Looks like more and more leftists and "moderates" are following the footsteps of Melanie Phillips or Eric Allen Bell, and having the "road to Damascus" moment, when it comes to the Religion of Peace... Way to go Pamela!

In the article, the author (despite finding kind words for Pamela) equates the Koran to the Bible and talks about the tiny minority of Jihadis - the key talking points of those against the counterjihad. In which case, I'll guess that her attitude previously was not only mere indifference...

RIP. Although not such a sad day to all... (especially students, who were at most in nappies when Thatcher was in power)

Why are these Muslim women fighting those who wish to help Muslim women? Because they've deluded themselves as to the overriding importance of their religion, and as a result they've persuaded themselves that what they are is not oppressed? Studies have shown that in South Asian countries, women who face beatings, acid attacks etc often blame themselves for it... so, if women facing acid attacks don't feel victimised, why not women wearing a hijab? But that's assuming, of course, that the hijabis in the photos above genuinely don't feel oppressed... In Britain recently, a court case has caught the public attention, involving a husband living with both his wife and his girlfriend, and their 10 children. When his girlfriend moved away taking her 4 children with her, he set his house on fire, with the intention of saving the remaining children and blaming it on his ex-girlfriend. Sadly, the fire blew out of control and the children died. Throughout the process, light was shed on this man's control-freak behaviour with his wife and girlfriend, and his previous women (he had children with 5 women in total). With each woman, violence was the norm - yet in a TV appearance several years ago, both his wife and girlfriend said how happy they were in the relationship... now that the man, named Mick Philpott, is behind bars, and the full story is known, we can conclude that life for both of the women was one of mostly misery - yet from watching their TV appearance on the Jeremy Kyle show (available on youtube), who would have known that?! Both of the women, perhaps under duress, or due to a genuine feeling of love/duty, hid any bad feelings and were shown to be happily living with their man. The moral of the story - can we be certain that the "Happy Muslimahs" in the photos above are not in a similar position to the "happy women" of Mick Philpott?

Thank you for that info. I guess that means I won't fly with Qantas then in the future. & I would advise any potential flyer who does not think of themselves as a dhimmi to, before booking their flight: 1) check the meal menu 2) if the meal menu does not contain pork, do NOT choose that airline. And contact the airline to let them know why you are not flying with them. As it happens, there are LOTS of airlines flying from Europe to Australia... your $1000+ airfare can go to any one of them. Singapore Airlines or Cathay Pacific must have some good sweet & sour pork, surely?!

"I suppose Pam Geller would get an apoplectic shock if she ever as much as gazed at one of my family photoes. Not only does it include people from all corners of the world, but also of all faiths. Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jews and a vast majority of atheists." Deciding when and where the family goes for prayers must be fun.

Dude - there's no starvation in Gaza. Instead there's great restaurants like this - where the Flotilla "activists" would have probably ended up dining. I don't know what the massmurderer wanted to start. Looks like he wanted to blame Pamela Geller for his acts. But don't worry - there will be peace in Norway. And it will continue to have skyrocketing rates of rape and gang crime - all committed by "non-Western immigrants"...

From Pamela Geller "hating", to Pamela Geller being "morally responsible" for Breivik, and now Pamela Geller "encourages position that those who criticize Israel deserve to be killed"... this gets better and better. Seriously, what do you guys smoke up there? Yes, Youth in Utoya and Norway stood for "human rights"... unless it was Jewish kids in Israel, being gunned-down in exactly the same way as in Norway. In that case, they deserved what they got, and they deserve to be boycotted as well! And you guys still wonder why freaks like Breivik go nuts in your country?

Funny how when Muslims commit a terrorist attack, everyone jumps looking for "root causes" - but when Pamela writes, she just "hates"... we are dealing with a bunch of harmless bunnies, who wouldn't hurt a fly, right? And who have every sympathy for those gunned down in similar fashion elsewhere in the world? Well, not unless they're Jews from Israel, it seems... "hatred" towards them is perfectly OK.

If this website is responsible for Breivik, then maybe your government & your country's mentality is responsible for "peaceful" and "beautiful" Norway turning into the rape capital of Europe - with ALL rapes in the past 5 years carried out by "non-Western immigrants"? And what of the 17,000+ terrorist attacks carried out by Islamists since September 11, 2001? Surely the Islamic prophet Mohammed, and his holy book which just-so happen to say "fight the nonbelievers until they pay the tax" (9:29) should not be held responsible for these? No, because Muslims are "just normal people"... but I guess everyone clicking on this website is a monster about to put a bullet through a child's head, right? Suddenly, stereotyping & generalisations become OK... And yeah, Israel is a "sort-of dick" at times - one ofthe World's tiniest countries committing the crime of trying to survive among neighbours from hell. As opposed to your brilliant police, who don't bother trying to protect their people, but who stood idly by a few days before the shooting, when a Norwegian lady was being raped on the steps of parliament - preferring instead to watch it all on CCTV. Yes, the beautiful, peaceful, tolerant Norway... not! And I prefer to drink a beer for less than 10 Euros- somewhere where it doesn't rain 24 hours a day.

Umm, and where exactly did you get this sensational news?!

"When a Post reporter stopped by Ahmed's stand Friday, he was scarfing down lunch -- a rice-and-meat dish from a neighboring vendor..." All one needs to know about the quality of "Ahmed's" own food...

"some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming" What's this? She does not have the power by herself to shame anybody, so what on earth can she mean by that statement????

well, South Africa for one I believe has good infrastructure. And Zimbabwe was until recent years known as the "Breadbasket of Africa". Sure - India has some infrastructure left by the British. But not sure it's that much for a population of over a billion. Or at least when I visited it was very chaotic. And almost everyone on the trains seemed to have a son or nephew doing a science-related degree - a few at Cambridge, Harvard and other top Western universities. Something rarely heard-of in Britain (among native English) these days. Would they all have the results necessary to do these degrees, if not for a pushy father behind them telling them to study one hour longer, when that's the last thing they want to be doing? I guess, as you say, there's no way of finding out for sure. But that father-figure and mother-figure are one of the main points of marriage - whatever the religion... So do we want to play dice with the futures of our countries - and take unnecessary risks with cultural habits? What if in 50 years' time, nobody wants to get married, as it's not got the status, and not worth the hassle - and someone else (likely a "non-western" immigrant) can have 8 kids instead? Do they get to turn the country into a carbon copy of their own - and Britain becomes the new Pakistan? In business, one of the most-important qualities is risk-management. Or avoiding risk when it's not necessary... so why do we want to take such risks with our societies, by introducing new things like gay marriage - and risking devaluing traditional marriage - one of the main historic features of our nations' culture? For thousands of years, gays have lived, have had relationships - and recently, their own clubs... is it really that much of a pain for them to not to get officially married?

So is India less industrialised than, say, sub-Saharan Africa? Yet it's India's economy which is growing at a lightning pace. While in many places in Africa, it's seen as a "badge of honour" to have children with as many women as possible - including through rape... children that then don't grow-up with a father figure - much like in American inner-cities... is there really no connection between such "cultural traits" and general economic prosperity? Then why are people in America's ghettoes still not prospering as quickly as the middle-classes, despite those middle-classes being "more industrialised", and despite the ghettoes having all the help they could wish for, in the form of measures like affirmative action? And how many of America's rich and successful have come from homes with no marriage? Not many I can think of... As for pornography - are you allowed to watch child pornography - even from other countries? I guess that's one type of pornography not protected as "free speech"...

4.6% of soldiers voting?! Does this mean 95% of soldiers NOT VOTING??!!

"The lesson is that extremism and hate can lead to the ultimate consequence of thousands of innocent people being murdered," - is that an attempt to make people think that "extremist Islam" can kill? Or that Atlas Shrugs can kill?

"you Muslim" - is that to me?!

wow... a product "made in China" finally doing something useful!

yes, they're very rare... thanks to obedient women, and false hymens :)

Marriage is a state union as well as a religious union, and for a reason... do you think that your country would be in the position that it is today (no. 1 economy, by FAR the no. 1 armed forces, masses of land and resources) if it was full of 10 generations of people adopted by gays, or brought-up by single parents? A clue - which countries today are growing the quickest? The ones obsessed with gay marriage and GLBT "rights"? That's not Dubai, the other Gulf states, China, India or Singapore..... For all the trials and tribulations of marriage (yeah, sometimes involving arguments, anger, or a little cheating/hypocrisy), it means a child grows-up with a father-figure, and a mother-figure... and will therefore be, on average, more capable, and knowing better its role-models, and responsibilities? Could this be the reason why marriage has been promoted by the state (through tax credits etc) for all these years? So is it really worth tinkering around with this model on a mass scale? And could promoting other forms of marriage, such as gay marriage, not be an attempt to make marriage lose its significance - and, in the long run, make the country concerned weaker? Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if the GLBT lobby, as well as other powerful lobbies (feminists, "civil rights" lobby etc) were being financed straight out of, say, Riyadh.

well, I remember an interview with an old black lady in Detroit - talking about how blacks learned a lot more, and behaved a lot better, when she was growing-up in the 40s than nowadays. A whole lot of good political correctness, ghettos and sh*t-hop have given them eh? "bans on freedom of speech" - violent scenes, such as beheadings, are already banned from youtube - because they are obscene... is pornography also not obscene, and getting people into bad habits? (research shows people watching pornography having greater tendency to be violent or cheat on their partner). As for LGBT - they already have rights. Such as being allowed to do what the hell they please in their own bedroom. (something they DON'T have in Dubai, or other places the LGBT lobby doesn't care one bit about). Did Bachmann suggest taking these rights away - or was she just stating her preference for marriage to be defined the same way as it has for the past 2,000 years or so?

So anything wrong in the pledge Bachmann signed? Is robust childbearing not beneficial to any of these things? In which case - must be an imaginary pensions crisis caused by an "ageing population", discussed almost constantly here in Europe...

So the religion that "Halim Muhammad" joined wants women free to work, dress the way they like, go out of the house when they want and marry whoever they want? NOPE... In which case, Mr Ellison/Muhammad should be the LAST person to criticise Michelle Bachmann. She's probably what Mr Ellison's imam sounds like when he's in a "liberal" mood.

3% Muslims in what age group?? If they're all over 60, fair enough - no problem... but if they're all 18-30, then how many British 18-30s do they have to compete against? And how many press-ups can the British 18-30s do, versus the Muslims? At least the British police running away from them during the Gaza protests seem to think "not that many". The Iranian revolution took about 10% of the population to achieve. And even that was regarded as being a lot! All you need is for the rest of the population not to care - and even 1% could be enough to gain you power. (the real variety on the streets - not the dhimmis in number 10) How many Brits being 18-30, and interested in combatting Jihad - versus those interested in watching Justin Bieber? I'd say 3% would be a very optimistic guess...