I don't think Islamophobia is entirely unjustified. There is, I feel, a legitimate fear in the community that Islam is incompatible with Western society/values (evidenced by the way Islamic countries and countries where Islamic belivers are the majority). Where, for example, in any Islamic country or country where Muslims are the majority is there true peace and tolerance of other faith systems, particularly Christianity? It is difficult to find, if not entirely absent.

Dinners hit the nail on the head.
Only yesterday there was a complaint of Christians evangalising in
Afghanistan and that it must be prohibited.
This to others seems very typical.
What chance of preaching Christianity in Saudi Arabia ?

It is the hard line on these and similar matters even by "moderate" moslems that puts people off.

Thats how it is, like it or not. The change is to be made by Moslems
not by the rest of the population.

If as has been said by Islamic clerics, that you cannot change your
principles on these matters, then you should go to a moslem
majority country.

I agree with Dinners, to a degree. I also don't think Islamophobia is entirely unjustified. The sight of someone wearing a full burkha, looking through those narrow slits, is quite disconcerting. Nevertheless, Syed Atiq ul Hassan's article is basically a pretty fair representation of the facts. Fred Nile's Christian view is absolutely reprehensible, but thankfully, Fred Nile has been regarded by a joke by most of NSW for many years. It is a pity that Iemma has been forced to give him an air of respectability.

Syed Atiq ul Hussan (should I call him Mr (or Ms) Syed - we/I have a lot to learn) says that "The media is supposed to work in the public interest". He surely recognises also that the media is supposed to make a profit as well. Editors will pander to people's prejudices, making the prejudice even stronger. He cannot expect a fair deal, except from those organisations not seeking to make a profit.

Religion, of course, is the main problem, but what do we do about it? I believe we should stop funding schools other than those in the public school system. Let them devote Friday afternoons to various religious groups, while the atheists and agnostics attend classes on philosophy and ethics etc. At least the children will be all part of the same school, and there will be a better chance for tolerance of differences to develop.

"Islam"-a-phobia is entirely justified. "Muslimaphobia" is a different matter.

Most Muslims are nominal, and pay little attention to the 'fine print' of their faith UNTIL they are pressured or attacked.
So... that friendly Muslim neighbour.. the Muslim mate at the gym, the nice Muslim lady across the road... no, we don't normally need to have a fear of them. Still, of those who have been charged with terrorism in both Sydney and Melbourne, there are those who deny the possibility of wrongdoing. The ETU along with Muslim sympathiser Dean Mighell have alleged that the arrest of the brother of an ETU shop steward is baseless racism. In other words...if his brother is in the ETU it is 'innocence by association' ...

But Islam... has specific doctrines which only come to the fore when they approach a majority.

JUST like the 'stolen generation' claimed long and loud "IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY" nowwwwww that Labor (the Champions of the Indigenous supposedly) the calls for BILLION DOLLAR COMPENSATION FUND are becoming increasingly hysterical and LOUD.

So to, when the Muslim community feels confident, has the numbers, and access to power... well the others said it already.

-Evangelism in Afghanistan..

but trendy Trad will just come out with his usual empty apologetic 'Islam is a tolerant religion, no compulsion in religion'

-Bomb attacks all around the world.

"But they arn't true Muslims, Islam does not condone the killing of 'Innocents'" But then, it also defines that the only 'innocent' people are the Muslims.

It's not "Muslims" we need fear, but "Muslims with power and the Quran taken as obligatory.

Does mainstream media benefit from "Islamophobia" ? of course they do, they win on the upswing (warning of the rise of Islamism) and on the downswing (Focusing on 'Islamophobia' and condemning it)

I appreciate David's distinction between justified fears between "Islam" as a system and those of Muslims as indivduals.

The distinction is important, as according to mainstream Islamic interpretation, the religion is a total system. The distinction between state and church is not made, ulema are both jurists and theologians, and individual choice on religious matters is denigrated.

The result of this lack of secular thinking is that Islamic states are almost invariably the most horrendous dictatorships on the planet and possibly without peer in their abuse of universal human rights.

i am against islamic schools, they corrupt the youth. but since ozzies have put up with catholic schools, anglican schools, hindu schools, buddhist schools, i don't see how they can protest against islamic schools. well, it's easy to see: the protesters are dim, narrow-minded ethnic bigots, so what else is new.

religion is a curse, right up there with national fanaticism. so let's do away with religious schools and private schools, and treat oz kids like citizen's-to-be, and give them an equal start, in public schools.

BOAZ_David, can I say that perhaps is the most singularly intelligent post I've ever read of yours on OLO.

Though I will say that by definition "phobias" are not justified. I'd allow that "Reasonable concern about the rise of Islamofascism" is entirely justified.

Of course, the Christains had their go at terrorising the Muslims during the Crusades. The big difference is that the most powerful weapons they had were swords, arrows and the occasional ballista.

There's certainly a level of Islamophobia projected by the mainstream media. Take for instance Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali's comments about women, men, meat and animals. The media picked up on in and focused on the comparison between women and meat. I think they missed the point. The point is that men (specifically those that would rape) are animals, and from their point of view women are nothing more than meat. And while a woman cannot control the actions of these men, she can control her own actions, and so like one would not get close to a wild animal without protection it is equally unwise to make oneself a target of such men.

Of course while women are capable of taking 'preventative action', I'm not suggesting that they are responsible or there should be institutionalized action restricting women. I'm just highlighting the almost unanimous negative view taken by the media.

The article also seems to be a bit hypocritical, complaining about Christian extremists (pigs head, etc) as if they are the mainstream while simultaneously arguing that Islam extremists aren't representative of Islam.

I think much of the fear is not of the religion itself, but with the culture that comes with it. Like the way various pagan and Roman traditions & ideals were absorbed by Christianity, there has been significant amounts of the barbaric, tribal culture of the middle east absorbed into Islam. It is this undemocratic, uncompromising, aggressive culture that is feared, not the tenants of faith expressed by mainstream Islam.

All phobia's are justified as they are essentially an

" intense, unrealistic fear, which can interfere with the ability to socialize, work, or go about everyday life, that is brought on by an object, event or situation".

Usually these are ammenable to treatment - as such Islamaphobia should be treated some what like a disease.

It is indeed intense unrealistic fear etc etc - just look at us and the way we carry on

It isn't the media's job to promote so-called "peace"
and so-called "harmony." In any case, Muslims get a better
run in Christian-majority countries than do Christians in
Muslim-majority countries.

I'm glad people are speaking out against Islamism. And,
this is a democracy. The more debates the better, but one bit
of advice: If you use the word "Islamophbia" then I have the
right to use the word "Christophobia."

A phobia might be justified, but how can we possibly justify spelling the plural form with an apostrophe? We all can make mistakes, but surely ones like this really diminish any impact the contribution might otherwise have had.

Er, if a phobia is an "unrealistic fear", then it's not justified, in my book.

Of course, people suffering phobias may rationalise justifications for them, but those justifications are not convincing to anyone not sharing the phobia.

And so the nth Muslim steps up to the dais, talks about Muslims, and again refuses to deal with the real issue: THE IDEOLOGY OF ISLAM.

Of course peaceful Muslims exist. But a growing Muslim community only remains peaceful IN SPITE OF THE IDEOLOGY OF ISLAM and IN SPITE OF THE EXAMPLE OF MUHAMMAD.

Ergo, any community with a growing Muslim community is at LONG ODDS TO REMAIN PEACEFUL.

But still, the nth Muslim pleads: PLEASE TAKE A CHANCE ON ISLAM.

Six years from September 11 and still this non-debate continues. When will a Muslim stand up and confront the issues?

SYED: Islam, like other religions, is open to various interpretations

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018752.php

"The Qur'an, on the other hand, quite clearly does teach believers to commit acts of violence against unbelievers -- see 2:190-193, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4, etc. There are no equivalents to such open-ended and universal commands, addressed to all believers to fight unbelievers, in the Bible.

... all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach, as part of the obligation of the Muslim community, warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers ..."

SYED: Scholars in the field of Islamic studies know well that most informed Koranic readings need careful scholarly analysis and explanation

Careful, like this? ...

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/09/islam-is-most-warlike-religion.html

"Islamic texts encourage terror and fighting to a far larger degree than the original texts of other religions, concludes Tina Magaard. She has a PhD in Textual Analysis and Intercultural Communication from the Sorbonne in Paris, and has spent three years on a research project comparing the original texts of ten religions.

"The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree. There are also straightforward calls for terror. This has long been a taboo in the research into Islam, but it is a fact that we need to deal with," says Tina Magaard.""

continued...

SYED: phrases like 'jihad' ... requires a dissertation

http://abandonskip.blogspot.com/2007/11/paul-stenhouse-islamic-incitement-to.html

"Muhammad's conduct demonstrates his understanding of the Quran's message.

If his understandings were correct, then all attempts by Islamic apologists to prove that Islam is a basically tolerant and peaceful religion fail when confronted by the Medina Sura and the indisputable facts of Muhammad's life and subsequent history of Islam ...

To those who would claim the nature of Jihad and the militaristic aims of Islam are misunderstood by non-Muslims, we turn back a challenge that Muhammad repeatedly flung at his adversaries in Mecca: prove me wrong 'if you care about the truth'."

And here's a dissertation on Muhammed by Serge Trifkovic ...

http://abandonskip.blogspot.com/2007/11/serge-trifkovic-look-at-muhammad.html

"On the whole, Muhammad's practice and constant encouragement of bloodshed are unique in the history of religions. Allah's order to "kill the unbelievers wherever you find them" is an injunction both unambiguous and powerful. The word "genocide" was not even coined when Muhammad conveyed Allah's alleged dictum, "When we decide to destroy a population. then we destroy them utterly." (17:16-17) Disobedient people "we utterly destroyed." (21:11) That Islam sees the world as an open-ended conflict between the Land of Peace (Dar al-Islam) and the Land of War (Dar al-Harb), which must be conquered by jihad, is the most important bequest of Muhammad to history. The end of Jihad is possible only when "there prevail justice and faith in Allah" everywhere. (2:193) Muhammad thus postulated the fundamental illegitimacy of the existence of a non-Muslim world. Muslims could contemplate tactical ceasefires, but never jihad's complete abandonment short of the unbelievers' abject submission."

SYED: al-Qaida ... they think this is what Islam or Muslims are

http://at-draft.blogspot.com/2007/10/west.html

Quotation from Abu Qatada, the Al Qaeda-linked cleric:

"I am astonished by President Bush when he claims there is nothing in the Koran that justifies jihad violence in the name of Islam," Abu Qatada said about six years ago. "Is he some kind of Islamic scholar? Has he ever actually read the Koran?"

This article is not worthy of Online Opinion, which is a place for debate, not denial.

Islamaphobia is justifiable - in the sense it is an irraitonal intense and disabling fear - it is as silly as a fear of spiders and just as treatable - Just as it is unlikely that the world as we know it will be over run by spiders so to it is unlikely rampant islamism will be our undoing - unless of course, as some are already, the rest of as act out against this irationality and continue to be provocative, stupid and jump at shadows

The author's point is that the media should be doing a better job. As the author is in the media, then his ascertions should reflect that better job.

He refers to the wonderful history of Islamic importees, but, does not tell us, even as an aside, of the Islamic shooters of Silverton during WWI. In his references to Indonesia, are the many and continued refusals for Christian Churches to be built (and actively shut down) even mentioned?

The validity of the 'Abrahamic connection' does not take into account that Allah also has a connection to an earlier moon god and that the call that 'Allah is great' comes from a polytheistic tradition where one group of followers claimed Allah was 'greater' (ie better) than the other tribes gods etc. Whether Islam is a religion in the Western or Judeo-Christian sense or merely another personality based interpretation /appropriation of Christianity disguising a political system is surely still open to critical debate and further consideration.

Anyway, the claim "hardly any print or electronic media group has shown the other side of the story or interviews of those who want to build the Islamic School" should have been addressed by the author.

The reason this might be difficult is because the proponents and funding may not be from/by Australian Nationals. Has the media found out about this incorporated group and how it has not lodged returns with the Department of Fair Trading for the last 5-6 years as required by law?

Questions about the spokesman's connection to the proposal, whether local bus companies have been approached to provide Muslim exclusive male and female only bus services (ie no other public passengers) and how these things relate to the notion of being part of the wider society etc. have not been raised or investigated by a lazy media.

If the Islamic community gets bad press, then this reply - a pro-Islamic apologetic as already provided in the mainstream media - is not convincing.

Again, we need to be careful when saying that being anti-Islam - as an ideology - can also be equated with being anti-muslim or racist and denigrates individuals.

Phobia or not, are we facing a clear and present danger, and is it immediate? History as a predictor is problematic, but, we are not only dealing with history as Islamic behaviour continues to be very much on display and I don't see a lot of charitable work for the wider community being sourced and channelled from the Islamic community (here or abroad)- at least not yet - but we see plenty of mega-mosques being founded in the west at great expense.

If this was a local initiative, then I wouldn't be worried, but, just as Sir Henry Parkes would have gone into Parliamentary meltdown if the Vatican was funding the early Catholic schools (note there was no problem with the Catholics providing free healthcare!), Fred Nile expresses an historical, cautionary, reaction.

Whether it is as sectarian and unfounded as Sir Henry's is yet to be determined, but if the local community is not funding this proposal, then this is not just a planning or education matter, but, a National Sovereignty issue and perhaps demands more attention?

Can the author tell us who is behind this Camden proposal and why they haven't hosted their own forum? That way we may be able to get both sides of the story if we choose to attend, because you clearly can't rely on media reports.

It's a bit late for Australians to object to Islamic schools after sitting back for years and saying little or nothing about large scale Islamic immigration.

I've made my views on Islam clear over a long period of time - the religion is not compatible with Australian society.

However, I try to be fair and, now that the stupid mistake that has seen our Muslim population grow to 300,000 has been made and cannot be overturned - thanks to apathetic Australians - how the hell can it be fair to prevent one religion from having its own schools when most other religions in Australia are actually encouraged to estabish schools and given tax payer funds to help relieve the education load for government's?

If the Islamic schools are monitored by the government as all other schools, state and religious are - required to have an approved curriculum in accordance with the needs of Australia and its kids - where's the harm, and what does it matter where these schools are located?

People get quite heated about the differences between their respective imaginary friends. Even quite intelligent people walk around with very elaborate prescriptions pertaining to the character and beliefs of these phantoms!

Some historians even maintain the extreme position, that, these imaginary friends have been the cause of more war and death then the combined baser motives, vanities and foibles of mankind.

Of course, I just don't believe it.

Islamophobia is a natural reaction to the ideolology of Islam which teaches its followers to hate non-Muslims. Islam more than a religion, it is a political ideology that invokes the name of god to justify hating non-Muslims and, as an excuse for their barbaric practices.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080106/wl_mideast_afp/irancrimejustice_080106124003

Non-Muslims must not be afraid of Islam but deal with it in a rational manner by not allowing mosques, Islamic schools to be built on any part of their neighbourhood. They must do Muslims a favour by encouraging them to leave Islam. Islam has kept Muslims in the dark and is the number one cause of trouble for Pakistan and Bangladesh today.

Main stream Islam has become, and is, a threat to social harmony all over the world. Listen to Ibn Warraq (Why I am not a Muslim?), an ex-Muslim and Tawfik Hamid (My life as a Muslim terrorist) a reformist Muslim, as they speak in point of inquiry.

Dr. Hamid explains how the average Muslim is supporting radical Islam and why mainstream Islam, having taken hold of 99% of mosques all over the world is actually radical Islam and is spreading hatred of non-Muslims.

Click http://www.pointofinquiry.org/, then click on “LISTEN”

Hasan Mahmud described how Muslims forming only 2% in some Western countries have made it difficult for parliament to deal with them. He described how main stream Islam, also called political Islam, stands as the antithesis of EVERYTHING non-Muslims. Their agenda is to destroy Western values.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ6WL8xtGtk

In 1453 Islamists ruled Christian Turkey (almost 100% Christians). In 1900, there are 22% Christians left, today it is estimated that there are only 0.3%
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/january/12.25.html

The meaning of Islam is peace and the meaning of Muslim is obedient. Look at the basic belief carried by Islam as whole, not the people those practice it wrongfully. If the law does not permits you to harm any one and then you do so, who is responsible the man or the law. Yes you will admit that certainly a person is wrong, not the law. Same stand with Islamic laws if someone not follow those divine laws and do malicious acts, who is responsible. Same with Bible and other religious divine holy books commanded the same laws. The Muslims country what ever facing today is not the Islam is wrong but they have shattered the rules of Islam. They are carrying out there own desire to fulfill their pathetic covet, it is not Islam or Islam phobia. Similarly if someone breaks law as Christian, the Christianity is not blamed; consequently, Muslim who does wrong, Islam is not blamed. Islam let people to practice harmony not conflict. The idea here is to promote concord among Australians not discord. Every one has right to share his ideas, but in a logical way. The way the petition has been forwarded by the fellow Australians to not give a chance to breathe in an open space is totally unacceptable to any one who has been living in wonder full country like Australia. We are here to promote knowledge not ignorance. We are educated from convent schools run by missionaries in our countries. They have freedom in all walks of life to uplift the communities using their own resources. They have setup many hospitals, schools and charitable organization around the globe. No one has gone after them and ask them to close their schools. They have free right to practice their custom. Do you think it is fair not to give a chance to get Muslim kids to be educated? Last but not least, one thing is important in all Muslims runs college most of the teachers are from Christian background. Do not be afraid we are true Muslims abiding all Islamic laws.

Syed,

Whilst only a “section” of Australians “feel threatened” by, implicitly, Australia’s ENTIRE Muslim community, rather than simply “a section” of it, your failure to have written the latter only reinforces the perception that the ENTIRE Muslim community “feel threatened” by, presumably, everybody else.

Similarly, in referring to the so-called media bias against Muslims yet in favour of the Great Satan (“the media has barely exposed either the amity or the enmity between Osama bin Laden and the United States”), your implication is clearly that the media is complicit in a conspiracy against Muslims generally.

It’s the Muslim community’s fears that are the only ones attributable to any “phobia” that everyone is out to get them, namely xenophobia.

Only xenophobia could conjure up “Islamophobia,” which is utterly baseless in fact (the strongest research yet is based only on “perceptions”).

And xenophobia is the essence of “racism”.

Only those yet to overcome the tribal “herd instinct” of evolution's legacy could equate legitimate media focus on those “fanatic groups” – whom you say “are as dangerous for Muslims as they are for non-Muslims” – with a focus on ALL Muslims.

Surely you must see how transparent it is to the wider community that it is MUSLIMS who do this equating.

The wider community “openly express their hatred against Muslims in the media” not simply in response to what those “fanatics” have done. That would be indicative of the tribalism rife in the East.

Rather, such fear and anger results only AFTER the relentless DEFENSIVE POSTURE is adopted even by moderates like yourself, who relentlessly fail to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for anything negative emanating from your community.

Actually, we are sick of it! Of your ANTI-LIBERAL TRIBALISM, which any fair and reasonable human being ought to be terrified of.

Why should the West have to undergo a massive population transformation from an open to a closed society to accommodate the world’s racists, who cannot get along with one another because they only care about the “injustice” done to their own little tribes, never to the injustice done to persons in general?

“Islam means submission to the will of God and obedience to His law. Submission to the good will of God, together with obedience to His beneficial Law, i.e., becoming a Muslim, is the best safeguard for man's peace and harmony.” (from a Muslim website)

It is a lie to say that Islam is a religion of peace. What motivates Muslims to randomly kill Buddhists in south Thailand? Kill Hindus in Kashmir? Kill Christians in Mindanao (Philippines), Egypt, Sudan,? Kill fellow Muslims in Sudan, Iraq, Pakistan and Bangladesh?

The answer is simple. Muslims are inspired by the Koran to kill non-Muslims until they are “converted” or submit to the will of allah :

“…fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”(9:5)

No wonder a person who draws an image of Mohammad is killed; Muslims who leave Islam are murdered.

The Muslim mind is imprisoned by Islam and Islamic practices. They are gripped with fear for their lives if they think of leaving Islam.
Islamic history is littered with stories of nations being forced by the sword into becoming Muslims.

Australia offers Muslims the best opportunity to break away from the cycle of imprisonment since the day their ancestors were forced into becoming Muslims.

Syed said
"The fact is, the media has barely exposed either the amity or the enmity between Osama bin Laden and the United States. It has hardly exposed the fact that Osama bin Laden and Mulla Omer were, at one stage, backed by the CIA, which provided them with funds and ammunition to fight against Russian foreign forces in the name of Jihad for more than 10 years."

Excuse me?

What utter rot. If you look up the word "blowback" in the dictionary, I reckon there would be a picture of the CIA and Osama. The US funding of bin Laden has been chronicled for YEARS in mainstream press. If you aren't aware of it, you have had your head in the sand.

What I seem to have missed, Syed, was your prediction at the time that US funding of the Mujahideen would lead to 9/11 and the rest of the Islamofascist atrocities the world has seen. Where was that published? Did I somehow overlook it? The retroscope is a wonderful tool isn't it Syed? Have you ever heard of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" The US were fighting what they perceived at the time, to be the greater threat. That's what nations do, deprived as they are of the benefit of your 20/20 hindsight.

As for the enmity bit, that is an even more preposterous statement isn't it...

Firstly, not even one Islamic leader, from all the thousands of little factions and sects, have ever condemed Bin Laden or what happened on 911. The late reporter for the Australian, Matt Price, asked ALL of them whether they thought Bin Laden did 911. Non-one answered him.

Sheik Hilali, who until recently represented the majority of Australian Musims, the Arabic Sunni ones, is on record saying that 911 was God's work, the hijackers are glorious, he said that Aussie women are meat who, if they don't cover up, deserve to be raped, and if they are raped, the animal or "cat" as Hilali put it, should be chatised while the victim should be jailed for 100 years. No community leaders or even Muslim community members expressed anything but support for the man.

Keysar Trad, Sheik Omran, Wassim Duheriri of Hizb-ut-Harir, all have openly expressed that democracy is not for Muslims, that terrorism is the USA, and every other Islamic representative have continously been shadowy and decietful, two-faced, when they deal with the media about issues regarding terrorism.

On 911, there were Muslim people waving Lebanese flags and bipping horns, cheering Allah Akbar on the streets of Sydney.

I can take you to a thousand locations around Syndey where gangs of Muslim thugs, hang around yelling and intimidating mostly Anglo passers by, bashing and robbing young Anglo men, and in hundreds of cases, stabbing and shooting them, sometimes resulting in racial murders. Check with police and the rape crisis hotlines, they will tell you that
gang rapes of Anglo women by Arabi/Muslim packs, is happenning 200 times each year.

How dare you even open your mouth unless it is to apologize for not trying to stop these horrific racial assaults and murders, and for teaching your children that
it is okay to blow up whitie, skippy-convict trash on a bus or train.

Phillip Tang, it is incorrect to claim that muslims are "inspired by the Koran to kill non-Muslims until they are converted". The section from the Koran you quote applies only to pagans of the Saudi penisula at the time when monotheistic Islam was at war with the pagans in that region. For specific criticisms and responses, you can find a neat summary here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Qur%27an#War_and_violence).

Stickman, there were indeed strong predictions that CIA support of fundamentalist Islam would result in what is now called blowback. At the time the Soviets made this warning that the Mujahideen were no friends of modern secularism - indeed they were just flabbergasted over US interference over this issue. Read the transcripts for the excellent documentary "The Power of Nightmares"; whilst not immune to criticism, it really is a recall device for those old enough to remember the issues as they happened and as an educator for those who are not.

http://www.daanspeak.com/TranscriptPowerOfNightmares1.html
http://www.daanspeak.com/TranscriptPowerOfNightmares2.html
http://www.daanspeak.com/TranscriptPowerOfNightmares3.html

White Warlock, you claim "not even one Islamic leader, from all the thousands of little factions and sects, have ever condemed Bin Laden or what happened on 911". This is false; indeed he has been roundly condemned even by fundamentalist Wahabi/Salafi scholars as a modicum of research will discern do some (you can start here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Osama_bin_Laden).

I am certainly no supporter of any Islamic state on the planet and never will be, but equally I do disapprove of ignorance and bigotry against Muslims.

This problem affects all of us, the problem being government funding of religious schools. If you give to one lot then the others want a handout. It is time to start running down religious educational funding and put the recources into public education. Maybe this is where we start to draw the line. It is hard to see the day when Islam becomes the majority religion, but the time may come. Maintaining a secular state requires that government stay out of religious matters altogether. Leave the superstitious alone and have the children - all of them, mix together in a non-religious atmosphere where reason prevails, where all the children are equals.
In order to promote tolerance government must treat everyone equally, but putting public money into superstitious institutions only breeds intolerance.
Christians are not the only non muslims afraid of the superstition. Our leaders have instilled fear in the Australian community about Islam and Christians in particular seem to feel threatened. Muslims are no more wierd than Christians, they are both whacky to the non-believer. The time has come to cap funding to religious schools and begin diverting future funding into public education. Let us start now.

Would anyone in Australia defend Nazism as a philosophy?Well,I view Islam in the same vein.Islam however is more insidious,it is allowed to deceive it's enemies about it's true intentions,and chaos/violence more often than not,is the reality.

Six years on from September 11, and still Muslims won't debate the issues. Robert Spencer explains why:

http://jihadwatch.org/archives/019230.php

""silence is sometimes an answer." Indeed it is, and it speaks loud and clear, and it says that they cannot refute what I say about jihad and Islamic supremacism. So all they can do is cry "Islamophobe!" and try to turn people of good will away from the realities I am reporting about. And this is a much larger issue than simply who will or will not debate me, because it highlights the fact that peaceful Muslims have never formulated an Islamic response to the jihadists' claim to represent pure and true Islam -- and as long as they do not and apparently cannot do so, the jihadists will continue to hold the intellectual initiative within Islamic communities worldwide. "Moderate" Muslim spokesmen such as those above have not just not answered me; they've done nothing to seize that intellectual initiative and blunt the force of jihadist recruitment among Muslims ....

Once one clears away the insults and attacks on my character and good will, there is dispiritingly little to deal with here, raising once again the question -- why can't, or won't, Muslims debate? Why must exchanges with Muslim spokesmen so often be of this kind? ....

I am beginning to suspect that all the abuse they delight in is not just a manifestation of their abysmal intellectual bankruptcy, although it is that also; it is at the same time a demonstration of their Islamic supremacist assumptions. The filthy kaffir is not to be respected, much less his arguments answered; rather, he is to be rebuked for his insolence and put in his place ...

I apologize for the length and tedium of this post, but I believe it encapsulates an important point: no one, Muslim or non-Muslim, has ever yet refuted the contention that Islam teaches warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. And so one thing is certain: that warfare will continue."

continued ...

Ergo, Muslims can't defend the indefensible unless they are either being deceitful or deceived. So when a Muslim steps up to the dais, all you need concern yourself with is which of the two they are: be ruthless with the former, and sympathetic but firm with the latter. We must conclude the debate is finished (and never even started) and now simply defend ourselves from the Islamic encroachment in the West. So stop holding your breath waiting for Islam and the West to get along - it's not coming. As Professor Israeli said: when the Muslim population gets to 10% you have trouble. So spread the word, educate others, lobby and vote accordingly before the Muslim baby boom takes over.

Lev, point noted. The Koran translated by Ali YusufI has a sub-heading (Repentance, Dispensation). I believe it is one of the ways Islamisation was and, is? propagated.

Non-Muslims are not out to demonise Muslims. There are many good Muslims, as there are many good people found in other religions, secular societies, etc.

Non-Muslims are stating what they have experienced, read from the newspapers or, watched it on the telly, of how Islam can turn Muslims into rather irrational beings, marching down the streets shouting threatening words or, blowing themselves up, committing rape and murder sanctioned by Islam.

If you have the stomach , read Abul Kasem an ex-Muslim from Bangladesh

“What I discovered horrified me. It was beyond my comprehension that a religion, touted to be the religion of peace could contain such blood-curdling, terrifying, barbaric verses, cultures, and laws to entice the entire Islamic community to slaughter the infidels and the not-so-good Muslims. Access to authentic books and Internet gave me more freedom to learn and express. I was greatly impressed by the writings of many honest critics of Islam.”
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/Abul-Kasem-Interview-An-Apostate-Speaks.htm

All the sources about Islam are taken from and by, ex-Muslims or reformed Muslims because they've been through it all e.g.

Ali Sani http://www.faithfreedom.org/

Islam Watch hosted by ex-Muslims http://www.islam-watch.org/index.html

International Society for Islamic Secularization http://www.secularislam.org/blog/SI_Blog.php

online_east, You look like a damn fool when you continue to engage in assertions that have been previously disproved. Erroneously you claim that Muslims will not debate the issues of September 11. This is demonstrably untrue. Even the more fundamentalist Wahabi/Salafi scholars have condemned the actions (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Osama_bin_Laden, "Muslim Americans Condemn Attack" http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=AM0109-335). Robert Spencer is just upset because he's being ignored - it's not that Muslims don't debate the issues, it's just the people he approached can't be bothered debating with him in particular, which is not surprising, given that he doesn't even seem to know what 'jihad' represents. Likewise it is demonstrable nonsense to claim that "no one, Muslim or non-Muslim, has ever yet refuted the contention that Islam teaches warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers"; I have already provided some basic and introductory references on the subject - plenty have refuted it, perhaps not your satisfaction, but they have been nonetheless refuted by scholarly context and interpretation.

The core problem with Islam, as previously mentioned, is a lack of separation between Church and State. If that separation is introduced into the faith, then many of the gross violations of human rights that are common in Islamic states would disappear (of course, they would cease to be "Islamic states" even if they remained "Muslim countries" - the distinction is important). At the moment however, they represent an embodiment of a religious-traditional legal code with modern institutional powers and technology; it's rather like having the Episcopal Inquisition conducted by knights with assault rifles and backed by KGB.

So what is one to do about this (the practical question)? Well, essentially there are two options; either engage in warfare against the Islamic states and those who wish to establish Islamic states, with all the misery such a strategy of never-ending war entails or support those Muslims, whereever they are, who advocate a modernist transformation of their society. There have been times when Muslim socities have been among the most secular, liberal and advanced in the world (especially during the period of the Mu'tazili); those times can be replicated.

Syed

You just don't get it, do you.
Whilst you and your co-religionists continue to follow the rantings of a caravan raiding, Jew-murdering, kid screwing bigot, you will all continue to be mocked and ridiculed here in Australia and abroad. It is called "free speech", something not available in Islamically influenced cultures.

It is not the media or non-muslims that give you and your co-religionists a hard time, it is the very insane message of Muhammed you have attached yourself to that causes your suffering. Get over it!

Bassam

Almost without exception,Muslims here view themselves as being Islamic first and Australian last.Most Aussies don't even entertain the idea of being a Christian first and Australian second.We take our religion with a fair degree of scepticism.

The concept of a protective almighty father gives us some comfort,but we never let religious,illogical dogma over ride the reality of social harmony or survival.Islam is poison to our society.It was not god who freed us from the shackles of poverty and drudgery,it was the freedom of thought spurred on by an open mind and democracy that made the West so creative and powerful.Religion is only our comfort blanket,and it should always be reminded of its' place when dealing with reality.

The "Mainstream" have a lot to be phobic about,since Islam has a very poor track record that isn't about to undergo a radical metamorphisis.The Pacifists are far outweighed by the fanatics,and the open minded intellectuals at the tertiary level, are the exception rather than the rule.

As the Catholics have the right to establish religious based schools, so do the Muslims.

However, in the light of islamic schools around the world and especially in Britian being used to radicalise young men who later commit acts of terror, the fears of the residents are not without foundation.

The proposed Islamic school has the ball in its court to convince the residents that it will produce good citizens and be a benefit to the society to which it belongs as would any new business venture otherwise the fear and mistrust will continue.

What an absolute load of Garbage.

This twit is referring to the scandalous acqusition by Al Amanah College of State public Land in Bass Hill.

They were unanimously knocked back by council , the residents fought the fight on planning grounds only.They will go to the Land and Environment court - Bring it on.

The word muslim or Islam was not used once in all the residents groups correspondance to council.

This is where Camden residents will come undone.

Hello to all - and what an interesting and informative bunch of posts, and almost completely free of the invective that used to characterise so many postings on OLO.
The one addition I'd like to make is that "Islamophobia" has no legitimacy. It is an attempt to defuse criticism of Islam by delegitimating the critic, specifically, by making opposition to Islam akin to having a medical condition. Point this out to the supporters and apologists of Islam, and ask them to address the question instead.
The implied question of the article is, why is there any opposition to Islam? Because of Islam's history, starting with convert number 1, and going on for the next 1400 years. Any clarification needed?
I also notice that no-one is responding to Irfan's latest piece, on Pakistan, also in this edition of OLO. Has everyone decided to ignore him, just as he used to ignore and/ or abuse posters? Whilst not knowing a lot about Pakistan, I imagine his piece leaves out the bits he'd like us not to know, which was a strategy he commonly employed. (He neglected to point out, for instance, that the founder of modern Pakistan wanted the country to be secular, whilst it was his religous opponents who saw Pakistan as the protection of the subcontinent's Muslims.)

Yes, good point camo. I am not an Islamophobe, I don't "fear" Islam, I just loathe it, as a belief system, and all of its militant adherents. I hold it it the same contempt as the other monotheisms... maybe just a little more contempt than the other two actually.

Irfan loves to dismiss opponents of Islam as "cultural warriors," a cheap shorthand way of saying that all who oppose Islam can be lumped into one convenient basket for his lampooning.

Irf's attitude thrives in a relativist landscape but to those tending to this disposition, I would recommend this piece by Kenan Malik:

http://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/malik/not-equal.htm

I think the challenge ahead for western democracies, is to ensure that the gains that have been fought for and achieved over centuries of enlightenment, are not squandered through gutless pandering to the dogmatic claims of the followers of a brutal stone-age tribal warlord.

On another topic, I note that the Saudis are considering allowing women to drive. Big of them.

Hello Proud, no-one else seems to have taken up your plea, so I thought I might.
At the end of your piece you say that you are obeying all Islamic laws - that is a significant part of the problem. When Islamic laws and the laws of your adopted country conflict, which are you going to choose, and on what grounds?
Secondly, on what grounds are you going to resist the calls by your co-religionists that Muslims in Australia must live under Sharia, and not be subject to the laws which every one else in the country must abide by?
Lastly, on what grounds are you going to argue against your co-religionists when they want everyone, Muslim and not, to live under Sharia? And what if the version of the Sharia they want you and everyone else to live under is rather like the Saudi Arabian version?

As someone else has commented, when the Islamic armies conquered and invaded the Byzantine empire, the population was, at least nominally, christian. By the year 1900, the christian population of Turkey (the successor to the heart of the Byzantine empire) was around 30%. Now the figure is down to less than 1%. And this is just one example.

As many who read this will know, I'm not a christian. But I have no desire to live under any sectarian system, and especially not an Islamic one.

For the first time in history, Muslims are choosing in large numbers to live in non-Muslim countries. Islam never anticipated this, and there is no precedent or theory to help Muslims, or their new hosts, to cope with it. Only Muslim superiority, as far as Muslims are concerned.

Having completed a Diploma in Islamic Studies at UNE with a thesis on Islamic Schools in Australia, I feel able to offer reassurances to some of the commentators in this blog. There are some 27 Islamic Schools in Australia, all partly state funded and following the national curriculum plus six or so hours a week on Islam, the Qur'an and Arabic, rather much the same addition as the conservative Christian schools and Jewish schools in Australia. This makes them different from a lot of Islamic Schools in other countries like the UK.

The Muslim Schools Charter specifically condemns terrorism in the name of Islam and all the schools subscribe to the Australian Values Charter. Only 10% of Muslim students in Australia attend these schools which started in 1983 in Sydney and Melbourne, but today there are others in Brisbane, Adelaide, Perth and Canberra. For the record, security experts state that no "Islamic terrorists" hail from an Islamic school in Australia ....

Over 60% of private schools in Australia are Catholic and the vast majority of new schools that have started up since 1996 are conservative Christian schools.

Hope this helps. Fair enough to oppose all private education but you cannot oppose Islamic Schools if you allow all the others. The Islamic schools also do a lot of interfaith outreach with other Jewish and Christian schools.