Do you feel threatened by terrorists in Australia?

[Mark L]

Of cause something may happen, but do you feel a threat?
Since there's no commercial flights any more, the security at Mudgee airport has been downgraded.

[Kym]

Personally no.
Will some extreme idiots try something? Probably.
But our security forces have already stopped several attempts.

The much bigger threat is the Greens, their latest "we should stop calling IS terrorists" just shows how dumb they really are

[mudman]

i doubt that IS has even heard of Mudgee, nice town that it is.
which means we should all move to Mudgee and boost the local wine indusry, and the terror threat. :D

[Steve Axford]

Well, we didn't call Hitler a terrorist, or Stalin, or Pol Pot or the Japanes in WWII or the Viet Cong. So what's changed? Perhaps we just have a new word for anyone who is an enemy. Why not just call them "baddies".

[Kym]

We called the AXIS Nazis, Heinie, Krauts, Nips, Yellow Peril etc. during WWII
USSR - Commies, Reds, Ruskies, "comrades" (derogatory tone), Bolshies, etc.

At least terrorist is accurate

[Steve Axford]

As are most fighters. "Shock and Awe" could be translated to "Terror". It's just a word that is designed to "baddie".

[ameerat42]

Semantics. Just some antics! Some get carried away. It's just an unfortunate stage of the pre-dust/ashes conclusion
to their state of questionable existence.
Am(raving somewhat:rolleyes:).

PS: I suppose I should answer your Q. Not particularly. There's always the possibility, but one has to appraise the
probability as sanely as possible. On the "News" tonight they were beating up the level of "increased threat", but what conclusion
they reached was uncertain (to me, anyway). And then when you consider it, some of the ads on TV are pretty horrifying(ly stupid!!!).

Am(again raving, I suppose).

[bobt]

Frankly, I don't remember a point in my life where there was more unrest, fighting and radicalism in the world. It's getting to be a more dangerous world full of extremists of all kinds, and it wouldn't surprise me if it migrated to Australia. It only takes one idiot with an explosive device and a "cause", and we'll join right in. I have never understood how killing people achieves anything but more violence. :(

[ApolloLXII]

No, not at all. Terrorists do not frighten me simply because fear is what feeds their cause. All throughout the history of the human race, there has always been some group or another attempting to impose their 'will' upon others. A propensity towards violence is part of what makes us human. It always has and it always will. We are territorial by nature (hence we have 'countries' and a sense of 'nationalism') and tribalistic (which is why we support football teams and follow differing religions etc) but there will always be certain people who are willing to go to extremes of violent conduct in an attempt to get their view across. Violence begets violence and so the cycle of violence throughout human history continues. Terrorism is just another chapter and, sadly, is just symptomatic of our modern era. On a positive note, the vast majority of terrorists and Islamist extremists are as dumb as bricks. Anyone who believes that they will be rewarded with virgins in "paradise" for the act of blowing the crap out of themselves and anyone else in their vicinity has got to be seriously deluded. They don't frighten me and I refuse to bow down to terror because that takes away the one thing that they desire the most and that is for people to be frightened and scared. If we give in to terrorism then the terrorists will win.

[ameerat42]

Apollo, what a BLAST!
Am wishes to thank for this useful post.:2cheer:

Just wait till such as they run out of bullets! They'd be scared SHOT-less!

[Duane Pipe]

Me, im more concerned about being bashed or robbed by my neighbor/ozzie scum.
I think the Ice epidemic could cause a lot of violent crime and not just in the big smoke but in the smaller country towns as well.

[Mark L]

A propensity towards violence is part of what makes us human. It always has and it always will.

And I'd like to see a fraction of the resources and media coverage that is given to preventing and covering "terrorists" devoted to preventing domestic violence. It's more common than is acknowledged and has a greater personal impact on more people in Australia than terrorism.:(
Hopefully I'll not be a victim of either.

[fess67]

I grew up in the UK. I grew up in the height of the IRA bombing campaign. My father was in the army. as a 10 year old it was a matter of fact that we checked under our car every time we went anywhere. Two of my friends lost their fathers to terrorist bombs.

When I joined the army we were not allowed in public in uniform. We had to hide who we were because terrorists were ever present.

As far as I am concerned, situation normal, just get on with your lives and have fun - -BUT, be vigilant, just in case. Truth is, if some dickweed wants to strap a bomb to him and blow up next to you - nothing you can do. Soooo quit worrying and go live life :)

[Duane Pipe]

And I'd like to see a fraction of the resources and media coverage that is given to preventing and covering "terrorists" devoted to preventing domestic violence. It's more common than is acknowledged and has a greater personal impact on more people in Australia than terrorism.:(
Hopefully I'll not be a victim of either.

I here call after call on the police scanner regarding domestic violence Mark. A lot of suicide threat call outs as well, there was one at 4am this morning.

[kleinpark]

To answer the original question.....No, I don't feel threatened, but then I live in the middle of nowhere and I'm not planning on catching a plane anywhere, anytime soon :D.
I sometimes wonder what would happen to "their" aka terrorists cause, if media coverage simply stopped :confused013
To be honest, I think we're more a risk to be taken out by a drunk or drug infused driver.....:(

[Granville]

And I'd like to see a fraction of the resources and media coverage that is given to preventing and covering "terrorists" devoted to preventing domestic violence.

Aahh, but that won't happen, more's the pity.

/rant mode on
Pet peeve. News on television stations is positioned to lead into the evenings ratings and keep people on channel. News programs will advertise and sensationalise the crap out of terrorism because it drags in viewers. The more sensational the beat up, the better. It reports on what's wrong with other cultural groups that we see as different to ourselves. Domestic violence on the other hand points to what's wrong with us, and that's a bit too close to home for people to feel comfortable with. It's easy to see reports of terrorism and say "we're not like that over here", rather than see reports of domestic violence and have to say, "that is us over here".

It doesn't win ratings, and news programs (commercial rather than non commercial I guess) are out to make money first, and report the news second. Naturally enough, you're more likely to see reports and analysis on domestic violence on the ABC news would be my guess.

/rant mode off

edit: Sorry. I answered No, I do not feel threatened by terrorists in Australia.....yet.

[Kym]

No fan of the lady, but...

http://www.news.com.au/national/jacqui-lambie-calls-for-supporters-of-sharia-law-to-get-out-of-australia/story-fncynjr2-1227059004256


JACQUI Lambie wants those in Australia who support sharia law to “pack up their bags and get out of here”.

The Palmer United Party Senator is also calling for them to be kicked off government benefits and not be allowed to vote in this country.

The outspoken Tasmanian, whose recent comments about the threat of a Chinese communist invasion caused a stir, this morning turned her sights on sharia law supporters.

“Anybody that supports Sharia law in Australia should not have the right to vote, should not be given government handouts and should probably pack up their bags and get out of here,” she told reporters in Hobart.

“Anybody supporting or calling for sharia law in Australia can get out. Simple as that.”

I agreed with her on the basis that those who want any other legal system are by default not supporting our constitution and values.
Alternate legal frameworks are discriminatory and should never be allowed

[Steve Axford]

Er - has anyone pushed for sharia law here? If not, then why bring it up?

[bcys1961]

Er - has anyone pushed for sharia law here? If not, then why bring it up?

Yes!

"In its submission to the parliamentary inquiry into the government's new multiculturalism policy, The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has called for Muslims to be granted "legal pluralism"."

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/govt-says-no-to-sharia-law-20110517-1eqm2.html

[Kym]

Given that IS ultimately want a global caliphate and there are Aussies actively involved -- I'd say those who want sharia is 100% relevant.
Especially as there are numbers who want to impose it violently.

We should oppose stupid cr*p like this (sharia) every day

[Nick Cliff]

Personally I feel it is prudent to read some enlightening books on this area . I was advised to read the book Nomad and did so , I certainly feel as a nation we are incredibly lucky to be in a quiet neighborhood . Jackie Lambie is a brave woman , no doubt about it . in Europe at least one politician and film producer have been killed for expressing similar sentiments and this has resulted in some harsh and rapid reactions after this , with the Dutch having had a few deaths in particular . The real worry is that freedom of expression can be shut down when misguided religious leaders sentence people to death as they may have thought was OK in their homeland , this it is not OK in a democracy .Our forebears have spilt too much blood to usurp the right to freedom of expression , fortunately we will overcome this medieval mindset with rational discussion and nipping problems in the bud .I understand ASIO has done a superb job to date dealing with potential domestic terrorism to date .This is a tragedy for the old Afghan and Turkish communities and other newer muslim groups who want democracy and I hope it will end up being resolved peacefully , as Australians we tend to be pretty good at sorting out these things without too much emotion and with logic prevailing ,regards Nick .

[Steve Axford]

Yes!

"In its submission to the parliamentary inquiry into the government's new multiculturalism policy, The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has called for Muslims to be granted "legal pluralism"."

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/govt-says-no-to-sharia-law-20110517-1eqm2.html
So, what is actually requested? Do they want the sharia law that most of us would reject, or do they want a dualism that wasn't defined in the article you reference. Why jump to conclusions that are very unlikely. Maybe we wouldn't agree anyway, but it is hardly something to get hot under the collar about.

[ricktas]

So, what is actually requested? Do they want the sharia law that most of us would reject, or do they want a dualism that wasn't defined in the article you reference. Why jump to conclusions that are very unlikely. Maybe we wouldn't agree anyway, but it is hardly something to get hot under the collar about.

I am confused? Who do you think is getting hot under the collar?

[Kym]

It is an issue of guarding against the proverbial thin edge of the wedge.
Islamic ideology is incompatible with Aussie values.

Given even moderates have asked for legal plurality (and it got stomped on - good) we do need to make sure that people know that everyone is equal under Aussie law, one law.

Edit: Agree with Rick. It is a discussion, no one has got personal, just put their opinions, which thankfully we are free to do

[bcys1961]

So, what is actually requested? Do they want the sharia law that most of us would reject, or do they want a dualism that wasn't defined in the article you reference. Why jump to conclusions that are very unlikely. Maybe we wouldn't agree anyway, but it is hardly something to get hot under the collar about.


I agree its very unlikely . I would say impossible , as any politician that even expressed the slightest sympathy would be voted out pronto.

They would like a duel Islamic Court System that could administer Sharia Law to solve disputes. No one is saying they are going to start stoning people to death tomorrow , but even some of the "milder" Sharia laws are very discriminatory to woman.

" Mr Soliman said ......."I can see some potential applications in matters of family disputes, inheritance law and so on - that would be a win/win for the Muslim community and the wider community."

A woman cannot divorce without her husbands permission , has no claim over any assets , even ones she bought to the marriage and a woman's word in Sharia court is worth only a half that of a man.

No thanks !!!

It's pretty simple to me . If you want to live under Sharia Law go and live in a country that has Sharia Law.

http://news.smh.com.au/national/govt-rejects-call-for-islamic-courts-20080208-1r0s.html

[Steve Axford]

I am confused? Who do you think is getting hot under the collar?

Seems to me that some things are being said that are a bit "hot under the collar". Would you not agree?

[Kym]

Seems to me that some things are being said that are a bit "hot under the collar". Would you not agree?

No, just a discussion.
Interesting that both major parties are supporting action against IS and Milne as usual has not got a clue.

[ricktas]

Seems to me that some things are being said that are a bit "hot under the collar". Would you not agree?

Not at all. Everyone has expressed their opinion. No one has called anyone else names etc just cause their views are different. I would say that this discussion has brought forward some good points of view, opinions, ideas. I would say that commenting that people are getting 'hot under the collar' is probably the only provocative comment in this thread about others points of view.

[Kym]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-14/death-threats-against-muslim-leader-who-denounced-radicals/5670774


The concern about home-grown terrorism has taken an alarming twist today with death threats being made against a Sydney Muslim leader who spoke out against Australian radicals. Dr Jamal Rifi and his family have been forced to take extra security measures in response to online threats that were posted on Twitter.



This is the guy that had a BBQ last weekend to open up a positive view on Islam (well done) - so they threaten his life.

[ricktas]

https://www.facebook.com/SevenNewsBrisbane/photos/a.133620586650802.21125.130736376939223/839075019438685/?type=1

In Brisbane they have sealed the rubbish bins in the train stations. To stop terrorists putting bombs in them.

It seems even if most are not threatened by terrorists in Australia, that our way of life is being impacted even more by the 'threat' that is perceived to exist.

[old dog]

evil is alive and `well` and whether it be these ISIL miscreants, derailed peodafilic (sp?) catholics clergy, large backpocketed pollies, etc.....nothing will change until evil is stopped....and it will be stopped one day because if it isn`t then the whole universe will be murdered, raped, pillaged and made a garbage dump. Rant finished.....make love not war I say....:D

[Mark L]

Islamic ideology is incompatible with Aussie values.


I think it can.
Maybe ideology of any kind can be incompatible with Aussie values.:D
True Islam, the same as true Christianity, is a faith of peace. Islamic State (or ISIL) has not much to do with Islam.
George W. evoked his Christian God when going after Saddam. Did he have true Christian peaceful intent?

[farmmax]

No I don't feel in least threatened by terrorists. While ever we change our habits and behavior to accommodate them, they win. They must be laughing to pieces at the costs and inconveniences we now go through. I'm prepared to take more risks in return for a lot less restrictions in my day to day living.

Don't forget, that to some people in the world we are terrorists. Just ask all the innocent people we bombed and maimed in Iraq and Afganistan simply because a minority of their population don't behave in a civilised manner. I would image we killed far, far more innocent people in those countries than the total of all deaths that the terrorists have inflicted on us. Bit hypocritical aren't we?

[Steve Axford]

Not at all. Everyone has expressed their opinion. No one has called anyone else names etc just cause their views are different. I would say that this discussion has brought forward some good points of view, opinions, ideas. I would say that commenting that people are getting 'hot under the collar' is probably the only provocative comment in this thread about others points of view.
Me? Provocative? I actually thought that people were getting a bit hot under the collar. After all, even our Prime Minister says that this terrorist threat is nothing to do with any religious community. It is just some criminal elements. Did I get it wrong?

[Grant S]

Given that IS ultimately want a global caliphate and there are Aussies actively involved -- I'd say those who want sharia is 100% relevant.
Especially as there are numbers who want to impose it violently.

We should oppose stupid cr*p like this (sharia) every day
Does that depend on which sharia law, or all of them?

From Wikipedia:

The Arabic word sharīʿa has origins in the concept of ‘religious law’; the word is commonly used by Arabic-speaking peoples of the Middle East and designates a prophetic religion in its totality. Thus, sharīʿat Mūsā means religious law of Moses (Judaism), sharīʿat al-Masīḥ means religious law of Christianity, sharīʿat al-Madjūs means religious law of Zoroastrianism

[bcys1961]

Does that depend on which sharia law, or all of them?

From Wikipedia:


I think this is part of the problem . Sharia law is religion based , different religions interpret it differently and this is one area where conflict starts and festers.

Our law is the same for everyone, regardless of what religion you follow. Hundreds of years ago the English separated the church and state , and prospered as a result. Countries to which this system has been "exported" , like Australia , have also in general prospered. Islamic countries that have not made this separation are still fighting battles that are centuries old.

[ricktas]

Me? Provocative? I actually thought that people were getting a bit hot under the collar. After all, even our Prime Minister says that this terrorist threat is nothing to do with any religious community. It is just some criminal elements. Did I get it wrong?

maybe our Prime Minister got it wrong? After all it would not be the first time that religious beliefs held by zealots was behind atrocities. I have many muslim friends who abhor what is being done in the name of their religion, but they understand that religion is behind it. something the rest of us are being told is not the case. We humans have learnt naught since the crusades.

[MissionMan]

I think it may reach a point religion in general should be treated like any right in Australia. It's one which can be taken away when it's abused. I.e. you have a right to drive but if you abuse that right by driving drunk, it can be taken away. I think the best way to deal with those who misuse (and I say misuse because no religion should be advocating violence against others) religion would be to take away their right to worship if they cannot do so in a responsible fashion. By that I mean take away their right to have religious artefacts, take away their right to go to religious places where they can influence people, etc. Perhaps then they might realise that if their actions put others at risk, they could lose the very right they hold dear. It may seem harsh to take away a persons right to go to religious meetings, but we stop paedophiles from going near schools, why wouldn't we stop extremists from going anywhere they can influence others?

[Steve Axford]

So we are getting hot under the collar about Islam

[ricktas]

So we are getting hot under the collar about Islam

Those words again. No we are discussing terrorism, religion and more. You seem to think a discussion on this means we are getting hot under the collar, when an articulate debate is taking place. Why should people not be able to discuss this in a reasonable and respectful manner, as long as all views are allowed to be aired? No one is getting irate at what another member has posted. A variety of points of view have been expressed, but no-one has been trolled, flamed, belittled for their views. No one has said someone else's views are wrong.

Stifling debate by inferring it is becoming heated, is simply about trying to shut down that aspect of the discussion. People may not contribute their views if they feel the discussion (on any topic) is going to become an all-in argument. IS is a religious based group and any discussion on it, should allow discussion on the beliefs of that group, thus Islam (the extremist version of it) should be able to be included in any discussion, if people want to. It does not mean they are getting hot under the collar, it just means they are discussing all aspects of the topic.

[Steve Axford]

I can't see anything reasonable or respectful about this debate. It's certainly not respectful of the wider Islamic community. At least Tony Abbot was bright enough to realise that he had to distance himself from any religious war that could be generated. ISIL is a particular group that happens to be linked to a particular Saudi sect of Sunni Islam. ISIL attracts disaffected youth from around the world and there is a fear that those people may cause trouble when/if they return to their countries of origin. To extend that to calls for general repression of Islam is not reasonable or respectful - in my opinion.

[Glenda]

No I don't feel threatened by terrorist attacks here. I'm a fatalist and whilst I don't knowingly put myself in danger, if someone chooses to plant a car bomb and I happen to be in the vicinity when it goes off, not much I can do to avoid it and I certainly don't want to waste my time worrying about it. To date Australia has been fairly insulated in regards to terrorist attacks on our home soil and I would love to see it remain that way. Realistically it probably won't. I agree with an earlier poster, the most dangerous thing Aussies do every day is get out on the roads as either a driver or pedestrian.

[MissionMan]

I can't see anything reasonable or respectful about this debate. It's certainly not respectful of the wider Islamic community. At least Tony Abbot was bright enough to realise that he had to distance himself from any religious war that could be generated. ISIL is a particular group that happens to be linked to a particular Saudi sect of Sunni Islam. ISIL attracts disaffected youth from around the world and there is a fear that those people may cause trouble when/if they return to their countries of origin. To extend that to calls for general repression of Islam is not reasonable or respectful - in my opinion.

I don't see where anyone has been disrespectful to the wider Muslim community.

The topics addressed to date have been targeted at:

A) extremists who are a risk to the community no matter what their religious allegiances are
B) Sharia law which is in contradiction to both our local laws and human rights charter (I.e. Sexist religious laws that hold no place in Australia)

In some respects, Christian versions of B are also being challenged by the average Australian because there is a rift between historical religious laws and equality, namely the lack of gay marriage laws.

No one is calling for a repression of Muslims, they are calling for a repression of the extremist views held by a minority saying they have no place in Australia.

As someone who moved to Australia, I am respectful of the laws in Australia and I can't understand why someone would want to move here, and then change the laws to be more like the country they left. I.e. If it was that great back in your old country, why did you leave? Clearly there was a reason why you moved, so perhaps it would be good for people to reflect on that.

On the issue of a disillusioned youth, again, as an outsider who moved to Australia, I have to say that Australians are very accommodating irrespective of your race, colour, creed or religious beliefs....but...they want you to fit in. You cannot come to Australia, close yourself off in a community, do your best to not fit in and try to create a mini-version of your home country, and then claim that you are not accepted. I don't care what country you go to, you will have issues if you do things this way. As an example, there are some foreigners who have been in Australia for 20 years and can't speak English because they have closed themselves off in communities of ex-pats. If you approach life this way, it will be to your detriment and you cannot blame Australia or any other country for that. Part of fitting in is understanding the people and culture of the country you are in. When I have traveled to foreign countries for work, that is the first thing I try to do. I learnt Arabic when I was in Saudi, Flemish in Belgium and I made friends. When you move to a country, you have two choices, you can move forward with your life in the new country or live in the past.

By the way, this is not just Muslims. This is any culture coming to Australia. As an example, In the tennis we saw fights between the Serbs and the Croats. Ironically these factions of people were youngsters who were born and bred in Australia and had never seen and violence between the cultures and yet their parents, living in the past had passed down a legacy of hatred to their children for people who had nothing to do with the atrocities of the past.

[bobt]

Personally I view religion as being a prime cause of global unrest, and greed comes a close second. Religion has always been about control, and humans en masse are essentially greedy and aggressive. The most dangerous substance on the planet is testosterone, without which most of the unrest would not occur. On the one hand humans have achieved amazing things, but on the other we are fundamentally flawed. What we see as "civilisation" is often just a veneer, covering a deeper and more destructive nature which emerges at the slightest opportunity.

We are currently in a dangerous phase where extremists of all flavours are emerging and threatening the progress we have made over the last few hundred years. When you factor in things like global warming and diseases like Ebola, it seems to me that the world is at a very dangerous point in its evolution. Many governments are corrupt, and most are bogged down in self-interest.

At the end of the day, our only refuge is in a very large block of chocolate ........:eek:

[Kym]

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorise 123 as being religious in nature, which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.


111724

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

[Steve Axford]

Point A) is what the thread is about and there has been no problem there.
Point B) however isn't part of the subject of this thread - at least it doesn't seem to be. I knew little about this issue until it came up here, but with a very small amount of reading it became a bit clearer. The calls by Jacqui Lambie for “I just say anyone who supports sharia law in Australia should not have the right to vote, should not be given government handouts and should probably pack up their bags and get out of here — that’s what I’m saying,” does seem to be quite inflammatory because there is no qualification that this probably does not include the majority of the Muslim community and any call for removal of rights just because someone asks (note: ask, not demand) for something we disagree with is also inflammatory. I believe that this view was supported here.
I remember exactly the same arguments being used against Italians, Vietnamese and people from the UK before we had the latest round against the Islamic community. I remember the troubles in Northern Ireland and how it was portrayed as a religious war. Of course it wasn't, and we now see it as an oppressed people trying to get a fair deal. Perhaps it is the same in the Middle East and we are just focussing on the religious side, which can blind us to the realities of what is really happening.

[Kym]

I can't see anything reasonable or respectful about this debate. It's certainly not respectful of the wider Islamic community.

Well I think you misreading the thread; in fact being provocative in your comments while others are being reasoned.
I commended Dr Jamal Rifi and his actions last weekend (BBQ etc) to put the majority view, even though his life was threatened by extremists.

We are dead set against the extremists / terrorists; also against any attempt to subvert the Aussie constitution and values via an alternate legal framework.
These are sensible things.

[MissionMan]

I can't see how speaking out against extremist views can be construed as being disrespectful to the wider community who apparently don't support these views. If they don't support them, or the implementation of Sharia Laws or parts of it which could be construed as sexist, why would they be bothered. I come from a Christian background and I have no issue with people speaking out against the church's views on gay marriage which I believe are completely misaligned with reality (not to mention have the bible verses that are used are completely out of context).

The biggest issue I have with the muslim community is the lack of tolerance for freedom of speech, one which they often use to their advantage when they marched against Zionism and Israel. Apparently we have to be respectful of the muslim community but if one of the muslim leaders comes out and says that when women get raped, it's their own fault we are not allowed to comment because it's anti muslim. Isn't it these exact people that will march against the US when the US government (which represents the views of the people but not necessarily all the people) make a decision to attack a particular country? We are judged by our leaders. Tony Abbott is a reflection of us because we (or the majority of us) voted him in. Lamb, despite the embarrassment that she is, was also voted in.

[Steve Axford]

The biggest issue I have with the muslim community is the lack of tolerance for freedom of speech, one which they often use to their advantage when they marched against Zionism and Israel. Apparently we have to be respectful of the muslim community but if one of the muslim leaders comes out and says that when women get raped, it's their own fault we are not allowed to comment because it's anti muslim. Isn't it these exact people that will march against the US when the US government (which represents the views of the people but not necessarily all the people) make a decision to attack a particular country?

I don't think that just because someone is elected it means that they are above the law. Hitler was elected too and almost everyone would agree that the war he started was wrong. I think that people have the right to protest when the US government, or any other, decides to start a war. We may or may not agree with them, but would you say they have no right?

[MissionMan]

I don't think that just because someone is elected it means that they are above the law. Hitler was elected too and almost everyone would agree that the war he started was wrong. I think that people have the right to protest when the US government, or any other, decides to start a war. We may or may not agree with them, but would you say they have no right?

I agree wholeheartedly. Protest at will.

What I disagree with is the double standards...



If a western leader does something, then the west is bad
If a muslim leader does something, then its not a reflection on muslims community as a whole and if we say something about it we are being anti-muslim

[Steve Axford]

Some Muslims are baddies. Some western people are baddies. Some people are baddies - and that's what we should be looking at. I doubt that they are bad because they are Muslim.

[ameerat42]

Be AFRAID!:eek: Be Very AFRAID!:eek::eek:

"TERRORIST THREAD Alert!":rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::D:D

[ricktas]

Some irony:

* Extremists vow to attack the US and their allies, but use iPhones, iPads etc to post videos etc online.
* Short memories. People seem to believe these extremists are isolated and new threats. Yet Christian Crusades centuries ago, attacking muslims, have created generations of hatred, that is passed down from parents to children.
* This can all be solved by going to war
* If I go to a muslim country I expect to have to adhere their laws.
* If muslims come to our country they should adhere to ours (most muslims I have met, agree)

[Steve Axford]

I agree. If we hope to survive in a crowded world we will have to devise a way to live together. We don't seem to be very good at that.

[MissionMan]

I think the bigger risk to us is the potential for Nuclear war from the likes of North Korea or Russia. You'd hope they would be smart enough not to start something like that but there are plenty of politicians locally that point to intelligence not being an entrance requirement. :p

[ricktas]

I think the bigger risk to us is the potential for Nuclear war from the likes of North Korea or Russia. You'd hope they would be smart enough not to start something like that but there are plenty of politicians locally that point to intelligence not being an entrance requirement. :p

I believe we are more at risk from a pandemic, etc. Rats, mice, rabbits etc all reach a point where they are in plague like proportions and nature takes over and eliminates them. Humans at present are like rats, over breeding, over populating, consuming way more than the planet can sustain. We are also overdue for a flu-like pandemic. We have built up resistance to antibiotics within ourselves and within bacteria etc.

Sadly, probably the best thing that could happen for the planet itself, is something that eliminated about 50-80% of the human population. But even then, we could not live in peace with each other.

[MissionMan]

There are way bigger problems than plagues/pandemics.

Some people on Ausphotography think brands like Pentax/Canon/Olympus are better than Nikon. That in itself should be a red flag for the end of the world. Until everyone is using Nikon, the world will never be at peace.

Disclaimer - I was paid $0.05 by Nikon for that statement.

[Mary Anne]

You were overpaid MM that comment is only worth 2 cents.

[Kym]

You were overpaid MM that comment is only worth 2 cents.

Inflation :p

[MissionMan]

Inflation :p

Nope, Nikon Tax. You could have bought the same Sigma or Pentax comment for 2 cents but the build quality of the Nikon comment is much higher.

[Nick Cliff]

Careful MM you may be about to trigger WW3 .

[Kym]

Christian Crusades centuries ago, attacking muslims, have created generations of hatred, that is passed down from parents to children.

And this is really really really incorrect.

Consider this:

The crusades initially were a response to a request from the Byzantine (Constantinople) empire who were being attacked by muslims
There were a few crusades (7 major and more minor ones); whereas there were more than 500 islamic 'crusades' over a much longer period (more than 1000 years)
(Consider that islamic expansion went into Europe and nearly took over Spain; i.e. the moorish invasion)
Islamic violent expansion took over most of North Africa and 99% of the middle east
eg. islam wiped out the then Christian Egypt 639 - 642


The whole 'how bad were the crusades' argument does not stack up with historical fact.
Islam has consistently produced more violence then any other ideology over history

Lets look at what led up to the first crusade...

634—644 The Caliphate of Umar ibn al—Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.
635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus
636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.
637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)
638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.
638—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.
639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.
641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.
643—707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.
644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.
644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.
656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.
656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.
657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali
661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.
661—680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus
673—678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire
680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.
691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.
705 Abd al—Malik restores Umayyad rule.
710—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.
711—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.
719 Cordova, Spain, becomes seat of Arab governor
732 The Muslim Crusaders stopped at the Battle of Poitiers; that is, Franks (France) halt Arab advance
749 The Abbasids conquer Kufah and overthrow Umayyids
756 Foundation of Umayyid amirate in Cordova, Spain, setting up an independent kingdom from Abbasids
762 Foundation of Baghdad
785 Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova
789 Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; foundation of Fez; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.
800 Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia
807 Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non—Muslim prayer houses and of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem
809 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy
813 Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country
831 Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy
850 Caliph al—Matawakkil orders the destruction of non—Muslim houses of prayer
855 Revolt of the Christians of Hims (Syria)
837—901 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France
869—883 Revolt of black slaves in Iraq
909 Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia
928—969 Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969)
937 The Ikhshid, a particularly harsh Muslim ruler, writes to Emperor Romanus, boasting of his control over the holy places
937 The Church of the Resurrection (known as Church of Holy Sepulcher in Latin West) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked
960 Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam
966 Anti—Christian riots in Jerusalem
969 Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo
c. 970 Seljuks enter conquered Islamic territories from the East
973 Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids
1003 First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed
1009 Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937)
1012 Beginning of al—Hakim's oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians
1015 Earthquake in Palestine; the dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses
1031 Collapse of Umayyid Caliphate and establishment of 15 minor independent dynasties throughout Muslim Andalus
1048 Reconstruction of the Church of the Resurrection completed
1050 Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.
1055 Seljuk Prince Tughrul enters Baghdad, consolidation of the Seljuk Sultanate
1055 Confiscation of property of Church of the Resurrection
1071 Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia
1071 Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine
1073 Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)
1075 Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia
1076 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana
1085 Toledo is taken back by Christian armies
1086 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca
1090—1091 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands
1094 Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970
1095 Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099

So it is only after all of the Islamic aggressive invasions that Western Christendom launches its first Crusades.

[MissionMan]

And this is really really really incorrect.

<snip>

I'm confused. Are you saying the Muslims created Canon?

[ricktas]

I'm confused. Are you saying the Muslims created Canon?

We could tell you, but we would have to charge you a $0.10 Canon tax.

[MissionMan]

We could tell you, but we would have to charge you a $0.10 Canon tax.

On a more serious note, I could never use Canon due to racism. I had a friend who wasn't allowed to join the Canon Professional Services because he was jewish.

They told him it was because he was circumsized. Apparently you have to be a complete prick to be a Canon user :lol2:

Now I think I'll leave because I think this will start world war 3.

[ameerat42]

Relax! There's nothing to worry about. That reference to Terrorist Threads was just a new clothing store opening.

[Mark L]

That reference to Terrorist Threads was just a new clothing store opening.

Well since it's my terrorist thread, I hope Terrorist Threads pay me a better CommisionMan than Nikon do.

[ameerat42]

Nick on? I've been told to Nick off at times.:rolleyes:

I reckon it all depends on which side of the bed one gets out of.

Now some beds are hard up against a wall, and when you try to get out on the "wrong" side...!
Well, they don't call it a Harvey Wallbanger for nothing.

So next time you're at Harvey's I suggest you look out for an "each-way bed".
I reckon if you have an "each-way bed" it won't matter what side you get out of.

That would have to be the ultimate cure for sore-headedness.

If anybody scoffs at this when you might mention it, don't think it's odds. Ask them if they want a bed!

Am.

Think I'm mad? Try reading this thread!

[Mark L]

I reckon if you have an "each-way bed" it won't matter what side you get out of.


Gives you two options if you need to escape a threat.

And I've not heard of to many people pushing for any sort of sharia law to be included in our legal system. Those few that do are rightly ignored. Just mentioned that as it's been raised in this thread.
It, and a lot what's been written above, doesn't have much to do with you feeling threatened by terrorists in Australia.;)
Feeling threatened by the Islamic faith also should not have much to do with feeling threatened by terrorists in Australia. But it does.:(

[ApolloLXII]

So, at the end of the great Nikon/Pentax/Canon war, Sony will be the only one left standing because us users are largely ignored and not considered a threat [emoji6]

[MissionMan]

So, at the end of the great Nikon/Pentax/Canon war, Sony will be the only one left standing because us users are largely ignored and not considered a threat [emoji6]

For now, but Samsung is the ISIS of the camera world. They copy indiscriminately and slowly picking up disillusioned camera users and one day Sony will have to join NATO when they start copying Sony as well. This war isn't over. It's only just beginning. Sony will only see the true evil when Samsung users behead their old DSLR's in the streets. :p

[ameerat42]

Gives you two options if you need to escape a threat.

And I've not heard of to many people pushing for any sort of sharia law to be included in our legal system. Those few that do are rightly ignored. Just mentioned that as it's been raised in this thread.
It, and a lot what's been written above, doesn't have much to do with you feeling threatened by terrorists in Australia.;)
Feeling threatened by the Islamic faith also should not have much to do with feeling threatened by terrorists in Australia. But it does.:(

Just "fought" I'd say "fanx" for the "fread", Mark:D It did tend to wander around the tropics some!! - Ie, off toppick!

[ricktas]

I wonder if today's events have made anyone consider a change to the way they voted in this poll?

[MissionMan]

I was going to ask the same question

[Duane Pipe]

Those of us that live in major cities or large suburban areas should watch their backs I rekon.
I would hate to read that an Ozzie had their throat cut while going about their daily life..

Remember This.
On 4 December 2005, a group of volunteer surf lifesavers were assaulted by a group of young men of Middle Eastern appearance, with several other violent assaults occurring over the next week.

Remember the British solderer that had his throat cut:eek:

It is possible that it could happen, if it dose I hope our security can handle the fallout.

http://www.news.com.au/national/australian-terror-raids-afp-asio-move-on-suspected-terrorists/story-fncynjr2-1227062204389

My scare factor has gone up 1 notch.

[aussie girl]

I feel that there are a few minority groups (some possibly Australian born) who would go to any length to get their message across. A key example of what can happen is the appalling and horrific beheading of the soldier in London, by an English born Muslim. It can certainly happen here - let's hope it never doesn't!!! And don't forget those photos of an Australian born Muslim's son holding up the severed head of some poor person
What concerns me a lot is the fact that the majority of the Muslim society who live here are not seen out in the streets protesting about what is happening overseas. There have been no Imam led protests in our streets in regard to the beheading of 3 innocent people, 2 journalists and one humanitarian worker. Not a whisper!! yet today, after Federal police raided certain Muslim homes, there was a protest in our streets about the invasion of women and children in their own homes. It is believed that some of those arrested where people who were involved in a previous terrorist plot, and it was reported on the news tonight, by the federal court judge, that in the last raid, a vast amount of explosives and chemicals were never recovered.

Look back at history. The German people stayed silent when Hitler started his rants and raves and before long they got to the stage where they were involved in reporting innocent people, Jew and German alike, to save themselves from suspicion.
There was a recent clip on YouTube that summed up this "willingness to do nothing" I have put the link below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAoXgZLRee0

What I get annoyed about is the way that Muslim people have to introduce themselves as a Muslim. You don't hear many people say, "as an Australian Christian" do you? and I cannot ever condone those who want "Sharia Law" put in place for "their" people. Why would you flee a country because of war and strife only to try to change a new country to be just like the country you fled? I have nothing against Muslims as such, and I am sure there are plenty out there who are no different to the average Christian person in our community, but I get very annoyed that this particular religious group are trying to demand changes under the name of Islam. Things like being "offended" by our Christmas celebrations, which has resulted in some shopping centres banning Christmas decorations being put up. In America, some bureaucrats in high places have introduced the saying "Happy Holiday's " instead of Merry Christmas, because they don't want to "offend" another religious group. I find this insulting to OUR cultural beliefs and customs. We are a very multicultural society - we have been bringing in migrants from many different countries over the decades. Greeks, Italians, English, Vietnamese, Phillapinos Sudanese, to mention a few, but I have not known of any of these races demanding to have our lifestyles changed to suit their beliefs. We have Greek Orthodox who hold their religious ceremonies and celebrate their Easter on different days to us, but never have they demanded that Easter be changed to when they celebrate it. You do not hear of Buddhist monks demanding that we change our ways to conform with their religion. Most of them go to their own churches or temples and pray for their own God in their own ways. Too many Muslim groups seem to be hellbent on changing everyone to Islam and getting the laws of the land changed to the Islamic ideology as well and I find that extremely worrying. This clip below is a good example of what is being attempted in Britain This parliamentarian has since been voted out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Knk_jpq7Vx8

[Mark L]

What I get annoyed about is the way that Muslim people have to introduce themselves as a Muslim.

I haven't encountered that?
In fact the Muslim I've met would rather not tell you they are, in our multicultural society.:confused013
Do you feel threatened by terrorists?

[MissionMan]

I haven't encountered that?
In fact the Muslim I've met would rather not tell you they are, in our multicultural society.:confused013
Do you feel threatened by terrorists?

I have actually seen that oddly enough, it doesn't happen often but they either introduce themselves as Muslim or Australian Muslim. It's a little like someone introducing themselves as an African American. If you were born in america, you're american. The Africa part is part of your roots but there is no need to distinguish yourself. If you do, you can't complain about racial segregation when you introduce yourself in such a way that you are segregated.

I noticed that Belgium has now introduced a system whereby those who go fight for ISIS will lose their citizenship and any future claim to refugee status. It's an interesting approach. I believe the UN says you can't revoke citizenship but if you swear allegiance to another nation, there might be loopholes. I'd be interested to see if others follow suit.

[Mary Anne]

I wonder if today's events have made anyone consider a change to the way they voted in this poll?

No I still feel the same way.. I am not the least worried about terrorists in Australia.

[bobt]

I wonder if today's events have made anyone consider a change to the way they voted in this poll?

Not me! I agree that we cannot afford to be intimidated, and we should not allow religious loonies to change our way of life - BUT, the fact remains that we are not dealing with rational, thoughtful people. What we do have in our midst is a relatively small group of individuals whose actions are not predicated on logical and reasoned arguments but on an ideology that is simply medieval and barbaric. Their thought processes are no more predictable than the Ebola virus as both kill indiscriminately without any rhyme or reason. Just as plagues need to be isolated and contained, so does radicalism. Our society needs to be educated so that radicalism finds nowhere to grow and be nourished, and this process needs to start within the Islamic community.

[rookie]

I don't see where anyone has been disrespectful to the wider Muslim community.

The topics addressed to date have been targeted at:

A) extremists who are a risk to the community no matter what their religious allegiances are
B) Sharia law which is in contradiction to both our local laws and human rights charter (I.e. Sexist religious laws that hold no place in Australia)

In some respects, Christian versions of B are also being challenged by the average Australian because there is a rift between historical religious laws and equality, namely the lack of gay marriage laws.

No one is calling for a repression of Muslims, they are calling for a repression of the extremist views held by a minority saying they have no place in Australia.

As someone who moved to Australia, I am respectful of the laws in Australia and I can't understand why someone would want to move here, and then change the laws to be more like the country they left. I.e. If it was that great back in your old country, why did you leave? Clearly there was a reason why you moved, so perhaps it would be good for people to reflect on that.

On the issue of a disillusioned youth, again, as an outsider who moved to Australia, I have to say that Australians are very accommodating irrespective of your race, colour, creed or religious beliefs....but...they want you to fit in. You cannot come to Australia, close yourself off in a community, do your best to not fit in and try to create a mini-version of your home country, and then claim that you are not accepted. I don't care what country you go to, you will have issues if you do things this way. As an example, there are some foreigners who have been in Australia for 20 years and can't speak English because they have closed themselves off in communities of ex-pats. If you approach life this way, it will be to your detriment and you cannot blame Australia or any other country for that. Part of fitting in is understanding the people and culture of the country you are in. When I have traveled to foreign countries for work, that is the first thing I try to do. I learnt Arabic when I was in Saudi, Flemish in Belgium and I made friends. When you move to a country, you have two choices, you can move forward with your life in the new country or live in the past.

By the way, this is not just Muslims. This is any culture coming to Australia. As an example, In the tennis we saw fights between the Serbs and the Croats. Ironically these factions of people were youngsters who were born and bred in Australia and had never seen and violence between the cultures and yet their parents, living in the past had passed down a legacy of hatred to their children for people who had nothing to do with the atrocities of the past.

Best post Ive read

[Steve Axford]

Nor me. I do think that we need to be careful of crazies (as always), but I don't think that putting this all on the Islamic community will help. It is likely to alienate them and provide more of a breeding ground for "angry young men". All cultures have them and we would do well to be inclusive to the Islamic community rather than demonise them. This will ensure that any Islamic crazies have minimal moral and/or physical support and it is very hard to operate with no support. Of course there is always the possibility of a lone Anders Behring Breivik or a Martin Bryant, but since we have banned automatic weapons it does make mass murder quite difficult.

[ricktas]

Nor me. I do think that we need to be careful of crazies (as always), but I don't think that putting this all on the Islamic community will help. It is likely to alienate them and provide more of a breeding ground for "angry young men". All cultures have them and we would do well to be inclusive to the Islamic community rather than demonise them. This will ensure that any Islamic crazies have minimal moral and/or physical support and it is very hard to operate with no support. Of course there is always the possibility of a lone Anders Behring Breivik or a Martin Bryant, but since we have banned automatic weapons it does make mass murder quite difficult.

I would have to say that from my experience over the past day or so, no one I know appears to be putting this on the Islamic community, including my muslim friends. However, the loudest element seems to be those protesting in Sydney etc, as though this was a reaction to Islam, rather than a reaction to terrorist threats. These 'protesters' are the ones making the link between their religion and the raids. They are trying to alienate themselves!

From where I sit, these noisy Islam minority are the ones getting into the media. They want the rest of Australia to start to hate them, and their religion, cause then they can scream that they are not wanted here, that we are racist, etc and justify radicalism within their ranks. The media should be ignoring them and talking to the muslim leaders who are saying this was about a threat, not about Islam.

Our media are the worst in all of this, they promote the extreme, make them popular, then sit back and 'report innocently' from the sidelines when their own actions are what stir up the animosity, anger etc in the first place. A Free Press comes with responsibility, and our media is lacking in any responsibility whatsoever.

[ameerat42]

Hear! Hear! That last bit esp. is about right. While listening idly to the "news" later in the evening, it was reported that "they" (the dreaded "they") were not in fact going
to perpetrate the atrocity that had till then been widely reported. This later report actually said "...probably by [committing that atrocity]...] In other words, [that atrocity]
had been confabulated in the earlier news reports.

In other words, I reckon it's "schoopid" to become all alarmed because the news says you should. A considered level of alertness would probably be more useful by way of
any sort of preparation against the unexpectable.

PS: Mark, after this you may well ask us to count penguins. Maybe "they" should count penguins. Give 'em something better to do!:rolleyes:

[Steve Axford]

I would have to say that from my experience over the past day or so, no one I know appears to be putting this on the Islamic community, including my muslim friends. However, the loudest element seems to be those protesting in Sydney etc, as though this was a reaction to Islam, rather than a reaction to terrorist threats. These 'protesters' are the ones making the link between their religion and the raids. They are trying to alienate themselves!

From where I sit, these noisy Islam minority are the ones getting into the media. They want the rest of Australia to start to hate them, and their religion, cause then they can scream that they are not wanted here, that we are racist, etc and justify radicalism within their ranks. The media should be ignoring them and talking to the muslim leaders who are saying this was about a threat, not about Islam.

Our media are the worst in all of this, they promote the extreme, make them popular, then sit back and 'report innocently' from the sidelines when their own actions are what stir up the animosity, anger etc in the first place. A Free Press comes with responsibility, and our media is lacking in any responsibility whatsoever.

So you would agree that it isn't a problem with the Islamic community, but rather a problem with the Australian media?

[chappo1]

Personally no as some others have said. The politics worries me though with grandstanding and photo opps for the media.

Obviously more kudos in grandstanding with troops than fighting poverty or ebola..... john

[ricktas]

So you would agree that it isn't a problem with the Islamic community, but rather a problem with the Australian media?

There is a problem with an element within the Islamic community..and the media. These are not isolated from each other. I think you are trying to over-simplify it by asserting that it is one OR the other. Just like there is an element within the Catholic church who are paedophilic. The actions of the Church in that instance (or lack of action) has seen the Church now being up at a Royal Commission. Elements within the Islamic religion are doing their religion a dis-service too. No matter how some Muslims try and isolate it from their church, it will not be. They are known as Catholic paedophiles..and Islamic terrorists.

[Kym]

My summary...

There are numbers of people living in Australia who identify as muslim that want to harm Australians
There are many more people who identify as muslim that want to live in peace in Australia
The people in point 1 are very dangerous because of their ideology/mindset
Our police and security must (and are) taking hard action against those in point 1
Violence in the Australian Islamic community is disproportionately high - refer comments about the 'violent' Buddhists (or lack thereof.)
There is some (but not enough) anti-violence commentary coming from group 2 above
There are numbers of people from group 2 above who tacitly support those in group 1
Australian media is a shamozzle
The basic islamic ideology is not compatible with the Australian Constitution, our values and aspirations -- this is the biggest problem we have


Further this is not a new problem.

Quote: The ambassador answered us that their right was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
-- Thomas Jefferson, then the U.S. ambassador to France, reporting to Secretary of State John Jay a conversation he'd had with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, Tripoli's envoy to London, in 1786

Note: That is before al Qaeda and the Taliban, before the creation of Israel or the Arab-Israeli conflict, before Khomeini, before Saudi Arabia, before drones, before most Westerners even knew what jihad or Islam was, and, most importantly, well before the United States had engaged in a single military incursion overseas or even had an established foreign policy.

[Steve Axford]

There is a problem with an element within the Islamic community..and the media. These are not isolated from each other. I think you are trying to over-simplify it by asserting that it is one OR the other. Just like there is an element within the Catholic church who are paedophilic. The actions of the Church in that instance (or lack of action) has seen the Church now being up at a Royal Commission. Elements within the Islamic religion are doing their religion a dis-service too. No matter how some Muslims try and isolate it from their church, it will not be. They are known as Catholic paedophiles..and Islamic terrorists.
From the last couple of posts I would say that it is very much being put on the Islamic community. The point I am trying to make is that this is a human thing. We can be barbaric people irrespective of religion or race or political persuasion.

[mudman]

it does not change my vote.
what upsets me is that the sense of safety and peace of mind we enjoy here in Australia has forever been trashed.

[I @ M]

it does not change my vote.
what upsets me is that the sense of safety and peace of mind we enjoy here in Australia has forever been trashed.

Interesting thoughts Muddy but surprisingly at odds with how our current guest feels. Coming from Germany where they feel totally secure and safe with a well ordered life they suddenly feel rather vulnerable in this country where our successive govts have let in less than desirable residents and that is a perspective of someone who is merely passing through ----

[ameerat42]

The last few posts (<edited to add an "s" here): Yes, that's about right.
Generally, DON'T stumble over terminology. If you feel strongly about something AND ESPECIALLY if you want to publicise it, make sure you have got it right.
Otherwise you just rave aimlessly and rather dully. - Worse, you expect others to believe you:rolleyes:

AND NOW... this thread has been rather lucid and to the point so far. Mark's original challenge is being fairly well tested. Issues have been raised that are
well deserving of frowns from great heights, and other points have been suitably downplayed.

Yes, I think I can subscribe yet to us being in A lucky country.
(You know who I) Am.

[Kym]

From the last couple of posts I would say that it is very much being put on the Islamic community.

With reason, not all but significant numbers.


The point I am trying to make is that this is a human thing. We can be barbaric people irrespective of religion or race or political persuasion.

True, yet certain ideologies lead to a great violent expression. Think of groups like ADL as well, who have a violent disposition.

[Mark L]

..... The politics worries me though with grandstanding and photo opps for the media.

Obviously more kudos in grandstanding with troops than fighting poverty or ebola..... john

mmmm, I'm more worried about a budget emergency than terrorism in Australia.
What happened to that emergency?:scrtch:

[bcys1961]

My summary...
The basic islamic ideology is not compatible with the Australian Constitution, our values and aspirations -- this is the biggest problem we have.

Your point 9 nails it . Further more people whose ideaolgy is not compatible , and who are not tolerant of the differences of all the other groups who choose to live here peacefully should not be able to live here .

There has been much talk about stopping those who wish to go and fight with ISIS going . I actually think they should be given a one way ticket to go . As soon as they are identified and leave the country cancel their passports and refuse re-entry.

As Rick says the only reason this is being put on the Islamic community is because the people perpetrating ( or wanting to ) the crimes are Islamic , and those who seem to defend them are Islamic. Our country is built on immigration - English, irish, Greek , Italian , Chinese , Vietnamese...... - all with different religious beliefs and none have caused any problem. There is a subset of Muslin/Islamic's that are a big problem.

[Steve Axford]

With reason, not all but significant numbers.



True, yet certain ideologies lead to a great violent expression. Think of groups like ADL as well, who have a violent disposition.

What's ADL?

[ameerat42]

What's ADL?

Good Q, Steve.

What does anything mean, anyway? - Whoops! Who said that?

[Steve Axford]

As Rick says the only reason this is being put on the Islamic community is because the people perpetrating ( or wanting to ) the crimes are Islamic , and those who seem to defend them are Islamic. Our country is built on immigration - English, irish, Greek , Italian , Chinese , Vietnamese...... - all with different religious beliefs and none have caused any problem. There is a subset of Muslin/Islamic's that are a big problem.

I remember that all these groups have caused, or been blamed for, major problems in the past.

[graham68ktm]

Im more worried about the fact that Pakistan has nuclear weapons with the amount of extremists that live there !

[ameerat42]

Im more worried about the fact that Pakistan has nuclear weapons with the amount of extremists that live there !

Suggesting?

OK, a hint: lots of other countries could fall into the same category.

[Grant S]

mmmm, I'm more worried about a budget emergency than terrorism in Australia.
What happened to that emergency?:scrtch:
Quick look over there. Squirrel!

[Kym]

What's ADL?

Australian Defence League - neo Nazis; also National Action and others

[ApolloLXII]

Australian Defence League - neo Nazis; also National Action and others

And of the same mind set as the idiot who painted the word "evil" on the outside of a mosque in Mareeba FNQ [emoji35].

[Mark L]

Wow, some of this has been interesting, but it was a simple question.
Onto page six of this thread and only 36 votes in the poll answering the simple question.

Now, go post and CC some photos!!

[mudman]

Interesting thoughts Muddy but surprisingly at odds with how our current guest feels. Coming from Germany where they feel totally secure and safe with a well ordered life they suddenly feel rather vulnerable in this country where our successive govts have let in less than desirable residents and that is a perspective of someone who is merely passing through ----

i find that very surprising Andrew.
if one looks at Germany's 20th century history, what with world war 1 , hitler era, red guard and, excuse spelling errors, bader mienhoff.
1972 olympics masacar, i am sure i would feel safer here than in Germany.
given your statement re 'less desirable residents' i suggest there is a degree of ethnic phobia involved, considering there are 200+ different nationalities in Australia. how many does Germany have?

[Kym]

Wow, some of this has been interesting, but it was a simple question.


Not true. It is a vexed and complex question with huge overtones that go to the very fabric of our society and what should and should not be tolerated.

[I @ M]

Muddy, yes, there is quite a history of unrest with Germany over the years as there is with many countries but in the case of the young Germans we know most of those troubles in their country are history from days before they were born. It is more the "here and now" that is being considered in this post and in the young Germans minds.
They feel ( rightly or wrongly ) that their society is safe and well ordered at the present but here in Australia today they don't see the same level of security.

You have it entirely wrong if you feel that I have any ethnic phobia when I say that the past and present governments have allowed "less desirable residents" in. My view of less desirable residents is free from any overtones of nationality, ethnicity or religion. There have been some really bad decisions made about entry, residency and even allowing convicted criminals to remain in this country. This country has allowed entry to individuals, some of them commit crimes by themselves, others join larger groups of like minded people and conspire to and commit crimes. Some of those groups comprise of people from the same ethnic background, others comprise of people who follow the same religion and then there are those who have neither of the aforementioned criteria but form criminal groups.

The government needs to assess and closely scrutinise individuals to weed out those who are likely to cause problems and when they miss one and that person refuses to live by the standards of their adopted country, they should act swiftly and decisively to remove them from this society.

[mudman]

Muddy, yes, there is quite a history of unrest with Germany over the years as there is with many countries but in the case of the young Germans we know most of those troubles in their country are history from days before they were born. It is more the "here and now" that is being considered in this post and in the young Germans minds.
They feel ( rightly or wrongly ) that their society is safe and well ordered at the present but here in Australia today they don't see the same level of security.

You have it entirely wrong if you feel that I have any ethnic phobia when I say that the past and present governments have allowed "less desirable residents" in. My view of less desirable residents is free from any overtones of nationality, ethnicity or religion. There have been some really bad decisions made about entry, residency and even allowing convicted criminals to remain in this country. This country has allowed entry to individuals, some of them commit crimes by themselves, others join larger groups of like minded people and conspire to and commit crimes. Some of those groups comprise of people from the same ethnic background, others comprise of people who follow the same religion and then there are those who have neither of the aforementioned criteria but form criminal groups.

The government needs to assess and closely scrutinise individuals to weed out those who are likely to cause problems and when they miss one and that person refuses to live by the standards of their adopted country, they should act swiftly and decisively to remove them from this society.

Andrew, I was not implying that you have some ethnic phobia, but that your German friend seems to by the statements you have reported him/her saying
i agree whole heartedly that Australia has to strengthen the screening protocols of prospective migrants to try and reduce the incidence
of importing the fundamentalist types. don't know if that can really be done, but it would be worth a try.

[ricktas]

The government needs to assess and closely scrutinise individuals to weed out those who are likely to cause problems and when they miss one and that person refuses to live by the standards of their adopted country, they should act swiftly and decisively to remove them from this society.

Agree, and some wonder why our successive governments have been concerned about refugees who destroy all their identity information, prior to trying to access this country.

It would be interesting to know of those taking into custody in recent days, how many were born here, how many moved here, etc. Simply for a show of statistics on the matter.

[phild]

Some excellent points and debate in this thread, I can't agree with Steve's comment
The point I am trying to make is that this is a human thing. We can be barbaric people irrespective of religion or race or political persuasion.

I can't recall, at least in my lifetime, a worldwide movement intent on killing innocent people for no apparent reason other than religious hatred.

That said, we need to look at the circumstances that have allowed the growth of this movement, I believe that interference by the the Russians, US and it's allies in the affairs of these countries has resulted in destabilisation and militarisation by groups who probably wouldn't otherwise gained a foothold.

Afghanistan and Iraq are prime examples, military intervention has turned both countries in to basket cases.

As for the terrorists being dumb, I think there's an abundance of stupidity on all sides, the baddies take action, then often hide in a refugee camp or school which then gets bombed by the "good guys", the result, more hatred, the baddies gain each and every time there is an inappropriate reaction.

I think the current strategy of air strikes against militants is flawed and will only create more unrest and hatred, as someone pointed out the "war on terror" has created more terrorists not less.

[Steve Axford]

Seems to me, Phil, that you agree that we can all be barbaric. On the religious question, I think to categorise ISIL as a religious group is incorrect. They are a military group that just happens to invoke a religion. They are much more akin to the Nazis than any religious freedom fighters. Most of our more senior government officials seem to agree with this view.

- - - Updated - - -




....... when I say that the past and present governments have allowed "less desirable residents" in. My view of less desirable residents is free from any overtones of nationality, ethnicity or religion. There have been some really bad decisions made about entry, residency and even allowing convicted criminals to remain in this country.

Andrew, this is very amusing considering who were the first European settlers in this country.

[ricktas]

... On the religious question, I think to categorise ISIL as a religious group is incorrect. They are a military group that just happens to invoke a religion...

But this naming and categorisation is what they decided to do themselves. They aligned their name with Islam. If you look through the list of terrorist organisations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations), you would be hard pushed to find one with Catholic, Christian, Buddhist in the name.

This invocation of the Islam name for military groups appears to be all to common to just be a co-incidence. Therefore it is no wonder people are concerned about the religion. Whilst most religions have their cult-like groups (Jones Town / Waco), Islam seems to attract quite a few militia style cults within. When these cults/military groups align themselves to a religion (any religion), people have a right to feel concerned. Islam seems to attract is over-share of them, sadly for those who are muslim who have no desire other than to be peaceful, integral members of our community, their religion is being trashed from within.

[I @ M]

Andrew, this is very amusing considering who were the first European settlers in this country.

Deliberately so, I am sure that the original inhabitants of this land considered the colonising power terrorists and history shows that indeed the early governments were less than humane in their dealings with the indigenous population. Equally so were many other countries in their treatment of native populations when attempting to impose either their societal or religious beliefs in lands far away from their "own".

Steve, times have moved on and a lot of the world lives relatively peacefully and with reasonably well structured societies so I would be interested to hear your views on what the bunch of murdering thugs operating under the name of the Islamic state are.

Are they members of an oppressed race or religion?
Are they soldiers of the prophet sworn to rid the world of non Islam believers?
Are they exhorting Muslim believers in Australia to march through the streets with banners stating that Sharia law will be the law of Australia one day?
Are they simply a PR machine who utilises the shock tactic of beheadings to draw attention to their cause?
Are they truly non secular but just happen to attract support in the form of flag flying and banners by Muslim inhabitants of Australia?

[Steve Axford]

But this naming and categorisation is what they decided to do themselves. They aligned their name with Islam. If you look through the list of terrorist organisations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations), you would be hard pushed to find one with Catholic, Christian, Buddhist in the name.


True enough - today. But if we look through history, even just a few years ago, things were quite different. Northern Ireland was a good example of this - Protestant vs Catholic, or was it really? The Christian churches have enough blood on their hands - but were most of the wars really over religion or was it more simple than that - power! That's what ISIL is about too. Power! And no, we don't want them to win, but we should understand who we are fighting and not fall into the trap of attacking people within our own society instead of the real enemy. I think ISIL is a relatively easy target - all of Islam is much more difficult and they would feel rightly aggrieved at our attack.

[I @ M]

And no, we don't want them to win, but we should understand who we are fighting and not fall into the trap of attacking people within our own society instead of the real enemy.

As far as I am concerned, it IS the people within our society that are directly and indirectly supporting ISIL who need to be removed from this society!!!!

[Steve Axford]

Deliberately so, I am sure that the original inhabitants of this land considered the colonising power terrorists and history shows that indeed the early governments were less than humane in their dealings with the indigenous population. Equally so were many other countries in their treatment of native populations when attempting to impose either their societal or religious beliefs in lands far away from their "own".

Steve, times have moved on and a lot of the world lives relatively peacefully and with reasonably well structured societies so I would be interested to hear your views on what the bunch of murdering thugs operating under the name of the Islamic state are.

Are they members of an oppressed race or religion?
Are they soldiers of the prophet sworn to rid the world of non Islam believers?
Are they exhorting Muslim believers in Australia to march through the streets with banners stating that Sharia law will be the law of Australia one day?
Are they simply a PR machine who utilises the shock tactic of beheadings to draw attention to their cause?
Are they truly non secular but just happen to attract support in the form of flag flying and banners by Muslim inhabitants of Australia?

My views are quite clear. None of the above. They a a bunch of thugs very akin to the Nazis in methods. They rely on propaganda, fear and terror. They happen to come from a part of the world that is very oppressed (for a variety of reasons) but which has almost unlimited money for guns. ISIL is the first freedom fighters I have seen that seem to be easily able to buy tanks and anything else they want. Without that money they wouldn't be a problem, except for their local villages (the money come from oil which is a chance of nature and which we happen to pay a lot for). Why should we believe them that this is an Islamic inspired war? There are about 500,000 muslims in Australia of which 60 have gone to fight with them. That's about 0.01%.

[Nick Cliff]

The Huffington Post news site has an interesting article by an ex MI 6 authority on this subject with many warnings about the public misconceptions and what he suspects is the long term Arab game plan with western forces in the IS caliphate battles to come ,regards Nick .

[ameerat42]

...The Huffington Post news...

Never heard of 'em, Nick, (nor they of me, I hope!!). Do you have a link to this potentially interesting article?
(A search on Huff and Puff yielded little of the ilk.)

[Nick Cliff]

Try http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/obama-isis-not-islamic_b_5843830.html

regards Nick

[Mark L]

Wow, some of this has been interesting, but it was a simple question.


Not true. It is a vexed and complex question with huge overtones that go to the very fabric of our society and what should and should not be tolerated.

Yes true, it was a simple question.
If I was interested in the very fabric of our society and what should and should not be tolerated, I'd have started a thread about that.;)

[jim]

About sharia. There is no chance that the more horrible applications of sharia (stonings, beheadings and whippings for example) could legally be applied in Australia, even if Australian muslims wanted them which I rather doubt many of them do. What sharia could do is for example provide councils that could adjudicate in the case of women who had obtained a divorce from their husbands in court, and wished to be able to remarry in their religion. In other words sharia could provide a way to peacefully reconcile muslim tradition and secular law.

[ricktas]

Yes true, it was a simple question.
If I was interested in the very fabric of our society and what should and should not be tolerated, I'd have started a thread about that.;)

In a world where 'what do you want for dinner?' can end up like the start of world war III, one must ask of your question in this thread topic.. What did you expect? :p

[pjs2]

On a positive note, the vast majority of terrorists and Islamist extremists are as dumb as bricks. Anyone who believes that they will be rewarded with virgins in "paradise" for the act of blowing the crap out of themselves and anyone else in their vicinity has got to be seriously deluded.

Wait until they get there and find out that nowhere in the contract was it stated that the virgins would be of the opposite sex.

Anyone who believes that they will be rewarded with virgins.

REINCARNATION, A WANDER THROUGH THE PEARLY GATES, WALKING THROUGH THE FIELDS OF VALHALLA. I DONT THINK THE POOR DELUDED BUGGERS ARE ON THIER PAT MALLONE.


TO THE DRONGO AUSTRALIANS
CAN WE PLEASE STOP USING THE SOUTHERN CROSS AS THE NEW WE HATE EVERYONE SWASTIKA.
OUR GOVERNMENT KNOWS THAT SMALL MINDS ARE EASLY SCARED

THINK PEOPLE

- - - Updated - - -


What sharia could do is for example provide councils that could adjudicate in the case of women who had obtained a divorce from their husbands in court, and wished to be able to remarry in their religion. In other words sharia could provide a way to peacefully reconcile muslim tradition and secular law.

WHAT DO YOU RECON INSTEAD OF CUTTING OFF THIER HEAD JUST LOBB OFF A COUPLE O FINGERS HEY.

WE HAVE AUSTRALIAN LAWS HERE IN AUSTRALIA THAT ALL AUSTRALIANS LIVE BY. EVEN OUR AUSTRALIAN WOMEN NEW OR OLD.IF OUR NEW AUSTRALIAN WOMEN OR OUR OLD AUSTRALIAN WOMEN GET ANY RULING IN OUR AUSTRALIAN COURTS THE MATTER IS FINAL AND NOT SUBJJECT TO ANY OTHER LAWS OR RULINGS.

[ameerat42]

TO THE DRONGO AUSTRALIANS
CAN WE PLEASE STOP USING THE SOUTHERN CROSS AS THE NEW WE HATE EVERYONE SWASTIKA.
OUR GOVERNMENT KNOWS THAT SMALL MINDS ARE EASLY SCARED

THINK PEOPLE



Hear! Hear!

But will it fall on deaf ears?:(

[bobt]

About sharia. What sharia could do is for example provide councils that could adjudicate in the case of women who had obtained a divorce from their husbands in court, and wished to be able to remarry in their religion. In other words sharia could provide a way to peacefully reconcile muslim tradition and secular law.

Call me skeptical, but I suspect that the last thing women need is Sharia law! Women are far more likely to get a fair deal from our existing laws than any application of Sharia!

[Kym]

About sharia. There is no chance that the more horrible applications of sharia (stonings, beheadings and whippings for example) could legally be applied in Australia, even if Australian muslims wanted them which I rather doubt many of them do. What sharia could do is for example provide councils that could adjudicate in the case of women who had obtained a divorce from their husbands in court, and wished to be able to remarry in their religion. In other words sharia could provide a way to peacefully reconcile muslim tradition and secular law.

We can't have more than one set of laws - EVER! It is discriminatory and we cease to be egalitarian (at least in theory).
It is a way to keep the country divided; which is never heathly.

[Steve Axford]

I agree, we should have equality in the law. Unfortunately, the Australian constitution seems to enshrine race as a reason for difference and there is no mention of egalitarian.

[jim]

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/images/BP-Light/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jim http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/images/BP-Light/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?p=1256100#post1256100)

About sharia. There is no chance that the more horrible applications of sharia (stonings, beheadings and whippings for example) could legally be applied in Australia, even if Australian muslims wanted them which I rather doubt many of them do. What sharia could do is for example provide councils that could adjudicate in the case of women who had obtained a divorce from their husbands in court, and wished to be able to remarry in their religion. In other words sharia could provide a way to peacefully reconcile muslim tradition and secular law.
We can't have more than one set of laws - EVER! It is discriminatory and we cease to be egalitarian (at least in theory).
It is a way to keep the country divided; which is never heathly.

Did anybody who replied to this post actually read it?

[bcys1961]

I agree, we should have equality in the law. Unfortunately, the Australian constitution seems to enshrine race as a reason for difference and there is no mention of egalitarian.

Please Explain! I would think the constitution would say the same laws apply to everyone regardless of race. I might be wrong and admit to not having read the constitution.

[Kym]

25. Provisions as to races disqualified from voting
For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at
elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of
the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_25_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia

[bcys1961]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_25_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia

I have read this about three times and do not have a clue what it is saying! :scrtch: It certainly put me off reading any more of the Constitution though , so thank you.!

[Steve Axford]

Please Explain! I would think the constitution would say the same laws apply to everyone regardless of race. I might be wrong and admit to not having read the constitution.

You have to remember when the constitution was written. At that stage, the Aboriginal people were not considered as people and while we did partly correct this and give them the vote, we have never corrected the more general provisions in the constitution. Specifically, this is section 25,

Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia is a provision of the Constitution of Australia headed ‘Provision as to races disqualified from voting’ and providing that ‘For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted.’

[bobt]

Did anybody who replied to this post actually read it?

Yup .... you suggested that we should have Sharia law working alongside our existing laws, which would be a foot in the door for watering down our own laws in favour of those from another culture.

[jim]

Thanks for that bobt. Though I don't see how the example I gave above could possibly result in the "watering down" of Australian law. Nor in fact do I feel qualified to make any suggestion on the subject. I wouldn't dismiss out of hand the possibility that sharia could be helpful is all.

[Mark L]

You have to remember when the constitution was written. At that stage, the Aboriginal people were not considered as people and ......

Makes me think about starting a thread asking who our first people think are terrorist. But the ones who have an opinion are long gone.
Oh no, I went off the topic of this thread.:D

[bcys1961]

You have to remember when the constitution was written. At that stage, the Aboriginal people were not considered as people and while we did partly correct this and give them the vote, we have never corrected the more general provisions in the constitution. Specifically, this is section 25,

Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia is a provision of the Constitution of Australia headed ‘Provision as to races disqualified from voting’ and providing that ‘For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted.’

Fair enough . And they are talking about fixing the constitution for aboriginals now - in 2017! . There has at times been a push at times to allow aboriginals to solve their disputes using customary law . Many of their customary laws are as denigrating to woman as sharia law , but I suppose the aboriginals at least have the argument that it was the law of the land before we arrived!

All other races of people ( Iraqi's Syrian's ...) now , once granted citizenship have the right to vote , so I don't think we really discriminate against anyone based on race.

[Kym]

A positive trend...
http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/notinmyname-campaign-sees-young-muslims-fight-is-on-social-media/story-fnjwnhzf-1227065544531

[Steve Axford]

All other races of people ( Iraqi's Syrian's ...) now , once granted citizenship have the right to vote , so I don't think we really discriminate against anyone based on race.
I don't think that there is much legislation that is actively discriminatory. It's just a bit of the constitution, and some attitudes of people ....

- - - Updated - - -


Makes me think about starting a thread asking who our first people think are terrorist. But the ones who have an opinion are long gone.
Oh no, I went off the topic of this thread.:D

I have some friends (who happen to be aboriginal) who lost some of their ancestors in a massacre near Patches Beach. They found human remains there in 1998 which included 6 skulls of girls under the age of 20. Some had indications of being clubbed to death. One was about 6 years old. But not all are long gone.

[bobt]

Thanks for that bobt. Though I don't see how the example I gave above could possibly result in the "watering down" of Australian law. Nor in fact do I feel qualified to make any suggestion on the subject. I wouldn't dismiss out of hand the possibility that sharia could be helpful is all.

One of the basic tenets of our society is the separation of church and state. Our culture bases its law on factual information based on hundreds of years of practical experience in a western society which reflects our whole underlying way of living. Sharia law is based on religious belief and is allegedly either the word of God or of the prophets.

Islamic laws do not represent or reflect Australian society, they reflect beliefs which are based on religious texts rather than modern day principles. We keep religion and laws separate for very good reasons, otherwise we might be finding ourselves subjected to the archaic religious teachings of centuries past.

Australia has a western culture, and it is vastly different from middle eastern cultures. Other cultures would not accept western laws being introduced to replace or work alongside sharia law, and we certainly do not want to introduce their legal system in Australia. We accept people from other cultures on the understanding that they submit to our laws, just as we adhere to their laws when we visit their countries. The ramifications of accepting the laws of other countries as an alternative to our own laws are significant and would prove highly detrimental.

In Belgium recently, the Muslim community tried to stop school children having pork in their lunches because it went against their religion. The authorities very quickly told them that if they wanted to introduce religious constraints on Belgians, then it was time they went back to an Islamic country. The bottom line is that people must adapt to the culture they adopt rather than expecting their adoptive country to change.

[jim]

some good points there bobt, though I'm not sure why you've addressed them to me. I'd ask you yet again to look at the example I gave in my original post.

[ricktas]

Thanks for that bobt. Though I don't see how the example I gave above could possibly result in the "watering down" of Australian law. Nor in fact do I feel qualified to make any suggestion on the subject. I wouldn't dismiss out of hand the possibility that sharia could be helpful is all.

One way: you cannot be tried twice for the same crime, unless under appeal (by either party). How could someone be tried in our courts, then in an additional sharia court, without watering down of the existing laws. Or if someone was convicted in a Sharia court and then themselves appealed their sentence, how could an existing Australian court uphold a ruling that is outside their scope of penalty?

It might sound good, but running on two differing legal frameworks would be fraught with problems.

[jim]

Ok, I hereby give up. We are talking past each other.

[ricktas]

Ok, I hereby give up. We are talking past each other.

Nup, maybe we just need more explanation. Even your point about a divorcee. Once divorced, a person is free to re-marry, under Australian Law. Adding a Sharia court on top of that/in addition to that, adds a level of legality to it that is not available to every Australian, not necessary as part of the process of re-marrying, under our current law.

I think you need to explain further what you mean, so we can gain an understanding of where you are coming from.

[jim]

Ok, good post Rick. The extra level of legality you mention would be irrelevant to any non-muslim, but could be helpful to a muslim woman who wanted to exercise her rights under Australian law, without alienating her from her religion.
At work now, but I may return to this when I have time. I don't think any reasonable person would suggest sharia should compete with Australian law, but that's not to say it needs to be excluded entirely.

[bobt]

some good points there bobt, though I'm not sure why you've addressed them to me. I'd ask you yet again to look at the example I gave in my original post.

I was responding to your suggestion that we should consider adopting part of Sharia law. The answer to that suggestion is that it is simply not feasible to operate two parallel forms of law, particularly when one of those systems is based upon the customs of another country. Once you start to go down that path, the potential for conflict increases exponentially.

[bcys1961]

Ok, good post Rick. The extra level of legality you mention would be irrelevant to any non-muslim, but could be helpful to a muslim woman who wanted to exercise her rights under Australian law, without alienating her from her religion.
At work now, but I may return to this when I have time. I don't think any reasonable person would suggest sharia should compete with Australian law, but that's not to say it needs to be excluded entirely.

I think it needs to be excluded entirely.

We need to accept however that there are elements of sharia law already being practiced in Australia . Recently in the Hunter Valley a man was arrested for marrying an 11 year old girl . He was charged with child sex offences. Subsequently the girls father and the Iman that performed the wedding were also arrested and charged with facilitating the marriage. On a more subtle level , under sharia law , a woman cannot divorce without her husbands permission and she also needs his blessing to remarry. Usually this blessing comes at the cost of a large payment to him. Without the blessing to remarry , other muslim men who practice sharia law will not marry the woman. Even if granted a legal divorce via the Australian courts , this does not change the culture and mindset of those practicing sharia , so woman still find it difficult to remarry without the former husbands consent. All of this treats woman as a possession to be owned and traded as the men see fit.

I do not see how any small part of sharia law can be accepted here. It would give legitimacy to something totally against the values our society holds dear.

[ApolloLXII]

I stopped off at MacDonald's the other day to buy a hamburger and there was a Muslim girl serving behind the counter wearing a burqa. I noticed that it was a bit dirty and had stains on it and looked a bit shabby. I didn't really like the thought of this girl handling my food if she couldn't even keep her own clothes clean so I left without ordering anything.
Across the road was a Hungry Jacks so I decided to go there to get something to eat. When I walked in, I saw another Muslim girl serving behind the counter and she was wearing a burqa too. Hers was nice and clean and had obviously been washed quite recently as there wasn't a mark or stain on it.
Just goes to show that the Burqas Are Better At Hungry Jacks [emoji6].

[ameerat42]

BURQA? (https://www.google.com.au/search?q=burqa&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=1077&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=PKUgVJXDD8uE8gXd-4CwDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDIQsAQ)

Are you sure it wasn't actually a burger?:D

[billy4030]

Maybe hungry jacks pay more and she can afford a better laundry powder


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tommo224]

Depends on what you define as terrorism, and in which context.

Such as; somebody living in another country may consider America a terrorist country, in the same way Americans may consider the "middle east" a terrorist country. Depending on what is being done, what actions are being taken, and how they're perceived by either party.



In regards to the poll, I myself, am not concerned. If something happens, it happens. If it doesn't, that's great. Until the time comes, I will continue as I am in my life.

Enjoying photography and cars.


The referenced "terrorists" win if you drop everything and run and hide in fear of what "could" happen. Sure, be aware of the possibilities, but don't lose any quality of your life because of it!


This is all generally speaking, of course.

[bcys1961]

BURQA? (https://www.google.com.au/search?q=burqa&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=1077&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=PKUgVJXDD8uE8gXd-4CwDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDIQsAQ)

Are you sure it wasn't actually a burger?:D


I think it's meant to be a joke AM. Mind you it sucked me right to the end!

[ameerat42]

I think it's meant to be a joke AM. Mind you it sucked me right to the end!

Oh, thanks. So was mine. OK, I give up! Call me a sausage!:rolleyes::eek::(

(OK, explification: If burqa was supposed to be that "dirty", perhaps it actually WAS a burger - gone astray??)

[Duane Pipe]

Haron Monis
Now lets define terrorism. They say that he was a man with psychological issues and his Attack on Australia had nothing to do with Terrorism.
I disagree. His faith was Islamic and he did what isis was asking of him.. (The Lone Wolf Attack) Our country is in trouble and if we sit back and let the do gooders have their way I think it will happen again. ***text removed - ubsuitable for this forum*** The death of Katrina Dawson and Tori Johnson could be just the start R.I.P :confused013

[ameerat42]

Duane. For the sake of moderation on this forum, I have deleted part of your post.

And, I have 2 Qs:
1. How could we know his motives? (So far you may have identified a coincidence. Think of Anita Cobby and Helen Morse.)
2. What is a "do-gooder"?
Am.

[ricktas]

Haron Monis
Now lets define terrorism. They say that he was a man with psychological issues and his Attack on Australia had nothing to do with Terrorism.
I disagree. His faith was Islamic and he did what isis was asking of him.. (The Lone Wolf Attack) Our country is in trouble and if we sit back and let the do gooders have their way I think it will happen again. ***text removed - ubsuitable for this forum*** The death of Katrina Dawson and Tori Johnson could be just the start R.I.P :confused013

So do you define those attacks in nightclub districts on people going about their business and being hit and killed in Coward Punches as terrorism as well? They certainly instill terror in their victims. If the perpetrators of those are Christian, or Buddhist do you call for people from those faiths be removed from our society. Martin Bryant was not Islamic.

Defining an entire group of people based on the actions of a few is also very dangerous.

[Mark L]

Now lets define terrorism. They say that he was a man with psychological issues and his Attack on Australia had nothing to do with Terrorism.
I disagree. His faith was Islamic and he did what isis was asking of him.. (The Lone Wolf Attack) Our country is in trouble and if we sit back and let the do gooders have their way I think it will happen again.

Suspect if it was terrorism everyone in that cafe would have been dead before the police arrived.
Suspect if he was truly Islamic this wouldn't have happened.
Know I'm more worried and concerned for people with a mental illness (though not very worried by).
Suspect this country is in trouble. That has more to do with the Federal Government than do gooders.
Reckon regardless of the dogooders and government we're kinda traveling okay.
Would you rather be where this can happen?? ........ http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/12/fighters-attack-army-run-school-pakistan-20141216742794184.html (and I chose the linked site for you Dave;)

[Duane Pipe]

The coward punch comes from the fist of a person that has major social problems and cant handle the Drugs or the Alcohol that they consume and not from religious beliefs imho, but you are correct Rick, they do put fear into the community.

***Text deleted for same reason as above*** I'm not in for a argument because Biblical stuff is blah blah to me but I do know that ***Text deleted for same reason as above***
- - - Updated - - -

(and I chose the linked site for you Dave;)[/QUOTE]

That is just horrible Mark. Who was responsible for the atrocity!!

Duane, to answer your last question, who were the victims?

Please desist from posting comments that show intolerance of others on this site.
Am.

[Mark L]

That is just horrible Mark. Who was responsible for the atrocity!!
The Taliban. Some call them Islamic fundamentalists. Don't think Islam has much to do with it.
They're just bastards, like those that keep killing their own with guns in the Christian U.S.A..

[Duane Pipe]

Do gooders am. The sheeple who believe that the moderate community are against what the perpetrators do. I don't think that they are! Sorry for bumping the thread :o I am concerned that things are only going to get worse....

- - - Updated - - -

I should stop searching Islam on Google and find other things to do! Shame on me but I am concerned about the future in so many ways:eek:

[ameerat42]

OK, you have made your point.

[ricktas]

I think what has just happened in Cairns shows that people can feel terror, but it does not have to be from confirmed terrorists. Our society needs to take a long hard look at where we are heading, and make some hard decisions on what we want our society to be, and how we go about getting to that.

[I @ M]

Shoot me down in flames but ---

I've disconnected my home alarm system and de-registered from the Neighborhood Watch.

I've got two Pakistani flags raised in the front yard, one at each corner, and the black flag of ISIS in the center.

The local police, ASIO and news.com.au are watching the house 24/7.

I've never felt safer and I’m saving $49.95 a month ------

[ameerat42]

(Andrew. :shh: ASI:cool:)

[peterv]

Defining an entire group of people based on the actions of a few is also very dangerous.

Indeed it is. Try going for a ride on a motorcycle in Queensland with a few mates.

[Duane Pipe]

With the www and social media I find it to easy too get involved in all the propaganda and conspiracy theorists with their scare mongering tactics. I find myself centered around the topic of the moment which turns to anger.

Drugs and Alcohol should be #1 on our list followed by the Judicial system which needs a Big Kick in the Arse..

How many innocent Children and Adults have lost their lives in the past yeas due to Scum-Bags being left to wonder the streets that have wraps as long as a piece of string:cool: