Actually Marilyn, what Marx wrote was:

"Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people."

So it is not a question of being "too dumb to think for themselves." It is a question of the material conditions of life that people find themselves in and their relationship as a memebr of one class to other classes.

Religion performs a dual function. It gives hope to the oppressed that there can be a better life (not just in the hereafter, but in the here and now) and reassures the oppressors that that hope will not amount to an overthrow of the established social order which benefits those oppressors.

The article started of adequately enough but was mainly a diatribe against Pipes. He's not much chop academically but has developed a following among certain sections of society who went to continue to create some form of fear of the other for their own political or economic purposes.

It will come as no surprise that The Australian printed an article of his today defending brave little Israel against the nasty Arabs. Of course this totally ignores the fact israel was built on the bones of the Palestinians.

I think the article's title might have been a little misleading because it is not just Pipes who fits into this xenophobic model. Much of the media, many politicians (including ex PM John Winston Howard and the rabble who used to be in government with him) and even the ALP with its attacks on Aborigines all manufacture an enemy to draw "us" closer together (and hopefully they reason, vote for them - either tweedle dee or tweedle dum).

The author writes: "...an essentialist, monolithic portrayal of Islam as the single greatest threat to democracy and the West"

Western civilization (read: Western European Christian civilization and its offshoots) has historically been in conflict with the Islamic world. They are clearly separate civilizations with different belief systems, values, histories and ways of life. To deny the differences between Islamic and Western civilizations is to deny their very existence as distinct civilizations.

"...masked within the euphemisms and indirect speech is a classically racist argument: blacks (or Muslims, or whomsoever is targeted) are not just inferior to us in the West, but inherently so."

And, according the same tests, East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews are more intelligent than people of European ancestry.

So, does that mean that people of European ancestry are not just inferior to East Asians and Jews, but inherently so?

Would be 'racist' against European and European-descended people if an Israeli or Japanese scientist examined the same studies and noted the results?

Pericles,

Like the author, Qadri, you seem entirely unable to take issue with Pipes comments so you indulge yourself in ad hominem attacks. Mosely is entirely irrelevant. It is obviously possible for Moseley to have been wrong and Pipes to be right.

You say >> “the fiction that all the bad bits of the Qur'an are not only gospel, but are driving the agenda of Muslims everywhere.”

Another fallacy. No one is suggesting that fundamentalist Islam is driving the agenda of Muslims everywhere. What Pipes and many others are pointing out is the increasing influence that fundamentalist groups are attaining across the Islamic world. Your contention that somehow those who are pointing out this dangerous development are causing the problem is infantile and beneath contempt. Since the formation of the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt and the Saudi Petro-dollar export of fundamentalist Islam, the prevalence of moderate Islam has been on the decline. Fundamentalist Islam is a project which has firm roots in a literalist reading of the Koran and associated hadith etc. To suggest that by somehow not offending their sensibilities we might be better placed to stem the tide, entirely misunderstands the problem.

Many of the violent extremists have moved to non Muslim countries because of their treatment by Muslim governments. Groups like Hizb-ut-Tahir are banned in most countries in the middle east, yet in Britain and Australia they are free to operate in mosques, community centres and University campuses. Muslim students organisations are being over run by these radicals who promote sharia, Islamists states and the return of the caliphate.

I think at some point you soft lefties are going to realise that you are the problem, that the Islamists are playing upon your dislike of western conservatives to help them hide their ultra conservative agenda.

I’m not against muslim immigration. I’m not interested in a white Australia. What I am opposed to is the insane and ongoing tolerance of the intolerant. Multiculturalism is the main culprit. What I am in favour of is a return to Assimilation/Integration as the explicit model for immigration

Paul L

I seem to remember a survey of 35,000 Muslims across most Islamic majority nations which showed 93 per cent abhorred fundamentalism and its suicidal actions.

That means fundamentalism has a very small base in Islam, much smaller than the base Christian fundamentalism has in George Bush's America. Why all the flapping about Muslims? if you want to be really scared remember those Christian wackos in the US have the ear of a man who could destroy life on this planet with one command.

Every 3rd week the Bush led invasion of Iraq results in the equivalent of one September 11. That is a crime against humanity. It's time Howard, Bush, Blair and now Rudd were tried for their crimes.

They could be tried alongside Osama bin Laden, whose crimes are nowhere near the same magnitude of Bush's.

Passy,

What rot. First I would like to see the survey. It sounds like the sort of absolute nonsense that a communist would throw about with abandon. Lets just start with Saudi Arabia and Iran. Tell me do you honestly believe 93% of their populations are “moderate”. It doesn’t matter anyway because the gov’t imposes strict Islamist law. In Palestine they voted in the head hackers and human bombs to represent them.

So the rest of your argument is rubbish because it is based upon an entirely flawed position.

Those Christian wackos have so little influence in the republican party that they couldn’t even prevent John McCain getting the nomination. Anyway, the Christian wackos scare me as well, although we aren’t seeing them self detonate in a room full of children at the moment. When they do I will be writing about them as well.

The deaths in Iraq are mostly being caused by inter sect violence and have been for a long time. That you refuse to recognise this is a pointer to your unwillingness to modify your dogmatic approach. Do you honestly think the violence will go away if the Americans leave?

Your comparison of Bush with Bin laden is a ridiculous notion that shows the complete departure from reality that you have taken. It is a sign of the moral and cultural relativism which has so thoroughly infected the left.

I really don’t know how a westerner can avoid being extremely apprehensive about Islam. If this author wants to persuade us that Pipes is mistaken, then he needs to provide a positive argument.

Mustafa Qadri, Please explain why Islam is compatible with democracy. Please convince me that Islam is not a threat. Please take into consideration what Muslims are doing in Britain and Europe, because that’s the precedent that is causing much of the apprehension. If your point is that, while Muslims have caused terrible strife in Britain and Europe, but will not do so in Australia, please explain what is different about Australia that will make it safe.

Please don’t waste my time bad-mouthing people like Pipes who are caught in a very natural state of apprehension.

If you have a benign interpretation of the Qur’an to offer (good luck), please convince me that it is the prevalent interpretation and that it will be followed by Muslims in Australia. If you cannot convince me of this, then there’s no point offering the benign interpretation.

I realise this apprehensiveness will lead to over-reaction, but how is it to be helped? My main concern is that, all the time we’re focusing on Islam we are ignoring greater threats like climate change and China. These are far more threatening and far more pressing. However, this doesn’t mean Islam is benign: it clearly isn’t.

SusanP, What is a flame? I know the rules prohibit it, but they don’t tell me what it is. Please excuse my ignorance.

Pax,