"Prominent author and campaigner against radical Islam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, is calling for all of Sydney’s Islamic schools to be shut down to avoid brainwashing children.

She has also criticised the Prime Minister for his failure to acknowledge the threat of Islamic fundamentalism in schools, deeming it “negligence”.

“I think the Australian government is not very different from other liberal governments. The Government just wants to be fair but in attempting to do so they end up ignoring the problem fermenting under the surface,” she said.

“They should stop insulting the intelligence of the public by going around saying Islam is a religion of peace.”

Ms Hirsi Ali, who grew up in the predominately Islamic Somalia, is due to visit Australia for a speaking tour next week, the Daily Telegraph reports....."
https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/march-2017/renowned-antiradical-islam-critic-calls-for-all-islamic-schools-to-be-shut-down

She knows what the 'Religion of Peace" is all about, having suffered under Islam and being currently under threat of death from the Faithful.

the schools that should be shut down are mainly State ones. They groom and pervert young kids through so called ' safe' schools, teach that all cultures are equal (including Islam) and promote the idiotic gw fantasy shutting down industry through outrageous power cost. They usually think they are intelectually superior. What a joke!

But Islam is the most feminist religion and good for girls - According to the self-promoting mighty mouths that the uber 'Progressive' ABC lends oxygen to,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P7iD4z_O2w&t=38s

The youth that are inclined to be radicalized come from Bankstown Boys High. This is a State School in a dominant Muslim area. The State should not by involved in gender specific schools as it breeds male superiority which suits Muslim view of women. We believe in equality of education for all. Schools that now separate buys and girls at curriculum breed discrimination.

Muslim Schools are not abiding by the standard curriculum teaching Art and Music rather teaching Koran in its place. This alone radicalizes young minds before critical thinking develops.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is promoted as a "women's rights"
activist and champion. Her supporters see a self-affirming
image, one that validates their beliefs of the
backwardness, barbarity and danger of Islam and Muslims.

I have read her book "Infidel," with all the painful
details of her upbringing. And I will try to get a hold
of her latest work, "Heretic: Why Islam needs a Reformation
now."

There is no denying that Ayaan's words are brave. She
explains that:

"All cultures are flawed, but if we want to aspire to a
society, whether it's on a national level or on a
global level of individual rights and respect for human
rights, then we have to criticise these cultures..."

And heroic Muslim women and their allies continue to
challenge the injustices before them in their nations and
locales. Whether it is the work of women like Ifrah Ahmed
to end FGM, Asma Hanif of Muslimat Al-Nisaa helping battered
women or organisations like BAOBAB in Nigeria that promote
women's rights within statutory and the legal (law) paradigm.
Where the focus is on Women's Human Rights.

It is very difficult for example,
to combat extremism in an environment
like Iraq where people have suffered decades of crippling
sanctions, invasions, a lack of global investment to replace
the huge loss of infrastructure caused by sustained bombing
by foreign governments. These issues also need to be
addressed along with issues of marginalisation and so on.
However, we can only hope that through criticism reform
is possible through people that want to help and actually
work towards that end.

Foxy reveals that she has read something on the subject; why does she shy away from the Qur'an?

Dear Is Mise,

I suspect that Foxy does not shy away from the
Koran it's probably the fact that she does not
approve of any analysis of the woes of Muslim
countries that are too simplistic and that fail
to bring into their analysis issues such as
colonisation, resulting loss of resources and
self determination. As stated earlier it is
difficult to combat extremism in an environment
like Iraq for example where people have suffered a
decade of crippling sanctions, invasions, and a
lack of global investment to replace the huge loss
of infrastructure caused by sustained bombing by
foreign governments. Any analysis that does not
address these kind of issues, along with issues
of marginalisation, is far from complete.

Foxy, the intervention of the west originated at the time of the
crusades which were undertaken to protect the Christians and Jews in
Israel and Mesopotamia.
This intervention has continued to today.
Now, the Christian survivors are so few and the Jews are now restricted
to Israeli territory it is time to extract all the Christians from the
middle east and seal off the middle east and no longer get involved
in the area. As many moslems as possible should be deported there and
not allowed out ever again.

A hard line of course but there really is no alternative unless
we feel that 1400 years of war is not enough. France faces civil war.

I know you will not approve of what I suggest, but it just goes on and on.

Dear Bazz,

I read your post with interest.

All we can continue to do - is as Ayaan Hirsi Ali
states:

"All cultures are flawed, but if we want to aspire
to a society, whether it's on a national level or
on a global level of individual rights and the respect
for human rights, then we have to criticise these
cultures..."

And, work with heroic Muslims and their allies
who continue to challenge the injustices before them in
their nations and locales.

Well difficult when their religion prevents any change at pain of death.
And why should we bother. Seal them off and let them get on with it.

Foxy,

What do you think of her remarks about Muslim schools in Sydney?

@Foxy, Thursday, 30 March 2017 3:19:34 PM

Most of your post is a direct quote from a group you appear to support who were trying to CENSOR the very speaker you claim to be supporting, ie Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

"Last week Anjum Rahman, of the Islamic Women's Council of New Zealand, says Hirsi Ali's analysis of the woes of Muslim countries is too simplistic.

"She fails to bring into her analysis issues such as colonisation and the resulting loss of resources and self-determination.

"It's difficult to combat extremism, for example, in an environment like Iraq where people have suffered a decade of crippling sanctions, two illegal invasions, a missing three trillion dollars and a lack of global investment to replace the huge loss of infrastructure caused by sustained bombing by foreign governments. Any analysis that doesn't address these kinds of issues, along with issues of marginalisation, is far from complete."

It appears that your source was probably 'stuff', NZ, March 5, 2017.

The respectful Ayaan Hirsi Ali said that she was hoping for people who are, "interested in civic discussion and debate", adding "I speak out against Islamic law as a moral code and a legal code. I think it's very important to have this discussion and not be inhibited by fears of violence and bigotry."

There is also a similar group of women Islamic academics who were petitioning to censor Ayaan Hirsi Ali in Australia. The SBS gave some oxygen to their petition.

Not supporters of free speech are they? But shouldn't they be heralding Islam as the most feminist religion*?

Feminist Islam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ev66F8U4L8&t=176s

Beware who is to be next!

Government aims to insert its talons into every child's brain, injecting them with Australian values so they end up as consumerist addicts in the industrial meat-grinder and give them lots of taxes.

leoj,

You need to go back and read my posts.

You appear to have missed the point of the
message that I was trying to send.

I did borrow a paragraph that to me made sense
regarding the analysis of the problems of
Muslim countries and what issues are often
left out. I tried to point out how difficult
it is to combat extremism in these regions and
why.

I also referred to the painful details of Ayaan's
upbringing and the fact that there is no denying her
words are brave. I also quoted what she had to say
about cultures and their flaws.

I don't understand what point you were trying to make.
If you disagree with anything that I posted - why don't
you simply say so. I do not believe that I posted
anything that would demean Ms Ayaan Hirsi Ali. If you
believe that I did - you are simply wrong.

I haven’t read much from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, although I’ve been meaning to.

I like Sam Harris’s thoughts on Islam. I find his criticisms fair and balanced, and he doesn’t pull any punches. When many on the Left are accusing you of being a xenophobe and an Islamophobe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60), while many on the Right are accusing you of being an apologist for Islam, it’s a pretty sure sign that you’re approaching the topic in a very balanced way. Although I do find some of his arguments to be a little simplistic and sociologically naive.

As for what Hirsi Ali said about shutting down Islamic schools? I agree with it in principle (no child should be exposed to ANY religion until their critical thinking faculties have at least started to develop), but actually doing it could backfire badly as it would undoubtable be seen as a hostile act. It’s the second- and third-generation immigrants that are at the greatest risk of becoming radicalised when they feel marginalised, and research suggests that one of the best ways to make an ethnic minority feel marginalised is to make them feel like they must abandon the culture of their heritage altogether.

It probably comes down to which approach would be the most successful both in the short-term and the long-term? Shut down Islamic schools, or try to engage with and empower moderate Muslims in Australia. Given the complexities surrounding radicalisation, I think it's pretty naive of Hirsi Ali to be so certain of what the best course of action is to take there.

One point to consider is the fact that many Muslims may home-school their children if Islamic schools were to be shut down - which would make monitoring what was being taught harder. Plenty of Christians in the US home-school their children to prevent them learning about evolution and climate change. I can't imagine Muslim home-schooling would be any better.

Foxy,
You seem to be one of those people with a hidden agenda that is designed to bring the Australian culture and way of life right down into the gutter along with all the other fanatics and socialistic Ideologues.
Why don't you just listen and not speak but since you seem to have a negative view point on anything that is Australian and uplifting I guess that would be too much to expect.
What the hell do you think they teach in Islamic schools?
Cooking and sewing?
The teach the Koran which decrees non believers (Infidels)must die.
That means you Foxy if your not a Muslim.
Off with your head and there's nothing more negative that that I guess.

Dear Is Mise,

Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants Islamic schools closed?

I don't think that's going to happen.

We have many private religious schools and closing
one group down would simply be difficult to
explain considering that the Government is meant
to treat all citizens as equal regardless of
religion.

All Australians are supposed to be equal under the
law which means that nobody should be treated differently
from anybody else because of their race, ethnicity,
country of origin,their age, gender, marital status,
disability, or because of their political or
religious beliefs.

Government agencies, including education departments,
and courts must treat everyone fairly.
Governments can insist on schools meeting certain
standards but I doubt whether they would close down
any private school on religious grounds.

Dear Chris,

I'm sorry that you feel so strongly about who
you perceive me to be. You actually do not
know me at all. However, I have no control
over what you think of me and therefore I shall
have to learn to live with your bad opinion.
It's a shame though because I have always read
your posts and thought you were a very fair man.
But then I really don't know you either. So I
guess we could both be wrong about each other.

cont'd ...

Dear Chris,

No, I'm not a Muslim.

I am a Catholic.

Dear chrisgaff1000,

You wrote of Foxy;

“negative view point on anything that is Australian and uplifting”

Don't be an idiot mate. Foxy is expressing very mainstream view of a country who always prided itself on giving people a fair go, tried its best not to discriminate on the basis of race, colour or creed and attempted to take a balanced, non-jingoistic view of the world.

Sure we might have shifted from that path a touch but we would have to go a bloody long way to get to what you would claim for us and thankfully there are people like Foxy who are fighting to hold on to our history as a progressive and open nation.

Despite some opposition at the time Australia took in substantial amounts of Jewish refugees from war torn Europe many of whom built large synagogues, Jewish schools, and lived in enclaves. They looked and acted differently, especially the orthodox who still to this day have some pretty conservative views on women.

But we allow them their segregated schools and places of worship. We even allowed them some freedom of religious law. We recognised after the horror they had been through that we were for the most part big enough to cut them some slack.

Foxy represents that kind of Australia and she certainly deserves more respect that what you have shown in your last post, so you might want to do yourself a favour and pull your head in.

Dear Steele,

Thank You.

Can I give you a hug?

You intolerant bigots are no different than the muslims you hate.
You are the same.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYV7KWQ-fY4

The 'religion of peace' refers to the period after Muslims have enslaved the rest of us. All will be peaceful for them.

Muslim boys prefer public schools...there's girls there...freedom there...fun there, and they enjoy themselves there.
But will Muslims sacrifice their daughters to same fate? Not likely. Special schools for them for all the reverse reasons.

No Muslim has ever been an imposition to me. Because you get a rouge, does not put spots on every Muslim. Our jails are full of rouges and they are not Muslim or Abbott supporters.

Nugget comes in three shades as far as I know. Black tan and white. I have all three, I class myself as a bowler, even though I have had three games in Australia over five years. I am very welcomed at the bar of my local club.

The whole issue is discrimatory, All nationalities have had their share of discrimination, I believe it has something to do with initiation. Get tough or get out.
Which P M banned calling Italian,s wogs.
The Vietnamese were branded slopes.
The Greek were called greasers.
I am not sure what the Abbo,s branded the habitants of the first fleet.
Australia now is full of mongrelised habitants., and still we critisize newcomers. We can not get any worse so why the intolerance.
When you sleep at night spare a thought for the person beside your mung realised body, you may well realise your best friend is a mongrel also.

Doog and Foxy,

You are reading it wrong.

Tolerance won't stop conflict and civil war.

Especially in the event of a massive economic breakdown,

In fact, I believe tolerating dangerous, fundamentalists religions, only allows
them time to build into big religious tribes.

Elizabeth the 1st of England, in fact, tried tolerance and appeasement with the Catholics, instead of persecution, but said they had to worship at home in private, probably fearing the plotting of the priests trying to shore up their power. But it didn't work, because the Catholics invited the priests and their neighbours to large masses in their homes. So the plotting for Catholic power continued in secret.
They attempted at least 2 assassinations of Elizabeth, plotting to put the Catholic Scottish Queen on the throne of England, which would have also returned power to the Catholic priests.

When those attempts failed, a big army of Catholic men on horses rode on London
to take the city and kill Elizabeth themselves. Elizabeth could no longer be tolerant
of them. She cut off 700heads of those involved and hung them as a warning on
posts around London streets.
Elizabeth believed in freedom of religious belief. But the Catholics, called Elizabeth,
a heretic (meaning- of the devil) sound familiar, infidel? They thought it was their holy duty to kill the devil.

Just pointing out, that tolerating groups with extreme beliefs won't save you from
their ambitions in the long term. It is a fallacy, that tolerating big religious tribes will
result in peace. History demonstrates.in many bloody examples, that the opposite is in fact true.

CHERFUL,
Exactly.

Hi Doog,

Down this way in beautiful SA, the Ngarrindjeri still call whitefellas 'Gringkari': it refers to the white skin which is seen on a dead body as the outer skin peels away: the ghost skin. Shortened to 'Krinks' these days.

Anne Aly MP has suggested that it should be illegal to criticise Islam, since that would be akin to racism. Of course, Islam is a religion, not a 'race'. But if Islam can't be criticised, then neither can any other religion. As a Leftist and atheist, I think that's far too restrictive of freedom of speech. Religions are ideas, ideologies, and everyone should be free to analyse and criticise any ideas in a free society.

Perhaps it's drawing a long bow, but Aly seems to be demanding that eventually Shari'a law be imposed, first on all Muslims, then on the rest of Australia as a country belonging to Allah, as all countries are perceived by strict Muslims to be. Aren't you glad that Aly is a 'moderate', dedicated to deradicalising Muslim youth ?

I hope that Ayaan Hirsi Ali comes to Adelaide on her tour: now there's a genuine 'moderate' Muslim. Incredibly brave, up there with Malala Yusufzai.

Cheers,

Joe

@Foxy, Thursday, 30 March 2017 5:22:36 PM, "You need to go back and read my posts"

You must have a book of patronising put-downs for all occasions.

However it is very obvious that I do read posts in detail. Or else I wouldn't have challenged you for copying and pasting a slab of text from the very hardline Muslim women activists in NZ who were petitioning to censor Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I also noted a similar, sinister group of what the SBS called 'Muslim women academics' (probably public bureaucrats too although the SBS would keep that under wraps) who tried to do the same thing in Australia.

Your glib reply you just found the words and sentiments as agreeable and useful to you 'made sense to you' you said (and somehow you didn't attribute the lengthy cut and paste either), is the very point I was endeavouring to make and of course you understand that despite your usual rhetorical artifice of pleading ignorance and acting surprised.

In another post you try to diminish Ayaan Hirsi Ali's and 'her supporters' credibility with a backhander, "Ayaan Hirsi Ali is promoted as a "women's rights"
activist and champion. Her supporters see a self-affirming image, one that validates their beliefs of the backwardness, barbarity and danger of Islam and Muslims".

That is only her supporters eh? And No, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not as you pretend attacking all Muslims. She is very disciplined in listing what she finds offensive and dangerous in ISLAM and she disagrees with White Knights and other apologists who claim that criticism of Islam is Islamophobia or 'racist'.

contd.
Of course Ayaan Hirsi Ali is right to be concerned about the cruel medieval, unreformed and uninformed beliefs of Islam and she has a duty to warn the well-meaning, accepting, vulnerable public in NZ and Australia. -Where incidentally if any of the harsh slagging of the Australian public (as 'racists' and 'xenophobes'!) by the invited 'multicultural experts' on ABC's Q&A and its other 'public affairs' shows was true, any such warning would be superfluous.

It is all 'Open Doors' for all comers isn't it and full steam ahead for 'Diversity' and a Big Australia, without consultation with the Australian public and regardless of the public's opinions and safety.

Of course government has a duty to be discriminating (not the political correct abuse of that word) in who is allowed in and emphatically YES, many mistakes have been made especially where large numbers are admitted.

Now what about some support for the Muslims who like other ethnic groups before, are stunned that the stupid Australian authorities supported by the virtue signalling (but 'White' hating) leftists, have carelessly imported the very tyrants, thugs, criminals and toxic cultural traditions that they escaped from and despise.

I agree with a lot that Steele said about Foxy but I do have some reservations.
A common tag to put on someone is Islamaphobia.
The meaning of this word is; An unreasonable fear of Islam.
In Canada you can be prosecuted for Islamaphobia.
Now I maintain that fear of Islam is quite reasonable.
Considering the texts in the Koran and the instruction to kill
infidels, Jews and the killings we see overseas and indeed a few here
I maintain it is very reasonable to fear Islam.

We have never had a Buddhist crime squad, we do not see the warfare
that we see from moslem gangs in Sydney and look at how many are
imprisoned in the Goulburn Maxi Mosque.

They follow a political system that is seditious.
ie they intend to overthrow the government and appoint a theocratic
government of unelected immans. In other words a dictatorship.

Do we need to be tolerant of the intolerant ?

I can accept that the author has a personal grudge and experiences with Islam but there are in fact no "religions of peace" at all.

It's OK for Christians to be all self-righteous about Muslims but remember the last three major attempts at genocide were -

Christian Nazis who killed 6 million Jews while their soldiers' belt-buckles were emblazoned with "God is with us". Despite the myths, Hitler himself was a devout Christian who claimed to be doing "God's work" and many of his supporters agreed. People don't force others into death camps for purely political reasons. It takes the religious aspect of "good and evil" to do this.

Christian Serbs with their attempted ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Szebrenica

The 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis hacked to death by the Hutu majority. Not only was the problem deliberately caused and fermented by Catholic doctrine but members of the clergy actively participated in many of the killings.
In fact, the Pope recently apologised for the Church's role -
http://religionnews.com/2017/03/20/pope-asks-forgiveness-for-church-role-in-rwanda-genocide/

(Funny - that didn't seem to be important enough to report in the mainstream media...)

Add that to the violent history of the Mormons in the USA and the multitude of killings throughout history in the name of spreading their message of "peace and love" and it's truly a bloodsoaked history certainly no better than radical Muslims.

leoj,
quote
"It is all 'Open Doors' for all comers isn't it and full steam ahead for 'Diversity' and a Big Australia, without consultation with the Australian public and regardless of the public's opinions and safety."
You said it all mate.
Its time we closed the "open Doors"
Have you ever heard the governments ask the people what they want or think?
Democracy is crap. When have the people ever had a say.
Public disobedience and open revolution are the only mechanisms that bring about change.
Did they ask the people if they wanted us to go to Vietnam? Did they ask us if we wanted to go to Iraq? Did they ask us if we wanted more water storage, electricity generation,higher pensions and lower corporate salaries. Did the ask us if we wanted parking meters, speed limits and building permits.
Did they ask us if we wanted the power supplies, the gas production, the oil reserves or the land we live on sold to the highest multinational bidder.
Ask yourself really is this the democracy we want? Forget what they tell you you need. Ask yourself.
Then get angry.

leoj cont.

Foxy will you get angry when the government steps in and takes your house because you have spare bedrooms and a non productive backyard that can be filled with hungry (Islamic?) refugees simply because it is the 'democratic' will.
Read Orwell [1984] or [Animal Farm] or Ayn Rand [Atlas Shrugged]
Do you really think these people were idiots?
This is the richest country in the world and yet we are broke and up to our necks in debt.
Credit is the product of democratic process and wow don't we wallow in it. No wonder the drug companies revel in our Valium wonderland.
Did you know they could cut out drug crime virtually overnight (one year max) if they really wanted to. Democracy dictates the drug empires embrace a fundamental economic mainstay. Employment. No drugs equals no employment in its field so instantly you have a couple of hundred people unemployed.
Did you know that a democratic government controls the max payouts on poker machines. Not the manufacturer or the operator but the government in Canberra. Why> because if individual venues were allowed to set their own jackpots the smaller clubs and pubs would be broke because of the lack of custom and then there would be massive unemployment. That's democracy? Crap!

G'Day Joe,

So, I'm a 'Krink'? Who would have thought it? I was born and bred in Ngarrindjeri country, and never heard that one.

Islam is not really a religion. It's a way of life that dictates everything sufferers of the 'disease' live by. And, I think you will find that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an apostate, not a 'moderate' Muslim. As far as I am aware, there is still a fatwa out on her.

Rache,

Your 'Christians', never actually slaughtered Jews or anyone else in the name of Christianity, as Muslims do in the name of Islam and Allah. There is no comparison between Islam and ANY other religion. You have blathered on previously about Adolf Hitler being a Catholic – complete nonsense of course. Hitler hated religion, but openly said, “Islam is something that I can work with”. And he did work with with the mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al Husseini, the very Muslim who suggested the Jewish 'solution' to him. It is one thing to dislike religion, as you apparently do; but to apologise for Islam is reprehensible.

Hitler was deeply influenced by Darwinism as he saw the White Arian Race as superior evolved. It was genuine Christians in Germany protecting and smuggling Jews out of Germany. Christians did not buy the argument of evolution of race, but saw all persons as equal. Hitler was not Christian neither by his beliefs or actions. You should inform yourself on the relationship of Christians to Jews in the 11 World war.

ttbn,

Islam is a religion by the very definition of the word:

“The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.” (http://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/religion)

Just what on earth you do you think a religion is? Or is this just an attempt to separate your beloved Christianity from Islam more than can be justified in reality?

While I think it’s a bit of a stretch to paint Hitler as a devout Catholic, it is equally a stretch to claim that he hated religion. Hitler expressed very mixed and contradictory views on both religion and atheism.

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

--

Josephus,

Even if everything you said were true (and not all of it is), creationism is still nonsense and evolution is still a fact.

Deal with it.

good post Jospehus. That is why Darwinist and Islam have so much in common. It is also why so many of the left despise the truth (Word of God).

' Even if everything you said were true (and not all of it is), creationism is still nonsense and evolution is still a fact.'

get over it AJ the fake news has been uncovered. No longer can you just recite something often enough to make it true. Your explanation of beginnings is a fantasy and certainly has no true science attached. Evolution is a fraud and unless you are only the gullible and deceitful ones still hold to such a fairytale.

Got any evidence for your claims this time, runner? No? Didn't think so. Just more assertions. Come back to me when you've got some actual evidence.

Any year now...

Dear CHERFUL and Bazz,

I've come across a website that might be worth a
read:

http://www.quora.com/Religious-Tolerance-Why-do-people-often-consider-Islam-to-be-an-intolerant-religion

The questions surrounding Islam will continue to perplex
us for quite sometime. I don't think any one
of us condones the violence that extremists and Islamic
fundamentalists practice. And I fully agree that we
should speak out and condemn those vile actions.

Should we tolerate the religion of Islam?

Definitely not the extremist fundamentalist version that
promotes violence.

However, having said that -
I think that I've made it quite clear that I don't
believe in generalisations about an entire religion or
group of people based on the actions of extremists within
their faith. I am hesitant in judging an entire group of
people based on the actions of a few.
At the same time - I do respect your concerns.
And fully understand them.

I feel that our hope lies
in the Muslim people (men and women) who
continue to challenge the injustices in their
nations and localities. As mentioned earlier, whether it is
the work of Ifrah Ahmed to end FGM, Asma Hanif of Muslimat
Al-Nisaa, who works to help battered women or the
organisations like BAOBAB in Nigeria that focus on
Women's Human Rights within the statutory law paradigm.
Our hope lies with getting Muslim communities on side and
working together
to make changes happen.

As Ayaan Hirsi Ali stated quite clearly, and as I quoted
earlier:

"All cultures are flawed, but if we want to aspire to a
society, whether it's on a national level or on the
global level of individual rights and the respect for
human rights, then we have to criticise those cultures..."

And work with the communities to enable changes to take
place.

AJ Philips,
I do not believe in 6day creationism. I stated Hitler was impressed with Darwin theory, so sought to breed a super race. For him all other races were less developed.

cont'd ...

Here is another website that might be of interest:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kelly-james-clark/why-don't-moderate-muslims_b_8722518.html

Dear Josephus,

I am flat chat at the moment trying to get something finished for a client but I just had to reply to your revisionist claptrap.

Hitler said without equivocation that he considered his actions against Jews as “the Lord's work”. He originally found anti-Semiticism distasteful and beneath him but it was his radicalisation by the Christian Democrat lord mayor of Vienna who was also a member of which put him on the path of wiping out so many of the Jewish race.

The anti-Jewish diatribe Mein Kampf was such a hit within Germany it made Hitler a millionaire well before coming to power.

While the 20 million Catholics were not as quick to warm to him the 40 or so million German Protestants embraced Nazi ideology with an unbounded fervor.

Here is a question for you mate, if we were to tally up the number of people of the other faith that Christians and Muslims have dispatched over the last 50 years who do you think would win? That is even given Christians outnumber Muslims by a third.

I don't think Islam has any right to call itself the 'religion of peace' but I sure as hell know Christianity isn't within a bulls roar of the title either.

Hi Josephus,

Darwin actually believed the opposite, that the mixing of people was healthy and beneficial (check out his 'Descent of Man'). Others, especially Herbert Spencer, distorted his view by extending what he applied to nature, to humanity as a whole. Darwin certainly never meant anything of the sort.

Many of the principles of the early Enlightenment, in this case that everything could be reduced to a science, was very much an over-reach (compare Saint-Simon's notion of sociology as a science of human social behaviour). One perversion of that flawed notion was that, as in nature, there was a 'survival of the fittest' (also not one of Darwin's ideas, I think Thomas Huxley's) amongst human societies. Darwin would have despaired.

Cheers,

Joe

"No one blames Beatles for Charles Manson, and no one should
No one blames Salinger for killing Lennon, and no one should
But no one looks beyond Islam to blame for ISIS or Al-Qaeda."

Hi Foxy,
Thank you for your reply,
There were some well made points in the article you posted,
Yes, decent Muslim people are being treated with suspicion because of the
appalling behaviour by groups like Isis.

The paragraph above from the article. however, doesn't really make sense, although I understand the point it is trying to make.

What connection, or link did Charles Manson ever have to the Beatles.

"No one blames Salinger for killing Lennon". I do., I think of him -as the nut that killed Lennon.

As to the Islamic connection to Isis, There is a very big link to the religion, a link which is proclaimed endlessly by Isis. The writings in the Koran about beheading the Devil(the infidel) are the reason Isis beheads people. The link to the religion is right there
In those actions of beheading the Devil.

Those teachings are coming directly from the Koran.

Is it any wonder, fear and suspicion is in people's minds in respect to Islamic followers.
All religions have Been guilty of this kind of thing in history, the difference is, that most of those religions have reformed under public pressure, but the Islamic religion is still going through the long process of modernisation. The decent Muslims will
. gradually bring this about, but until ithey do, people
who have already gone through this struggle with the Christian religion, have no wish to
fight the battle again,with another fundamentalist medieval religion,who are willing to
kill anyone who doesn't comply with their religious teachings.

The western mindset- "been there done that, no thanks!

@Foxy, Friday, 31 March 2017 6:01:59 PM

If you believe as that Huffington Post article posits, that moderate Muslims are not obvious because the media don't report them,

then,

you must also wonder why the ABC and Q&A especially give a podium and oxygen to Muslim 'experts' like Yassmin Abdel-Magied,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ev66F8U4L8

Part of the answer might very well be that ABC interviewers and programs like Q&A put sensationalism and 'gotcha' moments first. That is easy to believe.

However, in doing that the ABC is NOT being independent nor is it modelling balance. It is acting like the worst tabloids. Add to that the needless preoccupation with smut.

The ABC comes across as urban elitist and trying to rub the noses of the public in leftist 'Progressivism' (a bastardised politically correct version of Left). The ABC doesn't seem to like mainstream Australia at all. It has another demographic in mind.

How long the exasperated public are willing to put up with that is the question. The jokes around about the ABC are becoming less funny and sharper every day, so the time is about up one would imagine.

Here's a website from SBS that does give
good news as to what some Muslims are doing in Sydney:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/01/03/muslim-group-helping-sydneys-homeless

Dear CHERFUL,

As I stated earlier - I fully understand people's
concerns about Islamic extremism.
We should all condemn people who wish to inflict
violence on others.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali will be in Melbourne giving
a talk at Festival Hall on Friday 7th April at 7.00pm.
It will be interesting to see what she has to say.
Especially, on why Islam needs a Reformation now.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali will be a target of sincere Muslims as in their opinion she fights against the pure word of Allah. Allah's word never changes, nor does the life and example of his holy prophet

Dear Josephus,

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been under constant threat
earning the enmity of reactionary Islamists.
It will be interesting to see just who will
be protesting her in Australia and how large
the protests will be. Hopefully the police will
be out in full force and have things under control.

Foxy, "Especially, on why Islam needs a Reformation now"

You don't sound so sure. Perhaps you could report back, 'Did you encounter any arguments and facts that might have swayed your opinion in that respect?'.

After all, it isn't as though other posters haven't been kind and reached out by posting videos and print versions of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's many interviews over the years.

It is not only about terrorist murders. Some do try to frame it that way.

But what about whether young schoolgirls should be forced to wear the confining and discriminatory garb of their mothers? The boys don't have any such limitations. 'Sexist!', an outraged feminist would howl if it wasn't Muslim and 'multicultural'.

My reference in a previous post was to Ayaan Hirsi
Ali's book entitled :

"Heretic: Why Islam Needs A Reformation Now."

So naturally I stated that it would be interesting to see
what she has to say on the subject during her speaking
engagement here in Melbourne. As the link below tells us
in the book the author makes a powerful plea for a Muslim
Reformation as the only way to end the horrors of terrorism.

http://www.amazon.com/Heretic-Why-Islam-Needs-Reformation/dp/0062333941

Not just terrorism. You missed some vital text.

Quoting from your source,

"Continuing her journey from a deeply religious Islamic upbringing to a post at Harvard, the brilliant, charismatic and controversial New York Times and Globe and Mail #1 bestselling author of Infidel and Nomad makes a powerful plea for a Muslim Reformation as the only way to end the horrors of terrorism, sectarian warfare and the repression of women and minorities"

That last bit, "and the repression of women and minorities" is important one might have thought.

The 'Progressive' feminist elite may think otherwise of course.

I have great respect for her.

Read her books.

They couldn't be more timely or significant.

Foxy,
Is it only the radicals who need reformation? Or is it the whole of the Islamic religion? Does the text of the Koran need to be changed? Does the Hadiths need to be changed? Do Islam need to abandon the example of Mohamed who murdered and raped and plundered in the name of Allah as their source of inspiration?

Good on you, Foxy :)

Love,

Joe

Hi Josephus,

My limited understanding is that hadiths are always 'changing', being replaced with later ones. But since later hadiths are supposed to abrogate or supersede earlier ones, surely it shouldn't be impossible to come up with more 'reformist' hadiths and broadcast them as authoritative, if the will is there ?

But your point about Muhammad is vital: maybe that's what reformation will need. So it's going to be a massive ideological struggle, probably needing decades.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Josephus,

Thank You for asking such relevant questions.
That's why I am very interested in what Ayaan
Hirsi Ali has to say on the issues. From what I
gather I think she feels that the entire religion
needs to be reformed. She is an expert on the
topic. I am not. However I shall let you know
what her consensus is.

Josephus,

It is Islam in its entirety that has to be knocked in the head; there is no chance of reformation. The word of Allah, passed on by that “perfect human being” - the bloodthirsty lunatic, Muhammed – is final and cannot be changed.

Forget these mythical 'moderate' Muslims – they don't exist. No decent human being could continue to identify as a Muslim knowing the vile nature of the Koran. The monkeys among us might start yapping about the nasty bits in the Christian Old Testament (even though it is hard to see how that excuses Islam, as the monkeys seem to think it does), but they totally ignore the New Testament and the simple fact that no Christian goes around committing atrocities in the name of God or the Christian religion.

Islam is an abomination – the epitome of evil, hatred and violence. Nothing short of an all out, modern Crusade will save us. The last time, they were stopped at the gates of Vienna. Now, they are already inside the gates.

Islam intends to subdue Westerners “by their (own) hands”; and they are succeeding. We let them in. We are making excuses for their barbarity, blaming ourselves and the “sins” of our past. We are already acting like 'dhimmis', obeying the Islamic demand that we do not criticise the Prophet or Islam. The last Islamic empire was enabled by the elites of the invaded lands. It's all happening again. In fact, it is probably already too late to save ourselves, thanks to cowardly Western elites of the kind that have turned Europe into Eurabia already.

I am going to break my own embargo on Q&A on Monday to hear  Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the very few public figures prepared to tell the truth about Islam.

ttbn,

Not a “jot or tittle” of the “law” can be changed either. That goes for both testaments, by the way. Jesus said so.

<<The word of Allah, passed on by that “perfect human being” - the bloodthirsty lunatic, Muhammed – is final and cannot be changed.>>

That’s where interpretation and context comes into the mix. Just ask a Muslim or a Christian. I have. They’ll waffle on all day about ‘context’. Funnily enough, context never needs to be considered it comes to the nice bits.

<<The monkeys among us might start yapping about the nasty bits in the Christian Old Testament …>>

And the New Testament. There’s lots of little nasties lurking around in that too. Not as many, though. Granted.

<<… even though it is hard to see how that excuses Islam, as the monkeys seem to think it does>>

Oh, it doesn’t. Two wrongs never make a right. It is encouraging, at least, to know that no matter how bad a holy book is, the faith to which it belongs still appears to be reformable.

<<… no Christian goes around committing atrocities in the name of God or the Christian religion.>>

You see? Even you’re starting to recognise it.

Well, we still have the odd Christian go postal on us, but they’ve gotten a lot better in recent decades.

Now quit worrying and stop inflaming tensions. That’s how you’re guaranteed to radicalise ethnic minorities. Even those who aren’t Muslims. Heck, I can think of two who did a crash course in Islam before taking off to fight for ISIS. When the police raided their place, they found a copy of Islam for Dummies and a copy of The Koran for Dummies. That’s how little they knew before they took off. People tend to place too much emphasis on the doctrines.

Sometimes the doctrines are just an excuse.

Not all Muslim are terrorists but almost all Moslems are potential terrorists.

"Of course, the overwhelming majority of Muslims
are not terrorists or sympathetic to terrorists.
Equating all Muslims with terrorism is stupid and
wrong. But acknowledging that there is a link
between Islam and terror is appropriate and
necessary".
(Ayaan Hirsi Ali).

Dear Foxy,

I saw Ayaan Hirsi Alis talk one night, awhile ago, on the TV show Big Ideas.
I haven't read her book as you have, but I was so impressed with
her sane view and impressive intelligence.

I knew nothing of her until I saw her that night, and I was so impressed I have
never forgotten her.

If only women like her were in charge in Muslim societies. That is actually what the
religion needs, women with enough power to temper the excesses and selfish attitudes of the men.
With men it is all about them and their sexual needs, with women
it is much more inclusive and nurturing to a whole society.

Societies where women have no say, don't tend to advance and thrive,because men
like to hold onto power for themselves, no matter what the consequences,
with no understanding for the unhappiness and misery they cause.
Instead of threatening women like Ayaan, it would be better for Muslim men to understand,
that letting women like Ayaan share power with them, would benefit Islam and Muslim societies and themselves like they never dreamed.

It is the way forward for their religion. Thats what I think.
I will look forward to her talk.

CHERFUL,

You raise a very good point, that Islam has much more to answer for than terrorism.

It is very clear that the apologists for Islam (on OLO too) are cleverly trying to bracket criticism of Islam as being solely about terrorism. That allows the apologists to then declare that it is only some madmen, just a few, who the apologists then say have got the 'wrong take' of Islam.

That enables the tarpaulin to be pulled over the abuses of women (and men too!) by the bullies who benefit from the unreformed, medieval creed.

While Ayaan Hirsi Ali will undoubtedly comment on terrorism, she would also be saying that the politically correct 'White Knights' and ors who are apologists for Islam should not have such low, patronising expectations of Muslims in Australis and NZ, that they would not expect them to be critical and be trying to do something about the misogyny affecting Muslim women and girls.

To be blunt, we should always have the confident expectation that Muslims welcomed to Australia and who have made this country home, should be modelling the values of this society and Australian law and actively denouncing the medieval practices of Islam.

Which begs the question as to why this woman was held up to be a 'Muslim expert' by the ABC,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMs5eBO-xfs

Dear CHERFUL,

Thank You for your post.
I clearly remember the effect her first book,
"Infidel," had on me. I bought several copies
as gifts for friends. Today Ayaan Hirsi Ali is one of
the most admired and of course, controversial
political figures.
She is under constant threat as she refuses to be silenced.

As Western governments struggle to balance
democratic ideals with religious pressures Ayaan
Hirsi Ali,and her books, could not be more timely
or more significant. I shall definitely be
watching Q&A this Monday evening (3rd April 2017).
I encourage everybody to watch this particular
evening. It promises to be an immensely important
and necessary program and it should be viewed as
widely as possible.

Islam is not only cruel to humans, dogs, under Islam, lead a very poor life.
A dog, in the West, man's best friend is loathed in Islam, witness the Muslim taxi drivers who have tried to not carry Seeing-Eye dogs.

Dear Is Mise,

For your information, according to the Taxi Service
Commission assistance animals such as guide dogs
for people with a vision or hearing impairment must be
accepted by the taxi driver for carriage within the
cab. All other animals are not permitted in the cab
and drivers must refuse for them to be carried.

I believe that exceptions are made for animals who travel
to the vet.

I too shall be watching Q&A on ABC tomorrow night.
Leoj said;
It is very clear that the apologists for Islam (on OLO too) are
cleverly trying to bracket criticism of Islam as being solely about
terrorism. That allows the apologists to then declare that it is only
some madmen, just a few, who the apologists then say have got the
'wrong take' of Islam.

I had not really thought that out but it is true.
The two aspects, human & women's rights and the terrorist activities
are two different subjects but are so strongly connected to the same
texts that it becomes difficult to handle them separately.

It is probably why the media overseas pretends that the no go zones
in Sweden and Paris do not exist. The human rights aspects
are closer to home and make more politically correct news.
It is a more comfortable subject for gentle souls who shall be unnamed.

I don't doubt that Tony Jones will be interrupting as usual with irrelevancies already tried on Ayaan Hirsi Ali by the ABC, "What about Americans shooting each other (usually lower socioeconomic black, gang and drug related), or US military killed in war etc." That is after bracketing criticism of Islam as being solely about its terrorism.

In a recent ABC program where the woman(!) interviewer tried that on, that critics of Islam were being 'alarmist', Ayaan Hirsi Ali calmly said that of course one could go on too about the number of people who fall in their bath compared with the number killed by terrorists, but the criticism of Islam is not only about the violence, it is about large numbers of people adopting the belief that Islam is the 'higher path' for everyone, about the segregation of men and women and other toxic practices that have no place in modern society. The poignant example of the last mentioned was that as an apostate herself, Ayaan Hirsi Ali has to die. The vigilantes willing to carry that out are everywhere, including in Australia.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is primarily concerned with Islamic Law, Sharia, 'Wherever Islam is implemented, there is a segregation of society'.

She is saying that the debate should be about whether Islam is the recipe for a modern society - 'it is not only about terrorist attacks, it is about a coherent, whole ideology that those who believe and those who are promoting it want to implement in society' and 'It is not a recipe for a peaceful, modern society and that is what we should be discussing'.

Will Tony Jones and that 'special' Q&A audience allow her the respect and politeness to do that this time?

The ABC has a technique that they use to undermine a guest
They do it by selecting the audience and placing people
in the audience that undermine the guest.
I understand it has resulted in a number of people refusing to appear.
Most are politicians I think. Anyway it will be interesting to watch.

Totally agree with the posts bringing to our attention that it's not just terrorism, but the whole rotten Islamic deal that is wrong with Islam. There is not a single thing good about Islam.

So where do we place "Honour Killings" ?
Human rights or terrorism ?

I would say Human Rights.
However there is a complication;
Moslem countries have not signed the UN Human Rights convention.
However they are on the UN Human Rights Commission and at one time
even chaired the commission.
So they sit in judgement on countries that have signed it.
Moslem countries cannot be judged on their acceptance of honour
killings and we cannot complain about that acceptance.
I will be interested to see who is inserted into the audience.
Don't be surprised if there is someone who will represent an
Islamic Organisation that will bring up the UN Human Rights commission
and our operations in the ME.

Hi Cherful,

You're right:

"Societies where women have no say, don't tend to advance and thrive, because men like to hold onto power for themselves, no matter what the consequences, with no understanding for the unhappiness and misery they cause."

and there's a word for it:

'Culture'.

Can anybody name a 'culture' in the world which doesn't promote or pump up men at the expense of women, one way or another ? Is 'culture' merely the smokescreen for male dominance in any society ?

Cheers,

Joe

Any society that does not take advantage of women's abilities is
destined to look like, errr the Middle East.
I think that historically, very historically, the hunter gather scheme
was very natural.
The men went off hunting and that could be a dangerous occupation.
Certainly women encumbered by small children could not take part.
However gathering foods such as berries and nuts and root vegetables
gave women a lot of knowledge of plants.
I would bet that the first farmers were women who realised that if
they planted some of the plants near where they lived they would save
a lot of walking. And so agriculture was born !

The rest is history.

Foxy,

Of course, guide dogs must be accepted but that didn't stop Muslim taxi drivers from refusing them passage.

for your information you ignored the earlier part of my post, so here it is again:
"Islam is not only cruel to humans, dogs, under Islam, [generally] lead a very poor life".

Loudmouth, "Can anybody name a 'culture' in the world which doesn't promote or pump up men at the expense of women, one way or another?"

But hasn't the national broadcaster already brought to the screen a parade of Muslim women, some converts, who say that Islam is feminist? One recently expressed what the others were probably thinking, that Islam is the most feminist religion. She could have added culture, one supposes, but Islam is an ideology that covers everything (especially women and with a dark tent, a cynic might say).

So there you have it. To be liberated a woman just needs Islam, that magical Sharia Law and a bolt of expensive, attention-getting cloth to wear as a headdress (the bigger the better until it assumes the dimensions of a rail-head grain silo). Then by some miracle of the ABC's Transporter (Star Trek) she appears on a podium at the ABC, being fawned over while she talks about (you guessed it), herself.

First World countries like Australia could have saved many millions of dollars if only they had adopted Sharia from the outset instead of wasting money on all of that equal employment, affirmative action and so on. However, according to some it is not too late to correct those mistakes.

It may be me, but perhaps the feminists concerned have the liberty to pick and choose what they want from Islam (creed and lifestyle choices), because they are in Australia and rough men (and women) stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Dear Is Mise,

The taxi drivers that you refer to were in the
UK and were fined $500 each for their
bad behaviour.

Here is a link that gives the details concerning
guide dogs and taxis in the UK:

http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/media/8240022/access-guide-taxis.pdf

Foxy,

The taxi drivers to whom I referred were in Australia, however, it makes no difference where they were.

"Muslim taxi drivers are refusing to transport guide dogs and passengers carrying alcohol.
At least 20 blind Melburnians have lodged discrimination complaints with the Victorian Taxi directorate, News Limited reports.
Complaints have also been lodged against drivers who refuse to allow passengers to carry sealed bottles of alcohol.
Victorian Taxi Association spokesman Neil Sach said the association had appealed to the mufti of Melbourne to allow Muslim cabbies to carry guide dogs.
Dogs are considered unclean by many Muslims, and the issue is difficult for some drivers.
"I don't refuse to take people, but it's hard for me because my religion tells me I should not go near dogs," driver Imran said.
Guide Dogs Victoria spokeswoman Holly Marquette said blind people regularly reported taxi drivers refusing to allow them on board with their dogs.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Muslim-taxis-refuse-to-carry-guide-dogs/2006/10/08/1160245991954.html

So, Foxy, get around that and, while you're at it,
for your information you ignored the earlier part of my earlier post, so here it is again:
"Islam is not only cruel to humans, dogs, under Islam, [generally] lead a very poor life"

Hi Leoj,

In spite of Islam being the most feminist of all religions ever devised, what is there about it that is not to like for men ?

You can marry up to four women at a time, of any age as long as they've reached puberty, junk any one of them at any time, take the lion's share of their property, belt them 'as a last resort' if they displease you, require them to have sex whenever you want it, and demand that they obey you at all times. Any children from a marriage are yours, any babies still on the breast must be handed over and the mother can be pissed off when the baby is weaned.

What's not to like - provided of course that such men actually ARE complete bastards ?

Cheers,

Joe

Yes, one wonders how they can live with themselves.

Dear Is Mise,

I don't quite understand why you're carrying on about
Muslims, dogs, and taxis.

As I pointed out (and gave you links)-
there are laws concerning taxi drivers who refuse to
take guide dogs. They are fined if they don't comply.

The Taxi
Service Commission is very strict concerning what can
or can't be transported in a taxi. So what a Muslim
driver may or may not approve of is irrelevant. If they
don't comply according to the laws they will be fined.
How they feel about dogs is their business, but
if they are a taxi driver they will be forced to stick
to the rules whether they like it or not. Or they may
find themselves out of a job pretty quickly.

Just for interest's sake though the following link proves
that sometimes when things are closer to home, even Muslims
can be persuaded to change their minds about dogs.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/fresh-thinking-helps-blind-muslims-tackle-dog-taboo-20110406-1d4ie.html

I'll be keeping a close count of Tony Jones' interruptions tonight, and how many of them are nothing more than diversions from what the speaker is trying to get across. What's the betting odds ?

Joe

Foxy,

The point is that these people were allowed into this country and now they want to change our culture.

That a taxi driver should even think to discriminate against a blind person is reprehensible enough but when he cites his religion as an excuse then that is well over the line.

That the authorities should then ask an Imam to intervene instead of applying the law is part of the ongoing problem with the Fifth Column that stupid politicians and their fellow travellers have unleashed on this country.

Australians of all persuasions worked hard to get rid of the laws that forbade mixed bathing, yet these ingrates come here and demand segregated bathing at swimming pools.

The list could go on.

Hi Is Mise,

Don't forget that, in the doctrines of many religions, not just Islam, there is an assumption that whatever somebody has been afflicted with, that is god's will, and/or they must have done something wrong in a previous life. Perhaps it's a feature of most religions as practised in pre-industrial times, a sort of fatalist notion that whatever god has wrought, he knows what he is doing, there must be a reason for all the misery and affliction in their lives.

After all, one hears of incidents in some un-named countries when somebody is hit by a car on the road, and allowed to just lay in mortal agony (at least, until some interfering Western tourist organises transport to a hospital).

So, perhaps in the view of many people, a disabled person gets what they deserve.

As for dogs, I have rarely met a dog I didn't like, so it doesn't look like I'll ever become a Muslim :(

Cheers,

Joe

Is Mise, it is known as creeping Islamisation

Loudmouth,
A proper understanding of the message of Christ Jesus is not fatalism but "Faith can move mountains". Of the boy born blind when asked had he or his parents sinned to cause his blindness. Jesus answered neither. That the power of God be revealed by faith the boy was healed and did not need to just accept his fate. This is the story of many of Jesus healings. Believe it there is a better life, not submitting to fate. Islam has not accepted that message.

Dear Is Mise,

Talking about people who should not have been allowed
into this country... Did you happen to see "60 Minutes"
last night?

I watched with horror about the serial pedophile Michael Guider,
killer of Bondi schoolgirl Samantha Knight who may be about to be released into the community:

http://www.news.com.au/national/crime/michael-guider-killer-of-bondi-schoolgirl-samantha-knight-should-never-be-released/news-story/e8852ee8cbe63596ffd42765749ebe51

Foxy,
Guider is an individual motivated by his own evil passions. He can be dealt with by our laws as an individual. However Islam is an ideology that does not define one individual. It is socially all encompassing and calls itself a religion. However it is a system of itself that needs change, as it influences individuals who follow its ideology to murder, rape and plunder, as it has done for 1400 years in the Middle East. No where it rules do its citizens enjoy peace and security and freedoms.

Josephus,

The curve ball, well picked.

Hi Josephus,

Christianity was one religion which I was NOT referring to: after all, the apocryphal Good Samaritan story is surely evidence of a completely different outlook on other people's misfortune - that you help somebody, even if they are not of your own group, and no matter how they got into that situation. You help strangers, and you forgive sinners: those are core values of Christianity, if I'm not mistaken ? In other religions, you shun strangers and you condemn sinners.

As an atheist raised in a communist household, they seem to me to be quite admirable principles, and not that difficult to apply. I'm puzzled why the 'Left' seems to have forgotten them, and gone over to the dark side.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Josephus,

There are many people who should not have been allowed
into this country for a variety of reasons. However,
Australian values which are considered important in
our democracy - do not treat anybody differently from
anybody else because of their race, ethnicity or country
of origin, because of their age, gender, marital
status, disability, or because of their political or
religious beliefs. In other words as stated many times
all Australian are free to follow any religion they
choose, so long as its practices do not break any
Australian laws.

Dear Joe,

I have some devastating news.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has cancelled her Australian tour and her
appearance on Q&A tonight. Security reasons were given
as one of the causes of this action.

I was so looking forward to watching her on Q&A.

So disappointing.

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/controversial-islam-critic-hirsi-ali-cancels-tour-and-scheduled-qa-appearance-20170403-gvc6k3.html

Dearest Foxy,

So much for freedom of speech. So Change.org has also gone over to the dark side ?

There's not much point watching tonight then. The reactionaries have won this round.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

I think the best reaction to this would be to buy
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's latest book, "Heretic: Why Islam Needs
a Reformation now," and encourage other people to do
the same.

Well, that lets me off having to watch Q&A. I wonder if there really is a threat or, perhaps, the 'powers-that-be' have talked her out of it because they don't want to hear what she has to say because their own embarrassing ignorance will be apparent from what she would have said. The Australian Government and Opposition do not really like freedom of speech, and both are too cowardly to want the truth presented.

PS. I have just emailed the Prime Minister hoping that he feels the same shame that I do.

I for one will be watching Q&A this evening
for the simple reasons that I want to see who
will replace Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the panel,
what comments (if any) the other panelists will make
concerning her absence and how Tony Jones will explain
her absence. I also want to see what reactions will there
be from the audience members to all of this.

The reactions in the end will say more about modern
Australia. It should prove interesting.

The fact checker abc today said that Ayaan Hirsi Ali's life has been threatened by the ' religious right'. What a dishonest misleading bunch the left are. They can't even bring themselves to tell the truth when a woman's life is threatened.

I'll be watching too.

Dear Is Mise,

Good on you!

In all honesty, Ayaan Hirsi Ali's safety might not be guaranteed while appearing on Q&A either, where there have been some awful lapses of security, even where the risky background of the person was known in advance (and Q&A appeared to capitalise on that!).

Foxy wrote: "I for one will be watching Q&A this evening
for the simple reasons that I want to see who
will replace Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the panel,
what comments (if any) the other panelists will make
concerning her absence and how Tony Jones will explain
her absence. I also want to see what reactions will there
be from the audience members to all of this.

"The reactions in the end will say more about modern
Australia. It should prove interesting."

Foxy, I'm not often persuaded by what you write, but in this message you've sure persuaded me to tune in to Q&A tonight.

Security reasons would have come from high places.
A ttbn you have double crossed yourself. After mentioning both sides of govt you only send an email to the conservative side. That is downright bias you one eyed goose.

Comparison of Islam with Christianity is blunted by taking "Christianity" to be the Church of Rome. Comparing the body count from the 10 centuries of war of conquest and subjugation through the Middle East, North Africa, India and Dutch East Indies, inspired by the genocidal desert bandit Mohammed, with the 17 century war of subjugation against Christianity waged by the Church of Rome, set up by the tyrant Constantine as an auxiliary to his and his successors' brutal rule and endless military aggression. The murderous history of the Church of Rome shows up in Foxe's Book of Martyrs and is described in detail by the 19th Century Sevvo Ellen White (herself a kook but a meticulous chronicler) in her book "The Great Conspiracy".

There is a very satisfying read and re-read in the account of the demolition by Napoleon's soldiers of the castle housing the Spanish Inquisition near Madrid. It's at www.scionofzion.com/spanish_inquisition.htm

As an aside, I wrote the following contribution this morning to the Guardian's comments section

"Islamophobia is like Naziphobia – rejection of an ideology that calls for conquest and subjugation."

Unsurprisingly it got kerzonked by their dhimmi moderators.

Christianity is the Catholic Church, the rest, the Diminishing Christians, are breakaways and in their diversity compound their folly.

I hope you have been partaking in strong liquor.
The Catholic Church is Christianity. That is a filthy statement for anyone to make.
That puts you in the same basket as Islam, your mind is closed.
Your religion is your private crutch. It has no need for disclosure to anyone.
I have no religion so I am not naming any religion in my mane.

Emperor Julian

Christianity does indeed have a bloodthirsty, brutal history. Our ancestors
suffered, the burnings at the stake of the perceived infidels,sorry the heretics,
Both words meaning, of the devil, or belonging to the devil. Plus there was Bloody Mary
the queen of England who beheaded people who wouldn't convert to the Christian religion.

And don't forget the poor women selected as witches. They were given a chance to prove they werent witches by being submerged in the village pond for a long period of time. If they drowned, they were proclaimed innocent, if they didn't drown, they were burnt at the stake.

What a marvellous way to silence all those who dared to question.

Women and men,had to fight the Catholic Church for contraception, to be freely
available.
I think a lot of people in Australia are horrified at the prospect, of having to go
through this, again, under a Muslim group like Isis.
It took a long time to free ourselves from the power of persecution the early Christian
Priests had over people, the power to torture and kill and interfering in family life with their opposition to contraception.
The Christian religion today, since the separation of church and state,is a much more
Humane, caring institution.

Please don't let our society have to live through this again, with another
group of men like Isis, seeking to control people's lives even down to what happens
in the privacy of people's bedrooms by dictating contraception

Hi Cherful,

Yes, and Muslim women are having to go through much of what you condemn even in our time. I hope it doesn't take them as long to liberate themselves from pig-ignorance and gross inequality.

But it probably will :( So where will western feminists stand ? Will they go along with the Stockholm-syndrome Muslim women who have been persuaded to spout rubbish ? Sometimes - my god, this sounds arrogant - I don't think western feminists understand feminism.

The Muslim world has a very long way to go in order to reform itself, and bring it up into the 21st (or 22nd) century. An it seems that that vital process won't be helped along by the regressive 'Left', so it might take even longer than it needs to.

Cheers,

Joe

doog,

"I have no religion so I am not naming any religion in my mane"

I hope that that is a typo an' that you ain't a horse, or, perchance, an ass.

The Roman Catholic Church is a development of The Old Roman Empire the Pope replaced the Roman Emperor. It had very little in common with Christ Jesus who stated God's kingdom is not of the systems of this World's systems. The Roman system employed Roman Empire behaviour. Followers of Christ followed the teachings and practises of Christ. ait is important to know the leaders and their teachings and behaviour to recognise truth.

tbbn and Josephus,

Although as a typical extremist organisation, the Nazi Party kept religion under tight control Hitler was very much indeed a self-professed Christian who claimed to be doing God's work. He referenced God all throughout Mein Kampf, he was a painter of religious pictures, the Nazi Party had a close relationship with the Church in Germany to the point where they decorated some Churches with Nazi symbols.

While it's true that many people - including but not exclusively Christians - helped smuggle Jews out of Germany, many also worked in the Death Camps.

During the war years, the Pope signed a Concordat with Nazi Germany and the Catholic Church did not officially protest against any of the anti-Jewish policies of the Nazi state and despite being a Catholic, Hitler was never excommunicated.

That's the strange thing about religion. According to "The Rules", if Hitler (insane or not) solemnly and truthfully accepted Jesus as his saviour and repented of his sins before he killed himself then he must be in heaven right now - unlike the 6 million Jews he had killed.

Also, Darwinism (social or classical) isn't the same thing as Eugenics.

As for his relationship with Muslims, the disgruntled Persians hoped Hitler's army would come and liberate them from the British/Dutch/Americans who were stealing their oil and occupying their lands to the extent that they changed their name to Iran (Aryan) and that's as far as the sinister Nazi/Muslim relationship went. Members of the British Royal family had closer personal ties to Nazi Germany.

The BAN (no more of this 'security concern' bulldust) on Ayaan Hirsi Ali was kicked of by a petition signed by 400 MUSLIM women living in Australia. These are probably some of the "moderate" Muslims who are quietly helping to establish Sharia law and Islamism in our country. These harpies believe that Australia does not 'deserve' this sort of thing. What they really mean is that Australians do not deserve to hear the truth about Islam from someone who was a Muslim.

Dear ttbn,

Only 400 signatures?

And you think that this is what caused the last
minute cancellation
of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's trip to New Zealand and Australia?

Really?

Remember this is someone who is constantly guarded by her
own security forces. She travels all over the globe and
refuses to be silenced. She knows what to expect from
her speaking engagements and she has been to Australia
previously - It didn't stop her in the past.
So why the sudden change now?
"Security" reasons was only one of the factors given
for the cancellation. A statement issued said:

"...She was left with no alternative following a
succession of organisational lapses on the part of the
event organisers, "Think Inc".

In any case, whatever the reasons may be - let us hope
that she will make another trip in the near future.
In the meantime - try to get hold of her latest book,
"Heretic: Why Islam Needs Reformation Now".

That's the strange thing about religion. According to "The Rules", if Rache (insane or not) solemnly and truthfully accepted Jesus as his saviour and repented of his sins before he dies then he will go to heaven

well you do get some things right Rache

Islam doesn't need reformation, it needs a trip to the dustbin of history. 10 centuries after the desert bandit who invented it and it's still poison.

rache,
Obviously you do not believe the opposition forces to Hitler were Christian. What were they then? Hitler certainly was no follower of Christ and will not be found among the saints. He was an opportunist for his own agenda. Come clean how one defines a follower of Christ Jesus. It is not by using the name Christian, but by living as a follower of Christ.

Rache knows that Hitler acted exactly as you expect a Darwinian to act. Today they rename unborn babies as fetus's thinking that somehow that changes biology. The left luv to change the meaning of words.

Foxy,

I said that the petition 'kicked it off'. I did not say that it stopped her on its own. The usual suspects, our cowardly politicians and loony activists who cannot debate, therefore they want to close the debate down, would all have had a hand in it. I believe she was advised not to come in an offer she could not refuse kind of way. I don't think people realise just how bad things have become in Australia.

Dear ttbn,

I'm just in a bit of a puzzle. Here is a distinguished
champion of free speech who survived female circumcision,
brutal beatings and life in four countries under
dictatorships. She's been under constant threat and she
has always refused to be silenced in the past.
Now she suddenly
cancels her speaking tours to peaceful countries
like New Zealand
and Australia and the reasons given, to me at least,don't
add up. There must be more to it than what we're
being told. Very disappointing. I was so looking forward
to hearing her speak.

It must have taken a while to concoct that.

Regarding the courageous WOMENS' social and political emancipation campaigner, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, any suggestion that the security concerns were ill-founded and minor, perhaps an 'over-reaction'(a smear) is contemptible.

Foxy,

She was on TDT tonight, briefly from the U.S. Nothing much said, except for her suggesting that Islamic schools in South Australia should be closed down. Then the program switched to a local imam who is in hot water for speaking out against traditional Islam. He thinks that Islam in Australia should be Australianised. He regards himself very much as Australian and believes Australian laws come before Islam. Wonder how long he will last!

Dear ttbn,

Thank You for telling me that, it's good to know.

In her books Ayaan Hirsi Ali makes a powerful plea for
a Muslim Reformation. It would be heartening to learn
that she is getting through to some Muslims. May she
long continue her work.

doog et al,

"Matthew 16:17-20J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)

17-20 “Simon, son of Jonah, you are a fortunate man indeed!” said Jesus, “for it was not your own nature but my Heavenly Father who has revealed this truth to you! Now I tell you that you are Peter the rock, and it is on this rock that I am going to found my Church, and the powers of death will never prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven; whatever you forbid on earth will be what is forbidden in Heaven and whatever you permit on earth will be what is permitted in Heaven!” Then he impressed on his disciples that they should not tell anyone that he was Christ."

There can only be one true Christian Church and the true one is the one that can trace itself back to Peter in an unbroken line.
There could be no reason for a Religious Reformation for in light of the 'Tu es Petrus' there could never be the necessity and therefore all breakaways from the Catholic Church are in error.

Is Mise,
You did not read the whole context of Matthew 16:17-20. The Greek word Peter [you are petros is different word to the word Jesus used petra]. Petros means a detached stone whereas Jesus used the term for a huge foundation Rock. Peter you are a stone but I will build my church on a solid rock. What was that solid Rock? It was Peters confession! What was that confession? "You are the Christ the son of God". That confession is not exclusive to the Roman Church, though they would like to think it so.

Here we go again.

Hitler didn't act as a Darwinian because Darwin's book was one of those he banned. He refuted the idea of evolution in favour of the Biblical view of bloodlines and that's the basis of Aryanism.

As for quotes (and there are dozens) -

"We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people" -Adolf Hitler, 27 October 1928

"The Catholic Church considered the Jews pestilent for fifteen hundred years, put them in ghettos, etc, because it recognized the Jews for what they were".... I recognize the representatives of this race as pestilent for the state and for the church and perhaps I am thereby doing Christianity a great service by pushing them out of schools and public functions" -Adolf Hitler, 26 April 1933

There are also several similar notes handwritten in his personal copy of the Bible.

As I mentioned elsewhere, Hitler didn't kill anybody personally. It was done willingly by individuals. What sort of person would gas women and children during the day and then happily go home to his own family at night? The same sort of person who would become a suicide bomber.
There could not have been that many fanatics available - these must have been fairly average people.

It takes the twisted deluded notion of Good fighting Evil to allow such things and that only comes from religion and not plain or perverse politics.

I doubt that no sane person will bomb a Mosque on the suggestion of Pauline Hanson but many others have bombed abortion clinics and murdered medical staff in the USA because of their religion beliefs.

Re Is Mise: There was no "Catholic Church" in Christ's day to break away from. The Church of Rome was cobbled together by the murderous Roman tyrant Constantine using a rogue breakaway group within Christendom to serve as an auxiliary for his expanding wars against his own people and the rest of the world. The Church of Rome, re-branding itself as the "Catholic Church", has conducted a 17 century war against Christianity with a body count over the years to rival that of the followers of the genocidal desert bandit Mohammed.

Those that hold Hitler a Christian, have not identified who his enemy were. They assume his opponents were not Christian; but take Hitler's view they were a godless underclass that needed eradication. One sided ignorance, Thousands from Australia joined up to stop Hitler who pledged loyalty to God, King and country. Of course the apologists of Hitler believe he was a devout Christian. Absolute nonsense!

When everybody can agree to agree, let's not critisize my non compliance with any religion. I know what I said is mis , and I stand firm thank you.

Rache,

You said: That's the strange thing about religion. According to "The Rules", if Hitler (insane or not) solemnly and truthfully accepted Jesus as his saviour and repented of his sins before he killed himself then he must be in heaven right now - unlike the 6 million Jews he had killed.

At the time that Hitler killed himself, it was Church teaching that suicide was a 'mortal sin' and that suicides were probably damned.

'I doubt that no sane person will bomb a Mosque on the suggestion of Pauline Hanson but many others have bombed abortion clinics and murdered medical staff in the USA because of their religion beliefs.'

How many have bombed abortion clinics Rache or are you again trying to justify an abhorent industry because one or couple of people over the decades thought that by murdering murderers things would improve.

Re runner's superstitious obsession with abortion as "murder", there is not even an embryo until 26 weeks after conception, and it is only after that that a sentient, self-aware being starts to form and compete with the mother for consideration of human rights. That's why in the most enlightened State in this regard, WA, abortion that is performed on still-randomly moving and unconnected cells in the first 20 weeks is not forbidden except by woman-hating freaks, hobgoblins and monsters who harass patients and staff around clinics and libellously call them "murderers". Thereafter the restrictions on abortion increase as the foetus develops. These laws were pioneered by parliamentarian Dr J G Hislop who had more human decency in his left shoe than woman-haters like runner in their entire lives.

None the less, Emperor, the whole of the future human being exists in the fertilized egg.

I'm puzzled: some puffed-up sheikh declared a month or so ago, that if Ayaan Hirsi Ali came to speak in Melbourne, he would ring out five thousand followers to try to stop her speaking.

Sec. 18 (c) currently outlaws offending, insulting and intimidating someone.

So, the Islamists and their pseudo-Left lickspittles can't be offended, but they can intimidate others ?

Actually, I would have liked to have seen a combined gathering of Islamists and LBGQNTI+)-P supporters together, with their respective banners. Perhaps they could have engaged in polite discussion afterwards.

Joe

Good point, Joe, and it shows just how far we are into dhimmitude to the Muslims even though they are still a small part of the population. Our cowardly politicians will not take any action against Muslims for fear that there will be terror reprisals.

What a way to have to live in our own country!

Joe,

Section 18C is concerning racial discrimination. Going by your description, it doesn't sound like race was a factor in that situation.

Hi A.J.,

No, indeed, but it may have breached other laws against harassment, incitement to violence, intimidation, etc.

The point about Anne Aly's demands is that that sort of activity would have been legal - in fact, that anything that Ayaan Hirsi Ali said about Islam would have been ILLegal.

Joe

Yeah we know EmperorJulian the Nazis did not consider Jews as human also. Same tactics same result. Funny how you guys who try and use pseudo science to justify murder deny biology. Shows how sick the human heart is.

Is Mise: Stating that the whole of a future human being exists in a fertilised egg is an arbitrary cutoff instant chosen by the theocrats to support their hatred of women as expressed by runner. The event of conception is an instant on the path from existing human beings all of whom carry within them the ingredients of future human beings with or without conception. Every time the Yanks kill people in their incessant imperial wars for regime change they kill off thousands of future human beings yet we never hear a peep from theocrats like runner about that - the only point along the path that the woman-haters focus on is that of conception which still long precedes the coalescence of cells into an embryo which they can hold up as something with which they can blackmail women.

ttbn makes a valuable observation about the dhimmitude in the path of the march of Islam but I'm not sure fear of terror attacks is the motivation for appeasement.

What motivated the importation of a Moslem Fifth Column in the first place? Apart from the Fifth Columnists themselves, who benefited? Hint: the surveillance industry including the ASIO secret political police. A tried and tested question asked in the investigation of a criminal event is "who benefits?".

Every hint of terrorism has been used as a pretext by governments to close down right of dissent and increase funding and empowerment, at everyone's expense, of the surveillance industry. Surveillance not only against the Fifth Column but also - indeed primarily - against the rest of us

woman hater EmperorJulian. Try telling my wife, mother or daughter. You are pathetically small minded.

EmperorJulian,

There is more surveillance and cameras. That is not something that most of us would support. It is a concern with the linking of sources of information.

Recently I was in a nice little park. I noticed contract electricians installing video with infrared on a new pole.

I found out that recently a young fellow out exercising in another park nearby had nearly been killed in a vicious knife attack by a druggie. The victim had cooperated and handed over what he carried, a credit card and keys, but it was not enough apparently. The offender is still at large, there was only a limited description. So the City Council and rate payers are up for the expense of cameras and extra patrols to protect citizens.

Most of the surveillance is due to drug crime, criminal gangs and associated violence, also sex molestation. Surveillance is not a plot. The authorities really don't want to be spending money on it when there are so many other priorities, but they are being obliged to do it.

To Leoj: The additional "security" legislation attributed by the government to meeting the challenge of terrorism is not about ordinary civil crime.

To runner: There are vastly more women in the world than those in your close family and it is women in general who do not share your family's religion or your own theocracy against whose right to control of their own bodies that your incessant hostility is directed.

On the abortion debate.

A seed is not an oak tree.
It has the ability to become an oak tree, but it is not in the beginning' an oak tree.

An egg is not a chicken.
You have an egg sitting on your plate, not a chicken.

A fertilised human egg, is not a human being. It merely at that stage, has
the ability to grow into a human being.

Cherful,

"A fertilised human egg, is not a human being. It merely at that stage, has
the ability to grow into a human being."

It also contains all the genetic material from the father and the mother, it is a human being.

however, for the sake of argument, or illumination, just when does it become a human being?

Is Mise, the father and mother contain all the genetic material for a human being before they have even met. Why is it always post-conception that the woman-haters obsess about?

Emperor,

It's not till conception that they are combined; didn't you know that?

Hi Is Mise,

Presumably when a foetus is viable, when it can survive outside the womb, with the aid of modern medical techniques. And they get pushed back further and further in a pregnancy. So probably in the fifth month or so of pregnancy ?

Cheers,

Joe

In the US until 1973 the practice of abortion was
generally illegal except under limited conditions
primarily where the health of the mother or the
unborn child was at serious risk. However,
"backstreet" abortions by private physicians or even
by untrained practitioners were fairly common.
In that year the Supreme Court decided, in the case
of "Roe v. Wade" that American women do have the
right to abortion, if for whatever reason, they do
not wish to bear the child.

This right is not absolute, however, for the court
recognised that the unborn child seems to become more
human as it develops, over the course of pregnancy,
from a cluster of cells to an embryo and then a fetus.

On the medical evidence available at the time, the
court divided pregnancy into three periods of three
months each, or trimesters.

In the first trimester, the mother is entitled to
abortion on demand. In the second trimester, the right
to abortion remains, but is subject to regulation by
each state. In the third trimester, when abortions are
more difficult to perform and when the fetus is
potentially viable or capable of independent life -
all abortions are barred unless the health or life of
the mother is in danger.

Today about one in every four pregnancies in the US
ends through abortion, and in some areas like
New York State, there are almost as many abortions as
live births.

In short, abortion is being used as a means of
"after-the-fact birth control". To some people, this
is a matter of no particular significance; to others, it
is little short of mass murder.

In answer to Is Mise, there is no human being until more than 20 weeks after conception, and even then it is only with the onset of sentient self-awareness that a human being with human rights starts to emerge. The USA and decent states like WA recognise this in their laws. Woman-haters focus on the initial 20 weeks when there no human being (only the potential for human beings as in everyone whether there is conception or even any contact or not. The reason woman-haters focus on the first 20 weeks is that this enables them to blackmail women out of their right of choice even when it extends back to morning-after pills.

reports now coming through that the religion of ' peace' has contributed to man being fatally stabbed in Queenbeyan. Another 'lone wolf' I suspect.

"reports now coming through that the religion of ' peace' has contributed to man being fatally stabbed in Queenbeyan. Another 'lone wolf' I suspect." (runner)

We can bet the appeasers will be quick to attribute it to something personal like lunacy - anything but the Moslem religion.

Emperor,

As the viability of the foetus keeps going back, as medical science progresses then the only certain time for human life to start is at conception' no one can give a certain time other than at conception.
Conception is the time as laid down in Christian theology.

Yes - "IS" written in what looks like blood on the front window probably means those little boys were from "Inter-State".

Clearly this attack has nothing to do with Islam. After all, the victim was Muslim, and how can Muslims kill Muslims ?

Oh yes, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, I forgot.

Well, they were provoked by colonialism. No, I don't mean the Muslim colonialism over the past 1400 years, from Morocco to the Philippines, and Central Asia to Central Africa, but the Western colonialism of the last couple of hundred years, and the decades of control over parts of the Middle East: dreadful !

Those poor little boys were alienated by racism. That's enough reason to kill a Muslim student. Anyway, he probably resisted, so accidentally, as a last resort, .......

We shouldn't take this isolated incident out of context.

What a shocking incident in Canberra.
Two young teens - 15 and
16 years old. Apparently they went on a
rampage and are now in police custody.
The following link explains:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-07/counter-terrorism-police-join-investigation-into-fatal-stabbing/8425580

There was a couple of points I was going to make about abortions and contraception but was reluctant to break in as the thread started about Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Looks like topic has changed again to the Canberra incident.

Would EJ, runner or others like to start a new thread? Maybe Hirsi Ali is not over yet as she is still making the news.

Clumsy satire aside, clearly terrorist ideologies still have enormous influence on people who are easily led or are weak-minded. The warnings by the wonderful feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali about the dangers of Islamist terrorism, and the urgent need to reform Islam, seem to be affirmed.

Joe

Joe,

Islam reformed would not be Islam.

Just bye the way, the unfortunate service station attendant, who was so callously murdered, could have been saved by a simple bit of body armour, but that is illegal in NSW and the rest of Australia.