These youtube segments are from the Movie, and will help us all understand the forces at work in the world.

Please note, as the film says, it is NOT a film about "all Muslims" it is about Radicals.

1 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKt7J1U1Cs8
2 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqNHZuI5eTM&mode=related&search=
3 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho9jc9hjMvs&mode=related&search=
4 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kZ5dHhLtTc&mode=related&search=
5 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y142iq0uGCc&mode=related&search=
6 of 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5aWamRhXb8&mode=related&search=

FrankGol recently made a comment "Most Muslims" reject the radicals, but in the images I see, I cannot for the life of me see 'most' not being represented in the crowds.

Note also the words of Alfons Heck, former Hitler Youth member.
Note the words of the Muslim Youth leader in English, about ruling the world.
Note the words of President Ahmadinajad about Islam conquering the 'tips of the mountain tops of the world'
Note the words of Abu Izzadeen in UK "NO Kafir is 'innocent'"
Another "It's only a matter of time before we control the whole earth"

Does anyone see a 'struggle for palestine' in these words ? They are few and far between, but the similarity between these words and those of Hitler, are stunning.

David

Why on earth would you post this utter rubbish on OLO.

All that does is "promote it" because OLO gets lots of hits.

You dont acknowledge these type of lunatics because that`s just what they want.

I strongly urge you to ask OLO staff to take this link off. Its not tactful tasteful or helful.
Actually I thinks its totally irresponsible.

Put your energy into reaching out to nice people regarless of their religion.
Just imagine all the nice Muslims reading this think "we think" they are all like it.
Your breeding disunity and hatred. Just because they behave in a poor manner doesnt mean we have to lower ourselves to their standards.
You clain you are a Christain Leader but this shows little leadership to be honest.

No Little Buddy its not the way to go.

I am surpised by your actions .
And very dissapointed to be honest.

By far the most obvious OBSESSION in this forum is Boazy's fear of Islam, followed by his fixation on YouTube.

To your credit DB you finally found YouTube as a recourse.

The high brow can say what they like, this is a medium that everyone is talking about. The American sites, particularly the Christian sites and Fox really do sink their teeth in. To actually see the action with a narration is a powerful communication device. Commentry on this is quite appropriate in this forum and some should wake up from their ivory towers to see how far the world has moved.

Now, heh, you gave so many references David, it will me some take time to actually comment on them. No doubt I will disagree with them, no doubt, but it's good to see you moving with the times.

Morgan.

Its not nice make comments a personal attack on people.

Ok So dont agree with what David Said. I dont agree with what he "did' but there is no need to make such a nasty personal comment directed at the poster himself.
David like many others in the world including world leaders is commenting on concerns about radical Muslims.

I am sorry if your not born from here and perhaps you have been made to feel insecure yourself or unwelcome but try leave comments on comments not direct attacks on the person.

Saintfletcher
Aint no ivory tower here just plain little old me tellling it like I see it.
As I said I see it as a mistake to promote their rubbish all over the internet and OLO will do that for them.
I think it would have been more reasonsible to have made the comments about them and refered to a few things they have said- without posting the links.

Also I think David you opended this post in reponse to Algazeera on the other thread.

I already told you I dont think its a responsible good thing you have done buddy.

I know you mean well and the subject you raised is very important.
I just dont approve of you helping them by posting the links- that all.

I'm thankful they let this thread get up, because it is important to know what is going on 'out there'.

Regarding CJ.s comment, his failure to recognize the clear distinction between 'radical' Islamists and the general moderate population is only exceeded by his putting down of 'youtube' which is now a valuable asset for presidents and prime ministers seeking to get their message out.

CJ..if you want to look like a blinkered dill, don't do it so publically :)

Material like this, can never leave someone neutral, as evidenced by the comments thus far. I take them all on board, pro and con, its part of the process.

But how anyone like CJ can so blatantly miss "We ruled the world once, and we will rule it again" and dismiss this as 'my obsession' is utterly beyond my comprehension. (which of course will invite the retort from CJ "Boazy, LOTS of things are beyond your comprehension" :)

Personally, I don't like to live with my head in the sand, I want to know what is going on which might threaten myself and my family and my country. This kind of thing is clearly a threat.

See this one, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5BPVF1C5LE

and the response below was written to me by one of those protesters who trampled the American flag on the streets of NewYorkCity. (the bearded one who is on the right at the beginning of the demo)

QUOTE
Listen buddy, if we were in Australia, we'd do the same thing for that Australian flag and the Aboriginies would certainly join us. To step on such a flag that represents drunkard racist skinheads of Australia is an honor. Such a filthy nation of no-gooders. I thought Fosters was the national drink of Australia wasn't it? What makes a WWJD boy defend an immoral country like that?
END-QUOTE

If CJ and his other 2 blind mice fail to see the Islamic flag portrayed on the White House in one of the posters, then they are more blind than I thought.
(no..I don't mean you Fletch or you Pale)

It does not take much to get you kicked in the ribs BOAZ DAVID.
Seems book burning is still in fashion, all I saw was you inviting people to see why you fear radical Islam.
And while we can get all warm and comfy by pretending they do not think like that it is blind stupid to do so.
I time and again say, still believe, the silent majority will be the answer to this blind hate.
But they remain very silent am I just dreaming?
As dreadful as it seems only a war will stop middle ages hate from returning to haunt us.
we in time soon to come will learn to hate as blindly kill as dreadfully as those who are educated to hate us.
Once more if any God wants such outcomes so divides us humans why?

Hi Belly mate.....hey.. a bit of trivia :) (aside from the topic)
the other night, I had a 'fight' with a union member.. from the ETU .. it was a fist fight.. and a foot fight :) aaah.. all good.. just mucking around in fun... nothing serious, just exercise, we get along well.

BACK to topic.

This is the bloke who wrote to me, and notice how he is explaining "If you are a moderate secular muslim, WE will be your biggest obstacle" etc etc..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa4xgz8U23s&mode=related&search=

This is the true voice/position of HIZB UT TAHRIR... it appears they are being investigated now.. about time is all I can say.

I loved what Aqvarvis shared on the multicultural thread.

"Facts are difficult to deal with when they conflict with theory. And before changing theories most human beings will spend long periods of time pretending that the facts don't exist, hoping that the facts will magically go away, or denying that the facts are important. Only if the facts are very painful and very persistent will they deal with the fundamental inconsistencies in their world view." - Lester Thurow

CJ... are you there ? the above applies to you and Pericles moreso than anyone else.

saintfletcher: "The high brow can say what they like, this is a medium that everyone is talking about. The American sites, particularly the Christian sites and Fox really do sink their teeth in. To actually see the action with a narration is a powerful communication device. Commentry on this is quite appropriate in this forum and some should wake up from their ivory towers to see how far the world has moved."

I agree that YouTube is a fascinating site and concept. However, as it stands with respect to factual and political commentary, it appears to be overwhelmed with amateur dross, propaganda and misinformation. Further, there's no way of verifying if any video posted there is authentic.

For serious topics, it's little more than Fox News dumbed down - if that's possible.

Why bring commentary from such a site to this one, which purports to be a serious forum for political and social debate? Doesn't YouTune have commentary facilities?

It's not a question of 'ivory towers' - rather, it's a question of horses for courses. While YouTube undoubtedly has a big future and a legitimate function in popular communications, anybody who currently places much weight on it as a serious source of information and ideas is a credulous fool, to be frank.

I stand by my assessment that Boazy and his cohorts are obsessed with Islam. His object is to foster antipathy towards Islam - and hence Muslims - in Australia, and his latest tactic seems to be to direct the less literate amongst us to YouTube propaganda videos that he's selected on that basis.

Such a project can only lead to deepened social divisions and violence, which is why I speak out against it. Boazy happens to cop more of my attention, simply because he's so prolific and extreme in his hate-mongering.

I wasn't going to dignify this thread with a second thought until you invited me Boaz.

>>...the above applies to you and Pericles moreso than anyone else.<<

When will you understand that you are part of the problem?

What is it that prevents you from seeing what is plain as a pikestaff to the vast majority of ordinary, everyday, non-fanatical folk?

Broadcasting your personal hatred of a religion that is not your own is to behave precisely as those whom you accuse.

Spending your waking hours trawling through a mass of undifferentiated visual sludge, simply in order to find yet another piece of trash propaganda that "supports" your "view", is simply self-indulgent mischief-making, designed to inflame anti-Islamic fear in others.

You do this in the name of Christianity, invariably.

I have said this before, and I repeat it now: it is the behaviour of a person that determines their goodness or their evil, not the flag of convenience they happen to fly.

For example, you insist that the Crusades were not conducted by Christians, because it is not inspired by the words of Jesus. Yet they happened. They flew the flag of Christianity. By their actions let them be judged.

You insist that you have the right to slag off Islam, by comparing aspects of it unfavourably to Christianity. It is this behaviour that defines you, not the flag of Christian convenience that you fly, nor the words of Jesus.

I would love to see your "Jesus says it's ok" rationale for propagating hatred in the manner that you do. Since you are so adept at picking a favourable quote for practically everything else, how about finding one that justifies these continuing acts of rabble-rousing that you find so important to your self-image.

But I guess that anyone who can justify beating their own daughter can convince themselves of anything, right?

CJ Morgan, in order to help you with your obvious lack of understanding of the rules of polite discourse I've taken the liberty of compiling some examples of how to address a discussion without attacking the other party at a personal level.

I've tried to include comments addressed to a variety of posters to help your understanding.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=874#16229
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=905#15960
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=649#15555 (one of the better examples of calm discussion of the points without personal attack)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6135#89243
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=669#12594

You could if you find the former links instructional further your education by reading links found at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=23834&show=history

I do hope that this correction is taken in the spirit which it is intended ;) .

R0bert

Pericles... always a_challenge.

You said:

[Broadcasting your personal hatred of a religion that is not your own is to behave precisely as those whom you accuse.]

COMMENT. No..I do not put 'Crosses' over Parliament house in photos. Nor do I trample on our national flag in public places.

Then...
[Spending your waking hours trawling through a mass of undifferentiated visual sludge, ...to find yet another piece of trash propaganda that "supports" your "view", is simply self-indulgent mischief-making, designed to inflame anti-Islamic fear in others.]

COMMENT. I'm fully aware that people can make of a religion what they like. Fellow Human is a prime example of one who has made a friendly, even warm hearted construct. Irf is not quite there yet, but he is certainly not one I worry about.

What you missed out on P, is that the vid of the "Islamic Thinkers Society" is coming from a "Hizb Ut Tahrir" world Kalifate perspective.
They are in New York (and other parts of America) that SAME group is in Australia, and recently had their "Kalifa" conference seeking basically 'World Rule' for Islam..no, they don't mean 'World Islam united' they mean..as the Sheikh of the Islamic youth society said "We ruled the world once, we can rule the world again"...

Hence the problem.

You see the raising of awareness of this, as mischief making (my goodness, you are already using Islamic technical terminology and the next part of the verse which mentions 'mischief' also calls for crucifying the perpetrators of mishief. Err..that wasn't a veiled threat was it ?

I've posted a number of vids which show the progression of Radicals influencing/intimadating moderates and we have experienced this in Australia, with me providing 2 examples. Zrieka and Nile.

Yet.. you are still 'head in sand' mode... you say "I'm part of the problem" but the problem is there with or without me. The only difference I make is to inform people of the powerplays going on around us.

They don't need to fear "Yusuf Q Muslim next door" but the DO need to fear those who would turn him radical.

Hey Robert
You seem to have singled out our organisation.
Well thats ok thanks for the PR.
I think this started on the thread with the young single mum when either one of you could understand that partners move on.

All I was trying to say on that thread Robert was you can not dicate to others where they live espeically when there is a second marraige and othe children from that marriage to consider.

I said you can not dicate- Not you dictate Robert.

However given your response I then was forced to say some x wives and husbands seem to be control freaks.

I said you sounded a bit that way.

Now your really angry.- Hense get PALE at all costs!

It was not my intention to upset you so I apolgise if it did.

I was attempting to display to yourself and V that there are others to consider as you wanted a new law to stop parents from leaving the area or they would loose their children.

We are very local about cruelty to Animals- Yes.

We make no apoligies for that.

Put your efforts into something else or please feel free to contiune to attack an organisation who unlike some is not just obbessed with themselves.
Sorry off post to everybody else.

PS Morgan is Morgan and I am sure he makes up a part of OLO.
Hes unique just like you.
Why do you have to control others actions all the time. Hes bagged me but thats ok Robert.
Live and let live.

Sorry, Boaz, you are still missing the point.

>>[me]"...you behave precisely as those whom you accuse."

[you] No..I do not put 'Crosses' over Parliament house in photos. Nor do I trample on our national flag in public places<<

Apart from these exceptions...? So, you have slightly better manners when you denigrate and vilify. Big deal.

>>What you missed out on P, is that the vid of the "Islamic Thinkers Society" is coming from a "Hizb Ut Tahrir" world Kalifate perspective<<

Boaz, if a dozen people walk up and down Bourke Street Mall waving banners that say "we will conquer the world", how seriously would you take them? If a bunch of noisy Islamic militants make the same noise on the Internet, how seriously would you take them?

It is the easiest thing in the world to distribute hateful propaganda. YouTube is a classic example of how technology has created new opportunities for the dissemination of information in a most immediate and dramatic form.

However, the medium does not change the message.

Militant Islam is a threat to you and me only in the most peripheral way. I sincerely hope that those who are entrusted with our security take the threat from religious fanatics - of any persuasion - seriously, as they seem to be the single most dangerous category right now.

And their movements - all of them - are fed by the hatred generated from their perceived opponents. Their aggression can be excused, in their eyes, by portraying it as a fight for survival.

And that is precisely where you come in, Boaz.

You are intent on perpetuating the story that your religion is under attack, so that you can justify the hatred you stir up against its opponents.

>>You see the raising of awareness of this, as mischief making (my goodness, you are already using Islamic technical terminology ...<<

"Mischief-making" is Islamic technical terminology?

Rubbish. It is good, old-fashioned English terminology, and you are not going to hijack it for your own devious ends.

PALE, no attack on your organisation. It's your choice to use the organisations name as your online name, that does not give you the excuse to pretend that any reference to your own online behaviour is an attack on your organisation.

What was addressed in that post was your double standard in criticising CJ Morgan for personal attacks while your own posts often include personal attacks on others. I attempted to do so in a light hearted manner. There was a faint hope that you might consider what you had written in your post to CJ and the contents of your other posts and give a profound apology to CJ Morgan. Also a bigger hope that I might provide some amusement to other posters.

Not particularly angry, well and truly over your passion for double standards.

R0bert

Robert.
PALE would also like to add that we have found many of your comments very worth while.
You have made a difference quite often to the way in which we have seen something or even handled something.
You have always been the first to show compassion especially to new comers.
I totally agree its not nice to personally attack anybody.
I would also like to apoligise if I said something on the other thread that you found offensive.
Now I will be really in the poo for getting so off post with the others.
Morgan just remember its as easy to say something nicely as it is to make personal attacks.
I can see your not big on graceful posts but try to understand people will respond to you as you do them.
Both yourself and Robert are valued posters to pale.
Sorry for off post guys

Thanks R0bert. While I had noticed the irony in being chastened by one of OLO's most frequently intemperate frootloops, those links reminded me of how wrong s/he had got you in those 'control freak' posts. I for one was amused, as I often am by the sheer nuttiness of PALE's contributions that we all mostly ignore, but sometimes s/he posts something so ridiculous I can't help responding.

Speaking of nutty comments,

Boazy: "You see the raising of awareness of this, as mischief making (my goodness, you are already using Islamic technical terminology and the next part of the verse which mentions 'mischief' also calls for crucifying the perpetrators of mishief. Err..that wasn't a veiled threat was it ?"

Ah yes, I'm sure that 'mischief making' is a technical term derived from the hadiths or somewhere. However, why would it be written in English?

Thanks for the chuckle, you silly man :)

Robert.
Sorry I missed your post above. I get personal with the Government and the industry.
There will be no apoligies to them "ever.'
However you have pointed out I was rude to Morgan and CJ
dont recall.
Please show me the comment.
I am aware Morgan has gate crashed our threads several times just to make a rude comment or especially it would seem a personal attack at me.
I may have responded to one of those. I really to be honest do not recall.
I do recall way back Morgan [ who had not been posting on this particular thread] coming in and saying
Well I reckon the farmers are winning against you lot hands down.[ Then rushing off again]
I found that comment in particular annoying and mis leading because we are the one Animal Welfare organisation that DOES work with farmers and not against them.
I also think if you are annoyed by something I have said in a thread you should leave it to that threat and not take over another topic.
Perhaps my first observation was right.

I have left a comment on the thread that seems to have upset you so much you had to draw my attention back there.

I had thought it was best left because we really value many of your comments on OLO
Back on track .-We are delighted to inform everyone the New Mufti Of Australia has supported pre stunning of Animals for Halal.

Its a pity some of the Church leaders could not follow the same example and speak out about Kosher Slaughters .
We thank the new Mufti for his compassion to Animals and leadership.

I pray other might follow his example.

PALE, still off topic but Boazy has been so prolific in his bash a mossie threads that I don't feel any regret at dealing with another issue here. OBSESSION is an apt word for Boazy in regard to Islam.

Did you only read the first link to one of your postings I listed? If so please have a look at the others. Each one contains some kind of personal attack on another poster (or so I interpret them).

Whilst my interest in your comment to CJ Morgan was enhanced by your recent comments regarding myself on the other thread the post was prompted by your comments to CJ Morgan on this thread. I am hoping that you may realise how often you do make personal attacks regarding other posters and either accept it in others as part of on line debate or refrain from doing so yourself in the future.

R0bert

Robert
Some people they think its odd to be concerned about Cruelty to Animals. Many dont.

If your not interested in Animal Welfare then dont read it. If there are complaints you wish to lodge about me - "Anybody" please use OLO not Robert.

I take exception to making personal comments- such as the one you see above - calling informed people loonzies.

The only reason you have gate crashed this thread was to rubbish me- not to protect CJ because you resented my comments on the {some the mothers do have them thread]

It cuts both ways and people like Taryn[ whom I know well ] do "not deserve" being told they should leave their children 1, 2 4 6 years with the X simply because they must move to keep their job which puts food on the table.

I responded to you by saying each case is different Robert however you "insisted" there should be a lAW TO STOP PEOPLE MOVING AWAY from an area where there x lives! How outragous.

You wouldnt let it go when Taryn tried to explain.

You still insisted it was selfish to move regardless and you wanted a LAW to MAKE parents moving away to "leave their kids behind"!

You even offered a bribe by saying - and they would not have to pay towards their care! Children are not up for auction Robert.


I told you I thought you should "not try to control other peoples lives."
I clearly get the message you did not like that by the trouble you have gone to to high Jack Davids Thread.

You seem to think you not only run OLO but others personal lives.
Heres a tip. Live and let live and dont think you are the best judge of what other people might do.

Sure you can have an opinion but you cant force a law to control others lives.

Personally I found being as far away from my boyfriends X and her hysterical demands an absolute requirement not a luxury.

The more I think about it, the less I believe you should be allowed to get away with your reckless anti-Islamic rants, Boaz.

>>as the Sheikh of the Islamic youth society said "We ruled the world once, we can rule the world again"... Hence the problem.<<

What problem? When, exactly, did Islam "rule the world"?

This is simply empty - noisy? yes; somewhat offensive? yes... but also empty - rhetoric. It is the kind of raving that you can hear on any street corner of any civilized society.

When I lived in London, I used to enjoy a trip to Hyde Park Corner to watch the soap-box orators at work. Every one of them was an apocalypt of some kind, predicting the end of civilization in some form or other. Some were also rabble-rousers, from the Boaz school of rabble-rousing, playing upon the fears of their audience, and urging them to confront and fight whatever menace they had unearthed.

It's not new, Boaz. It's not different. It is the same old hatred, in a slightly different guise, that's all.

>>Yet.. you are still 'head in sand' mode... you say "I'm part of the problem" but the problem is there with or without me. The only difference I make is to inform people of the powerplays going on around us.<<

OK, let's assume for a moment that there is a problem. Now answer me this: is the problem likely to get a) larger or b) smaller, if you keep picking at it like an old scab? Are your enemies likely to get a) more or b) less militant, as a result of your endless stream of febrile insults?

Boaz, you are not "inform[ing] people of the powerplays going on around us", you are indulging in - nay, wallowing in - self-righteous sniping at your religious enemies.

And I do wish you would wake up to the damage you are causing, and stop.

PALE: "The only reason you have gate crashed this thread ..."

Extraordinary. This from the User who hijacks just about every thread s/he's on. Are Boazy's silly threads invitation-only now? [If only... could they be made invisible too?] :)

PALE. this thread's about Boazy's OBSESSION with vilifying Islam. It's not about your appalling manners and diction, and neither is it about animal welfare.

I don't know why you silly b@st@rds respond to this goat it only encourages him as if he needs it.

Alan... seriously, do you not see a direct challenge to Western society in the material in those links ?

Pericles... 'empty rhetoric on a street corner is one thing'
An address to a massive crowd of passionate young muslims who are all there to be encouraged in their faith is quite another..'that' dear Pericles is the problem.

You love to compare me with Mosely, but why... honestly..WHY...don't you see things in proportion. Me..I just write a few words here.. I occasionally involve myself in street actions..(you know..the no effect loony Hyde park kind) I've never addressed crowds of 1000s as the Sheikh who said they will rule the world again... I've never sought to inpsire young people to actually BELIEVE they, by virtue of their religion, will dominate the white house....place their flag on it... so.. why am "I" a Mosely, yet this rabble rousing mini-me Hitler wanna_be "not"?

I am simply saying

1/ There are very determined people out there who wish to politically and spiritually dominate you, humiliate you, and enslave you under their system.

2/ Those people are working ceaselessly to achieve this very real political objective.
3/ They have LARGE numbers and MASSIVE finance behind them. (Though in Australia the finance more than the numbers)
4/ I show clear evidence of the above, from their own mouths.

5/ We should be aware of this, and strive to clarify our own values of freedom and democracy, to combat such terror.

I have no political alternative than democratic freedom. These people heap ridicule on such ideas. Its Sharia_way or the Highway.

Perhaps if you and others like you (Alan, CJ, Pericles) demonstrated more fervor 'for' our freedom and 'against' threats to it, I'd shut up.
There is only ONE serious threat to our freedom at the moment....I'm prepared to name it.
"Radical" Islamists.

But that is the point Boazy, we see you and your kind as the biggest threat to our freedoms. We can fairly easily fight a threat from an alien culture when it becomes a real problem, but a threat from within that proclaims to be 'protecting our freedom', while showing all the signs of doing the opposite, now that is a different story. No wonder Pericles has compared you with Mosley.

Maybe it's about time we did have a Bill of Rights, with one fundamental charter FREEDOM FROM RELIGON

Boazy: "There are very determined people out there who wish to politically and spiritually dominate you, humiliate you, and enslave you under their system"

We know that, Boazy - and you're one of them. As Bugsy suggests, many of us see you and your cohorts as a far greater immediate threat to our freedom than a few Muslim nutters.

As Pericles said, "It's not new, Boaz. It's not different. It is the same old hatred, in a slightly different guise, that's all."

Bugsy, CJ Morgan, amen to that.

R0bert

David
Perhaps you will find this offensive but I hope you take it as meant.
You talk all the time about being a good christian yet you seem to lack basic manners.

When a person directs a question to you or comment it is polite to answer.

I David have asked you several times why you follow a book that when written it was beleived that people with mental problems were possesed by the devil and the world was flat etc.

Also the Muslim gentleman on the other thread was quite happy to debate you but you left there and strated this without finishing the debate.

Then you emailed my private address at my invitation to obtain a phone number. I wrote to you twice. No reply.
If you want to tell others how wrong they are your not much of an example.
May I suggest that instead of attacking you debate and ask questions.
Here is an example of perhaps how you could approach this subject.-

The Quaran~ picture of paradise is exacly what a seventh- centuray pagan would have thought wonderful. The carnal concept of a harem of beautiful women and all the wine you can drink is in direct conflict with the spirituality and hiliness of the biblical concept of heaven[ Revelation 22.12.17]The contradiction canot be clearer.
Why dont you ask nicely why its a sin hear on earth but cool in heaven?
Nicely
See if you get somebody to explain that.?
Argue and debate- Not attack
Ok thats my two bobs worth and relpy to fellow posters David. Show them how polite good Christian people are- Not how arrogant.

I'm thinking weeeelll; no worries here, Islamphobia is being countered with skill. Then I read this:

"I don't know why you silly b@st@rds respond to this goat it only encourages him as if he needs it."
Posted by alanpoi, Monday, 3 September 2007 11:15:42 PM

LOVE THAT!!

Hi Pale....
I'll try to correct the record here..

1/ it may have been the popular belief that "all" mental illness was due to demons, but those who Jesus healed definitely did have demons. I don't find much information if any about regular mental illness.

2/ I did reply to you.. don't know why it never made it. My email has been down for a few days due to an IT issue.

Bugsy, Ginx, CJ, Pericles, Think4self and Robert,

1/ We are free 'from' religion. (Think4self)
2/ You others, well... when far off people in positions of influence and power start talking about 'ruling the world' and I find people of the same mould becoming more and more active in Australia, some on trial for terrorism, in 2 out of 6 states, extremely close similarities between the 'other' bloke who said Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer.......and those currently talking about retaking the world they once ruled...creeping Islamic favoritism coming into universities etc... I believe there are very valid reasons for concern and awareness raising.

You folks give me the distinct impression that you would have waited for the Panzers to roll up the beaches of Brighton or somewhere before you actually believed in the 'Nazi menace' . Clearly, you would be ridiculing anyone who spoke of it b4 that and called them "Hateful Naziphobes"

I guess you would not care about France or the other places taken by Hitler, all of which pointed to the end game. That's the result I suppose when your knowledge of Islam is so limited.
If you did have a substantive knowledge of the religion itself, your counter arguments against me would be based on seeking to correct my understanding of that faith, rather than playing the man...as you always do.
So, as long as you play the man rather than the issue.. I'll continue to work along as I've been.

David
Thanks for answering the questions. cant say I agree but then again neither of us were there were we?

Its a fine balance between educating and making things worse I guess.
I know you believe in what you are doing but you also must remember others see your posts as stirring up even more trouble.
For my mind David there are just good and bad people.
Clearly you would understand given my work I would not be impressed with our so called christian leaders.
Through my eyes I can tell you only Muslim leaders of Australia have spoken out about the cruel live animal trade and lets face it David thats more than ours have done. We are sending the animals along with our jobs yet the church remains silent.
I try to be fair and I am honest to a fault which upsets some posters.
I may have upset you with the first post on this thread however I dont see how putting these goons up you are helping.
I do see your argument about the way in which the world did not repond to Hitler and of course that is why Bush howard , Blaire sent the troops.

I also see you as having the right to express those fears but I encourage you to try to ask questions rather than attack.
We have to work a lot more with our Australian Muslim leaders David and find answers.
Its hard at times and one wonders why under labour all those years ago we took so many people from a culture so different to us.
It is also important the Muslim people understand in Australia we have a law and a choice of faith but our laws goes for everybody without exceptions.

There is no doubt that you have great skill in avoiding tough questions, Boaz. And equally, that you have somehow worked out that the best way to feed your self-righteousness is to accuse those who question your actions and motives of something. Anything. Attack is the best form of defence etc.

Most times this is "you simply don't understand, but I do".

This time the accusations are:

i) stupidity - "You folks give me the distinct impression that you would have waited for the Panzers to roll up the beaches of Brighton or somewhere before you actually believed in the 'Nazi menace'",

ii) callousness - "I guess you would not care about France or the other places taken by Hitler, all of which pointed to the end game."

iii) and a rather convoluted combination of "you don't understand" and accusations of ad hominem attack - "If you did have a substantive knowledge of the religion itself, your counter arguments against me would be based on seeking to correct my understanding of that faith, rather than playing the man...as you always do."

The reason that I draw attention to your behaviour - or "play the man", as you would like to see it - is that you remind me so much of the over-excited rabble-rousers of the thirties. Now, underneath it all, you are probably a decent man simply trying to make sense of the world, which is why I spend more time attempting to show you the error of your ways than I do responding to the more obviously mean-spirited posts that frequently appear here.

Take it as a compliment, that someone believes that you are more confused than evil, and cares enough to point this out to you.

PALE.. you did hit the nail on the head there.. regarding the kind of 'reality avoidance' that some posters are expressing...thanx.

PERRRRRICLES :) wow.. and I'm supposed to be 'patronising' eh..

"Now, underneath it all, you are probably a decent man simply trying to make sense of the world, which is why I spend more time attempting to show you the error of your ways"

and you speak of my 'selfrighteousness' ? :) Is that a pulpit I see you standing on ? and 6 feet above contradiction at that ?

Mate.. all I'm doing is looking at history pre WW2, looking at history in the past few decades, subjecting both the historical material and the flow of ideas, to scrutiny, and recognizing strong similarities between the 2.

Now..ur probably a decent bloke too... (like that?) but in my humble view, you are either in denial or misguided, hence "I have to spend much time correcting you"... sounds a bit over the top doesn't it.

It boils down to assessment of evidence. I'd be interested seriously in where the 'line' is in your mind... which line ? I mean for example.. the line regarding cultural/religious encroachment of Islam into Australian life. Just that one issue alone of providing prayer halls/rooms and ablutions for Muslims, while denying Christians a prayer room where they can put various religious symbols on its walls say.. should YELL at you 'something is wrong'.. and that 'something' is not a one of thing, its a trend. Trends have beginnings and endings.
So.. if I may ask.. do you see any problem with that particular trend

Boazy, "your counter arguments against me would be based on seeking to correct my understanding of that faith". Substantial effort has been put towards that end by a number of posters of a long period of time.

Your obsessive hatred of Islam and complete blindness to the similarities with your own faith make that a loosing proposition but some still persist. Perhaps we get a little jaded with the process.

If this was the lead up to world war two we would be attacking you for insisting that all Germans are at heart Nazi's because its built into the core of their culture (or a variation thereof). The parallel from this side is more akin to being in Germany in the lead up to that period with you ranting about the threat posed by those nasty Jews and how something final needs to be done about them.

What we have done is a risk assessment and clearly the risks to the freedoms and values of the western world from christian religious extremism are far higher than the risks posed by extremist muslims.

R0bert

David
I guess really what I am saying is we need to deal in the real world now"`.
All this debate about what the bibe said or what was in the Koran drives everbody nuts. We need to care about loving our neighbours now in 2007.
I dont agree with what paul Keating did but its done. We must try to live together. I am concerned about house avalabilty and i put much of the lack of it down to imagration.
What are the Christian Churches doing to try to unite the two WITHOUT talking religion.?
You know David you might do yourself a favour and some of your buddies to just ask some of the Mossies out fishing for a day.
You can still take your beers if you like as they really do not mind.
They just dont drink it thats all. You might even find you have a lot in common regarding concerns of Extreme Islamic cults.
Look has it ever occured to you if you had come to the West to escape terribly things you might just appreciate an Aussie mate.
I think it Just imagine after coming all that way being terrified that all that fighting was going to break out again and with YOU in the middle.

Dont you think some of the Muslim Leaders of Australia and the new mufti deserve a chance and some support to keep their flock on track.
Well heres news- They do.

I know a few mossies that be right up there on front line fighting for Australia too if ever some of the extreme lot dropped by.
PS Still hate burkas and that wont ever change but 99% of them understand and appreciate that.

Oh, Boaz, how I love the smell of injured innocence in the morning!

>>and you speak of my 'selfrighteousness'? :) Is that a pulpit I see you standing on ? and 6 feet above contradiction at that?<<

Yes, I guess it was a little patronizing. My only defence is that you don't seem to respond to any other approach, so I had to find another way to attract your attention.

You say stuff, then avoid the follow-up. You have always done this, and it's rude.

This time it was:

">>as the Sheikh of the Islamic youth society said "We ruled the world once, we can rule the world again"... Hence the problem.<<

...to which I asked...

>>What problem? When, exactly, did Islam "rule the world"?<<

You have avoided the question, which was intended to highlight yet another "Chicken Little" exaggeration of yours.

You avoid the reality that "white supremacy" is a construct that connotes racism.

You avoid the reality that "One Nation, One Culture, One Race" is a construct that attracts racists.

You quote endless verses from the Qur'an - or is it the same verse, endless times? - and expect the world+dog to share your view that you are simply educating us peasants.

You resist any attempt to provide perspective to your attitude towards your religion, by suggesting that anyone who behaves badly in the name of Christianity (crusaders, paedophile priests, the inquisition etc.) is not actually a Christian.

Is it any wonder that, very occasionally, I feel that I ought to drop out of my calm, rational pattern of responses to you and get all schoolmistressy?

Now, what was the question again?

>>I'd be interested seriously in where the 'line' is in your mind... the line regarding cultural/religious encroachment of Islam into Australian life.<<

There is no "line" here, except the law of the land. If Christians or Muslims want to pray, that's fine by me. If they break the law, that's not fine by me.

And if you were about to suggest that we are in danger of falling under Sharia law, or whatever, please don't.

Pericles... you did well.. persisting with the seemingly insignificant till you obtain an answer.. the comment about "We once ruled the world" was not mine but from the Imam/Sheikh .. it was his view not mine, but.. in that rather twisted mind of his, I presume he meant the time after the Byzantines had been routed and the Islamic empire stretched eastwards into China, quite a large slab of empire to say the least.. this was done under the auspices of the concept of Caliph..and that Caliphate was only removed by Attaturk quite recently historically speaking.

I don't know why you took issue with that... because it doesn't seem important to me.. the important thing is that HE thought they ruled the world and wish to again...... I'm still showering my keyboard with dandruff as I scratch my head over why you don't see "Hitler Mini me" in that address.. not that this particular individual would at this point in time have the same influence as a Hitler, but my goodness mate.. he is having a jolly good go at it.. then you add the giggling voice of Sheikh Faiz as he splutters 'Jews..apes and pigs' etc... I mean.. there 'is' a common theme running along out there.

YOUR LINE... "The Law of the Land".. I'm glad you said this. Now..is it not the law of the land NOT to make laws promoting particular religions? Or.. can a secular UNI make discriminatory provision for one religion but not others ? Yet in the 'prayer rooms at UWS' that 'line' has been crossed..or do you see it differently?

If we can agree on this, then were are close to being on the same page.

As you must have realized, Boaz, it is your comment that I was calling into question.

">>as the Sheikh of the Islamic youth society said "We ruled the world once, we can rule the world again"... Hence the problem.<<

...to which I asked...

>>What problem? When, exactly, did Islam "rule the world"?<<

A perfectly normal, uncontroversial and - above all - non-rabble-rousing response to the sheikh's slogan, would be "nonsense; since when did you guys rule the world anyway?".

Or, even more appropriately, ignore the whole stupidity of it, knowing full well that someone who made claims like that is clearly a nutter.

Instead, you pretended that he really did intend to "rule the world". You probably still do, despite the fact that you yourself have obviously also scratched your head to try to come up with some part of the world that they had, in fact, ruled.

Even at its most literal - "we will again rule those parts of the world that we used to rule" - his geographic reach hardly extends to Melbourne, now does it?

So, once again.

You take any old junk that you find on the Internet, and simulate fear and loathing - "see, they'll murder us all in our beds, you mark my words" - simply in order to be able to express, one more time, your fundamental hatred of Islam.

It is utterly irrelevant what the Sheikh said; what I am trying to point out to you is that you are a very important part of the problem, Boaz, and until you go away, the problem won't go away either.

I can only try to bring it home to you by asking, yet again.

"...is the problem likely to get a) larger or b) smaller, if you keep picking at it like an old scab? Are your enemies likely to get a) more or b) less militant, as a result of your endless stream of febrile insults?"

Boazy: "Now..is it not the law of the land NOT to make laws promoting particular religions? Or.. can a secular UNI make discriminatory provision for one religion but not others ? Yet in the 'prayer rooms at UWS' that 'line' has been crossed..or do you see it differently?"

Boazy seems in a bit of a lather about UWS providing prayer rooms for Muslim students. Firstly, every University I've ever visited has at least one Christian chapel and several Christian colleges. Secondly, UWS has had an active Christian chaplaincy program since the early 1990s, and harbours several Christian chapels. See http://www.tcma.org.au/spalding_working_paper.pdf for a discussion paper about this.

The furphy regarding the Constitution is just that - University policies, by-laws etc aren't set by the Federal parliament. I wish you were right though - what a wonderful argument it would be for removing Commonwealth funding from church schools and colleges.

This appears to be yet another case where Boazy's all worked up about something that simply isn't true, and which he could have easily checked if he was halfway interested in telling the truth.

I have been helping an asylum-seeker gain refuge in our wonderful country, a Christian who converted from a Muslim background, and my first hint of trouble was when her small child was kidnapped by Muslim relatives determined to ship him back to Iran, facilitated by moderate Muslims here.

If Muslims are prepared to risk much by being openly condemnational of their beliefs, such as Khaled Abu Toameh (Pt 1) saying that he is "worried and ashamed", and that the "silent majority is not speaking out" which he hopes is out of fear not out of sympathy - these are good indicators of the climate in which they live - then we should speak out at every opportunity.

This video is out there not to change your mind about Christianity or Judaism, but as an invitation to open your minds to the "enemy among us".

- "The infiltration of radical islam is so deep it's shocking and everyone is in denial about it" (Pt 5, John Loftus, former federal prosecutor".

- "A large and growing minority (of Muslims) rejects the society in which they operate" (Part 6, Sir Martin Gilbert, author and historian)

- "The West was sleepping..." (Pt 6, Walid Shoebat, former PLO terroist)

Ignoring these messages is like sleeping with your eyes open.

I'm a mother of a four year old. To see a 3.5 year old child calling Jews apes and pigs because it says so in the Qu'ran (Pt 3) and the evidence of kids being taught to be suicide bombers is mind-boggingly horrific. My four year old's focus is nursery rhymes, Thomas the Tank Engine, dinosaurs....

Every day, I drive past a Jewish school, which my friends attend. I see the security fence and the security guards. Parents pay a premium for these necessities - in Sydney, not Tehran.

For the moment, the child has been returned to his mother forcefully with police intervention. Australia has agreed to grant a protection visa to them, his safety though is not guaranteed.

Pericles..and CJ... I rest my case.. refer all questions to KatieO's post.

Does anything more need to be said ?

cheers.

Boazy: "Does anything more need to be said ?"

Not if you don't mind being being shown up yet again as a bulldust artist - concerning your apparently mendacious rabble-rousing around the UWS prayer room.

Let me see if I have this right.

>>I have been helping an asylum-seeker gain refuge in our wonderful country, a Christian who converted from a Muslim background, and my first hint of trouble was when her small child was kidnapped by Muslim relatives<<

An asylum seeker. I have to presume that only the two - she and her child - are trying to settle here, and the father is still in Iran? So, taking the emotion out of it, the religious leanings of the parties etc., we have a straightforward international custody battle?

>>For the moment, the child has been returned to his mother forcefully with police intervention. Australia has agreed to grant a protection visa to them, his safety though is not guaranteed.<<

Again, taking out the emotive stuff - "forcefully", "agreed to grant", "safety not guaranteed" - we have the information that the child has been returned to the custody of her mother.

The law has been upheld. Surely, that's a good thing?

I am sure that it is a traumatic time for all concerned, but there have been many such stories with similar features, but lacking any religious overtones. A good friend of mine described her escape from communist Romania many years ago, in very similar terms.

All very sad. But absolutely nothing to do with the topic. There is no virtue in ascribing religious motives or overtones to an already unfortunate situation. And it adds nothing to the blatant propaganda of the stuff Boaz brought to our attention.

The "enemy among us" is, I would suggest, far better described as "the enemy within us".

And Boaz, this does not absolve you from addressing the tough questions.

"...is the problem likely to get a) larger or b) smaller, if you keep picking at it like an old scab? Are your enemies likely to get a) more or b) less militant, as a result of your endless stream of febrile insults?"

If this battle was fought in the law courts, assigning rights to the child under the Hague Convention (to which Iran is not a signatory), the mother would no doubt have been awarded custody of the child.

But this battle was fought in the Refugee Review Tribunal, an immigration issue, not a custody issue.

For the record, the Muslim father was not involved. However, an unrelated Muslim person stepped forward to claim that the child was his own (at the Iranian Embassy in Canberra, where they were in the process of separating this child’s passport from his mothers,). Taqquia…a justifiable Islamic deception.

Traumatised? Intolerable, both for mother and child. Unimaginable, for Australian women and children.

The reason they are permitted to stay in Australia, is because the Australian government accepted that on return to Iran they would be persecuted (not an imagined or perceived persecution). For converts to Christianity, the penalty for apostasy is death and though the death penalty has not been carried out since 1994, torture, beatings, imprisonment, discrimination and punitive taxes help Iran climb to No. 3 on the Open Doors watch list for Christian persecution.

End of wake up call.

It is a triumph for Australian law, not sharia law, where this mother would have half the rights of the father or her male relatives.

In the tribunal, this woman said “Will I be safe anywhere?”

“ (Muslims are) here with an agenda to make Islam the law of the land” (Pt. 5, Nonie Darvish, daughter of martyr) resonates loudly if you care to listen.

Could it be that katie0 is a member of some fringe Christian group that shares the Islamophobia that characterises Boazy's obsessive crusade? Certainly, the references to taqqiya and Sharia law seem to come from the same prayer book.

How on earth does a custody dispute, successfully conducted under Australian law, give any kind of credence to the ravings of the nutters in Boazy's favourite movie?

KatieO, I am sure that you are a very caring and compassionate person, but all you have shown us so far is Australian law in action. That in itself is encouraging of course, as there are many on this Forum who would like to send everyone back to wherever they came from, without a second thought.

But in the context of this thread, you have simply added religious overtones to a family dispute in order to inflame anti-Islamic emotions. In doing so, you are joining the crack whack-a-mozzie brigade on this Forum, so I hope you realize you have some fairly high standards of obfuscation and self-deception to aspire to.

Just as an aside, would you have spent any time on the case if the woman concerned were a Muslim, rather than "a Christian who converted from a Muslim background"?

The radical Islamisation of Arabian children who are being taught to be suicide bombers (Pt 3) does not inspire fear, but great sadness.

As a Christian, my first response it to pray, pray that the grace found in Christ will cover us all. Believing the battle to be won for all eternity at the Cross, I have nothing to fear.

If the Islamic baseline is spiritual warfare for children’s hearts and minds, then so is mine. Christian playgroups for 2-5 year olds are not a breeding ground for radical Islamophobia. But the erosion of Australian institutions and freedoms via Islam-creep is increasingly hard to ignore, and I don’t believe tolerance is a biblical response,

- “…. We are strangling ourselves with our political correctedness” (Pt5, Nonie Darvish, Muslim)

And yes, in a separate issue, I am assisting a Muslim woman with her medical bills, her job search, and friendship.

Just two questions, KatieO.

>>But the erosion of Australian institutions and freedoms via Islam-creep is increasingly hard to ignore, and I don’t believe tolerance is a biblical response<<

Which Australian institutions and freedoms are being eroded by "Islam-creep"? So far you have only managed to illustrate the precise opposite, that the administration of the law is as robust as ever.

And are you absolutely certain that tolerance is not a biblical response? Whatever happened to "but I tell you who hear me: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you."

I was sure that it is biblical.

Or are you as selective as Boaz in your interpretations?

TOLERANCE and the Bible

Pericles.. its time you actually 'read' it. Jesus himself was scathing of religious leaders, lawyers and hypocrites in general.
He did not tolerate them.
Paul was not tolerant of those who 'preached a different gospel' read for yourself in Galatians 1

The 'in'tolerance of both Jesus and Paul, is connected with the Kingdom of God, in 'The Body' of Christ, we do not tolerate either false teaching or hyprocritical living...in theory anyway...

How in the heck does CJ see something which quacks, has feathers, webbed feet, a broad flat bill and NOT....see a duck... he sees a rooster.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22370116-2,00.html
Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said in May that Islamist groups represented the "biggest threat to the stability and security of Germany".

Well of course, using CJ and or Pericles 'tolerant' reasoning, the Interior minister of Germany (who obviously knows nothing) is 'Islamophobic' for the sake of it.

Err..no, he is reflecting genuine concerns about how 'normal' German young men, can be converted to Islam, and then.. how something goes wrong with their brains and they make plans to blow up half the country... in the name of Islam.

This is the very reason why I goto considerable efforts in OLO to raise awareness...there are Australians who are converting and developing the SAME attitudes. Some are on trial now.

They have access to the same news as CJ and PERICLES.. so...'how' did they go from 'normal' to 'radical' in Islams name ?

Now that we have 'exposed' the German Islamophobia.. lets not forget the Danes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6977741.stm

Australia
Germany
Denmark
Spain
America
England
Algeria
Morocco
France (riots)

ALL... having Islamic radicals and bombs as a common theme.
yep..I'm just obsessed :)

Ok, so not all A’s are bad .
Like all groups, A’s got it share of goods bads
And ‘some of my best friends are …’

But Ay!, I’m not a member of the Areopagus (or AA for that matter!)
But it seems to me that there are more bads in the A, A team than in B,C,or D, A teams –at least nowadays . And the bads that are in the A, A team, aspire to badness on a astronomical scale.

And what I find aspecially alarming is that both the good A’s & the bad A’s,
take their authority from a book –a book that has a lot of bad ( and good!).
Bad, which the goods currently ignore (no doubt, for a1 reasons)but...should an atypical situation arise where there are not be enough meal-tickets to go around , might not the good A’s choose to be born–again as bad A’s ( as ‘appened in anonymous country under the ‘aliban and another anonymous country under the ayatollah).

Some, statesmen, argue we should keep our mouths shut, not antagonize –then we’d be all, A-OK!, and after all, that’s how the bad A’s would like us to behave –until they become the alite – then they’ll give everyone else, the big A.

Now I’m no orator – but ay!, what do you say ? ah, I mean, what are we aloud to say about A’s, nowadays?

Australia
Germany
Denmark
Spain
America
England
France

ALL... having Christian clergy and sexual abuse of children as a common theme.

yep..you're just obsessed :)

Let me see if I understand this.

From what you say, Boaz and KatieO, Christianity is an intolerant religion - did I get that bit right? - justified by the intolerance of its leading light, Jesus.

This intolerance is targetted at "religious leaders, lawyers and hypocrites", according to Boaz. That's a pretty broad set of targets, especially if you include all religious leaders, all lawyers and all hypocrites. So, it's fair to say that intolerance is widespread amongst Christians, yes?

Why exactly is this a good thing?

If you take a linear scale with intolerance at one end and tolerance at the other, wouldn't you find authoritarianism and dictatorship close to the intolerant end, with democracy and reliance upon the rule of law at the tolerant end?

(We are not talking "tolerance = do as you please" here. We are talking as grown-ups, about a human trait that accepts that people are not all born with identical characteristics, characters or aspirations. I know that Christians like to believe that anyone who doesn't subscribe to their belief system must by definition practice bestiality, but we know that isn't actually the case, don't we?)

Apart from the power trip that this attitude obviously engenders, what precisely is the positive contribution that Christian intolerance provides?

>>TOLERANCE and the Bible
Pericles.. its time you actually 'read' it<<

Actually, Boaz, I did read it. That's where the quote comes from.

And why the inverted commas around "read"?

Which part of "but I tell you who hear me: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you" did I misinterpret?

To answer Pericles: why should I tolerate the intolerable? Can I not hate the sin but still love the sinner? Matthew 5:44 shines a light in this dark place: Not fear, but prayer. Not hate, but love. Not enemies, but fellow sinners, all under God's judgement. Matthew 5:48 summarizes the passage, imploring us to "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Humbly, we can only but try. Realistically, we can only but fall short.

It would be unconscionable to compromise my beliefs by being silent and uncritical of a minority attempt to restrict open and frank discussion of all issues, especially religion. I accept your freedom to choose your words so carefully, and your beliefs. That is not an exercise of tolerance, but of love.

Under the guise of tolerance, I could be silent, self-censor and not post on this debate. As with Khaled Abu Toameh, the Palestinian journalist quoted in Pt.2, you will be left wondering if I am part of the silent majority, unsure if my actions are due to fear or sympathy.

Numerous examples in my thread of Islamisation (taqquia, denying a child the right to be raised by his mother, forcing Jewish people to take extreme measures to protect their children on Australian soil, denial of equal rights for man and woman, and the constant fear of perseuction), then there are the prayer rooms at UWS, and outside of this discussion halal food in my fridge, sharia finance being introduced at NAB, discussion of “sin industries” on Bloomberg News, the Catch the Fire Ministries’ trial, but to continue on with this list just seems to polemize the thread, not my intention. All in all, if I am given a choice between the two, I would prefer this subtle lack of integration rather than an outright invasion (thanks Mr Putin, that $6Bn will do nicely).

Pleased to see you can thumb through your bible to arrive at an appropriate passage. I'll be sure to divert your free copy elsewhere, problem is, the places I would like to send it will most likely burn it.

Wow, KatieO, your life is certainly chock-full of fear and loathing, is it not.

>>Numerous examples in my thread of Islamisation (taqquia, denying a child the right to be raised by his mother, forcing Jewish people to take extreme measures to protect their children on Australian soil, denial of equal rights for man and woman, and the constant fear of perseuction), then there are the prayer rooms at UWS, and outside of this discussion halal food in my fridge, sharia finance being introduced at NAB, discussion of “sin industries” on Bloomberg News, the Catch the Fire Ministries’ trial<<

What a laundry-list of imagined wrongs! I'm amazed that you sleep at night.

Perhaps you don't; that would explain a lot.

For your information, this is Australia.

- we don't deny the right of a child to be raised by his mother. Almost the reverse is true, most courts practically insist upon it
- we don't force Jewish people
- we have equal rights for man and woman (perhaps not absolute equality, but close enough for this argument I think)
- no-one should be in “constant fear of persecution”, we have laws against that
- there is nothing illegal about prayer-rooms, of any denomination
- no-one is forcing you to keep halal food in your fridge
- no-one is forcing you to accept sharia finance from NAB
- and please, correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the law come down on the side of those bad-mouths at Catch-the-Fire?

I Googled “sin industries on Bloomberg News” but got no meaningful results.

I'll repeat my question, in case you misread it:

“Which Australian institutions and freedoms are being eroded by "Islam-creep"?

So far you have only managed to illustrate the precise opposite, that the administration of the law is as robust as ever.”

If you choose to spend your life in fear of your own shadow, so be it. But translating that fear into aggression against Islam is, as I have pointed out to Boaz on numerous occasions, simply destined to fan the flames of fear and distrust.

KatieO,

"taqquia, denying a child the right to be raised by his mother, forcing Jewish people to take extreme measures to protect their children..."

Just like the Jewish children taken by Christians, eh? The name Edgardo Mortara comes to mind (to name just one).

Pericles,

"translating that fear into aggression against Islam is, as I have pointed out to Boaz on numerous occasions, simply destined to fan the flames of fear and distrust."

Very wisely put.

CJ Morgan:
Makes a valid point, (some) Christian clergy abuse children.
And we have seen prosecution & compensation arising there from.

But, being even-handed as he no doubt is, he may now care to go further and investigate the plight of thousands of foreign maids abused in Saudi Arabia -many by religious figures -and consider the implications from their very different outcome (?)

Mr Mann & Pericles:
It is not criticism that is at the root of the ill feeling that some Muslims may feel. Christians, Buddhists, Communists etc cop criticism & parody ever day -is it not one of costs/benefits of an open society(?)
Rather the ill feeling/distrust stems from a value system that some Muslims ( & others) live that prescribes that their figureheads & beliefs are above criticism -if anyone challenges them, they have a god driven right to silence them…
And following closely thereupon, a world view that says they will register all injustices done to their group -but none of the injustices their group inflicts on the others…

Pericles
you point out some very important parts of the Sermon on the Mount.
Please bear in mind also.....

That Jesus in the same sermon exhorts us to cut off sinning hands and gouge out sinning eyes...
True understanding of a passage, must come from placing ourselves in the place of the HEARERS of those words in that cultural setting.

The simple fact that Jesus uttered those words on one day, and warned against the scribes and pharisees on another (or the same) means we have to come to grips with the actual intended meaning.

Mr Man.. in terms of your assessment that raising awareness of radical Islam is 'fanning the flames of hate' could you please give your wise counsel regarding this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2409833.ece

Then..you may wish to refer to the transcript of the speeches of the leader of the Deobandi movement, claimed to 'run' 600 of the 1300 mosques in UK..
and then... re-think your statement ?

Who is fanning hate.. those PROMOTING it in speeches like these..OR.. those who point to those speeches as being 'hate rants' ?

Was Hitler the problem. or...those who criticized him ?

Its not rocket science....but sometime prejudice and bias and possibly vested interest ? can alter our perception of such blatant examples of hate and aggression as coming from the Deobandi movement.

Or.. as this Pakistani Judge says:

Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani argues that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle.

Now.. you may retort "Oh..but the British Muslims are not saying this" to which I reply "Are you sure? and if not, would you expect them to"? Blind Nellie can see though that one.

So...again..WHO is 'fanning hatred'..those who are overtly encouraging Muslims to 'prepare for battle' or..those exposing such rants?

Tolerance is not a luxury we can afford in cases like these.

Boaz, do you ever listen to yourself?

>>...Jesus in the same sermon exhorts us to cut off sinning hands and gouge out sinning eyes...
True understanding of a passage, must come from placing ourselves in the place of the HEARERS of those words in that cultural setting.<<

How many times, Boaz, have you taken a single phrase from the Qur'an, and generalized from it? How many times have you taken a single verse, and drawn from it the conclusion that Islam is irredeemably evil?

There is only one reason that I cannot answer this question for you, and that is because there are, literally, hundreds.

And yet, and yet...

Here you are, bold as brass, telling us that whatever it was Jesus said, he clearly didn't mean it literally.

Does that not strike you as just the teensiest bit hypocritical?

No, I didn't think so.

But it might help you understand why others take this view from time to time, and why your anti-Islamic rants lose their intellectual force when exposed to the light of day.

They are still anti-Islamic rants, though, and help fan the flames of hatred and evil.

You simply refuse to see what is right in front of your nose, don't you?

David

How right you are! Thank You. I dont know how you keep going really You must have a great wish to help others. It kind of sad really.
Pericles Why are you so full of hate towards this lovely women who helps others. Tell me. Tell us all what do you do to help other?
You come in here and snipe at David because he has his eyes open.
You shake with fear so the sake of speakng out. I can see you not stupid so you know the real situation of the world. Ok I get that YOUR scared but why try to stop David from his comments. Why rubbish Kate?

There culture in its political expressin, family affairs, dietary laws, clothng, religis rites, lagauge, etc, is to be imposed on all other cultures.

I am not trying to offend Muslims. I have Muslim friends. However if they wish to come to our free country and they critise us they should no we are also free to speak and defend our own country.
My muslim frends know extreme groups are set on taking the western world over,.. they fear it and so should you.

>>Pericles Why are you so full of hate towards this lovely women who helps others<<

TarynW, I have said nothing in the least hateful in my posts. I have simply asked some questions, when her posts don't make sense. Just to be on the safe side, I even prefaced my first post with "KatieO, I am sure that you are a very caring and compassionate person...". No sarcasm, just a supportive observation.

But this bit really puzzles me.

>>You shake with fear so the sake of speakng out... Ok I get that YOUR scared but why try to stop David from his comments. Why rubbish Kate?<<

I have never tried to stop anyone making comments or observations. Similarly, I expect the same courtesy, that when someone says something that I find puzzling, I will question it.

Boaz's posts are so full of anti-Islamic fear and loathing, he is a bit of an easy target.

KatieO, on the other hand, seems to assume that her personal situation gives her leave to say the same things without being questioned. She may be Australia's answer to Mother Theresa, but that still does not give her permission to print rubbish, and expect to be left alone.

>>There culture in its political expressin, family affairs, dietary laws, clothng, religis rites, lagauge, etc, is to be imposed on all other cultures.<<

If I decipher this correctly, this is the nub of your argument. If someone doesn't stop "them", "they" will take over all these aspects of your life, which is obviously of concern to you.

I happen to disagree, fundamentally and totally.

Your concern that I might be fearful of something is also unfounded; I have every faith in our population's ability to absorb new cultures and new ideas, and to grow stronger as a result.

>>My muslim frends know extreme groups are set on taking the western world over,.. they fear it and so should you.<<

I don't. I am a realist and a pragmatist. Terrorists have absolutely no chance of taking over, particularly a country as much at peace with itself as Australia.