Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 24
Send Topic Print
Is Islam inherently violent? (Read 86418 times)
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #75 - Mar 13th, 2007 at 10:57pm
 
Quote:
Yes trump there is, its the law of the country, written very clearly and people paid the legal price for acting in the way they did.


If that's actually so, zoso, then why were these violent yahoo's at the S11 protests given 700,000 compensation for sustaining injuries from police?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21323913-5006785,00.html


Quote:
Very well said.


Why am I not surprised?  Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
TommySix
New Member
*
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 29
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #76 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 12:32am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 13th, 2007 at 10:57pm:
Quote:
Yes trump there is, its the law of the country, written very clearly and people paid the legal price for acting in the way they did.


If that's actually so, zoso, then why were these violent yahoo's at the S11 protests given 700,000 compensation for sustaining injuries from police?



Only $700K? Like the article says, over $600K of that will go toward Slater & Gordon's legal fees, so its hardly a reward or even meaningful compensation since it won't work out to much per person.

Also, I found this to be the most disturbing:

'Police Association secretary Paul Mullett was disgusted with the deal yesterday. He called for "an end point of legislative reform" to make it illegal to protest.'

Make protest illegal? Is that the view and mentality shared by those in the force?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie Nationalist
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #77 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 5:24am
 
The truth about Islam. Smiley
Back to top
 

Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie Nationalist
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #78 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 5:31am
 
Aint it the truth Wink
Back to top
 

truth.JPG (27 KB | 46 )
truth.JPG
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #79 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 6:58am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 13th, 2007 at 10:57pm:
If that's actually so, zoso, then why were these violent yahoo's at the S11 protests given 700,000 compensation for sustaining injuries from police?

That doesn't change the law and you know it Roll Eyes Police have guidelines to stick to as well, clearly they breached them, or at least a magistrate thinks so. Let me think... Australian judge vs DT... ? I think I'll side with the law.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gavin
Senior Member
****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 304
Sydney, Australia
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #80 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 9:08am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 13th, 2007 at 5:33pm:
I justify those attacks by saying that people of Middle Eastern appearance should have been smart enough not to show up in that area in the first place.

There was media advertissment all week that there was going to be a protest... and still ... people of Middle Eastern appearance still had the nerve to show up anyway. To me, they were asking for it.


donaldtrump, those Lebs were stupid for showing up to Cronulla at that time, but going there isn't illegal and they definately did not go there bashing up Australian protestors (i'm not talking about the lifesavers, i mean Lebs that were there on the day of the Cronulla riots).

If they did, then bashing them would have been a defensive act. but as we all know, the Australian protestors bashed up any Leb that they saw, which is an offensive act.  

Quote:
I can't justify the follow-up attacks though... attacking a separate suburb... for no good reason. Smashing eighty cars, causing serious property damage, stabbing a man in the back, hitting an old lady over the head with a baseball bat..


i agree, the follow-up attacks were not justifable either.  

Quote:
Cronulla was DEFENSIVE... whereas the Middle Eastern revenge attacks were OFFENSIVE (In two ways).

That's how it can be justified.


both attacks were offensive and cannot be justified at all.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 14th, 2007 at 10:02am by Gavin »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48833
At my desk.
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #81 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 12:27pm
 
If that's actually so, zoso, then why were these violent yahoo's at the S11 protests given 700,000 compensation for sustaining injuries from police?

Because the police were inappropriately violent towards them. They weren't beating anyone up. Do you like the idea of police being able to crak people's spines because they are protesting?

DT are you seriously suggesting that it isn't illegal to beat up lebanese people?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #82 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 6:42pm
 
Quote:
If they did, then bashing them would have been a defensive act. but as we all know, the Australian protestors bashed up any Leb that they saw, which is an offensive act. 


I think this view has some merit Gav (On the smaller scale), but you also have to look it on the larger, political scale too. There are two ways of looking at this.

I think you can see this as offensive because they targeted people who... (supposedly) weren't there to stir trouble.

And you can also see it as defensive... as people who showed up on the day went with the intention of defending their hometown against Islamic thugs.

I agree to a certain extent with your above point Gav, so you should at least take the time to agree with my point to a certain extent.



Quote:
both attacks were offensive and cannot be justified at all.


In my opinion, the actual principle of the Cronulla protest staged by Australians can be justified. The way they carried out the protest can't be justified.

And there is NO justification... at all... for the Middle Eastern guys for what they did the following two nights.

How's that?


Quote:
That doesn't change the law and you know it  Police have guidelines to stick to as well, clearly they breached them, or at least a magistrate thinks so.


There was actually no courtcase, zoso, it was supposed to be a secret exchange between the Bracks Government and the organisers of the protest.


Quote:
Because the police were inappropriately violent towards them. They weren't beating anyone up. Do you like the idea of police being able to crak people's spines because they are protesting?


Not only did they beat people up, attacking police officers, freediver, they seriously damaged public property.


Quote:
DT are you seriously suggesting that it isn't illegal to beat up lebanese people?


No.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48833
At my desk.
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #83 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:04pm
 
There are two ways of looking at this.

A right way and a wrong way. No matter what the broader situation, it doesn't justify beating up random strangers, regardless of their skin colour. Whether you lable offense or defense is meaningless.

The way they carried out the protest can't be justified.

Good. I was worried you were trying to jsutify it when you said:

I justify those attacks by saying that people of Middle Eastern appearance should have been smart enough not to show up in that area in the first place.

Not only did they beat people up, attacking police officers, freediver, they seriously damaged public property. 

You mean the specific people who recieved the injuries? The state coughed up because they didn't have a leg to stand on.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #84 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:31pm
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 14th, 2007 at 6:42pm:
There was actually no courtcase, zoso, it was supposed to be a secret exchange between the Bracks Government and the organisers of the protest. 

Fair enough, I wasn't aware but my point is unchanged, the law is the law and you can't bash people up randomly under the law. This is only damning to the police position as they were obviously REALLY in the wrong.

Damage to public property and violence against the police is of course as unforgivable as police violence against the protesters. Two wrongs don't make anything right.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #85 - Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:45pm
 
Quote:
There are two ways of looking at this.

A right way and a wrong way. No matter what the broader situation, it doesn't justify beating up random strangers, regardless of their skin colour. Whether you lable offense or defense is meaningless.

The way they carried out the protest can't be justified.

Good. I was worried you were trying to jsutify it when you said:

I justify those attacks by saying that people of Middle Eastern appearance should have been smart enough not to show up in that area in the first place.

Not only did they beat people up, attacking police officers, freediver, they seriously damaged public property.   

You mean the specific people who recieved the injuries? The state coughed up because they didn't have a leg to stand on.


You're putting so much emphasis on the 'daevilwhiteaussieswhobeatuptrhepoorhelplesslebanesemen,' can you at the very least acknoledge the reasons I pointed out that this protest was justified?
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
Leon
New Member
*
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 16
London
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #86 - Mar 15th, 2007 at 12:11am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:45pm:
[quote]There are two ways of looking at this.

You're putting so much emphasis on the 'daevilwhiteaussieswhobeatuptrhepoorhelplesslebanesemen,' can you at the very least acknoledge the reasons I pointed out that this protest was justified?


Everyone has the right to protest. It's part of our democratic freedom. Nobody is suggesting that the protesting was wrong, but breaking the law is wrong. When a protest turns violent it's usually for one of two reasons: Firstly the authorities attack the protesters (the protest in Zimbabwe last week being the most recent example) or the feelings about that issue are so strong that people lose control of their normal values and start lashing out. And from the 'Nationalists' (and I do understand the meaning of the word) here on this blog, emotions are running very high.

I want to go back to the wider issue of propaganda. Propaganda has played a major in every war since Hitler invaded Poland. He even had German feature films made for his by the best film makers of their time - famously: Leni Riefenstahl. To help rally the population behind a political action, waring governments have become outwardly racist towards each other to incite hatred and therefore justification for attacking the 'enemy'.

During the cold war it was the Communists and in modern times it has fallen to the feet of the Muslims to be our enemy. The clever thing with propaganda, when both sides use it, you can use the other parties material for your own gains. DT has been doing this very successfully with the picture at the bottom of his posts, which goes to show that the propaganda against Muslims is working. Here in England we are only starting to get over the racism towards Germans, more than fifty years after WW2 . That's how it works. You have make the 'enemy' a single evil generic body - Germans, Communists, Muslims, in order to justify your military actions. Which is why the riots in Cronulla seem so acceptable to so many, it's just a mini version of what we are told is happening in Iraq. And if the might of the West is doing this in Iraq, it's seemingly justifiable to do so at home too.

Most people you meet stand up for what they believe in, and that's what is happening here. But here's the funny thing, we all tend to believe in the same thing: and end to violence and living in a peaceful society. The few who don't tend to be politicians trying to make a name for themselves to gain more power; or huge multinational corporations looking to do the same. Us, the people on the street don't generally give a damn if we invade Iraq for their oil fields, in fact we'd prefer cleaner energy. And the majority of us don't realise that Saddam Hussein was armed by Britain and America, fuelling his dictatorship. Something that America has done for years: Franklin D Roosevelt was confronted with the multiple cruelties of his ally, the Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza, he replied: "He may be a sonofabitch, but he's our sonofabitch." http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1486339,00.html

You might argue that September 11th changed all that, but the situation started with America in the first place:
"6 months before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Jimmy Carter paid Afghan Warlords $500 million to help set up the Mujaheddin, a terrorist organisation. The American people were completely unaware that their government, along with the British secret service: MI6, had begun training and funding Islamic extremists including Osama Bin Laden. Out of this came the Taliban, Al'Qaeda and September the 11th"
John Pilger (Australian) from his documentary: Breaking the Silence: The Truth and Lies in the war on Terror.
http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=1

The reason we went to war in Iraq was because of the weapons of mass destruction threat and the fear that Hussein was connected with Al'Qaeda. Andrew Wilkie, former head of the Australian Intelligence Agency resigned in the run up to the war because he knew this was not true. He of course, proved to be correct.

We have to ask ourselves why are we in this situation in the first place, why is there so much anger against Muslims? We need to listen to the news in a far more objectional way and do our own research to find the real truth and then look to those root causes to fix these problems. We need to stop fighting with each other, but fight the cause of the problem in the first place. And I guarantee, the cause is not the second largest religion in the World, it is the power hungry, money hungry individuals who run the World. The Politicians; the multi billion dollar corporations making huge profits from the war and the heads of news corporations who choose not to stand up to government propaganda (or indeed those who help to make it, Mr Murdoch)
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 15th, 2007 at 2:33am by Leon »  
 
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #87 - Mar 15th, 2007 at 7:03am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:45pm:
You're putting so much emphasis on the 'daevilwhiteaussieswhobeatuptrhepoorhelplesslebanesemen,' can you at the very least acknoledge the reasons I pointed out that this protest was justified?

Of course the protest was justified. No peaceful protest needs justification, we are free to express our views. The SECOND it became a violent riot it was no longer justifiable in ANY way whatsoever. Just as it is for the anti-globalisation rallies. Cronulla was not a protest in my eyes, it may have begun that way but it quickly became an unjustifiable violent riot. I think the bulk of the country, especially the law would agree with me. That was a black day for Australia.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #88 - Mar 15th, 2007 at 7:14am
 
Wise words Leon.

As well as those sources he presented, everyone should check out this BBC documentary series that was on SBS a short while ago:

Power of Nightmares
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=7318483000475351598
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=2839463332690200955
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4729189253956590972&q=power+of+nightm...

Extremely good documentary.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gavin
Senior Member
****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 304
Sydney, Australia
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam inherently violent?
Reply #89 - Mar 15th, 2007 at 9:08am
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 14th, 2007 at 7:45pm:
Of course the protest was justified. No peaceful protest needs justification, we are free to express our views. The SECOND it became a violent riot it was no longer justifiable in ANY way whatsoever. Just as it is for the anti-globalisation rallies. Cronulla was not a protest in my eyes, it may have begun that way but it quickly became an unjustifiable violent riot. I think the bulk of the country, especially the law would agree with me. That was a black day for Australia.


Yes, it was a black day for Australia, and it got broadcast in all the major networks worldwide.
I'm pretty sure the Australian tourism industry took a major hit because of the Cronulla riots, since people would have cancelled their holidays if they saw Australian's as racist.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 24
Send Topic Print