I think bill maher is the only leftie who has some real balls and is on the same page with me about islam.

The Political left and Islam

Lines up with the political right and stupidity.

the last 30 years over 90% of global terrorist activity has been committed by many, many Islamic based groups around the world

The IRA Islamic fundamentalists ??? ======= NO

The IRA global terrorists ??? ======== No

Stryder, ill tell you something about media services and governments in Australia. The real deceit is not their agenda. The real deceit is that they claim to be about democracy, freedom and Australian values while working to divide this country. Thats why to even question multicuralism and the truth about islam makes you a racist. Even worse are the brainwashed lefties that fight their causes for them.

Dnarever wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 4:13pm:



Stupidity seems to thrive alot on the left, you should know that DNA, 

True Colours wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:




But true colours the left have really shown there true colours that they are absolute cowards and so contradictive on it, that you see the scum and stupidty of the left so bright

The thing that lefties dont understand. Every race and culture hates traitors.

Well that is the case. The only problem is backing out sharia law before we all get strung up for not following a pedo.

stryder wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:


What a load of crap.

Isnt it funny how muslims get sniffy when people dont tiptoe around their medieval religion as the socialist criminals have been conditioned to do. At least its better than terrorism.

Frances wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 11:26pm:



How so ??,  there is enough evidence to suggest that it is sooo, i mean lefties have so much courage attacking a religion that doesnt fight back, but with Islam what a deafening silence except that american comedian bill maher the only leftie i know who sticks to principles that lefties very often fail to do


Bill maher attacks christianity alot, but a least he also attacks and gives Islam a good serve as well fearlessly, which why i respect him at of all the lefties at least he tries not to be contradictive and a hypocrite like the rest of you lefties are with islam

Check out this, bill maher and richard dawkins two lefties themselves explaining why the left wont confront Islam.

hazy123 wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 7:43pm:



No it doesn't.

I am no racist.

People who call me [and people like me] 'racist' - ARE THEMSELVES BIGOTS.

Bigots are people who want to have control over the [local] political agenda/discourse, exclusively.

- to the extent that such people [the intellectual fascists] will denigrate others - whenever others verbalise [make known] an opinion [i.e. a political opinion] that does not align with their own opinion(s).




and they are people who - demonstrably - have no viable counter-argument(s) that they can present.

So because their counter-argument(s)/position is so, so weak, their only viable option is to seek to gag the views of those who present views which do not align with their own views.

who seek to crush the expression of any views which they do not agree with.







Quote:

Frances wrote on May 16^th, 2014 at 11:26pm:



Read it again, Frances.

Yadda wrote on May 17^th, 2014 at 2:38pm:


I did, and I still think it's crap.

stryder wrote on May 17^th, 2014 at 10:19am:

I'm afraid I can't see where members of the political left as a whole do this sort of thing.  I would suggest that the few that do it (other than that vile thing, Bill Maher, who does it for money) do it from the standpoint of Atheism rather than as a result of their political views.

Frances wrote on May 17^th, 2014 at 10:56pm:



Then you are as blind as bat, or you simply choose to be blind, most of the political left like to criticise christianity, whether it is from a atheist standpoint, historical or secular reasons it has been going for a long while.

Frances wrote on May 17^th, 2014 at 10:56pm:



But their brave transgressive, liberating instinct stops when it comes to Islam - they are afraid, like everyone else, of having their heads kicked in or worse by the excitable and unaccomodating Muslims.

For the Left, the Muslims are the new proletariat, the oppressed anti-capitalist masses. That most of them are tinted is a bonus: more opportunities to preen on the moral high ground the better and never mind that come the caliphate, freedoms of every kind will go the way of the Qurayza Jews. The Lefties are not particularly hot for freedom themselves so they don't mind. Islam is the new Soviet for the left, the totalitariansim that has replaced Communism. That it has a race element makes it 'Islamophobic' to argue against. The civil rights movement's sentiments and slogans are coopted into shutting down the discussion on Islam in the West. In the third world they will chop off your head, in the west, they will sue you for their hurt feelings. And nothing is more easily bruised than a Muslim's feelings.

That's why the lefty atheists carry on about Christianity (safe to do) but are silent on Islam (dangerous to do).

Looks like you concur with the old boy, G.

The left like Muslims because they’re tinted.

It is a jolly world, no?

Soren if you seriously believe that only one type of tinted peoples in Australia are singled out for physical attacks and racist intimidation then you really should get out more.

For the violent racists, the hijab is just another racial marker - not a religious one.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 21^st, 2014 at 8:16am:



ANd attack on Muslims in Muslim countries is a .... er..... Islamic issue?

Or is that again a case of Muslims have nuffin' to do wiv Islam?

Or is he saying the curries are loved, admired and left unbashed to save our strength for the Muselman?

What say you, Moslem?

I love the sanctimonious moral standards of the US and their recent Taliban kidnap demand/ransom swap. They've kept Afghani prisoners of war in Guantanamo Bay for the last 13 years - kept off US soil to avoid the US Constitution, and classed as "enemy combatants", a retrospective law designed to kidnap anyone they want on or off a US battlefield.

A US soldier is captured and held by the Taliban and it's an outrage. Fox News must be having a field day in all their Saving Private Ryan glory.

Of course it's all the fault of Islam. The US should be free to capture anyone they choose. How despicable these Muselmen are for daring to say boo.

The price of an Amerikan soldier? Five Taliban soldiers - sorry "enemy combatants".

Islam - ain'tcha sick of it?

Peter Freedman wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2014 at 12:08pm:


The warlike christians are not following Jesus example.
the warlike muslims ARE following mohs example.

And yes, protesting is not as bad as terrorism.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2014 at 1:43pm:




Nah.

When bigots 'Yaddas' see a hijab they see a moslem - no matter the 'tint' of the skin.

And so [or, in any case], 'moslem' is not a race.




But coming back to the wearing of hijab.....

The hijab does, designate a person as a moslem.

And being a 'moslem' designates a person as a follower of ISLAM.

And being a follower of ISLAM does designate a person as a supporter of religious terrorism, religious bigotry, and religious fascism, and religiously justified murder.

Not so ?

Because.......



A moslem is a person who declares;




Dictionary;
Muslim = = a follower of Islam.






e.g.

WHAT IS TERRORISM ?

Dictionary;
terrorist = = a person who uses violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Mohammed is a terrorist, as defined by the Haddith....

Allah's Apostle said,

hadith/bukhari #004.052.220


hadithsunnah/muslim/ #004.1062





WHO IS A MOSLEM ?

ALL MOSLEMS CAN BE CHARACTER-ISED AS 'WANNA BE' MURDERERS [of those persons who resist their will Allah's will] - because ALL moslems do endorse the laws and tenets of ISLAM, which do call for and 'sanctify' such murders.

And for a moslem to condemn or to criticise a fellow moslem for wrongdoing [e.g. LAWLESSNESS, by a 'Western' standard of law], is just not 'Kosher'!!!!

And that is why moslems in the West will do absolutely not one practical thing against an organisation like BOKO HARAM.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4





IN A MOSQUE, IN THE UK, a moslem cleric [i.e. a moslem community leader in the UK] declares that whenever a moslem kills a non-moslem, Allah will be happy,

"What makes Allah happy?
Allah is happy, when kafir get killed."

Please watch this YT...
         goto 4m 30s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZx8cNSC9O0







I could also quote some Koran verses, but you have all seen them before.
[whoops!!!]



"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11


"Fighting [against unbelievers] is prescribed for you, and [if] ye dislike it.....Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
Koran 2.216


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29



Sorry, i couldn't resist posting them.

You'd think gay lefties would protest against Islam considering it's a death sentence in most parts of the Muslim world.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2014 at 4:02pm:



The reflex ambivalence of the Left in all its hideous, studied idiocy.

Sparky wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2014 at 11:30am:


It is indeed baffling that the sandalistas will happily defend a religion and cultures that prove daily they are inimical to those things the luvvies hold dear, gay and female rights to equality.

I put it down to the reflex hatred of the west.

what two? And what muslims?

Despite them both being bat poo crazy would you nominate one over the other as the greater threat to a liberal secular west?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 5^th, 2014 at 1:11pm:


I would.  I choose Islam as being antithetical to liberal secular values

Datalife wrote on Jun 5^th, 2014 at 1:23pm:



And what do you choose Christianity as?

Datalife wrote on Jun 5^th, 2014 at 2:58pm:



The 'secural' is a Christian idea. There is no 'secular' in Islam.

Its reflexive in the west because its true.

Muslims in Australia overwhelmingly belong to 2 or 3 non-white racial groups and are identified in these racial terms - not in terms of their beliefs. And at under 3% of the population they are a minority.

Datalife wrote on Jun 5^th, 2014 at 2:58pm:



Do you feel threatened?

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 9:35am:


Actually, the Enlightenment arose as a critique of Christian beliefs. It has extended throughout the entire world, including Muslim countries.

And liberal secular values have had a great deal of opposition from Christian, Hindu and Muslim quarters. Opposition to secular values is hardly secular.

Better tell Y about the secular West though. He thinks Israel belongs to his very own version of Gud - a god that is only accessible if you follow Y's specific directions.

Spooky, no?

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 2:01pm:


The only majority Hindu and Muslim nation states arose in the 20th century, long after the Enlightenment and its subsequent European revolutions in the mid 19th century.

In Latin Europe, the church got its payback in Spain and Italy under Franco and Mussolini. The protestant countries were different. There, the state (or crown) leads the church. In England, the Queen is the official head of the Church of England. Some Western European states have similar deals with their Lutheran equivalents.

India and the majority Muslim states were established by the European powers using their own constitutional models. With the exception of the Arab monarchies (granted their own tribal political models by Mother to keep them in the fold) and post-Revolution Iran, these countries follow the British or French parliamentary and legal systems.

All states have religious parties - India has been ruled in recent years by the BJP, a Hindu-renaissance party. Religion is a big political magnet in post-colonial societies. However, most countries have kept their secular political models intact. Leaders, whether they're generals or career politicians, must pay constant homage to religious groups to stay in power.

People I've talked to in India understand this process. They simply call it "politics" - the standard response to most religious conflict in India. There is, of course, no organised movement to end secular government in India, as there is in Pakistan - unless you include Maoist rebels.

Does this help to answer your question?

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 3:57pm:


I'm confused, FD - is there an answer you'd like me to say? You tell me what you want to read and I'll cut and paste it.

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 4:53pm:


No worries.

I think that Christianity is inherently more open to the separation of church and state than Islam, due to ideological differences.

It looks a bit light though. Don't you think we should add anything?

Mattywisk wrote on Jun 6^th, 2014 at 10:41pm:

Luke 20:25

Soren wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 12:14pm:



REALLY ? Lets take alook shall we.

New International Version
He said to them, "Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

New Living Translation
"Well then," he said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."

English Standard Version
He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

New American Standard Bible
And He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

King James Bible
And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
"Well then," He told them, "give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's."

International Standard Version
So he told them, "Then give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

NET Bible
So he said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Yeshua said to them, “Give therefore to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.”

GOD'S WORD® Translation
He said to them, "Well, then give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, and give God what belongs to God."

Jubilee Bible 2000
And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's.

King James 2000 Bible
And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's.

American King James Version
And he said to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and to God the things which be God's.

American Standard Version
And he said unto them, Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And he said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's: and to God the things that are God's.

Darby Bible Translation
And he said to them, Pay therefore what is Caesar's to Caesar, and what is God's to God.

English Revised Version
And he said unto them, Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

Webster's Bible Translation
And he said to them, Render therefore to Cesar the things which are Cesar's, and to God the things which are God's.

Weymouth New Testament
"Pay therefore," He replied, "what is Caesar's to Caesar--and what is God's to God."

World English Bible
He said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Young's Literal Translation
and he said to them, 'Give back, therefore, the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God;'


--------------------------------------

Every verse says give back the things that are Gods to God and the things that are Caesars to Caesar.

Not one thing there remotely instructing a separation of Church and State.

Do enlighten me please, and not just a non Christian or Atheistic rant because that is where this little chestnut originated.

freediver wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 3:25pm:


Oh I agree, there is no mandate in Christianity to take total control and rule the earth as you stated there is in islam. The very fact islam is written like that just reeks of it being made up by a man not a god. Where I was coming from with regards to Christianity is that verse was referring to the paying of taxes. When Jesus was asked if they should, he simply looked at the coins and said hey dudes give Caesar what is his and God what is his, as it was just man made metal. They thought he was gonna say no. As His concern and his kingdom are not of this world there is no concern in Christianity to take it over. There is also no mandate not to get involved in government affairs at all either.

Islam is a regime based on one mans ambition to dominate the earth. He even tested out his story about going to the mountain before he came out and said he was visited by an angel. Even the rewards in heaven are something a man would think up not a God. 72 Virgins yeah right. He even copied all the pagan practices at the time because he couldn't invent his own. You would have to be thick to follow it and that's exactly what we have, a lot of thick people hundreds of years later easily influenced and that is a big problem. Just look at their facec in any protest. Incapable of self control.

Once key positions are held in government that will be the end of Australia. There is already one in there with his Quaran.

Mattywisk wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:


OF COURSE Islam is a man-made project. Any Muslim will tell you this.

What religion isn’t?

Jesus was a mystic living under Roman occupation. Of course he didn’t see his teachings as establishing a state.

This, of course, is the very argument put by Jews to dismiss Jesus’ messiah status. The Jews see the messiah as a political ruler who will come to unite the 12 tribes.

That’s right - just like Muhammed.

And yes, politics and the Christian church were originally separated until Christianity became the official religion of Rome, and spread from there. During the dark ages, it was illegal NOT to be Christian. In most parts of Christendom, heathens were put to death and buried in unconsecrated ground. Christians actively went on raiding parties to rape and kill heathens. When they weren’t fighting among themselves, these parties became armies, and the armies became a series of crusades to liberate the Holy Lands from the despicable Muselman.

800 Jews, you say?

I blame Islam.

RR was a great orator.

Mattywisk wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 3:19pm:


caesar is the state
Jesus is stating the state and God are different.

I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to make matty.

You’re addressing a wisk, dear.

Carry on.

BlindFreddy wrote on Jun 12^th, 2014 at 9:01pm:


You seem awfully interested in Matty’s impliment, Freddie.

You’re a bit late though. Matty has left us.

Good find Frank

You have just been awarded a Ban Immunity Free Card.

That Islamists, who are responsible for 86 per cent of terrorism-related deaths in the West since 2000, glorify violence is no revelation. Nor is it news that the far left has long shared that appetite for destruction. From the Russian Zemlya i Volya (“Land and Liberty”) of the 1870s, which exalted “the dagger, the revolver, and dynamite” as “the revolutionist’s most effective means of persuasion”, to today’s Antifa mobs, the lineage is unbroken. Now, as Islamists and the far left converge, their methods are spilling ever more brazenly into Australian streets.

That contagion of rage reflects a deeper transformation. The far left has ceased to be a movement with an encompassing social project; it has become a loose federation of incompatible identity factions, united only by shared hatreds. Having no overarching vision of a better future, its members find common purpose in fury – using vitriol and protest as both the glue that holds their movement together and the fuel that drives its radicalisation, each confrontation testing how far the boundaries can be pushed.

...


Like their Islamist allies, the radicals who dehumanise opponents shun dialogue because it drains the hatred that sustains their politics – and, echoing Lenin’s contempt for “reactionaries”, they believe that “There is only one answer to reaction: smash its face in!”.

The question is why we let them get away with it. There is, they contend, an inalienable “right to protest”. But no such right exists. What the law protects is the right of peaceful assembly – a right that, since its initial development in the 19th century, has always been subject to stringent limits designed to prevent disorder and safeguard the public.

So when the Free Palestine Coalition claims that “police denied thousands the right to protest”, what it is really seeking is the right to deny the rights of others, suppressing their freedoms of peaceful assembly, association and expression. Since October 7, that has been the method of Islamists and their leftist fellow travellers: threats, intimidation and disruption deployed not to defend liberty but to extinguish it.

Yet a free society is under no obligation to tolerate the intolerant, still less to bow to their ultimatums.

Henry Ergas

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 27^th, 2025 at 1:40pm:



https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1702644867

Quote:


Will Brian get banned?
Tune in for the next exciting episode.
JaSin will probably forgive him.   

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 27^th, 2025 at 1:40pm:



He told no lies, liar.




A SCATHING review of Labor's troubled National Broadband Network rollout has found that the project would take three years longer to complete than promised while costing $29 billion more.

Cultural problems within NBN Co have also been identified, with unhappy staff, blame-shifting, soft hiring processes and mistrust in leadership hindering the rollout.







Why are you posting on MRBs where you are banned?


Do you have ANYTHING relevant to say on the topic of this discussion?

Black working class guy confronts Islam. Modelling the correct response for spineless whiteys  to respond to Islam.

https://x.com/DaveAtherton20/status/1982708553136693642

Bobby. wrote on Oct 27^th, 2025 at 1:46pm:


Brian should be banned for violating forum rules.

Jasin shouldn't forgive him!