following comment - "Western Christians have for more than 2,000 years been programmed to hate Jews". [His comment left on the above article on Wednesday, 28 February 2007 at 10:32:33 PM]. Yet on the other hand he leaps to defend the Ummah from charges of ant-Semitism even when there is overwhelming evidence that it is widespread TODAY in Muslim-dominated countries.

Is there a word or words to describe people like Irfan? You betcha – one of them begins with H and ends with E and sounds a bit like a doctor’s oath. But the one I prefer is charlatan.

LOL Savage Pencil,

Irfan's behaviour is all too typical of what we found when confronting Muslims. We dubbed it the "octopus manoeuvre" because an octopus, when cornered, squirts out an inky black fluid to hide behind. Much of Irfan's writing is reminiscent of an octopus' black ink. It's designed to hide rather than illuminate.

I see Irfan's family hails from Karachi. Thought this might be of interest:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/Pakistan.html

Quote:

"The media in Pakistan have provided extensive coverage of the political and personal career of the cricket star Imran Khan. Since Khan's marriage in 1996 to Jemima Goldsmith, daughter of a British industrialist and politician, Sir James Goldsmith, Khan was accused of acting as an agent of the "Jewish lobby." Jemima Khan publicly denied that her parents were Jewish. An Egyptian newpaper distributed in Pakistan accused Khan of receiving large sums of money for his election campaign from the "Jewish lobby." Following complaints from Khan, the deputy editor of the newspaper retracted the story and published an apology."

Here's what Imran himself had to say on ABC.

"I did not lose this election , or had a bad result compared with what we might have got because of Islam. The main reason was the opposition very cleverly exploited my marriage and the Jewish conspiracy was really exploited I this country."

And

"Actually I expected most of the sleaze. I expected the Jewish conspiracy, because after all these were the two things they could attack me on."

See:

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/stories/s400602.htm

LOL Irfan. Tell us again you cannot comment on antisemitism in the Ummah. At least in Pakistan belief in a Jewish conspiracy seems rife enough to cost Imran Khan many votes if not the entire election.

Stephany, G Z Tan and Savage Pencil,
I have some respect for Irfan and do not envy his task of defending Islam. He has in the past critisized Sheik Hilali, that That sheik Faiz Mahommed and the mob that undertook the retalitory attacks after Cronulla. He also does respond to comments to his articles.

However I share your frustration in getting a direct answer for questions put to him. He usually offers a strawman for the questioner to chase. Try as I might, he would not agree that we have a problem with the anti-social behaviour of Leb muslims. He wants more statistical evidence even though the problems have been there for many years. The behaviour of the Leb muslims must be abhorent to Irfan as to all others. I even asked him for any suggestions but got no responce. You can see all this earlier in this thread.

I do not see what can be done about it. One can only put forward ones opinion and leave it at that. Good luck!

I do have some respect for Irfan (especially when comparing him with Fellow_Human):

1. he writes articles, that naturally makes him a "target".
2. importantly, he responds to comments (except mine of course, but that's another matter)
3. his evasiveness is crude. So I find him a rather simple man (and do not regard him very deceptive)
4. I do not find him patronising. (whereas Fellow_Human makes me spews)

Fellow_Human's stated "mission" is to address "misconception" about Islam and I know him as a very closed-minded person.

"The members of our research group belong to various bodies. However, this project is our private initiative. It grew informally."

=> Perhaps you could start by naming the 'various bodies'. You can then name the imams you interviewed and the mosques where these imams preached.

"Irfan's behaviour is all too typical of what we found when confronting Muslims."

=> It seems you entered your research with a pre-conceived notion of what is 'typical' Muslim behaviour.

"This exchange is pointless. I'm not going to continue unless you post a substantive response to the issue of antisemitism in the Ummah."

=> How can I provide a response when you refuse to provide details of what evidence you have, who you have interviewed and which organisations took part in the research? All you have provided are a few quotes from Imran Khan and a few links to groups and thinktanks that repressent the Israeli far-Right (such as MEMRI, Daniel Pipes' organisation etc).

=> Do you expect me to take Daniel Pipes seriously when just about nobody in the field of Middle Eastern Studies takes him seriously? Or would you also expect me to take David Irving seriously in the field of Holocaust studies?

=> I think the real evasion comes from your end. Why aren't you prepared to reveal which organisations were involved in your research? Why not start by naming which organisation you represent? You know who I am. Who are you? Why aren't you prepared to say who you are and what interests you represent?

I don't know about anybody else at this forum but I represent the cats of Australia ... who have made their choice and it ain't Sheik Taj Al-Din Hilali.

LOL,

More black ink of the octopus, Irfan.

Irfan mentions Daniel Pipes. His scholarship on Islam is sound but he is zealously pro-Zionist. In my view this often warps his judgment. It leads him to embrace George Bush who is, in my view, unhinged.

Unfortunately there has been a reluctance to tackle the issue of Muslim antisemitism. Anyone who has any attachment to a university social sciences department will understand why. The McCarthy-ism of the left means that anyone who even raises the issue could suffer serious career damage. This is, of course, why I shall not reveal the names of my collaborators.

To see ONE EXAMPLE of the strength of Left McCarthy-ism consider the following article from the Education Guardian.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,2034778,00.html

The Guardian at least covered the story albeit giving it as favourable a spin as it could. (It's only a procedural issue) Most of the mainstream media ignored Leeds University's outrageous suppression of free speech.

For a more straightforward account see of the incident, see:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article1517364.ece

Here is Kuntzel's own version of events.

http://www.matthiaskuentzel.de/contents/is-there-still-room-for-debate

Quote:

"Should you invite him [Matthias Küntzel] in the future," says a letter from the head of the university’s German department to those who invited me, "the university would look closely at the proposed content of the talk. I do not see this as censorship. The university has clear legal requirements to do this, designed to guarantee free speech but also to promote respect and tolerance".

In other words, discussing an aspect of Muslim intolerance is "intolerant." This is the sort of twisted logic to be found in universities today.

Irfan, of course, understands this perfectly. He can hide behind my refusal to reveal more specifics about my collaborators because he knows I would risk damaging them if I made their names public. As is the case with homosexuality, I believe that the decision on whether to out yourself should be a personal one.

"Unfortunately there has been a reluctance to tackle the issue of Muslim antisemitism. Anyone who has any attachment to a university social sciences department will understand why."

=> Yes, it's all those nasty lefties. The reds still hide under the bed.

"Irfan, of course, understands this perfectly. He can hide behind my refusal to reveal more specifics about my collaborators because he knows I would risk damaging them if I made their names public. As is the case with homosexuality, I believe that the decision on whether to out yourself should be a personal one."

=> You and your "collaborators" (if they exist outside your imagination) are conducting 'research' on the basis of isolated media reports, defective translations and interviews with 5 imams from 2 countries. Your sample is so small as to be meaningless. I'm not sure if statistical and demographic principles are being used in your 'research'.

=> Your refusal to identify yourself makes your claims even more suspect. You are casting aspersions on 1.2 billion people spread across all countries on the earth. You expect me to accept your aspersions on the basis of work by anonymous researchers interviewing 5 imams.

=> Unless you are prepared to reveal your identity and that of your so-called researchers, I'd be safe in regarding you as yet another internet fraud.

Irfan, you are a distinctly unpleasant person. As was noted by Savage Pencil just a few posts earlier you are quite content to spray vitriol at all Western Christians yet leap to the defence of the Muslim Ummah even when there is clear and unchallenged evidence that anti-Semitism is alive and kicking today in many Muslim-dominated countries. You have no credibility whatsoever.

LOL, Irfan, more evasion.

Readers should consider the following:

I have asked Irfan to comment on anti-Semitism in the Ummah, not on our research. His response is:

"Stephany, I cannot answer this question because I simply have not done enough research or travelled enough among Muslims."

Oh really? Someone who sets himself up as a spokesperson for Muslims cannot comment on something as topical as that? Is this believable?

I think the incident at Leeds University indicates the strength of Left McCarthy-ism. I don’t need to respond to the "reds under the bed" nonsense.

Ifran wrote:

"You are casting aspersions on 1.2 billion people spread across all countries on the earth."

I am questioning some aspects of a belief system that has a powerful grip on many people. It is a legitimate and, indeed, important line of inquiry. Islam is going to be an important force shaping the future. We need to know what we're in for.

Or does the fact that Muslims number 1.2 billion mean a critical inquiry into Islam is verboten?

I make no bones about my belief that the Ummah is antisemitic, that what is taught and preached as Islam in 2007 is heavily laced with antisemitism. I have given some reasons for my belief. Where possible I have provided links to sources. That's the best I can do here. Postings on an internet forum are not, cannot be, definitive scholarly papers.

Irfan's responses include sarcasm, ad hominem attacks, distorting what I wrote, emotional outbursts and an attempt to delegitimate a perfectly valid line of research on the grounds that it would offend 1.2 billion people – like certain cartoons perhaps?

Readers will note that Irfan has done everything EXCEPT address the issue.

For readers interested in educating themselves on the history of anti-Semitism, including Muslim antisemitism, I recommend:

Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred by Robert S. Wistrich

It's a little dated but still worth reading.

I would give more sources but I'm near my word limit.

For a flavour of what's being said in the Arab / Iranian media see http://www.memri.org

>>You are casting aspersions on 1.2 billion people spread across all countries on the earth.>>

Muslims make up one fifth of humanity and the proportion is rising. There are substantial Muslim minorities in many Western countries including Australia. That is precisely why Muslim attitudes matter.

I appreciate that Islam is not some sort of monolith and we cannot speak of "The Muslim View." That being said, it does appear to me that there is a strong strain of Jew hatred that runs through present day Islam. Being Jewish I am more than a little apprehensive of what this may mean for my children and grandchildren. Will they be able to live out their lives in Australia?

Irfan's tactics in this debate do nothing to reassure me.

There is a deeper issue here. I'm not going to go into the "Is Islam compatible with secular democracy" debate. Plainly it isn't. No proselytising religion is. Witness the attempts to have creationism taught in schools or the prohibition of gay marriage.

Until recently there was a consensus among the moderates on the secular left and right that secular democracy needed to be defended from the encroachments of religion. When Catholic Bishops objected to the display of "Piss Christ" in Melbourne many prominent left pundits rushed to the defence of the gallery on freedom of speech grounds.

That consensus has now been broken. As the cartoon case illustrates, the left is falling over itself to appease Islam. It seems to have started with the weak response to the Salman Rushdie fatwa.

Those that do defend free speech tend to redefine it in such a way as to meet the demands of Islam and other religious groups.

Most disturbing has been the conflation of attacks on a religion with racism. There is no such thing as a race of Muslims. Of course many pundits use attacks on Islam as a cover for racism. So do many people use attacks on Israel as a cover for THEIR racism.

<< Readers will note that Irfan has done everything EXCEPT address the issue.>>

Irfan,

Please do not contribute another article until you address my point that Islam is a "1.2 billion strong" HOAX.

I cannot understand how a consistently evasive non-intellect, so lacking in credibility like yourself, can be allowed to post numerous articles on OLO as if your views are to be seriously regarded.

You are afterall a lawyer, aren't you?

Irfan, welcome to Aussie Democracy, aint it grand!

At the turn of the 20th century Australia was mainly of English and Irish background. I recall, my father telling me that as he grew up in the 20's and 30's, the Irish were regarded as lower class because of their religion and the less than favourable view of Australia's super power protector, Britain. In fact, by the 30's the Irish community had a particularly vocal religious leader in Archbishop Mannix. He railed againts the British continually and the establishment was highly displeased with him. To add insult to injury, he started to insist on seperate schools for his flock and built church's all over the country. To top it off, he started to establish medical facilities, social clubs and eventually, political platforms for the flock.
I find it interesting that the conservatives who tried to stop the Irish, failed. They later failed to stop the Italians and eastern europen immigrants and finally the Vietnamese. In fact they are loosers and for those Muslim Australians, stick it out; they always fail and eventually, they will take out their insecurity on some other group.

"I am questioning some aspects of a belief system that has a powerful grip on many people. It is a legitimate and, indeed, important line of inquiry. Islam is going to be an important force shaping the future. We need to know what we're in for."

=> Your language/terminology suggests that either you are plagiarising from Melanie Phillips or you are Melanie Phillips.

=> Like Phillips, you are claiming to question a 'belief system', presuming there is only one form of Islam. This assumption in itself is false.

"Someone who sets himself up as a spokesperson for Muslims cannot comment on something as topical as that?"

=> Stephany/Melanie, provide evidence that I've made any claim to represent any group.

"I have given some reasons for my belief. Where possible I have provided links to sources. That's the best I can do here. Postings on an internet forum are not, cannot be, definitive scholarly papers."

=> My e-mail address is freely available from my blog. You are welcome to e-mail me and provide full references and sources. If you are too ashamed to tell us of your identity, you can send a private e-mail.

"Readers will note that Irfan has done everything EXCEPT address the issue."

=> How so? I've admitted there's anti-Semitism among Muslims, just as there's anti-Muslim hatred among Jews and Christians. That someone like Raphael Israeli is invited by a mainstream Jewish educational institution speaks volumes, just as the fact that leaders like Mahathir Mohamad and Ahmedinejad could make infantile statements about Jews speaks volumes.

=> What you are asking me to acknowledge is that 21st century Islamic theology ensures that virtually all Muslims are anti-Semitic. To do that, you need to prove (a) that Islamic sacred law itself is a source of anti-Semitism; and (b) that Muslims as a whole implement this sacred law.

=> What you need to do is provide evidence. If this forum is not enough, submit an article to OLO. If you have the evidence, present it. If you are to paint 1.2 billion people with one brush, show us your true colours.

LOL Irfan, I've been called many things but never "Melanie Phillips."

For interested readers here is a link to Phillips' website.

http://www.melaniephillips.com/

I have at times introduced myself as the racist, bigoted, antisemitic, islamophobic, Nazi, commie bitch, those being a sample of the names I have been called.

I am not altogether simpatico with Phillips. While my sympathies lie with Israeli Jews I have doubts about the Zionist project. Phillips is a fierce Zionist.

If you think Phillips and Professor Israeli are extreme, what do you make of Rear Admiral Chris Parry and the British Ministry of Defence?

See:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article673612.ece

Quote:

Europe, including Britain, could be undermined by large immigrant groups with little allegiance to their host countries — a "reverse colonisation" as Parry described it. These groups would stay connected to their homelands by the internet and cheap flights. The idea of assimilation was becoming redundant, he said.

AND

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2053020,00.html

Quote:

Resentment among young people in the face of unrepresentative regimes "will find outlets in political militancy, including radical political Islam whose concept of Umma, the global Islamic community, and resistance to capitalism may lie uneasily in an international system based on nation-states and global market forces", the report warns. The effects of such resentment will be expressed through the migration of youth populations and global communications, encouraging contacts between diaspora communities and their countries of origin.
Tension between the Islamic world and the west will remain, and may increasingly be targeted at China "whose new-found materialism, economic vibrancy, and institutionalised atheism, will be an anathema to orthodox Islam".

I was born in 1971 so I should make it to 2035. Think you'll make it to 2035 Irfan? We can see whether MoD got it right. ;-)

SUBJECT CHANGE

I posted a table here:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=518

The data was extracted from:

http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=248 (Views of Christians, Jews and Muslims)

I think it safe to say that Jews are not flavour of the month in Dar ul Islam.

I won't wish you a happy Easter or Passover but I hope you've enjoyed the long weekend break.

Irfan

Islam and the Koran are rabidly antisemitic and always have been.

Here is but one reference for you to enlighten yourslef

http://www.newenglishreview.org/print.cfm?pg=custpage&frm=6628&sec_id=6628

Perhaps you could follow this with a read of Mahartirs Mohammeds opening speech to the OIC in KL a few years ago, and he is supposedly and international statesman.

Irfan,
I do hope that you are going to point out to the last post that it it was christian nations that killed 9 million Jews in the Second War. Secondly, that the New Testament is also anti semitic with a constructed myth that the Jews were responsible for the death of Joshua when it was clearly the Romans. Finally, if the writer finds exhortations to religious conflict disturbing, he should not listen to George Bush on the subject of his crusader wars.
But hell mate, do something about this cleric. Mind you, the same mob who are going for you, were telling us Irish in the 1930's that we should do something about our cleric, the good archbishop.
Happy Easter!

"To do that, you need to prove (a) that Islamic sacred law itself is a source of anti-Semitism; and (b) that Muslims as a whole implement this sacred law."

Netab, all I was doing was responding to the point made by Irfan himself.

a) Is certainly true.
b) Is common but not universal

But of course it is not the only source of anti semitism

Irfan,

With all due respect you are evading the issue.

I've cut and pasted Stephanie's table here:

UNfavourable attitudes towards:

Country......Christians...Jews.......Muslims

US..............6%..........7%........... 22%
Canada..........9%.........11%............26%
UK..............6%..........6%............14%
France.........15%.........16%............34%
Germany........13%.........21%............47%

Spain..........10%.........20%............37%
Netherlands....15%.........11%............51%
Russia..........3%.........26%............36%
Poland..........5%.........27%............30%
Turkey.........63%.........60%............11%
Pakistan.......58%.........74%.............2%

Indonesia......38%.........76%.............1%
Lebanon.........7%.........99%.............7%
Jordan.........41%........100%.............1%
Morocco........61%.........88%.............3%
China..........47%.........49%............50%

India..........19%.. ......17%............43%

We Jews are a tiny minority in Australia. As a proportion of the population we will decline while the proportion of Muslims will grow. If the figures for Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Jordan and Morocco are at all indicative of the attitudes of Australian Muslims to Australian Jews then the future for Australian Jewry looks grim

Stephany/tortasaurus, if you have an argument to make, do so by writing an article for OLO.

I notice the Pew figures only provide attitudes of four Muslim-majority states. How many Muslim-majority states exist in the world?

And what would be the attitudes of Israeli Jews toward Arabs (Muslim and Christian)? Are these attitudes reflected in the Jewish diaspora attitudes in countries such as Australia?

Any attempt to answer these questions requires thorough research. Certainly anecdotal evidence backed up by limited polling suggests Muslims and Jews seem to hate each other. Certainly the support given by Jewish groups to racists like Israeli and Pipes suggests levels of hatred at extreme levels.

It seems, Stephany, that you are avoiding the provision of your research methodology and findings here at OLO. What is your reason for this? Don't you want people here to know who you are? Don't you want your claims to be examined and tested? Do you regard being published on OLO as being below your dignity?

Remember the figures. 1.2 billion. You cannot prove such a heterogenous group has certain attitudes without far-reaching and comprehensive research. Instead of making bogus claims and throwing snippets of evidence, present the entirety of your evidence and the methodology used to obtain that evidence.

If you are not pretend to do so, I can only assume that you are an intellectual fraud.

There is none so blind as he who will not see, and none so deaf as he who will not hear. Irfan is suffering from a denial syndrome. However, this isn’t the case with fellow Pakistani (a Malaysian by nationality), Syed Akbar Ali, writer of the book “The collapse of the Islamic Countries”.

In the introductory page he wrote,

“The Islamic countries have collapsed- economically, politically, and even socially. …I have produced or referred to media reports, books, research findings and speeches by Islamic leaders which clearly proves the same. And for those who deny that the Islamic countries are collapsing I have dedicated a whole chapter to the deniers.”(pg v)

Giving Pakistan, as an example of a failed state, Syed Akbar Ali mentioned how the Islamists in Pakistan belittled fellow Pakistani Dr. Abdus Salam for having won the Nobel prize in physics just because he is a Muslim from the Qadianis denomination and called him a “mule”.
“….the Qadianis are great allies of the Jewish/Zionist movement. They cooperate with each other in spitting out venomous propaganda against Muslims on an international base. Zionism is a sworn enemy of Islam since its inception. History testifies that they damaged the Islamic polity by motivating separatist movements. This time they have a protagonist in Qadianism and a ready mule to ride on. The award to Dr. Abdus Salam Qadiani is in pursuance of a common cause of the antagonists of Islam.”

http://www.irshad.org/brochures/absalam.php (A glimpse into Qadiani-Jewish objectives)

{continue}

In chapter 5 (Denial-The fuel of falsehood), Syed Akbar Ali went on

“A lot of Muslim people will most likely get upset with this book. This is a certainty. This is because they are in a state of denial. They feel embarrassed to admit that the problem lies in their religion.” (pg. 85)

So obviously when the Islamists hate anything, the first thing that comes to their mind is to label it as “Jewish”, “Zionist”, “Christian”, “Western”, etc. In southern Thailand, the Muslims are killing and beheading innocent Buddhists. The word ‘Buddhists’ is not even mentioned in the Koran yet the Islamists said, “We will kill all Thai Buddhists.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6260245.stm

It is not difficult to see what Islamists will do to Jews and Christians if they gain an upper hand since the Koran condemns Jews and Christians.( Surah 4.160; 5.51; 9.30). Not surprisingly, Islamists deny that 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis and 2 million Christians died at the hands of the Muslims in Turkey.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm
http://www.anc.net.au/more_turkey_denies_more_recognise.htm

Irfan would have you run round in circles doing “research and gathering more data” to prove that Islamist hate many things unIslamic. Reading the book by Muslim secularist Syed Akbar Ali will give one a much better insight into a Islamist’s psyche rather than reading articles by Islamist apologist pouring out almost-truths and poorly reasoned arguments.

Irfan,

You are becoming very nauseating.

You wrote: << Remember the figures. 1.2 billion. You cannot prove such a heterogenous group has certain attitudes without far-reaching and comprehensive research.>>

If you know anything about research statistics then you have just told a lie.

If I toss a coin, there is only a 50% chance that my guess (either a head or a tail) is correct.
However, if I were to toss the same coin 1.2 billion times, the following logical statement will certainly be true: "Nearly 50% of the coin tosses would be head (or tail)."

If I grap hold of any Muslim on the street, whether that Muslim is a "moderate" Muslim or a "radical" Muslim, I will not know beforehand.

But like tossing a coin 1.2 billion times, the figure of 1.2 billion Muslims gives a completely TRUE picture, not about any individual Muslim per se, but about the religion Islam itself !!

Such a picture about Islam would be correct whether Muslims population expanded to 2.4 billions or 4.8 billions !!

In statistics, there is no need to research each and every individual in the population.

You're a LIAR !!

Afterall, you are just a typical "moderate" Muslim, who compulsively, and deceptively white-wash your fraudulent religion !!

Irfan is hiding behind "statistics" as a way of evading issues that he cannot defend.
He will always argue you have not done sufficient "research" that Mulims are anti-Jews and anti-Christians.

Suppose someone were able to research the entire 1.2 billions Muslims population to reach a conclusion. But when Muslim population were to explode to 2.4 billions strong, Irfan would argue that the earlier conclusion is no longer valid. He would argue for more research.

Such is the cunning deceptiveness of a "moderate" Muslim.

Truth is, a "research" is NOT needed in the first place.

If it were ever possible to research every single Muslim in this world, you would arrive at one finding - the nature of Islam in the world.

But there is no need to conduct ANY Muslim research at all. Koran/Quran - the book of Islam would tell you exactly what you need to know - the nature of Islam.

Muslims the world over follow the same blueprint - Koran/Quran.

If a Muslim in Timbuktu is anti-Jews by faithfully following teachings in Koran, then another Muslim far away in Sydney would also be anti-Jews when faithfully following teachings in Koran.

Koran/Quran would tell us a lot about the entire 1.2 billions Muslims population in the world. Conversely the behaviour of 1.2 billions Muslims merely CONFIRM and REFLECT the ideologies irradiating off Koran/Quran.

So far, how 1.2 billions Muslims impress the world is not good, NOT GOOD at all :
1. Islam is anti-freedom, anti-democracy
2. The "honest" Muslims are the radicals, extremists who are not afraid to thumb their noses.
3. The "moderate" Muslims (like Irfan) are the deceptive evaders.

What more can you expect from Muhammad's hoax?

"You're a LIAR !! Afterall, you are just a typical "moderate" Muslim, who compulsively, and deceptively white-wash your fraudulent religion !!"

Great to see some reasoned argument entering this discussion.

Anyway, I have invited Stephany and her colleagues to present their research methodology and outcomes. They have refused to do so. They are content to throw mud from the sidelines, joining forces with all the other armchair nazis and fruitloops who congregate here. When their evidence is challenged, all they can do is cry "evasion" and "you are just like the rest of them".

My work is done. I tried to reason and engage in a sensible discussion. Instead, it has degenerated into name-calling and personal attacks on me.

Anyway, I have work to do and a real life to live. Adios, amigos!

And off he goes in a cloud of self-righteousness.

LOL

Did anyone hear John Laws extensive and enlightening interview with a delightful Muslim cleric?

He was distraught that the Sheik who calls himself the Mufti of Aussie - you know the one - who described women as meat - is embarrassing people of Islamic faith and the wider Aussie community. Apparently, the Mufti is using our money overseas to support political groups who support the Taliban?

I have mo proof of this - John Laws has.

Irf, I think you should do some more homework.

I'm glad to see Irfan saying goodbye. This thread is awful and full of hate and abuse. I must say though that he kept this thing going far too long by enjoining with the level of contempt and loathing I see here.

Perhaps it's a reflection of our society. Say the "right" thing in public and trot this stuff out when you are anonymous. Great world.

If suffering leads to enlightenment then I have to say many of you have much suffering ahead. Hope it's short for your sake and that yu learn from this sort of abuse and hatred. Followers of bny creed must learn to take the good bits and remove the bad. It seems man, and woman, although it's mainly man, hasn't changed their thinking much since we all huddled in the dark.

If it's unknown then destroy it, quick.

I must correct you on something Pegasus.

What I write here is what I say in public

"What I write here is what I say in public"

Yet you hide behind an anonymous name and deliberately don't take opportunities to release your research methodology and findings.

I think any reasonable person would conclude that you are an intellectual fraud. It is sad, given that some of your claims actually do have merit. There is indeed anti-Semitism in many Muslim communities. However, your sectarian bigotry has led you to make the inherently absurd claim that Muslims are all but genetically programmed to hate Jews.

I guess your next post will claim Adolf Hitler had some Muslim ancestors ...

An Arabic saying goes: "The dogs bark. The caravan keeps moving on."

Stephany. Irfan makes a good point. I said anonymous and that's what you are, still hiding aren't you.

And Irfan. Mate, you said goodbye. Let's just end this here OK. One last comment from Irfan and then close the thread. PLEASE.

All too often we see in this forum that the most vigorous expressions of tendentious views come from posters who hide behind the cowardly cloak of anonymity. In the case of 'Stephany', who claims to be a bona fide researcher rather than another Islamophobic ratbag, there seems to me to be little valid reason for declining Irfan's quite reasonable request to come clean.

Agree with him or not, Irfan regularly displays the courage of his convictions by publishing articles and posting comments here under his real name. 'Stephany', on the other hand, like several other prolific Islamophobes who post here, does nothing for his/her credibility by refusing to identify themselves and the interest groups with which they are associated.

Irfan posted, “…I have work to do and a real life to live. Adios, amigos!”
Thought you left for good. So you’re a liar after all and don't mean what you have said. Welcome back.

Irfan,

It is tragic you still cannot get your facts right.

No one here (except you) had written : "Do you think Muslims are genetically programmed to hate Jews?"

Stephany merely corrected you by saying << Leave out "genetically"...>>

She also provided an example that this kind of fraudulent comment was made by another Muslim (Iranian Political Analyst Majid Goudarzi), against the Jews !!

It's not hard, check out previous postings on this thread. Then retract your accusations !!

Your failure to retract may be seen by some that a moderate Muslim is prepared to tell lies like Majid Goudarzi. This may be not very far from liers like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who is also a holocaust denier). Sheik Hilaly has moved closer to the Iranians. Who will follow next?

CJ Morgan,
Pretending to be an umpire, are you?
You obviously cannot pick out a lie even if the deception is staring you in the face.
All you need is someone to display a courage of convictions, never mind whether truth or not.
It is not courage, cowardice or anonymity that is the issue here, stupid.

200 post on the only thing proven is that bigots by definition do not require the shielding of a conservative facade. You were totally wrong Irfan. Rewrite the article and call it "Bigots will find any excuse to voice their intolerance and prejudices."
Like Martha Stewart tells us. "That's a good thing". It lets every community know where their work is cut out for them. I should very much like to see all peoples regardless of religious or political beliefs stand up for what is right, proper and just. We are having our communities stolen from us by the fear merchants and those who push racial ghettos in the name of multiculturalism, instead of promoting "national" integration.

Irfan,

I have never asked you to comment on our research. Therefore I am under no obligation to show you anything.

All I asked for are your comments about antisemitism in the Umma. You responded with:

"Stephany, I cannot answer this question because I simply have not done enough research or travelled enough among Muslims."

I do not find this a credible answer. I doubt many people do.

You then go on and on about the number of Muslims in the world.

Question for Irfan.

If there were 1.2 million Muslims instead of 1.2 billion, how many people would be interested in Islam anyway?

It is only because there are so many Muslims that Islam is going to play an important role in shaping the future of the world while (say) Judaism is not. That's why we're having this discussion. That's why Islam and the attitudes of Muslims are so important. Kafirs like me want to know what we're in for.

For example, how will the increasing number of Australian Muslim voters use their ballot power? What concessions will parties make to gain the Muslim vote?

In Australia the rise of a major Islamist party is unlikely; but in some European countries with a proportional representation voting system, Islamist parties may end up holding the balance of power in legislatures. What price will such parties exact for joining a coalition?

You see, Irfan, we already know there are a lot of Muslims. No need to keep repeating that. Unless, of course, you mean it as a threat.

Who am I really? What is my "secret identity?" LOL

Good news, Irfan.

One of the reasons I'm posting here and in other fora is because I want to gain a feel for the "blogosphere." I'm planning on setting up my own website.

So stick around and all will be revealed.

LOL

While I intend to reveal my identity, I defend the right of others to refrain from doing so. OLO allows anonymous comment. If you don't like it don't post here or try to get OLO to change their policy.

Hell, its starting to sound like a fascist convention with overtones of the religious looney right. Well, you can rant, rave and insult but whether you like or not, the author and the Muslim community are here and here to stay. They will add to and change our culture for the better and hopefully will show more tolerance to the next wave of people with a cultural difference, than they have been shown.
What a shameful exhibition of bigotry and racism.

In a sense Irfan has addressed the issue of the Umma's antisemitism. In his post of Tuesday, 10 April 2007 12:57:39 AM he wrote:

>>Certainly anecdotal evidence backed up by limited polling suggests Muslims and Jews seem to hate each other.>>

A grudging admission certainly. But there it is.

Irfan goes on to say:

>>Certainly the support given by Jewish groups to racists like Israeli and Pipes suggests levels of hatred at extreme levels.>>

At this point I could come up with a very VERY long list of Jew hating Muslims who enjoy widespread support and whose unhinged rants make anything Prof Israeli or Daniel Pipes may have said look urbane and coolly logical in comparison. But why bother?

Do Jews hate Muslims?

Did we hate Nazis?

I'll admit it. We have this unreasonable tendency to hate people who keep saying that, given the chance, they'll kill us. It's just one of those many undesirable traits we Jews have. Must have something to do with our association with apes and pigs.

Apes and pigs?

"In a weekly sermon in April 2002, Al-Azhar Sheikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, ... called the Jews "the enemies of Allah, descendants of apes and pigs"

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sr&ID=SR01102

The aforementioned Tantawi who called us descendants of apes and pigs, was at the time "Grand Sheikh" of Al-Azhar University in Cairo. Al Azhar calls itself the world's oldest university. It is certainly the world's most prestigious Islamic University.

Imagine the rector of Harvard University calling Muslims "descendants of apes and pigs!"

Irfan, you've answered my question. As the proportion of Muslims in Australia grows life for Jews here is going to become increasingly unpleasant, perhaps even untenable.

Netab says >>They will add to and change our culture for the better and hopefully will show more tolerance to the next wave of people with a cultural difference, than they have been shown>>

You reckon?

A few additional points.

One of the people Irfan loves to hate is Daniel Pipes. You may want to make your own assessment of Dr. Pipes. Here is a link to his website:

http://www.danielpipes.org/

Another of Irfan's pet aversions is Prof. Raphael Israeli. Here is some information about Prof. Israeli.

http://www.acpr.org.il/people/risraeli.html

Professor Israeli has written extensively on Muslim Jew hatred. A partial list of his publications may be found by searching Amazon.

Prof Israeli is Professor Emeritus of the Institute of Asian and African Studies, Faculty of Humanities at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Unlike Grand Sheikh "apes and pigs" Tantawi's Cairo institution, Hebrew University boasts a number of recent science Nobel Prize winners among its alumni.

And now it's time for this old man to go to bed.