Would be interested in some wide-ranging discussion of the documentary, seen on the ABC.http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/05/2154616.htm


Sensible comments please otherwise I am sure the thread will be closed down.

Hate bitterness and bile, all came from the mouths of these two women.
They surely are not Representative of this religion?
We should remember they in fact are not.

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

See also koran 5:33 where Muslims are enjoined to torture and crucify those who "war against Allah."

This is what I can't get past when it comes to Islam.

Muslims believe that the creator of the universe used an angel to dictate the koran verbatim to Muhammad, a 7th Century Arabian warlord. The koran is supposedly the final uncorrupted word of the creator of the universe.

Muslims believe the creator of the universe used the words in 9.5. Under certain ill-defined circumstances believers are COMMANDED to MASSACRE a loosely defined group called "IDOLATERS."

In other circumstances Muslims are COMMANDED to TORTURE an ill-defined group of people who "wage war" on the creator of the universe.

How does one wage war on the creator of the universe?

Let's assume there is a creator of the universe and that for some reason "he" takes in interest on the doings of one species on planet Earth. Is it credible that he would use words like 9.5 or 5.33?

What are we to make of people who truly believe that 9.5 and 5.33 is the creator of the universe speaking?

Can we imagine other great religious leaders such as Jesus or the Buddha commanding their followers to commit genocide?

Of course Christians have committed genocide. But that was clearly contrary to the teachings of the man who said "Those that live by the sword shall perish by the sword."

But Muslims could TORTURE people believing they were acting under instructions of the creator of the universe!

Today we revile Torquemada who did just that. Abu Ghraib has become a term of approbation. But we seem to give Muslims, whose teachings make Torquemada and Abu Ghraib look tame, a free pass

Uh, Steven - did you watch the program? Or is that just a pre-packaged anti-Islamic rant that you just had to post somewhere?

I saw it, and I kept thinking to myself how sadly deluded these women are, and how alienated they must have been from their own society and culture to have willingly taken on such an anachronistic religion and lifestyle.

But I think that about nuns, and Exclusive Brethren, Jehovah's Witness etc women too.

What I couldn't make sense of was the comment by one of the women that she would defend Islam with her life. How is Islam under any threat which would require one of its followers to sacrifice their life. The only people risking their life for their religion seem to be Christians living in Muslim countries as far as I'm aware.

I'd be much obliged for someone to explain how a belief in Islam endangers your life.

It doesn't, fester, it's just that people like to force them into choosing, so when they don't choose 'Australia' they can abuse them for it.
I notice that we don't seem to pose the same question to many Christians though.

Fester. She wasn't saying it endangers her life, but that she'd give her life to defend Islam. The analogy she made was that she'd also die for her children. But she wasn't about to blow herself up to prove it.

I'm *not* saying I agree, but reverse roles for a second. She's seen friends killed. She's seen two Muslim countries, one of which she loves and desperately wants to return to, invaded. Imagine if New Zealand and then Australia were invaded by a Muslim country. One that wanted to save us, to free us. And as a result, our compatriots were blowing each other up in KMart. Is there a chance you'd feel under siege? Endangered? Again, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but I do understand.

Basically, I agree with CJ. The first woman, especially, was one screwed-up unit who'd obviously embraced Islam because the Assemblies of God — or heroin — didn't get her first. Both women, psychologically, were looking for strict rules to contain the destructive, negative passions their upbringing had aroused in them. They were loony, but no more loony than BOAZ_David, who posts on these boards. (No offense Boazy, but if the shoe fits and all...)

I also thought there were some great insights. The second women's experiences of Afghanistan versus the Western backlash against Islam particularly. She made it real for me.

Ultimately, they were conservative, suburban, not overly clever women caught between cultures. Disenfranchised, for a variety of personal and cultural reasons. David Hicks was the young male equivalent. A lot of Westerners make the same points on "our" side. These women say you're either with us or against us. Dubya says you're either with us or with the terrorists. It's all so terrifically dull. So bland and childish - the goodies and the baddies. It depresses me, the lack of room for the complexities and prejudices of the human heart. The inability to understand layers of loyalty and the subtle dance of cause and effect.

For me, it's a pox on both their houses.

It's interesting. We've had a recent thread on this Forum - asking posters to speak out and vent their true feelings - not to be afraid
et cetera.

We've had another thread raging against human rights and
migrants and another on the curtailment of "Freedom of Speech."

Yet, when two women go on television and do say what they think - they're vilified.

I'm not saying that I agree with or support them. I found them both rather odd, to say the least.

But what happened to the "Freedom of Speech" theory and saying what you truly believe?

Or does that privilege only apply to a select few?

Foxy wrote:

"But what happened to the "Freedom of Speech" theory and saying what you truly believe?"

I don’t think anyone here is denying the "Jihad Sheilas" their right to have their say.

But the right to have your say is not the same as the right to have what you've said immune from critique.

The "Jihad Sheilas: can say what they like. That is their right to free speech.

And I can say that they are propagating a vile belief system. That is MY right of free speech.

Or is what the "Jihad Sheilas" say to be deemed immune from critique?

The above is not a rhetorical question Foxy.

CJ Morgan,

LOL

If you can see any similarity between the Jihad Sheilas and nuns then you really are desperate to be an apologist for Islam.

I have found interesting the reaction of my Leftie friends when confronted with the sheer horror of what the Jihad Sheilas said. They split right down the middle. One half try to excuse it or explain it away – the path taken by CJ Morgan and TRTL.

The others assert that this is not "real" Islam – the path taken by belly.

Only one among my Leftie acquaintances was prepared to concede that maybe, just maybe, CONTEMPORARY Islam really is a pathological a belief system that needs to be opposed with the same vigour that the Left opposed Fascism in a bygone era.

BTW I can see no reason why one of them should be forbidden from leaving Australia if that's what she wants

I found it fascinating how the woman was saying how the Aussies were all into child porn, drugs etc.. in fact.. I hereby LEAP onto that statement as a hungry lion does to a limping wilderbeast!.!.!

CHILD SEX in the QURAN.

Lets make NOOOOO mistake.. the Quran PERMITS sexual relations with pre-pubescent children. Surah 65:4 speaks of 2 things.

1/ Divorcing those who have not YET had there menses.
2/ The requirement of the IDDAH (waiting period to see if they are pregnant) for them.

1+1=2 ie. the marriage to the pre-pubescent child had been CONSUMATED.

This understanding is further supported by:

A. Islamic scholars who are looked up to by most Muslims (Ibn Kathir and Maulana Maududi)
B. By the Hadith of Bukhari also!

In short..it is an AIRTIGHT CASE..

and these women have the GAUL to judge "Aussies" as they did.

I have no problem judging Islam..in the name of God... because truth is there for all to see.

STEPHEN.. just a little hermeneutical point on your selected verses in Surah 9

That one..9.5 can in fact be connected to real world events of that day, and Muslims can argue so contextually.
A safer bet is 9:30 which specifically condemns/curses/calls for the destruction of Jews and Christians based on perceived core beliefs!!
Stick with that one mate it was used by the degenerate Iranian who drove his SUV into crowds in a mall in the USA to try to kill as many as possible "For the sake of Allah"

I would LOVE 15 minutes with those girls.. and a Quran..

The strange thing is.. this woman would defend it with her LIFE ?
Good Grief.

Dear Steven,

The entire reference to "Freedom of Speech" arose from a previous
thread - that referred to the case in Canada concerning the series of Danish cartoons and the lawyer Ezra Levant. I felt that "Freedom of Speech" did not entitle you to harm others. I was critical of the actions of Mr Levant.

You seem to agree - that someone's actions does not exempt them from
critique. I fully support your position with the ABC programme.

What I didn't support were the previous threads that tended to lean towards a double-standard in their logic.

Dear Foxy,

When I was younger I lived in Malaya - a Muslim country - for several years. It was a multi-racial and multi-religious country, however, the dominant culture was Muslim, and we respected this. If anyone attempted to convert a Muslim to a different religion, they were deported; we never wore skimpy clothing in case it offended Muslim sensibilities. We saw this as entirely correct as we were visitors in their country.

All Muslims, male and females, attended Islamic schools and were well educated in their religion The Malay women were very beautiful in their diaphenous form fitting kabya and sarongs, they wore makeup and their hair loose - perhaps a token piece of lace which enhanced them. They moved freely in society without male escorts. They regularly danced with Malay men - ronging. I found all Muslims devout, gentle, warm and welcoming. I was very fortunate to have friends from every racial and religious group.

Now these beautiful women are confined in traditional Islamic garb; recently a young woman was publicly flogged. This is not the Islam I knew. Recently, on checking a Malay website, I found an erroneous statement that women wore long-fitting corsets under their kabayas. They didn't. They wore bras, which were quite clear under the fabric. None found any offence in this.

I know a lovely family of Islamic Arabs, the wife is an anglo-Australian who converted; she wears Islamic clothing; the husband is warm, kind and generous. However, whenever I speak with them I feel I am walking on glass so as not to say anything which might lead to offence. Consequently, our friendship is necessarily superficial. When I mentioned my experience in Malay, I was informed that those early Malays hadn't been true Muslims, but animists. End of discussion. Their little daughter is very beautiful, and I caught myself just in time, as I was about to say that she would be a "heart-breaker" when she got older.

cont ...

I also know a Arab Muslim, who wears jeans, etc. She had to flee her country with her son, because her doctor husband divorced her. She told me that her life expectancy, and that of her son, would have been limited if they had stayed. She is undeniably critical of her country, but even with her, I am careful that I may inadvertently give offence.

None of these Muslims are militant in any way - quite the contrary. However, there are definitely topics which are "off limits" - not necessarily Islamic beliefs, but issues - political, social, and cultural. With other friends, such subjects are debated freely, whatever our background, and no offence taken. However, I know I could not do this with my Muslim friends.

Foxy we must always be free to say what we think, without that freedom we are no longer free.
The thread here contains some who seem to want to find something in these Lady's that I can not see.
And there are others that want to highlight the bad as representative of the religion.
The words they used came without promoting, they stand convicted not by us but themselves.
As for the words in that Holy book, they too are there they exist we have no right to remove them.
I see Wasps moving away from religions and in truth hope one day humans will truly debate why we think we are the product of Gods.
Our aim should be to understand we need not kill each other in the name of a fantasy.

there's no shortage of christian nutters. one of them is currently dealing out indiscriminate death in iraq and afghanistan. this is not an aberration. even buddhists have managed to twist their religion into an excuse for murder. the other major religions are much less reticent. it's no use blaming religion, religion is just one of many kinds of banner humans use to organize their struggles against other societies. blame god, for giving us a finite planet and an unlimited urge to procreate.

these particular 'nutters' have found a way to give some meaning to their lives, some brief celebrity to remember in old age. we can't all be on 'big brother'.

Interesting editorial piece in today's (Thursday) Australian.
People may care to look at it.

I deliberately avoided this program because I don't like Islam and I will not listen to people who hide behind yards of cloth, with just their faces showing or, as with one of them, displaying only a pair of glasses through a slit.

So I've no comment on the program itself.

However, the fact that these two silly, perhaps dangerous, creatures threatened to sue the ABC if it they showed the program - regretting, apparently, what they had said - says it all.

*The first woman, especially, was one screwed-up unit who'd obviously embraced Islam because the Assemblies of God — or heroin — didn't get her first.*

So true! It seems that certain personality types are attracted
to this kind of thing. I once debated with a Catholic fanatic,
about as bad as those two, who conceded that if he wasn't Catholic,
it would be some other kind of religion. He needed his fix to cope
with life, it seems.

Go to the US bible belt, its full of fanatics

Danielle, what an excellent post. Thanks for those insights.

What a lot of sobering thoughts - and extremely well argued...

I have to admit - I find extremists of any persuasion - offputting.
But the factions found in the Muslim community scare the heck out of me. Possibly because some of them are driven to violence and the destruction of innocent people. Why? I don't understand.

Are we (as in Westerners) partly to blame for any of it? I think someone in another post said that going in with guns is not the answer and only worsens the situation whereas medical aid and assistance would get better results.

I'm not an expert - I know that we all have our biases - that's a human trait. But Islam to me remains a quandary. One that probably will not be solved in my lifetime.

Where are the calm voices of their communities? Why aren't they heard?
Perhaps the ABC should now do a programme presenting a different,
more rational view of the Muslim Communities here in Australia - to
let us get a more balanced view.

As for the two ladies of "Jihad Sheilas" - if they want to leave
Australia - let them.

Danielle,

I too would like to thank you for those excellent posts.

For once I agree with C J Morgan, or at least his second sentence about these women being deluded and alienated from us.

To my mind this puts them in the same catosgory as David Hicks. Not capable of planning anything but dangerous because of willingness to obey.

The best I can find to say about them is that none of the three are not very bright. Sad really.

It is a worry isn't it ?
The incompatibility was well demonstrated in the program.
The problem is not that their peculiarity of dress matters it is just
the complete illogicality of their belief that is the problem.
If I was in business I would refuse to deal with someone who would show her face.

The parts of the Koran that were quoted earlier is why those who
would never harm another person are silent and would probably shield a
terrorist, because they feel a religious solidarity with them.
The wording of the quotes I have seen place a heavy emphasis on the
its us against them mentality.

Islam is a religion that came into being some 400 years after Christ.
To establish a new regime in an Arab region who are not Jews nor
are they westerners means that you have to make a political
declaration as well as a religious declaration.

I am unaware of the politics of the area of the time but I will bet
that with the decline of Rome Mohammad found it necessary to form
a new political system and to back it up with a new religion.
Does not Islam say that there is no difference between religion and
politics ?

I'll bet Boaz David is full bottle on this.

Dear Danielle,

Once again, you've shared your experiences and provided all of us with a keener insight into the situation.

You really are what I would call a "Plus" person. You make us see things in a different light.

Thank You.

I am atheist, I do not care for any religious or god. I respect the freedom of speak for any person, without any discrimination and I am ready to fight to protect this basic right. I do not know anything about =Jihade Sheilas= and I can not tell anything about them. It is their right to believe in the Islam and protect it. The way they use to protect or serve their religious must comply with the basic democratic values and human rights and I am not ready to do any discount on them. I am against sharia law and jihad. It is their right to leave Australia any time and return back if they are Australian citizens or permanent residents. Australian government not only has the right but it is its duty to protect Australians from any threat. It is the Australian justice system which will decide if any person is a threat, not the government.
Generally it is better to respect human rights and democratic values than to Exaggerate the terror threat, violating them.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

As much as I dislike Islam I think a country with so many fundamentalist atheist who are happy to see thousands of aborted babies each year really are not in a position to judge. The atheist seem to have more in common with Islam and their death cult. Between Stalin and Mao I am sure far more people have been murdered than even those done in the name of God. Add to this the slaughter of babies (mainly for convenience) and it is no wonder those who hold to secular humanism dogmas tend to be apologist for Islam and hate Christ and His followers.

runner
this is new for me!! I did not know that Stalin and Mao was democrats and respected the human rights.
runner hundreds of million of people lost their life in the name of the god, and it is seemed that much more are ready to die for the god(s).
Big problem with religious fundamentalists. I hope you recognize that over any god or religious stand the democracy and human rights.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaid

Hi Bazz...yep..I am full bottle AND full THROTTLE on that.

Symionakis old son..... you want freedom of speech!

GOOD.. we are on the same page. Now.. do you believe in fighting those who would PREVENT your freedom of speech ? I do.. with words, laws, protests, awareness campaigns.. all that the law allows me/us to do.

I say.. 'deportation/arrest/incarceration' to anyone coming onto our streets calling for 'extermination' of US..if we don't follow their rules about their religion.(see the vids)

Few publishers are bold enough to publish anything critical of Islam for fear of PHYSICAL reprisal.. that alone is enough reason to utterly condemn this warlike ideology and hunt it out from Australia in every legal and spiritual way possible. You might be an atheist, and I respect your desire to be that, if you ever wish to know about the Gospel of salvation in Christ.. I'm only a message away and happy to provide all information to help.
On the political level, I'm happy to work with anyone, including gays, who will stand with me against the evils we face.

If you wish to know the 'end game'.. where it's all headed.. a glimpse at Minnesota would be valuable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn-9_FUBUc

Note also the sentiments expressed by the 'Islamic Thinkers Society' about the country which gives them the freedom to speak.....

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=HO74GwUTZj4 "Sharia Law" in the US?

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ipsYKjHJktQ "Politicians speak about Islam" (part 1 of 2)
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-B1INyKF8 same..Part 2 of 2

Very revealing of what the PC media won't report.

PS.. if you want to see an interesting trial at the moment and are in melbourne.. goto the county court.. 13 Muslims on trial for terrorism.

Runner
Have have just demonstrated the first real type of racist statement I have seen since opening this thread.

Other than that I think our P M can be very proud of his flock.''

Atheists have never been the argument behind women having the right to chose if she has children or not.

What an extrordinary comment which was almost fired off as a weapon against ASymeonakis.

However speaking of religion and nutters in case you hadnt noticed the world is over populated.

If I had to vote for a religion it would be one with the common sence to do something to take some control over birth rate to stop millions starving to death in the name of whatever God.

On a more personal note I would like to point out that all these mumbling about a woman having a termination for whatever reason to me are a bunch of religious hypicrital nutters IMOP.

Church Leaders around Australia have remained silent as to the flight of millions of Australian Animals being sent LIVE to third word countries .
I think Senator Andrew Bartlett best summed it up when he said to another pro life nutter+ It would be impossible to inflict the same amount of pain on something that is less than a grain of rice and not yet born -unlike the barbaric treatment of millions of Australian animals in the cruel live trade.

"Well Spoken indeed."
What a bunch of hypicrits IMOP

I wonder if those two women have any spare room. Perhaps 'you' would be more comfortable with people who hold extreme views.

Do be careful not to trip over the RSPCA thread on your way out.

I watched some of the documentary.
I was horrified to see to aussie women speak the way they did of the Muslim faith.
I found it quite aggressive, these women where very angry.
mabye their is some truth in there though.
Look at the religions track record, the killing that has gone on for over three centuries.
Aussies are known to speak their minds, which can also be known as a form of telling the truth..telling it 'how it is'.
I couldn't imagine giving up four of my children, it is sad for the children, who will guide them now? and under which faith?(religious teaching)-they will become estranged from their mother and possibly never truly recover from being abandoned.
Interesting to see two Aussie women brashly speaking up like that about the Muslim faith,wont they be persecuted when they return to Iraq, as women are barley seen and never heard there...wont they be crucified for letting go of their mouths so?

ASymeonakis, as much as I usually diagree with runner, I think you missed his point. This is that both these despots were godless people that murdered many. I didnt see a reference to their being democratic at all.

If anyone thinks that western society is to blame for the current concerns over islamic fundamentalism, get your hands on a copy of Milton Giles "White Gold", which is the account of white (christian) slavery in North Africa, and the treatment under their muslim masters. Its truly horrific, and shows that not much has changed in islamic attitudes in the last 300 years.

The reality of Shariah law.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/05/wiran205.xml

Snip

Two Iranian sisters convicted of adultery face being stoned to death after the supreme court upheld death sentences against them, Iranian media have reported.

Snip

The two sisters were found guilty of adultery - a capital crime in Iran - after the husband of one of the pair presented a video showing them in the company of other men while he was away.

Snip

The Etemad newspaper quoted Jabbar Solati, their lawyer, as saying that the sisters had initially been tried for "illegal relations" and had received 99 lashes. However, they were convicted of "adultery" in a second trial for the same incident.

End snips

My understanding is that the two sisters have now been executed by stoning.

But who cares?

The feminists don't.

Most of the media don't.

The Archbishop of Canterbury doesn't.

NOBODY cares.

Why should I care?

stevenlmeyer wrote: "But who cares?

The feminists don't.

Most of the media don't.

The Archbishop of Canterbury doesn't.

NOBODY cares.

Why should I care?"

Clearly you don't, or you wouldn't be exploiting the situation to slag off the usual leftie suspects and list your pet peeves.

For those interested in acting on this issue, go here: http://stop-stoning.org/node/41

More info here: http://www.meydaan.com/English/Default.aspx
And here: http://www.wluml.org/english/index.shtml

Unfortunately, steven, these are feminist organisations - this news has gone like wildfire through feminists and blogging communities and mass lettering has worked in the past. We can only try. Either way, don't you worry - if you join the campaign and I promise never to tell you were once tainted. And you're free to bitch to continue bitching that feminists do nothing.

Who pays for all the travel arrangments that these two Sheilas have experienced?
Does the Australian Child Support Agency keep tabs on all the fathers regular payments?
How is it possible for a single mum with Kids to travel the world?
Their is nothing wrong with Islam per say,but these Ladies from the Bush have their own unique religion.I must start my own today.

BROCK...said "There is nothing wrong with Islam per se"....

sorry mate.. clearly you have not read many of my posts.

There is plenty wrong with Islam..at it's kernel... core.. roots.. foundations..

Do you not call institutionalized wife beating, and child exploitation 'problematic' ? have a read of surah 65:4 and see how it refers to divorcing 'those who have not yet had their courses' (Menstual cycle)

You dont take issue with
a) Marrying pre-pubescent female children
b) Consummating that marriage
c) DIVORCING them...?

Maybe you need to study Islam more, or just open your eyes.. either will do the trick.

I did not miss his point I tried to encourage him to write more, I want to give my answer at the end

Aussies are known to speak their minds, which can also be known as a form of telling the truth..telling it 'how it is'.
Mariah, you're confusing convenient truth with inconvenient truth.

re Jihad sheilas, "She says she feels more sympathy for the Afghanis than for the Bali bombing victims, "because they weren't holidaying in someone's country sometimes engaging in child pornography or paedophilia or drug taking".

That is a very, very valid point. I know quite a few Australians who exploit the "cheap" asian countries. Only a few days ago a Commonwealth public servant told me about how "cheap the young girls are up there" and, that he'll be spending most of his retirement there. A couple I know always buy clothing from asian countries because it's "cheap"
These Australians are no better than those who they point the finger at.

So what's the problem with buying cheap clothing? And why is doing that no better than.....whatever it was you you said?

The individuals killed in the Bali bombing were certainly not predominantly anything but holiday makers. For that idiot woman to make claims about the victims being in some way deserving of their fate is an absurdity.

The only question I have with that program on the ABC is why did they bother showing it let alone making. Its the sort of sensationalist rubbish that used to be shown only on the commercial stations.

To say that this woman made a "very valid point" Individual, indicates that you haven't got a clue. Don't you realise that the number of people who behave unethically in Asia, in the way that are referring to, is a small minority. To group them in the way you have done with Bali victims is ignorant and disrespectful.

Ditch,
I have no intention to be disrespectful to the victims. It simply is not my nature & for you to say so is showing that you are the one with tunnel vision regarding to live amongst different cultured people. I expected for someone to burr up when being critical about Australians after all it's their nature to criticise everyone else but unable to cope with it when put in front of a mirror.
All I drew attention to was that many Australians have a reputation for being noisy, disrespectful & a pain generally. If you take note of the news you will find almost daily reference to that. So, when you have years & years of crap from morons looking for a cheap thrill at the expense of poor people you're bound to cop serious consequences. You may be a perfectly good person but many of your compatriots are a disgrace. What's wrong with buying cheap clothing that's made by child labour? THINK !

The "Jihad Sheilas" are more to be pitied than pilloried.

It does the rest of us good to hear such points of view.
Hopefully, it serves to inoculate some more of us against the contagion that belief systems are all the same, & all we need do is join hands in a circle and sing ‘que sera sera’, and all will turn out fine.

Though somehow , I doubt if the ABC programmers had such noble intentions.I think their motives had more to do with publicity than nurturing free expression/education :First they run a program that some will see a unbalanced & vilifying Islam.And the next week, some other ABC program will run a program that bemoans the (unreasonably/irrational ) anti-Islamic sentiment in Aust society–it’s a win win!

To all the religios of whatever faith who post here:

For the sake of argument ONLY I'll assume the following.

--There exists a creator of the universe.

--For reasons that escape me the creator takes a personal interest in our species.

--The creator thinks that for our own good we ought to worship him.

With all that, none of you have any EVIDENCE that your particular holy book(s) is (are) the word of the creator.

You accept the authenticity of your holy books on FAITH ALONE.

For the most part, in a secular democracy, this does not matter. If Christians believe that Jesus is God incarnate they're welcome.

Hindus are free to believe that the universe goes through cycles of creation and destruction. In fact Hindus may even be right on that score.

But of all the holy books, the koran stands out.

--The koran alone declares that other holy books, notably the bible's, have been corrupted. It then sets out to correct what is contained in these books. (And Muslims demand that we not "insult" their faith!)

--The koran alone commands Muslims, under certain ill-defined circumstances, to crucify, torture and slaughter vaguely defined groups such as "idolaters" or those who wage war against "Allah" and "his" people – TO THIS DAY. ("TO THIS DAY" is what makes the koran different from eg the Old Testament. There are, for example, no Amalekites around anymore for Jews to slay)

For examples see koran 5:33 and 9:5

The trouble with accepting violent holy books like the koran ON FAITH ALONE is that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. We are all surely as free to slaughter, crucify and torture Muslims who war against our faiths as Muslims are to do the same to kafirs.

--Perhaps the Israeli government should crucify Hamas members.

--Perhaps the problem with Abu Ghraib was that the inmates were humiliated instead of having hands and feet amputated.

Monty Python, religion trumps you in the theatre of the absurd.

In some Christian places, “honour killings” - a harkback to primitive custom - are still practiced. They are illegal, nevertheless they continue.

Obviously all Muslims don’t take the Koran literally - certainly many Iranian Muslims look at the Koran quite differently than other groups. Malay Muslims of years ago were nothing like what we see today. I don’t know about Arab Muslims. However, as evidenced OLO, many are enlightened and kind. But, until such time as the Koran is addressed and re-appraised by Islamic religious leaders, very serious problems are going to remain. This is further complicated because there has been so much conflict between, and within Arab (Muslim) states, indeed Muslim groups, as to make any form of concensus virtually impossible. It is not surprising then, that non-Muslims are cautious about Muslims, and of what particular groups might be capable. When outrageous comments are made from certain sections of the Muslim community, perhaps other Muslims should raise their voices loud in protest and condemnation. Being part of a minority, they may feel diffident about doing so.

This issue has to be addressed by Muslim on Muslim. For other groups to get involved is a recipe for disaster. At best non-Muslims would be seen as offending Muslim sensibilities; at worst, condemning them outright. However, we should support Muslims, such as those in Iran, and elsewhere, who want change.

Steven, and Foxy, and Vanilla,

Thank you for your kind words.

I am unfamiliar with the Koran. What you have cited, Steven, is chilling. I also wonder to what extent accretions of old tribal mores - often extremely savage - have become attached to, and practiced within its “name”.

Many Iranian Muslims - intellectuals and dissidents - protest against the Islamic penal code in their country; a code with admits, among other horrors, the execution of 9 year old little girls. In the past year, two such children were publicly executed. These dissidents have appealed to the UN to have Iran expelled from this body until such time as such barbaric laws are changed - indeed secular law is introduced. As Arab countries are amongst the most influential members of the UN, are among the most wealthiest countries in the world, and also among those with the lowest literacy rate, such appeals fall on deaf ears. These dissidents also appeal to human rights bodies, and others - again with little success. Their site, on which appear many petitions, is:
www.activistchat.com/

These Iranians are currently, desparately petitioning against Iran having nuclear capability; they support Israel’s right to exist. As many are Muslim, I wonder if they see the Koran engraved in granite, and not subject to re-evaluation as has been seen with Christianity.

Christianity’s history is also marked with barbarity - converting the infidel at the end of a sword, then immediately despatching them in case they recant. However, Christianity has gone through the Reformation, the Counter Reformation and also the Englightenment. Christianity also had accretions of pagan beliefs attached. In Gothic cathedrals in England, bosses are very evident along the ceilings; as are gargoyles - many of which are downright obscene. These elements are of pagan gods, which the Church permitted so as to make their Christian faithful feel at home. Chartres cathedral is built on the site of a Roman temple, the goddess, an ebony figure, was re-assigned as the Black Madonna.

cont ...

I have yet to see any passage in the Koran, which mentions wearing
a Burqa. IMHO thats more an Arab cultural thinggy, of some Arab
males being paranoid about some other guys wanting to sleep with
their wives.

By what we could see of the two female fanatics, being covered up by
a Burqa might not be such a bad thing. They might well just be kidding themselves that males might really find them hugely attractive.

Covering up under a Burqa means not having to compete with other
females. Easier just to live the fantasy and not deal with the
real world

Danielle wrote;
Obviously all Muslims don’t take the Koran literally - certainly many
Iranian Muslims look at the Koran quite differently than other groups.
Malay Muslims of years ago were nothing like what we see today. I don’t know about Arab Muslims.
unquote
The differences between the different groups is so large and fundermental
that it will be many, perhaps hundreds of years before they remove the
offensive passages from the Koran. However I think there is absolute
ban on altering any wording of the Koran.

Can we afford to wait that long and why should we be bothered.
Ultimately it is their problem not ours.
I believe we should just hold them at arms length until they decide
to join the rest of the world.

Personally, I'm sick of religion. it's got nothing to do with any supreme being. it always has been & will be for a long time yet a tool to control not the unbelievers but the unthinking. Sad thing is it works. christians push their goody goody hypocrisy. others push their hypocritical agenda. What is life all about ? is it to just live as long as you can or should you do as much as you can ? what is the right way to live your life ? I haven't a clue. All I am trying to to is to live my existence without harming anyone else & try to have some sort of a good time doing it. Do I really need some religious egotist high priest or whatever these mutts call themselves to live my life ? I really don't think so. I know sfa about those religious brainwashing handbooks but I have read the 10 commandments and I think that "thou shall not kill' is not interpreted correctly. I think it should be "thou shall not murder" and that's one hell of a difference. If some moron threatens my life then I should be entitled to return the favour. Bible, Koran, Buddha whatever are a waste of paper if we're not allowed to defend ourselves. Well, that's my view. that should invite some interesting comments. c'mon let's have it.

I'll let you have it individual. (Good to see you have lived up to your tag!)

I endorse completely what you say. I feel so strongly about this thread that I am holding off at present, and doing some research.
But "I'll be back"!

Just wanted to give some support to.., individual...thinking!

GINXY..... while you are doing some 'research'...I offer you a very serious challenge...

STUDY Surah 9

a) Historical Context (see Maududi referred to below)
b) Relevance for today (ditto)
c) pay particular attention to verse 29 and 30 (29: fight unbelievers so Allah rules 30 "May Allah destroy/Allahs curse on, Christians and Jews")

Steven is still using verses which when taken in correct literary and historical context (although volatile and warlike) cannot actually be construed to apply to today and for all time. verse 29 and 30 can.

d)"Why" can verse 30 be applied to today? What internal evidence is there to support this ? Is there any evidence in either the verses themselves or externally (wider Quran) to oppose such an understanding.

For added research material, you should at least read the following.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/053.sbt.html

scroll to number 386 and look very closely at what Al Mughira says to the Persians. (who ask why the Arabs are invading them)

Then..follow this link
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html

scroll down to the major heading..."Chapter 9" (that alone makes interesting reading)

then read the following hadiths (just under that heading)

Book 1 numbers 29 30 31 32

Then...see this 'tafsir' of Maududi
http://www.tafheem.net/main.html
1/ Scroll on left side bar to '9 Al-Taubah. navigate by clicking 'next' until verse 29 is displayed with his explanation or.. click on the [25-29] section in the heading..and read.. and learn.. how 29 is applied.

and see what conclusions you draw.

I have a very high confidence level, that you will emerge from this in agreement with me :) and I assure you, I won't indulge in any triumphalism when you do.(but you will hear a sigh of relief)

I urge ALL readers to take the trouble to follow these links, it will wipe away most of the fuzzy thinking and myths which are trotted out by the uninformed. (and I mean..UNinformed) Periles..CJ...this means YOU Blokes also.

Predictable to hear from you BOZO.

You suffer such a chronic case of verbal diarrhoea that it is now habit for me (and I suspect others)-not to read your posts,(but thanks for reading mine even if as usual, it gives you grist for your Christian Fundamentalist mill).

It IS opportune that you post at this juncture though; the comparison between Rabiah Hutchinson and yourself was inevitable.
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE!

As Individual has already pointed out.

Given that you infest this forum with the same preaching condescension again, and again, and AGAIN; I am surprised that you are allowed to swamp the board with so many threads, carrying the same message.

All of these threads have to be passed by moderator/s. If I WERE to say that it does not surprise me at all, that would show a distinct lack of respect for the vetting process.
I happen to know that it works very well.............; except in your case.

Boazy, I have about as much interest in reading the Muslim book of myths as I do in reading the Christian book of myths - i.e. zilch.

Bazz,

I can see where you are coming from.

Perhaps anthropologists and archaeologists, both Muslim and western, should examine where some of the practices originated. If not Islamic, these could be expunged from Islamic practices. It would be a start ...

Female circumsion, in its various forms, originated tribally. Originally when certain groups converted to Christianity they brought these practices with them - but these are not now practiced by Christians. The burqu and belly-dancing appear "on the same page" in some Arabic regions. The burqa, undoubtedly, comes from a tribal society which perceived women as chattels - much as camels.

A Muslim intellectual blamed the Western "high priests" of political correctness for much of what is still occurring in Islamic countries. He said that these "high priests" of academia, by ignoring, not condemning what is happening, relegates his people, as they were in the past, to being the "white-man's burden".

About 18 months before I was in Kyrgyzstan for few weeks, a Central Asian Muslim country. I visited a Muslim friend. In the capital city, Bishkek I did not see any woman with headscarves etc. There are huge differences between Muslims from country to country, as between Christians from country to country. There are good and bad Muslims as there are good and bad Christians, there are Muslims extremists as there are Christian extremists. The persons who wear headscarves or burka could be good or bad, it is not their cloths or headscarves which make them good or bad nor their religious. There are different civilizations on our planet, there are same civilizations but in different levels. It is wrong to think that everything different from our civilization is bad or worst from our civilization. We must learn to respect the values and sensitivities from people of different civilizations. It is impossible to be wrong everything from their civilization , it is impossible to be right everything from our civilization. Let 's open our eyes tand grab anything good from other civilizations, let's have open our eyes to abandon anything bad from our civilization.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Antonios,

I agree with you.

However, why should women wear the burqa - it is very insulting to them? Indeed, insulting to men as well. Men are not necessarily slaves to their erections.

Why should little girls of 9 yrs old be publicly executed?

Are these original, Islamic practices; or accretions of ancient tribal mores with no relevance to Islam whatsoever.

Nuns don't wear habits now; little boys are no longer mutilated to sing castrati for the glory of the church.

CJ.. if you wish to be taken seriously...then a perusal of those documents would be advantageous. How in the world can you rant against me from an uninformed position? That's irrational.

GINXY... ur welcome :)
but seriously..I went to a bit of effort to present that information, the least you can do is have a peek.. and then, rather than just trot out the usual 'you are a moron/you stink/you are this that the other ting' you can actually (believe it or not:) have something to comment which is based on some facts for a change.

You see.. whether you like my style or are unable to see how I get past the moderators.. firstly..I don't always.. many of my threads have ben snipped b4 seeing the light of day..... but one thing you cannot say "I don't provide evidence".....

because I do! Maybe thats why I get through ?

Disagree if you must...but please disagree with 'facts' and conclusions rather than just 'me'.

peace and blessings...

OOPS.. I 4got.. the diff between me and the Jihadi's is that I do care about the victims of Bali.. and I spend a lot of time demonstrating WHY the forces behind that explosion, are to be reckoned with..
Then.. I get called mean names :) go figure.

If you read up that information, you migggght just get a glimmer.. albeit with that small amount of reading a dim one.. of what goes on in the radical Muslims mind.

Can't be bothered with the usual, but this caught my eye: "'you are a moron/you stink/" (Quote: BOZO)

Excuse me?? I said what? Freudian.

___________________________

Danielle, 'public execution of 9yo girls'?? I have tried to find a source for this, can you provide one please?

Ginx,

http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/ir_un2005a.pdf.

(Page 4) The Death Penalty

Executions of minors: A child becomes criminally liable under the Islamic Penal Law, at nine years old for girls and at 15 years old for boys (Article 49 of the Islamic Penal Law). Accordingly, a girl of 9 years old may be sentenced to death. Whenever a boy or a girl who has not reached the age of liability commits a crime, the court is entitled to sentence him/her to corporal punishment.

If you go to the site Free Iran, it has the Islamic Penal Law and all Articles in detail. These
are quite upsetting.
www.activistchat.com/
www.activistchat.com/blogiran/

A few months ago I spoke to an Australian business woman (married to an Iranian) who had been to Iran over the prior 6 months; she said that whilst being there two little girls were executed in a village nearby.

Danielle
I am against the Sharia law, I signed many petitions to support Muslim women, go to Asian Human Rights, on this forum and support two Iranian women who sentenced to death by stone. Danielle the truth is, according to the Human Rights Commission of UN, that the Saudi Arabia is the country which violates, most of any other country, Women's rights. The regime of this Country, Danielle, stand on westerners support and weapons. From one side we speak for women rights and against the sharia law and from the other side we support them with our money and guns. We (westerners) are cheap, dirty, hypocrites.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Antonious....

you support 'human rights' and therefore you made your voice heard about some Iranian women who were to be stoned.

GOOD 4 U...now.. here is the problem. Islam... as a religion, does not recognize 'Human Rights' outside of how they are defined in the Quran and Sunnah!

do...you....understand....this ?

Because if you don't, you will be spending your energies on the symptom rather than the problem.

Please. PLEASE ...look at this little gem.

http://whatthecrap.wordpress.com/2007/12/06/canada-to-hear-human-rights-violations-complaints-against-mark-steyn/

In France, Michel Houellebecq was sued by Muslim and other “anti-racist” groups who believed opinions held by a fictional character in one of his novels were not merely disagreeable but criminal"

then this: (about Mark Steyne)

<<Up north, the Canadian Islamic Congress announced the other day that at least two of Canada’s “Human Rights Commissions” – one federal, one provincial – had agreed to hear their complaints that their “human rights” had been breached by this “flagrantly Islamophobic” excerpt from my book, as published in the country’s bestselling news magazine, Maclean’s.>>

DO..YOU ..SEE that 'Human Rights' are being used by Muslims as a WEAPON against freedom of speech?

The true sinister nature of all this (the above) is found in this phrase:

"opinions held by a fictional character"

Now Australian religious vilification law, excempts 'works of art' from any penalty under the act. I have a letter from the chairwoman of the EOC/HRC to support this. I complained about 'Da Gospel according to Ali G'.
There are also many legal cases where Indigenous people have complained about things said by 'characters' in plays they found offensive. All such cases were dismissed.

HOW LONG....until WE.. arrive at the situation described by the earlier quotes? Where Muslim groups will sue over the words of 'fictional' characters ?

"That" is where the 'Jihaid Sheilas' would take us.. and that..is what must be opposed with every legal weapon available to us. (such as this forum)

David
I wrote that <<The way they use to protect or serve their religious must comply with the basic democratic values and human rights and I am not ready to do any discount on them. I am against sharia law and jihad>>. I do not like to abandon my rights and liberties in the name of any god or for any other reason. Generally I do not like to write about religious and if I do it I do because I want to promote the understanding and cooperation between people from different religious and because I want to sent the message we are not ready to abandon our rights as the freedom of expression. My message to religious people is calm, calm, try to understand each other and DO NOT TOUCH OUR BASIC RIGHTS.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Islam have forumulated their own code of Human Rights which they want to be recognized and acknolwedged by the UN - presumably as applicable to Islamic countries.

The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (Adopted and Issued at the Nineteenth Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers in Cairo) on 5 August 1990.
http://www.religlaw.org/interdocs/docs/cairohrislam1990.htm

Article 25
The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration

Ginx,

I should point out that the Islamic Penal code I mentioned is that which is applied in Iran; and I should have made this entirely clear.

To be fair and honest, I do not know what the Islamic Penal codes are in other Islamic countries.

Hi Antonios

I can appreciate your position, as well meaning and kind hearted.

Unfortunately it lacks a most important ingredient. "a basis" which can be agreed to by all.

The concept of "Human Rights" is an entirely human invention, and the idea does not come from anywhere except the secular West. So, that means that 1.4billion people (Muslims) will disagree with it. They will only recognize those rights from the Western version which advance their cause, and once that cause is sufficiently strong, will reject them and impose Sharia law.

This is how the Muslim mind of Benbrika and company (Trial began today) works.

According to the Crown Prosecutor:
http://news.theage.com.au/group-aiming-for-violent-jihad-court/20080213-1rvk.html

He said that Benbrika taught the group that it was "permissible to kill women, children and the aged".

Now..in the interests of a good understanding of 'WHY' he may have taught this...lets look at the basis in the 'Islamic version of human rights'...the Hadith tradition, where... we find...THIS!

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4460

Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE
Book 019, Number 4321:

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

COMMENT. Now..the hadith preceeding this, claims that MOhammad dissaproved of killing women and children, but the one above clearly approves it. I guess BenBrika took the view of this one.

You see.. THAT is "Islamic Human Rights"... so.. your seeking to build 'understanding' between faiths,is entirely futile when it comes to Islam.
Hindu's...Buddhists... Zoroastrians.. Bahais.. Christians all can mutually understand and leave each to their own. So, it will work among them.
True Muslims...cannot and will not.

David do not be a blind,
they will change as we change, we was very different. Christians was same as Muslims, do you remember Galileo? Only a god knows how many innocent lost their life from paranoid Christians priests. If the Muslims stone their victims, the Christians put on fire their victims, few centuries before. The sharia law is only in few countries. Bush's policy helped the hardliners and blocked the improvement in Muslim Countries, but be sure there are big changes in their society.
David USE YOUR BRAIN, THE MUSLIMS FROM WEST COUNTRIES WILL CHANGE THE MUSLIMS IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES. SHUT UP YOUR MOUTH (INCLUDING ME ) AND SUPPORT THE MUSLIMS IN WEST COUNTRIES. What do you think the Muslim women like to be as slaves? Do you think the Muslim women like to cover their face and their body? Do you think only west women need sex? Our Muslim is the best persons to bring the changes in Muslim world. STOP TO PRESS THEM. THEY ARE OUR BEST ALLIANCE. Do not push them to the hard core of the Muslims. We have the brain to use it. Think what I say to you. I am not your enemy but a friend, more experienced from you and I want good results not empty words.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Hi Antonios...

mate.. 2 points from your last post please...

1/ "They (Muslims) will change, Christians were the same, remember Galileo"

That understanding of yours is most important for me to address,
and try to bring better understanding why 'some' Muslims might change but "Islam" will not.
If you do nothing else in your life.. please do 'this' Study the foundations of Christianity ..directly from the Bible (Gospels is a good start...then Acts and Pauls letters) and see.. just see, if you can find anything to support the historic cruelty perpetrated by those calling themselves 'The Church'.

Then..do the same for Islam, most of all.. look at the differences between Mohammad, and the Lord Jesus.
-Did Jesus ever assasinate people who mocked him ?
-Did Jesus ever massacre a whole tribe who had surrendered?
-Did Jesus have sex with a 9 yr old girl and take around 11 wives?
-Did Jesus call on his people to take up arms and invade other countries and fight for Christianity?

Of course the answer to each of those questions is... "no"
and in Mohammad's case..it is 'yes'....

Mate.. please 'get' this.. THAT is why "Islam" doesn't change. If you need help in seeing this, I'll come and dicuss it in person.
But you can find all the information at:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Muhammad/index.html

I can offer more perspectives than they on the issue of "Fight those who do not believe in Allah" (9:30) which is a declaration of eternal war with non Muslims.

You are not recognizing the true nature of Islam..how it works. You are projecting a 'secular western' understanding on it. Square peg/Round hole mate.

2/
Your belief that criticizing them will drive them to the radicals.. is flawed. The reality is "Given the power, the moderates will BECOME radical".. if you don't believe me just look at the reaction in the Muslim world over the Danish Cartoons.

David
I write often to you because I think you are not a bad person. OK? I respect your rights and I want to see you supporting Muslims and Asians. You can.

Individual says,

"Ditch,
I have no intention to be disrespectful to the victims. It simply is not my nature & for you to say so is showing that you are the one with tunnel vision regarding to live amongst different cultured people. I expected for someone to burr up when being critical about Australians after all it's their nature to criticise everyone else but unable to cope with it when put in front of a mirror.
All I drew attention to was that many Australians have a reputation for being noisy, disrespectful & a pain generally. If you take note of the news you will find almost daily reference to that. So, when you have years & years of crap from morons looking for a cheap thrill at the expense of poor people you're bound to cop serious consequences. You may be a perfectly good person but many of your compatriots are a disgrace. What's wrong with buying cheap clothing that's made by child labour? THINK !
Posted by individual, Saturday, 9 February 2008 8:59:59 PM"

It pays to practice what you preach Individual and you obviously haven't. THINK! There is no reason to assume child slave labour because of low prices. Wages across the board and therefore the costs of production are lower in many parts of Asia. Slave labour is not a given simply because prices are lower. It's naive to make such an assumption.

So Australians have a reputation for being a pain and noisy etc do they? Just like Americans, British and Germans for example. Is this what you read in the papers is it? I bet you see it on commercial TV "current affairs" programs too. I would suggest reading wider than you currently do. You'll find you get a broader, better balanced knowledge of the world than you have at the moment.

And don't forget to THINK! You know what that is don't you Individual?

Danielle,

Thanks, I went through the code carefully. I have no doubt of its authenticity. I need to also make it clear that under no circumstances could I ever endorse such 'laws'. They are unconscionable.

I am concerned though at your mention of the execution of 9 year old girls. I'm concerned because it fills me with horror; I'm also concerned that 'facts' can become distorted in order to advance a particular view. By anyone.

It was on those grounds that I went looking for evidence that this or ANY mid-eastern country had carried out such a heinous act, ( it is horrendous enough that 16 yo girls have apparently been executed ).

I would appreciate it if you could approach your friend for any evidence she can provide that two little girls were executed. I have little doubt that had this occurred the world would have been told of it. Any barbarism that can be demonstrated by Iran would be leapt on by the global and in particular,- right-wing American press, to discredit Iran.

"Men are not necessarily slaves to their erections." (Quote: Danielle) (I just noticed this!)

Oh yes they are!!

Ginx,

The person to whom I spoke was a business woman importing Iranian art/crafts. I mentioned this to her in assessing whether this penal code - was NOT actually enforced in practice. (One can only hope ...) She obviously knew of the code (showing no surprise) and responded that she knew of no cases in "civilized" areas (cities), but was aware that this had occurred in a small village ... obviously where primitive barbarity was enforced. She didn't mention the name of place - and presumably knew nothing more.

As you can see from this fidh document, 9 year old girls are liable, as "adults". Thus, treated the same as adult women. Younger, they can be publicly flogged.

The fidh document didn't provide any "crime" which would attract such a punishment. The Free Iran site do have a blog - they should be able to provide further information. It might be that the little girls were victims of rape and, thus, blamed for it ... I do not know. But this seems the only thing I can think of for this barbarity. I don't know if the Islamic Iranian penal code address crimes of "witch-craft". That is the only other "crime" I can think of ...

A couple of years ago, a 14 yr old blind girl in India was flogged for being raped. It received media coverage out here. Obviously, the victim is responsible in such cases unless witnesses support her evidence. However, a female's word/evidence is worth considerably less than a male's. I can't remember the ratio of female witnesses needed verus male evidence.

Ginx,

Just to clarify. I don't know the woman as a friend. She had a shop which she (and presumably her Iranian husband) ran. We had a passing discussion whilst she was
finalising a sale for me.

Dear Antonios....

I support Asians..I married one :) my children are half asian.

I support Muslims.. and Buddhists, Hindu's, Zorostrians, Bahais... all of them.. 'until' they seek to change our laws and re-shape our society in terms of the own limited religion.

Here is one of the reasons. You speak a lot of discrimination.. mate... 80% (no..not 5%...or 10%...or even half.. but EIGHTY percent of Muslim taxi drivers in Minneapolis refuse to take people carrying Alchohol or having guide dogs.

Here is a report.. please have a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjwAr1-Ffxk&feature=related

The difference between you and I... seems to be that I can see the 'then'.....you only look at the 'now'.

If we don't take pre-emptive action... mainly in the enforcement of our discrimination laws, we will end up with a Minneapolis situation.

We should all watch very carefully how the Minneapolis situation pans out.. ask this "If 80% of taxi drivers strike......what impact would this have on Minneapolis economy and movement of people" ? This then raises the issue of 'politics'..ie..those with most to lose put pressure on the Aiport Authority to ALLOW the Sharia attitude..and then..who runs the country? Clearly..Muslims.

David
1. I am very sorry because I was a little bit hard to you, last few days but I hope you knew that I did not mean that you hate me or Asian people.
2. Thank you I found you did a big step to the right direction. If David Muslim people change then the Islam will change too. None like to loose its privileges, they will change the interpretation of their books, this happen with Christians too.
Antonios Symeonakis

GINX GINX.....GINX.....

I'm greatly encouraged by your interaction with Dannielle.... and your opposition to 'barbarity' etc..

I understand your reservation about how somethings are used to 'advance a point of view'......

I want slip in this 'underarm' delivery .. i.e..an easy one, for your reflection.

The idea that 9 yr old girls are considered 'adults' in Islam......

Can you guess where that comes from ? have a think...then read the rest....

If you guessed "Because Mohammad consummated his marriage to Ayesha when she was 9" you get a prize.. CORRECT.

Now.. from this very easy beginning.. it might be possible to 're-construct' you :) in a way which is truly supportive of Australian Identity and the need to 'actively' oppose the central values of Islam.

I can show very clearly.. from scholarly Islamic sources, that sexual use (I call it abuse) of PRE pubescent girls is quite acceptable.(in 'marriage') Not many muslims will agree or admit this, but when they see the particular scholars who express this 'fatwa' they have only one retreat...and that is "Islam teaches us to use our common sense, and to find the truth ourselves" there is nowhere else they can go.... well..one place, they can try to find an 'opinion' which is based on a mis-translation of the Quran, or one which neglects the supporting evidence from the hadith. This might make them feel better, but it changes nothing about the reality. The only other 'refuge' they have is to point to Mohammad himself as an example. But 2 problems arise immediately.
1/ He sexually used Ayesha prior to full intercourse, by 'thighing' her.... (but this info is mostly in Arabic.)

http://www.islamic-fatwa.net/viewtopic.php?TopicID=8330

2/ The Quran is 'above' Mohammad.. in Islamic law.

Rejecting the opinions/fatwa of Ibn Kathir and Maulana Maududi raises questions about any muslim doing so, scorning the opinions of scholars who are considered to be the pillars of Islamic thought.

Have a look at this.. and be outraged!

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/alshifa/pt4ch1sec1.htm

I see HOPE.... yes I do :)

Thanks Danielle, you've gone as far as you can to provide information. Much appreciated.

Ginx,

As this fidh document was presented to the UN General Assembly – Third Committee 60th session October 2005 - I wonder what the outcome was. Just the fact that the Islamic Iranian penal code includes execution of 9 year old girls should have rung alarm bells. It is absolutely, as you say, horrific.

It seems to be the same thing over again.

Arab countries are among the most influential and wealthiest at the UN (whilst having the highest rate of illiteracy). It looks as if this fidh document just got shelved and/or ignored.

Western media should look into such attrocities. Instead we get politics ... and whatever, the particular country wants us to know about.

It pays to practice what you preach Individual and you obviously haven't. THINK! There is no reason to assume child slave labour because of low prices. Wages across the board and therefore the costs of production are lower in many parts of Asia. Slave labour is not a given simply because prices are lower. It's naive to make such an assumption.
Ditch,
Did my post get you so worked up that you totally forgot to mention the many australian sex tourists ? Also, you assume that I'm assuming that low prices cause slave labour. I'm not assuming that at all. It does happen. What I am assuming is that your patriotism is somewhat in the shadow of "Cheap" imported goods and that the slogan "Buy Australian made" does not stir you up as much as a little fact pointing out.

So Australians have a reputation for being a pain and noisy etc do they? Just like Americans, British and Germans for example. Is this what you read in the papers is it? I bet you see it on commercial TV "current affairs" programs too.
Ditch,
YES !
btw, I was & now am part of two of those nationalities you mention. I just choose not to behave like they do.

"btw, I was & now am part of two of those nationalities you mention. I just choose not to behave like they do."

Well gee whiz. Aren't you just too good for words.

Well gee whiz. Aren't you just too good for words.
Ditch,
it's not about that. It's about realising one's own shortcomings & taking action. When Australians express disapproval re ethnic groups who refuse to let go that part of their culture which obviously is the source of so much discontent out here then the question must be asked. Who's ignorant policy invited them to stay in Australia & consented to the practice of that part of their culture. The fact that the radical useless amongst them managed to flourish here is due to only one people. Australians !
Every nation has it's share of hypocrites.
So far as cheap goods & lower wages across much of Asia is concerned it's not a moral right to exploit & behave immorally. If or when wages were so low that that your only option to survive is to sell your children to sex tourists or have them work alongside you in a cafe or shirt factory then I'm sure you'd feel very badly about those who take advantage of your circumstances. Mix that with some indoctrinated religious fanaticism you reap what you sow.

Individual said "it's not about that. It's about realising one's own shortcomings & taking action. When Australians express disapproval re ethnic groups who refuse to let go that part of their culture which obviously is the source of so much discontent out here then the question must be asked. Who's ignorant policy invited them to stay in Australia & consented to the practice of that part of their culture. The fact that the radical useless amongst them managed to flourish here is due to only one people. Australians !"

Ignorant policy? Why so? There are faults on both sides and we all know it. Failing to assimilate and learn the local lingo is an irritant for many especially when terrorism is the hot topic. But it's always been the way of immigrant groups to stick together in a foreign culture. It's hardly surprising that this is the case nor is it surprising that there is local resentment.

Accusing the locals of hypocrisy solves what?

Accusing the locals of hypocrisy solves what?
Nothing Ditch !
First of all it's not an accusation. It's a fact. Secondly, when people are not inclined to be more community minded you get what we have now in 2008.
Surely you can see some truth in this statement? As much as it sounds like I'm stirring crap, I assure that that is the last thing I want to do. Hollywood movies have been made & countless novels & books have been written about greed, religion, suburbian indifference, jealousy, racism, power & plain stupidity. Some of these movies & books reflect reality to a frightening degree and yet, people still don't look at themselves & realise that they are a cog in that big wheel called selfishness. Again I recommend to sit back & think. Think about how much we all contribute to the destruction of the environment, to the rising cost of living, to the inadequacy of the health services, to insane real estate pricing & the insanity of religion. Top that off with a justice system which rewards the bad & you get, yes mate, 2008.

I don't have to sit back and contemplate the selfishness of a large number of the population. It's so blatant and severe there's no ignoring it even if you wanted to. What's it take to get that same proportion to care?

No need to answer, it's a rhetorical question.

BD jumps in between Ditch and Individual..."Woah you blokes"

Both of you seem right to me.. but there is a dimension of the equation which seems to be escaping both of you...

When Individual blames 'Australians' for the policy which allows these radicals to come here, hmm it's not quite that simple.

Political expedience often means that some things are not made a major plank of electioneering, they rather form the stuff of backroom deals.

We seldom get what we voted for.. we ALways get hidden extra's that come with the bundle.

How many Aussies would have voted for Sheikh Hilali to not be deported ? He was nurtured by Keating and Leo McKlay to keep the voters of Lakemba happy for an election.

So.. this is one reason I go to such lengths to hightlight the dangers of unrestricted non discriminatory immigration policy. We SHOULD discriminate on the basis of any creed which is a threat to our freedom and peace.