sharkfin: the circumstances leading to the London Tube “killing” (“murder” is a more fitting term) had no resemblance to any of the scenarios for “terrorist attack” even as presented by compliant, gullible and/or corrupt journalists. The Haneef case and its contrivance around the “Glasgow attack” is more a matter of ridiculous hyperbole. The modus operandi of the “attack” and its sleuths' SIM card detail had the clear signs of amateurish fit-up: think Jackie Kelly's pre-election household and the clumsily inflammatory pamphlets. Either you're just winding me up, or you're being had.

Perhaps the biggest and most obvious lie is that about “suicide bombings”. It has become so commonplace for TV news to claim a “suicide bombing” when a detonation has not even had the most basic forrensic investigation; not to ignore that such attacks do occur (as in Palestinian cases), but there are key, highly sensitive diplomatic cases where such detonations are not suicidal, but plainly homicidal from remote control. That such obvious facts are not reported is a scathing commentary not only on the media, but on the entire web of “terrorism business” that has been imposed on us.

How can you claim “they did their job”? I worked many years in that field and your claim is absurd (they'd recruit you fast though!), apparently very gullible and naive. Imagine: “Quick, there's a darkish-skinned guy with a package, running to a train!” Yeah, right. Another day at the office for Keystone's terrorbusters. Their job is supposedly to watch for that rare moment when a package-laden commuter runs to catch a train, because that must be how such attacks are made? Then there's the post-bombing CCTV!

Your criticism of the Haslam text is quite correct, but it seems equally gullible, taking at face value his glib reference to “prejudice” (notice the irrelevant sub-title too). As we can now expect from Murdoch a la FOX, such articles are meant to provoke and incense the fair and critically minded, and marginalize them among the many readers either too simple or too busy to check just what is being said.

Mil-observer,

I'm not surprised your Malaysian friends are non-Malay-non-Muslim. I have plenty of those. None openly complains about Malaysia either. A close friend in KL owns a business, told me he bribes "everyone" in government departments to get things done. Corruption is a way of life in Malaysia. But his grief is failure to have a child, not whether there's corruption, lack of freedom/justice in Malaysia.

I don't expect Malaysians to grasp the meaning of freedom and democracy. My friends are mostly successful economically and never seem to desire freedom/democracy anyhow.

Humans can be very resilient. But human minds becomes warped and get muddled about right and wrong, when survival is the main consideration.

When asked about injustice and inequality, a Malaysian shrugged his shoulder that we (Chinese) are living in someone else's (ie.Muslim-Malays) terrority, so put up,shut up. (What a weird attitude).
Even some relatives think it's alright to appease the Muslim-Malays with unfair advantages, (to lessen ethnic-tensions from them).

I openly mentioned Malaysia racism once, a colleague (Malaysian) looked in horror and protested, "No,no,no...". For a moment I couldn't believe his reaction...how could he not admitting institutionalised racism there??

One close relative only truly understood freedom,democracy after migrating here.

A close relative (in KL) confides in me readily how he feels. "KL is a sick place". A country is judged by the way it treats the minority. "In Malaysia, the majority (Muslim-Malays) bullies the minority".

Depending on your "friends" and your prejudice, different stories can be made up.

But the 1969 race-riot was a FACT. Plights of ethnic Indians is FACTUAL (including many poor Chinese).
Despite denials, it's doubtless Malaysia has many "unseen" problems.

To say your non-Muslim friends are constantly appalled by Australian fear and ignorance about Islam and Muslims...makes you a snake-oil salesman, a con-artist with words-- You words cannot be trusted!!

To attack preaching of Christianity in a majority Muslim country, when Malays are compulsory Muslims BY LAW, when the Dayaks themselves accept preaching, indicate you're prejudiced and cannot get the balance right.

Your mind is as warped as many Malaysians living in denials.

'No TR: Somehow you caught the epidemic “Islamophobia”. And if you want “totalitarian and spiteful”, you can hardly beat Christopher Hitchens. After the latest 1-million+dead Iraq crime that he backed, he could almost qualify as a warmonger too, except he's a Chickenhawk like the neocons who pushed it officially, or its ideological tour guides like the very recently dead Islam-hater SP Huntington.'

I'm not sure why you keep linking me to Chris Hitchens. I am perfectly capable of estimating the religio-political ideology of Islam on my own without someone holding my hand. Having lived in Khamis Mushayt and a small one bedroom unit adjacent to a large mosque in Riyadh for 3.5 years I feel that I am reasonable well informed. And yes I have some good Muslim friends as a result.

However, I don't confuse Muslims with Islam. They are two separate entities. The former is a human being trying to come to terms with the confusion of life like the rest of us, and the other is a totalatarian and spiteful ideology perpetuated by a succession of delusional Imams. The fact that most Muslims ARE decent people is a testament to the human spirit and its amazing ability to rise above the religious brainwashing that begins at birth.

Anyway, I'm off to listen to Sheik Mohammed Feiz on YouTube. He's comes highly recommended by many young Aussie Muslims. Apparently child martyrdom and Jew hating are beneficial pastimes if you want to impress that demanding deity called Allah

GeeZuz: get it right. You're the mouth-frothing Islamophobe, so just going by your obsessiveness yours would appear to be the warped head. As one other OLO-er once said to the Islamophobe den: what did you guys ever do before UBL and 911? It must have been terrible.

As you can confirm from my text, I understand Malaysia has problems with its Bumiputera system; one such, probably caused by corruption via western missionary imperialists, was that the state set no officially recognized religion for Dayaks. As a minority Bumiputera ethnicity, that was a mistake, and denied them the protection afforded most Malay Muslims against becoming an indigenous minority themselves. Other obvious related problems came from allowing missionaries in, whereas Indonesia would have had such predators breaking rocks or practising their parasitism far away from Indonesia. Nonetheless, Malaysia is an amazing achievement, especially its confident resistance during the '97 onslaught led by Soros (this time around it seems Indonesia's turn to lead such resistance).

More recent Malaysian corruption is clear from western bankers' toady Anwar Ibrahim, who's trying to foment Indian and Chinese discontent, just part of the deal from his western backers. If UMNO boffins had spine over this issue, they'd figure how to deport Anwar too.

But you're really kidding yourselves with your cherry-picking on “Islam”. Indonesia's anti-missionary stance applies to sects like Al Arqam and Ahmadiyah (and Wahabbism itself too).

TR: the Saudi fundies are precisely the type actively courted by the west over many decades, starting in Whitehall; Wahabbism has been encouraged from the same quarter, just as the UK itself became the haven for fundy, comic-book militancy, like a “showcase” but also a petrie dish for disseminating terror. The Mumbai operation appears to be the first major overseas test of such processes. The UK press backtracked into self-censorship after its initially widespread reporting of the many UK citizens conducting the Mumbai operation (Oz press, forget it – beside neolib ABC—SBS, there's christian fundy Stokes, and little else).

Yes, Hitchens is not only a coke fiend, but he loudly and repeatedly backed a massive war crime. Some genius.

Mil-observer wrote:
"...Malaysia has problems....that the state set no officially recognized religion for Dayaks....that was a mistake, and denied them the protection afforded most Malay Muslims..."

It is very clear...
(1)...Mil-observer insists that the natives of Sarawak (a part of East Malaysia) should have been forced to be Muslims by legislation, by the state of Malaysia.
(2)...Mil-observer thinks forcing the Dayaks to be Muslims will "protect" them from Christian missionaries/preachers.
(3)...Mil-observer thinks it's wrong that the Dayaks people should have a freedom of religion.

Mil-observer boy, listen up !!

I had only read a few posts from you earlier when I concluded that you're an IGNORANT FOOL who actually does not grasp Australian values of freedom and democracy.

I was right in coming to that conclusion, that you're an IGNORANT FOOL !!

The evidence is plain to see by all !!

Thanks Gee-Zuhz: you just sh@fted yourself in public. Not a pretty spectacle, but a funny one. I just lerv the touch about "Oss-traylian values" too: yum, how very "Cronulla". Shouldn't you try waving that flag in Afghanistan, or are you feeling a bit squeamish with bad knees too?

No, I never wrote or implied anything about Dayaks and Islam. Malaysia's Dayaks - like their cousins in Indonesia - have a background of animist religion. That is probably another big reason why KL did not get its head around institutional protection of Dayaks' religious heritage. Another related challenge was infrastructure and, more obviously, education. Some slack KL officials obviously took the easy option of allowing missionaries in to cover much activity that should have been the state's responsibility in the first place. I understand that similar processes happened among Indonesia's neighboring Dayaks, where slack Soehartoist officials turned a blind eye to missionary activity, while squeezing serious loot out of the spoilt, naive and soft-headed fundies.

So have another cup of invective, paranoia and megalomania, and I'll watch what you vomit up next.