Interesting episode with Maajid Nawaz joins Rebecca Weisser, John Stanley and Sara Saleh.

How big anidiot is Sara Saleh. She really thinks that Muslims wanting religious theocracy in Australia is just another opinion that should be respected. Yup great. Was great to see  Rebecca Weisser put her in her place by saying that support for secular democracy should be unconditional by any immigrants.

Perhaps we should also consider Nazism. It would be disrespectful not to. Back in the golden age, they had wonderful railways.

GordyL wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:07am:

Interesting episode with Maajid Nawaz joins Rebecca Weisser, John Stanley and Sara Saleh. How big anidiot is Sara Saleh. She really thinks that Muslims wanting religious theocracy in Australia is just another opinion that should be respected. Yup great. Was great to see  Rebecca Weisser put her in her place by saying that support for secular democracy should be unconditional by any immigrants.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-25/the-drum-monday-january-25/7113980

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-25/the-reformation-of-maajid-nawaz/7113994


Google;
site:http://www.jihadwatch.org/ Maajid Nawaz, reform

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 9:10am:

Perhaps we should also consider Nazism..

We do. We belong to a site with a core group of Nazis. Herbie was once one. Plenty of members here believe in most of the Nazi policies, including liebensraum and the final solution.

So yes, some here do consider Nazism and we’re all most jolly to them. We’d fight to the death for such jollies, no?

Surrender is not an option.

Most boring segment ever.

So tell us about the Nazi love room Karnal.

wally1 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 1:22pm:

Most boring segment ever.

So that's how you shrug off a suggestion of Islamic theocracy . . .a boring segment?
If it was about a Christian theocracy we wouldn't be able to shut you up.

Wally what are you thoughts on Islamic theocracy?

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 2:27pm:

wally1 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 1:22pm: Most boring segment ever. So that's how you shrug off a suggestion of Islamic theocracy . . .a boring segment? If it was about a Christian theocracy we wouldn't be able to shut you up.

Sarah never mentioned she wanted a theocracy in australia

wally1 wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 2:49pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 2:27pm: wally1 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 1:22pm: Most boring segment ever. So that's how you shrug off a suggestion of Islamic theocracy . . .a boring segment? If it was about a Christian theocracy we wouldn't be able to shut you up. Sarah never mentioned she wanted a theocracy in australia

No but she thinks it's a valid view to be respected.

GordyL wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 4:08pm:

wally1 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 2:49pm: bogarde73 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 2:27pm: wally1 wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 1:22pm: Most boring segment ever. So that's how you shrug off a suggestion of Islamic theocracy . . .a boring segment? If it was about a Christian theocracy we wouldn't be able to shut you up. Sarah never mentioned she wanted a theocracy in australia No but she thinks it's a valid view to be respected.

Here's the video
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-25/the-drum-monday-january-25/7113980

I just watched it from beginning to end. Not once did she say that believing in a theocracy is a "valid" view that should be "respected". Not once.

She said:
"You only believe in one way of a government, only a  secularism and no room for a theocracy.. so what I'm trying to say is there doesn't need to be that limitation."

My answer is, sorry lady, but even discussing an Islamic theocracy as a thought experiment in Australia is off the table.

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 2:25pm:

So tell us about the Nazi love room Karnal.

No worries, FD. I’ll show you with an example. Do you agree with Yadda’s final solution for the Muselman? Do you agree with Honky and Homo’s stance on racial iinterbreeding? Do you agree with the old boy’s love of blitzkrieg and his plan to recolonize the tinted races? Do you agree with Herbie’s vision of rounding up every race traitor, in the fullness of time, and putting a bullet in the back of their heads?

You will, of course, refuse to answer. Your evasion of these questions will demonstrate the Nazi within, that Nazi you’ve been so keen to hide since 2007, that you’ve given up all discussion of your own views lest it sneak out.

We miss the 2007 FD, peace be upon him, but I fear we’ve lost him for good.

Still, you’re free to discuss your new views with us here, FD. You will, I can assure you, find us a most sympathetic audience.

Karnal last time you asked if I agreed with someone else's position on an issue, they responded by accusing you of outright lies.


GordyL wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 6:02pm:

She said: "You only believe in one way of a government, only a  secularism and no room for a theocracy.. so what I'm trying to say is there doesn't need to be that limitation." My answer is, sorry lady, but even discussing an Islamic theocracy as a thought experiment in Australia is off the table.

Gandalf were you really so eager to see the good in this fellow Muslim that you didn't pick up on this, despite watching the video specifically for references from her to theocracy?

So you read that question, eh?

I read a lot of your questions Karnal. I am usually glad I didn't bother answering. A yes or no will suffice.

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:

I read a lot of your questions Karnal. I am usually glad I didn't bother answering. A yes or no will suffice.

So you agree with Y that expressing your views will get you into hot water, eh?

That’s sad. You started this board to have interesting chats with us all, not become the new Abu.

You should chat more often, FD. Some of your views show a great deal of insight and curiousity.

And yes, this is a good thing.

freediver wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 7:40pm:

Karnal last time you asked if I agreed with someone else's position on an issue, they responded by accusing you of outright lies. GordyL wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 6:02pm: She said: "You only believe in one way of a government, only a  secularism and no room for a theocracy.. so what I'm trying to say is there doesn't need to be that limitation." My answer is, sorry lady, but even discussing an Islamic theocracy as a thought experiment in Australia is off the table. Gandalf were you really so eager to see the good in this fellow Muslim that you didn't pick up on this, despite watching the video specifically for references from her to theocracy?

Oh I picked up on it FD - I picked up on the fact that this is not her saying, as claimed here, that wanting a theocracy is a "valid view to be respected". Did you also pick up on that? I'm surprised if you didn't - for someone who thinks its the most outrageous misrepresentation to paraphrase the question "do you think we are not even trying to set up democracy in Iraq?" as "do you think we are trying to set up democracy in Iraq" - I thought you might have noticed

In one case (yours), it is saying the exact opposite Gandalf - in the context of quoting written communication from the same thread where it would have actually been easier to quote directly rather than misquote, and where the discussion had focussed on the grammatical issues with what was said.

So tell me, if theocracy is not valid and not worthy of any respect, why would she say there doesn't need to be this limitation that excludes theocracy? In what way is Gordy misrepresenting what was said? Do you think the woman in question would disagree with Gordy's take on the show?

Or do you actually agree with Gordy's interpretation, but you merely wanted to point out that she did not use those two exact words?