When Sonia Kruger said that she didn't feel safe with all the terrorism perpetrated by Islamic extremists, she was instantly called a racist and pilloried by the left. Now her job and sponsorships are being threatened because she spoke her mind.

Is big brother already here?

Big Brother?

The whole bloody family is here!!

SM,

"Is Sonia Kruger allowed to feel threatened by Jihadists?"

She's allowed to feel and say whatever she wants.

And others have a right to respond by agreeing or disagreeing.

Sonia has the right to feel and express fear just as Charlie Hebdo's family has the right to feel and express fear.

Scared fearful little cowards show that isis is winning.

"Sonia has the right to feel and express fear just as Charlie Hebdo's family has the right to feel and express fear."

Absolutely!... as have the families of the hundreds of civilians slaughtered in Syria by US and French air strikes in the last few days.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/us-air-strike-in-syria-kills-up-to-85-civilians-mistaken-for-isi/

"‘Beyond a massacre: France deliberately bombed Syrian civilians after Nice attack’"

"Western coalition forces knew they were attacking an area inhabited by civilians and yet they carried out a bombing. How can 30 airstrikes be a mistake? How can they all be a mistake, political commentator Marwa Osman asked RT.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry has written to the UN blaming US and French warplanes for the deaths of more than 100 civilians near the city of Manbij.

The alleged French act of aggression claimed the lives of more than 120 civilians, most of them children, women and elderly. The fate of scores of other civilians still under the debris is unknown. The letter also mentioned the French air strikes came a day after US warplanes conducted a bombing raid, which Damascus claims killed 20 other civilians."

http://www.rt.com/op-edge/352283-syria-us-france-bombing/

Poirot, "And others have a right to respond by agreeing or disagreeing"

Political correctness is wearing very thin with the public.

That might not be so evident to leftists in their echo chamber.

"That might not be so evident to leftists in their echo chamber."

Lol!...says the fella who marinates in the right-wing echo chamber of OLO.

'Absolutely!... as have the families of the hundreds of civilians slaughtered in Syria by US and French air strikes in the last few days.'

Oh yeah Poirot I seem to remember not long back the Syrians were begging the West for action.

Sonia Kruger is allowed to feel whatever she wants, as are
we all. However, we have to be prepared that we may have
to deal with people
who do not agree with our point of view and will react to it.
Especially if we happen to be a media personality, as Sonia
Kruger happens to be - whose words possibly carry more clout and
influence, and more media opportunities.

However, people who enjoy the rights of free speech have a duty
to respect other people's rights. A person's freedom of speech is
limited by the rights of others. Democratic societies put various
limitations on what people may say. They prohibit certain types
of speech that they believe might harm the government or the
people. However drawing the line between dangerous and harmless
speech can be extremely difficult.

Most democratic countries have four - major restrictions on free
expression. 1) Laws covering libel and slander. 2) Laws that
offend public decency (using obscenities or by encouraging people to commit acts considered immoral).
3) Laws against spying, treason,
and urging violence.
4) Laws the invade the rights of people. For
example a local bylaw might limit the times when people may use
loudspeakers to make announcements in the streets.

The development of freedom of speech in most Western countries has
been bought about through the growth of democratic governments based on
the rule of law. In other countries, this freedom has grown
more slowly or not at all.

What I would like to see in the national discourse on this subject
is less personal insults, labelling of people, less generalisations,
more facts, and a greater
representation in the media of many viewpoints. Especially from the
Muslim Community.

If Sonia Kruger wants to join Pauline Hanson's little group of scared people who let the few violent terrorists get to them, then she has every right to do that.
However, like Pauline, she has to take the fallout about the stance she has taken.

Sonia can't expect all her viewers to agree with everything she says, and so maybe she shouldn't be in that job anymore if she is going to be so delicate about it all?

Fox,

So you would be opposed to fascism and all sorts of reductive ideologies of which Islamofascism and its obvious actual harm to innocents is by far and away the best current example? You would want spruikers and apologists for Islamofacism and its toxic creed, associated traditions and political system censored?

Or does anyone, who can claim non-white discrimination even (especially?) Islamofacists qualify for a 'get out of gaol free card'? That would be in accord with the extreme political correctness that is systemic in Oz.

Just trying to understand the limits of who can be offended.

There are one-sided restrictions, read as bans and censorship, as in the UK and Oz (Section 18c) for example.

There is also atheist religious fundamentalism, but that is OK strangely enough for the liberal apologists for Islam, which qualifies for protection. Hence we must never offend an Islamist,

Islamist
"An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists" [Wikipedia and ors]

What about 'progressive' Islamists who nonetheless practice elements (which ones are never specified of course) of Islam that most citizens of the developed world would find horrendous, such as Halal meat, certifying as it does that the animal has been subjected to ritual slaughter.

What about 'progressive' or 'moderate' Muslims who support Islamic law? Say what! What are they thinking?

It is time for moderate Muslims in the developed world to take a stand against those elements of Islam which do not fit with the democratic societies of which they are part. Here is the woman who should be the model for Muslim moderation and progressivism,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib8r4-OhyRA

It is only freedom of speech that can help educated Muslims of good will who are pushing back against Sharia Law and Islamism. Apologists knowingly set them back.

Poirot,

You are typical of the finger wagging moralising left. I have no doubt that there have been over 100 civilians killed by allied air strikes, but I seriously doubt that the Syrians prime cause of fear are the airstrikes, rather the bands of marauding ISIS followers that have murdered 10s of 1000s in the most brutal fashion.

As the ISIS thugs are intermixed with civilians, and while the allies are not aiming for civilians, amongst the 10 000 odd ISIS thugs killed there were a tiny proportion of civilians, the only zero risk strategy would be for the allies to do nothing. This is precisely what the moralizing A-holes on the left would have us do.

SM,

"As the ISIS thugs are intermixed with civilians, and while the allies are not aiming for civilians, amongst the 10 000 odd ISIS thugs killed there were a tiny proportion of civilians, the only zero risk strategy would be for the allies to do nothing...."

Considering it was the moralising right who decided to destabilise the region by invading Iraq - giving rise to the dreaded ISIS...I don't think your lot are any position to be giving lectures.

Questions for moderate Muslims.

1, Do you believe that the Koran is the word and will of Allah?
2. Do you believe that Muhammad was Allah's prophet?
3. Which parts of the Koran are wrong and do not apply today?
4, In light of 3 (above) do you have adequate insurance?

Dear Is Mise,

What do you believe?

"Considering it was the moralising right who decided to destabilise the region by invading Iraq - giving rise to the dreaded ISIS...I don't think your lot are any position to be giving lectures."

I'll give the invasion part of it to Bush, Blair, Howard etc with it's massive toll on lives and huge destabilisation in Iraq but ISIS owes a lot to Obama's decision to pull the US out of Iraq while they were still in a big mess and Obama's determination to try and oust Assad.

Both sides have made some pretty big screw ups whilst trying to bring about regime change. Obama inherited the mess in Iraq left by his predecessors, perhaps there were no workable solutions on that front but the mess in Syria does not seem to be a Bush leftover and owes a lot to US interference.

R0bert

Yep the latest slaughter of kids and adults from a follower of Mohammed from Iran. Don't remember anyone attacking Iran. Germany gives kindness and this is how they are rewarded. Again showing the regressive narrative dishonest.

The Us isnt responsible for the civil war that followed the invasion of Iraq.

They set up a democratically elected government and then stopped.

The mess and bloodshed that followed was perpurtrated soley
by the Arabs.
It was their hands on the bombs and guns and their armys brutality in
the Sunni neighbourhoods that caused what followed.

But of course the Arabs always blame everyone else but themselves, for their troubles.

Isis is responsible for the death of citizens because they hide behind them and use them as shields.

The Arabs then scream about citizens being killed.

Its alright for them to kill civilians though and people like Ms Kruger
should have no right to complain.

Foxy.

I believe that Islam is a political movement, designed by a very astute trader.
I believe that he gave it a religious slant as a means of control and I further believe that one cannot trust Muslims and that all further Muslim migration to Australia should be stopped.

runner,

"Yep the latest slaughter of kids and adults from a follower of Mohammed from Iran. Don't remember anyone attacking Iran. Germany gives kindness and this is how they are rewarded. Again showing the regressive narrative dishonest."

You're the one with the dishonest narrative.

"A teen gunman who killed 10 people in a rampage in Munich was "deranged", police said, linking his actions to Norwegian far-right mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik rather than Islamic State jihadists."

"There is absolutely no link to the Islamic State," Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae said.

He described the attack as a "classic act by a deranged person" and described an individual "obsessed" with mass shootings.

Mr Andrae added "the link is evident" with Breivik's massacre of 77 people, which took place exactly five years ago.

Munich prosecutor Thomas Steinkraus-Koch said the 18-year-old German-Iranian — whose name has been withheld for the time being — had suffered depression and reportedly undergone psychiatric treatment."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-23/no-evidence-of-links-between-munich-gunman-and-is:-police/7655364

I can understand how you would like to pose this as vindiction of your stance...but no - just another case of a nutter + gun = murder.

Oh Poirot you know your beloved abc hide the facts to protect the religion of peace and the regressives dishonest narrative. They really are traitors and you should not be so naïve (I will give you the benefit of the doubt)

try this one Poirot
'Witnesses said the shopping centre gunman screamed 'I'm German' and 'Allahu Akbar' before shooting

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3703705/Major-police-investigation-way-shots-fired-shopping-centre-Munich.html

That report was put up hours before German police had any idea of the gunman's background.

Are you inferring the the ABC report is made up and German authorities quoted are lying?

If you are, you're really off the rails now.

Noting again that authorities liken this to the "right-wing" mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik.

"Mr Andrae added "the link is evident" with Breivik's massacre of 77 people, which took place exactly five years ago."

''Witnesses said the shopping centre gunman screamed 'I'm German' and 'Allahu Akbar' before shooting'

what don't you don't you understand. The witness's made it up for fun did they Poirot.

If you call leaving out or hiding the fact that this maniac was calling
out 'Allahu Akbar' before shooting kids then I would say they are at best deceiving the public.

Looky here, runner.

Here's another news agency making stuff up!

"Munich (Germany) (AFP) - The lone teenager who shot dead nine people in a gun rampage in Munich was "obsessed" with mass killers such as Norwegian rightwing fanatic Anders Behring Breivik and had no links to the Islamic State group, police said Saturday."

"There is absolutely no link to the Islamic State," Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae said.

He said the assault was a "classic act by a deranged person" and described an individual "obsessed" with mass shootings.

He said German investigators saw an "obvious link" between Friday's killings and Breivik's massacre of 77 people in a bomb attack in Oslo and a shooting rampage on the nearby island of Utoya exactly five years earlier.

Most of the victims in Friday's attack were foreigners.

http://www.yahoo.com/news/lone-munich-shooter-kills-nine-commits-suicide-002815425.html

Do not fear! Sonia Kruger, aka Tina Sparkle, will be back tomorrow, for today, on the Today Show, which cannot be tomorrow otherwise it would be the Tomorrow Show and not the Today Show, unless of course that was yesterday. Anyway Sonia will be doing her regular Mixed Grill segment without fear, and minus the kebabs. I can hardly wait, otherwise I'll be off somewhere dancing with the stars.

The announcement comes as media experts warn that the emerging trend of networks getting their own stars to be part of contentious TV debates is a recipe for disaster.

Poirot,

ISIS sprang up in Syria not Iraq, where the insurrection and jihadism was entirely home grown from the Arab spring which you lot supported, and ended up killing far more than either the allied invasion of Iraq or the many more that Saddam Hussein had killed before that.

As for the latest atrocity in Germany, the perpetrator had no direct links to ISIS, but was Muslim of Iranian descent, and identified as muslim when killing, so the links to Islamic terror are definitely there.

Foxy,

In most democratic countries free speech is paramount. The limits you talk about are not actually limits, but the rights of others to take action where there has been deliberate harm caused.

libel is a civil, not criminal, action to recover damages caused by deliberate falsehoods, and the onus is on the plaintiff to prove not only that the allegations were false, but to prove the extent of the damage concerned.

Obscenities are not banned, only restricted on TV, and then not always. Similarly the noise issue you mentioned is a noise issue only. If the person spoke without a megaphone it would be permitted.

Suz,

Being afraid of terrorists is not a link to One nation, as being afraid of sharks or crocodiles does not make you cruel to animals.

Some of you guys think its right to attack Sonia Kruger, but I think she's now being subjected to more discrimination that Man Monis ever was or ever will be. Shame.

SM,

"As for the latest atrocity in Germany, the perpetrator had no direct links to ISIS, but was Muslim of Iranian descent, and identified as muslim when killing, so the links to Islamic terror are definitely there."

That is unadulterated BS...there are no links to ISIS - and you know it if you've read any of the reports from German authorities.

"The 18-year-old gunman who killed nine people in Munich was obsessed with mass shootings but had no known links to the Islamic State group, German police say.

Written material on such attacks was found in his room. Munich's police chief spoke of links to the massacre by Norway's Anders Behring Breivik."

"They are investigating whether he may have lured his victims through a Facebook invitation to the McDonald's restaurant where he launched his attack on Friday evening."

"Police say the Munich-born gunman had been in psychiatric care, receiving treatment for depression."

"Munich police chief Hubertus Andrae said there was an "obvious" link between the new attack and Friday's fifth anniversary of Breivik's attacks in Norway, when he murdered 77 people."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36874497

You appear to dismiss Iraq's involvement in the flowering of ISIS.

"Next door in Iraq, an emboldened Nouri al-Maliki waged his own sectarian campaign to consolidate power, betraying promises to his political partners to share it around. Within days of being welcomed at the White House and praised by Barack Obama for his leadership, Maliki returned to Baghdad to mastermind the arrest of his principal Sunni rival, vice-president Tariq al-Hashimi.

Supported by Iran and armed with US-made Humvees, M-16s, and M1A1 tanks, Maliki's forces closed in on Hashimi, only to see him flee to Kurdistan. Dozens of his guards were imprisoned on terrorism charges. At least one of them died under interrogation."

"And so, Syria's unravelling spilled into Iraq, and vice versa. Powerful regional tribes such as the Shammar and Anezah, faced with countless dead and persecuted members in both countries, banded together with former Iraqi and Syrian military officers, embracing Isis jihadis as their frontline shock troops. Cash poured in from sympathetic donors around the region."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/22/syria-iraq-incubators-isis-jihad

I don't want to go off topic from discussing Sonia Kruger but respectfully a lot of you have been misinformed from information you learned from TV and the corporate media.

A lot of people supported the war against Ghaddafi because it was portrayed as 'the people rising up against an oppressive ruler'.
Libya was the wealthiest and most prosperous nation in Africa and his people loved him.

Here's a different scenario.
US government stirs up civil unrest and prepares to put an opposition (puppet) government in place.
Ghaddafi is forced to respond and put down civil unrest.
Media portrays Ghaddafi as attacking his own people, and steers readers towards supporting the people and the insurrection against an oppressive dictator.

...And this is where you dills come into the picture.

Too dumb to read news other than the news they feed you SM.
Does this seem 'HOMEGROWN' to you?
http://youtu.be/FmIRYvJQeHM

I couldn't find the link I wanted to show you about the people in Libya loved him but just watch the first 15minutes of this instead.
http://youtu.be/O1iHgz-f_10

I already posted this link on your other thread Shadow Minister.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-emails-gold-dinars-and-arab-springs/5535232

You make fun of me and infer I believe in fantasies (as you have on your Turkish Coup thread) but your own geopolitical knowledge isn't that great and you ignore facts put right in front of you because obviously you think you already know better.
Stop being an ignorant know-it-all and start becoming informed.

Poirot,
Not sure why you posted your first comment.
Yes the US airstrikes killed more civilians than the 'Bastille Bastard', but I don't understand why you brought it up.
Opposing US wars is more of something I'd support not something I'd necessary expect the progressive left to support.

Armchair Critic,

This was my "first comment":

"SM,

"Is Sonia Kruger allowed to feel threatened by Jihadists?"

She's allowed to feel and say whatever she wants.

And others have a right to respond by agreeing or disagreeing."

My second comment was in reply to runner talking of families of the dead.

"Not sure why you posted your first comment."

Well we're not sure why you posted the above on Ghaddafi, but you probably saw a link to the discussion.

"Libya was the wealthiest and most prosperous nation in Africa and his people loved him."

Yes, he seemed to look after his people. He was US enemy number 1 - then he seemed to be embraced again - then he was destroyed.

Sadam was a great pal of the US for quite some time. Iraq also was an advanced middle-eastern nation - top education and healthcare in the region.

Both Iraq and Libya now in utter ruins thanks to US intervention.

Poirot,

My god you spout unadulterated BS.

I never claimed the gunman had links to ISIS, in fact quite the opposite. However, the fact that he was Iranian/German and shouted Allah Akbar while shooting civilians is a compelling link to Islamic terrorism no matter how desperately the left whingers are trying to cover it up. ISIS is only one of many Islamic extremist group.

Secondly your claim that "invading Iraq - giving rise to the dreaded ISIS" given that ISIS arose in Syria is complete BS.

SM,

Go and educate yourself....anyone with a brain knows that ISIS was empowered by its links with disaffected Sunnis in Iraq...you know, the one's who were marginalised after the "democratic" govt was installed by the US.

Read my link.

"However, the fact that he was Iranian/German and shouted Allah Akbar..."

That is reported after nearly every attack by a lone nutter. It may or may not be true. I recall Trump tweeting exactly the same thing after the Orlando massacre - which was later proved to be utterly false.

"I've read myriad reports that the German gunmen shouted "I'm German" amongst other things.

"ISIS is only one of many Islamic extremist group."

So it doesn't really matter if you're dismissing ISIS in this case or not. You're still gung-ho attempting to fabricate a link to Islamic extremism - even though all the evidence points to the precise opposite...links to a "right-wing" mass murderer.

You would have to be most desperate on OLO to attempt to link every outrage to a planned event by Islamists...even going to extremes to ignore almost every piece of information to the contrary.

That's quite a feat of wilful ignorance.

Congratulations!

Hey Poirot,
Sorry my mistake, it was your second comment.

And though it was off topic, it was in response to SM statement that "ISIS sprang up in Syria not Iraq, where the insurrection and jihadism was entirely home grown from the Arab spring which you lot supported"

It annoys me in that if you base your opinion on mistruths then every argument and opinion you put forward stemming from that 'foundation knowledge' is therefore uninformed.
I'm peeved that he says I'm in fantasyland and what that infers when his knowledge is based on BS.

None of this stuff was ever home-grown...
I apologise for generalising though, I thought when I read the comments that a few commenters had supported this position, and it seems that only SM holds this view (at least publicly on this thread).

CHERFUL's comment though that "The Us isnt responsible for the civil war that followed the invasion of Iraq..." was a little naive, maybe that's why I generalised.

Poirot,
As an afterthought, I figured you as 'Hillary Supporter' type.
Someone who supports immigration, open borders, BLM, Pro-gay, Women's causes etc, policies of the left.
But Hillary had much to do with these wars which you oppose.
So I'm glad you're more of a free thinker than I first thought.

Poirot,

Perhaps you should educate yourself, I never claimed that Iraq was not fertile ground for ISIS, I disputed your claim that "invading Iraq - giving rise to the dreaded ISIS" from which you seem to running away from.

Witnesses (more than one witness) said the shopping centre gunman screamed 'I'm German' and 'Allahu Akbar' before shooting

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3703705/Major-police-investigation-way-shots-fired-shopping-centre-Munich.html#ixzz4FHmgV7WY

That's a slam dunk.

Armchair Critic,

I'd be more of a Bernie supporter.

I think Hillary is somewhat dodgy - and yes, I've read about her involvement in Libya....however she's up against an unbalanced narcissist and fascist loon in Trump.

He's a very dangerous character....that view being pronounced now far and wide.

I believe the Republican Party (as we know it) is on its last legs...that view also being widely shared.

We live in interesting times.

Poirot , anyone at all is preferable to Trump.
I agree he is beginning to get on the nose with many in his own party. Can you imagine himself and the little wife on the world stage, meeting other world leaders?
It is all just too awful to contemplate. It would be worse than Abbott!

Well off topic but I'd read as interesting piece earlier that is relevant to Suseonline and to some extent Poirot's previous posts.

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

I'm not familiar with the leanings of the politicalcompass site but the article over all gives me the impression of being left leaning.

I also get the impression some on Republicans are thinking they would be better off with Hillary in further damaging the Democrat brand rather than Trump in and finishing off what's left of the Republican brand.

Interesting times where it seems some on both sides may be convinced that the lesser of two evils may not be the better option if that particular evil is a little to close to home.

R0bert

Dear Shadow Minister,

I've just come across an article on the web that in
my opinion makes a good case regarding issues surrounding
freedom of speech.

We're told that: If we look at our newspapers and current affairs
programs, we only talk about the need for freedom of speech and
our "right" to make unfettered comments about Muslims, asylum seekers,
Indigenous people, transgender and same sex attracted people, et
cetera. We need to examine that.

The article states that this is not really about freedom of speech.
What it is about is a particular desire to say awful things about
groups of specific people while at the same time refusing to
allow them to respond. We're told that this says a great deal about
the lack of maturity in this debate when those with power and
influence, can demand the
right to say what they like but at the same time demand that no
one answers back. We need only look to peopele like
Andrew Bolt, Pauline
Hanson, and others who constantly complain they are victims of free
speech laws and political correctness.

We know that empathy is not a skill shared by everybody. Learning to
be considerate is far more achievable.
Put simply - the article tells us that to be considerate requires
only one thing: don't be a dick.

We're told that - you don't have to imagine yourself in another
person's shoes. You don't have to imagine yourself to be a Muslim,
or in a detention centre, or in love with a person of the same sex
as you. The article simple asks that we think - "Is there a way
of putting my point across that does not involve severely insulting
or hurting another person?" We're advised that if there is not,
then don't say anything at all.

We're told this is not a denial of your freedom of speech. It's
called being a grown-up. And, if we all grew up
maybe we would make meaningful headway on
becoming the country we want to be.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/a-helpful-guide-to-free-speech/7175442

<Free Speech and Islam — The Left Betrays the Most Vulnerable
http://richarddawkins.net/2016/05/free-speech-and-islam-the-left-betrays-the-most-vulnerable/

When surveying the ill-informed, shoddy work that at times passes as in-depth journalism regarding Islam these days, a rationalist may well be tempted to slip into a secular simulacrum of John Bunyan’s Slough of Despond. In reputable press outlets, articles regularly appear in which the author proceeds from an erroneous premise through a fallacious argument to a fatuous conclusion..

.. Those who deploy the “stupid term” (see Christopher Hitchens) “Islamophobia” to silence critics of the faith hold, in essence, that Muslims deserve to be approached as a race apart, and not as equals, not as individual adults capable of rational choice, but as lifelong members of an immutable, sacrosanct community, whose (often highly illiberal) views must not be questioned, whose traditions (including the veiling of women) must not be challenged, whose scripturally inspired violence must be explained away as the inevitable outcome of Western interventionism in the Middle East or racism and “marginalization” in Western countries.

Fail to exhibit due respect for Islam — not Muslims as people,Islam — and you risk being excoriated, by certain progressives, as an “Islamophobe,” as a fomenter of hatred for an underprivileged minority, as an abettor of Donald Trump and his bigoted policy proposals, and, most illogically, as a racist.
..
Also, remember that Islam claims jurisdiction not just over its followers, but over us all, with a message directed to humanity as a whole. Which means Islam should be susceptible to critique by all. ..

The misguided progressives who denounce “Islamophobia” and turn a blind eye to the mistreatment of, say, women, gays, and adherents of other religions in Muslim communities or in Islamic countries constitute what Maajid Nawaz has dubbed the “regressive left.” Regressive leftists are not genuine progressives at all, of course, but deeply confused de facto apologists for the most illiberal notion conceivable: namely, that one group of humans has, on account of its religion, an inalienable right to dominate and abuse other humans — and to do so unmolested by criticism.>

One thing that the West cannot be blamed for is honour killings, unless it is the Wests example that leads Muslims astray and thus forces Muslims to kill their own friends or relatives.

Concerning freedom of speech in Australia the last word
should go to the Dept. of Immigration and Citizenship
who explain our freedom of speech like this:

"Australians are free within the bounds of the law to
say or write what we think privately or publicly about
the Government, or about any topic.
We do not censor the media and may criticise the Government
without fear of arrest. Free speech comes from facts not
rumours and intention must be constructive - not to do harm.
There are laws against saying or writing things to incite
hatred against others because of their culture, ethnicity,
religion or background. Freedom of speech is not an excuse
to harm others."

Dear Is Mise,

The following link is worth a read:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-10/gross-islam-and-honour-killings/3823232

Hey Poirot,
Aha, now it makes sense.

And yes there are some in the Republican camp that would prefer to see Hillary in.
Take what Ted Cruz said a few days back when he refused to support Donald Trump and asked people to "vote their conscience".
A lot of people are saying what he did was political suicide as the Texan voters with their Yes Sir's and No Maam's don't take kindly to someone not keeping their word.

But of course there's some Bernie supporters that feel Hillary stole the nomination (which she did) and aren't prepared to vote for her either.

Hey Foxy,
I kind of think differently that that which your guide puts forward.
Your guide basically says "If it's not PC (as someone will complain about it) then you're not allowed to talk about it".

Respectfully I call BS to the left-leaning article, and my opinion is this:
- If we're ever going to solve the big issues we need to understand everyone's point of view.
We can't shy away from other peoples points of view whether or not it's politically correct because we'll NEVER get to the bottom of the issues if we don't face the ugly truths.
Some issues however are sensitive ones and we need to cross non politically-correct territory to deal with them.

Dear Armchair Critic,

Of course we need to talk about issues that affect
people and put our various point of views across.
However we need to try to keep our discussions
informed and reasoned. Sadly, the current debate is
neither informed or reasoned. And that is something
we need to examine.

Foxy,

I read the link and it is a typical whitewash.

Why is Islam so over represented in honour killings?

Could it be because of the Koranic teachings regarding women?

nstead of the broken record what about confronting and attempting to dispel the facts as presented by

Free Speech and Islam — The Left Betrays the Most Vulnerable
http://richarddawkins.net/2016/05/free-speech-and-islam-the-left-betrays-the-most-vulnerable/

To add,
http://quillette.com/2016/06/17/free-speech-and-islam-in-defense-of-ayaan-hirsi-ali/
<Free Speech and Islam — In Defense of Ayaan Hirsi Ali
written by Jeffrey Tayler

True progressives really should get around to constructing a Doric-columned Hall of Shame to memorialize, for all to revile, the imbecilities, curios of casual hypocrisy, and artifacts of outright intellectual and moral treason the benighted diehards of the regressive left choose to display as a matter of pride these days when the subject is Islam and former Muslims, especially former female Muslims. The contrast between the lofty liberal ideals espoused by such leftists and their sordid output should concern us all, though, of whatever political persuasion.

They have largely succeeded in squelching forthright, reasoned discourse about Islam and Islamist terrorism, which jeopardizes national security and the lives of some of some of the most vulnerable, including women who have left the faith, or who, rightfully or wrongfully, are accused of disrespecting it.

For in de facto alliance with regressive leftist denouncers of “Islamophobia” — a semantic swindle of a noun equating criticism of Islam with bigotry against Muslims as people — stand assassins, as the late Elsa Cayat of Charlie Hebdo, the late Farkhunda Malikzada of Afghanistan, and countless victims of honor killings would attest, were they still alive...>

Dear Is Mise,

So you think that the link cited earlier was a "white wash?"

Then there's nothing more to say.

I get this 2 days late as usual.

Poirot: Considering it was the moralising right who decided to destabilise the region by invading Iraq - giving rise to the dreaded ISIS...I don't think your lot are any position to be giving lectures.

The invasion of Iraq came about because to the shear weight of murders committed against the Shia by Saddam & to try to stop the flow of Asylum Seekers escaping Saddams Iraq.

Is mise:
1, Do you believe that the Koran is the word and will of Allah? No!
2. Do you believe that Muhammad was Allah's prophet? No!
3. Which parts of the Koran are wrong and do not apply today? All of it!
4, In light of 3 (above) do you have adequate insurance? Yes!

Foxy: What do you believe?

None of it.

Poirot: He described the attack as a "classic act by a deranged person" and described an individual "obsessed" with mass shootings.
Poirot: Here's another news agency making stuff up!

The media, once again, doing a pretzel, so not to involve moslims.

Foxy: The article states that this is not really about freedom of speech. What it is about is a particular desire to say awful things about
groups of specific people while at the same time refusing to allow them to respond.

Oh, but they do respond. Eg,: Racist, Homophobic, Islamaphobic, & other general PC put downs.etc,.

Foxy: We do not censor the media and may criticise the Government without fear of arrest.

True, the Censorship is enforced heavily by the Left Wing, PC types instead.

"The invasion of Iraq came about because to the shear weight of murders committed against the Shia by Saddam & to try to stop the flow of Asylum Seekers escaping Saddams Iraq."

Try again, Jayb...

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2005/06/09/the-secret-way-to-war/

And don't bother with your inane questions - are you all there?

Foxy,

There is more to say; you could tell me where I'm wrong for instance.
You could tell us all just how the article proves its main contention.

Do try!

To answer the original question, which seems to have been forgotten, the obvious answer is resounding, yes.

We are all threatened by Jihadists. Another Bombing in Germany this morning, I see.

As Islam is above 2% of the population in Australia, & growing, due to allowing in moslims & the number of extra wives have more babies. The moslim population will soon reach European percentage then the Terror for Australians will really begin as moslims demand more & more restrictions on Australian freedom.

Any refusal to any Islamic demands is seen as a declaration of War against Islam, therefore they are commanded by their Religion to retaliate. This means that eventually there will be mass killing by Islamists in Australia. Those that claim to be Moderate now will join in with their Jihadi brothers & sisters.

Therefore Sonya, Hanson, Xenaphon & the rest of us real Australians do & are allowed to feel threatened, even by the likes of poirot, SOL Steelie etc,.

Strange, we haven't heard from Steelie, must be in Syria this time of year.

Dear Is Mise,

I've tried to point things out to people from my point
of view. We're all entitled to our fears - and we all
have fears. However, not all of them are rational, and
many are simply based on ignorance. What is needed in the
national discourse - is not to stop people from speaking
out - but to bombard them with facts.

I would suggest that you Google Jamila Rizvi's article -
on news.com.au - "Five facts to fight Sonia Kruger's
fear of Muslims." She deals with facts.

But then again you shall probably tell me it's all a white-wash.
Still, it's worth a try because as Mahatma Gandhi stated so
many years ago:

"I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet."

Have a nice day.

Foxy: Jamila Rizvi's "Five facts to fight Sonia Kruger's
fear of Muslims."

FACT #1: MUSLIM IMMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA IS NOT A NEW PHENOMENON

True, Indonesians did not immigrate to Australia proir to White Settlement. The Country was used as a fishing stop in Season, then they left. Afghan Cammeleers & Surveyors were brought to the Australia to open up the West & Survey the Land. Then they were left here.

FACT #2: MORE MUSLIM MIGRATION TO A COUNTRY DOESN’T EQUAL MORE TERROR.

There was never a Security Watch or System in place especially to keep watch on moslems 20 years ago.,What is the reason to have one now? Increase in moslims into Australia? Hmm..., I would say so.

FACT #3: THERE IS ENTRENCHED DISADVANTAGE AMONGST THE FRENCH MUSLIM POPULATION.

& the reason for this was? Increase in Terrorist incidences? I would say so.

FACT #4: A MUSLIM IMMIGRATION BAN WOULD MAKE ALL OF US LESS SAFE

Yes, as any refusal of Islamic demands or ceasing moslim immigration would make more “Moderate” moslims commit terror offences in Australia. In other words If you do not give us what we want we will kill you. A definite threat as I see it.

FACT #5: MUSLIM AUSTRALIANS FEEL UNSAFE TOO

Of course they do, because if the moslims do not get their way & they will start killing people & the “innocent” moslem women & children might get hurt too.

Rebuttle;

Fact 1. First moslim Terrorist attack. Two moslim ex Cammeleers shoot up a train.

Fact 2. No further moslim Terrorist attacks until the mass immigration of moslims lately.

Fact 3. Moslim population in excess of 4%. Thats when they act with impunity.

Fact 4. Of course, It does not take much to turn a moderate into a Fanatic. Another Fact “There are no Moderate moslims only moslims.” Errorguard.

Fact 5. Moslims made the problem. They have to pay with the rest of us.

I'm not entirely sure what dreadful crime this Ms Sonia KRUGER's committed ? Other than express an opinion concerning her safety from ISIS, and all the other low life slugs, that regularly emerge from the sewer systems to orchestrate terrorists acts.

Yesterday when speaking with a young girl I know working part time in a coffee shop to earn a little extra to supplement her plans to travel Europe, now she completed her degree. Apparently, in consultation with her parents, she's now decided not to go, because of her fear, that's been generated by these filthy bastards !

These terrorists have all but paralysed many in the West from leading normal, ordinary lives, and undertaking recreational travel after saving hard in order to satisfy those dreams ? Seems Ms KRUGER is just another hapless victim, worried for hers, and her families safety, from these miserable cowards ? Mobilise the Aussie Armed Forces, and clear out this terrorists vermin, currently ensconced in Syria's drainage systems - in fact show them a bit of real 'terror' for a change !

Foxy,

I don't know where you dig up these articles, but confidentiality agreements can carry heavy penalties, such as the official secrets act or inside information on shares, for real reasons. The article you linked is an ABC journo whinging that the detention camp workers have signed such an agreement. Such agreements have nothing to do with free speech, as no one is forced to sign these documents.

However, clause 18c where you can be jailed for offending someone is the biggest threat to freedom of speech, followed by vicious campaigns run by the left against anyone that does not toe the PC line.

OSW: Mobilise the Aussie Armed Forces, and clear out this terrorists vermin, currently ensconced in Syria's drainage systems - in fact show them a bit of real 'terror' for a change !

We couldn't do that we'd have all the Army Lawyers claiming they were being naughty for shooting back if they were shot at. They might hurt one of the women or a child the fighters are hiding behind.

Best we do it here instead & root out the current lot of Terrorists that are still allowed to live in Australia. Let any moslim that wasn't to go to Syria go, including their families etc. Never let them return, ever.The ones held in Detainment centres must be returned to whence they came or to UN Controlled Camps. They try to go back anyway once they get Australian Citizenship.

SM: clause 18c where you can be jailed for offending someone is the biggest threat to freedom of speech,

So if one of these PC idiots says something & I feel offended by it, does that mean I could get them jailed? ;-)

Foxy,

One simple question: how can one trust the word of a Muslim, when they are talking about Islam?

Dear Is Mise,

I'm no sage or pundit, but from my experience I've
found that the best way to find out if you can trust
somebody is to trust them. Mutual trust has worked
for me. Very few people have actually let me down.

Hey JayB
Not necessarily.
Australia has 2 key elements that make up our freedom of speech: freedom of opinion and freedom of expression.

Freedom of opinion is your right to hold opinions—however different from mainstream opinion it may be—without interference. There are no exceptions or restrictions to this right.
Freedom of expression relates to any medium, including written and oral communication, the media, public protest, broadcasting, artistic works and commercial advertising. This right is not absolute, as it may be restricted in areas such as posting on the internet, the urging of violence or classification of artistic material and in relation to publishing defamatory information about someone.

http://www.qld.gov.au/law/your-rights/right-to-protest-freedom-of-speech-and-censorship/freedom-of-speech/

I did have a better link for the laws, but I couldn't find it.

Basically you have the freedom to express any genuine opinion so long as you're not inciting violence or being openly and aggressively racist etc..
There's nothing that specifically says 'thou cannot offend' as far as I know.

Foxy: We are talking about moslims here. Remember the Old Lady & "The Snake." It's so true when dealing with moslims. They probably won't bite on the first day, but they will sooner or later & if you want to continue to trust them then you have to turn into a Snake. so they won't bite. But, then again, some snakes eat other snakes, don't they.

Dear Jayb,

I can only speak from my own experiences with people.

I don't believe in generalisations. I find that those
sort of concepts are too vague and sweeping in their
scope. Of course some people tend to think in terms of
general categories, if only to enable them to make sense
of the world by simplifying its complexity. Stereotyping
and scapegoating sadly are not checked against reality.

Anyway, enough said. I'm now going to visit my mum in
her nursing home. Where by the way, many of the excellent
staff just happen to be Muslim.

Cheers.

Foxy,

I didn't ask you if you trusted Muslims but how can you trust them if they are speaking about Islam, there's a world of difference.

Foxy,

I read the "Five facts to fight Sonia Kruger's fear of Muslims" and found an opinion piece.

1 MUSLIM IMMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA IS NOT A NEW PHENOMENON

So what? How is that going to make Sonia feel safer?

2: MORE MUSLIM MIGRATION TO A COUNTRY DOESN’T EQUAL MORE TERROR

It doesn't necessarily mean so, but there is a strong correlation. Germany has recently had a spate of incidents, and Russia had a serious problem before it had a vicious crack down in Chechnya.

3: THERE IS ENTRENCHED DISADVANTAGE AMONGST THE FRENCH MUSLIM POPULATION

But other disadvantaged populations don't resort to terrorism. And it is no excuse.

4: A MUSLIM IMMIGRATION BAN WOULD MAKE ALL OF US LESS SAFE

Unsubstantiated opinion.

5: MUSLIM AUSTRALIANS FEEL UNSAFE TOO

That more muslims are killed in muslim countries is not a plus.

Another bombing in Germany, failed Asylum Seeker. Another bombing in Iraq. Just today.

These people hate each other as much as they hate us.

That's a good enough reason to feel threatened by jihadist in the moslim population in Australia. Any more & the likely hood of something as happens in France, Britain & Germany, etc, happening here goes up & up.

Oh silly me I forgot ? Many of the current crop of Army Lawyers are such enlightened souls and ergo, strong supporters of the PC community. Therefore any attempt by me to muster the Army, would amount to nought. Moreover, as I'm from that far right wing, intellectually challenged cadre, to even suggest we should try to identify and then completely excise, all these jihadist terrorists, would have me quickly expatriated from my country forever.

Me and my 'few' colleagues from the 'Bronze Age', none of us being especially clever, do realise when we've been defeated. Furthermore we should either tow the PC line, or perish in our own mire of injudiciousness and folly. Whatever else that may occur - Within a century, the entire Western World as we now know it, will be practicing Islam !

'Within a century, the entire Western World as we now know it, will be practicing Islam !'

I would not be that pessimistic O sung wu. You don't really think God has abandoned His throne do you. We are just suffering the idiotic embracement of secular/feminist dogma.

Islam has no ultimate future as Christ will have and is having HIs way

' Therefore God has highly exalted Him, and has given Him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of heavenly ones, and of earthly ones, and of ones under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.'

Islam like secularism has a limited lifespan. They are both death cults.

Curtis Cheng's son:

""We cannot generalise the actions of extreme individuals to encompass that of other successful and law-abiding citizens who happen to be of the same faith," he said.

"My father was murdered by a 15-year old boy. I cannot deny the fact that the perpetrators professed to be followers of ISIS, however, it does not follow from these facts that Muslims should be feared."

Mr Cheng said Jabar's actions were not caused by his faith but by brainwashing from people overseas.

He said his own close relationships with Muslim friends and students had not changed after his father's death.

"They have the same hopes and dreams of all Australians; to be successful in their lives and enjoy the freedoms we enjoy."

In addition to a royal commission, One Nation policies include a ban on further Muslim immigration to Australia and the intake of Muslim refugees as well as a ban on the burqa and niqab in public places

"When I first arrived to Australia, I remember being a victim of the hateful and fearful attitudes that the One Nation Party promoted," Mr Cheng said.

"I remember being told I will be sent back to where I came from because I was Asian and, therefore, not Australian.

"I remember feeling ostracised and isolated from the country I identity with, which I had adopted – in harmony with my cultural heritage."

"He said his father's death would not lessen his own belief that Australia was a successful multicultural and multi-faith society.

"We need to look how we can heal and build; not how we can divide and exclude.

"My dad was a gentle and peaceful man; his name should not be used to promote fear and exclusion," Mr Cheng said."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/curtis-chengs-son-calls-on-pauline-hanson-to-stop-referencing-his-dad-in-racial-comments-20160725-gqcx7o.html

Frankly, the clubhouse midgetry on display on threads up and down the general section of this forum is pathetic. You fellas no doubt consider yourselves enlightened "men" in the Western tradition.

I call you follow-the-leader, flaming torch and pitchforks, hysterics.

Ooh that sonja Kruger ! Sonja , you've been very naughty and said something naughty......NOW GO TO MY ROOM & STAY THERE TIL I SAY. Oh...er....nevermind.Carry on !

'Frankly, the clubhouse midgetry on display on threads up and down the general section of this forum is pathetic. You fellas no doubt consider yourselves enlightened "men" in the Western tradition.

more to the point Poirot you display the typical western feminist narrative that until directly affected you defend your hopelessly flawed narratives. Unfortunatley many of the girls/boys in Sweden, Germany, Brussels, Britian, Australia and France and their families no longer believe you. Hatred of what made this nation great and gave you are privileged life has totally blinded you. Sort of like the grateful immigrants now blowing kids limbs off in the country that welcomed them.

Muslims have been murdering other Muslim tribes for 1,400 years. Saddam was no different, however when he began genocide of the Kurdish population the Western World was appalled. This happened before the West got involved to remove him.

We have two main Muslim groups in Australia and both hate each other with a passion. As they populate the same antagonism and murder will happen here. Sonia is right to say we do not need Muslim immigration as both antagonistic factions are here. That they kill Westerners [Crusaders] is a recent development by a small group of terrorists.

Susie want to silent any dissenting voice by suggesting Sonia should not have a public voice.

runner,

"...Hatred of what made this nation great and gave you are privileged life has totally blinded you...."

You are a prime example of what I was getting at in my previous post. A closed-minded religious warrior for Christianity - who appears to think he can ditch the central tenets of Christ's message while he shambles around the forum.

You in particular are a classic example of the pitchfork and burning tar brigade - who parachutes into threads, deposits his dollop of odium and races off to the next thread to do the same.

And who thinks because he posts fundie dogma like this:

"You don't really think God has abandoned His throne do you. We are just suffering the idiotic embracement of secular/feminist dogma.

Islam has no ultimate future as Christ will have and is having HIs way

' Therefore God has highly exalted Him, and has given Him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of heavenly ones, and of earthly ones, and of ones under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.'"

...that we'll all think, "Wow! - what a Holy fella!"

I kinda like Christians who demonstrate humility and compassion and a well-formed sociology...not so much the craven run-by graffiti you bring to the forum nearly every post.

Dear Is Mise,

The same way We can trust self-proclaimed Christians
like runner when he speaks. ;-).

Foxy,
Today you say, "I don't believe in generalisations. I find that those
sort of concepts are too vague and sweeping in their
scope. Of course some people tend to think in terms of
general categories, if only to enable them to make sense
of the world by simplifying its complexity. Stereotyping
and scapegoating sadly are not checked against reality."

Gee, you don't believe in generalizations. Considering that on the 18-4-2014 you posted "People who are in denial about racism in this country are simply ignorant". Is that not a pretty good generalization.

When challenged, you denied that you wrote that and when I presented valid proof you then claimed that you were quoting somebody else. Yet only your name is underneath your posting and you refused to withdraw your statement. Of course I can post your complete statement if you care to see it for the fourth time.

Foxy, you have shown that you do not have much regard for the truth or facts. Now I can accept that persons can say things that are erroneous but persons usually withdraw and apologize, if they posses moral character which is apparently lacking in you

Foxy,

I'm so glad that you trust Runner's word.

Dear Is Mise,

Which word of runner's are you referring to - he
has so many?

Dear Banjo,

You and I have had several attempts at discussions
in the past on this forum. I have learned that you
are not concerned about genuine issues or explanations.
All that interests you are - negative statements that
feed your existing hostilities.

I am not going to provide these for you. Find someone
else who will.

Foxy,

"....like runner when he speaks. "

"speaks" is plural.

Dear Is Mise,

Yes, "speaks" is plural and very apt.
When runner "speaks" it speaks volumes.

Sonia Kruger has not said nor done anything illegal nor what a large portion of the population has been thinking. The response from the left has been a string of death threats and abusive comments in the most obscene language.

Yet when Nova Peris gets one abusive post the man is hunted and charged, and when senior clerics claim that homosexuals should face the death penalty, the response is limper than wet lettuce.

While I don't support her stance to ban muslim immigration, I support her right to question it. It would be great if the left could show a modicum of the tolerance it demands for its views.

SM: It would be great if the left could show a modicum of the tolerance it demands for its views.

It would be great for those Protected Imams who preach Infidelophobia & every other type of hate of things Western would show some tolerance too. Fat chance.

Foxy,
You are right about one thing. I am hostile toward you and the reason is that you are prepared to disparage my country with dishonest and implied comments. You magnified that when challenged by denying you wrote the post. That is also why there is no need for explanation on your part as you made your dishonesty quite clear. It was calculated and you have enough brains to know better, which makes it worse.

I post on the matter only to inform others of your dishonesty and lack of decency. I wont let you get away with it. I'll continue to inform others when I see the need.

I don't know if you are a citizen or not, but I hope not as you don't deserve to be and Australia deserves better.

Banjo,

"I post on the matter only to inform others of your dishonesty and lack of decency. I wont let you get away with it. I'll continue to inform others when I see the need."

It's most apparent that you have popped onto this thread with nothing other in mind than to troll Foxy.

How about you either address the subject or toddle off and find something more constructive to do.

Dear Banjo,

This is my country too. I was born and raised here.
My family and my ancestors have paid their dues in blood,
sweat, and tears, working hard and contributing.
Therefore being able to criticise certain aspects
of our society and some of the people in it is something that I
shall continue to do whether you like it or not.
What you think of me doesn't interest me. You're not someone whose
opinion matters to me.

However, the following link may help you solve some of the personal problems that appear to be eating you:

http://www.spiritualperception.org/the-tactics-of-bigotry/

Dear Poirot,

He's a sad case. I hope the link helps him.

Piorot,
I followed this thread from its inception as the subject of stopping muslim immigration as I have been advocating that for many years and people are now starting to wake up. Interest in the subject is gaining momentum.

I posted in response to foxy's claim of not believing in generalization. In posting her comments of the 18-4-14 it showed clearly that she was writing another untruth. Glad I was following the thread as I may have missed Foxy's dishonesty this time.

poirot: How about you either address the subject or toddle off and find something more constructive to do.

& This coming from the Queen of deflection. Don't make me sick. You have never stuck to any subject.

You always bring up side issues that have no relationship to the subject.

You never directly answer a question to clear up exactly where you are coming from in your stance on a Subject or exactly what you believe according to your Belief System & how it relates to what you post.

Says Jayb,

Completely going off subject....

BTT boys!

(C'mon, Jayb, your line of accusing me of deflection is what you use when you've run out of argument. It's an old ploy of Loudmouth's, except of course, when he strays from the convo - then it's apparently all fine and dandy:)

Dear Poirot,

Just for your information so that you'd know
what Banjo is banging on about the following
link is self explanatory:

http://www.forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6339

Try page 9.

Dear Poirot,

I'll be away for a little while. I've got to
go into hospital tomorrow for more tests. Keep up the
good work in the meantime. I'll be thinking
of you all.

Take care.

Hi there FOXY...

You have to go into hospital again do you FOXY? I trust it's just a routine set of tests after your last visit ? Whatever the reason, I hope it's nothing serious, in any event please hurry back soon, because this FORUM, really needs You, POIROT, and SUSEONLINE, aka the perfumed trio. The three of you whether we agree or not, does add a considerable amount of mastery and panache that keeps us blokes in line and moderately civilised. Take care FOXY.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank You for caring.

These are more tests that my specialist wants done.

Quite frankly I'm so sick of all this and would just like
to be left alone. I'm beginning to feel like a guinea
pig. A scared one. That's why I'm doing as I'm told.

Anyway, Your words always comfort me - and make me realise
how lucky we all are to have people like you in this country.
And on this forum.

Bless You!

Foxy,

I have just had a good friend diagnosed with cancer, and she is to have operations and chemo. And whilst being scared is trying to be brave for her kids.

While I don't know what you are facing, I wish you the best through uncertain times.

Since I started this thread there have been further Islamic terror atrocities in both Germany and France.

I bet a lot more people there are starting to feel the same way that Sonia Kruger does.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Thank You for you good wishes. I'll be going into
hospital this afternoon.

I've just received several articles from New Matilda.
They are distressing to say the least.
What do you think of them?

http://newmatilda.com/2016/07/22/australias-racism-problem-is-a-growing-
emergency/

And -

http://newmatilda.com/2016/07/26/nt-juvenile-prison-abuse-the-most-shocking-part-is-that-anyone-is-actually-shocked

Foxy,

My disdain for the New Matilda is due to shoddy journalistic work, its cherry picking of facts and its complete failure to even try and hide its far left whinge bias.

For example this gem: "In her maiden speech to Parliament, Hanson called for the abolition of ATSIC. In 2004, the Howard government put that plan into action." Is pure BS. What the authors fail to mention is that in spite of efforts to reform ATSIC, it was clear that the members were using the funds corruptly and the infighting paralysed the organisation to the point that it did almost nothing, and that the Labor opposition also urged Howard to dismantle it.

Secondly the article completely fails to deal with the main reason for Islamophobia which is the Islamic extremist terrorism which while mostly targeting other muslims in other countries, is now frequently targeting soft targets in western countries. And as most sharks don't target humans, people would prefer to swim with dolphins than sharks.