The Great Australian Bikini March: Cancelled in Brunswick… and Lakemba?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions…

Mosque to get police guard for bikini rally
Taghred Chandab and Matthew Benns
Sydney Morning Herald
December 3, 2006

POLICE have been asked to protect Australia’s largest mosque next weekend because of concerns that a bikini march staged to coincide with the anniversary of the Cronulla riots may get out of control.

The caretaker of Lakemba Mosque, the Lebanese Muslim Association, says it is taking no risks, requesting at least 32 police officers to protect the place of worship on Saturday and Sunday.

Association president Tom Zreik said he met police on several occasions to ensure there would be adequate numbers of officers present to defuse problems and arrest troublemakers.

“We are treating this as something that is funny and hilarious but also taking precautions,” Mr Zreika said of the bikini march. “Some people may see this as provocation and the last thing that we want is to see anyone being attacked.”

The organiser, Melbourne grandmother [?] Christine Hawkins, has asked women nationally to dress in bikinis and colourful beachwear and rally outside large mosques [in Lakemba, but not in Brunswick… apparently] to show their disgust at comments by leading Muslim cleric, Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly, who likened women to “uncovered meat”.

A white supremacist website has promoted the march. Members of Sydney’s Muslim community began raising their concerns last week, with hundreds joining an internet discussion to find a “peaceful avenue” to protect their mosque.

[Scumfront is one of the websites which has been used extensively by Perth-based convicted neo-Nazi criminal — and former member of Jack van Tongeren‘s Australian Nationalists MovementBen Weerheym to promote the March. Fascists on Shitfront regard Muslims as a sub-species of people they refer to as ‘muds’. (Since their BBQ in September, Brisbane-based members of the fascist forum in question have been meeting at a local bikie club.) The March has also been endorsed by members of convicted neo-Nazi criminal Dr. Jim Saleam‘s Australia First Party, which is standing John Moffat in the NSW state election in March, 2007.]

Many Muslim women suggested joining the march in their hijabs and burqas to voice their outrage at comments made by Senator Bronwyn Bishop and Prime Minister John Howard about the way they dress. “We’re really asking people not to bother coming to the mosque,” Mr Zreika said.

“All this is doing is degrading women and giving men a great excuse to have a perv. There are better ways women can express their concerns.”

In Cronulla yesterday members of the Lakembaroos sports club attended a barbecue at North Cronulla Surf Club to mark the progress of more than 20 Muslim lifesavers, who are training for their bronze medallions.

“If we didn’t have the events of Cronulla last December in the back of our minds, we wouldn’t even be conscious that the people here were of Lebanese background,” Community Relations Commission chairman Stepan Kerkyasharian said.

“They look Australian, they are taking part in an Australian activity and you have to ask ‘what’s the problem?”‘

The training is an initiative of Surf Life Saving Australia.

See also : Francis De Groot Brigade

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2024 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in !nataS, Anti-fascism, Sex & Sexuality, State / Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Great Australian Bikini March: Cancelled in Brunswick… and Lakemba?

  1. David Ross says:

    Of ALL people in this great country, THIS man should know better than most of us about the problems of multi-culturalism as it is \’practiced\’ (rather than intended):

    Community Relations Commission Chairman, Stepan Kerkyasharian.

    Why? I wonder if anyone can guess? Think first… (hint: his name).

    His name is Armenian. His own people were slaughtered by the Turks who did NOT want \’Multi-culturalism\’ in Turkey. Why did the Turks bother about the Armenians? Armenian = Christian. Turk = Muslim.

    Here is \’multi-culturalism\’ from the real world:

    Looking at history, the hate and venom and mercilessness of the Maroubra revenge attackers and some of the really really angry whites at Cronulla, shows one thing: \”Multi-culturalism does not work\”. Some might say \”It shows there are ratbags in all communities\”. But this requires deeper analysis. Lebanese Muslims are tribal, white Australians are \’ad hoc\’. There is little tribalism among whites. Those who do such things ARE ratbags in the social sense. The Lebanese Muslims did it because of TRIBE, kinship and community tribal identity. In such cases, there is more likelihood of much BIGGER numbers of people being involved.

    The Bikini March is a very tame response to the cultural obscenity of Sheikh Hilaly\’s comments. Be thankful it\’s not Lambing Flats. But… failure to take history into account and implement UNIFYING and INTEGRATING and ASSIMILATING policies will undoubtedly, eventually, result in something more akin to this historical example occurring.

    Bringing Muslims into the lifeguard movement is a good step. It remains to be seen whether they will be \’tribal\’ or \’Australian\’ at the first \’incident\’.

    The problem with Iraq is tribalism. Sunni Iraqi army members only want to pick up Shias and vice versa. The Americans have not addressed the need for an idea bigger than tribalism. For Arabs this was Islam; \’democracy\’ offers nothing to such. There is no virgin-filled paradise in \’democracy\’.

  2. @ndy says:

    Dear David,

    Yr like a broken bloody record mate: ‘assimilate’ or die.

    Yeah, K is of Armenian descent (born in Cyprus).

    Yeah, there was an Armenian genocide in 1915.

    The responsibility for the genocide lies with the so-called Young Turks (officially known as the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP)). The dictatorial triumvirate of Young Turks — Enver, Talat, and Cemal — who had assumed control of the remains of the rapidly-decaying Ottoman Empire used the occasion of WWI to conduct the genocide in the name of creating a ‘pure’ Turkish empire: the kind of shit you’re very familar with, and a political project which totalitarians of many different stripes — ethnic, cultural, national, religious, and, in modern times, secular — have pursued throughout history.

    And which others have resisted, often at the cost of their lives.

    But, leaving aside the q of its relevance to contemporary Australia and the farce known as ‘The Great Australian Bikini March’, to claim that the reasons for this horrible event may be reduced to ‘Armenian = Christian; Turk = Muslim’ may well be ideologically serviceable (as well as being, like, simple enough for simpletons to repeat, ad nauseum) but in reality, it is to do great violence to the study of *real* history: by which I mean the ability to take into account the complex range of factors that produce any historical event.

    For example:


    Purdue University West Lafayette, IN

    The aim of this essay is to advance the development of a conceptual framework for the study of genocide, by comparing and generalizing from the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide of 1915. Some current explanations of the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide emphasize the ideologies of the perpetrators, the functional exigencies of the organizations of destruction, and the provocative behaviours of the victims. Without denying the importance of such factors, this essay focuses on the revolutionary crises of the state and on the successful modernization and mobilization of traditionally despised minorities as crucial antecedent variables to genocide.


    In essence, the Young Turks, like the Nazis in WWII, embarked upon a strategy of EXTERMINATION as a result of the ‘FAILED ASSIMILATION’ of (Christian) Armenia :


    Still, unlike yrself, some descendants of the survivors of the Armenian genocide — most notably, members of *System Of A Down* — draw the appropriate lessons and work FOR peace, freedom and equality, and AGAINST the kind of SIMPLE-MINDED BIGOTRY you espouse.

    See for example:

    Go read some fucking history.

    Australian history.

    Black/white relations. Catholic/Protestant relations. Gender relations. Class relations. Empire. State. Nation…

    Yr assertions are just that, and yr bigoted ideology is a haphazard collection of ‘facts’, incoherent in their composition, and reflecting little other than the irrational nature of yr vain quest for acceptance by a critical thinker/drinker/smoker and anarchist, whose desire is very well-armed…


    Theodor W. Adorno, ‘Anti-Semitism and Fascist Propaganda’, (1946):


    Let us consider three characteristics of the predominantly psychological approach of current American fascist propaganda.

    1. It is personalized propaganda, essentially non-objective. The agitators spend a large part of their time in speaking either about themselves or about their audiences. They present themselves as lone wolves, as healthy, sound American citizens with robust instincts, as unselfish and indefatigable; and they incessantly divulge real or fictitious intimacies about their lives and those of their families. Moreover, they appear to take a warm human interest in the small daily worries of their listeners, whom they depict as poor but honest, common-sense but non-intellectual, native Christians. They identify themselves with their listeners and lay particular emphasis upon being simultaneously both modest little men and leaders of great calibre. They often refer to themselves as mere messengers of him who is to come – a trick already familiar in Hitler’s speeches. This technique is probably closely related to the substitution of a collective ego for paternal imagery. Another favorite scheme of personalization is to dwell upon petty financial needs and to beg for small amounts of money. The agitators disavow any pretense to superiority, implying that the leader to come is one who is as weak as his brethren but who dares to confess his weakness without inhibition, and is consequently going to be transformed into the strong man.

    2. All these demagogues substitute means for ends. They prate about this great ‘movement’, about their organization, about a general American revival they hope to bring about, but they very rarely say anything about what such a movement is supposed to lead to, what the organization is good for or what the mysterious revival is intended positively to achieve. Here is a typical example of a redundant description of the revival idea by one of the most successful West Coast agitators: “My friend, there is not but one way to get a revival and all America has got to get that revival, all of the churches. The story of the great Welsh revival is simply this. Men became desperate for the holiness of God in the world, and they began to pray, and they began to ask to send a revival (!) and wherever men and women went the revival was on”. The glorification of action, of something going on, simultaneously obliterates and replaces the purpose of the so-called movement. The end is that we might demonstrate to the world that there are patriots, God-fearing Christian men and women who are yet willing to give their lives to the cause of God, home and native land.

    3. Since the entire weight of this propaganda is to promote the means, propaganda itself becomes the ultimate content. In other words, propaganda functions as a kind of wish-fulfillment. This is one of its most important patterns. People are let ‘in’, they are supposedly getting the inside dope, taken into confidence, treated as of the elite who deserve to know the lurid mysteries hidden from outsiders. Lust for snooping is both encouraged and satisfied. Scandal stories, mostly fictitious, particularly of sexual excesses and atrocities are constantly told; the indignation at filth and cruelty is but a very thin, purposely transparent rationalization of the pleasure these stories convey to the listener. Occasionally a slip of the tongue occurs by which scandal mongering can easily be identified as an end in itself. Thus a certain West Coast demagogue once promised to give in his next speech full details about a phony decree of the Soviet Government organizing the prostitution of Russian womanhood. In announcing this story, the speaker said that there was not a real he-man whose backbone would not tingle upon hearing these facts. The ambivalence implied in this ‘tingling backbone’ device is evident.

    To a certain extent, all these patterns can be explained rationally. Very few American agitators would dare openly to profess fascist and anti-democratic goals. In contrast to Germany, the democratic ideology in this country has evolved certain taboos, the violation of which might jeopardize people engaging in subversive activities. Thus the fascist demagogue here is much more restricted in what he can say, for reasons of both political censorship and psychological tactics. Moreover, a certain vagueness with regard to political aims is inherent in Fascism itself. This is partly due to its intrinsically untheoretical nature, partly to the fact that its followers will be cheated in the end and that therefore the leaders must avoid any formulation to which they might have to stick later. It should also be noted that with regard to terror and repressive measures, Fascism habitually goes beyond what it has announced. Totalitarianism means knowing no limits, not allowing for any breathing spell, conquest with absolute domination, complete extermination of the chosen foe. With regard to this meaning of ‘fascist dynamism’, any clear-cut program would function as a limitation, a kind of guarantee even to the adversary. It is essential to totalitarian rule that nothing shall be guaranteed, no limit is set to ruthless arbitrariness.

    Finally we should bear in mind that totalitarianism regards the masses not as self-determining human beings who rationally decide their own fate and are therefore to be addressed as rational subjects, but that it treats them as mere objects of administrative measures who are taught, above all, to be self-effacing and to obey orders.

    However, just this last point requires a somewhat closer scrutiny if it is to mean more than the hackneyed phrase about mass hypnosis under Fascism. It is highly doubtful whether actual mass hypnosis takes place at all in Fascism, or whether it is not a handy metaphor that permits the observer to dispense with further analysis. Cynical soberness is probably more characteristic of the fascist mentality than psychological intoxication. Moreover, no one who has ever had an opportunity to observe fascist attitudes can overlook the fact that even those stages of collective enthusiasm to which the term ‘mass hypnosis’ refers have an element of conscious manipulation, by the leader and even by the individual subject himself, which can hardly be regarded as a result of mere passive contagion. Speaking psychologically, the ego plays much too large a role in fascist irrationality to admit of an interpretation of the supposed ecstasy as a mere manifestation of the unconscious. There is always something self-styled, self-ordained, spurious about fascist hysteria which demands critical attention if the psychological theory about Fascism is not to yield to the irrational slogans which Fascism itself promotes.

    What, now, does the fascist, and in particular, the anti-Semitic propaganda speech wish to achieve? To be sure, its goal is not ‘rational’, for it makes no attempt to convince people, and it always remains on a non-argumentative level. In this connection two facts deserve detailed investigation:

    1. Fascist propaganda attacks bogies rather than real opponents, that is to say, it builds up an imagery of the Jew, or of the Communist, and tears it to pieces, without caring much how this imagery is related to reality.

    2. It does not employ discursive logic but is rather, particularly in oratorical exhibitions, what might be called an organized flight of ideas. The relation between premises and inferences is replaced by a linking-up of ideas resting on mere similarity, often through association by employing the same characteristic word in two propositions which are logically quite unrelated. This method not only evades the control mechanisms of rational examination, but also makes it psychologically easier for the listener to ‘follow’. He has no exacting thinking to do, but can give himself up passively to a stream of words in which he swims.

    In spite of these patterns of retrogression, however, anti-Semitic propaganda is by no means altogether irrational. The term, irrationality, is much too vague to describe sufficiently so complex a psychological phenomenon. We know, above all, that fascist propaganda, with all its twisted logic and fantastic distortions, is consciously planned and organized. If it is to be called irrational, then it is applied rather than spontaneous irrationality, a kind of psycho-technics reminiscent of the calculated effect conspicuous in most presentations of today’s mass culture, – such as in movies and broadcasts. Even if it is true, however, that the mentality of the fascist agitator resembles somewhat the muddle-headedness of his prospective followers, and that the leaders themselves are hysterical or even paranoid ‘types’, they have learned, from vast experience and from the striking example of Hitler, how to utilize their own neurotic or psychotic dispositions for ends which are wholly adapted to the principle of reality, (realitasgerecht)[?]. Conditions prevailing in our society tend to transform neurosis and even mild lunacy into a commodity which the afflicted can easily sell, once he has discovered that many others have an affinity for his own illness. The fascist agitator is usually a masterly salesman of his own psychological defects. This is possible only because of a general structural similarity between followers and leader, and the goal of propaganda is to establish a concord between them rather than to convey to the audience any ideas or emotions which were not their own from the very beginning. Hence, the problem of the true psychological nature of fascist propaganda may be formulated: Of what does this rapport between leader and followers in the propaganda situation consist?

    A first lead is offered by our observation that this type of propaganda functions as a gratification. We may compare it with the social phenomenon of the soap opera. Just as the housewife, who has enjoyed the sufferings and the good deeds of her favorite heroine for a quarter of an hour over the air, feels impelled to buy the soap sold by the sponsor, so the listener to the fascist propaganda act, after getting pleasure from it, accepts the ideology represented by the speaker out of gratitude for the show. ‘Show’ is indeed the right word. The achievement of the self-styled leader is a performance reminiscent of the theater, of sport, and of so-called religious revivals. It is characteristic of the fascist demagogues that they boast of having been athletic heroes in their youth. This is how they behave. They shout and cry, fight the Devil in pantomime, and take off their jackets when attacking those sinister ‘powers’.

    The fascist leader types are frequently called hysterical. No matter how their attitude is arrived at, their hysterical behavior fulfills a certain function. Though they actually resemble their listeners in most respects, they differ from them in an important one: they know no inhibitions in expressing themselves. They function vicariously for their inarticulate listeners by doing and saying what the latter would like to, but either cannot or dare not. They violate the taboos which middle-class society has put upon any expressive behavior on the part of the normal, matter-of-fact citizen. One may say that some of the effect of fascist propaganda is achieved by this breakthrough. The fascist agitators are taken seriously because they risk making fools of themselves.

    Educated people in general found it hard to understand the effect of Hitler’s speeches because they sounded so insincere, ungenuine, or, as the German word goes, verlogen. But it is a deceptive idea, that the so-called common people have an unfailing flair for the genuine and sincere, and disparage fake. Hitler was liked, not in spite of his cheap antics, but just because of them, because of his false tones and his clowning. They are observed as such, and appreciated. Real folk artists, such as Girardi with his Fiakerlied, were truly in touch with their audiences and they always employed what strikes us as ‘false tones’. We find similar manifestations regularly in drunkards who have lost their inhibitions. The sentimentality of the common people is by no means primitive, unreflecting emotion. On the contrary, it is pretense, a fictitious, shabby imitation of real feeling, often self-conscious and slightly contemptuous of itself. This fictitiousness is the life element of the fascist propagandist performances.

    The situation created by this exhibition may be called a ritual one. The fictitiousness of the propagandist oratory, the gap between the speaker’s personality and the content and character of his utterances are ascribable to the ceremonial role assumed by and expected of him. This ceremony, however, is merely a symbolic revelation of the identity that he verbalizes, an identity the listeners feel and think, but cannot express. This is what they actually want him to do, neither being convinced nor, essentially, being whipped into a frenzy, but having their own minds expressed to them. The gratification they get out of propaganda consists most likely in the demonstration of this identity, no matter how far it actually goes, for it is a kind of institutionalized redemption of their own inarticulateness through the speaker’s verbosity. This act of revelation, and the temporary abandonment of responsible, self-contained seriousness is the decisive pattern of the propagandist ritual. To be sure, we may call this act of identification a phenomenon of collective retrogression. It is not simply a reversion to older, primitive emotions but rather the reversion toward a ritualistic attitude in which the expression of emotions is sanctioned by an agency of social control. In this context it is interesting to note that one of the most successful and dangerous West Coast agitators again and again encouraged his listeners to indulge in all sorts of emotions, to give way to their feelings, to shout and to shed tears, persistently attacking the behavior pattern of rigid self-control brought about by the established religious denominations and by the whole Puritan tradition.

    This loosening of self-control, the merging of one’s impulses with a ritual scheme is closely related to the universal psychological weakening of the self-contained individual…


    As for Lambing Flats… yr a right bloody arsehole, aren’t you David? But mate, this ain’t the 1860s, you ain’t a miner, and I ain’t gonna back down. “Be thankful”?!? Fuck that: I fight!

    “Treat us not as beasts (as I have seen some of us treated) but bear with us with kindness and civility for this you will get in return; and do not forget that although our skins are yellow we have the same kindred feelings as yourselves and a heart beneath our jumpers which beats the same as any man…”

    — Letter from William Loo Ching, Surry Hills to the editor of the ‘Daily Telegraph’,
    May 9, 1888

    Have a nice day, and don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

    — @ndy.

  3. David Ross says:

    Dear Andy,

    Myyy goodness that was something of a weighty diatribe old son… I did read most of it, but I scanned some after I came to the bit:

    1. Fascist propaganda attacks bogies rather than real opponents, that is to say, it builds up an imagery of the Jew, or of the Communist, and tears it to pieces, without caring much how this imagery is related to reality.

    You appear to be taking the \”Justice Higgins\” approach of trying to understand a subject (Catch the Fire Pastors) with which you are not particularly familiar… hence the success of their appeal… and I believe the success of my own here to you.

    You equating my \’rants\’ with Fascism is indicative of your lack of perception about where I\’m really coming from.

    You feel that \’Today\’s demonization of a minority is tomorrow\’s genocide of those same people\’.

    Whereas I am not demonizing a people but an idea.

    I freely confess that I am absolutely, without the slightest apology or restraint, demonizing (literally) the ideology called \’Islam\’. Now at this point, you need to understand the mentality behind this. (No doubt with which you will disagree.) It is quite possible to passionately disagree with an idea, yet feel compassion for the adherents to that idea WITH THE NOTABLE EXCEPTION of the radical, stubborn, SS-style promoters of such an ideology who, like the Waffen-SS themselves, would be yelling \”Heil Hitler\” even as the gun which executes them is pointing at their heads, ie, the likes of Zarkawi and [his] ilk.

    Where you err, is that you fail to recognize that Zarkawi was in fact a very \’Quranic/Sunnic\’ Muslim. He had a spiritual advisor who informed him of what he could and could not do in the light of the Quran and its author, ie, Mohammed.

    Attacking the doctrines (such as \”The world and all that is in it BELONGS to Allah AND His apostle\” and by implication \’to those who follow\’ his apostle) is different from attacking the people or planning their demise in any other way than exposing them to truth as I and many others see it. At the root of this truth lies the following value: \’Love your enemies\’. Now I\’m not sure, but I cannot recall Hitler ever saying \’Love the Jews\’, but for sure you will enlighten me if he did.

    Another point you fail to see is the very familiar theme cropping up in the words of various high profile imams around the world such as, and I quote: \”Islam once ruled the world and we can rule it again\” (Palestinian), \”Israel must be wiped off the map\” (Ahmadinejad) so I suggest the fascist shoe is rather on the other foot.

    Today\’s distant echoing voice of some Middle Eastern imam or Iranian president, calling for world domination, is tomorrow\’s thundering \’We demand an Islamic state\’ in Australia.

    You misunderstand true Islam ol\’ buddy. You can wax eloquent about the \’complex causes of history\’ \’til the moo-cows meander back to the milking shed, but… History shows also, a number of quite simple and re-occurring themes.

    One of which is that DIFFERENCE does NOT produce unity or strength. Unions use the mantra \”The workers, united, will never be defeated\”… hmmm golly gosh… Why the heck do they not use \”The workers, divided, will never be defeated\”… now that will take some brain power to work out.

    MULTICULTURALISM = RACISM is a theme I will be increasingly promoting. There will also be a demonstration in Melbourne \’at a date to be fixed\’ which will have a large banner saying \”ONE NATION, ONE RACE, ONE CULTURE… full stop\”. Now… without saying any more I\’ll leave you to chew on that little morsel of what you think is \’white supremacist\’ crap, and let you see what really goes down… which of course will be on youtube soon after.

    So… I see I have much work to do in your re-education. Be thankful I don\’t send you off to some hard work at the same time.

    Cheers you smelly smoker and drinker… yuk!

  4. @ndy says:

    G’day David!

    Damn. I thought a weighty diatribe from a dead Marxist intellectual was just the thing to shut you up! Ah well. At least it delayed your response for ten days while you were reading…

    As for pasta, I quite like gnocchi in a cream and mushroom sauce. And, of course, Pastor a la Niemoller:

    “In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

    Anyways, I’m shocked and stunned to learn of your affiliation to ‘Catch the Fire’: I couldnae guessed. Incidentally, why don’t you go spam Mr. Lefty’s blog?

    As for the success of Catch the Fire’s appeal:

    “The Court of Appeal ordered the case to be reheard at the original tribunal, before a different judge and with no further evidence. It set aside the orders for public apologies in newspaper advertisements and for the pastors not to repeat their remarks.”

    As for — “You equating my ’rants’ with Fascism is indicative of your lack of perception about where I’m really coming from” —




    “I bring you the stately matron named Christendom, returning bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored, from pirate raids in Kiao-Chou, Manchuria, South Africa, and the Phillipines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies. Give her soap and towel, but hide the looking glass.”

    — Mark Twain, “A Salutation from the 19th to the 20th Century”, 31/12/1900


    Arbeit macht frei,


  5. David Ross says:

    Hi Andy,

    Actually, I\’m not \’affiliated\’ with CTF, I simply share their vision for a renewed Australia, a repentant, revived, gloriously transformed society, such as occurred in the Welsh revival:

    CTF are quite \’charismatic\’ in their orientation and I have some serious reservations about some aspects of their position and emphases. I always worry when someone tells me \’I\’ve had a long interview with the risen Christ, in Saudi Arabia\’ which is a claim Danny N makes in some of his literature. The moment I hear such things, I immediately start comparing \”His vision\” with Scripture.

    Then, I also scrutinized \”Does this vision translate into fundraising or personal glory?\” and neither of these are Biblical when presented in this way.

    The revival I long to see, is not so much the emotional type as in the Welsh, because such things usually occur when society is so far gone, so down [t]he toilet, so decadent, that it\’s like a huge spiritual boil being lanced and GUSH… out comes the [yuck].

    We humans are very fickle. We tend to live a pendulum existence, swinging from this way to that. I\’ve seen a cycle as follows:

    1/ Village becomes Christian. Much repentance and joy;
    2/ Time goes by, old habits creep back, people become judgemental;
    3/ Things go badly, ill feeling, jealousy etc.;
    4/ Revival… people are renewed, turn back to God;
    5/ The enthusiasm of the revival goes overboard, all-night meetings, all-day meetings… finally some people get weary, fade out, go back to normal life;
    6/ Those \’faders\’ are often criticized by the \’spiritual\’ ones, and it can all fall apart again and end up in bitterness.

    This is why the best thing is a studied growth in Christ, and a level-headed spiritual commitment is needed, and is why I steer clear of the hyper emotional.

    You reaction to my \’ONE…\’ thingy was quite predictable.


    and fully understandable. It was the desired effect. \’NOT NEUTRAL\’. You either hate it (if yr a non-racist type) or you love it (if you\’re a white supremacist type) and so I say… \’WELCOME TO COMMUNICATION 101\’.


    \”GET their attention.\”

    Then, we make use of this reaction to present the information we are passionate about. Here is another hint:

    http://www .

    You will have to suitably strengthen yourself for this. It\’s a chapter from… wait.. THE BIBLE.


    Please read the whole chapter — will take less time than one paragraph of your lengthy diatribe — and will hint at our true purpose in that ONE thing. Verses 3-8 are most relevant to the ONE theme.

    You may also like to peruse THIS:


    Aha. Life is a rush and an adventure.


  6. David Ross says:

    Andy, for the closest to your


    in the current world, look at THIS:

    http://www .

    Needless to say, in the light of such Satanic goings on, I am seriously working on a doctrine of Just War. If you want to know the scriptural foundation it\’s found in Romans 13:1-7. I cannot call it a \’Christian\’ doctrine, because the Emperor referred to is Pagan at the time of writing this.

    There are many sides to the question, but the most important ones are these:

    1/ Faith, can NEVER be imposed or forced.
    2/ There can NEVER be a theocractic government on Earth apart from when Christ returns.

    The passage above (Romans), applies to Christian or Pagan emperors. The principle is \”Authority, based on civil and just society\”.

    My biggest challenge is understanding how Christians fit into that framework, in the light of Christ\’s calling to \’love your enemies\’ etc., where my current understanding is that to \’restrain\’ an enemy from harming yourself or others is in fact loving him.

    Matt 5:38 :

    \”Do not resist one who is evil, but if he strikes you on the right cheek, offer to him the left.\”

    Sheeesh… anyone who says that the Bible is made up by \’man\’ for man\’s benefit, clearly has not read this challenging passage! I struggle and cry out over this… I wish it was NOT there… every human bone in my body rebels against this idea… so, I seek to understand it in the bigger context of that Sermon on the Mount… where we read such things as:

    \”If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away.\”

    Yep… this is clearly invented by men. NOT! But the point is: Jesus is saying \’Sin is so serious etc., and with regard to enemies\’… is he not saying \”Don\’t allow vengance and cruelty to rule your actions\”? (He can sort me out on this when I\’m in Glory!)

    Cheers. You can have some wine — that\’s biblical — but throw away the filthy smokes, OK?

  7. @ndy says:

    Jesus Christ.


    So yr a religious nutter, a Christian one… but Danny doesn’t do it for you.

    Fair enough: Bible-thumping IS an art.

    Anyways, ‘Catch The Fire’ are indeed quite “charismatic” in their hallucinations… but I confess I have some serious chuckles about many aspects of their “positions” and “emphases”… (not that these should necessarily be subjected to the laws in the manner in which they have).

    I also always laugh when someone tells me “I’ve had a long interview with the risen Christ, in Saudi Arabia” or proclaims “My name’s John the Baptist… and I just gotta sing!” or asks “Have you heard The Good News?”.

    The moment I hear such things, I immediately start comparing ”His vision” with, er, reality.



  8. David Ross says:


    Check this out:

    I\’m sure I\’ve missed a few things.

    Something to ponder:

    1/ [Narrated Abdullah]

    Allah\’s Apostle said, \”The blood of a Muslim, who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.\”

    (Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17.)

    [ ]

    2/ If a Muslim country attacked Australia, would they kill to defend this country? (Before you answer, you should ask some, and before asking, point out the condition in [1].) If they cannot answer in the affirmative, then to be honest, they are disloyal and have no right coming here. Those already here or born here, would be equally suspect. If they say they could kill to defend, they are denying their own faith.

    This is simple 2 [+?] 2 reasoning.

  9. @ndy says:

    “For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple — and wrong.”

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.