Australian Muslim Sheik Up

Here are the comments that started the storm that are now plaguing the Australian Muslim community.

"If you get a kilo of meat, and you don’t put it in the fridge or in the pot or in the kitchen but you leave it on a plate in the backyard, and then you have a fight with the neighbour because his cats eat the meat, you’re crazy.

"If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street, on the pavement, in a garden, in a park, or in the backyard, without a cover and the cats eat it, then whose fault will it be, the cats, or the uncovered meat’s? The uncovered meat is the disaster. If the meat was covered the cats wouldn’t roam around it. If the meat is inside the fridge, they won’t get it. "

As a result of these comments there have been calls for him to have his residency stripped, to stop preaching, and for the legality of these statements (and others reported by the Australian that claim he praised jihadists) investigated.

It appears that he has no intention of resigning, which appears to be a soft stance from the muslim community and almost an endorsement of these values that were espoused. This course of action also seems completely characteristic of the actions of other muslim communities depicted in the documentary Obsession.

However, if these values aren't endorsed by the muslim community it would seem that anything short of removing the Sheik from his position of influence would be unnacceptable. At the same time, it should be noted that it would seem inappropriate to prosecute the Sheik for saying these things, and for supporting the cause of jihadists - despite the provisions for this being in Australian law. Why would it be innapropriate? Because of freedom of speech. Is it not more beneficial that we hear the Sheik say these things so we can challenge these ideas? Is it not more beneficial that we allow the Sheik to say these things, so that we can say things that others whom hold values incompatible with ours will not be able to prosecute us for exercising our freedom?

Silencing anybody's right to speak is a slippery slope, we should be glad we have heard the Sheiks point of view, and the public outrage is currently being sufficient in addressing these radical ideas.