"The reason we have to label "alternative" music, left wing views, etc as extremist is because our government seems to be scared to point out that the threat we face is from Islamic extremism."
This highlights an interesting dichotomy; that left-wing views are held to be a cause of extremism given that it is the political Left who advocate for Islamic immigration in the first place. It's particulary surprising since one of the most fundamental tenets of the Left is "intolerance of intolerance." Thus we have all these buzzwords - racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic etc - to identify the various forms of intolerance that they tell us must be opposed.
But Islam, generally, is intolerant of other cultures. Yet by saying this I will be accused of being intolerant - "Islamophobic" I believe is the word. But the evidence is there for anyone to see. Simply look at the social conditions that prevail in any country in which Muslims are a majority of the population. Look at the laws imposed on those countries. I challenge anyone here to name one country in which Muslims are a majority, that allows women to dress as they wish, to consume or sell alcohol or pork products, to eat, drink or smoke in public during Ramadan, and to promote any religious beliefs other than Islam.
I've done a lot of looking into this sort of thing, and I am very wary of both pro-Islamic and anti-Islamic agendas here. I no more trust, say, the EDL or Take Back Australia as a reliable source of information than I would trust an IS or al-Qaeda site. Mostly my sources are government travel-advisory websites, such as smartraveller.gov.au, legal institute websites such as austlii.org, and news events examined across multiple sources ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC.
Without exception, smartraveller.gov.au provides warnings such as "women should dress modestly in public", "it is illegal to eat, drink or smoke in public during daylight hours in Ramadan", "possession and sale of alcohol is illegal", "public displays of affection may cause serious offence", and "homosexual relations are not socially acceptable / are illegal and may attract the death penalty," among others. These warnings are given in relation to every single country in which Islam is the predominant ideology - without exception.
And all this is on a neutral, unbiased, government travel advisory website. What other inferences can possibly be drawn from these observations, other than that Islam is generally intolerant of other cultures and ways of life wherever it has gained majority?
I know that I will likely cop a lot of downvotes for saying all this. But I'm not being hateful or racist here; I am not advocating excluding Islamic immigrants or suppressing Islam, I'm merely pointing out that all the facts indicate Islam being intolerant of other cultures despite claims made by some of its adherents that it is a religion of peace and tolerance. The observed facts do not back up the claims. So if we are to allow this ideology to take root in our democratic countries, it must be unequivocally made clear to its adherents that intolerance of our way of life, our freedoms, will not be tolerated, now or in the future.
So I find it paradoxical that the political Left, which claims to be intolerant of intolerance, so vehemently defends a clearly intolerant ideology - to the point where it would sooner alienate a sector of its own supporters rather than point the finger at Islamic extremism. And the obvious whitewashing of this issue in the pamphlet referenced in the article, while plainly referring to Islamic religious radicalism yet avoiding unequivocally naming it, merely highlights this very paradox.