It always makes me chuckle, Boaz, when you firmly grasp the wrong end of the stick, and then wave it above your head to show the world.

>>When you quoted Mosely, you implied that when a group of people who are specifically working against the state....that this is ok?<<

Let's try this again, shall we? I quoted Mosley as follows:

"We will not tolerate within the State a minority organized against the interests of the State. Jews must either put the interests of Britain before the interests of Jewry or they will be deported from Britain."

Your natural inclination, it seems, is to take these kind of statements at face value. If you had been in his audience, as my grandfather was, you would have followed the bouncing ball to the inevitable conclusion that - hey, those Jews are acting against the interests of the State! Let's send the lot of them back where they came from.

(The fact that many of "them" had been born in London, perhaps lived there for generations, would conveniently be discarded at this point; the rabble had been roused to tar all Jews with the one brush, which was the point of the oratory)

Truth doesn't come into it. Emotion - principally fear - is the sole objective. Nor is the "enemy", or their perceived fault, particularly relevant.

It is the process itself that disgusts me: transference of hatred of another group of human beings by instilling fear and loathing in the audience.

My other chuckle is when you, the man who proudly announces on OLO that he beats his daughters, say stuff like this, with a straight face:

>>Do you support a 'DOCTRINE' of wife_beating ?<<

As I have noted elsewhere, Christianity and Islam have more in common than you care to admit. Subjugation of women, homophobia, all that stuff.

There's a strong tendency for people to hate in others, that which they also hate in themselves, is there not?

Hello socratease, I’m as concerned about Islam as anyone is, but I agree with you nonetheless. We should be very gracious and neighbourly towards Muslims in Australia – absolutely. I guess we should be like that towards everyone (even each other!), but I’d say especially towards Muslims both for expedience (to woo them into the community and away from the Wahabists etc) but also because the current community mood might make them feel even more marginalised that recent arrivals normally feel.

Don’t be surprised if others on OLO who have the same concerns as me also agree. We may differ in our degree of optimism, but I suspect that Boaz, Philip Tang, Sancho, Themistocles, viking13, stevenlmeyer and others would agree with what you’ve written.

I would also say that your point is more relevant than much of the discussion. I think what we need to figure out is not so much what to think and feel about Islam, but what to do in relation to Muslim people who are within reach.

But, the current discussion becomes important when people like Mustafa suggest that Islam is benign by its nature. It clearly isn’t, and his oily message is irritating and misleading. Anyway, cheers to your post.

Pax,

Dear BOAZ_David

Like all religions (including your own) Islam is contradictory. The idea that texts written in societies radically different from today's economically, politically and socially could be guides to living or guides to truth based on faith alone is one that I find a little hard to take.

Religion adapts to the society it finds itself in. Thus feudal Christianity is very different to Christianity under capitalism. But the main function of religion is to give false hope to the oppressed while at the same time calming the oppressors to understand that the religion itself is major protector of the oppressor. That class contradiction reflects itself in variants of Christianity,(eg from fundamentalism to liberation theology), Islam and I assume other religions in the industrialised world or in the process of entering the industrialised world (eg Hinduism in India. Not sure. Does anyone know more detail about that?).

You also ask me:

"Do you support a 'DOCTRINE' of sexual abuse of captive women? see surah 23:5-6

"Do you support a 'DOCTRINE' which enables old men to:
-Marry
-Sexually use
-Divorce
pre-pubescent female children?
...

"Well...do you? seriously ..do you ?"

I am not quite sure what you are implying here. I assume it is based on your view about the inherent evil of Islam so anyone who defends Muslims defends what you, BOAZ_David, think is their doctrine.

The question is so ludicrous and so contemptuous it does not deserve an answer.

You justify the Cronulla riots. This to me seems a very unchristian thing to do. Nevertheless they were clearly a racist outburst. The fact that oppressed groups like Aborigines indulged in bashing Australians who were "foreign looking" people (if that is true) doesn't detract from the nature of the attacks as racist, and expressing the latent fear many Australians have of the other. that ear comes from a society in which we as humans are deeply alienated through the process of production where our labour and its value is stolen from us.

Indeed, apart from racism, another expression of this deep alienation in present day society is religion.

The Takeover by Demography strategy is absolutely drilled into the Muhammadans from birth, all across the globe. The women breed like rabbits while the husbands skulk around preaching jihad. How do they fund all this? From the dopey infidels' welfare state! Check out the stats on birth rates and welfare dependency by religion.

You really are a repulsive little slug aren't you, John Sleazefield?

goodthief: << We should be very gracious and neighbourly towards Muslims in Australia – absolutely...

...Don’t be surprised if others on OLO who have the same concerns as me also agree. We may differ in our degree of optimism, but I suspect that Boaz, Philip Tang, Sancho, Themistocles, viking13, stevenlmeyer and others would agree with what you’ve written. >>

Is goodthief seriously suggesting that the Islamophobic bile that is continually posted here by the people s/he names constitutes being "very gracious and neighbourly towards Muslims"?

<< ...the current discussion becomes important when people like Mustafa suggest that Islam is benign by its nature. It clearly isn’t, and his oily message is irritating and misleading. >>

It's also "irritating an misleading" when good Christians like goodthief post frequent disingenuous and "oily" messages that vilify Islam, while claiming the high moral ground.

Goodthief and his Islamophobic cohorts are every bit as bad as Islamic apologists like Trad, and are in fact even more irritating in this forum at least - because there's so many of them.

Passy: << Indeed, apart from racism, another expression of this deep alienation in present day society is religion. >>

Quite so. Interesting how the two expressions of alienation occur so often together.

John Greenfield: << The Takeover by Demography strategy is absolutely drilled into the Muhammadans from birth, all across the globe. The women breed like rabbits while the husbands skulk around preaching jihad. >>

I bet John Greenfield isn't a racist either.