Religious leader condemns RAPE

Prospector said:

To even compare the wearing of a seat belt to avoid injury when in a car, with wearing the hijab to avoid being raped is evil. No, that isnt even the word for it. Cant think of anything that remotely expresses my disgust that anyone could think like that.

Click to expand...

Yes, I do agree 100% & I am MORE disgusted with the comments because that boofhead helped in destroying the image of a good reliegon.

Comparison I put is to illustrate the original meaning but of course there's no clear comparison in fundementals, unfortunately, in some parts of the world, revealing cloths do tempt some mentally ill & maniacs & in a way or another provoke them to attempt such crazy things. Generally, that is due to their very conservative thinking that were formated from thousands of years of conservatism.

Being a weak or a strong precautionary level is subject to the individual background & thinking, if it will minimise the chance of getting assaulted to 50% or 5% or even 0.0001% is subject to your surronding conditions, social values & own personal views.....but still to some extent....could be a precautionary level even if its a very low on priorities.

Again, not necesserily that a girl is wearing Hijab that she couldn't get raped, it happens almost everyday in the middleeastern & muslim countries around the world. Sometimes precautions do protect & sometimes they don't!

Kauri said:

Seeing as we seem to be running with the driving analogies....
If you are wearing a seatbelt it does lessen your chances of serious injury if a speeding and /or a drunk driver hits you. Even if you are not wearing a seatbelt it is the drunk-speeding driver who is held responsible, and has his driving privileges and sometimes his liberty removed.
As there seems to be a group of men in our diverse society who cannot control themselves if they see a womens uncovered hair and face maybe we should help them by fitting them with seatbelts in the appropriate area.
By the way, there's nothing quite like taking responsibility for your own actions.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'm not a reliegous expert & I don't want to sound like someone who'll sit down give reliegon lectures, but Men in Islam as well have restrictions in perving on women even if they're naked

Hijab is put there to protect women from sex maniacs & lunatics, those with no values & no respect to women. Regular men should have enough respect to women to not assault them or even view them as sex object & nothing should "permit" a sexual assault or even a thought on women even if they are naked!

IGO4IT said:

Ok, I'm not a reliegous expert & I don't want to sound like someone who'll sit down give reliegon lectures, but Men in Islam as well have restrictions in perving on women even if they're naked

Hijab is put there to protect women from sex maniacs & lunatics, those with no values & no respect to women. Regular men should have enough respect to women to not assault them or even view them as sex object & nothing should "permit" a sexual assault or even a thought on women even if they are naked!

Click to expand...

My point is that if women are considered at risk and need to wear seatbelts to protect themselves, then if we are really serious about it, any man who is at risk of offending if they see uncovered hair and faces should also be made to wear a seatbelt.
I'm sure a couple of the good ladies here could "design something appropriate".

Kauri said:

My point is that if women are considered at risk and need to wear seatbelts to protect themselves, then if we are really serious about it, any man who is at risk of offending if they see uncovered hair and faces should also be made to wear a seatbelt.
I'm sure a couple of the good ladies here could "design something appropriate".

Click to expand...

I think so as well!!!!!!!!

hypothetical.
If I go into a bank with motorcycle helmet, the screens come up.

But if I ( and here I could be a non-muslem bank robber, cunning enough to pretend to be moslem), put on a hijab (as incidentally one of the recent pommie bombers did to temporarily get away - although later caught) , and incidentally plenty of room under dress/kaftan for weapons (which is more than can be said for a helmet) - then the screens stay down

2020hindsight said:

hypothetical.
If I go into a bank with motorcycle helmet, the screens come up.

But if I ( and here I could be a non-muslem bank robber, cunning enough to pretend to be moslem), put on a hijab (as incidentally one of the recent pommie bombers did to temporarily get away - although later caught) , and incidentally plenty of room under dress/kaftan for weapons (which is more than can be said for a helmet) - then the screens stay down

Click to expand...

I think same thing will happen if you'd wear any skiing jacket, baggy jeans, or simply pretend to be pregenant

To be really practical, the way guns are designed these day, you could hide I think up to a dozen of guns in your normal suit jacket!!!

I see that we may say the same about nuns & priests & rabbies being at banks as well

You remind me of a techinician I got to install a new alarm/locking system to my house that after 3 hours presentation & a price of $25k system that he presented......he ended the conversation by saying...."if someone still wanted to get inside your house & steal things....they still can"

From ABC , January 26, 2007

Hilali's controversial comments 'misunderstood'

Sheikh Taj el-Din Al Hilali has sought to play down the controversy that erupted recently over comments he made during an interview on Egyptian television.
The cleric suggested that people who pay to come to Australia have more of a right to be here than those who were brought in shackles.
During his first interview since flying back into the country, the sheikh told Channel 7 many of his comments had been misinterpreted.
"One hundred per cent misunderstood, why [is] the Australian media always making my speech upside-down meaning," he said.
He denied suggestions that he thought Australian women ask for trouble by the way they dress, saying it is a question of personal freedom.
Sheikh Al Hilali says he does not intend to run at the next state election, but has responded to comments he plans to field three Muslim candidates.
"Anything that [is a] benefit for our society or community I help," he said.
The sheikh has also denied having ever said that Muslim gang rapists receive heavier sentences because of their religion.

Click to expand...

This line of excuse looks like standard, pity it is happily accepted every time.

Now we have new issue, strict Islam superstate.

Happy said:

This line of excuse looks like standard, pity it is happily accepted every time.

Now we have new issue, strict Islam superstate.

Click to expand...

Watch out people, I actually got sucked in before with the "misunderstood" excuse few times but I just read that he has some "political" ambitions.

What's he's doing is simply propaganda for himself, in many people's view, there's nothing called bad propaganda, all good!!

He's trying to get the spot light for some political ambitions, more or less he'll try to be the typical opposition of some for instance like Pauline Hanson.

We are helping his plan to be more popular by talking about him more & more & getting him on the news over & over again.

From ABC , January 29, 2007

ISLAMIC GROUP COULD FACE LEGAL ACTION: NSW LIBERALS

The New South Wales Opposition says a radical Islamic group in Sydney could face court over what it says is the racial vilification of non-Muslims.
The group, called Hizb ut Tahrir, held a conference in south-west Sydney yesterday and called for the establishment of an Islamic state under sharia law somewhere in the world.
Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock says there is insufficient evidence to ban the group.
But the NSW Liberal's justice spokesman, Chris Hartcher, says the State Government has the power to prosecute Hizb ut Tahrir separate to the Commonwealth.
"The whole thrust of Islamic extremism in Australia is to vilify the races in Australia who are not adherents to Islam," he said.
"That clearly constitutes vilification under the racial discrimination sections of the racial discrimination act."
Mr Ruddock says NSW will have to decide itself if it wants to ban the controversial Islamic group.
"If the State Government believes it should be banned as an organisation simply because they don't like their views, I would suggest they've got power to do it," he said.
"The Commonwealth doesn't and we know that from the Communist Party dissolution case."

Click to expand...

There was earlier another comment - quoted below, why group should not be made illegal.

This type of logic is scary.

From ABC , January 29, 2007

BANNING MUSLIM GROUP 'WOULD BE DANGEROUS'

A leading Muslim says the Federal Government is right to allow the controversial Islamic group, Hizb ut Tahrir, to practice in Australia.
There have been calls for the group to be banned following a conference in Sydney's south-west yesterday, which focused on creating an Islamic super state with sharia law somewhere in the world.
But former chairman of the Federal Government's Muslim Community Reference Group, Dr Ameer Ali, says banning the group and its controversial teachings could do more harm than good.
"That call may be appropriate in a Muslim country, but it is totally inappropriate to Australia," he said.
"Therefore they have to be monitored in what they are saying, but to ban them is not a wise move, because once you ban them, they go underground. That is much more dangerous."
However, Dr Ali is concerned the conference held by the group may further damage the community's perceptions of the faith.
He says the best way to deal with the group is to engage moderate Muslims to counter its views.
"These youngsters don't realise the damage they are doing to the mainstream Muslim community in this country," he said.
"So I'd say let them do whatever they want to do, but there must be some line - we draw a line beyond which they have to be monitored very closely.
"And I think the law enforcement authorities must monitor them."
Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock says there is insufficient evidence to ban the group.
But chair of the Community Relations Commission, Stepan Kerkyasharian, says Hizb ut Tahrir is overstepping the mark.
"If people are going to hold public meetings calling for a way of life and our institutions to be replaced by some other system, then they are definitely crossing the line," he said.
"It's not acceptable in our society and it's tantamount to calling for a revolution."

Click to expand...

Kauri said:

My point is that if women are considered at risk and need to wear seatbelts to protect themselves, then if we are really serious about it, any man who is at risk of offending if they see uncovered hair and faces should also be made to wear a seatbelt.
I'm sure a couple of the good ladies here could "design something appropriate".

Click to expand...

Yes, Kauri, I can visualise some very appropriate restraints indeed.

IGO4IT: I find your comments - in addition to being distasteful as far as how women should dress or behave are concerned - rather confused. First you appear to be an apologist for the Sheik then you appear to change your mind.

To continue the driving analogy, if we were to pursue your theory, we'd all simply stay off the road in case a drunk driver were to cause us harm.
It's a silly analogy anyway.

I wonder how women would fare were they to make a sexual assault on a bloke in some well fitting Speedos???

Julia

Hello
Firstly Julia - you would find it difficult to 'rape' a man, if he does not wish to do so - I thought that's obvious.

The other thought that has occurred to me consistently is that the Muslim World, quite apart from the fact that they are derived from a gentleman who had multiple wives and married his last and child bride at age 60, need to protect themselves from themselves rather than anybody else.

The spectacle of winter dress on Muslim women, complete with socks and gloves in a summery Britain recently (I visited there in August/September), right next to a fairly exposed and statuesque dark-skinned beauty and her equally undressed child is laughable and makes you think. The imposition of that dress code on their women folk is inhumane. Also the other day I saw on the news a small child in the arms of what looked like a white basket - a person who resembled a ghost with a bit of latticework in front to allow her to breathe - now what kind of distortion is already instilled into such a small child, whether male or female, doesn't even bear thinking about. I felt incredibly sad for that mother/child relationship.
I believe we should do everything possible to integrate these people - seeing they are already here - possibly take our own exposure a notch down (it's not so good to expose yourself to our hot sun, anyway), but insist that they make some concessions to our dress code as well. This can all be done legally. The next generation will already adapt a little, although they may go the other way (as has been shown in Britain) - but I believe by the third generation you will have an integration process in place, which will slowly open their minds to our freer way of thinking and living; and eventually they will embrace it.

Those crazies with their ill-considered public statements are simply parasites who bludge off their communities and crave the exposure the media give them. What about our media just ignoring them? Is that an option?

Possibly we should ask ourselves the question, what is it really that upsets them so much, has Western society gone a little too far in its freedom of expression, sexual and otherwise. Is it time to consider family values ?? etc. etc. should we look into our own hearts for part of the answer?
Or: is Television to blame? do 'they' believe everything they see on their television screens IS the Western lifestyle? We all know, it is not, but newcomers usually live in their own enclaves and have little chance to meet and integrate with the normal community. Should we make more of an effort to extend a welcome?

Or if they find it impossible to adapt, arrange some sort of program whereby they can be repatriated to either their own country or a Muslim country of their choice; and be more selective and careful when screening prospective migrants to our country.

I am an older woman, but I would find it sad if our young girls and young men would have to slavishly cover their beautiful bodies - in fact I would like to see more colour and fashion sense all round.

Cheers

Taurisk

IGO4IT said:

I think same thing will happen if you'd wear any skiing jacket, baggy jeans, or simply pretend to be pregnant
I see that we may say the same about nuns & priests & rabbies being at banks as well

Click to expand...

Igo, My main point was meant to the covering of the face.
I imagine the day will come when everyone will be asked to remove head covering irrespective, so that the bank security cameras get a good look at you. . (goes for beanie, headcover inside windcheater, helmet, balaclava, etc - or hats I guess).
Nothing to do with rape obviously - but we may all have to give up such claims to closeted personal identities when security is involved. Personally I think it would be reasonable to let banks ask this question of patrons.
As you know the entire hijab thing was recently a big issue in France. (and not just for banks)

Julia said:

IGO4IT: I find your comments - in addition to being distasteful as far as how women should dress or behave are concerned - rather confused. First you appear to be an apologist for the Sheik then you appear to change your mind.

To continue the driving analogy, if we were to pursue your theory, we'd all simply stay off the road in case a drunk driver were to cause us harm.
It's a silly analogy anyway.

I wonder how women would fare were they to make a sexual assault on a bloke in some well fitting Speedos???

Julia

Click to expand...

I don't apologise for anyone because that sheikh is free to say what he sees to be correct & up to each individual to like to dislike his comments. HE should be responsible for his actions. He does NOT represent me or any muslim because he's not an elected leader by any chance. Because of the free speech environment we're living in & because of democracy, we all have to expect idiots to come up with crazy ideas for us to find out what's right & what's wrong. if we stop all those lunatics including the likes of the sheik & Pauline Hanson, then we lose the sense of what we like or dislike, this is what democracy is all about, many opinions & only 1 winner.

I don't like what he said & I don't find it appropriate to the society we're living in today in Australia but I still think that the rule of wearing a Hijab is in a way or another could be considered a precautionary step that many may like to take, its up to their individual opinion, if you don't agree with it then that's fine, it's up to you to think of the risk & consider what you think is an appropriate precaution or not.

To get off the road because you're scared of crazy people hitting you is the same as those now that get scared of planes becuase they fear them being hit into towers, some may believe that its safer to avoid catching planes after september 11th & others may think the chances are too little for it happen again! so whether you're an advocate of "take your chances" or that you'll do what you have to do or whether you need to take EVERY individual precuationary step, its up to how paranoid you are & of course if you're a muslim, the attraction factors increase by adding few good points with god if you do it.....its totally your own opinion & decision.

cheers,

Taurisk said:

The other thought that has occurred to me consistently is that the Muslim World, quite apart from the fact that they are derived from a gentleman who had multiple wives and married his last and child bride at age 60, need to protect themselves from themselves rather than anybody else.

Click to expand...

Amazing info, why don't you highlight for us the circumstances for the ugly occasion or did you hear about it in talk back radio . There are many circumstances & historical facts that you need to mention before you say the fact. Before making an opinion, make some study & argue facts....if you're not here to help damaging a reliegon's image & you want objective discussion then you should give us the full historical reason for such an occasion to happen.

Taurisk said:

The spectacle of winter dress on Muslim women, complete with socks and gloves in a summery Britain recently (I visited there in August/September), right next to a fairly exposed and statuesque dark-skinned beauty and her equally undressed child is laughable and makes you think. The imposition of that dress code on their women folk is inhumane. Also the other day I saw on the news a small child in the arms of what looked like a white basket - a person who resembled a ghost with a bit of latticework in front to allow her to breathe - now what kind of distortion is already instilled into such a small child, whether male or female, doesn't even bear thinking about. I felt incredibly sad for that mother/child relationship.
I believe we should do everything possible to integrate these people - seeing they are already here - possibly take our own exposure a notch down (it's not so good to expose yourself to our hot sun, anyway), but insist that they make some concessions to our dress code as well. This can all be done legally. The next generation will already adapt a little, although they may go the other way (as has been shown in Britain) - but I believe by the third generation you will have an integration process in place, which will slowly open their minds to our freer way of thinking and living; and eventually they will embrace it.

Click to expand...

First of all, you're generalising by mentioning that every muslim is poor. No, some are more intellegent than me & you. Australia took only the war refugee, that's why Australia doesn't get the decent muslims here, they all go to Europe & US...if you want a proof, check out the famous Price Walid ben talal......HE OWNS 15% OF THE NASDAQ

Taurisk said:

Those crazies with their ill-considered public statements are simply parasites who bludge off their communities and crave the exposure the media give them. What about our media just ignoring them? Is that an option?

Possibly we should ask ourselves the question, what is it really that upsets them so much, has Western society gone a little too far in its freedom of expression, sexual and otherwise. Is it time to consider family values ?? etc. etc. should we look into our own hearts for part of the answer?
Or: is Television to blame? do 'they' believe everything they see on their television screens IS the Western lifestyle? We all know, it is not, but newcomers usually live in their own enclaves and have little chance to meet and integrate with the normal community. Should we make more of an effort to extend a welcome?

Or if they find it impossible to adapt, arrange some sort of program whereby they can be repatriated to either their own country or a Muslim country of their choice; and be more selective and careful when screening prospective migrants to our country.

I am an older woman, but I would find it sad if our young girls and young men would have to slavishly cover their beautiful bodies - in fact I would like to see more colour and fashion sense all round.

Click to expand...

I also find it funny for those that colour their hair pink or have 50 rings in their face & genitels, but ITS THEIR CHOICE!!! its the free world people, you get to do & wear anything you like if you're happy with it.

I don't see how you advocate freedom & still assume that everyone will like wear revealed clothing, they CHOOSE to wear these clothes & its their OWN choice.

As for sending people home.........WHERE IS HOME????....they're Australian, like you & me, this is their home, they choose that lifestyle & that clothing... I don't see why it should annoy you for someone wearing or not wearing clothes!!!

Again, I'm very annoyed from your general view on Islam, I do understand that media had be covering the sad bad points ONLY & not interested at all in highlighting the good factors of the reliegon, but again, Islam is a reliegon & NOT a nationality, its the way you communicate to your god if you have one, whether you're a Jew, christian or Muslim, its only the way that you communicate with god which is always ......the one god....again...if many forgot.

Cheers

2020hindsight said:

Igo, My main point was meant to the covering of the face.
I imagine the day will come when everyone will be asked to remove head covering irrespective, so that the bank security cameras get a good look at you. . (goes for beanie, headcover inside windcheater, helmet, balaclava, etc - or hats I guess).
Nothing to do with rape obviously - but we may all have to give up such claims to closeted personal identities when security is involved. Personally I think it would be reasonable to let banks ask this question of patrons.
As you know the entire hijab thing was recently a big issue in France. (and not just for banks)

Click to expand...

I'm totally againist covering the face, the % of those covering their faces is very little but for every rule there's always an exception.

Covering the face is an extreme & I don't support it by any chance & under any circumstances, I personally get scared of them when I see them down the road....but again...I go back & say who am I to tell people what to wear!

Yes, they're dangerous & could be an excuse for many to commit many crimes under cover, I do believe that its not a part of Islam to do such a thing & only very few that do that to themselves under the name of Islam but in fact reliegon has nothing to do it.

By no meaning I would recommend that to any of my relatives or family & I would be extremely angry if my kid once decided to take such a step.

cheers,

IGO4IT said:

& I would be extremely angry if my kid once decided to take such a step.

Click to expand...

lol, and i'd be extremely depressed if my daughter said she wanted to become a nun - but that's about as likely as "jonah and the whale"
she's too busy enjoyin life - thats her in the glider btw.

2020hindsight said:

lol, and i'd be extremely depressed if my daughter said she wanted to become a nun - but that's about as likely as "jonah and the whale"
she's too busy enjoyin life - thats her in the glider btw.

Click to expand...

The Flying Nun??

Taurisk said:

Hello
Firstly Julia - you would find it difficult to 'rape' a man, if he does not wish to do so - I thought that's obvious.


Cheers

Taurisk

Click to expand...

Taurisk,

My comment was fairly obviously facetious. However, if you want to take it seriously, what I mentioned was "sexual assault". I'm sure I don't need to be graphic, but that doesn't by any means imply rape.

Julia

Kauri said:

The Flying Nun??

Click to expand...

and getting into the habit (as the bishop said to the... mother superior?).
(now now tcch tcch, we'll have nun of that !! )

2020hindsight said:

and getting into the habit (as the bishop said to the... mother superior?).
(now now tcch tcch, we'll have nun of that !! )

Click to expand...

we will have nun of that bishop bashing here thanks..