Quote:

A recent report by Student Rights found that over a quarter of visits by Islamic speakers to British universities resulted in segregated meetings. Last week the controversy over gender segregation prompted the Prime Minister to intervene. Mr Cameron said: ‘I’m absolutely clear that there should not be segregated audiences for visiting speakers to universities in Britain. That is not the right approach, the guidance should say that universities should not allow this.

link

This is a good opportunity to stand up for the rights that Islam would take away.

Quote:

‘Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. ‘It happens naturally

From my experience I agree with this. Rarely does anyone ever say "women you must sit here - away from the men". The reality is, most muslims are culturally used to segregating themselves, and they would feel uncomfortable sitting next to a non-family person of the opposite sex.

Right, so lets get this right.  The Universities did not create any rules which prevented segregation?  And so, when Muslims do segregate, they are suddenly in the wrong?

Further, as these are more than likely private functions, utilising university facilities rented by the Universities, suddenly the Universities are to blame for what goes on in these functions, even when it is NOT breaking any laws or rules?

Haven't we seen this all before?   Talk about storm-in-a-teacup.

Tell me, will we see you, Herbie, getting equally upset at the segregation that occurs in Synagogues and traditional Christian churches or even the fundamentalist Christian churches?  Suspect not...   

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:02pm:

Tell me, will we see you, Herbie, getting equally upset at the segregation that occurs in Synagogues and traditional Christian churches or even the fundamentalist Christian churches?  Suspect not...

Apart from your typical and reflex "hey look over there!" is your point that if a Christian church does it, it is bad, but if Mulims do it, it is good?  Or that they are both good, both bad?  Do you have a point? 

Your view that you cannot possibly criticise Muslims for cutting the heads off unbelievers is well known, does that view also include ambivalence on female equality within Islamic culture? 

 

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

This is a good opportunity to stand up for the rights that Islam would take away.

What does it say that a premier learning institute in Britain is happy to accommodate these retards?

It was the students themselves who blew the whistle on this medievalism.

Datalife wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:16pm:

Apart from your typical and reflex "hey look over there!" is your point that if a Christian church does it, it is bad, but if Mulims do it, it is good?  Or that they are both good, both bad?  Do you have a point?

Sorry, mind if I chip in Brian? 

The reason I keep bringing up parallels mostly to elaborate on the fact that while there are Islamic extremists, there are also those from other religions too.  No one is an excuse for the other, I am simply making the point that is far more dependent on the person rather than the religion.  Religious scriptures are massively open to interpretation, and anyone with a bone to pick will find a way for it to support their actions, it really isn't that hard.


Datalife wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:16pm:

Your view that you cannot possibly criticise Muslims for cutting the heads off unbelievers is well known

Seriously?


Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:16pm:

accommodate these retards?

Stay classy Herbert

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:00pm:

Quote: ‘Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. ‘It happens naturally From my experience I agree with this. Rarely does anyone ever say "women you must sit here - away from the men". The reality is, most muslims are culturally used to segregating themselves, and they would feel uncomfortable sitting next to a non-family person of the opposite sex.

And that's because women in Muslim societies have been so crudely sexualised that the men are barely able to keep it in their pants if they should happen to find themselves in close proximity with a female stranger.

Can you not see how pathetically immature it is that Muslim males feel 'challenged' and under stress because they find they must control themselves to not openly lust after an unattached female in their close proximity?

Is it any wonder that these sexually infantile Muslim males raped 19 women in Cairo's Tahrir Square in just two weeks when they happened to espy females in the crowd?

What this tells us is that Islamic culture needs to grow up in an awful hurry if it is not to remain an immature anachronism in Western society.

***

It is already enough that Muslims demanded their own Prayer Hall at our Sydney universities after every other religious group had agreed to share the same hall for all religions.

Just a pain in the arse at every turn.

Stratos wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 12:16pm: Your view that you cannot possibly criticise Muslims for cutting the heads off unbelievers is well known Seriously?

Yeah, seriously.  In a discussion about Islamists hacking off the heads of unbelievers. 


Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 5:39pm:

I make no excuses for those nations and their laws, BV.  I merely recognise that it is their right to create and unfortunately impose those punishments.   It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticise them.  I am neither a member of their religion or a citizen of any of those nations.

And just to confirm he dug himself a little deeper...


Brian Ross wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 9:11am:

*YAWN*, I don't have to define anything, FD.  The statement, in context means what it means.   I am neither a citizen of or a member of their religion or those nations.  Therefore I have no right to change or criticise either the religion or the nations concerned.

Those are the idiot paths a reflexive and spineless apologist is forced to walk when you twist yourself into a pretzel refusing to criticise anything done in the name of religion of peace. 

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Quote: A recent report by Student Rights found that over a quarter of visits by Islamic speakers to British universities resulted in segregated meetings. Last week the controversy over gender segregation prompted the Prime Minister to intervene. Mr Cameron said: ‘I’m absolutely clear that there should not be segregated audiences for visiting speakers to universities in Britain. That is not the right approach, the guidance should say that universities should not allow this. link

Yeah so, I don't see it as a big deal.

When I went to university many years ago, majority of the women sat in the front, we boys sat in the back. We just did it that way.

Stratos wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

Datalife wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 12:16pm: Apart from your typical and reflex "hey look over there!" is your point that if a Christian church does it, it is bad, but if Mulims do it, it is good?  Or that they are both good, both bad?  Do you have a point?  Sorry, mind if I chip in Brian?

Go for it.  I don't read DL's posts [mod edit: personal attack deleted]


It is obvious from this comment he has completely missed the point of what I said.  it is not that it is that Muslims do it but rather why should Muslims be singled out and others who the same thing be ignored?  If you're going to condemn people for this, you don't think it should be universal, rather than the usual selective condemnation?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 1:10pm:

If you're going to condemn people for this, you don't think it should be universal, rather than the usual selective condemnation?   ::)

I agree.  You want to post on some Christian or any other religions atrocities or acts of buggerbuggery I will happily condemn them.

Unlike your idiot self who will grant an exemption of criticism for anything Muslim I can condemn heinous acts and do so universally.   Hypocrite much Brainless,  see the idiot the paths you walk when you introduce universality whilst excusing one from that universality?

Here ya go Brainless, your concept of universality...


Brian Ross wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 9:11am:

*YAWN*, I don't have to define anything, FD.  The statement, in context means what it means.   I am neither a citizen of or a member of their religion or those nations.  Therefore I have no right to change or criticise either the religion or the nations concerned.

[mod edit: personal attack removed]

In fact not only will you refuse to criticise you will actively attempt to defend, apologise for and distract from any such criticism. 

Quote:

Further, as these are more than likely private functions

This was not a 'private' function. The guy was a guest speaker. It was not a dinner party. Do you feel some kind of desperate need to make up excuses, no matter how unlikely?


Quote:

Seriously?

See the spineless apologetics thread.


Quote:

Yeah so, I don't see it as a big deal.

Of course you don't.


Quote:

When I went to university many years ago, majority of the women sat in the front, we boys sat in the back. We just did it that way.

Did they have designated boys and girls areas?


Quote:

it is not that it is that Muslims do it but rather why should Muslims be singled out and others who the same thing be ignored

It is not the same thing though is it Brian? You basically had to equate a state run university with a church or synagog in order to frame your apologetics.

mod edit: personal attack deleted

Huh? Wha'?

Does this mean no Christmas presents?  :-?

I just read the article a bit more carefully, and noticed a few things.  They are basing the article on what appears to be a photo within the article, which has what appears to be half a hijab in it, with a lot of men at towards the front.  Surely if there was a better photograph they would have used it, so I'm curious as to why they decided to go with the one they did.

Is it segregated? well, maybe, but you really can't tell based on the corner of one woman's head.

Added were the speakers comments, such as


Quote:

Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce.

and

Quote:

‘This photo must have been taken at the start of the meeting because by the end there were many more women at the talk.

Also the signs down the bottom were related to a different event and refers people to different entrances, and I feel I have to ask once again, if there is clear evidence of segregation, why isn't it in this report?.  It could be happening, I have no idea, but this is a very flimsy article.

Seeing as the title was


Quote:

Shocking picture shows how men were reserved front-row seats while women had to sit at the back

I get the feeling someone wrote the title before the rest of the article.

Another case of a Muslim failing to see what is in front of his own eyes.

Abu Hurairah narrates that the Prophet said: “One who keeps the faults of a Muslim secret in this world, Allah will keep his faults in the Hereafter


Quote:

Surely if there was a better photograph they would have used it

Have you ever tried to take a photo of an entire room from within the room?


Quote:

Mr Chagtai said: ‘Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. ‘It happens naturally and if Muslim women were disadvantaged they would be the first to complain. They are forthright, not meek and mild as those who do not understand Islam assume.

It did not happen naturally. The seats were arranged into two groups for them.


Quote:

‘We have consulted with Liberty and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to ensure that we stay within the law and we do this by providing a mixed seating area for those who prefer this.

LOL - no evidence of segregation eh Stratos?


Quote:

Soon after this photograph was taken, the IERA was barred from University College London for segregating seating at a debate over the existence of God.

Good

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

Have you ever tried to take a photo of an entire room from within the room?

Well maybe they should have considered that before writing a massive beat up story around that exact photograph?  I find it hard to believe that is the best photographical evidence they could have fond.


freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

It did not happen naturally. The seats were arranged into two groups for them.

Oh, does it say that somewhere?


freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

LOL - no evidence of segregation eh Stratos?

Not based on the photo in the article no.

My point is simply that this is a weak article, nothing more.

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

Another case of a Muslim failing to see what is in front of his own eyes. Abu Hurairah narrates that the Prophet said: “One who keeps the faults of a Muslim secret in this world, Allah will keep his faults in the Hereafter Quote: Surely if there was a better photograph they would have used it Have you ever tried to take a photo of an entire room from within the room? [quote]Mr Chagtai said: ‘Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. ‘It happens naturally and if Muslim women were disadvantaged they would be the first to complain. They are forthright, not meek and mild as those who do not understand Islam assume.

It did not happen naturally. The seats were arranged into two groups for them.


Quote:

‘We have consulted with Liberty and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to ensure that we stay within the law and we do this by providing a mixed seating area for those who prefer this.

LOL - no evidence of segregation eh Stratos?


Quote:

Soon after this photograph was taken, the IERA was barred from University College London for segregating seating at a debate over the existence of God.

Good[/quote]

It was a public free lecture.

If you dont like the rules of the organisers then don't attend the lecture.Simple really.

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

It did not happen naturally. The seats were arranged into two groups for them.

Ah yes, the photo clearly shows a guy ushering men to the 'mens' table and women to the 'womens' table, plus you can clearly see tables marked "sisters" and "brothers"  :P

from the article:


Quote:

Mr Chagtai said: ‘Separate seating for men and women is not something we ever enforce. ‘It happens naturally and if Muslim women were disadvantaged they would be the first to complain. They are forthright, not meek and mild as those who do not understand Islam assume.

But hey, why take a muslim's word for it? Far better to make baseless assumptions. And since you've been channelling Yadda the last couple of days, maybe you can remind us to google "taqiyya: the muslim doctrine of deceit"

Quote:

Well maybe they should have considered that before writing a massive beat up story around that exact photograph?

The article actually reported on several instances.


Quote:

Oh, does it say that somewhere?

You can see it in the photo. I believe that was the reason for the photo.


Quote:

If you dont like the rules of the organisers then don't attend the lecture.Simple really.

It is not like that at all. Rather, if you don't like the rules, you can get them banned from campus for good, which is exactly what happened in one of the example cited. People do not have to put up with this sort of backwards mentality creeping into public institutions.


Quote:

But hey, why take a muslim's word for it?

The Muslim did not disagree with me. He did not claim there was no segregation. Rather, he claimed it happened "naturally". Basically he is saying that even in Britain, Islam has already created a culture that relegates women to positions of inferiority - automatically and without question.


Quote:

And since you've been channelling Yadda the last couple of days, maybe you can remind us to google "taqiyya: the muslim doctrine of deceit"

Here you go - let me know if there is anything there you disagree with:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/wiki/index.php?title=Deception_of_Non-Muslims#Textual_justifications_for_deception

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 4:38pm:

The Muslim did not disagree with me.

umm... saying there is no forced segregation and that it only happens "naturally" is 100% disagreeing with the claim that the seats were "arranged" for segregation.

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 4:38pm:

The article actually reported on several instances.

Are you serious?  This was the headline

Shocking picture shows how men were reserved front-row seats while women had to sit at the back

And then there is literally nothing to indicate that was actually what happened.  There is no evidence from the pictures to show that men were reserved front row seats, or that women had to sit at the back.

Also, unless you are scared of Muslims or powerpoint presentations there really isn't anything shocking about it either


freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 4:38pm:

You can see it in the photo. I believe that was the reason for the photo.

Show me, show me where in the article there is proof that
freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

The seats were arranged into two groups for them.

Like I said, this article is terrible.

The seats were arranged into two groups so that Muslims naturally segregate that way. If the seats were not split, how would they know where to sit? You cannot have natural automatic segregation into one group of seats. These are Muslims remember, you have to be careful or they might explode.

The seats are split into two groups?

How do you even know there isn't another table full of men right beside that table with one woman we can see?

You are extrapolating an awful lot from one very unclear photo.

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 4:56pm:

The seats were arranged into two groups so that Muslims naturally segregate that way. If the seats were not split, how would they know where to sit? You cannot have natural automatic segregation into one group of seats. These are Muslims remember, you have to be careful or they might explode.

Yeah so, its a muslim event.

If a muslim invites me to a mosque and asks me to take off my shoes before I enter, I will do it.If I don't want to take my shoes off, then don't enter.

freediver wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 1:35pm:

Quote: Further, as these are more than likely private functions This was not a 'private' function. The guy was a guest speaker. It was not a dinner party. Do you feel some kind of desperate need to make up excuses, no matter how unlikely?

"Private function" does not mean that it is necessarily held in private, FD.  You are just being obtuse.  What it means is that it is not the University itself organising the function, rather it is an organisation separate to the University.   ::)



Quote:

It is not the same thing though is it Brian? You basically had to equate a state run university with a church or synagog in order to frame your apologetics.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought the issue was segregation, was I mistaken?  Is the issue about state funding of higher education institutions who then in turn RENT OUT their facilities to other groups within society to use?  I have pointed out other religious groups which practice segregation.  Where is your outrage?  Oh, thats right, its purely reserved for Muslims, right.   ::)

Again, I point out when this picture was taken THERE WERE NO UNIVERSITY RULES FORBIDDING segregation.  THERE ARE NO LAWS making segregation illegal.

So, where does that leave your mock outrage, FD?   ::)

Quote:

How do you even know there isn't another table full of men right beside that table with one woman we can see?

That would be unnatural, wouldn't it? The women would distract the men from their important work, and might end up getting raped. You can't just leave pieces of meat lying out for the cat like that.


Quote:

Also, unless you are scared of Muslims or powerpoint presentations there really isn't anything shocking about it either

Sexual segregation happening at a public university in the UK is very unusual. Shocking even, enough to get the PM involved and enough to get Muslim groups banned from universities.


Quote:

If a muslim invites me to a mosque

Earth to wally, this was not a mosque. It was a university.


Quote:

"Private function" does not mean that it is necessarily held in private, FD.  You are just being obtuse.  What it means is that it is not the University itself organising the function, rather it is an organisation separate to the University.

I know you would like it to, but the University cannot simply absolve itself of responsibility for what happens on its own campus this way.



Quote:

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought the issue was segregation, was I mistaken?

Segregation in a University. If you cannot see the difference between that and segregation in a mosque that is your own deficiency.


Quote:

Again, I point out when this picture was taken THERE WERE NO UNIVERSITY RULES FORBIDDING segregation.  THERE ARE NO LAWS making segregation illegal.

And yet a Muslim group has already been banned from a UK university for exactly that reason.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/12/14/article-0-1A1B55FA00000578-27_634x510.jpg

Don't ever believe a word any muslim tells you about his beliefs ever.

Quote:

Muslim protestors demand restaurants and shops stop selling 'evil' alcohol warning them they face 40 lashes if they carry on     Dozens of men and women gathered on Brick Lane, East London     Delayed as English Defence League members staged counter-protest     Among protestors was Anjem Choudhary, former leader of Al-Muhajiroun     Organisers said protest was held yesterday to coincide with large numbers of office workers expected to be celebrating Christmas in the area

link

The greater their number, the more their political power.

Muslim activists need do nothing but simply wait for Muslim birthrates and the immigration program to give them the power to elect members of parliament who will act on their behalf.

The British political elite have already made peers of several Muslims ... Lord this and Lord that.

It's only a matter of time before the Islamisation of Britain will be in free-fall, and irreversible without a civil war.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 5:57pm:

HERE WERE NO UNIVERSITY RULES FORBIDDING segregation.  THERE ARE NO LAWS making segregation illegal.

There are no laws making sh!tting in the park illegal. Yet you know it is not something you should do.

This is the problem with giving freedom to people who do not want to fit in- they will demand a rule. But the point of social cohesion and solidarity is that people live together in a settled, common understanding of what makes their society a society, and their own.

With aliens like Muslims, Hindus, Gypsies and others, the fundamental idea of a shared, unstated, common ground goes out the window.

SO you now need chapter and verse of the law to back up your expectation that the sexes should not be segregated in public places or that sh!tting in the park is not an affirmation of a free society.

Soren wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

There are no laws making sh!tting in the park illegal.

don't know where you live, but it must be a long way into the sticks Soren

Soren wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 5:57pm: HERE WERE NO UNIVERSITY RULES FORBIDDING segregation.  THERE ARE NO LAWS making segregation illegal. There are no laws making sh!tting in the park illegal.

I think you'll find that the laws covering public indecency and defecation in public would make sure it's illegal, Soren.

I suggest you never attempt to defend yourself in court.  Your ignorance of the law is severe.   ::)

The plot thickens.

We now hear another major British university has been pandering to 'Muslim cultural sensitivities' rather than cause upset to 'Muslim cultural sensitivities'.

The university leadership who have been sponsoring these regressions to gender apartheid should be sacked wholesale for promoting Islamisation-by-stealth.


Quote:

Female students banned from speaking at Islam seminar and forced to walk through separate 'sisters only' entrance at leading London university     Female students had to write questions down at Islamic society event     Men present raised their hands to be addressed by guest speaker     Women had to enter through separate entrance at Queen Mary University     Students at University of Leicester were segregated at Muslim seminar

link

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 12:30pm:

And that's because women in Muslim societies have been so crudely sexualised that the men are barely able to keep it in their pants if they should happen to find themselves in close proximity with a female stranger.

The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones.

ian wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 11:10am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 12:30pm: And that's because women in Muslim societies have been so crudely sexualised that the men are barely able to keep it in their pants if they should happen to find themselves in close proximity with a female stranger. The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones.

You've shot yourself in the foot again. Another own-goal.

The reported incidence of sexual abuse in Muslim countries is as low as it is for two very obvious reasons.

Go on, gandalf, tell him.

Too busy?

Okay ...

1. In order to avoid stirring up the lustful passions of Muslim males, the womenfolk 'hide their beauty' with all sorts of drapery and concealing apparel.

2. It is fraught with self-defeating hazard for a female in a Muslim society to accuse a Muslim male of having sexually abused her. 

ian wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 11:10am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 12:30pm: And that's because women in Muslim societies have been so crudely sexualised that the men are barely able to keep it in their pants if they should happen to find themselves in close proximity with a female stranger. The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones.

D'oh!

Reporting that you were raped will land you in jail. That tends to severely cut down on the rate of reporting.

ian wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 11:10am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 12:30pm: And that's because women in Muslim societies have been so crudely sexualised that the men are barely able to keep it in their pants if they should happen to find themselves in close proximity with a female stranger. The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones.

Why would a Muslim woman go to the police when she'll get the blame? Sexual abuse is rampant in Muslim societies. A Muslim woman hasn't any  right to say "no" to anything.

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 11:56am:

The reported incidence of sexual abuse in Muslim countries is as low as it is for two very obvious reasons.

Soren wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:00pm:

Reporting that you were raped will land you in jail. That tends to severely cut down on the rate of reporting.

Right, so the "evidence" that sexual abuse rates are higher in muslim countries is that there is no evidence. Makes sense  :P

Quote:

The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones.

Wrong Ian. Rates of conviction are lower. Abu tried to pull this crap all the time. What else do you expect in countries that blame women for not wearing tents in public, that routinely jail rape victims, and allow old men to legally marry little girls in arranged marriages.

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

Wrong Ian.

How exactly is he "wrong"? He says the evidence does not support the view that sexual abuse rates are higher in muslim countries. We now have 4 replies to that claiming he is wrong to say that - when you all actually agree with what he said.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:11pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:06pm: Wrong Ian. How exactly is he "wrong"? He says the evidence does not support the view that sexual abuse rates are higher in muslim countries. We now have 4 replies to that claiming he is wrong to say that - when you all actually agree with what he said.

So Muslim men treat Muslim women like princesses Gandalf. So there's no problem then?

Perhaps you should take note of what I'm actually questioning Sparky.

In case you're new to this whole debating thing, what you are doing is constructing a strawman.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:19pm:

Perhaps you should take note of what I'm actually questioning Sparky. In case you're new to this whole debating thing, what you are doing is constructing a strawman.

I'm not creating a strawman. Islam has an absolute disgraceful reputation when it comes to human right-especially female. I hate reading responses sticking up for this barbaric religion.

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

I'm not creating a strawman.

Yes you are. What you accuse me of doing is not even close to what I am saying.

Again, no one is disputing Ian's claim that the available evidence does not indicate sexual abuse crime rates are higher in muslim countries. Of course you make the point that thats because crimes are not reported or they are not actual crimes. But you are wrong to say Ian is wrong about his point.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:23pm: I'm not creating a strawman. Yes you are. What you accuse me of doing is not even close to what I am saying. Again, no one is disputing Ian's claim that the available evidence does not indicate sexual abuse crime rates are higher in muslim countries. Of course you make the point that thats because crimes are not reported or they are not actual crimes. But you are wrong to say Ian is wrong about his point.

Where did I say he is wrong? I just find a comment like that absurd when many Muslims treat their women like animals. It's a well known fact.

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:34pm: Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:23pm: I'm not creating a strawman. Yes you are. What you accuse me of doing is not even close to what I am saying. Again, no one is disputing Ian's claim that the available evidence does not indicate sexual abuse crime rates are higher in muslim countries. Of course you make the point that thats because crimes are not reported or they are not actual crimes. But you are wrong to say Ian is wrong about his point. Where did I say he is wrong? I just find a comment like that absurd when many Muslims treat their women like animals. It's a well known fact.

Quote:

Narrated Aisha- Mo's child bride,his favourite wife The things that annul the prayers were mentioned before me.They said a prayer is annulled by a dog,a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of praying people). I said you have made us (women) dogs www.sunnah.com/bukhari/8/158

When you jail rape victims that could discourage women from reporting rape, as Sheik Hilaly said if a woman is in her home and wearing a hijab these disasters dont happen.

https://www.google.com.au/#q=rape+victim+jailed+uae

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:41pm:

many Muslims treat their women like animals. It's a well known fact.

As do many non-muslims.

Do you have any evidence that sexual abuse rates are higher amongst muslims than non-muslims?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:41pm: many Muslims treat their women like animals. It's a well known fact. As do many non-muslims. Do you have any evidence that sexual abuse rates are higher amongst muslims than non-muslims?

No I don't. You don't know and I don't know. Any religion that puts one sex below another isn't going to have a good record though. What do you think? I suspect you are a Muslim so how about some insight. I'd love to learn.

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:40pm:

Any religion that puts one sex below another isn't going to have a good record though. What do you think? I suspect you are a Muslim so how about some insight. I'd love to learn.

Well I could try and tell you the truth - that islam does not "put women below" men, but it seems your mind is already made up. I would also probably be accused of being misinformed or being deliberately deceptive by the usual suspects.

Islam is a poster child for equity.   ;)

And before the usual idiots attempt to distract the same can be said for fundy Christians.

Nobbers the lot of them, but why the left bend over backwards to support and apologise for queer hating women segregating Muslims is beyond me, the best I can put it down to is the perverse behaviour of the lefties to support anything that is against anything they perceive as being of the "west". 

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:19pm: Perhaps you should take note of what I'm actually questioning Sparky. In case you're new to this whole debating thing, what you are doing is constructing a strawman. I'm not creating a strawman. Islam has an absolute disgraceful reputation when it comes to human right-especially female. I hate reading responses sticking up for this barbaric religion.

It's not rocket science, is it?

The only reason Lawrence of Arabia liked the Muslims was because he was a roaring homosexual who liked to take it up the arse.

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 2:42pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:23pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 12:19pm: Perhaps you should take note of what I'm actually questioning Sparky. In case you're new to this whole debating thing, what you are doing is constructing a strawman. I'm not creating a strawman. Islam has an absolute disgraceful reputation when it comes to human right-especially female. I hate reading responses sticking up for this barbaric religion. It's not rocket science, is it? The only reason Lawrence of Arabia liked the Muslims was because he was a roaring homosexual who liked to take it up the arse.

RIP   :'(


http://www.myticketpremium.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Peter-OToole.jpg

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 11:56am:

[ You've shot yourself in the foot again. Another own-goal. The reported incidence of sexual abuse in Muslim countries is as low as it is for two very obvious reasons. Go on, gandalf, tell him. Too busy? Okay ... 1. In order to avoid stirring up the lustful passions of Muslim males, the womenfolk 'hide their beauty' with all sorts of drapery and concealing apparel. 2. It is fraught with self-defeating hazard for a female in a Muslim society to accuse a Muslim male of having sexually abused her.

Perhaps, but you cannot state that incidences of sexual abuse are higher when you have zero evidence they are. You understand what factual information is dont you?

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

Quote: The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones. Wrong Ian. Rates of conviction are lower. Abu tried to pull this crap all the time. What else do you expect in countries that blame women for not wearing tents in public, that routinely jail rape victims, and allow old men to legally marry little girls in arranged marriages.

If I am wrong then post the evidence. Simples. Yours and Herberts problem is that you bopth are unable to distinguish betwenn culture and religion, the majortiy of the worlds Muslims do noit live in the middle east and have a different culture than middle eastern Muslims. Until you understand this you are going to lose the argument every time.

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:40pm:

No I don't. You don't know and I don't know. Any religion that puts one sex below another isn't going to have a good record though. What do you think? I suspect you are a Muslim so how about some insight. I'd love to learn.

All three monotheistic religions place womens value below mens. Ever read the old testament?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:45pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 1:40pm: Any religion that puts one sex below another isn't going to have a good record though. What do you think? I suspect you are a Muslim so how about some insight. I'd love to learn. Well I could try and tell you the truth - that islam does not "put women below" men, but it seems your mind is already made up. I would also probably be accused of being misinformed or being deliberately deceptive by the usual suspects.

What do you expect me to believe when Muslim women can't get educated, drive, get divorced, go out alone, can't show their hair or face, get an inheritance , marry outside their religion etc etc etc.

Quote:

How exactly is he "wrong"? He says the evidence does not support the view that sexual abuse rates are higher in muslim countries.

No he doesn't Gandalf. I even quoted what he said for you: in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies


Quote:

Well I could try and tell you the truth - that islam does not "put women below" men

That is a lie.


Quote:

but it seems your mind is already made up

You are welcome to try to change our minds Gandalf. I'll even start a new thread if you'd like. In fact we may have some old threads we could raise from the dead. I know how you dislike starting new threads on the same topic.


Quote:

I would also probably be accused of being misinformed or being deliberately deceptive by the usual suspects.

Well you did once try to convince me that Muhammed did not have sex with his sex slaves. I was happy to accept that you were misinformed by other Muslims who were themselves being deliberately deceptive.


Quote:

If I am wrong then post the evidence. Simples. Yours and Herberts problem is that you bopth are unable to distinguish betwenn culture and religion

It is straight from the Koran Ian. This is not culture being projected onto religion. It is religion dictating culture, law, wiping your arse and every aspect of human existence.


Quote:

the majortiy of the worlds Muslims do noit live in the middle east and have a different culture than middle eastern Muslims.

Yet they are all Muslims and all do their best to turn their country into a mirror image of those middle eastern shitholes.


Quote:

Do you have any evidence that sexual abuse rates are higher amongst muslims than non-muslims?

Of course not. Muslims do everything they can to hide the evidence, including forcing the women to wear tents. Some even go so far as to insist that women where the letterbox outfit, whereas more progressive Muslims suggest you should refrain from beating them around the face.

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 5:39pm:

No he doesn't Gandalf. I even quoted what he said for you: in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies

Fine, so how is that wrong?


freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 5:39pm:

It is straight from the Koran Ian.

we're not talking about the Koran, we're talking about the evidence (or lack thereof) of muslim crime rates:


freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

Quote: The evidence does not suppport this, in fact rates of crime involivng sexual abuse are far lower in Muslim societies than they are in Western ones. Wrong Ian. Rates of conviction are lower. Abu tried to pull this crap all the time. What else do you expect in countries that blame women for not wearing tents in public, that routinely jail rape victims, and allow old men to legally marry little girls in arranged marriages.

Again, how is this wrong?

I'm not talking about rape on the street. I'm talking about rape in the home Gandalf. How well do Muslim women go when they don't want sex and their husband does? Is it easy for them to get a divorce and get out of abusive relationships?

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

I'm not talking about rape on the street. I'm talking about rape in the home Gandalf. How well do Muslim women go when they don't want sex and their husband does?

To answer that sensibly we need statistics, and we all agree the statistics aren't there. So how on earth am I supposed to give you a proper answer? The best you can do is make a guess based not on the demonstrated behaviour of actual people, but on a simplistic understanding of what the quran commands - and then (baselessly) assume that all or most muslims act like that in real life. I'm not saying that you do that, but freediver and Yadda have been flogging this dead horse for years.

bump

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:01pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 6:19pm: I'm not talking about rape on the street. I'm talking about rape in the home Gandalf. How well do Muslim women go when they don't want sex and their husband does? To answer that sensibly we need statistics, and we all agree the statistics aren't there. So how on earth am I supposed to give you a proper answer? The best you can do is make a guess based not on the demonstrated behaviour of actual people, but on a simplistic understanding of what the quran commands - and then (baselessly) assume that all or most muslims act like that in real life. I'm not saying that you do that, but freediver and Yadda have been flogging this dead horse for years.

So you have no opinion on the subject at all without stats?

Gandalf doesn't have an opinion full stop. The stats are just one of his many deflections.


Quote:

Fine, so how is that wrong?

Crime rates are not lower. Conviction rates are lower.


Quote:

we're not talking about the Koran, we're talking about the evidence (or lack thereof) of muslim crime rates:

Is there any evidence to back up Ian's claim? Or is it only the people who disagree with him that actually need evidence?

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

Gandalf doesn't have an opinion full stop. The stats are just one of his many deflections.

Surely he must have some insights being a Muslim.

I have spent over a dozen pages trying to get an opinion out of him on tricky subjects. He can be very creative. But it is still worth it. I've noticed the harder it is to get an opinion, the more surprised I am by the answer, or the more difficult questions it raises.

So let's have a review of 'Islamisation by stealth'.

Here's a fairly credible account of how it progresses in Western society.

link

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:07pm:

So let's have a review of 'Islamisation by stealth'. Here's a fairly credible account of how it progresses in Western society. link

Haha, what?  Credible source?


Quote:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100% Somalia — Muslim 100% Yemen — Muslim 100%

Ha, good one.

Sparky wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:04pm:

So you have no opinion on the subject at all without stats?

Not an informed one - and neither do you. An uninformed opinion is worse than no opinion at all.


freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

Crime rates are not lower.

You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

In the absense of evidence indicating the contrary, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that lower conviction rates = lower crime rates.

Quote:

In the absense of evidence indicating the contrary, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that lower conviction rates = lower crime rates.

So jailing rape victims doesn't count as evidence to the contrary?

At what point does common sense kick in?

Abu Hurairah narrates that the Prophet said: “One who keeps the faults of a Muslim secret in this world, Allah will keep his faults in the Hereafter"

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

So jailing rape victims doesn't count as evidence to the contrary?

Not even close.

If you could give me some statistics on its prevalence, and show conclusively that it demonstrates a higher rate of sexual crime against women than in the non-muslim world, then and only then might you have something.

As a Muslim, Gandy cannot be critical of Islam without some Muslim authority to back him up. He can be critical of Islam if other Muslims are critical of it but he cannot simply reason against Islam off his own bat. He must have some Muslim authority to back him.

This is incomprehensible for non-Muslims, especially to a post-enlightenment European non-Muslim, but that's the nub of it. A Muslim cannot side with non-Muslims when it comes to a critical appraisal of Islam.
No     can     do.

So certain things are impossible: criticism of Mohammed, rejection of the infallability of the Koran, disputing the perfection of sharia, etc.
No     can     do.

Stoning, veils, ham sandwiches - peripheral issues with a 'diversity' of interpretations so an impression of intellectual ferment can be pretended. But it ain't there. There is an intellectual ferment in Islam only about the things that don't matter.

The things that matter - Mohammed, Koran, sharia, submission - there is only grim stagnation and uniformity of opinion.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:22pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 7:04pm: So you have no opinion on the subject at all without stats? Not an informed one - and neither do you. An uninformed opinion is worse than no opinion at all. freediver wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 7:32pm: Crime rates are not lower. You have absolutely no way of knowing that. In the absense of evidence indicating the contrary, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that lower conviction rates = lower crime rates.

That's a conclusion. Muslim woman can't get legal help. Why dismiss the whole part of the argument?

Sparky wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 4:29am:

Why dismiss the whole part of the argument?

Because it is completely baseless.

Soren wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:40pm:

The things that matter - Mohammed, Koran, sharia, submission - there is only grim stagnation and uniformity of opinion.

That just about sums it up.

Whether it's Islam, or the infallibility of the Pope, or Mao's Little Red Book, the mindset is one of necrocephalic intellectual inertia with regard to applying any degree of critical examination and inspection of the sanctified claims being made.

And what THIS leads to are followers and congregations that are just as devoid of intellectual mobility and enervation as the Terracotta Warriors in China.


Quote:

"The unexamined life is not worth living"

Socrates 400BC

I want to see gandalf cast off his shackles and unchain himself from the religious straitjacket that has stultified his intellectual processes like an alien virus.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:37pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 16th, 2013 at 8:24pm: So jailing rape victims doesn't count as evidence to the contrary? Not even close. If you could give me some statistics on its prevalence, and show conclusively that it demonstrates a higher rate of sexual crime against women than in the non-muslim world, then and only then might you have something.

What it demonstrates is that it requires extreme self delusion to conclude that the lower conviction rates reflect a lower crime rate.

It is not up to me to conclusively prove that you assumptions are absurd. If you want to try to back up your claim, or Ian's for that matter, go ahead, but there is no point backing it up with an obviously illogical and flawed argument then demanding that others "prove" the existence of the flaws.

bump

freediver wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:34pm:

bump

Dry bumping?  How disgusting!   ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D

freediver wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:33pm:

What it demonstrates is that it requires extreme self delusion to conclude that the lower conviction rates reflect a lower crime rate. It is not up to me to conclusively prove that you assumptions are absurd. If you want to try to back up your claim, or Ian's for that matter, go ahead, but there is no point backing it up with an obviously illogical and flawed argument then demanding that others "prove" the existence of the flaws.

You just claimed something that muslims do without a shred of supporting evidence. And you expect this to be some sort of proof about the crime statistics. So you tell me who is making "illogical and flawed arguments".  :P

Quote:

You just claimed something that muslims do

That was Ian. I pointed out that the conviction rates are lower, not the crime rates.

Do you need me to prove that Muslims punish rape victims?

freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:

Do you need me to prove that Muslims punish rape victims?

Oh it happens, but to claim it happens to such an extent to have the impact on the crime statistics you claim it does, without any supporting evidence, is obviously absurd.

I suspect the best you can do is provide a couple of anecdotes from Pakistan and boldly claim "this is normal".

Islam builds a culture out of subjugating women. Rape convictions are not easy, even in a society that puts great effort into catching the perpetrators and making women feel like they can come forward and report it. You don't have to put many rape victims in jail in order to stop all of them coming forward.

Like I said, completely baseless. Keep digging that hole FD.

Nothing you say disproves an alternative theory - that there simply isn't as many rapes in the muslim world, and thats why there are less convictions.

I am not trying to disprove it. You have no actual evidence for it, only assumptions. You need some serious rose tinted glasses to interpret it the way you do. It is not up to me to disprove every idiotic theory posted on the internet.

Abu Hurairah narrates that the Prophet said: “One who keeps the faults of a Muslim secret in this world, Allah will keep his faults in the Hereafter

freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 6:59pm:

I am not trying to disprove it.

Yep, much easier to accept your own viewpoint isn't it, afterall, it reinforces your one-eyed view of Muslims rather nicely doesn't it, despite there being as Gandalf points out, alternative explanations which make more sense! 

freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 6:59pm:

I am not trying to disprove it. You have no actual evidence for it, only assumptions.

No. This is an assumption FD:


freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

Crime rates are not lower. Conviction rates are lower.

In the absense of any evidence to the contrary (which you have so far failed to provide), then crime convictions must equal crime rates.

What you are doing here, if it needs to be spelled out, is assuming that crime in a particular part of the world is not consistent with official figures - with absolutely no good justification.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 11:07pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 8:24pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 15th, 2013 at 5:57pm: HERE WERE NO UNIVERSITY RULES FORBIDDING segregation.  THERE ARE NO LAWS making segregation illegal. There are no laws making sh!tting in the park illegal. I think you'll find that the laws covering public indecency and defecation in public would make sure it's illegal, Soren. I suggest you never attempt to defend yourself in court.  Your ignorance of the law is severe.   ::)

Very sneakily you neglected to engage with the substance of what I said:

This is the problem with giving freedom to people who do not want to fit in- they will demand a rule. But the point of social cohesion and solidarity is that people live together in a settled, common understanding of what makes their society a society, and their own.

With aliens like Muslims, Hindus, Gypsies and others, the fundamental idea of a shared, unstated, common ground goes out the window.

SO you now need chapter and verse of the law to back up your expectation that the sexes should not be segregated in public places or that sh!tting in the park is not an affirmation of a free society.





I am not the least surprised that you pretended to not notice the main points. You could make your inane little post only by such pretence.
Pathetic.

freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 6:52pm:

Islam builds a culture out of subjugating women. Rape convictions are not easy, .........

Particularly not when 4 witnesses are required for a woman to bring an allegation of rape:
youtube.com/watch?v=V22qDQqMPL0

As the Norwegian tourist in Dubai learned when she went to the police with an allegation of rape, but instead of arresting the perpetrator, they imprisoned the victim for fornication instead.
google.com/#q=norwegian+woman+sentenced+to+prison+in+dubai

Perhaps as prophesied, and of the 53-year old that was doing a 9-year old:

Dan 11:37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

Tabari I:280 Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of the world menstruate and are stupid.

Sura 24:33:...But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is Allah, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),    

So when they don't desire chastity, prostitute them out and make a gain. Perhaps when they want to share in that gain or maybe just get some distance from their filthy captor for a little while.
But then even if you compel them, Allah is forgiving!
Pretty convenient god for an band of cutthroat, imperialistic conquering, female prisoner violating, murderous, thieves.

beholdthebeast.com/women_in_islam.htm

beholdthebeast.com/2829a1f0.jpg

Sura (4:34) - Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

beholdthebeast.com/27168100.jpg


freediver wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 6:52pm:

......... even in a society that puts great effort into catching the perpetrators and making women feel like they can come forward and report it. You don't have to put many rape victims in jail in order to stop all of them coming forward.

It's absolutely amazing to read some of the contortions on this thread. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can deduce that if a woman is jailed for being raped, she would be very unlikely to report same.

It's also not a stretch, given the trenchant sexism of Islam, to realise in such Islamic societies where women are seen as lesser beings, they are more likely to be sexually assaulted. Rapists don't tend to think much of women.

I picked up a copy of The Australian yesterday. Muslims causing havoc in Syria. Muslims causing havoc in southern Russia. A Muslim whinging about being denied an Australian passport by ASIO because of his unsavoury views. Then there was an article on alcohol induced violence that has resulted in the deaths of three men over the Christmas period. They've caught the assailants in each case...two of them, Middle Eastern names, the other African.

Then, the paper reports that a new program starts in the Victorian police today, as some of their members racially profile and that's a no-no.

Like what?

Not enough journalists are making the connect.

Nicole Page wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:10pm:

Then there was an article on alcohol induced violence that has resulted in the deaths of three men over the Christmas period. They've caught the assailants in each case...two of them, Middle Eastern names, the other African.

Good grief, you realise hospitals around Australia are literally inundated with alcohol induced assault cases every single Saturday night? And you pick on the one story that has "middle eastern names?? Could it possibly be that a person that is partaking in behaviour that is expressly forbidden by islam is maybe not a muslim?

And you whinge about those who clamp down on racial profiling.  ::)

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:53pm:

Could it possibly be that a person that is partaking in behaviour that is expressly forbidden by islam is maybe not a muslim? And you whinge about those who clamp down on racial profiling.  ::)

If someone says they are a Muslim I am happy to accept them at their word, no matter if what they do is not considered by you to be a proper Muslim. 

To say that those who blow themselves up in service of  Islam whilst yelling al Akbar are somehow not real Muslims is a ridiculous concept.

As for racial profiling, I am glad you appear to agree that is a useful tool.

Nicole Page wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:10pm:

It's absolutely amazing to read some of the contortions on this thread. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can deduce that if a woman is jailed for being raped, she would be very unlikely to report same. It's also not a stretch, given the trenchant sexism of Islam, to realise in such Islamic societies where women are seen as lesser beings, they are more likely to be sexually assaulted. Rapists don't tend to think much of women. I picked up a copy of The Australian yesterday. Muslims causing havoc in Syria. Muslims causing havoc in southern Russia. A Muslim whinging about being denied an Australian passport by ASIO because of his unsavoury views. Then there was an article on alcohol induced violence that has resulted in the deaths of three men over the Christmas period. They've caught the assailants in each case...two of them, Middle Eastern names, the other African. Then, the paper reports that a new program starts in the Victorian police today, as some of their members racially profile and that's a no-no. Like what? Not enough journalists are making the connect.

Can you give more details please?

Nicole Page wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:10pm:

Then there was an article on alcohol induced violence that has resulted in the deaths of three men over the Christmas period. They've caught the assailants in each case...two of them, Middle Eastern names, the other African. Then, the paper reports that a new program starts in the Victorian police today, as some of their members racially profile and that's a no-no. Like what? Not enough journalists are making the connect.

Is this a joke?  firstly, your logic is flawed that middle eastern names are automatically Muslim.  There are more Muslims in Asian countries that in the Middle East but I'm sure you don't automatically think Muslim when you see an Asian name.

Secondly, as Gandalf pointed out, alcohol fueled misbehavior is hardly something that Muslims have the upper hand in, as new years celebrations recently showed.

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

Stratos wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 10:08am:

Is this a joke?  firstly, your logic is flawed that middle eastern names are automatically Muslim.  There are more Muslims in Asian countries that in the Middle East but I'm sure you don't automatically think Muslim when you see an Asian name.

Typical. Stratos I bet you're one of those do-gooders who rail against honest Australians and their God-given right to racially profile right?  >:(

I mean about the Australian Muslims being denied passports because they are terrorists. Do you mind if I start a new thread on that?

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 10:57am:

I mean about the Australian Muslims being denied passports because they are terrorists. Do you mind if I start a new thread on that?

I get the feeling that would be a very short thread

I tried to split that post in the new ASIO thread I just made, but it turned up as a nonsense post with my email address  :P I am unable to delete the post - but thankfully I could edit out my email address.

looks like a bug in the split facility...

Anyway, all these related topics can go in the one ASIO thread.

A post has gone missing where you linked to an article about Muslims not being allowed to travel.

I removed the buggy post.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 11:13am:

A post has gone missing where you linked to an article about Muslims not being allowed to travel.

THAT was the buggy post! I split it into the new ASIO thread and it turned up as that buggy post. Now the real post has presumably disappeared forever  :(

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 10:00am:

Nicole Page wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:10pm: It's absolutely amazing to read some of the contortions on this thread. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can deduce that if a woman is jailed for being raped, she would be very unlikely to report same. It's also not a stretch, given the trenchant sexism of Islam, to realise in such Islamic societies where women are seen as lesser beings, they are more likely to be sexually assaulted. Rapists don't tend to think much of women. I picked up a copy of The Australian yesterday. Muslims causing havoc in Syria. Muslims causing havoc in southern Russia. A Muslim whinging about being denied an Australian passport by ASIO because of his unsavoury views. Then there was an article on alcohol induced violence that has resulted in the deaths of three men over the Christmas period. They've caught the assailants in each case...two of them, Middle Eastern names, the other African. Then, the paper reports that a new program starts in the Victorian police today, as some of their members racially profile and that's a no-no. Like what? Not enough journalists are making the connect. Can you give more details please?

Sorry FD I can't. It was in The Australian two days ago.