http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/television/controversial-antiislamic-activist-ayaan-hirsi-ali-makes-sensational-claim-about-waleed-aly/news-story/e0fa7792c40e7c7249c427582e23b791


Quote:

Talking to Andrew Bolt on Sky News last night, the former Dutch politician said: “If I analysed that kind of language and those arguments I think that he (Waleed Aly) is someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation.

What language, what arguments?

This simply doesn't make sense - nobody who actually has listened to or read Waleed's arguments and language pertaining to Islam and muslims - could possibly accuse him of having any sort of stake with a  "Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation". I can't think of an aussie muslims who has been more dedicated to appealing to common ground between muslims and non-muslims and building bridges.

I frankly expected more from Hirsi Ali, this is below the belt, and she should be above such trash talk.

No surprise to me Gandalf.

boges - you're right in the sense its no surprise at all that the anti-Islam outrage machine would target a much loved, prominent, successful and decidedly uncontroversial muslim with baseless slurs - in a desperate attempt to manufacture controversy against him.

Whats really sad here is it exposes Hirsi Ali's theme about muslims needing to reform themselves - as a complete ruse. I can't think of an Aussie muslims who has been more at the forefront with regards to calling out backward Islamic behaviour, condemning muslims behaving badly, and yes, the need for muslims to reform. But of course, because he is so popular on both sides - cheering him on won't drive the wedge in Australian society that she is trying so hard to do.

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled is in league with extremists when the converse is evidently true clearly exposes that.

It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 3:33pm:

boges - you're right in the sense its no surprise at all that the anti-Islam outrage machine would target a much loved, prominent, successful and decidedly uncontroversial muslim with baseless slurs - in a desperate attempt to manufacture controversy against him. Whats really sad here is it exposes Hirsi Ali's theme about muslims needing to reform themselves - as a complete ruse. I can't think of an Aussie muslims who has been more at the forefront with regards to calling out backward Islamic behaviour, condemning muslims behaving badly, and yes, the need for muslims to reform. But of course, because he is so popular on both sides - cheering him on won't drive the wedge in Australian society that she is trying so hard to do.

well as you can see by your very reaction..

she is wrong  automatically 

Waleed is all good...

we get that from you gandy.....anyone says anything negative about Muslims is

anti muslim..

couldnt possibly have any truth attached to it..

do you know this person?

do you personally know Waleed??

no of course you dont...only what you read....

or what waleed is very careful to say on the Project..

I read today where a community is against an Islamic school being built in their neighbourhood...[what else is new]..... they said many Muslims were moving into their area to get away from main stream Islam.. they want to blend in with Australians and their kids to go to Public schools...

whats wrong with that idea Gandy  is that anti Muslim of them to feel like that?..


is it not something we aussies should encourage????>.

I am a great believer in

when in Rome do as the Romans do..

I think we should encourage them to accept what this country is about....believe in your god by all means....

but cultural beliefs that are unlawful in our country .. have to be left at the gate..

do not take us or our laws  for granted......


thats what puts my back up..

and that doesnt just go for Muslims...its anyone that comes here and abuses us..or our way of life.

mothra wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled is in league with extremists when the converse is evidently true clearly exposes that. It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to.

who would you have rather she spoke too?..


lets be fair!  he may have been the only one interested in talking to her.. ::)

mothra wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled is in league with extremists when the converse is evidently true clearly exposes that. It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to.

It all just depends on what is the definition of an extremist.

I call the Imams in the major mosques who spread Saudi style puritanical garbage extremists.

mothra wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda.

Did you expect an ex muslim who has suffered Female Genital Mutilation to praise Islam considering the numerous death threats she receives from muslims who you support?

Does Richard Dawkins have a toxic agenda or is that a tag that only applies to ex muslims?

cods wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:51pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 7th, 2017 at 3:33pm: boges - you're right in the sense its no surprise at all that the anti-Islam outrage machine would target a much loved, prominent, successful and decidedly uncontroversial muslim with baseless slurs - in a desperate attempt to manufacture controversy against him. Whats really sad here is it exposes Hirsi Ali's theme about muslims needing to reform themselves - as a complete ruse. I can't think of an Aussie muslims who has been more at the forefront with regards to calling out backward Islamic behaviour, condemning muslims behaving badly, and yes, the need for muslims to reform. But of course, because he is so popular on both sides - cheering him on won't drive the wedge in Australian society that she is trying so hard to do. well as you can see by your very reaction.. she is wrong  automatically  Waleed is all good... we get that from you gandy.....anyone says anything negative about Muslims is anti muslim.. couldnt possibly have any truth attached to it.. do you know this person? do you personally know Waleed?? no of course you dont...only what you read.... or what waleed is very careful to say on the Project.. I read today where a community is against an Islamic school being built in their neighbourhood...[what else is new]..... they said many Muslims were moving into their area to get away from main stream Islam.. they want to blend in with Australians and their kids to go to Public schools... whats wrong with that idea Gandy  is that anti Muslim of them to feel like that?.. is it not something we aussies should encourage????>. I am a great believer in when in Rome do as the Romans do.. I think we should encourage them to accept what this country is about....believe in your god by all means.... but cultural beliefs that are unlawful in our country .. have to be left at the gate.. do not take us or our laws  for granted...... thats what puts my back up.. and that doesnt just go for Muslims...its anyone that comes here and abuses us..or our way of life.

do you personally know Waleed??

No? then STFU

bogarde73 wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 3:22pm:

No surprise to me Gandalf.

nor to me.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 3:15pm:

This simply doesn't make sense - nobody who actually has listened to or read Waleed's arguments and language pertaining to Islam and muslims - could possibly accuse him of having any sort of stake with a  "Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation". I can't think of an aussie muslims who has been more dedicated to appealing to common ground between muslims and non-muslims and building bridges. I frankly expected more from Hirsi Ali, this is below the belt, and she should be above such trash talk.

A "Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" is a Sunni moslem militant group.

A "Hezbollah-type of organisation" is a Shia counterpart, moslem militant group.




Waleed Aly.     ?

What complexion of moslem would Waleed Aly be gandalf ?

Oh yeah, Waleed Aly would be one of those [my wife should wear an ISLAMIC headscarf], but i'm a secular loving Shia moslem.  Honest!



"We Shia moslems love infidels and we love secular life in Australia. Honest.      Coz we Shia, are the moslems who love infidelity.    Honest."
- Waleed Aly - not really

No ?

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 3:15pm:

This simply doesn't make sense - nobody who actually has listened to or read Waleed's arguments and language pertaining to Islam and muslims - could possibly accuse him of having any sort of stake with a  "Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation". I can't think of an aussie muslims who has been more dedicated to appealing to common ground between muslims and non-muslims and building bridges. I frankly expected more from Hirsi Ali, this is below the belt, and she should be above such trash talk.

Moslems like gandalf and Waleed Aly,         would try to convince us, that Shia ISLAM, is the more civilised and tolerant expression of ISLAM.

Be warned, there is no 'moderate' expression of ISLAM.




IMAGE.....
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/pics/2419.jpg

Sina Dehghan, 21, was arrested by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) when he was 19 for "insulting Islam". Charges were brought against him for insulting the Prophet Muhammad on the messaging app LINE.

"During his interrogation, Sina was told that if he signed a confession and repented, he would be pardoned and let go," said the source in an interview with CHRI on March 21, 2017. "Unfortunately, he made a childish decision and accepted the charges. Then they sentenced him to death." "Later he admitted that he signed the confession hoping to get freed," said the source. "Apparently the authorities also got him to confess in front of a camera as well."




Sentenced to Death for "Insulting Islam"
by Majid Rafizadeh
April 7, 2017
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10170/iran-insulting-islam



Quote:

When the Islamists gain power, they immediately create their own "judiciary system" in order to "legitimize" their implementation of sharia law. In fact, the judiciary system is used less as a tool for bringing people to justice, and more as a tool to suppress freedom of speech and of the press. ......For the Islamists, once you submit to their religion, your freedom of speech and of the press belong to Allah. Your only job is to exercise silence and obedience, and follow your religious leader, imam, sheikh, or velayat-e faqih ("guardianship of the Islamic jurist").

QUESTION;

Waleed Aly, for president, of the Australian Republic ???

mothra wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled is in league with extremists when the converse is evidently true clearly exposes that. It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to.

This sounds like Gandalf's BS. Can you quote her?

https://s25.postimg.org/vh1oqhzb3/17759686_10210191098626926_8136020822186534842_n.jpg

Camel shagging piece of sh!t!

A Muslim leader whose group planned to rally 5000 protesters outside a talk by anti-Islam activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the basis that she "condones violence and radicalises people" has previously met with a radical sheikh who promoted suicide bombing.


What did he say about Hirsi Ali?
"She shouldn't need to cancel her tour to Australia rather Australian immigration must ban her from entering Australia as she is an extremist who condones violence and radicalises people".

It is now people like Hirsi Ali who radicalise and condone violence, not the Muslims who actually radicalise and carry out the violence.

Unbelievable hypocrisy and double-speak. No wonder Muslims are simply not believed and not trusted.


Also listen to the initiator of that petition being as two-faced as gandalf, insisting that preventing Hirsi ALi from speaking in Australia is not denying her freedom to speak.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/religionandethicsreport/ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-australian-muslim-women/8418472

When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis.

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 3:07pm:

When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis.

Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that.

But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on.
It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known).

This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees.

And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand.


Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say.

mothra wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:

Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled is in league with extremists when the converse is evidently true clearly exposes that. It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to.

Only according to a pseudo-intellectual leftard apologist like you.

Waleed Ali is also an extremist apologist.

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 3:07pm:

When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis.

Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming.

But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence?

Frank wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 6:54pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that. But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on. It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known). This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees. And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand. Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say.

Oh look - here's the guy who replies "good" to a law to ban long beards and muslim head scarves at the same time he feigns outrage at muslims depriving us of free speech. And now he talks of 'double speak'.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 8:08pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence?

She should come to Australia and explain herself.

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 8:55pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself.

Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them?

So you don't think she should come to Australia?

Was Wally going to be on the show with her?

Oh look FD evading the question.

Do you think she should have substantiated her slur against Waleed? Does she have to be in Australia to do that?

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 9:21pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them?

They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost.

If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour.

This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers.

That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation.

This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed.

What does he get for his views?

Death threats & being called a fake Imam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ

Gnads wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 8:18am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ

 


This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe.

Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation.

Didn't think that all the way through, did you?

freediver wrote on Apr 8^th, 2017 at 10:16am:

mothra wrote on Apr 7th, 2017 at 5:18pm: Hirsi Ali, unfortunately, has a very toxic agenda. Stating categorically that Walled[highlight] is in league with extremists when the converse is [/highlight]evidently true clearly exposes that. It's also telling that she chose Andrew Bolt, of all people, to give an interview to. This sounds like Gandalf's BS. Can you quote her?

apparently not.. ::)


Quote:

Talking to Andrew Bolt on Sky News last night, the former Dutch politician said: “If I analysed that kind of language and those arguments I think that he (Waleed Aly) is someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation.

from the op..


a stake... meaning maybe an interest..

if he is honest... and I assume he is.. he will be on board with everything pertaining to Islam.. not just seeing one side..

I agree if he is saying the majority of Muslims dont hate...

and I believe that... I must believe that...as evil never wins... look at out history..

but in saying that...lets not pretend islam does not have massive problems... :( :(

because it does....being a Londoner... I cannot imagine walking around that town in fear.....and I would imagine anyone who lives here and has watched as their own birth place is blown up....feels the same way...

we are amazingly protected in Australia....

its easy to lose sight of the elephant in the room.....

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 7:39am:

Oh look FD evading the question. Do you think she should have substantiated her slur against Waleed? Does she have to be in Australia to do that?

I don't think there is anything there to substantiate. It is a pretty vague accusation. Put her on the panel with Wally and let them sort it out.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 8:08pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming.

Which, of course, was NOT a bs claim. It was Allah's honest truth -  if there is such a thing.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 9:21pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them?

What 'baseless slur' was that?  Islam motivates Islamic terrorism? Muslims are 100 % of Islamic terrorists? Islam can't be reformed?

WHat slur?

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 8:12pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 6:54pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that. But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on. It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known). This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees. And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand. Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say. Oh look - here's the guy who replies "good" to a law to ban long beards and muslim head scarves at the same time he feigns outrage at muslims depriving us of free speech. And now he talks of 'double speak'.

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

It is identifying and suppressing the enemy.

Knowing the Chinese, you are lucky they didn't decree a shot in the head on the spot for transgressors.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2017 at 8:08pm:

Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming.

Which is not defending them?

mothra wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 10:54am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you?

Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach.

I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation

the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you.

but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines.

The only one being illogical is you.

You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot.

Frank wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 7:57pm:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

This gem really ought to be framed and immortalised as a permanent testament to your rank hypocricy.

Don't you ever lecture muslims about their sinister plots to curb freedom again mmmkay?

Frank wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 7:57pm:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy. Knowing the Chinese, you are lucky they didn't decree a shot in the head on the spot for transgressors.

Gosh FD, looks like you missed this most flagrant attack on freedom. I'm sure it was an innocent oversight.

But now I've brought it to your attention, would you care to offer an opinion on it? What do you think about the sentiment that depriving people of facial hair and headscarves is not depriving people of freedom, and is in fact "identifying and suppressing the enemy"? As someone who spends so much time seeking out and condemning attacks on freedom here, I thought you would pounce on this one - drag the poster through the mud, pin them up in the hall of shame -aka spineless apologetics thread, and harass them endlessly for months.

I think you've got this one figured out all on your own Gandalf.

Gandalf you should work for Qantas .... as a jet engine.

What a whiner ::)

Gnads wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 10:04pm:

mothra wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:54am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you? Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach. I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you. but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines. The only one being illogical is you. You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot.

So when you said (and repeatedly say) "Muslims", you don't mean all of them?

Have you thought of making yourself clearer, lest you misrepresent yourself?

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 6:33am:

Frank wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 7:57pm: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy. Knowing the Chinese, you are lucky they didn't decree a shot in the head on the spot for transgressors. Gosh FD, looks like you missed this most flagrant attack on freedom. I'm sure it was an innocent oversight. But now I've brought it to your attention, would you care to offer an opinion on it? What do you think about the sentiment that depriving people of facial hair and headscarves is not depriving people of freedom, and is in fact "identifying and suppressing the enemy"? As someone who spends so much time seeking out and condemning attacks on freedom here, I thought you would pounce on this one - drag the poster through the mud, pin them up in the hall of shame -aka spineless apologetics thread, and harass them endlessly for months.

Oooh, look, he knows that Islam is the historic enemy of everything Western and Christians as well as Jewish!!

Look, FD, he stated the facts of the last 1400 years!!!! 

Frame that!!!!  He doesn't want the same freedoms afforded to his enemies as he affords his own people!!!!
WOW!!!  How unIslamic!!!!!

mothra wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 10:56am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:04pm: mothra wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:54am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you? Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach. I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you. but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines. The only one being illogical is you. You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot. So when you said (and repeatedly say) "Muslims", you don't mean all of them? Have you thought of making yourself clearer, lest you misrepresent yourself?

So you're so infantile you have to be led by the hand everywhere?

Or is that just another twist in the eel?

Gnads wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 6:38pm:

mothra wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 10:56am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:04pm: mothra wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:54am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you? Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach. I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you. but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines. The only one being illogical is you. You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot. So when you said (and repeatedly say) "Muslims", you don't mean all of them? Have you thought of making yourself clearer, lest you misrepresent yourself? So you're so infantile you have to be led by the hand everywhere? Or is that just another twist in the eel?

Not at all Gnads. It's just that Islamophobes like you are always on about "Muslims this" and "Muslims that" .. like they're, you know, a homogeneous blob.

When you do that, you are tarring all Muslims with the same brush.

Would you like it if i said "men are rapists" because some men rape?

Of course you wouldn't.

So why refer to peaceful, integrated, progressive and moderate Muslims in the same breath you refer to terrorists in? You do it all the time. It's really tedious.

It's an important distinction, don't you know.

Quote:

Not at all Gnads. It's just that Islamophobes like you are always on about "Muslims this" and "Muslims that" .. like they're, you know, a homogeneous blob.

Gandalf likes to argue that one of the large groups of Jews slaughtered by Muhammad was literally a mindless collective of treacherous warriors out to commit genocide against Muslims.

All lies, of course.

mothra wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 9:26pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 6:38pm: mothra wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 10:56am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:04pm: mothra wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:54am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you? Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach. I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you. but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines. The only one being illogical is you. You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot. So when you said (and repeatedly say) "Muslims", you don't mean all of them? Have you thought of making yourself clearer, lest you misrepresent yourself? So you're so infantile you have to be led by the hand everywhere? Or is that just another twist in the eel? Not at all Gnads. It's just that Islamophobes like you are always on about "Muslims this" and "Muslims that" .. like they're, you know, a homogeneous blob. When you do that, you are tarring all Muslims with the same brush. Would you like it if i said "men are rapists" because some men rape? Of course you wouldn't. So why refer to peaceful, integrated, progressive and moderate Muslims in the same breath you refer to terrorists in? You do it all the time. It's really tedious. It's an important distinction, don't you know.

I'll give you a hint at what's really tedious ::)

Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2017 at 7:43am:

mothra wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 9:26pm: Gnads wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 6:38pm: mothra wrote on Apr 11th, 2017 at 10:56am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:04pm: mothra wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 10:54am: Gnads wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 8:18am: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 9:21pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:55pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:08pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Try quoting what I actually said FD. I didn't defend them - merely refuted your bs claim that they demanded she be banned from coming. But to the topic... FD do you think its acceptable for Hirsi to publicly accuse Waleed of being "someone who has some form of a stake in a Muslim brotherhood-type of organisation" - and not produce any evidence? She should come to Australia and explain herself. Why? She went on Bolt to make her slur without having to physically be here. If she can make baseless slurs on Australians without having to be here, why can't she explain them? They're not Australians .... they're Muslims first & foremost. If they were Australians Hirsi Ali would have completed her tour. This is typical of Muslims & their apologists who want to shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers. That's why we have Muslim MP's advocating for religious vilification legislation. This Sth Australian Imam has spoken out against the extremism in Islam & of those who refuse to respect the law of the land in Australia. He wants Islam reformed. What does he get for his views? Death threats & being called a fake Imam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmcCmjhO8KQ   This is typical of the illogical 'thiinking' of the Islamophobe. Denouncing all Muslims as "unAustralian" and desiring to "shut down any criticism of their religion & it's followers" ... all the while citing a moderate Imam who is clearly not an example of either accusation. Didn't think that all the way through, did you? Listen you gobshyte... how about you practice what you preach. I didn't denounce all Muslims ... the Sheik above is a Muslim ..... him as an example of sensible moderation the groups protesting & calling for Hirsi Ali to be banned from speaking are definite examples of the hypocrisy across the majority of Muslims ... extremists & those that call themselves moderates ... or are called moderate by apologists like you. but at least Tawrhidi is one that talks some sense & believes his faith/ideology should be reformed & is critical of it & it's doctrines. The only one being illogical is you. You're twistier than 2 eels fornicating in a bucket of snot. So when you said (and repeatedly say) "Muslims", you don't mean all of them? Have you thought of making yourself clearer, lest you misrepresent yourself? So you're so infantile you have to be led by the hand everywhere? Or is that just another twist in the eel? Not at all Gnads. It's just that Islamophobes like you are always on about "Muslims this" and "Muslims that" .. like they're, you know, a homogeneous blob. When you do that, you are tarring all Muslims with the same brush. Would you like it if i said "men are rapists" because some men rape? Of course you wouldn't. So why refer to peaceful, integrated, progressive and moderate Muslims in the same breath you refer to terrorists in? You do it all the time. It's really tedious. It's an important distinction, don't you know. I'll give you a hint at what's really tedious ::)

Bored are you?

Perhaps you should evolve past the point of needing to have the blatantly obvious pointed out to you.

Yeah, give that a go.

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 6:33am:

Frank wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 7:57pm: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy. Knowing the Chinese, you are lucky they didn't decree a shot in the head on the spot for transgressors. Gosh FD, looks like you missed this most flagrant attack on freedom. I'm sure it was an innocent oversight. But now I've brought it to your attention, would you care to offer an opinion on it? What do you think about the sentiment that depriving people of facial hair and headscarves is not depriving people of freedom, and is in fact "identifying and suppressing the enemy"? As someone who spends so much time seeking out and condemning attacks on freedom here, I thought you would pounce on this one - drag the poster through the mud, pin them up in the hall of shame -aka spineless apologetics thread, and harass them endlessly for months.

Enemies do not have the same rights as everyone else. Stop the jihad and get back to us about freedom.


You are not free to be an unfettered Islamic supremacist, plotting and carrying out acts of violence in the name of your supremacist ideology (30 thousand and counting in 16 years). Your sharia, your hostility and disdain to your host cultures everywhere, your agitation against every non-Muslim culture and society you find yourselves in is not to be given open slather and unhindered freedom.

Enemies do not have the same freedom as friends.  Stop the jihad, Gandalf. Stop Islamic murders. That's where you should concentrate your energy, not on how to explain away Islamic mayhem, jihad and violence.i

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 10:10pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Apr 7th, 2017 at 3:22pm: No surprise to me Gandalf. nor to me.

Surprise them.

Frank wrote on Apr 10^th, 2017 at 7:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:12pm: Frank wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 6:54pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that. But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on. It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known). This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees. And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand. Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say. Oh look - here's the guy who replies "good" to a law to ban long beards and muslim head scarves at the same time he feigns outrage at muslims depriving us of free speech. And now he talks of 'double speak'. Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy.

Frank, you see, is a liberal.

Freeedom, innit.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2017 at 9:36pm:

Quote: Not at all Gnads. It's just that Islamophobes like you are always on about "Muslims this" and "Muslims that" .. like they're, you know, a homogeneous blob. Gandalf likes to argue that one of the large groups of Jews slaughtered by Muhammad was literally a mindless collective of treacherous warriors out to commit genocide against Muslims. All lies, of course.

Lies?

But, FD, G was quoting you.

Shurely shome mishtake, no?

Mattyfisk wrote on Apr 12^th, 2017 at 8:25pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 7:57pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:12pm: Frank wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 6:54pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that. But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on. It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known). This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees. And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand. Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say. Oh look - here's the guy who replies "good" to a law to ban long beards and muslim head scarves at the same time he feigns outrage at muslims depriving us of free speech. And now he talks of 'double speak'. Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy. Frank, you see, is a liberal. Freeedom, innit.

Are jihadists not the enemy?

Don't be so stupid. We know you are stupid, but just don't be SO stupid.

Frank wrote on Apr 12^th, 2017 at 9:22pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Apr 12th, 2017 at 8:25pm: Frank wrote on Apr 10th, 2017 at 7:57pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 8:12pm: Frank wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 6:54pm: freediver wrote on Apr 9th, 2017 at 3:07pm: When Ali cancelled her trip, Gandalf was in the middle of defending an Australian Muslim Women's group who put together a petition opposing Ali's visit and calling it hate speech. They went on to claim the cancellation was a victory for free speech. That is just the sort of double speak we see from Muslims here on a regular basis. Here and everywhere else. Double speak is simply what the Koran teaches them to practice.  The Koran says everything and the opposite of everything: kill the kuffar, love the kuffar, freedom of religion, kill the apostate, beat your wife - er, sorry, it doesn't actually say the opposite of that. But for most things it says contradictory things because it is a mish-mash of disjointed snippets put together on the basis of the stupidest of organising principles, one that can only ever appeal to illiterate fetishists of text - the length of each hastily and randomly assembled 'book'. The principle of idiocy is piled on, and on and on. It's like haggling in a bazaar, thinking in Koranic terms. Just make sure you repeat endlessly that Allah the unknowable is actually merciful (and never mind how that can be known). This is why Muslims are not trusted - they stand for everything and the opposite of everything, depending on who they are talking to, what's in it for them, etc. Why? because Allah is exactly like that. He will tell you an eternal truth and a lie and you will never ever know which one is which. All the while remaining totally inscrutable and unknowable, of course, because everything Mohammed COULD misunderstand about Judaism and Christianity, he did misunderstand. He had a knack for the wrong end of every stick he came across. And so have, to this day, his devotees. And so there is no such thing as Islamic morality or ethics - it's forever up to endless and contradictory (of course!) interpretations by some bearded idiots who are supposed to know because they memorised a book in a language they are likely not understand. Friikken MADNESS. But it passes for clever and intellectually satisfying for Muslims. Go figure as our American friends say. Oh look - here's the guy who replies "good" to a law to ban long beards and muslim head scarves at the same time he feigns outrage at muslims depriving us of free speech. And now he talks of 'double speak'. Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. It is identifying and suppressing the enemy. Frank, you see, is a liberal. Freeedom, innit. Are jihadists not the enemy? Don't be so stupid. We know you are stupid, but just don't be SO stupid.

I'm not shure, old boy. Are bearded Lutheran shooters the enemy?

Don't answer that.

Oh look!! another blow for Muslims women's rights!!!! Another non-targeting of writers!!!!


With her book The Veiled Threat dealing with the plight of Muslim women in Europe, former radical feminist Zana Ramadani has kicked the Islamist hornets’ nest in Germany. Being born a Muslim herself, Ramadani is fearful of her life after receiving countless death threats from radical Muslims in Germany. German authorities have not granted her police protection yet.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/04/german-muslim-author-faces-death-threats-after-publishing-book-critical-of-islam/



In Germany. Frikken Muslim monsters, taken in by Germany, are threatening her with death because she no longer likes Islam.

And she is talking about Mothra, too:
“I have problem with certain kind of Feminists,” Ramadani says. “Those who talk about women’s solidarity, but don’t practice it in reality. They only regard White Western male as source of all evil and that he needs to be criticise without any inhibitions, but when it comes to criticising those belonging to other cultures…one automatically gets labelled as racist.”


Mothra, get those Hizbi bints to explain why this is a good thing for Muslim women.