We should fund Islamic schools for our own good

iansand says:

05:58am | 15/02/11

Look up “madrassa”.  Look up “Wah’habism”.  Look at who is funding the spectacular upsurge in the numbers of madrassas.  Look up the correlation between people who study at extreme madrassas and subsequent acts of terrorism.

When you are a little better informed get back to us.  That half billion is probably a lot more effective than any number of fridge magnets.  It is probably the smartest money we are spending on anti-terrorist measures.

persephone says:

06:06am | 15/02/11

Except, BofB, the Liberals admit it’s good policy.

Firstly, it was introduced by them, and still has the support of the majority of the Liberal party - or Tony wuold have cut it entirely, rather than just wimpily suspending it for a couple of years.

So that’s an admission that the program is worthwhile, right there.

Secondly, what’s wrong with ‘writing truths’  (as you put it) about the Opposiion? As the alternative government, they need to be scrutinised, too.

Thirdly, half a billion is cheap, in terms of fighting terrorism. It’s very very cheap in terms of Defence.

The Liberals in government introduced this program as an effective way to fight terrorism. Were John Howard and Downer mistaken about this? We know that Downer (and his successors, Briggs and Bishop) believe the program works.

Jugg says:

06:21am | 15/02/11

iansand,

Go and live in the country and find out how out of touch and how far from reality your statements are from the truth.  Hysterical scare mongering based on litle true knowledge.

freddy f says:

06:56am | 15/02/11

Bugger the Indonesians hows about sending the 500 mil to the Aboriginals in the NT struggling in third world conditions for education health and accommodation. It begins at home you know, charity thats is. How politically correct for us to believe sending money to Indonesia will have an effect on religious beliefs. Sad and beyond beliefto me. and dont you think the Indonesians will report back on how well our money is being spent coz its okay to lie to unbeleivers.

persephone says:

07:40am | 15/02/11

Jugg

so you admit Indonesia has problems? Surely educating the new generation will help lessen the difficulties we may behaving in the present.

freddy

firstly, we can walk and chew gum. We can afford to both help Indonesia and the aborigines.

The idea that we are a poor country struggling to make ends meet is totally ridiculous.

Secondly, what we’re doing in Indonesia isn’t ‘chairty’. It is an investment in our future - just as money spent helping aborigines is.

How much did the Bali bombings cost us?

Jugg says:

08:03am | 15/02/11

Persephone,

Do we educate our own because we have outlaw bikies in this country?  Would it be balanced assessment for Indonesian media to report that Australia is being over run with terrorist bikies who blow stuff up, kill people, traffick in drugs and are a danger to the rest of the world?

freedy f says:

08:13am | 15/02/11

persephone this is real world stuff not politically correct everybody has some good in them. money doesnt deter terrorism, they just smile and find ways of getting their hands on some of it for training and killing people. And if we are so rich why are babys in the NT dieing at third world rates.

iansand says:

08:21am | 15/02/11

Jugg

I used the word “madrassa”, as opposed to “pesantran” for a reason.  My knowledge of Indonesia is irrelevant to my point.

But as you have so much knowledge about Indonesia perhaps you could enlighten us and help me regain contact with reality?

Adam Diver says:

08:29am | 15/02/11

@ iansand and tory

“The money we spend on education in Indonesia works. It is a valuable program.”

“Look up the correlation between people who study at extreme madrassas and subsequent acts of terrorism.”

Why don’t you guys just provide evidence or examples, this isn’t a research assignment, we shouldn’t have to do your work for you to have a debate.

Quite frankly I don’t know if it works or not, but I know if a journalist says outright that it does work, provides no facts and aligns perfectly with thier beliefs that I am only getting half the story.

Ando says:

08:38am | 15/02/11

Jugg,
Yes, education has always be used to combat crime and poverty. Are you seriuosly questioning this.

AndrewK says:

08:43am | 15/02/11

Straw man argument, Jugg. The bikies of today may well have taken advantage of public education (hey, they may have gone to private school) but that is not the point - comparing the motivation of a member of a Bikie gang and a religious extremist is really chalk and cheese. One is financially motivated, and uses organised crime as a means to monetary gain. The other is politically motivated, and uses violence to attempt to install religious belief into state governance.

iansand says:

08:45am | 15/02/11

Adam - One of my sources is “Sowing the Wind: The Seeds of Conflict in the Middle East”  by John Keay.  It traces the development and influence of Wah’habism from its roots in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan to its current, Saudi oil revenue fuelled, position in the world.

But I doubt that there is a sensible commentator on the rise of Islamism who does not draw the connection.  If you are not aware of that connection I cannot be responsible for your ignorance.

iansand says:

08:50am | 15/02/11

Whoops - I meant “God’s Terrorists: the Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Modern Jihad” by Charles Allen.  An interesting and worrying read.

persephone says:

08:53am | 15/02/11

OK, Adam, do some research and provide the other half,

All the indicators are that the progam is valuable - it has had bipartisan support, for starters, always a good sign.

I know there was a One Nation website which had some talking points opposing this spending - may be you could start there?

Barry says:

09:21am | 15/02/11

@freedy f

I couldnt resist but aboriginal health has nothing to do with money. It has every thing to do with diet and the mixture betweeen traditional indigenuous culture and western culture.  This mix is in every element of thier lives and it reduces thier life expectancy . The rate of kidney failure, pancreatic cancer, heart disease, malnutrition are all attributed to poor food intake not the lack of food but food high in sugars. Western society has had at least 250 years and it hasd been gradual while alot of aboroginals have only been exposed to high fructose diets for 20- 40 years and it has been immediate.  In fact too much money is killing indigenous communities not the other way around.

Jugg says:

09:46am | 15/02/11

Ando,

No.

AndrewK,

I don’t need nor asked for you assessment of my contribution.  So keep your ‘straw man’ comment to yourself.

Perhaps you are unaware of the High Court Challenges of the bikie gangs attempting to influence the governance of our States.

freddy f says:

09:49am | 15/02/11

barry its political correctness that stops us stepping in and taking action to improve standards, teach and save lives. ie the stolen generation that was in reality the saved generation.

James1 says:

10:50am | 15/02/11

As I say below, the main reason we need to keep spending this money is to oppose Saudi foreign policy, and the Wahabist interpretation of Islam it is designed to spread.

Adam Diver says:

10:52am | 15/02/11

@ Pers

“All the indicators are that the progam is valuable “

What indicators would those be?

I am not in this debate because I don’t have any idea about the tangible results of such an initiative. Think of me as a moderator for this one, between people claiming we should spend 500 million dollars overseas in our national interest and then providing no evidence as to why.

Looks like you fell into that same trap Pers.

iansand says:

11:17am | 15/02/11

Adam -  Wah’habists exist.  Osama Bin Laden is one.  What he is doing/has done is entirely consistent with Wah’habist teaching.  You have an inkling of step 1 of the problem.

Madrassas exist.  They are schools.  Some madrassas, funded by the Saudis, teach Wah’habist doctrine.  Those Madrasas have increased, and are increasing rapidly.  I forget the figures, but over the last 2 or 3 decades they have expanded at a huge rate.  Particularly in Pakistan and Afghanistan.  They produce radical Islamists.  That is step 2 of the problem.

Indonesia is the largest Muslim country.  Pesantren are the Indonesian equivalent of madrassas.  They are not all teaching radical Islam.  Most are not, but some are.  That is step 3 of the problem.

If you can cut radical teaching off at the knees by removing the need for funding there is a chance that you can prevent the increase in radical Islamists in Indonesia.  That is a possible solution to the problem.

If you can’t work that out, you should hand in your Diploma of Rocket Surgery and Bartending.

L. says:

11:18am | 15/02/11

Agree with Adam here…

It’s working?

By what metric?

Plus, it’s one thing to build these establishments, but who’s staffing them..?

Gregg says:

11:44am | 15/02/11

@ Persey,
You do remember another fella do you not who had a few things in common with our White haired clown bounding around?
A little hint - first name Gareth
Also bound to the odd clanger and being well renowned
For it seems not only Cheryl but that ” It seemed like a good idea at the time “
Even both sides of politics can have bright ideas but whether they are good ideas or not is debatable.
Like who is monitoring the program for belief is often different to facts too.
And HTH will we know if it is effective against terrorism?
Right now the bad guys are probably saying see, they just give money to build some buildings and what else do they do for you?

Gregg says:

11:52am | 15/02/11

@ Freddy,
And there is already heaps of money allocated to the indigenous Freddy though somehow a lot of it gets bound up in bureaucracy and so maybe there’s education needed in that area too, using the 4x2 variety.
But with the indigenous schooling, though you can lead a horse to water, it’s difficult to make it drink - ever tried holding a horses head under water?, one that you haven’t decapitated at least!
Well even getting the kids to turn up to a school is a challenge when the option is to go out fishing with Uncle Twiddlethumbs.

How do you propose we get over that little hurdle - put them into a school chain gang!

There are also then many that are in more developed areas like Darwin that do partake of schooling, even technical colleges so as it might give them a chance for working in the future.

I believe in fairytales says:

12:56pm | 15/02/11

Interesting article from Canada about multiculturalism and their current issues. I think this has been the only ‘moderate’ muslim I’ve heard speak up. And I was starting to think moderate muslims were as rare as unicorns!

http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Time+change+tune+official+multiculturalism/4270908/story.html

barry says:

01:05pm | 15/02/11

@freedy f

I agree with the PC statement.

But remember in this current age of equality the PC is far more importanat than peoples health.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

01:29pm | 15/02/11

Thanks for that link to the Calgary Herald. It should be compulsory reading for anyone holding public office in Australia, from dog-catcher to Prime Minister. 
 
Then we need to clone this guy and get him out here to spread the news. 

‘‘If you don’t like it, leave. If you want to live under sharia law, go back to the hellhole country you came from or go to another hellhole country that lives under sharia law,” said Kanwar

Gold.

iMitchy says:

02:01pm | 15/02/11

@ Gregg
That’s right, you can’t make that horse drink. But if you leave it alone, chances are it will find its own water. Alternatively it will perish.
Cruel? That’s up to you -  but it beats standing knee deep in the cold rapids fighting it, and ending up with a dead horse anyway.
We have to stop intervening. The whole indigenous funding issue in Australia just screams “Billy Madison” to me….... R-O-K?

This Indo school issue is touchy because if this policy doesn’t work, then one could fairly assume that there had been cases where extremists used the very funding donated to prevent extremism to recruit and train more of their ilk.
If it does work, how much more money do we have to throw at the situation in future to maintain that peace. Are we simply giving the school bully our lunch money to leave us alone?

Then there is the index against which we measure the success.
If we experience any attacks advocates will still try to tell us about how many attacks didn’t take place - which can only properly be measured by the number of plans that are foiled by investigators - anybody making plans in the first place would mean that the policy was not successful.
And what if we aren’t attacked? The success is only individually interpretable, like trying to define the moment a quitting smoker becomes a non smoker.
Australia has not experienced any major terror attacks, so doing nothing seemed to be succesful. From the implementation of this policy, there is only 2 possible outcomes - wait for failure or fail. If the policy gets canned, then any attacks will be blamed on the cancellation of the policy.

If it helps to save lives then I’m for it but the fact that the policy even has to be in place isn’t doing the greater Muslim population any favours in trying to undo the tarnished reputation left from past terror attacks. That and the fact that we can justify being at war in the Middle East while throwing money at the most populous Muslim country in the world to educate leaves a contradictory bad taste in my mouth. A bit like paying tax in first place.

Rosie says:

02:08pm | 15/02/11

BofB - I was thinking the same as well. Fund Islamic schools so as to stop the children from becoming future terrorists! Worse still the citizens of this country are made to feel that it is our moral obligation to give as much aid as we can afford because we can afford it. At the same time the Non Govt charity organisations are working damm hard to provide for the homeless, abused children etc

BofB says:

02:30pm | 15/02/11

I see no one (except Persphone) has addressed my point regarding this being yet another article, that focuses on the coalition who are not in a position to cut this spending.
As far as the policy is concerned, it may be good insurance (I’m certainly open to be convinced) but it’s bloody expensive insurance, I assume this half-bil is not a recurring payment, but a once off?

The fact is though, that more time and space has been wasted focussing on something which doesn’t exist! This money will be sent, as the coalition “are not in government”!

@iansand, I’ll look those books up, thanks for the tip.

Anne Dawson says:

03:00pm | 15/02/11

This is ridiculous. It’s akin to paying protection money to the mafia bullies. So now we are paying protection money to Islamic bullies? Indonesia has an appalling record of human rights abuses, from the Invasion of East Timor, the slaying of Australian Journalists which was hushed up by our government, to the invasion of Irian Jaya (West Papua) - stealing land and resources from the indigenous population. They have enough resources and enough money to fund their own education programs. If they can afford to invade and subjugate neighbouring countries, then they can afford to look after their own affairs. And just how much of our taxes (foreign aid) are being pocketed by corrupt Indonesian officials? I’m looking for a party to vote for that puts Australia first and stops paying protection money to these types of bullies.  Diplomacy can go hang itself.

Bruce says:

07:41pm | 15/02/11

Liberal and Labor may think its good policy, but it does not make it right. I can think of $400 / $500 million reason why.

TChong says:

06:11am | 15/02/11

So Zac , what are you going to ask these godless unionised teachers?
‘Have you never believed ‘? How long have you not believed for ?
Who and what dont you believe in ?
Atheism is social engineering, unlike believing in invisible sky pals ?
Amusing, and bemusing , Zac.

MrMac says:

06:18am | 15/02/11

Tory’s article is specifically about Indonesia, Zac.

Where are these places other religions are banned? . Where is this conversion by authority you are concerned about? . Where is this social engineering you are worried about?

Zac de Spudnut says:

06:42am | 15/02/11

Chong,

Only when you comprehend that Atheism is much more than what you think it is, only then you will ask adult questions. For a start Atheism is a religion. Let’s ask the Atheists themselves:

“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,” the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion.

A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate’s rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.

Ref:  Court rules atheism a religion

“Legally atheism counts as a religion” – John Perkins, Atheist Foundation of Australia *

“THE Atheist Foundation of Australia has lodged complaints of religious discrimination in Melbourne and Hobart after being refused permission to put atheist advertising on buses”.*

* The Age, January 29, 2009

Kevin says:

07:06am | 15/02/11

What a ridiculous post.  This is the classic tactic by christian groups, akin to the attempt in the US to characterise creationism as a science and get it equal billing with evolution in the science classroom.

As a non-believer, I would be more than happy if the government didn’t spend any money on promoting religion or “atheism”.  Ban the promotion of any belief system at schools.  No indoctrination of the children.  Teach nothing.  Fine by me.

GregS says:

07:28am | 15/02/11

Zac it is hardly logical or sensible or grown up or (I could go on and on) to cite legal cases from the USA.  Torcaso vs Watkins was specifically about whether the governor of Maryland (?) was required to declare a religious belief in order to hold public office. Nothing from the USA should be applied to life in Australia when it comes to religious belief.  And atheism is not a religion.  The statement that not believing is believing in not believing is just silly.  Much of your other posts here are even worse.

P. Darvio says:

08:38am | 15/02/11

Atheism receives no public funding whereas in Australia religion receives each year $31 Billion in direct funding and tax exemptions - this is a disgrace and outrageous. We are starving children to ensure those children are exposed to the evil of religion. We are funding Christian Fundamentalism to teach children in our classrooms that they will go to hell and humans once fed dinosaurs on a big wooden boat in a big flood.

http://home.alphalink.com.au/~jperkins/TaxesAndSubsidies.htm

http://www.news.com.au/national/creationists-hijack-lessons-and-teach-schoolkids-man-and-dinosaurs-walked-together/story-e6frfkvr-1225899497234

Religion has no morals or ethics at all because the religious texts of the 3 so-called Abrahamic faiths are the most violet, hateful, war mongering terrorist evil ever written – books that promote and encourage child abuse, rape, murder, torture, the stoning of women and mass genocide – and that’s just the Christian Faith and Bible.

The great dictators of the last century where either Christian (Hitler) or where trained in the genocidal ways of the Christian Bible (Stalin, Pol Pot). Tens of Millions of people have been slaughtered by religion in the last 100 years and Christians are now killing gays in Africa in accordance with Bible Law (the Christian equivalent of Sharia Law). The Christian faith with complicit aid from the Vatican has protected Christian Holocaust NAZI’s and helped them escape prosecution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alois_Hudal#Ratline_organizer

The funding for Christian fundamentalism in our classrooms must be stopped and the funding used solely for secular based ethics classes, as only secular society has morals and ethics. Secular ethics classes must be made mandatory at all religious schools to ensure these poor children are given some guidance and not the rubbish and evil of religious indoctrination.

The funding of Religious madrasah’s in Indonesia must also stop and that money used to promote secularism in Indonesia.

Syl says:

08:40am | 15/02/11

Zac

re·li·gion
? ?/r??l?d??n/ Show Spelled[ri-lij-uhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

atheism (?e?????z?m) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]
— n
  rejection of belief in God or gods

So Religion is a set of beliefs usually involving a supernatural being (i.e. God).  Atheism is lack of belief in Gods (or supernatural beliefs).
Therefore Atheism is not a religion.  Its not that hard to understand. 

The faithful constantly bleat “Atheism is a Religion” when Atheism has no set belief system (it is defined as the opposite), no structured rituals etc.  Lack of belief is not Religion, not matter how badly you want it to be.  It is the default position of every person born on this Earth before indoctrination into ancient fairytales.

A Dose of Reality says:

08:54am | 15/02/11

Zac, Zac, ZAC,

You have to secretly know how ridiculous your posts are.  Quoting US court rulings?  You are reduced to that? and in a thread about a totally different topic?

How sad.

Just to go along with the “argument”:

Firstly, read the decision record again, you’ll find it is in relation to rights applicable for religious/supernatural beliefs/non-beliefs (simplified for you - that means atheists should have the same rights under the Law as superstitious people) rather than a case to determine the nature of atheism.  Furthermore perhaps you should educate yourself on the operation of common law country legal systems to learn how such terms ARE actually determined.

Cherry picking paragraphs out of lengthy documents so you can put them out of context is the cheapest of arguments, and points to the very nature of your assertions.

Secondly, to illustrate the effectiveness of using definitions under court decisions as “proof”.  You may want to know that another US court decision (Nix v. Hedden) classified the tomato as a vegetable (for taxation purposes) - this does not change the biological reality!

Just as a US court ruling cannot change the fact that atheism is the absence of belief in the supernatural.

Thirdly, and most amusingly, you cite atheists as attempting “social engineering”?  Are you completely unaware of the very nature of religion?  Are you that blind to the historical record?  READ SOMETHING!  A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black (although in this case the kettle could be more accurately replaced with grandma’s prized shiny white translucent porcelain plate).

N8 says:

09:35am | 15/02/11

Yeah Zac turn the rant dial down a few notches.

Your point would be much better raised if you simply said “In Australia 70% of the population claim adherence to a religious faith of some description. Why therefore should we enforce an atheistic viewpoint in our schools, when at 18.7% of the population it is clearly a minority?”

The deal with this as anything is choice, let people make it and don’t hate them for it. Not Tory’s strong suite, but then as most people who believe so militantly in something they tend not to recognise that any other viewpoints have merit.

source - http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/religion.html

Zac de Spudnut says:

09:52am | 15/02/11

Kevin,

There is heaps of teachers, professors and scientist who use the tool of evolution to promote Atheism. It is an Atheistic evangelism tool. Mind you there is heaps of scientist who disagree with evolution theory.

And it is up to the tax paying parent to decide if their kids has to be taught spirituality and spiritual values or omnipotent chance or we are hear just like that absurdity.

GregS & Syl,

So it is ok to use what happens in U.S and other parts of the world against the religious but not against Atheists. What matters is the substance. Even the Atheist foundation of Australia thinks Atheism is a religion, it can’t get any better than that.

Not only that “Contemporary Western Atheism unquestionably has six of the seven dimensions of religion set forth by Smart, and the remaining dimension, ritual, has also started to develop. Thus it’s fallacious to assert, “Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair colour”. Perhaps a better analogy would be calling a shaved head a “hairstyle”. Other than the denial of the divine, there is little difference between Atheism and other worldviews typically labelled as religions.

Atheism shouldn’t be taught or enforced in settings where other religions are banned and shouldn’t be favoured by laws which imply a religiously neutral government.”

For more on this read: Atheism: A religion

http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion

Danny B says:

09:58am | 15/02/11

Oh, FFS.  Atheism isn’t a religion, it’s a lack of belief in a sky-fairy.  There is no agenda and no organisation.  It’s just a choice, to believe in what is observable and repeatable (i.e. science), rather than something that can’t be proved to ever have existed.  And a religiously neutral government is a good thing.  Take a look at countries like Iran, where the separation of church and state is non-existent.

True Believer says:

10:16am | 15/02/11

@ P. Darvio

What a bigoted and misleading post.
promote and encourage child abuse, rape, murder, torture, the stoning of women and mass genocide – and that’s just the Christian Faith and Bible

“Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the New Testament which Christians follow.  Jesus prevented the stoning of a woman by saying to the crowd “let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”

Jesus taught – “love thy neighbour as you love yourself.”  On children He said if anyone harmed a hair of their head there would be severe punishment. These are just a few examples of how wrong your post is. You make statements that are manifestly untrue.  As for rape, torture – Jesus did not mention those at all.

As for all dictators being Christian – again you have no idea what you are talking about – dictatorship is directly in opposition to Christianity.  Hitler may have had a denomination – that does not make him a Christian. 

“The Christian faith with complicit aid from the Vatican has protected Christian Holocaust NAZI’s and helped them escape prosecution”

Having been to the Holocaust Museum in Israel I am aware of the claims made about a particular pope - it is mentioned there You state something that allegedly happened once by one denomination as being indicative of all Christianity. This is utter nonsense.

As for only secularism having morals and ethics – I would like to see the basis of that statement – other than claims being made by secularists and atheists. I think you would find their beliefs are built on shifting sands.

It is sad to see someone so embittered against Jesus, when all He came to bring was Life in all its fullness.  Look past denominations and acquaint yourself with what He did and taught.

Zac de Spudnut says:

10:17am | 15/02/11

P. Darvio,

Atheism receives no public funding whereas in Australia religion receives each year $31 Billion in direct funding and tax exemptions >>>

Atheists do receive tax funding. Let me know who else is funding Atheist evangelists in preps, child care, schools, colleges and uni’s.

So to you Western Christian nations have no morals or ethics. Do you think morals and ethics came out of “omnipotent chance” or some “big bangish chemical soup”? Even the Atheist head mufti Richard Dawkins thinks he is a Christian (absurd as it looks, by the way there is nothing intelligent about Atheism) and accepts the west is a Christian nation.

http://atheismsucks.blogspot.com/2009/04/richard-dawkins-christian.html

Darvio, it is a well know fact that all the tyrants in our life and the ones during French revolution were Atheists.

In the name of creating their version of a religion-free utopia, Adolf Hitler (Was Hitler a Christian?), Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong produced the kind of mass slaughter that no Inquisitor could possibly match. Collectively these atheist tyrants murdered more than 100 million people. (Zac’s research says it’s more than 300 million). Whatever the motives for atheist bloodthirstiness, the indisputable fact is that all the religions of the world put together have in 2,000 years not managed to kill as many people as have been killed in the name of atheism in the past few decades.

It’s time to abandon the mindlessly repeated mantra that religious belief has been the greatest source of human conflict and violence. Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history.

Ref: Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

http://atheisticviolence.wordpress.com/2007/12/04/atheism-not-religion-is-the-force-behind-the-mass-murders-of-history/

Secularism is nothing more than Atheism in sheeps clothing and I am totally against funding anything to do with secularism in schools or otherwise. Ours kids can certainly do with out this “Jerry Springer style “Singer” morality”.

Bert says:

10:34am | 15/02/11

Atheism is as much a religion as NOT collecting stamps is a hobby.
Evolution is NOT a tool used by atheists to promote the supposed religion atheism. It’s a scientific theory (theory is one of the highest level something in science can achieve and does not mean what people use it for in everyday language) that explains how diversity of species occurs in the world. It has nothing to do with how life or the universe began. It as core to biology as the periodic table is to chemistry.

It is observed every day in our natural world. There are more scientists called “Steve” that support evolution then ALL scientists who do not support evolution.

AdamC says:

10:36am | 15/02/11

P.Darvio, your comments border on the delusional. How can you claim that Pol Pot’s, an atheistic communist, was inspired to genocide by the Bible? Indeed, I find your claims that the Bible promotes child abuse and murder (among other evils) quite ridiculous and offensive.

Zac de Spudnik, while atheism isn’t technically a religion, I agree that it has many things in common with religion. Unfortunately, it shares most of the negative aspects (self-righteousness and intolerance of non-believers) and few of the good ones. However, I stress I am reluctant to endorse your hysterical rants even to that degree, given how nutty you seem to be.

James1 says:

10:55am | 15/02/11

Zac,

If you don’t know the difference between atheist, which takes an active position of the existence of god, and secular, which takes no position at all, what is the point of having a discussion?

Also, evolution is not a religious position, as religion implies a certain level of faith, which in turn requires a lack of proof.  Evolution is based on facts, and indeed has been proven to occur (think antibiotics).  Those scientists are just teaching the facts - if you choose to ignore facts, that is your problem, not the scientists’.

A Dose of Reality says:

11:14am | 15/02/11

Zac,

Now you are using propaganda from religious websites as a “reference” to support your statement? (creation.com) can you not see the blatant stupidity in this?  Such a website cannot be viewed as authoritative - it has an obvious agenda.  I wonder at the possibility that you are still a minor, or that your schooling was severely limited (in either case, perhaps we all should treat you with “kid gloves”).

The article you use was very well written, in that it combines many half-truths within it’s agenda to give the impression of considered opinion (very political - even rann would be impressed), however an educated person (someone who has knowledge of “other” religions and philosophies) sees through every paragraph, it “preaches to the converted”.

martinX says:

12:02pm | 15/02/11

“Not believing in God” is a religion just like “not collecting stamps” is a hobby.

P. Darvio says:

12:18pm | 15/02/11

Why is it that most so-called Christians know nothing of their “faith” and what it is they are required to believe?

Christians are required to believe in the Christian Bible as a matter of faith. The Bible is 2 parts – the OLD and NEW Testaments – if you don’t know, except or understand this please don’t pretend to be Christian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible

“The Christian Bible (sometimes known as the Holy Bible) is divided into two parts. The first is called the Old Testament, containing the 39 books of Hebrew Scripture, and the second portion is called the New Testament”

AND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity

“Christianity regards the Bible, a collection of canonical books in two parts (the Old Testament and the New Testament), as the authoritative word of God”

If you don’t understand this keep reading it until your do. I get really tired of telling so-called Christians what it is they are required to believe in.

Atheists know more about Christianity and the Bible than so-called Christians do – maybe because they have actually read it or studied it or both - and so-called Christians are too embarrassed to admit that their Bible is so violent, unethical and immoral?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/09/28/130191248/atheists-and-agnostics-know-more-about-bible-than-religious

Only 27% of Australians can claim to be Christians as they claim to actually believe in GOD and the Christian Bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Australia

This 60+% figure so-called Christians claim is just rubbish and a lie, and they know it.

The Christian Bible is an evil, sick, barbaric terrorist manifesto and one of the religious texts that cause most of the World’s problems and Wars, both current and throughout human history.

Hitler was a Christian and the Christian Vatican helped him into power and then protects NAZI War Criminals and helps them escape to South America. Stalin was trained as a Christian Priest for 4 years in the terrorist ways of the Bible, Pol Pot was trained at a Catholic School in the genocidal ways of the Christian Bible for 7 years !!!! – brainwashed with Christian evil - and we continue to allow these Christian People into our schools to teach them the same evil mantra of the Christian Bible – the book that teaches people to hate, rape, murder, torture and commit mass genocide. As for Mao Zedong he grew up in a Buddhist household – the evil of religion never ends.

Wherever the tentacles of religion sprout you will find the worst of the genocidal dictators of the last 100 years and throughout human history, and the violent murder of tens of millions of real innocent people unlike the 300 million these other bloggers falsely attribute to Atheism.

The Christian “saintly” Mother Teresa takes bribes from crooked real estate developers (and praises third World Christian dictators) and when asked to hand the money back by US Courts she ignores the Court request!! And this is what Christians want our children exposed to, and ideology of bribery, corruption and theft?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/mother.htm

No wonder your Christian Priests are raping children and the Christian community sits back and does nothing about, the Christian Bible gives Christian Priests approval to abuse children. Only great Atheists (Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris etc) are standing up for the Children and protecting them.

HappyCynic says:

12:21pm | 15/02/11

@Zac

Religion is not the be all and end all of life.  When you grow up you’ll realise this.  You’ll also realise there is no conflict between religion and science.  Indeed even evolution has no conflict with the Bible.

Your paranoia is showing and it’s intolerant and extremist in the worst kind of way possible.

True Believer says:

12:31pm | 15/02/11

P Darvio

Boy you have a bad case of hateful bigotry spewing out such ignorance against something you know zilch about.

It is not worth replying because you are disinterested in the truth so best for me to ignore you and your rantings.

When you have met the Author and then read His book then come back and we can have a reasonable discussion.  Until then, try to keep a check on your prejudices, must make you a very unhappy person.

P. Darvio says:

12:36pm | 15/02/11

I should have added this video link about the Christian Saintly Mother Teresa as well - oh dear it just gets worse…...just a property acquisition fund for GOD by the looks of it…and for the Christian Vatican

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3tUuA7WBRE&feature=related

AdamC says:

12:38pm | 15/02/11

“I get really tired of telling so-called Christians what it is they are required to believe in.”

P.Darvio, is anyone actually asking you to do this? Do these Christians seek your opinioon on the matter. I think I will leave it up to the Christians to decide what they *do* believe in.

To be honest, I am a little worried that you and Zac de Spudnut actually represent two opposite personalities of the same crazy commenter. That, or you are some kind of unannounced satirical double act. You are both so unhinged in your views that it is diffiuclt to imagine they are sincerely held.

Zac de Spudnut says:

02:10pm | 15/02/11

Bert & James1,

If Evolution is based on science and facts, you got nothing to fear and hide right, then how about trying this challenge…..

Challenge to Evolutionists

First. I am calling for a single empirical study that reflects evolution via the creation of a new feature, not contained in the original genome, that is beneficial to the selection of the organism. This needs to be empirical in the sense that it is measurable in real time with ordinary instrumentation, it is coherent in its results, it is replicated, and it is falsifiable. Also, it needs to be in the public domain – I won’t pay to see it.

This eliminates inferential and extrapolatory conjectures. It eliminates ideological rationalization. It eliminates axiomatic crashing.

Second. I am calling for a single, reputable, credible source that shows that change to a genome is not required in order to produce new features that are not in that genome, or if you will, DNA change (mutation) is not required. I am asking for validating empirical data here, not just a statement such as “evolution doesn’t happen to individuals, it happens to populations” or variations thereof.

Third. I repeat, a single (just one) instance. Not a raft of reading; not a link to gazillions of papers. Just one, single, irrefutable, replicated, falsifiable empirical study.

http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.com/2009/03/challenge-to-evolutionists.html

Rose says:

02:13pm | 15/02/11

P. Darvio, are you serious? You have the entire internet at your disposal and you use wikipedia, youtube, newspapers, an atheist website and blogs as your references. You do understand that there would be thousands of other credible sites to gain information but you chose to use all the dinky little unreliable sources. You are truly an intellectual giant, not!

iansand says:

02:32pm | 15/02/11

Spudnut - Resistance to antibiotics in bacteria.

James1 says:

02:34pm | 15/02/11

Zac,

Nice cut and paste work.  Do you know what any of those words mean?

iMitchy says:

02:51pm | 15/02/11

As an Atheist, I would be happy to identify Atheism as a religion.
Maybe then some of those anti-discrimination laws might protect me from attacks on my beliefs like Zacs little rant up the top there. Maybe there’s some entitlements in it for me too!

We Atheists are out to get you, we are currently recruiting but only if you come to us because we don’t poach members by shoving our skepticism down your throat.
We are on a mission to um… er… we each have an individual goal that doesn’t necessarily affect anyone else…
We are using taxpayer money to erect buildings to meet in….wait… No actually we aren’t.
Looks like those atheist teachers aren’t really doing to much teaching at all. But it’s not their fault, they have no subject matter.

Zac de Spudnut says:

03:14pm | 15/02/11

James,

Zac,

Do you know what any of those words mean?

Let’s assume for a moment I have no idea what any of those words mean and the religious are the most ignorant and violent. On the other hand Atheists as claimed are super intelligent, rational, logical and intellectuals to the extent they know everything under the planet. But how to do they end up believing the most discriminatory, absurd and sexist things:

“I can show that from a Darwinian point of view there is more Darwinian advantage to a male in being promiscuous and a female being faithful, without saying that I therefore think human males are justified in being promiscuous and cheating on their wives.  There is no logical connection between what is and what ought. . . .”

Ref: Dawkins, Frank Miele, ‘Darwin’s Dangerous disciple – An Interview with Richard Dawkins’, The Skeptic vol. 3, no. 4, 1995.

and their belief systems to lead to the most heinous outcomes? Have a look…..

The Trouble With Atheism

The Trouble with Atheism is an hour-long documentary on atheism, presented by Rod Liddle. It aired on Channel 4 in December 2006. The documentary focuses on criticizing atheism, as well as science, for its perceived similarities to religion, as well as arrogance and intolerance. The programme includes interviews with a number of prominent scientists, including atheists Richard Dawkins and Peter Atkins and Anglican priest John Polkinghorne. It also includes an interview with Ellen Johnson, the president of American Atheists.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/trouble-with-atheism/

Seano says:

03:23pm | 15/02/11

“Atheism is a religion”

Puhlease…Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Zac de Spudnut says:

03:48pm | 15/02/11

iMitchy,

As an Atheist, I would be happy to identify Atheism as a religion.>>>

In the face of undeniable proof that is all you can do.

Maybe then some of those anti-discrimination laws might protect me from attacks on my beliefs like Zacs>>>

I always knew Atheists have beliefs.

http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.com/search/label/Atheist Beliefs

But I thought you guys are underpinned by science, logic, rationality, intelligence, back up from Atheists who are scientists, Atheistic-ideological army in schools, colleges and uni etc. So are you saying even with such back up Atheism can’t with stand in market place of ideas. Then I think Atheism is in serious trouble and worth exposing for what it is.

Zac de Spudnut says:

04:45pm | 15/02/11

Sorry the earlier link is not working. Try this one.

Atheist Beliefs

http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.com/2011/01/atheist-drops-by.html

iMitchy says:

04:51pm | 15/02/11

@ Zac,

“Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history.”

But Zac, if Atheism is a religion as you say it is… then isn’t religion responsible? Or does that statement self nullify rendering it false in any context?
Surely I haven’t found yet another paradox created by the super religious?!

Most people who identify themselves as Atheist use the word to represent “non-religeous in any way”. If Atheism was determined to be a religion then those people, like myself, would simply just choose another word to identify by.

I don’t bother trying to convince creationists, they cannot use their beliefs to contribute to the betterment of humankind. Creationists use the science which supports the theory of evolution to try to disprove the theory of evolution. Kinda like going back in time and killing your father before you were born….. Any kind of success will lead to the ultimate failure - by voiding the tools used to create the anti-argument.

@ P Darvio
You are as extremist as the people this $440 million is going towards preventing. Regardless of your cause, you are extremist. I mean hey, there are extremist peace and environment advocates too, running around breaking rules and creating hysteria to promote their own interpretation of the “greater good”.
“Christianity” covers a broad spectrum of faiths. It is not a stagnant religion. I do not need to remind you that “Christianity” covers both Catholocism and Protestantism and try looking into the history of The Church of England.
When Christians disagree with certain rules, beliefs or history of their church they branch out and practice the facets of Christianity that suit them. (For me, this fact supports my decision to be Atheist). Over time, Christian extremism has diluted.
You yourself said that most Christians do not even know of the hate that you say is what they are supposed to learn from the Bible. The bible is now viewed by the majority of followers as being is largely interpretive, and if people find peace within the pages then who are you to accuse them of supporting the heinous acts from past generations? You may want to take note that Hitler’s actions were done in the name of Germany, not Christianity. How do you feel about vilifying Germans?
Whilst Zac may well be an ignorant nutter, you are the only one here inciting hate. For that you are the worse of two evils.

The way you two have carried on I am honestly starting to wonder if that money could be better spent preventing home grown extremism which may breed folks the likes of both of you.

True Believer says:

04:53pm | 15/02/11

P Darvio

What a pathetic attempt to prop up your prejudices. the late Mother Theresa and her Sisters of Charity are people - I know nothing about them, I do not follow them and I do not belong to the Catholic denomination.

What people do in His Name, good and bad is a reflection on them not on Jesus.  He will judge them and you are in no position to, nor am I.

Jesus is Love personified. If (and it is an if) His people let Him down it does not diminish His great Love and Lordship. 

I cannot recall a great atheist work in India or elsewhere for that matter although I am sure there are atheists who from their good hearts do good things for their fellow human beings individually.  Collectively though they do not seem to have much to show do they?

Perhaps it is a case of people in glass houses should not throw stones?? :0)

iMitchy says:

05:05pm | 15/02/11

Zac,
My original comment was written in jest. By using intendedly sarcastic quotes as evidence to support your theories you make yourself and your theories look foolish.

Also the use of your language suggests that you see a difference between religion and Atheism. You keep comparing the two while trying to say that they can be one and the same. It would seem that you use the word “Atheism” to describe non-religion - the same way Atheists do!

PS>Look up the word “belief” champ, then try not to feel silly.

iMitchy says:

05:41pm | 15/02/11

I hereby give all Punch moderators explicit permission to edit / censor parts of my comments.
Please don’t simply block them as they take a long time to type and without knowing what content was unacceptable I find that typing a self edited comment seems futile.
Failing this, some of the strongest arguements are lost to the breeze.

Barry says:

10:34pm | 15/02/11

@ P. Darvio
I checked your link on irreligion and it seems though that the religious organizations are probably giving the most accurate figures, which sort of makes your statement that Christians are producing this 60% figure as pretty idiotic.  The 60% figure actually comes from the 2006 census, which would mean that it’s not in fact Christians who are lying, but atheists who are listing themselves as Christian when they aren’t . . . . . . how ghastly!  Your statement that only secular society has morals indicates that you lack even more understanding about what morals actually are.  It might be a good start for you to look up the definition of morality.  While you are there, maybe look at some of the more controversial comments made about such subjects as rape by Dawkins and others, I don’t think he would quite live up to the standards you are demanding either . . . .

Bert says:

10:16am | 16/02/11

@Zac - Watch this series “Foundational Falsehood of Creationism” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY) it’s about 2.5 hours long, the Paleontologist who created the series goes into great detail about the facts of Evolution and will pretty much tear any argument you have to pieces.

You’re probably going to complain that it’s 2.5 hours long. But evolution is a massive piece of science and can’t just be summed up in a paragraph.

Zac de Spudnut says:

06:33am | 15/02/11

Faith is something that should not be in public schools.>>>

Parents will decide if their children should be offered spiritual education not the militant secularists or Atheists.

I am 100% behind a parent being able to send their child to a Faith based school, but I am also 100% behind not having to fund this.>>>

These parents pay tax and in many cases lot more than the normal population and no one especially the militant ideologists will not dictate how this money should be used.

James says:

09:48am | 15/02/11

No there should be no faith based schools and yes absolutely I include no Christian schools in this.  Religious schools are one of the most incidious devisive elements in our society and should be banned post haste.

Tedd says:

06:22am | 15/02/11

Wow, Zac. Show us the pictures, please!

Those Atheist greenies have Naturalistic flags ready to wave, too

TChong says:

06:35am | 15/02/11

You watch a lot of Glenn Beck, ? Big fan of Paul Sheehan, Miranda Devine?
Try frontpagemag Zac, you’ll get your fill there of plenty of like minded god botherers.

Zac de Spudnut says:

06:45am | 15/02/11

Tedd,

Do some research on the war between Israel and Lebanon and the protests in Sydney by the Atheist front - Greenies.

undertow says:

08:26am | 15/02/11

So, how does the hierarchy of the Greenies work Zac? Is there a division between the “Atheist greenies” and those greenies who happen to believe in a God but also believe in looking after our planet? Or are the religious greenies being hoodwinked by those atheist charlatans like some snake oil seller “look after earth and you’ll go to heaven man, trust me”.

It’s a conspiracy, I tells you. A conspiracy.

James says:

09:46am | 15/02/11

I am 100% commited to the environment and 100% against the three religions spreading their tentacles into our society especially islam which I regard as a highly suspect cult.

A Dose of Reality says:

11:25am | 15/02/11

Now zac,

“Atheist greenies who wave Hezbollah flags?”

You have an astoundingly profound ignorance of:

1) what an Atheist is
2) what a “greenie” is
3) what Hezbollah is

Given that, I must ask the question if you know what the words “who”, “wave” and “flag” mean?

As for the “war between Israel and Lebanon” are you referring to the invasion of Lebanon by Israel?  Perhaps you should notice that Lebanon has no troops involved (do you know what “troops” are? - I’d hate to use big words).

Steely Dan says:

11:25am | 15/02/11

You’ve jumped the shark, Zac.

(I await a response wherein Zac states that these Communist Darwinist atheist sharks wouldn’t be killing people if they just accepted Jesus.)

persephone says:

07:44am | 15/02/11

Obviously, then, Howard and Downer had the same problem, given that this was originally their program.

And so do the majority of the Liberal party, given that they still support it.

Madpad says:

08:55am | 15/02/11

Ja, she doesn’t even work out to go to NZ during the rugby world cup!

Flexo says:

10:28am | 15/02/11

Howard gave Indonesia money to build relations, he was paying off Labor’s debt at the same time. He has also travelled and worked with Indonesian politicians many times before money was introduced into the relationship between our 2 countries.

Julia has been to Indonesia once. Hasn’t travelled much overseas, has created huge debt, has to introduce a flood levy because HER government has no more money. She is now distracting us with another lie - She has successfully created health care reform.

News flash Miss Gillard:
You haven’t solved the health care issue.
You haven’t done enough to build relations with Indonesia for us to trust you with giving them money.
You have drained us of money.

Hope the wake up call jars you back into the real world pers. Stop talking about past PMs, talk about the current one who isn’t achieving much

persephone says:

01:51pm | 15/02/11

Flexo

all I did was point out that this program is actually Howard and Downer’s, and that Downer - and most of the Liberal party - still support it.

Even Abbott isn’t going to cut it entirely.

So not sure why you’re going all partisan here, when I’m pointing out that the policy is bi partisan….and in doing so, stating that JWH got something right!

Tedd says:

06:29am | 15/02/11

More conspiracy theory, Zac - “the creation of atheism as the de facto established religion”.

Huh. Atheism does not invoke anything supernatural, Zac, so cannot be called a religion.

Reference to the inappropriately named WYD and the focus of its idolatry - one of the world’s popes - as the status quo is a bit unrealistic, too.  no need for radical change by most of the world to ignore it, unless foistered upon it by a fawning local govt.

Your reference to intolerant is self-projection.

malohi says:

07:14am | 15/02/11

I remember a few years ago reading the punch and thinking,
“What a wonderful alternative to news.com and its inane commentaries. Finally a bit of higher level discussion on current affairs while still being light hearted.”

Now all I see in the punch is copypasta spam from conspiracy nuts like Zac and people blindly pushing left/right/political agendas ignorant to reality. No discussion using logic or arguments, just people yelling their one eyed beliefs at each other until one side gives up. Any call to reason is snowed under the tirade of ignorance.

To the mods, Do you not moderate anymore? or do you let such nonsense as Zacs comments continue to spam up the site so it can stir the pot and attract more loonies- Classy, you must be proud.
The punch 2011 aka Twitter 2.0.

I dare you to publish this.

Zac de Spudnut says:

09:15am | 15/02/11

Tedd,

Did you read the Ref: Test of Spirit, The Australian? This is from the editorial of the “The Australian” newspaper. By the way a main stream Australian news paper run by the same guy who owns Punch. So if this inconvenient truth is conspiracy to you then I can’t help.

malohi,

I back up my opinion and if that to you is copypasta (LOL!), spam whatever, that is your problem.

No discussion using logic or arguments,>>>

What you are looking for is not logic or arguments. You want “unpleasant thoughts/opinions” that doesn’t suit your ideology banned (you have a simillar mindset to the greenies in NZ) from this site, that is exactly what you are asking the mods. How democratic is that? No wonder Atheism is incompatible with democracy.

Kika says:

09:44am | 15/02/11

Unfortunately atheism is a religion
a= anti
theism = the belief in one god as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation.
Religion = something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

Atheists believe they already know all the answers in the universe and know the truth on whether there is a God or not. You have a belief and are faithful to your belief that there is no creator God therefore you have a religion.

malohi says:

10:14am | 15/02/11

Zac,
What I want is a discussion of the topic, with posts relavent to the topic. Not ... something something.. relate it to athiests somehow… Boom, a copy and paste of your same post everyday in every thread. (Get it copy/pate => copypasta)

I do not want your comments banned, but when someone posts a comment and you hijack the replys with generalisations about athiests which are scarcely related to the original post, It gets in the way of reasoned debate of the authors points.

You see atheism as a threat and have posted sources backing up your point. So start a comment of your own and let the debate of your points ensue rather than posting several of your own as well as hijacking any subsequent post which may be scarcely related to your point. The hijacking of posts with the same thing over and over is analogous to advertising “spam.” Which is what I am asking be moderated.

BTW Can you even post a structred on point arguement without mentioning anything to do with athiesm?

James1 says:

12:42pm | 15/02/11

Kika,

The prefix “a” does not denote “anti”.  The prefix “anti” denotes “anti” (as in antitheist.  The prefix “a” is about irrelevance.  If something is amoral, it has not bearing on morality.  If something is ahistorical, it has no historical relevance.  If some is atheistic, the deities are not relevant.

Kika says:

04:13pm | 15/02/11

Bla Bla Bla - it’s all just symantics. You knew what I was trying to get at.

James1 says:

08:41am | 16/02/11

It is not semantics Kiki.  There is a world of difference between thinking a deity is irrelevant, and actively opposing it.

undertow says:

08:29am | 15/02/11

You assume you are going up, but of course, no Christian should assume that they will make it in to heaven. Being so presumptuous would surely anger your God and preclude you from his grace. Right?

Paul says:

06:39am | 15/02/11

withholding all that to be able to spring it on the first chump who has a go smacks a little of Reillyism, Tory.  Reillyism being defined as finessing, manipulating and generally shaping a story to catch someone out; see, smart arse, being a.

Jugg says:

06:44am | 15/02/11

Hi Tory,

Thanks for your personal response.  Your experience, your assessment of ‘concern’ doesn’t support the statement that ‘extreme Islam WILL quickly fill the vacuum’.  The actions and vigilance of the moderates (as well as their sheer numbers) indicate that this is not likely to occur.

Having lived in Indonesia for an extended period of time, I was asked to challenge the view that it is a terrorist ridden country.  It’s not the case and the continual reporting that it is, without factual basis, is an extremely unfair position to adopt.  It does nothing for the uneducated and unaware Australian national, except to portray fear.

Your trips to Indonesia, would have told you this yourself.  You know this is true.

persephone says:

07:51am | 15/02/11

Jugg

I doubt that Indonesia is no more riddled with terrorism now than it was before the Bali bombings - which shocked most Indonesians.

The point is that it only takes a few ‘terrorists’, who have been indocrinated to believe that their mission is just, to cause untold damage.

Children hungry for an education and parents determined to educate them will grasp at any opportunity. If the only option is the mullah down the road, who mixes extremist religious teachings with reading, writing and arithmetic, then they’ll go to the mullah down the road.

If there are other opportunities offered to them, they’ll take those.

In Palestine, Hamas gained control by winning the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people. They did this by mixing their terrorist activities with the provision of basic services, such as education, and thus building up good will amongst the general community.

If someone else had been providing these services, Hamas wouldn’t now have the foothold it has in the Middle East.

Tim the Toolman says:

07:53am | 15/02/11

Hehehe….owned.

Jugg says:

08:15am | 15/02/11

Persphone,

The ‘Mullah down the road’ is precisely the myopic and misguided perception that is the issue here.  Mullah does not refer to a terrorist leader.  There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of schools and religious entities in the country. 

The view that there is a terrorist mullah waiting down the road amongst the chickens and a cow in a tiny village, to impart, train and raise future terrorists is exactly the stereotype the media want you to believe. 

Indonesia is a massive, thriving country with extensive infrastructure.
There is already massive mainstream education.  Someone is providing these services to which you refer.  They are a moderate country.  They have greater values than most of us.

Jugg says:

08:16am | 15/02/11

You names half right, Tim.

Levi says:

08:54am | 15/02/11

Well if Indonesia has so many moderates, why can’t they sort out the extremists themselves? Im sure they have enough money to fund their own schools. Why is it always the white mans burden?

persephone says:

09:04am | 15/02/11

Jugg

so where did the Bali terrorists go to school then?

The Indonesian government says there’s a problem. The Australian government and Opposition say there’s a problem.

I have no doubt that the majority of Indonesians - like the majority of Palestinians, Irish, Aghanistanis, whatever - are decent people who reject terrorism. It’s not about how the majority behave or think; it is the very very small minority who engage in these activities and do so much harm.

We know that one of the drivers of terrorism is the beliefs you are raised with, particularly if these are reinforced by religion.

Providing children with alternative views of the world has always been one of the benefits of education.

I’m surprised you care about the people of Indonesia so much yet want to deprive their children of these opportunities.

Jugg says:

09:41am | 15/02/11

Levi,

Who prosecuted the terrorists?  Who jailed the terrorists?  Who executed the terrorists?

Our governments choose to fund other countries.

persephone,

That you rely on one act of terrorism, speaks volumes of your ability to understand where I am coming from.  We have had terrorist acts committed here by white Australians.  Does that mean we are a terrorist country?

No one denies there are problems with criminal/terrorist elements.  Should Australia be portrayed the same way?  Full of crazy radicals running around committing terrorist acts, killing people, spreading evil?

One small section of the community commits these crimes and the Australian media spreads the word that this is common place and a normal feature of everyday life.

‘Providing children with alternative views of the world has always been one of the benefits of education.  I’m surprised you care about the people of Indonesia so much yet want to deprive their children of these opportunities.’

That’s precisely the problem.  They are a normal country raising normal people, just like you and I yet, it’s your perception that the children are being deprived of educational opportunities.  Who says they are and on what do they base these statements?

persephone says:

10:30am | 15/02/11

Jugg

The Indonesian government, for starters.

Our Department of Foreign Affairs. John Howard. Alexander Downer. Jamie Briggs. Julie Bishop. Kevin Rudd. etc

mary says:

10:40am | 15/02/11

Thanks Tory for that inside bit of info.
Maybe the problem lies in how we separate religion and belief systems. What if we were to bundle it all into the one category called belief systems?

A lot of the debate perhaps wouldn’t be quite as heated or challenging if we’re simply funding some one else’s differing belief system (as opposed to religion) with the intention to prevent more extremist belief systems to possibly take over.

Roo says:

11:03am | 15/02/11

Jugg - one act of terrorism? In Bali alone there was a second bombing incident at Jimbaran, albeit not as devastating. And the marriott, the embassy bombings i can’t even remember all the seperate incidents post bali, but a google search will remind you if you’re confused.

Don’t get me wrong, I love Indonesia, and there’s no way you can paint all Indonesians with the same brush but to dismiss that there’s a MINORITY problem is wilfully shutting your eyes to the obvious. And that’s not to pick on Indonesia in anyway, even developed countries have problems confronting terrorism and they have much more comprehensive social welfare.

Jugg says:

12:03pm | 15/02/11

LOL,

I love this site, people telling me what I am saying, people misquoting me…makes me laugh.

Roo,

I didn’t say there had only been one act of terrorism.

persephone referred to the Bali bombings - we have had a huge number of bombings right here in our own country.

Who is dismissing the issue? Who said it was the minority?  Or is that your interpretation of what I said?

persephone says:

01:57pm | 15/02/11

Jugg

‘we have had a huge number of bombings right here in our country’.

Oh, so you’re not Australian.

I think we’ve only had one bombing related to terrorist activity, and that was back in the seventies.

Roo says:

02:40pm | 15/02/11

Jugg - u attempted to dismiss pers for talking about bali, making a strawman out of “one act of terrorism.” There have been many acts of terrorism, that u well know.

As to terrorism on our soil? that is a matter of definition feel free to play semantics but i cab’t be bothered so i’ll agree, but that it is to a lesser extent. U seem to define bikies as terrorists, so again I’ll agree for matters of ease, and point out that we spend considerable amounts of time/money and policepower/judicial time in an attempt to wipe them out. What is starkly different about Indonesia is they don’t have the resources to throw at the cause like we do with our “terrorists.” Nor do they have the vast resources for education that we do.

Religious schools- Christian, Islamic and probably every other denomination, but I have not witnessed any myself, fill the void. You talk about “their” religion but you cannot make a generalisation like that, there are moderates, there are extremists, in every faith and every country - especially one so diverse as indo.

What those that advocate educational aid to Indonesia want is to counteract the influence that extremists have, especially amongst the impoverished. To deny that educational vacuums are not exploited by extremist agendas ignores the very existence of Pakistan.

You seem to think that giving aid to Indonesia for schools is about labelling them as a terrorist state, I didn’t read that in the piece. IMO I think the aid, even dressed as counterterrorism, is helpful to Indonesian moderates, Hindus and Christians as they too are harmed by extremist tendancies, long before they could ever attack Australian interests.

Minorities - u said that the “sheer number of the moderates” prevents extremism. it’s reasonable to infere that you know that the extemists are a minority. The problem with small minorities though is that they scream the loudest.

And a large number of bombings? That’s an even greater exageration than the xenophobic few that say all Muslims are terrorists. sure we had some,  quite a while ago but realtively speaking that comment cannot be substantiated.

I can’t figure out your angle - you seem to care about indonesia, as do I. And you don’t like it being labelled as terrorist, nor do I. Are you against all aid we give them? Or just that it’s now being labelled as a counterterrorism measure for public approval in Australia

iMitchy says:

05:09pm | 15/02/11

I would just like to point out that there is a difference between Extremist Muslim and Terrorist.

Thanks for your time.

Loulou says:

09:45am | 15/02/11

Richard - what would your solution be for Indonesian airports? Stop all middle-eastern men from entering their country on the chance that they are ‘spurious’ and bound for Australia? How do you prove which ones are which? I think the issue is more complicated than you say.

Richard the Lionheart says:

11:24am | 15/02/11

Lou Lou, When I visit Indo I have to have a return ticket and their immigration card asks how long am I staying and where. I would suspect single male passengers from the more poor/dysfunctional middle east countries. They are not going to resorts or businessmen hotels. Any young single guy would go to Thailand for a bit of fun. No, there is corruption at the airports and info isn’t being put into computers properly. Nevertheless Indo computers should have the persons name and passport number. That’s more than the Australian taxpayer gets when they arrivie at Christmas Island.

Kika says:

04:25pm | 15/02/11

Since when is Sri Lanka a middle eastern country?

Tim the Toolman says:

08:22am | 15/02/11

“They pray to God every single day to be better people, to be more understanding, to be more tolerant, to be of greater assistance towards their fellow man.”

I’d rather they actually do it themselves, rather than hoping their imaginary friend will do it for them.

Syl says:

08:59am | 15/02/11

Uh I thought the point was that the majority are moderates and reject the actions of the radicals, but the money we are sending for aid is helping to keep it this way (i.e. stop the extremists from gaining any sort of foothold).  I don’t see anything in your post that refutes this and I see nothing in the opinion peice that says otherwise.  No-one has suggested that extremists are the norm in Indonesia, but to discount the risk factor to our people of the very small minority who are is negligent.  Whether or not our aid money is actually helping or not is a different matter, and one that I don’t know enough about to comment on.

Oh and our organised criminal groups generally tend to kill each other, not try to kill as many innocents as humanly possible in the name of their imaginary friend.  There is a pretty big difference.

No one is suggesting that criminals dont exist here, no-one is suggesting that we should portray Indonesia as a terrorist haven.  But putting your fingers in your ears and screaming “la la la” when somebody says they exist (in either case) doesn’t help anyone.

Jugg says:

10:01am | 15/02/11

Thanks for your contribution Tim, I haven’t met a more appropriately named contributor on here.

Syl,

Look at the bigger picture.  Why is the article here?  What is its purpose?  Does it present an open view of what is really occurring in the country? 

Criminals groups tend to try and kill each other.  So it’s acceptable if we only try and kill our own kind?

Who said they didn’t exist?

Tim the Toolman says:

12:02pm | 15/02/11

“Thanks for your contribution Tim, I haven’t met a more appropriately named contributor on here.”

Ahh, insults.  Nothing like ignoring the argument and attacking the person.  Either you agree with my sentiment (unlikely given your response) or you realise I’m right but have no reply.  I mean really, it’s common sense….I’d much rather someone who is actively working to be a better person than someone who is talking to no one hoping that they’ll just magically be a better person

Tim the Toolman says:

01:14pm | 15/02/11

“Thanks for your contribution Tim, I haven’t met a more appropriately named contributor on here.”

Thanks for the confirmation that I’m right….if I were wrong, you would have corrected me, instead of insulting me.

Dazeddazza says:

01:34pm | 15/02/11

I agree, as a long term expatriate teacher in Indonesian High Schools, I find that the students thirst for knowledge, and the greater percentage can differentiate between the radical and moderate elements in their society.  I find that on the whole the Indonesian people are extremely friendly, and accept other viewpoints just as we do in the developed world.  Let me make it quite clear, the bulk of the Indonesian population abhor terrorism just as we do.

Tedd says:

07:15am | 15/02/11

Good points. Coupled with the colossal increase in ignorance here has been an increase in fundamentalism, especially in the pronouncements of religious ‘leaders’ and in Australian politics, and associated increased intolerance by those fundamentalists.

Tom says:

08:45am | 15/02/11

Jade, try casting your mind back to the two Bali bombings, the bombing of the Australian embassy in Jakarta, the bombing of the Mariott hotel and the host of foiled terrorist attacks on international targets in Indonesia and try telling us again that we should not care about Islamic militancy in Indonesia. The people who perpetrate these attacks tend to have one thing in common, they attended schools operated by radical clerics like Abu Bakir Bashir. Building these schools is a highly cost effective counter-terror measure. Ask anyone who has the slightest knowledge in counter-terrorism and they will tell you that Indonesia has had one of the most successful counter-terror policing operations of any country over the last ten years, and a crucial element of this is cutting off the flow of young children indoctrinated with Jihadist ideology. If you don’t think that measures aimed to cripple the types of groups in Indonesia that specifically target Australians is not in our national interest than you trully have a warped understanding of our national security.

Jade says:

09:44am | 15/02/11

Tom there will always be Islamic Extremest, they are brought up that way.  Throwing money at something doesn’t solve the problem.

Tom says:

11:33am | 15/02/11

That’s exactly the point, they are brought up that way. Building schools run by moderates aims to reverse that. Is it such a bad idea that we should try to reduce the the number of extremists in Indonesia? Do you have any suggestions how we might do this otherwise? Money can’t solve everything, but it is essential if we want to address this issue. As the overwhelming evidence shows, counter-terrorism assistance given to Indonesia (which has been given by many western countries) has had a very tangible effect in disrupting and diminishing the capability of terrorist networks there. Is that really such a bad thing?

Steve Putnam says:

07:05pm | 15/02/11

@Jade It is precisely because Indonesia has adequately resourced intelligence services that it has a good record in rooting out extremism. Now if you know of a way of doing this that doesn’t involve spending money could you let us in on the secret. If you don’t, spare us your mindless babble about throwing money at problems.

persephone says:

09:08am | 15/02/11

Abbott’s proposal is to defer the spending for four years.

If you were a child, don’t you think four years out of your education would make a bit of difference to your life?

It’s a foolish and short sighted proposal, apparently (by his own admission) driven by some emails Abbott received, which originated from a campaign run by One Nation.

It is particularly silly given the Opposition’s support for raising the aid budget as a % of Australian GDP - it doesn’ t actually save money, because it means that (were it to be implemented) we’d have to spend more money in future years in order to meet this target.

And all to save a measly $400 k, which is chicken feed in the context of the federal budget.

James says:

09:52am | 15/02/11

Not sure that most Indonesians hold Bashir in very high regard, they have not desire to be subjected to a theocracy.

Jugg says:

07:49am | 15/02/11

Please provide evidence of the Islamic religion preaching ‘nothing but hate’ or is this something you just made up?

Loulou says:

09:38am | 15/02/11

I second Jugg’s request.

Tony says:

10:05am | 15/02/11

Jugg, the evidence in in the news every day…example, Pakistanis by the thousands want an American hanged for shooting 2 people (allegedly muggers) without a trial. Christian Schoolgirls murdered in Indonesia, Copts in Egypt.

Jugg says:

10:14am | 15/02/11

Tony,

Link your examples to the Islamic religion.

Loulou says:

10:25am | 15/02/11

Tony, what is portrayed in the media isn’t evidence of an entire religion preaching ‘nothing but hate’, I’m sure you’re well aware that the media likes spreading fear about Islam.

I personally was looking for more substantial evidence. The Koran is no different from the Bible in terms of content, both preach love & tolerance, but on the dark side of the moon, they also preach intolerance for other religions and harsh punishment for sins against God.

Throughout history, there has been sects that have taken the word of God too literally, that is throughout all religions, not just Islam.

It is just that Muslim extremists seem to be more prevalent than Christian extremists these days. why? I don’t know.

But labelling an entire religion as ‘hateful’ is uneducated.

Levi says:

08:57am | 15/02/11

End of argument right there Tory

Tony of Poorakistan says:

11:28am | 15/02/11

Agreed. Her prose is nothing more than the typical idealistic, wishy-washy, namby-pamby conciliatory crap spouted by the lefties. 
If you are going to fund schools, why not Christian schools?  If it is OK for them to open schools here, why can’t we open Christian schools in an Islamic country and provide top-notch education plus religious instruction in Christian ethics? And do it for free.

Peter says:

12:44pm | 15/02/11

This would be my opinion. Perhaps there is value in teaching Islam to Islamic peoples at the expense of the Australian taxpayer.  However if we were to suspend funds for one year at a time until we have made good on our own issues, and then restart the funding, then we could do more good than bad.  If it is not prudent to wholly suspend the funding due to loss of continuity or other reason, then reduce it for 2 years at a time whilst we fix the issues at home. 

It is not polite, it seems, to state the old adage that charity begins at home, however we have huge needs for funding in Australia.  The Aboriginal peoples are in many cases too lazy to work for themselves, but more than that too many do not have the opportunities of the rest of the nation and I would like to see more funding for these wonderful people. And that is just one very urgent home item inadequately funded partially because we are funding other people outside of our borders.

Surely, Tory, as an anthropologist you should have some compassion for the issues at home.  But you appear to place others in front. Perhaps your priorities are out of synch with mainstream Australia, who might just prefer to clean up our own house as a matter of priority.

Tom says:

12:51pm | 15/02/11

@Tony of Poorakistan
I think that you will find there are quite a few christian schools in Indonesia. We could go and fund christian schools, but given that most of these schools are in Aceh its hardly likely that anyone would actually attend them. And besides, given that the major aim of this school building program is to counter radical islamic ideology what would be the use? Building these schools is not about favouring one religion over the other, its about redirecting young impressionistic minds away from schools that preach extremism and hate. I am bewildered why so many people fail to see the ultimate objective of this program - Australia’s national security.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

01:22pm | 15/02/11

Tom

I posted an alternative, but it was moderated out.

Markus says:

01:23pm | 15/02/11

@Tom, it is not that we cannot see that ultimate objective, it is that just like the US funding despot governments, we do not see it actually achieving the intended objective, and are concerned it is either achieving nothing, or worse - successfully increasing resentment and distrust of the West among radical Islamic groups.

Tom says:

03:23pm | 15/02/11

@ Marcus
I would respectfully disagree and say that the policy is working. The schools that are being built by the Australian government are run by normal, everyday Muslims who do not preach extremist ideology. We are now giving Indonesian parents a choice (where in many cases there was none before) between schools run by fruit loops and schools run by normal people. The schools program is not pursued for simple altruism, but a hard-headed analysis of our national interest. This was clearly understood by Howard and Downer and it is why the government continues to fund the program. Partly due to the high level of CT assistance given to Indonesia by Australia and other nations, Indonesia has led one of the most successful counter-terror programs in the world over the past 8 years (and don’t take my word for it, read what the eminent expert on Indonesian terrorism Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group has to say). We should not give up on a program which is clearly beneficial to Australia’s security interests.

iansand says:

08:28am | 15/02/11

If that is so (and I do not know) it is exactly what this aid is intended to counteract - the funding of moderate schools to squeeze out the extremists.

:petery says:

03:15pm | 15/02/11

I would ask the question as to how much education do you really need to carry out the process of non surgical amputation, about five minutes I imagine.Or are so called infidels tougher and more difficult to slice and dice than non infidels?

Probably the web sites and london tabloids that highlighted this dubious fact assume their readers are ignorant and slow on the uptake in the first place, and will believe anything. No one but a simpleton would need educating in such a process,and i don’t even think readers of sensationalist media even fit into this category. It might however make a better story than merely suggesting what really happens in this school might mainly be bland and boring for ninety percent of the time,just like many Christian schools.

Tim the Toolman says:

08:26am | 15/02/11

“but at least we made a conscious choice,”

Yes, a five year old who has jesus hanging on every wall at home, goes to church and then goes to school where they’re taught that god is real is making an informed decision.  Pull the other one.  Put your god in where it belongs with the others (Zeus, Thor etc…) and then we’ll teach about “religion”.

Syl says:

09:05am | 15/02/11

Im sorry Stephy, as a child who was brought up as a Christian until I was old enough to seriously think about it, I can safely say there was no personal choice involved.  In general, children are indoctrinated before they know both sides of the debate, hell it’s been stated time and time again as a tactic of some christian sects, to claim otherwise is a little dumbfounding to be honest.

The Original Oz says:

09:15am | 15/02/11

Stephy - You are free to believe in your imaginary sky friend all you want but school is no place for the teaching of religion. If parents want their children indoctrinated into a religious belief then that is their responsibility and their are many ways in which they can do this. The primary ones are by teaching the children about religious beliefs or even taking them to church. But the school system should not be used to aid the spread of religion.

Stephy says:

09:39am | 15/02/11

I was “indoctrinated” too. I grew up with faith around. But I was 13 before I took religion into my own hands, looked at all the facts (and because of my previous learnings, I already knew a fair bit about Christianity) and made the choice for myself. Do you really think people just grow up as Christian? You should research the term Born Again. How can you make a choice about something you don’t know?

James1 says:

11:22am | 15/02/11

Indeed Stephy - my experience was similar.  I was raised a Catholic, and believed that stufff with all my heart, or so I thought.  At Catholic school, around the age of 14, we were taught about what faith was, and encouraged to look inside ourselves to discover our faith.  I thought it through and realised I had no faith, and have followed my (lack of) beliefs ever since.

Point is, we can all question and interrogate our beliefs once we reach an appropriate age.  No amount of religious indoctrination can prevent this.  However, it must be facilitated by a balanced education that gives us the mental and intellectual capacity to process information and facts and reach appropriate position therefrom.  It seems, from this thread, that not everyone has been afforded this opportunity (see particularly Zac and his fantasies about the nature of atheism).

Elphaba says:

03:07pm | 15/02/11

@Stephy “but at least we made a conscious choice, knowing both sides of the debate,”

So do a lot of atheists.  Careful Stephy…

Your name:OchreBunyip says:

03:47pm | 15/02/11

I’ve been exposed to RE classes and avowed Christian teachers as a child and worked alongside a number of faiths, both recognised and not, as an adult. Being exposed to religion, or the absence of religion, will not remove a persons ability to think rationally and, believe it or not, people make a rational decision when they choose to believe, or not believe Rationality is often from a certain point of view, after all. Despite my exposure I did not feel constrained from making my own choice regardless of the influences of other people.

Religious or not, we should all stand guard at the portals of our mind.

Loulou says:

09:23am | 15/02/11

I don’t see how the Bible is any different. Rape is condoned in the Bible a few times, as is murder. You could be killed as a Christian/Jew by members of your own faith for being gay, not being a virgin on your wedding night, cursing your parents, not listening to priests, and here’s the most interesting one of all Apostator:

‘They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.  (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)

Gee. That sounds like the Bible is condoning killing members of other religions.

How on earth could you be a moderate Christian when this is in the bible?

James says:

09:53am | 15/02/11

The major problem with the Koran being taken literally.

Loulou says:

09:26am | 15/02/11

Like Christianity? Here’s a good verse from Deutoronomy about other religions:

Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden.  When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. Deuteronomy 17:2-5

Stoning to death? That sounds like some other ‘dangerous cult’

Gav says:

10:50am | 15/02/11

The difference is Loulou that stonig is no longer practised by that religion. SOME forms of Islam still allow it.  The only thing that will stop the Extreme elements of Islam are the moderate taking a stand, because of they do not the extreme elements will decide that the moderates are not Muslim enough for them and they will be the next targets. All religions have extreme elements (the Exclusive Bretheren needs damn good looking into) and others are just beyond belief (Scientology anyone) but at the moment none of them publicy preaches or actively attacks “non-believers”.

Jade says:

01:56pm | 15/02/11

Stoning is still practiced by Christians in parts of Africa. They routinely put to death witches, adulterers and those who do not accept Jesus. And the Lord’s Resistance Army is a Christian “army” fighting against the Muslim and animist populations to forcibly convert or kill those who believe differently. Furthermore, they are guilty of war crimes more vicious than anything Ahmadinejad could dream up.

Let’s not kid ourselves that a small group of Muslims practicing an arcane and mostly discarded version of their religion represent the beliefs of all, any more than the extremist Christians of the Westboro Baptist Church, or the vile criminals of the LRA represent the views of the majority of Christians.

James1 says:

11:34am | 15/02/11

Abracadabra, Adrian, and Apostator are the same person.

Loulou says:

12:22pm | 15/02/11

@James - I came to that conclusion also.

Likes Joining Dots says:

12:26pm | 15/02/11

@James1

Not THE Trinity? This is going to shake up the atheists.

OchreBunyip says:

04:44pm | 15/02/11

THE Trinity that cracked the IRS D-base? :-p

majid says:

04:55pm | 15/02/11

SS Reality, while I am aware your comment is more provocative than constructive, I still feet like I have to remind few things:

1) How could you be so sure 1.5 billion Muslims around the world are all extremists?

2) All historians agree Arab Muslim Civilization in Spain (7th to 13th century) was the most tolerant in the history of humanity: Muslims, Jewish and Christians lived harmoniously together under an Islamic Law.

3) During the 11th century and while the Arab Muslims were living their golden age (eg: establishing universities in the Middle-east, North Africa and Spain and were studying medicine, mathematics, algebra, exploring the universe and navigation, translating and studying the Greek philosophy… etc ), at the same time and up North of Europe was the scene of a savage world, Christians killing Christians during all days of the week apart from Sunday, as it is the sacred Christian day.

At the libraries in Europe, there are texts from that period which describe the degree of violence and darkness the Christian lived in during early 11th century. I remember reading this text at the library in France: A Christian leader of a village was killed during a battle against the neighboring village and it happened the coffin was too small for his body… I leave it to your imagination what they did to him to fit him in the coffin…

4) Today the Arab Muslim world is struggling because the colonizations they were victims of: the English , the French, the Italians, the Portuguese…etc exploited them, ripped their soul out and reduced them to a vegetable state. As well as most of the Muslim countries today have corrupted leaders…

Sad Sad Reality says:

09:05am | 16/02/11

Majid, thanks for proving my point. I’m talking about the modern world and the only possible positives you can offer about Islamic culture are from the 11th century.

“Today the Arab Muslim world is struggling because the colonizations they were victims of: the English , the French, the Italians, the Portuguese…etc exploited them, ripped their soul out and reduced them to a vegetable state.”

What a cop out. No one makes anyone strap explosives to themselves and blow themselves up - oh wait that’s right Islamic leaders do to school children. There is no occupation long or cruel enough to make me or millions of other subject children to that type of torture. Your excuse is disgusting.

“As well as most of the Muslim countries today have corrupted leader”

The people get the leaders they deserve.

majid says:

02:20pm | 16/02/11

SS Reality, you are full of hatred and maybe that’s all what you deserve… a SAD SAD ignorant person who carries hate and venom for people who have different beliefs.

I used history just to prove you wrong(Islam is peceful). I invite you to visit some Muslim countries to see it first hand. I know Muslims and Islam and I can assure you these people are loving, caring and generous… and certainly more knowledgeable and more tolerant than you do…

Your sight is selective and your knowledge is one dimensional as you sound to me more like a cartoonist with very bad drawing skills… Try to draw yourself throwing shit/bombs at Muslims… That’s how I imagine you anyway, a sort of modern bully/terrorist!!!

iansand says:

10:06am | 15/02/11

Because the Saudis are busy funding the extremist schools.  This aid is intended to provide an alternative to the Saudi funded schools.

James says:

12:36pm | 16/02/11

Kids this is why you should buy electric cars, no petrol no donations to creepy Saudis

Lola says:

09:51am | 15/02/11

Allah = the same God as the Christian and Judaic God

Jesus also condoned ‘eye for an eye’ and told that even if your eye wanders you are committing adultery and it’s better to pull your eye out than allow yourself to sin.

And another thing - we all know jails don’t work. So maybe sharia law and old testament punishments are appopriate and work? Perhaps the threat of stoning would keep a lot of straying spouses in their own beds.

True Believer says:

12:49pm | 15/02/11

@Lola
“Allah = the same God as the Christian and Judaic God”

No Allah is not the same. Ridiculous comment. If you knew the Living God you would know the difference.

Jesus said “those who live by the sword will die by the sword” He never promoted or condoned violence by one person against another.  You just get a verse here and there - quote it without knowledge and out of context.  Meet the Author, then read His book.

James1 says:

01:14pm | 15/02/11

TB,

A more accurate way of putting Lola’s post is that they are all Abrahamic in nature.  They just disagree on who the god of Abraham’s last prophet was.

True Believer says:

02:51pm | 15/02/11

@James1

No that is no answer. Jesus said “No one comes to the Father but through me.” so for those of other faiths there is no access to the God Christians know.

Jesus said it, not me so take it up with Him.

Trjn says:

04:25pm | 15/02/11

@True Believer: Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same god. You can’t dispute that, it is fact. Arabic Christians even refer to your god as Allah.

Jesus is mentioned in the Koran, he’s worshiped as a prophet. They just don’t believe that he was the son of Allah. Much like Jews don’t accept that he was the messiah.

So they believe in the same god but not the same things about that god.

True Believer says:

05:46am | 16/02/11

@Trjn:

“So they believe in the same god but not the same things about that god.”

They may “believe” in the same God as Christians, but God says their “belief” is misplaced.  There is only one way to know God and that is through Jesus His Son.

Jesus said those who reject Him, reject the Father who sent Him.  Again not me saying this God said it.  So no, not the same God.

Jim says:

10:01am | 15/02/11

Labor could also sack its legion of internet trolls and spin doctors! You might have to go back to teaching, persephone…

LMK says:

11:59am | 15/02/11

$95.000 for the car. Get the figure right Pers.

Thank goodness she no longer teaches. I am a long time lurker with affiliations to no political party. I wanted to know where she actually may have been a teacher.

I needed to ensure any children I knew avoided someone with such one eyed bias who can never see two sides to an argument and who would most certainly would bring it into the classroom.

Apologies for the OT comment but had enough.

Ripa says:

01:30pm | 15/02/11

Hey Pers, whats your address? id like to send you invoices my wife had to pay for teaching resources because there wasn’t enough ink or A3 paper or laminating covers, or books, or kids coming without lunch that she covered. I wanted to buy her class a portable aircon but wasnt allowed because of the added electricity cost.  schools have to have a fund raiser to get equipment they need, no thanks to this labor govt you seem to love so much. You want to talk about waste, how about we get our $350 million back for the failed rail network in syd. How about we calculate the waste spent on the school halls program.
I wonder how many toner cartridges that could buy!

persephone says:

02:04pm | 15/02/11

LMK

given that I’m supporting a Howard government initiative here, I find your comment a little one eyed as well!

Tony of Poorakistan says:

12:24pm | 15/02/11

^^^^ This

James says:

12:38pm | 16/02/11

All religion is bogus, the new testament bought in the concept of hell so don’t be telling me Christianity isn’t uber dodgy too.

James1 says:

10:59am | 15/02/11

Its not so much a vacuum as a contest, Joe.  Our money is competing with Saudi money.  The Saudis are the ones who committed the 9/11 attacks, and they are spreading their version of Islam in moderate states like Indonesia.

Indonesia, with all of its provinces and competing interests, would fall apart and fragment if not for its reasonably powerful land army, and its capacity to move this army to where trouble occurs.  A brief survery of Indonesia’s history since formal independence in 1949 will make this clear to you.  It is far better for Australia to have one unified neighbour with which to relate, than tens or perhaps even hundreds of tiny ones.  So no, it is certainly not in Australia’s interests for Indonesia to decrease its spending on defence.

James1 says:

11:33am | 15/02/11

You have connected two issues without any kind of connection.  Could you explain what trying to counter a radical Wahabist interpretation of Islam in Indonesia has to do with asylum seekers from Sri Lanka and Afghanistan potentially being terrorists?

There is plenty of evidence that Wahabist schools produce Islamists.  There is also plenty of evidence that Islamists are more inclined towards terrorism than others.  There is plenty of evidence that Australia is a target for terrorists.  There is no evidence that asylum seekers are terrorists - that is simply racial profiling.

In any case, if you were a terrorist, would you choose such an obvious and high profile way of entering the country?  How did the 9/11 hijackers get into the US?  Or how did the 7/7 bombers get into England? 

Thus, it is perfectly reasonable to think that terrorists could be trying to enter Australia, albeit not through our refugee intake.  There are many other ways to enter Australia than through our refugee intake, which by the way requires the person’s background to be investigated thoroughly.

So there is no hypocrisy involved in holding those two positions on entirely separate issues.  It sounds a little bit like you are confused, though.  Hope this helps to clarify your thoughts.

AdamC says:

11:29am | 15/02/11

James1, I think the Indonesians would be less likely to accept the funds if they were nakedly presented as foreign policy and security driven.

“We also need to lobby our ally, the US, to get rid of its alliance with Saudi Arabia .. “

This echoes what mahy said about the US and Mubarak. The question is, how would it benefit anyone for the Americans to cease its alliance with Saudi Arabia?

James1 says:

11:54am | 15/02/11

Good point.  I can be such a foreign policy realist at times…

On Saudi Arabia, I have no doubt it would.  Sadly, I have an academic background in terrorism and foreign policy issues, and as a result can not post a response that would be short enough to actually post in this forum.  Suffice to say, Saudi Arabia has one of the most extreme religious cultures in the world, indeed, nearly all of the 9/11 bombers were Saudis. Saudi Arabia is the source of most of Al Qaeda’s funding.  The House of Saud is at least as bad as Saddam Hussein, but unlike Saddam actively exports its particular brand of extremism.  If only it didn’t contain the two holiest cities in Islam, the US could have invaded Saudi Arabia instead of getting distracted in Iraq.

If Saudi Arabia is a friend to the US, it is likely the most two-faced, backstabbing friend in the world.  It takes billions in US aid money, meanwhile pouring billions of its own dollars into teaching Muslims all over the world to hate the US.  The US cannot oppose this while Saudi Arabia is its ally.

AdamC says:

02:27pm | 15/02/11

James1, I don’t diagree with anything you say about Saudi Arabia. However, I am not sure why it necessarily follows that the US should cease its alliance with it. How would you see a US disengagement with Saudi Arabia working on the ground?

There is no doubt that the Saudis are two-faced in their dealings with America. That could be seen as better than the Iranian model of complete hostility. However, I am sure that, if the oil tap got turned off, the US would invade Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina notwithstanding.

James1 says:

03:02pm | 15/02/11

I guess the gain I see to be made from such a course of action is that the US could be far more openly hostile to much of Saudi Arabia’s activity around the world than it is now, plus a couple of billion less in the red each year budget-wise. 

I don’t think this would really improve much (if anything), but in international politics, the real question is “would it make things any worse”.  That I cannot answer.

On your last sentence, I can’t help but wonder if Venezuela would be a softer (and thus more inviting) target…

Jon says:

03:47pm | 15/02/11

Saudi Arabia is a rock and hard place kind of argument. It is nothing like Egypt. The ruling Royal family does not control education or religion in the country. This is controlled by the crazy Wahhabists and the Royal family has no power over them.  The Wahhabists are responsible for funding extreme Islam all over the world via petrol dollars they get via the Saudi government. I would be far better to get rid of the Wahhabist’s and let the Royal family run everything, which are the lesser of two evils.

Bloggs says:

09:19pm | 16/02/11

Jon, the King of KSA uses the wahabbis to do this work.  He is one himself.

I have lived there for a few years. The believe that the freedoms of the West will be our undoing. And they fund Islamic teachings their way and building mosques around the world while we try to fund it our way - they spend mega-millions, we spend a fraction of that.  Who do you think will win?

iansand says:

02:40pm | 15/02/11

Quite right.  We should do everything we can to stamp out ignorance.  I have a cunning plan.  We could educate people.  Maybe fund a few schools.  That might work.

Harquebus says:

03:26pm | 17/02/11

Indonesia, a member of OPEC, has stopped exporting oil. They are keeping it for themselves. Fair enough.
@iansand. We need to stamp out religion first.

Harquebus says:

03:27pm | 17/02/11

We are told a lot of things.

Laura says:

12:27pm | 15/02/11

Would you care to elaborate on what is ‘really’ happening?

Steve Putnam says:

08:05pm | 15/02/11

@MarK I’d be interested in hearing your views on the $1.4billion the previous government threw away on Seasprite helicopters that will never see even an hours operational time for the RAN.
What with you being such a pugnacious defender of the taxpayers interest in getting value for their dollars…. You do have an opinion surely(?)

michael j says:

05:15pm | 15/02/11

Thats easy stop the redneck going to a bar for a quite beer,,
and the Musilm extremist might not take his bombs in to BLOW
it UP,,,,,,,,,,yes it is a hard one at that,,unfortunly the redneck
proberly votes,,

persephone says:

04:08pm | 15/02/11

Er, Indonesia has donated money towards the flood efforts.

Oh, and I’ve got another cliche for you, while we’re throwing them around:

Prevention is cheaper than cure.

Kika says:

04:29pm | 15/02/11

Actually Indonesia donated $1million to the flood appeal

The Badger says:

02:43pm | 15/02/11

I know Ryan, just like their are no moderate conservatives. They are all warmongering right wing hateful xenophobes who worship at the altar of the dollar.

James1 says:

03:04pm | 15/02/11

You should let the Sunnis, Shi’as, and Sufis know that Ryan.  Apparently they didn’t get that email.

Ryan says:

05:03pm | 15/02/11

@The Badger: I didn’t call them that, you just did though, nice offensive assumption there buddy!

Ryan says:

05:05pm | 15/02/11

@James1: they have a different Koran then? Well I never, you learn something new every day </sarcasm>

James1 says:

08:55am | 16/02/11

“sorry to break it to you but there is no such thing as “moderate Islam” and “extreme Islam”, “There is only one Islam” as quoted by any Muslim and the Koran.”

Nice reductionist and offensive assumption there, Ryan.  Also totally incorrect.  But hey, you have never let facts get in the way of your opinions before, so why start now?

And if you are so confident that a Sunni and a Sufi Muslim are the same thing, why not go and tell a Sunni that he is actually the same as a Sufi, considering you know so much more about his religion than he does.

Bloggs says:

09:13pm | 16/02/11

There is only one Islam as stated.  There is only one Allah. There are many ways of practicing Islam in the same way that there is only one Christian God but many ways of practicing Christianity. There is only one Koran and only one (perhaps) Bible. Many Islamic people believe that Allah and God are one and the same but we kick with the wrong foot (so to say).

That’s a fact.

rufus says:

03:20pm | 15/02/11

Good writing as usual, Zeta, but while OSB may be holed up in a cave or buried somewhere, he is/was not ‘barely literate’, but a western-educated engineering graduate. Some other jihadists are graduates, including medical doctors (eg the guy who drove his car into Glasgow airport and detonated it). Education generally can’t hurt, but it’s not a guaranteed terrorist-blocker.

stephen says:

08:50pm | 15/02/11

If Australia has to send over 450 million dollars to teach Islamic children the moderate ways of the Word, (and despite the seeming insipidness of the local Clerics), then perhaps the problem is not the Zionists, or the Christians, but Islam.
The Ideal sounds right : we are afraid of what the kids, later, may do to us, so their books and fellow Islamists are offered with a dose of brotherly love, (9/11 is now only a phone no.), and we want to convert History and Knowledge to new tapestries that will save the West from its own fear.
I like life too much, and I have earnt so much my pride, to feel a great bribe will not make me stare at the ground and feel already a martyr.

iansand says:

07:42pm | 15/02/11

In 1938 this sort of journalism would have been the equivalent of arming the Czech resistance.

Bloggs says:

09:05pm | 16/02/11

Christianity has Catholicism, Wwesleyism, Protestant, etc.  How is this different?

Servaas says:

12:09am | 16/02/11

Petery, have you ever read The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien? If so, is there violence in it? Does it encourage people to be violent and destructive or does it promote violence as something good and necessary? The difference between the LOTR and Bible on the one hand and teh Koran on the other is that the first two tells a story, it communicates a message, with both sad and happy parts to it, the Koran however is a collection of quotes (please correct me if I’m wrong here).

All of it should still be read in context though, both Bible. Koran LOTR and any other writing for that matter. The Bible, when read in context, does not encourage people to kill but love. The Koran on the other hand says things about love, hatred, killing in such a way that most types of behaviour can be justified.

Why is it that Tory wants Aus to help teach them to be ‘moderate’? Because should they adhere to the actual message Muslim people have plenty of reasons to kill non-Muslims simply because they adhere to another religion. If what I just said is incorrect why not rather say: let’s teach them how to correctly interpret the Koran instead of ‘moderate’?

“To suggest that all islam is hateful, and all christianity is good is stupid,because it contradicts the known facts”

You refer here to Christians and Muslims, not Islam and Christianity as in the message preached by Muhammed and Jesus respectively.

If my understanding of how the Koran should be read and is put together is incorrect I’d appreciate it if a Muslim Punch reader can correct me here.

iansand says:

07:55am | 16/02/11

It gets a bit complicated when you find out that Jesus is a prophet in Islam.

Bloggs says:

09:03pm | 16/02/11

You missed one large point here…  The old testament is not a book that describes how Christians should live every day.  It is regarded as an old book and the Western Life Style does not adopt the ways of the Old Testament.

However the Qaran, and the Sunnah, or writings of Mohammed, ARE instructions for Muslims in the way they live their lives.  Sharia requires this.

The Muslims will never accept us; they will come here and only wish to eventually take over.  We breed at the rate of 2.x children per couple.  Muslims breed at the rate of 7 to 8 children per couple.  Do the maths, it is easy.  Muslims will win.  They have all the time in the world and that is all it takes for Australia to turn Islamic.

However if you look at some European countries you will see our future.  in UK the most common babies name is Mohammed, in Sweden the mosques are burnt by the locals, in Denmark there are major issues.  Herewith is the future of Australia. Get used to it because we do not have the political or cultural will to avoid this future. People like you will contribute and one day, wonder what the hell has happened.

James says:

12:45pm | 16/02/11

Wow didn’t need that eye, ease up on the capitals.

iansand says:

06:21pm | 16/02/11

I think that is the plan.  Pretty cunning, I think.