Here you go Gandalf, you seem to have missed this one. I am sure it was just an oversight.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:38am:


BTW, how many faces does Islam have, and how do you tell which is the right one?

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


I assume your beef was the calls for violence (beheadings) against those who criticise islam. If muslims had gone out in force in an officially sanctioned (by mainstream islamic bodies) protest, then there may be some substance to your fears. But it wasn't - the protest was organised through text messages instigated by a little known fringe group that has no affiliation with mainstream organisations. Not surprising then that they only got a couple of hundred people to turn up. Nor is it surprising that the official bodies immediately condemned the protest and declared any protest against the video as unislamic and would never be sanctioned.

So perhaps you can explain to me how this "message sent to the Australian community" of a few dozen thugs that is roundly rejected and condemned by just about everyone - especially the mainstream muslim community - is in any way significant in terms of the threat posed to our democracy. Usually when this sort of stuff happens with other extremist groups, we just laugh at them, not become frozen with fear.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


No we don't, but thats not vilifying an entire group. Vilifying, in this case is using a single isolated and non-representative event to make up stories about the sinnister undemocratic motives of the entire muslim community. Most Australians believe in a fair go, and would rightly acknowledge that such an event is not representative of the majority - and indeed would stand up for that community (note 'community' - ie this is about minorities and how they are treated, not religion) in the face of such vilification.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


You said it previously - that press releases, public statements etc are merely a cover, and that the real "internal reasonings" are that terrorism is only wrong because its not official and unsanctioned - but that violence is still the main game. All baseless of course.

For any reasonable person, the public explanation that these protests are unislamic is enough - and there is no need to "be genuinely interested" in the "internal reasonings" - which is just code for "why are they lying?". If the Australian muslim community had a history of projecting an anti-democratic and intolerant message, then there would be some justification to not take them at face value. But they do not, so such antics are little more than hysterics.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


Because I ignored the deliberate insult. I don't know why you're  trying to get a rise out of me, but quite frankly that little "declare your loyalty" schtick left a bad taste in my mouth, and I won't dignify it with an answer.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


now whose making up strawmen?

The threat is not criticising the calls for beheading, because by that logic I would be labelling those muslim leaders who condemned those calls as a threat to freedom 

The threat is from condemning an entire community over the actions of a few.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:


Yes quite the tedious read. It was quite a challenge to swallow that jingoistic neo-liberal nonsense without throwing up I must say.

The basic take home message was that islam is the number one threat to our virtuous democracy and freedom, and we must be ever vigilant against this global threat.

All I would say in response is that you seem blissfully unaware of the potential such jingoistic "call to arms" (so to speak) can have for targeting, in a negative way, a rather disempowered minority such as the muslim community in Australia - who have done nothing to deserve such vilification. Even just a little disclaimer stating things like "I don't want to tar the entire muslim community - most of whom are peaceful" or "this is not a call to vilify and entire community" - wouldn't have gone astray.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:


Let me spell it out to you then. I had just finished explaining, at length, how I (and I believe the majority of muslims) go out and contribute positively to the community, building bridges with the non-muslim community, and presenting the peaceful, tolerant face of islam. To any reasonable person, support for human rights and democracy is implicit, and needs no further clarification. And if you don't think adding that little gem "Or is that too much to ask from a Muslim?" - is insulting - then I suggest you get your head examined.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:


If you took notice, you would see it was in response to a specific attack by Soren. I felt I needed to clarify my personal position.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:


These idiotic claims pop up every now and then, and in any adult conversation, they are rightly laughed out of court.

The greatest barrier to the march of democracy and human rights is first world, nuclear armed superpowers rampaging across the globe bombing and plotting against any regime that dare stand up to the neoliberal economic world order. True freedom and democracy generally emerges when nations revolt against this imperialism - as we are starting to see in South America. The islam "clash of civilizations" schtick is just a tool to appeal to the useful idiots - which enables the imperialism to continue unimpeded. Yet, for anyone who actually pays attention, its patently obvious that the imperialist activities carried out under the auspices of promoting democracy and/or fighting terrorism are in fact hindering both. Why, for example, is the US supporting salafist extremists from Saudi Arabia to fight in Syria - who openly call for all the things you warn about in the OP - on steroids?

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:


Yes, I just noticed that. Basically your OP can be summed up as "this is not about painting muslims as terrorists... but I'll proceed to write an entire essay in which I basically portray muslims as terrorists." 

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:


And you aren't doing exactly the same, trying to deny them their right to Freedom of Speech, FD?   

You are as equally guilty as they are, I would suggest.  They are bigots, you are a bigot.  They seek to deny Freedom of Speech.  You seek to deny them, their Freedom of Speech.  Pot, kettle, black!   

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:


No because I don't believe any muslim said that to you. As I said previously, you've proven yourself such a fabricator in this regard, that I no longer believe anything you claim muslims have told you - until you produce actual quotes.

Personally I don't believe its possible to oppose the values of our society while at the same time being an active and positive contributor to that society. Thats a pretty obvious point I would have thought.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:


are you trying to be funny?

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:


It looks identical to the debate outside the islamic community.


freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:


Hmmm let me think FD - how about aiding and abetting the most blatant electoral fraud by the Karzai government? How about Australia propping up a corrupt and brutal local warlord in Oruzgan province? Or we could look at viceroy Paul Bremer's 97 edicts to impose a neoliberal utopia on Iraq. Not to mention his interventions against the setting up of local democratic councils (not hand-picked by the CPA - can't have that!).

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


If you say so. However my default position is to ignore anything you claim muslims say unless there is direct quotes.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


Of course I do. I wouldn't be here if I didn't.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


Yes and you keep making up sh!t about an imaginary campaign to criminalise blasphemy in Melbourne. As for my claims, I don't know what you are talking about - I'm merely repeating what was all over the news - that Melbourne's islamic leaders got together and made proactive moves to prevent a repeat of what happened in Sydney.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


Believe it or not, neither do people inside the mainstream islamic community. So thats not what I was talking about. I was more talking about the appropriate way to deal with acts of extremism and calls for violence. So my point was that, IMO, the views on this between the mainstream islamic community and the non-islamic community is near identical - ie condemn it and emphasise the peaceful nature of islam.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


FD - reality check please. Afghanistan is not even remotely a democracy. The vote rigging of the Karzai government is just the tip of the iceberg. The US/NATO forces aren't really even pretending to run with the democracy meme anymore. The reality is what is happening in Uruzgon - as mentioned before - propping up local strongmen who obviously have no interest in democracy. Now NATO are simply in a holding pattern - mostly only concerned with preventing more insider attacks, and counting the days until they leave. As for Iraq, I think it would be quite a stretch to call that a democracy today - and even if it was, you'd be a brave person to say the hundreds of thousands dead, millions displaced and the probable break-up of the country - was worth the price.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:


Egypt and Tunisia are two countries who have sprung into democracy by a mass grassroots revolt against the US Supported oppressive dictators. Conversely, in Bahrain, a mass revolt against the oppressive autocracy was brutally suppressed when Saudi troops were brought in. The US - who have a naval base in Bahrain looked on and said nothing. Or you can take the democratically elected Venezuelan government, who in 2002 the US plotted (and failed) to overthrow - and thereafter never stopped trying to undermine. Or the Sandinistas in Nicuragua - democractically elected, and then subject to a brutal military campaign by the US army who attempted (and failed) to overthrow them - attempting to install the unpopular Contras. Shall I go on? The post WWII period is literally filled with similar examples. Soeharto in Indonesia, Wahabists in Saudi Arabia, military dictatorships in Pakistan, Saddam in Iraq, the Shah in Iran etc etc...

Quote:


I said it was a global campaign and I asked you how they managed to convince the would-be protestors in Melbourne not to go ahead.

Quote:


Yes I noticed you keep changing the topic.

Quote:


What about their views regarding blasphemy and freedom of speech? What about democracy?

Soren wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:37pm:


no need for that

THe fascist Western corporatized military terrorist armies led by the USA accomplish this task with carpet bombing, drone attacks, terrorist attacks and unprovoked military strikes of civilian targets

They even use depleted Uranium in their weaponry

What a wonderful group of fair skinned Males who go to Christian Churches and pray each Sunday.

YOu look in the mirror and all you see is moral perfection

THank GOD that GOD doesn't really worry too much about mirrors

You PERSONALLY have a lot to answer for when you croak it and meet whatever maker cast your pathetic carcass in the clay of hatred and ignorance