Brian Ross wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2015 at 1:23am:


people in Sydney.
almost police in vict.
almost many people all over aust that the police have thwarted terrorist plans on.
victims in bali.

Brian Ross wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2015 at 3:46pm:


"US" In this instance is a collective for Australians.

Hope I have cleared that up for you, playing childish games only enhances your stupidity brian.

Soren wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2015 at 11:13pm:


Lets go with the assumption it makes no improvement.

Then what S? Is this some segue to justify - or even just to spinelessly apologise for Sprint's collective punishment doctrine? To ban, deport, bomb people purely for having a belief?

Just out of curiosity S, if Sprint and yadda had their way - and muslims were rounded up and either locked away or deported to some country most of them have never set foot in - would you be expressing concern over these human rights violations, or would you continue on with your "Hey muslim - justify islam!" routine?

Soren do I really have to explain to you that Australia doesn't have a "dress code"? That we actually live in a society that considers it ok to dress as you please?

Are these girls "demonstrating their apartness"?



I would be fascinated to get a list of Soren-approved clothing that would pass the "not demonstrating their apartness" test - I really would.

How about a top hat and baton? Doesn't exactly "fit in" to contemporary style, yet you can't say its not western. Explain your criteria Soren, I really would love to understand how this works.

Adamant wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2015 at 3:59pm:


Ah, where would we be without you to interpret for Sprint, Anti/Matty/Adam?

Since when was Sprint authorised to speak for all Australians?   

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2015 at 12:25am:


Fascinating logic - really fascinating.

People from all walks of life make dress a statement of their identity. Yes, absolutely they want to "mark themselves" - as a proud member of group x - whether its a religious group, member of the gay community, a supporter of a particular sporting team, etc etc. This is one of the most natural and common things about our culture, no one bats an eyelid. Yet when muslims do it, you somehow make the leap that its a deliberate act of belligerence - some sort of act of war against society. I literally cannot fathom the mindset that leads to this logic - other than the usual prejudice that muslims are guilty by default, and that their every move is automatically judged to be sinister and belligerent. 

Soren at least think about this: do you accept that people have a right to adopt a particular belief system? I assume you do - surely you do. If so, then does it not logically follow that you would also accept that these people have a right to proudly outwardly identify with such a belief system? And if so, why wouldn't you accept that adopting attire that represents said belief system is a mere expression of this pride - and that there is no reason to assume that this act must necessarily be a declaration of war against the host culture?

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "not acceptable in our society" Moses? Would you have thoughts and beliefs become criminal offenses.

We criminalise murderers and those who would seek harm to others, and islam does not have a monopoly on those.

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2015 at 12:25am:


Oh, but we used to, old boy, before you Lutherans popped in.

Where I grew up it was flanelette shirts, tight jeans and desert boots. No exceptions. If you wore anything else, you were beaten up for being a poofta. Literally.

National feature articles and columns were devoted to Don Dunstan wearing a pink shirt in the South Australian parliament.

This is the Australia multiculturalism changed. I now go to some of the places where the uniformity and bashings were most prominent. There, the Asians are the most toned down. The white kids are all dressed as punks.

The game has changed. Thanks, Lutherans.