Last Post, November 17
There are contradictory claims about the contents of the Koran.
Usman Mahmood (Letters, 16/11) says that not a single verse of the Koran promotes violence. Perhaps he could explain, to those who do not understand, how Islamic State could claim Koranic support for their atrocious, violent behaviour.
Jerome Paul (Letters, 16/11) seems to be upset that a Muslim leader referred to Scott Morrison as “this bloody Prime Minister”. Let me assure him that non-Muslims have referred to this and other PMs in much less flattering terms.
In the caliphate that Sheik Omran would inflict on the world, such disrespect as he gave our PM would be rewarded with a harsh sentence. How long must we tolerate this intolerance that stretches the fabric of our society?
Why do we need to move our embassy to Jerusalem? Is our lease up? Is the parking better? Why do we need to get out of the Paris accord? We are on track to meet our obligations. Why do we need a republic? Our system seems to serve us well. Why do we keep trying to fix things that aren’t broken?
As supporters of the Palestinians, it would be interesting to know how much aid Indonesia has given them. You don’t have to be a genius to bet it’s less than the $360 million Australia gives to Indonesia.
Compared to some of the hell-holes populated by our indigenous people, Nauru appears to be an island paradise. If our indigenous people were given the same amount of publicity and support, it would go a long way to solving some of the issues they face, issues that are far worse than those faced by the detainees on Nauru. But our indigenous folk are not a popular topic in the coffee shops in the more affluent suburbs.
Malcolm Turnbull’s failure wasn’t because he was posh (Last Post, 16/11). The Left loved him. Robert Menzies, our longest-serving PM by far, was also a bit posh, but he had wit, wisdom and a willingness to weather political storms gracefully.
The best argument against becoming a republic is that one of our politicians would become our head of state.
My letter (16/11) used the word ijtihad, not jihad. Ijtihad is making a legal decision by independent interpretation of the legal sources such as the Koran. Jihad is a struggle or fight against the enemies of Islam.