Page 4 of today's Australian - "Mainstream leaders skirting around extremism" by Chris Kenny. For some reason I can't google it.

From the front page:

Premier Mike Baird’s backing for ‘besieged’ Islamic community

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/premier-mike-bairds-backing-for-besieged-islamic-community/news-story/9901a9d091fd7953070b313a3ae3401d

NSW Premier Mike Baird has ­endorsed remarks from a senior Muslim leader who, in an emotional speech, said his community was under siege from Islamophobic Australians and racism.

At a celebration to mark the end of Ramadan, the Lebanese Muslim Association president, Samier Dandan, gave a forceful address in front of 40,000 Muslims in which he attacked the media and the political elite for encouraging the rise of far-right political parties and “hate preachers” in federal parliament.

The leader of one of the country’s largest Muslim organisations used the religious occasion to lament how “vulnerable” the Australian Muslim community had become in the face of “bigotry and hatred”.

“The continued rise of Islamophobic discourse in the public in addition to a number of divisive and toxic policy decisions have only exacerbated negative sentiments towards the Australian Muslim Community,” Mr Dandan said. “We are witnessing the growth in far-right hate groups and political parties, as proven by last week’s election. Their increasing influence is a reflection of the critical mass of support public Islamophobia is currently enjoying.”

Mr Dandan also referred to the “dehumanising of Muslims” and the misunderstanding of Islam in Australia.

Speaking after Mr Dandan, Mr Baird failed to condemn the community leader’s inflammatory remarks about “divisive and toxic policy decisions” and ­instead joined in the chorus ­denouncing racial vilification in the Muslim community.

Mr Baird spoke of his trip to the Middle East during the year, where he visited a refugee camp on Israel’s west bank.

“Friends, I had the opportunity this year to go to Palestine and I met with the next generation and some young kids, and what was clear was their yearning for peace,” Mr Baird said.

“We must do more to promote peace and come together. And as we just heard from Samier, we must stand up against any form of racial vilification. We must stand up, where we see intolerance we must respond with tolerance.”

Organisers estimated about 40,000 people gathered in southwest Sydney to mark Eid-ul-Fitr, the end of Ramadan, but none of the speakers mentioned the rise in Islamic State or the issue of radicalisation.

NSW Deputy Premier and Police Minister Troy Grant told The Australian he did not think Islamophobia was a bigger issue than Islamic terrorism.

None addressed the issue of radicalisation, focusing instead on Islamophobia and racism.

Mr Baird refused to condemn Mr Dandan’s remarks when contacted after the ceremony. “There were a number of other speakers but the Premier won’t be doing any commentary on their contributions,” his spokesman said.

Asked why he spoke about ­racial vilification towards the Muslim community but did not use the opportunity in front of 40,000 people to discuss radicalisation or terrorism, Mr Baird’s spokesman said “there were many subjects the Premier did not mention in his remarks, which occupied less than three minutes”.

Federal Labor MP Tony Burke, whose electorate of Watson sits in south west Sydney, also spoke about Islamophobia and hatred in his speech, which did not touch on radicalisation or terrorism. “There will be some people over the next three to six years who will try to respond with hate and there will be people who try to divide our community,” he said in his speech, while promoting the multicultural face of modern Australia. When asked why he raised Islamophobia but not radicalisation as an issue, Mr Burke said his speech was directed at “anyone who is trying to cause division or hatred”.

He said both issues were a problem in Australia. “My speech today was against all forms of hatred, whether it be people who seek to radicalise the community or people who promote prejudice,” he said.

“Radicalisation involves fewer people with much more extreme consequences. Prejudice doesn’t have the same extreme consequences but can often involve more people. Both are wrong and both need to be opposed.”

NSW Opposition Leader Luke Foley addressed the crowd and also spoke about the “preachers of hate”, with a reference to One Nation leader Pauline Hanson. He had a similar message about ­racism, xenophobia and the need for cultural diversity in Australia.

“The likes of Pauline Hanson who seek to spread ignorance and hateful bigotry, we reject you,” Mr Foley said, adding he visited Lebanon two months ago where he met with the Grant Mufti to discuss co-operation between Muslims and Christians in the middle eastern country.

By 6am yesterday, Lakemba Mosque in south west Sydney, which was hosting the religious celebrations, was full to capacity.

Lakemba Mosque imam Sheikh Yahya Safi said some Australians wanted Muslims to “react in a bad way” but that the religion was one of peace.

“We love each human. We love the good for each person, especially here for the Australians here in Australia,” he said.

“We never see Muslims that has hatred in his heart because it is against Islam. It is against Islam.

“We see in our days people want us to react in a bad way in order to show that Islam is not love, is not mercy, but we need ... to show you that Islam indeed in reality is a religion of peace, a religion of mercy, a religion that likes for others what it likes for themselves.”

On the jumping castles at the Eid-al-Fitr celebrations yesterday, children were playing, with some wearing hijabs, following a global trend where the hair-scarfs are being worn by children who have not reached puberty.

---

I wonder if Sheikh Yahya Safi agrees with Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman and Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed who want to kill gays (and who also deny having radical anti-gay views).

How does that fit in with the "peace, love, do unto others" version of Islam presented at the victimhood rally?

FD I can't say I've heard the Grand Mufti saying he wants to kill gays. Can you cite him please.

If Islam is a religion of peace why are we wasting over $10 million a year on deradicalisation programs for muslims?

Why is the total amount spent to deradicalise all other religons in Australia zero zip zilch?

smh.com.au/national/the-multimillion-dollar-deradicalisation-business-20160212-gmske3.html

If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse?

Islamophobia has become a shield that blunts out the cry of evil behaviour.

This is not about race, this is about doctrine, that does cut across all ethnic backgrounds,

You cannot be a bigot in calling out Islams or another religions set of bad ideas.

True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:31pm:

If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse?

There was a muslim who got into trouble for marrying a 12 year old girl in Australia, I wonder how many muslims haven't been caught for sex offences.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:35pm:

True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree?

I agree there is no need to make up lies. Islam looks bad, all by itself.

Mistress Nicole wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:41pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:35pm: True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree? I agree there is no need to make up lies. Islam looks bad, all by itself.

Thanks Nicole. I wonder why so many people here have so much difficulty admitting this.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:35pm:

True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree?

There will always be racists and bigots among us, its just fact and common sense that they will always exist.

But its also inexcusable that we deny that there is a pattern of disturbing behaviour coming from people who associate themselves with a radical islamic doctrine that calls for war against non believers or infidels that's seen in effects through terrorist attacks seen in places like New York city, Paris, brussels, san berdanino, Orlando, instanbul, the rise of issis, there is clearly a problem within Islam that cannot continue to be denied forever.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:31pm:

If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse?

Because we don't believe that putting a new council in charge of a few schools will fix an institutionalised problem.

What do you think Gandalf - should we refrain from calling out Islam in case Muslims start blowing things up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shady_Alsuleiman

In 2013, Alsuleiman spoke of the "evil actions" of homosexuality, saying, "Allah will send on them diseases they have never experienced before, What's the most common diseases these days, HIV, AIDS, that's so common, and there's no cure to it... These are evil actions that bring evil outcomes to our society.”" He has also called for women to be ‘hung by their breasts in hell’ and that adulterers should be stoned to death and pre-marital sex by women should be severely punished. "Remember that if there is an Islamic state the punishment of zina (sex outside marriage), the punishment of those who commit zina, if they have never been married before, they will be lashed 100 lashes. If they are married while they committed zina, or previously been married and divorced, and they committed zina, then their punishment is stoning to death."

In 2014 it was reported that Alsuleiman spoke at Park View Academy,[10] a Birmingham UK secondary school claimed to be at the centre of Operation Trojan Horse. Alsuleiman told the pupils, "Give victory to Muslims in Afghanistan… Give victory to all the Mujahideen all over the world. Oh Allah, prepare us for the jihad".[11][12] A subsequent Department for Education, Education Funding Agency (EFA) report said that there was a breach of standards at the school which had allowed, "Sheikh Shady Al-Suleiman, known to extol extremist views (e.g. stoning of adulterers), to address the students".[13] A newspaper report said Asuleiman had only talked about "time management".

In June 2016, Alsuleiman participated in an Iftar dinner at Kirribilli House hosted by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister said he would not have been invited Alsuleiman had he known of his position regarding homosexuals. The sheikh denied he held radical anti-gay views.[15][16] Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed has repudiated Malcolm Turnbull's position on this issue, saying Islam has a, "longstanding" position on homosexuality" which "no person can ever change". He said that any attempt to call out its teachings could lead to radicalisation.[17]

FD can you cite the Grand Mufti saying he thinks gays should be killed?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:06pm:

FD can you cite the Grand Mufti saying he thinks gays should be killed?

FD doesn’t need to do that, G. He has a question:

Do you believe in executing gays who do it Mardi Gras-style.(both the giver and receiver)?

Karnal wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:14pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:06pm: FD can you cite the Grand Mufti saying he thinks gays should be killed? FD doesn’t need to do that, G. He has a question: Do you believe in executing gays who do it Mardi Gras-style.(both the giver and receiver)?

Greg told me they're called "pitchers and catchers".

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:38pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:31pm: If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse? There was a muslim who got into trouble for marrying a 12 year old girl in Australia, I wonder how many muslims haven't been caught for sex offences.

All social groups/religions/etc. have at various times sheltered sex offenders in Australia's history, Baron, even your favoured fellow gun nuts.  We have a massive Royal Commission in progress at the moment on the issue.  Jews, Christians, yes, even an occasional Muslim are up before it.  Shame on them all.   So why single out Muslims alone?  You're not an Islamophobe are you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

stryder wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:51pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:35pm: True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree? There will always be racists and bigots among us, its just fact and common sense that they will always exist. But its also inexcusable that we deny that there is a pattern of disturbing behaviour coming from people who associate themselves with a radical islamic doctrine that calls for war against non believers or infidels that's seen in effects through terrorist attacks seen in places like New York city, Paris, brussels, san berdanino, Orlando, instanbul, the rise of issis, there is clearly a problem within Islam that cannot continue to be denied forever.

And how many have occurred in Australia, Spider?

A small handful.

Funny that.  Could it be that Australian Muslims in the main are peaceful, law-abiding Australians?   If they are, perhaps its not what you believe they believe but what they actually believe that matters?  Mmmm?    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:48pm:

stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:51pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:35pm: True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree? There will always be racists and bigots among us, its just fact and common sense that they will always exist. But its also inexcusable that we deny that there is a pattern of disturbing behaviour coming from people who associate themselves with a radical islamic doctrine that calls for war against non believers or infidels that's seen in effects through terrorist attacks seen in places like New York city, Paris, brussels, san berdanino, Orlando, instanbul, the rise of issis, there is clearly a problem within Islam that cannot continue to be denied forever. And how many have occurred in Australia, Spider? A small handful. Funny that.  Could it be that Australian Muslims in the main are peaceful, law-abiding Australians?   If they are, perhaps its not what you believe they believe but what they actually believe that matters?  Mmmm?    ::)

Why would Australian Muslims believe any different to Rotterdam Muslims?

Mistress Nicole wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:48pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:51pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:35pm: True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree? There will always be racists and bigots among us, its just fact and common sense that they will always exist. But its also inexcusable that we deny that there is a pattern of disturbing behaviour coming from people who associate themselves with a radical islamic doctrine that calls for war against non believers or infidels that's seen in effects through terrorist attacks seen in places like New York city, Paris, brussels, san berdanino, Orlando, instanbul, the rise of issis, there is clearly a problem within Islam that cannot continue to be denied forever. And how many have occurred in Australia, Spider? A small handful. Funny that.  Could it be that Australian Muslims in the main are peaceful, law-abiding Australians?   If they are, perhaps its not what you believe they believe but what they actually believe that matters?  Mmmm?    ::) Why would Australian Muslims believe any different to Rotterdam Muslims?

Different interpretations, "Nicole" based on where they originate from.  Differing circumstances, differing relationship with the surrounding society.

We have few North African Muslims in Australia.   We mainly source our Muslim immigrants from SW and SE Asia.  Therefore, they have differing views on aspects of their religious beliefs.   And of course, because many are Refugees and Asylum Seekers, they are usually fleeing the more conservative Muslims...    ::)

Mistress Nicole wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:48pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:51pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:35pm: True Spider, but I'd contend that you can be a bigot for making up lies, or at the very least perpetuating baseless claims in order to smear muslims, would you agree? There will always be racists and bigots among us, its just fact and common sense that they will always exist. But its also inexcusable that we deny that there is a pattern of disturbing behaviour coming from people who associate themselves with a radical islamic doctrine that calls for war against non believers or infidels that's seen in effects through terrorist attacks seen in places like New York city, Paris, brussels, san berdanino, Orlando, instanbul, the rise of issis, there is clearly a problem within Islam that cannot continue to be denied forever. And how many have occurred in Australia, Spider? A small handful. Funny that.  Could it be that Australian Muslims in the main are peaceful, law-abiding Australians?   If they are, perhaps its not what you believe they believe but what they actually believe that matters?  Mmmm?    ::) Why would Australian Muslims believe any different to Rotterdam Muslims?

The fact that they are about 10 thousand miles apart, different national and ethnic composition, different host community, different political issues - we could probably cite about 100 reasons.

FD,

Regarding statements made in the OP;

People like Mike Baird and Malcolm Turnbull are not stupid, unintelligent men.

So, do you believe that politicians like Mike Baird and Malcolm Turnbull, have been ill-informed [by their 'expert' advisors] about the nature of ISLAM ?            [n.b. in the example from o/seas, moslems are invariably accepted [by government bureaucrats] as 'the best people', to be appointed to advisory positions in government, advising the government executive, about how best to deal with issues involving ISLAM and local moslems !]

Or, do you believe that politicians like Mike Baird and Malcolm Turnbull are largely aware of ISLAM's nefarious nature, but that cynically, they have chosen to simply play 'smart politics', and avoid any harmful public confrontation with an increasingly [politically] influential, and politically savy group of people in our community ?

Or, do you believe that current political leaders like Mike Baird and Malcolm Turnbull may be aware of the 'challenge' which ISLAM presents to our 'systems' of control, but are confident that they have the means to 'manage' [and prevent or minimise] any harmful social conflict or animosity which could possibly emerge, between moslems and non-moslems, here in Australia ?



Me ?

I suspect either the 1st or the third.

Myself, i despair for our peace, here in Australia, when people in our community like Mike Baird and Malcolm Turnbull, can't or won't or are incapable of, confronting what is true.

If not them [people into whose hands we put, and entrust, our very lives and safety], then who ?

Atm, we are simply allowing the cancer to grow, unchecked, throughout our systems !

ISLAM does not bring anything benign [nor any gratitude], to those who choose to host and nurture it.



When there were 50,000 moslems living in Australia, moslems did not attempt to assert themselves or assert their 'wishes' [with regard to aspects of Sharia law], here in Australia.

When there are 500,000 moslems living in Australia [today ?], moslems will be agitating against the collective 'discrimination', against members of their community, for the offences of a 'tiny minority' of 'extremists'.

When there are 5,000,000 moslems living in Australia, we will be unable to peacefully resist the demands which the moslem community places upon us and our systems.



ISLAM is a violently 'mono-cultural' system.....

"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4


When they can [when circumstances come to favour them], moslems will, and always do, assert their own interests, above the interests of those [i.e. non-moslems] who are unable to resist them [i.e. moslems].

Tyranny.



Is it wrong to resist and to reject [and to not 'accommodate'], those who would [if they could!] impose a tyranny,         ....upon those who favour a system of control which promotes freedom and [is reliant upon] personal responsibility ?

Wherever they are a minority, moslems 'play' at being the victims of discrimination,     ....and will present themselves [and their whole community], on behalf of ISLAM, as being the champions of fairness.   !!!!!

And you [false] liberals, and lefties, just suck up, all of those blatant and naked moslem LIES.

And this moslem falsehood, about the 'beneficence' of the 'noble moslem', has rarely been challenged by the non-moslems of liberal democracies;


Q.
Why not ?

Because the evidence is there,    ....which would enable us to openly challenge, the misrepresentation of what ISLAM is, by moslems, to those who are not moslems!



.



In every moslem majority jurisdiction,       .....and where ISLAMIC law is the basis of the system of laws and lawmaking,       .....we always see the merciless oppression, persecution, and often public [i.e. mob] murder [or, an official execution], of members of minority non-moslem communities, for the 'real' crime of not being a moslem.

e.g.
A trumped up allegation against a Christian woman and mother, by a hateful moslem neighbour, followed by calls from the wider moslem community, for the 'rightful' and LAWFUL execution of the person alleged to have offended/'insulted' ISLAM;

"found guilty of insulting the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH)"

Google;
pakistan, christian woman sentenced to death, blasphemy

And in those moslem majority jurisdictions, we never see a groundswell of 'moderate' moslems, who are willing to champion the human rights, of members of minority non-moslem communities [who face, often false charges of blasphemy].

Malicious, and false accusations, upheld, because the accused are non-moslems,     ...accused by a moslem;

"She has been on death row since November 2010 after being convicted of committing blasphemy during an argument with a Muslim woman over a bowl of water."


Google;
persecution, minorities, islam, blasphemy law


http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2014/08/27/1227038/812722-d0870956-2cc7-11e4-a978-2255e0b773c2.jpg

A moslem, promoting that preeminent ISLAMIC 'mercy', which is offered to the non-moslem


Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Indonesia, Malaysia, et al.



Wherever moslems are in a majority, ISLAM is often exposed, as being a violently intolerant, 'mono-cultural' system.....


"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4


"Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred...."
Koran 58.22


"O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers."
Koran 9.23


"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29




.



Do some Googling;

"Malaysia's Prime Minister: LGBTs, liberalism, and pluralism are enemies of Islam"

"Last Malaysian Hindu temple in central Kuala Lumpur condemned, given five days to vacate"

"Malaysian temple condemned, temple staff and devotees given 15 minutes to leave"

"Malaysian government views LGBT community as a 'spreading problem' to be stopped"

"Malaysian deputy prime minister: Islam not compatible with freedom, liberal thought"

"Yet another Malaysian non-Muslim house of worship demolished"

"Malaysian state holding seminar on "threat of Christianity" "

"A message from Malaysia's king: "Muslims need to emulate Prophet Muhammad" "

[/quote]



Checkout news reports from secular, liberal, democratic, Indonesia, the 'crucial US ally'.....

http://www.jihadwatch.org/category/indonesia




And checkout news reports from secular, liberal, democratic, Malaysia, 'the partner of the West'.....

http://www.jihadwatch.org/category/Malaysia

THE TRUTH;

Moslems only promote tolerance of minorities, in places where moslems are a minority.  !!!!

And, the moslem living here, in Australia, full-well knows, but hides and denies, the fact,    ....i.e. the truth, that the moslem is not permitted by his religion, to be tolerant of people who are not moslems.

And that fact, is an article of faith, for every moslem.




.




Quote:

July 28, 2006 Islamic Dictionary for Infidels ...Robert Spencer, ..."Religious deception of unbelievers is indeed taught by the Qur'an itself: "Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them" (Qur'an 3:28). In other words, don't make friends with unbelievers except to "guard yourselves from them": pretend to be their friends so that you can strengthen yourself against them. The distinguished Qur'anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that this verse teaches that if "believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers," they may "show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly."

Google




.





Quote:

A Study in Muslim Doctrine "...while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden, insincere friendship - whenever beneficial to Muslims - is not."

http://www.meforum.org/2512/nidal-hasan-fort-hood-muslim-doctrine





EXAMPLES OF THE NEFARIOUS METHODS, OF;

More filthy, stinking, DECEITFUL moslems!
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1431746985/0#0

Yadda wrote on Jul 8^th, 2016 at 10:16am:

Wherever they are a minority, moslems 'play' at being the victims of discrimination,     ....and will present themselves [and their whole community], on behalf of ISLAM, as being the champions of fairness.   !!!!!

Yadda said...
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1413535119/11#11

Quote:

Moslems 'in the West' have been known to [commonly] commit some heinous crime, and to then cast blame upon others [i.e. non-moslems] within the wider community. The moslem does this [it is assumed], 1/ so as to cause societal disharmony, and even so as to justify inter-community violence by moslems, and 2/ of course, because the moslem does not want to be responsible for the evil that he, himself, has done. e.g. The victim of this [below] 'on-moslem-hate-crime', was in fact the victim, of another moslem. Her own husband!!!! Who 'set the scene' of his wife's murder, to make the murder [which he committed!] look like it was an 'on-moslem-hate-crime' perpetrated against a moslem. .... ....

And then there is that prominant Australian example;

-------- >

Google;
carnita matthews


Google;
Carnita Matthews false complaint against racist Sydney policeman


Google;
Fake Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes and Other Lies


6 11 2010 Jason Morrison Racial Hoax Carnita Matthews 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEUog0AZ5eQ

freediver wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 8:58pm:

I wonder if Sheikh Yahya Safi agrees with Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman and Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed who want to kill gays

One more time FD? Can you cite the Grand Mufti stating that he wants to kill gays? Last chance, or I'm afraid its going into the porkies register.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 9:24pm:

If Islam is a religion of peace why are we wasting over $10 million a year on deradicalisation programs for muslims? Why is the total amount spent to deradicalise all other religons in Australia zero zip zilch? smh.com.au/national/the-multimillion-dollar-deradicalisation-business-20160212-gmske3.html

[smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 10:46am:

freediver wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 8:58pm: I wonder if Sheikh Yahya Safi agrees with Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman and Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed who want to kill gays One more time FD? Can you cite the Grand Mufti stating that he wants to kill gays? Last chance, or I'm afraid its going into the porkies register.

Well, we have you saying you want to kill gays who do it Mardi Gras-style, we have Muslim schools funding terrorism, we have Muslims refusing to eat off plates used by decent white people, we have Abu saying whatever FD likes - why wouldn't the Grand Mufti want to kill gays?

FD's around, so he could have posted something if he wanted. So into the registry it goes.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 10:46am:

freediver wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 8:58pm: I wonder if Sheikh Yahya Safi agrees with Sheikh Shady Alsuleiman and Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed who want to kill gays One more time FD? Can you cite the Grand Mufti stating that he wants to kill gays? Last chance, or I'm afraid its going into the porkies register.

“We cannot describe those who disagree with homosexuality, or simply communicate a ­religious ruling that one firmly believes in, that such a person does not respect or accept others,” Dr Mohammed said. “We cannot claim that he spreads hatred in our society. Despite Islam’s longstanding position on homosexuality, which no person can ever change, no matter who they are, I would like to state the following. That which Sheik Shady has said regarding homosexuality is simply a conveyance of a religious fact which is known to every practising person in the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths.”

Good work Frank - now all you have to do is cite Sheik Shady saying he wanted to kill gays  ;D

So what was Turnbull denouncing at that stupid stunt of a dinner?

Tell us, gandalf.


Nuffin'??

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:45pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:38pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:31pm: If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse? There was a muslim who got into trouble for marrying a 12 year old girl in Australia, I wonder how many muslims haven't been caught for sex offences. All social groups/religions/etc. have at various times sheltered sex offenders in Australia's history, Baron, even your favoured fellow gun nuts.  We have a massive Royal Commission in progress at the moment on the issue.  Jews, Christians, yes, even an occasional Muslim are up before it.  Shame on them all.   So why single out Muslims alone?  You're not an Islamophobe are you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

We had a Muslim on here arguing that it is OK to marry children because that is what Muhammed did. The Muslim referred to above openly asked a Newcastle mosque to marry him to the 12 year old girl. They had the good sense not to break the law, but they took no steps to protect the girl and the wedding went ahead with the father's consent. Try going into a church with a 12 year old and asking them to give their blessing to pedophilia. There is a fundamentally different problem with Islam. Identifying and addressing that problem requires Islam to be singled out. Attempting to pretend it is identical will only facilitate the rape of children.

You don't want that do you Brian?

Frank wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 6:58pm:

So what was Turnbull denouncing at that stupid stunt of a dinner? Tell us, gandalf. Nuffin'??

No Frank, not "nuffin".

Turnbull denounced him for blaming the spread of HIV and other diseases on homosexuality - and rightly so.


Quote:

“What’s the most common disease these days?” he said in a sermon uploaded in YouTube in 2013. “HIV, Aids, that’s so common and there’s no cure to it. And when did it exist? Just decades ago, and more diseases are coming.” He said it was “homosexuality that’s spreading all these diseases”

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/antigay-mulsim-sheik-shady-alsuleiman-attends-turnbulls-dinner/news-story/6dc163c86d3a43dfd71a8be767145109

Do you now agree that claiming he and the Grand Mufti "want to kill gays" is a big fat porky?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 7:04pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 6:58pm: So what was Turnbull denouncing at that stupid stunt of a dinner? Tell us, gandalf. Nuffin'?? No Frank, not "nuffin". Turnbull denounced him for blaming the spread of HIV and other diseases on homosexuality - and rightly so. Quote: “What’s the most common disease these days?” he said in a sermon uploaded in YouTube in 2013. “HIV, Aids, that’s so common and there’s no cure to it. And when did it exist? Just decades ago, and more diseases are coming.” He said it was “homosexuality that’s spreading all these diseases” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/antigay-mulsim-sheik-shady-alsuleiman-attends-turnbulls-dinner/news-story/6dc163c86d3a43dfd71a8be767145109 Do you now agree that claiming he and the Grand Mufti "want to kill gays" is a big fat porky?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqhyr_9sLe0

2 minutes.

Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point.


You bastards are STILL thinking in terms of stonings. That's how medieval and unreconstructed you are. In 2016.



Victims, my arse.

Frank wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 8:38pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 7:04pm: Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 6:58pm: So what was Turnbull denouncing at that stupid stunt of a dinner? Tell us, gandalf. Nuffin'?? No Frank, not "nuffin". Turnbull denounced him for blaming the spread of HIV and other diseases on homosexuality - and rightly so. Quote: “What’s the most common disease these days?” he said in a sermon uploaded in YouTube in 2013. “HIV, Aids, that’s so common and there’s no cure to it. And when did it exist? Just decades ago, and more diseases are coming.” He said it was “homosexuality that’s spreading all these diseases” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/antigay-mulsim-sheik-shady-alsuleiman-attends-turnbulls-dinner/news-story/6dc163c86d3a43dfd71a8be767145109 Do you now agree that claiming he and the Grand Mufti "want to kill gays" is a big fat porky? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqhyr_9sLe0 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. You bastards are STILL thinking in terms of stonings. That's how medieval and unreconstructed you are. In 2016. Victims, my arse.

X 2

Frank wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 8:38pm:

2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point.

Well spotted.

Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man.

Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot.

Got anything else?

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2016 at 6:59pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:45pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:38pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 9:31pm: If christians are opposed to sex abuse, why are we spending around $500 million to uncover the extent to which the catholic church promoted and covered up sex abuse? There was a muslim who got into trouble for marrying a 12 year old girl in Australia, I wonder how many muslims haven't been caught for sex offences. All social groups/religions/etc. have at various times sheltered sex offenders in Australia's history, Baron, even your favoured fellow gun nuts.  We have a massive Royal Commission in progress at the moment on the issue.  Jews, Christians, yes, even an occasional Muslim are up before it.  Shame on them all.   So why single out Muslims alone?  You're not an Islamophobe are you?  Tsk, tsk.   ::) We had a Muslim on here arguing that it is OK to marry children because that is what Muhammed did. The Muslim referred to above openly asked a Newcastle mosque to marry him to the 12 year old girl. They had the good sense not to break the law, but they took no steps to protect the girl and the wedding went ahead with the father's consent. Try going into a church with a 12 year old and asking them to give their blessing to pedophilia. There is a fundamentally different problem with Islam. Identifying and addressing that problem requires Islam to be singled out. Attempting to pretend it is identical will only facilitate the rape of children. You don't want that do you Brian?

Nope.  There are though, better ways than continually criticising a religion's founder and the religion's belief system, FD.   Its something you do all the time.   Remember, an unwillingness to accept correction is a sure sign of bigotry.   Perhaps you should consider that?

I wonder how many Muslims support child marriage?

I wonder how many Americans support child marriage?  Never hear you criticising them for that, now do we?    ::)

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 12:08am:

Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else?

So all gays have to do to avoid being killed by Muslims under shariah law is enact gay marriage?

Is this you trying to worm out of your porky about the Grand Mufti FD?

In June 2016, Alsuleiman participated in an Iftar dinner at Kirribilli House hosted by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister said he would not have been invited Alsuleiman had he known of his position regarding homosexuals. The sheikh denied he held radical anti-gay views.[15][16] Australia's Grand Mufti, Ibrahim Abu Mohamed has repudiated Malcolm Turnbull's position on this issue, saying Islam has a, "longstanding" position on homosexuality" which "no person can ever change". He said that any attempt to call out its teachings could lead to radicalisation.[17]

What do you think the grand Mufti is referring to here Gandalf?

I think any attempt to call out Islamic teachings on homosexuality is the decent thing to do. The threat that this could lead to radicalization is quite sinister. This, it seems, is the Islamic establishment’s new stick.

Mind you, he’s probably right. Critiquing the church’s views on homosexuality has led to radicalization in the US. The Westborough Baptist Church are obsessed with homosexuality,  as is the growing racist movement and even the black churches.

Homosexuality is an issue few fundamentalists will budge on.

Bigot.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 11:21am:

What do you think the grand Mufti is referring to here Gandalf?

That he thinks its a sin.

Is that your proof that he wants to kill gays?

Is that the first time you have used the word 'sin' here Gandalf?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 12:08am:

Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else?

Zina doesn't mean adultery it means unlawful sex, consenting sex before marriage is called zina which attracts 100 lashes according to Allah.

Has the Grand Mufti ever criticised the death penalty for gays in Saudi Arabia or Iran, the Saudis use beheading to cure gays Iran hangs them.

The only time more than 500 imams have ever protested anything it wasn't killing and enslaving non muslims they were butthurt over gay marriage in the UK.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 7:29am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:08am: Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else? So all gays have to do to avoid being killed by Muslims under shariah law is enact gay marriage?

;D ;D ;D ;D

Exactly.



Gandalf, zina includes ALL non-marital sex, don't pretend otherwise. Why are you so reflexively  dishonest about something so easily refuted? Zina is not about married men, you know that.

Karnal wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 12:50pm:

I think any attempt to call out Islamic teachings on homosexuality is the decent thing to do. The threat that this could lead to radicalization is quite sinister. This, it seems, is the Islamic establishment’s new stick. Mind you, he’s probably right. Critiquing the church’s views on homosexuality has led to radicalization in the US. The Westborough Baptist Church are obsessed with homosexuality,  as is the growing racist movement and even the black churches. Homosexuality is an issue few fundamentalists will budge on.

Turnbull's hand was forced because he overlooked the fact he invited someone to his house who blamed deadly diseases on homosexuality. It suddenly became an issue of his own personal judgment - and therefore he really had no choice to go into "preach" mode. Otherwise he would be spinelessly apologising for him like everyone else.

That particular sermon by Sheik Shady about diseases was quite bizarre, given how breathtakingly ignorant it was. Its these sorts of inflamatory and bigoted pronouncements that should be distinguished from the rather more vague "homosexuality is a sin" sentiments, that yes, most muslims hold. Currently the mainstream muslim bodies are trying to maintain a bet each way: deny supporting violence or vilification against gays, but not softening their stance that homosexuality is a sin. This balancing act should actually be conducive to an Islam that is perfectly ok with equal rights for gays - if muslims could not only accept the principle of individual rights and freedoms, but actually accept that it is consistent with core Islamic teachings - in the tradition of the "postponement" philosophy* that was prevalent amongst the early muslims.

The trouble of course is when muslim leaders still get hung up on the "if there was an Islamic state..." question. In which case they feel compelled to defend all the "sharia" thought control laws we are all familiar with. IMO, about the first thing that must be purged from Islamic ideology in order to facilitate the necessary reform of Islam, is the idea that an "Islamic state" with sharia law is something that should be pursued. This is nonsense, and it has no basis in actual Islamic doctrine. The fact that  muslims have far more freedom to practice their religion in so called "infidel" states in the west than they do in anything resembling "Islamic"states, should be enough to settle the issue once and for all.

Anyway, I digress. So back to Sheik Shady, while the sermon was unforgivable, the response from the Grand Mufti was probably even more so. The problem though was that when Turnbull went all preachy because of the difficult political situation he found himself in, the Mufti also felt cornered and no doubt felt something of a 'slap down' was needed. But politics aside, bigotry is bigotry, and irrespective of what the Mufti believes about Islam's view of gays, it shouldn't preclude him from calling out such obvious ignorance and bigotry.





*"postponers" was the name given to a particular school of thought in early Islam that taught that no human had the right to inflict earthly punishments for sins against God - and that the punishment must be "postponed" until the afterlife. It was the precursor to the rationalist ideology in Islam that advocates personal freedoms as well as rational interpretations of Islamic law - and rejecting dogma.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:27pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:50pm: I think any attempt to call out Islamic teachings on homosexuality is the decent thing to do. The threat that this could lead to radicalization is quite sinister. This, it seems, is the Islamic establishment’s new stick. Mind you, he’s probably right. Critiquing the church’s views on homosexuality has led to radicalization in the US. The Westborough Baptist Church are obsessed with homosexuality,  as is the growing racist movement and even the black churches. Homosexuality is an issue few fundamentalists will budge on. Turnbull's hand was forced because he overlooked the fact he invited someone to his house who blamed deadly diseases on homosexuality. It suddenly became an issue of his own personal judgment - and therefore he really had no choice to go into "preach" mode. Otherwise he would be spinelessly apologising for him like everyone else. That particular sermon by Sheik Shady about diseases was quite bizarre, given how breathtakingly ignorant it was. Its these sorts of inflamatory and bigoted pronouncements that should be distinguished from the rather more vague "homosexuality is a sin" sentiments, that yes, most muslims hold. Currently the mainstream muslim bodies are trying to maintain a bet each way: deny supporting violence or vilification against gays, but not softening their stance that homosexuality is a sin. This balancing act should actually be conducive to an Islam that is perfectly ok with equal rights for gays - if muslims could not only accept the principle of individual rights and freedoms, but actually accept that it is consistent with core Islamic teachings - in the tradition of the "postponement" philosophy* that was prevalent amongst the early muslims. The trouble of course is when muslim leaders still get hung up on the "if there was an Islamic state..." question. In which case they feel compelled to defend all the "sharia" thought control laws we are all familiar with. IMO, about the first thing that must be purged from Islamic ideology in order to facilitate the necessary reform of Islam, is the idea that an "Islamic state" with sharia law is something that should be pursued. This is nonsense, and it has no basis in actual Islamic doctrine. The fact that  muslims have far more freedom to practice their religion in so called "infidel" states in the west than they do in anything resembling "Islamic"states, should be enough to settle the issue once and for all. Anyway, I digress. So back to Sheik Shady, while the sermon was unforgivable, the response from the Grand Mufti was probably even more so. The problem though was that when Turnbull went all preachy because of the difficult political situation he found himself in, the Mufti also felt cornered and no doubt felt something of a 'slap down' was needed. But politics aside, bigotry is bigotry, and irrespective of what the Mufti believes about Islam's view of gays, it shouldn't preclude him from calling out such obvious ignorance and bigotry. *"postponers" was the name given to a particular school of thought in early Islam that taught that no human had the right to inflict earthly punishments for sins against God - and that the punishment must be "postponed" until the afterlife. It was the precursor to the rationalist ideology in Islam that advocates personal freedoms as well as rational interpretations of Islamic law - and rejecting dogma.

Gandalf, does it worry you this 'Shady' character is not just a Sheik-youtube but none other than the Pres of the Imams council?

Frank wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 7:29am: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:08am: Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else? So all gays have to do to avoid being killed by Muslims under shariah law is enact gay marriage? ;D ;D ;D ;D Exactly. Gandalf, zina includes ALL non-marital sex, don't pretend otherwise. Why are you so reflexively  dishonest about something so easily refuted? Zina is not about married men, you know that.

Frank, have you forgotten already the video you posted just yesterday? Mr Shady was very specific: stoning is only for married men caught performing the act of zina. You even showed me where - from 2 minutes on.

Why are you so reflexively dishonest about something so easily refuted?

Dustwun wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:38pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:27pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:50pm: I think any attempt to call out Islamic teachings on homosexuality is the decent thing to do. The threat that this could lead to radicalization is quite sinister. This, it seems, is the Islamic establishment’s new stick. Mind you, he’s probably right. Critiquing the church’s views on homosexuality has led to radicalization in the US. The Westborough Baptist Church are obsessed with homosexuality,  as is the growing racist movement and even the black churches. Homosexuality is an issue few fundamentalists will budge on. Turnbull's hand was forced because he overlooked the fact he invited someone to his house who blamed deadly diseases on homosexuality. It suddenly became an issue of his own personal judgment - and therefore he really had no choice to go into "preach" mode. Otherwise he would be spinelessly apologising for him like everyone else. That particular sermon by Sheik Shady about diseases was quite bizarre, given how breathtakingly ignorant it was. Its these sorts of inflamatory and bigoted pronouncements that should be distinguished from the rather more vague "homosexuality is a sin" sentiments, that yes, most muslims hold. Currently the mainstream muslim bodies are trying to maintain a bet each way: deny supporting violence or vilification against gays, but not softening their stance that homosexuality is a sin. This balancing act should actually be conducive to an Islam that is perfectly ok with equal rights for gays - if muslims could not only accept the principle of individual rights and freedoms, but actually accept that it is consistent with core Islamic teachings - in the tradition of the "postponement" philosophy* that was prevalent amongst the early muslims. The trouble of course is when muslim leaders still get hung up on the "if there was an Islamic state..." question. In which case they feel compelled to defend all the "sharia" thought control laws we are all familiar with. IMO, about the first thing that must be purged from Islamic ideology in order to facilitate the necessary reform of Islam, is the idea that an "Islamic state" with sharia law is something that should be pursued. This is nonsense, and it has no basis in actual Islamic doctrine. The fact that  muslims have far more freedom to practice their religion in so called "infidel" states in the west than they do in anything resembling "Islamic"states, should be enough to settle the issue once and for all. Anyway, I digress. So back to Sheik Shady, while the sermon was unforgivable, the response from the Grand Mufti was probably even more so. The problem though was that when Turnbull went all preachy because of the difficult political situation he found himself in, the Mufti also felt cornered and no doubt felt something of a 'slap down' was needed. But politics aside, bigotry is bigotry, and irrespective of what the Mufti believes about Islam's view of gays, it shouldn't preclude him from calling out such obvious ignorance and bigotry. *"postponers" was the name given to a particular school of thought in early Islam that taught that no human had the right to inflict earthly punishments for sins against God - and that the punishment must be "postponed" until the afterlife. It was the precursor to the rationalist ideology in Islam that advocates personal freedoms as well as rational interpretations of Islamic law - and rejecting dogma. Gandalf, does it worry you this 'Shady' character is not just a Sheik-youtube but none other than the Pres of the Imams council?

It does.

Though the bigger issue here is the fact that we have an "Imams council" to begin with. A religious hierarchy is a completely alien concept in Islam - not to mention the fact that they are quite out of touch with the average Aussie muslim.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:47pm:

Dustwun wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:38pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:27pm: Karnal wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:50pm: I think any attempt to call out Islamic teachings on homosexuality is the decent thing to do. The threat that this could lead to radicalization is quite sinister. This, it seems, is the Islamic establishment’s new stick. Mind you, he’s probably right. Critiquing the church’s views on homosexuality has led to radicalization in the US. The Westborough Baptist Church are obsessed with homosexuality,  as is the growing racist movement and even the black churches. Homosexuality is an issue few fundamentalists will budge on. Turnbull's hand was forced because he overlooked the fact he invited someone to his house who blamed deadly diseases on homosexuality. It suddenly became an issue of his own personal judgment - and therefore he really had no choice to go into "preach" mode. Otherwise he would be spinelessly apologising for him like everyone else. That particular sermon by Sheik Shady about diseases was quite bizarre, given how breathtakingly ignorant it was. Its these sorts of inflamatory and bigoted pronouncements that should be distinguished from the rather more vague "homosexuality is a sin" sentiments, that yes, most muslims hold. Currently the mainstream muslim bodies are trying to maintain a bet each way: deny supporting violence or vilification against gays, but not softening their stance that homosexuality is a sin. This balancing act should actually be conducive to an Islam that is perfectly ok with equal rights for gays - if muslims could not only accept the principle of individual rights and freedoms, but actually accept that it is consistent with core Islamic teachings - in the tradition of the "postponement" philosophy* that was prevalent amongst the early muslims. The trouble of course is when muslim leaders still get hung up on the "if there was an Islamic state..." question. In which case they feel compelled to defend all the "sharia" thought control laws we are all familiar with. IMO, about the first thing that must be purged from Islamic ideology in order to facilitate the necessary reform of Islam, is the idea that an "Islamic state" with sharia law is something that should be pursued. This is nonsense, and it has no basis in actual Islamic doctrine. The fact that  muslims have far more freedom to practice their religion in so called "infidel" states in the west than they do in anything resembling "Islamic"states, should be enough to settle the issue once and for all. Anyway, I digress. So back to Sheik Shady, while the sermon was unforgivable, the response from the Grand Mufti was probably even more so. The problem though was that when Turnbull went all preachy because of the difficult political situation he found himself in, the Mufti also felt cornered and no doubt felt something of a 'slap down' was needed. But politics aside, bigotry is bigotry, and irrespective of what the Mufti believes about Islam's view of gays, it shouldn't preclude him from calling out such obvious ignorance and bigotry. *"postponers" was the name given to a particular school of thought in early Islam that taught that no human had the right to inflict earthly punishments for sins against God - and that the punishment must be "postponed" until the afterlife. It was the precursor to the rationalist ideology in Islam that advocates personal freedoms as well as rational interpretations of Islamic law - and rejecting dogma. Gandalf, does it worry you this 'Shady' character is not just a Sheik-youtube but none other than the Pres of the Imams council? It does. Though the bigger issue here is the fact that we have an "Imams council" to begin with. A religious hierarchy is a completely alien concept in Islam - not to mention the fact that they are quite out of touch with the average Aussie muslim.

Does this suggest Islamism is their main objective?

You say a hierarchy is an alien concept, but why do so many Middle Eastern governments call themselves Islamic regimes? Are they co-opting?

Dustwun wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:57pm:

You say a hierarchy is an alien concept, but why do so many Middle Eastern governments call themselves Islamic regimes?

Even Islamists concede that some expediency and even innovation is needed in relation to how the state is run - given the total lack of any guidance on this matter in any Islamic doctrine. The caliphate, for example - famously yearned for by the most extreme of Islamists - has no basis in Islamic doctrine, and even the Islamists understand that.

I suppose the one exception to the hiearchy thing is the version of Shia Islam that is practiced in Iran. For them the Ayatollahs are chosen by God specifically to rule over the people - which is why they will always have the final say over any leaders chosen or appointed by mere men (and women).

Actually I should correct myself - there is one guiding principle that the Quran mentions for how a state should be run - which funnily enough is most compatible to democracy. That is, to rule by "consultation" and "consensus".

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 3:37pm:

Dustwun wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:57pm: You say a hierarchy is an alien concept, but why do so many Middle Eastern governments call themselves Islamic regimes? Even Islamists concede that some expediency and even innovation is needed in relation to how the state is run - given the total lack of any guidance on this matter in any Islamic doctrine. The caliphate, for example - famously yearned for by the most extreme of Islamists - has no basis in Islamic doctrine, and even the Islamists understand that. I suppose the one exception to the hiearchy thing is the version of Shia Islam that is practiced in Iran. For them the Ayatollahs are chosen by God specifically to rule over the people - which is why they will always have the final say over any leaders chosen or appointed by mere men (and women).

Is that why Sunnis hate them so much,  because they claim a direct link to 'god'?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:44pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:13pm: freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 7:29am: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:08am: Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else? So all gays have to do to avoid being killed by Muslims under shariah law is enact gay marriage? ;D ;D ;D ;D Exactly. Gandalf, zina includes ALL non-marital sex, don't pretend otherwise. Why are you so reflexively  dishonest about something so easily refuted? Zina is not about married men, you know that. Frank, have you forgotten already the video you posted just yesterday? Mr Shady was very specific: stoning is only for married men caught performing the act of zina. You even showed me where - from 2 minutes on. Why are you so reflexively dishonest about something so easily refuted?

He wasn't talking about zina as if it was only about married men as you tried to insinuate. And stoning is still the proper punishment in an Islamic state. Or being thrown off building or being hanged.

Frank, he was very specific - stoning only for married men, caught in the act. We are not talking about what you think you know about Islamic law, we're talking about what Mr Shady thinks. And he was crystal clear in that video. At least concede your mistake.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 3:40pm:

Actually I should correct myself - there is one guiding principle that the Quran mentions for how a state should be run - which funnily enough is most compatible to democracy. That is, to rule by "consultation" and "consensus".

Can you cite the verse from this link?

quran.com

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 2:44pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 2:13pm: freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 7:29am: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 12:08am: Frank wrote on Jul 9th, 2016 at 8:38pm: 2 minutes. Stoning. The Grand Mufti defended that very point. Well spotted. Shame he's talking about zina (adultery) with regards to a married man. Also, claiming that according to the sharia the punishment for a particular type of sexual act is death is not "wanting to kill gays" - not by a long shot. Got anything else? So all gays have to do to avoid being killed by Muslims under shariah law is enact gay marriage? ;D ;D ;D ;D Exactly. Gandalf, zina includes ALL non-marital sex, don't pretend otherwise. Why are you so reflexively  dishonest about something so easily refuted? Zina is not about married men, you know that. Frank, have you forgotten already the video you posted just yesterday? Mr Shady was very specific: stoning is only for married men caught performing the act of zina. You even showed me where - from 2 minutes on.

Was this stoning punishment a case of monkey see monkey do?

Sunnah.com/bukhari/63/75

Gandalf, if two married men in an Islamic state get caught having sex with each other, what would the Mufti's opinion be on the most appropriate punishment?


Quote:

That particular sermon by Sheik Shady about diseases was quite bizarre, given how breathtakingly ignorant it was. Its these sorts of inflamatory and bigoted pronouncements that should be distinguished from the rather more vague "homosexuality is a sin" sentiments, that yes, most muslims hold.

That's the second time I have seen you use the word sin Gandalf. Have you seen the light?


Quote:

Currently the mainstream muslim bodies are trying to maintain a bet each way: deny supporting violence or vilification against gays, but not softening their stance that homosexuality is a sin.

Third time! Do you think Turnbull would refuse to let a priest into his house who says that he considers homosexuality to be a sin?


Quote:

The trouble of course is when muslim leaders still get hung up on the "if there was an Islamic state..." question. In which case they feel compelled to defend all the "sharia" thought control laws we are all familiar with.

What are they, in the context of gays?


Quote:

IMO, about the first thing that must be purged from Islamic ideology in order to facilitate the necessary reform of Islam, is the idea that an "Islamic state" with sharia law is something that should be pursued.

Do you think that is what Muhammed would have wanted?


Quote:

But politics aside, bigotry is bigotry, and irrespective of what the Mufti believes about Islam's view of gays

What do you think the Mufti believes Gandalf? I do not recall the Mufti using the word sin.


Quote:

Frank, have you forgotten already the video you posted just yesterday? Mr Shady was very specific: stoning is only for married men caught performing the act of zina.

What do the women get?


Quote:

Though the bigger issue here is the fact that we have an "Imams council" to begin with. A religious hierarchy is a completely alien concept in Islam

True. As Muhammed demonstrated, it should be combined with the political heirachy in a proper Islamic state.


Quote:

not to mention the fact that they are quite out of touch with the average Aussie muslim

Are you in touch with the average Aussie Muslim?


Quote:

Even Islamists concede that some expediency and even innovation is needed in relation to how the state is run - given the total lack of any guidance on this matter in any Islamic doctrine. The caliphate, for example - famously yearned for by the most extreme of Islamists - has no basis in Islamic doctrine, and even the Islamists understand that.

Not even in the example set by Muhammed, the best of men?

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 6:22pm:

Gandalf, if two married men in an Islamic state get caught having sex with each other, what would the Mufti's opinion be on the most appropriate punishment?

You'll have to ask him that FD.

Sorry, but you're doing a particularly bad job at defending your porky. Just sayin.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 6:08pm:

Can you cite the verse from this link? quran.com

42:38:


Quote:

And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend.

Quote:

You'll have to ask him that FD.

My interpretation of what I have seen him say is he would support killing them.


Quote:

And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend.

Looks like a long bow to me Gandalf.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 8:18pm:

My interpretation of what I have seen him say is he would support killing them

I guess similar to your "interpretation" that I want to kill gays doing it mardi gras style. Carry on then.

Do you disagree with my interpretation of the Mufti's position?

Do I agree that he wants to kill gays when there's no indication of him saying that?

No I don't.

But you are not willing to offer an alternative interpretation? Surely your reform work would give you a feel for the establishment's view on this?

alternative interpretation to what? Him not saying he wants to kill gays? That should be an interesting exercise.

And you have no awareness at all of what the establishment view on this is? The Mufti seemed to think it was pretty clear. Unchangeable even.

The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track).

As far as "consensus" view on what the punishment is, well there is no consensus, and it is absurd to assume that the Grand Mufti's statement is a ringing endorsement of Sheik Shady's interpretation of the temporal punishment under Islamic law (as opposed to simply expressing his agreement that it is sinful).

Number 4. Why does it seem so unusual for Muslims to use that word Gandalf?

Are you suggesting the Grand Mufti would deliberately make his views on gays look more barbaric than they really are, just two weeks after the Orlando shootings?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 8:51pm:

The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track).

If it's just a sin why do 10 countries with Islam as the state religion have the death penalty for homosexuals?

From what I understand Zina (unlawful sex) must involve a cock so is this a punishment for men?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 8:51pm:

The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track). As far as "consensus" view on what the punishment is, well there is no consensus, and it is absurd to assume that the Grand Mufti's statement is a ringing endorsement of Sheik Shady's interpretation of the temporal punishment under Islamic law (as opposed to simply expressing his agreement that it is sinful).

You should apply for a spot on the next 'Dancing with the Stars' competition. Your footwork is up there with Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 9:05pm:

Number 4. Why does it seem so unusual for Muslims to use that word Gandalf?

No idea what you are talking about.


Quote:

Are you suggesting the Grand Mufti would deliberately make his views on gays look more barbaric than they really are, just two weeks after the Orlando shootings?

Ah I think I'm beginning to understand - the proof that he wants to kill gays is hidden in what he didn't say. That old chestnut.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 9:06pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 8:51pm: The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track). If it's just a sin why do 10 countries with Islam as the state religion have the death penalty for homosexuals?

Great question Baron - but what I want to know is if its mandated death sentence, why do 40 something countries with Islam as the state religion *NOT* have the death penalty - and only 10 do?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 9:33pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 9:06pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 8:51pm: The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track). If it's just a sin why do 10 countries with Islam as the state religion have the death penalty for homosexuals? Great question Baron - but what I want to know is if its mandated death sentence, why do 40 something countries with Islam as the state religion *NOT* have the death penalty - and only 10 do?

Can homosexuals openly practise their sexuality in ANY muslim countries Gandalf???....let me guess, typical no comment. Usual Muslim reponse.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 9:33pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 9:06pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 8:51pm: The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track). If it's just a sin why do 10 countries with Islam as the state religion have the death penalty for homosexuals? Great question Baron - but what I want to know is if its mandated death sentence, why do 40 something countries with Islam as the state religion *NOT* have the death penalty - and only 10 do?

They are not truly Muslim - that's what you keep telling us: there are no truly Muslim countries.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 7:39pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 6:22pm: Gandalf, if two married men in an Islamic state get caught having sex with each other, what would the Mufti's opinion be on the most appropriate punishment? You'll have to ask him that FD. Sorry, but you're doing a particularly bad job at defending your porky. Just sayin.

You are a gutless, dishonest coward.

Just sayin'.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 9:46pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 9:33pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 9:06pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2016 at 8:51pm: The establishment view is that homosexuality is a sin (oops there I go again - better note that down FD - vitally important to keep track). If it's just a sin why do 10 countries with Islam as the state religion have the death penalty for homosexuals? Great question Baron - but what I want to know is if its mandated death sentence, why do 40 something countries with Islam as the state religion *NOT* have the death penalty - and only 10 do? Can homosexuals openly practise their sexuality in ANY muslim countries Gandalf???....let me guess, typical no comment. Usual Muslim reponse.

Not like in Rooty Hill, Homo, no.