There’s No Erasing Mohammed from the Koran


It is not possible to understand Israel’s demonisation immediately after its people (men, women, children and babies) were savagely butchered, without understanding Islam. It is not possible to understand why the hateful spewing of imams is not roundly condemned by “moderate Muslims’ without understanding Islam. It is not possible to understand the equivocation of many in the media without understanding that they simply don’t understand Islam. Maybe, as atheists, they bucket Christianity, Judaism, Islam and other faiths into the same equally misguided bucket. Islam is not the same.

Israel is in the front line of defence against Islam. Christendom, or the West if you like, lives behind the skirts of Israelis. We better make sure Israel survives and thrives. It’s threatening enough as it is. Take note of the character of the demonstrations in Sydney and Melbourne, and in European and American cities. Take note of the pro-Muslim vote-buying of those on the political left and of the outright pro-Islamic antisemitism of the Greens.

Things aren’t as they were. Without permission, our betters have let millions of Muslims into the West. It’s intellectually lazy to say most are ‘moderate’. Of course they are. So were Persians under the Shah and Turks under Kemal Ataturk. The creed is not moderate. And creeds are powerful moulders of behaviour in the hands of zealots.

You will not have heard the phrase ‘moderate Christians’ to describe Christians who don’t go around threatening others. I wonder why? You will have heard the phrase ‘moderate Muslims’. You will have heard that radical Islam, aka political Islam, aka Islamism, doesn’t represent Islam proper. You will have heard about the Religion of Peace. George W. Bush was quite fond of the expression. I read somewhere that Osama Bin Laden found it ironic that President Bush and other Western leaders characterised Islam as peaceful only after the Twin Towers were brought down. And you most definitely will have heard of ‘Islamophobia’. Which, to interpret, means not appropriately deferring to Muslims or Islam.

A definition of terms is called for. Moderate, in context, means having a tolerant disposition; a live-and-let-live attitude. A Muslim is a follower of Islam. Critically such a follower believes in Allah and that Mohammed was his final and defining prophet; and that the Koran is a compilation of the very (verbatim) words of Allah as told to Mohammed by the Archangel Gabriel.

Like so-called “Christians” who don’t believe in the Trinity, in the crucifixion and in physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, some “Muslims” are not followers of Islam. They are Muslims in name only. And they may, on the whole, be moderate in their outlook on life. Equally, Christians in name only may, on the whole, be moderate in their outlook on life. At this juncture there is no apparent schism. A schism appears when we get to the genuine articles; to actual Muslims and actual Christians. Henceforth, simply Muslims and Christians.

A Christian following the precepts of the Bible cannot be other than moderate. It would be wrong to say that a Muslim cannot be moderate. But the Koran makes it hard. Among moderates are many Muslims who, if they ponder their faith at all, pick the good bits from the Koran and wish away the bad. Others would like to do away with the bad bits. Among the latter are those who believe that Islam is in want of a reformation, apropos 16th century Christianity. Three leading lights of this misconception that come to my mind: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a lapsed Muslim; Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy; and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. None of them appear to understand that the Koran is not reducible. The immutable words of Allah are not the playthings of would-be reformers. Their misconception is compounded by their failure to understand the Protestant Reformation.

The Reformation changed not one word of the Bible, nor did it question the essential elements of the faith: the Trinity, the redemptive crucifixion, the resurrection and its promise. In fact, it doubled down on the Bible. Indulgences, a lucrative money-earner for the church and its pardoners when Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses to the church door, was subtext for achieving redemption by works. Saint Paul makes it abundantly clear that redemption can’t be earned but is gifted, and directly, through faith in Jesus Christ. An important distinction to be sure, but it should not be overstated. Roman Catholicism goes on with its confessionals and the intermediation of saints without disturbance to the essential shared elements of the Christian faith across different denominations.

On the other hand, large swathes of the Koran (and the Sunna – Mohammed’s life, words and actions) would need to be excised, if the creed were to become benign. I covered this fairly comprehensively in a Quadrant article in December 2017, where I wrote: “Islam without Islamism is an unwritten book. If it were ever written – which it won’t be – it would be very short and extremely nondescript.”

Short of an heretical excision of Allah’s very words, what are you to possibly do with passages like these, a small sample (Pickthall translation):

♦ So, choose not friends from among them [disbelievers] … if they turn back to enmity [apostates] then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend or helper from among them (Verse 4:89)

♦ Slay the idolaters wherever ye find them (9.5)

♦ Mohammed is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves (48:29)

♦ I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite their necks and smite of them each finger (8:12)

♦ Fight against those who have been given the scripture as believe not … until they pay the tribute [jizya] readily, being brought low [read dhimmitude] (9:29)

Andrew Bolt, the other evening, showed a video of an Islamic preacher in Sydney referring to Jews as the progeny of apes and pigs. Surely that would bring condemnation of a vast horde of Imams? Hardly. And why? The words of Allah can’t be gainsaid, that’s why. According to the Jewish virtual Library, the “divine punishment of Jews” is included in three Koranic verses:

♦ They are those whom Allah has cast aside and on whom His wrath has fallen and of whom He has made some as apes and swine (5:60)

♦ You have surely known the end of those from amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath, in consequence of which we condemned them: Be ye like apes, despised (2:65)

♦ [And] when, instead of amending, they became more persistent in the pursuit of that which they were forbidden, we condemned them: Be ye as apes, despised (7:166).

Decent people might be puzzled as to why so much hateful speech from the Islamic pulpit goes unchallenged in the Muslim world. It’s not a mystery. If it isn’t in the Koran, it’s in a canonical hadith. As is article 7 of the original Hamas (1988) charter, since sanitized:

The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews. (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).

Compare this, if you will, with the Sermon on the Mount:

But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in Heaven. (Matthew 5:44)

As I recorded in the article to which I referred above, Mark Durie in his book Islam, Human rights and Public Policy refers to a poll taken in Indonesia in 2006 which found that 58 per cent of respondents in this apparently moderate Muslim nation believed that adulterers should be stoned to death. In 2010, Pew Research found that 84 percent of Egyptians, 86 per cent of Jordanians and 76 per cent of Pakistanis favoured death for apostasy.

We have a problem. It’s growing among us, and there is no excuse for not knowing about it. Ayaan Hirsi Ali has written about it; as, among others, have Mark Steyn, Douglas Murray, Irshad Manji, Robert Spencer, Oriana Fallaci, Mark Durie, Michel Houellebecq.

At question is how many Australians of the Muslim faith think of themselves primarily as part of the Umma rather than primarily as Australians.

108 thoughts on “There’s No Erasing Mohammed from the Koran

  • lbloveday says:

    I am at times unsure of what practising Christians mean by “The Bible” (I stopped attending Mass when the Pope started washing the feet of Muslims, something that many Catholics would figuratively give their right arm for).
    The author says “A Christian following the precepts of the Bible cannot be other than moderate”.
    My Bible, titled “Holy Bible”, Authorized King James Version, published by World Bible Publishers and manufactured in Belgium, includes:
    Deuteronomy 20
    13 And when the Lord your God lets you take the city, you must kill all the men in it.
    14 But you may take for yourselves the women, the children, the cattle, and everything else in the city. You may use all these things. The Lord your God has given these things to you.
    1 Samuel 15
    3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
    When I have brought that up, people have said along the lines “That’s the Old Testament. Christians follow Christ’s words in the New Testament”.
    Oh, like Matthew 10?
    [34] Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
    [35] For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
    I guess it depends on what is meant by “the precepts of the Bible”.

    • rosross says:

      That is just so sad.

      “I stopped attending Mass when the Pope started washing the feet of Muslims,”

      The gift of the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus were to see the humanity in all and to be prepared to ‘wash the feet’ of anyone, particularly the outcast and despised.

      I am not a Christian and follow no religion but I have studied Christianity and totally respect the teachings of Jesus as unique in the times and from the look of it, for some, still unique.

      What a horrible world is created in the name of fear and hatred and what beauty can be created in the name of love, forgiveness, compassion and grace.

      • David Isaac says:

        I suspect you are descended from a long line of Christians. Pacifism and kindness work well on the domestic front amongst your own people as long as hard heads and a warlike mien prevail on the frontier.

        • rosross says:

          @David Isaacs,

          I think we are all descended from a long line of religious followers because as you have touched upon, in the past most people belonged to a religion.

          My childhood was nominally Anglican because the local church helped a lot when they discovered we had a sick mother. Grandparents and great-grandparents were a mixed bag of Greek Orthodox, Baptist, Protestant, Lutheran, Catholic, Jewish. Beyond that were Wendish, Scottish Reform, some fundamentalist dabbling, and exploration.

          But I think the importance and influence of Christianity on Western culture has affected all Australians and indeed all Western nations and its general loss is to our detriment. Particularly since a more hardline Biblical Old Testament Christianity seems to have endured while the more enlightened New Testament values are being discarded.

          I fully understand that sometimes strength is required but that does not mean compassion must be absent. And I do not consider hatred of others and demonisation of a group to be strength. It is weakness. If we turn on others then eventually they will turn on us.

          We do not have to like what others believe, or support it but neither do we need to hate them for it.

          Remembering our common humanity is what matters even as we take a stand for the values we believe are important.

    • Peter Smith says:

      Lbloveday, I agree, the Old Testament can be confronting. For example, in the passage from Deuteronomy you quote, God lays down the rules of war to ensure that the Israelites can attain and enjoy the Promised Land in communion with God without idolatrous influences. However, it does not prescribe ongoing war of the Jews on disbelievers. But be that as it may, Jesus came from God to institute a New Jerusalem with loving God and your neighbour at its core. A Christian puts all of the Bible into that perspective. As to the New Testament, you have completely missed the point with your quote from Matthew Ch. 10.
      “[34] Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. [35] For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”
      The word “sword” is a metaphor for division between those whose faith in Jesus Christ will save them and those without faith. And those with and without faith might well be family members. God takes one, the Devil takes the other. You are right though; this Jesus Christ is not for the fainthearted. After all, the Afterlife and saving your soul is serious business. Plain talk is called for and Jesus delivered.
      Finally, the Bible has laid the basis for all that is good in the development of Western civilisation. No accident. No accident also that Islam causes misery wherever it appears. False prophets will arise – aka Mohammed – and you’ll know them by their fruits. Matthew 7:15-16

      • lbloveday says:

        I passed it to my “Bible expert”:
        “Do you take “sword” as he does, or as I did – a weapon of war”?
        I’ll get her answer anon.
        In my first post I used “figuratively” to indicate metaphorical usage. I always take words at face value unless I have strong reason not to, and while I recall Schwarzenegger’s metaphorical reference to a sword as a metaphor for democracy, I’ve not previously seen it used for “division” and on reading Matthew 10 in full I still can’t see it as meaning “division”, although I acknowledge your much greater knowledge of the Bible. Maybe there’s a market for a plain English Bible as without the author, no-one can be certain which is plain English, which is metaphorical…..


        • lbloveday says:

          Her considered reply:
          When Jesus was first born, a prophet spoke these words to Mary his mother:
          Read Luke chapter 2 for the context, but here is the excerpt:
          Jesus’ parents were amazed at what was being said about him. Then Simeon blessed them, and he said to Mary, the baby’s mother, “This child is destined to cause many in Israel to fall, and many others to rise. He has been sent as a sign from God, but many will oppose him. As a result, the deepest thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your very soul.”
          The Holy Scriptures contain layers and layers of meaning – especially when meshing with the life and context of a reader in any given time and place.
          This is because one co-author [the Holy Spirit] can be speaking to a current reader in their heart as they read. The other co-author [the human who put quill to parchment] is not physically present – so we really can’t be certain of their meaning and intent – only make an educated guess!
          The Bible has been used by people throughout history, to their own ends, to justify all kinds of hideous crimes! But that doesn’t make the Bible evil or wrong. It is the heart of the reader that shapes what they do with the words.
          Many swords have been wielded in Jesus’ name. But not all have been endorsed by him.
          I hope you don’t mind that I answer your question so enigmatically.
          All I know for certain is that a sword divides, and a sword is a weapon and tool to carry out an intention.
          Blessings today and always

      • lbloveday says:

        Peter Smith,
        Here’s another interpretation along your line:
        Walter Kaiser, in Hard Sayings of the Bible, wrote:
        “When Jesus said that he had come to bring ‘not peace but a sword,’ he meant that this would be the effect of his coming, not that it was the purpose of his coming.” The metaphor of the sword describes how unbelievers may respond to the gospel, not how we communicate it! As children of God, our purpose is to represent the Prince of Peace, regardless of the effect it has.

    • Michael says:

      Quite a misunderstanding of Matthew 10, which is an invitation to be oneself, an individual, not merely the vessel of one’s parents. The sword is metaphorical, not literal; the enemies are in one’s own household, the peace that Jesus rails against is the harmony of family suffocating the individual personality; the battle is to discover through Jesus one’s own unique individuality.

    • whitelaughter says:

      lbloveday – many (not all) atheists will agree with you about what the Bible says. Neither Christians nor Jews do, because we’ve studied it. The verses you are cherry picking? Refer to one, very specific evil group, who needed to be wiped from the earth. All rabbis agree – the Palestinians are not Amelekites. Hamas are not Amelekites.Yes, they indiscriminately rape and murder, behead babies and film this all to upload onto the web.
      Incredibly evil.
      Still not as bad as the Amelekites.

      And yes, Jesus confirmed our right to self-defence with the order to buy a sword. *Good*.

      Meanwhile, Muslims everywhere agree that the Koran and Hadiths teach killing, raping and taking the property of those you’ve murdered.

  • David Isaac says:

    ‘In 2010, Pew Research found that 84 percent of Egyptians, 86 per cent of Jordanians and 76 per cent of Pakistanis favoured death for apostasy.’

    Religion has a critical political function which we have neglected to our peril in the international realm of Christendom. Formerly church attendance, taking communion, even hanging Christmas decorations as a minimum. were outward signs, if not of faith, then of acknowledgement of a common cause required for civic participation. This was dismantled legally in the mid-nineteenth century but custom and education maintained cultural Christianity for over a century.

    As these overtly Christian rituals have gradually disappeared from most people’s lives and large numbers of non-Europeans, most non- Christian, have joined the polity there is very little connexion left to tie us together. This situation has been wonderfully exploited by the cultural Marxists who have given us the incessant acknowledgements of country, especially from the state bureaucracy and its commercial affiliates in big business. To go with these written and spoken orisons there are two flags, one of which looks quite pretty but represents a set of tiny islands on which a mere 5,000 people live, the other of which, in the colours of the socialist international, represents the struggle to overthrow the historical Australian nation. The effect of this set of rituals and symbols is to demoralise any who have a link to Australia pre-war, the dastardly British colonists.

    But this is a duotheism since we must also worship deviance, a truth celebrated at all times but especially in Pride month and in regional events like the Sydney Mardi Gras, both of which ape Christian themes. Many do not hold yet to these new beliefs but most must kowtow to the nonsensical rituals at least some of the time. Cancellation is already de rigeur for blasphemy perhaps the death penalty is not too far away.

  • rosross says:

    Be careful what you wish for. Demonising any group or religion will deliver division and ultimately violence and is something no democracy should ever do.

    If the hatefest against Muslims were directed against Christians, Jews, Hindus or any other religion there would be outrage.

    Why did we have Nuremberg? Why do we have the ICC in the Hague? Because we once believed it was not enough to simply accuse others of crimes but to hold them to account in a court of law. Justice it was called, a word some can no longer spell.

    Any religion can be cherry-picked for backward and violent teachings. All religions have fanatics but only with Islam do some blame all for the actions of a few.

    How does demonising Muslims, most of whom are moderates, help anyone? History clearly records that such an approach leads to atrocities because it is human nature to quickly decide the object which has become demon is less than human.

    That is the end result of 75 years of demonisation by Israelis, with the support of their so-called friends. Well done to all the haters.

    The real question is, if one were to accept everything said about Muslims as written here and repeated constantly, does that mean others have the right to commit war crimes and human rights atrocities against them? Is that a civilized world? Is that a world where human rights are respected?

    Even if one believes each and every single atrocity story about the Palestinians, does that justify the Israelis committing terrible atrocities in return? I don’t think it does but, if my views are in the minority, do we accept that all principles of human rights, rule of law, democracy, justice and common human decency are binned for future generations? Is that what we want for our children?

    A world which does not respect the innate humanity of everyone is a truly terrible world where might is right, revenge rules and any atrocity can be committed on any group deemed to be other and accordingly demonised.

    This is the way the civilized world ends, with a bang and a whimper in a sea of hatred and blood.

    • Roger Franklin says:

      Let’s also not take a dim view of the Kali cult’s Thuggees. One has to be open-minded, not judgmental, accepting and tolerant in this gorgeous mosaic of a multicultural land.

      • rosross says:

        @Roger Franklin,

        I don’t think there is any doubt humans have committed atrocities throughout history. The Thuggees were hardly unique as criminals who preyed on travellers..

        And while the goal was to eradicate them I don’t believe their families were also targeted. In fact the British subjected them to rule of law and dealt with them in a civilized manner in terms of the values of the times. Between 1826 and 1835, a total of 1562 thugs were tried; 382 sentenced to death, 909 to transportation, 77 to imprisonment for life.

      • lbloveday says:

        Kali is usually depicted as a woman with black skin and a hideous face; covered in blood and wearing a snake skull around her neck or legs and with her tongue hanging out.
        You can pick up a statue on your next trip to Bali.

        • rosross says:


          I lived in India for more than four years, Bombay actually, and know all about Kali. I studied Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism while I lived there. Like all religions most of it is metaphor as opposed to literal. Or rather it should be read as such.

          Kali the great destroyer and source of creativity and life. She is a female version of the Greek God Pluto. Such archetypal energies are often depicted as male or female, depending on the belief system, just as the Moon has been.

          In the same way many Christians believed Hindus had multiple Gods. They do not. They worship various manifestations of one God as indeed primitive peoples did in our distant past.

          The snake is a symbol common to all religions.

    • David Isaac says:

      Nuremberg was victor’s justice as attested by many Americans and Brits, viz Republican Senate Majority Leader Robert Taft, and Frederick P Veale in his ‘Advance to Barbarism’. Not an example to follow if one is interested in the truth.

      • Sindri says:

        “Nuremberg was victor’s justice”. More tripe from this nazi sympathiser “David Isaac”.

        • David Isaac says:

          Tedious ad hominems aside, John F Kennedy in his book ‘Profiles in Courage’, included Senator Taft, who very nearly became president instead of Eisenhower, for standing up for American legal principles which had been flaunted at Nuremberg.

          • Sindri says:

            Nothing to do with ad-hominem. Your posts – particularly the one about the brilliant warlike white folk being under the thumb of the “world controllers” – clearly expose your fondness for infantile but poisonous conspiracy theories about Jews, and other posts expose your admiration for National Socialism. Tripe, that has no place in an intelligent conservative magazine like Quadrant. There are plenty of distasteful websites for people with your views. Please don’t infect this one.

            • David Isaac says:

              As I have said before, anyone who uses the thought-stopping expression ‘conspiracy theory’ does not love the truth. As to whether my comments are intelligent, that’s up to other readers. I think you’ll find I’ve at least done a lot less name-calling and expressed a lot less vitriol than many others here, including you.

              • Sindri says:

                When your views are called out, you put on a cloak of faux-mildness – “gosh, I’m just a seeker after the truth” – in a manner reminiscent of the late Dr Töben. Are you by any chance a refugee from the Adelaide Institute?

              • rosross says:

                @David Isaac,

                Does it mean something that those who resort to ad hominem attacks, personal abuse of the messenger and failing to address the message, are invariably hiding behind fake names while the truth-seekers, of which you are one, use a real name or at least a name which could be real?

                Your informed, reasoned and very sensible posts are valued by some.

                • Sindri says:

                  Truth seekers, Rosross? Did you read his post about the brilliant warlike white folk being under the thumb of the “world controllers”? I’d like to think that someone as smart as you would excise those views from the domain of “truth seeking”.
                  And “David Isaac”? With his views? Come off it.

                  • rosross says:


                    A truthseeker in that he strives for a level of facts and balance instead of emotional opinion. That does not mean everything he says is going to be right. No-one ever gets it all right. Even a great scientist like Einstein was wrong about Quantum Mechanics.

                    As to ‘world controllers’ I have an open mind. I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories but I do hold the view that while many things are unlikely, nothing is impossible. Is it likely there is a group or groups which seek to control the world and work toward that end? It is. Does that mean there is a group doing that? Who knows?

                    All I do know is having read a lot of history and lived in a dozen different countries that it is not actually easy to control humans. A few will be easily brainwashed, some will be manipulated in the name of fear, others influenced because they remain ignorant through choice or chance, but in general a sense of justice and reason abides in all humans and it will emerge in some, perhaps many, in time.

                    It is like the Israel/Palestine issue. And as we saw with the Voice Referendum, the more effort which goes into trying to bully people into taking a certain position, the more some will become curious and do their own research, others will become stubborn and take the opposing view, and few will have their minds changed.

                    The reality is, seeking something positive in a truly ghastly situation in human history, is that Israel has done more in a month to promote global support for a free and independent Palestine and justice for the people whose land it occupies and has colonised than BDS could have achieved in a decade. Every bomb and bullet, every image, reminds the world of the tragedy of Palestine.

                    Videos like that released by Norwegian doctor, Mads Gilbert, who has worked in Gaza over 17 years, now in Shifa Hospital as Israel bombs it, with the screams of the injured behind him, because so many are injured and there are no meds may not move Governments, but they do move people and at the end of the day, the power of the people is the greatest power of all.

                    No-one is going to believe that any atrocities, real or imagined, committed by the Palestinian Resistance /Hamas deserve such suffering for men, women and children who have nowhere to run, inflicted by an all-powerful occupier. No-one of conscience anyway.

                    • Sindri says:

                      “Is it likely there is a group or groups which seek to control the world and work toward that end? It is.”
                      That’s where our opinions diverge, but thanks for explaining your position fully.

      • rosross says:

        @David Isaacs,

        Nuremberg was selective victor’s justice because the Americans quietly took a lot of the cleverest Nazis to safety in the US so they could serve their interests. Operation Paperclip. Ever thus no doubt but hardly true justice.

        • guilfoyle says:

          @rosross- it was revealed in the 1980’s that all the confessions had been obtained by torture. The evidence was ludicrous. One of the judges resigned because he was so disgusted at the way it was conducted.

        • cbattle1 says:

          And Werner von Braun was actually in the SS! Well, to be fair, Himmler took over the Vergeltungswaffen program. The V-waffen were built with slave labour, and they were only effective against large cities, due to the limitations of their accuracy; effective then only against civilian targets. Of course, the Anglo-American bombing campaign killed a lot more civilians, but, that was “good” bombing!

    • Rob H says:

      So people who believe in Democracy should not condemn believers in Nazism, Hitler, Stalin of Mao Tse Tung?

  • rosross says:

    @Peter O’Brien,

    Given your position as articulated here and previously, I have a few questions:

    1. If Islam is the problem why did the Zionists also drive out Christians and why do they discriminate against them as they do Muslims today? Do you think Israel should allow all Christian Palestinians in Gaza to leave and be given safe haven? Or perhaps creating a special status for Palestinian Christians wherever they may be?

    2. If Muslims are the problem and Christians are not, as you argue, do you believe Israel should allow right of return for all Palestinian Christians and offer them citizenship?

    3. If Muslims are the problem as you argue, do you think Australia should ban all Muslim migrants?

    4. Since you foresee future problems do you think Australia should refuse citizenship to current Muslim migrants and send them home and remove citizenship from all Australian Muslims and deport them?

    6. And since what you cite is religious dogma, and a constant, why do you think Muslim migrants in centuries past managed to assimilate into Australian society as well as anyone else?

    In essence, if Muslims are the problem you describe, how is it resolved? And how would such religious discrimination impact our democracy and our society given that some Australian Muslims can trace their ancestry in this country back to the 19th century.

    • Peter Smith says:

      Not sure that Peter O’Brien is on this thread, but apropos your comments rosross:
      If you must contribute repeatedly please don’t confuse Islam with Muslims. It is a category error. Islam is the issue and the problem. As Churchill wrote: “Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world [and] How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog…”
      And, if there were not an endemic problem with Islam why did President el-Sisi of Egypt take his life in his hands in front of senior clerics in 2015 at Al Azhar University in Cairo and talk about the need for a “religious revolution” – “that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It is antagonizing the entire world! Is it possible that 1.6 billion people should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants –that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live? Impossible!”
      You need to get with the el-Sisi program.

      • rosross says:

        My apologies to you and Peter O’Brien. You both have current articles on the topic with similar themes.

      • rosross says:

        @ Peter SMITH,

        I don’t confuse Islam with Muslims but I would humbly suggest the tone of your article does conflate the two quite forcefully at times.

        You did not answer any of my questions and simply added to the premise that it is almost impossible for a moderate Muslim to exist, quoting Churchill on the topic.

        When you say

        Is it possible that 1.6 billion people should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants –that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live?

        You are saying that all Muslims want to kill all non-Muslims which surely means you are arguing the worst teachings of Islam are the beliefs of every Muslim.

        Is it even true that Islam wants to kill all non-Muslims in this modern age? I know one can find within Islamic teachings such rhetoric but that is not unique to Islam.

        The fundie Christians want Armageddon in the Middle East so Jesus can pop back and uplift them to eternal glory while everyone else dies in agony, including all Jews/Zionist Israelis whom they fund because they see it as the road to Armageddon. It is not in their interests to have peace between Jews, Muslims and Christians.

        And is it fair to conflate backward Islamic teachings with the situation in Palestine where Israel is the occupier and coloniser of that land treating Palestinian Muslims in ways which would encourage more fundamentalist Islamic beliefs. Indeed, doing the same to Palestinian Christians who may also have become more fundamentalist in their beliefs.

        There is a huge difference between Old Testament Christian beliefs, the cornerstone of the orthodox and fundamentalists and New Testament Christian beliefs, the cornerstone of more evolved forms of Christianity.

        Christianity also has 600 years on Islam and how do the two religions look if we compare Christianity in the 15th century? The Inquisition and the Witch Hunts from that time stand out as pretty barbaric.

        And if the argument is that we are not in the 15th century but in the 21st, I would simply say, having lived in India and four African countries I can assure you, many people do not live in the 21st century but something more akin to a range from the 15th to the 17th in terms of their cultural circumstances.

        The less developed a society is, the more patriarchal and misogynistic it is going to be. And the less opportunity there is for a religion to change with the times. We also know the better women are treated the more a society is likely to become enlightened. Even Christianity fought against that until a few centuries ago and look how fast things moved once women were considered to be humans on an equal with males?

  • lbloveday says:

    The Pew Research Centre reported on the result of a 2010 poll:
    “About three-quarters of Turkish and Lebanese Muslims oppose the stoning of people who commit adultery (77% and 76%, respectively), as does a narrower majority (55%) of Muslims in Indonesia. So a maximum of 45% (which would exclude any unsure…) support for stoning to death”.
    That’s significantly different to “a poll taken in Indonesia in 2006 which found that 58 per cent of respondents in this apparently moderate Muslim nation believed that adulterers should be stoned to death”. And even more significant as the Pew poll refers to “Muslims in Indonesia”, generally given as about 87%, and it is reasonable to presume about 0% of the 13% non-Muslims would be in favour, so the percentage in favour in the whole population would be 45*0.87, say 39%, while the 2006 poll does not indicate it was restricted to Muslims

    • rosross says:

      I wonder how different that is to citizens in First World Australia who would like to see a return to the death penalty. The environment in which people live needs to be understood to have context for the poll results.

      Is it more shocking that some Australians would like to see State sanctioned murder, which is what capital punishment is, than some Indonesians living in a Third World environment would want to see stoning for adulterers? I think both practices are barbaric but each must be assessed in context.

      The principle of civilization was that the more secure and developed a culture was, particularly in regard to the treatment of women, the more advanced and enlightened the culture would become. There is no doubt Islam is misogynistic but so are all fundamentalist forms of religion. There is also no doubt that the cultures in less developed nations are more patriarchal and misogynistic as well. Double dose for those Third World nations with Islam as a majority religion.

  • Katzenjammer says:

    The success of Hamas has given mobs of jackals a licence to come out of the dark.
    “Today, the world is full of wilfully blind callous perpetrators and complicit witnesses who see no Evil and hide behind a veneer of intellectual abstraction.”
    But most think their long meaningless raves lend an air of gravitas to their hollow attempts at faking “intellectual abstraction”.

  • STD says:

    Gaza-Piers Morgan v Douglas Murray

  • wdr says:

    All too true. Yet our beloved leftists champion these barbarians and monsters. They deserve each other.

  • Peter Smith says:

    “When you say – Is it possible that 1.6 billion people should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants –that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live?”
    For goodness sake rosross, I’ve put it in quotes. I didn’t say it. Devout Muslim President el-Sisi said it.

    • STD says:

      Rosross-Off with your head-Peter.
      Look Peter, you and all the fair minded people here at QOL need/ must watch this. Here we have Jay Smith THE TRUTH BEHIND THE EMERGENCE OF ISLAM, as 2hr27min- slow to start, however we’ll worth the patience.
      Jay Smith, PHD in Islamic polemic’s.
      This is a forensic autopsy on the historicity of Islam – no BS
      Oh Dear!
      Islam is a political force, just like the Albanese Voice it’s our way or the highway – there are plenty of left wing parallels. I guess this is why the left has gone out of its way to support this type of immigration – a voter visa-Islam displays the same political fervour- make no mistake though, Islam will cannibalise the useful idiots when the time is right

    • rosross says:

      @Peter Smith,

      The medium can be cryptic. It is a good idea to forensically source quotes as opposes to simply adding quotes to a line so readers can be absolutely clear about who said what.

      And I should have said, when you quote not when you say. Mea Culpa.

      However, whether you are quoting or saying you appear to be strongly suggesting:

      All Muslims want to kill all non-Muslims which surely means you are arguing the worst teachings of Islam are the beliefs of every Muslim.

      Now we have the quote issue sorted can you address my ‘question?’ Is that what you are arguing?

      • Peter Smith says:

        No, I don’t believe that rosross. Neither, I’m sure, did el-Sisi mean it literally when he said it. But he was trying to make a point in calling out Islam. The creed is especially evil. It causes people to do evil things. Clearly, you don’t accept that. That’s fine. We are all entitled to our views. As for Muslim immigration to the West, including to Australia, I’m on the record as believing this was and is a bad idea. Among many similar works, The Strange Death of Europe by Douglas Murray captures my concerns and my views. I’ll leave it at that.

        • rosross says:

          I am glad you do not believe that but then you go on to say the creed is especially evil and it makes people do evil things which suggests that while you reject such a belief consciously you hold it unconsciously. As one must if they believe that a particular religion is evil and those who follow it, prone to great evil as a result.

          We can agree to disagree. There is evil in all religions and evil has been committed in the name of every religion at some point. Was the genocidal foundation of Israel in the name of Jews not an evil, even if some consider it a necessary evil? Those who suffered under it certainly saw it as such.

          I think we need to be careful dismissing anyone or any group as evil. The mere use of the word to label others is evil in itself.

          As to Muslim immigrants, is the problem Islam or is the problem poor management of migrants and the destructive policy of multiculturalism. As I said before, Muslims integrated well into Australia in centuries past which says the problem is not Islam per se: since the religion, as you say, has not changed.

          I think migration from any fundamentalist religion should be curtailed but that includes all of them for the same sorts of reasons. I think we need fewer migrants, taken more slowly, and encouraged to assimilate. Singling out Muslims just creates division. It breeds fear and hatred in both sides and ultimately brings destructive separation between the two.

          The constant demonising of Muslims and Islam which has gone on in recent decades in the West, is creating what you and Douglas Murray fear.

          Thanks for your time.

        • Citizen Kane says:

          Peter, I think she means forensic citations like this example of her complete comment from a recent related thread;

          “Jews marching for justice and freedom for Palestine, absolutely. Many now realise that the Israeli State does not represent them or their religion.
          ‘Not in our name’: American Jewish activists lead march to White House over Israel’s ‘genocide’ ”

          Another example of do as I say, not as I do. However, Hypocrisy is a strong point of hers.

  • Botswana O'Hooligan says:

    The irony of it all, and one ponders on stuff like that as one approaches the great silence, is the question of whether there is a place redolent with the scent of 72 virgins, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, is the rumour that there is no hell for old DC3 captains and as much free beer at the right temperature one of them can consume, did Hiram Abiff of Tyre (modern Lebanon) really exist, and if he did why did the three assassins, ignorance, prejudice, and greed, do away with him for he was supposed to be a nice bloke, myth or not? Another one is why doesn’t the World adhere by the ten commandments, and of course the greatest question of them all is one of “if there is a supreme being, why doesn’t he/she smite barbarians of any description for they do indeed need smiting with a mighty smite.” The other and perhaps the greatest irony of it all is that if all the various denominations are correct and there are 72 virgins and angels pole dancing on pin heads, how does one return and relate all that info and calm the populace, Labor voters included.

    • rosross says:


      The problem with all religions is that for too long they have been read as literal when they should be read as metaphor. If we applied theories of quantum mechanics to such imagery as, ’72 virgins and angels pole dancing on pin heads,’ it might be more fruitful than thinking of it in any literal and material sense.

      However, even the great wisdom in all religions is clouded and crowded by the beliefs, thoughts, dreams, fantasies of mere mortals,usually male with that tendency toward left-brain thinking which steers thought into mechanical and material realms. Not always, but often.

      As to why any God does not fix things, one supposes it is the element of free will at work in a universe which is regulated by its own laws, some we understand and some we do not, and that we humans are here to make the most of the material as incarnated minds and bodies. Just as we support a child growing up by establishing ground rules and then allowing independent experimenting and exploration, perhaps any intelligence at work in this world does the same with us. A child whose life is dictated to by a parent will never mature as a fully functional human being. Ditto for humans in this material universe.

  • Citizen Kane says:

    ‘If the hatefest against Muslims were directed against Christians, Jews, Hindus or any other religion there would be outrage.’ but seemingly not if directed against Australian Aboriginals as @rosross is happy to do. Oh thats right, thats different it has been 240 years of colonisation, not 75 years – its OK after, I don’t know, pick a number 100 years.
    But wait – from another @ rosross post ‘However, what the Palestinians do have is right, justice and determination on their side and as we saw in Vietnam, those things can defeat any enemy.
    Even if all 16 million Palestinians in the world could be exterminated the Resistance would not end. JUSTICE IS AN IDEA WHICH CAN NEVER BE DEFEATED. Israel should know that.’
    I’m confused – in previous posts @rosross has dismissed the colonisations of the Aztecs, Mayans, Inca, Aboriginal, even the Ottoman Turk colonisation of Palestine , always based on the morally arbitrary – that was ‘ancient history’ – that was different, things have (conveniently) changed since then etc etc – but then she claims ‘Justice is eternal and can never be defeated’ go figure?
    Thats twisted moral relativism for you.

    • Citizen Kane says:

      How could I have overlooked this gold from above @rosross – ‘do we accept that all principles of human rights, rule of law, democracy, justice and common human decency are binned for future generations? Is that what we want for our children?’
      It would seem so Roslyn if you were a child like yourself from say 50 years ago and were looking at history from say 150 years prior to that.
      Its kinda ugly when the mirror of your own moral relativism is turned back on yourself.

  • Citizen Kane says:

    The name Israel first appears c. 1209 BCE, at the end of the Late Bronze Age and the very beginning of the period archaeologists and historians call Iron Age I, on the Merneptah Stele raised by the Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah. As distinct from the cities named (Asqaluna, Gezer, Yenoam) which are written with a toponymic marker, Israel is written hieroglyphically with a demonymic determinative indicating that the reference is to a human group, variously located in central Palestine and the highlands of Samaria.
    Based on the archaeological evidence, according to the modern archaeological account, the Israelites and their culture did not overtake the region by force, but instead branched out of the indigenous Canaanite peoples that long inhabited the Southern Levant, Syria, ancient Israel, and the Transjordan region through a gradual evolution of a distinct monolatristic (later monotheistic) religion centered on Yahweh.
    In the Iron Age, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah emerged. The Kingdom of Israel, with its capital at Samaria, fell to the Neo-Assyrian Empire around 720 BCE; while the Kingdom of Judah, with its capital at Jerusalem, was destroyed by the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 586 BCE. Some of the Judean population was exiled to Babylon, but returned to Israel after Cyrus the Great conquered the region.

    • Phillip says:

      Oh! And no mention of the word “Palestine”..?!?
      No mention of any form of government administered by the word “Palestine”..?!?

      Is it not then a bit weird how some respondents go verbosely virus like claiming that a fake country with some evil satanic savages citizens has been “forcibly occupied “ for 75 years and yet history does not give rigour nor credibility to support such claims.

  • rosross says:

    While all attention is on backward and barbaric Islamic teachings, the horrors of today committed by followers of other religions are ignored. That is an evil double standard. We know there are some Palestinian Christians in Gaza dying alongside Muslims but we also know if it were majority Christians, Jews, or even Hindus being bombed in a prison, there would be outrage.

    Quote: A hunger for genocide and ethnic cleansing colours senior Israeli officials’ statements and has influenced their conduct in this war. Talk of civilian casualties is brushed off, and so are calls for a ceasefire.

    By Vijay Prashad
    Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research

    More than 10,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli armed forces in Gaza since Oct. 7, nearly half of them children, according to the most recent report by spokesperson for the Gaza Ministry of Health Dr Ashraf Al-Qudra. Over 25,000 others have been injured, with thousands still buried under the rubble.

    Meanwhile, Israeli tanks have begun to encircle Gaza City, whose population was 600,000 a month ago but whose neighbourhoods are now largely vacant due to the desperate flight of its inhabitants to Gaza’s southern shelters and due to Israel’s killing of thousands of Palestinian civilians in their homes.

    A hunger for genocide and ethnic cleansing colours senior Israeli officials’ statements and has influenced their conduct in this war. Talk of civilian casualties is brushed off, and so are calls for a ceasefire. The spokesperson of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) James Elder said of this situation: ‘Gaza has become a graveyard for thousands of children. It’s a living hell for everyone else’.

    Thus far, Israel has dropped a higher tonnage of explosives on Gaza than the combined weight of the two bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. End quote.

  • cbattle1 says:

    “I’m OK, You’re Not OK” was one of the four “transactions” of Transactional Analysis, in the book, “I’m OK, You’re OK”, which was a popular self-help book in the late ’60’s, and I’m seeing that transaction appear in these comments, particularly in relation to the middle east and religion. One definition of the “I’m OK, You’re Not OK” communication transaction is: “People in this position feel themselves superior in some way to others, who are seen as inferior and not OK. As a result, they may be contemptuous and quick to anger. Their talk about others will be smug and supercilious, contrasting their own relative perfection with the limitation of others.” That appears to be what I am seeing in these comments.

    • rosross says:


      Any division creates a them and us situation and is usually sourced in some semblance or illusion of power. The hatred of Muslims/Islam is not sourced in anything rational but in irrational fears. Humans like to have an enemy because it gives them a sense of victimhood which does create the illusion of their superiority.

      However, the illusion of victimhood, and this is writ large for Israel, also creates at unconscious levels terrible fears. To assuage the fears humans become angry, often enraged, because this both physiologically and psychologically creates a feeling of strength., It is illusion for fear makes us weak but the combination of fear and rage limits the ability for reasoned thought processing and critical thinking.

      Any entrenched sense of victimhood means that there must always be an enemy because, without an enemy, the superior position of victimhood is lost and one is called to account as an individual, responsible for one’s self, life and experiences.

      The greater the fear, the greater the rage, which in itself creates a sense of powerlessness which creates even more fear and more rage. And so it goes.

      When mature psychological processing is not in place to work through the fears and the rage, it becomes critical, not just useful, to have a clear enemy and the demonisation process intensifies. This is how humans, good and decent people, can do the most evil things to others. That lesson, clearly unlearned, litters our history.

      When it is a choice between ME being okay and everyone being okay, the angry and frightened self has no room for the other, but must remain consumed within, defending the battlements of psyche which must, by necessity, grow ever higher.

      I have long believed it is not strength which does so much harm but weakness and the greatest violence is committed by those who are psychologically weak.

    • rosross says:

      Jung is my particular favourite for psychological understanding but Freud is also brilliant and some of their acolytes, like Maria Louise Franz and Alfred Adler stand out. Transactional Analysis is Behaviourist which does work well for some and not at all for others. But it has some good insights.

    • Citizen Kane says:

      Said with the smug arrogance and sense of superiority one might expect based on form to date.

      ‘When you think everything is someone else’s fault, you will suffer a lot. When you realize that everything springs only from yourself, you will learn both peace and joy.’ – Dalai Lama

      I’m not sure of any profound insights from Oprah Winfrey like pop psychology found in a self help book, but I’m pretty sure Jung was on the money when he introduced the notion of ‘projection’ to explain how people can feel certain they know what another person is like and what they think. He suggested that everyone has ‘shadow’ personality traits ie elements of our personality that we dislike or of which we are ashamed and that rather than acknowledge their presence, we attribute them – project them – onto other people.

      Given how complicit you have been in all of the ongoing ‘discussion’ here, not least of which is the above statement which attributes the very same qualities to others that have emanated from the author, I reckon Carl was on to something.

  • Phillip says:

    Palestine is not a country
    Never has been
    Sometimes weeds sprout in a rose garden
    Careful horticulture will flush them out
    All praise to The Israelites
    Erase the pest and the parasite
    And keep the Garden in condition supreme

    • cbattle1 says:

      Jawohl mein Führer!

      • Citizen Kane says:

        However when an Islamic preacher or follower spouts the same obnoxious rhetoric towards infidels and whole global political movements of jihad and intifada are inspired and motivated by that same vile rhetoric – well that’s different. There is ‘context’ to understand. It’s America’s fault. It’s Britain’s fault, it’s Israel’s fault, It’s the West’s fault.
        Your moral relativism has you bathing naked in public in the faeces of your own hypocrisy.

  • lbloveday says:

    News to me:
    Green’s MP Gabrielle de Vietri said her speech was about how Remembrance Day is not only for grieving the lives lost in conflicts past, but also the lives lost in the Gaza-Israel conflict.

    • lbloveday says:

      One of the ex-service men I emailed this to replied:
      … 1997, Governor-General Sir William Deane issued a proclamation formally declaring 11 November to be Remembrance Day, urging all Australians to observe one minute’s silence at 11 am on 11 November each year to remember those WHO DIED OR SUFFERED FOR AUSTRALIA’S CAUSE in all wars and armed conflicts.

  • Peter Marriott says:

    Good piece Peter and I agree with you. Hamas has to be stopped and it’s obvious from the reactive demonstrations mobilised around the world that the operation is working.. The Israelis will have to hold their nerve and finish the job I’m afraid.
    Of course if you site your guns and tunnels under civilian infrastructure, like hospitals, as Hamas has done, it will involve civilian casualities.
    I should add that these same civilians seem to have shown no remorse over the horrific deaths of Israeli women and children, paraded through their streets at the start……. quite the contrary in fact.

  • Gordon Cheyne says:

    I’m a proud Islamophobic man.
    Islam is a nasty religion. As an atheist, I get along fine with Hindus, Christians, Jains, Jews. Zoroastrians, Buddhists and Shintoists.
    But Muslims would like to kill me because I don’t believe the same things that they do.
    I’ll give them a wide berth, thanks.

    • STD says:

      “I’ll give them a wide berth, thanks.“
      Presumably you are talking about a wide bed of sorts. Gordon could you be a bit specific,Queen size or King – double or single? Yours truly in Limbo!

    • cbattle1 says:

      Gordon Cheyne:
      You say: “But Muslims would like to kill me because I don’t believe the same things that they do.” Personally I’ve never met any of those people that you are describing. Years ago I travelled around the West Bank and Egypt, met lots of Arabs of the Muslim faith, but wasn’t aware of anybody wanting to kill me for any reason. Especially had a good time hanging out with the Bedouin in the Sinai, fishing in the Gulf of Suez. And then there are all the millions of Muslims in Indonesia and Malaysia. Travelling around the Archipelago, I met with many friendly people. Like in Christian countries, the Muslims I met seem to be Muslim in name only, or at least didn’t give the religious side of things too much attention.

      • STD says:

        “Travelling around the Archipelago, I met with many friendly people. Like in Christian countries, the Muslims I met seem to be Muslim in name only, or at least didn’t give the religious side of things too much attention”.
        So they were Muslim but they didn’t appear at face value to be Muslim!
        So we’re they good Muslims? We’re they honest Muslims? or we’re they people who did or did not honour the Koranic word in deed at that point in time.
        Could I buy you a mug with your name inscribed? – your preference the inside or the outside- your CALL!
        Or perhaps your preference would be an alarm clock radio, that heralds the ensuing morning with that oh so friendly call to prayer-PEACE!

        • cbattle1 says:

          Thank you so much for your offer STD, I’ll take the alarm clock radio that will wake me up with the call to prayer, “Allah hu-Akbar!”. Does it repeat that for all 5 of the daily prayers? So cool!
          I am assuming that you’ve never been to Indonesia or Malaysia, or spent much time with the people? The Malays converted to Islam voluntarily. In recent years, however, our good friends the Saudis, aligned with the USA and reaching out to Israel in friendship, have been promoting their own brand of Islam called “Wahhabism” into South East Asia, and that has created a more conservative and anti-Western, anti-Christian attitude, adding to the tensions in Ambon and Mindanao. You can see that even in Australia’s Coco-Keeling Islands, where in former times the Malay women didn’t cover their hair, but now the hijab is universal for post-puberty women.

  • exuberan says:

    The vast majority of Australians have never heard of the term Apostasy let alone knowing what it means.

  • Searcher says:

    “An important distinction to be sure, but it should not be overstated.” I am not sure whether you mean ‘overstated’ or ‘understated’. I will infer from ‘should’ that you mean ‘overstated’.

  • Searcher says:

    It seems to me that both Christianity and Islam would much benefit from radical reformation. Whether that is possible is anyone’s guess. I guess it is more possible for Christianity than for Islam. But for the time being, we have to admit it won’t happen overnight in either.

  • Searcher says:

    Correct me if my memory is wrong, but as I remember, Mohammed is mentioned precisely once by apparent personal name in the Koran.

    • lbloveday says:

      The name “Muhammad” is, I’m told, mentioned four times in the Quran, and the variant “Ahmad” once.
      However, just as Jesus is refered to by various titles in the New Testament, Muhammad was refered to as Messenger of Allah, Prophet…. and chapter 47 is titled “Muhammad”.

  • Searcher says:

    Yes, indeed we have a big problem. It is mainly created by ‘woke’ and other re-labellings of Marxist agitprop.

  • lbloveday says:

    “The root of ALL these corruptions IS America”

  • lbloveday says:

    Surprised to see the Australian publish so much criticism of Penny “Trifecta” Wong in the comments – mine missed the cut of course.
    idiotic statement
    Wong is the modern day Chamberlain
    Penny Wrong again
    Wong underlining how out of step she is with Australian values
    Wong is totally unsuitable for the role of Foreign Minister and needs to step aside
    our foreign minister makes ridiculous, ill-informed – and frankly laughable – “demands”
    Wong’s comments and interventions are disgraceful
    Wong and Albanese made their pro-Palestinian government in Gaza policies very clear to us all when they resumed funding them
    Wong is too full of her own perceived importance

  • lbloveday says:

    From The Australian, just one of the many stories about Hamas supporters:
    The image of an Islamic State ­terrorist with a knife in his hand about to behead a hostage in Syria was sent to Australia’s peak Jewish body with the words “We are coming for you soon, from western Sydney”.
    The scum allegedly responsible “was charged with ­behaving in an offensive manner in a public place, using a carriage service to threaten to kill and three counts of using a carriage service to menace and offend. He was refused bail and was remanded in custody to appear in court on January 10”.

  • sirtony says:

    “Just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.”
    ― Jonathan Swift

  • MargieCJ says:

    Excellent and factual article Peter Smith. Thank you.
    You said, “Things aren’t as they were. Without permission, our betters have let millions of Muslims into the West. It’s intellectually lazy to say most are ‘moderate’. ”
    “They are Muslims in name only.”
    Agree, in the same way that we use the term RHINOS meaning Republicans In Name Only, let’s use MINOS – Muslims In Name Only.
    There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. Islam is Mohamed, Islam has never changed, Islam will never change. To change Islam, you would have to take Mohammed out of it and then it wouldn’t be Islam any more. And today, 2023, which group is STILL calling for the deaths of ALL infidels/non-believers including Israelis and Americans? ONLY the death cult of Islam.
    Multiculturalism must be a two-way process. Australia should only welcome people from cultures that are free to respect other cultures. Common sense dictates that islamists should never be given residency in any first world, free Democratic country because Islam respects ONLY Islam and NO other cultures.
    Islam is a closed monoculture. Islamists have openly, repeatedly and forever, insisted that Democracy is unacceptable to them. They have been instructed and brainwashed in their mosques since birth to reject Democracy in all its traditions, cultures, freedoms and laws, and replace it with their stone age, brutal and barbaric islamic sharia law which spurns diversity, appeasement, inclusiveness and tolerance. Under sharia, there are NO individual human rights.
    Islamists are using our Democratic freedoms and laws, to enter our country. But, once they have been given residency, they then set about destroying that very same Democracy that they used to get in. Islamists will NEVER integrate. They are increasing in strength and numbers by weakening the host countries and setting up their violent, jihadi, islamic caliphates.
    Under sharia, ONLY the monoculture of islam exists which discriminates against all infidels and all other cultures. Time to stop appeasing the Islamists, and tell the truth about Islam. It is imperative that Islam is understood. Here is a short list of readings to better understand the savagery of Islamic doctrine.
    1. “The Story of Mohammed Islam unveiled” by Harry Richardson published 10th October 2013
    2. Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades
    3. Acts of Islamic Terrorism from September 11th 2001 right up to the present.
    4. 4 Stages of Islamic conquest –
    “Israel, Iran and the Biden Administration: If America Does Not Win, Its Enemies Do” by Guy Millière November 12, 2023
    “While the Israelis were urging the residents of northern Gaza to move south to avoid being caught in the cross-fire, Hamas leaders were ordering Gazans not to move to safety, and shooting at them as they tried to flee — presumably so that Hamas could have more dead bodies to show the television crews how evil the Israelis supposedly are.”

  • lbloveday says:

    I like Tim Blair’s way with words:

    “…..prisoners and playthings of subterranean Hamas mole men – themselves willing agents of death commanded by Hamas’s billionaire bosses, usually found whoring it up 1700km from Gaza in friendly and secure Qatar”.

  • lbloveday says:

    After Saturday’s disgraceful march by pro-Palestinian supporters, the UK’s home secretary Suella Braverman criticised the anti-Semitic messaging seen on the streets of London:
    “This can’t go on. Week by week, the streets of London are being polluted by hate, violence, and anti-Semitism… Jewish people in particular feel threatened; further action is necessary”.
    For that, saying what the vast majority of Tory supporters think, the PM Rishi Sunak sacked her.

    • lbloveday says:

      She also wrote:
      there is “a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters” and “were tougher on rightwing extremists than pro-Palestinian “mobs”.

  • lbloveday says:

    What next? I agree completely with Bill Shorten:
    Melbourne school students have been encouraged by a pro-Palestine activism group to stage a walkout and congregate for a rally in the CBD.
    Shorten has criticised the rally due to take place in Melbourne next Thursday.
    Shorten said “most parents” would likely agree with him when he says that “during school hours kids should just go to school”.
    Shorten further said he was unsure how a negotiation process could occur with Hamas, when they believe Israel “don’t have the right to exist.”

  • lbloveday says:

    “What about the Palestinian hostages”? asks one of the thugs. Huh?

  • lhackett01 says:

    The Government and the media must stop ignoring the truth and detail about Islam. One fact about Islam is that it demands the dominance of religious law over man-made law (there has been no Age of Enlightenment within Islamic societies). There are reports that Muslim communities within Australia, and certainly within England and some other countries, manage their affairs according to Islamic principles, including Sharia law. They do not rely on Australian law and do not involve our police forces in their issues. This attitude has no place in Australian society.

    Islam is not just another religion like, for example, Christianity or Hinduism. These and many other religions have been reinterpreted over time to become more acceptable to the way we believe societies should behave. Islam, however, requires its followers (Muslims) to believe in the Quran, the Sunnah (including the Hadith) and Sharia law. The Quran is considered by Muslims to be the unaltered and the final revelation of God. The Quran has not been and cannot be reinterpreted.

    The Quran prescribes death for all who fight Islam or are unbelievers. Christians and Jews are offered the opportunity of converting to Islam or of paying a tax, or death. People of other faiths and atheists are deemed unbelievers and are to be killed.

    These and other instructions lie dormant until triggered by events. This is why, for example, Sunnis and Shias can live together and intermarry but will kill each other when provoked. Each sect claims the other to be comprised of unbelievers. The members of the Islamic State (IS) act in accordance with Islam.

    Muslims who do not follow their sect’s teachings of Islam will be declared apostates by their fellows and are subject to punishment. In many sects of Islam, the punishment for apostasy is death.

    Ask any Muslim if this is not the truth. But, beware of Al-Takeyya. Al-Takeyya is based on Surah 3:28 which, put bluntly, permits Muslims to lie if they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened.

  • cbattle1 says:

    It is disturbing to see the intensity of fear and loathing towards “Muslims” published on QoL. Stereotyping hundreds of millions of people as fanatics that are bent on killing anyone who doesn’t conform to their beliefs, is really beyond the pale! I have suggested that people visit Indonesia and Malaysia to meet some “Muslims”, because clearly it is ignorance that is breeding the kind of “fear of the other” that we are seeing here.
    If all “Muslims” hold the same fanatical belief, regarding non-Muslims, then what about the Muslims in the Gulf States/Emirates/Saudi Arabia, that are seeking to normalise relations with Israel? Perhaps a quick trip to Dubai or such places would be helpful.

    • Citizen Kane says:

      Almost as disturbing as the prejudiced antisemitism or is that Jew hatred, proffered other contributors here.

      I visit Indo semi-regularly and have a great regard for most of the people I have interacted with while there. Most Muslim in name only and not Islamists. I have been struck however how much ISIS iconography, graffiti, flags etc adorning walls and vehicles etc in localities such as Aceh and Sumbawa. In many of these localities female travelling partners were treated like sub optimal humans. Clearly the kind of society you are pretty comfortable with.. Best waves on the planet though!

      • lbloveday says:

        Quote: “Most Muslim in name only ”
        “Muslim KTP” is the common term.

      • cbattle1 says:

        Citizen Kane: I am gladdened to read that you distinguish “Islamists” from “Muslims”, and that you agree with my observation that many people in Indonesia are “Muslim in name only”. I wish other commentators would also travel around Indonesia and experience what you have. Curiously, and strangely/bizarrely amusing, were the T-shirts and Posters for sale by the friendly street-stall vendors, featuring portraits of Osama bin Laden! Oh, dear, what a strange but wonderful world we live in!

    • MargieCJ says:

      “It is disturbing to see the intensity of fear and loathing towards “Muslims” published on QoL.” 
      Just what is it about “islamophobia” that you are not understanding? Since the horrendous and barbaric massacre of innocent Israeli citizens on October the 7th, we have witnessed millions of pro-Hamas Islamists protesting all over the world in support of the savagery and mutilation on that day of peaceful Jewish men, women, children and babies. The demonstrators yell for all the world to hear, “Death to Israel; Death to America; Kill the kaffirs/ infidels/ unbelievers/ Christians; From the river to the sea; Gas the Jews; Annihilate the State of Israel; Genocide against the Jewish people etc”
      There you have it, islamophobia is a very real FEAR by freedom loving people, of the fanatical intent of Islamists all over the world, to commit Jihad and those who MUST support that Jihad.
      It is most instructive to read this link:-

  • cbattle1 says:

    OBTW, many Europeans lived under Ottoman rule, and a fair few converted to Islam, as you can see today in Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc. By my recollection, it was the “Christian” Serbs & others who were doing the “ethnic cleansing” back in the ’90’s.

    • Citizen Kane says:

      Of course conveniently overlooking one of the greatest Genocides in History of Armenians by Ottoman Turks. You really do love bathing in the faeces of your own hypocrisy don’t you!

      • cbattle1 says:

        Citizen Kane: Just because I do not share and echo all of your beliefs and thoughts, does not mean that I am a hypocrite, and as for your statements like: “You really do love bathing in the faeces of your own hypocrisy don’t you!”, shows the intensity of your fear and loathing, or maybe even hatred towards others. I have not “conveniently overlooked” the Armenian genocide, as you have said; that is a charge or indictment that you have brought forth so as to continue your campaign of vilification against me. Why do I feel an empathy with the victims of Nazi persecution, when I read your slanders against me? Just because I am not echoing outrage about October 7 doesn’t mean that I am a militant champion of Hamas. Perhaps if you went to Gaza and expended your hatred in a cathartic frenzy of revengeful slaughter, you could return home and contribute comments to QoL in a more peaceful and respectful manner?

        • Citizen Kane says:

          ‘Perhaps if you went to Gaza and expended your hatred in a cathartic frenzy of revengeful slaughter, you could return home and contribute comments to QoL in a more peaceful and respectful manner?’

          Perhaps along the lines of this previous contribution of your own

          ‘Jawohl mein Führer!’

          On that basis, I might see you in Gaza on the Hamas side of the border launching your missiles at those infernally wretched Jews on the other side.

          cbattle1, when it comes to responding to your contributions here, its simply a case of if it quacks like a duck, if it looks like a duck – then it probably is a duck. You have unfortunately distinguished yourself as a champion hypocrite.

          You patently had overlooked the Armenian genocide otherwise your comment could not have been made in good conscience or if you hadn’t overlooked it, your comment was rank hypocrisy. Take your pick.

  • Sindri says:

    A predictably excellent editorial in the latest New Criterion, for those with a subscription. Roger Kimble, presumably the author, is a splendid deflator of airy nonsense about Gaza being a “prison”:
    “The succeeding history [ie after 1947] is complex. Its chief fea-
    ture has two aspects. One is the story of attack
    after attack by Arabs against Israel, beginning
    just hours after the nation was born. The other
    is the series of compromises, negotiations, and
    concessions by Israel, whose overriding desire
    has been peaceful coexistence. In the present instance, the relevant drama be-
    gan in 2005, when Israel withdrew all its civilian
    settlements and military outposts from the Gaza
    Strip. The following year, Hamas won power in
    a legislative election—the last such election in
    Gaza—expelled other Palestinian groups, and
    has ruled the area as a theocratic war party ever
    since. Some pro-Palestinian commentators say
    that the Gaza Strip is a prison state. If so, as one
    observer put it, Hamas is the warden.”

  • lbloveday says:

    Today (14/11/23) Masada College, an Independent Jewish Co-Educational in St Ives, Sydney asked for a quote for several outdoor games for a function this Friday from a company, Western Sydney Jump.
    The company replied by email “There is no way I am taking a Zionist booking,I don’t want your blood money. Free Palestine”.
    Would a simple “Not available” not have sufficed?

  • lbloveday says:

    A portion of the crowd at Celtic’s Parkhead stadium booed the minute’s silence for Remembrance Sunday.
    The same lowlifes have been displaying Palestinian flags and pro-Palestine banners at matches, despite warnings from the club to desist.

  • lbloveday says:

    On 13/11/23, Q+A interviewed Nasser Mashni, the head of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, whose has said “the world is a far better place once we destroy Western imperialist control of the world”.
    A UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Francesca Albanese said of Mashni’s performance that he ‘did very well in front of an execution squad’
    I did not watch, so can’t judge what she calls “an execution squad”.

  • lbloveday says:

    Gemma Tognini makes sense as usual.
    Why, after what Hamas’s terrorists did, how they did it, the glee, unabashed pride and joy with which they murdered, mutilated, raped and kidnapped, has the group been afforded the privilege of legitimacy? How have the words of a globally declared terrorist organisation been afforded the weight of trust and credibility given by many left-leaning news organisations?

Leave a Reply