Australians think Muslim population is nine times greater than it really is.    ::)

Very interesting they found that muslims are 2% of Australia's population.

Right now there are 161 Australian muslims either practicing hijrah or given absolute support to isil terrorists.

161 = 2% then 8,050 = 100%.

There are no non muslim Australians who are practicing terrorists, or are supporting a terror group.

Conclusion: muslims are 8,050 times more likely to be a terrorist than any body else.

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 2:23pm:

There are no non muslim Australians who are practicing terrorists, or are supporting a terror group.

Says who?

I am not aware of any, do you have some reliable figures?

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 2:33pm:

I am not aware of any, do you have some reliable figures?

You made the claim: it's up to you to substantiate that claim.

"There are no non muslim Australians who are practicing terrorists, or are supporting a terror group."

Says who?

I said, based on the fact I can't find reference to any non muslim Australians at large who are practicing terrorists.

I am open to proven reliable information which give the stats re Australian non muslims practicing terrorism, if you have such information share it with us for the good of all.

If I'm wrong I'll adjust my calculations.   

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 2:46pm:

I said, based on the fact I can't find reference to any non muslim Australians at large who are practicing terrorists. I am open to proven reliable information which give the stats re Australian non muslims practicing terrorism, if you have such information share it with us for the good of all. If I'm wrong I'll adjust my calculations.

You made the claim: it's up to you to substantiate that claim.

There are no statistics available to show how many 14 year old boys are currently jerking off to Asian lesbian porn in the privacy of their bedrooms.

According to your "logic", that means that it's not happening.

(Herbie: you may have to hand over your crown - we've found ourselves a new village idiot).

Seems a bit hard to believe to me. Where do they find these people? The dole queue? Some other results:

1 in 4 people unemployed and looking for work.

One in six girls between 15 and 19 giving birth.

greggerypeccary wrote:


Quote:

You made the claim: it's up to you to substantiate that claim. There are no statistics available to show how many 14 year old boys are currently jerking off to Asian lesbian porn in the privacy of their bedrooms. According to your "logic", that means that it's not happening.

I'm sure you're able to research masturbation on the net, in behavioural sciences etc.

I'm equally sure that if there were non muslim Australians actively practicing terrorism, this information would be available, exactly the same as numbers for Australian muslim terrorists is obtainable.

No matter how much you try and dodge it, Australiam muslims are 8,050 times more likely to be a terrorist than the rest of us.

Moses, just because you haven't heard of any doesn't mean they don't exist.   ::)

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 2:33pm:

I am not aware of any, do you have some reliable figures?

Come on Gweg, poo puncher, prove your statement, Gandalf likes sor ends apparently, are you somehow related.

Bum chums perhaps?

Its ok to talk about things like this because Gandalf is a "New Age" Muslim.


greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 3:02pm:

According to your "logic", that means that it's not happening.

No No No its according to your logic gweg. Which is hopelessly flawed.

Answer the question hopelessly flawed!

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 2:23pm:

There are no non muslim Australians who are practicing terrorists, or are supporting a terror group.

Quote:

the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

Yeah, no non-Muslim has ever done that in Australia ever. ::)

Yes leftwing supporters are notorious for it, however I don't think they are listed as terrorists.

Unlike Australian muslims who are listed as practicing islamic terrorists.

freediver wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Seems a bit hard to believe to me. Where do they find these people? The dole queue? Some other results: 1 in 4 people unemployed and looking for work. One in six girls between 15 and 19 giving birth.

Don’t go there, FD. You remember what happened when tried to argue a total of one Muslim underage marriage in Australia was an epidemic.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 1:59pm:

Australians think Muslim population is nine times greater than it really is.    ::)

Needless to say, the reason for this impression is because our local Muslims make the nightly news almost every night of the year. You'd think they were 25% of the population instead of only 3.

moses wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 4:59pm:

I'm equally sure that if there were non muslim Australians actively practicing terrorism, this information would be available ...

Of course it would: the offenders would present themselves to the police and say "Hi guys, we're terrorists. Just letting you know ... for your stats, and stuff".

Tell me, do you practice at being this stupid or were you born that way?

Herbie: you've lost your crown old boy.  This character makes you look like a genius.

Lord Herbert wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 7:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 1:59pm: Australians think Muslim population is nine times greater than it really is.    ::) Needless to say, the reason for this impression is because our local Muslims make the nightly news almost every night of the year.

I know. How appalling to get on the nightly news almost every night of the year. Who do these people think they are?

I blame Islam.

Lord Herbert wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 7:08pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 1:59pm: Australians think Muslim population is nine times greater than it really is.    ::) Needless to say, the reason for this impression is because our local Muslims make the nightly news almost every night of the year. You'd think they were 25% of the population instead of only 3.

And of course you believe what the MSM tells you - when you want to, Herbie.  http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/hand-gestures/fingerwagging-smiley-emoticon.gif

Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault.

Nuffin' to see here, go back to sleep, PB, Brain and the rest.

Soren wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 9:49pm:

Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault.

No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg

::) ::)

A distinguished apostle in every aspect was none other than saidina muhammad .he was sent to be sent to the world as the last prophet, the final one, after whom no other prophet was to be sent again by allah. This is the reason why he was granted a shari'ah or the law that was perfect and final requiring no revision in the days to come.

For the teaching of the last prophet were to be everbinding, to remain unchanged to the end of time, he was sent as a acme of perfection with over-flowing guidance and resplendent light. There can be no revision of the qur'an.

Any muslim who believes the above islamic doctrine, is a supporter of terrorism.

moses wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 3:10pm:

A distinguished apostle in every aspect was none other than saidina muhammad .he was sent to be sent to the world as the last prophet, the final one, after whom no other prophet was to be sent again by allah. This is the reason why he was granted a shari'ah or the law that was perfect and final requiring no revision in the days to come. For the teaching of the last prophet were to be everbinding, to remain unchanged to the end of time, he was sent as a acme of perfection with over-flowing guidance and resplendent light. There can be no revision of the qur'an. Any muslim who believes the above islamic doctrine, is a supporter of terrorism.

Ah.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 12:50am:

Soren wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault. No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg ::) ::)

So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault?

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 12:50am:

Soren wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault. No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg ::) ::)

No perhaps required, islams bad reputation for violence and intolerance is because of the actions of Muslims acting on religious agendas dictated and interpreted by them as furthering the interests of thier religion. 

Soren wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 9:28pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 12:50am: Soren wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault. No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg ::) ::) So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault?

What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.   I have been saying this for many, many, many, many posts but it doesn't seem to sink in for you.  Why?  Are you incapable of comprehending a simple concept?   ::)

Time to revise the figures.

According to islamic terrorism apologists, if there are no figures to show how many Australian non muslims are actively participating in terrorist activities, there definitely would be some by a factor of 0 to any given number.

Well in order to be fair I have revised my stats on the islamic terror apologist's reasoning that there absolutely has to more that we don't know about.

We know for absolute certain there are 161 Australian muslims actively taking part in islamic terror. Using a lower ratio than the apologists, I will use the ratio of 1:1

Therefore 161 Australian muslim terrorists we know about, add 161 or more to give the islamic terror apologists theory some credence, we have at least 332 Australian muslims actively taking part in islamic terrorism. (by islamic terror apologists logic)

2% = 332  then 100% = 16,600.

New figures are: Australain muslims are 16,600 times more likely to be actively taking part in islamic terror groups, than any non muslim Australian

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 11:48pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 12:50am: Soren wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault. No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg ::) ::) So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.

That's the thing though: Soren, Sprint, moses, et al. don't think it is unfair.  Their hatred & fear literally knows no bounds.

If muslims refuse to address the islamic teachings which are the core of islamic terrorism e.g.: jihad, hijrah, taqiyya and kitman, hate speech against non muslims, self alienation, a prophet of islam has to be a mass murderer etc. etc., then muslims are in it with the actual terrorists.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2014 at 11:55am:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 11:48pm: Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 12:50am: Soren wrote on Nov 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation.  It's all everyone else's fault. No Soren, it is the fault of some Muslims perhaps but to tar the entire 1.6 billion of them with the same brush indicates you shop here. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/63/b4/d5/63b4d5793c948c15f6ff01f55ee1c7b4.jpg ::) ::) So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.  That's the thing though: Soren, Sprint, moses, et al. don't think it is unfair.  Their hatred & fear literally knows no bounds.

Not only do they think it's not unfair, they believe anyone who argues what Brian has should be whacked in with all the Muslims and banned, killed, bombed, nuked and damned to hell.

Rich tapestry, innit.

Why are muslims and their apologists so afraid to address the teachings of islam which are the root cause of islamic terrorism?

moses wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2014 at 12:13pm:

If muslims refuse to address the islamic teachings which are the core of islamic terrorism e.g.: jihad, hijrah, taqiyya and kitman, hate speech against non muslims, self alienation, a prophet of islam has to be a mass murderer etc. etc., then muslims are in it with the actual terrorists.

They don't need to address it if they don't believe it in the first place. For most Muslims, your claims about jihad, taqiyya, etc, are completely wrong. As for hate speech against non-Muslims, apart from the Tele's Facebook jihadists, who's doing this?

Islamic leaders in Australia have addressed it. They say it's not tolerated and completely unacceptable.

If Muslims disagree with the actual terrorists, how are they in it with them?

So  they are saying islam, allah, muhammad, qur'an and hadith are wrong and have no place in a modern 21st century civilization?

moses wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2014 at 12:48pm:

So  they are saying islam, allah, muhammad, qur'an and hadith are wrong and have no place in a modern 21st century civilization?

Ah.

You got me there, Moses.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2014 at 11:48pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.   I have been saying this for many, many, many, many posts but it doesn't seem to sink in for you.  Why?  Are you incapable of comprehending a simple concept?   ::)

Noticing the centrality of Islamic doctrine to all but one of the listed terrorist organisation in Australia is unfair? How?

By noticing that the most vicious bunch of jihadis call themselves the Islamic (Submission) State I tar all adherents of Submission???  I didn't name them the Submission State. If anyone is tarring anyone, it is them, not me.   It is evident to all that Submission doctrine is at the heart of all the Submission terrorist organisations. It is in their names, their manifestos, their pronouncements.  Does this have to change or are all the vast number of Submitters, tarred and untarred, happy with how things are done in the name of vibrantly diverse Submission?

If things need to change,  I can't do it, only Submitters can. Is that 'tarring'?   I have no doubt that all this is hugely problematic and embarrassing to a lot of Submitters. But Submission is not Peace. Sharia is not freedom. Jihad in the name of Submission is not just a private spiritual exercise. The niqab is not women's liberation. Etc, etc.


As I said to Gandalf, if he can organise a Muslim demo in support of secular liberal democracy, I'll be marching with him arm in arm. But don't expect me to be marching for Submission.

ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says
By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN
November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT)


http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


Some of the 322 people executed were women and children,
Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 12:27pm:

ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Some of the 322 people executed were women and children, Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said.

The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control.

Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 12:30pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:27pm: ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Some of the 322 people executed were women and children, Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said. The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control.

Yes Sir Nail,

Saddam knew what to do with terrorists.

freediver wrote on Nov 1^st, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Seems a bit hard to believe to me. Where do they find these people? The dole queue? Some other results: 1 in 4 people unemployed and looking for work. One in six girls between 15 and 19 giving birth.

Muslims will win their war in the bedroom -

create many more brainwashed people.

Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 12:30pm:

The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control.

Ah those were more idealistic times. People thought Muslim Arabs were capable of peacefully arranging their affairs like us if only the tiny minority of evil dictators and their supporters were removed. We all demanded that the West stop supporting this tiny minority and let the Muslim Arabs determine their own ways, freely.

Now that they are determining their own affairs freely we are to blame for not keeping the tiny minority of evil dictators in place.


Take up the White Man's burden, Send forth the best ye breed
  Go bind your sons to exile, to serve your captives' need;
To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild--
  Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man's burden, In patience to abide,
  To veil the threat of terror And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple, An hundred times made plain
  To seek another's profit, And work another's gain.

Take up the White Man's burden, The savage wars of peace--
  Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought,
  Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought.

The old boy only has about 3 posts. The above is one. Vintage old boy.

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 3:52pm:

The old boy only has about 3 posts. The above is one. Vintage old boy.

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr06/2013/7/12/0/anigif_enhanced-buzz-24036-1373604418-24.gif

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 3:52pm:

The old boy only has about 3 posts. The above is one. Vintage old boy.

THat's right, PB, bring back the tiny minority of unrepresentative evil dictators who are the only ones capable of controlling Muslim Arabs and who have reigned over them for centuries for some reason.

The softy bigotry of low expectations.

Either they are equal and responsible for their own bloody ideology and mess - or what the hell are we doing treating them as equal, importing them, excusing them, financing them?

People can make their own fate. Look at the Koreans. Half of them went nuts, kicking against modernity, half of them went with the program.


Please explain.

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 11:14am:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 11:48pm: Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.   I have been saying this for many, many, many, many posts but it doesn't seem to sink in for you.  Why?  Are you incapable of comprehending a simple concept?   ::) Noticing the centrality of Islamic doctrine to all but one of the listed terrorist organisation in Australia is unfair? How?

I didn't claim it was.

When however, you assume that the Terrorists' interpretation of Islam doctrine is the same as mainstream Islamic doctrine, then you run into trouble, Soren.    ::)

Your problem is that you quite deliberately seem to make sure that you tell people that you make no differentiation between different interpretations of Islam, Soren.

It is like suggesting that all Christians are Catholics.    ::)

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 5:24pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 3:52pm: The old boy only has about 3 posts. The above is one. Vintage old boy. THat's right, PB, bring back the tiny minority of unrepresentative evil dictators who are the only ones capable of controlling Muslim Arabs and who have reigned over them for centuries for some reason. The softy bigotry of low expectations. Either they are equal and responsible for their own bloody ideology and mess - or what the hell are we doing treating them as equal, importing them, excusing them, financing them? People can make their own fate. Look at the Koreans. Half of them went nuts, kicking against modernity, half of them went with the program. Please explain.

Gee, you’ve thrown me here, old boy. Koreans?

Make  that four posts.

Whoops! You’ve included the soft bigotry of low expectations and people making their own fate. That’s post two.

You almost had me there, old boy. Lucky I checked the formula.

Oh, and before you go into the mendatious idiot PB schtick, that’s post one - the Sore End signature post.

You realise we could just script "Soren" as an AI and save us all a lot of time?   He'd be a bit of a retrograde step from Mark V. Shaney who existed in the 1980s though.   The Mark V made sense sometimes, unlike Soren who hardly ever makes sense.    ;D ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 7:57pm:

You realise we could just script "Soren" as an AI and save us all a lot of time?   He'd be a bit of a retrograde step from Mark V. Shaney who existed in the 1980s though.   The Mark V made sense sometimes, unlike Soren who hardly ever makes sense.    ;D ;D

Look in the Mirror...or as they say..don't throw stones Brian...come up with a reply or be damned as just another Spot/Karnal spammer. I like to justify to myself reading your replies even if I don't agree...but I don't expect a sarcastic remark. It's bad enough with Gweg changing his M.O. He also used to have a reasonable reply but now he resorts to childish pictures..

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 12:33pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:30pm: [quote author=bobbythebat1 link=1414814389/34#34 date=1415068064]ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Some of the 322 people executed were women and children, Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said. The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control.

Yes Sir Nail,

Saddam knew what to do with terrorists.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:26pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:33pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:30pm: [quote author=bobbythebat1 link=1414814389/34#34 date=1415068064]ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Some of the 322 people executed were women and children, Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said. The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control. Yes Sir Nail, Saddam knew what to do with terrorists.

True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause.

Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freeedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer.

You know, because of their religion.

Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing.

And so it is.

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:37pm:

True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause. Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freeedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer. You know, because of their religion. Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing. And so it is.

Namaste

Forgiven

~ B = > )

Karnal,

Quote:

True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause. Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer. You know, because of their religion. Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing. And so it is.

Hi Karnal,
Yes - remember when Iraq was going to be a beacon of democratic light
shining out across the Middle East?

The Americans are dreamers.
Mussies could never live in a democratic country -
they are too brainwashed by their stupid religion.

And so it is

all part of the divine plan

namaste

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 6:53pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 11:14am: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 11:48pm: Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.   I have been saying this for many, many, many, many posts but it doesn't seem to sink in for you.  Why?  Are you incapable of comprehending a simple concept?   ::) Noticing the centrality of Islamic doctrine to all but one of the listed terrorist organisation in Australia is unfair? How? I didn't claim it was. When however, you assume that the Terrorists' interpretation of Islam doctrine is the same as mainstream Islamic doctrine, then you run into trouble, Soren.    ::) Your problem is that you quite deliberately seem to make sure that you tell people that you make no differentiation between different interpretations of Islam, Soren. It is like suggesting that all Christians are Catholics.    ::)

Don't be an idiot on purpose, Brain.

NOWHERE have I said that every interpretation of Islam is the same as every other.

I am beginning to question your sanity.

What I maintain is that ISLAM is common to ALL the various Muslims ways of thinking.

Islam = submission to sharia, jihad and the final, unalterable word of god. Whatever your interpretation of Islam, submission to sharia is a non-negotiable.

Show me an interpretation in the vibrant diversity of Islam that doesn't require you to submit to sharia, or to recognise Mohammed as the final messenger of god or to treat the  Koran as a the final, UNALTERABLE word of God.

There is NO Muslim who can contradicts these fundamentals. This is a narrow and specific 'vibrant diversity', Brain. You believe it all and so you are a Muslim or you don't and then you aren't.i

That’s old boy post number two. That’s absolutely, always, never ever.

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 9:32pm:

That’s old boy post number two. That’s absolutely, always, never ever.

Oh, I get it now. You're just.....

http://media.giphy.com/media/lAhV1U3MCBPhu/giphy.gif

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:43pm:

Karnal, Quote: True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause. Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer. You know, because of their religion. Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing. And so it is. Hi Karnal, Yes - remember when Iraq was going to be a beacon of democratic light shining out across the Middle East? The Americans are dreamers. Mussies could never live in a democratic country - they are too brainwashed by their stupid religion. And so it is all part of the divine plan namaste

Are you nuts? Amerika left both Iran and Iraq far more Islamic and radicalised than they were before they went in.

Both countries started out as secular. After Uncle, both are now Shi’ite states.

As for Saudi Arabia, it’s a Fascist state.

Read FD’s Pew Survey. Strangely, the most liberal Muslim.majority countries appear to be the ex-Soviet ones.

What does that tell you about Freeeedom?

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

Are you nuts? Amerika left both Iran and Iraq far more Islamic and radicalised than they were before they went in. Both countries started out as secular. After Uncle, both are now Shi’ite Shite states.

Fixed.

brumbie wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 7:57pm: You realise we could just script "Soren" as an AI and save us all a lot of time?   He'd be a bit of a retrograde step from Mark V. Shaney who existed in the 1980s though.   The Mark V made sense sometimes, unlike Soren who hardly ever makes sense.    ;D ;D Look in the Mirror...or as they say..don't throw stones Brian...come up with a reply or be damned as just another Spot/Karnal spammer. I like to justify to myself reading your replies even if I don't agree...but I don't expect a sarcastic remark. It's bad enough with Gweg changing his M.O. He also used to have a reasonable reply but now he resorts to childish pictures..

Brumbie, occasionally I like to lighten the mood.   If you don't like it, don't read it. 

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:54pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 6:53pm: Soren wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 11:14am: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 11:48pm: Soren wrote on Nov 2nd, 2014 at 9:28pm: So you are saying that Islam and Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam's and Muslims' poor reputation? It's all everyone else's fault? What I am saying is that it is unfair to tar all adherents of a vast religious group like the Muslims because of the actions of a minority, Soren.   I have been saying this for many, many, many, many posts but it doesn't seem to sink in for you.  Why?  Are you incapable of comprehending a simple concept?   ::) Noticing the centrality of Islamic doctrine to all but one of the listed terrorist organisation in Australia is unfair? How? I didn't claim it was. When however, you assume that the Terrorists' interpretation of Islam doctrine is the same as mainstream Islamic doctrine, then you run into trouble, Soren.    ::) Your problem is that you quite deliberately seem to make sure that you tell people that you make no differentiation between different interpretations of Islam, Soren. It is like suggesting that all Christians are Catholics.    ::) Don't be an idiot on purpose, Brain. NOWHERE have I said that every interpretation of Islam is the same as every other.

Yet, you act as if it is what you believe, Soren.   You imply it, everytime you erect that strawman claim that the Terrorists are the real representatives of Islam and that what they are doing is what Islam demands of them, each and everytime they cut a head off.    ::)


Quote:

I am beginning to question your sanity. What I maintain is that ISLAM is common to ALL the various Muslims ways of thinking. Islam = submission to sharia, jihad and the final, unalterable word of god. Whatever your interpretation of Islam, submission to sharia is a non-negotiable. Show me an interpretation in the vibrant diversity of Islam that doesn't require you to submit to sharia, or to recognise Mohammed as the final messenger of god or to treat the  Koran as a the final, UNALTERABLE word of God. There is NO Muslim who can contradicts these fundamentals. This is a narrow and specific 'vibrant diversity', Brain. You believe it all and so you are a Muslim or you don't and then you aren't.

What you're missing, Soren is how one submits to Allah - note, Allah, NOT "sh'ria".   Sh'ria is a part of Islam, it is not the keystone.   You appear to ignore that for some reason.

Then, of course there is what Sh'ria is, exactly.  Many different versions, many different interpretations, all different.   You however, keep acting as if there is only one interpretation of what Sh'ria is!   ::)

As for Mohammed being the final messenger, I wonder how that fits with the Twelver belief system?   ;)

Such subtleties keep passing you by, Soren.   You have heard the siren call of the extremists and you've succumbed.   They have converted you to their interpretation of Islam and you've dived in, quite happily, now haven't you?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 11:20pm:

Brumbie, occasionally I like to lighten the mood.   If you don't like it, don't read it.

In other words, doing this...
http://media.giphy.com/media/1157yTwr5rIpd6/giphy.gif

If interpretation is responsible islamic terrorists, why do other muslims find it impossible to show the correct meaning to the terrorists?

Why can't the goodies prove that a command to slay and be slain, doesn't mean exactly that?

Why can't the goodies show that a command to emigrate in order to slay and be slain, doesn't mean exactly that?

Why can't the goodies show that a command not to take non muslims as friends, doesn't mean exactly that?

Why can't the goodies show that a command which states that non muslims are the vilest of people, doesn't mean exactly that?

Why can't the goodies show that a command to kill apostates and hypocrites, doesn't mean exactly that?

Why are there millions of pathetically stupid muslims who can't understand they've got all of the above wrong?

We all know the reason why the terrorists don't understand they are wrong, they are following the qur'an to the letter.

It's up to muslims to solve this problem physically and literally, by purging the commands which cause terrorism, from the qur'an.

If they don't, then the **interpretation terrorists** are here to stay, as long as islam exists.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 11:28pm:

Yet, you act as if it is what you believe, Soren.   You imply it, everytime you erect that strawman claim that the Terrorists are the real representatives of Islam and that what they are doing is what Islam demands of them, each and everytime they cut a head off.

I never, ever claimed that the terrorists are the real representatives.  I claim that they are impeccably Islamic. They are doing what they take Islam to demand of them. They are not distorting anything.

Can others, the peaceful majority, ignore the particular passages and teachings that exercise ISIL? Yes they can and they do. But these passages are there, irrefutably, and they are the basis of terrorism.

No imaginary Christian or Buddhist terrorist could claim that Jesus or the Buddha said kill all the unbelievers where ever you find them, unless they convert or pay you a levy because Jesus or Buddha said no such thing. They couldn't say that Jesus or Buddha told them to rape their captive women because they did not say anything like that.

Not so with Muslims and Islamic texts (unalterable final words of God texts, no less).



Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 11:28pm:

Then, of course there is what Sh'ria is, exactly.  Many different versions, many different interpretations, all different.   You however, keep acting as if there is only one interpretation of what Sh'ria is!

No, Brain. Sharia is the law given by Allah in the Koran. So the second class status of nonMuslims is uniform in every interpretation of sharia. So is the second-class status of women.
When it comes to the directives in the Koran, there is no room to negotiate.

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 8:43pm: Karnal, Quote: True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause. Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer. You know, because of their religion. Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing. And so it is. Hi Karnal, Yes - remember when Iraq was going to be a beacon of democratic light shining out across the Middle East? The Americans are dreamers. Mussies could never live in a democratic country - they are too brainwashed by their stupid religion. And so it is all part of the divine plan namaste Are you nuts? Amerika left both Iran and Iraq far more Islamic and radicalised than they were before they went in. Both countries started out as secular. After Uncle, both are now Shi’ite states. As for Saudi Arabia, it’s a Fascist state. Read FD’s Pew Survey. Strangely, the most liberal Muslim.majority countries appear to be the ex-Soviet ones. What does that tell you about Freeeedom?

America brings Freeeedom.

Soren wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 4:49pm:

Not so with Muslims and Islamic texts (unalterable final words of God texts, no less).

Bobby. wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 6:37pm:

America brings Freeeedom.

Karnal wrote on Nov 4^th, 2014 at 8:37pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 8:26pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:33pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 12:30pm: [quote author=bobbythebat1 link=1414814389/34#34 date=1415068064]ISIS kills 300 members of Sunni tribe, Iraqi government says By Odai Sadik and Steve Almasy, CNN November 4, 2014 -- Updated 0045 GMT (0845 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/03/world/meast/isis-mass-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Some of the 322 people executed were women and children, Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights said. The libbos and the coalition of the killing are responsible for this mess now. They got rid of the 'evil dictator' which was the only person able to keep Iraq under control. Yes Sir Nail, Saddam knew what to do with terrorists. True, but the old boy War Against Terror crowd were stupid enough to pretend Saddam.was the problem. They know they lied, but they pretend they did so for a good cause. Oh, let’s just go in. Surely we can liberate Iraq and bring Freeedom to the Middle East. FD still refuses to admit that we didn’t. The old boy likes to pretend how disappointed he is that Iraqis turned down our kind offer. You know, because of their religion. Saddam was a bastard. The fakes are worse. Forget Saudi sheiks. The shifting sands of oil politics have nothing on the old boy crowd. These people will stop.at nothing. And so it is.

Paki Bvgger gibberish, as always.

You’re on a roll tonight, old boy. Gibberish. Idiot. Good old post number one.

Now you say the same to Brain and we’ll complete our nightly ritual. I need to get you off to bed before Sister finishes.

Karnal wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 9:04pm:

You’re on a roll tonight, old boy. Gibberish. Idiot. Good old post number one. Now you say the same to Brain and we’ll complete our nightly ritual. I need to get you off to bed before Sister finishes.

But we all agree -


Saddam knew what to do with terrorists.

I don’t know, Bobbie, let me guess.

Hang em high?

Looks like you’ve got competition, old boy.

Karnal wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 9:17pm:

I don’t know, Bobbie, let me guess. Hang em high? Looks like you’ve got competition, old boy.

Well whatever he did you can guarantee that ISIS

would not have lasted a week in Iraq if he was the leader.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 9:40pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:17pm: I don’t know, Bobbie, let me guess. Hang em high? Looks like you’ve got competition, old boy. Well whatever he did you can guarantee that ISIS would not have lasted a week in Iraq if he was the leader.

Better tell FD. He thinks Iraq is the next South Korea.

Thanks to our gift of Freeeeedom.

Karnal wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 9:48pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:40pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:17pm: I don’t know, Bobbie, let me guess. Hang em high? Looks like you’ve got competition, old boy. Well whatever he did you can guarantee that ISIS would not have lasted a week in Iraq if he was the leader. Better tell FD. He thinks Iraq is the next South Korea. Thanks to our gift of Freeeeedom.

Really?

Bobby. wrote on Nov 6^th, 2014 at 6:55am:

Karnal wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:48pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:40pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 9:17pm: I don’t know, Bobbie, let me guess. Hang em high? Looks like you’ve got competition, old boy. Well whatever he did you can guarantee that ISIS would not have lasted a week in Iraq if he was the leader. Better tell FD. He thinks Iraq is the next South Korea. Thanks to our gift of Freeeeedom. Really?

I kid you not. Do you think I could possibly make this up?

Freediver is forgiven

namaste

Freediver’s not taking any more questions. He knows how to play the game.

I do hope FD doesn’t feel offended. That’s now classed as an attack - if a Muslim does it.

If not, we just pretend he did. It’s called suspension of disbelief. We do it all the time when we watch actors pretending to be characters on TV.

FD wants this applied to real life. You gotta have a dream, you see.

Feel free to quote me Karnal.

freediver wrote on Nov 6^th, 2014 at 7:13pm:

Feel free to quote me Karnal.

I just did, FD. You didn’t reply.

But we know what you’re thinking.

Cunning, no?

Check this out, Bobbie.

FD, do you think Iraq could be the next South Korea after we gave them Freeedom?

I’m curious.

FD’s not saying. Deliberate evasion.

There’s your quote, FD.

Re: Perhaps this is why the "Islamophobes" fear Muslims?


How low is the bar of expectation for Islam when the most barbaric atrocities in the name of Allah surprise no one. (Raymond Ibrahim)



Startlingly well put.



On radicalisation of Muslim yuf:
After terror attacks, Western leaders routinely call on Muslim clerics and community representatives to condemn the acts as a message to would-be radicals in their flock. But for Muslim radicals, wrote University of South Australia academic Yassir Morsi in The Guardian in August, being condemned "is itself an affirmation".  According to this school of thought, supine community leaders provoke contempt among young Muslims, further entrenching their rad... I know, it's getting tedious.

On the shopping list of factors that are/might/could encourage radicalisation are proposals to cut welfare payments to people engaged in extremist conduct and not having Islamic chaplains in schools. Add to all this the bewildering and varied individual vulnerabilities to radicalisation, the needles in the haystack: single parent households, drug use, criminal activity, religious conversion, mental illness.

The point of this exercise is not to weigh the merits of these theories. Suffice to say, some seem sensible enough, others less so. (The one that made me laugh out loud came from American commentator Lee Smith who asserted teenage girls in Europe are joining ISIL because the West can't offer them "meaning and purpose", all but laying the blame at the feet of One Direction.)

The problem with this loose talk about radicalisation is probably twofold. In the racism of low expectations it verges on casting Muslims as tinderbox volatile, at risk of exploding if the wrong thing is broadcast or said or done. On the flip side, there's a subtle intimidation at work. Everything we do is fatally wrong. We're damned if we move against extremism, we're damned if we don't - and should a catastrophic attack occur then sure as night follows day it'll be our fault.
http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/radicalisation-every-answer-is-always-wrong-20141105-11gzy9.html

Quote:

The problem with this loose talk about radicalisation is probably twofold. In the racism of low expectations it verges on casting Muslims as tinderbox volatile, at risk of exploding if the wrong thing is broadcast or said or done.

Like a silly youtube video?

Especially silly YouTube videos. Very potent radicalisers.

Then we need more silly YouTube videos. Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations. No one has the right to not be offended.

We’re doing them a favour by offending them, no?

Exercising your freedom of speech is the best way to defend it Karnal.

I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it.

Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core.

Karnal wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 2:32pm:

I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it. Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core.

See? Complete, idiotic gibberish.
Like Brain and other heresy sniffers, you confuse (deliberately? are you that stupid?) opposition to something with offense.
I do not oppose the ostentatious display of anachronistic efnik dress, manner and values because they merely offend. I do not argue that they have no place in western, secular, liberal countries merely because they offend me. Being offended is not an arguement in itself.

Soren wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 12:04pm:

Re: Perhaps this is why the "Islamophobes" fear Muslims? How low is the bar of expectation for Islam when the most barbaric atrocities in the name of Allah surprise no one. (Raymond Ibrahim) Startlingly well put. On radicalisation of Muslim yuf: After terror attacks, Western leaders routinely call on Muslim clerics and community representatives to condemn the acts as a message to would-be radicals in their flock. But for Muslim radicals, wrote University of South Australia academic Yassir Morsi in The Guardian in August, being condemned "is itself an affirmation".  According to this school of thought, supine community leaders provoke contempt among young Muslims, further entrenching their rad... I know, it's getting tedious. On the shopping list of factors that are/might/could encourage radicalisation are proposals to cut welfare payments to people engaged in extremist conduct and not having Islamic chaplains in schools. Add to all this the bewildering and varied individual vulnerabilities to radicalisation, the needles in the haystack: single parent households, drug use, criminal activity, religious conversion, mental illness. The point of this exercise is not to weigh the merits of these theories. Suffice to say, some seem sensible enough, others less so. (The one that made me laugh out loud came from American commentator Lee Smith who asserted teenage girls in Europe are joining ISIL because the West can't offer them "meaning and purpose", all but laying the blame at the feet of One Direction.) The problem with this loose talk about radicalisation is probably twofold. In the racism of low expectations it verges on casting Muslims as tinderbox volatile, at risk of exploding if the wrong thing is broadcast or said or done. On the flip side, there's a subtle intimidation at work. Everything we do is fatally wrong. We're damned if we move against extremism, we're damned if we don't - and should a catastrophic attack occur then sure as night follows day it'll be our fault. http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/radicalisation-every-answer-is-always-wrong-20141105-11gzy9.html

How was the article put well?

So before the west bombed iraq Saddam and his regime were extremists?

Is stopping centrelink payments going to stop extemists? Hizb Tahrir a supposed extremist group have alot of the members with uni degrees and good jobs.

Because a handful of kids went to syria, every muslim Kid needs to be punished by stopping isalmic chaplains?

Soren wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 3:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 2:32pm: I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it. Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core. See? Complete, idiotic gibberish.

Oh, old boy. Are you saying you don’t take offence at women in headscarves and bearded numpties? Are you saying they don’t represent everything that is offensive to you and should be criticised and ridiculed at every opportunity?

Idiotic gibberish, eh? How many times have you told us this, old boy?

A fair few, I’d say. I know the words off by heart.

No one has the right to not be offended.

Karnal wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 2:32pm:

I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it. Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core.

Our freedom of speech does depend on the exercising of that right. Responding to the very real threats from the "tiny minority" with self censorship will only encourage the rest of them to demand more.

freediver wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 7:24pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 2:32pm: I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it. Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core. Our freedom of speech does depend on the exercising of that right. Responding to the very real threats from the "tiny minority" with self censorship will only encourage the rest of them to demand more.

I know, FD, that’s exactly what the old boy is saying.

If you don’t give those who offend you a piece of your mind, you’re just begging to have your Freeeedom taken away.

You know, PBs, deviants, dirty little inverts, bearded numpties, idiots, the tinted races, Muselmen...

How dare they parade themselves in such a way? To do so offends everything we as a civilised race stand for. Decency, normality, Freudian Lutheran values. The old boy didn’t come to this country to be offended. How can they do this to him?

No, FD, no one has the right to not be offended. We need to stick it to the deviants to protect our Freeeedom.

Karnal wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 9:02pm:

How dare they parade themselves in such a way? To do so offends everything we as a civilised race stand for. Decency, normality, Freudian Lutheran values.

Exactly.

They can and should be ridiculed for the anachronistic, antagonistic stance they embody.

There is no compulsion in accommodating backward cultural practices and norms.  Backward people must not be sheltered from their backwardness.

Karnal wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 6:08pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 3:09pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 2:32pm: I agree, FD. No one has the right to not be offended, and all should be offended in the most offensive way possible. Our Freeeedom depends on it. Just don’t offend the old boy, okay? He’s quite sensitive. The very image of a woman in a headscarf or a numpty with a beard offends him to the core. See? Complete, idiotic gibberish. Oh, old boy. Are you saying you don’t take offence at women in headscarves and bearded numpties? Are you saying they don’t represent everything that is offensive to you and should be criticised and ridiculed at every opportunity? Idiotic gibberish, eh? How many times have you told us this, old boy? A fair few, I’d say. I know the words off by heart. No one has the right to not be offended.

Yes, I told you this a fair few times but you are as thick and mendacious as ever and so you pretend not to comprehend.

Incomprehension is your base line, PB. Holding forth with great intellectual pretence in one minute, then carrying on like a fvcken looney the next, when your intellectual pretences are shown up for the vacuous BS they are.

Put on a headscarfe, PB, and assume a silent Muslima demeanure,  because exposing yourself like this is an embarrassment to you, a female Muselwoman, and all of us onlookers.

Soren wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 10:10pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 9:02pm: How dare they parade themselves in such a way? To do so offends everything we as a civilised race stand for. Decency, normality, Freudian Lutheran values. Exactly. They can and should be ridiculed for the anachronistic, antagonistic stance they embody. There is no compulsion in accommodating backward cultural practices and norms.  Backward people must not be sheltered from their backwardness.

Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations. I understand how you must feel, old boy. All those years of keeping a stiff upper lip - the private schools, the sodomy, the University of Balogney, the constant pressure to be someone you’re not, always striving to conform, to fit in, to keep up appearances.
.
You never feel comfortable in your own skin. Never. You don’t even know who you are or how you truly feel apart from a dull, burning numbness where once a soul - a soul? - may have been.

And there’s the dirty inverts getting fcked to Kingdom Come, there’s the grinning PBs, sitting in their slums with their hands out for your hard-earned baksheesh, everyone living it up and enjoying themselves while you struggle for your hard won virtue, hands above the sheets, the alarm clock set, your chastity intact.

Civilisation has its discontents, no? And the deviants have the hyde to expect to be treated equally, on the same level as someone like yourself, someone who has never done anything abnormal, despite the temptations which burn away, being wrestled away, always to return.

It is offensive. Of course it’s offensive. Who do these people think they are? You’ve struggled your whole life to be normal, and there they go, preening and parading their deviancy like savages - worse than savages. Animals.

They have no right whatsoever not to be offended, dear boy. Only decent, normal people have this right. As FD says, if you don’t actively use this right, they’ll win. And then where would we be?

Back in the jungles, that’s where.

You carry on, old boy. Your honour relies on it. No, our very civilisation relies on it. Without people like yourself, the inverts would win.

And this is the white man’s burden.

Soren wrote on Nov 5^th, 2014 at 4:49pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 11:28pm: Yet, you act as if it is what you believe, Soren.   You imply it, everytime you erect that strawman claim that the Terrorists are the real representatives of Islam and that what they are doing is what Islam demands of them, each and everytime they cut a head off.    I never, ever claimed that the terrorists are the real representatives.  I claim that they are impeccably Islamic. They are doing what they take Islam to demand of them. They are not distorting anything.

You see no inherent contradiction between what you've just claimed at what I've said you've claimed all along?

So, if they are the "impeccably Islamic" what does that make the rest of the Islamic world which rejects their supposedly "impaccable" credentials, Soren?    ::)

It is this sort of double-think that makes you so unbelieverable and so obviously such a good believer in the Islamist interpretation of Islam.

Tell me, what do you think of Opus Dei's interpretation of Christianity?  The Westboro Baptist Church's?  Or the Exclusive Brotherhood's?  Or even the Catholic versus Eastern Orthodox versus Protestant interpretations of Christianity?

Using your logic one or all of them is "impeccably Christian", which suggests what about the others?    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 4:04pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 5th, 2014 at 4:49pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 4th, 2014 at 11:28pm: Yet, you act as if it is what you believe, Soren.   You imply it, everytime you erect that strawman claim that the Terrorists are the real representatives of Islam and that what they are doing is what Islam demands of them, each and everytime they cut a head off.    I never, ever claimed that the terrorists are the real representatives.  I claim that they are impeccably Islamic. They are doing what they take Islam to demand of them. They are not distorting anything. You see no inherent contradiction between what you've just claimed at what I've said you've claimed all along? So, if they are the "impeccably Islamic" what does that make the rest of the Islamic world which rejects their supposedly "impaccable" credentials, Soren?    ::) It is this sort of double-think that makes you so unbelieverable and so obviously such a good believer in the Islamist interpretation of Islam. Tell me, what do you think of Opus Dei's interpretation of Christianity?  The Westboro Baptist Church's?  Or the Exclusive Brotherhood's?  Or even the Catholic versus Eastern Orthodox versus Protestant interpretations of Christianity? Using your logic one or all of them is "impeccably Christian", which suggests what about the others?    ::)

Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them.

In the meantime you apologise from and distract from Islamists doing exactly that.  Is that where idiot lengths reflex relativism takes you? 

Somewhere along the way you have lost what little brains you have ever possessed. 

Quote:

Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them.

But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we?

freediver wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:02pm:

Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we?

But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::)

freediver wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:02pm:

Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we?

Thankfully I am not as silly as that, or maybe my thinking is a bit more nuanced. The world must be a very confusing place for the likes of Brian and co who cannot see difference or graduation. 

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::)

Point us to the impeccable Christian theological credentials of blowing up trains, thicko.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::)

Why not?  If they consider themselves to be Christians, blow people up and behead and torture them in the name of thier Christian ideology and cite Christian texts as inspiration and reason to do so, you would need to be a particular sort of buggerwittery to say they are not Christian.  It may not be an interpretation of Christianity that you agree with, but they are most definately Christian.

To deny it is the  very specific and strange form of brain damage that Brian employs when pretending Islamists are not islamic. 

Brian doesn't deny it at all. In fact, just the other day he was holding up Joseph Kony as representative of Christianity. And the day before that. And the day before that. You'd be lucky to find a day when he hasn't.

freediver wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:35pm:

Brian doesn't deny it at all. In fact, just the other day he was holding up Joseph Kony as representative of Christianity. And the day before that. And the day before that. You'd be lucky to find a day when he hasn't.

Well that would make Brian all over the smacking shop then but then he has never been too coherent or his arguments possessed of any internal consistency.

Soren wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:17pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:10pm: freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::) Point us to the impeccable Christian theological credentials of blowing up trains, thicko.

I understand. It’s hard to talk with your mouth full, no?

Miam miam.

Soren wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:17pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:10pm: freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::) Point us to the impeccable Christian theological credentials of blowing up trains, thicko.

How about blowing up Abortion Clinics instead?  Will that do?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 12:47am:

Soren wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:17pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:10pm: freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::) Point us to the impeccable Christian theological credentials of blowing up trains, thicko. How about blowing up Abortion Clinics instead?  Will that do?   ::)

Indeed Brianless that is a very bad thing.  And yes they were Christian.  They were also smacking murdering terrorists. 

Exactly like the murdering terrorists whose actions you defend and deflect and apologise for.  Do you even have a point?  I think you think you do, but boiled down you got nothing. 

You apologise for atrocities committed in the name of Islam and condemn atrocities committed in the name of Christianity.

I can only put down your incoherent and inconstant philosophy as the usual White sandalista self loathing.

Datalife wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:19pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:10pm: freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::) Why not?  If they consider themselves to be Christians, blow people up and behead and torture them in the name of thier Christian ideology and cite Christian texts as inspiration and reason to do so, you would need to be a particular sort of buggerwittery to say they are not Christian.  It may not be an interpretation of Christianity that you agree with, but they are most definately Christian.

Yet Soren, Moses, Matty, et al all denied they would or could be Christians...   ;D ;D ;D ;D


Quote:

To deny it is the  very specific and strange form of brain damage that Brian employs when pretending Islamists are not islamic.

Has he ever suggested that?  I think you'll find instead he points out that their interpretation of Islam is not the same as that of mainstream Muslims.   Of course, that just might be too subtle for you.  Perhaps there are too many gradations for you to cope with?   ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 11:38am:

Datalife wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:19pm: To deny it is the  very specific and strange form of brain damage that Brian employs when pretending Islamists are not islamic.  Has he ever suggested that?

That's ALL he ever does.

You could not interpret vegetarianism as a call to eat as much meat as possible.
Not so with the Religion of Submission - it is interpreted as as the call to ... er... Submission.

Not peace. Submission.   Not exactly a consultative, accommodating kinda belief system, is it? 
Submit or else.

So these ISIS types take Islam at its word and go around spreading the message - submit or we'll keeeeel you.   As so they do. They do in the name of the Religion of Submission.
No peace until you submit.

Looks like the old boy studied Comparative Religion at the University of Balogney. They taught him that rather submitting to One Gud, Islam teaches submission to, er, Muslims.

How’s that for gibberish?

Karnal wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 6:53pm:

Looks like the old boy studied Comparative Religion at the University of Balogney. They taught him that rather submitting to One Gud, Islam teaches submission to, er, Muslims. How’s that for gibberish?

Islam is the Religion of Submission, not of Peace.


You don't need to go to uni to know that, PB. Islam means Submission. Being an arse bandit you would know all about submission.  You think Islam says 'jizz ya'   - that's why you are so hot for it and want it.

But you are labouring under a misunderstanding, PB.  Its jizya, and its a tax on the infidels.   
You must be disappointed.  Cruel, cruel heteronormative world.i

I beg to differ, old boy. It is a very jolly world.

And you’ll learn to submit. These things take time.

Open wide and stop being such an.old prude. You’ll like it, you’ll see.

Karnal wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

I beg to differ, old boy. It is a very jolly world. And you’ll learn to submit. These things take time. Open wide and stop being such an.old prude. You’ll like it, you’ll see.

Dear Karnal,
you have much to fear if ISIS takes over Australia:


http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Fear? Good heavens, anyone who can produce an iimage that makes the old boy go weak at the knees like that has my utmost respect.

What could turn him on more than strapping, red-blooded men beating themselves up?

They have my vote.

Karnal wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 10:25pm:

Fear? Good heavens, anyone who can produce an iimage that makes the old boy go weak at the knees like that has my utmost respect. What could turn him on more than strapping, red-blooded men beating themselves up? They have my vote.

How could anyone be so stupid as to whip themselves

half to death - over some old book?

Bobby. wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 11:31pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 10:25pm: Fear? Good heavens, anyone who can produce an iimage that makes the old boy go weak at the knees like that has my utmost respect. What could turn him on more than strapping, red-blooded men beating themselves up? They have my vote. How could anyone be so stupid as to whip themselves half to death - over some old book?

You clearly don’t know the aged care system. The old boy will go to great lengths to feel something - anything.

We do him a favour by turning him over and giving him a jolly rogering. It’s the only time he feels comfortable expressing himself.

If you ask me, ISIL are performing a civic duty.

Karnal wrote on Nov 11^th, 2014 at 9:56am:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 11:31pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 10:25pm: Fear? Good heavens, anyone who can produce an iimage that makes the old boy go weak at the knees like that has my utmost respect. What could turn him on more than strapping, red-blooded men beating themselves up? They have my vote. How could anyone be so stupid as to whip themselves half to death - over some old book? You clearly don’t know the aged care system. The old boy will go to great lengths to feel something - anything. We do him a favour by turning him over and giving him a jolly rogering. It’s the only time he feels comfortable expressing himself. If you ask me, ISIL are performing a civic duty.

Dear Karnal,
it is not as you see it in your world.

It's all predestined -  in the book of revelations.

forgiven

namaste

Bobby. wrote on Nov 11^th, 2014 at 1:12pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 11th, 2014 at 9:56am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 11:31pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 10:25pm: Fear? Good heavens, anyone who can produce an iimage that makes the old boy go weak at the knees like that has my utmost respect. What could turn him on more than strapping, red-blooded men beating themselves up? They have my vote. How could anyone be so stupid as to whip themselves half to death - over some old book? You clearly don’t know the aged care system. The old boy will go to great lengths to feel something - anything. We do him a favour by turning him over and giving him a jolly rogering. It’s the only time he feels comfortable expressing himself. If you ask me, ISIL are performing a civic duty. Dear Karnal, it is not as you see it in your world. It's all predestined -  in the book of revelations. forgiven namaste

ISIL are fine with that. I really don't know what you've got against them.

I might hand out their how-to-vote cards at the next erection. If we can get the old boy helping out in his wheelchair with his Hannibal Lector mask and restraints, we might rake in the sympathy vote.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 8:57pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 8:10pm: I beg to differ, old boy. It is a very jolly world. And you’ll learn to submit. These things take time. Open wide and stop being such an.old prude. You’ll like it, you’ll see. Dear Karnal, you have much to fear if ISIS takes over Australia: http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Yes, and of course you realise this is a shia ritual - you know the guys who ISIS are slaughtering wherever they find them?

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 11^th, 2014 at 2:02pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 10th, 2014 at 8:10pm: I beg to differ, old boy. It is a very jolly world. And you’ll learn to submit. These things take time. Open wide and stop being such an.old prude. You’ll like it, you’ll see. Dear Karnal, you have much to fear if ISIS takes over Australia: Yes, and of course you realise this is a shia ritual - you know the guys who ISIS are slaughtering wherever they find them?

No I didn't  -  it seems like they are doing a good job of slaughtering themselves.


http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Karnal wrote on Nov 9^th, 2014 at 8:45pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:17pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:10pm: freediver wrote on Nov 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Quote: Any time adherents of Westboro blow up a building or train, in furtherance of thier religion and citing thier religion as justification I will be more than happy to condemn them. But what if only a tiny minority of westboro baptists (say, 3 of them) blow up a train? You would then be forced to come to the defense of the rest of them, wouldn't you? Can't be tarring them all with the same brush now, can we? But would they be doing it because of their "impeccable" credentials as Christians?  I wonder?    ::) Point us to the impeccable Christian theological credentials of blowing up trains, thicko. I understand. It’s hard to talk with your mouth full, no? Miam miam.

These are the people in your corner, Brain. You should be concerned.

Oh, we’re concerned, old boy. We relish our concern.

No one has the right to not be offended, after all.


Karnal wrote on Nov 8^th, 2014 at 11:44pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 10:10pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 8th, 2014 at 9:02pm: How dare they parade themselves in such a way? To do so offends everything we as a civilised race stand for. Decency, normality, Freudian Lutheran values. Exactly. They can and should be ridiculed for the anachronistic, antagonistic stance they embody. There is no compulsion in accommodating backward cultural practices and norms.  Backward people must not be sheltered from their backwardness. Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations. I understand how you must feel, old boy. All those years of keeping a stiff upper lip - the private schools, the sodomy, the University of Balogney, the constant pressure to be someone you’re not, always striving to conform, to fit in, to keep up appearances. . You never feel comfortable in your own skin. Never. You don’t even know who you are or how you truly feel apart from a dull, burning numbness where once a soul - a soul? - may have been. And there’s the dirty inverts getting fcked to Kingdom Come, there’s the grinning PBs, sitting in their slums with their hands out for your hard-earned baksheesh, everyone living it up and enjoying themselves while you struggle for your hard won virtue, hands above the sheets, the alarm clock set, your chastity intact. Civilisation has its discontents, no? And the deviants have the hyde to expect to be treated equally, on the same level as someone like yourself, someone who has never done anything abnormal, despite the temptations which burn away, being wrestled away, always to return. It is offensive. Of course it’s offensive. Who do these people think they are? You’ve struggled your whole life to be normal, and there they go, preening and parading their deviancy like savages - worse than savages. Animals. They have no right whatsoever not to be offended, dear boy. Only decent, normal people have this right. As FD says, if you don’t actively use this right, they’ll win. And then where would we be? Back in the jungles, that’s where. You carry on, old boy. Your honour relies on it. No, our very civilisation relies on it. Without people like yourself, the inverts would win. And this is the white man’s burden.

Essentially Karnal,  you are saying that Australia is a colonial backwater without a discernable culture of her own. That's unusual for you.
Deflection is the kid brother of denial, if you don't like the message, ridicule the messenger. Here's a challenge for you, a witty piece criticizing the zealous beliefs of jihadists.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 3:41am:

Essentially Karnal,  you are saying that Australia is a colonial backwater without a discernable culture of her own..

Am I? Good heavens, that’s the old boy’s argument.

The zealous beliefs of jihadists, eh? Will do.

Wait until Y makes a post and we’ll have a little look-see.

Don't get me wrong, Karnal. I love the courage it takes for a Pakistani (man/woman-not sure) to stand up to the allied narco-industrial war machine. I would love it more if you were doing from Pakistan.

Homo? Is that you?

Don't play coy with me. You know I'm a Pakistani feminist from Western Sydney. I'm just down the road from Roti Hill.

Allied narco-industrial war machine, eh? You know how to get me all wet.

Just to let you know, Homo, all penetrative sex is rape, so don't even go there. Flirt with me again and I'll have you up for sexual assault.

Apparently I'm a homo and you're a feminist, yet you have a fear of me penetrating you. By applying some logic here, i can safely say that you're a man who is a feminist and you're actually experiencing anal moistness. BTW, is a male muslim feminist one who feeds his wives/daughters and or both before the goats?

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 12:32pm:

Apparently I'm a homo and you're a feminist, yet you have a fear of me penetrating you. By applying some logic here, i can safely say that you're a man who is a feminist and you're actually experiencing anal moistness. BTW, is a male muslim feminist one who feeds his wives/daughters and or both before the goats?

Now you're practicing patriarchal gender imperialism. It's a basic human right to choose my gender, thank you very much. Try pidgeon-holing me again and I'll have you up on a charge of slavery.

Does everyone call you daal when you go to Roti Hill?
Boom tish

Would you 2 homos get off the Islam section.

Islam is for real men like those below:


http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Bobby, that's gotta go in the caption contest.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 1:21pm:

Bobby, that's gotta go in the caption contest.

Its was off CNN - their best images.

Enter the photo.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 1:13pm:

Does everyone call you daal when you go to Roti Hill? Boom tish

How dare you even suggest such a sexist term?

Also, you're disrespecting our subcontinental brothers and sisters who founded this multicultural suburb. I could have you up for racial vilification for that one.

The hegemonic Anglo race is violent, oppressive and needs to be bred out of existence.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 1:16pm:

Would you 2 homos get off the Islam section. Islam is for real men like those below: http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Menstration envy. They're just jealous of our menses.

Men are so useless. Rather than caring for the young and cleaning up, they'd prefer to bleed.

Typical.

You know Karnal, old chap, Governor Phillip grazed sheep at the base of Rooty Hill (Roti Hill). I don't recall reading about any curry houses though. Shame, together they could have made a great vindaloo.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 1:45pm:

You know Karnal, old chap, Governor Phillip grazed sheep at the base of Rooty Hill (Roti Hill). I don't recall reading about any curry houses though. Shame, together they could have made a great vindaloo.

Absolute racism. Of course colonial history has whitewashed the curry houses from its pages. It doesn't reflect the true multicultural past of Sydney.

If you continue to offend our subcontinental fore-fathers, you should be prosecuted for racism. No ifs or buts. We Western Sydney residents are comfortable with our history. You racist blow-ins obviously come from some elitist, privaledged suburb.

The workers united will never be defeated. Your elitist racist ideology is an offence to our history.

Oh, please,  namaste Karnal, sir (or madam),last thing I would like to do is offend your racial sensitivities.  I just don't recall reading about too many Singhs in Australia's early history.

Karnal wrote on Nov 10^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

I beg to differ, old boy. It is a very jolly world. And you’ll learn to submit. These things take time. Open wide and stop being such an.old prude. You’ll like it, you’ll see.

You are in it for the promise of 'jizz ya', PB, we all know that.

But lemme tell you - you are labouring under a massive misunderstanding. They might jizz ya but the purpose really is extra tax and loss of privileges. Jizya is not the same as the sufi bathhouse 'We will, we will jizz ya' you frequent.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 12^th, 2014 at 5:52pm:

I just don't recall reading about too many Singhs in Australia's early history.

Of course you don’t. As a homo heteronormative imperialist racist, you’ve blacked it all out. The Roti Hill cemetary is full of proud, pioneering women from a range of cultures, black and white people alike.

Your white colonialist revisionism is a crime against our history. You people should be expunged. What contribution have you types made to our great multicultural past? Do you even eat curry? What about homos?

How offensive.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 11^th, 2014 at 2:02pm:

Yes, and of course you realise this is a shia ritual - you know the guys who ISIS are slaughtering wherever they find them?

AND vice versa.


Why are Muslims slaughtering their fellow Muslims? To show America how a proud Muslim deals with Western meddling in their affairs? 
Racism? Bigotry? Anti-diversity? Anti-multiculturalism?
All of the above? 

an important question S - but an infinitely more important one is - why are 99% of muslims *NOT* slaughtering their fellow muslims?

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 12:23am:

an important question S - but an infinitely more important one is - why are 99% of muslims *NOT* slaughtering their fellow muslims?

Well, it's more than the "1%.

Half are women, another 40 are below 18 half of whom are boys - so that leaves 30 %of males in the fighting age bracket. A good proporortion of those would be over 45-50, past the serious fighting age, leaving about 15% of the muslim population who is able to participate.
In Syria 200 thousand were killed in the last two years and half the population was driven beyond the borders. And the killing is done by the killers and their supporters, commanders, suppliers etc.

To say that it's the 1% of the Muslim population that causes all the upheaval is nonsense.  If it were rue then the question is - what is it about islam that allows 1% of its adherents to so completetly shape the political and social  landscape? What ARE the 99% doing about this takeover by the 1%??

*sigh* and round and round we go again.

In most places in the muslim world the 99% are and have been prevailing - they are prevailing in the largest muslim country on earth where the extremists are thoroughly quashed and confined to political irrelevance, they are prevailing in Turkey where a secularism reigns supreme, they are prevailing in almost every God-damned muslim country that isn't a war zone (thats right, believe it or not, almost all muslim countries are *NOT* slaughterhouses like Syria and Afghanistan).

Your depiction of the entire muslim world being dominated by slaughter and destruction is pure fantasy.

Oh, G. The proscribed response to that is a couple of news stories from the apologists’ cuddly Malaysia, followed up with FD’s selected exerpts from the Pew Survey.

You should know that by now. How many times have we done this?

Thats right K - and surreptitiously replace "muslims slaughtering" to "muslims wanting to slaughter. That takes care of the small inconvenience that most of the muslim world isn't characterised by actual slaughter  - rather its merely dominated by a whole heap of sinister "slaughter-minded" muslims.

As Yadda will never tire of explaining - a muslim is a follower of islam.

Karnal wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 11:01am:

Oh, G. The proscribed response to that is a couple of news stories from the apologists’ cuddly Malaysia, followed up with FD’s selected exerpts from the Pew Survey. You should know that by now. How many times have we done this?

Too often.  Far too often.  You know the definition of insanity?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 11:27am:

Thats right K - and surreptitiously replace "muslims slaughtering" to "muslims wanting to slaughter. That takes care of the small inconvenience that most of the muslim world isn't characterised by actual slaughter  - rather its merely dominated by a whole heap of sinister "slaughter-minded" muslims. As Yadda will never tire of explaining - a muslim is a follower of islam.

Exactly. Terrorists are replaced with that sinister class of ne’er-do-wells, the terrorist suspect. Child brides are replaced with unmarried defactos. Anti-Muslim crime (drug-dealing, alcohol-fuelled violence, etc) is deigned as the orders of Mo, and any Muslim denial of the above is described as deflection, playing the victim, or out and out taqiyya.

Cunning, no?

Moslem = a follower of Islam.

Say no more.

I neither eat curry nor homos, old chap.

Good for you.

If you ever fancy a bit of pork hock, the old boy’s in.

Try saying that with your mouth full.

Rocketanski wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 12:45pm:

I neither eat curry nor homos, old chap.

How unlucky can you get?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 10:26am:

*sigh* and round and round we go again. In most places in the muslim world the 99% are and have been prevailing - they are prevailing in the largest muslim country on earth where the extremists are thoroughly quashed and confined to political irrelevance, they are prevailing in Turkey where a secularism reigns supreme, they are prevailing in almost every God-damned muslim country that isn't a war zone (thats right, believe it or not, almost all muslim countries are *NOT* slaughterhouses like Syria and Afghanistan). Your depiction of the entire muslim world being dominated by slaughter and destruction is pure fantasy.

This is an exaggeration and you know it. But victimology requires relentless exaggeration.

Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Fine with me, you continue with that. No need to face any critical issues, no need to look within - keep deflecting and diminishing the problems that beset Muslims and Islam.

It is not a solution to anything but if you are uncomfortable with facing and honestly appraising  Islam's problems in front of nonMuslims, that's your personal weakness or choice at any rate.

Probably depends  on perspective, some would think France is in danger of going down the shitter, others would welcome it.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 12:23am:

an important question S - but an infinitely more important one is - why are 99% of muslims *NOT* slaughtering their fellow muslims?

The 99% is a myth.

Young Dutch Turks’ radical views worry MPs, call for more research Society November 12, 2014    MPs from across the political spectrum have called for more research into the attitudes of young Dutch Turks to the Islamic State, after a poll of 300 showed 80% saw nothing wrong in jihad, or holy war, against non-believers. The research, carried out by the Motivaction group in Amsterdam, was commissioned by the Forum multicultural institute. During a parliamentary debate on integration issues on Wednesday, Socialist, D66 and CDA MPs called for a special sitting to investigate why youths have such radical views, website nu.nl reports. The survey found 90% of young Turks think those fighting against Syrian president Assad’s troops are ‘heroes’ and half thought it would be a good thing if Dutch Muslims went to join the fight. Social affairs minister Lodewijk Asscher told website nu.nl on Tuesday the results of the survey were ‘worrying’ and pledged to carry out more in-depth research. He also said the research was contradictory, with high support for jihad but very little support for a religious caliphate. Speaking after a visit to the Kuba mosque in IJmuiden on Wednesday, Asscher said he had failed to find anyone who supported IS, the Volkskrant reports. Research The Forum research involved a mixture of online and face-to-face interviews with Dutch Turks aged between 18 and 34. It also showed 74% of Dutch Turks and 61% of Dutch Moroccans oppose the declaration of an Islamic caliphate in the region and a clear majority (62%) consider democracy essential for progress. Just 8% thought a caliphate was better for the Arabic world than a democracy. Forum said the support for pro-IS fighters among Turkish youngsters may be due to the coverage of events in the Middle East on Turkish broadcasters, watched by 86% of those questioned. By contrast, only 27% of the Moroccan youngsters in the survey watched Moroccan news programmes

Read more at DutchNews.nl: Young Dutch Turks’ radical views worry MPs, call for more research http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2014/11/young-dutch-turks-radical-views-worry-mps-call-for-more-research.php/

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 12:23am:

an important question S

Yet never addressed by Muslims.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 5:25pm:

Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it.

Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point.

I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly.

But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems".

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 5:37pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:25pm: Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point. I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly. But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems".

All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention.

Where the muslim world does go wrong is due to a variety of reasons, some of it shared by other, nonMuslim societies at the same stage of social and economic stage - but there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies.

That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on.
By Muslims.
Always deflecting from it by way of saying that other backward societies are also backward is covering up the uniquely ISLAMIC dimensions of the problem Muslims DO have. And by their having it, those who come into contact with them - in the Middle East, South Asia, the West - also have these problems in their lives.
Islam's problems have become everyone's problems because Muslims have been allowed to migrate everywhere and bring Islam with them. Islam and nonIslamic societies have a problem with living together when Islam is not able to dictate what it stand for and what is means  - Submission.
Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears.

Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others.

It is a big problem for you and other Muslims. Christianity requires love. That is something in the heart.
Submission is visible, covers every outward sign of behaviour. Islam wants to subjugate - but people do not want to submit to it. A recipe for confrontation - which is what you have everywhere where Islam appears.i

Quote:

I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly.

Either that, or once. But let's not split hairs eh?

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 8:18pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:37pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:25pm: Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point. I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly. But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems". All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention. Where the muslim world does go wrong is due to a variety of reasons, some of it shared by other, nonMuslim societies at the same stage of social and economic stage - but there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies. That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on. By Muslims. Always deflecting from it by way of saying that other backward societies are also backward is covering up the uniquely ISLAMIC dimensions of the problem Muslims DO have. And by their having it, those who come into contact with them - in the Middle East, South Asia, the West - also have these problems in their lives. Islam's problems have become everyone's problems because Muslims have been allowed to migrate everywhere and bring Islam with them. Islam and nonIslamic societies have a problem with living together when Islam is not able to dictate what it stand for and what is means  - Submission. Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears. Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. It is a big problem for you and other Muslims. Christianity requires love. That is something in the heart. Submission is visible, covers every outward sign of behaviour. Islam wants to subjugate - but people do not want to submit to it. A recipe for confrontation - which is what you have everywhere where Islam appears.

Old boy post number 3. Good old always, absolutely, never ever.

I like the new twist on submission. Did you use this one ten years ago, old chap? I’ve forgotten. How about Christianity and love?

No, some things change and some stay the same. I never underestimate the old boy tendency for creativity.

The ideas change ever so subtly, even if the arguments are carved in stone.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 8:18pm:

All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention.

well...


Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 9:56am:

what is it about islam that allows 1% of its adherents to so completetly shape the political and social  landscape? What ARE the 99% doing about this takeover by the 1%??

Frankly I see no meaningful difference - especially in the context of the comment that immediately preceded this about muslims killing other muslims.

Either way, the same points I made refute this argument as well.


Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 8:18pm:

Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others.

OK, Soren I know you are smart enough to realise you are misconstruing the meaning of the word 'submission' here. You are making a rhetorical point about how islam is sometimes manifested in the real world, which I'll grant you is not unreasonable. But it is unreasonable to insist that this manifestation is the be-all and end-all of islam, or even that it predominates in the islamic world - it doesn't. And it is particularly unreasonable to segue this into a lecture about the doctrinally driven moral differences between christianity and islam - which takes us back into the tired old "islam will only be good when it takes out islam" domain. Please leave this dead end debate to moses and FD - and all the rest of them.  The coversation has to be how muslims civilization can move forward - islamically, not masturbating over Yadda's various "a muslim is a follower of islam" rants. And we start that conversation by abbandoning this wilfully dishonest position that the crazy 1% is somehow dominating the entire muslim world and rapidly taking it over - and acknowledge the significant advancements the non-crazies have made - as muslims.

Quote:

The coversation has to be how muslims civilization can move forward - islamically, not masturbating over Yadda's various "a muslim is a follower of islam" rants. And we start that conversation by abbandoning this wilfully dishonest position that the crazy 1% is somehow dominating the entire muslim world and rapidly taking it over

You mean ISIS?


Quote:

and acknowledge the significant advancements the non-crazies have made - as muslims

You got me here Gandalf. What do you want me to acknowledge? The prestigious Saudi university uncovering new medical treatments? Or your efforts at reinterpreting Muhammed's command to kill gay people (both the giver and the receiver)?

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

You mean ISIS?

Ah yes - mighty ISIS taking over the muslim world:

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77494000/gif/_77494621_areas_under_is_control_624_untitled.gif

note the orange bits denote areas of actual control. Massive innit?


Meanwhile most of the muslim world is either partaking in military attacks against it, or condemning them.


freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

You got me here Gandalf. What do you want me to acknowledge? The prestigious Saudi university uncovering new medical treatments? Or your efforts at reinterpreting Muhammed's command to kill gay people (both the giver and the receiver)?

The thriving democracy and the near complete rejection of islamism in the largest muslim country on earth would be a start.

Quote:

Meanwhile most of the muslim world is either partaking in military attacks against it, or condemning them.

Oh. How is that working out?

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 10:31am:

Oh. How is that working out?

Lets see... more news from that largest muslim country that you pretend doesn't exist:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-16/isis-jakarta/5675550


Quote:

A Jakarta-based terrorism expert says there's been a unified backlash in Indonesia against the extremist group ISIS, which is now branded Islamic State.

Quote:

"There's rejection, absolutely, of both the caliphate of al-Baghdadi, as well as of the tactics used by ISIS in the pursuit of their objectives, particularly executions of other Muslims," Dr Jones told ABC AM. She says she's surprised by how widespread the condemnation of ISIS has been, ranging from mainstream Muslims to parts of the more extreme Jihadi community. "We've seen a bigger backlash and a strong backlash against ISIS than anything we've seen in Indonesia over the last ten years. And reaction and the condemnations of ISIS are coming from all quarters."

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 9:12am:

OK, Soren I know you are smart enough to realise you are misconstruing the meaning of the word 'submission' here.

Shurely shome mishtake.

So ISIS is raping and pillaging their way across Iraq and Syria, with real support from Muslims around the world, including Australia, and the Indonesians are saying bad things about them?

That's how it is working out?

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 10:45am:

So ISIS is raping and pillaging their way across Iraq and Syria, with real support from Muslims around the world, including Australia, and the Indonesians are saying bad things about them? That's how it is working out?

How its "working out" is that iSIS has an estimated force of 30 thousand who have managed to overrun a few dessert towns because they seized control of some heavy weaponry, and have a bit of money because they robbed some banks. Meanwhile there are sh*t-load more muslims fighting and condemning them, which means their manpower remains pitiful, and their area of control extends no further than this tiny strip of dessert.

And thus your attempt to use ISIS as an illustration of the 1% taking over the muslim world is exposed for the joke that it is.

Quote:

Meanwhile there are sh*t-load more muslims fighting and condemning them, which means their manpower remains pitiful, and their area of control extends no further than this tiny strip of dessert.

So why is it that this pitiful group of men in a tiny strip of desert is able to hold the "sh*tload more" of the good Muslims at bay?


Quote:

And thus your attempt to use ISIS as an illustration of the 1% taking over the muslim world is exposed for the joke that it is.

ISIS is only a tiny minority of the tiny minority. It is wrong to tar the rest of the tiny minority with the same brush.

Soren wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 8:18pm:

Christianity requires love.

I take it then you're a non-Christian?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 11:04am:

So why is it that this pitiful group of men in a tiny strip of desert is able to hold the "sh*tload more" of the good Muslims at bay?

Holding them at bay?

A rag tag group of fanatics sieze control of a few dessert towns - by default. A couple of months later, while the response force is still being organised, you ask how they are being "held at bay".

Its about as sensible as asking why, in the few weeks it took for the US and co to push the Iraqis out of Kuwait the Iraqis were able to "hold the US at bay".

Quote:

A couple of months later

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

Foundation of the group (1999–2006)

As Islamic State of Iraq (2006–2013)

In July 2012, al-Baghdadi released an audio statement online announcing that the group was returning to the former strongholds from which US troops and their Sunni allies had driven them prior to the withdrawal of US troops.[83] He also declared the start of a new offensive in Iraq called Breaking the Walls, which was aimed at freeing members of the group held in Iraqi prisons.[83] Violence in Iraq began to escalate that month, and by July 2013 monthly fatalities had exceeded 1,000 for the first time since April 2008.[84] The Breaking the Walls campaign culminated in July 2013, with the group carrying out simultaneous raids on Taji and Abu Ghraib prison, freeing more than 500 prisoners, many of them veterans of the Iraqi insurgency.

As Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (2013–2014)

Seems like a storm in a tea cup with everything blown well out of proportion.  IS has played on your Islamophobia and you've responded in exactly the knee-jerk way they expected you and your fellow Islamophobes to.   I'll give them this, they're masters of psychology but then, getting a Pavlovian reaction from your sort isn't hard.   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 1:28pm:

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

ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. And even there their success in terms of territorial expansion has been limited exclusively to dessert areas where the locals have existing grievances with the regimes.

You try and make a lot out of what a small group of fanatics can predictably do in remote and friendly terrain. Yet, as a demonstration of what the "muslim mind" is really thinking you completely ignore things like:
- the fact that it is such a pitiful force (30 thousand from a pool of 1.5 billion)
- the fact that they have failed spectacularly in their recruitment drive in non-war zones/non-failed state neighbours including Saudi Arabia and Jordan (countries that are now bombing them)
- the fact that their muslim brothers elsewhere in the world are overwhelmingly condemning them (see article on Indonesia)

Quote:

ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria.

Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf?

Karnal wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:37pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:25pm: Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point. I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly. But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems". All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention. Where the muslim world does go wrong is due to a variety of reasons, some of it shared by other, nonMuslim societies at the same stage of social and economic stage - but there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies. That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on. By Muslims. Always deflecting from it by way of saying that other backward societies are also backward is covering up the uniquely ISLAMIC dimensions of the problem Muslims DO have. And by their having it, those who come into contact with them - in the Middle East, South Asia, the West - also have these problems in their lives. Islam's problems have become everyone's problems because Muslims have been allowed to migrate everywhere and bring Islam with them. Islam and nonIslamic societies have a problem with living together when Islam is not able to dictate what it stand for and what is means  - Submission. Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears. Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. It is a big problem for you and other Muslims. Christianity requires love. That is something in the heart. Submission is visible, covers every outward sign of behaviour. Islam wants to subjugate - but people do not want to submit to it. A recipe for confrontation - which is what you have everywhere where Islam appears. Old boy post number 3. Good old always, absolutely, never ever. I like the new twist on submission. Did you use this one ten years ago, old chap? I’ve forgotten. How about Christianity and love? No, some things change and some stay the same. I never underestimate the old boy tendency for creativity. The ideas change ever so subtly, even if the arguments are carved in stone.

I can see you have no actual counter-argument, only PB grinning and gibberish.

"there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies.
That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on."


Address that, PB.

Or this:
"Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears."

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13^th, 2014 at 5:37pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:25pm: Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point. I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly. But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems".

I never "insisted on the entire muslim world being a war-ravaged hell hole". This is entirely your invention and formulation.  I am saying that every Muslim country is backward relative to where it could be for no other reason than the ideology of Islam. It is a mind-wrought prison and apostasy means Muslims are shackled to it in Muslim countries.

When Islam or Muslim-majority countries reject apostasy laws in the Koran and hadiths then you will have a chance for a free Islam because then people will follow it solely for honest reasons and those who do not will be able to freely express why they don't, without fear of 'vilifying Islam'.

Now it is coercion - Submission.

Soren wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 7:44pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 10:06pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:37pm: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 5:25pm: Look, Gandy, you go about your life thinking that Islam has no problems other than what nonMuslims project onto it. Thats rubbish and after all the time I've been here you should know better by now. I'll refer you to my thread critiquing the way modern islam has in many cases steered towards blind adherence to the hadith and sunna (directly contradicting the message of the Quran) as a starting point. I do and have speak/spoken up against the errant ways of modern islam - tirelessly. But this is different to insisting that what I would term as 'errant islam" has transformed the entire muslim world into war-ravaged hell holes. It demonstrably has not - as is illustrated by the fact that almost all the muslim world are not in fact war-ravaged hell-holes. Not prosperous and democratic paradises either, I'll grant you, but thats not what we are talking about. I'm not going to apologise for pointing out how wrong you are on this point, and I most certainly will take great issue with your flawed argument that in doing so I am "going about my life thinking that Islam has no problems". All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention. Where the muslim world does go wrong is due to a variety of reasons, some of it shared by other, nonMuslim societies at the same stage of social and economic stage - but there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies. That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on. By Muslims. Always deflecting from it by way of saying that other backward societies are also backward is covering up the uniquely ISLAMIC dimensions of the problem Muslims DO have. And by their having it, those who come into contact with them - in the Middle East, South Asia, the West - also have these problems in their lives. Islam's problems have become everyone's problems because Muslims have been allowed to migrate everywhere and bring Islam with them. Islam and nonIslamic societies have a problem with living together when Islam is not able to dictate what it stand for and what is means  - Submission. Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears. Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. It is a big problem for you and other Muslims. Christianity requires love. That is something in the heart. Submission is visible, covers every outward sign of behaviour. Islam wants to subjugate - but people do not want to submit to it. A recipe for confrontation - which is what you have everywhere where Islam appears. Old boy post number 3. Good old always, absolutely, never ever. I like the new twist on submission. Did you use this one ten years ago, old chap? I’ve forgotten. How about Christianity and love? No, some things change and some stay the same. I never underestimate the old boy tendency for creativity. The ideas change ever so subtly, even if the arguments are carved in stone. I can see you have no actual counter-argument, only PB grinning and gibberish. "there is an identifiable and evident ISLAMIC dimension to the backwardness and hell-holery of Islamic societies. That ISLAMIC element has to be owned, faced, discussed, corrected and worked on." Address that, PB. Or this: "Islam has a real problem with submitting to nonMuslim norms and values. This is why there is trouble everywhere Islam appears."

I see. You have Muslim troubles in your suburb, do you?

Oh, dear. Have you tried contacting police?

Better call the station, dear boy. Get someone out to blame Islam.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 9:12am:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: All of the Muslim world being a "war-ravaged hell hole" is your own victimological invention. well... Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 9:56am: what is it about islam that allows 1% of its adherents to so completely shape the political and social  landscape? What ARE the 99% doing about this takeover by the 1%?? Frankly I see no meaningful difference - especially in the context of the comment that immediately preceded this about muslims killing other muslims. Either way, the same points I made refute this argument as well.

The 99% versus 1% dichotomy is your invention.  But I do not believe it. I repeated your 99/1% dichotomy to show how ridiculous it is - if 99% of Muslims are all fine how come the crazy - supposedly tiny 1 % minority - is setting political agenda instead the 99%?

The answer is - they are not 1%. They are far more significant. And the '99%' are not all freedom loving but helpless victims of the manipulations by the 1%.

Freud, ancient history, cheese-snorting, mathematics, the old boy’s studied it all.

University of Balogney, eh? We can tell!

Karnal wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 8:16pm:

Freud, ancient history, cheese-snorting, mathematics, the old boy’s studied it all. University of Balogney, eh? We can tell!

moronic.

Soren wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 8:21pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 8:16pm: Freud, ancient history, cheese-snorting, mathematics, the old boy’s studied it all. University of Balogney, eh? We can tell! moronic.

What percent, old chap?

freediver wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 7:25pm:

Quote: ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf?

Iraq and Syria.

The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 11:09pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 7:25pm: Quote: ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Iraq and Syria. The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones.

Oh, I think you’ll find FD blames Islam for that.

Taqiyya, innit.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 11:09pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 7:25pm: Quote: ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Iraq and Syria. The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones.

I think we pay about $600 million in extra security costs because of Muslims.
Other countries have the same costs & that's the only reason
we don't have chaos & wars in our countries.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg

Karnal, does the Medical University of Islammabad teach hand-washing?

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 11:09pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 7:25pm: Quote: ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Iraq and Syria. The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones.

Perhaps, but this is the question I am asking. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Are you arguing that ISIS only thrives in places where ISIS thrives?

freediver wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 7:48am:

Are you arguing that ISIS only thrives in places where ISIS thrives?

Indeed I am.

Which is particularly relevant in response to you using ISIS as an example of the 1% rampaging across the entire muslim world. I'll say again, ISIS recruitment drives elsewhere - including their immediate neighbours - have been spectacular failures.

How do you know this?

How would you describe their recruitment drives in Australia?

There are plenty of places where the "tiny minority" actually makes up the majority of Muslims.

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14^th, 2014 at 9:12am:

Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: [quote author=soren2 link=1414814389/151#151 date=1415873919]Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. OK, Soren I know you are smart enough to realise you are misconstruing the meaning of the word 'submission' here.

Not at all.

All problems with Islam in Western countries stem from the unwillingness of the serious devotees to subordinate their Islamic aims to the liberal democratic culture they live in. Walking around in your pajamas, with the lady of the house in a black tent a few steps behind you is not exactly acting with full cultural awareness and sensitivity and willingness to embrace your host culture, does it? It is a mini revolt and demo of your apartness and superiority. In turn, they attract contempt, scorn and derision. 

Those nominal Muslims who have no interest in advancing the superiority of Islam have no problems in Western societies - they fit in and get on with it. They dress like everyone else, behave like everyone else. You wouldn't know they Muslims unless they told you. Nobody is bothered by them.

Soren wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 1:41pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 9:12am: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: [quote author=soren2 link=1414814389/151#151 date=1415873919]Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. OK, Soren I know you are smart enough to realise you are misconstruing the meaning of the word 'submission' here. Not at all. All problems with Islam in Western countries stem from the unwillingness of the serious devotees to subordinate their Islamic aims to the liberal democratic culture they live in. Walking around in your pajamas, with the lady of the house in a black tent a few steps behind you is not exactly acting with full cultural awareness and sensitivity and willingness to embrace your host culture, does it? It is a mini revolt and demo of your apartness and superiority. In turn, they attract contempt, scorn and derision.

That’s right, old boy. It might offend the Krauts.

No one has the right to be tinted, no?

Soren wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 1:41pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 9:12am: Soren wrote on Nov 13th, 2014 at 8:18pm: [quote author=soren2 link=1414814389/151#151 date=1415873919]Islam does not mean 'peaceful coexistence', it means Submission. If you take Islam seriously as a devotee, you are not going to submit bur rather expect submission from all others. OK, Soren I know you are smart enough to realise you are misconstruing the meaning of the word 'submission' here. l Those nominal Muslims who have no interest in advancing the superiority of Islam have no problems in Western societies - they fit in and get on with it. They dress like everyone else, behave like everyone else. You wouldn't know they Muslims unless they told you. Nobody is bothered by them.

Sorry, dear boy, did I hear you right? Are you saying you’re not offended by Muselmen?

Shurely shome mishtake.

Maybe this is why Islam is feared:

The International Society for Human Rights reports that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination are directed against Christians. If 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination were directed at any other group, it would be the top story on every news channel and the chief concern of our leaders. But it's Christians, so . . . no worries.

And who is doing the persecution? Find out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U#t=69

Bobby. wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 4:28am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 11:09pm: freediver wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 7:25pm: [quote]ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Iraq and Syria. The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones.

I think we pay about $600 million in extra security costs because of Muslims.
Other countries have the same costs & that's the only reason
we don't have chaos & wars in our countries.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg


My post ignored by Gandalf again?

Soren wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 2:27pm:

Maybe this is why Islam is feared: The International Society for Human Rights reports that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination are directed against Christians. If 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination were directed at any other group, it would be the top story on every news channel and the chief concern of our leaders. But it's Christians, so . . . no worries. And who is doing the persecution? Find out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U#t=69

So, who are the other 20% directed against, Soren?

I'd suggest any persecution for any reason against any group is wrong.  You however appear to want to perpetuate increased persecution of one group.  Why?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 4:49pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 2:27pm: Maybe this is why Islam is feared: The International Society for Human Rights reports that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination are directed against Christians. If 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination were directed at any other group, it would be the top story on every news channel and the chief concern of our leaders. But it's Christians, so . . . no worries. And who is doing the persecution? Find out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U#t=69 So, who are the other 20% directed against, Soren? I'd suggest any persecution for any reason against any group is wrong.  You however appear to want to perpetuate increased persecution of one group.  Why?   ::)

Muslims are persecuting Christians. Got that, dishonest b vgger? Muslims are persecuting Christians.

Will you say anything about THAT, you dishonest bastard??

Soren wrote on Nov 16^th, 2014 at 8:42pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 4:49pm: Soren wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 2:27pm: Maybe this is why Islam is feared: The International Society for Human Rights reports that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination are directed against Christians. If 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination were directed at any other group, it would be the top story on every news channel and the chief concern of our leaders. But it's Christians, so . . . no worries. And who is doing the persecution? Find out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U#t=69 So, who are the other 20% directed against, Soren? I'd suggest any persecution for any reason against any group is wrong.  You however appear to want to perpetuate increased persecution of one group.  Why?   ::) Muslims are persecuting Christians. Got that, dishonest b vgger? Muslims are persecuting Christians. Will you say anything about THAT, you dishonest bastard??

Why do you avoid the question I asked, Soren?  Why do you feel it necessary to resort to personal abuse all the time?   ::)

Perhaps it's his reversion to childhood?  Better be careful, he'll be flinging faeces at you next!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Nov 17^th, 2014 at 11:31am:

Perhaps it's his reversion to childhood?  Better be careful, he'll be flinging faeces at you next!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Miam miam.

freediver wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

How do you know this? How would you describe their recruitment drives in Australia? There are plenty of places where the "tiny minority" actually makes up the majority of Muslims.

Where?  Your imagination?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 16^th, 2014 at 11:03pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 16th, 2014 at 8:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 4:49pm: Soren wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 2:27pm: Maybe this is why Islam is feared: The International Society for Human Rights reports that 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination are directed against Christians. If 80 percent of all acts of religious discrimination were directed at any other group, it would be the top story on every news channel and the chief concern of our leaders. But it's Christians, so . . . no worries. And who is doing the persecution? Find out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdMUddGe-U#t=69 So, who are the other 20% directed against, Soren? I'd suggest any persecution for any reason against any group is wrong.  ::) Muslims are persecuting Christians. Got that, dishonest b vgger? Muslims are persecuting Christians. Will you say anything about THAT, you dishonest bastard?? Why do you avoid the question I asked, Soren?  Why do you feel it necessary to resort to personal abuse all the time?   ::)

Because you are incredibly dishonest and will never shrink from completely misrepresenting what I say.

" You however appear to want to perpetuate increased persecution of one group.  Why?  " Where do I say anything about always resort to dishonest misrepresentation. wanting to increase persecution of one group?  You equate criticism with persecution. That is a dishonest, willful, deliberate misrepresentation. But as you have no real response to the criticism.
This is why I identify you as a dishonest bastard.

|dev|null wrote on Nov 17^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

freediver wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 8:55am: How do you know this? How would you describe their recruitment drives in Australia? There are plenty of places where the "tiny minority" actually makes up the majority of Muslims. Where?  Your imagination?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Some of the places that Gandalf and Brian hold up as examples of progressive Islam.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 15^th, 2014 at 4:27pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 4:28am: polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 11:09pm: freediver wrote on Nov 14th, 2014 at 7:25pm: [quote]ISIS has thrived only in the warzones of Iraq and Syria. Interesting logic there. Why is Iraq a warzone Gandalf? Iraq and Syria. The question you should be asking is why almost all the rest of the muslim world are not war zones. I think we pay about $600 million in extra security costs because of Muslims. Other countries have the same costs & that's the only reason we don't have chaos & wars in our countries.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/Crazy_Muslims.jpg



My post still  ignored by Gandalf again?

Bobby. wrote on Nov 17^th, 2014 at 8:00pm:

My post still  ignored by Gandalf again?

Of course. In order to accept the precepts of Islam, one must engage in Orwellian Doublethink. But Gandalf's ideologically opposed to any kind of thinking, so he simply ignores it instead.

MumboJumbo wrote on Nov 17^th, 2014 at 8:50pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 17th, 2014 at 8:00pm: My post still  ignored by Gandalf again? Of course. In order to accept the precepts of Islam, one must engage in Orwellian Doublethink. But Gandalf's ideologically opposed to any kind of thinking, so he simply ignores it instead.

Bush was right -

you're either with us or you're with the terrorists.

I refuse to be with either group of idiots.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Nov 18^th, 2014 at 4:08pm:

I refuse to be with either group of idiots  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

That would be this group?

;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

Your a life and founding member of that "group of idiots".

http://s25.postimg.org/wxzx1w6f3/image.jpg

And besides that:

http://s25.postimg.org/imawgi0zj/image.jpg

Quote:

Dominion Theology Dominion Theology or Dominionism is the idea that Christians should work toward either a nation governed by Christians or one governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law. At least under this name, it exists primarily among non-mainstream Protestants in the United States. It is a form of theocracy and is related to theonomy, though it does not necessarily advocate Mosaic law as the basis of government. Prominent adherents of Dominion Theology are otherwise theologically diverse, including the Calvinist Christian Reconstructionism and the charismatic/Pentecostal Kingdom Now theology and New Apostolic Reformation.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology]

:D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Nov 18^th, 2014 at 5:14pm:

Quote: Dominion Theology Dominion Theology or Dominionism is the idea that Christians should work toward either a nation governed by Christians or one governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law. At least under this name, it exists primarily among non-mainstream Protestants in the United States. It is a form of theocracy and is related to theonomy, though it does not necessarily advocate Mosaic law as the basis of government. Prominent adherents of Dominion Theology are otherwise theologically diverse, including the Calvinist Christian Reconstructionism and the charismatic/Pentecostal Kingdom Now theology and New Apostolic Reformation. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology] :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

[T]here is no “school of thought” known as “dominionism”. The term was coined in the 1980s by Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.

Same wiki



You see? You are a stupid, malicious little fish.

Sounds like "Islamofacism" in that regard, Soren.  It is never used outside of Islamophobic websites and blogs...   ::)

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/18/world/meast/jerusalem-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

4 worshipers killed in Jerusalem synagogue; Netanyahu calls for unity
By Greg Botelho, Ralph Ellis and Ben Wedeman, CNN
November 18, 2014 -- Updated 1951 GMT (0351 HKT)




Quote:

Jerusalem (CNN) -- A Jerusalem synagogue turned from peaceful sanctuary to house of horrors within moments Tuesday, after two Palestinian cousins wielding a gun and butcher knives attacked during morning prayers -- a terror attack that Israel's leader characterized as "blood libel" fanned by Palestinian leaders. Addressing reporters Tuesday night, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for national unity against "those human animals who committed this massacre" and against those -- singling out Hamas, the Islamic movement and the Palestinian Authority -- who he claims "disseminate libels against the state of Israel." "There are those who wish to uproot us from the capital, from our land," he said, referring to Jerusalem. "They will not be successful... We have to unify forces." Netanyahu spoke hours after the latest act of violence to afflict the region, this time at a synagogue in West Jerusalem's Har Nof area.

Alleged terrorists, cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal, residents of Jabel Mukaber. One of them worked in the supermarket adjacent to the synagogue

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/11/18/1416315976123/572d5d3b-13d0-4d81-a5ff-6a2cb131ef09-460x276.jpeg

freediver wrote on Nov 17^th, 2014 at 7:31pm:

|dev|null wrote on Nov 17th, 2014 at 1:31pm: freediver wrote on Nov 15th, 2014 at 8:55am: How do you know this? How would you describe their recruitment drives in Australia? There are plenty of places where the "tiny minority" actually makes up the majority of Muslims. Where?  Your imagination?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D Some of the places that Gandalf and Brian hold up as examples of progressive Islam.

Really?  According to whom?  You?  We know your opinion on this sort of issue is seriously warped FD.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 18^th, 2014 at 10:17pm:

Sounds like "Islamofacism" in that regard, Soren.  It is never used outside of Islamophobic websites and blogs...   ::)

Exactly:


Quote:

The term, "Islamofascism" has been criticized by several scholars[29] and journalists. Historian Niall Ferguson[30] and international relations scholar Angelo Codevilla consider it historically inaccurate and simplistic.[31] Author Richard Alan Nelson[who?] criticized the term as being generally used as a pejorative or for propaganda[32][33] purposes. Tony Judt argued in a September 2006 article in the London Review of Books that use of the term was intended to reduce the War on Terror to "a familiar juxtaposition that eliminates exotic complexity and confusion", criticising authors who use the term Islamo-fascism and present themselves as experts despite not having previous expertise about Islam.[34] Critics such as former National Review columnist Joseph Sobran, and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman argue that "Islamofascism is nothing but an empty propaganda term" used by proponents of the "War on Terror".[32][35][36] Security expert Daniel Benjamin, political scientist Norman Finkelstein and The American Conservative columnist Daniel Larison, highlight the claim that, despite its use as a piece of propaganda, the term is inherently meaningless, since as Benjamin notes, "there is no sense in which jihadists embrace fascist ideology as it was developed by Mussolini or anyone else who was associated with the term."[37][38] Cultural historian Richard Webster has argued that grouping many different political ideologies, terrorist and insurgent groups, governments, and religious sects into one single idea of "Islamofascism" may lead to an oversimplification of the phenomenon of terrorism.[39] In a similar vein the National Security Network argues that the term dangerously obscures important distinctions and differences between groups of Islamic extremists while alienating moderate voices in the Muslim world because it "creates the perception that the United States is fighting a religious war against Islam."[40] Daniel Larison attributes proponent Hitchens' support of the phrase to his anti-religious stance.[41] British historian Niall Ferguson points out that this political use of what he calls a "completely misleading concept," is "just a way of making us feel that we're the 'greatest generation' fighting another World War."[30] Reza Aslan claims the term "falls flat" when describing groups like al-Qaeda, noting that they are anti-nationalist while fascism is ultra-nationalist.[42]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism#Criticism]

Seems to a lot of knowledgeable people speaking against the use of "Islamofacism" as against the two speaking out against "Dominionism Theology".  Soren is again proving how much of an spineless apologist he is for Christianity.  ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D