Well said, agree 100%.

Well written Hossein Esmaeli. It's nice to see some one educated in Islamic law advocating the full use of the civil courts system and laws over Islamic Courts and law. However, the Sheikh al-Hilali's of the world aside. Shouldn't there be some faith representation and authority that Muslims with questions can approach for answers and maybe live closer to their faith with out having to reject their "Australianness".
I like your promise of an inclusive greater Australian community, and maybe a Mufti in the traditional authoritative role is redundant but, I do think a "Head of Church" is an important social religious station. It not only solidifies a faith view but, also unifies individual communities in faith. A bit of an anchor if you like.

Aqvar...

The existence of either a head of Church.. or a Mufti, is in some ways dangerous in my view. Both suggest 'big organizations'.

The Head of the Church is Christ. This is fairly simplistic, I know, and without some guiding luminary to 'shepherd' doctrinal issues, many small groups will tend to launch out in their own direction, as happened in the early days of the young Church and was the cause of the bigger councils and attempts at protecting orthodoxy for the whole Church.

Dills like Marcion, who

"rejected the writings of the Old Testament and taught that Christ was not the Son of the God of the Jews, but the Son of the good God, who was different from the God of the Ancient Covenant."

Or..in the Islamic history stream there are people like Rashad Khalifa who claims to be the 'final MESSENGER of Allah' (as opposed to the final 'prophet' of Allah)

"During my Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca, and before sunrise on Tuesday, Zul-Hijjah 3, 1391, December 21, 1971, I, Rashad Khalifa, the soul, the real person, not the body, was taken to some place in the universe where I was introduced to all the prophets as God's Messenger of the Covenant. I was not informed of the details and true significance of this event until Ramadan 1408.

His emergence relies on the interpretation of ONE verse in the Quran... in fact he relies on one WORD "a" for his legitimacy.

But Islam ? It's verrrry hard to escape the idea of a 'Caliph' or a big boss, general, mover and shaker. It began, grew and expanded as a 'state' with a 'Head of State'.

A thought for FH to ponder :) "Why was it that the 'message' of Islam had no serious impact until Mohammad had political 'POWER' in Medina"?

Hmmm.*thinks*

"Islam cannot survive without political power"

One Eqytian radical arrested in USA openly admitted this. (can't find his name right now)

The appointment of any mufti is not welcomed by many Australians at all dear author.

It is simply a relief from that invoker of hate.

Frankly Australia doesn't need any Muslims. Or Christians, Or any religion other than those that practice their beliefs as indivuduals and leave everyone else alone.

No brain washing children by forcing them to read Bibles, Korans and the rest.

Here's an interesting stat from today's Census figures. look this up for yourself.

Australia has 1.7% Muslims. Fine, they are entitled to their beliefs.

Australia has 2% Buddhists. What? But we never hear them telling us what to do!

Australia has, well, far too many Christians, regardless of %.

How can we manage if a religion doesn't spread propaganda at every opportunity?

It's simple. The Buddhists just do what they believe in, and here's the big difference, thay actually practice it too.

Name one other religion that does that. Christian is by far the worst offender but most of the others are coming down the straight in a race for second place.

Enough of religious leaders going public. Preach to those who bother to turn up and that's it.

I say we need laws to prevent this constant stream of attempted conversions. We have a "do not call" line. What about a "Do not attempt conversion" line?

An interesting article

It's good to see OLO showcasing the diversity - and reasonableness - of Australian Islam, in contrast to the shock-jock sensationalism of mainstream media that highlight only the idiots like Hilali.

Boaz_David - you say, "Islam cannot survive without political power". Where do you think Christianity would be without Constantine, and the imperial/colonial activities of Rome, Constantinople, the Holy Roman Empire, Britain, Spain, Portugal, Germany … ?

Actually the religion that seemed top be the fastest growing was Hinduism. That' s OK, they seem a peaceful lot , mind their own business and don't keep drawing attention to themselves.
What we need most is people who want the best for this country, who wish to see its freedom of speech,religion,principles grow and grow.
We do not need the muftis who spew their hatred, ignorance and intolerance. Stick them in their own countries, don't let them in here.

Rhian - wat u said.

BD - so JC was only fooling around when he said "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I build my church", huh? And how come the "message" of Christianity - as opposed to that of yet another breakaway Jewish sect - only got serious when popes were seen as political leaders?

An no, before you even start, I am not catholic. I just studied history. Out of more than one book.

RobbyH doesn't know what (s)he is talking about! Stick with what you know a little bit about.

RobbyH posted, “I say we need laws to prevent this constant stream of attempted conversions. We have a "do not call" line. What about a "Do not attempt conversion" line?”

RobbyH would be most at home in Malaysia. The IHT reported

Malaysian state stiffens penalties to stifle Muslim conversions

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia: People who try to convert Muslims to other religions could face a whipping, a fine and longer prison terms in a state ruled by a conservative Islamic party in northeast Malaysia, an official said Wednesday.....

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/27/asia/AS-REL-Malaysia-Converting-Muslims.php

Like it or not robbyH is not far from right.
Far to much power s required by Christians and any religion, a separation from politics is the best for any country.
The thread however is well thought out.

No, Austrailian Muslims don't need a spiritual leader. That role is filled by their dear leader and prophet, Mohammad. He alone speaks for Islam. He is also the great moral example for all Muslims.

Let me give you all the bottom line on Islam. It is a religion of hate and violence. The Quran is a message full of anger and vile words against non-Muslims. Yes, it says some nice things, the at best, it is contradictory. At worst, it is bad, confused prose. Muslims don't want to talk about this but I would like one of them to explain why people who do "mischief" should be killed or mutulated?

The traditions are even worse. According to Islam,'s own writings (hadith), Mohammad murdered, tortured, enslaved, plundered, lied, raped and even beat his wife. Other than that he was a nice guy, a "mercy for mankind". Guess what, Muslims don't want to talk about these things, even if found in all traditions (Muslim, Ishaq, Bukhari, Abu Dawud, Tabari, Hisham, etc...). If anybody wants links to these facts, please request. Please!

That is why things never get better. That is why Muslims do what they say. That is why things are bad in Islamic societies.

So remember, when a Muslim says anything, He/she is a person that loves and respects a man that did many vile, evil things and doesn't care. Murder is OK if done by Mohammad. Rape is ok, if done by Mohammad. Etc. They even say "Praise be unto him" knowing these things. That is the bottom line.

The new mufti is like all Muslims. Murder and conquest is OK, if it is Islamic murder and rape. He will say and do as all Imams do. The murder of this pregnant lady will not bother him:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/038.sat.html#038.4348
dagger, belly, blood, child, praise be unto him.

Most of the Muslim posters here know these things, but don't care. Guess what that means? Figure it out, if you can. I don't know what is in Muslims' heart, but here it is not ignorance, so it must be denial or deception.

Kactuz

Good morning Kaktuz,

To understand Islam you need to look at how Muslims see it and practice it. Here is a good site : www.readingislam.com

Re the prophet of Islam, a Turkish thinker have a good biography on the prophet and his teachings.
http://www.fethullahgulen.org/

Peace,

Dear Romany,
look at exactly what Jesus said..(make reference to the greek pls) and also, if he was going to build a huge organization, he would have given much more than one tenuous verse about it. Remember his commands to the disciples. "take nothing for your journey, etc".. very mobile and transient. Peter also had his problems with his compromise over circumcision etc.

Rhian.. where would Christianity be without Constantine etc ? A LOT HEALTHIER :) and much purer. There is nothing like a bit of persecution to shape up the Church and ship out the fakes.
I don't think I've ever been so proud of an indigenous believe when he (as general sec of the indigenous Church in Borneo) was called up before DAtuk Harris Salleh the Muslim Chief Minister, and told "DENY CHRIST and EMBRACE ISLAM" with a lot of other things said..and he was as solid as a rock, not flinching a bit. Praise God! But I remember that incident echoed through the Church and it was much stronger and more committed for it.

FH.. talk about 'duck and weave' :) the real issue is not about how 'Muslims' view atrocities of Mohammad.. it is whether he committed them or not and whether such behavior is something which should be glorified ?

I must remember that next time the ICV attacks Christians, should we do a "Ka'b" on them? After all, they are 'enemies of Christ'- Nope.. Christians have no such murderous example from the the Lord Jesus to inspire them to such barbarism, and they/we also have specific commands to avoid such things. I always think of 9:30... "May Allah destroy them" .... I can offer you peace .. and mean it. I don't think you can do the same and be true to your Quran. After all, I believe that Jesus is Son of God, and that...is the basis for the call for my destruction. According to Sheikh Femhi.."The Quran is the absolute Word of God" -I have another view on that.
cheers

Fuhrer Boaz,

What do you make of this comment:

In your justification of why 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered, you said:
“ Genocides don't just 'suddenly happen'....they have roots, background, reasons.
Questions for consideration.
-What was the predominant Tutsi attitude towards Hutu?
-HOw did they perceive themselves (The Tutsi) in regard to the Hutu?
-Did the Tutsi believe they had some kind of 'manifest destiny' to rule the Hutu ?
-Do the Tutsi have connections with a wider cross border Tutsi movement, and does this have any geo political implications?
So, to answer the question 'where does the hatred come from'.. I'd guess "All of the above"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6026#85037

Thats the justification Nazis used to murder 6 million Jews. And ironically thats the same brush you are trying to paint Islam and Muslims with. "Mein Auschdralia" is not a legal political party in Australia and can't get to government.
I don’t talk to Nazis, but I will 'flag you' by copying this link every time you address me or the islamic faith, Auf viedersen, Adolph

Boaz_David

You might believe that Christianity would be “a lot healthier” without having hitched itself to the political structures of the cultures it inhabits, but its much more likely it would have died out long ago without political support and the infrastructures of empire. Even during its early years as a minor and persecuted sect (when it was by no means “pure” if you read the early histories), its expansion was possible because of its cultural and political milieu – the gospels and epistles were written not in Jesus’ first language of Aramaic, but in Greek (the language of an earlier empire still prevalent in the Roman empire of the Eastern Mediterranean), and Paul’s journeys took him only around the Roman Empire.

Former Archbishop of Canterbury William Temple said that Judeo-Christian religious tradition is the most materialistic in history. By this he didn’t mean materialistic in the popular sense, of over-valuing possessions and prosperity, but that it is a religion that focuses on the real, material world and real flesh-and-blood human beings in contrast to the idealising, dualistic, abstract, world-denying tendencies of other faiths.

Christianity never was, and never was meant to be, a sect of the “pure” that disdains the political messiness of real human life.

What? "no need for a mufti"

For someone suggests such fibs He/she:

1. believes a single mufti cannot represent all brands of Islam
2. wished the mufti was their own sect
3. is annoyed how the office is a media magnt
4. is embarrassed how true Islam is unveiled

Because to say that Muslims don't need constant guidance is TOTAL HERESY.

Muslims need DAILY guidance on earth, on their death bed, under the ground, on their way to hell, and later in paradise for eternity.

Islam is a fully regimented and legalistic religion.

The goal is to attain acceptance from a demanding god ‘Allah’ by behaving in a "prescribeed UNIFORM fashion", following the exact letter of the Islamic law as prescribed by a local mufti, imam, leader, cleric, whatever you want to name it.

Islam means “surrender” total slave-master obedience to Allah and his prophet. No concept of personal freedom.

The Islamic law IS the Islamic religion (Deen) – which is NOT OPEN to interpretation by anyone except by qualified clerics (like Hillali).

The Islamic “code” is the Arabic way of their prophet Mohammad.

From dress codes to the way they go to the toilet, what they can eat, how they pray, eat, talk, look, touch, wash, and (especifically) how they must have sex.

Judging from islamic chat rooms and radio programmes, the Deen is Not negotiable. It's all Halal or Harram.

It is all codified according to the personal (and vast) experiences of the prophet and author of Islam.

Islam to integrate (I prefer 'infiltrate') in Australia must constantly hide its own precepts, until they will have the numbers to implement "force".

Historically Islam has never prospered without ruse and/or force.

True Islam – a totalitarian ideology - cannot compromise or modify its own teachings.

Australia (like the UK) will have do all the compromising - i.e. providing a space for Islam to co-exist...

Some of the hypocrisy in this thread is truly breathtaking, reaching new heights (or depths) I've seldom experienced.

I used to think that the Landover Baptist web site was just a parody.

FH... thanx for the flag waving. I suggest that the other understanding of those events is contrary to your assessment.

Rather than 'thats the justification of the nazis' etc.. it was in reality the justification of the Allies to RID themselves and Europe of the Nazis.

I guess ur desperate :) grasping onto anything I say so it can be twisted and rebranded as some kind of extremism etc.. Don't bother :) I'll give you MUCH more reason to brand me as that in due course.
What I did in that thread (which has no business in THIS one to be frank) was point out that there are always 2 sides to story, and the article seemed to be created at an arbitrary point in time, in a historical vacuum, with the goal of historically sanitizing the Tutsi and condeming the Hutu. Read the history. Enuf said on that.

RHIAN...
that historical influences were in place (Greek language, Roman roads, Pax Romana) and that they came from a previous empire cannot be denied nor need it be. The purity of the Church I'm speaking about was the spiritual, and there would be little incentive for materialism in a group which could at any time be called on the deny Christ or be thrown to wild animals.
Your point about "But it would have died out" is naive and dogmatic, nor based on the reality of the growth of the Church in a hostile environment over 300 yrs. The Church grew, because of the Gospel, and the signs which often accompanied it.
That Gospel of Christ is what saves mankind. It was then, is now and forever will be.
Part of that Gospel is "If anyone will be my disciple, he must deny himself and take up his cross and come after me" Hardly 'materialistic'.

Fuhrer Boaz,

There is only one side to genocide: its genocide. Murdering 6 million Jews or 800,000 civilian in Rwanda have no justification or ‘buts’ or ‘if’.

“grasping onto anything I say so it can be twisted and rebranded as some kind of extremism”

I don’t need to do that you were caught by many other posters “grasping and twisting” facts about Islam and Muslims to incite fear and hate. Your own actions and comments “branded you”. Here is a sample:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5905#82871
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5905#82883
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5905#82904

You had over 3600 comments over 2 years with the sole purpose of inciting fear and hate towards Australian Muslims. That’s over 2400 pages! Just face it you are a Nazi in denial.
I am not a lawyer but I don’t think what you are doing is legal in this country.

Rhian,

Jesus' words in Matthew 16:

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.

18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Jesus is talking about a spiritual church, not an empire, not buildings and cathedrals, no real rocks, but people and souls.

Jesus is the foundation rock of His Church.

Jesus loves His Church like a bride.

Christians are One body, Jesus as the Head…is another illustration.

How would you otherwise explain the explosive growth of the church in China (some say 80 million)?

No buildings, no State support, and plenty perssecussion.

It is important to research the meanings of the metaphores before jumping to "secular' conclusions.

Thank you for this article Hossein Esmaeili. As a non-Muslim who has grown up with many who pracitice this faith I've at times been very puzzled by the weight the media gives to some voices who are proclaimed to be speaking for all Muslims.

I had never experienced all Muslims being represented like this in secular countries before.

Could it be because most Australians have mainly had experience with Christianity and know that every sect has a spokesperson who speaks with complete unquestioned authority for all and presume that Islam must be the same?

Fellow Human, Boazy is on a mission, but don't forget Coach. He hates it when you ignore him and is consequently trying to write with even more spaces than Boazy. At least he uses fewer capital letters. Both of them are beginning to sound boring trotting out the same hoary old statements.

Neither of them are an authority on Christianity, a faith they profess to live by and they certainly have even less authority on Islam.

It's too bad this thread deteriorated into religion vs. religion Vs. anti-religion. I thought the author made some very important and supportable thinking in regards to law and was rather hoping some discussion would be forth coming on the topic aside from there being a Mufti or not. We seem to have lost sight of what are the doings of the office of Mufti with in Islam. And why that office ought to be made redundant in some Muslim and secular eyes.

YVONNE...

Heyyyyy wait a minute there. I am trained you know. I didn't use 3 yrs of my life studying Greek, Old and New testaments, Culture, Anthropology and sociology for nading you know.

Regarding Islam ? I don't know how much of an 'authority' one needs to be, but my training in the other areas certainly qualifies me to comment on Islamic texts, especially when I provide sources and use the same methods which people use to interpret our own constitution.

Did you pick up on FH.s wild hysterical claim "You are trying to cause fear and hate against ALL Muslims"

FH. when have I said 'hate muslims' ? I've told you many times of my affection for some Muslims I meet. An Iranian at my gym is a prime example. Another at my other gym named 'mohammad' is another.

I am definitely critical ISLAM and MOHAMMAD. and on grounds which are used to also criticize Hitler Musselini, and Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tze Tung and other tyrants.

If you wish to 'spin' that as 'You want everyone to hate and fear Muslims' then.... how can I stop you ?

Another one of my 'mantras' has been "Radicals drive agendas" and I've always made a distinction between 'radicals' and 'moderates' something I learned from reading the judgement of the CTF case.
So, nothing illegal about what I'm doing.

There IS something ILLEGAL in the Quran, and that is sura 9:30
calling for destruction of Christians (a religion) and JEWS ( A race)
and you can bet that I will be raising awareness about this on every level available.
Its my democratic and constitutional right, and a social/spiritual responsibility.
*peace*

ps. I cannot point to a syllable in the Bible which calls for the destruction of Muslims. OR for violence against non Christians by Christians in this life. Judgement though, will surely come to all at the Last day.
PSS. Islam is your choice. In making that choice, you must inevitably accept the baggage which comes with a faith which condemns and calls for the destruction of other faiths and races.

Boaz,

“Did you pick up on FH.s wild hysterical claim "You are trying to cause fear and hate against ALL Muslims"
The Pot calling the kettle black : -)
‘Hysterical’ is for those who use the upper case, dozens of exclamation marks or slanting other’s for no reason.

Anyway, on topic,

My argument is that you are inciting fear, hatred and eventually violence against Muslims in Australia for the following clear distinct reasons:

- As a missionary, you know that most Muslims practice Islam as per sites I referred you to earlier. The version you use is based around character assassination of the prophet pbuh was developed during the crusades by French missionaries. Most Muslims either don’t know it or just dismiss it as it contradicts the Quran.
- Unlike other un-informed mob, you are doing that on purpose and intentional. You got caught by a number of members such as in the links above. Your reaction is to duck and weave and re-post the lies on a new thread.
- There is no difference between inciting fear and hate of Islam and Muslims. If an average person on the street fears Islam, then they will fear Muslims then they will hate them. Violence against them will be the natural next step of the snow ball effect.
- There is no difference between fear, hate and violence: its basic human psychology. If you followed the news and analysts, terror masterminds and their recruiters brainwash naïve young Muslims exactly the way you do: that all the Christian west is conspiring to take over, kill and destroy all Muslims so lets get to them first. Your actions are an exact copy of what the Terror masterminds do. Your actions can only inspire violence against Muslims.

Who are you to judge a faith anyway? You have no authority to speak of Islam or Christianity. I know Christianity is a beautiful tolerant faith and I am proud of my Christian and Jewish friends. Perhaps Taliban is a better fit for you.

Peace,

Here is a quick refresher note on Authority and Christianity

Jesus words in the last chapter of Matthew's Gospel:

18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Questions:

Which part of "All Authority" don't you get?

How can Jesus be with His disciples (us) up till now and always to the end of the age?

So when we speak - we speak with Authority, God's authority in Jesus through the Holy Spirit living in us.

Also note that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three but share one singular name, therefore "One" Triune God.

But then again you will tell us that Boaz or I must have changed the Words of God to frustrate Mohammad's theory of Islam.

Part 1

Hossein Esmaeili
You might be a lecturer in law at a university but in my view you are overlooking certain constitutional issues.
Firstly, unlike the Mufti dealing with legal issues, the Commonwealth of Australia does not appear to have any constitutional council that advises the Government, the People, the Parliament and the Courts as to CONSTITUTIONAL powers/limitations.

My blog http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH and my website http://www.schorel-hlavka.com might be interesting reading and you might just discover that despite being a lecturer in law you could learn a lot.

For example, religious funding is not permitted and hence “religious education” cannot be provided at cost of the Commonwealth of Australia.

Last Friday, I was attending at a bank when a staff member and myself ended up in over an hour conversation about religion, etc. I made clear I was born with Jewish blood, baptised Lutheren but do not practice religion because of sick and tired of religious fighting. In the end this staff member (female) made known that I was living a life as a true Muslim.
Moment, I had told her I had never read the Koran, I opposed violence, etc.

And, this is perhaps what it is about. Nothing to do with violence, etc, despite this may be found in the Koran, the Bible, etc, as the real message is that people can have their faith and should take the good from it.

Hilali was in my view misunderstood, because had he stated the same without being a Muslim no one may have taken notice of him. Hence, it is overdone.

The Commonwealth of Australia is a secular “political union” where every person can pursue their own customs, traditions, etc, regardless if they are religious based or not provided it is and remains within legal provisions.

What the problem in the Commonwealth of Australia is that people are Muslim-phobic and this cause microscopic analysis of everything unduly.
Lets give religion a rest and accept all people as human beings

Part 2
So what if they are Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buhdist, atheist, or whatever they are all entitled to live their own religion/non-religion/customs or whatever as long as it remains within legal provisions.

If any one does act in breach of law then the relevant authorities are there to deal with them in the appropriate manner.
Don’t stir the pot! Did anyone check out the religion of the Melbourne killer,, I doubt it. However, if he had been a Muslim it would have been plastered all over the newspapers and we would not have heard the end of it.

What ever the function of a Mufti might be in, say Iran, as to guide the government into ensuring legislation is deemed constitutionally appropriate, a Mufti in the Commonwealth of Australia is constitutionally prevented having such a power/influence. As such if you want to big note yourself about being a lecturer in law, then why not state matters clearly how it is and not dwell on misconceptions!

On 19-July-2006 I defeated, after a 5-year legal battle the Federal Government lawyers on all constitutional issues!

In my view the fact that you refer to the function of a Mufti without explaining that it cannot apply in the Commonwealth-of-Australia as such indicates there is a considerable lack of proper presentation of your argument.
Indeed, if this is your modus operandi then I feel sorry for the students you teach!

I never read the Koran, neither need to do so as your set out is so much lacking proper consideration that I view it is a danger to have left unanswered by me.
For my part, a Mufti can operate as he likes provided it is within legislative provisions. That is it!

And, that is what the Framers of the Constitution debated also in regard of any religious practices that might be cruel, etc. They made clear that it was not for the Commonwealth-of-Australia but for the States themselves to deal with it if it was in breach of State laws, this, as the Commonwealth-of-Australia lacks legislative powers for this.

Boaz,
See opinion by Tanveer Ahmed in todays Oz.

Coach,
If you respond to steel about FGM, he will try to hyjack the thread with his obsession with male circumcission. If it is so important to him, he should start his own thread under General,

Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka,

Interesting comments - but I suggest you start reading the Qur'an instead of making stupid suggestions to others who may be more acquainted with the Political / Social totalitarian ideologies of Islam.

Banjo,

Thanks for the tip.

Coach
QUOTE
Interesting comments - but I suggest you start reading the Qur'an instead of making stupid suggestions to others who may be more acquainted with the Political / Social totalitarian ideologies of Islam.
END QUOTE

EITHER YOU DIDN’T READ MY POSTINGS PROPERLY OR YOU LACK THE COMPETENCE TO COMPREHEND WHAT I SET OUT.

In certain religious countries a mufti may wield considerable powers but this is not applicable in a the secular-political-union called Commonwealth-of-Australia as the Constitution does not permit this.
Therefore, it has absolutely nothing to do with “political/social totalitarian ideologies of Islam” and neither do I need to understand that as it is simply an issue of what is constitutionally permissible.
Therefore, I do not need to read the Qur’an or whatever other religious-book under whatever name as it is not relevant as the Constitution is in the Commonwealth-of-Australia the supreme law. This, I also point out to Muslims, when they ask me if there is a clash between religion and statutory law!
Basically, statutory law (such as our Constitution) is a rule of society and religious laws are those of certain religions and cannot and do not override in secular societies statutory laws!

My issue was that here we had a “senior lecturer in law” referring to the position of a mufti without setting out that his position in a secular society is totally different then his position in an Islamic state.
By this, I view, he was stirring the pot, so to say, feeding the Muslim phobia without any proper consideration to present a well argued case.
There are Muslims who desire to have a mufti for their own religious reasons and I for one see no problem in them having the comfort of their mufti as much as a Catholic may have a Bishop/pope and Christians may have a Minister, a Budhist has a monk, etc, as long as they operate within societies legal provisions!
Hence, a mufti can only interpret religious laws within the framework of Australian law’s and as such no mufti can be considered as a danger in that regard.

BLESS YOU FH :) you ARE a scallywag:) "Dozens" of Exlamation marks.....?

Grrr.. now you KNOW that OLO software only allows ONE exclamation mark. That is called shooting yourself in your sandal :)

Nevermind. Mate.. (yes..I'll still call you that)... the time for defending the indefensible is way past.

You said:

"My argument is that you are inciting fear, hatred and eventually violence against Muslims in Australia for the following clear distinct reasons:

- As a missionary, you know that most Muslims practice Islam as per sites I referred you to earlier. The version you use is based around character assassination of the prophet pbuh was developed during the crusades by French missionaries."

Unfortunately, you have 2 major enemies (neither of which are 'me')

1/ The fear and hatred is being fuelled FAR more by the bombings of Glasgow airport, carried out by no less than a cell of DOCTORS.. well educated men, dedicated to saving life and they do this kind of thing to deliberately maime, kill, anihilate all and sundry. THIS HAS 2b explained, and only 'theology' will do it. (Psychology will help, but that will only lead to the Theological aspect)

2/ The claim (by a Muslim) that there are approx 3000 youth susceptable to radicalisation in Sydney, and around 1000 to 2000 in MELBOURNE (thats getting close to home)

The above 2 points, show clearly that there IS a need to understand the theological drivers for such behaviour.

I honestly feel that 'my' contribution to ill feeling towards Muslims simply is not on the radar of the big scheme of things.
You should have noticed by now, that I restrict my comments usually to issues about 'Islam' and yes..I do attack the person of MOhammad, but the REASON for that, is
a)To open minds and hearts to some balance/truth
b)Warn those who are considering Islam, that there is MORE to it than the sugar coated web sites show.
c)To help Muslims realize that Christ IS in fact the true way of salvation.

Herald Sun front page "TERROR DOCTORS" ... do I really rate ? :) no.

Boaz,

I can understand why you have singled out Islam as the enemy as we have a different position on Jesus (pbuh). You can debate all you want but you can be more tactful about it. Deedat and Swaggart debated years and years on theology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skrQ1TYGdK4
At the end of the day nobody really change their position. Yet they always walked away as friends, maybe there is a lesson for you there.

Peace,

The new British Prime Minister Gorden Brown has changed course by making clear that those seeking to blow up a car are “CRIMINALS” and he seems to avoid using the reference to “TERRORIST”.

And this is what we need badly also in the Commonwealth of Australia. Too much we are as a society gun-ho upon Muslims, arguing about the person who is a mufti, etc rather then to look at people irrespective of their religion to be equal in law and anyone committing offences are “CRIMINALS”. We then take out the sting against Muslims also!
Has the Melbourne killer (killing a lawyer) been a Muslim it would have been plastered all over the media, but now it never was.

Considering how many people have been killed by what is being referred to as being “TERRORIST” versus the number of people killed by “CRIMINALS” in the commonwealth of Australia, then there is no comparison, yet what is being spend on the fights against “TERRORISM” and the laws enacted regarding this and the fear sowed into people by the Federal government ought to make clear that there is something drastically wrong.

As Hermann Goering stated;
"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they're being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."

Hermann Goering, Hitlers' Reich-Marshall, at the Nuremberg trials after WW2.

The Commonwealth of Australia being a secular "political union" should be careful not to interfere with the right of any religion to practice its religious laws and for that have whomever as a mufti, where they are doing so within the realm of the law!

Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka

“Last Friday, I was attending at a bank when a staff member and myself ended up in over an hour conversation about religion, etc. I made clear I was born with Jewish blood, baptised Lutheren but do not practice religion because of sick and tired of religious fighting. In the end this staff member (female) made known that I was living a life as a true Muslim.
Moment, I had told her I had never read the Koran, ….”

WOW what a good Muslim you are. Mohammed must be very proud of you. Never confessed Allah as god and Mohammed as his prophet and yet you are living a life as a true Muslim! I must inform my Muslim friends.

I went to your website and found "YES, WE KINDLY ACCEPT DONATIONS" written in bold and bright red. Now I know what you are getting at and who you are aiming for.

Mr Balaklava,

I think you are more delusional than you appear to be – If you are so damn interested in constitutions – start by reading the Islamic constitution that is slowly but surely infiltrating all aspects of society and government.

Only then will you be able to differentiate between a Melbourne outlaw criminal and a Muslim jihadist who acts on his religious beliefs inside a democratic society.

Your credibility to compare religions and dogmas is zero

Part 1.
Philip Tang, it appears to me that your conduct indicates some tunnel vision, and I am therefore setting out some details.
Since 1982 I have conducted a special lifeline service under the motto MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (a trademark) assisting people who contemplated to commit suicide/murder even mass murder. About 7 people a day are currently committing suicide!
After having provided this service for some 25 year, FREE OF CHARGE and without any Government financial support, even so I would even assist people in Court as their Attorney and even pay out of my own pocket the cost for them to file documents, etc, my wife, now tuning 75, had made it known that I should no longer refuse accepting people to pay back monies I paid out on their behalf or donations. This, as I was selling our shares as to finance the assistance of others and when people offered to pay back, as I would simply make known that I preferred them to assist others as I had assisted them or make a donation to a refugee organisation of their own choice. In fact, I would send out books, over years, again seeking that people make a donation to a refugee organisation of their own choice rather then to pay me for the book.
At no time did I differentiate between people as to their race, colour of skin and/or religion as this was never relevant to me. My family crest for over 1000 years has been St Michaels the Dragon slayer, and I have taken up the fight for many.
When dealing with people, such as a person contemplating to blow up a tanker in the midst of Melbourne as to cause maximum casualty, then to avoid such a horrific incident also is saving hundreds of lives. Over the 25 years I have undoubtly saved thousands of lives, without ever seeking any financial reward, all doing this, so to say, working behind the scenes.

Keep in mind this thread relates to a mufti in Australia and not some other islamic country!

Part-2
By the time you would be anywhere near my ongoing effort to seek JUSTICE for others, then I view you can come back, but for now I view unlikely would you be this kind of person!

In 1985 I created the document titled “ADDRESS-TO-THE-COURT” see also my published book;
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® & ADDRESS TO THE COURT
A book on CD, making litigation a more level playing field
ISBN 0-9580569-7-8 (After 1-1-2007; ISBN 978-0-9580569-7-7

This document since has been used in all levels of Courts including the High Court of Australia in both civil and criminal cases.

It means that a person without having legal representation in court can file such a document setting out their entire legal arguments and be able to walk free from the Court without any trial being held, with charges being dismissed/struck out.

Others desire to seek a revenge to give a message to the community to contemplate a mass murder. Today society refer to them as “TERRORIST”, but they are people who pursued JUSTICE but lacking this ended up doing worse to others are simply out of their minds.

I accept that my wife is right that after 25 years I should now avoid selling further shares in that if something were to happen to me my wife will not be left without financial security. If you consider this to be a sin then you would be indeed very small minded.
I choose to rather assist people, regardless of the financial burden with it.
Knowing what make people tick to commit suicide/murder and how to possibly avoid it I do my bit for society. As such "YES, WE KINDLY ACCEPT DONATIONS" is an indication that albeit assistance is sought to be provided where possible we no longer will refuse monies.
Hence, if you were trying to make a cheap attack upon my person then consider you have, so to say, egg-on-your-face.

coach

The tread is about a mufti in Australia, not in another religious country!
As long as the mufti remains preaching within Australian legal provisions I for one have no issue with a mufti.

FH... A few points.

1/ I've not singled out Islam as 'the enemy' due to the differing position on Jesus. Its because of the POLITICAL nature of Islam.
Buddhists and Hindus also have a differnt view of Jesus, but they are not a political threat. Nor are they bombing in the name of their religion mate.

2/ Don't confuse my attacks on Islam 'the idea' with Muslims..the people. I say this so much but u still don't seem to get it.

The way you say "Attacking Islam is to attack Muslims" is not my problem but yours old son. I can only respond to what I read, observe and hear.

While I'll put my arm around my Shia buddy at gym, I'd do what I had to do (if I'm in the police or army or.. encountered a physical attack by a radical) towards the likes of.. xyz radicals like Abu Izzadeen or Anjem Choudary. If I met Anjem Choudary in the street at a demo and he had a sign "Behead those who insult Islam" I'd probably consider that an act of war and take appropriate action :) like squeeze his nose or something horrible like that.

You most likely don't 'see' as I see when it comes to the political/social impact of Islam, and you will need to consider that when looking at my comments.

As for Deedat and Swaggart.. I saw that debate (or one of them) a while back.. I'll bet the Muslims were overjoyed when it came out that Jimmy had done the wrong thing...
Have you seen any debates with Anis Shurosh? Quite a powerful speaker. Deedat just does his usual thing 'Did Jesus say dogs have 3 heads" ?... NO.. and then proceeds to argue that straw man.
cheers.

Gerrit,

It appears we are not on the same wave length. Although I admire what you are contributing to Australia, I must insist Islam is a completely new ball game with unpredictable rules.

So I repeat if you want to continue to work with people without differentiating, you need to really "know" as you put it "Knowing what make people tick to commit suicide/murder and how to possibly avoid it I do my bit for society."

YOU MUST ASQUAINT YOURSELF WITH THE ISLAMIC PSYQUE.

As for:
"The tread is about a mufti in Australia, not in another religious country!
As long as the mufti remains preaching within Australian legal provisions I for one have no issue with a mufti."

I agree, the mufti is preaching "legally" - but some of us are concerned with the content of his sermons and the legality of his religion.

ISLAM is the common denominator for all islamists and suicide killers. It is that religious ideology that needs to be exposed, scrutinised, and not just allowed to "legally" and freely prosper producing more radical criminals every day.

Our government has been found grossly incompetent dealing with Islamic policies.

Hizb el Tahrir is just another example of Government blunder. Clearly and openly a revolutionary group, banned in many countries, posing a direct threat to our national security, but happily “legal” in Australia.

Our Government is clueless and totally inept when dealing with the home grown enemy within Australia.

God help us all.

Boaz,

“You most likely don't 'see' as I see when it comes to the political/social impact of Islam, and you will need to consider that when looking at my comments”

That’s incorrect I lived long enough in Muslim countries and aware of potential political and social impact. The difference between you and I is I think its today’s Muslims problem to deal and resolve these issues with the support of intl community. While you are taking the failed missioanries approach: pin it all on Islam so you can promote your views. You reminded me of a joke about Fidel Castro: communism didn't work for his country for decades and he needed 'few more months'. French missionaries failed for 14 ceturies but Boaz need few more weeks ! : - )
No offence intended.

I have seen all Dr Anis Sorrosh videos and you summarised it beautifully: ‘powerful speaker’, that’s it.
I was surprised to see him challenging Deedat and had little homework done. The result was expected.

None of the televangelist I watched seems to have studied the Bible (earlier versions, including the 5 major revisions) let alone the Quran. I think they are more like movie stars in the sense of they act well the script at hand but they can’t defend it or understand it.
Maybe a real theologist can be up to the challenge but not the 'Hollywood' mob.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcMzHgq2zRo&mode=related&search=

This is also a good one on a debate with Deedat's Jewish boss:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geqUWQGXqzI

PS: I accept Deedat can be provocative and sarcastic and when he was asked, he said he expriences frustration with what others are trying to make of God.

Peace,

"I accept Deedat can be provocative and sarcastic and when he was asked, he said he expriences frustration with what others are trying to make of God. "

I would have used different words to describe the late Deedat but that would be bad manners to a dead man.

His way of desecrating the Bible, mocking Jesus, and the Christian God, were totally un-Islamic to say the least. As for any theology he had none… just tricks.

I don't believe you people still use his outdated materials. Lol.

I much prefer FH if you came up with your own opinions instead of relying on a dead con artiste though.

Coach,

What do you make of this in your own comment:

1. " I would have used different words to describe the late Deedat but that would be bad manners to a dead man"
Then the following line you said:
2. "instead of relying on a dead con artiste though"

You promoted a good value in the first line and contradicted it the second! No comment sir!

"claiming that Deedat mocked Jesus" is absolute non-sense and as you rightely said it: un-islamic. You from all people should know that I can't be a muslim if I disrespect Jesus or the Bible. What you failed to understand that although he was challenged, he made it clear that Jesus according to the Bible is a prophet and we should not claim what we don't understand (you saw Anis's last comment).

I know you admire Anis Shorrosh as many of your quotes are his.
I felt sorry for him in the debate but he was the challenger.

"I don't believe you people still use his outdated materials. Lol"

Er, not sure where you got that from? There is no 'fashion' when it comes to theologists like Deedat. Every muslim I know (especially non-arabs) follow and have a complete library on theologists and Deedat is a popular one even to non-muslims because he is thought-provoking.

Peace,

Coach,

There appear to be a misconception about what I am about.

As I made clear it doesn’t worry me what a mufti is about as long as he is within Australian law. This means, if he preaches violence or other unlawful conduct against Australians then he clearly is in breach of Australian law.

Sheik Halali was a mufti who was much condemned by many Australians, including many Muslims, for daring to say that British were lairs (or something of that meaning).
The truth is they are, and a lot more deceptive then Hilali stated, and in my books I have set this out, so to say, in chapter and verse. Just, as I am not a Muslim I can do so and no one take much disturbance to this albeit they should.

Look at Dodo website showing a bikini clad female when I log into the Internet. Excuse me, I can do without this, and do not feel it appropriate for such display. Hence, I intend to move to another server. When Hilali made a comment that basically seemed to come across that females were parading as such invited rapes, he did not appear to me to say women should be raped but rather warned against such appearances. As a Father and grand father many times over I detest such display of women flesh. It is one thing for a woman to be in a bikini at the beach, and I could not care less then about it but to have this kind of nearly naked parading on television, bill boards, etc is in my view unacceptable. Yet, often the very women getting highly paid for this years later accuse the companies for having used them as sex symbols. Get the message?
While the can earn good money their conscious doesn’t bother them but when they are over-the-hill they blame others.
I view Hilali, as an Australian, had every right to speak up, and I for one in those issues did not consider he spoke out of tone.
Politicians should have stayed out of it.

Fellow_Human,

I must have stumbled on a sensitive nerve there about Deedat and you. I did not mean to waste another post on that dead clown… (Oops, another Freudian slip. Sorry) let alone watch his unsubstanciated vitriolic Christian-bashing videos again.

I object the title 'theologian' beeing used on someone like Deedat; I reserve that honour for people who would know the real God and not just the one portrayed in the Qur'an.

All I can say for the likes of Deedat is repeat Jesus blessing for his killers as He was dying on the cross: “forgive them Father for they know not what they do”.

If you, Mohammad or Deedat knew who Jesus is (not was) you wouldn’t try to challenge Him or His Bible.

Your misconception of who God really is allows you to have a go at Jesus and other gods.

Your little understanding of God - through Mohammad’s alleged revelations - is incomplete, therefore you are lacking the entire picture. Your view of God is still so limited and pre-historic (BC). Your "theology" is quite ambitious, admirable, but not there yet.

Converts from Islam to Christianity admit that they always thought that they were worshipping the real God, but now that they discover the actual fullness, saving grace, love, intimacy of God, they feel 'home' at last. No more need for rituals of kissing stones or washing and wiping anymore. They are now saved, completely cleansed, and will never face God’s judgement reserved for the unbelievers (those who don’t accept God’s Son Jesus as Lord and only Saviour).

FH, Mohammad can’t save you. Your prayers won’t save you. Can I add Deedat wont save you either.

Only Jesus! As the Bible tells us..

You do respect the Bible, don’t you?

If yes, you must believe what it says too. Starting with Jesus death on the cross…

Coach,

“If you, Mohammad or Deedat knew who Jesus is (not was) you wouldn’t try to challenge Him or His Bible”
.
Please re-read the topic again: It was Anis Sorrosh who challenged Deedat and not the opposite way around.
Sorrosh claimed Islam is a ‘sect of Christianity and not a religion of its own’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcMzHgq2zRo

“You do respect the Bible, don’t you? If yes, you must believe what it says too. Starting with Jesus death on the cross”

Islam and Christianity are one of the same with the only difference being the nature of Jesus pbuh. We have a lot more in common to bring us closer together but you keep focusing on our only difference.
Muslims beliefs are not different than unitarian christians on the issue of crucifix. Here is an explanation of our beliefs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGXxgnJnrMI

Peace as always,