Thanks to Christina McIntosh
Yet another all-too-typical sample of the Islamopuffery that has been appearing, over and over, in our official media outlets. Mr Muller’s effusion saw the light first in the ABC’s sub-site, “The Conversation”, and then was also presented in the “Just In” newsfeed on their home page.
At both locations reader Comments were enabled and at both at least a hundred were posted; it is a sad reflection on the type of person who signs up to Comment on ABC articles, that the vast majority of commenters would have to be described as abject proto-Dhimmis, falling over themselves to excuse and flatter and defend Islam and Muslims and protect them from the vicious attacks launched by ignorant, racist, eeevil Islamophobes. Here and there dissenting voices were raised – only to encounter frantic denunciations from the zealous Defenders of Islam.
Anyway: read it and – if you wish – the comments, to get a taste of the sort of nonsense that, all too often alas, Islamosavvy Aussies find themselves trying to counter.
Here’s the link to the piece as presented on 9 October in “The Conversation” (where you will see, in the comments, whole strings of postings that have been deleted by the “moderators”).
Follow the link if you want to peruse the Comments and see just what sort of things Aussie dhimmis are saying in order to avoid having to face the facts about Islam.
And here’s the link to the piece as presented amidst all the actual news stories.
Again, if you follow the link you will be able to read the Comments… but if you do, be prepared to spend half an hour in sheer bogglement at just how deeply people have their heads buried in the sand.
And so to Mr Muller’s effusion, which begins by accepting as gospel truth, and as Proof! proof! of the ubiquity and deadliness of Aussie Islamophobia, an anecdote related to him – without any corroborating evidence whatsoever – by his Muslimah hairdresser. – CM
“Such hair as I have is cut from time to time by Mrs E., who runs a one-chair salon in my neighbourhood.
‘She has been in business there for 40 years (that means, since 1977 – CM). She knows all about the history of the street, and many of her clients have been coming to her for half a lifetime.
‘The salon is shut on Mondays, when she cuts the hair of the elderly and disabled in various local institutions.
‘Mrs E is a petite woman with a cloud of brown hair, a bright smile, and that empathetic personality that fits so many hairdressers for their parallel occupation ofi nformal counsellor.
‘Under her hairdresser’s smock she wears a dress or a blouse, and trousers.
‘She came to Australia as a child from the Balkans, grew up, married, had two sons.
If she has been in business for ‘forty years’, that is, since 1977, then she cannot have been younger than about 20 when she opened the salon (possibly older), so the earliest she can have come to Australia is circa 1957. Not many Muslims arrived in that era. I observe that we are not informed whether this woman is Albanian or Bosnian by ethnicity. – CM
‘Australia is home and a place where she says (note: she says – CM) she has always felt welcome, until the other day.
‘A client whose hair she had been cutting for 20 years (i.e. since 1997 – CM) came in as usual and then, without any prompting or preamble, launched into a tirade against Muslims.
One must note that, a little later in the story, we discover that this person had to be told, supposedly, by Mrs E, that she, Mrs E, was a Muslim. That is: this ‘tirade against Muslims’ – the precise specifics of which are not given, at all – was uttered in the hearing of someone whom the speaker did not know to be a Muslim; whom, presumably, the speaker thought to be a fellow-Infidel. – CM
‘Mrs E heard her out. As a rule, like most sensible businesspeople, she resists being drawn into conversations about sex, religion, or politics.
‘But eventually it became too much.
To repeat: what, precisely, did this alleged ‘tirade’ consist of? Mr Muller does not tell us. Did our nice sweet unbehijabbed Muslim-passing-as-infidel not tell him? The article gives us no information whatsoever as to what it was, exactly, that this offending customer said. Were they complaining about Islamic misogyny? Wife-beating? Child-marriage? Beheadings? Welfare fraud? Rape gangs? Acts of jihad terror, such as the Muslim murder of two women in Marseilles just recently, or the Muslim rampage in Nice, or the Muslim massacre at the Bataclan, or the Muslim massacre at Orlando, or the mass-murderous Muslim explosion in Manchester? -Did the customer cast aspersions on the character of the ‘perfect man’, and (truthfully) accuse him of being a slave trader, keeper of sex slaves, child rapist, or caravan robber? We don’t know. We’re not told, so we have to assume Mr Muller wasn’t told, either. – CM
“I’m a Muslim”, she told the client, “and I regret that after 20 years I must tell you I will no longer cut your hair”.
‘The salon contains no outward sign of her faith; nothing in her appearance or in the room itself gives it away. For her, it is something private; nothing to do with her professional life.
Does Mr Muller actually know that? Because the concept of a “private” faith, sequestered from the public space, is wholly alien to Islam. There might be other reasons why this woman does not – or, up until now, has not – chosen to manifest her allegiance to the Allah Gang, the Religion of Blood and War. – CM
‘It happened that I came in about a week later. Mrs E and I often talk in general terms about what’s going on in the world. She knows I am a journalist and academic and I think she feels safe pushing her conversational boundaries slightly.
She knew he would believe her. She had a pretty good idea, I hazard the guess, that he would do exactly what he has done: publicised her heartrending story of “lovely Modern Moderate Muslimah insulted by Evil Islamophobe Infidel Customer” far and wide. But the million-dollar question is this: did the claimed conversation between Mrs E and the Evil Islamophobe even happen at all? – CM
‘She told me this story and as she did so, the hurt was written all over her face.
Mr Muller has obviously never heard of the Arab Muslim saying “tamaskan tatamakan” – “show a victim’s face, and take over”. The proverb is couched in Arabic but the technique is everywhere that there are Muslims. – CM
“Tamaskan tatamakan” doesn’t sound Arabic. We are familiar with the term thanks to Mark Durie, who lived 10 years in Aceh/Indonesia, which is now under full blown sharia law. I suspect its Indonesian.
“And after nearly a lifetime in Australia, she said she felt just that little bit less welcome.
Bear in mind that – if, to repeat, the incident happened at all – the customer was speaking to someone that she – that customer – thought was a fellow Infidel. So Mrs E, as a ‘concealed Muslim’ was in the position of an eavesdropper. She herself was not being buttonholed and lectured as a ‘representative Muslim’. And again: what did the other lady actually say? If she was, for example, deploring acts of jihad terrorism, and observing that they were being carried out by Muslims shouting allahu-akbar, why should our nice semi-Muslim Mrs E. take it so personally?? Are we supposed to not discuss – let alone complain about or condemn – these sorts of things at all, in case some dear sweet Mrs E might overhear us, and suffer hurt feelings? – CM
‘Hate speech creeping into Australian society.
‘So this is how it goes.
‘Hate speech becomes part of the currency of national debate and is exploited for political purposes.
‘In 1996 Pauline Hanson delivers her notorious maiden speech in which she says Australia is being “swamped by Asians”.
And yet.. just recently the ABC, even the ABC, has begun to publish stories about undue Chinese-government – which means, Communist-party-and-cronies – influence-peddling in Australian politics and academia, and buying-up of Australian real estate both rural and urban, and intimidation and manipulation of the Chinese emigre community, both the residents of long standing, and persons such as Chinese foreign students. So, although Hanson’s fears were crudely expressed, she was in fact onto something, something that does require to be addressed. – CM
‘John Howard, as prime minister, dog-whistles that this is all about free speech.
‘In 2001, the so-called “Tampa election” occurs.
Observe that our Mr Muller entirely omits mention a little something else – something having rather a lot to do with Islam, and Muslims – that also happened in 2001. Not to mention what happened in Bali in 2002. And then there was what happened in Madrid in 2004, and in Beslan in 2004, and in London in 2005, and so on, and on, and unendurably on.– CM
‘Boat people – overwhelmingly Muslim – become the butt of Howard’s assertion of national sovereignty. “We will decide who comes to this country, and the circumstances in which they come”.
As opposed to who else deciding, Mr Muller? Who else should decide who enters which countries and in what numbers and why? Should it just be open borders for all comers, no matter who, no matter how many, and no matter how they behave once they get here? Would you do that with your own house, Mr Muller? Anyone who wants can walk in your door, flop on the sofa and help themselves to the fridge and do so for as long as they want, without question? – CM
‘There are votes in this and both sides of politics pile on.
‘In the midst of the 2013 election, Labor’s Kevin Rudd – the same man who claims Dietrich Bonhoeffer as an inspiration – slams the door on asylum seekers by striking deals with Nauru and Papua-New Guinea, that Australia is still living with.
Well, it seems to have slowed down the boats… The muhajiroun don’t seem to like the idea of being held in a ‘transition’ location with no easy route out to anywhere else. – CM
‘In 2014, the Federal Government tries to weaken the Racial Discrimination Act in what is said to be in the interests of free speech.
‘Attorney-General George Brandis asserts that “people have a right to be bigots”.
‘in 2015, research conducted for the Melbourne Social Equity Institute finds that the single most important driver of negative attitudes towards asylum seekers is religious prejudice, sometimes expressed as concern about the “Islamisation” of Australia.
Oh, the horror! Some people – how ignorant and/ or wicked they must be – don’t like islam and don’t want Australia to be Islamised! Does it ever enter your head, Mr Mullter – or that of those earnest researchers from the “Melbourne Social Equity Institute” – that dislike of Islam, and Muslims, might not issue from mere ‘ignorance’ and ‘prejudice’ but might issue instead from grim, rational knowledge of the religion of blood and war, and of its adherents, of the person, words and works of the putative Founder of Islam, warlord Mohammed, and of the contents of the Islamic founding texts and their traditional interpretations, and of the documented behaviour of so many Muslims, in space and time, over 1400 years of mass-murderous jihad on three continents… and now on five? – CM
‘In August 2017, Senator Hanson wears a burka into Senate Question Time.
Ooooh, horror!! However: let us not forget those Muslims who, in Australia, hatched a plot to attack Parliament and .. behead the then Prime Minister. There was a similar plot hatched by Muslims in Canada; and there was an actual attack, fortunately foiled when the Muslim attacker was shot by a former Mountie who had his wits and his weapon about him. And the Parliament of India and the parliament of Trinidad and Tobago were in actual fact violently attacked… by Muslims. – CM
‘Senator Brandis discovers where bigotry can lead and assails her for an “appalling stunt” disrespectful of the Muslim faith.
And, of course, dissing Muslims, being disrespectful of Muslims and of wonderful, beautiful Islam is the cardinal sin, for all our nicely-conditioned dhimmis such as Mr Brandis, and Mr Muller. Disrespecting islam!! How dare anyone disrespect Islam! Blasphemy! Racism! Islamophobia! – CM
‘Eventually the political licensing of racism (since when was a belief system a ‘race’, Mr Muller? – CM) and religious intolerance (oh, cry me a river, Mr Muller; go talk to Copts from Egypt, to Assyrians and Yazidis and Mandaeans from Mesopotamia and Syria, or Hindus and Christians from Pakistan, and find out the real meaning of “religious intolerance” when it is being dished out by… MUSLIMS – CM) seeps into the fabric of society. It might take a generation or it might take longer.
‘But when it does it stains and rots that fabric, eating away at people’s sense of belonging(sic: but the only thing that pious Muslims are supposed to “belong” to, is the Ummah, or Mohammedan mob; it is their belief system that divides the world, grimly, into two opposing halves, into the dar al Islam, where Islam reigns and Muslims rule, absolutely, and the dar al harb, the Zone of War, where infidels and infidel states offend allah and Muslims by insisting on unislamic belief systems and laws and dare to govern themselves rather than submitting to Muslim despots. – CM) undermining the Australian multicultural project(Mr Muller, are you aware that the process of Islamisation is the process of imposition of a grimly monochrome monoculture? the more Islam there is in any society, the more purely Islamic it becomes, the less “multicultural” it will be – CM), and in a small suburban hair salon, a middle-aged woman feels emboldened to vent her prejudice (but, to repeat, Mr Muller, we do not know what she said, so we don’t know whether it can be classified as ‘prejudice’, as a ‘tirade’ or whether it could just as easily have been something else entirely …an impassioned but fact-based and rational critique of Islam and / or Muslim actions as undertaken in obedience to Islam. And, to repeat, we don’t even know whether this alleged tirade happened at all; the Muslimah could have invented the story out of whole cloth, knowing that the naive and gullible Mr Muller – who doesn’t seem to have even attempted to fact-check the anecdote; an old-fashioned cynical journo would surely have attempted to discover the name of the customer, and then sought the customer’s version of what happened, for purposes of comparison – would rush off to write the sort of piece that he has just written, a piece enlisting sympathy for a Nice Moderae Muslim and confirming the prejudices of all those uninformed persons who are incapable of grasping that, just possibly, some people might criticise Islam, and fear ISlamisation, not out of ignorance, but out of knowledge.
As I said at the outset, the comments are in general an exhibition of grovelling dhimmitude. But there are, thank God! a few dissenting voices. Notably, “Domi3”, who in the comments section at The Conversation, remarked sardonically, “University of Melbourne’s ‘Centre for Advancing Journalism’? [this being Mr Muller’s home base – CM]. What a hairdresser said [that] someone else said about Muslims. That’s advanced journalism for you!”
In the same section, ‘carmineKarman3 said “…Islam is unlike any other religion… and more and more people have come to realize that”.
And *this* comment is worth noting – “ARicho” said, “Hate speech has become normalised. As a child I heard it said about the Italians and Greeks at school, but we were told by our parents to pull our heads in as everyone has a right to live in peace and harmony and we should stand up to the bigots who put our friends down, no matter where it happens.
“Two generations later I hear kids of my grandchildren’s age calling any muslim they see “a terrorist”. “Even though I try and educate them that Australia has always had victims of war, ethnic cleansing, and economic hardship call Australia home and have called this place a safe haven from the hate they endured, most teenagers come back with the argument that 9/11 changed all that…”.
Now that is interesting; despite all the pro-Islam puffery with which they have been deluged, these kids are at bottom recognising that Islam is.. a religion of blood and war. They hear about 9/11 (many having been born since it happened!) and they understand what so many adults in the western world deny; they understand what Oriana Fallaci understood, and Conor Cruise O’Brien; a war is and has long been in progress, a war declared by the Muslims, against the non-Muslims. If these kids are in school with Muslims, then.. it’s possible they’ve been on the receiving end of Muslim aggression, Muslim deceit, Muslim threats, and, if girls, Muslim insults and creepy Muslim propositioning (or worse); perhaps they have had Muslim classmates who disappeared, and then were heard of later on, as having joined Islamic State. – CM
Someone else, ‘Saneprogressive3’,remarked, inter alia, that “There is scant evidence in human history to support the proposition that large Muslim populations can live peaceably and on even terms with non-Muslims..”.
‘Katzy3′ inquired sweetly, “Would an anti-atheist tirade in a hairdresser’s be considered newsworthy?”
‘Jack 443’ observed – “…I might be more interested in Mr Muller’s article (he is, after all, a senior research Fellow of Journalism”) if I could read his articles railing against the head of the Shia religion who issued the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie. State approval of assassination, no less. I’m frankly not convinced that the [claimed – CM] experience of one hairdresser is representative of 23 million people, and I am getting a little tired of being lectured by moral elitists.”
And the astute Domi2, yet again – “So what was this “angry tirade” actually about? Female genital mutilation, woman not being allowed to drive cars? What is hate speech?”
Then, when one goes to the Comments that appeared under the article in its other location, one finds certain glimmerings of sanity, as well. For example, Michael Holland – “… It’s too easy to pin the blame for what appears to be a little xenophobia on Ms Hanson. Much easier indeed than pinning it on the source of concern. It is not Ms Hanson shooting, stabbing, exploding, assaulting with vehicles, destroying ancient relics, inciting children to become radical killers, refusing to obey court orders, refusing to integrate with the society that has offered a welcome mat and outrageous welfare…”.
And one ‘Douglas Dempsey’ remarked,“Personally, the kind of ‘hate speech’ that worried me most was the kind delivered by various ‘dawah’ spruikers in Western Sydney, and even invited in from overseas to lecture us on the perils of following our hedonistic lifestyle. The upshot of their tirades led to a couple of hundred of our (sic – CM) youth volunteering to go and fight for ISIS in Iraq and Syria, a problem we’re left with, contemplating how to deal with them on their unwelcome return..“.
then there was ‘Richard Nota’, calmly observing – “From time to time I recall that before the turn-of-the-century things were published about a clash of civilisations. I never delved into these things, but in regard to Islamic extremism there may have been something in it”.
And “Paul Johnson” came right out and bluntly stated the obvious:
“Why don’t we simply side step the issue & significantly reduce muslim immigration across the board in favour of non-muslim immigrants from South America, SE Asia , UK, etc.
“Large ongoing muslim immigration into Australia is risky & divisive across many Australian.
“All immigrants are choices we make via policies . All immigrants should be welcomed , accepted & supported …also capable of easy integration.
“If they cannot [be easily integrated] by an increasing risk averse Australian population – why again bring muslims or anyone else with a similar risk profile?
“Sorry I cannot ignore the endless terrorist murders by muslims around the western world , the foiled muslim terrorist attacks in Australia & the fundamental long term risks to our kids from an increasingly large recalcitrant muslim population in Australia.
“Why is this not just a pragmatic decisions about sources of immigrants …..why is it an act of racism from haters?
“Is increased muslim immigration flows “fit for purpose” as a source of immigrants or even a good choice at all?
“What was it that >60% of Australians wanted a cut back of muslim immigration.
“No , no we have to bring more & more muslims to Australia to prove those people wrong & to show off our superior humanitarian credentials by our humanitarian elites at dinner parties or something?”
And one ‘Joshua Forrester” who identified himself as a PhD candidate in law at Murdoch University, noted (among other things) that – ”
As to religion, it is comprised of ideas about spirituality. But, ultimately, when we talk about religion we are talking about ideas. Islam is no different to any other religion on that count. The Australian people are perfectly entitled to talk about ideas. (They are not, however, entitled to threaten imminent physical violence to the person or property of people holding those ideas.) Any suggestion that laws should put certain ideas “off limits” should make everyone nervous.
“I’m sorry that Mrs E had her feelings hurt. But she lives in a liberal democracy. In a liberal democracy, you need to accept that others will not always agree with your values, beliefs, or way of life. (I’m fully expecting to be piled on in this comments section, by the way.)…”.
And then there was an exchange between a Defender of Islam, one ‘Mike Puleston’, and a “Brien Doyle’ (Doyle’s original Islamocritical comment had been, so far as I could discover, deleted, but not before others had read it). – ‘Mike’ pontificated, thus – ”
“Do you actually know any Muslims, Brien? I do, living in a part of Melbourne with a high Muslim population. Most of them are peaceable and law-abiding, and I do not in any way feel unsafe living here.
“Do not be taken in by the tiny minority of nutty Wahabists (ah yes, the TMOE who have NothingtodowithIslam – CM), who get far more than their fair share of media coverage. Most Muslims in Australia are OK, and are making positive contributions to this country’s prosperity and well-being.” (Suuuure they are – CM).
To which Brien retorted, acerbly, ”
“Why do you deniers have to constantly do this??
Make this a personal thing!!?? I lived and taught Muslims in their nation for 15+ years, and brought home a Muslim (nominally) wife. (Touche; so bang goes ‘Mike’s airy assumption that criticism of Islam necessarily issues from ignorance of Islam/ Muslims – CM).
“Do I need to live in Nazi Germany to understand the threat of the Nazis?!!”
And then he added – ”
“Furthermore, when I first arrived [in said Islamic country – CM] in 1994, there was not a jilbab/ hijab in sight – anywhere in the country !!.
“By the time I left, not only were there a pushy abundance of head coverings but also – for the first time – there were burkas! You will notice the exact same repetition happening throughout Europe and now here in Australia. I am not ignoring what is obvious……and yes…most people are peaceful…ladida…as was Europe… and is no longer…lalalala.” (And in another, later comment, ‘Brien Doyle’ remarked irritably, to another Defender of Islam – “You want to talk traitor? while you defend an ideology which ticks more boxes for fascism than fascism ever did? It is this sort of pandering to this ideology and purposeful ignoring of the ideology’s effects that earns the term Vichy…”.
And another commenter, one Mark Amey, observed – “.. it seems that any of us can criticise any other religiion, without much interruption, but criticising, or even question, Islam, [and you will be] howled down by cries of racism, and so forth”.
I will conclude by reproducing another exchange. Commenter Mark Amey quoted “Mike Puleston’, a defender of Islam, who had said “Every expert on radicalisation that I have read or heard speak has stressed that radicalisation is most likely to occur when young Muslims are made to feel alienated and unwelcome”, then retorted, “I can only imagine that the seed of radicalisation comes from reading the Quran, which commands Muslims to kill unbelievers”. One Hugh McColl, another Defender of Islam, leapt in, ““I can only imagine that the seed of radicalisation comes from reading the Q’ran, which commands Muslims to kill unbelievers.” Pretty impoverished imagination, I reckon.” To which Mark replied, succinctly, “Have you read the Quran?”
So there you have it. The kinds of conversations that arise when Auntie ABC, having offered a platform for the naive regurgitation of a Muslimah’s complaint about being offended by an alleged “tirade against Islam” (content wholly unspecified), unwisely throws open a door for Comments. Many of those who Comment are still thoroughly fooled; but not all.