Sadly, his anti-Bush screed sounds no different than the average Moonbat. Our definition of "crazy" nowadays is so skewed, Sigmund Freud wouldn't recognixe it.

He sounds like one of those 'cool' Dixie Chick fans.

Like Glenn Reynolds said: "All sins are pardonable, apparently, so long as one is sufficiently anti-Bush. It's a religion that transcends religious divisions. Bush: A uniter, not a divider!"

This nut deserves to be missle droned by a predator..

Firstly i dont in any way support the statements of the Mufti.

Secondly I do wish that posting on this site really did the research rather than cut and paste and then make similarly inflammatory comments.

This guy has made some despicable comments, but he is more complex than you have made out. Eg he has been an active supporter of womens rights in muslim Australia.

He comes from Egypt - not so much "a stuck in the stone age country" and a supporter of the US's GWOT.

He was infact appointed by the Australian PM Howard to his Mulam advisory council (until his recent comments).

A better post would have examined these complexities and tried to examine why he is popular with the ground roots Muslims in Australia but has alienated the Muslim organisational heirarchy. A posting on his comments in the context of what drives the Australian muslims attitudes would have been useful

I question the interpretation of his remarks. He did not call for the eviction of President Bush. He called for the elimination of the White House. That would make his remarks inclusive of all future Presidents. Thereby, eliminating the existence of the U.S. To me, it sounds like he is saying that the U.S. has no more right to exist than does Israel.

I would call Egypt a "stone age country". It't a country where 40% of the people live in miserable poverty. Egypt should be a rich, productive nation, but it is not.

The Mubarak dictatorship is the only thing keeping the Muslim Brotherhood from coming to power in Egypt and creating an "Islamic" state.

I would argue that "Islamic state" is a pretty good definition of a stone age society.

Everyone easily sees his comments as derogatory to women. But he didn't disparage men more by insisting that they're no better than a pack of feral cats incapable of self-control? I took his comments (not that I've heard them in context, though) as saying that women should cover themselves to protect themselves, not that uncovered women should be raped. I'm not defending him at all - his comments sound idiotic. Just wondering why we don't interpret it as an insult to men as well as women.

Oops. should have been "didn't he" not "he didn't"

Diane, I will respond to your question in two parts.

First, it seems common for leading Muslims to blame their problems on others, rather than look inwardly. Think of Israel, America, Pope Benedict, and the Danish cartoons. It is always someone else who "makes" them respond the way they do.

Second, saying that Muslim (or any other) men cannot control themselves when around uncovered Muslim women is just ludicrous. Do you see them raping uncovered non-Muslim women in countries outside the Middle East and Africa? No, because they know they will be punished for it, and that defense would not stand up.

I'm just waiting for American "feminists" to get over their petty hatred of GW Bush and stand up for their Muslim sisters across the globe. Then again, they wouldn't stand up for Juanita Broderick or Paula Jones. I guess some women are more equal than others.

Not Kerry,

to your 2nd point.

Yes.

The mufti was obliquely referring to actual rapes and actuals rapists when he referred to the victims as exposed meat. Hence his referral to 65 years, the sentence that the rapists got. Please read some more about this as there is a real, serious issue here with a religious leader encoutraging his followers to rape women not of their faith.

He said, "...and then you get a judge without mercy and gives you 65 years."

Sounds pretty clear to me that he's putting the blame on women for inviting it. Here's the deal: Veiled Muslim women get raped too. Apparently being covered up doesn't stop rape. Hmmm... Mr. Mufti may have to rethink things. It could have something to do with the Muslim male mindset of idiots like himself where women are given lip service about how equal they are as they're alternately chained to the bed post and the kitchen sink.

A better post would have examined these complexities and tried to examine why he is popular with the ground roots Muslims in Australia but has alienated the Muslim organisational heirarchy. Posted by: neil Smith at October 27, 2006 11:20 AM

Mass BDS, is the only answer.

The only complexity is how a normal human mind can be turned into oatmeal so easily.

The reality is it matters not. But it is important the Aussie gov put a tail on this loonbat 24/7/365.

And BTW niel Smith, examine this ection of this nuyjobs speech that has been vastly under reported.

"But when it comes to this disaster, who started it? In his literature, writer al-Rafee says, if I came across a rape crime, I would discipline the man and order that the woman be jailed for life. Why would you do this, Rafee? He said because if she had not left the meat uncovered, the cat wouldn't have snatched it."