falah wrote on Jul 8^th, 2012 at 3:19pm:

Quote: Tamarind "Tamarind seed" refers to the careful introduction of a fruit tree species. This was not done lightly, in the same manner as the European introduction of thousands of exotic pests that now cost the government four billion dollars each year to control. Scholars, farmers and botanists from the two cultures tested, examined and exchanged extensive knowledge about the Tamarind and its habitat before deciding to introduce it. It was carefully integrated with the local ecology over time, then interwoven with the lore of the place, and became a component of the agricultural industry and economy in northern Australia to such an extent that it is now regarded as a native plant by Aboriginal peoples. The first tree was planted on the beach, at the site of the Macassan embassy. It is still there. http://suite101.com/article/macassancrew-a923

Falah can you tell me a bit more about these aboriginal scholars please? In particular, which crops and livestock did they reject on behalf of the aborigines and on what scientific basis did they make these decisions?

Kenoath, no wonder the education system is upshite creek when even the planting of a tree is now regarded as scholarly activity.

Scratching your arse - dermatology
picking yer nose - keyhole surgery
bothering ants with a stick - entomology
not having an aphabet or any form of writing - advanced communication
hunting and gathering - agricultural industry

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 8:39am:

falah wrote on Jul 8th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Quote: Tamarind "Tamarind seed" refers to the careful introduction of a fruit tree species. This was not done lightly, in the same manner as the European introduction of thousands of exotic pests that now cost the government four billion dollars each year to control. Scholars, farmers and botanists from the two cultures tested, examined and exchanged extensive knowledge about the Tamarind and its habitat before deciding to introduce it. It was carefully integrated with the local ecology over time, then interwoven with the lore of the place, and became a component of the agricultural industry and economy in northern Australia to such an extent that it is now regarded as a native plant by Aboriginal peoples. The first tree was planted on the beach, at the site of the Macassan embassy. It is still there. http://suite101.com/article/macassancrew-a923 Falah can you tell me a bit more about these aboriginal scholars please? In particular, which crops and livestock did they reject on behalf of the aborigines and on what scientific basis did they make these decisions?

Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility?

History is a mess of competing stories about the past. Whether we like it or not - whether we think that it's true or not - people pass their stories down. From what I've read, there is a rich oral tradition of stories in the far-north about Indonesian traders. This, I think, deserves to be accounted. It's a viable part of Australian history.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here - deny any pre-European influence on Aboriginal Australia; or slam anything to do with Islam.

I like the discussion, but it isn't served by the dumb point-scoring and tit-for-tat. It makes your critique come across as vengeance. Personally, I think this would read better as a discussion than an out-and-out ideological war. The Islam versus the West crusade is not an issue here - I haven't seen any evidence of Islam in far-north Australia. Sea trade, yes - mosques, no.

Falah's thesis deserves to be placed under scrutiny. But to what end? I'd be interested to know your own motives here.

inventing the stick- engineering

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 8:39am:

falah wrote on Jul 8th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Quote: Tamarind "Tamarind seed" refers to the careful introduction of a fruit tree species. This was not done lightly, in the same manner as the European introduction of thousands of exotic pests that now cost the government four billion dollars each year to control. Scholars, farmers and botanists from the two cultures tested, examined and exchanged extensive knowledge about the Tamarind and its habitat before deciding to introduce it. It was carefully integrated with the local ecology over time, then interwoven with the lore of the place, and became a component of the agricultural industry and economy in northern Australia to such an extent that it is now regarded as a native plant by Aboriginal peoples. The first tree was planted on the beach, at the site of the Macassan embassy. It is still there. http://suite101.com/article/macassancrew-a923 Falah can you tell me a bit more about these aboriginal scholars please? In particular, which crops and livestock did they reject on behalf of the aborigines and on what scientific basis did they make these decisions?

Did you read the article? It doesnt say.

SOB

Not attacking.

Simply calling 'Bullshyt!' on it.

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 11:46am:

freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 8:39am: falah wrote on Jul 8th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Quote: Tamarind "Tamarind seed" refers to the careful introduction of a fruit tree species. This was not done lightly, in the same manner as the European introduction of thousands of exotic pests that now cost the government four billion dollars each year to control. Scholars, farmers and botanists from the two cultures tested, examined and exchanged extensive knowledge about the Tamarind and its habitat before deciding to introduce it. It was carefully integrated with the local ecology over time, then interwoven with the lore of the place, and became a component of the agricultural industry and economy in northern Australia to such an extent that it is now regarded as a native plant by Aboriginal peoples. The first tree was planted on the beach, at the site of the Macassan embassy. It is still there. http://suite101.com/article/macassancrew-a923 Falah can you tell me a bit more about these aboriginal scholars please? In particular, which crops and livestock did they reject on behalf of the aborigines and on what scientific basis did they make these decisions? Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? History is a mess of competing stories about the past. Whether we like it or not - whether we think that it's true or not - people pass their stories down. From what I've read, there is a rich oral tradition of stories in the far-north about Indonesian traders. This, I think, deserves to be accounted. It's a viable part of Australian history. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here - deny any pre-European influence on Aboriginal Australia; or slam anything to do with Islam. I like the discussion, but it isn't served by the dumb point-scoring and tit-for-tat. It makes your critique come across as vengeance. Personally, I think this would read better as a discussion than an out-and-out ideological war. The Islam versus the West crusade is not an issue here - I haven't seen any evidence of Islam in far-north Australia. Sea trade, yes - mosques, no. Falah's thesis deserves to be placed under scrutiny. But to what end? I'd be interested to know your own motives here.

The 'competition of stories' about the past is not a competition of equals. Treating oral history going back 300+ years as if it was of the same weight as written or material evidence is not competition but slant.
Falah talks it up because he wishes to present an Islamic slant, Islam as beneficient for aboriginese, against British and European deleteriousness. So Falah is not presenting scholarship but propaganda, built around a weak, constantly talked-up kernel of scholarship (there was contact betwteen Aboriginese and Indonesians).
That you don't see it is unsurprising.

Quote:

Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility?

I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence.

A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area.


Quote:

From what I've read, there is a rich oral tradition of stories in the far-north about Indonesian traders. This, I think, deserves to be accounted. It's a viable part of Australian history.

The Macassan contact is well documented. The oral tradition is a reference to much earlier contact about which historians are less sure, and is apparently how rice ended up growing in the NT.


Quote:

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here - deny any pre-European influence on Aboriginal Australia; or slam anything to do with Islam.

I am merely trying to get a handle to the reference to aboriginal academics, universities and embassies. I am aware of the earlier contact, but that is way beyond the sort of influence I had imagined.


Quote:

I haven't seen any evidence of Islam in far-north Australia.

Falah attempted to attribute all pre-european contact to Muslims, including the introduction of rice. He claimed many aborigines were converted and that social conservatism was introduced in places. He used Islam as a reason why pigs would not have been brought over.


Quote:

Falah's thesis deserves to be placed under scrutiny. But to what end? I'd be interested to know your own motives here.

I just found the claims he made about agricultural potential quite outrageous, especially for someone who claimed to have written a thesis on it. I've never been to the NT and I'm hardly an expert on farming, but even to me it was obviously BS from the start. So far all the evidence has contradicted Falah.


Quote:

Did you read the article? It doesnt say.

Yes I did have a read of the article, and there is more there about aboriginal universities and embassies. For some reason it triggered my BS detector. Perhaps Falah has some reason for taking the claims seriously. He claims to have written a thesis on it so he should have an idea of whether the claims are accurate.

abbo sholars of the 1600's

what did they invent ?
they already had stick throwing and mud spitting onto a rock down pat.

Was it the video, running sewerage or maybe electricity they came up with?

'parrently not. they were cave dwellers when we got here.

You knew it ws a fabrication when it mentioned 'aboriginal scholars'. for a culture that invented absoltuely nothing and didnt have a written language, becoming a scholar must have take 10 minutes.

pure fabrication.

Soren wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 12:46pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 11:46am: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 8:39am: falah wrote on Jul 8th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Quote: Tamarind "Tamarind seed" refers to the careful introduction of a fruit tree species. This was not done lightly, in the same manner as the European introduction of thousands of exotic pests that now cost the government four billion dollars each year to control. Scholars, farmers and botanists from the two cultures tested, examined and exchanged extensive knowledge about the Tamarind and its habitat before deciding to introduce it. It was carefully integrated with the local ecology over time, then interwoven with the lore of the place, and became a component of the agricultural industry and economy in northern Australia to such an extent that it is now regarded as a native plant by Aboriginal peoples. The first tree was planted on the beach, at the site of the Macassan embassy. It is still there. http://suite101.com/article/macassancrew-a923 Falah can you tell me a bit more about these aboriginal scholars please? In particular, which crops and livestock did they reject on behalf of the aborigines and on what scientific basis did they make these decisions? Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? History is a mess of competing stories about the past. Whether we like it or not - whether we think that it's true or not - people pass their stories down. From what I've read, there is a rich oral tradition of stories in the far-north about Indonesian traders. This, I think, deserves to be accounted. It's a viable part of Australian history. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here - deny any pre-European influence on Aboriginal Australia; or slam anything to do with Islam. I like the discussion, but it isn't served by the dumb point-scoring and tit-for-tat. It makes your critique come across as vengeance. Personally, I think this would read better as a discussion than an out-and-out ideological war. The Islam versus the West crusade is not an issue here - I haven't seen any evidence of Islam in far-north Australia. Sea trade, yes - mosques, no. Falah's thesis deserves to be placed under scrutiny. But to what end? I'd be interested to know your own motives here. The 'competition of stories' about the past is not a competition of equals. Treating oral history going back 300+ years as if it was of the same weight as written or material evidence is not competition but slant.

It doesn't matter if it's slant or not. People will continue to tell their own stories and believe what they want.

Postmodern bunkum? I'm including the biggest story in our tradition: the gospels of Jesus the Christ. There is no written or material evidence that predates them. Still, people continue to believe what they want.

It's clear that Falah is telling a pro-Muslim story. In a way, he's re-colonising the past. He is, however, quite up-front with his telling. I'm not sure if Freediver is - he just seems willing to cut down what he sees as a pro-Muslim story.

With the exception of Falah's perspective, I can't see what Indonesian sea traders have to do with a Muslim meta-narrative. Sure they were Muslims, but from what I can see, their story is more about trade than any Islamic influence or colonisation. After all, there are no Aboriginal mosques, but plenty of Aboriginal churches.

Which raises a very interesting question - Islam exists all through South-East Asia. Why DIDN'T it take off in Australia or, for that matter, the Pacific?

I'd suggest it had a lot to do with the motives of the traders, along with the economic conditions and traditions of far-north Aboriginals. And Falah has touched on this in his thesis.

Anyway, I'm getting off-track. My point is that if you create a historical diatribe - a set of history wars - peope stop listening. They merely retreat into their own ideological fortresses.

That you do this is unsuprising.

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 12:48pm:

Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area.

This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war.

We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted.

Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered.

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 1:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered.

for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 2:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 1:42pm: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered. for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of.

I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick.

True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this.

"Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric.

The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric.

That's what this debate is all about.

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:01pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 2:49pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 1:42pm: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered. for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of. I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick. True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this. "Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric. The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric. That's what this debate is all about.

i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously.

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 1:22pm:

My point is that if you create a historical diatribe - a set of history wars - peope stop listening. They merely retreat into their own ideological fortresses. That you do this is unsuprising.

To hear this:



Quote:

The 'competition of stories' about the past is not a competition of equals. Treating oral history going back 300+ years as if it was of the same weight as written or material evidence is not competition but slant. Falah talks it up because he wishes to present an Islamic slant, Islam as beneficient for aboriginese, against British and European deleteriousness. So Falah is not presenting scholarship but propaganda, built around a weak, constantly talked-up kernel of scholarship (there was contact betwteen Aboriginese and Indonesians). That you don't see it is unsurprising.

as a "historical diatribe - a set of history wars" requires an unsually cloth-eared Paki bvgger.

Step forward.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:08pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:01pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 2:49pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 1:42pm: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered. for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of. I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick. True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this. "Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric. The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric. That's what this debate is all about. i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously.

Macassans came and traded a bit of tobacco and tamarind. This argument is hardly going to bring down real estate values, is it?

Karnal wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:31pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:01pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 2:49pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 1:42pm: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered. for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of. I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick. True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this. "Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric. The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric. That's what this debate is all about. i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously. Macassans came and traded a bit of tobacco and tamarind. This argument is hardly going to bring down real estate values, is it?

the claim of aboriginal scholars and universities and all the rest of the drivel is what I was referring to. Do you seriously think there were SCHOLARS by any meaningful undestanding of the term?

No - probably more like "medicine men". But the argument - that tobacco was not "abused" (i.e, smoked daily) sounds right. American natives also used tobacco in rituals and social events.

I agree that Yolngu universities is stretching things to the absolute limit. Who writes these things? Nanette Croce is referred to down the bottom of the page. She appears to be American or Canadian.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 3:47pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:31pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:08pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 3:01pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 2:49pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 1:42pm: freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 12:48pm: Quote: Freediver, this is a really interesting historical issue. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to attack. I understand that you've come to hate all things Islamic, but I don't really see how this is an Islamic issue - it's an historical one. It's good to see you put Falah's thesis under the microscope, but why the overt hostility? I'm sorry you feel that way. Can you explain which bit of my question came across as hostile? Regarding Islam, in the thread I quoted from Falah attributed all contact to Islamic traders and claimed the converted many aborigines. I assumed the aboriginal Universities and embassies were something to do with that influence. A lot of it is probably down to me losing patience with getting Falah to acknowledge the reality of the farming potential of the area. This I understand. You actually raise good points - it's the relentless attempts to corner your prey that make this seem less like a discussion, and more like an ideological war. We expect this from posters like Sprinty and the old boy. They wouldn't even read the op before they demonstrated their unique insight on the stick. They see this as a strength - they believe they know all the answers and anyone stupid enought to read something places themselves at risk of being ideologically tinted. Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered. for all you want to indulge this nonsense, it sounds more ridiculous the more you read. aboriginal UNIVERSITIES??? SCHOLARS??? studying what? they are already on record as being the single most prehistopric race on earth having invented nothing more than a stick and haveing no technology or literature to speak of. I think you'll find archaeological evidence of a number of Aboriginal universities around this country - many of them with faculties of the stick. True, evidence of any faculties of Pakistani Studies has not yet been discovered, but Falah is currently working on this. "Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric. The history Falah is referring to - Australia prior to European settlement - could best be described as prehistoric. That's what this debate is all about. i read that suite101 reference to aboriginal history. Surely you dont subscribe to any of that patent nonsense. It is pretty hard to take ANY of it seriously. Macassans came and traded a bit of tobacco and tamarind. This argument is hardly going to bring down real estate values, is it? the claim of aboriginal scholars and universities and all the rest of the drivel is what I was referring to. Do you seriously think there were SCHOLARS by any meaningful undestanding of the term?

There would be by THEIR understanding of the term.

SOB

[quote author=416B78646B660A0 link=1341787168/18#18 date=1341814138]No - probably more like "medicine men". But the argument - that tobacco was not "abused" (i.e, smoked daily) sounds right. American natives also used tobacco in rituals and social events.

I agree that Yolngu universities is stretching things to the absolute limit. Who writes these things? Nanette Croce is referred to down the bottom of the page. She appears to be American or Canadian.[/quote

if there was even ANY substance to the claim there would be evidence to support it. but there is prceisely none. the level of aboriginal knowedge seems limited to their numbering system (one, two. many...) and their level of technology (a stick). if there were any centres of learning all evidence has disappeared along with any of the actual learning.

Based on that alone there is no reason to no dismiss the entire article as rubbish. The treatment of tobacco is yet another ludicrous bit of fantasy.

Quote:

Anyway, I'm getting off-track. My point is that if you create a historical diatribe - a set of history wars - peope stop listening. They merely retreat into their own ideological fortresses.

You need a pretty strong ideological fortress to believe there were aboriginal universities in the 1600s.


Quote:

Such righteousness is self indulgent. It merely preaches to the choir. If you wanted to make someone change their mind, you use different tactics to needling and bludgeoning. No one is persuaded if they feel cornered.

Can you suggest an alternative? Humour? That just makes it hard to figure out when you are being honest. Also, I don't get why you describe what I am doing as preaching to the choir. Isn't it the opposite? And what do you call asking simple questions? Is that needling? Should I instead go into lengthy explanations rather than asking Falah to think for himself? When your views are that absurd, attempting to explain the basic inconsistencies has got to wear down that fortress a bit.


Quote:

"Prehistoric" refers to cultures without written histories. Outside Greeco-Roman, Semitic, Egyptian, Chinese, Vedic and a couple of American empires, everyone else is classed as prehistoric.

That is a lot of outside. Also, writing had been adopted in many other places by the time in question (starting in the late 1600s I think). Not all of these were parts of empires.


Quote:

That's what this debate is all about.

Actually most of the previous debate was about the farming potential of the Yolngu land - something that has not changed.


Quote:

No - probably more like "medicine men". But the argument - that tobacco was not "abused" (i.e, smoked daily) sounds right.

What about the argument that this was due to a planned and controlled introduction of tobacco under the guidance of Islam, rather than merely a response to a hard life that did not lend itself to much in the way of non-critical pursuits?

Freediver, if your only beef with Falah is over farming land, I'd be a little bit suprised. 

Where did you get the 101 article from? Is it one of Falah's sources?

Quote:

Freediver, if your only beef with Falah is over farming land, I'd be a little bit suprised.

Obviously my main beef is the whole "destroying freedom and democracy" thing. I don't think that would be very nice.

In the other thread, it was all about the farmability. Falah came up with one ludicrous claim after another to justify his original claim that the Yolngu valiantly fought off the white farmers and would have otherwise been overrun, rather than admit that it is some of the least fertile and most difficult to farm areas in the country and is surrounded by huge tracts of unfarmed and unfarmable land with a consistent history of failed attempts. This was part of a broader argument that the Muslims taught the aborigines to be violent and hostile towards white people (without actually training them in any way) and that the aborigines benefitted from violent conflict. And yes, he did post massacres of aborigines as proof of this.


Quote:

Where did you get the 101 article from? Is it one of Falah's sources?

There should be a link on the quote. Follow it to see where Falah posted it to back up his claims.

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 6:48pm:

Quote: Freediver, if your only beef with Falah is over farming land, I'd be a little bit suprised. Obviously my main beef is the whole "destroying freedom and democracy" thing. I don't think that would be very nice. In the other thread, it was all about the farmability. Falah came up with one ludicrous claim after another to justify his original claim that the Yolngu valiantly fought off the white farmers and would have otherwise been overrun, rather than admit that it is some of the least fertile and most difficult to farm areas in the country and is surrounded by huge tracts of unfarmed and unfarmable land with a consistent history of failed attempts. This was part of a broader argument that the Muslims taught the aborigines to be violent and hostile towards white people (without actually training them in any way) and that the aborigines benefitted from violent conflict. And yes, he did post massacres of aborigines as proof of this. [quote]Where did you get the 101 article from? Is it one of Falah's sources?

There should be a link on the quote. Follow it to see where Falah posted it to back up his claims.[/quote]

he isnt called 'galah' for no reason. his arguments rarely exceed that of the usual Greens_lose argument ie imaginary and ridiculous.

like greens win, hes definitely one of the most off with the fairies posters here. i attribute this more to stupidity with greens win though rather than hard ideology.

JC Denton wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 10:30pm:

like greens win, hes definitely one of the most off with the fairies posters here. i attribute this more to stupidity with greens win though rather than hard ideology.

A fairy with hard ideology and matching beard and eyebrows.

Smallpox also appears to have been introduced to northern Australia via Makassan contact in the 1820s.


Uh-oh... bad thing coming from Muslims.

Soren wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 11:44pm:

JC Denton wrote on Jul 9th, 2012 at 10:30pm: like greens win, hes definitely one of the most off with the fairies posters here. i attribute this more to stupidity with greens win though rather than hard ideology. A fairy with hard ideology and matching beard and eyebrows.

How is your mother?

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2012 at 6:48pm:

Quote: [quote]Where did you get the 101 article from? Is it one of Falah's sources? There should be a link on the quote. Follow it to see where Falah posted it to back up his claims.

I did this, but I couldn't find a source to the article, or see where Falah posted it to back up his claims. Perhaps the reference to the "immorality of the dominant culture" gives us a clue about the author. Am I right?

I must admit, I was a teensy bit skeptical about the Macassan introduction of tobacco until I found this article:

http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/8-2-history-of-tobacco-use-among-aboriginal-people

I doubt very much that Falah has the will or the ability to destroy "freedom and democracy" (if we had this in the first place). I've never seen Falah advocate violence. He's as nutty as any other utopian poster on this board and, if you ask me, much less dangerous than people who advocate nuking or carpet bombing the tinted races to keep them in line.

Mind you, all of this is hyperbole. Put them in as Commander in Chief and they'd sit on their hands.

Falah excepted. I wouldn't trust a zealot of any persuasion to have their finger on the button. Lucky our men in Pakistan are completely corrupt.

Quote:

I did this, but I couldn't find a source to the article, or see where Falah posted it to back up his claims. Perhaps the reference to the "immorality of the dominant culture" gives us a clue about the author. Am I right?

Scroll down a bit to the end of his post:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1338172056/184#184


Quote:

I doubt very much that Falah has the will or the ability to destroy "freedom and democracy"

There are a whole host of problems that could arise before we get to the stage of Muslims overthrowing the government.


Quote:

(if we had this in the first place)

Abu and Falah have recently attempted to argue that we do not have the freedom to criticise the government, so our system of government is therefor no better than the Islamic one, where you get your head chopped off if you speak out of turn.

Are you not sure whether we have democracy?


Quote:

I've never seen Falah advocate violence.

I have seen him promote violence plenty of times. Have you seen the list of people he thinks should be killed?

He does however have some common sense when it comes to keeping his mouth shut. That is why if you ask him what the proper Islamic method is to achieve his goal of Shariah law in Australia once Muslims have the numbers to take over (he thinks this is inevitable), his response will be silence. Or to attempt to change the subject. Or to accuse you of violently overthrowing some other government. You know how it goes.

Quote:

I have seen him promote violence plenty of times. Have you seen the list of people he thinks should be killed?

I havent seen it but i have seen yaddas opinion of palestinians. Same thing you accuse falah of methinks. Perhaps they should be both put in a room together.

SOB

I know how it goes, Freediver, but I doubt very much that Falah believes the overthrow of the Australian government is even remotely possible.

Falah is a Muslim fundamentalist - the same kind of thinking as Yadda - a Christian fundamentalist. Yadda would also have a list of people he'd like to see tried and executed, but is probably realistic about the likelihood of this happening.

Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though. I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board.

If I was the target of this hostility day-in day-out, I'd be inclined to retaliate. I'd try very hard not to, but I'm not perfect. I'd probably feel marginalised. I'd probably get angry. You know the sort of posts I'm talking about - there's a thread about Muslims having the audacity to pray.

When it gets to this level, people get defensive. But they can't win - as soon as they arc up it's evidence of their violent ways. They're expected to take every jibe, and answer every dumb question with equanimity. If they don't, their reaction is proof of their corrupt religion. You do this yourself. You've even created a whole list of their answers as proof - proof!

To me, it demonstrates perfectly how the War on Terror works.

Karnal wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:53pm:

I know how it goes, Freediver, but I doubt very much that Falah believes the overthrow of the Australian government is even remotely possible. Falah is a Muslim fundamentalist - the same kind of thinking as Yadda - a Christian fundamentalist. Yadda would also have a list of people he'd like to see tried and executed, but is probably realistic about the likelihood of this happening. Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though. I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board. If I was the target of this hostility day-in day-out, I'd be inclined to retaliate. I'd try very hard not to, but I'm not perfect. I'd probably feel marginalised. I'd probably get angry. You know the sort of posts I'm talking about - there's a thread about Muslims having the audacity to pray. When it gets to this level, people get defensive. But they can't win - as soon as they arc up it's evidence of their violent ways. They're expected to take every jibe, and answer every dumb question with equanimity. If they don't, their reaction is proof of their corrupt religion. You do this yourself. You've even created a whole list of their answers as proof - proof! To me, it demonstrates how the War on Terror works.

you mean how they round up their children, women and retards, strap a bomb vest to them and put them on buses filled with school children? THERE is a difference.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:56pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 10th, 2012 at 1:53pm: I know how it goes, Freediver, but I doubt very much that Falah believes the overthrow of the Australian government is even remotely possible. Falah is a Muslim fundamentalist - the same kind of thinking as Yadda - a Christian fundamentalist. Yadda would also have a list of people he'd like to see tried and executed, but is probably realistic about the likelihood of this happening. Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though. I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board. If I was the target of this hostility day-in day-out, I'd be inclined to retaliate. I'd try very hard not to, but I'm not perfect. I'd probably feel marginalised. I'd probably get angry. You know the sort of posts I'm talking about - there's a thread about Muslims having the audacity to pray. When it gets to this level, people get defensive. But they can't win - as soon as they arc up it's evidence of their violent ways. They're expected to take every jibe, and answer every dumb question with equanimity. If they don't, their reaction is proof of their corrupt religion. You do this yourself. You've even created a whole list of their answers as proof - proof! To me, it demonstrates how the War on Terror works. you mean how they round up their children, women and retards, strap a bomb vest to them and put them on buses filled with school children? THERE is a difference.

That's right. And Falah's the head of the Lakemba suicide-bombing committee.

Lucky we've got his posts under surveillance, Longy.

Spot:


Quote:

I havent seen it but i have seen yaddas opinion of palestinians. Same thing you accuse falah of methinks.

Having a low opinion of someone is not the same as wanting them put to death, in my opinion.

Karnal:


Quote:

I know how it goes, Freediver, but I doubt very much that Falah believes the overthrow of the Australian government is even remotely possible.

Not now. In the future he considers it inevitable, and will get very frustrated when he sees it slipping away - far more frustrated than he he gets on here.


Quote:

Yadda would also have a list of people he'd like to see tried and executed, but is probably realistic about the likelihood of this happening.

Have you asked him?

What makes Abu and Falah different is that they have a long list of names, are prepared to follow through with it, are part of a relatively well organised group, and so far have been largely flying under the radar. Our society dealt with Christian extremists centuries ago. We have barely scratched the surface on Islamic extremism. What is especially odd is that so many people who are quick to criticise religion in general (spot is an extreme example of this) are also quick to come to Islam's defence and fairly oblivious to what the Muslims they defend are actually saying.


Quote:

Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though. I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board.

That's because you have not read anything like the sort of backwards opinions on freedom and democracy from other members as you have from the Muslims, nor the deceptive ways they try to present themselves as flag carriers for true freedom and true democracy. With Yadda, what you see is what you get. With Abu and Falah what you think you see is usually the opposite of what you actually get. There is a huge difference between your garden variety nutter and someone with a carefully constructed PR campaign around their nuttiness. One type is in a mental asylum. The other is a Hitler.


Quote:

If I was the target of this hostility day-in day-out, I'd be inclined to retaliate. I'd try very hard not to, but I'm not perfect. I'd probably feel marginalised. I'd probably get angry. You know the sort of posts I'm talking about - there's a thread about Muslims having the audacity to pray.

Perhaps you should direct your comments at the people making these claims. It is hard to feel sorry for Falah when he spends most of his time on this forum googling random articles to try to pin stuff on other religions, then carefully editing out any bits that don't suit before he copies and pastes.


Quote:

When it gets to this level, people get defensive. But they can't win - as soon as they arc up it's evidence of their violent ways. They're expected to take every jibe, and answer every dumb question with equanimity.

I would prefer he simply ignored them, like I do with his dumb freeliar jibes. He responds to about every third post from with with an accusation that I am lying that he cannot back up. He seems to handle the dumb stuff well and uses it as part of the Muslim victim PR campaign. What seems to really annoy him are the genuine questions about freedom and democracy, or when he is caught out with blatant lies and misrepresentations - like in the thread on farming and his spin about aboriginal scholars.


Quote:

You do this yourself. You've even created a whole list of their answers as proof - proof!

Karnal, the reason I did this is because they kept denying the things they had said previously. It was incredibly frustrating trying to have a simple debate when their position changed to suit whatever spin they are trotting out and they pretended they did not say things. Like I said, with Yadda what you see is what you get. Whereas Falah and Abu kept demanding I prove that they had said what I remembered them saying the day before. It was their demands that created that list.

What else do you expect people to do? Ignore it when people with an agenda to kill start posting spin on a politics forum and changing their story constantly?

How is what you say any different to asking that people be nice to Nazis because if we call them on their BS it is our fault if they lose it and start killing Jews? It is kind of naive to assume everything will work out better if we ignore this sort of thing or treat it with kid gloves don't you think? When should we start calling them on their BS? When will it be too late?


Quote:

To me, it demonstrates perfectly how the War on Terror works.

You will have to elaborate on this one for me.

Karnal, this debate with Islam in general has very real implications, involving the deaths of thousands of people every year. It is a discussion we need to open up, not ignore and hope it goes away. We are currently involved in two decade long wars, and the only reason we are still there is because we are trying to establish a functioning democracy. If Muslims are fundamentally opposed to democracy and it is doomed to failure - as Abu and Falah suggest - we need to know. If it is 10% of Afghans who are murderously opposed and 90% who want it, we need to know. If the majority will simply turn away as democracy is destroyed because their religion demands it, we need to know. If we cannot even figure out what local English speaking Muslims really want, what hope do we have? If Abu, Falah and like minded people in the Taliban and Al Quaida try to spin it as if they support democracy when in fact the opposite is true, we need to know. These people may not be running the world, but they are powerful enough to draw us and the US into a long war. How many people need to die before we take it seriously? Millions? If we don't even have the balls to ask the tough questions from the safety of the internet, what hope do we have?

The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have to be the most farcical in human history. It is monty python class comedy, except for the hundreds of thousands of dead people. When else in history has the victor attempted to establish a popularly elected government in a country they defeated, only to have it violently thrown back in their face, then persisted in trying to help the people? This is the farce we are in, and the things that Abu and Falah have posted here give genuine insight into that farce. Before Abu and Malik turned up my views on the matter were not that different to spots. It was only by talking to genuine Muslims that I gained an appreciation for how backwards the ideology is, how thick and unfamiliar the spin is and how difficult the war on terror will be to resolve. The reason I try to put it out there for others to see in a simple manner is because I did so much head scratching myself trying to figure out what is going on.

Karnal wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:53pm:

Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though.

It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best.




Quote:

I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board.

Why is there no similar hostility towards Buddhists, Sikhs, Taoists, atheists? Your equivocation ignores actual real difference in the religions, the behaviours of the adherents of each and the resultant aseessment of them by the rest of the population.

Nobody says that Buddhists are hostile towards Western liberal democracy because they aren't. According to a recent survey, the vast majority of people do think that Islam is hostile to Western liberal democracy. Are the same people right in their assessement of Buddhism but wrong about Islam? How could that be and why?

They aren't wrong in either case. Islam is and has always been the enemy of the West, of Christianity, as well as of Buddhism, Hinduism, atheism, animism, Judaism and of course has great internal tensions among its various sects and cults.

Quote:

According to a recent survey, the vast majority of people do think that Islam is hostile to Western liberal democracy.

This includes Muslims.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 7:30pm:

Spot: Quote: I havent seen it but i have seen yaddas opinion of palestinians. Same thing you accuse falah of methinks. Having a low opinion of someone is not the same as wanting them put to death, in my opinion. Karnal: [quote]I know how it goes, Freediver, but I doubt very much that Falah believes the overthrow of the Australian government is even remotely possible.

Not now. In the future he considers it inevitable, and will get very frustrated when he sees it slipping away - far more frustrated than he he gets on here.


Quote:

Yadda would also have a list of people he'd like to see tried and executed, but is probably realistic about the likelihood of this happening.

Have you asked him?

What makes Abu and Falah different is that they have a long list of names, are prepared to follow through with it, are part of a relatively well organised group, and so far have been largely flying under the radar. Our society dealt with Christian extremists centuries ago. We have barely scratched the surface on Islamic extremism. What is especially odd is that so many people who are quick to criticise religion in general (spot is an extreme example of this) are also quick to come to Islam's defence and fairly oblivious to what the Muslims they defend are actually saying.


Quote:

Falah and Yadda are minorities in their respective religions. There is a difference though. I have not read anything like the sort of angry, ignorant and relentless attacks on Christianity as I have on Islam - and I'm referring to most of the threads here on the Muslim board.

That's because you have not read anything like the sort of backwards opinions on freedom and democracy from other members as you have from the Muslims, nor the deceptive ways they try to present themselves as flag carriers for true freedom and true democracy. With Yadda, what you see is what you get. With Abu and Falah what you think you see is usually the opposite of what you actually get. There is a huge difference between your garden variety nutter and someone with a carefully constructed PR campaign around their nuttiness. One type is in a mental asylum. The other is a Hitler.


Quote:

If I was the target of this hostility day-in day-out, I'd be inclined to retaliate. I'd try very hard not to, but I'm not perfect. I'd probably feel marginalised. I'd probably get angry. You know the sort of posts I'm talking about - there's a thread about Muslims having the audacity to pray.

Perhaps you should direct your comments at the people making these claims. It is hard to feel sorry for Falah when he spends most of his time on this forum googling random articles to try to pin stuff on other religions, then carefully editing out any bits that don't suit before he copies and pastes.


Quote:

When it gets to this level, people get defensive. But they can't win - as soon as they arc up it's evidence of their violent ways. They're expected to take every jibe, and answer every dumb question with equanimity.

I would prefer he simply ignored them, like I do with his dumb freeliar jibes. He responds to about every third post from with with an accusation that I am lying that he cannot back up. He seems to handle the dumb stuff well and uses it as part of the Muslim victim PR campaign. What seems to really annoy him are the genuine questions about freedom and democracy, or when he is caught out with blatant lies and misrepresentations - like in the thread on farming and his spin about aboriginal scholars.


Quote:

You do this yourself. You've even created a whole list of their answers as proof - proof!

Karnal, the reason I did this is because they kept denying the things they had said previously. It was incredibly frustrating trying to have a simple debate when their position changed to suit whatever spin they are trotting out and they pretended they did not say things. Like I said, with Yadda what you see is what you get. Whereas Falah and Abu kept demanding I prove that they had said what I remembered them saying the day before. It was their demands that created that list.

What else do you expect people to do? Ignore it when people with an agenda to kill start posting spin on a politics forum and changing their story constantly?

How is what you say any different to asking that people be nice to Nazis because if we call them on their BS it is our fault if they lose it and start killing Jews? It is kind of naive to assume everything will work out better if we ignore this sort of thing or treat it with kid gloves don't you think? When should we start calling them on their BS? When will it be too late?


Quote:

To me, it demonstrates perfectly how the War on Terror works.

You will have to elaborate on this one for me.

Karnal, this debate with Islam in general has very real implications, involving the deaths of thousands of people every year. It is a discussion we need to open up, not ignore and hope it goes away. We are currently involved in two decade long wars, and the only reason we are still there is because we are trying to establish a functioning democracy. If Muslims are fundamentally opposed to democracy and it is doomed to failure - as Abu and Falah suggest - we need to know. If it is 10% of Afghans who are murderously opposed and 90% who want it, we need to know. If the majority will simply turn away as democracy is destroyed because their religion demands it, we need to know. If we cannot even figure out what local English speaking Muslims really want, what hope do we have? If Abu, Falah and like minded people in the Taliban and Al Quaida try to spin it as if they support democracy when in fact the opposite is true, we need to know. These people may not be running the world, but they are powerful enough to draw us and the US into a long war. How many people need to die before we take it seriously? Millions? If we don't even have the balls to ask the tough questions from the safety of the internet, what hope do we have?

The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have to be the most farcical in human history. It is monty python class comedy, except for the hundreds of thousands of dead people. When else in history has the victor attempted to establish a popularly elected government in a country they defeated, only to have it violently thrown back in their face, then persisted in trying to help the people? This is the farce we are in, and the things that Abu and Falah have posted here give genuine insight into that farce. Before Abu and Malik turned up my views on the matter were not that different to spots. It was only by talking to genuine Muslims that I gained an appreciation for how backwards the ideology is, how thick and unfamiliar the spin is and how difficult the war on terror will be to resolve. The reason I try to put it out there for others to see in a simple manner is because I did so much head scratching myself trying to figure out what is going on.[/quote]
I agree completely.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:15pm:

Quote: I've never seen Falah advocate violence. I have seen him promote violence plenty of times. Have you seen the list of people he thinks should be killed?

Where's that list?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337120583

Please add to it as you come across more examples. I have tried getting him to explain just how far he thinks it should go, but he went all shy on me.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 10:22pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337120583 Please add to it as you come across more examples. I have tried getting him to explain just how far he thinks it should go, but he went all shy on me.

Bloody hell!

Maybe Karnal can bring his Foucault and do some hermeneutical surgical precision on Islam. Nothing must stand remember, Karnal! All is word games and ideology!

Quote:

Having a low opinion of someone is not the same as wanting them put to death, in my opinion.

What a short selective memory you have. You do not remember him saying they should all be killed and "pushed into the sea"?

SOB

Quote:

It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best.

the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid.

the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries.

SOB

Huh - yup john howard tony blair and george bush should all be tried for war crimes.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 6:07am:

Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB

Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east?

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 9:11am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:07am: Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east?

What? No - read what i said.

SOB

I read what you posted and have no idea what you are on about - hence the question.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 7:30pm:

What makes Abu and Falah different is that they have a long list of names, are prepared to follow through with it, are part of a relatively well organised group, and so far have been largely flying under the radar.

How do you know this, Freediver? Are we supposed to assume that they're dangerous just in case they are?

Abu and Falah are extremist Muslims with a few loopy ideas - without proof; no more, no less. Yes, like anyone else from an extremist mindset, they're careful about what they choose to disclose.

Back in the 1970s, a host of cults had similar apocalyptic ideas. Jim Jones chose suicide. The Moonies prophecised a world war and the elevation of Reverend Moon as the leader of a one-world government. Before he ascended to the spiritual sky, the Hare Krishnas had similar beliefs about their own leader, Prabubada. Unknown to many, both groups amassed weapons they intended to use in their struggles.

In Australia, the Hindu/yoga group, Ananda Marga were at the top of Asio's watch-list. If you remember, the NSW Special Branch blamed them for the Hilton bombing and arrested 3 members for terrorism. All 3 were later aquitted and released for a bombing that all evidence points to the guilt of the police themselves.

Soren is wrong. Islam has not always been the enemy of the West. In the last days of the cold war, it was Maoists, Trotskyists, anarchists and other assorted agnostics from the left. Islam has only come to centre stage since 9/11.

Islam is a mainstream religion. It's not unified or centrally organised. It contains cults, splinter groups, terrorist cells, along with the benign organisation of religious practice and religious law. It's not monocultural: it accommodates hundreds of ethnic groups. About a quarter of the world's population is Muslim, and you won't hear a peep from the majority of them.

Yes, there is no clear division of church and state in Islam. Likewise, there is no separation of powers in places like Afghanistan. If you think we're there to be nice and bring them our fine political traditions, think again. We're there to secure a politically unstable region in the interests of our geopolitical ally and their friends in the fossil fuel business. Our mission, of course, has failed.

We have good political traditions. They're not perfect, but they're better than warlords and tribal law. In the state Afghanistan is in, building a functioning democracy - with all its institutions, powers, values and economic imperatives - is impossible. And everybody knows.

I doubt very much that Abu and Falah want to import the Taliban to Australia. To me, they don't seem too clear in their beliefs or stated objectives. I've read a few of your examples and quotes, and it looks as if you're reading way too much into them. Abu and Falah are largely critics. Like the rest of us, they don't have any solutions either.

Hinted references to the impending caliphate, the brilliance of shariah law, a return to some enlightened age and imagined system of justice - which, as you've pointed out, was never just at all.

Never will be either.

Still, I'm open to the possibility that Abu and Falah are sinister agents of global chaos and destruction. Without proof though, I'll continue to see them as garden-variety fundamentalists.

As an agnostic, I don't have a hardened view of the evils of religion. I think there should be a range of options open to people who seek meaning in their lives, and I don't think this should be subject to the tyranny of popular opinion and the idols of the marketplace.

I agree: people who advocate hatred, violence and division should be shouted down. The thing is though, we have to be very careful that we don't do this ourselves. It's why we have a legal system. It's why we have empirical systems of measurement based on evidence. And it's why we have a rule of law.

This - and only this - is what separates us from superstition and tribal law.

"(The Hilton Hotel)...a bombing that all evidence points to the guilt of the police themselves..."

A view no doubt shared by Pederick.

Karnal wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 1:31pm:

Soren is wrong. Islam has not always been the enemy of the West. In the last days of the cold war, it was Maoists, Trotskyists, anarchists and other assorted agnostics from the left. Islam has only come to centre stage since 9/11.

I didn't mean history as the last 5 minutes (ie the Clinton and Pop Bush era), the age of sax and cigars and cool shades. Apart from that brief decade or two, Islam has been the enemy of the West from the 7th to the 20th century.

Or put it another way - Islam has never, ever, ever been pro-Christian, or pro-secular or pro-liberal democracy or pro-free love or pro-multiculturalism or pro-anything that the West has been for since the 7th century.

Insofar as Islam has had a voice, it has always stood against the West: spread of islam across the Eastern Roman Empire, sustained attack on the Western Roman Empire, the spread of the Ottomans on land (to Vienna) and sea (the menace of the Barbary (!) pirates operating out of Muslim territory).

Abu and Falah and all the other Hiz ul Tahrir and Taliban and Al Qaida cheer squad are in that Muslim mould and tradition because there is no other Muslim tradition.

Even when there was a bet going as to who is the strong/weak horse, the Russians or the West. Even then, most of them were instinctively betting on the Russians.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 9:11am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:07am: Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east?

im sayng they are just like the xtians were not long ago (couple hundred years maybe). Same area too funnily enough. Its the same crap. Stone adulterers kill thieves etc. The muslims that are subjected to western civilisation are not so violent. How many stonings and shootings of women happen in australian or america or uk? Not so many just the normal amount of criminals. It is the environment.

I read both the holy books. Not being indoctrinated beforehand i didnt know which bits were supposed to be figurative in either one. They are both the same. They are both from the same era in the same area thats why. Suddenly when a muslim lives in a western country more parts of the book are figurative prolly. Like the xtian book.

Tell me freediver. How did you read the books? Did you know which parts are supposed to be figurative?

SOB

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 1:46pm:

"(The Hilton Hotel)...a bombing that all evidence points to the guilt of the police themselves..." A view no doubt shared by Pederick.

What do you mean? Pederick was released too, and his evidence discounted by the court of appeal.

Soren wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 1:56pm:

Abu and Falah and all the other Hiz ul Tahrir and Taliban and Al Qaida cheer squad are in that Muslim mould and tradition because there is no other Muslim tradition.

Sure there is. There are Islamic reformist movements in countries from Turkey to Malaysia.

There is also a distinct separation of church and state in most Muslim countries. Outside civil disputes and family matters, shariah law is rare. I'm not sure how many states use it in their criminal systems, but I'd say this would be extremely rare. Indonesia is the biggest Muslim state, and liberal democracy there is starting to take hold - without any recent Western intervention.

Anyway, this isn't about defending Islam. It's about defending our own secular traditions. People are free to subject themselves to any ethical system they choose as long as it doesn't keep the neighbours up at night.

This isn't some vague, abstract principle, it's the cornerstone of the Western liberal tradition. It defines, if you want, "our own culture". It's the very reason you defend the West, and its the basis of every measurement we use to assess the values of others.

If you don't practice it in action, you might as well join the Taliban.

The gates of the church will always remain open.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 12:45pm:

I read what you posted and have no idea what you are on about - hence the question.

a common experience... SOB makes little sense most of the time.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 3:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 12:45pm: I read what you posted and have no idea what you are on about - hence the question. a common experience... SOB makes little sense most of the time.

I doubt anyone makes sense to you. Take your meds. Stop skipping them.

SOB

Quote:

How do you know this, Freediver? Are we supposed to assume that they're dangerous just in case they are?

Because Falah told me. I posted a link for Soren.


Quote:

Abu and Falah are extremist Muslims with a few loopy ideas - without proof; no more, no less.

Proof of what? That there are enough of the 'extremists' around to keep the middle east in the dark ages?


Quote:

Soren is wrong. Islam has not always been the enemy of the West.

I see. He should have said an enemy of the west. Unless you count the Nazis as the west, in which case they once were a willing ally.


Quote:

it accommodates hundreds of ethnic groups. About a quarter of the world's population is Muslim, and you won't hear a peep from the majority of them.

Only because I don't listen to the majority. And like I said, a minority can cause more than enough trouble, especially if the majority feels compelled by their beliefs to let them cause problems.


Quote:

I doubt very much that Abu and Falah want to import the Taliban to Australia.

Falah said they were the only true Islamic government on earth.


Quote:

I've read a few of your examples and quotes, and it looks as if you're reading way too much into them.

Trust me, I have asked plenty of times for clarification. It is their refusal to clarify that I read most into.


Quote:

Like the rest of us, they don't have any solutions either.

Yes they do. Shariah law for everyone. You really should ask them what they think instead of telling them what they think.


Quote:

im sayng they are just like the xtians were not long ago (couple hundred years maybe).

I think you have to go back a bit further than that. And remember, the Christian societies did not have a superpower imposing freedom and democracy on them, the were busy creating such systems. Without external influence, the Muslim societies would not be that different to Muhammed's time. The extremists would be running the show.


Quote:

Tell me freediver. How did you read the books? Did you know which parts are supposed to be figurative?

I don't claim any special knowledge on this. Much of the bible reads like a poorly written history book to me, especially the old testament. I think it would be impossible to get the statutes from the bible that you get from Islam.


Quote:

Indonesia is the biggest Muslim state, and liberal democracy there is starting to take hold - without any recent Western intervention.

Islam is also a historically introduction there. THe further you get from Mecca, the more diluted it gets.


Quote:

Anyway, this isn't about defending Islam. It's about defending our own secular traditions. People are free to subject themselves to any ethical system they choose as long as it doesn't keep the neighbours up at night.

Why do you think we are criticising Abu and Falah for rejecting freedom and democracy? You are the one claiming we should ignore an organised attempt to subvert it.

Karnal wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 2:47pm:

It defines, if you want, "our own culture".

WTF!! Now 'we' have 'our' own culture??? if I want??

Michel et Roland won't like this one bit.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 2:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 9:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:07am: Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east? im sayng they are just like the xtians were not long ago (couple hundred years maybe). Same area too funnily enough. Its the same crap. Stone adulterers kill thieves etc. The muslims that are subjected to western civilisation are not so violent. How many stonings and shootings of women happen in australian or america or uk? Not so many just the normal amount of criminals. It is the environment. I read both the holy books. Not being indoctrinated beforehand i didnt know which bits were supposed to be figurative in either one. They are both the same. They are both from the same era in the same area thats why. Suddenly when a muslim lives in a western country more parts of the book are figurative prolly. Like the xtian book. Tell me freediver. How did you read the books? Did you know which parts are supposed to be figurative? SOB

You may well have read them both, but you clearly had no idea what you were reading.

They were not written in the same era, and they were not written in the same place. In fact, they both use very different Literacy forms and therefore read nothing like each other.

How can anyone be so critical of something they know so little about? Actually, that question answers itself.

Karnal wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 2:47pm:

Soren wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 1:56pm: Abu and Falah and all the other Hiz ul Tahrir and Taliban and Al Qaida cheer squad are in that Muslim mould and tradition because there is no other Muslim tradition. Sure there is. There are Islamic reformist movements in countries from Turkey to Malaysia. There is also a distinct separation of church and state in most Muslim countries. Outside civil disputes and family matters, shariah law is rare. I'm not sure how many states use it in their criminal systems, but I'd say this would be extremely rare. Indonesia is the biggest Muslim state, and liberal democracy there is starting to take hold - without any recent Western intervention. Anyway, this isn't about defending Islam. It's about defending our own secular traditions. People are free to subject themselves to any ethical system they choose as long as it doesn't keep the neighbours up at night. This isn't some vague, abstract principle, it's the cornerstone of the Western liberal tradition. It defines, if you want, "our own culture". It's the very reason you defend the West, and its the basis of every measurement we use to assess the values of others. If you don't practice it in action, you might as well join the Taliban. The gates of the church will always remain open.

The religious and ethical principles of Islam are a parody of judaism and christianity.
Philosophically and ethically Islam is a stuck-in-the-mud retard.
Artistically, in literature and music, it is negligible to mindlessly hostile and death-thirsty
Socially, it is the dark, tribal badlands of humanity.
Politically, it is a furtive to wild-eyed idiocy.
Economically, Islam is buggered. 
It stand for sociopathy - complete incomprehension of how the world has changed around it in 1400 years.




Islam it is either  joke or a grave danger, depending how ditzy you are. And if after the murders in the name of Islam in the last 20 year you are still leaning toward the 'harmless loonies' assessment, then you are thicker and more militantly stupid than even imagined you, and that's saying something.  in this case only SOB is more ditzy than you, but thn noboy beats SOB when it comes to sheer, native idiocy impervious to any tutoring.i

Soren you are doing it again. Stick to the topic please.

Sorry - SOB is a shining light to us all.

(better?)

You have seen the light!

Thanks to Yadda for this little gem. This video is from the USA. it was shot in an amusement park. Apparently, the people throwing whatever they can pick up at the group are Muslims who object to their right to speak their mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZHbonMUEI&feature=player_embedded

Karnal, how do you think we should respond to this sort of thing? Self censorship?

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 10:09pm:

Thanks to Yadda for this little gem. This video is from the USA. it was shot in an amusement park. Apparently, the people throwing whatever they can pick up at the group are Muslims who object to their right to speak their mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZHbonMUEI&feature=player_embedded Karnal, how do you think we should respond to this sort of thing? Self censorship?

My sense is that these stupid Muslims think that everyone is a multiculti pussy like Karnal and so when the Muslms get ripped into, in response to their intolerable intolerance as it happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Cronulla, Norway, they will be just stunned.
Most people in the West are not ABC listening, Drum reading, hand wringing social workers. If you look at history, the western tradition is not about quietude and going along with the intolerable.

Quote:

I think you have to go back a bit further than that. And remember, the Christian societies did not have a superpower imposing freedom and democracy on them, the were busy creating such systems. Without external influence, the Muslim societies would not be that different to Muhammed's time. The extremists would be running the show.

Well @ any rate that area has always been that way with the killing and extremism and crap. Its where xtianity came from too. The extremism america seem to be trying very hard to get control of the show. :(


Quote:

I don't claim any special knowledge on this. Much of the bible reads like a poorly written history book to me, especially the old testament. I think it would be impossible to get the statutes from the bible that you get from Islam.

History book? If you see it as a history book then the koran is of the same "history". they are the same. They have the same cultural influence and all that revenge and violence. Its fiction. Not much in either book has ever been proved as "fact" if anything. Fiction of the time though. The time where that was how life was and still is for a lot of ppl.

About abu and falah. Even if all the things you say about them are true (and if I remain a member here for a while I will talk to them) they are hardly representative of all muslims. If I thought avram was representative of all jews I would be on a crusade (or jihad lol) like you are.

Thing is that I dont like any religions and I especially dont like extremists of any religion. they are all dangerous. The thing is though with all this fear campaign against the muslims isnt it like poking a hornets nest with a stick? Comon stop playing into it. the ppl that treat them like they are poo are the ones making them angry.

I know muslims. I have lived with them. Their religion is annoying just like living with xtians is annoying however the xtians are MORE annoying. In the countries where muslims are the majority but there is actual law and order the stonings and stuff dont happen. They dont happen here either - if an incident does happen they are treated like the criminal they are.

SOB

Quantum wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 8:03pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 2:13pm: freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 9:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:07am: Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east? im sayng they are just like the xtians were not long ago (couple hundred years maybe). Same area too funnily enough. Its the same crap. Stone adulterers kill thieves etc. The muslims that are subjected to western civilisation are not so violent. How many stonings and shootings of women happen in australian or america or uk? Not so many just the normal amount of criminals. It is the environment. I read both the holy books. Not being indoctrinated beforehand i didnt know which bits were supposed to be figurative in either one. They are both the same. They are both from the same era in the same area thats why. Suddenly when a muslim lives in a western country more parts of the book are figurative prolly. Like the xtian book. Tell me freediver. How did you read the books? Did you know which parts are supposed to be figurative? SOB You may well have read them both, but you clearly had no idea what you were reading. They were not written in the same era, and they were not written in the same place. In fact, they both use very different Literacy forms and therefore read nothing like each other. How can anyone be so critical of something they know so little about? Actually, that question answers itself.

What are you saying im critical of? the xtain book or the muslim one? I am critical of both in fact - they are both violent fiction.

I thought i explained earlier that i dont have the indoctrination to read the xtian bible "properly" I see it like the koran - all literal. I dont know which bits are figurative same as most ppl with the koran.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 12^th, 2012 at 6:09am:

Quantum wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 8:03pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 2:13pm: freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 9:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:07am: Quote: It is ridiculous to compare Yadda to Falah. Just bizarre. There is no political dimention to Christianity that is comparable to the explicit political aims of Islam, for starters. Your reflex equivocation between every religion just to excuse Islam's very unique charactristics is ignorant at best. the religions are almost identical. the comparison is valid. the cultures on the other hand arent so much anymore. Most xtians cant get away with what the muslims can get away within some countries where the culture is suitable for it. Funnily enough those are mostly occupied countries. SOB Can you give some examples Spot? Are you saying there is more religious and political freedom in the middle east? im sayng they are just like the xtians were not long ago (couple hundred years maybe). Same area too funnily enough. Its the same crap. Stone adulterers kill thieves etc. The muslims that are subjected to western civilisation are not so violent. How many stonings and shootings of women happen in australian or america or uk? Not so many just the normal amount of criminals. It is the environment. I read both the holy books. Not being indoctrinated beforehand i didnt know which bits were supposed to be figurative in either one. They are both the same. They are both from the same era in the same area thats why. Suddenly when a muslim lives in a western country more parts of the book are figurative prolly. Like the xtian book. Tell me freediver. How did you read the books? Did you know which parts are supposed to be figurative? SOB You may well have read them both, but you clearly had no idea what you were reading. They were not written in the same era, and they were not written in the same place. In fact, they both use very different Literacy forms and therefore read nothing like each other. How can anyone be so critical of something they know so little about? Actually, that question answers itself. What are you saying im critical of? the xtain book or the muslim one? I am critical of both in fact - they are both violent fiction. I thought i explained earlier that i dont have the indoctrination to read the xtian bible "properly" I see it like the koran - all literal. I dont know which bits are figurative same as most ppl with the koran. SOB

The problem is comments like this;


Quote:

History book? If you see it as a history book then the koran is of the same "history". they are the same. They have the same cultural influence and all that revenge and violence. Its fiction. Not much in either book has ever been proved as "fact" if anything. Fiction of the time though. The time where that was how life was and still is for a lot of ppl.

and this;


Quote:

They are both the same. They are both from the same era in the same area thats why.

They are not from the same place or time period and they are written to completely different cultures. They are also written in completely different styles, the Bible primarily being complied of many different types throughout. How someone could have read them both and not noticed this is impossible.

As for not knowing what if figurative and literal, unless you read newspapers, fiction novels, instruction manuals, poems, private letters, bills, and road signs the same way, then the old excuse of not knowing doesn't fly. Either that or you have no comprehension of written English.   


   

Quote:

About abu and falah. Even if all the things you say about them are true (and if I remain a member here for a while I will talk to them) they are hardly representative of all muslims.

They are representative of the problems with Islam, and why the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still dragging on, and why people get nervous if an unaccompanied bag is left on a bus.


Quote:

The thing is though with all this fear campaign against the muslims isnt it like poking a hornets nest with a stick? Comon stop playing into it. the ppl that treat them like they are poo are the ones making them angry.

Sure, but what do you suggest as an alternative? Self censorship? That we don't call them on their BS in case they kill someone? Would you suggest we treat Nazis the same way?


Quote:

In the countries where muslims are the majority but there is actual law and order the stonings and stuff dont happen.

That's because Shariah Islamic law, the law Abu and Falah want to bring back and impose on people, has been largely eradicated. But it does still happen and will happen more if people are afraid to shine a light in dark places.

If you don't have the balls to call their BS for what it is from the safety of the internet, what hope do you have? When has freedom ever been protected by cowering in the corner?

Soren wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 8:14pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 2:47pm: Soren wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 1:56pm: Abu and Falah and all the other Hiz ul Tahrir and Taliban and Al Qaida cheer squad are in that Muslim mould and tradition because there is no other Muslim tradition. Sure there is. There are Islamic reformist movements in countries from Turkey to Malaysia. There is also a distinct separation of church and state in most Muslim countries. Outside civil disputes and family matters, shariah law is rare. I'm not sure how many states use it in their criminal systems, but I'd say this would be extremely rare. Indonesia is the biggest Muslim state, and liberal democracy there is starting to take hold - without any recent Western intervention. Anyway, this isn't about defending Islam. It's about defending our own secular traditions. People are free to subject themselves to any ethical system they choose as long as it doesn't keep the neighbours up at night. This isn't some vague, abstract principle, it's the cornerstone of the Western liberal tradition. It defines, if you want, "our own culture". It's the very reason you defend the West, and its the basis of every measurement we use to assess the values of others. If you don't practice it in action, you might as well join the Taliban. The gates of the church will always remain open. The religious and ethical principles of Islam are a parody of judaism and christianity. Philosophically and ethically Islam is a stuck-in-the-mud retard. Artistically, in literature and music, it is negligible to mindlessly hostile and death-thirsty Socially, it is the dark, tribal badlands of humanity. Politically, it is a furtive to wild-eyed idiocy. Economically, Islam is buggered.  It stand for sociopathy - complete incomprehension of how the world has changed around it in 1400 years.

Sorry, old chap, is this another never ever ever assessment?

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 10:09pm:

Thanks to Yadda for this little gem. This video is from the USA. it was shot in an amusement park. Apparently, the people throwing whatever they can pick up at the group are Muslims who object to their right to speak their mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZHbonMUEI&feature=player_embedded Karnal, how do you think we should respond to this sort of thing? Self censorship?

Oh no, I think we need a concerted PR campaign to drum up hatred, kill them all, let Gud sort them out, and then - censor them.

It's strange to see you join the Yadda/Soren combo, Freediver. I always thought they were more of a small backroom act.

I assumed your view of the world was bigger.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 12^th, 2012 at 6:09am:

I am critical of both in fact - they are both violent fiction. ... I thought i explained earlier that i dont have the indoctrination to read the xtian bible "properly" I see it like the koran - all literal. I dont know which bits are figurative same as most ppl with the koran. SOB

Fiction... no, wait... literal... no, wait... figurative.. no, wait... Oh, I dunno.... but I know I am critical, and that's all that matters to me, to be critical.
Coz being critical is like thinking...
Isn't it?


SOB

Soren wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 10:42pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 10:09pm: Thanks to Yadda for this little gem. This video is from the USA. it was shot in an amusement park. Apparently, the people throwing whatever they can pick up at the group are Muslims who object to their right to speak their mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZHbonMUEI&feature=player_embedded Karnal, how do you think we should respond to this sort of thing? Self censorship? My sense is that these stupid Muslims think that everyone is a multiculti pussy like Karnal and so when the Muslms get ripped into, in response to their intolerable intolerance as it happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Cronulla, Norway, they will be just stunned. Most people in the West are not ABC listening, Drum reading, hand wringing social workers.

Oh, I'm fully aware of that, old boy. Handwringing social workers like me are a cottage industry. Mind you, we're happy to share our ABC with you for Classical breakfast.

You think the Cronullas riots were a response the Muselman's intolerable intolerance? The crowd targeted Lebanese Christians and Indians - anyone with a tint. You could get ripped into if you had a bit of a tan too.

Now I know you don't support collective action like this, old boy. You just like to cheer from the sidelines.

I don't know why you bring the West into this. The Cronulla riots were a purely Australian phenomenon. If you'd walked past and opened your thick accented mouth, it's likely you would have copped one as well.

Still, it's good to know which side you're on. After all, that's what this debate seems to be about.

Sides.

Quote:

As for not knowing what if figurative and literal, unless you read newspapers, fiction novels, instruction manuals, poems, private letters, bills, and road signs the same way, then the old excuse of not knowing doesn't fly. Either that or you have no comprehension of written English.

Well if i take it that the stuff thats obviously "magic" or is too violent to be literal is figurative then we have to take the koran the same way. Its confusing though for someone that isnt indoctrinated. So should we stone gays or behead them or just hate them? Should we give our daughters to strangers @ the door or sell them or marry them off @ a young age?

what do you mean "doesnt fly"? You mean you are indoctrinated so its obvious to you? Why isnt the koran obvious too then? Even ppl of either religion get confused as to whats literal. the catholics think they are actually eating somebodies flesh and drinking their blood. Some think a personal jihad is a literal jihad. Some think its okay to destroy this planet because in the end we will get another one.


Quote:

They are representative of the problems with Islam, and why the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still dragging on, and why people get nervous if an unaccompanied bag is left on a bus.

They are representative of their particular sect of islam. Ppl get nervous about a bag on a bus because of the media.


Quote:

Sure, but what do you suggest as an alternative? Self censorship? That we don't call them on their BS in case they kill someone? Would you suggest we treat Nazis the same way?

I suggest we leave them alone. Stop provoking them.. There arent enough here to cause problems even if they were inclined. Quit interfering with them and their oil.


Quote:

That's because Shariah Islamic law, the law Abu and Falah want to bring back and impose on people, has been largely eradicated. But it does still happen and will happen more if people are afraid to shine a light in dark places.

Sharia wont happen here. Im not saying its not a bad thing. Its nasty. However it is not mainstream.


Quote:

If you don't have the balls to call their BS for what it is from the safety of the internet, what hope do you have? When has freedom ever been protected by cowering in the corner?

On other forums I have had debates with muslims but not here because its not a level playing field where i can have a decent conversation with them. Everyone just insults them and puts them on guard so of course they say things that will make you angry. you cant find out the real facts that way imo.

Spot

Soren wrote on Jul 12^th, 2012 at 10:55am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 12th, 2012 at 6:09am: I am critical of both in fact - they are both violent fiction. ... I thought i explained earlier that i dont have the indoctrination to read the xtian bible "properly" I see it like the koran - all literal. I dont know which bits are figurative same as most ppl with the koran. SOB Fiction... no, wait... literal... no, wait... figurative.. no, wait... Oh, I dunno.... but I know I am critical, and that's all that matters to me, to be critical. Coz being critical is like thinking... Isn't it? SOB

I have a boat in darwin Its parked in the mangroves and fully stocked with raw steak. Why dont you go sleep in it?

SOB

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 6:34pm:

Quote: [quote]I've read a few of your examples and quotes, and it looks as if you're reading way too much into them. Trust me, I have asked plenty of times for clarification. It is their refusal to clarify that I read most into.

I agree. I find this very disconcerting. The way they put up the shutters as soon as you start to probe is not only sinister, it's just plain rude.

If someone's views aren't open to full and frank discussion, their views aren't worth discussing.

I get similar responses from it_is_the_Light. He's much more judgemental than Abu and Falah. He doesn't advocate physical violence, but he does represent a prejudiced, reactionary mindset which is ultimately violent in its conclusions - he lectures, he refuses to engage in dialogue, and he is incapable of listening to others or reflecting upon his own beliefs.

Still, people like this are not necessarily physically violent. In fact, they're increasingly common. This is the direction we're all travelling in. It's not a symptom of Islam, it's a symptom of modern communication and the rise of fundamentalist ideology.

The first thing to go is empathy. Put us in a lab with a fake electronic shock gadget hooked up to an actor, and watch us obey the order to inflict pain. I'll be the first to admit it: I don't think I'd go too well in that test.

Still, tell Abu and Yadda the subject is a Jew, or it_is_the_Light the subject is a mason, or Soren and Yadda the subject is a Muslim. Watch the sparks fly.

That's real fundamentalism - the willingness to inflict pain upon the enemy.

Ah, the tired old "Look at moi, I'm a clever and discerning Paki Bvgger because I can see that they are all the same ' argument.

I was wondering how long before you trotted it out again.



ZZZzzz....

Soren wrote on Jul 12^th, 2012 at 12:18pm:

Ah, the tired old "Look at moi, I'm a clever and discerning Paki Bvgger because I can see that they are all the same ' argument. I was wondering how long before you trotted it out again. ZZZzzz....

Old boy, a minute ago you were cheering on your team at the Cronulla riots.

You just wear different colours. Don't tell me you play a different sport.

Anyway. Have a nice rest, old boy. Sleep well.

Karnal wrote on Jul 11^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

The Heartless Felon wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 1:46pm: "(The Hilton Hotel)...a bombing that all evidence points to the guilt of the police themselves..." A view no doubt shared by Pederick. What do you mean? Pederick was released too, and his evidence discounted by the court of appeal.

Pederick DID plead guilty and then appealed unsuccessfully, he served 8 years...incidentally, he set a precedent in the Australian Public Service in that he was allowed to resign so that he could collect not only his super contributions but also the employer contributions as well. Now if anyone looks like getting the heave-ho from the APS, they cite Pederick... 

Karnal wrote on Jul 12^th, 2012 at 10:46am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 10:09pm: Thanks to Yadda for this little gem. This video is from the USA. it was shot in an amusement park. Apparently, the people throwing whatever they can pick up at the group are Muslims who object to their right to speak their mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOZHbonMUEI&feature=player_embedded Karnal, how do you think we should respond to this sort of thing? Self censorship? Oh no, I think we need a concerted PR campaign to drum up hatred, kill them all, let Gud sort them out, and then - censor them. It's strange to see you join the Yadda/Soren combo, Freediver. I always thought they were more of a small backroom act. I assumed your view of the world was bigger.

It was a serious question Karnal. How do you think we should respond?


Quote:

I suggest we leave them alone. Stop provoking them.. There arent enough here to cause problems even if they were inclined. Quit interfering with them and their oil.

Would you suggest the same thing if we were discussing Nazism? Why should Islam be treated any differently? How many Muslims does it take to cause problems?


Quote:

On other forums I have had debates with muslims but not here because its not a level playing field where i can have a decent conversation with them. Everyone just insults them and puts them on guard so of course they say things that will make you angry.

I have found the opposite is true. I mainly have a problem with what they won't say. Are you suggesting they don't mean what they say about freedom and democracy?


Quote:

you cant find out the real facts that way imo.

What way can you find it out? What if merely asking the question about controversial issues is enough to put them on edge?


Quote:

He's much more judgemental than Abu and Falah. He doesn't advocate physical violence, but he does represent a prejudiced, reactionary mindset which is ultimately violent in its conclusions - he lectures, he refuses to engage in dialogue, and he is incapable of listening to others or reflecting upon his own beliefs.

How is that ultimately violent? Are you suggesting it is the same as stoning people to death in ill defined situations?

I think I actually saw this one coming from Falah. From June 2:


freediver wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2012 at 2:44pm:

Falah's thesis: http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Australias_population_density_3.png

Posted by Ahovking:

http://vrroom.naa.gov.au/Images/Habitability%20map%20of%20Australia1_11844220_tcm11-17831.jpg

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1393886554/59#59

"next to useless"

Hilton bombing, eh?  I was there within five minutes of the blast..... (spoken by the Grappler alter ego as an International Man of Mystery)...