This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Religion IS crazy!

Jump to new
Value Collector said:
I think we should Assume innocence until proven guilty, or at least until we have evidence that wrong doing is going on rather than basing the assumption on bigotry.
Click to expand...

You are correct, but when do we start collecting evidence ? After the first beheading on our streets or should we be taking preventative action ?

Our police forces took preventative action this morning based on investigations. In such a case where terrorism is closely linked with a religious organisation we should be within our rights to satisfy ourselves that the organisation is not supporting a terrorist group.

I for one hope that our Police and Intelligence services are following any lines of enquiry that lead to exposing terrorists and their supporters.
 

I mentioned before that we have very good intelligence agencies who's job it is to investigate such matters, so it's not up to the average punter to make assumptions and spread misinformation, unless they have some how come across evidence, then they should report it to the authorities.

To assume any organisation that has anything to do with Islam must be put on the stand and prove itself innocent to make the bigots happy would be making australia a worse place to live.
 

Who said anything about "putting people on the stand" ? Investigations should be done, that's all. If evidence is found, it should be acted on.

If it wasn't for investigations already done, some "average punter" would have had his head cut off, so I think we have a right to express our opinions.
 

And you just have to trust that those investigations are being done. It's not up to the public to make public assumptions and accusations, for all you know the intelligence agencies have looked at the halal group and found no links, but here you are on a public forum trying to spread a seed of doubt about an organisation you know nothing about other than they are Muslim.

You are sort of suggesting they take the stand, because you seem to think they should have to be publicly proved innocent before you will trust them, or some sort of public investigation be done against any organisation members of the public care to name.
 
Yeah, right. That's all just fine then. Repeated investigations have shown that such reassuring motherhood statements are just that, and in fact animals are frequently abused in the most horrible ways. This is not confined to any secular or religious group.

Well, thank you, Rumpole. We have had saturation coverage all day of the most intense counter-terrorist action to ever happen in Australia, and no one here until now has even considered it worthy of a mention.

Why? Is there so much concern about the potential to offend "moderate Muslims"? Even from people here who have so vehemently previously criticised all religion.
Perhaps some of these people might be able to explain why there exists a rally of Muslims against today's actions by authorities:
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2014/09/18/200-protest--govt-aggression--in-sydney.html

Are we all so confident that we don't actually have home grown terrorism right here in Australia that we don't feel it warrants any comment?

That it's all some sort of beat up in order to strike fear and compliance into the heart of Australians?

A couple of weeks ago I raised the thought that if disaffected Muslim youth are denied, via cancelling of their passports, the opportunity to go and fight with ISIS in the ME, their frustration will exacerbate their obviously already existing hatred of Australia, despite their having been born here.
Today's news reports include the fact that every one of those in today's events had had their attempts to travel from Australia thwarted.

What, then, is the point of this? Isn't it better to let them go and vent their murderous intent in the main battlefield, instead of randomly executing some innocent Australian, plucked off the streets?

I'm just really interested to know people's reactions to today's events.
 

No doubt not every individual in the industry is 100% compliant 100% of the time, but what's that got to do with halal products or methods?

I mean, if your concern is that individuals could break rules and mishandle an animal, thats got nothing to do with halal, so I can't see how the problem would be resolved by avoiding halal meat, you would have to go vegan to avoid it.
 
In regards to the terrorist plot in Australia, I wasn't shocked, it's the 3rd or 4th major plot thats been thwarted. And I am happy that the authorities have uncovered the plan and put an end to it. It has given me confidence in their work.

I am concerned that more than likely a terrorist action will happen, they can not stop them all, eventually the dice will roll the wrong way. All I can hope for is that they can stop them long enough for a gradually shift if the general population away from religious ideas.

This is the main reason I speak out publicly to try and assist people to move away from religious ideas and instead value critical thinking.

I don't believe moderate religion is the answer, where ever there are moderates you will breed a level of extremism, the extremists are recruited from moderates, the vast majority of extremists come from moderate homes that laid the foundational beliefs that extremism could be build on.
 
Well it certainly reinforces the title of this thread. The events of the day are born in a ridiculous devotion to a ridiculous doctrine. There have been a few 'Australian' 'leaders' and recruiters in the extremist islamic movement so there was/is always a likelihood some of the mindless BS was going happen here. So while the news is horrific from an Australian way of life perspective, it is also not completely surprising that these elements exist and are active right here.. The behaviour of the 'moderates' is a complex topic. Some speak up but the vast majority are silent - why are the vast majority silent? Is it out of fear of retribution in their own community if they spoke up or is it something else? In any case does it matter what the moderates do or dont do? It is much more about the extremist jihadists than them and there seem to be plenty of them and plenty of available young recruits.
I am pleased that our police etc are active on this front - there are enough indicators here and elsewhere to tell us that we need to take some measures to protect the community. If the moderates have to, and they will, pay a price for this then so be it. I would very much like to see a street march by the moderates separating themselves politically and religiously from the extremists-rather than bemoaning the 'unfair' treatment of a few suspects.
 
Sigh. I already said
This is not confined to any secular or religious group.
Click to expand...
I do not eat meat. That does not mean I have to be vegan which involves no consumption of any product or byproduct or any part of any animal, eg eggs.
 

Misrepresentation once again. Once more , when did I suggest a PUBLIC investigation ? I don't expect the AFP to shout from the rooftops WE ARE INVESTIGATING THE ISLAMIC COUNCIL, I just think they should do it via their normal processes, and if they have nothing to hide I'm sure that the council would cooperate.

In most criminal investigations there are more suspects than perpetrators, which means that innocent people get investigated and cleared. That's a fact of life. I would equally expect investigation of the Catholic church if there was any suspicion of a link between them and a terrorist group.
 

So as i how, how do you know that they have not already been investigated?

And at what point do you refrain from publicly suggesting the organisation may be involved in terrorist activity?

Because as you said your not expecting the investigation to be made public, and you have no idea if they have already been investigated, and you have no information to suggest they have done anything wrong. So it seems your comments are just flinging mud, for no reason.
 
Julia said:
I do not eat meat. .
Click to expand...

Ok, that's fine, but when you said you would rather look for alternatives than eat halal it gave me the impression you were eating meat, and you just wanted to avoid halal meat for some reason, I was just trying to say that there is no extra animal cruelty involved in halal, and that the whole purpose of halal is to minimise cruelty.

A lot of people that are against halal have some pretty strange ideas as to what it is, I was just trying to bring the facts to light. The only reason I know so much about halal is because I was offended when I was younger and my butcher started saying all his meat was halal, when I researched it though, I realised it was not evil and was actually a good thing.

That does not mean I have to be vegan which involves no consumption of any product or by product or any part of any animal, eg eggs
Click to expand...

I understand now that you don't eat meat, but if animal rights is the issue, then eating egg products should be avoided also.

In my opinion the life of a broiler hen (meat chook) is better than that of a laying hen. I mean they both end up at the slaughter house, the laying hens just spend 2 years in tight cages prior to the slaughter house. broilers on the other hand are not caged up, and living conditions only get tight in the last 2 weeks or so, because they only spend 40days on the farm, and the majority of that they are small with lots of room to move, only when they are full size does it get cramped, but then they are shipped off, and a fresh load of chicks brought in.

Any way, this is getting off topic, I have no problem with vegans or vegetarians or what ever people want to eat. I am just interested in facts.
 
So it seems your comments are just flinging mud, for no reason.
Click to expand...

Your staunch defense of a class of organisation you have been throwing mud at throughout this thread is touching.

Some may say hypocritical, but I won't throw that piece of mud.
 

VC

Most cattlemen visit an abattoir every so often to see their own cattle slaughtered. Their objective is to see the carcass hanging up so they can assess the fat levels and other relevant details that can help them to modify their breeding programs so they produce cattle with better carcass attributes – hence more money for their bottom line.
I’ve visited abattoirs a couple of time myself in this capacity. I can tell you that the purpose of a stun gun is not to penetrate the skull and kill the animal. As the name suggests, the stun gun is only for the purpose of stunning the animal by delivering a blow to the back of the head. Once the animal is rendered unconscious, the slaughtermen move in to cut the throat so as to deliver a quick and painless death, and to bleed the animal as much as possible before the carcass is hung up for processing.
 
SirRumpole said:
Your staunch defense of a class of organisation you have been throwing mud at throughout this thread is touching.

Some may say hypocritical, but I won't throw that piece of mud.
Click to expand...

Are we talking about motorcycle groups with individuals not allowed to consort, locked up on suspicion, constantly monitored and harangued? It's a wonder they haven't converted to Islam to get the cops and govt off their backs.
 
Tisme said:
Are we talking about motorcycle groups with individuals not allowed to consort, locked up on suspicion, constantly monitored and harangued? It's a wonder they haven't converted to Islam to get the cops and govt off their backs.
Click to expand...

I know you're joking, but some of them have.

Middle East bikie groups are an increasing problem.
 
SirRumpole said:
I know you're joking, but some of them have.

Middle East bikie groups are an increasing problem.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling the VLAD laws were in response to the MEB gangs and memberships of "those types" in established clubs.
 

yes, I know, I have seen the process also, and I have heard stories of the stun gun not rendering the animal unconscious.
 
SirRumpole said:
Your staunch defense of a class of organisation you have been throwing mud at throughout this thread is touching.

Some may say hypocritical, but I won't throw that piece of mud.
Click to expand...

As I said, there are many good reasons to attack religion, why attack the good parts? the more people conducting inspections inside meat processing facilities the better, Why care if a food processor pays to have another group conduct routine inspections.

and secondly, I have never been in favour of bigotry, As I have said many times, I am a big supporter of religious freedom, they can build as many churches, mosques etc as they like, as long as they fund it themselves, they can have as many religious groups as they like, as long as It doesn't infringe on the rights of the non religious.

And they have the right not to be discriminated against, it not up to us as individuals to be making accusations and requests for investigations, Until they are proven to be doing the wrong thing, or unless you have other evidence, we have to assume innocence.

(please note when I say it's not up to us I mean me and you, the authorities can investigate, but they will probably not make investigations public, so we have to assume the group is ok, unless the authorities say they aren't)

The authorities have already proven their investigations work, so until the authorities publicly charge them or raid them, the rest of us have to assume their innocence. Other wise we will start to adopt a society where bigotry rules and racism thrives.

Trust me the average Muslim on the street is going to be copping enough dirty looks and abuse to make them resent other groups and widen the cultural gap, they don't need it from me and you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...