My Apology To Sheikh Taj Eldine Al Hilaly

My last article was critical of Sheikh Taj, I was critical of him for putting Muslims in the firing line and although I didn't buy the sensationalised hype from the right wing hysteria filled media I was unfair to the Sheikh in that I hadn't got his side of the story first.

Today the Sheikh was taken to hospital after suffering a mild heart attack, and boy oh boy have the rabid media had a field day with this. A man collapses and talkback radio is filled with people taking pleasure in what this man is suffering.

Today made me realise that it isn't Sheikh Tajs comments that put Muslims in the firing line, it is those who pose as journalists who are looking for an excuse and will abuse every rule of what is considered fair and reasonable under journalistic ethics. They don't care about the truth they are just vultures.

Sheikh Taj is a man who stands at the front line for Muslims, he takes all the heat, cops all the abuse and is the one who is demonised.

His views may not always be popular be at least he always defends the rights of Muslims- I mean this was a man who had undergone heart bypass surgery and put his life on the line to help rescue a fellow Australian, Douglas Wood.

This is a man who has stood up for women, he has stood up for a fair go and he has made his voice heard.

Was the sermon he delivered a mistake? That question is now irrelevant because the attacks have become personal. The media wants Sheikh Taj out but the thing is no matter who we get to replace him they will never be happy.

I'd like everyone to read the Sheikhs press release and then tell me you can condemn this man. In some peoples eyes he may have made a mistake but don't we all.

The Sheikh has done alot for the Muslim community and it will be a sad day indeed if we were to lose him, it is imperative that each and everyone of us stands by him.

We may disagree with what was said, but we will not be dictated to by politicians as to who will be our Mufti.

The saddest thing is that those people close to the Mufti have betrayed him. I can tell you now there is an agenda against him by people who have political aspirations and after speaking to some of them I can reveal that at least one of them was told by a staff member of a prominent state politician that they will have no political career unless they are active in dismissing the Sheikh- this runs against every democratic principal and is a sad day for this country.

On top of this you have a certain Muslim splinter group, who have a record of being underhanded, leaking sensationalised half truths to the media in the hope of having them run as stories against the Sheikh. This group is seeking to control the Muslim powerbase through dishonest means and God shall judge them.

There are times when we have to accept that we will be attacked and demonised but standing by a person like the Sheikh is worth every single article, paragraph and sentence of abuse and demonisation.

Sheik Hilaly And Those Comments


OK after reading a few different transcripts here is my opinion on this issue.

In regards to the gang rapes, I don't see any link between those rapes and what the Sheikh said- he called rape a crime, by saying "a meeting, a crime...." he then says "a merciless judge gives you 65 years"- well a merciful judge wouldn't give you 65 years, so I don't think we can draw any conclusion of excusing the behaviour of the rapists....a judge giving 65 years for rape is being merciless because the perpertrators don't deserve mercy. So on that point the Sheikh is completely exonerated in my opinion.

In regards to the "uncovered meat" outrage, it is obvious that he is quoting someone else, but in my opinion that doesn't excuse or vindicate him. This part is reminiscent of the Pope protesting that he was quoting someone else. Quoting someone else is used to illustrate a point and support an argument, so in this case the Shiekh has used an unacceptable analogy. So although his comments were misrepresented by The Australian he still made the comments, and at best they were inappropriate.

As the Mufti it is his role and his duty to protect the Ummah in Australia, unfortunately this episode has increased the heat on our community. It is an unnecessary yet highly inflammatory issue and something which our community has grown accustomed to.

Whether we like it or not or mosques are under increased surveillance by those who hate us and they are looking for a minor slipup so they can put the boot in. They will sensationalise everything and demonise us at every turn. We need to ensure that we don't give them any ammunition.

So whether the Mufti is in the right or in the wrong becomes irrelevant because his comments have put us in the firing line and that is something a strong leader needs to avoid.

On top of this the issue has caused something alot more serious and that is division within our Ummah and that is something we cannot tolerate.

My fear is that although the story will eventually blow over, there will always be another issue coming out.

Blair. The veil. And a new low in politics
By PETER OBORNE
21st October 2006

Great sea changes of thought or opinion are rare in British public life, taking place perhaps only once or twice in a generation.

But there is abundant evidence that we are undergoing one now.

Until only a few months ago, mainstream British politicians were extremely cautious about articulating the fears and resentments felt by many ordinary people on the subject of mass immigration.

Those who spoke out publicly (Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech is the notorious example) were ostracised. Political parties which raised the issue were thrust beyond the outer margins of debate - the fate of the National Front and the BNP.

This self-restraint has now vanished. Practically every day for the past two weeks, another minister has insulted the customs, habits or religious beliefs of Britain's Muslim minority.

The most recent assault, which came just hours after the subject was discussed at a Cabinet meeting in Downing Street, was launched by Hilary Armstrong on Question Time and came with the full authority of the Prime Minister.

Harriet Harman, Tessa Jowell, Peter Hain, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Ruth Kelly and a number of other frontline Labour politicians have also entered the fray.

It is now clear that Jack Straw's comments on women who wear the veil were not, as seemed likely at the time, the result of some random rumination. He surely set out with the intention of putting in motion a national campaign .

In other words, Labour has made the extraordinary decision to place the politics of religious identity at the centre of public discourse, in the same sort of way that Jorg Haider's Freedom Party does in Austria and Pim Fortuyn's List Party did in the Netherlands

Criticisms of this tactic in the Press - which was so derogatory about Michael Howard's timid excursion into similar terrain 18 months ago - have been few and far between.

On the contrary, Jack Straw's comments have liberated the media to follow suit. It seems every day now brings forth news of an outrage allegedly perpetrated somewhere by a Muslim.

Many of the stories - such as the front page claims two weeks ago that a Muslim man had shouted abuse in a hospital at a British soldier wounded in Iraq, or the allegation that a terrorist suspect used the veil to evade detection - are impossible to substantiate and may well turn out to be fabrications.

Some people will feel glad that the subject of Islam is being widely aired at last. And it is perfectly true that many of the comments made by ministers, whether Jack Straw on the veil or Ruth Kelly on the need to keep an eye on 'extremism', contain grains of good sense.

But cumulatively this litany of condemnation has turned into an anti-Islamic crusade. I am a practising member of the Church of England and if we had come under the same wave of condemnation for our practices and traditions I would by now be affronted beyond belief.

If I were Jewish, with the experience of the 20th century to look back on, and came under the same weight of hostility I would be terrified.

There is a whiff of the lynch mob about the wave of attacks over the past fortnight, and it is no surprise to learn that the new national mood sparked by Jack Straw and sanctioned by Tony Blair has indeed led to a number of assaults on British mosques, including one firebombing.

There have also been reports of a sharp rise of physical assaults on Muslims.

It is nothing short of appalling that the Blair government has been ready to countenance this change in public culture, but I think three main factors lie behind Labour's campaign against Islam.

The first is a genuine belief that it is extremely difficult to reconcile Muslim fundamentalism with full membership of British society. I know from many personal conversations -that Phil Woolas, the minister for race relations - who last week intervened in the row over the classroom assistant Aisha Azmi by calling for her to be sacked - has long held this view.

At last year's General Election Woolas - who unlike his colleagues has the merit of being consistent - put the Union Flag on his campaign literature and highlighted 'anti-white racism' as a vital issue in his Oldham constituency.

Many experts expected that Woolas would lose this marginal seat, but his tactics ensured that his vote surged, an outcome that was carefully noted by the Millbank electoral machine.

My guess is that Labour strategists have now calculated that the Muslim coalition of voters, which was so stalwartly behind the party in 1997 and 2001, is now lost for ever as a result of the Iraq War.

Rather than try to win them back, Labour has cut its losses, and decided instead to stir up racial tension as a means of appealing directly to the white working-class vote. Labour activists tell me Jack Straw's remarks have proved 'incredibly resonant' on the doorstep.

This callous strategy has one extra attraction: it confuses the Tories. In the 1997 and 2001 elections, William Hague and Michael Howard rather hesitantly raised the abuse of the asylum system only to be denounced by Labour for running 'racist' campaigns.

As a consequence of this experience, the Conservatives plumped for David Cameron and swore a self-denying ordinance on the subject of immigration.

With awesome cynicism, Labour has now moved directly into the ground vacated by the Conservatives, only with far greater assurance. It is now engaging with issues that Michael Howard would never have dared even to mention.

So far the Conservative response has been impressive. To his credit, David Cameron has braved internal criticism by refusing to join in some kind of bidding war with Labour.

Instead, the Tory leader has gently rebuked Labour for victimising Muslims. I hope he will speak out much more strongly on the subject in due course.

That said, it must be admitted that this is very clever stuff from Tony Blair. There is every sign the strategy is working and I am sure that Labour will continue to deploy what used to be called the race card right up to next year's May elections and beyond. But playing politics with Islam is reckless beyond belief.

In the wake of last year's London atrocity, the Prime Minister promised to engage with the mainstream Muslim community. He never really tried to do so - the 'working parties' set up in the wake of the July bombings met just two or three times, they were not listened to, and their recommendations were ignored.

Now Tony Blair has allowed a campaign that is bound to undermine moderate Muslims and encourage extremism, whether from white supremacist parties like the BNP or within Islam itself.

It is quite the nastiest and most irresponsible politics I have seen from a mainstream political party in my life, and we will all pay a horrible price for such cynical opportunism.

The Daily Mail

Racist Attack In Maroubra
Daily Telegraph, October 17 2006

So a family having a BBQ and enjoying the wonderful Sydney weather is viciously attacked by a gang of 20 youths in a racist attack.

You'd expect this to be front page news especially since the Cronulla Race Riots. You'd expect to hear talkback shock jocks whipping up hysteria and telling these people to go back to their own country if they can't abide by our laws.

And you'd expect Naomi Robson to throw on the makeup and do an expose on these violent ruthless gangs.

But you'll find none of that- why????

Because this was an attack on an Asian family by Caucasian youths.

Racism spewed from their mouths during the attacks with comments like:
'Get the f. . . out of the area, do you know this is our area, you filthy f. . .ing Asians'

Now let's say it was the other way around, what would the outcry be if it was Asian youths attacking an "Aussie" family? What if it was a Middle Eastern group who was telling a Caucasian family to get out of the area? What would the outcry be?

The double standards of the media in this country make me sick. They are happy to paint the minorities as villians but when the perpertrator is not from a minority group the story is virtually ignored or not sensationalised.

Think this is only my opinion? This morning John Laws during his morning radio show said virtually the same thing and I am paraphrasing here- Can you imagine the outcry if these thugs were Middle Eastern , it would be plastered over every front page- that is from John Laws, someone who cannot be accused of being pro-minority group.

Muslim Taxi Drivers Refusing To Take Dogs
(Daily Telegraph)- 12th October 2006

Boy oh boy has a story ever been blown out of proportion like this?

The hysteria queens are already out in force telling us how this is evidence of Shar'ia Law being implemented in Australia- whilst at the same time ignoring the fact that every Muslim organisation asked to comment has said that it is not against the Muslim religon for Cabbies to take dogs in their cabs.

Let's investigate this- there have been, the article tell us, at least 20 dog-aided blind people have lodged complaints- well you can take that as 20 complaints.

Now how many of these complaints were against the same driver? How many were against Muslim drivers? How many were about Muslim drivers refusing to take dogs?

The article doesn't tell us this- and why should it. This blog is currently attempting to gain comment from the Victorian Taxi Directorate and as soon as the information is received we will post it.

In the meantime you can enjoy the Xenophobic posts of the ratbags and rednecks on the Daily Telegraph Blog.

5 Years since 9/11 and the world is a much more dangerous place- there is the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the quagmire in Iraq, the threat of Iran and now North Korea with nuclear weapons.

Imagine if instead of jumping in all gung ho and bombing Afghanistan back to the stone age, or invading Iraq on false pretences, the US took action against the real threat.

Now it is too late and we have the dangerous situation of a crazy leader with dangerous weapons.

Terrorist threats persist with no sign of letting up and North Korea is now a nuclear power.

It's OK for Bush and the neocons to talk tough and drop bombs but the people that will pay the ultimate price are us, while they hide in their bunkers protected.

The Death Of Innocents- The Destruction Of Lebanon

Israels genocide of the Lebanese people.

Israeli Terrorism

See the real face of the war on Lebanon

Israel Attacks- Lebanon Burns

A Photo-Documentary detailing Israels War Crimes In Lebanon

I love this country, it is my home and it is home for my family.

I love it because it is a beautiful place to live, it is a great place to work plus it is home to the Mighty South Sydney Rabbitohs.

Now I see myself and my family as your ordinary run of the mill Aussies, but for some reason we are expected to justify our loyalty to this country or why we live here.

Nobody has the right to proclaim themselves a better Australian than us just because of the colour of their skin or their religon, and that brings me to the demonisation of Muslims in this country.

We've had some stupid comments from some stupid polticians looking to score political points, we've had beatups from Newspapers and Television shows looking to generate more ratings, and we've had the usual shock jocks preaching to us about how Muslims don't fit in.

In this country most Muslim voices are ignored, instead the media tends to focus its attention towards the people and self-appointed leaders who will give them a great headline.

Fact of the matter is that there hundreds of Mosques in Australia and hundreds of Imams, yet we only see 2 or 3 different ones in our media- and you guessed it they are the ones making the controversial comments.

So why does the media do it? Simple- it sells newspapers and generates ratings, I mean what better tool than fear of the unknown.

I'm not just playing the victim here, far from it, but next time a person with a Muslim name does something wrong I want you to count how many times the word Muslim is used to describe that person and then when a person with a Christian name does something wrong count how many times the word Christian is used.

Truth be told, us Muslims aren't really that exciting our lives are quite mundane- work, family, and home.