If you don't like the reply then don't post more mindless muslime stupidity.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 9:18pm:


I was talking to the last poster obviously. It does appear most of us do condemn them actually. We deal with facts and with individuals who break the law and we deal with what causes them to break the law in this case islam... and mightily so.

Do you understand the difference crappler ?

freediver wrote on Nov 8^th, 2015 at 8:30pm:


Then you're not trying very hard. The distinction is very clear.

Does someone refrain from saying something offensive because they want to? = not self censorship

Does someone refrain from saying something offensive - against their will purely by the fear (real or perceived) of what someone else might do in reaction (ie intimidated into doing so)? = self censorship.

The newspaper who refrains from "fanning the flames" falls into the former. Your spineless insistence that people should not, in the interests of freedom, speak their mind about Muhammad cartoons through fear of agreeing with the terrorists = self censorship.

It really is that straight forward FD.

People call for all sorts of blacklists / banning.

Some people want immunization banned.

Some people want religious schools banned.

Some people want cars banned in defined areas (public transport only).

Etc. etc. it's nothing new.

Around the globe numerous entities are blacklisted and banned for various reasons.

We have workplace health and safety bans.

We have bans on certain types of speech.

We have bans on who can and can't perform medical procedures.

We have bans on who can and can't work with children.

We have bans on terrorist organizations.

We have bans on non terrorist organizations, for various reasons.

We have bans on who can and can't enter our country.

We have bans on who can and can't drive a car / motorbike / truck etc.

We have bans on the certain animal welfare practices / issues.

The list goes on and on.

You can not simply do as you like in our society.

Many of us know and understand just how evil and depraved islam is.

muslims are liars, that is a simple fact.

islamic atrocities are divinely sanctioned in the filth and perversion of the qur'an.

All muslims know this yet they consistently lie, trying to sell islam as a religion of peace, they are degenerate prevaricators.

Any muslim who regards the islamic dogma of thieving, lying, rape, torture and mass murder, as being the immutable perfection of the satanic allah, by definition whole heartedly supports the utterly inhumane depravities caused by this doctrine.

islam is not fit for our modern 21st century civilization.

It is only natural that people ( who understand and recognize the satanic islamic degeneracy) would call for islam to be banned / outlawed.

The tension is building daily, the satanic obscenity of islam will eventually bring down the muslims and their apologists.

There's a bit longer to go yet, but it will come.

You're convinced that evil has won the battle Karnal.

I think we are in the early stages, there's more to come.

The lies and fiendish blood crazed evilness of islam, ensures that eventually muslims and their submissive apologists will go down.

The tide is turning, we only have to wait for it to come in.

I think it could be done smarter than that K.

You pay lip service to the principle of freedom of religion, but in practice you chip away at the edges until eventually being openly muslim in Australia becomes practically impossible.

Ultimately it has to be a cultural change, but it probably needs to start off with some key legislation. Behind the scenes, the power brokers of the major parties reach agreements with key commercial/business interests that Islam is to be flushed out of society. The obvious starting place is anti-terror legislation: broaden the police powers to enable them to be far more intrusive with search orders, make it far easier to get warrants, broaden the "detain without charge" powers etc. No doubt there would already be no shortage of "places of interest" on the police watch list, but with their new powers, they can carry out their raids/searches with far less tact. A few choice undignified images from a willing media (invited to every raid of course) of disgraced half naked imams being dragged out of bed, and uncovered women being manhandled will have the desired effect - dehumanise the muslim population in the eyes of the non-muslim public, but more importantly, further marginalise and radicalise the muslim population. Police will have free reign due to bipartisan political support.

On the other side, corporate Australia will work overtime through the media to demonize the muslim population - using terrorism as the excuse. Through a concerted and cleverly targeted propaganda campaign, the transition in societal attitudes from "its only a radical fringe" to "actually this is real Islam" will start to eventuate. The political/legal side will of course compliment and reinforce the cultural side and vise versa.

Slowly the cultural transition will sift through to local administrative matters: mosque applications will of course be rejected, community events will stop inviting local muslim representatives, acts of vandalism and random attacks against muslims couldn't be ignored, but it will inevitably give a platform for the "while we condemn lawlessness and violence - there is an issue here with the muslim community that we shouldn't ignore" debate - which can only help the fight against Islam.

Muslims will of course lash out - exactly as intended. And when they do, it will convince an already well conditioned public that discriminatory measures against muslims should continue and even increase. In this environment, businesses who previously supported muslim institutions and ventures will withdraw. Halal branding becomes a particular target - visible labeling will go first, but eventually producers will be clamoring to highlight how their products are specifically *NOT* halal, and how meticulous they have been to ensure that no halal ingredients entered anywhere into the production process.

For a long time muslim institutions (mosques, schools) will survive, but they will be entirely isolated, cut off from their community, its members tribalised and defensive. For the non-muslims, every Islamic landmark will be etched on everyone's mind as places to be deeply suspicious of. Furthermore, because of the withdrawal of community support, they become run down and dilapidated, renovations are abandoned, grounds are no longer maintained - as no source of funds to maintain them are available. They become physical eyesores, which of course merely reinforces the image the public have of muslims. For these symbolic landmarks, final orders to have the destroyed may not even be necessary - they may die a natural death. Islam will no longer be a visible part of the landscape - muslims will make do using friend's apartments to pray. And imagine the outrage neighbours would feel hearing about these "terrorist cells" emerging in their neighbourhoods. large gatherings eventually become wholly impracticable as they will, without fail, be subject to police raids on the flimsiest of pretexts.

a realisation of the unfair discrimination will of course create a negative feedback in the eyes of the public - to justify a continuation of the discrimination: "sure we made them pissed - so of course we have to take measures to protect ourselves from retaliation". Exactly the same rationale was used to maintain the discrimination of blacks in America for decades.

Visibly, Islam will have disappeared from society - mosques and schools abandoned, the Imam council long since driven underground, and obviously hijabs are unthinkable. Immigration probably poses the biggest problem: legislators can either move to end immigration from muslim countries (probably do-able), or continue letting muslims in but subject them to the same campaign of intimidation and discrimination as the local muslims - and hope that they too abandon their public expression of Islam.      

Karnal wrote on Nov 20^th, 2015 at 11:32am:


I disagree slightly - I think the real purpose is to get angry. And if we actually did go and ban them like they are demanding- they would have nothing to be angry about. I think thats why my solution provides the best scenario: moses and sprint's lives will have meaning watching our society stick it to the muslims, but they can also occupy themselves with their favourite passtime - whinging about the fact that Islam hasn't been specifically banned.