"ISLAMOPHOBIA" read the lower half of the Herald Sun front page yesterday. It was in reference to a statement made by Yvonne Ridley, a convert to Islam who is a visiting speaker at the Islamic conference in Melbourne Uni this weekend.

She claims Australia is one of the most 'Islamophobic' countries in the world.

Well... who can resist such a challenge ? Not me. I went along last night, quite prepared to protest (had sign folded up in my back pocket) but also prepared to read the situation as I found it, and take whatever action seemed appropriate. Even if I protested, my goal was to enter into discussion, so if I could fulfill that goal without ruffling too many feathers.. all well and good.

After rambling through the rabbit warren of Melb Uni, and finding Copland Theatre, I noticed a small gathering of Muslims, and heard some speaker though the PA.

Many of the men were sporting Wahabist style beards, and while a few looked a bit aggressive, mostly it was quite calm. I introduced myself to a man who originated from Somalia, educated in UK, and we had a fruitful discussion as Christian to Muslim. He offered to introduce me to Yvonne Ridley, but I declined as I think her ears would be closed to what I had to say.

He wondered why Aussies were 'anti Muslim' and I explained that its more anti 'some' segments of the Muslim community and referred to Cronulla. He also could not understand why Christians are happy to obey all from Noah to Jesus, but not Mohammad, and I shared John 14:6 with him. We parted amicably.

Getting out of Melbourne Uni is like getting out of Islam, a near death sentence. Finally I asked a passer by who had been the conference. He was heading to his car and guided me. Turned out he was from Cameroons, but recently from NZ, and shared many similiar outlooks to myself, but also spoke MALAY, whereupon we had a great natter.
All in all, quite an adventure.

I do not gather my opinions via the Medea, in fact that path has become very unreliable.
Having spent some important parts of my life in western Sydney I have seen much to concern me .
It can not be ignored the lies are as thick as the pavement in that part of Australia.
Our culture makes fun of and belittles those who lie, others expect it as part of life.
It is not Australians do not like Muslims, far too often it is the reverse pushed into the children from birth.
Parents who decry racism are nothing less than bigoted racists.
Two young Muslims, you do not need me to tell you what race spat on police who pulled them up 80klms over the speed limit and said they only pulled s up because we are @#$% Muslims, right here right in front of me, lies?
Those from this community who want this to work must understand racism is always wrong, even when from a minority.
And lies? well once a mans word was indeed his bond however not now.
Lies used so freely are a measure of lack of honor.

Boaz, the description of your "adventure" is fascinating, but criminally short on detail.

>>I went along last night, quite prepared to protest...<<

But it appears that you didn't. Can we assume, then, that there was nothing in the meeting to protest about?

>>I noticed a small gathering of Muslims, and heard some speaker though the PA.<<

We are all agog here. How many Muslims? How could you tell they were all Muslims? What did the speaker say? Was it inflammatory? Was it subversive?

Too little information allows us to make our own assumptions.

>>He offered to introduce me to Yvonne Ridley, but I declined as I think her ears would be closed to what I had to say<<

How utterly disappointing. What happened to Boaz, seeker of truth?

Weren't you primarily there to listen? The speaker had pre-announced her position, you state that you cannot "resist such a challenge", but when you get there you can't be bothered to find out what is her evidence?

Shame on you. You have the profound cheek to decline to talk with her on the basis that she might not listen to what you had to say, but you don't have the courtesy to take the time to listen to what she has to say.

What does that say about your level of interest in anything that does not fit into your narrow view of the world.

Seeker after truth? Not a chance. I am far more inclined to the image of Boaz, seeker and exploiter of dissonance.

On this occasion, you simply didn't find any.

You must have been terribly disappointed.

Pericles, you are right, I was very short on detail mate.

I declined to meet Ms Ridley for a number of reasons, none of which included any resistance to truth and soforth. She is a speaker and a gathering of like minded people, and I really didn't want to upset her by having a combative interchange of views. Her topic was 'Islamophobia' but I arrived too late to hear it in person, so anything I reacted to would have been from the media only.

Then, due to the engaging conversation with the Somali man, I felt the greater benefit was to be found in discussing with him. He was evangelised for Christ and I was called to consider ulitmate truth by him.

My 'protest' goal, was in any case a starting point for meaningful discussion, given that I already had that, what is there to protest publically about ? I was not really in 'protest' mode that night, much more congenial and events unfolded to confirm this was the wisest course.

You are welcome to monitor events are similar Islamic occasions, or even at Muslim book shops, or a mosque. I don't know if anything is planned, but there is a movement growing now which includes Jews, Christians and Atheists all having the same concerns.
http://www.australianislamistmonitor.org/
I note with interest that Ridley converted to Islam after being kidnapped by the TALIBAN.. the mind truly boggles. I guess blindness to all they stand for is one of the symptoms of her conversion sickness.

On Numbers ? I'm only guessing, probably 100 outside including 30% running merchandise stalls. Inside.. presumably full. How did I know they were muslims ? come come.. hijabs, burkahs and beards for crying out loud.

I anticipate actual protest in the future, but at times and places more of my choosing.

The following is an extract from a table on the Pew Global Attitudes Project website:

http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=248

UNfavourable attitudes towards:

Country......Christians...Jews.......Muslims

US..............6%..........7%........... 22%
Canada..........9%.........11%............26%
UK..............6%..........6%............14%
France.........15%.........16%............34%
Germany........13%.........21%............47%

Spain..........10%.........20%............37%
Netherlands....15%.........11%............51%
Russia..........3%.........26%............36%
Poland..........5%.........27%............30%
Turkey.........63%.........60%............11%
Pakistan.......58%.........74%.............2%

Indonesia......38%.........76%.............1%
Lebanon.........7%.........99%.............7%
Jordan.........41%........100%.............1%
Morocco........61%.........88%.............3%
China..........47%.........49%............50%

India..........19%.. ......17%............43%

Among Western countries in the sample, the "Anglosphere" countries, US, Canada and UK, had the least proportion of people with negative attitudes towards Muslims. I suspect that Australia fits into the Anglosphere pattern. Ms Ridley's complaints notwithstanding, I doubt we are especially Islamo-phobic.

The Chinese obviously don't much like any of the "Abrahamic" religions.

It is disturbing to see the extent of anti-Christian and anti-Jewish sentiment in our most important neighbour, Indonesia.

It is fair to say that Jews are not liked in the Muslim world.

If Morocco is representative of North Africa then Europe has a problem.

Given the attitudes in Turkey what impact would Turkish membership of the EU have on European Christians and Jews?

Looking at the table as a whole it iseems that a sizeable proportion of people in Western countries hold unfavourable opinions of Muslims. An ever greater proportion of people in Muslim countries have unfavourable opinions of Christians.

To what extent do immigrants bring their home country attitudes to Australia

Steph.. many important questions and facts raised by your posts.
Many thanks. I'd like to follow on with....

THE RIDDLE OF RIDLY'S CONVERSION.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvonne_Ridley

-Married a Palestinian Arab a PLO 'Colonel'.
-Divorced, one child.
-Captured by the Taliban, and treated very well.
-Urged to read the Quran after her release.
-She did so to try to find out "why they treated women so well".

-She converts and suddenly all the western perceptions of Islam and Jihadists are 'inverted' and transformed into the 'good guys'.

CURIOUS POINT. I think we have little to fear from Ms Ridley, who appears to be very naive, bordering on irrational, and definitely a strange individual.
How much brain power does it take to realize that captors treating an 'enemy' well may have a hidden agenda ? One isolated case of good treatment from a regime which whips women publically for showing their angkles, which follows a code which specifically ALLOWS them to rape her without her permission. Any doubts ? read surah 23:5-6 it is an EXACT fit. They could have legally enslaved her, and turned her into a sex slave.
Yet ...... because they did not causes her to read the very document which permits this, and wonder of wonders, she misses it totally and comes out of this reading experience a "Muslim". Well, I wonder if she actually 'read' and further, 'understood'.

Clearly not. No, there is something more at work in this womans life, and I would not discount the possibility of demonic possession.
There is no rational psychological explaination of her conversion other than it is based on VERY selective information, and a good time with the Taliban, who's brutality, cruelty and fanaticism in most other circumstances is well documented.

Not exactly the basis for a thinking person who knows what is happening in the world to make such a life changing decision.

Based on the account David gives us of his welcome the thread might better have been titled "A Christian Wolf on the prowl amongst Muslim Sheep".

Once again BD has been treated with courtesy by Muslims and once again he misses the point.

I'm left wondering what the treatment would be for a representative of some other faith who turned up at an event at BD's church prepared with some protest signs in the back pocket, who declined to meet the advertised guest speaker and who attempted to evangelise another attendee. My guess is a lot less polite than BD recieved from his "Den of Islamic Lions".

R0bert

That is simply shameful, Boaz.

>>I declined to meet Ms Ridley for a number of reasons... Her topic was 'Islamophobia' but I arrived too late to hear it in person<<

...followed by

>>I note with interest that Ridley converted to Islam after being kidnapped by the TALIBAN.. the mind truly boggles. I guess blindness to all they stand for is one of the symptoms of her conversion sickness.<<

It is, at the very least, the very epitome of bad manners to go to a meeting about Islamophobia, miss the presentation itself, pass up on an open invitation to meet the presenter, and then to have the blind cheek to criticise her for what she has done.

If you are not totally ashamed of such conduct, then you should be.

Do you not have a close friend, or a family member perhaps, who can take you to one side and explain in simple terms that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable?

It is obvious that you yourself see nothing wrong in what you are doing, because you clearly take such pride in it.

>>due to the engaging conversation with the Somali man, I felt the greater benefit was to be found in discussing with him. He was evangelised for Christ and I was called to consider ulitmate truth by him<<

Read this out loud to to yourself, Boaz, and listen to its consummate smugness. The poor guy, standing there listening politely to this nutty Christian with an anti-Islam placard in his pocket - have you no shame at all?

Incidentally, could you explain to us mere mortals exactly what is involved in being "evangelised for Christ" and in your being "called to consider ulitmate truth by him"

Maybe it only sounds distressing, who knows.

Some like to put the boot into you BD but it is clear they can not find much of Merritt to do so.
In Iran a rather mad fellow has again asked for war on the west, he holds Australia's pass port.
The only action I can think of that would prove Muslims in Australia do not share his views is to get rid of this bigoted idiot now.
Some very good Muslims could be found to represent this group but is the will there?
Is there any point in multi cultures if insults such as this persons are not stopped?
Some from within the community I speak of find nothing wrong with his rambles but much wrong with my views.
Australia needs some to review their views on racism and bigotry and our right to be concerned at importing problems.

Hi Belly.. a lot of people put the boot into me :) I take kicks every week..literally... rarely do they hurt.

Rob... on Australia day, I attended a prayer meeting in Festival Hall, it was a Catch the Fire organized event. Outside there was a small group of committed atheists holding up the book by Dawkins "The God delusion" and they were trying to 'set us free' from our Christian bondage. I noticed no-one speaking to them (including myself) in any other way than that of concern, and polite disagreement.
I welcome their exercise of their democractic and free speech rights, it goes with the territory. If Muslims came to my own Church with a protest sign or 3 I wouldn't mind, it might shake some of our more apathetic brothers and sisters out of their comfort zones.

Rob, I don't know how it would have gone if I'd made a similar approach to the rather ferocious looking Wahabbis present. They might not have taken the same tone. I don't open a coversation with a sledgehammer whack of John 3:16 on people. I open with friendly banter.

Pericles, I don't mind you having a feeding frenzy there :) You are reading way too much into all this. 'Evangelized' means that the man was presented with a statement of the finality of Christ. (John 14:6) and that..in response to a direct question from him..."Why don't you obey Mohammad" ? He needed to go in, and prior to departing he simply suggested that I consider the various 'answers' in the various religions, but obviously he meant for me to discover "Islam" as the true faith. Thats no problem. It seems the most ruffled feathers in all this are on your own back.

I've been at the Alemain fountain with a gospel group in days gone by, and a drunk came up and king hit one of our team. It is not always smooth.

Wolf Rob ? :) not a bad comment.

>>Pericles, I don't mind you having a feeding frenzy there :) You are reading way too much into all this.<<

Hey, you started this thread, not I.

>>the man was presented with a statement of the finality of Christ. (John 14:6) and that..in response to a direct question from him..."Why don't you obey Mohammad" ? He needed to go in, and prior to departing he simply suggested that I consider the various 'answers' in the various religions<<

That's "a fruitful discussion as Christian to Muslim"? Sounds more like a Mormon doorstep interchange.

>>She claims Australia is one of the most 'Islamophobic' countries in the world. Well... who can resist such a challenge ? Not me.<<

From what you subsequently tell us, you resisted the challenge remarkably well.

Entirely, in fact.

Given that you didn't actually attend the meeting, or engage in any meaningful discussion, what exactly was your point?

Just another excuse to score a few cheap points, apparently.

Belly asks, somewhat obscurely:

>>Is there any point in multi cultures if insults such as this persons are not stopped?<<

Given the full story of your sojourn, where exactly is the "insult"?

This is the problem with rabble-rousing. You don't actually have to do or say anything meaningful to get a reaction from the masses. You simply blow that dog whistle, and they bark away.

Boazy: "I think we have little to fear from Ms Ridley, who appears to be very naive, bordering on irrational, and definitely a strange individual."

Yes, well - that's undoubtedly exactly how the Muslims at the conference regarded you. And, of course, pretty well how most of us here at OLO regard you as well :)

RE ms Ripley
Any western woman who converts to a religion that wants to make women wear bedsheets in the street has got to have some strange ideas if you ask me. Thats the last thing I'd want for my daughters. I agree with David on that. I bet she wouldnt want to go and live in a really strict muslim county though. It's easy to live as a muslim in the West where you have female doctors and contraception and all the other life enhancing freedoms for women. Women under the Taliban in Aghanistan werent allowed to go to male Doctors and women werent allowed to work or go to school so there werent any female doctors. Too bad if you got sick.

Muslim women may say, but we're more moderate but that can change
very quickly when you put some of these strange Imans in charge of a country like Shiek Hilali.

Good on you David for stepping out of your comfort zone and going down for a look it'll give you more inspiration for next time. Its
probably wise just to check things out at first.

You may not be religious C J Morgan but you certainly have airy fairy utopians veiws about multiculturalism. World War 1 started in the multicultural Germany when the German kaiser was assasinated in the Serbian section. He sent the army in no doubt to do a bit of ethnic cleansing and the Serbs called on their old tribe in Russia for help and Russia came in on their side and it esculated from there because France felt threatened and so Britain came in.

Twenty years later World War two started in the same multicultural Germany only this time the Germans tried to etnically cleanse the Jews.
Now it threatens to blow up into World War 3 with the Arabs and Jews trying to ethnically clean each other out of Palestine.

By the way Morgie could you send me some chocolates and a bottle of wine.

No? MEANIE!

BOAZ: Clearly, you've missed the point entirely. As an alumnus of the University of Melbourne, I will let you in on a little secret. The Parkville campus may appear to be a complete mess, but it's actually designed with one very clear objective: to keep the riff raff out, or if they do manage to get in, to make sure the experience is sufficiently painful and confusing that they never return. On the other hand, other "universities" have campuses that appear easy to navigate precisely because they have no standards, and will therefore accept any plaebian. :D

sharkfin: What? Where did you learn history? World War 1 started in Sarajevo (in the province of Bosnia-Herzegovina), which was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (not the Second Reich/Germany). The assassinated (Franz Ferdinand) was not the German Kaiser (Wilhelm II), he was the nephew of the Austro-Hungarian Emperor (Franz Joseph).

The Austro-Hungarian Empire held Serbia (which was an independent nation) responsible, and issued an ultimatum, and then declared war. Russia, which had aspirations of pan-Slavism, declared war on the Austro-Hungarian Empire. This war had been building arguably ever since the three partitions of Poland in the late 18th century, but was averted by the rise of both Napoleon in the early 19th century and European nationalism in 1848 amongst other things. Because the Austro-Hungarian Empire was allied with Germany and Turkey (Triple Alliance, a.k.a. Central Powers), and Russia was allied with France and Britain, WW1 erupted. (Incidentally, Italy was originally in the Triple Alliance instead of the Ottoman Empire, but later fought against the Triple Alliance -- I believe it gained South Tyrol and Trieste from Austria-Hungary.) However, this had been on the cards for a while since the Triple Alliance was itself the product of all three nations fearing a very powerful and expansionistic Germany (which had only unified in 1871), and indeed, France had lost the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine to Germany in the Franco-Prussian War in 1871.

Basically, it was all about alliances, grievances and escalations. It wasn't about ethnic cleansing at all. It was about the fact that most of the major powers in Europe were multi-ethnic, often with very large minorities who wanted independence (some of whom gained it in the 19th century), and the fact that as a way of gaining leverage over one's opponents, the major powers often supported unrest within, or on the edges of, other major powers.

Multi-culturalism didn't exist in Imperial Europe -- to be an ethnic minority was to be oppressed in most ways, including even linguistic.

Okay, you can call me a war nerd now. :D

CJ. "most of us" ? wow..thats projection bordering on 'astral'....

Its also CJ 'mind-o-centrism' projecting your own thoughts into others. Its all good.

Pericles, yes, I started it, and mainly to share an experience and some insights. There was no HUGE point in this thread, other than to recount that experience which could have the following impact:

-Encourage others to step out of their comfort zones for things they care about.
-Educate others about what is likely or not likely to happen should they do so.
-Inform others of the types of people and attitudes they may encounter in such activities.

Many of us talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. Unfortunately, when someone like myself takes a few faultering steps of 'the walk' they are still accused of multitudinous errings by the likes of blessed CJ and your good self. But walking the walk includes 'taking the flack' so it's ok.

The most encouraging aspect of the whole night, and which I probably didn't give sufficient space to, was my final 'struggle' to extricate myself out of Melbourne Uni to the tram stop (Shorbe..thanx for your illuminating comments mate) which I did with the aid of probably the most enlightened Muslim I've ever met.

He shared my own views (I'll duck for the verbal belt that comes from this) on National Identity, i.e. that none of us should call ourselves by our ethnicity first, rather, by our nationality.
He was reluctant to disclose his actual background for these reasons.
I'm sure, given time we could have had a most enriching conversation.

So, for those who may be interested in sharing their views with Muslims, my conclusion is you will encounter the best and the worst, -the clue is, avoid the worst as much as it depends on yourself.

I have no argument with this observation of yours, Boaz...

>>He shared my own views (I'll duck for the verbal belt that comes from this) on National Identity, i.e. that none of us should call ourselves by our ethnicity first, rather, by our nationality<<

I'm not sure this was ever in question, was it?

Even sharkfin acknowledges this.

>>It's easy to live as a muslim in the West where you have female doctors and contraception and all the other life enhancing freedoms for women. Women under the Taliban in Aghanistan werent allowed to go to male Doctors and women werent allowed to work or go to school so there werent any female doctors<<

I suspect that is why so many people from less enlightened countries want to come here. Irrespective of their religion, they prefer to come here and to become Australian.

However, I don't believe that they should leave their religion at the border - that is a personal matter, and not one in which the state should interfere. So long as they obey our laws, that should be the end of the matter.

But it is illuminating that you should consider the act of attending a meeting to have such an air of wonder about it.

>>[an] experience which could have the following impact:

-Encourage others to step out of their comfort zones for things they care about.
-Educate others about what is likely or not likely to happen should they do so.
-Inform others of the types of people and attitudes they may encounter in such activities.

Many of us talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.<<

It is stunning that you should think of attending a meeting at a well-known university to be out of your comfort zone.

But I feel obliged to point out that you actually did not walk the walk, did you, and missed the whole point of the exercise.

As a result, you are patently ill equipped to educate others on what might happen, or inform others of what they might encounter.

Ain't that right?

Well Pericles, as usual, there are things of value in your posts, in between the sustained and unabating ad hominems.

1/ "People should not have to leave their religion behind at the border."

Agreed...except when that religion actually has at its core the value of 'overthrowing the new non Islamic state and implementing a Sharia based society' Naturally, 'most' Muslims would take the view that it can only be by conversion that such 'overthrowing' can occur, but then....there are others, London Bombers, Madrid Bombers, Sydney and Melbourne would be bombers (allegedly)..... and the list goes on, who prefer to take a more aggressive approach, so that statement of yours, while 'sounding' balanced and compassionate, is on closer inpsection on a par with Chamberlains 'Peace in our time'.

It continues to amaze me that you can (did you ?) view such vile actions as the cartoon protesters in London with their signs calling for death, destruction, decapitations and disaster on the West, yet not detect a mild 'problem' in the existence of a substantial Muslim community in any country.

The conference in question was in fact aimed at building up this community, and what you appear not to have recognized is that it was put on by a Wahabist movement. Sheikh Bilal Philips, is on record as being in agreement for old males like me, marrying children of 9 "because Mohammed did it".

2/ The meeting was out of my comfort zone NOT because of its geography, but its spirituality. Refer point 1 above.

3/ Missed the point of the exercise ? You mean my exercise or that of the conference ? Mine was fulfilled. The conference itself had a dodgy purpose and my presense was to highlight that, though in the end I took a low profile approach.

Why does that disqualify my experience from being of value to others ?

From a Westerners view-point Islam is not a religion of spiritual values but it is a political system of national laws to be enforced upon society in the name of Allah. Democracy is anathma to the rule of Allah's laws, because it fails to curb behaviour defiant of Allah's laws. Democracy allows the individual freedom of expression and choice, which is the primary value upon which Western society is based. Islam cannot coexist in a democratic society; it must subvert and overthrow it so that Allah might reign supreme.

I think that at the moment, for most people, Islam remains an abstraction, and that a lot of people assume that like any other group of immigrants, they may keep their cooking or an odd festival or two, but they'll largely be assimilated. I don't believe that to be the case.

What will be interesting will be when a country like the Netherlands passes the mark at which it becomes more than 50% Muslim (which is predicted at or before mid-century). Then it will be really interesting to see what happens. Western democracy's greatest strength is also its greatest weakness in that ultimately, it doesn't matter whether someone is a ratbag or not, but whether that person has the numbers behind him.

Will the Netherlands remain the most "liberal" of western nations? If not, to what degree will it change? I think we're fairly fortunate in Australia in that this sort of friction point will occur in a great many countries before here, and so we'll have enough time to assess the fallout and get things right. However, I have to say that I wouldn't like to be in the Netherlands (or a few other European nations), which is set to become the petri dish of this whole cultural clash within my lifetime.

I personally think that at some point (perhaps when it's too late for some), Europeans are suddenly going to wake up and realise they don't live in Europe anymore, and then they're going to be really, really pissed off. Europeans have always been good at organisaing an inquisition, pogrom or holocaust though, so I'm sure they won't have any problems sorting it out. Sure, they've spent spent the past fifty years acting like a bunch of namby pambies, but a couple of thousand years of stylishly kicking the crap out of each other and everyone else they've encountered doesn't just go away, as much as some bureaucrats in Brussels would like it to. Despite two millenia of Christianity, at heart, Europeans are a bunch of savage pagans (Roman or barbarian), and that will be their saving grace.

Stephany said: "To what extent do immigrants bring their home country attitudes to Australia."

At the risk of being assailed by the political correctness police, I happen to agree with the recent comments made by Israeli Professor Raphael Israeli when he suggested that Australia should limit Muslim immigration from Indonesia in the interest of social cohesion and cultural preservation.

According to Israeli, there will be demographic pressures for Indonesian Muslims to emigrate, with Australia being "one of the big possibilities", with the Professor warning that "they will continue to come legally, or illegally, and settle here, and when they get to the rate of the 10 per cent, like in France, then you will see life will become untenable".

http://www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=2626

shorbe said: "Multi-culturalism didn't exist in Imperial Europe -- to be an ethnic minority was to be oppressed in most ways, including even linguistic."

Germany is still by no means a multicultural nation (the only exception being perhaps the special rights granted to the Sorb minority). In fact, Germany has some of the strictest citizenship laws in Europe, and expects migrants to assimilate. This is understandable as Germany has never been an immigrant nation. Considering the ethnic and cultural problems experienced in neighbouring "multicultural" Holland, the German model seems preferable.

Ad hominem, Boaz?

I think not.

Referring to you as a rabble-rouser, when it is supported so well by the evidence that I unfailingly present together with the claim, does not constitute an ad hominem attack on you.

If I were to call you a stupid unfeeling dunderhead, without presenting evidence to support the claim, that would be ad hominem.

But I think you will discover that I have been pretty scrupulous in justifying my position - I wouldn't swear to a hundred percent record, because you do tend to get under my skin occasionally, but you'll certainly find a small enough number for me to escape the "sustained and unabating" charge.

No matter.

I have mentioned before that your position is one-eyed in the extreme, and once again you do not disappoint. I observed that

"People should not have to leave their religion behind at the border."

... to which you replied:

>>Agreed...except when that religion actually has at its core the value of 'overthrowing... etc. etc.<<

This once again shows that you have tarred every Muslim with the brush of automatic sedition. You have inferred from the fact that they are Muslim, they are de facto unable to live in Australia.

Do the parallels with other regimes, who vilify a race by amplifying one particular perceived attribute, escape you still?

>>It continues to amaze me that you [do]not detect a mild 'problem' in the existence of a substantial Muslim community in any country<<

You are right. I don't.

I abhor terrorism, whether it is the IRA, the Red Brigade or the Tamil Tigers. I despair of the politicians who use factional terrorism as an excuse to fight a war against an entire people.

It occurrs to me that if the US had decided to spend the money it has since 9/11 allocated to the "war on terror", creating allies instead of enemies, Al Quaeda would be a mere historical footnote by now.

Oligarch: I wasn't claiming that Europe as a whole was multicultural now, merely that it wasn't in the past. Some parts certainly have changed, but many haven't. In fact, some countries, particularly in eastern Europe, are decidedly more mono-cultural now than they have been for a long time, if ever.

Pericles: I personally think the whole so-called War on Terror is a farce from an economic point of view (amongst others). If the U.S. and other Western governments had wanted to "save lives" then they could have invested that money in any one of a number of schemes (road/car safety, prevention of major lifestyle diseases, etc.) that would have paid much greater dividends. Or, they could have put all that money into energy research so we could one day wean ourselves off oil and then not have to be embroiled in a completely crazy part of the world that is not content to drag itself back to the Dark Ages, but sees that as its greatest potential world export/contribution to human civilisation.

Pericles, it was not my intention to tar every muslim with the seditious brush, but to tar the religion itself. Sorry for the confusion. (poor expression)

As I've said many times, it's not the majority who carry out the sedition, its a minority of radicals who take their religion to heart to the point where they see an 'Enemy of Islam' under every rock and behind every green tree. Hence we have numbers of radical (Quranic) Muslims on trial in Sydney and Melbourne.

Philo makes the valuable point about the nature of Islam as 'political'.
Shorbe and Oligarch make the points about 'invasion by stealth' in words to that effect.
But you... you don't see a problem with a substantial Muslim minority.
Well, we are all welcome to our opinions.
Do you see a problem with defacto polygamy by Muslims ?
Do you see a problem with 1000s of Muslims raging in the streets calling for death to those who insult Mohammad or Islam ? (your turf..London)
Do you see any difficulty in the likes of Abu Izzadeen claiming "Islam will take control of UK whether you like it or not"?

Pointing out such things is not to seek to tar every muslim with the brush of idiocy or extremism, but it IS to suggest that we need to tighten up our immigration laws and actually be more selective. While one cannot claim that denying entry to Muslims would be fair to those among them who just want to 'get on with life' we can be sure that denying entry to all of them would reduce the potential for their offspring to become radical and rant in our streets. (remember the demographics of the London bombers ? "home grown")

I'll agree on one point. The money spent in Iraq would be better spent in Afghanistan and in creating allies.

BOAZ: My problem in this is not Islam as such. That's not to say that I have any respect for Islam. I don't. I'm not a particular fan of religion in general, but due to Western history, Christianity and Judaism have largely been reformed to the point where they comfortably co-exist with the secular. Islam, to the lay observer, remains mired in the Dark Ages. How, or why, could I respect that?

Anyhow, my point is not that I have a real problem with Islam. I believe it's a failed ideology, and that for Muslims to be anything other than second class citizens or second class nations, they will naturally have to reform their religion in a similar way to Christianity. In this respect, I'm in a state of mild amusement watching these clowns grappling with the realisation that once the oil runs out, no one will care about their crappy world view.

However, my real problem is with the West. To me, the decision to jump ship from a world view spawned in the Dark Ages to something better should take the average person all of about half a second. Yet, for a multitude of reasons, that isn't happening like it should. Why not? What's fundamentally amiss at the heart of postmodern, Western civilisation and how it identifies itself that not only do people not voluntarily and eagerly embrace it, but that it has such a hard time defending itself not to outsiders but to insiders (ie. Westerners)? Why, in the face of such overwhelmingly obvious idiocy, do we not laugh Islam off like we would anyone who believed in Asgard and Valhalla, but instead stand paralysed when these barbarians want to go on a rampage over some cartoons and what is supposedly one of the cornerstones of our very existence (free expression)?

Yes, my problem is with the West. It's like that quote from Fight Club, "I felt like putting a bullet between the eyes of every panda that wouldn't screw to save its species". If there is invasion by stealth, then it's because we're bloody idiots.

Ingenuous.

>>Pericles, it was not my intention to tar every muslim with the seditious brush, but to tar the religion itself<<

Unfortunately, this dividing line is often invisible to the rest of us.

How are we supposed to draw a distinction between the Boaz who excoriates Islam because he disapproves of it, and the Boaz who execrates Muslims for the perceived faults of Islam?

>>As I've said many times, it's not the majority who carry out the sedition, its a minority of radicals who take their religion to heart to the point where they see an 'Enemy of Islam' under every rock and behind every green tree<<

Many people think the same about Christian evangelists. Simply substitute "rabble-rousing" and "Christianity" for "sedition" and "Muslim", and you have defined the problem in a nutshell.

Each side has its extremists, who like nothing better than to point fingers at each other. In doing so, they stir up antipathy where none existed before except in their own heads.

Shorbe makes an interesting point.

In terms of maturity, Islam could be regarded as a rebellious teenager. Due to a confusing rush of hormones, it is not possible - for a few years at least - to treat teenagers either as children who will instinctively do as you tell them, or adults whom you can trust to listen to reason.

(To stretch the metaphor a little, the hormones in question might well be the wealth created by oil over the past thirty years, which allows them to buy guns and feel important.)

But as any parent knows, it is impossible to instruct teenagers in this state as if they were still little kids - which is the way the US and Europe have tended to treat the Middle East - nor yet treat them as rational adults.

Normally the best way to deal with the raging hormone issue is to state the boundaries clearly, and to exercise superhuman patience.

So far, with Islam, we have allowed evangelical Christianity to dictate the former, and have at the same time discarded the latter entirely.

Pericles
Islam as a teenager, with hormonal problems -an interesting analogy!

Islam as practised in some countries -like Malaysia & Indonesia, was in past centuries almost universally moderate and included many borrowings from other creeds. But in recent times its leading lights have sought to cleanse it & make it increasingly fundamentalist (read- intolerant, aggressive & shoganistic )

Would Malaysia & Indonesia be examples of the teenager regressing -or a case of a reversion to younger ways that old people sometimes experience -dysmnesia ?

Oh yes , yesterday in Turkey there was a major demonstration by secular Turks.When interviewed one of the demonstrators made a telling point.She said -The Islamisists are using democracy, when they gain the position of power they will ditch it & impose their fundamentalist model -Now if Boaz had said that -it would be bigotry -but there it was from someone on the frontline -and a non-Anglo -and non- Christian to boot!

Horus: That's something a few European nations need to wake up about. The liberal Dutch (amongst others) will quite probably find themselves being outvoted in their own country within a few decades. Then they'll face an interesting dilemma.

The problem with democracy is that as long as one has the numbers, winning is assured, regardless of whether one is a ratbag or even believes in democracy. Democracy has only been seen as a preferable system thus far because such problems have not arisen on a major scale. It will be interesting to see how Europe (and the West) react when the Netherlands starts winding back the clock back. My prediction is the fur will start to fly.