Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Shministim
Pilots
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network


Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile



Google
Web antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Blogs

Sites




Previous Posts



Powered by Blogger

 


Thursday, January 05, 2006

Bring back that monochrome world

Unsure what threatens the Western way of life? Clueless columnist Mark Steyn has all the answers:

"The progressive agenda - lavish social welfare, abortion, secularism, multiculturalism - is collectively the real suicide bomb."

Now you know.

42 Comments:

Blogger Shabadoo said...

I'm not quite sure what your problem is here; I've just given a quick skim of the piece and he's quite pessimistic about the future of Western Civ. Now you might not like the reasoning behind this conclusion, as it attacks many progressive sacred cows, but as someone who doesn't particularly like Western culture (despite all the freedoms it has afforded you), you should be happy with the end result. Isn't Western exceptionalism bad, after all?

Rather than just dismissing Steyn as clueless, I'd be interested to see you engage some of his questions, including : "if your big thing is feminism or abortion or gay marriage, are you so certain that the cult of tolerance will prevail once the biggest demographic in your society is cheerfully intolerant?", especially in light of stories like this?

Thursday, January 05, 2006 12:42:00 pm  
Blogger Mike Hunt said...

Why don't you rebut some of his claims?

Such as how social welfare for baby boomers will be affordable with an ever shrinking workforce.

Thursday, January 05, 2006 4:28:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

shabadoo,

your link= Not Found

Mr Steyn's a "journalist", as a darling of the Right he's oft quoted because aside of his bigotry he's often funny and entertaining. Mr Steyn is the equivalent of our madam neolefty but with style. All bad thing start and end with muslims according to him. If you recognise this, it's like being enchanted by someone telling you a joke - you know the punch line but listen anyway to see how the telling goes.

Thursday, January 05, 2006 6:57:00 pm  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Orang : I challenge you to provide us with an example of Steyn's "bigotry". And please don't say "he criticises Muslims", because that's just lame. Criticism isn't bigotry.

Thursday, January 05, 2006 8:15:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

if your big thing is feminism or abortion or gay marriage, are you so certain that the cult of tolerance will prevail once the biggest demographic in your society is cheerfully intolerant?

Stein is right on the ball of course and let's take France for example:

-- currently 10% of the population is Muslim, by 2025 some are predicting it will have risen to 25%

Or let's look at Europe

And now let's look at Muslim dominated countires like Iran:

-- Feminism does not exist in any overt way. Women are oppressed and have no basic civil rights. Homosexuality is punishable by death and abortion is a crime.

Exactly how is it that Stein is clueless?

Thursday, January 05, 2006 9:09:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

An example of what Antony is clueless about -- Taliban Beheads Teacher for Educating Girls and Force his Wife and Eight Children to Watch

Thursday, January 05, 2006 9:22:00 pm  
Blogger leftvegdrunk said...

James, is criticising an entire group of people on the basis of stereotypes considered bigotry in your books?

Thursday, January 05, 2006 9:58:00 pm  
Blogger Melanie said...

That's a great article - forwarded it to a few people - thanks for the link. Melanie Philips wrote a good piece today on people being blinded by Political Correctness as opposed to Factual Correctness.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001527.html
As a female I would hate to be under Sharia Law and I'm glad I don't live in Europe and have to face that ever nearing possibility. Anyone that doubts that will think differently in a few years time when it becomes all too apparent.

Friday, January 06, 2006 12:49:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Don't you think that is being a tad alarmist Melanie. I will gladly read the article you referred to, but are you impling that Euprope is a step away from Sharia law or will ever be?

Friday, January 06, 2006 2:30:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Violet,

Thansk for the link. No wonder you are a fan of Michelle Malkin. She often appears on Faux News.

I am not suggesting the story is flase, but I would have an easier time of believing th story if it came from a real news source. After all, we've been down this road roadhavent's we?

So all this talk about the succes of democracy and the wave of women's rights to Afghanistan has been exposed as a complete shame, in spite of war supporters holding up Afghanistan as a success story.

One could only imagine what failure woudl look like.

Friday, January 06, 2006 2:36:00 am  
Blogger anthony said...

Yeah, thanks for the link Loewenstein- it was a good article.

James, is criticising an entire group of people on the basis of stereotypes considered bigotry in your books?

Oh… Dirt… come off it. You could have at least attacked the article rather than toss around the race card.

I’m not convinced by Steyn’s James-like conclusions (that’s a not so subtle reference to your scary post on China, btw).

In Israel the ‘demographic time bomb’ apparently in the form of over-breeding Muslims is offset by equally sexually active orthodox Jews, popping out the kids at the same rates (or so I’ve heard). I imagine the same thing would happen in the US or here (might already be happening in the Bible Belt).

Of course, we could fix the fear of letting Islamic fundamentalists grow out of control within Western borders by stopping immigration from the ME. That place is loaded with petro-dollars anyway, just give the religion of peace time to fix things with corrupt governments, maybe implement some Moore-like Utopia or whatever, and we could better focus on African immigration, especially Christians fleeing Muslim oppression and mass starvation. The situation of the latter is certainly more deserving of the West’s help.

Friday, January 06, 2006 3:18:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

If the orthodox are attempting to win the race by breeding, they are out of luck.

There are far more palestinians with nothing to do but breed. And they start at a younger age.

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:09:00 am  
Blogger Melanie said...

Adammo, yes I am implying that Europe is on the verge of having Sharia law. Have you noticed in the last few weeks, the changes to citizenship requirements in some European countries designed to weed out those that are sympathetic to Sharia. The alarm bells are ringing in Europe but too many are too PC to even dare think about the possibility.

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:14:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Well, having been to Europe a number of times this past year, and a few times over the last 3 years, I can only tell you that from my experience (in France and Italy) that if there is such a movement taking place, it is invisible.

Imposing Sharia law to Europe is abotu as likely as finding Taliban leaders in a strip club.

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:29:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

Anthony

Your stats on fertility rates in Israel are incorrect.

The average Palestinian refugee woman in Gaza and the West Bank is giving birth to at least six babies. Women in Israel are averaging 2 babies each.

In Gaza a girl may be married at nine years of age and just a few years older at fourteen in the West Bank— where it is legal for male refugees to have up to four wives. Official forms leave space on documents to insert the names of four spouses.

The population of Palestinian refugees exploded in Israel by 45% over the last ten years.

According to the World Health Organisation, almost 10% of babies born to Palestinian women in the West Bank and Gaza suffer from hereditary diseases and congenital malformations due to the inter-marriage of close relatives.

Islam online boasts that the fertility rate of Islamic women is superior to that of Israeli women. This, the organisation claims is, ‘ an indicator Palestinians consider a natural [support for] resistance.’. The Palestinian birth rate is growing, they claim, ‘much to the threat of Israel’.

The demographic route is viewed by Arab and Palestinian leaders as the best way to ‘settle the score with the Israelis.’ In the 1980s Arafat personally encouraged refugee women to produce as many babies as possible, while allowing young men to vandalise family planning clinics.

The Palestinian population explosion on the Gaza Strip is expected to double within ten years. The infant mortality rate is extremely low in Gaza and people live long lives due to extensive free health care provided by UNWRA. And UNWRA, of course is funded by contributions from donor countries.

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:29:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Tell me Violet,

What is the fetility rate of women in African countries like Sudan or Somalia? Do you think the women there are adopting Arafats decree?

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:30:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

Yes addamo, they are.

Approximately 16 out of the top 20 fertility rates in the world today are countires that are predominantly Muslim.

The fertility rate in Gaza is as high as Somalia and Uganda but with one distinct difference. Because of the extensive health care provided to Palestinian refugees by the UN (and mostly paid for by USA and Europe) the refugees -- unlike other third world peoples -- are living long healthy lives.

Thus, the population explosion in Gaza is unlike anything in the rest of the world. It is also a population that depends entirely on the rest of the world to pay its healthcare bills.

Most of your thinking, addamo, appears to begin with conclusions.

Friday, January 06, 2006 8:58:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Violet,

My conclusion was drawn from an earlier comment you made that attributed the high fertility rates among Palstinians being the results of Arafats decree to outpupulate the Israeli Jews.

I am curious as to whether this is connected to the Muslim faith per se, or whether it is a product of 3rd world communities who are are used to absorbing high infant mortality rates. I only ask in case there are multiple contributing factors to the numbers.

Incidently Violet, your last comment is somewhat strange. Does anyone post and think out loud at the same time, or do they respond to a previous post after having arrived at a conclusion first?

I tend to do the latter.

Friday, January 06, 2006 9:19:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

James Waterton said...

"Orang : I challenge you to provide us with an example of Steyn's "bigotry". And please don't say "he criticises Muslims", because that's just lame. Criticism isn't bigotry."

James, you so bad. "I challenge you". No, I have not had his little face between my hands and got him to admit he's a bigot.
Let's just say he is gleefully prolific in his anti-Muslimisms- Google "Steyn + Muslim" and you get 625,000 hits. Is he an obsessed ctitic you think?

From Wikepedia-
"While for some fellow conservatives, Steyn is a gifted polemicist, other readers find him a prejudiced writer who uses poorly sourced facts, and whose perceived reliance on disparagement makes his views less worthy of attention. He has been accused of "Steynwalling": resorting to personal abuse when confronted with his own factual errors. Detractors claim that he disregards both opposing arguments and events that contradict his earlier predictions, including his repeated claims that Osama Bin Laden was "certainly" dead.
........ The Observer in June 2004, took him to task as a 'neo-con ranter'[6], citing Steyn's labelling of Neil Kinnock and Chris Patten as on the 'lunatic fringe' in matters relating to the EU.

Steyn's claimed commitment to democracy has also been called into question, by writers who point to statements like this:
"Consider Haiti. John Kerry, in quite the most stupid observation of his campaign, insisted that Bush should have sent in the troops to Haiti to prop up President Aristide - or "Father Aristide", as Kerry likes to call him, defrocking notwithstanding - because the Holy Father was "democratically elected". After a fashion. But so what?" "

....I still think he's bigotted, and now I also think he's a twat. But that's just my personal opinion, so don't ask me to prove it.

Friday, January 06, 2006 9:54:00 am  
Blogger Shabadoo said...

Interesting here how most of the 'progressives' are still slinging names rather than engaging Steyn's arguments.

Addamo, the 9/11 hijackers spent the previous night in strip clubs, and one of the Bali bomber's hard drives was an absolute pornucopia, so go figure...

Friday, January 06, 2006 10:20:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Yes I know Shab bizarre isn't it? So much for religious fundamentalism.

And did you know that Mohammad Atta spent time on Abramoffs flaoting casinos?

Friday, January 06, 2006 11:50:00 am  
Blogger anthony said...

The average Palestinian refugee woman in Gaza and the West Bank is giving birth to at least six babies.

I was referring to Israeli Orthodox Jews outdoing Israeli Muslims, in Israel not Gaza or the West Bank. But if I'm still wrong there, I'd like to emphasis the "or so I’ve heard" part of my post.

According to the World Health Organisation, almost 10% of babies born to Palestinian women in the West Bank and Gaza suffer from hereditary diseases and congenital malformations due to the inter-marriage of close relatives.

Yes, the same thing is happening in Britain with Pakistani incest, not simply first generation immigrants either. And who foots the bill for their retarded or just perpetually unhealthy children? The Pom taxpayer! Laughable...

Orange, Google "Steyn + Muslim" and you get 625,000 hits. Is he an obsessed ctitic you think?

Google Antony Loewenstein + Jews and you get 18,000 hits. Note that Loewenstein is less well known.

Google Noam Chomsky + Jews and you get 669,000 hits.

If you seriously suggesting Steyn is a bigot because he writes about Muslims? Does he have to be a Muslim before he is allowed to discuss Islamic fundamentalism in the public arena?

Friday, January 06, 2006 1:08:00 pm  
Blogger Shabadoo said...

And yet, Addamo, the 9/11 guys shaved their bodies and left wills instructing tht their bodies not be "sullied" by women...so fundamentalism is clearly at play, as are the contradictions that come from living a medieval faith in the modern world...

Friday, January 06, 2006 1:37:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Well Shab,

I'm inclined to think that these guys weren't the real deal to be honest, as far as being devout muslims. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but there are still so many unresolved issues surrounding these shady individuals.

1. A passport survived the carnage and floats perfectly to the ground floor, unscathed.

2. None of the guys names appear on any flight lists.

3. The morning of September 11, Porter Goss (nw head of hte CIA) was hosting a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill in honor of General Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" (to use the FBI's expression) behind the 9/11 hijackers.

4. These idiots leave a suitcase behind containing a Koran and a aircraft flight manual.

And I could go on.

Friday, January 06, 2006 2:39:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

Shabadoo said...
"interesting here how most of the 'progressives' are still slinging names rather than engaging Steyn's arguments."

anthony said...
"If you seriously suggesting Steyn is a bigot because he writes about Muslims? Does he have to be a Muslim before he is allowed to discuss Islamic fundamentalism in the public arena?"

Oooh I dared ctriticize the Right's little darling?

Bigot , I have Dictionary.com definition of a Bigot - "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

I would say that describes the turd when it applies to Muslims. A recent example,

Mark Steyn in the Daily Telegraph, 20 December 2005

"These days, whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it involves a fellow called Mohammed. A plane flies into the World Trade Centre? Mohammed Atta. A gunman shoots up the El Al counter at Los Angeles airport? Hesham Mohamed Hedayet. A sniper starts killing petrol station customers around Washington, DC? John Allen Muhammed. A guy fatally stabs a Dutch movie director? Mohammed Bouyeri. A terrorist slaughters dozens in Bali? Noordin Mohamed. A gang-rapist in Sydney? Mohammed Skaf."

What is it about the above that requires engagement? Although it would have the Right wing racist muslim haters knee slapping and drooling with laughter.."That Steyn what a guy, gets it down perfect every time. Ha Ha ."


anthony also said,
"Orange, Google "Steyn + Muslim" and you get 625,000 hits. Is he an obsessed ctitic you think?
Google Antony Loewenstein + Jews and you get 18,000 hits. Note that Loewenstein is less well known.
Google Noam Chomsky + Jews and you get 669,000 hits. "

I don't get it. What is the significance of Googling the other 2 with word "Jews"?


anthony, the nom de plume is "orang". No "e" you see.

Friday, January 06, 2006 4:11:00 pm  
Blogger anthony said...

Orang*

"I don't get it. What is the significance of Googling the other 2 with word "Jews"?

I was pointing out that Steyn has an academic interest in Muslims, and is not an 'obsessed critic' because of such an interest.

To show you this, I put Loewenstein and Chomsky in the place of Steyn, and Jews in the place of Muslims.

Now, if Steyn is an obsessed critic or bigot based on your Google logic- the same is true of Chomsky and Loewenstein!

Taa Daa!

"These days, whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it involves a fellow called Mohammed [..].”

“What is it about the above that requires engagement?”

Steyn is noting the problems, he sees- probably as inherent- with the Islamic faith. Read between the lines, he’s not saying Mohammad as a name leads to criminal acts, but giving Mohammad as a connotation of Islam itself, and addressing the issue in a relatively witty way.

It’s been said in a more simple manner on many an occasion, without rhetorical questions. Orang, you would be wrong to assume that the issue of whether Islam as a faith contributes to rape and terrorism does not require engagement. Similarly, there are certainly enough people out there tackling why it is ‘Catholic priests and boys’ are a poor mix- the link between Islam and terrorism is something that should equally be up for discussion, even if Steyn wants to do it in a way you find difficult to comprehend.

Of course, I’ve only read that paragraph you gave- completely out of context. Perhaps the questions he gave are genuine, and he needs someone like you to answer them for him.

Who knows what goes though a writers mind, blogger or otherwise.

Friday, January 06, 2006 6:51:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

Your explanation, "Steyn is noting the problems, he sees- probably as inherent- with the Islamic faith. Read between the lines, he’s not saying Mohammad as a name leads to criminal acts, but giving Mohammad as a connotation of Islam itself, and addressing the issue in a relatively witty way." ..........sucks.

You and I know your explanation is bullshit.

I'll give you a hypothetical entry to an article ...

"Have you noticed the number of high dollar crooks with political ties have a name which has Abraham in it...."

One could come up with a few names and linked to crimes would you agree? Of course this would be merely an observation.

So If this were to be published, how long do you reckon it would take before the writer was accused of being the "anti" word? How long would this "journalist" be in business?

Pull the other one.

Friday, January 06, 2006 7:31:00 pm  
Blogger James Waterton said...

*sigh*

Sometimes you just can't be bothered.

Friday, January 06, 2006 9:13:00 pm  
Blogger anthony said...

You and I know your explanation is bullshit.

I took a leftist approach when I was posting.

Here's an example:

A bunch of folks riot in France, destroy cars, burn a church, etc.:

The extreme poverty of these young, brave, French, mostly from migrant families, coupled with the images appearing in the evil Murdoch press and more generally all of the Western media machine presents an image of the Arab 'other' as dangerous to Western ideals. It is this which has led to the uprising against modernity, represented by the torching of 500+ privately owned vehicles and a church, the latter being a symbol of the imperialist West. This uprising, similar to that of the French student movement in the 1960s, is essentially against the capitalist Chirac Government, and indeed the imperialist West and its crusader-like War for oil.

But back to addressing your post...

I said that Steyn is noting the high numbers of bombings and other criminal acts by Muslims, and claiming that it is Islam which is producing this non-proportional figure, rather than the usual reasons those on the left love so dearly- i.e., 'colonial Israel' (Jews on Islamic land), Murdoch press, Halliburton - i.e., capitalism- the US, etc.. etc..

You compared that to saying that there is a non-proportional 'number of wealthy, politically connected Jews.'

The difference is: the latter is a stereotype perpetuated by anti-Semites, clearly with no foundation in the texts of Judaism or the real world, while the former is a stereotype effectively perpetuated by individual, and organised, Muslims themselves. Most people have had enough of those on the left trying to blame the evil Murdoch Empire for reporting every time a Muslim blows her/himself up in Baghdad or in an Israeli market, or blaming Israel, or the US, and at least a few people are willing to consider whether it is Islam which is at fault.

Does it say in Talmud or Torah, 'go forth, be rich, control the world from the shadows, make deals with Satan' (as the stereotype goes)?

"There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate."


There are over a hundred verses in the Qur’an that exhort believers to wage jihad against unbelievers.

“O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed” (Sura 9:73).
“When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly” (Qur’an 47:4).

“O ye who believe! Fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him” (Qur’an 9:123).”

“Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate” (Qur’an 9:73).

“Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil: so fight ye against the friends of Satan” (Qur’an 4:76).

“Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is forgiving, merciful” (Qur’an 9:5).


Etc.. etc..

Find equivalent versus in either the New Testament or Talmud/Torah.

Oh, and this from Spencer, too.

Probably should have given this post the once over to make sure I am being coherent, but if the left doesn’t have to do it- I sure as hell wont.

Friday, January 06, 2006 9:58:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Anthony,

Pat Robertson, says the felling of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with a massive stroke is punishment from God "for dividing the Land of Israel." In fact he said that both Sharon and former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin were victims of retaliation by God Himself.

Just goes to prove that extremism doesn't require a Bilble or a Torah to exist.

Nonetheless the issue about whether the Bible advocates violence towards non Christians is debatable. It most certainly promises that non Christians will be met with violence unless they accept God and Jesus. In the case of Robertson and his followers, they believe the Jewish people will be faced with a choice to accept Jesus or perish.

Here we have Robertson saying that Sharon and Rabin's demise is due to their enabling the division of the Jewish state. While this may sound harmless it is most certainly morbid.

As for Zionist influence, I think that denying the influence and power of the Zionist lobby in the US is futile. AIPAC has been described as the second most powerful lobby group in Washington. Their conventions are always attended by Washington elite. Members from both parties in the US trips over themselves, trying to out do the other in showing their allegiance to Israel. Nancy Pelosi made an arse of herself with at the last APIAC convention when she did her best to prove she was more heartbroken about the Gaza withdrawal that even Sharon.

Uri Avnery has written about the power of the Zionist lobby and it preparedness to flex it’s muscle to make examples of people as they did with Cynthia McKinney
(who has been described as one of the few honest politicians in Washington) for daring to criticize Israel.

This is not stereotype perpetuated by anti-Semites Anthony, it is on the record.

Saturday, January 07, 2006 12:55:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

Anthony, you keep quoting right wing christian and jewish publications to bolster your agruments that the muslim religion (unlike the others) is bad?
-well I'm convinced.

Must be over a billion muslims, all we got to do is convince them they're inherently bad and then we'll have real partners for peace.

Saturday, January 07, 2006 6:37:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

Oh, and anthony, I love the one by Robert Spencer comparing the Koran with Mein Kampf. Apparently in principle they match!

And he ends,

"So is the Qur'an the Mein Kampf of the totalitarian, supremacist movement that is the global Islamic jihad? If we take seriously the words of the book itself and how they are used by jihadists, then it clearly is their inspiration and justification.....The challenge for genuinely peaceful Muslims today is to confront this fact,.......so that Muslims can coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims without the continuing recrudescence of this supremacist impulse.
Can it be done? The odds against it are prohibitive "

So you see by comparing their religious book to Mein Kampf he's helping the Muslims. - He does this not merely as an academic excersize you understand, (so no point getting all pissy about it) but also to give moderate muslims some sound advice.

Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:16:00 am  
Blogger anthony said...

Anthony, you keep quoting right wing christian and jewish publications to bolster your agruments that the muslim religion (unlike the others) is bad?

And you keep refusing to address the points made by anyone who you see as right wing (or Jewish or Christian, apparently- unless its Loewenstein). So KKKanadian Spencer is not allowed to criticise Islam? Nor are Jewish publications, or Christian ones. Are Islamists allowed to criticise Jews and Christians?

In any case I’m not saying the others are not ‘bad’ in some way. Take note, I was saying it is not- and should not be- off limits to scrutinise the Catholic Church, its leadership and the Bible to see whether there is in any evidence these are somehow leading to the rape of children under the care of Priests.

The challenge for genuinely peaceful Muslims today is to confront this fact

(Left-leaning and Muslim, if it helps) Irshad Manji essentially makes the same point. Recognise where the Koran is wrong- challenge it. Recognise it as wrong when the local Mufti calls Jews the allies of Satan, or attacks other dhimmi. Just like bible-based attacks on gays should be criticised.

Must be over a billion muslims, all we got to do is convince them they're inherently bad and then we'll have real partners for peace.

No. Again- Steyn, Spencer, these people are not attacking individual Muslims but a religion, its bible, and its leadership.

I’ll make a comparison- it should not be off limits to condemn and outlaw female circumcision throughout Africa, simply because it’s a part of the local culture or law.

Addamo, I never said there is no such thing as a Zionist lobby. You’ve misread my post. Have another glance, in context with Orang’s posts.

Oh, and anthony, I love the one by Robert Spencer comparing the Koran with Mein Kampf

I suppose you want me to condemn that statement? Ok Sure. One is effectively the bible of Nazis, the other is used as a bible for Islamic terrorists. Apples and Oranges.

Interestingly, as I’m tapping away at the keyboard, another story on terrorism is in the news.

Saturday, January 07, 2006 3:39:00 pm  
Blogger anthony said...

Take a look at this, as well

LGF posted it as an external link, so I honestly don’t know if the author is right-wing, Jewish, Christian, whatever.

Interesting post in the comments section by a gay guy who pointed out Egypt's treatment of 'the other' in a gay bar, of all places, and was abused as a racist, without being allowed to get his point across.

Interesting parallel to a few people in this forum- free speech for all, except for those who don’t agree.

Commendably, Antony hasn’t banned those who disagree from his little blog, yet…

Saturday, January 07, 2006 4:12:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

Look I have no problems with legitimate criticisms of muslims or their religion. What I know however, is the so called moderates, the peaceful ones (you know the ones we all love..) are having enough problems with their more zealous ones without the Mein Kampf comparisons, or the "Notice how every shithead has a name which starts with Mohammed.hahahaa .from SunshinesoutofhisarseSteyn.com.

Your link - the one about terrorism in Australia.(Beatiful Atrocities - just too busy, LG Footballs..?!!)

Remindful that the lucky country went to war based on Mr Howards assertion that we're helping to reduce terrorism. Well guess what? The Zarqawi fans are here!

Do you believe our joining the conga line to Iraq has made us safer?

Saturday, January 07, 2006 5:04:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Good points Orang.

Our joinig the effort in Iraq has given us what exactly, more oppressive laws than the ones we had before.

Yep, we definitely starting to see the benefits of the war.

Sunday, January 08, 2006 4:35:00 am  
Blogger anthony said...

In the long term, Australia’s support of the US in Iraq has strengthened the alliance between the two and our long-term security, and was a factor in the decision to go to war:

Our alliance with the United States is unapologetically a factor in the decision that we have taken. The crucial, long-term value of the United States alliance should always be a factor in any major national security decision taken by Australia.


this speech


Clearly we were on bin Laden’s wish list of Satan’s to bring down prior to Iraq, unless you believe Fisk (and ignore bin Laden’s comments). But, Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is not some united movement. If there are Australian based groups who attack civilian targets within Australia, it is unimportant whether they blame their attacks on Iraq or bikini-clad women on Bondi. Their illegitimate tactics make their cause illegitimate.

You’ve effectively changed the subject, though. I was primarily defending Steyn’s right to criticise Islam without being labelled an Islamaphobic whatnot. Do you still believe his criticisms are akin to labelling ‘the Jooz greedy bankers’?

i.e., the comparison you gave:

"Have you noticed the number of high dollar crooks with political ties have a name which has Abraham in it...."

Monday, January 09, 2006 3:59:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

anthony,
shame .

John Howard's speech...shame, lies, slimy fuck.

Any attack by anybody, for any political reason in Australia is illegitimate.

But, don't tell me we are going to war in Iraq to get rid of WMD's and terrorism.

Steyn..?? I'm saying that to single out Muslims in the manner Steyn does is a cheap shot and is aimed at Islamophobes for an atta boy. I guess he's an "expressive" and needs others to bolster his ego. I'm also saying that for anyone to single out Jews in a similar fashion would bring anti-semitism charges - may even get Alexander Downer to slap you.

Monday, January 09, 2006 7:52:00 pm  
Blogger anthony said...

Here’s something I’m sure you ignored.

Monday, January 09, 2006 8:22:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

anthony,
you appear to be of reasonable intelligence...broaden your politics. Or at least do a simple check on the veracity of your authors. ...Douglas Feith mmmmmmm honest man..

From Wikipedia:

"Stephen F. Hayes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Stephen F. Hayes is a columnist for The Weekly Standard, a prominent American neoconservative magazine. He is best known for his series of articles describing alleged links between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist organization. (See Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda). He has written a book on this subject entitled: The Connection: How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein has Endangered America [ISBN 0060746734]. The book and his series of articles are largely based on a memo from Douglas J. Feith to the U.S. Congress on 27 October 2003 that was based on leaked intelligence from the Pentagon, which it has since called "inaccurate," noting that the information leaked "was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, and it drew no conclusions."[1] Nevertheless, Hayes made the memo the basis of his allegations of a conspiracy between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and his work has been mostly dismissed by counterterrorism researchers. What Hayes called "perhaps the government's strongest indication that Saddam and al Qaeda may have worked together on September 11"[2], for example, is believed by most experts to be a mere confusion over names that sounded alike.[3]

Hayes also gained some attention with a piece attacking former PBS host Bill Moyers whom he claims interviewed "Cornel West, O.J. attorney Alan Dershowitz, and 'Vagina Monologues' playwright Eve Ensler."[4] Bill Moyers replied in a letter to the editor, "He gets it right only once. I have never met or interviewed Alan Dershowitz or Eve Ensler." Moyers summarized the piece famously as "replete with willful misrepresentation, deceitful juxtaposition, and outright error, with a little hypocrisy thrown in for flavor."[5]"

Monday, January 09, 2006 9:01:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Oh boy. Anthony, I took you for an intelligent dude, and here you are quoting the Murdoch owned right hack rag Weekly Standard and citing the man describes as the dumbest fucker on the face of the earth?

Bill Kristol is a neo-com Straussian grand master and one of the strongest advocates for the Iraq war.

C'mon mate. Are you really that desperate?

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:43:00 am  
Blogger anthony said...

To quote you from another post addamo:

"I provided a link. If you don't accept it, so be it.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:09:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home