The West has lost its freedom of speech

[Chris45]

I think they are backing the wrong side. I don't think that either of them realises that allah is an imaginary god.

In danger of going off topic here so I'll keep it brief. I suggest you watch:

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/customuniverse/

Scientists are slowly waking up to an inconvenient truth - the universe looks suspiciously like a fix. The issue concerns the very laws of nature themselves. For 40 years, physicists and cosmologists have been quietly collecting examples of all too convenient "coincidences" and special features in the underlying laws of the universe that seem to be necessary in order for life, and hence conscious beings, to exist. Change any one of them and the consequences would be lethal. Fred Hoyle, the distinguished cosmologist, once said it was as if "a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics".

To see the problem, imagine playing God with the cosmos. Before you is a designer machine that lets you tinker with the basics of physics. Twiddle this knob and you make all electrons a bit lighter, twiddle that one and you make gravity a bit stronger, and so on. It happens that you need to set thirtysomething knobs to fully describe the world about us. The crucial point is that some of those metaphorical knobs must be tuned very precisely, or the universe would be sterile.

Example: neutrons are just a tad heavier than protons. If it were the other way around, atoms couldn't exist, because all the protons in the universe would have decayed into neutrons shortly after the big bang. No protons, then no atomic nucleuses and no atoms. No atoms, no chemistry, no life. Like Baby Bear's porridge in the story of Goldilocks, the universe seems to be just right for life.”
― Paul Davies

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/1876666.Paul_Davies

Food for thought.

 

[FxTrader]

Islam is the most problematic religion on Earth and we should be calmly, but firmly, resisting its attempts to infiltrate us and ultimately dominate us. Boycotting Halal certified food and objecting to the building of mosques, etc are simple acts of resistance we can all do, as well as rejecting socialist, bleeding heart politicians who favour Muslims.

Many religions and religious sects are problematic for various reasons. Radical Islam and the extreme violence it sanctions can't be "calmly" resisted, it requires decisive military action. Boycotting Halal certification is a total waste of time and only hurts local producers.

If you advocate for the prevention of Mosque construction then to avoid the charge of overt discrimination, no new temples or churches should be built. While a highly desirable outcome, it's wishful thinking. It's not the building that's the problem, it what is taught inside.

France now has a serious Muslim problem, but they have created it for themselves so now they have to deal with it, ... and no one can tell the French what to do.

Every society harboring radical Islamists has a serious problem. France did not create this problem, Islamists did.

Of course I condemn the barbarous murders in Paris, as I condemn all acts of terrorism and wanton violence, but I'm not going to shed crocodile tears and run around holding up a silly "Je suis Charlie" sign in support of a bunch of arrogant French artists who frankly should have known better.

My compassion is directed to the innocent victims of this horrific massacre ... the cops who were slaughtered in their line of duty, plus any others who were innocently caught up in the event.

Actions have reactions and we all know that Muslims take their prophet very seriously and those cartoonists knew perfectly well what they were doing when they published their provocative and insulting drawings, and it does not surprise me that a couple of extremists one day decided to whack them. And if that sounds callous and insensitive then sorry but they should have heeded the first message that was sent to them when their office was burnt down.

On one hand you condemn the massacre and on the other you think some of the victims are more deserving of compassion and sympathy than others based on their occupation. They are ALL innocent victims, clearly something you fail to comprehend and yes your comments sound callous and insensitive and they are. Your attitude reminds me of those who criticized the Jews for not leaving Europe quickly enough when the Nazi's started to persecute them based on the notion that they should have seen what was coming. Hence the victims are at fault as they should have anticipated the violent actions of the perpetrators and been intimidated into action.

Calm and firm resolve to resist the Islamic takeover is what we need, and what we don't need are arrogant film makers, cartoonists and other provocateurs, and the fools who support them, who delight in insulting particular groups of people and desecrating their religious icons, monuments, grave stones, etc, etc ... things that they hold sacred ... under the guise of "freedom of speech", for their own personal gain ... and I disagree with those who think that this is acceptable behaviour.

Ah, the slippery slope argument for censorship of those who might offend others belief in imaginary God's and their false prophets. Sam Harris says it best...

The freedom to think out loud on certain topics, without fear of being hounded into hiding or killed, has already been lost. And the only forces on earth that can recover it are strong, secular governments that will face down charges of blasphemy with scorn. No apologies necessary. Muslims must learn that if they make belligerent and fanatical claims upon the tolerance of free societies, they will meet the limits of that tolerance

But rather than seeing them executed I would prefer to see them firmly re-educated to redirect their energies into more productive activities.

Re-education camps like we have in North Korea perhaps. This is nothing more than totalitarian excrement masquarading as a reasonable proposition.

What "free speech" we enjoy in this country is something that should be treasured and not exploited and abused for the sake of notoriety and personal gain. Our cartoonists seem to understand that concept and exercise appropriate restraint when expressing their views, and for that I congratulate them.

Free speech is exploited every day on the internet and cartoonists who avoid mocking the bad ideas embodied in religions like Islam are cowards.

 

[Calliope]

Food for thought.

Yeah. Junkfood for idiots.

 

[Julia]

It depends very much on what time period and what brand of religion you're talking about. If it's today's Taliban and Al-Qaeda perverted version of Saudi-style Wahhabism, you may have a point. But turn the clock back 500 years and contemplate Spanish Catholicism, and the Incas, who were murdered by Spanish Conquistadors, would strongly disagree. As would the Canaanites two millennia before that, when "The Chosen People" killed them for their "Land of Milk and Honey".

I get your point but, pixel, it doesn't really seem particularly useful to consider what may have occurred hundreds of years ago as relevant to what is happening now.

This evening I heard the latter part of Radio National's "Encounter" doco which was titled "Dreaming of the Caliphate".
One speaker rejected the notion that the desire by Muslims for a global caliphate was an old aim, and actually suggested it had moved into the post-modern era. Further, that the West would have to realise that they could no longer dominate global power and thinking.

It hardly left me with a sense of reassurance that so called moderate Muslims (whatever this means) will provide much resistance to a religious/political force which can convince them that it represents the will of their Prophet.

 

[Calliope]

"Moderate Muslim" is an oxymoron. It's like saying that Ted Bundy was a moderate serial killer, because he only killed females.

 

[lindsayf]

Many religions and religious sects are problematic for various reasons. Radical Islam and the extreme violence it sanctions can't be "calmly" resisted, it requires decisive military action. Boycotting Halal certification is a total waste of time and only hurts local producers.

If you advocate for the prevention of Mosque construction then to avoid the charge of overt discrimination, no new temples or churches should be built. While a highly desirable outcome, it's wishful thinking. It's not the building that's the problem, it what is taught inside.


Every society harboring radical Islamists has a serious problem. France did not create this problem, Islamists did.


On one hand you condemn the massacre and on the other you think some of the victims are more deserving of compassion and sympathy than others based on their occupation. They are ALL innocent victims, clearly something you fail to comprehend and yes your comments sound callous and insensitive and they are. Your attitude reminds me of those who criticized the Jews for not leaving Europe quickly enough when the Nazi's started to persecute them based on the notion that they should have seen what was coming. Hence the victims are at fault as they should have anticipated the violent actions of the perpetrators and been intimidated into action.


Ah, the slippery slope argument for censorship of those who might offend others belief in imaginary God's and their false prophets. Sam Harris says it best...




Re-education camps like we have in North Korea perhaps. This is nothing more than totalitarian excrement masquarading as a reasonable proposition.


Free speech is exploited every day on the internet and cartoonists who avoid mocking the bad ideas embodied in religions like Islam are cowards.

+1.

 

[pixel]

Paul Davies may know a thing or two about Physics and Cosmology.
Does that make him infallible when it comes to speculation about metaphysical hypotheses? A number of his fellow scientists disagree. Let us not place undue emphasis on his co-authorship of the ill-fated "discovery" of arsenic-based life forms. However, his thirty-something knobs that have to be tweaked just so that we can exist, remind me of another great theorist, Georg Cantor, who lived from 1845 to 1917.
Cantor formulated the Set Theory, a corner stone of Mathematics, which brought him fame and wide-spread recognition. Subsequently, he also embarked on religious and philosophical studies. Some indications are for that to be sparked by the discovery of the great paradox of Set Theory, the set of sets that do not contain themselves as a subset. His inability to recognise this as a paradox, i.e. ultimately an inadmissible concatenation of terms, drove him deeply into depression.

Davies' thought experiment speculating on hypothetical knobs that have to be fine-tuned seems to be just such an inadmissible concatenation of terms. Of course, if the mass ratio between neutrons and electrons were any different, the entire mathematical model of our cosmos would be different. Quantum Theory may find an equation that would allow a different set of numbers. The wave-particle duality could possibly allow a few alternatives. But the resultant universe would then have different properties; and so would life forms - if they existed at all in a recogniseable shape. With 30 or more observed or hypothetical parameters, the problem may well turn out a paradox more complex by orders of magnitude than Cantor's "set of sets". ... and by orders of magnitude more likely to drive anybody insane...

Regardless of whether or not it's a paradox though, plain logic would suggest Davies has the cart before the horse when he suggests a Divine Planner has arranged those parameters just so that we can exist. If in fact that's his tenet at all. A more appropriate way of wording it would be "We exist in a universe that has the following properties..." And even though one may want to bypass the paradox by postulating a para-doctor named "God", any and all of the attributes commonly associated with Allah, Baal, Christ, ... Wotan, Xuhu, Yahweh, Zeus would be superstitious poppycock, Especially those bits about killing or re-educating everyone who disagrees with a particular brand of superstitious poppycock.

It is conceivable, though highly unlikely, that one day, we'll have a complete model of the universe and everything that surrounds it. At that time, scientists might then feed different parameters into a super computer to find how other configurations would look like. Who knows, there might even be some really intelligent life forms possible.

 

[burglar]

... Who knows, there might even be some really intelligent life forms possible.

Would they make them underground? Just to have a peek!

 

[Macquack]

Free speech is exploited every day on the internet and cartoonists who avoid mocking the bad ideas embodied in religions like Islam are cowards.

I think the trick is to be anonymous or at least, not have a published address.

 

[Calliope]

It's not surprising that the Islamic atrocity apologsts hate Andrew Bolt...especially when he has the guts to tell it like it is.

PROTESTERS around the West, horrified by the massacre in Paris, have held up pens and chanted “Je suis Charlie” — I am Charlie.

They lie. The Islamist terrorists are winning, and the coordinated attacks on the Charlie Hebdo magazine and kosher shop will be just one more success. One more step to our gutless surrender.

Al-Qaeda in Yemen didn’t attack Charlie Hebdo because we are all Charlie Hebdo.

The opposite. It sent in the brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi because Charlie Hebdo was almost alone.

Unlike most politicians, journalists, lawyers and other members of our ruling classes, this fearless magazine dared to mock Islam in the way the Left routinely mocks Christianity. Unlike much of our ruling class, it refused to sell out our freedom to speak.

Its greatest sin — to the Islamists — was to republish the infamous cartoons of Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten which mocked Mohammed, and then to publish even more of its own, including one showing the Muslim prophet naked.

Are we really all Charlie? No, no and shamefully no.

No Australian newspaper dared published those pictures, too, bar one which did so in error.

The Obama administration three years ago even attacked Charlie Hebdo for publishing the naked Mohammed cartoon, saying it was “deeply offensive”.

President Barack Obama even told the United Nations “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” and damned a YouTube clip “Innocence of Muslims” which did just that. The filmmaker was thrown in jail

.

Read more;
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...nd-shamefully-no/story-fni0ffxg-1227180871950

 

[Value Collector]

So do I. The problem is that there is no hierarchy in Islam as there is in say the Catholic church. It all depends on the local mullahs and what their attitude is.

Keeping track of the local Muslim leaders and what they teach their adherents is essential. Then you also have the problem of radicalisation via Internet. Surely the most violent jihadist sites could be blocked, but then people use VPN's to spread child pornography so supposedly the jihadists do the same.

Difficult situation that requires international cooperation.

There is no hierarchy in Christianity as a whole either, I mean certain sects and cults like the Catholic Church have a hierarchy within their little ecosystem, but there are thousands and thousands of cults based on Christian mythology.

Eg, the catholic cult hierarchy has no sway over what the, Mormans do in their cult etc.

 

[SirRumpole]

There is no hierarchy in Christianity as a whole either, I mean certain sects and cults like the Catholic Church have a hierarchy within their little ecosystem, but there are thousands and thousands of cults based on Christian mythology.

Eg, the catholic cult hierarchy has no sway over what the, Mormans do in their cult etc.

True, but there is a hierarchy within the Mormon church and most of the other offshoots of Christianity, eg the Archbishop of Canterbury is head of the CofE (or is it the Queen?), anyway someone is responsible for policy and administration of that entire sect, but with Islam it's less concentrated as the Imam's do their own thing as far as interpretation of the Koran goes.

 

[basilio]

Well it's great to see that Andrew Bolt has now entered the debate as another seasoned, responsible public speaker. And clearly we can understand where he gets his ideas from. Rupert Murdoch has made his position clear.

Maybe most Moslems peaceful, but until they recognize and destroy their growing jihadist cancer they must be held responsible.

So here's a suggestion on just how we could encourage the Muslim community to take seriously it's responsibility to ensure that Muslim terrorists aren't able to get away with the dastardly acts of Sydney, Paris, Nigeria, Syria wherever.

First. Clearly as a first step we need to be able to identify and then locate every Muslim person. This is as much to protect them as it is to protect us. So we can start with universal Muslim identity cards and compulsory tattoos. ( I suppose more extreme elements would ask for visual identification (a crescent ?) and implanted location finders. IMO that is going too far in the current circumstances.)

Now we have to have a public debate on just what measures we take as a peaceful law abiding community to encourage Muslims to eradicate the scourge of jihidists amongst their midst and in our society. Perhaps we should consider the old systems of collective responsibility and collective outcomes..

So one proposal might be that if there is any outrage committed by a jihidist and someone dies we ballot the Muslim community and pick 100 adults who are stripped of citizenship rights and within two weeeks are deported to a Muslim country (This is a democratic country so naturally they can choose where they want to go..) They are allowed to take two suitcases each (up to 30kgs in each case) and up to $10,000. Of course if two people die it's 200 adults and so on.

Again some more extreme elements would advocate for harsher measures. Automatic imprisonment, possibly even public hanging or blowing them off the barrel's of cannons. (Highly effective response by the British after the Indian mutiny I understand)

But again we are a fair, peaceful and law abiding country so such extreme measures should not be countenanced in the current circumstances...

This proposal might be a bit rough around the edges but given the horrors inflicted on Western Civilizations by these fanatics and their refusal to respect the dignity of human life we have to defend ourselves as best we can..

________________________________________________________________________________________

Source notes for this proposal.
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html Jonathan Swift "A modest proposal..."

PS. Naturally if any Muslim state dared to terrorize their holy Christian citizens as a misguided response to this restrained but necessary measure we would have to immediately terminate them with extreme prejudice.
I'm sure Allah and Christ will be able to separate the good from the bad.

 

[SirRumpole]

This proposal might be a bit rough around the edges but given the horrors inflicted on Western Civilizations by these fanatics and their refusal to respect the dignity of human life we have to defend ourselves as best we can.

There would be some people on this forum who would think you are serious and I see them saluting right now.

 

[Bintang]

There would be some people on this forum who would think you are serious and I see them saluting right now.

Yes, some really excellent ideas there from Basilio.
I would add to the list the idea of bringing back internment camps for all those living in our midst who are adherents to Islam – i.e. akin to Australia’s World War 2 camps that interned thousands of men, women and children who were considered to be enemy aliens.

 

[basilio]

Yes, some really excellent ideas there from Basilio.
I would add to the list the idea of bringing back internment camps for all those living in our midst who are adherents to Islam – i.e. akin to Australia’s World War 2 camps that interned thousands of men, women and children who were considered to be enemy aliens.

Well done Bintang. I knew i wouldn't be disappointed. But just to refine your idea.

Building, paying for and guarding internment camps is probably far too costly and unwieldly. A more modern and cost effective solution would be designating particular suburbs for the true believers and ensuring all such people are safely housed in these areas.

A decent perimeter wall, searchlights and entry and exit checkpoints would ensure Security for everyone.

I believe some people call them ghettos but perhaps we should come up with a 21st Century name in case people get the wrong idea. ?

 

[Bintang]

Well done Bintang. I knew i wouldn't be disappointed. But just to refine your idea.

Building, paying for and guarding internment camps is probably far too costly and unwieldly. A more modern and cost effective solution would be designating particular suburbs for the true believers and ensuring all such people are safely housed in these areas.

A decent perimeter wall, searchlights and entry and exit checkpoints would ensure Security for everyone.

I believe some people call them ghettos but perhaps we should come up with a 21st Century name in case people get the wrong idea. ?

Cost, of course was one of the main excuses Neville chamberlain used in the 1930's to reject Winston Churchill's calls for the re-arming of Britain.
Nonetheless Basilio, keep going with the suggestions. I like them.

 

[SirRumpole]

Cost, of course was one of the main excuses Neville chamberlain used in the 1930's to reject Winston Churchill's calls for the re-arming of Britain.
Nonetheless Basilio, keep going with the suggestions. I like them.

How about psychodelic truth serum implanted into all Halal food that when consumed convinces the eater to immediately go to the police and confess their sins ?

 

[Bintang]

How about psychodelic truth serum implanted into all Halal food that when consumed convinces the eater to immediately go to the police and confess their sins ?

Now let's be fair. If that was really a good idea it should be implanted into all food. Especially anything fed to our politicians.

 

[Value Collector]

True, but there is a hierarchy within the Mormon church and most of the other offshoots of Christianity, eg the Archbishop of Canterbury is head of the CofE (or is it the Queen?), anyway someone is responsible for policy and administration of that entire sect, but with Islam it's less concentrated as the Imam's do their own thing as far as interpretation of the Koran goes.

As soon as the hierarchy in the Christian cults do something that a portion of the followers don't like they split into a new sub group, hence why there is like 20,000 different ones, some are big like the Catholic Church, some are small like the Westboro baptist church.

its no different to Islam, each Muslim group has a hierarchy, they just tend to be smaller groups.

All the cults based in Christian mythology do their own thing with regards to interpretation of the bible, some are ok with gays, others want to kill them, some believe hell is a real thing, others believe its metaphor, some think the bible is 100% true! others think its poetic.