Gweggy is a bit like dog sh!t you inadvertently step in, the stench stays around until you scrape it off and disinfect your boot to destroy the bacteria.

In other words, he's just a f##king bad smell!

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 10:24am:



While everyone cares about just what an enormous unflushable Bondi cigar YOU are. There are more and more threads threads dedicated to pouring cold sick and scorn on you.

You have made it, you are noticed.

Is Islamophobia the driver of ­Islamic terrorism? Some observers think so.

They argue that if only we in the West were nicer to Muslims, if only we didn’t diss their prophet, then angry terrorists wouldn’t shoot us, bomb us, execute ­cartoonists.

Everything from the 7/7 bombings in London to the Paris atrocities last week has been linked to our alleged mistreatment of ­Muslims.

The Guardian newspaper in Britain wonders if French “discrimination against Arabs” may have been a big factor in pushing French youth towards Islamic State.

A writer for The New York Times says feelings of “exclusion and disrespect” among French Muslims is what motored the bloodshed. He says Islamophobia provides “fertile soil” in which “anger (can) grow”. After Paris, he says, France must “openly ­embrace Muslims”.

The Grand Mufti of Australia caused a stink with his claim that there were “causative factors” to the Paris assaults, including the “racism (and) Islamophobia” faced by French Muslims.

In short, we’re nasty to them, that’s why they kill us.

These worriers about Islamophobia always insist they aren’t ­offering a justification for terrorism. But they are.

They imply that murderous ­assaults are at least an understandable response to being disrespected. They provide the Paris nihilists with a posthumous explanation for their barbaric behaviour: “I was treated badly, therefore I killed people.”

The sly justifiers of barbarism have no explanation for why earlier generations that faced far worse discrimination — the blacks of the American south, for example — did not blow up concert halls packed with youths.

But leaving to one side the utter nonsense of linking mass murder with societal disrespect, there’s an bigger problem here. Which is that these observers get things entirely the wrong way around.

It isn’t Islamophobia that alienates Muslim youth and incites in them such a powerful sense of grievance that some of them ­develop violent urges.

No, if anything, it’s the ­obsession with Islamophobia that does this.

Look — the only people responsible for terrorist attacks are the terrorists themselves, not any people or ideas that once may have offended them. These people have free will, and they use it to murder and maim.

The elitist panickers about Islamophobia have been out in force post-Paris.

The bodies were barely cold before these fearers of the masses were predicting a bovine pogrom.

It’s the great irony of the fashionable concern with Islamophobia: it presents itself as a stand against prejudice, yet it’s fuelled by prejudices of its own. It is built on a view of ordinary people as ­irrational, easily switched to ­violence, itching to burn down a mosque.

And like all prejudice, it is largely fact-free: no terror attack has been followed by widespread anti-Muslim violence. Isolated attacks on mosques, yes. A pogrom? No.

In terms of social cohesion, and social peace, the fear of Islamophobia — what we may call Islamophobiaphobia — is a bigger problem than Islamophobia itself.

The Islamophobia industry, funded by officials, uncritically fawned over by much of the media, does two really bad things.

First, it gives Muslims the impression that criticism of their religion is wicked.

Indeed, when the idea of Islamophobia was invented in the 1990s, primarily by aloof think tanks such as the Britain-based Runnymede Trust, the concern was entirely with policing criticism of Islam and shooting down the idea that Western values are ­superior.

Runnymede, whose 20-year-old definition of Islamophobia informs the global debate, said Islamophobic speech included claims that Islam was “inferior to the West”.

It implored the political classes to present Islam as “distinctively different but not deficient”, as being as “equally worthy of respect (as Western values)”.

So from the get-go, the Islamophobia industry was about reprimanding opinion, punishing moral judgment, so that even the belief that Western democratic values trumped Islamic ones came to be pathologised as a phobia.

It was about imposing relativism, not challenging racism.

The Islamophobia industry, and more importantly the late 20th-century creed of relativistic non-judgmentalism that fuels it, makes it harder to do the very thing we must do post-Paris: argue unapologetically for the values of liberty and democracy, for all the good, amazing stuff about Western society, and assert that these things are better than Islamism.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 20^th, 2015 at 5:26pm:



She doesn't care about the likes of me who are unable to flush away the likes of you?  We should have a register for the likes of her.

Melanias purse wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 1:18pm:



Yeah, I passed an enormous one called gweggowy  - or to speak technically, choked an enormous darkie we named gweggowy - and now he cannot be flushed.

You in Pakistan have many such darkies, including your good self - the country is practically awash with them/you - how do you deal with them/you??

Please advise and regards.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 10:55am:



I am trying to flush you, turd.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 6:00pm:

That's why you are the unflushable turd. Geddit??

Gawd you are thick, you are brown and you stink.

Soren wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 6:18pm:


Is it your mission to reply to every single post I make?

Don't you think getting a life would be a better ambition?