Terrorist attacks in Paris | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Terrorist attacks in Paris

Coburgtiger said:
Don't mistake me, ISIS are way more evil than Reclaim Australia, way more insane, cowardly, violent. But they are less powerful, and less immediately dangerous to our society than the values Reclaim Australia represent. In fact, they are essentially doing the same job. ISIS are responsible for some sporadic extremely violent and abhorrent acts. That, in itself, is not causing terror here. The terror is arising from certain political movements here (and in other western countries) stirring up fear, indiscriminate hostility, xenophobia and prejudice.

Good series of posts Coburg and spot on.
 
Coburgtiger said:
Don't mistake me, ISIS are way more evil than Reclaim Australia, way more insane, cowardly, violent. But they are less powerful, and less immediately dangerous to our society than the values Reclaim Australia represent. In fact, they are essentially doing the same job. ISIS are responsible for some sporadic extremely violent and abhorrent acts. That, in itself, is not causing terror here. The terror is arising from certain political movements here (and in other western countries) stirring up fear, indiscriminate hostility, xenophobia and prejudice.

There are posters here who are clearly terrified of ISIS, and as a result, they have become proponents of actions which would act to separate our society, and create a conflict which didn't previously exist. Those messages are inherently dangerous. And the posters here have never had any contact with anything ISIS have ever done. Nor has anyone they know. It's not just ISIS doing the job of terrorisng, it is our political leaders - our recent PM kept talking about "Death Cults who are coming after us" - and parties that are fostering terror.

I guess it depends on what you qualify as destructive. I think fear and prejudice are far more destructive on a global scale than violence in and of itself. Granted, the aim of terrorism is to foster that fear and prejudice. But it's not possible for a terrorist group to do that on it's own. We have to engage them.
I would suggest we don't help the cause.
Thanks. I understand with what you are saying. Dont totally agree with it all but there's levels of interpretation.
 
Sintiger said:
Donald Trump is scary, far more dangerous to the US than ISIS.

The way he talks about Syrian refugees is just plain wrong from a factual point of view. I posted on another thread some weeks ago that the number of refugees who have arrived in the US since 9/11 who have been charged with any offences related to terrorism is zero. There is just no basis in fact that refugees from places like Syria have any propensity for violence against the state whatsoever. In fact they are refugees because they are escaping from ISIS !

I agree with this. Trump is dangerous. As are guys like Bernardi. But it doesn't change my stance on Islam. I don't see how you can call millions of followers lunatics/madmen etc - whole countries practice sharia law as a rule, these countries are not far removed from ISIS in their following of the Quran IMO.
 
millar time said:
I agree with this. Trump is dangerous. As are guys like Bernardi. But it doesn't change my stance on Islam. I don't see how you can call millions of followers lunatics/madmen etc - whole countries practice sharia law as a rule, these countries are not far removed from ISIS in their following of the Quran IMO.

Do you actually have any understanding of Sharia Law? To compare it to IS is just plain wrong, the literal meaning is 'path to be followed', it is based on certain verses in the Koran and has been twisted and contorted to drum up fear. The aspects referring to adultery and hand cutting are not practiced in the vast majority of countries because their is a clause for people to repent - something which is routinely ignored by the media.

Every country has socially regressive laws, sodomy was still banned in 14 states of America until Obama repealed the law 2 years ago, Republicans were outraged and want the ban reinstated. I can guarantee that if a nutcase like Trump gets into power then we will be revisiting a dark place in Christian fundamentalism.
 
bullus_hit said:
Do you actually have any understanding of Sharia Law? To compare it to IS is just plain wrong, the literal meaning is 'path to be followed', it is based on certain verses in the Koran and has been twisted and contorted to drum up fear. The aspects referring to adultery and hand cutting are not practiced in the vast majority of countries because their is a clause for people to repent - something which is routinely ignored by the media.

Every country has socially regressive laws, sodomy was still banned in 14 states of America until Obama repealed the law 2 years ago, Republicans were outraged and want the ban reinstated. I can guarantee that if a nutcase like Trump gets into power then we will be revisiting a dark place in Christian fundamentalism.

You have little understanding if you think the motive is to drum up fear. It's almost condescending the way some on here feel they can speak on behalf of those Muslims that interpret the Quran as they do. And you think it's just nutters that take a literal and extreme view of the Quran? Do you know how many countries practice sharia? Do you know how many Muslims would prefer to live under sharia? Of course that is the choice of these countries but I reckon you pay lip service to their beliefs when you label them Mis-interpreters or nut cases.

As you and sin point out interpretation is the issue. Apparently there are 5 different schools of sharia law and they differ how literally they interpret the texts from which the law is derived. I imagine there would be many Muslim scholars who might object to being called nutters because of how they interpret the Quran.

How much does it impact on my life? Zero other than reinforce my dislike of religion. How much will it impact on my children's life? I hope the same. But there is no way I can guarantee aspects of Islamic life won't be interfering with my children's enjoyment.
 
millar time said:
You have little understanding if you think the motive is to drum up fear. It's almost condescending the way some on here feel they can speak on behalf of those Muslims that interpret the Quran as they do. And you think it's just nutters that take a literal and extreme view of the Quran? Do you know how many countries practice sharia? Do you know how many Muslims would prefer to live under sharia? Of course that is the choice of these countries but I reckon you pay lip service to their beliefs when you label them Mis-interpreters or nut cases.

As you and sin point out interpretation is the issue. Apparently there are 5 different schools of sharia law and they differ how literally they interpret the texts from which the law is derived. I imagine there would be many Muslim scholars who might object to being called nutters because of how they interpret the Quran.

How much does it impact on my life? Zero other than reinforce my dislike of religion. How much will it impact on my children's life? I hope the same. But there is no way I can guarantee aspects of Islamic life won't be interfering with my children's enjoyment.

As I mentioned in the previous post, I am well aware of Sharia Law and the number of countries that have adopted that into everyday life. Where your argument crumbles like a house of cards is the insistence that those countries are akin to Islamic State, it's so incredibly sensationalist that I'm resigned to the fact that your fear of Islam cannot be reconciled. I personally believe church and state should be separate, but the reality is that many countries, whether Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or Jew, have aspects of religious doctrine enshrined in law.

As for your attitude to Islamic life and your kids welfare, I wonder if you would go so far as to tear down a picture of Bachar Houli from your kid's bedroom wall, the mere fact that Bachar has his own football academy for Muslims must make you decidedly uncomfortable.
 
bullus_hit said:
As I mentioned in the previous post, I am well aware of Sharia Law and the number of countries that have adopted that into everyday life. Where your argument crumbles like a house of cards is the insistence that those countries are akin to Islamic State, it's so incredibly sensationalist that I'm resigned to the fact that your fear of Islam cannot be reconciled. I personally believe church and state should be separate, but the reality is that many countries, whether Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or Jew, have aspects of religious doctrine enshrined in law.

As for your attitude to Islamic life and your kids welfare, I wonder if you would go so far as to tear down a picture of Bachar Houli from your kid's bedroom wall, the mere fact that Bachar has his own football academy for Muslims must make you decidedly uncomfortable.

Funny. How you somehow think I have some sort of hatred or distrust of all Muslims? In western countries I have no doubt the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving and law abiding. Bachar is an inspirational figure. It doesn't stop me questioning his beliefs. And, it's likely that it's the influence of men like bachar within the Muslim community that are the best hope for future peace. But when you've got "interpretation" involved of an ancient text I see little hope of that. What I hope for is the emancipation and advancement of women and the education of the youth makes for outright questioning of the religion itself. It's happened in the west and I have no doubt will happen in the east. Will just be painful getting there.

I do take issue with the condescending attitude you and sin have and the apparent judgements about who I am and how I live. I actually think we share many similar values. We do share a love of the only true religion.
 
millar time said:
I do take issue with the condescending attitude you and sin have and the apparent judgements about who I am and how I live. I actually think we share many similar values. We do share a love of the only true religion.
Honestly debate all you want but all anyone can do is judge your opinions and that is all I have done. I can't judge you because I don't know you nor would I presume to judge how you live.

We all have to have a somewhat thick skin in these debates and move on.
 
We sure are worried as a society of offending a bunch of peaceful moderates! All the hard questions should be asked without fear or favour.
 
Djevv said:
We sure are worried as a society of offending a bunch of peaceful moderates! All the hard questions should be asked without fear or favour.

It will happen I have no doubt. Some brutal honesty required rather than defensive denials. The Catholic Church has had and is going through a painful transformation. Will happen with Islam.
 
Djevv said:
We sure are worried as a society of offending a bunch of peaceful moderates! All the hard questions should be asked without fear or favour.

You might need to explain these hard questions, people like Abbott and Trump seem to be very vocal about such issues. Is this the direction we should be taking?
 
Abbott and Trump.

Strange co-incidence that they make Pauline Hanson and Sarah Palin look like better candidates.
 
bullus_hit said:
You might need to explain these hard questions, people like Abbott and Trump seem to be very vocal about such issues. Is this the direction we should be taking?

Trump has gone too far: freedom of association and freedom of religion are core values of the U.S. Constitution. But Abbots comments are fair enough. Although most Muslims are moderates there is a large minority who will support violence if their faith is questioned or mocked - even gently. This is not acceptable.

Why do so many Muslim women wear this Hijab or Niqab in modern western society? Why is female circumcision still practiced? What should happen to a Muslim that leaves the faith? Are you OK with your daughter/sister marrying a non-Muslim? Do you believe that domestic violence is OK under any circumstances? Do you believe that suicide bombers are martyrs for the faith? Etc.
 
Djevv said:
Trump has gone too far: freedom of association and freedom of religion are core values of the U.S. Constitution. But Abbots comments are fair enough. Although most Muslims are moderates there is a large minority who will support violence if their faith is questioned or mocked - even gently. This is not acceptable.

Why do so many Muslim women wear this Hijab or Niqab in modern western society? Why is female circumcision still practiced? What should happen to a Muslim that leaves the faith? Are you OK with your daughter/sister marrying a non-Muslim? Do you believe that domestic violence is OK under any circumstances? Do you believe that suicide bombers are martyrs for the faith? Etc.

The Hijab is traditional, we could start picking apart the styles of all religions if you want to go down that path, the Burkha which covers the face is rarely seen in Australia or in the West in general. The fact that parliament instituted a ban on this apparel was a classic case of scaremongering - not one person had ever worn it prior, just stupid & divisive politics if you ask me.

Female circumcision is not the sole domain of Muslims, it's practiced by 27 African countries of varying religious persuasions, it's a regional issue and should be tackled accordingly.

If a Muslim leaves the faith there is no punishment prescribed in the Koran, if death is the response then this is a state issue and should be tackled accordingly.

If one of my family members decided to marry a Muslim I would judge the spouse by his actions and not his beliefs, I have spent time in Indonesia for example and found the locals to be friendly and kind-hearted, I also worked very closely with a Bangladeshi gentleman and still consider him to be a close friend.

Domestic violence is not exclusively a Muslim issue, it's a huge issue in Australia yet receives very little coverage because it doesn't sell newspapers. In fact the Abbott government cut funding to many programs which addressed this very issue.

Suicide bombing is a heinous crime and every effort should be made to stamp it out, however we need to address the root causes of radicalism without tarnishing all Muslims with the same brush. The best way to police such activities is to get Muslims onside, not to critique their beliefs and claim like Tony Abbott, that my relgion is better than yours. Our Indonesian neighbours have already sounded a clear warning when it comes to such language, it is diplomatically stupid and reeks of attention seeking. If Abbott had the welfare of Australians at heart, he would be trying to unite and not divide. I can see his game from a mile away, he's trying to outdo Turnbull on security issues just in case there's a homegrown attack. He likes to scare us with his 'death cult coming to get us' drivel, he also thinks that carpet bombing Syria is a great idea, just kill everything in sight and the problem will magically disappear. Such actions will only create more martyrs for IS, Abbott is a simpleton who needs to be banished for good.
 
Djevv said:
Trump has gone too far: freedom of association and freedom of religion are core values of the U.S. Constitution. But Abbots comments are fair enough. Although most Muslims are moderates there is a large minority who will support violence if their faith is questioned or mocked - even gently. This is not acceptable.

Why do so many Muslim women wear this Hijab or Niqab in modern western society? Why is female circumcision still practiced? What should happen to a Muslim that leaves the faith? Are you OK with your daughter/sister marrying a non-Muslim? Do you believe that domestic violence is OK under any circumstances? Do you believe that suicide bombers are martyrs for the faith? Etc.

Unfortunately despite being fair questions bullus response is typical of the denial and deflection type behaviour. It's a small minority (yes in western society but not in Muslim countries) , we've got the same issues, all the Muslims I meet are great people ( why is that a surprise?), etc etc.

And again, his interpretation is completely at odds with the majority of Muslims in Muslim
Majority countries so why he thinks he is some sort of Muslim Scholar is beyond me. He pays lip service to those who have devoted their life to study of the Quran and Islam.

I give ISIS about a decade and Islam about another decade. Like all faiths they'll be redundant by then. Women will change it all.
 
Well Bullus in as much as a Muslim repudiates all of these things I mentioned have no issues with him or her. But as we both know all of the things mentioned are practiced as a religious duty in some quarters of the Islamic faith. And while that is the case I would argue it needs reform. I would also question the wisdom of letting those with such views settle in our country.

Moreover I agree with Abbot that it is no crime to believe that our culture is worthwhile, good and worth preserving. Why would anyone come to settle here who doesn't believe that?

Just in answer to some of your points: I have seen Burkas. To me it looks like the subjugation of women to an excessive degree.
On female circumcision 'Circumcising females is sunnah; it is neither a bad practice or harmful, if it is done within moderation. When extreme forms of female circumcision are carried out, harm may result.' http://islamqa.info/en/1188
Does apostasy carry the death penalty? '(1) This is the ruling of Allaah and His Messenger, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (reported by al-Bukhaari, al-Fath, no. 3017).' http://islamqa.info/en/811
Can your daughter or sister marry a non-Muslim? 'It is not permissible for a Muslim woman to marry a kaafir, and the marriage is not valid' http://islamqa.info/en/118098
Wife beating? 'The hadeeth may be understood as meaning that a man has the right to hit his wife, in a manner that is not harsh and does not cause injury if if there is a reason for that, such as her going against his wishes or disobeying him.

This is like the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“As to those women on whose part you see ill‑conduct, admonish them (first), (next) refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allaah is Ever Most High, Most Great”'http://islamqa.info/en/41199

Suicide bombing is haram (good to hear this!) : 'When there is a legitimate jihad, then he may strive in jihad with the Muslims, and if he is killed, then praise be to Allah. But to kill himself by attaching explosives to himself, so that he is killed with them, this is wrong and is not permissible.' https://islamqa.info/en/217995

Attitude toward non-believers is a bit of a worry. Although enjoined to treat non-believers with mercy and fairness: 'In Islam it is forbidden to love non-Muslims and take them as close friends. Anyone who has common sense can distinguish between kindness, fairness, compassion and mercy, on the one hand, which we have been enjoined to show towards a non-Muslim who is not in a state of war with us, and love on the other hand, which we are not allowed to feel towards disbelievers because of their disbelief in Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and because of their not being Muslims.'
http://islamqa.info/en/128862
 
Again, Djevv, you merely point out that female circumcision occurs in Muslim society and have ignored the cultural pressures placed on females. I abhor the practice but to point the finger at Islam in isolation is to ignore the reality.

"Female Genital Mutilation occurs in non-Muslim societies in Africa and is practiced by Christians, Muslims and Animists alike. In Egypt, where perhaps 97 percent of girls suffer genital mutilation, both Christian Copts and Muslims are complicit. Thus, it has long been concluded to be a cultural practice, not connected to religion."

http://www.stopfgmmideast.org/background/islam-or-culture/

As for the Muslim headwear, I don't agree with Burkas and feel they are counter to our values in Western society, but I also don't see them often enough to start howling down all Muslims for the way they dress. Once again, we are talking about a small minority, to include attacks on the hijab opens a poisonous can of worms. Do we then start banning skull caps, turbans and tunics? If a Muslim female wants to wear a head scarf then that should be her choice, to take away the right is actually counter to our values as a Western society.

I mentioned in my previous post that there is no explicit mention of violence or implicit punishment when it comes to apostasy. Like any religion, abandonment is frowned upon but to suggest it is a sure fire way to execution is wrong, again this is a state issue and if you object to the death penalty in such circumstances then it would pay to cite those regimes living under such a hard line rule. I'm no fan of Saudia Arabia, but that doesn't mean I go tarnishing the reputations of those muslims living in SE Asia for example. Your quote isn't from the Koran, it is an interpretation and is the very attitude that has caused many to flee their homelands. On one hand we admonish groups like the Taliban & IS, we bomb them into submission, we then refuse people asylum in the name of border protection and go so far as to imprison children and women on island detention centres. For people like Tony Abbott to then claim the moral superiority with his belief system is bordering on psychopathic, he has now gone so far as to imprison anyone who dares speak about the systemic cruelty on places like Nauru. The subject of human rights is not one of Abbott's strong points, and that's putting it mildly.

As for the remaining quotes, again these are interpretations, you could get something similar in the rhetoric spouted off by those waving the flag at Reclaim Australia. Domestic violence isn't the sole domain of Muslims, it is almost at epidemic proportions here in Australia. It's the elephant in the room that nobody wants to acknowledge because it sits uncomfortably with the way Australians see themselves as flag bearers of gender equality. Until we clean up our own backyard we have no right to lecture others about treating women with decency and respect.
 
Gibberish of the year contender there bullus

Good article by Peter singer a few months ago

http://m.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20150311000276#jyk