Perhaps the Qur'an will be next.

That would be helpful.

Jet

Posted by: blazar-jet at July 11, 2006 2:41 AM

"... but that's different from saying that it necessarily causes a threat"

Got the point. It's not the book that kills, it's the bomb.
Pull the other leg.

Posted by: FreeSpeech at July 11, 2006 3:28 AM

Always good to have a win in one's own backyard so to speak? What do you reckon Zathras?

Posted by: Anthony at July 11, 2006 3:43 AM

Perhaps not such a win after all? LGF states that:

"Board convenor Maureen Shelley said the Board had sought advice from the Mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali, and the NSW Council for Civil Liberties in making its decision."

Underwhelmed!

Posted by: Anthony at July 11, 2006 3:49 AM

Anthony...yes about time too.

Now if we can repeal those Racial vilification laws and outlaw the Koran and indirectly islam we might have a future.

But still one small step for Ozkind and a mild dent in the armour of pc muslim backside kissing

Posted by: Zathras at July 11, 2006 4:04 AM

Wow! What's next? The Koran?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 11, 2006 4:59 AM

This could happen in NZ too. There are a number of similar publications widely available at mosques all over the country. The Film and Literature Classification board could ban these publications based on similar criteria. They do not have the jurisdiction to act unilaterally, and can only act in relation to an official complaint. However, there is no real substantive penalties attached to those who distribute and/or sell.

Posted by: Haidon at July 11, 2006 5:57 AM

Someone else answer this guy please as I have work to do.

That screed so far divorced from reality and so rambling and disjointed as not to be worth noticing. It also has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. It's best ignored.

I can only suggest that if any casual visitor to the site sees it and wishes to investigate further any of the scattergun references made to any of a dozen things in it - the attitude of Islam to homosexuals, for example - that he visit the articles page and find something written by Robert or Hugh on whatever it is that interests him:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/articles/

Posted by: Yojimbo at July 11, 2006 7:44 AM

Problem solved.

The main point of the post deleted can stand. It is folly to turn the analysis of Jihad, and the response to Jihad (that which exhibits, or refuses to exhibit, attitudes associated with the historic condition, and plight, of the "dhimmi"), into an attack on this or that supposedly clearly identified group in the Western world -- the poster was incensed that "liberals" are to blame, and he suggests that "white Republicans" are to blame. But there is blame for the Buchananites and for the Farrakhanites, for Carter and for Brzezinski, for George Bush Sr. and for Scowcroft, for Nixon and for Kissinger, for Clinton and Albright, for so many. One feels like someone accepting the Oscar, and standing on stage, breathlessly trying to remember all the names of all the people one forgot to thank. Except in this case, one thinks of all the people one forgot to blame.

Posted by: Hugh at July 11, 2006 7:53 AM

When will they start banning mosques?

Posted by: Elric66 at July 11, 2006 7:55 AM

Hate-inciting material should, if found in a bookstore or in any other store (the backroom of a halal grocery store), be cause to close that store permanently. The presence of such material could be seen as a subversive act -- subvesive of the government, and a menace to the well-being of those whom Muslims are taught to hate. If such hate literature, or if false passports or I.D. cards,guns, explosive material and timing devices for IEDs -- all of which have been found hidden in mosques, sometimes in false ceilings -- are located, then the mosque itself should be closed, permanently. There is no need merely to deport the odd imam or two.

An entirely new set of laws may have to be written to deal with this unprecedented problem, caused by Western men permitting to settle within their own countries not possessors of an alien creed (the West is able to absorb that), but possessors of an alien and murderously hostile creed. That is unacceptable, and governments must perform their first duty: protection of their citizens.

Write them.

Posted by: Hugh at July 11, 2006 8:01 AM

bravo australia, now europe (i hope)

Posted by: osamakillr at July 11, 2006 8:24 AM

Hugh:

You write much better than I ever could.

Please: Why don't you write an open letter to Phillip Ruddock and Amanda Vanstone and I (and many others I know) will sign it and we keep sending it to everyone in government again and again and again until the coin drops?

It seems that the Auzzie government is one of the very few that still has cojones...

Here's something about the slippery Waleed Aly:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=3617

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 11, 2006 8:36 AM

Anthony, Zathras

Yep this is good news! I guess we will have to keep voting for Howard/Costello!

Geez,,I reckon Pauline Hanson has a good chance if she came back!

I shudder to think what Beazley and his left wing mob, who get the muslim votes, would do if they won.

Posted by: Gramfan at July 11, 2006 9:00 AM

>>>They do not have the jurisdiction to act unilaterally, and can only act in relation to an official complaint.
posted by Haidon.

Haidon, perhaps this is your big chance? A complaint from you perhaps?

(I am aware this would further endanger you.)

Posted by: Gramfan at July 11, 2006 9:02 AM

Gramfan...I tried to write an article on pauline hanson and the way she was railroaded by a conspiracy between all parties (including hers), the trade unions, the multicultural groups, the media, the multinationals and god knows who else.
I failed as no one would allow me to quote them as a source despite beig willing to talk about it over the phone.

This conspiracy group were so scared of her and not only for her potential in creating a strong third part which would disturb the equilibrium betwen the usual two that the media went out of their way to categorise her as a neonazi and thus every extremist right winger headed for her party and tilted it into chaos. So many extremists joined in, as did some plants, that they gained control of the candidate selection procedures and the party finished up with a real lunatic fringe collection of shallow, corrupt, selfinterested idiots. this was NOT what she had wanted and in fact was the opposite. But it worked and the other groups seduced the elected representatives and even persuaded them to perjure themselves in an attempt to remove her which was succesful.

If you wonder why she was released suddenly and has stayed out of politics ever since but gets "bones" from the media and the goverment, it was because she threatened to sue privately and thus to access the relevant documents which would have shown her to be(as she was)totally innocent. However her lawyer told her that if she did then the goverment would use every trick in the book to not only incarcerate her for life but to gaol other members of her family. As she was not even a mildly affluent woman she realised that she was beaten. After a suitable period they released her after her promise as above.

It is the MOST disgusting event ever to occur in Australian political history and it makes Whitlam's sacking look pathetic by comparison.

It is indeed ironic that the chickens she warned about are all coming home to roost and please no one tell me that she was a racist as if you do then you know nothing as that was HOW she was painted by the combined opposition above and they were very scared of her as although she was no intellectual she had insight and she had courage both almost absent in politics in Oz.

ahhhhh I will never get any work done !!
Nite all!!

Posted by: Zathras at July 11, 2006 9:23 AM

Zathras,
Thanks for that! I also thought they overdid the dirt on her.
She certainly made some good points,agreed.

I think many would welcome her, or someone like her, back right now. Especially in NSW.

Posted by: Gramfan at July 11, 2006 9:34 AM

The only thing that will save the Koran from eventually falling into this same category, itself, and being banned as incitement to terrorism, is for Muslims in Oz to declare that it is a work of fiction.

Of course, this would merely be tactical taqiyya, but the infidels are so willing to be naive that it might work.

Until the inflowing demographic Islamic tide removes the necessity for the deception.

The same applies to all future versions of this kind of seditious and tyrannical propaganda.

Keep your wits about you Australia.

The Great game is just beginning.

Posted by: profitsbeard at July 11, 2006 10:25 AM

Hope they get around to banning the koran soon.

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at July 11, 2006 10:46 AM

Thank God for Philip Ruddock!!

This is a very rare piece of encouraging news in times of seemingly endless despair.

I wonder how many months will pass before anything else happens that we can take encouragement from?

Posted by: enemyofislam at July 11, 2006 11:51 AM

blazar-jet & Sheikh Yermani

You both captured my thoughts. If they don't ban the Quran, can they at least ban the hadith and tafseer? So that Muslims can stay confused and pick out the more 'moderate' passages by accident?

One can hope

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 11, 2006 12:19 PM

To mix metaphors, let's hope this is a straw in the wind preceding a turning of the tide.

Posted by: wallyUK at July 11, 2006 12:41 PM

Actually, I am somewhat conflicted that
such selective banning may only lend credence (to the ignorant) the myth that, Islam is alright and only the "extremist views" are the problem.

I think one day we should carry out a worldwide
campaign of publically burning --- not banning ---
Islamic books. That would make a strong statement that even the dhimmi media can't ignore.

Posted by: Steve Cheng at July 11, 2006 1:17 PM

"such selective banning may only lend credence (to the ignorant) the myth that, Islam is alright and only the "extremist views" are the problem."

Yep. It's part of the vast enterprise of surgically detaching all objectionable parts of Islam, from Islam itself, in order to keep Islam itself blameless while acknowledging parts that are condemnable -- but as parts they can be expendable without harming the Islam from which they have been lopped off.

This process of surgical detachment has been a thriving industry for several decades now, only increasing in intensity and irrationality since 911 and the increasing mountain of data of Muslims doing bad things.

This process of surgical detachment reaches the bizarre extent of those who would condemn virtually the whole cigar of Islam, yet would persist in refusing to condemn Islam itself -- sort of like surgically detaching the body from the head of a person and trying to maintain that this is somehow not a decapitation. Unless one thinks that a zombi is a viable Islam, one would think a pronouncement of a T.O.D. would be in order sometime soon -- like yesterday.

Posted by: Television at July 11, 2006 2:15 PM

Personally, I'd rather ban the jihadists. Books, even stupid vile books, can't pick up an AK-47.

Posted by: treehugger at July 11, 2006 6:06 PM

I'm ABSOLUTELY opposed to ever banning any book no matter how vile, hateful, or violent. Treehugger is right. No book ever picked up an AK-47. (BTW I'm also opposed to banning AK-47s).

No, the problem is the Muslims who act on the vile recommendations of their hate-filled books, so ban them from life but never ban any book. Outlawing anything just increases the popularity of the item. In the Soviet Union, many books were banned but circulated in samizdat. Today, it is the Muslim countries like Iran or Saudi Arabia which ban literature that is deemed anti-Islamic and no free country should ever emulate them.

Besides, if a government has the power to ban this book, then it has the power to ban any of Robert's books when the Muslims complain.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 11, 2006 7:28 PM

One last point. Banning the sale of this book is a waste of time, since its complete text is available on the internet for anyone to read.

http://www.religioscope.com/info/doc/jihad/azzam_defence_2_intro.htm

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 11, 2006 7:30 PM

"Join the Caravan" is being pushed by several Muslim sites on the internet. Just do a Google search. Abdullah Azzam was the spiritual godfather of Al-Qaeda and his literature is probably soom of the best selling throughout the Umma.

http://www.worldofislam.info/ebooks/joincaravan.pdf

Rather than advocating that they be banned, every JW/DW enthusiast should read these books just to understand how our enemies think.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 11, 2006 7:42 PM

I don't believe that banning books is a good thing either.

However, consider a jihad book to be like a busted tail light -- provocation and justification enough for law enforcement to come to bear on the situation.

Then Hugh's remedy can be applied--shut down the facility in question, incarcerate or deport the staff (incarcerate and then deport the staff), etc.

Even if possession of the books are a minor infraction, that's enough to start populating publically available lists of known terrorist sympathizers.

Posted by: Hyman Roth at July 11, 2006 8:58 PM

A look at the future for non-muslims.

http://www.acage.org/news/?day=07112006&id=0006July 10 (Compass Direct) – For two years Francis Yohanna Anche, 15, has been suffering from a brain injury he sustained when Muslim students in his high school in Zaria city attacked Christian students. His right hand and leg are still paralyzed from a machete cut to his head.
02 Muslim students at the Government Science Secondary School-Kufena, Anche told Compass, had written a letter on June 24, 2004 warning Christian students that they should stop worshipping in the school’s chapel or else face their wrath.
03 “Our school fellowship leaders took the letter to Mallam Nuhu, our principal, but nothing was done to stop the plan to attack us,” Anche said. That night around 1 a.m., sensing the Muslim students were bent on attacking, the school’s Christians gathered in the chapel to pray, he said.
04 Soon Muslim students began stoning the Christians inside the chapel, he said.
05 “There was pandemonium. Some of us jumped out of the chapel through the windows while others rushed for the door,” Anche said. “When I sensed that there was danger for me to remain in the chapel, I ran out as fast as I could, but I became tired and they caught up with me. All I can remember is that I received a cut on my head.”
06 Anche was in coma for two weeks at the Ahmadu Bello University Teaching Hospital, where he underwent surgery on his brain. He still suffers severe headaches from the injury, besides the paralysis of the right hand and leg. He said his father, Sgt. Yohanna Anche of the Nigeria Police in Dankande, died on June 22 after his condition was weakened from bearing the burden of Francis’ pain and paralysis.
07 Anche has four siblings. He fears that his mother Grace, an elementary teacher in Dandimi village, may also become burdened by his incapacitation.
08 Seven other Christian students also sustained injuries in this attack. This was not the first such incident in the school, where Christians have endured periodic assaults.
09 Cradle of Militancy
10 The Rev. Joseph Hayap, secretary of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Kaduna chapter, confirmed the attack on Christian students at the school, adding that the Muslim students burned down the chapel.
11 Hayap, who raised some 200,000 naira (US$1,558) for Anche’s hospital treatment, said such attacks are one of many problems facing Christians in the northern Nigerian state of Kaduna. Christian leaders in the state describe it as the nerve center of Islamic extremism, where many religious conflicts in northern Nigeria originate and spread to other parts of Nigeria.
12 In some parts of the state, Christians are dragged before Islamic law (sharia) courts. The introduction of the Islamic legal system in 2000, they said, has contributed to the escalation of religious conflicts in some parts of the state.
13 Hayap, a Baptist pastor with the Nigerian Baptist Convention, has chronicled over 20 religious conflicts in Kaduna state from 1987 to 2006. These conflicts, he said, resulted in the killing of over 25,000 Christians and the destruction of about 500 churches in Makarfi, Kaduna, Kafanchan, Zangon Kataf, Kasuwa Magani, and Zaria.
14 “I was a witness to them, and I even participated in mass burials of the victims as the secretary of the Kaduna state chapter of CAN,” he said. “I know very well that these casualty figures of Christians that were killed are not fake, which is the impression that some people want to create. These Christians were indeed killed by Muslim fanatics.”
15 Hayap added that there have been unending religious conflicts in the state’s Ahmadu Bello University-Zaria, Kaduna Polytechnic, Federal College of Education-Zaria, and the Kaduna State Polytechnic-Zaria.
16 He noted that a pastor was recently set ablaze in his room by Muslims in Zaria city.
17 “All these attacks on Christians have made us realize that Christians are dealing with Muslims whose ways of promoting their religion is war,” he said. “Muslims like doing what they are doing, killing and burning churches.”
18 Above the Law
19 Hayap alludes to the constitutional crisis that has erupted over the imposition of sharia in 12 northern states when he locates the main cause of religious conflict in the Muslim desire to make the Quran supreme over the Nigerian constitution.
20 He believes that this attitude leads Muslims to believe they are above the law.
21 “The problem we have had in Nigeria is that there has been no rule of law,” he said. “They see Islam as a religion whose adherents cannot be subject to the rule of law.”
22 Kaduna state now operates with a dual legal system, sharia and the customary legal system. The Kaduna government claimed it was establishing the customary courts to serve Christians and animists.
23 Hayap, however, said the customary courts are run in accordance with traditional religious practices of animists and hence do not serve the interest of Christians. By allowing the dual system, the government was only trying to create the impression that it was addressing injustice done to Christians, he said.
24 “The truth is that the sharia law or the sharia courts in Kaduna state were given to the Muslims, but Christians were given none, because customary courts are not for Christians,” Hayap said.
25 Christians’ rejection of sharia has nothing to do with opposition to amputations or prohibition of prostitution and drunkenness, he said.
26 “Christians in Nigeria have rejected the sharia because it stops evangelism,” he said. “If sharia is in place, and if a Muslim after hearing the gospel makes a decision to receive Jesus, he is killed by Muslims for converting to Christianity.”
27 Diverted Social Funds
28 Another reason Christian leaders oppose sharia is that resources granted for social services can be diverted into propagating Islam.
29 In agreement on this point are Hayap; Anglican Bishop of Wusasa Diocese in Zaria Ali Buba Lamido; Secretary-General of the Northern Nigeria CAN chapter Deacon Saidu Dogo; and Dr. Bitrus Gani, chairman of the board of Governors of Hope for the Blind Centre in Zaria. These Christian leaders assert that resources meant for services such as hospitals, schools, roads, and utility services are now being diverted toward building Islamic institutions, payment of Muslim judges, and enticing poor Christian women and orphans into Islam.
30 They insist that innocent and largely illiterate Christians in the villages are dragged daily before Islamic courts. They cite numerous cases of Christians who have been tried in Islamic courts and are jailed, or are standing trial in these courts, while the Nigerian government seems helpless to intervene.
31 Dogo confirms the fact that innocent and the little educated rural Christians have become victims of Islamic law.
32 “On a general note, what we discovered is that the introduction of sharia was purely to hoodwink people who are not educated enough to understand the implication,” Dogo said. “Muslim leaders implementing the sharia use it unjustly in punishing the less privileged in northern Nigeria, particularly Christians.”
33 Muslim-controlled governments have banned the teaching of Christian Religious Knowledge to Christian students in schools, and all media houses in these states have been banned from airing Christian programs, Dogo added.
34 He said town planning authorities have been denying churches approval to develop their properties, which has led to the demolition of church buildings.
35 “Churches have now become targets of town planning authorities,” he said. “These agencies of Islamic governments now boldly demolish churches at will, alleging that such churches are illegal structures.”
36 Furthermore, he said, whenever Christians build houses and convert them into churches because they have been denied approval for church buildings, these homes are then marked as illegal structures and demolished.
37 “Yet, Muslims everywhere build mosques and approvals for them are not required,” Dogo said. “That is what it means to be a Christian in Islamic states like Kaduna.”

Posted by: Borg at July 11, 2006 9:42 PM

Hyman Roth, et al-

You can ban literally seditious works that advocate the violent overthrow of a specific government if you have such laws.

The Koran, since it advocates the overthrow of all governments and the establishment of a global theocratic Super-state, could be so proscribed. But this won't happen until Muslim terrorists kill an unforgivable number of infidels and a universal contempt for this root inspiration of absolute intolerance and 'sanctified' genocide is born.

Meanwhile, attempts at banning books, other than narrowly-defined "terrorist training manuals" (that could be removed from store shelves for "national security" reasons, and not "censorship" ones), is impossible. For the reason noted above: that all a clever terrorist has to do is transpose it into the key of "fiction".

As one could create a a novel about a cult called "Malsi", based on the teachings of a murderous sex fiend, which then sweeps the world, with orders to kill everyone who will not bow to its "secret truth": that we are really all the spawn of the Devil, and that we live in one of his lesser Hells. And, by his command, all behavior- no matter how brutal- is permitted. As long as these crimes are offered up to the memory of the cult's founder "Dam Mahom", and to the demonic 'God', named "Halla".

Fiction, like this, would also permit Islamic terrorists to spread their propaganda as a "fantasy" story, just as Aesop did (when a tyrant forbade him to speak openly). Jihadis could be "Lions", infidels, "swine", etc.

Better to spread the knowledge of the words of the Koran far and wide, in all of their nakedly homicidal viciousness, and let those people, who are now mostly uninformed, decide its true message, and worth.

You won't need to ban what will become well-known enough to be naturally rejected.

As inhumanly disgusting.

Posted by: profitsbeard at July 11, 2006 9:50 PM

Provoslavni, the eleventh commandment is "Know Thy Enemy".

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at July 11, 2006 11:05 PM

Bohemond_1069 and profitsbeard,

Exactly!!!!

I have a copy of Mein Kampf translated into English and published in 1941 by the American Jewish Congress. Their attitude was that it should be widely read by Americans so we could know the nature of the enemy. I believe they had the right approach. Even in countries without First Amendment protections, we should never advocate the banning of any book. Instead show the public exactly what the enemy plans for us.

Besides, dhimmi countries like the UK are more likely to ban books exposing Islam than those of their beloved Islamists.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 11, 2006 11:42 PM

Provoslavni-

The official copyrighted (yes, it actually was copyrighted in America) "version" of "Mein Kampf", released in English in the U.S., was a Hitler-approved "p.c." version of the German original, cunningly toned-down of some of his more megalomaniacal violence, so that it would be more 'appealing' to the generally-anti-semitic audience, at that time. (Henry "Model T" Ford himself wrote a screed called "The International Jew", so this kind of looney crap was almost mainstream, at that period.)

An American politician, Alan Cranston, had a non-p.c.-ified version of "Mein Kampf" translated and printed and sold it for about 2 weeks before Hitler had the American courts stop the sale.

(It was too close to Pearl Harbor for this disinformation campaign by Der Fuhrer to work, luckily.)

It would be nice if someone could find an angle to sue over the contents of the Koran ...as hatespeech, anti-feminist, anti-gay, etc... and get it into a court where its anti-semitic, anti-Christian, anti-everybody-else-but-Muslim texts could be broadcast more openly and widely to the still-indifferent sleepwalkers at large.

Spread the dread.

Posted by: profitsbeard at July 12, 2006 1:09 AM

profitsbeard,
I'm not sure but I think the "approved" version came out in 1940 or early 1941 and was pushed by pro-Nazi groups like the German-American Bund. It was in response to this the the AJC published their unabridged version in 1941 with an introduction by Stephen Wise.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 12, 2006 1:20 AM

Since my copy is in a box at my sister's house in another state, I can't check to see if it is connected to the Cranston version you mention. It belonged to my Jewish grandfather and is probably quite rare. Next time I go to see my sister, I'll get it.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 12, 2006 1:25 AM

Provoslavni-

Cranston's version of The Notorious Nazi Book came out in 1939, so it may be the same one you have. It sold a half a million copies before Hitler's lawyers had it supressed.

Posted by: profitsbeard at July 12, 2006 2:11 AM

I think it was Hugh who suggested that banning these books isn't the best approach, rather we should hold them up for all to see so that others may gain an insight into what motivates these representatives of the "Religion of Peace". A valid point I believe, however it is also good to see these mohammedans reminded that they live in a civilized secular society where their hate filled literature has no place. It's not a major move, but an important one in that respect.

Zathras, I don't know why you chose to deify Pauline Hanson. I don't recall that she had anything to say on the islamisation of Australia, I only recall her rants against Asian immigration. I suspect that in Pauline's ideal Australia we would all be Anglo-Irish roast lamb & potato eaters. No thanks, not for me.

Posted by: Ozi_bloke at July 12, 2006 6:41 AM

What is the point of banning these book when we have the internet?

The only thing our governments can do is put filters on ISP's. This can be done to porn sites so do it to islamic sites also.
I can't see this happening any time soon as the ISP's make too much $$$ out of it.

I went ot an islamic site today, very tentativley, following up a story on the Jerusalem Post. I immediately ran spyware doctor after and it found 12 infections! HELP!

Posted by: Gramfan at July 12, 2006 8:23 AM

Ozi_bloke:

Yes Pauline Hanson's first targets were Asian. This was a bit of a mistake as I feel they are assimilating well.

However I think she got onto mo's later.

And also her main point,,IMHO,,was that "white" Aussies, (for want of better terminology,,so I am sorry for that) were being discriminated against, and that can be seen to be reasonable.

I have seen some stories about people desperate for centrelink help who are struggling, yet mo's get pensions for their wives under "single mother" status.
Then again Pauline may have been ahead of her time???

Posted by: Gramfan at July 12, 2006 8:30 AM

P. Hanson was never quite where its at:

She lacked knowledge and basic intelligence. She may have had her heart in the right place, but you don't get very far with belly-talk.

She upset many asians who at that time invested heavily in Australia, (I can testify to that because of my own experience) and even now , years after, Chinese, Japanese and Koreans remember her with rather mixed feelings.

She accepted known racists to back her party and that backfired.

She didn't have what it takes.

She knows nothing about Islam and she never spoke out against the soldiers of Allah, who are invading in masses...

She didn't like Asians and that came to bite her in the ass...

Racism is out. Mohammedans use the race-thing against us to invade.

Politicians should not lack basic intelligence, they must be smarter than that...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 12, 2006 9:01 AM

Sheik
Yes,,politicians should be smarter.
However, at least she had some guts!

I was not comforatble with some of the white supremacists who were among here supporters.
We need another REAL leader who can say and do what is necessary.

Shame Costello did what he did. He is on the right track but I fear he will not be PM now.
Anyway,, Libs are more tuned in to this problem than Beazley et al.

Posted by: Gramfan at July 12, 2006 9:58 AM

Pauline Hanson was about 10 years to early and needed to polish her act up. But the facts on islam are starting to dawn on some of our politicians but we still have a long way to go.

Posted by: learnmore at July 12, 2006 11:20 PM

Zathras wrote.. "I am also sick of people jumping off half cocked at the merest mention of a name be it BNP or Pauline Hanson"

Half cocked?, are you calling me penile challenged?

I simply stated that PH didn't have much to say (possibly had nothing to say?) about the islamisation of Australia. She did talk a lot about the high rate of Asian migration to Australia, but I don't remember her mentioning Islam - I doubt it even registered on her radar.

Now she might have been a lovely lady, I don't know, but she didn't have anything to say that interested me. In fact, her strident anti-Asian attitude put me right off.

Half-cocked Ozi bloke.

Posted by: Ozi_bloke at July 13, 2006 4:03 AM

I back that, Ozi-bloke...

PH was not only half-baked, she was crude, foolish and ignorant. Her resentment was towards Asians (only) and to this day she never uttered a word about Islam.

She didn't help our cause in no way, and I doubt she ever will.

I posted this today on another thread:

Ignorance is not necessarily American only:

I asked the waitress in my favorite cafe today who Yassir Araf*k was, just to make a point...

She said:

"Wasn't he, some kind of president, like, the president of, of , of, like, Israel...!"

The Americans are not the only ones living in a bubble...

(Just saying 'hello' from downunder...!)

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 13, 2006 4:57 AM