Australian Politics Forum

It seems as if the Muslim world and the West are exchanging places. France is quelling freedom of speech with all their genocide nonsense, Britain is now shutting down TV stations that report other than British approved "truth", economically they're all becoming basket cases.

All this with the backdrop of the Muslim world heading in the opposite direction. Overthrow of dictators, massive economic growth, governments that more represent the people (ie. more Islamically inclined).

Looks like the tide is indeed turning..

Ofcom revokes Press TV's UK license

In a questionable move and without offering a valid response to the Press TV CEO's letters, the British Office of Communications (Ofcom) has revoked Press TV's broadcasting license and finally removed the channel from the Sky platform.

Ofcom has revoked Press TV's license for what it calls breaching of the broadcasting code.

Earlier, Ofcom also hit Press TV with a fine of 100 thousand pounds. The British media regulator stepped up pressure on Press TV after the news channel covered British police crackdowns on anti-austerity protesters in London and other British cities.

Ofcom is said to have close ties to Britain's royal family. And the cables released by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks show that Press TV's programs on the royal wedding, which many in the country described as extravagant, angered the royal family.

Many observers have also noted that the British government's hostile campaign against Press TV has its roots in the channel's extensive and transparent coverage of the role that the British government played in the killing of tens of thousands of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Press TV has extensively given coverage to Britain's support for autocratic Persian Gulf monarchies and even given legitimacy to the dictatorial regimes in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

In January, Press TV's CEO Mohammad Sarafraz sent a letter to Ofcom questioning the independence of the British regulatory body given that the British Secretary of State has the power to appoint or remove from office Ofcom's chairman and its members, and even to dissolve the entire organization.

Sarafraz also pointed out that Ofcom is funded by loans and Grant-in-Aid from the British Government.

He further pointed to Ofcom's “glaring contradiction” in its dealings with Press TV. “Ofcom wants to revoke the broadcast license because it has determined that Press TV Ltd. does not have control over the broadcast. Yet at the same time, Ofcom sentences Press TV Ltd. to pay a financial penalty for the broadcast of something Ofcom says it has no control over! How can you possibly explain your paradoxical performance?”

Sarafraz stressed that Ofcom's bid to revoke Press TV's license will not prevent the channel from broadcasting the truth about the British Royal regime.

“It is futile to attempt to conceal the truth from the people of Britain, and those that want to hear our alternative voice will find a way despite your efforts,” he said.

Source: [url=http://www.presstv.com/detail/222122.html]PressTV (don't follow if you're in UK, you might get in trouble)]/url] ;D

Even more censorship in the UK:

'No problems' with anti-gay leaflet, men tell court

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-16603548

Two men told a court they did not see anything wrong with a leaflet calling for the death penalty for gay people.

Mehboob Hussain, 45, of Rosehill Street, Derby, and Umar Javed, 38, of Whittaker Street, admitted handing out a leaflet, called Death Penalty?, in the city in July 2010.

However, both men have denied intending to stir-up hatred.

Mr Hussain told Derby Crown Court he did "not see any problems" with the leaflet.

He told the jury: "I just read it and to me it was just the Koranic verses on there and the history of England's law.

"I did not see any problems."

He added: "It's the duty of a Muslim to pass on the words of God."

Mr Hussain and Mr Javed said their co-defendant Ihjaz Ali, 42, of Fairfax Road, Derby, gave them the leaflets to distribute in Rosehill Street, near to the Jamia Mosque.

'Right channels'

Mr Javed said he believed Mr Ali had had the leaflets checked for any possible criminal offences.

He told the court: "He showed me the leaflet and I looked at it.

"I said: 'You're still going through the right channels to check the leaflets are fine?' and he said that it had been checked and it was OK."

Two other Derby men, 28-year-old Razwan Javed - Umar's brother - of Wilfred Street, and Kabir Ahmed, 28, of Madeley Street, are charged along with Hussain, Javed and Ali with distributing threatening written material intending to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.

It is thought to be the first prosecution of its kind since legislation came into force in March 2010.

All five men deny the charges.

Mr Javed, a takeaway worker who is married with six children, said he did not think the leaflets were offensive or threatening, but after listening in court to the testimony of four gay men who received the leaflet through their doors, he thought differently and wanted to send them a written apology.

"That was not my intention to make them upset," he added.

The leaflets were distributed as a counter-protest in response to the Gay Pride parade due to be held in Derby on 10 July 2010, the court heard.

The trial continues.

abu_rashid wrote on Jan 21^st, 2012 at 12:24pm:

Let's hope so. Next, they should throw out of the country all those anti-British Muslim agitators.

The West runs blindly towards fascism.

falah wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 1:45pm:

The West runs blindly towards fascism.

Islam is there already.

Quote:

Mehboob Hussain, 45, of Rosehill Street, Derby, and Umar Javed, 38, of Whittaker Street, admitted handing out a leaflet, called Death Penalty?, in the city in July 2010.

However, both men have denied intending to stir-up hatred.

Is it normal procedure for the press to publish the street addresses of people accused of a crime in the UK?

If you want to be a journalist here in Australia you have
to do a one week course to learn what you are - and what you're not allowed to say.
I would call that censorship.

It goes on in every country - including FREE Australia.

No you don't.

Who told you that?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 2:58pm:

Quote:

Is it normal procedure for the press to publish the street addresses of people accused of a crime in the UK?

Yes.

That's probably a bad idea...

If you are going to identify someone, it would reduce the risk of misidentification and a libel lawsuit (or the wrong person getting attacked by an angry mob).

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:57pm:

No you don't.

Who told you that?

A journalist told me who wanted to be a radio announcer.

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 2:16pm:

falah wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 1:45pm:

The West runs blindly towards fascism.

Islam is there already.

You do love misrepresenting Islam with the Shi-ites such as these Shi-ite Hizbullah.

This is how the US deals with protesters:

The US knew how to deal with anti-Vietnam war protesters at Kent State university:

falah wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 12:16am:

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 2:16pm:

falah wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 1:45pm:

The West runs blindly towards fascism.

Islam is there already.

You do love misrepresenting Islam with the Shi-ites such as these Shi-ite Hizbullah.

They are as Muslim as you, galah. They say they are muslims. Who the hell are you to say they aren't.

Are they apostates Falah, and if so what is the appropriate Islamic punishment for them?

falah wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 12:16am:

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 2:16pm:

falah wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 1:45pm:

The West runs blindly towards fascism.

Islam is there already.

You do love misrepresenting Islam with the Shi-ites such as these Shi-ite Hizbullah.

falah,
Are we non-moslems misrepresenting ISLAM when we point to the conduct of Shi-ites, who claim to follow the tenets of ISLAM ???

I don't think so.

But falah,
As a good moslem, as a good Sunni moslem, living in Australia, do you take to yourself the right to kill your own children [if they dishonour your family, or, if they 'rebel' against the authority of ISLAMIC law] ???

Because Sunni ISLAMIC law says that you have that right.

Am i 'misrepresenting' ISLAM, when i point to that tenet of Sunni ISLAM ???

falah,
Who is 'misrepresenting' ISLAM?

Is it we non-moslems?

Or is it the good Sunni-moslems, by their premeditated and intentional omissions, concerning what Sharia permits with regard to 'unbelievers' ?

Quote:

It is no accident or coincidence that Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says......"not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/01/victim-of-attempted-honor-killing-speaks-out.html

n.b.
The term "honour killing" used in the Western mainstream media is a misnomer.

Dictionary;
misnomer = = a wrong or inaccurate name or term. the wrong use of a name or term.

These type of moslem-on-moslem murders are justified and 'lawful' [within ISLAM], as the killing of 'rebels' against the authority of ISLAM.

Correct falah ???

"...If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260

falah,

If you are a proud moslem.
If you are a proud of what ISLAM promotes.
And if ISLAM is a virtuous philosophy.

Q.
Why won't you openly reveal to non-moslems, the tenets of belief which ISLAM promotes ?

Is the answer, that you and all moslems, are;
1/ ashamed of your error [in choosing to be a moslem], OR, because you,
2/ are ashamed of what ISLAM/Sharaia promotes and permits?

Hmmm????

"Ye People of the Book! Why do ye clothe Truth with falsehood, and conceal the Truth, while ye have knowledge?"
Koran 3.71

This is an audacious rebuke to Jews and Christians from 'Allah', considering the lying and duplicitous relationship moslems have always had towards those Jews and Christians who are not yet under moslem power.

+++

The fact is, that moslems are only prepared to reveal what ISLAM really promotes, when moslems believe that they have the ability [the political power, the 'licence'] to murder their critics, for 'insulting' ISLAM.

e.g.
As per the 'religiously' justified murders which are happening NOW, in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc.

Otherwise in those places where moslems lack political authority, moslems, and the whole moslem community, will blatantly, and intentionally, and deceitfully, misrepresent ISLAM to non-moslems and to naive and trusting non-moslem host communities.

THE TRUTH IS THAT....
Moslems are unwilling to lay ISLAM bare to the scrutiny of non-moslems,
because moslems know that they, moslems, are guilty people.

Moslems know that they themselves are,kuffar.

Quote:

You who embrace ISLAM, your own lies and deception, have become a witness against you, before God......

"kuffar" = = "...is an Arabic word meaning.....[an unbeliever] a person....who hides, denies, or covers the truth."

more on that, here...
"Dear muslim, YOU are the kuffar"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1229682951/0#0

+++

Many ISLAMIC spokesmen living within Western nations have also stated that moslems can obey the law of the country in which they live in,
BUT ONLY WHERE THE LOCAL NON-MOSLEM LAWS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH ISLAMIC LAW.

The implication being that, moslems need not obey local laws, WHEREVER local laws conflict with ISLAMIC [Sharia] law.

Google;
muslims can obey a local law which does not conflict with islamic law

Google;
muslims, obey law of land

IMAGE;

Voting is kufr -- an expression of your unbelief
Moslem street protest in New York city

IMAGE;

ISLAMIC law should replace Constitutional law
Moslem street protest in New York city

see also....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Parliament_of_Great_Britain

+++

When Mohammed lived in Mecca, i.e. WHEN MOHAMMED WAS POLITICALLY INSECURE, and when Mohammed had to rely upon the infidel rulers of Mecca for his saftey, Allah said this...

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things."
Koran 2.256

Koran 2.256 is now an 'abrogated' [put aside by Allah] Koran verse, which moslems no longer 'take hold' of.

Then after Mohammed became politically secure in Medina, Allah changed his mind and said this...

"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him;...."
Koran 3.85

as is explained somewhat here....
Raymond Ibrahim: How Circumstance Dictates Islamic Behavior
Consider this video of Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami, a top-ranked figure in Egypt’s Salafi movement which won some 25% of the votes in recent elections. He makes clear a point that, in a different era, would be thoroughly eye-opening—that all notions of peace with non-Muslims are based on circumstance: when Muslims are weak, they should be peaceful; when strong, they should go on the offensive.
......Burhami is referring to the famous Mecca/Medina division: when Muhammad was weak and outnumbered in his early Mecca period, he preached peace and made pacts with infidels; when he became strong in the Medina period, he preached war and went on the offensive. This dichotomy—preach peace when weak, wage war when strong—has been instructive to Muslim leaders for ages.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/01/raymond-ibrahim-how-circumstance-dictates-islamic-behavior.html

Yadda - your posts are too long to read.
Just make a small point & move on.

Not to mention they're laced with so much psycho babble and innuendo that any normal sane rational person will pass most of it by.

So why do you prefer to respoind to Yadda above everyone else Abu?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 7:14pm:

Yadda - your posts are too long to read.
Just make a small point & move on.

bobby,
falah made the argument.....

Quote:

"You [critics of ISLAM] do love misrepresenting Islam...... "

bobbythebat1,

If i should respond to falah with;

"No falah, you are mistaken."

.....i'm sorry. But that just wouldn't do it for me. ;D

+++

i.e.
Any fool can have an opinion.

An opinion expressed without proof or reason, is just an OPINION.

And it seems to me, that many of those [the opinions we see expressed in forums], are worthless [i.e. if they are un-informed opinions]!

My reasoning is that, if i want people to take my opinion(s) seriously, then i really need to set out my argument with reasoning, and/or proofs.

And that takes space.

Sorry.

But hey bobby, if my posts are a 'pain' for ya brain........
........then when you see the word >> YADDA << in the post header, then just pass over the post, without trying to read it.

How does that work for ya ? ;)

abu_rashid wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 9:36pm:

Not to mention they're laced with so much psycho babble and innuendo that any normal sane rational person will pass most of it by.

Yes Abu, it is so, so difficult for a sane, rational person, to demolish the arguments made by an irrational 'psycho', in an internet forum.
Its so much more sensible to ignore, the arguments made by irrational 'psychos'.
/sarc off

Coz, only someone who is irrational and unhinged, would dare to criticise Allah's perfect religion, ISLAM.
/sarc off

......what with all of the threats such a course is likely to attract.

+++

John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Abu why was the anti-semitism thread deleted? Are we allowed to discuss Falahs opinion about Jews?

Firstly because it slanders him, he is not an anti-Semite, and you well know it.

Secondly Soren was posting too much of his usual nonsense.

More to the point, why is Soren unbanned from this forum?

I clarified that when I said he is an anti semite I meant he hates Jews so that you would not get all pedantic about the terminology.

I think a lot of the bans were lost with the software upgrade.

Abu, are we allowed to discuss Falah's attitude towards Jews, or is this now on your list of censored topics?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:39pm:

I think they would basically show you what may get you put into jail or taken to court for libel etc.

Not aware of this in NSW though and know a lot of people in journalism.

freediver wrote on Jan 24^th, 2012 at 10:11pm:

I clarified that when I said he is an anti semite I meant he hates Jews so that you would not get all pedantic about the terminology.

I don't hate Jews. I believe in treating Jews fairly. I condemn the Christian genocide of Jews in Germany, England, Russia and Spain. Look at history, and you will find it is Christians that genocide Jews, and Muslims that provide them sanctuary.

Ironic that you would take issue with this when this is such an outpouring of hate towards Muslims on this forum.

So you don't mind if I start a new thread to discuss some of the things you have been saying about Jews?

With the British media in the state they are I would have thought fair cause to de register some of the Murdock rubbish but no we get this. Unbelievable.

The state of the media news business is at an all time low it seems around the western world at least.

In Aust News Ltd were censored for their deliberate bias and dishonesty but have continued on their merry way as if nothing happened.

Aparently nobody important has any fear of the regulators at all.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 8:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:39pm:

I think they would basically show you what may get you put into jail or taken to court for libel etc.

Not aware of this in NSW though and know a lot of people in journalism.

The course was all about what you are & aren't allowed to say.
This included vilification of people based on race, gender etc.
Our media is very tightly controlled.
It's not a free press here.
That's why these interent forums are more exciting -
you can say almost anything that you truly believe in
without going to jail - although that of course will change soon
as very strict laws & interent censorship is upon us.

Enjoy a fairly free internet for now - it won't last.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 2:16pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 8:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:39pm:

I think they would basically show you what may get you put into jail or taken to court for libel etc.

Not aware of this in NSW though and know a lot of people in journalism.

So it's about staying within the law??
What a surprise...

And there is no 'free press' (in the way you seem to mean) anywhere on Earth...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 2:42pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 2:16pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 8:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:39pm:

I think they would basically show you what may get you put into jail or taken to court for libel etc.

Not aware of this in NSW though and know a lot of people in journalism.

So it's about staying within the law??
What a surprise...

And there is no 'free press' (in the way you seem to mean) anywhere on Earth...

The press is free to say what they like - that does not mean that they are or should be exempt from the law if they choose to illegally vilify people. There was a recent case in Australia which showed the laws working well.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 3:02pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 2:42pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 2:16pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 8:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 3:39pm:

I think they would basically show you what may get you put into jail or taken to court for libel etc.

Not aware of this in NSW though and know a lot of people in journalism.

So it's about staying within the law??
What a surprise...

And there is no 'free press' (in the way you seem to mean) anywhere on Earth...

Yes, 'freedom of the press' really means in the choice of topics, not in how they describe a person or group of people....any more than an ordinary citizen is allowed to make vilifying statements on a street corner...

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl Member Run Boards >> Islam >> Britain censoring media http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1327112643 Message started by abu_rashid on Jan 21^st, 2012 at 12:24pm