Dear Danielle,

This may seem a little trite but isn't the sentiment “Islam tolerates no criticism” a criticism?

I would love to find the context in which the remark was made but my efforts to find the original interview have failed.

Germany is taking a thoughtful approach, one Australia might learn from. An Integration Minister seems like a good idea. That there are challenges that would benefit from a more focussed approach is undeniable.

The quote; “She also said it was easier to dialogue with Muslims in Germany because they are relatively well educated. "In other parts of the world," she said, "some take to the streets and set fire to embassies." is stating a given which could be said of any race or religion.

'it was easier to dialogue with fundamentalist Christians in Australia because they are relatively well educated. "In other parts of the world," she said, "some take to the streets and demand their governments hang homosexuals.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsDbaRknWXs

The Gladstone Institute's report quotes Abu Assad al-Almani who is apparently a German Jihadist calling for the murder of those associated with the film. Outside this article I can not find any other references to him. We have some virtually anonymous jerk doing a rant in the German language and it is referenced by the Gladstone Institute? Why?

When a jerk from a far right wing Christian organisation like the KKK gets up and calls for the 'killing of all the Jews but only after they are tortured first' why isn't there the same reaction?

Or; “In 1980, three KKK members shot four elderly black women ... following a KKK initiation rally. A fifth woman ... was injured by flying glass in the incident. Attempted murder charges were filed against the three KKK members, two of whom … were acquitted by an all-white jury, and the other ... was sentenced by the same jury to nine months on lesser charges. He was released after three months”

I don't consider the views of extreme Christian groups reflect the values of the faith nor do I consider the same for Islam.

Dear Yabby,

You wrote;

“Unlike yourself, they clearly realise that explosions going of in numerous countries killing thousands and buildings toppling over in New York after being hit by human bombs, is a bit more serious than your fob off.”

I take these issues and threats very seriously but I don't fob them off as an us vs them debate because while it would be easy it isn't smart nor in keeping with the facts.

Osama Bin Laden was not originally a hater of the US. He fought on its side in the war against the Russians in Afghanistan opening recruitment centres in the States and receiving CIA funds. What turned him was the deployment into Saudi Arabia of thousands of American troops who did not leave after the first Gulf War. On the seventh anniversary of their deployment Osama organised a series of embassy bombings which killed hundreds. The troops remained. After the towers came down the troops were removed.

Just as the Jewish people respond to the notion of Israel I think it is obvious that the Islamic faith with rituals likes the Hajj serves to heighten empathy between Muslims perhaps more so than the Christian faith would between its own adherents. This is why events in the Middle East have a far greater impact on Jewish and Muslim Australians than we Australian secularists are able to appreciate.

Usually when I see geopolitical issues being dismissed then it is obvious other agendas are at play. As I said fobbing this off as an 'us and them' issue is lazy, ignorant and corrosive to our society.

Dear Poirot,

Whenever I describe someone as having “become the type of poster that is not worth the effort” I have found it is fairly normal behaviour for them to ratchet up the vitriol in an effort to get me to respond. The only interest left for me is seeing how far they will go. As you said at times it can be fascinating. Sometimes I have not been above giving a surreptitious little prod when they have gone quiet.

As-Salamu Alaykum

*What turned him was the deployment into Saudi Arabia of thousands of American troops who did not leave after the first Gulf War.*

Oh if only it were that simple, Csteele. Fact is that bin Laden
thought that he could protect Saudi Arabia against Saddam and the
Saudi Govt wisely thought that the Americans had a far better chance
of doing that, so invited them to establish a base there and paid
for the costs. At the same time bin Laden was receiving religious
instructions from Sayyid Qutb's brother, all about radical Islam.

When the Taliban finally ran Afghanistan, with photos, music, tv,
schools for girls etc all banned, bin Laden described it as the
closest thing to a perfect muslim state. For Qutb's ideology had
also affected Zawahiri and other radicals who formed the basis
of Al Queda. Qutb despised the West and campaigned for a global
overthrow, to turn the whole world into a Caliphate, with the Koran
as its constitution.

So you completely ignore the change in ideology which bin Laden
underwent during his lifetime, but then I expected no more of you,
as your posts show.

I have been giving my contributions to this thread, and the forum some thought.
Here in this thread, and ones about my party, my thoughts are different than some.
People I respect, BonMot, Lexi, and poirot, seem to have very different thoughts than me.
I except this, without hurt.
But how can others not share a view free speech, even if you do not like it is worth while?
What places other views at higher value than mine.
Poirot and the other, CONSTANTLY, from a lofty castle, declare me wrong, but is that so.
Why then has this thread, unlike any its author ever started, become our longest one in history?
Thieving another,s saying here, but it fits, an inconvenient truth is on display here.
The majority, vastly, agreed with me yabby kactuz and others.
Prior to ww2 warnings met with do not be silly from well meaning folk.
I do not claim one contributor is well meaning, but most who oppose me are.
Time will tell.
I also have never before seen so much uninformed and one sided debate , my threads may not bring big numbers but I intend to try to get a bit away from politics for a while.

Hi Poirot,

Nice to see you've got over your huff.

You write,

" .... many of those contributing display the same sort of closed-minded arrogant and defensive attitude that they are criticizing."

Apart from the obvious comment that one should be circumspect about living in glass houses, etc., I like to think that some of us try not to :)

But congratulations anyway, that after 500 posts on this thread, you have successfully avoided touching on any of the issues. What are they, you may well ask ?

* freedom of speech (which applies to Islamists as much as the rest of us non-Islamists), and recognition of the boundaries (i.e. incitement, violence) of those freedoms

* respect for the rule of law in a bourgeois and post-Enlightenment society

* the right to offend, whether the offendees are Christian (cf. Life of Brian), atheists ( much of the entire corpus of religious dogma), Hindu, Buddhist, OR Muslim. I don't mind whatever dreadful things are said about us atheists, by the way - even comments by Pericles sort of honour the rest of us.

Once upon a time, some women had the temerity to push for equal rights - they called themselves feminists, but of course they know now that they should stay in the background, walk five paces behind with eyes cast down, supporting their men's rights to call for beheadings, as long as the bruises don't show.

If you talk like a duck, and waddle with ducks, Poirot, .....

Cheers,

Joe

:)

Yes, Loudmouth, it occurred to me that your mutterings weren't worth the vexation : )

And you, Mr oh-so-enlightened, have failed to offer anything of substance yourself. You get most of your kicks from attempting to belittle fellow posters...in your well-rehearsed and long-plied style.

Now if someone I respected pulled me up for a reason other than their own snide entertainment....that would be a different story.

"If you talk like a duck, and waddle with ducks, Poirot,...."

I suppose that's Loudmouth's version of scintillating wit.

Ho hum......