I am writing this letter in reply to ridiculous arguments made by Mr Robert Manne. I must say that all too often people abuse the word "racism", that they all too often give it a meaning it does not have. The word "racism" means to discriminate against or dislike another person on the basis of his/her biological looks or the so-called "race" which can include skin colour, eye colour, hair colour and many other features. Islam is not a race but a religious ideology, a political religious ideology at that. How can a criticism of particular ideology, therefore, be regarded as racist? Secondly, why should it be wrong to criticize an ideology which creates so much trouble and hatred and which is responsible for so many crimes against humanity? I would say that it would be simply highly immoral and unethical to avoid criticizing such an ideology.

It has become very common in certain circles to accuse people critical of Islam of Islamophobia. I am really wondering who invented this idiotic term which seems to suggest that the fear of Islam is irrational. In psychiatry the name "phobia" is usually applied to irrational fears. The fear of Islam, however, has strongly rational basis. People fear Islam because Islam can be terribly brutal, barbaric, ruthless and chauvinistic. And we have seen how in the recent years Islam has been becoming ever more destructive and chauvinistic. When people fear Islam they fear it for a good reason and not because they suffer from some imaginary delusions. When Gypsies and Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe feared Germans - and all of them did - would we say that they suffered from Germanophobia or Naziphobia, would we say that their fear was irrational? Their fear was very much rational and justified. In the same way the fear of Islam is also rational and justified today. The vast majority of the world's terrorists come from Muslim societies. Muslim societies are not only undemocratic and hostile to non-Muslim societies but they actively discriminate against and even ruthlessly murder non-Muslims. Muslim societies promote a fascistic system of values where non-Muslims and women are second-class citizens with limited rights if any. Muslim societies have the worst record on human rights - torture, barbaric punishments, brutal behaviour are prevalent throughout the Mohammedan world. Muslims are also responsible for most of violence in Western societies these days. The best example is France. Almost 90 per cent of people in French prisons are Muslims. Why? Why is the crime rate so high among Muslims? Someone will tell me that the economic factor is all behind it, because French Muslims are the poorest class. And why are they the poorest class? There are also Hindus and Buddhists in France - why aren't they so poor and underprivileged?

For the last 200 years France has been a country of migrants. In the beginning of the 20th century all sorts of culturally diverse migrants arrived to France. They included Russians, Poles, East European Jews, Armenians, Italians, Romanians. When these people came to France life was much harder in those days. Unlike the modern day Muslim refugees they never got anything for free, they were mostly terribly poor. There was no social welfare, no tertiary education for free, no language schools, no commission housing. All these people had to depend only on themselves or on the help of their communities if such existed. Yet, they were all happy to be in France because, compared to the life in their own countries, compared to persecutions some of them suffered, life in France was easier, it offered more opportunities, it was tolerant, secular etc. It did not take long for these groups to become a respectable part of the French society, to grow wealthy, to get educated. One never heard of any of these groups commit any crimes. Why is it that Muslims have such a big problem to integrate, to become part of the general French life and culture even though today they have access to free education, to comission housing, to welfare help? I think the answer is very simple. Their fascistic and chauvinistic religion prevents them from committing themselves to France and sets them on collision course with other peoples.

As for Mr Andrew Bolt, I regard him as one of very few honest journalists. Is Mr Andrew Bolt right winger? I personally don't know but I can only say that one does not have to be a right winger to make comments and observations similar to his. In fact I think that the term right wing and left wing seem to have lost their original meaning too. As far as I know people on the left should be the chief supporters of secularism and secular values and yet strangely enough many so-called left-wingers show support for Islamic groups these days which, as far as any definition goes, are simply fascistic and propagate fascistic ideas.