Not trying to nitpick but you should close the link.

It's about time...for you to close the link, Ace.

Unless that would be placating. We all know you don't placate.

And for that we are gracious.

Thanks, yls!

Ace, link is missing context.

First of all, Lebanese muslims had just beaten the crap out of two lifeguards on this same beach, the prior weekend, one of them unconscious.

Secondly, women were harassed on this same beach by the same muslim gang, yelled at for wearing bikinis and told it invites rape.

Third, the police have not responded appropriately, no presence on beach to address these problems. So people have felt the need to take things into their own hands. What are they going to do, let Muslims turn an Australian suburb into another French ghetto, where women are gang raped and have their faces slashed?

Fourth, don't forget about the gang rape trial in Australia, in which the muslim rapists said it was their right to rape australian women when they dress immodestly and are unescorted.

So who can't get along? Who are the racists? Who started it? The muslims.

By the way the muslim gang trashed dozens of cars, I think burning cars is next.

It's about...

Oh, sorry

Can we say "evil returns upon itself," like the Moslems said after 9/11?

:P

It's going to be a good day.

Here is one report from Australia that took place before the beatings. Put this together with the muslim beating of two life guards (one unconscious), and you can understand why it happened:

A YOUNG woman this week told a TV camera crew of the intimidation she has experienced on Cronulla beach.
"They'll stand over you while you're sunbaking, block your sun so they get your attention, then say, 'She's not worth doing 55 years for'," she told them.

(By the way 55 year is a reference to the sentence given for gang rape)

In other news this same mulim gang stabbed a man in the back outside a golf club:

The police spokesman said: “The 23-year-old man was with friends outside a golf club when a group of males of Mediterranean or Middle Eastern appearance approached him.

“Following a short conversation the 23-year-old sustained stab wounds. Police are appealing for help from anyone who witnessed the incident.”

What, no burning Peugeots? That's not a riot.

While I agree with your point about hurting the innocent and the ratio of 1000 innocents to 1 guilty... I would like to comment that when it gets to the point that the other side starts fighting back, its past the point where the 1000 innocents should have done something about the 1 guilty that makes them a target.

So who can't get along? Who are the racists? Who started it? The muslims.

I'm sure that makes the innocent targets of today's mob more understanding about the shithammering they recieved.

The police should have been cracking down on that kind of crap a long time ago. You ease up on policing because of some "special" ethnic concerns, you invite this sort of unreasoning primal shit as people get angry that nothing is being done about their problem. Doesn't excuse their behavior, but their behavior is exactly why we have police.

That said, I was pretty damn surprised to hear about the rioting. Though I don't know whether I should be surprised or not that it took place in Australia.

A bunch of burning Holdens, now that's a riot.

"After three days of rioting Mayor Quimby has declared mob rule"

when it gets to the point that the other side starts fighting back

Rand called it the sanction of the victims.

It's sad, because we are fighting, at least in part, a PR battle. If these gangs of the innocent ever decide to take an eye for an eye, al Reuters will start calling it discrimination, racially-based, etc.

as people get angry that nothing is being done about their problem

But we all have problems. If it's going to degenerate into violence, then why say that one side was justified in violence and the other is not. At some point, people have to defend their own.

Is this why you won't interview Tim Blair?

Those Aussies do not placate!

I think one of the reasons many would say "its about..." is that there has been a total lack on the part of western governments to confront this phenomenon. Because let's be honest, these incidents are not isolated, but part of a global movement. Time after time, country after country, Islam proves that it cannot and will not co-exist with Western society. There's no vast conspiracy, there's no organziation per say behind it, just a medieval philosphy that wasn't confronted and destroyed when it should've been.
Our governements have been so blinded by PC that they refuse to see the threat, and people are being forced to take vigilante action, undermining their cause by becoming criminals, racists etc.
Idividual Muslims can be nice law abiding fun people, but the philosphy they follow has at its core the idea that differences cannot be tolerated. And it is that posion seed that makes Islam unacceptable, because it provides the muslim with justification to violate the Western social contract.

Idividual Muslims can be nice law abiding fun people, but the philosphy they follow has at its core the idea that differences cannot be tolerated.

Almost every religion does this, though, including Christianity. Through means both subversive, enlightening, and militaristic, Christianity has grown.

I don't mean to kill your whole point - Islam seems particularly specific and graphic as to what it thinks about non-believers, and what to do with them. Frankly, much more so than any other world religion. My opinion is that it is this brutalness that appeals to many of the worst sort of people - criminals, thugs, maniacs. It's comforting to hear your own version of black-and-white is specifically endorsed by the only prophet to God.

Anytime you surrender your own capacity of thought and decision to any authority, be it a government or a religion or a political party, you are becoming a tool and a useful idiot.

The world has been waiting an awful long time for the "innocent and peaceful muslim majority" to start standing up and at the very least condeming the 1 percenters. As far as I know, the world is still waiting. These people are supposed to be humans and citizens of the country they live in first and muslims second.

If you aren't willing to condem and help put a stop to action being done in your name then you become complicit with that action even if you aren't technically involved or actively supporting it. The only way this problem will ever be solved permanently is if the muslim community refuses to allow it to continue.

I won't say the innocent are getting what they deserve because they aren't innocent. This isn't 1 percent of the protestants or 1 percent of the moonies. This is 1 percent of the muslim community acting on what they say is the teaching of islam. Its way past time for the muslim community to stand up and put a stop to this crap. Or remain part of the problem.

I hope that everyone recalls that not that long ago (wish I had a link for this, but I don't have time to look for one right now) that Australian politicians were urging the police to be "culturally sensitive" toward Muslims about things like domestic violence. In other words, the government itself urged two different standards for violent behavior: one for Muslims and one for non-Muslims.
With this type of law enforcement idiocy, it doesn't seem surprising that non-Muslims would start engaging in vigilantism.

A gloss by Leo Paul S. de Alvarez (University of Dallas) on a Machiavellian text comes to mind: "If you don't protect the matter, the matter will protect itself." My own gloss on Prof. de Alvarez's is advice to left-liberals: If you're frightened by the helter-skelter ways in which private people protect themselves, then you should redouble your own efforts to protect them. This advice is applicable to civil policing and to warfare. One ought not carp about the way people protect themselves unless one is prepared to do a better job.

Almost every religion does this, though, including Christianity.

Except, as you say, Islam specificly demands that the unbeliever be killed or forced to convert. While different churches may have resorted to arms at different times, Christianity itself says that one cannot be forced to believe. One has to choose freely.
Furthermore over the 2000 years of its existence, Christianity has "evolved" from using force to resolve differences to using persuasion from its origins in the different councils called by the various emperors. Aside from the sectarian violence in Northern Ireland (which are really clan wars legitimizing themselves with religion) where else do you see Christians slaughtering each other, or non-believers for issues of faith? Basically 200 years after the reformation everything had for the most part setteled down. The same can't be said for Islam.
Islam has been around for 1400 years, and it still can't get along with others. Hell, if it wasn't for Muslim aggression the Jews wouldn't have kicked anybody's ass since Masada (and they lost that one). Furthermore, there doesn't seem to be any willingness to even explore these ideas on Muslims parts. These" interfaith" hootenanny's are basically "How can we accomodate the Muslims today" meetings.

If these gangs of the innocent ever decide to take an eye for an eye, al Reuters will start calling it discrimination, racially-based, etc.

Will nothing at all instill discipline in the leftist media?

Except, as you say, Islam specificly demands that the unbeliever be killed or forced to convert.

Iblis: Christianity itself says that one cannot be forced to believe. One has to choose freely.

This is a great point, and it is really the heart of the matter.

Furthermore over the 2000 years of its existence, Christianity has "evolved" from using force to resolve differences to using persuasion from its origins in the different councils called by the various emperors.

I agree with you more or less. The Crusades were justified by using Old Testament morality vs New Testament, even thought the motives were obviously NT. It was, from the evolutionary point of view, a step backwards. I think that Augustine decided to figure out how to justify a moral war per Christianity. It's interesting in that his attempt is considered by many to anti-Christian, but that pre-supposes the notion that Christianity is implicitly pacifist.

But I'm really being a shit to pick this nit. You're right - the course of Western History is pretty clearly a Judeo-Christian motivated push towards a deep respect for the individual and the individual's capacity to think and reason and ultimately, to choose.

Islam has been around for 1400 years, and it still can't get along with others.

I agree, but my opinion is that it is a mistake to turn this into another Crusade. I think that one of Bush's truly enlightened notions is that this war is not a crusade, but war against terrorism.

That said, you would hope that somewhere, Islam would wake up and police itself. It won't do to have Imams in America sowing the seeds of insurrection.

Time after time, country after country, Islam proves that it cannot and will not co-exist with Western society.

Yes but more. Its not just western countries and it didn't start with Islams spread into the west. This same phenomena has been occuring throught the muslim world for generations and exists throughout the middle east.

The House of Saud was the first to make a deal with radical Islam, essentially giving them free reign as long as they left the ruling families alone. Its tough to find a place in the middle east, northern Afica and parts of Asia where this does not occur today. Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Algiers, etc., etc.. When I hear about innocent muslims the first thing that comes to my mind is yes and no. Yes, they may be innocent to the actual acts being committed in the name of islam but they have seen this stuff for generations in their own countries (these radicals hate the majority of muslims almost as much as they hate us, witness Iraq) and did not confront it. Now that it has spread to the west they are still doing nothing.

There IS at least a philosophy if not a conspiracy that binds all these people and their acts. They operate under many names now but all can be traced to Wahabism. The teachings of this malignant strain of Islam is what binds these people. Not national borders or even Islam as a whole.

And unless the muslim world starts putting the madrasas out of business and confronts this death cult head on we will continue to fight it in wars like Afghanistand and Iraq and in the streets as in Australia, Sweeden and NYC.

but they have seen this stuff for generations in their own countries ... and did not confront it

How, exactly, would they have confronted it?

I'm not just arguing - it's a serious question, because they simply didn't have the political system to change their methodologies. And maybe this is one of the damning points of Islam - that historically it does not and cannot endorse a government of the people, by the people, and serving the political will of the people.

unless the muslim world starts putting the madrasas out of business and confronts this death cult head on ...

Amen. You've got it right.

Which maybe makes the Bush doctrine and the Bush methodology really works of genius. Following this line of thought means that he has sown the seeds of our enemies' destruction by giving the people a voice.

What is the deal with Muslims and gangrape? Kill the apes.

Nothing warms my heart like an angry mob.

"With this type of law enforcement idiocy, it doesn't seem surprising that non-Muslims would start engaging in vigilantism."

The problem is that what happened in Sydney wasn't real vigilantism; it was a bunch of drunks beating the shit out of anyone who looked dark. If we were talking about local residents getting fed up with police inattention and going after specific criminals, like Mossad went after the Olympic kidnappers, I'd be all for it.

You realize, of course, that this is all Bush's fault.

My favorite part:

“Following a short conversation the 23-year-old sustained stab wounds.

Note that he wasn't stabbed, he just sustained stab wounds.

My favorite part:

“Following a short conversation the 23-year-old sustained stab wounds.

The passive voice seeks to excuse even an attempted murder.

Andrew, are you actually in Sydney and eye-witness to this, or are you taking the MSM portrayal of the "bunch of drunks beating the shit out of anyone who looked dark" as the whole story?
Remember whose side the MSM is on after all...
'Disaffected youths'...'insurgents'...

It's a step back. Asshole leftists have been arguing that we should turn our eyes away from crimes committed by muslims because, you know, we're all a pack of drunk racists anyway and anyone who tries to take the treat of Islamism seriously is just a lizardoid nazi redneck.

Oh, and hey, now they have examples. It's a lot like the black riots after the Neo-Nazis tried to march.

The mobs aren't just attacking anyone brown, either, they're going after ambulances and paramedics.

When this cools down, you can bet your ass that the left is going to be preening themselves, not embarassed for defending the behavior that sparked this mess.

Uncle J, check out http://timblair.net for some reporting out of Oz. It's not just an MSM portrayal, Blair's on our side.

Mark Steyn has been writing for a while on how multiculturalism has become such a fetish in the West that radical Islam is not only allowed to fester but actively enabled. We've become so tolerant that we allow one of the most intolerant socio-political movements in the world to grow unchecked. It's not just Islam that is growing in the world; that in and of itself is not that big a deal. But it's this violent, whacked-out brand of it that is growing, and it's a major threat to Western civilization. Something has to give or this crap will continue.

Is this payback for france from downunder? on no its armagedon comming

Considering what happened in France, where Muslim gangs have more or less taken over, it's hard to judge the Aussies too harshly.

After this weekend's festitivities, I'd wager that the beachgoers at Cronulla won't be having too much trouble with roving gang's of Muslims next weekend.

In the absence of effective law enforcement, and with Muslims' failure to encourage decent behavior from their youth, I don't know what other option the Aussies had.

"Please, don't post something like "It's about time." I don't need to see that on my site, thank you very much."

Ace turning all PC cuz he smells crazy blog money after his NBC ad. He's even thinking about an LA Times column. But, not if Google has him pegged as a "hate" site.

"...Still, the race-rioters were going after anyone who looked Muslim or Middle-Eastern."

This is the real failure of blogs. Reliance upon a biased media for information.

Well, as I was there yesterday, I can tell you that you are dead WRONG. The only people targeted by the mob were gang members. They're VERY easily identifiable, as they all have the same kinds of haircuts.

Everyone in Sydney knew that locals were going to be there in force. The only Lebanese who were there went there with the express purpose of taunting the crowd (again, which I personally saw) with the imagined safety of nearby cops.

So pull your head out of your ass and stop believing the first words out of a VERY biased media's mouth, mate.

Comparing Christianity to Islam is like comparing apples to Chris Klein.

"Muhammad brought down from heaven and put into the Koran not religious doctrines only, but political maxims, criminal and civil laws, and scientific theories. The Gospels, on the other hand, deal only with the general relations between man and God and between man and man. Beyond that, they teach nothing and do not oblige people to believe anything. That alone, among a thousand reasons, is enough to show that Islam will not be able to hold its power long in ages of enlightenment and democracy, while Christianity is destined to reign in such ages, as in all others."

~Alexis de Tocqueville

How, exactly, would they have confronted it?

To me this is much less a question of nationalism than it is a question of religion. People may not have a choice into what country they were born but they did have a choice into what brand of Islam they were going to follow if any. Wahabism didn't just spring forth from thin air and its spread and growth didn't happen by accident.

People chose to support this cult and it became much more powerful than rulers or national borders. Look at the 9/11 hijackers. Predominately Saudi but not all. But all Wahabists. Look at the Taliban. Wahabists from throughout the Middle East and even beyond. Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Islamic Brotherhood, etc., all contain either Wahabist elements or are sympathetic and symbiotic. And again, their supporters are much more loyal to their cause than they are to secular politics. I'd say the Hashemite ruler of Jordan has finally come around to realizing this truth.

If this was a splinter group from Christianity it would be logical to expect that Christians be the first and loudest voices condeming it. Secular rulers can't stop a religious issue. It can only come from within the religion itself.

Jake, while reading your comment I wondered if you really did witness the mob action in Oz.

Then I saw the "mate" at the end of your comment and just knew you were legitimate.

Signore Sortelli, Jake gets my point.
I've been away for a few hours, but these last few hours have been spent with a friend who's leaving to go home to Sydney next week, after several months here for our grape harvest.
And such a fine time we had, including discussions of immigration/assimilation down under, vis a vis the current state of affairs.
Please, watch out for what the MSM tries to feed you...
And Sortelli, I know we're on the same side.

"Islam specificly demands that the unbeliever be killed or forced to convert."

No, it doesn't. Hence the very useful word dhimmi.

It demands they die, convert or fix Islam a sandwich, but that's not *precisely* the same.

Dhimmitude is a temporary situation, when the Muslims don't have to power/resources to kill or force conversion of the non-believer.
However heaven cannot be achieved on earth until the entire world is Muslim and the non-believers, especially the Jews, are all dead.

Why are you all going along with the MSM in categorising these as "race riots"? They are not race riots. They are riots between Muslims who want to change the Aussie way of life and Australians who are quite attached to their way of life.

Lebanese Christians have integrated well into Australia (as they have in Canada and the United States). It is not that these thugs are Arabic that is the problem. It is that they are violent, aggresive Muslims. This has absolutely nothing to do with race and the MSM is trying to pull the wool over your eyes by brainwashing.

And it looks as though they've succeeded, because all the commenters above have referred to "race riots".

Verity, you didn't read all of the comments above...

Andrew, are you actually in Sydney and eye-witness to this, or are you taking the MSM portrayal of the "bunch of drunks beating the shit out of anyone who looked dark" as the whole story?
Remember whose side the MSM is on after all...
'Disaffected youths'...'insurgents'...

Posted by Uncle Jefe at December 11, 2005 06:28 PM