Dear Melanie Phillips

On behalf of all fair minded Australians, I offer you an apology for a poster’s unprovoked and unwarranted attack on your character, where the poster contemptuously described you as "a demonstrated Islamophobic hack."

Since the poster is unwilling or unable to justify this attack, I cannot offer you any excuse for this deliberate affront.

Your article reminds me of the necessity for vigilance against the threat of terrorism. I believe that in regards to Islam, nowhere in this nation’s successful immigration history have so few received so much attention.

Now we have Australians pitted against Australians, a result of citizens struggling to correctly evaluate a rigid and unyielding belief system which is creating unprecedented conflict amongst the members of most Western nations and the sycophants continue to accuse the more outspoken of “racism” or "Islamophobia."

I am also reminded of all the other nationalities which have settled on our shores and of the wonderful contribution they have made to our nation, despite the initial hardships they also had to endure in adjusting to a culture which at times was unfriendly and alien.

The West has now grown dependant on the moderate Muslims, who tell us the Islamic agenda has been hijacked by a ‘tiny minority of extremists’ and that soon the huge (and often silent), moderate majority of Muslims will take charge and change things.

Therefore, it is our duty to respect moderate Muslims and treat them how we find them. I have already had that pleasure. However, we must not become sycophants to an ideology where many of our own bleeding hearts already view Islamic members as the maligned under-dogs in our society. This is not of our doing.

In the meantime, whilst we squabble among ourselves, the faceless infidelophobes rub their hands in glee, happy in the realization that their forward planning, in setting the cats among the pigeons, is reaping the rewards which they had anticipated – rewards which will contribute much to their insidious plots for global domination.

dickie, please...!

>>On behalf of all fair minded Australians<<

It is presumptuous of you to claim to speak on my behalf without consulting me.

>>...we must not become sycophants to an ideology where many of our own bleeding hearts already view Islamic members as the maligned under-dogs in our society<<

You are, of course, allowed to speak for yourself.

The charge of sycophancy simply won't stick, dickie. As CJ pointed out earlier, simply because fair-minded Australians oppose intolerance and bigotry, it does not imply that they support Islam. Or any other religion, for that matter.

It is simply that which it is: opposition to the fear-mongers amongst us, who would have us believe that every Muslim is a pack rapist and a child molester.

Boaz, ah Boaz. Once again, the past master of the "when did you stop beating your wife" school of interviewing.

>>"Fahdi...don't you think that verses from the Quran like 'destroy' Christians and Jews contribute to the hostile attitude Aussies have toward Muslims"?<<

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of those non-Muslims shown on the program are unlikely, to put it mildly, to even know what the Qur'an is, that question is known in the trade as "leading the witness". Their particular brand of anti-Islam feeling had nothing whatsoever to do with an understanding of the Gospels either, I'm afraid.

And as someone who gets terribly upset when a fellow-Melburnian chooses to support the Greek soccer team, this is just a little rich, Boaz.

>>"Fahdi... don't you wonder why Aussies seem to get along so well with many of the other races and religions which come here...<<

Now, where's my dictionary?

Hyp... hypo... hypocr... - ah yes, there it is.

Pericles,

You are mistaken.

Boaz's interview question is not of the "when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife" type at all !!

To be a WDYSBYW-type question, the interview question would have to be re-phrased, like this:

>>"Fahdi...don't you think that verses from the Quran like 'destroy' Christians and Jews contribute to the hostile attitude Muslims have toward Aussies"?<<

Your dictionary will not help you.

Has anyone ever pointed out, that BD is a much more intelligent and intellectual person than you've ever given him credit for. You cannot tell partly because your're obscured by a biased mind.

At least do yourself a favour -- Retract that "hypocr..." remark.

Dickie, I rather suspected your somewhat indignant rants would then come my way. Very well.

For starters, you still haven't provided context for CJ's quotes.

Using the same logic, I can say you believe Australians are "idiotic pseudo intellectuals."

Clearly, you also believe Australians are "sanctimonious" and "arrogant."

Of course, you'd be able to assert this is a stupid conclusion, taken out of context. You'd quite rightly ask that people provide the link to prove the context in which it was spoken.

That's the charge that's being levelled against you, but you won't lift a finger to disprove it.

And make no mistake, if you're making accusations it's up to you to justify them, especially when pressed.

Believe it or not, reasonable people in this country like to use an 'innocent until proven guilty' ethos, but as is clearly evidenced in your post, you do not.

If you like, I can provide a link.

Dickie - CJ has proven that yes, Melanie Phillips is indeed a xenophobic hack.

Xenophobic: "Xenophobia is a fear and contempt of foreigners. It comes from the Greek words (xenos), meaning "foreigner," "stranger," and (phobos), meaning "fear." The term is typically used to describe fear or dislike of foreigners or in general of people different from one's self"

Hack: "A term journalists use to describe themselves and their work. Hacks churn out stories daily informing the world or at least a newspaper's readers what has been going on."

Now read these direct comments from her here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/jun/16/media.politicsphilosophyandsociety

". British nationhood is being disembowelled by "mass immigration, multiculturalism and the onslaught mounted by secular nihilists against the country's Judeo-Christian values"

She may be right about Tariq Ramadan, but perusing her other writings, it's clear she is indeed, a xenophobic hack.

You never addressed my main contention either, in regard to the exaggeration fallacy.

While on definitions:

By high court beak, I'm assuming you mean extensive knowledge of the law.

As for moralist: "a philosopher who specializes in morals and moral problems."

Cheers. Seeing as you've given no competent reason to believe otherwise, I'm gonna take that literally.

Given the amount of twaddle being posted on this thread by the Islamophobic contingent, I thougth I'd go back to the actual article that prompted this outpouring of paranoia. Some may recall that Melanie Phillips' article sought to discredit the visit to Australia by Professor Tariq Ramadan, a prominent moderate Muslim scholar.

A cursory sniff around reveals that Phillips is a Jewish Zionist, who is lately a well known far right tabloid press journalist. Besides her Islamophobia, she is known for denying the validity of evolution and for being a vociferous global warming sceptic, as well as opposing the recognition of same sex relations [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanie_Phillips ]. In other words, an Islamophobic, homophobic, creationist hack.

On the other hand, Prof Ramadan is a visiting fellow at Oxford University who advocates the reinterpretation of Islamic texts, opposes terrorism and violence, and is an advisor to the UK and EU governments, who has been nominated as one Time magazine's "100 Great Innovators" of our time [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Ramadan ].

Who has the better credentials? Given that Ramadan has been, delivered his paper and gone, and there hasn't been any noticeable upsurge in Islamist activity in Brisbane, I think we might conclude that Phillips' paranoid article was just a tad exaggerated. In fact, as an avowedly moderate Muslim theologian who advocates the integration of Muslims into Western societies, isn't he exactly the sort of person to whom we should be looking for answers to the apparent problems some Australians have in this area?

gz: "Boo..boo...A bit of knowledge with a pea brain is very dangerous."

You said it.

stevenlmeyer seems to relish the development of a school system where 'coloured' school kids are segregated from wealthy 'white' kids. Perhaps it reminds him of home.

Boazy: "Lucky I'm not one of the Journo's"

I agree. Ratbags like Phillips are bad enough, but I suppose at least she can write English.

Lastly, thanks Pericles. I wasn't going to respond to dickie's nonsense, but you've covered anything I would have said anyway.

Fascinating how this article's brought them out from under their rocks, eh?

Dear Good thief,
Thank you for your comments on religious bigotry.Let us all accept the truth that religions were made by men in different regions according to the demands of their times. Therefore there cannot be any holiness about them.They are all nothing but some concepts to lead man to righteous ways.
Let us be passionate about fellow human beings and not about virtual things.If we strive to create a conducive social environment, the importance for religions will disappear.Because man is desperate with his fellow men he goes in search of some solace elsewhere.
If the religious beliefs cannot stop war and hunger then why we need them? As you rightly say, religions are not at fault but it is only man who makes mistakes in the practice of the tenets of religions. Then why we need so many religions? There can be only one religion, a religion of HUMANISM.It is not the religion which has made some people good.They are good because of their nature and they happen to practice a religion because of their birth.