I guess perspective is everything, eh Paul.L?

>>I accept that things have calmed down since 2004, as your reference suggest<<

So if you take a slightly longer view than the first three years after 9/11, we get a less dramatic image, would you not agree?

>>Muslim populations in general have tired of the tactics of these groups<<

As indeed the Irish became disenchanted with IRA terrorism. They didn't change their religious allegiance, simply got fed up with being tarred with the terrorist brush.

It happens.

>>I never suggested that this was a massive movement.<<

Whoa there. It was you who used the term "massive" first, and I who objected to it.

>>The effect of 9/11 has been to give massive impetus to the Islamo-Facist organisations<<

But you now seem to agree that this "massive impetus" has died away somewhat. What is also becoming clear is that these Islamo-Fascist organizations are themselves becoming fragmented and incoherent. The antics of three idiots from Essex don't exactly fit with the "massive impetus" theory.

Incidentally, it is germane to point out, before we get too excited about book censorship, to note the following observation on the publisher's "prior".

"Gibson Square published OJ Simpson's If I Did It, his 'hypothetical' account of how he would have killed Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. The book had originally been bought by the U.S. publishing giant HarperCollins, which later dropped it in the face of mounting criticism."

http://tinyurl.com/43dqpz

So it's not just religion that causes books to be pulped.

Intriguingly, from the same article:

"When the UK publication of the book - which so far has only been published in Serbia - was announced Mr Rynja said: 'I immediately felt that it was imperative to publish it."

Serbia, eh? Now that is interesting...

Pericles, -As Paul L said "Please stop manufacturing straw men"

you are a bother arn't you.. straw men gallore.

Your last one "wipe each other out" .. aaah..there you go a----gain.

Who has spoken about wiping anyone out? I've spoken about tighter immigration policy, and various things like that. But wiping out Muslims? errr ur living in that famous Disney chanel P..you know..the one for kids.

"we might be able to settle into a more sober and productive assessment of how we can get along without forever wanting to wipe each other out."

Sure... we can do that. But it would take specific policy and deliberate steps.

1/ Identify potentially dangerous mindset at Immigration Visa application time. This can be done with some well designed questions.

2/ Identify potentially dangerous teaching at local Mosques. This can be done by intelligence gathering.

3/ Monitor potentially dangerous individuals. AAah yes..that's what the AFP DID..and now we have a number of convicted people.. all Muslims who did want to wipe many of us out in the name of their religion.

There are other measures. I would include the names of Mosques. I would not allow for example a mosque to be named "Bilal Bin RabaH" (Prahran) as the man in question was an absolute animal and inhuman sociopath. He also happened to be Mohammad's must trusted Muzzein/prayer announcer.

I would also ensure that history was clearly taught.... including the near collapse of Christendom under Islamic onslaughts. For balance we can do a critical assessment of the Crusades.. I see nothing to fear in that. After all, they were a reaction to Islamic military adventures and aggression.

So.. in order to create an atmosphere of 'Lets not wipe each other out' we need a very clear position statement on who we are, and what will happen to anyone trying to change that in the name of Islam.

Hizb would be banned.
ISSNA Coburg...banned.
Haldon St Prayer hall (Lakemba).. banned.

It's called imagery, Paul.L

>>Here you go again, I don’t envision scimitar wielding fanatics. Why do you insist on manufacturing straw men?<<

While you and Boaz may not use those exact terms, the image you intend to appear in the minds of your audience is just that.

Be afraid, you tell them.

Be very afraid.

Unfortunately, a couple of disaffected youths playing martyr doesn't have quite the firepower of a worldwide conspiracy.

So you concentrate on building the idea of a worldwide, Islam-led conspiracy that will kill us all in our beds for our apostasy.

A concept fully interchangeable with "marauding packs of scimitar-wielding fanatics", in its intent and effect.

Paul.L: << CJ's definition of an Islamaphobe - anyone who doesn't agree with his loony-left worldview

CJ's definition of a wingnut - same as above.

CJ's definition of an hysteric - same as above >>

Actually Paul, I use those terms as they are most commonly understood, i.e.

Islamophobia - "prejudice or discrimination against Islam or Muslims"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

Wingnut - "a mildly derogatory American slang term for a person who holds strongly right-wing political beliefs"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingnut

Hysteric - someone who suffers "unmanageable fear or emotional excesses"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

I hope this helps. Are you reminded of anyone you know?

Steven,
I was rather hopefull that more information would now be available regarding those arrested for the fire bombing and their motives.

Still it will come in time and I'll keep an eye out.

PERICLES says:

<<Unfortunately, a couple of disaffected youths playing martyr doesn't have quite the firepower of a worldwide conspiracy.>>

It took 2 people.. Terry Nichols and Tim McVeigh to take out the Oklahoma government building.

A similar truckbomb could to incalculable damage to the MCG and take uncountable lives....

But all Perilous sees is a couple of dissaffected youths playing matyr?

Well.. that rather says it all... and leaves Pericles credibility in complete tatters in the dust.

Some people see facts as they are.. then there are others who have this 'minimalist' sydrome like Pericles and simply deny them.

More..they have a 'minimalist/maximumist' syndrome to describe this clinical condition fully.

a) Anything presented as dangerous which has an Islamic connection or basis is 'non existent'
b) The representations of this information are in reality a result of fear/loathing/hysteria/distortions/rabble rousing.

Pericles minimizes the threat and maximizes the mockery of the reporter.

I suppose we have to take Pericles word for it that he is an atheist rather than a closet Muslim. (or that no-one in his immediate family is Muslim)
But the evidence over time is most compelling to the contrary.