I think I will probably start with multiculturalism. I am myself a migrant to Australia but I have always been saying that multiculturalism has is limits. Some very good and enlightening comments on multiculturalism were made by Mr Ibn Warraq, a famous apostate from Islam and the author of the book: Why I am not a Muslim. He said that multiculturalism is a product of cultural relativism and cultural relativism is an approach which implies that all cultures have the same basic values and all are worthy of respect. He rightly says that cultural relativism is incapable of judging anything, of making comparisons. And I would also say that cultural relativism simply clashes with ethics. The logic - if it can be called "logic" at all - of cultural relativism is such that cannibalsitic societies should be allowed to practise cannibalism; that it was ok for many Medieval societies to hunt and burn witches at the stake because this practice was part of their culture. For this reasom Ms Maryam Namazie quite correctly called cultural relativism this era's fascism.

In the religious ideology such as Islam there does not even exist such an idea as multiculturalism. Islam itself is anti-multicultural in every respect. Its division of the world into the real of Islam and the realm of war (non-Islam or simply kufr); its division of society into believers and non-believers; dhimmis and kafirs; and its goals of establishing Islam world-wide at the cost of other religions and social systems is simply fascistic - nothing short of that. What's worse, Islam has not so far managed to get rid of these fascistic tendencies, rather, recent decades have seen the rebirth of the most ugly forms of Islam.

Islam is the only religion that legalizes rape in war. According to strict Islamic teachings and rules women of a conquered enemy belong to Islamic conquerers and can be used for sex. In the course of their invasions Muslims abducted, enslaved or/and raped large numbers of kafir women. Many of these women were later sold in bazaars - not infrequently naked - to other Muslim "buyers". East Europeans have many stories on this subject, so do Hindus and Buddhists and other nations or societies victimized by Islam.

Apart from its soft approach to rape, Islamic tradition sanctions all sorts of other violence against women. A husband can beat his wife for disobedience, according to the Koranic verses. Another example could be honour killings - a particularly abhorrent practice. Many Muslims will say that it is not Islamic. Well, if it is not Islamic then why does it continue to be practised. Why hasn't Islam abolished it. Why don't we see Muslim men and Muslim clergy, above all, protest against it? Excision is not mentioned in the Koran either and yet it is practised in various Islamic countries. Moreover, a considerable number of islamic theologians - past and present - describe this ugly mutilation as "makrumah" - a beneficial thing to do. More than that, just quite recently thousands of Christian women and girls in Indonesia were forcibly converted to Islam and forcibly subjected to excision. Where do we see Muslims protest against these outrageous deeds - forcible coversion and mutilation? The fact that such practices continue in Islamic societies shows what a low regard Islam has for women, for their bodies, for their health, for their lives.

The way most Muslim men perceive kafir women is usually very negative. The Muslim men are generally irritated by the freedom kafir women enjoy. It does not fit into their own system of values which implies that women should be under the male control and any attempt on the part of a woman to break out of this control should be severely punished. Flirting and romance are unknown phenomena in most parts of the Islamic world. They survive only there where societies have not yet been fully Islamicized. Most Muslim men have a big problem with relating to women on a level other than sexual.

The Islamic attitude towards women clashes severely with the Western - and not only Western - attitude towards women. Western societies have a long tradition of chivalry towards women. This tradition originated in the aristocratic courts and was encouraged by the cult of the Virgin Mary at one stage. Along with that came the idea of romantic love. Men of nobility were encouraged to treat women with great respect, to kiss their feet, to serve them in every possible way, to defend them if need arise, even to offer their lives for them. Rather than immediate sexual gratification courting was encouraged as a way of winning the heart of a woman. In other words, the man had to submit himself to the service of his beloved in order ot get at least her kiss. This idealized kind of love was common among the nobles and was later taken up by middle and even lower classes. There is no doubt that the rise of this chivalry paved - at least partly - the path for a greater liberation of women.