The Ignorant Speak Out
This guy (scroll down to the comment by Tony Zaki) has an interesting historical perspective...
Anyway - I don't see how the actions of the authorities in this country constitute "pogroms, massacres or religious annihilation." Although which extremist group in our society preaches "pogroms, massacres [and] or religious annihilation", and seems likely to act on such exhortations? As for the authorities, far from perpetrating these events, they have prevented such atrocities taking place by their recent actions.
Update! "disillusioned" weighs in with
I am an Arab Christian who has been living in Australia for three decades. I really feel sad of this hysteria against Moslems in this country. Our ancestors lived in peace and harmony with Moslems for centuries. Of course, there were some problems along the way, but these did not amount to progroms, massacres or religious annihilation.It's impossible to briefly summarise just how wrong this bleeding heart is. I suspect he's been watching that Hollywood touchy-feely lie-fest Kingdom of Heaven - that one pitting the barbarous, nasty, murdering Crusaders against the civilised, "why-can't-we-all-just-get-along" Muslims. I would point him to the early years of the Ottoman Empire and its actions in the Balkans; maybe also the dhimmi laws that maintained the "peace and harmony" our misguided charge mentions.
Anyway - I don't see how the actions of the authorities in this country constitute "pogroms, massacres or religious annihilation." Although which extremist group in our society preaches "pogroms, massacres [and] or religious annihilation", and seems likely to act on such exhortations? As for the authorities, far from perpetrating these events, they have prevented such atrocities taking place by their recent actions.
Update! "disillusioned" weighs in with
Clap Clap Clap - I love what this nation has become - A beakon of stupidity.
posted by James Waterton at 7:05 pm
7 Comments:
I think you don't even know the meaning of the word dhimmi! I know for sure it's a word you picked up while browsing one the anti-Islam sites.
FYI 1 The dhimmi laws weren't invented by the Ottomans. These laws had a great contribution on stabilizing the whole region back in that time.
What makes these laws different than the laws of your oh so civilized country?
You're people, mostly out-cast, excuse le mot, who were sent away from the UK because they were thieves/muggers/rapers etc, deprived a whole nation of their country and tried to exterminate this whole nation! How civilized was that?
Your current government implemented laws, which made it possible to detain refugees for years in jails, simply because they commited the crime of applying for asylum. How civilized is that? And I could go on and on and on...
It's always funny to read from people like you who think they know the history of Islam and the Arab much better than Muslims/Arabs themselves and make the wrong links between what happened in ages ago and the current so called war on terror events.
I suggest you occupy yourself with another subject, like crocodile hunting instead of making a fool out of yourself.
Nowhere did I say the dhimmi laws were created by the Ottomans.
Regardless, thanks for stopping by. And you're right, our country is civilised. You see, as a nation descended of "rapists/muggers/thieves", we are in exactly the same position as the descendants of Mohammed himself. How civilised! Hang on, did I say exactly? Curse my hasteful tongue! We drop down a few civility marks because we failed on the child molesting, murdering and slave-taking counts. Mohammed sure got a couple over on us there.
Now let me assure you that it would be impossible for me to steal the limelight in regards to making a fool out of oneself when I'm surrounded by such overqualified commenters like you.
Anyway, why are you still here? Don't you have some heretical cars to torch?
You're people, mostly out-cast, excuse le mot, who were sent away from the UK because they were thieves/muggers/rapers etc, deprived a whole nation of their country and tried to exterminate this whole nation! How civilized was that?
Yes, early immigrants to what was later Australia included many criminals, through the opportunities provided by the founding of Colonies these people were able to establish a better life than they would ever have had in Britain. Unlike many of today's modern Middle East immigrants, these criminals took the abundant economic opportunities, many becoming wealthy or reasonably well-off.
Later, waves of post-World War Two immigration took many Eastern Europeans who were not wanted elsewhere. Again, these people seized on opportunity in the new environment.
The effects on the Aboriginal population are, yes, sad. This was the result of British policy and settler attacks rather than an Australian extermination campaign. Nevertheless, Australians pay for such policies with affirmative action programs, giving Aborigines preferences in Universities and guaranteed Government benefits which only serve to remove the incentive to properly participate in the modern Australian economy.
Australia under the Howard Government continues to take in many refugees (primarily from Africa), when compared with other nations, especially those in the Middle East, which continue to claim there is a Palestinian refugee problem, but refuse to absorb such people into their own ethnically, culturally and religiously similar societies.
I suggest you occupy yourself with another subject, like crocodile hunting instead of making a fool out of yourself.
Crocodile is a protected species, hunting it would be- in most cases- against the law. I suggest you advocate criminal activity at another blog, try:
http://antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com/
There you probably wont be able to discuss killing a protected species, but you can discuss murdering human beings without fear of reprisals.
"These laws had a great contribution on stabilizing the whole region back in that time."
Here is part of the text of the Pact of Omar that our "progressive" "Dutchman" believes is so "enlightened". Presumably, if Australia was to apply the Pact of Omar, only in reverse, Mr Bittersweet would be the first to applaud, right?
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html
"We (the Christians) shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.
We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children.
We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
We shall not sell fermented drinks.
We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists
We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims."
You know, this sounds a whole lot like the Jim Crow laws of the American South, or even apartheid South Africa.
No doubt, if we were to cross out "Christians" and "churches" and replace with "Muslims" and "mosques" and apply the law in Australia, Mr Bittersweet would be cheering us for our multicultural tolerance.
"What makes these laws different than the laws of your oh so civilized country?"
Say, Mr Bittersweet, given you are obviously an expert on the Australian criminal code, perhaps you can point me to the offending statutes.
"...tried to exterminate this whole nation!"
No we didn't. Do you actually have any evidence for that defamatory claim?
"Your current government implemented laws, which made it possible to detain refugees for years in jails, simply because they commited the crime of applying for asylum."
They are not refugees until they are proven to be so (and those who can prove their status are granted visas). Until then, they are either undocumented aliens or "asylum seekers". These "refugees" arrived in Australia illegally (without any documentation) from a safe country (Indonesia), having skipped through at least half-a-dozen others along the way. We do not owe a damned thing to these people.
Oh, and another thing, Mr Bittersweet. What is your opinion on Theo Van Gogh?
I just dropped Mr Bittersweet a note at his blog letting him know that his arse has been handed to him. I'm sure he'll drop by for tea and sympathy, chaps. Cheerio!
Post a Comment
<< Home