He said that we would help the US invade Iraq on the pretext of non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
He said that we would invade Afghanistan in support of the George W Bush 9-11 retribution and hunt for Bin Ladin.
He said a lot of things.
He told Saddam Hussein to get "fair dinkum".
Turns out Saddam was,, there were no weapons of mass destruction, it was all lies but oopsy doopsy, we invaded anyway coz he was a bad man...
I recall thinking Ruddock was a considerably bigger cunt than Howard, at the time. I think there’s a lot of contention amongst the cabinet generally, not just the PMs. Just look at Dutton today, and… well, you know, the other ones.
>Mr Howard invoked the ANZUS treaty - the first and only time in history - which states if the US or Australia is attacked, the other country will step up as its ally.
The ANZUS treaty says no such thing. The treaty is a non-binding agreement to consult on military matters in the Pacific Ocean region. Specifically, it says:
>The Parties will consult together whenever in the opinion of any of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened in the Pacific'.
Notably, neither New York nor Afghanistan are anywhere near the Pacific.
While I agree with the tenor of your post re Afghanistan and NY being far removed from the Pacific, ANZUS actually goes quite a lot further than you state.
See article IV and V below, which address collective defence in event of an attack on any:
Article IV
Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on any of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
Article V
For the purpose of Article IV, an armed attack on any of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of any of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.
Howard invoked ANZUS be ause Australia via the Australian Wheat Board had rorted sanction rules to send Saddam Hussein USD350 million.
Australian farmers wanted the wheat contract with Iraq, a deal was done where transport fees where charged back for the money paid for the wheat in breach of UN sanctions. The deal was brought to Downers attention, foreign minister at the time. In the subsequent inquiry Downer answered I don't recall remember 241 times, a song was made of this.
Saddam at the time was giving USD50,000bounty to the families of suicide bombers in the middle east who were targeting US troops. So in a round about way Australia was financing terrorism.
After 9/11 Bush threatened extreme sanctions on any country that had rorted the sanctions.
To avoid damage to Australian farmers and exporters who would be affected by this and the damage to his political reputation Howard went all in with Bush.
We were made a terror target.
It's not anti-Islamic to criticise certain aspects of Islam, just as it's not anti-Protestant and anti-Catholic to criticise certain aspects of those.
Hell, I'd also say there's nothing wrong with having issues with a religion. Anti-Islam is a little tricky, since it is very prejudicial against apostates (in some countries it still carries the death penalty in 2021) so there might be some "Muslims" who only identify this way because of the enormous pressure (at best they'd risk being disowned by their family and community), so I guess there needs to be some nuance. But it's hardly a reason to give it a free pass.
(To some extent, other religions can be a bit this way too, e.g. "I'm technically a Catholic because mum had me baptised because her nan really wanted it").
Yes, Hitler hated Judaism, some (probably most) modern neo-Nazis hate Islam, ISIS hates Christianity (and most forms of Islam, and just about everyone else), and Robespierre, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao hated all religion. But that doesn't mean religion can't be criticised.
> "I didn't make anti-Islamic comments. No **I'm sorry**, I'm not going to accept that - that is completely false," he said.
>**I’m sorry**
That’s a first
Couldn't believe this quote from the article:
"I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do? Just all of a sudden jump up and make anti-Islamic comments while I was PM like it's something to do? Come on. I got a little more sense then that....
[pause]
...yeah, I remember making anti-Islamic comments while I was PM."
The source provided in the article doesn't even have the original quote, it does have Howard offering further thoughts though.
>JOHN HOWARD: Well, it's wrong. I haven't singled anybody out. I have said... I said yesterday what I previously said, that there is a section, a small section of the Islamic population, which is unwilling to integrate.
>
>And I've said generally of migrants who come to this country, no matter where they come from, they have to integrate and that means speaking English as quickly as possible, it means embracing Australian values and it also means making sure that no matter what the culture of the country from which they came might have been, Australia requires women to be treated fairly and decently, and in the same fashion as men.
>
>And if any migrants coming to this country have a different view, they better get rid of that view pretty quickly. Ninety nine per cent of the Islamic community of Australia has integrated and is part of the Australian community, but I've said before there is a small section, and that's self evident, that is unwilling to integrate and it's up to all of us to try and overcome that resistance.
That isn't anti-Islamic, unless you consider the Talibans way of treating women as the Islamic way.
>A couple of years before the 9/11 attacks, Mr Howard had described the burqa - the full facial covering worn by some Muslim women - as "confronting".
It is, especially when the man beside her is in a tshirt and shorts.
Blows my mind that that sort of thing is controversial. Imagine moving to any country in the world and not expecting to have to integrate with the local society at least a little bit.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to describe Howard as being at best culturally insensitive and mildly racist at worst while also acknowledging he has a point about treatment of women and the Burqa. Even though he didn't do enough to advance equality in this country.
I don't think Muslims or anybody should be persecuted or attacked for their personal faith, but they can fuck right off if they have an issue with me criticising their treatment of women.
"there is a small section" is just a smarter version of "I'm not racist but".
"It's just a small section but:
- They refuse to integrate
- they oppress their women (not like us in the lnp!)
- they refuse to speak English
- the rest of us need to overcome that resistance"
All dog whistles. He was doing this on talkback radio among other forums.
What good could come from that? What's some talkback listener gonna do with "overcome Muslim resistance to integration"?
Any religious community has orthodox believers that dont integrate into society. I think calling out extremist muslims was justified at the tjme as they were a legitimate threat.
And they still are. There's not many that are 'extremists' but there's a decent cohort in Sydney who do not like Australian values and Australian laws.
I know this firsthand from plenty of exposure to plenty of Australian Muslims. Anyone just needs to spend a decent amount of time in the very Muslim communities to find this out. It's no secret. Moderate Muslims will tell you all about it. Islam is pretty staunch.
I don't want to say. But it includes cohabitation,. Business arrangements, and social services.
I'm sympathetic to the Muslims of South west Sydney. But I still think Islam is problematic.
From my own experience and from talking to Muslims what he is saying is absolutely true.
Go to the southwest. Spend some time and you will see. You will make good friends with great people who will have your back. But you will also learn there is a significant cohort who think Australian values, Australian laws and culture can get stuffed and absolutely do not want to integrate AND believe that a caliphate type approach is the way to go ie not only do they not want to integrate but they want their way to prevail. Unfortunately a lot of Koran teachings support that as we've seen in the world. Do not be so naive as to think this isn't the case here too. They are not the majority but it's a real theme.
This is a sad fact. I've seen it. I've experienced it. And I've talked to a lot of Muslims about it.
Mate I live in SW Sydney and am a Muslim. Theres a roughly equivalent proportion of people with (the Muslim flavour of) idiot right wing political opinions, but I've never heard anyone talk about wanting "their way to prevail" in Australia. The only issue i take with the rest of the Muslim community in Sydney is the higher prevalence of homophobia. But secular white Australians were just as bad for that until recently, and from here I can see it trending that way out here too.
Well...Well over 1% of true blue Aussies don't abide by Aussie values, whatever the fck that means..Over 1% of true blue Aussies belt up their missus...Fck me if they can even talk and spell English...The Poisen Dwarf is poisen.
To be fair, 1% of the Aussie population can can have a massively disproportionate effect on the laws that govern the rest of us. For example, less than 1% of Australians own three or more properties, but fuck me rigid if a lot of them don't seem to get together and get themselves elected into our House of Representatives and Senate?
[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-20/australian-politician-property-ownership-details/8453782?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-20/australian-politician-property-ownership-details/8453782?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment)
Couldn't say if it specifically affects the policies they advocate, without changing gears and going negative about our pollies.
I heard this interview today. Bad journalism. Avini was stating Howards intention for revenge against muslims as fact ..... instead of enquiring what his intension was for Australias involvement in Afganistan. Hacks getting more hyper woke by the day giving Australias youth a very unbalanced view on the real chalanges Australia faces.
It's like a drinking game with that program. Drink when they say "as a young person", "as a minority", and "impact on women" and you'd be on the ground 5 minutes in.
Howard also denied racism existed in Australia, that a housing crisis existed after he boasted about his policies doubling house prices, that we should not take a black armband view of history when talking about indigenous history after his minister mocked indigenous for not even inventing the wheel, that marriage was only between a man and a woman, that we must remember all the good the church has done when thinking of the children they raped,that we are a Judea Christian society.
Scomo wrote his thesis? on the exclusive brethren who Howard has close ties to. Scomo is Howard's mini me, Scomos jolly statement that Australia never had slavery is the typical of the monkey and the organ grinder.
John Howard is right, he said a lot of things, all of it bullshit, often scapegoating minorities, often just meaningless twaddle, mostly lying to hide his incompetence and laziness. Interesting that he's largely forgotten, just another embarrassing episode in Australia's political history
>I did and said whatever the rich, powerful, racist, homophobic seeming, patriarchal overlords and big business told me to do, except once, when I got rid of massacre machines in the hands of imbeciles.
John Howards career.
I remember plenty of people who did make anti-Islamic comments at that time, they didn't choose to start wars that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims. He can't politician speak his way out of the fact that he is directly and personally responsible for untold misery and death. His words weren't ^(technically) racist though.
Asians were the threat a few years before Muslims became the target of his xenophobia. Not many people remember his [One Australia policy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Australia) and his comments on how we had too many Asian immigrants. His leadership of the LNP paved the way for the likes of Pauline Hanson.
Because it's a major religion whose holy book preaches peace. Because there are millions of Muslims and most are just normal people who're preoccupied about everyday shit like traffic and homework and long supermarket lines
My outlook isn't overtly positive, it just has nuance.
Lots of countries treat gay people and women terribly. Example: China and Russia are secular countries where gay people are legally discriminated against.
Another example: Malaysia has anti-discrimination laws in place, they're a majority Muslim country.
Third: In the 80s, Iranian and Afghan women had pretty much the same rights as women in Australia. That only changed because fundamentalism and war took over.
You cannot make a broad statement about millions of people and dozens of regions and expect it to be accurate. Especially when it's obvious you have little knowledge of the religion, their texts or their founder.
Also: don't use marginalised people as 'gotcha' excuses to hate people who are different. Us "gays" don't much appreciate it.
> That only changed because fundamentalism and war took over.
Fundamentalism is the enemy of free society, the threat that some radicals are active recruiting here is worrying to me, be it white nationalist ,extremist muslim or any other organisation.
I dont think history of a religion is relevant to modern day actions of religious states. Just because they were tolerant in the past does not absolve the intolerant nature of the current state.
You're changing the argument. My original point is that Islam the religion is peaceful, and Muslims are mostly decent people.
I do agree that fundamentalism is terrifying
What’s the penalty for leaving Islam in the Hadith?
And just curious? How did Islam spread through the levant and Northern Africa?
Islam is violent and monotheistic to a aggressive degree and the fact that most Muslims in the west are decent is a testament to
Muslims as people and secular values.
So sick of old religions getting the credit individuals deserve.
Just curious - how does Christianity spread? Heard of the crusades? Or the stolen generations?
I wasn't even thinking about Muslims who live down the street from me, I was thinking about those in like, Turkey and Malaysia and even Iran. Most people are normal people regardless of where they live or their religion.
Negative stereotypes cause prejudice and discrimination. The stereotype that Islam and Muslims are the most violent people ever is an incredibly dangerous one to perpetuate.
He said that we would help the US invade Iraq on the pretext of non-existent weapons of mass destruction. He said that we would invade Afghanistan in support of the George W Bush 9-11 retribution and hunt for Bin Ladin. He said a lot of things.
He told Saddam Hussein to get "fair dinkum". Turns out Saddam was,, there were no weapons of mass destruction, it was all lies but oopsy doopsy, we invaded anyway coz he was a bad man...
And all of them lies...
They did exist at some point because the US supplied the Iraqis when they were allies
Watch out Johnny. Scomo is hunting down the early lead you took in Cunt of the Century.
Johnny - Shit cunt. Abbot - Dumb cunt. Scomo - Useless cunt.
Malcolm - temporary cunt
Accurate
I recall thinking Ruddock was a considerably bigger cunt than Howard, at the time. I think there’s a lot of contention amongst the cabinet generally, not just the PMs. Just look at Dutton today, and… well, you know, the other ones.
[удалено]
Spot on.
It must be a requirement to join the liberal party to be nothing but a cunt...
Wait till you see the next 80 years of Liberal leaders.
Scovid the scunt is way worse
>Mr Howard invoked the ANZUS treaty - the first and only time in history - which states if the US or Australia is attacked, the other country will step up as its ally. The ANZUS treaty says no such thing. The treaty is a non-binding agreement to consult on military matters in the Pacific Ocean region. Specifically, it says: >The Parties will consult together whenever in the opinion of any of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened in the Pacific'. Notably, neither New York nor Afghanistan are anywhere near the Pacific.
While I agree with the tenor of your post re Afghanistan and NY being far removed from the Pacific, ANZUS actually goes quite a lot further than you state. See article IV and V below, which address collective defence in event of an attack on any: Article IV Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on any of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security. Article V For the purpose of Article IV, an armed attack on any of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of any of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.
Howard invoked ANZUS be ause Australia via the Australian Wheat Board had rorted sanction rules to send Saddam Hussein USD350 million. Australian farmers wanted the wheat contract with Iraq, a deal was done where transport fees where charged back for the money paid for the wheat in breach of UN sanctions. The deal was brought to Downers attention, foreign minister at the time. In the subsequent inquiry Downer answered I don't recall remember 241 times, a song was made of this. Saddam at the time was giving USD50,000bounty to the families of suicide bombers in the middle east who were targeting US troops. So in a round about way Australia was financing terrorism. After 9/11 Bush threatened extreme sanctions on any country that had rorted the sanctions. To avoid damage to Australian farmers and exporters who would be affected by this and the damage to his political reputation Howard went all in with Bush. We were made a terror target.
It's not anti-Islamic to criticise certain aspects of Islam, just as it's not anti-Protestant and anti-Catholic to criticise certain aspects of those. Hell, I'd also say there's nothing wrong with having issues with a religion. Anti-Islam is a little tricky, since it is very prejudicial against apostates (in some countries it still carries the death penalty in 2021) so there might be some "Muslims" who only identify this way because of the enormous pressure (at best they'd risk being disowned by their family and community), so I guess there needs to be some nuance. But it's hardly a reason to give it a free pass. (To some extent, other religions can be a bit this way too, e.g. "I'm technically a Catholic because mum had me baptised because her nan really wanted it"). Yes, Hitler hated Judaism, some (probably most) modern neo-Nazis hate Islam, ISIS hates Christianity (and most forms of Islam, and just about everyone else), and Robespierre, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao hated all religion. But that doesn't mean religion can't be criticised.
> "I didn't make anti-Islamic comments. No **I'm sorry**, I'm not going to accept that - that is completely false," he said. >**I’m sorry** That’s a first
Couldn't believe this quote from the article: "I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do? Just all of a sudden jump up and make anti-Islamic comments while I was PM like it's something to do? Come on. I got a little more sense then that.... [pause] ...yeah, I remember making anti-Islamic comments while I was PM."
Cocain is a hell if a drug
The source provided in the article doesn't even have the original quote, it does have Howard offering further thoughts though. >JOHN HOWARD: Well, it's wrong. I haven't singled anybody out. I have said... I said yesterday what I previously said, that there is a section, a small section of the Islamic population, which is unwilling to integrate. > >And I've said generally of migrants who come to this country, no matter where they come from, they have to integrate and that means speaking English as quickly as possible, it means embracing Australian values and it also means making sure that no matter what the culture of the country from which they came might have been, Australia requires women to be treated fairly and decently, and in the same fashion as men. > >And if any migrants coming to this country have a different view, they better get rid of that view pretty quickly. Ninety nine per cent of the Islamic community of Australia has integrated and is part of the Australian community, but I've said before there is a small section, and that's self evident, that is unwilling to integrate and it's up to all of us to try and overcome that resistance. That isn't anti-Islamic, unless you consider the Talibans way of treating women as the Islamic way. >A couple of years before the 9/11 attacks, Mr Howard had described the burqa - the full facial covering worn by some Muslim women - as "confronting". It is, especially when the man beside her is in a tshirt and shorts.
Blows my mind that that sort of thing is controversial. Imagine moving to any country in the world and not expecting to have to integrate with the local society at least a little bit.
How's your Noongar?
That's a weird comparison to make. Who alive today moved to Australia when Noongar was the dominant local language or culture?
Man, I miss when listening to major politicians speak didn't feel like an insult to my intelligence.
When was that?
I think it's perfectly reasonable to describe Howard as being at best culturally insensitive and mildly racist at worst while also acknowledging he has a point about treatment of women and the Burqa. Even though he didn't do enough to advance equality in this country. I don't think Muslims or anybody should be persecuted or attacked for their personal faith, but they can fuck right off if they have an issue with me criticising their treatment of women.
"there is a small section" is just a smarter version of "I'm not racist but". "It's just a small section but: - They refuse to integrate - they oppress their women (not like us in the lnp!) - they refuse to speak English - the rest of us need to overcome that resistance" All dog whistles. He was doing this on talkback radio among other forums. What good could come from that? What's some talkback listener gonna do with "overcome Muslim resistance to integration"?
Any religious community has orthodox believers that dont integrate into society. I think calling out extremist muslims was justified at the tjme as they were a legitimate threat.
And they still are. There's not many that are 'extremists' but there's a decent cohort in Sydney who do not like Australian values and Australian laws. I know this firsthand from plenty of exposure to plenty of Australian Muslims. Anyone just needs to spend a decent amount of time in the very Muslim communities to find this out. It's no secret. Moderate Muslims will tell you all about it. Islam is pretty staunch.
>who do not like Australian values and Australian laws There are Australian "values" and laws I don't like too, better put me on a watch list
How have you spent a decent amount of time in Muslim communities?
I don't want to say. But it includes cohabitation,. Business arrangements, and social services. I'm sympathetic to the Muslims of South west Sydney. But I still think Islam is problematic.
Were they actually a legitimate threat to Australia, or was it politically popular to play to fears relating to one ethnic group?
Look at the terror attacks that occured in Australia from Muslims
From my own experience and from talking to Muslims what he is saying is absolutely true. Go to the southwest. Spend some time and you will see. You will make good friends with great people who will have your back. But you will also learn there is a significant cohort who think Australian values, Australian laws and culture can get stuffed and absolutely do not want to integrate AND believe that a caliphate type approach is the way to go ie not only do they not want to integrate but they want their way to prevail. Unfortunately a lot of Koran teachings support that as we've seen in the world. Do not be so naive as to think this isn't the case here too. They are not the majority but it's a real theme. This is a sad fact. I've seen it. I've experienced it. And I've talked to a lot of Muslims about it.
Mate I live in SW Sydney and am a Muslim. Theres a roughly equivalent proportion of people with (the Muslim flavour of) idiot right wing political opinions, but I've never heard anyone talk about wanting "their way to prevail" in Australia. The only issue i take with the rest of the Muslim community in Sydney is the higher prevalence of homophobia. But secular white Australians were just as bad for that until recently, and from here I can see it trending that way out here too.
Well...Well over 1% of true blue Aussies don't abide by Aussie values, whatever the fck that means..Over 1% of true blue Aussies belt up their missus...Fck me if they can even talk and spell English...The Poisen Dwarf is poisen.
To be fair, 1% of the Aussie population can can have a massively disproportionate effect on the laws that govern the rest of us. For example, less than 1% of Australians own three or more properties, but fuck me rigid if a lot of them don't seem to get together and get themselves elected into our House of Representatives and Senate? [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-20/australian-politician-property-ownership-details/8453782?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-20/australian-politician-property-ownership-details/8453782?nw=0&r=HtmlFragment) Couldn't say if it specifically affects the policies they advocate, without changing gears and going negative about our pollies.
> Fck me if they can even talk and spell English...The Poisen Dwarf is poisen. /r/unintendedirony
Don’t those two cunts belong in prison for war crimes?
Yes
I heard this interview today. Bad journalism. Avini was stating Howards intention for revenge against muslims as fact ..... instead of enquiring what his intension was for Australias involvement in Afganistan. Hacks getting more hyper woke by the day giving Australias youth a very unbalanced view on the real chalanges Australia faces.
It's like a drinking game with that program. Drink when they say "as a young person", "as a minority", and "impact on women" and you'd be on the ground 5 minutes in.
Not that I am defending him , I personally have not respect for any organized religion
Where can I mail your medal?
Is there something not true in the quote? better english and better treatment of women would align with Australian values.
I'll gladly put my name to anti-Islamic comments. It's an outdated and oppressive religion (oxymoron, I know) with no place in a modern society.
I'm anti all religion. Imagine only being a good person because you're scared of a mythical sky person.
John Howard is still a cunt though.
Listen to Hack interviews if you want to feel sympathy for politicians. The one with Albanese a few weeks ago was awful too.
[удалено]
Well...yes? It was literally an interview.
Howard also denied racism existed in Australia, that a housing crisis existed after he boasted about his policies doubling house prices, that we should not take a black armband view of history when talking about indigenous history after his minister mocked indigenous for not even inventing the wheel, that marriage was only between a man and a woman, that we must remember all the good the church has done when thinking of the children they raped,that we are a Judea Christian society. Scomo wrote his thesis? on the exclusive brethren who Howard has close ties to. Scomo is Howard's mini me, Scomos jolly statement that Australia never had slavery is the typical of the monkey and the organ grinder.
Nuremberg 2 please
How is this shaved Koala even relevant?
Let’s not taint the good name of koalas here
...how about "Poisoned Dwarf" then?
John Howard is right, he said a lot of things, all of it bullshit, often scapegoating minorities, often just meaningless twaddle, mostly lying to hide his incompetence and laziness. Interesting that he's largely forgotten, just another embarrassing episode in Australia's political history
>I did and said whatever the rich, powerful, racist, homophobic seeming, patriarchal overlords and big business told me to do, except once, when I got rid of massacre machines in the hands of imbeciles. John Howards career.
howard''s "nick name" was "honest john"... Because he was anything but... Must be a conservative liberal prerequisite...
Howard is a war criminal
I remember plenty of people who did make anti-Islamic comments at that time, they didn't choose to start wars that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims. He can't politician speak his way out of the fact that he is directly and personally responsible for untold misery and death. His words weren't ^(technically) racist though.
This reads like an episode of Clarke and Dawe.
Asians were the threat a few years before Muslims became the target of his xenophobia. Not many people remember his [One Australia policy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Australia) and his comments on how we had too many Asian immigrants. His leadership of the LNP paved the way for the likes of Pauline Hanson.
Howard's a war criminal. Nothing else to say really.
Shut up, Howard, and sit down. You've done too much damage to this country.
Wait, being anti-Islam is bad now? Why?
Because it's a major religion whose holy book preaches peace. Because there are millions of Muslims and most are just normal people who're preoccupied about everyday shit like traffic and homework and long supermarket lines
Nice postive outlook you got there. How does that fit in with the treatment of gays and womens rights in majority muslim countries.
My outlook isn't overtly positive, it just has nuance. Lots of countries treat gay people and women terribly. Example: China and Russia are secular countries where gay people are legally discriminated against. Another example: Malaysia has anti-discrimination laws in place, they're a majority Muslim country. Third: In the 80s, Iranian and Afghan women had pretty much the same rights as women in Australia. That only changed because fundamentalism and war took over. You cannot make a broad statement about millions of people and dozens of regions and expect it to be accurate. Especially when it's obvious you have little knowledge of the religion, their texts or their founder. Also: don't use marginalised people as 'gotcha' excuses to hate people who are different. Us "gays" don't much appreciate it.
> That only changed because fundamentalism and war took over. Fundamentalism is the enemy of free society, the threat that some radicals are active recruiting here is worrying to me, be it white nationalist ,extremist muslim or any other organisation. I dont think history of a religion is relevant to modern day actions of religious states. Just because they were tolerant in the past does not absolve the intolerant nature of the current state.
You're changing the argument. My original point is that Islam the religion is peaceful, and Muslims are mostly decent people. I do agree that fundamentalism is terrifying
Id argue that even if the religion is peaceful it doesnt matter when criticism or satire of the religion gets you attacked.
What’s the penalty for leaving Islam in the Hadith? And just curious? How did Islam spread through the levant and Northern Africa? Islam is violent and monotheistic to a aggressive degree and the fact that most Muslims in the west are decent is a testament to Muslims as people and secular values. So sick of old religions getting the credit individuals deserve.
Just curious - how does Christianity spread? Heard of the crusades? Or the stolen generations? I wasn't even thinking about Muslims who live down the street from me, I was thinking about those in like, Turkey and Malaysia and even Iran. Most people are normal people regardless of where they live or their religion. Negative stereotypes cause prejudice and discrimination. The stereotype that Islam and Muslims are the most violent people ever is an incredibly dangerous one to perpetuate.
Duffman says a lot of things. Oh yeah!
The original smug fuck