Cleric 'should go for rape comments'

[ECH1969]

AUSTRALIA'S top Muslim cleric Sheik al-Taj al-Din al-Hilaly should be sacked and deported for comments which essentially excused young Muslim men who committed rape, federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner Pru Goward said today. Ms Goward said the sheik had a history of making such comments and many would feel Australia's tolerance had been abused.

"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat," he said.

"The uncovered meat is the problem. "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hajib (Islamic headdress), no problem would have occurred."

"It is incitement to a crime. Young Muslim men who now rape women can cite this in court, can quote this man ... their leader in court," she told Channel 9.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20647517-1702,00.html

[BattyDem]

1. Meat? Did he actually call women MEAT?!?!!?

:grr: :grr: :grr:

[Igel]

15. Only if you think he called Muslim men cats.

IMHO, that's hardly likely. They're not halal.

Analogy = some similarity, not equivalence.

(edited to remove absurdities.)

[DeSwiss]

2. Using that logic.....

....then Muslim men who cannot control themselves when they see "uncovered meat," should refrain from looking at it by cloistering themselves in countries where they won't have to be exposed to it.

KICK HIS DUMB ASS OUT NOW!!!!

:grr:

[bloom]

6. They should all be locked up in jail as a preventative measure.

The men, of course. Who think like that.

Then they could be re-educated in regard to the understanding of what it means to be a member of the human race and the expected, legal, behavior of such members.

[poverlay]

16. Worse, the implication is that no man anywhere can control himself

if there is a piece of "meat" around! Just another bigoted religinut blaming the body for crimes that are allowed by the mind... This is one of the greatest crimes and setbacks to human society.

I second the DUMB ASS label!

[niallmac]

3. I wonder...Does the Sheik in need of a nick name cite the Koran

when he makes such a proclamation? I wonder where in the Koran this
statement is supported? I wonder who declared him the "Top Muslim Cleric" in
Australia. Do all Muslims in Australia hang on his every word or is he the
Oral Roberts of Australian Islam?

And my eternal question; How is it that Muslim religious leaders get the title
"cleric" or "radical cleric" and our Christian leaders do not?
I think Pat Robertson deserves the moniker: "Radical Cleric".
I think this would help encourage a 'One World' mentality.

[mcscajun]

4. These comments are reprehensible. Not sure if Oz will be able

to toss him out, though.

From elsewhere in the article:

Ms Goward said she was unaware of the conditions under which the sheik was in Australia.

"We have got past the stage of everybody rushing around being upset and saying he should apologise and the Islamic community understandably and rightly being annoyed and embarrassed," she said.

"If we are really serious about Islamic Australia being part of Australia, then I think there has got to be a bit more leadership shown and he has got to leave."

"The next step is for the authorities to consider whether somebody who incites from a position of very important leadership in that community ... ought to go. I don't know his visa arrangements, I don't know the status of his citizenship and that might be more difficult."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20647517-1702,00.html

Ms. Goward has every reason to be incensed, and her opinion is valid, but without knowing what his status is within Australia, some of her words are poorly chosen, considering she doesn't know if he's a citizen or not. One would hope NOT, and that after clarifying his status, he'll be on a plane soon.

The cleric in question is already back-pedaling, saying his comments regarding "meat" applied only to prostitutes, not to any "scantily-clad" woman not wearing the hajib.
Uh-huh. Yeah, you were misunderstood, Sheik. :sarcasm:

[badgerpup]

5. Well...we know what happens to male cats because they can't control...

themselves...And I'm not referring to 'eating meat'.

My guys have no behavioral problems at all...but then I got them snipped pretty young.

Still want to consider your boys 'cats', al-Hilaly?
:grr:

[bemildred]

7. He reduces us all to the level of cats.

What a maroon. You see this argument here in the USA too, but this fellow makes it cartoonish enough to show how silly it is.

[PsychoDad]

34. Indeed.

His comment is nearly as equally insulting to Muslim men as it is to women.

Perhaps the Brothers and Sisters at his masjid will help educate him.


Peace.

[bemildred]

45. He insults us all, each and every one of us.

Let us hope someone takes him in hand.
Peace be unto you.

[Megahurtz]

44. And he's reducing women to the level of MEAT.

What an sexist asshole.:grr: Doesn't this guy know what Century it is?:crazy:

[bemildred]

47. Hey, at least you get to be "fresh".

But seriously, no, he doesn't know what century it is, he views women as property, things, not persons. The thing is he does the same to men, we are supposed to be unable to control our own actions, no better than animals, and he makes that analogy explicitly.

[aquart]

8. A man who is not responsible for his own actions

should not be allowed to vote or own property. And should only be allowed out on a leash.

[rodeodance]

9. under SD women could work--now they are meat in many parts of the

country

[hogwyld]

10. As much as I deplore those comments

In a sense, he's expressing an (idiotic) opinion, that's guaranteed under free speech. We don't have to like it, but we have to allow it, or our opinions might be the next target.

[DeSwiss]

13. hogwyld....

...I agree with you that "opinions" should be covered under free speech. However, as these comments were delivered in Australia, their laws on freedom of speech while similar, are unlikely to be identical to our own. Further, our own laws have limited freedom of speech when, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stated in his opinion, "abridgment of free speech is permissible when it presents a clear and present danger." I would conclude that interpreting his words using our own system of jurisprudence, they would constitute a "clear and present danger" to women.

As a cleric, he holds a position where his words are held to be sanctified by many of the Muslim faith. These comments were a part of his sermon given at the end of Ramadan. As a visitor to Austrailia, he has certain responsibilities to respect the culture of the host country. If he dislikes "scantily-clad" women so much, he should have stayed at home. But beyond all of that, his comments taken at face value appear to give sanction to Muslim men who rape women whom they have determined do not conform to Shria-Islamic customs.

It is evident that he realizes his error now, because he is backing away from his prior comments and is now applying them only to "prostitutes." So now is okay to rape prostitutes at-will under his religious edict. Praise Allah.

Free speech isn't free when the price for what you say is borne by others.

[Matilda]

20. Racial slurs are a crime in Australia.

Of course, the aim is to protect minorities - such as Muslims - from
vilification, but a slur is a slur and it's as much a crime when it's
directed at Anglo-Australian women as when the victim is Muslim, or
Aboriginal.

That sort of ill-considered comment isn't needed right now, with the
Cronulla riots not so far behind us, and I'm afraid there's likely
to be repercussions.

Howard has been bleating a lot about "Australian values" and in this
case, I'd support him if he could find a way to deport the Sheikh. If
he is a citizen, then perhaps it should just be suggested that he take
a long holiday overseas, for his health.

[DeSwiss]

52. I agree with you wholeheartedly Matilda....

....and I'll go one further, its not the kind of comment needed AT ANY TIME.

I've gotten pretty fed up with people hiding behind the cloak of religion to vent their prejudices. Particularly when it results in the abrogation of human rights. Honor killings, clitoral circumcisions, indiscriminate beatings, and stonings seem to be the basis of these medieval Shria customs. All seemingly designed to suppress individual thought and determination in general and all human rights for women in particular.

Our own fundamentalist versions here are only slightly better. They haven't digressed to stonings. Yet.

This is http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/texts/stoning.htm">Shria Law in action. WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTO

This shit needs to be stopped. And stopped NOW!

:grr:

[smirkymonkey]

21. Just like the Danish cartoons and other "offensive" material

mocking Muslim culture. Right?

[Divernan]

30. You are absolutely wrong that such statements should be allowed.

It is exactly such "sermons" from radical Muslim clerics in Germany which promote the "honor killings" of young Muslim women by their fathers and brothers to save the family honor. Speech which incites to violent crime is not guaranteed under free speech, just as you cannot shout "Fire" in a crowded theater for the fun of seeing people panic.

And since you evidently don't know about "honor killings", google the term along with "Germany".

[davidinalameda]

11. how many times have we heard the refrain that the woman was asking for it

this, unfortunately, is nothing new

[Divernan]

33. Big difference between after the fact comment & inciting to crime

People who say a crime victim was asking for it, merely display their ignorance of the law (because the law doesn't define rape victims as a limited class of subdued females). This sexist pig of a "cleric" is inciting men to consider any woman in modern dress as free-for-the-raping.

[msongs]

12. maybe some muslim men oughta wear the hajib if they are so.....

exciteable. why is that only muslim women have to cover up and men can run around in shorts if they want?

some practioners of the religion have issues.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Vidar]

14. I hope the aussies send him packing.

[Taverner]

26. Me too

If only we could deport Falwell, Robertson, Dobson and Phelps...

[poverlay]

17. If all men had their chastity belts on no problem would have occured. nt

[Orsino]

18. Reframe it:

"Cleric says Muslim men no better than cats, and Muslim women no more than meat."

[geek tragedy]

19. Australian Muslims are just as outraged as anyone.

This fucker needs to go to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

[seriousstan]

22. Outrage as Muslim cleric likens women to 'uncovered meat'

A Muslim cleric's claim that women who do not wear the veil are like 'uncovered meat' who attract sexual predators sparked outrage around Australia yesterday.

---cut---

a Ramadam sermon in a Sydney mosque, Sheik al-Hilali suggested that a group of Muslim men recently jailed for many years for gang rapes were not entirely to blame.

There were women, he said, who 'sway suggestively' and wore make-up and immodest dress "and then you get a judge without mercy and gives you 65 years. But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he said, referring to the women victims.

Addressing 500 worshippers on the topic of adultery, Sheik al-Hilali added: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it..whose fault is it - the cats or the uncovered meat?

"The uncovered meat is the problem."

He went on: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab (veil), no problem would have occurred."

Women, he said, were 'weapons' used by Satan to control men.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=412697&in_page_id=1770

[Name removed]

23. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mad_Dem_X]

29. That is f'ed up on SO many levels

How many times do we have to hear the "men can't control their urges" argument to defend attacks on women? This is disgusting. Men CAN control themselves, some of them just refuse to do it!!!! :argh: :grr:

[PsychoDad]

40. Perhaps we should start a voluntary program....

Where men who "can't control themselves" are neutered so that they no longer have to feel that they need to use that excuse.

(Note NO Sarcasm)

Peace.

[Taverner]

24. This is religion, folks

This is why I have no respect for it - whether it is Xianity, Islam or any other BS.

Religion is ALWAYS used as a tool for hate

[jobycom]

27. And as a tool for good.

Condemn the man, not everyone who uses the tool he used.

[Taverner]

32. OK - lets weight the good vs the bad

GOOD

Civil Rights
Womens Sufferage
Abolitionist Movement
Dorothy Day's Catholic Worker Movement
The Sojourners

BAD

The Crusades
The Nazis
The Inquisition
The Conquest of the Americas
Female Circumcision
MALE Circumcision
The Scopes Trial
War of the Roses
The Slaughter of the Jews by Mohammed
The Slaughter of the Palestinians by Israel
The Slaughter of the Jews by Palestinians
The Taliban

and I could go on...

[jobycom]

35. I'm sure you could slant any list you wanted to in your favor.

But as you said, religion is a tool, and some use it to justify bad things, others good. Condemn the man for his evil, not the institution, which is a neutral thing.

[Taverner]

38. But the very nature of religion is that one person or group speaks for God

And whether that person is really speaking for God is unverifiable - and one has to have "Faith" - and to ask for proof or emperical evidence is considered "lack of faith" and sinful in nature.

Basically, don't ask questions.

I have no respect for that mindset.

[jobycom]

Is that Jimmy Carter's mindset? Martin Luther King's? Muhammad Ali's?

Well, maybe Muhammad Ali's, but he believes he was that one person, and he had the fists and money to back it up.

Some people see religion as a stabilizing force, not as a mind-control system. Some people see God as someone or something which speaks to all people, through all people, and through nature, so that God to them is the voice they hear telling them that Billy Graham is wrong.

What you are describing is a type of person, not a result of religion. Take away religion, and that type of person will blindly cling to some other voice or person, and will deny everything else. It's human psychology, not religion.

[PsychoDad]

41. So, what you are saying is....

Men without religion never make such chauvinistic comments or actions?

Wow...


Peace.

[Taverner]

49. Not at all...just that it's a very convenient tool to do so

The saying is "Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels." I would venture to say Religion is too.

[jobycom]

25. Sounds like Bill O'Reilly. Though, to be fair, the article is misleading

He didn't compare women to uncovered meat, he compared their sexuality to uncovered meat. Still not something I agree with, but it's more prudish and less dehumanizing than the god damned media tried to make it sound.

Still wrong.

[Taverner]

31. Balderdash. He dehumanized all women plain and simple

We should not be tolerant of intolerance

[jobycom]

36. Ah, the irony. nt

[Divernan]

39. No, your comment is what is misleading.

The article nowhere quotes this "cleric" as using the term "sexuality". He posits that women should only go without the veil in their own homes. Can we agree that women are not acting in a sexual capacity everytime they set foot out of their own homes?

If you follow the rantings of such extreme clerics - you will learn that in their twisted minds there is something evil about all women's bodies - that put the family honor at risk by inciting lust in every man who sees them.

[jobycom]

43. No.

He doesn't say "Women are uncovered meat," either. He makes an analogy. In that analogy, he isn't describing women as "uncovered meat," he is saying that women without a veil draw men the way uncovered meat draws cats. A vile, sexist comment, to be sure, but he isn't calling women "uncovered meat" and he isn't calling men "cats." The "uncovered meat" is what is drawing the cats. I called it "sexuality" for lack of a better word. Call it what you want. But the article is trying to anger you, stir your hatred. It sells more papers that way.

The paper is trying to whip up hatred, just as the cleric is. Sounds like both succeeded.

[Divernan]

46. So you equate a woman in public with female sexuality.

Analogy: a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects.
Similar: (1)like, alike; (2)having a resemblance; (3)of the same kind, nature or amount.
(definitions from the Oxford English Reference Dictionary).

So, by definition, this cleric DID in fact say that unveiled women (in public) are the SAME as uncovered meat; and men who rape such women are no worse than cats eating uncovered meat.

And you ignored my point that this "cleric" preaches that any woman who sets foot outside her home is to be seen in a sexually provocative context.

[Julius Civitatus]

28. Outrageous

Absolutely outrageous comments, which show the type of caveman mentality those radicals have.

Disgusting, really.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. religious leaders who make sexist/homophobic comments should be thrown behind bars

for inciting violence against women/gays...

whether its muslim clerics ..hindu priests's...or the pope

[Taverner]

50. Yup

It's the social equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater

[colorado_ufo]

42. Putting the asininity of the analogy aside for the moment,

meat does very little on its own. Who uncovered it? Who put it there? What was its source?

What a maroon . . .

[Swede]

48. Gang rapist's attacks unavoidable, says lawyer

No wonder people hate lawyers.

A violent gang rapist should have been given a lesser sentence partly because he was a "cultural time bomb" whose attacks were inevitable, as he had emigrated from a country with traditional views of women, his barrister has argued.

MSK, who, with his three Pakistani brothers, raped several girls at their Ashfield family home over six months in 2002, was affected by "cultural conditioning … in the context of intoxification", Stephen Odgers, SC, told the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal yesterday.

MSK, 26, MAK, 25 and MMK, 19, are appealing against the severity of their sentences after they were found guilty of nine counts of aggravated sexual assault in company - a crime carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment - against two girls, aged 16 and 17, in July 2002.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/gang-rapists-attacks-unavoidable-says-lawyer/2005/10/11/1128796528939.html?oneclick=true

[Odin2005]

51. Christ, this fucker insulted both women and men in the same sermon!

:puke:

He basically says women not weaing veils "asked for it" and said us men have no self control. What a bunch of crap.

[Matilda]

53. The Sheikh has been told by the Board of Lakemba Mosque to shut up -

but only for a few months.

There are many senior Muslims who are upset by his comments, but the Board has made its decision.
According to an online Herald poll, 70% of people think he should be sacked for what he said, and
a number of State and Federal politicians have condemned his remarks.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/sheik-told-shut-up--for-a-bit/2006/10/27/1161749284120.html



I don't think we've heard the end of this. The relationship between Muslims and the rest of the
community is rather tense, and this man appears to have no commonsense at all. The Lebanese Muslim
community needs a diplomat to head its biggest mosque, and they should be head-hunting for a better
leader right now.