'Useless comment' Slic?

Useful enough to get a response!

Try to be original. At the very least put your own feelings of hatred down, NOT those you recycle én masse from elsewhere.

Thank-you BOZO. You might be being sarcastic in your welcome comment, BUT you put it politely. Nice one. Keep it up..............

You and Slic, and the usual mob, chant the same intolerant mantra again, and again, and AGAIN.

Soooo; my type of mob will come in and try to steer you on the right path. It's a dirty job but.........

Of course I don't tolerate the execution of homosexuals. I've said repeatedly, I've no time for religious regimes no matter what stripe they are, and I hate religious extremists.

What I object to, is the way genuine criticism of ugly muslim regimes, has been appropriated by insular racist rednecks who hate people who are different.
Now, genuine criticism is muffled.

I hate the muslim regimes that persecute their people and I was disgusted during that recent rape case, when it was the victim who was punished by the law.

That being said, I disagree with them, and I disagree with you. I don't want to be aligned with either, but your tactic is to condemn muslims on a whole and attempt to draw others into your bigotry against the many people who don't deserve it, by acting appalled when there isn't enough criticism of those who do.
I'll condemn those who do, but I won't condemn the many muslims who don't.

That's more than a billion people, many of whom have no choice as to the regime that is controlling them. Many people of the muslim faith are kind, caring people, regardless of the ugliness in their book - just as the book of Job is ugly, and most christians are decent people.

That's what I'm getting at, but you're warping it to some kind of refusal to condemn ugliness. Quite the contrary.
I've considered your posts I see some similarities to my views but on the whole, you're appropriating genuine criticism of the few, to a broadside assault on all muslims.

That's what I've been getting at in this post - I don't give a damn about the religion, I care about the actions of the people.
And for all your talk of extremists and murder, you fail to give any credit whatsoever to the hundreds of millions of muslims just living their lives in peace. You tar them with the same brush as the extremists.

That's what I hate, and that's why I don't tolerate your posts for a second. That's what makes us different.

Welcome back Ginx. Where have you been? That was a very long sulk.

I see that your 'useless comment' has stirred up the others but it was irrelevant to the thread. Your self-imposed exile of the last few weeks hasn't changed you, has it?

Can't wait for your next bit of irreverence.

Ahhh! Jasper; the teflon prat!

Always personally going for me; did before; doing it again.

Your OCD is getting worse.

First/last post to you. You never have anything of value to say.

"Your tactic is to condemn Muslims on a whole. A broadside assault on all Muslims."

So how do we know, when hundreds of thousands of Muslims are submitting their visa applications, *which* ones are going to be a problem and which ones aren't?

They're indoctrinated from birth to follow orders (or else) and despise liberalism (It's the work of Satan, remember).
They're infiltrating our world to take over it.
It's the *publicly stated aim* of their faith!

An apparently "kind, caring" 7-11 manager could become an "extremist" overnight, depending on world events, leading him to drop his usual moderation, and defend his fellow *Muslims*, not his fellow Australian citizens.
Faith trumps nationality with these guys.

We distrusted *all* Germans, Italians or Japanese during WWII.
We had to tar them all with the same brush for our own protection.

Of course there were moderate, kind, caring, peaceful Germans, Italians and Japanese.
But could we just *ignore* the potential threat, and tar them all with the same "moderate" brush?

In liberal Western countries during WWII, ethnic Japanese, Germans and Italians (even citizens of the Allies) were interned in camps.
The American Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this, arguing that it's permissible to curtail the civil rights of a racial group when there's a "pressing public necessity."

How many more bombings, hijackings, kidnappings and executions need to occur before you accept there's a "pressing public necessity" to restrict Muslim immigration.

"More than a billion people, many of whom have no choice as to the regime that is controlling them."

Interesting choice of words: "Have no choice."
Precisely what's wrong with Islam.
Precisely why it's a threat to the liberalism you claim to love so much, but would sacrifice in its own name.

As I've said before, liberalism only works if *everybody* agrees to live by that principle.
Muslims are the most intolerant people in the history of the world.
And they (even the moderates) think we're slaves of Satan.
Can we really "tolerate" this potential threat?

It might break your tender little heart, but sometimes you're going to have to say "No".

It's not personal, Ginx, you just can't help being a fool and I just pointed that out.

This isn't my last post to you. So how long till your next hissy fit and disappearance?

To everyone else on this multi-culti thread, not 'happy invasion day', not even 'happy multi-coloured, multi-lingual melting pot day', but 'Happy Australia Day'.