The Prog left have always sneered derided and lied.  Ridiculing and harassing those who dissent from their "enlightened" pov.

Quote:

pt1

The Left have never been anything but deluded opportunists, always in search of something to destroy.

It's no accident they entered the Nazi-Soviet pact and now are in pact with Islamists. They spawned the Red Brigades and the PLO. Nothing is beyond the pale for them as long as it is the enemy of liberal democracy, the true Great Satan to the ProRegressive Left and to Islamists everywhere.

You always miss the point karnal. 
You'd almost think you were doing it on purpose.

Oh well at least there one less lefty in the Senate for a short while.

Wassup bwian, you're laying on the sanctimonious bullsh a bit thick even for you eh.

How about debating some real facts and stop ignoring and avoiding reality for a change?

Looks to me like all you are good for these days is TROLLING and FLAMING.

I am glad to see that there are still a few journalists who don't chant the acceptance of Islam as a religion of peace.  There are some extremely important points in this article. But defense of Islam in the West is not exactly a leftist point of view. Its a form of denial from anyone who cannot bear to recognise that Islam is not a culture which wants multiculturalism. Multiculturalism requires a central umbrella philosophy, in our case, democratic secular pluralism. This is the antithesis of Islam. 

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 5:11pm:

Caution! Virtue signalling and moral preening above.

The Lefty looneys were poo-pooing the wall Israel had to build to defend itself against Muslim terror.
And then came the anti-Muslim barriers all over the West:

Denmark:



Canada


Australia





The West should have all those bollards and barriers and walls at the border. But (completely misplaced and baseless) Western guilt is too powerful a seduction for Lefty looneys.

Frank wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 6:56pm:



were they? were you asleep at the time that happened?

Frank wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 9:16pm:


Islamists do not strike out of no where, Soren.  Islamists take a long road to the point where they are willing to commit violence.    More often than not, it is other Muslims, alarmed at the violent and aggressive turn their friends/relatives have taken that report them, as the revelations after Manchest and London showed.  Unfortunately, all too often their reports are ignored by the authorities.   Perhaps instead of blaming the majority of Muslims you need to look closer to home, the authorities who think that no one represents a threat?   Or is that too hard a concept for you to grasp?

As for the barriers, they are intended to stop Extremists from using vehicles to kill people.   They are not intended to stop individuals.   I suppose, you'd just like to declare that no Muslims are allowed to drive anywhere, now wouldn't you?

Your Islamophobia is sickening, Soren.  Seek help.   

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 9:34pm:


Yes.  Islamophobia blinds people to reality.   

Frank wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 9:44pm:


For some Muslims, without a doubt, Soren.  The overwhelming majority though are peaceful, moderate and well assimilated to Western society.   When you realise that, you may be able to discuss Islamism extremism sensibly but until that time your just spouting the same tired old Islamophobia.  You're wasting my time and everybody else's as well.   

Quote:




Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Soren why do you always resort to ad hominem debate when you're losing the argument?  All that does is confirm that you've lost the argument.   You keep attacking me personally, rather than addressing the points I am making.  It's boring and foolish.  Tsk, tsk.

John Smith wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 7:09pm:


Not at all. He was distracted by the invasion of Iraq. The old boy, you see, had a thing with tinted secular dictators.

He's since changed his mind. Now he's going for bearded numpties.

Always absolutely never ever, innit. They keep you on your toes, no?

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 9:25pm:


So it is the police's fault for not taking Islamism seriously enough?

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 14^th, 2017 at 6:19pm:


You tick all these boxes, with bells on, Bwian:

Allaholic Frenzy. (1) – “Display of highly agitated behaviour, often in a crowd setting. Can be triggered by almost anything that can be interpreted as disrespectful to Islam, esp. cartoon. Frequently seen in Islamic areas such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and England. Patients suffering from Allaholic Frenzy are advised to be cautious when operating machinery or motor vehicles. References. (1). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 6th Edition: DSM-6.”

Alutheran – “A forward-thinking progressive who thinks a man should be judged by the colour of his skin, not the content of their character, and who is thus supercilious and condescending towards an Alt-Racist.”

Faulty-cultural – “A multi-cultural society gone wrong which tends to occur after importing a backward 7th Century culture incompatible with your societal norms.”

Fauxb/Fauxbia/Fauxbic – “The dishonest and slanderous labelling of an individual who publicly questions the narrative imposed by a self-selected moral elite regarding specific favoured groups which share characteristics such as race, gender, sexual preference, religious or cultural belief. e.g. Homofauxbia, Islamofauxbia. The labelled individual is portrayed as suffering from an irrational fear, akin to a dangerous mental illness, of one or more of the favoured groups, thus consciously separating themselves from the societal ‘norm’ and voluntarily surrendering any rights, protections or privileges. This pathologising of dissent is analogous to the historical concept of outlawry, wherein an individual was legally stripped of the rights enjoyed by fellow citizens as the result of an alleged crime committed by the accused. Said outlaw could be ‘hunted’ using means not otherwise permitted by the contemporary legal system. The Post-Rational branding of an individual as a ‘fauxb’ presently submits them for hunting (by any and all persons who express an interest) in a reputational and social sense only, though Self-Elected Retributive Justice Magistrates (SERJMs, or simply RJMs) aim to progress legislation to the point where the hunting of fellow humans is again sanctioned by society as a whole, or its unelected representatives.”


NTDWI – “Nothing to do with Islam: Description of a terrorist attack in which a perp yelling something in that Arabic people frequently say when going about their normal daily business, and brandishing a black flag which has some common Arabic phrases kills a bunch of people.”

Pollicock – “Political correctness” (remembering ‘poppycock’).

Pollikak – “From Collins English Dictionary – C19 from Dutch dialect ‘pappekak’ literally: soft excrement, from ‘pap’ soft + ‘kak’ dung.”

Pregressive – “A self-righteous, soi disant ultra-modern thinker who takes his agricultural beliefs from 10,000 BC (pre-farming), social policies from 3000 BC (pre-family groups), marital policies from 1500 BC (pre-Mosaic monogamy), science and technological ideas from 1700 AD (pre-industrial revolution) and economic guidance from 1860 (Marx).

Tollerance – “The heavy monetary and social price Western countries have to pay in order to ‘enjoy’ the ‘benefits’ of multiculturalism.”

Triggs Point – “The realisation that after broadcasting your contempt for someone in the left media for days that you have completely forgotten the facts of the matter.”

Tuppitude – “Sexual intercourse involving sheeple.”

Two-bagger – “Your typical leftist/SJW who is as repulsive in the outside as they are on the inside and thus during tuppitude require two paper bags over the head in case the first one falls off.”

VisOrama – Panoramic Virtue Signalling (anything from the environment to sexuality to electing a black, Marxist homo as president).

Youthajism – “The smug, satisfactory feeling achieved by SJW students as they march, chant and ejaculate meaningless slogans and platitude. Often used as a substitute for the fact that SJWs are largely incapable of getting laid, or if they are then it’s with a two-bagger.”

Zyx – “The politically-correct form of ‘Dude.’ i.e. ‘Zyx, check out the pair on that one!”

Frank wrote on Jul 16^th, 2017 at 3:16pm:


Oh, dear, oh, dearie, me.  Stealing other people's ideas, Soren? Tsk, tsk, plagarism.    

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 16^th, 2017 at 6:44pm:



Get back to us when Muslims or you have decoupled Muslims from Islamic terrorism.

Until then Muslims and you are tainted by Islam.

Do Poms subscribe to an ideology that promotes the murder of non-Poms?

Or are you just trying to equate race and religion again?

freediver wrote on Jul 16^th, 2017 at 9:16pm:


Poms? But, FD, shurely you mean Danes.

Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 16^th, 2017 at 11:24pm:

Typo, pappikak.

The left looks away?

Of course it does.

Leftards are backed into a corner.

Submitting to and excusing muslims' terrorism, rather than questioning and denigrating the cause and motivation (islamic doctrine).

How can people be so sick?

Because an honest investigation into the consolidation of islam and worldwide human rights atrocities, would destroy islam.

The left prefers the blood to flow rather than admit they got it wrong.

It's been done to death.

You must get a kick out of reading the answer.

Here we go again one more time for you.

Jewish doctrine was over 1000 years in the making, it is the works of 48 Prophets and 7 Prophetesses.

Consequently Jewish writings cover many different literary styles and subjects.

The archaic barbarity which reflects society in those days is easily read as belonging to the ancient past, it has no bearing on the modern Jew.

result?

Jews are streets ahead of the muslims in the civilization stakes.

conversely

islamic doctrine is the work of one man, a thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer, muhammad.

It spans a very short period of time historically (a few decades).

It is a collection of extremely faulty plagiarism of Jewish and Christian writings, plus a massive amount of exhortation by muhammad to get muslims to rape torture and kill non believers and corrupt muslims.

Due to its' literary style it is conducive to muslims committing atrocities today, 21st century, 2017.

Result?

Today worldwide muslims / islam is nothing more that a death cult.


There's only one answer to the threat of islamic atrocities in the world today.

A thorough review of the evil in the qur'an, which causes and motivates islamic terrorism.

moses wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 2:16pm:



So, Moses, using your logic, we should question Christianity and it's motivating of Northern Irish Terrorism?  I mean, the PIRA are Catholic, the Ulster Defence Volunteers, Protestant.  Both drawn inspiration from their Christian teachings....   Where does that leave Christianity, Mmmm?  Tsk, tsk, 

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 4:41pm:



So?? Aborigines want to live in an even more ancient past.

And the Jews don't drive trucks into crowds in France or England or Germany for Moses or Abraham, you dullard.

I assume Brian, that you include Bryant as a Christian terrorist?  On what basis?  What ideology was he espousing? How was he radicalised?

Moreover, and this is the kicker, how do luvvie clowns reconcile declaring  that alakbahing cultists have nuffin to do wiv Islam, cos Islam is always puppies noses and rainbows but declare a Christian terrorist based on....

What Brian? 

Thank Christ you ain't managing anything to do with security, you would be spending all the money looking under rocks for Hindus and Buddhists.    

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 5:46pm:

TWO THOUSAND years ago, you stupid, stupid bloody idiot!!!

freediver wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 6:41pm:


You've been shown exactly where it says no such thing, FD. However, the Torah instructs Jews to kill Gentiles, seize their livestock and take their children and wives for slaves.

There is no doctrine of self-defence here, merely the admonition that Jews are God's chosen people.

So why are the Jews not terrorists anymore? To date, neither yourself nor Moses have been able to answer this question, despite claiming that the Koran is the root cause of Muslim terrorism - that, and their subhuman Negroid genes.

A plausible theory.

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 6:05pm:


Nope, don't include Bryant as a Christian Terrorist at all.   Knight, the anti-Abortionist though, was.   

miketrees wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 7:34pm:


As against the Right?  All Brown Skin bad, all white skin, Good?   Tsk, tsk.  It's interesting how the Right always uses "race" as a reason...   

Gordon wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 9:10pm:




Nothing to see here, folks, just move along, move along.  Just Gordon displaying his tired old Islamophobia again.  Tsk, tsk.   

Gordon wrote on Jul 17^th, 2017 at 9:15pm:




Nothing to see here, folks, just move along, move along.  Just Gordon displaying his tired old Islamophobia again.  Tsk, tsk.   

No other religion comes close to Islam in terms of promoting the spread of violence and oppression.

The proof is in the pudding.

Leftards rise in a frenzy of exculpations for global islamic terrorism.

They all prefer the bloodshed death and destruction caused and motivated by islamic doctrine, to a thorough examination of the evil in the qur'an.   

Oh well it'll come as sure as the sun will rise and set.

The world will eventually get sick of the leftard backed islamic atrocities, then turn on the duo of evil (muslims and their apologists).

Frank wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 2:08pm:


Mmm, actually it doesn't.  The link takes you to post 1948 Terrorism by Jews, Soren.   You really need to get a proper browser rather than relying on your phone...  Tsk, tsk, still mistaken.   

The Australian Government web site tells us.

Australian National Security listed terrorist groups

1. Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)

2. Al-Murabitun

3. Al-Qa'ida (AQ)

4. Al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)

5. Al-Qa’ida in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS)

6. Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)

7. Al-Shabaab

8. Ansar al-Islam

9. Boko Haram

10. Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades

11. Hizballah's External Security Organisation (ESO)

12. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan

13. Islamic State

14. Islamic State in Libya (IS-Libya)

15. Islamic State Sinai Province (IS-Sinai)

16. Jabhat al-Nusra

17. Jaish-e-Mohammed

18. Jamiat ul-Ansar (JuA)

19. Jemaah Islamiyah (JI)

20. Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)

21. Lashkar-e Jhangvi

22. Lashkar-e-Tayyiba

23. Palestinian Islamic Jihad

The muzzies seem to be pretty high on the database of listed terrorists by the Australian Government.

Yet the leftards prefer to wallow in the blood of innocent men women and children, rather than admit that islamic doctrine is a global threat right here/right now, the 21st century.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 3:48pm:


What Christian terrorists? What bible motivation? Is there no end to your faux parallels and baseless comparisons?

Tsk tsk tsk oh dearie dearie me bwian.

Just, there's a good coward.  Put some factual meat on those disingenuous bones bwian.
List all those Terrorist attacks, that took place in Australia.
List all those terrorist attacks, you claim re O/S.
Then explain in answer to my other question why have the Jews been able to end and control this behaviour yet Muslims cannot.
Come on bwian surely you need to have some credibility.
No?

Frank wrote on Jul 19^th, 2017 at 10:31am:


Soren, both Islamist and Christian Terrorism are inspired by the wrong interpretations of the religions which underlay them.

Jihad, BTW, means literally "struggle".   It does not mean "Terrorism".   The MSM and lazy fools like yourself have perverted it's meaning in the minds of many people to mean "Terrorism".    Were you aware that the Mujihadeen who fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan were undertaking their own personal Jihads?  "Jihadis" is another perverted word.  A person who takes up arms for religious reasons is referred to in Islamic teachings as a "Mujihadeen". I've known a Muslim woman who's first name was "Jihad".   Given to her by her parents after a difficult delivery which was literally a "struggle".   Jihad can be a physical, a religious or a mental struggle to achieve an objective.   It can be peaceful, sometimes it can be violent, it all depends on the circumstances.   If anything, is similar to the Christian concept of crusade which can be both a personal or an impersonal one.

Knight was inspired by Christianity.  A bad, wrong interpretation of that teaching.   Islamists are inspired by Islam.  A bad, wrong interpretation of that teaching.   See the similarity yet?   

Quote:


Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Nothing to see here, just Soren's tired old ad hominem insults.  Move along folks, move along.   Tsk, tsk.   We always know when you're losing the argument, Soren 'cause you resort to your childish hurling of faeces.   

Grendel wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 3:40pm:

Here you go, chapter 9 uses the term Jihad 8 times, in the context of encouraging Muslims to slaughter the infidel.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 19^th, 2017 at 6:28pm:

Circumstances determined entirely by jihadi standards.

In any case, jihad is about murdering the infidel for Allah, for Allah's glory, for the triumph of Allah. Nothing else.

He has nothing useful or truthful to contribute.

freediver wrote on Jul 19^th, 2017 at 8:06pm:


No they don't, FD.    I've known a Muslim who undertook "Jihad" against an ice-cream company which inadvertently use some italic writing to describe their ice cream which when turned on it's side, resembled Arabic for "Allah".   He wanted them to change it.  No violence, just letter writing.    

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 20^th, 2017 at 6:10pm:


Muhammad would have had them assassinated.

freediver wrote on Jul 20^th, 2017 at 8:44pm:


X 2

freediver wrote on Jul 20^th, 2017 at 8:44pm:



And yet this Muslim did not.  Funny old world, hey, FD?   Your Islamophobia, betrayed by reality, yet again.  Tsk, tsk.   

Islam and its enablers and defenders (Bwian, gandalf, kameel, gweg, Gino, Arsie, Mothra et al) are enemies of free speech as it has been understood in the West since French and American revolutions (that is, since the founding of Australia).

Exhibit No 47,985:

Richard Dawkins is dragged into America’s tedious free-speech war
Douglas Murray    23 July 2017

Richard Dawkins is, by any standards, one of the most famous scientists on the planet. His books have brought writing about science to a world-wide audience. One recognition of this achievement is that just this week his book ‘The Selfish Gene’ was voted the most inspiring science book of all time in a public poll commissioned by the Royal Society.

However it is important that the gentle denizens of a city like Berkeley be prevented from hearing from such a person. There were to have an opportunity next month, when KPFA in Berkeley were due to host an evening centred around Professor Dawkins’s new book ‘Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist'. But people who had booked tickets for this event have just received the following email:

Dear Richard Dawkins event ticket buyers,

We regret to inform you that KPFA has canceled our event with Richard Dawkins. We had booked this event based entirely on his excellent new book on science, when we didn’t know he had offended and hurt – in his tweets and other comments on Islam, so many people.

KPFA does not endorse hurtful speech. While KPFA emphatically supports serious free speech, we do not support abusive speech. We apologize for not having had broader knowledge of Dawkins views much earlier. We also apologize to all those inconvenienced by this cancellation. Your ticket purchases will automatically be refunded by Brown Paper Tickets.
Sincerely,

KPFA Radio 94.1 FM

If I were one of the recipients of such an email I would not just spit on my Brown Paper refund, I would (hoping that Professor Dawkins might forgive the allusion) turn my back on KPFA and Berkeley and shake the dust from my feet.

What is this nonsense? We didn’t know that a distinguished scientist who we are lucky enough to have been hosting has expressed his views on earlier occasions?

We are sorry that one of the world’s most famous atheists turned out to have expressed views on religion?

We are sorry that one of the world’s most famous atheists who we were about to host has when we had assumed he was just a good old blasphemer of Christianity and every religion except Islam? I do sometimes wonder why the Ayatollah’s advance guard in places like Berkeley don’t just move to Qom and be done with it.

Anyhow – for his part Professor Dawkins is well rid of these people. Who would have wanted to have slipped through the modern censor’s net only to find yourself speaking to an audience of bed-wetting nice people who have a problem sitting through any event where they have to listen rather than jabber? People who think they know the difference between ‘serious free speech’ (any speech they themselves might venture to utter) and ‘non-serious free speech’ or ‘abusive speech’ (speech uttered by the rest of the world – because they say so).

As I say, Professor Dawkins is well rid of his ignorant hosts. But does anyone else sense that the territory on which people are allowed to actually speak freely is narrowing these days?
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/richard-dawkins-is-dragged-into-americas-t...

This is a famous example of what is happening on these boards, in Australian and Western  media outlets, workplaces, schools, universities.

Selectively standing up for Islam has become a dishonourable thing, like standing up for Nazi Germany in 1938 and denouncing those who didn't believe the 'peace in our time' bromides then.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 28^th, 2017 at 9:18pm:

You stupid bastard.
You won't  read it because it discredits you and you have no valid arguments to make to counter it.
You are, at once, a cunning fascist and a mindless mong. There are millions of you, stupid besterd. Millions.

In bwian's case, he has his head stuck up his proverbial.
Nothing to see here folks...

Frank wrote on Jul 29^th, 2017 at 10:17am:


jeez what a wanker.

He must get off on mocking tinted people.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 29^th, 2017 at 7:45pm:

Tinted opportunistic wankers are exposed.

Why don't  muslim refugees go to Egypt,  saudi, pakistan, all the other wonderfully islamic countries? Why  are they all leaving the 'islamic lands' and seek 'protection' from the the christian kuffars from their fellow muslims?
And when they are given protection they demand special islamic treatment?

Do explain it, if you can, invader.

Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 29^th, 2017 at 11:59pm:


No matter how many times its pointed out to him, he just keeps bringing it up. Incredible.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30^th, 2017 at 8:26am:



They are not settling them even though they are Muslims. They are keeping them in limbo.

Why don't Somalis go to Egypt and start a new life? Or Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar, Morocco, Tunesia?

Why Europe, US, Australia, full of kuffars? Why?  Why aren't Muslim refugees given a new life in Muslim countries?  THAT is incredible.