I am surprised it has taken this long.

Bazz if you are referring to the events in London tonight there is no indication that any of those attacked were part of the sowing. The terrorist who ran them down had no way of knowing if they had stood against the Islamic terrorists (and some have).

We don't know much of the story yet but at this point it looks like another thug dishing terror on people regardless of and right or wrong on their part other than being near a mosque and in one reported case dressed in a way that appeared mulsim.

R0bert

I understand that anyone who does what that bloke did in London would be called a terrorist..but what of the Bourke St killer in Melbourne? The powers that be made very sure he wasn't called a terrorist, yet he was muslim, had hate speech on his facebook page (I saw it) and he killed people.

That aside, an eye for an eye so to speak and I'm just surprised payback is so slow in coming, and it wouldn't surprise me to see more of it unfortunately. The Norwegian killer blamed the government so killed the government's children because of the muslim intake, so I suppose that was a payback.

Our countries have changed immensely since the invasion by stealth ..and not in a good way. I rarely heard of muslims until they started coming by the millions, now I hear of them every damn day..and again, not in a good way.

And this rubbish! imagine if anyone else did this! http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/current-affairs/new-development-targeted-at-muslims-in-melbourne-sparks-outrage/news-story/a5b8a611ae7dfcfffd1f1785dcd17acb

There is a massive and very dangerous problem in the world.

Guess what it is.

RObert with a lack of obvious government response to Muslim terror attacks, & the continual migration of these known problem makers, just how long did you expect it would be before some started retaliating.

Surveys have told us that 75% of Muslims would not report a prospective offender, even when they know a terrorist attack is being planned. This makes 75% of them guilty before the fact of terrorist activities, yet our governments continue to allow more into the country.

Obviously some more radical people are becoming frustrated enough with both government & Muslims to want to strike back at the problem. They can chose either government or Muslims to strike to relieve their fear & frustration. Innocent Muslims, if such a thing exists, are the easiest.

Fear is a huge driving force. Get even the average person fearful enough in their normal environment, & some will react. Get the violent & more aggressive fearful, & some are going to strike.

This is a chicken & egg situation. We had none of this, before Muslims brought terrorism to our streets. Obviously the cause is Muslim terrorism. If you want a cure, you have first to stop the cause, kill the chicken so to speak.

Time you started blaming the cause, & not the reaction in this.

Ladies and Gentlemen I'm afraid it's all too late to worry about importing terrorists in the coming waves of refugees, they're already here. Through the total ineptitude of 'ALL' governments we've allowed our soft underbelly to be exposed to this and other very serious crimes. Just watch the mushrooming power of the 1%'ers (Bikies)? Together with Muslim membership in such groups? Who are the heavies in Long Bay Gaol? That's easy, Lebanese = Muslims!

You don't believe me, just ask any working detective who're at the coal face. I've been retired for awhile, and I still hear the quiet remonstration from former colleagues and blokes I've trained in my squad(s). Executive police command will never rock the boat, as their political masters would rip 'em apart, even remove them.

Our current leadership under the treacherous TURNBULL, is so pathetic, so weak, it would cause you to suck on the end of your 9mm. Save for one outstanding politician, who's at least trying! Mr Peter DUTTON. Sir I salute you!

o sung wu,

you are right again. The previous immigration officers should hang their head in shame. Regressives such as Fraser, Rudd, Gillard and Turnbull should be ashamed. Thankfully Abbott had the guts to stop the boats. Now only Hanson with all her faults and Bernadi have any courage to at least minnimise the damage for our grandkids.

Hi there RUNNER...

You've been around awhile, and I've always respected your opinion, OK? So please tell me honestly, am I being too pessimistic on my take of what's happening in Australia now? To be very honest with you, one of the (couple of) 'nick names' I had when I was in the CIB was the 'Prophet of Doom', and I'll admit I do tend to look at things as the 'glass is half empty' rather than 'half full'?

Speaking with a mate (newly retired) well away from Sydney, and he was saying there are parts of Punchbowl, his latest patrol district where he was previously I/C, prior to retirement, where a single police presence in daylight hours (supposed to be the safest part of the 24 hour cycle for police) is now being cancelled until further notice! Ostensibly because of the elevated risk to police? There's an old saying that I always observed; in areas of high crime against the person, it was the coppers who owned the night, not some flea bitten bunch of petty crims!

When I joined the job in the sixties, I was stationed at Redfern, doing foot patrols on my 'pat malone'. What in hell's happened to yours, mine, and our country, for F..k sake? Moreover what are our "conservative" (sic) politicians doing about it? And what are police command doing about it as well - go FULLER go!

'So please tell me honestly, am I being too pessimistic on my take of what's happening in Australia now? '

O sung wu

I hope you are being to pessimistic however I very much doubt it. Australia has never been so divided. We have always had our struggles but by and large people got on. Even in the days of having a brawl in the pub (not that I condone it) and then shaking hands and moving on after it. The left have refused to have their own filthy ideology under a microscope and hence have not a clue when it comes to Islamic ideology. The left's hatred of the natural family, decency and the Christian faith that demands a conscience is abhorrent to them.

I actually hate to say it but with creeps like the masterminds of the child grooming program (safe schools) I wonder of this country is even worth defending any more. Once the conservatives had conviction of their ideals. They were at least smart enough to know that fatherless kids leads to diaster. You saw that everyday in policing. I saw it in the gaols. Now the conservatives have been infiltrated by weak regressives who care only about the next election and not about our grandkids future. It's all about me. Either we will have a mass awakening or continue to regress into the Greens land of sodom and gomorrah. To prove that they have some sort of superiority the regressives have adopted the gw faith in order to look down on anyone prepared to think. Yep they have won the minds of our kids. Maybe we are to blame for sitting back in comfort while these social engineers have destroyed our society.

This is incredible. We currently have a discussion thread running, filled with angry right-wingers condemning (and rightly so) the actions of a pair of hooligan pranksters for attacking Andrew Bolt, and yet when one of their own mows down a group of Muslims (killing one of them), the general response is ‘Well, what did you expect?’

Given the fact that Andrew Bolt makes a career out of twisting and distorting the truth (with his latest example being the ‘gay children’ misquote) and stirring up resentment, I could quite easily have asked ‘What did you expect?’ in that instance (and probably more reasonably, too, given that no one was killed), yet, had I done that, I would have been howled down by the same people here who are shrugging their shoulders with indifference to this attack.

Hasbeen I don't consider it an either or situation. There is in my view a serious incompatibility with many of the teachings of Islam and a sane society. That does not mean that it's not valid to criticise bad reactions that make things worse. Revenge attacks on people you know nothing just stir up the risk of more people being radicalised.

There us clearly plenty of room to debate issues of further immigration but the reality is without utterly destroying our own freedoms there are a lot if Muslim's in western countries who are not going away. We need to find ways of dealing with that without destroying most of what we care about in the process. Lashing out with violence against Muslim's is not part of any credible solution, rather part of making things worse.

R0bert

' and yet when one of their own mows down a group of Muslims (killing one of them), the general response is ‘Well, what did you expect?’'

what is more incredible is your arrogant assumption that he is one of 'one of their own '. And who might that be AJ? One of the Salvation army or the many Christians who have helped aids patients. Or is this another slur that the left use to cover their total depravity. The regressives again creating a problem with their pig headed multi cultural fantasy and now blaming others for the obvious fruit that it would produce.

Robert,
you missed the point, he did not care if that Mosque had any
connection to any of the Islamic attacks in Britain. It was the fact
that they were moslems. Just like the moslems that attacked people
in Britain did not care if they were Catholic, Methodists, Hindus,
Buddhists, atheists etc etc.

O Sung Wu,
Oh something has stirred you up recently. I guess being
updated by your ex workmates might have done it.
Here is a link that will tell you what is happening to police in Germany.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10543/germany-crime-gangs

I suggest that you send this link to your mates, especially those
still in the job, forewarned better armed.

Runner,
That man that was on the footpath that died was not hit by the van.
He was being treated for a suspected heart attack when the attack occurred.
At least that was the update I saw, there could be more by now.

Of course the law will take its course. Found guilty he will no doubt
get a multidecade sentence which will be deserved.
That should be a lesson to the Islamists not to complain when one of
their own gets a multidecade senence.

Well, I doubt he’s a raging Lefty, runner.

<<… what is more incredible is your arrogant assumption that he is one of 'one of their own '.>>

You lot don’t seem to be in too much of a rush to distance yourselves from the perpetrator, either.

<<And who might that be AJ? One of the Salvation army or the many Christians who have helped aids patients.>>

Given what a pack of homophobic bigots the Salvos are, it’s possible. That's an oddly specific question, though. Why do you ask?

<<Or is this another slur that the left use to cover their total depravity.>>

And what would that depravity be? Are you referring to your so-calling “child grooming” that doesn’t even resemble child grooming? Lying can be a form of depravity, too. Did you know that, runner?

well theirs your answer O sung wu. With the likes of AJ and others with his very sick worldview in places of policy making I rest my case. Just look at his bigotted views in one post

' You lot don’t seem to be in too much of a rush to distance yourselves from the perpetrator, either'

' Given what a pack of homophobic bigots the Salvos are'

charming and I wonder if he has condemned the rapist from the Greens. Thats right he has no moral base to draw any rational conclusions.

No Bazz, I got that point. Wondering how you think that will pan out over time if it's repeated? Do you think that will cause Muslim youth to see the error of their ways or to be more inclined to keep the cycle going?

I don't think we win this one by demonstrating that we are just as devoid of any sense of decency or fairness as the extremists. Attacking probable innocents in my view plays right into the hands of those who want war with the west.

Any credible plans on how to remove all Muslim's from western countries that you really think could be implemented without destroying those same countries? If not then tell me how you think attacks like that contribute to a better future for western countries. We know that extremists want a fight, in many cases they want to die in the service. Is that the future you want for our societies?

R0bert

So, runner, I highlight an overt display of apparent bias or a double-standard, and instead of challenging anything I say, you start slinging mud with your usual baseless assertions. Only this time, you’re too cowardly to address me while you do it. How predictable. You need another shtick. This one’s getting old.

Robert, your post is very confusing.
You make assumptions about me out of nowhere.
>Wondering how you think that will pan out over time if it's repeated?

It could be the start of a vicious cycle.
=-=-=-=-=
>Attacking probable innocents in my view plays right into the hands
of those who want war with the west.

Of course it does. Retaliation is what the Islamists want.
=-=-=-=-
>Any credible plans on how to remove all Muslim's from western countries that you really think could be implemented without destroying those same countries?

No, do you ? I wish I did.
=-=-=-=
>If not then tell me how you think attacks like that contribute to a better future for western countries.

Why all these questions ?
Are you devoid of any answers?

Thank you BAZZ for that Link apropos the German Police, a very serious state of affairs for sure. FYI; The Germans have one of the best counter-terrorist groups in the Western World; GS-G9.

I've not heard details of this alleged retaliatory action against a Mosque in London? If true this will only worsen the government's position in their pursuit of stopping incidences of terrorism. If Cabinet perceives the civilian police of not being in control, or incapable of keeping the community safe.

In relation to this country at least, they'll introduce the emergency laws which currently exist, and are already on the books so to speak, and hand over the functions of law-enforcement to either SAC-PAV or PSCC to regain community order, using the Military assets instead of police.

If the military take control, they'll quickly introduce far tougher methods and restrictions then you'll ever see from the police. Martial law; curfews; stop and search (at gunpoint) and other onerous restrictions placed upon the civilian population. The last of which I saw personally in Ulster, in the late 1980's when I was undertaking training with the RUC on 'Hadrian & Hobo' (Remote 'Bomb Ignition Vehicles') used for IED's.

There's absolutely no room for vigilantism; whatever the reason. It places the authorities in an unenviable position, All that will do is reduce and weaken police resolve to nail the real culprits, the terrorists themselves, not just a bunch of angry young men, who possess very little understanding of the difficulties confronting the government and the police force in these troubled times.

And you're perfectly correct BAZZ I should keep well away from my ex colleague/mates! At my age all I wish to do is live in quiet oblivion, not worry about criminals of any variety.

Bazz your opening post and some comments since appear to be applauding the attack. Suggesting that muslims however innocent of support for terrorism are getting what they deserve. Were you trying to say something different?

R0bert

No-one is applauding the attack on the London mosque!

We are merely saying that we understand it! there just comes a time when even the worm turns, but that is completely different from condoning the killing of innocent people no matter what the reasons.

I detest the muslim fake religion because it's a croc of rubbish from the long dead pedophile they worship to the mutilation of women's privates to the absolute rot of women covering up to avoid being raped, or whatever pathetic reason is used for that particular habit.

The 4 wives crap, the 72 virgins rot, the falling on your face with butt in the air 5 times a day.. and every other completely stupid, backward and downright insane nonsense they come up with. How any sensible person with at least half a cup of commonsense can condone such ridiculous and fictitious rot is beyond me.

And that's not even going anywhere near the mass killings of infidels that they seem to take great delight in.

I've no time for any religion but that one takes the cake on every level.

The mosque in question has had a reputation for producing terrorists in the past; it should have been bulldozed years ago.

A drunken Welshman should not be taking revenge; the UK government should be doing it, by taking a leaf out of Israel's book. Israel punishes the family and associates of terrorists by confiscating their housing and goods, banning them from receiving welfare and, if plots are hatched at a mosque, razing the mosque to the ground.

RObert, it is probably already too late for anything but a civil war. Will we win, well with our crazy gun laws, a lot more of them will have guns than we do.

My son is currently living with a mate in Carlton, a couple of stations south of Rockdale on the Cronulla line, while doing some navy reserve time.

He & his mate will only get off the train at Allawah, the next station, & closer to the house, if they are together. Even with the pair & in daylight, they are regularly followed, at a safe distance, by a group of 20 something year old Muslim men, behaving most threateningly.

When duty times cause them to travel alone, they catch a taxi from Rockdale. These are a couple of defence force trained fit young men, much more capable of defending themselves than most, but even together they would not get off a train at Allawah at night.

This is the Muslim push to get the Australians, {& I mean that} out of the area, now they have moved in. It is equally dangerous for a white man to walk alone in Canterbury, Bankstown, & a number of other districts in Sydney. Non Muslim women would be mad to go near the places, except in an M1A2 Abrams tank.

It is not a matter of if we will lose control of large tracts of our cities, it is now past tense, we have lost them now.

I guess it is not all bad. At least the Muslim takeover will eliminate the Women's libbers, & the same sex mirage garbage, & I guess we can get used to dirty smelly feet.

I think if they keep bringing big tribes in here, it is more than our cities that will be
no go zones..

Eventually they will push for separatists states when they have enough numbers.

This will lead to pieces of Australia being divided up into separate countries
unless we win the battles.

I have said multiculturalism will lead to this for many years now, even before
all these terrorists attacks began.

I study history, I can see this clearly.
The academics look at history and say, oh remember the terrible German holocaust it
shows us we must bring in all these big tribes and live in tolerance.

It doesn't teach me that. What it conveys to me is. One ethnic group absolutely
ethnically cleansed the other ethnic group to regain control of the land and resources
But it happens just as much the other way around, when the immigrant tribe, like the
Tamil Tigers fights a 20year guerilla war to divide up the country of Sri Lanka.

What the hell is wrong with our academics why do they teach ideology and not fact.
Look at the mess it has led to.

The random attack, by a presumed Christian, on Muslims is, in fact, worse morally than random attacks by Muslims, for the Muslims can find some justification in the recorded word of Allah as handed down by Muhammad.

sad to hear that about Carlton Hasbeen. I use to regularly visit my sister there 35 years ago. It seemed a very peaceful place. Sounds like she made the right move getting out of there.

Just as the outrages terrorist attacks in Manchester, and on London Bridge, elsewhere in the west, and don't forget the daily terrorism perpetrated on innocent people in the Middle East, should all be condemned!

There is a disgusting degree of, "well they are only getting what they deserve", over this attack from the Forums 'Usual Suspects', a deplorable attitude! To take up on just one rubbish comment, in a sea of rubbish from a number of the 'Usual Suspects';

The criminality of the Israeli Government!

ttbn <<Israel punishes the family and associates of terrorists by confiscating their housing and goods, banning them from receiving welfare and, if plots are hatched at a mosque, razing the mosque to the ground.>>

Irony of such action, could have just as easily read:

The National Socialists Government of Adolf Hitler punishes the family and associates of Jews by confiscating their housing and goods, banning them from government jobs, if plots are hated at a synagogue, razing the synagogue to the ground.

And this << A drunken Welshman should not be taking revenge; the UK government should be doing it>>

ttbn why not suggest the UK government get drunk, and drive an armed car into a group of Muslims near a London mosque, much your style, you and others on here could applaud it as justifiable action, worms turning and all, I'm sure.

My god you have a twisted way of looking at things Paul! quite sad really. You are purposely ignoring the real threat and are happy to abuse fellow countrymen in favour of a foreign entity that has some very nasty habits! you ignore the reasons for the dislike of muslims and are content to waffle rubbish and call people names. Why is this? what do you get out of it? do you not think there are very good reasons why they're so disliked? what other group of people do you know of that has caused so much misery and harm to the modern world, not even counting their females! What a wonderful country Saudi Arabia is!!

My son in law had to go to Dandenong for work for a week, early this year..he and his fellow workmate were warned by the company not to go out at night because of the gangs of muslims that roam the streets.
We found out later they were talking about the Apex gang that seems to have Victoria in a state of panic and terror.

'It doesn't teach me that. What it conveys to me is. One ethnic group absolutely
ethnically cleansed the other ethnic group to regain control of the land and resources
But it happens just as much the other way around, when the immigrant tribe, like the
Tamil Tigers fights a 20year guerilla war to divide up the country of Sri Lanka."

I absolutely agree with this CHERFUL...and was amazed the Tamil's were allowed to come here after what they did ..especially after the Sri Lankan government asked us not to accept them.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Day in, day out. Yet some people have a total and quite pathetic meltdown in someone feels as though enough is enough and retalitates! are we really that dumbed down now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/20/traffic-halted-brussels-small-explosion-central-train-station/

Robert, the attack is bad news, it is the start of a slippery slope.
It can only end in civil war if we are not careful.
London is already starting to look like Baghdad.
It is almost inevitable that if no changes are made in our immigration
intake it is almost inevitable we will also go down that same track
as every other country.
A deterioration in police control of "Middle Eastern Crime" to blatant
defying of Police and loss of control of districts followed by
retaliation by gangs of non moslems which will escalate into civil war.

Just read up on what has happened in France. Then read this link I
posted

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10543/germany-crime-gangs

then read up on what is happening in Sweden.
The patten is clear and is inevitable because Mohommad predicted it.

Paul is right, there is no justification for taking it out on the innocent, that puts us on the same footing as the terrorists, but as I aid previously, morally worse for we have no justification.

"The random attack, by a presumed Christian, on Muslims is, in fact, worse morally than random attacks by Muslims, for the Muslims can find some justification in the recorded word of Allah as handed down by Muhammad."

What unbelievable rubbish! what an unbelievable twisted way of looking at it. Muslims have justification because some twisted pedophile prophet told them so? really?

The justification in killing muslims is revenge and sick and damn tired of the misery they've put every country that has taken them in through.
That is the justification! I don't condone any killing though I often understand the reasons,but to insinuate we don't have any justification for retaliation is just insane because we certainly do! Our justification is worth a whole truckload of fantasy rubbish. ours is real!

'"The random attack, by a presumed Christian; 'Oh yes Moonshine how desperate the regressives are to try and find some minute bit of evidence to support their ever failing narrative.

Moonshine, there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the World, do you believe because of acts of terror being perpetrated by some Muslims, undeniable fact, that every Muslim is fair game for revenge?
If you do I can only say, get that god of yours to help you.

<<The justification in killing muslims is revenge and sick and damn tired of the misery they've put every country that has taken them in through.
That is the justification! I don't condone any killing though I often understand the reasons, but to insinuate we don't have any justification for retaliation is just insane because we certainly do!>>

You can't not condone revenge killing, then on the other hand legitimize it by claim its justified. Is it justified or not

Whatever governments do, it needs to be done quickly, whilst the Islamic populations in Western countries remains small.
The only thing I can think of is to ensure all Muslims totally understand that they are living in a majority Christian country and that they will never effect the changes they are trying to achieve. That they will not get special treatment, that they cannot set up suburbs as enclaves, that Sharia Law will never be accepted etc. Eventually some may decide they would prefer to live in a Muslim country. And definitely we have to stop migration from Muslim countries.
Several things can be done to help this. Ban the burqa, stop allowing segregation at public places like swimming pools, get the judiciary to stop taking culture into consideration when sentencing criminals. Publically funded school should not be allowed to segregate boys and girls. Stop providing welfare for large numbers of children whose fathers are on long term welfare, or single mothers (second wives). This should apply to everyone anyway. Tax payers shouldn't be expected to raise someone else's children beyond one or two.
The majority of Muslims live in public housing. It's possible to split up enclaves by rehousing people so they are more spread out amongst the general community. For those areas where problems continue, increase the police presence to ensure non Muslims are safe and the message is clear. No intimidation of non Muslims!
Of course, all these measures would require governments with balls and selective deafness to calls of discrimination etc.
can't see it happening.

Well, as problematic as Big Nana’s suggestions are, at least she’s offered some. That rarely seems to happen on the Muslim-bashing threads around here. On another thread, moonshine suggested hatred and anger as a solution, but wouldn’t expand on that.

Most of us seem to agree that running Muslims over in a van isn’t the best idea, so how about we discuss solutions instead of the usual complaining that goes on around here?

I’ll go first.

The way I see it, we have three options:

1. A Muslim ban.
2. A Muslim and mass deportation.
3. Extermination.

The first option is problematic because Muslims are already here, and so stigmatising them and telling them that their kind are no longer welcome here is a good way to radicalise them. Then there’s the problem of screening every prospective migrant reliably to make sure they’re not a Muslim.

The second option would have all the problems of the first, only there would be less Muslims left to become radicalised since we would have shipped quite a few of them out. But then there’s the expense of rounding them all up and making sure they go. We probably couldn’t deport those with children born here, either.

The third option, which was hinted at by ttbn earlier today (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19108#340117), would resolve most of the above issues. However, we’d inevitably face crippling economic sanctions and military action (That gosh-darned UN is such an undemocratic inconvenience, isn’t it?!). Then there’s the issue that the ‘First they came ...’ poem raises, too.

Of course, there is another option, but I don’t think anyone here would be interested in it.

@ Paul.

Understanding something is a far, far cry from condoning it!

Not even close.

The acts of terror are not being carried out by 'some' muslims...the acts of terror are being carried out by THOUSANDS of muslims. Thousands and thousands, right across the globe including their own countries, even against each other and their own women.

My justification comment was my answer to Is Mise who said at least the muslims have a reason to kill..their prophet said so..which was, of course the most disgusting and pathetic reason to kill I've ever heard of, and comes from a completely fabricated fairy tale load of rubbish.
But you know that don't you.

I have no god, I have a brain and commonsense so please don't talk about 'my god' as I'm fully atheist and stopped believing in pie in the sky rot from about aged 10

Darren Osborne - the perpetrator of this incident in
Finsbury Park, UK has been described by his neighbours
as being "aggressive" and "strange". His hatred and
obsession with Muslims was well known. Apparently he
did have mental issues. And that is now obvious from
what he did.

The Prime Minister Theresa May made quite clear
"hatred and evil will not succeed." And the actions of
people that followed this attack clearly shows the power
of solidarity that has been expressed by so many good
citizens in the UK.

An imam and other men "protected the
attacker from the mob," immediately following the incident.
A vigil was held for the victims in Finsbury Park that
evening in which leaders of various faiths expressed solidarity.
Therefore the actions of a lone disturbed man ended up uniting
a community instead of dividing it. It had the opposite effect
to what was intended by that troubled soul.

It gives one hope that if we unite to fight hatred - much good
can be achieved. Yes indeed - you will reap what you sow.

Paul,

"You can't not condone revenge killing, then on the other hand legitimize it by claim its justified. Is it justified or not"

Right with you on that.

Moonshine is the name and apparently the favourite drink; there must be some reason.

moonshine,

I can understand Paul’s assumption about your religious status. You referred to Islam as a “fake religion” earlier (It’s not. It is a religion in every sense of the word). This could suggest that you think one of the religions is real (or true).

On another note, I think you’ve misunderstood what Is Mise was saying. The point he was making was that Islamic doctrine supports what terrorists do. If Islam is true, then killing infidels is justified. If Christianity is true, on the other hand, then turning the other check and owning slaves is justified.

No, AJ, owning a slave is not justified whether or not Christianity is true. If you think Christianity justifies it, you clearly don't know much about Christianity.

@Foxy, Wednesday, 21 June 2017 12:52:46 PM

That is a fair summation.

Given that this offender's aberrant behaviour was known to family, neighbours and local traders, it would surprise if he was not already known to authorities. But likely enough through poor planning by government, there were no facilities and no means/facility whereby there could have been any intervention before.

It is probably another case where the family was left to cope. There were no mental health and 'drop in' facilities, even a 'sheltered workshop' where this man could have found a place, treatment and observation to keep him out of trouble.

To protect their behinds, politicians from all parties would be rushing to find some other reason for his offence. It would never do to admit the obvious, that mental health is poorly planned and poorly funded by government.

In Australia, where I walk along foreshores late afternoon and evening, the homeless are often on the move and passing through, security sees to that. Some with shopping trolleys, on bikes and many living in cars. It would be the unusual case where drugs(& booze) and mental* issues are not involved. Most simply cannot manage their lives without some support. They may have been ejected by relatives who could not stand the strain and drain on their own health and resources.

*Some simply have incompetence (or marginal competence) in some of the necessary self-management areas of life, such as handling money. Or they may have financial illiteracy and difficulty completing (government) forms.

There is no facility for them and there should be. I am not excusing the UK offender.

What is needed is not more laws but better government planning and management of resources. Maybe some politicians should get out of those cars and walk around occasionally. Maybe they are too cunning to do that.

Yes, Aidan, I know a lot more about it than most here. I spent nearly half my life studying the Bible. I have justified the Bible’s endorsement of slavery many times before on OLO after being accused of knowing nothing about it, so I won’t bore people with it again. I’m sorry you missed it.

Then clearly you haven't studied it very well. Just because there are a few regulations about slavery in the OT doesn't mean Christianity endorses it.

yes Nana the apology Rudd made will seem to be a grain of salt compared with the apology to our grandchildren by pig headed leftist with their warped narrative that ignores the plain truth.

It is possible to both condemn the attack on innocent Muslims but recognise that its a foreseeable result of other attacks on innocents and the authority's seeming inability to effectively respond.

By the same token, it should be possible to condemn the attack (for example) on Bolt but recognise that it is a foreseeable result of the difference in world-views between Bolt et al and the antifa et al.

Europe is at a cross-roads. Almost 60 years ago Enoch Powell warned of the rivers of blood that would result from the growing alien (to western culture) immigration to the UK. While the Thames isn't quite running red, it doesn't take too much imagination to see the outbreak of urban tit-for-tat civil war in London, Manchester and other Muslim enclaves.

That it would be lamentable in the extreme is hardly reason to ignore the risks and causes.

As MArk Steyn noted over a decade ago, Europe has only two choices - allow its culture to quietly pass into history or neutralise the Muslim threat to that culture. It seems the various governments and a large minority of the population prefers the former primarily from a lack of will to do that latter.

But equally a plurality, if not a majority, of the population is becoming disenchanted with the incremental loss of their heritage and are demanding that the authorities put an end to it. And if the authorities don't do it, they themselves just might.

Europe has, over the past millennium, more than enough examples of what happens to minorities when their presences is deemed to be no longer acceptable.

It can go one of three ways: the 2500 yrs old European project is bought to a close, the governments of Europe decide to defend their heritage in as peaceful way as they can muster, the people decide to take the defense of home and hearth into their own hands.

Option three becomes more likely with each passing year. If so, it'll be bad for Europe and human rights, but it'll be a disaster for those innocent minorities in their midst.

Aidan,

No, Christianity nowadays (as far as I know, at least) does not endorse slavery. Similarly, not all Muslims think infidels should be killed (I was referring to doctrines, following from Is Mise).

<<Then clearly you haven't studied it very well.>>

Twenty years would be a long time to not study something very well, don't you think?

<<Just because there are a few regulations about slavery in the OT doesn't mean Christianity endorses it.>>

It goes beyond just a few regulations in the Old Testament. Jesus endorsed the old law in its entirety (every “jot and tittle”, to be exact (Matthew 5:18)). The New Testament tells slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5-8); which is, at best, unsound advice. Furthermore, in all those pages, and in all those books, the Christian god could not find any room to simply say that “slavery is wrong.”

These are issues for Christian doctrine that go well beyond just a few regulations in a collection of books that Christians want to appeal to or sever willy-nilly, depending on the mood.

It sounds to me like it is you who needs to study their Bible a little more closely. This is garden variety apologetics you're spouting here.

In other words A.J.PHILLIPS whatever we do, seemingly we're buggered! Your words do paint a very sombre picture of what might ultimately happen. The one thing I do know, if this attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque in London is some sort of payback by this severely troubled knucklehead who thinks he'll solve the problem of radicalization of young Muslims, by some tit for tat measure of violence - then we're confronting an even more gloomy future than I originally thought?

A.J.PHILLIPS - Do you have any sense as to where all this Muslim radicalization and expansion stuff might end up? To a declared War, between the West and Muslim nations; sporadic civil War; or relentless, unremitting incidences of indiscriminate and arbitrary terrorism, which surely cannot possibly remain constant? Personally I really don't know, what to think, other than definitely not another Ulster situation.

leoj,

Thanks for your insights.

I agree with you totally.

We need to take care of our most vulnerable.
And mental problems are a major part of the
communities in which we live. I also am not
condoning this man's behaviour - but it
possibly could have been avoided had he
received help.

We could be very well be stuffed, o sung wu.

I did mention a fourth option, though, which I suspect most who read my post had an idea as to what it was I was alluding. It is, however, a method of dealing with the problem which the very thought of frustrates many because it is often perceived to be a do-nothing means of dealing with the problem, and it can all sound very clichéd. I can sympathise with that.

Unfortunately, though, not only do I think it is the only realistic option we have, but the evidence suggests that it is the most likely option to succeed.

My reason for not going into it, however, was because of the sheer number of posts it would take to defend; especially against assumptions of Taqiya and the supposed non-existence of the moderate Muslim (which just seem to me like quick and convenient ways of dismissing more peaceful and less-inflammatory methods of handling the situation which lack the offer of an alternative solution). So, I instead chose to present what I saw as the only other alternatives (as horrendous as they were). Although, I’d be interested to see if anyone can think of any other options which would not inflame tensions further, and actually work.

Of course, if we just wanted to complain, we could cast blame on multiculturalism, but the horse has already bolted on that one; and, in a country with a history like Australia’s, some would argue, was never really in the corral to begin with.

As for where all this is heading? Predicting the future of terrorism is a highly speculative business. I’m a bit of an optimist and believe that we’ll get through it, provided education levels among the world’s population continue to increase and poverty levels decline, because both these factors (going in the right direction) promote tolerance and reduce levels of religiosity.

In Western countries, young Muslims are leaving the faith in droves. I’m encouraged by that.

Thank you A.J.PHILLIPS for your take on the situation. Your previous three options wouldn't work, no doubt they 'may' work, but at a terrible cost.

The only thing we Western nations can do, is get all the 'stakeholders' at the table and thoroughly thrash it out (around said table). Whether you'd be able to even get Daesh to the table at all, is highly questionable? Given their entrenched and unquestionable hatred they have for the West, and without them, negotiations would undoubtedly flounder.

Anyway, would the disparate Muslim leadership, be of a mind to be completely genuine and sincere with their negotiations and demands. Or would it be similar to the same outcomes, the US have had, with the differing talks they've undertaken with P'yongyang, over the years?

Somehow I have this sense that genuine talks and negotiations, only pay dividends with Nations, who are equally keen on finding satisfactory solutions to their various problems.

But with the entrenched hatred that some Muslims harbour for the West,and for Christianity, and our Culture. And Islam not only being a devoutly practiced religion but an ineradicable ideology, I'm really not so sure at all, of ever finding an equitable solution, more likely an embedded impasse.

Other than perhaps vigorously pursuing one or more of your three options, all of which appear thoroughly untenable, I've not got any answers I'm afraid. Thanks A.J.PHILLIPS for your thoughts.

Bloody hell, where to start?

Dear moonshine,

You wrote;

“That aside, an eye for an eye so to speak and I'm just surprised payback is so slow in coming, and it wouldn't surprise me to see more of it unfortunately.”

There are some people in Syria and Northen Iraq right now who are getting bombs dropped on their heads by Australian planes, sniped at by Australian troops, and straffed by Australian helicopters. They would be saying exactly the same bloody thing.

The pictures of children's bodies, of bombed hospitals, or entire families being wiped out by coalition raids will be coming through their social media feeds.

Do you wonder why Japan or for that matter New Zealand aren't facing heightened terrorism threats? Do you possibly entertain the notion it is because they aren't over there dropping bombs on the heads of these guys?

What do you think would have happened if we had Australian troops on the ground in Northern Ireland during the worst of the troubles?

Now our politicians made the decision to go in along side the US, not because they think ISIS is an existential threat to this country, but because they believe that having the US as an ally is worth the risk to the public. I suspect that most Australians feel the risk is worth it.

But it means we can add one more to AJ's list of possible actions; leave the conflict in the Middle East. Now I happen to think helping out the people in the region resist ISIS is a worthwhile exercise on its own, but I also realise that we are putting Australians at risk in doing so. How about you?

Dear runner,

You wrote;

“I actually hate to say it but with creeps like the masterminds of the child grooming program (safe schools) I wonder of this country is even worth defending any more.”

My goodness. How on earth do you have the hide to say something like that when a Royal Commission is busy showing large numbers of Christians in leadership positions within the various denominations buggered and raped their way though thousands of Aussie kids leaving rampant suicides and broken lives in their wake?

Shame you little man, shame!

Dear Bazz,

You bent over backward to defend the rights of Monis to send those terrible letters to the families of soldiers serving and dying overseas. You wanted hate speech laws diluted while I wanted them maintained or even strengthened so that we were able to sanction those who spread hatred from the mosques and the Churches. We need to stop our vulnerable young being polluted by religious radicalism whatever the stripe.

Dear foxy,

Monis was described as having a myriad of mental health issues just like the recent Finsbury Park Mosque terrorist. Where does that leave us?

"Monis was described as having a myriad of mental health issues just like the recent Finsbury Park Mosque terrorist. Where does that leave us?"

First, most (not you, probably) would conclude that Howard's 'gun control' was an expensive political sham, which it was.

Also, most (not you, probably) would be wondering why Monis was on the loose. Or are you conveniently forgetting he was on bail for serious crimes? There was already a place for him wasn't there? Gaol.

BTW, that really is a faulty analogy of yours. No comparison at all.

SteeleRedux, I would presume that Japan has no problems with terrorism because they don't allow asylum seekers or refugees.
On the other hand, countries who do have refugees but are not involved with bombing anyone, like Denmark, Sweden etc. do have problems with terrorism.
And the current civil war happening in the Phillipines has no connection to any involvement in the Middleeast.
From that we can presume that all you need to attract terrorist attacks is a population of Muslims large enough to shelter radicals

Not often do Leoj and I agree on things, but in fairness Leo's observation about homeless people in his area is so true, I actually do some part time work on housing issues with homeless and what I would term semi-homeless people. It applies in my location as well. The biggest issues with the homeless is not alcohol, is not drugs, its mental illness. The other two play their part, as does family issues, but they are not the primary cause.

I think its fair to say people who commit terrorists acts are not normal, far from it. Does anyone think for example that Man Monis was in someway normal.

AJ, this might be a silly idea, but would it help if we possibly tried a different approach in the Middle East. If we tried to bring peace for example. that might require a lot of negotiations between all parties, and a lot of concessions being made by them and us, and everyone else. That is not to say we should not continue what we are doing at home on the terrorists front, vigilance at home is certainly necessary, given the state things are in at the moment.
I am not overly optimistic that peace is not achievable in the long term, nothing will change in the short term, that is for sure, and I can't say how long that is, but I am not totally pessimistic either.

On the score of what Christianity and Islam, and all the other major religions teach, or don't teach, Theologians have been arguing that for centuries. I recall one Pope justified enslaving Black Africans on the grounds that although they were human beings, because that was obvious, enslavement was justified because the black devils didn't have a soul, like good white folk, and you can't enslave a soul, everything else is fair game.

@SteeleRedex..."There are some people in Syria and Northen Iraq right now who are getting bombs dropped on their heads by Australian planes, sniped at by Australian troops, and straffed by Australian helicopters. They would be saying exactly the same bloody thing."

There are some people in Iraq and Syria who are having their heads chopped off, burnt to death, their women raped and tortured because their own people calling themselves ISIS are murdering them by the thousands. What do you suggest we do?

Ignore them? Personally, ignoring them is probably the best solution as far as I can see, let them work it out for themselves...they're not particularly grateful for our help are they. They never are and they never change.

Their religion is backward and they stay backward because of it. Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan have to be two of the saddest countries on the planet, Iran not much better...and why? because of their religion. And that says it all really.

That is not what I want for anyone in my country, but unfortunately a lot of their revolting practices are already ingrained. I'll never forget my shock on first hearing about female genital mutilation..I honestly thought the media was making it up.

Steele Said;
Dear Bazz,

You bent over backward to defend the rights of Monis to send those
terrible letters to the families of soldiers serving and dying
overseas. You wanted hate speech laws diluted while I wanted them
maintained or even strengthened so that we were able to sanction those
who spread hatred from the mosques and the Churches.
=-=-=-=

I DID NOT ! Please apologise !

It is simply not the case that terrorists are suffering from mental conditions.

The consistent link is Islam.

The evidence is that jihardist organisations employ a range of tactics, there is a core and a diverse, decentralised (intentionally so) number of cells. However through fundamentalism and the outreach of fundamentalist Islam (which can be international or domestic) casts a broad net.

Where it is claimed that there are 'lone wolves' and 'home grown' terrorism, such assertions by 'authorities' are probably aimed at denying the international terrorist handlers/propaganda credit. The push against anti-terrorism has propaganda too. But trace back such 'home grown' terrorists and find they were commonly the recipients of asylum and citizenship.

As too for example are so many of the (middle eastern ethnic) criminal gangs who deal in drugs and commit so much violence in Australia and may be apprehended overseas. Through citizenship they are called 'Australian'. But of course such criminals are in fact anything but Australian, or for that matter British or American or Swedes, because they lied and have rejected the very ethos of the kind country that took them in.

So a terrorist can be anyone and for usefulness and possible deeper integration, professionals who are fundamentalist but not inhibited by any stupidity or 'derangement] that impairs their function, organising skills and mission.

We might only think that all are mad, stupid and easily influenced because it is scary to be confronted by the truth, which is that we and our secular democratic institutions and especially the law inherited from the UK are inconvenient to and are therefore despised by Islamists.

The problem as I see it is that we are not doing enough to encourage and support the small number of Muslims who are focussed on changing Islam. That and our federal government still puts 'diversity' ahead of the goals of immigration and above our quality of life and safety.

Lots of comment about slavery. I recently had need to read up on early
Roman history and I have learnt something.

No society can advance unless it has a surplus of energy after it has
performed all the work necessary for its maintenance.
It can then devote that excess energy to new projects or expansion.
Slaves are a source of energy that can be directed to those new
projects or expansion.
The ERoEI of slaves may be poor but it can improve the overall system.

I believe that this was a path to development of our societies.
With the early development of technologies eg, water wheels, water
races, by work of slaves, a more efficient excess energy became
available which made slaves redundant.

Note that in Rome slaves started to be educated and employed in
clerical work and were being granted citizenship. Then some hundreds
of years later slavery ended in the west as coal was put to work.
The moslems never learnt those lessons and still engage in the slave trade.

Steele, I believe I may have said that Monis had the right of free
speech but I certainly did not condone his writing to those families.
It is your bloody hide to put words in my mouth.

We need to concentrate on Islam, We are not fighting terrorism or extremism, we are fighting Islam - or we should be; the West doesn't seem up to fighting for its own values any more.

Dear SteeleRedux,

You asked where does that leave us?

I certainly don't have the answers. I do have questions
though. Why are people with obvious mental problems
not receiving the help they obviously need? Why are
people with histories of violence (like Monis) being
allowed into the community to do as they please?

Something is dreadfully wrong.

Foxy, sometimes people with mental problems are not noticed.
They can hide their problem as they understand it themselves.
To people who know them such as family, well Fred has always been
a bit odd, remember when he was a child he -=-=
etc.

Dear Bazz,

Yes I agree. However in the case of Darren Osborn,
his neighbours described him as "aggressive" and
"strange" and his hatred and obsession with Muslims
was well known. You'd think that he would have been
on some sort of "watch-list," and the police would
have been keeping on eye on him - due to the volatile
current climate in the UK and recent events.

AJ,

"The New Testament tells slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5-8); which is, at best, unsound advice"

At best, I'd call it sound advice, the alternative wouldn't do the slaves any good.

So what is to be done?

Europe's got its own series of problems created by feckless politicians over the last two generations. Their solutions are much more problematic and much less hopeful.

We (Australia) have lesser problems due to sensible decisions made since the 1980s but especially by Howard and Abbott. While we have our issues they aren't in the same league as Europe's.

If I had my way we'd:

1. Withdraw from all Middle-eastern entanglements - Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan. Not because they increase our danger - they don't. But because the west should leave these people to wallow in their own special brand of lunacy.
2. Ban all immigration from those nations which bred jihadists. That's pretty much the whole of the M-E and NorthAfrica. Exceptions to be made for non-Muslims from those regions eg Christians and Yazidi.
3. Begin the work of integrating those already here to our culture while guarding against and rooting jihadist sentiments. Don't ban the burqa and the like but do ban and enforce diligently bans on child marriage, FGM, polygamy etc.
4. In the same way as we make owning and/or actively seeking out child pornography a crime which carries legal penalties for life, make owning, distributing or actively seeking out jihadist literature a crime. Gaol followed by permanent entry on a 'potential-jihadi' register. Involvement with such literature plus having a gun and/or bomb-making equipment would result in life imprisonment if a citizen, deporting if not.

In the end recognise that there are some cultures and world-views that are incompatible with our own, that we made a terrible mistake by letting such people settle and set about rectifying those errors. A couple of generations should do it. By then we'll have forgotten how bad it was and we'll do it all over again.

Mhaze,

1. Yes.
2. Immigration from Commonwealth countries only
3. They will not integrate, so get rid of them.
4. 18c (incitement to hatred) should already be taking care of that, but it isn't.

Of course, nothing will happen while we have two Left-wing parties plus Greens.

mhaze,

Canberra needs to urgently review immigration policy anyhow and for all sorts of reasons, cost/benefit to the population being one.

It is incredible that the 'diversity' tail wags the immigration policy dog, for example.

Of course Australia, as a plum destination for migrants, should be discriminating in what skills, abilities, traditions and values it wishes to acquire. It isn't as some would have it, that it is solely about more bodies and any will do.

Above all, why has the federal government been taking unnecessary risks in taking migrants from jihadist countries, when there are many from more reliably safe countries who are being refused?

Why do successive federal governments imagine that they can just bring in thousands who will be lobbing in the large metropolitan cities and the 'feds' can wipe their hands clean, dumping the problems onto beleaguered local and State governments? They have been doing that for years and shrugging off responsibility.

It's really interesting when you think about it? A good strategy in assisting to defeat a foe, is to promote and then nurture confusion and speculation, to such a point where even different neighbourhoods have no idea what's verifiable or merely notional. Isn't it just the case with Islam and Muslims per se. They now enjoy a much higher profile within the Australia community, then they've ever had previously?

Mhaze said;
We (Australia) have lesser problems due to sensible decisions

Not really, the only reason we have lessor problems is because the
Muslim population is 2.2%, not the 10% + in Eurabia.
Our immediate problem is to stop the percentage from rising and then
reduce it. There is a slight indication of hope as organisations of
apostates are being formed in western countries. Something I read a
while back hinted at that there is one here.
Somehow we have to encourage such an organisation.
It has to be covert because of the risk associated with it, so how do
you publicise it ?
It needs to be perhaps an online organisation connected by the tor
network to make it untraceable. How do you vet members ?
For politically correct reasons the government would not host it.
Very difficult.

Dear Bazz,

Not a hope of wriggling out of this one I'm afraid.

I had asked;

“... how many support sanctions against the self appointed Muslim cleric Sheik Haron and his off-sider who sent the letters to the families of our soldiers killed in combat. I certainly do...”

Less than an hour later you shot in this answer;

“Oh yes csteele, the sheik has the right to say it and even write it.”

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5656&page=0#157249

You later reinforced your stance by saying;

"I don't believe anyone should be prosecuted for writing such a letter"

So when you ask me to apologise for saying this; “You bent over backward to defend the rights of Monis to send those terrible letters to the families of soldiers serving and dying overseas.” I hope you understand me saying 'Shove it!'

Perhaps if those letters had put him behind bars lives might have been saved, who can know. What we sure as hell didn't need was blokes like you sticking up for his right to write them. Now would be a good time to make a heartfelt apology for your lack of judgment and to acknowledge I was correct. If you were to do so I would be happy to give an undertaking that I will never raise it again.

There is no need for the mahommedeans to worry. It was only a Lone Wolf attack.

Steel
No I did not bend over backwards to defend his rights--
I pointed out that the he had the rights to write those letters and
could not be prosecuted.
Nowhere did I say I approved of him writing them !
I defended the rights we have for free speech.

You knew that from everything else I wrote but you chose that typical
lefty technique to twist it.

Mhaze yes I agree with your comments.
I have suggested that a few times; put an electronic wall around the
middle east, no one in, no one out and only ME Arabs and moslems etc
allowed to return.

Tell them 1400 years of attacks from Arabs and Persians is enough.
There is a video I cannot find that talks about the 800 plus battles
with attacking Islamic armies in Europe !
Mohammed ordered his followers to conquer Rome.
In their context Rome means Europe.
I asked some relatives, schoolteachers, if they could tell me which
European capitals had been attacked and or occupied by moslem armies.
They knew about Madrid and Athens but that was it.
They did not know about Budapest, Zagreb, Bucharest, Rome, Berne,
Sarajevo, Bratislava etc being occupied.
They attacked Vienna two or three times and their last defeat at
Vienna was with the help of the Polish army.
They occupied Sicily for a few hundred years I think but were trurfed
out when a real western army turned up, namely the Normans. of 1066 fame.
They almost reached where Paris is now but were defeated at Tours.

Put all this in context and you might have a better understanding
what is going on and why Islam is intent on attacking Europe.
Look for the great siege of Malta

ttbn,

I don't agree that we should " get rid of them". They're here, they're often citizens, we invited them. Our problem isn't with 'them', its with that portion of them who are, or will become, radicalised. It is here that our efforts need to be made. By all means don't add to the potential pool by adding to the overall pool but don't expel those who are here.

"Immigration from Commonwealth countries only". Again, I'm not thrilled by that. If we have to have an immigration policy then we ought to take the best from anywhere. As an example, Jews are leaving France like its Berlin 1934 due to islamic pressures and soft governmental antisemitism. I've often thought we should make a special offer to these people for 'asylum'. That I'd tweek French noses is an added bonus.

Bazz,

You wrote:
"Mhaze said;
We (Australia) have lesser problems due to sensible decisions

Not really, the only reason we have lessor problems is because the
Muslim population is 2.2%, not the 10% + in Eurabia."

Keeping the Muslim population low was indeed the sensible decisions I was talking about. That and the moves made by Hawke in the 80s which meant that we didn't feel the need to import a generation of taxpayers to cover the pension plans offered to the native population.

Just on your historic summary of Islamic conflict. When Mohamed talked about 'Rome' he likely meant Constantinople which had been from the outset thought of as new Rome. At that time the Byzantines still thought of themselves as Romans.
And Rome was never occupied by the Muslim armies. They got to the outskirts but the Aurelian Walls held.

Mhaze maybe, but the actions of the Islamic armies and pirates in
the Mediterranean in the 100 years after were not that selective.
By the way St Peters was outside the Aurelian Walls.
One of the local U3As is starting a semester on Roman History next
month so I might go to that and learn some more Roman history.

Mhaze, I have found that video that I mentioned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

A very interesting historian. He explains a lot about the Islamic invasions.
It puts so much into perspective.
I have started to watch it again, it needs to be repeated because there
is so much data in it.

@ SteeleRedux.. "moonshine,

I can understand Paul’s assumption about your religious status. You referred to Islam as a “fake religion” earlier (It’s not. It is a religion in every sense of the word). This could suggest that you think one of the religions is real (or true)."

Quite a stretch of the imagination there, to think because I called one religion fake that I imagine a different one to to genuine.

The subject was muslims and the subject religion was islam. I wasn't aware that I would need to clarify that anglican, catholic, presbytarian, methodist, baptist, jehova's witness, 7th day adventist, and the gospel singers down the road were all based on fake rubbish, as I didn't see any of them mentioned anywhere, let alone involved in any mass killings

@ mhaze..."I don't agree that we should " get rid of them". They're here, they're often citizens, we invited them. Our problem isn't with 'them', its with that portion of them who are, or will become, radicalised. It is here that our efforts need to be made. By all means don't add to the potential pool by adding to the overall pool but don't expel those who are here"

So what is your definition of 'radicalised'? because to me the killing is the major problem of course..but not the only problem I have with islam.

It's pretty much everything about it, everything it believes in and everything it does. From the FGM to the burka, from the nonsense of the virgins to the 4 wives, from the marrying of children and everything in between.

It's wrong. On every level.

Paul1405,

You probably have a point regarding foreign policy. I'm reluctant to comment in too much depth there because I'm not an expert on international relations. My knowledge on terrorism is mainly focused on the radicalisation of homegrown terrorists, and for them, foreign policy never seems to be a primary grievance factor.

--

moonshine,

That was me who said that.

<<The subject was muslims and the subject religion was islam. I wasn't aware that I would need to clarify that anglican, catholic, presbytarian, methodist, baptist, jehova's witness, 7th day adventist, and the gospel singers down the road were all based on fake rubbish, as I didn't see any of them mentioned anywhere, let alone involved in any mass killings>>

You don't need to clarify that. But if they're all fake then your mentioning of fakeness was redundant.

@ AJ Phillips.
Yes, I know it was you that said that, but my reply was in answer to Steele's comment saying he understood why you believed that I might believe some religions were not fake.