Muslim leader: It's the woman's fault who is raped. She's "uncovered meat"

A big problem here is that the mufti is not an official position, its not recognized by the governement, and he has no actual authority over all muslims in australia, they don't even have to recognize him.

Having said that, the muslims in australia should band together, completely ignore the declarations of this idiot as illegitimate, and elect a "Grand Mufti" or "Supreme Mufti" to sideline him.

Apparently, he was voted in in 1988 by the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils. Oz mulsims have been trying for a long time to get rid of him and that groups influenec:

www.abc.net.au...
A new body has emerged, seeking to supplant AFIC and over time, replace the mufti. The new group calls itself the Darulfatwa Islamic High Council of Australia. It says it’s independent and moderate, a ‘symbol of hope for Australian Muslims’.

So it is those two groups, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils and Darulfatwa Islamic High Council of Australia that probably have to be focused on. Pressure needs to be put on AFIC to get rid of him, and the government and general public has to start supporting the DIHCA.

www.afic.com.au...
head office: [email protected]
These are their local offices:
www.afic.com.au...

www.darulfatwa.org.au...
[email protected]

[edit on 27-10-2006 by Nygdan]

There you go. Thank you nygdan!

See, thats the right approach. focus on the problem instead of going around muslim bashing. Mufti is a 'problem', and the australians muslims are gonna deal with him. I for one, am gonna email AFIC and DIHCA to request to get that man out of his current position. People like him should not be representing muslims and causing unnecessary problems or crimes.

Originally posted by Nygdan

flighty
Who is to know what exactly is being preached in these Mosques in Arabic?

Anyone that understand arabic and bothers to attend.

Very good point. I would urge some of you to take the effort to visit some mosques near you and see if you can learn what they teach there.

I would be glad to hear your comments and stories of your experience. Also visit these muftis if possible and relate the stories.

Originally posted by Nygdan

]Originally posted by half_minded
How about everyone stop giving these nutcases any attention. thats all they desire.

There is absolutely no reason to not stand up to stupid thugs.

They should be condemned and stood up against. But they should not be in media headlines worldwide. In a way, the media is only helping get his ideas across the world.

People who dont agree with his opinion will condemn it worldwide. But, those few sick minded people are out there who will adopt his teaching and use his teachings as an 'excuse' to rape girls. Even though courts will not forgive them but still, the media did help in getting his word across the world. On top of that, the media spotlight causes the average muslims to suffers.

We all know NEWS make money off these kind of people and not average joes like us. Therefore, the world only sees one side of story. And this scumbag mufti is able to get his sick ideas around the globe using the media.

Thats why I said dont give him attention. Let the locals deal with him. Australian muslims and Australian women can deal with him. Its their country, Mufti is autralian citizen, This happened in autralia.

As I said earlier, let the dog bark coz he aint gonna bite.

It seems to me that these guy, whatever they are called, do need to be in the headlines, because what they say can have global consequences.

The hot, bright light of international scrutiny will do more to hold these individuals accountable than simply ignoring them.

We've ignored these fanatics long enough.

: freedom_for_sum
If you take the time to read the Qur'an and Hadith you'd notice that Islam, if taken literally, percieves women as property who voices have significantly less worth that that of their men.

The problem is that the Qur'an and hadith support his general views on women being a second class; though it, of course, doesn't use words such as "second class".

Originally posted by Nygdan
This is not a problem with the koran. There are perfectly pious muslims in australia dennoucning this pig's statemets. Every holy book has been used to justify horrible acts, the koran is no different.

Originally posted by Nygdan
It also says that a widow who remaries is commiting adultery. If the Mufti had said that, there'd probably be even more people calling for oppression of muslims.

YA! We should denounce all those Christians, Catholics, and Jews who blow themselves up to kill others; and who kill women who are raped in order to regain lost honor in their families; and who believe their god allows them to beat their obsitnant wives. Denounce all those Christian, Catholics, and Jews who riot and murder because Jesus, the Pope, or matzah balls are parodied in a cartoon.

Oh wait.....You don't need to denounce them because they don't do these things. At least for their god. What is it about Islam that keeps so many (not all of course) in the dark ages. And don't grace this thread with some nonsense about tiny minorities of extremists either!! If you pay any attention at all, you'd know they are not a tiny minority.

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum

Originally posted by Beelzebubba
What about the boys currently being investigated in Werribee? They are mostly Italian/Australian Catholics.
Link

What about the current rash of rapes on the north side of Brisbane?

What relevence do these links and rapes have to this thread?

It was pointed out by another member that we have a problem with young Muslim men in this country (Australia). I was simply providing evidence that rape is not just being committed by young Muslim males. Religion is not what defines a rapist in this country.

double post

[edit on 27-10-2006 by Beelzebubba]

I hope that Austraila has the courage to show him the door.

You don't need people who hold beliefs like that in your country.

In a sense he was saying that it's OK to rape if the victim isn't fully covered from head to toe. His sermon could be seen as an incitment to rape.

I think that it just shows how he values women far less than men.

Originally by Vegabond
Though I don't particularly object to this statement because I see morals as arbitrary and basically irrelevant I will note something about your tactics. You have kept away from specifics so as not to be engaged on anything such as Abu Ghraib or Gitmo: you are keeping the issue vage and large so that Iraq as a whole is the subject. Unpopular wars make great cudgels when you're defending a fringe position, particularly defending the moral courage of men who are cool with the Mufti defending the rape and murder of their daughters. Clever tactic, seriously, but a little dirty. At the end of the day we are still talking about whether or not Western civilization is going to stand for people defending rapists and implicitly advocating "honor killings", and not the war in Iraq.

You are correct -- I'm keeping basic and vague because I do not keep up with the news, I do not watch tv, nor listen to the radio. I have enough issues with depression already. Frankly, the news often disgusts me and frays what little faith I have in humanity...

I do not know the specifics about practically any 'world event', and have no gumption to spend hours researching them. (I've tried, and I got so frustrated that I no longer saw the point.)
I do, however, have the patience for the driving ideas behind all the actions... and that is where I think change could (maybe, possibly, hopefully!) happen. Or at the very least, be reasonably promoted.

The battle of morals is one that I am currently figuring out for myself. As always, I end up sitting on the fence. If culture x thinks it's okay to eat their grandfathers, then I think 'so be it -- so long as they do not touch mine.' However, the clash comes when two cultures try to mix... Then, it seems, that we must reasonably agree on 'rules' that work towards the well-being of everyone. (However, I am aware that the 'well-being of everyone' factor gets skewed... and when it comes to religion, reason itself becomes skewed...)

We have decided that certain things aren't to be done and when they are done or when there is conspiracy to do them, we apply punishments.

Point understood, but I have a disagreement with the fundamental idea of muscle/force and punishment. I don't see it as effective mentally; in fact, I'd argue that it incites even more rebellion. (However, such a discussion may be too off topic.. I'm not sure.) ((And yes, I would love to engage philosophically about practically anything. I am, honestly, a tyro when it comes to the various philosophical theories. So, to have an open discussion would be most valuable... especially when it comes to figuring out how humanity can live peacefully -- the well-being of everyone.))

Western civilization isn't going to back off of its demands. If Islam won't either, there's going to be a clash. This clash has already manifested on an international level, and it can also manifest on the personal level either in the form of individuals or law enforcement imposing our terms on people like the Mufti in whatever way is appropriate to the situation.

Again, forcing someone to think or act this way or that because we say so.. my father tried that, and it failed miserably. (However, this harkens back to reason being skewed in the eyes of religion... I'm not sure how to correct this misshapen thinking.)

Aside from that, we are not setting a fantastic example for people who think it's okay to rape young girls/women, when our elite go over to Indonesia and do the same... (This particular topic I do have articles and quotes for.. *looks around* someplace...) 'Do as I say (because I threaten you to do so), not as I do' is not a good way of correcting the wrong behaviors, let alone bring about some semblance of peace...

Forgive me if I'm minimally concerned with objectivity when it comes to the question of whether or not basic human rights can be quieted in deference to cultural differences.

But, isn't it objectivity that will ultimately decide what is, or is not, a basic human right? The ability to think outside of oneself and look at the whole picture to be able to figure out what to do for the well-being of everyone, both individually and as a collective?

In civilized nations the expectation of a man is that he will respect women.

While I can't pull an example out of my brain at this particular moment, I'm still going to say that the definition of 'civilization' is subjective. No, it shouldn't be... However, methinks that in any _true_ civilization, people would act civil to each other... no matter how fortune spins the wheel...

I cannot claim the mufti's words, nor the actions he (may) incite, to be civil. Nor can I claim the reactionary response of force & punishment as a form of 'correction' to be civil.


Okay. We decide that it is ultimately incorrect to promote rape. Fine. I agree because it harms others, and the pleasure gained from such an action is, ultimately, temporary.
Now, the discussion should turn to the thinking of the mufti. Anyone have access to the Qu'ran to be able to point out passages? Thus, we may actually work our logic centers in finding a reasonable way to approach this issue.

...maybe if we (the world) lived as a shame culture instead of a guilt culture... think that would help?

Didn't the Muslim religion spawn from the Jewish? maybe we could figure out why they broke away and what differences they engendered? ((This is an effort in trying to get back to the basic ideas that have carried through the ages and lead us to where we are today. Seeing that the Qu'ran hasn't changed since it was first published... there's gotta be something in that.))

[edit on 27-10-2006 by Diseria]

Originally posted by resistancia
I misunderstood your post...I am sorry.

Lots of misunderstandings lately...apologies.

No worries!
I'm certain that I could have said/explained my thoughts more clearly.

'Tis the constant endeavor of the writer to say things as clearly as possible!

If one steps aside from the white flag propaganda for a second... what the Mufti said was not objectionable.

In Muslim society the women are covered up so that publicly they cannot be sex objects and the men's natural inhibitions are not restrained as they are in Western Society.

the problem exists when these people are in western society and their system cannot interface with ours.

the other question is this: who foistured the high immigration and multi-culturalism on western society? this feeds the problem if you ask me.

Originally posted by half_minded
Leaving any religion is not easy. Most of the time you have to break off ties with family and relatives to break off from religion. thats how it is in the East. Take India for example, ask any Hindu if they can convert to a different religion and see what they say. They will tell you that it would pretty much mean breaking relations from every family they got. In the east it is very rare that you will find a family that will accept ur change of religion.

And yet Hinduism accepts any and every religion because it's understood that no matter the name given to God, it's all really the same God, same idea, same essence.

It seems backwards that it'd be so hard to leave this religion for that, when it's all for the same purpose..

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum

YA! We should denounce all those Christians, Catholics, and Jews who blow themselves up to kill others; and who kill women who are raped in order to regain lost honor in their families; and who believe their god allows them to beat their obsitnant wives. Denounce all those Christian, Catholics, and Jews who riot and murder because Jesus, the Pope, or matzah balls are parodied in a cartoon.

Oh wait.....You don't need to denounce them because they don't do these things. At least for their god. What is it about Islam that keeps so many (not all of course) in the dark ages.

Um.. wait, wasn't it the Christians/Catholics who began the Inquisition?

And frankly, I knew of lots of 'God fearing' people who were general sinners... They believed that when they went to church on sunday, they were saved, their sins washed away, and could go out and live as they pleased. In fact, I lived in a city full of them... oh wait, I do now too!!!

I can only think of a few religions that, as far as I know, did not murder for their religion. Needless to say, most religions can't be excluded on this point when history is concerned. So, I do not understand this as a valid point of argument.

[edit on 27-10-2006 by Diseria]

Originally posted by Diseria
Um.. wait, wasn't it the Christians/Catholics who began the Inquisition?

The inquisition was an event that happened hundreds of years ago and I find it interesting; illuminating even, that you're comparing the Islam of today to religious motivated behavior of that time.

Originally posted by Diseria
I can only think of a few religions that, as far as I know, did not murder for their religion. Needless to say, most religions can't be excluded on this point when history is concerned. So, I do not understand this as a valid point of argument.

You can bring up ancient history all you want. The fact is that if it weren't for the actions of Muslims today we wouldn't be here having this debate. I've taken a keen interest in Islam since the brutal attacks on my fellow countrymen (and fellow emplyees BTW) and have learned the these so-called "extremists" aren't extreme at all. They are following the teachings and guidance of Islam, which the pentagon recently discovered.

Here's a prediction: In the next ten years there will be a greater effort on the part of immigrant Muslims to impose their beliefs and customs on their adoptive country. They're already doing this--just watch it become much worse. In fact; watch for your various Islamic alphabet groups (CAIR etc) successfully gain (due to political correctness) greater political muscle and attempt to impose Sharia law into various Constitutions.

[edit on 28-10-2006 by Freedom_for_sum]

Playing devils advocate here, there seems to be alot of emotional bunkum on this thread which is distracting. It seems the media everywhere are hell bent on eaves dropping on Muslims everywhere with the sole purpose to miss represent them and to incite racism and hatred towards Muslims.

If any person as an individual or part of any organisation is found in law to be guilty of inciting others to commit harm by what every means then they should be brought to justice. But this may be dificult in light of my above comments, first the language spoken has to be translated and you have to believe the media in being honest to tell the thruth. Now how many of us are willing to put money down that the media are honest and truthful, not many I would think. The only thing their interested in is sensationalism to sell papers.

Only the law and the courts can settle matters such as these and people should be aware that they dont fall into the I hate you trap, as this is the sole purpose of such stories. And if people want to cast stones just remember, women in Europe were killed in their millions, burnt, tortured and drowned as witches. Nobody is lily white when it comes to the persecution of women, no race, religion or country, all have been and still are guilty of persecution/discrimination against women.

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum

Originally posted by Diseria
Um.. wait, wasn't it the Christians/Catholics who began the Inquisition?

The inquisition was an event that happened hundreds of years ago and I find it interesting; illuminating even, that you're comparing the Islam of today to religious motivated behavior of that time.

Go back and read what I quoted you saying. Specifically the part about Catholics, Christians and Jews not killing others in the name of their religion. In your words "They just don't do that".

*That* is what I was responding to.. the incorrect comparison you made.



And fine, if the media is told by our government that the terrorists were just following what Islam told them. I am not keen on believing anything the media, or popular thought, tells me anymore.

Again, I maintain the stance that we should be returning back to their original text (the Qu'ran) and try to understand that. At least then we may have a reasonable debate with them using their own language and reasons.

Originally posted by Diseria
Go back and read what I quoted you saying. Specifically the part about Catholics, Christians and Jews not killing others in the name of their religion. In your words "They just don't do that".

*That* is what I was responding to.. the incorrect comparison you made.

I'm not getting your position. What comparison did I make? Show me some examples of Jews, Christians, and Catholics who are murdering others in the name of their religion today; not hundreds and thousands of years ago.

Originally posted by Diseria
Again, I maintain the stance that we should be returning back to their original text (the Qu'ran) and try to understand that. At least then we may have a reasonable debate with them using their own language and reasons.

OK; what translation gives the "original text"? Or are you saying that it has to be in Arabic? If so; what translation do you think Osama bin Laden reads since clearly; by your estimation, he isn't reading from Islam's "original texts".

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Playing devils advocate here, there seems to be alot of emotional bunkum on this thread which is distracting. It seems the media everywhere are hell bent on eaves dropping on Muslims everywhere with the sole purpose to miss represent them and to incite racism and hatred towards Muslims.

Where was he misrepresented? He actually said women are like uncovered meat, said they are the devils favourite weapon and said rape victims are to blame for being raped by blaming women for attracting sexual deviants. How on earth can that be taken out of context? There are numerous transcripts available from unbiased sources and they are complete to show he has not being taken out of context . He himself has said [taken from the original post]:

www.theaustralian.news.com.au...
Sheik Hilali said he only meant to refer to prostitutes as "meat" and not any scantily dressed woman with no hijab, despite him not mentioning the word prostitute during the 17-minute talk.

The man is hopeless at backpeddling.

It's also not eavesdropping when it's a public speach.

If any person as an individual or part of any organisation is found in law to be guilty of inciting others to commit harm by what every means then they should be brought to justice.

By the way.. this is who he was reffering to when he mentioned 65 year jail sentences.. and before anyone says he was refferring to something else.. 'standard' rapist only get a couple of years.

en.wikipedia.org...
The Sydney gang rapes were a series of gang rape attacks by a group of up to fourteen Lebanese Australian men against white[1] women in Sydney, Australia in 2000. The crimes, described as racially motivated hate crimes by commentators such as Miranda Devine[2][3][4] saw blanket media coverage, the passing of new laws, and over 240 years in jail time handed out to nine men.

Again, I wonder if they even heard his sermons as he seems to be standing up for them. I vaguely remember Abdul Nacer Benbrika [melbourne 'cleric' [untrained] who was charged with a terrorist attempt] making similar radio comments about women [and the gang rapes] but I can't find a source on it. Do any other aussies remember it?

But this may be dificult in light of my above comments, first the language spoken has to be translated and you have to believe the media in being honest to tell the thruth.

Kind of reminds me of the race riots in Sydney. They began when four lifesavers were bashed. The media called it 'race attacks' when caucasions rioted but when middle easterns rioted they called it 'revenge attacks'. Media bias goes in either direction so I don't think they're setting out to pick on muslims.
If it indeed were a language thng.. why on earth would the muslim community be divided over his comments? They know their own language. There are many muslims that want him to stand down so your theory doesn't make sense.

Now how many of us are willing to put money down that the media are honest and truthful, not many I would think. The only thing their interested in is sensationalism to sell papers.

I'm still not sure how this proves he didn't say it. He hasn't even denied saying it.. only that he was taken out of context and was refferring to prostitutes/adulterers [he didn't mention either ].

Only the law and the courts can settle matters such as these and people should be aware that they dont fall into the I hate you trap, as this is the sole purpose of such stories. And if people want to cast stones just remember, women in Europe were killed in their millions, burnt, tortured and drowned as witches.

Yes they were.. and IMO that is basically what he's trying to incite. Not sure what you mean about 'casting stones' though.. there are no glass houses here.. [we weren't around during the witch trials] and not everyone judges entire cultures on extremists.

Nobody is lily white when it comes to the persecution of women, no race, religion or country, all have been and still are guilty of persecution/discrimination against women.

..so that makes it okay or defensable? Otherwise I'm not sure how reviewing history is relevent as society is supposed to have become more civilised and women today actually have rights. Men with his outlook want to take them away.

[edit on 28-10-2006 by riley]

Riley, I'm not defending this person the point I am making is that its the Muslim shooting season is it not. If anybody else had said this the story would not of lasted 5 minutes, if this person is breaking the law then the authorities can/will do something about it, if he's not then its free speach if you like it or not.

Democracies dont consist of some having the right to free speech but not others. You, I and all the posters on this thread were not at that meetiing, we dont know what was said or how it was said. But its seems were now in a situation where if any Muslim says anything its anti West, anti Women, their terrorists etc. One ignorant fool opens his mouth and the whole is tainted. You and others make it sound like people of the Muslim faith are some kind of robots, not people with brains in their heads who know right from wrong. The assumption is made that if he says it others will think it, well who is being ignorant know.