Is Jacqui holed up surrounded by barbed wire ?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/gpe73p3gxlg/hqdefault.jpg
Jacqui sure doesn't mince words!!!!   When will she join Pauline ?



Muslim community members demand apology from ABC over Q&A debate
By Ben Winsor  15 FEB 2017 - 9:18 AM  UPDATED YESTERDAY 9:34 AM

VIDEO:

Senator Jacqui Lambie's comments were 'racist, Islamophobic and crude', an online petition states.

Muslim community members are demanding an apology from the ABC over a heated debate on Monday's Q&A episode, which saw a shouting match over Sharia law between Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie and youth activist Yassmin Abdel-Magied.

"We demand an apology from Q&A for its poor handling of the debate and for its failure to uphold its values of respect and integrity," an online petition reads.

It appears Ms Abdel-Magied has not publicly endorsed the petition or asked for an apology, and could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.

The petition has been signed by the Australian Islamic Mission, La Trobe University Islamic Society and numerous members of the Muslim community.

"Lambie used undignifying, demeaning slurs that were personal attacks against Abdel-Magied and her integrity as a Muslim woman," the petition reads.

"We wish to remind Q&A that Yassmin’s appearance in itself is brave as it puts her in danger of being a target to online fascists who are relentless in attacking public Muslim Australian figures, and particularly Muslim females."

The petition said the program breached its stated aim to provide a "safe environment" where people can "respectfully" discuss their differences.

Debate between Senator Lambie and Ms Abdel-Magied reached its peak over Sharia law.

“The fact is, we have one law in this country and it is the Australian law – it is not Sharia law, not in this country, not in my day” Senator Lambie said, drawing applause.

“In Sharia it says you follow the law of the land you are on,” Ms Abdel-Magied said.

As the pair shouted over each other, Senator Lambie demanded an answer to why women are treated like second class citizens, and “why gays are killed”.

“That is not my religion,” Ms Abdel-Magied said, as Q&A host Tony Jones intervened.

“Can I just say that shouting at each other is not going to help – so please stop,” he said.

Ms Abdel-Magied followed up her appearance with a video for an online news organisation explaining what Sharia law is.

"Sharia is not a system of laws like Australia’s legal system is a series of laws that everybody must obey - Sharia is about a Muslim's personal relationship with their god," Ms Abdel-Magied said.

Sharia law is not a parallel legal system, she said.

“But the majority want to feel safe, be safe," she said.

“Stop playing the victim, we’ve had enough ... Your ban got lifted, get over it – it hasn’t hurt you at all.”

The petition characterised Senator Lambie's comments as "racist, Islamophobic and crude".

"If Q&A wants to invite Muslim individuals to its forum, it should be able to guarantee a safe environment," the petition states.

The ABC could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.

At 9am Wednesday morning, the petition had more than 900 supporters.


http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/02/15/muslim-community-members-demand-apology-abc-over-qa-debate

Where does it say behead?

Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam, Jews practising Judaism, Buddhists practising Buddhism and so on. But there is only one law in this country. It's the one everyone must abide by and be judged by. It's as simple as that. If people want to practice their own religion, that's fine. But no man has the right to beat his wife because she was seen with another man who is not a relative, for example. Once we start down the path of accepting certain aspects of religious laws then our social fabric will start to fall apart.

ARMChair,

that dark woman on the ABC was ducking and weaving because she was dead scared that if she seemed to agree with Jacqui she might be punished when she returned home.

Jacqui had her pinned to the wall as Jacqui regaled the barbarous acts that are regarded as normal by the Devil Worshiping ISLAMIC Heathen Barbarians.

where are all those woman's rights campaigners ? why don't they come down on the ISLAMIC barbarians like a ton of bricks ?



Horsey, read between the lines.

I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc

I watched this episode of Q&A and it was the Muslim woman who was being aggressive and spoiling for an argument. Lambie only fired back after this nutter went ballistic at her. Just watch the video.  I'm still trying to work out what it was that Lambie said was offensive?

tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 11:57am:

I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc

It's got multiple meanings and interpretations tickle. Everything thing from peaceful insight to barbaric law enforcement.

The Sharia "Law" crap can only exist while people are uneducated and unable to see what a total farce it is.

That's why in those primitive barbaric ISLAMIC countries they don't like education.

If Jacqui visited Syria etc she would be beheaded as a fowl female before you can say Jack Robinson. Even if she wore a burka.

Lambie is nearly always crude...  she is more than Likely Islamophobic, even though it seems she would rather kill Muslims than fear them but I don't recall her making a racist remark about Islam...  which would be hard to do, because Islam is NOT A RACE.

Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 12:00pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 11:57am: I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc It's got multiple meanings and interpretations tickle. Everything thing from peaceful insight to barbaric law enforcement.

The problem is that Jacqui Lambie is projecting the fear that at all Muslims want those barbaric sharia law in Australia.  This is far from the truth.  First, it is almost impossible, because Australia have seperation of religion and state.  Second, most muslims here wants to get away from those crule barbaric so called law enforcement.   Third, when there are calls for Sharia law in Australia, the caller is probably referring to the peaceful insights. 

Jacqui Lambie is a senator.  And she have the first hand experience on passing laws and motions.  She knows... better than any of us non politician, how hard is to pass legislations and change law.  Just look at marriage equality, it took forever, and still nothing is done. So do you think passing Sharia law is going to be a) impossible, or b) easy. 

So, why is Jacqui Lambie so against it?  One answer.  She is using the fear tactic on a population too lazy to think the deeper and the bigger picture. 

I wasnt the only one to get a laugh it seems, comedy gold.

Quote:

Islam, the most feminist religion? Oh, come on But it was an exchange between Tasmanian independent senator Jacqui Lambie and brightly-hijab’ed author/activist Yassmin Abdel-Magied that really brought down the house. Riffing on the old standard “How do you solve a problem like sharia?”, Lambie suggested that Australia’s primary obligations welfare-wise ought to be those who already live here, adding for good measure that those who would rather live by the lights of a theocratic legal code would probably be better off living somewhere else. “Excuse me, Islam, to me, is one of the most... is THE most feminist religion, right?”, Abdel-Magied jumped in. “We got equal rights well before the Europeans. We don’t take our husband’s last names because we ain’t their property, right?” Right. You could almost hear the viewing audience choking with laughter, even in the darkest heart of our cities’ latte belts. Because while Islam might be many things, in suggesting that of all the faiths practised around the world it is “the most feminist religion”, Abdel-Magied delivered a comic line destined straight for the pool room. Amazingly, Abdel-Magied was able to make her statement on Q&A with a straight face even after having taken a taxpayer-funded tour of some of the world’s most anti-feminist Islamic regimes including Saudi Arabia (where women can’t even drive), the United Arab Emirates, and Sudan. Jacqui Lambie wasn’t having a bar of it. (Pic: Q&A) No word as to whether, while on her trip, Abdel-Magied told the local religious authorities that they have got their theology all wrong and that lashings and stonings for the crime of adultery is not actually true sharia.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/islam-the-most-feminist-religion-oh-come-on/news-story/ae559774f368b9d5b4bf5881ad88d46b#itm=newscomau%7Chome%7Cnca-homepage-topstories%7C5%7Clink%7Chomepage%7Chomepage&itmt=1487270134950

tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 1:23pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 12:00pm: tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 11:57am: I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc It's got multiple meanings and interpretations tickle. Everything thing from peaceful insight to barbaric law enforcement. The problem is that Jacqui Lambie is projecting the fear that at all Muslims want those barbaric sharia law in Australia.  This is far from the truth.  First, it is almost impossible, because Australia have seperation of religion and state.  Second, most muslims here wants to get away from those crule barbaric so called law enforcement.   Third, when there are calls for Sharia law in Australia, the caller is probably referring to the peaceful insights.  Jacqui Lambie is a senator.  And she have the first hand experience on passing laws and motions.  She knows... better than any of us non politician, how hard is to pass legislations and change law.  Just look at marriage equality, it took forever, and still nothing is done. So do you think passing Sharia law is going to be a) impossible, or b) easy.  So, why is Jacqui Lambie so against it?  One answer.  She is using the fear tactic on a population too lazy to think the deeper and the bigger picture.

In the UK they have Sharia courts and even here some Muslims have been calling for parts of it to be put in here. When a country has parallel laws it sends a bad message. That was the whole crux to what Lambie was saying- one law for everybody.

Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 1:48pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 1:23pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 12:00pm: tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 11:57am: I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc It's got multiple meanings and interpretations tickle. Everything thing from peaceful insight to barbaric law enforcement. The problem is that Jacqui Lambie is projecting the fear that at all Muslims want those barbaric sharia law in Australia.  This is far from the truth.  First, it is almost impossible, because Australia have seperation of religion and state.  Second, most muslims here wants to get away from those crule barbaric so called law enforcement.   Third, when there are calls for Sharia law in Australia, the caller is probably referring to the peaceful insights.  Jacqui Lambie is a senator.  And she have the first hand experience on passing laws and motions.  She knows... better than any of us non politician, how hard is to pass legislations and change law.  Just look at marriage equality, it took forever, and still nothing is done. So do you think passing Sharia law is going to be a) impossible, or b) easy.  So, why is Jacqui Lambie so against it?  One answer.  She is using the fear tactic on a population too lazy to think the deeper and the bigger picture.  In the UK they have Sharia courts and even here some Muslims have been calling for parts of it to be put in here. When a country has parallel laws it sends a bad message. That was the whole crux to what Lambie was saying- one law for everybody.

Mr Hammer, in UK, the sharia courts are developed to deal with civil matters, and it is does not include brutal criminal codes that people are lead to believe.   It is no different to the arbitration process that we have already.  And both parties have to be happy about it.   People equate stoning and beheading with sharia law, because the word 'Sharia', which for many people it sounded foreign.   

Any way, my position is that I am neither for or against a Sharia civil system, but when it comes to legal binding decisions, or criminal laws, it must be well thought out, debated and free from religious influence.   My opposition is to Jacqui Lambie for using a non issue (e.g. its impossible Australia to have Sharia law in all of its courts) as a fear tactic to gain votes and supporters.  And i hope that those on the right of the politics would see through that.

juliar wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 10:11am:

Is Jacqui holed up surrounded by barbed wire ? Muslim community members are demanding an apology from the ABC over a heated debate on Monday's Q&A episode, which saw a shouting match over Sharia law between Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie and youth activist Yassmin Abdel-Magied.[/b] Debate between Senator Lambie and Ms Abdel-Magied reached its peak over Sharia law. “The fact is, we have one law in this country and it is the Australian law – it is not Sharia law, not in this country, not in my day” Senator Lambie said, drawing applause. LIE #1, “In Sharia it says you follow the law of the land you are on,” Ms Abdel-Magied said. As the pair shouted over each other, Senator Lambie demanded an answer to why women are treated like second class citizens, and “why gays are killed”. LIE #2, “That is not my religion,” Ms Abdel-Magied said, as Q&A host Tony Jones intervened.

I do not know how much Yassmin Abdel-Magied knows about,     HER OWN RELIGION......

......but she is either extremely ignorant about what ISLAMIC law and ISLAMIC doctrines allow and prohibit,     OR SHE IS A BIG FAT LIAR.



LIE #1;
"In Sharia it says you follow the law of the land you are on"       This is a LIE, a deceit !!!!!!!!!!!

If that statement by Yassmin Abdel-Magied is correct,
then someone please show me an authoritative quote from an ISLAMIC cleric which     explicitly     states that the moslem living with a secular nation must obey local law, ABOVE Sharia law.

[I know that Sharia DOES NOT SAY THAT. Not even close.]



What WE [non-moslems] are told,      is that moslem, living within a secular jurisdiction, is instructed by ISLAM, that;
"The moslem should obey the laws of the land in which they are resident".


But the religious dictate to the moslem community is actually this;
"1/The moslem should obey the laws of the land in which they are resident,
2/ whenever the local secular laws do not clash with Allah's law."



.



LIE #2,
“why gays are killed”

“That is not my religion,” Ms Abdel-Magied said,......       This is a LIE, a deceit !!!!!!!!!!!




Google;
If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did, kill the one who does it

Google;
Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lot, execute the one who does it




Quote:

Abu Dawud’s authoritative hadith collection records a report from Abdullah ibn Abbas:     The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done (38:4447).

Google






http://thereligionofpeace.com/pow/gay-phobia.jpg

QUESTION;
Is it only legitimate to have a "phobia" about moslems, AFTER they throw you off a roof?


Image source

-------- >

THE RELIGION OF PEACE
http://thereligionofpeace.com/

tickleandrose wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 11:57am:

I think Sharia means path to enlightenment - finding the water path.   I do not think there is actually a country in the world that based their criminal and civil justice purely on Shara alone.   But, if you are a muslim, you usually follow the sharia.  Which for most people, its about praying 5 times a day, what food to eat, etc

LIAR.

The authority to kill apostates, is Sharia law.


"...the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him." - DEAD.
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260



.



I think Sharia is a complete crock.

Especially for women.



Yadda said....

Quote:

+++ THE 'RIGHTS'(?) OF WOMEN IN ISLAM e.g. #1 The Koran [Allah] instructs moslems to beat disobedient wives, but ever so lightly. And you know, don't you, that moslem men do beat their wives,...ever so lightly. "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)." Koran 4.034 Actually, i have read somewhere, that the 'clarifying' insertion "(lightly)", DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE ARABIC KORAN. And that this 'insertion' is [has been] added in some English translations of the Koran - to mislead those readers of the English translation of the Koran, one can only assume. +++ THE 'RIGHTS'(?) OF WOMEN IN ISLAM e.g. #2 IMO, within ISLAM, women have the status of cattle or 'fields'. The Koran [i.e. Allah] states that the woman, the wife, has the status of a field [of earth, 'tilth']. And her husband may use her [plough her] as he wishes ['how ye will']. And remember that every word in the Koran, has the sanctity of coming directly from Allah himself. And remember also, that Allah is never wrong, mistaken. "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe." Koran 2.223 Dictionary; tilth = = cultivation of land; tillage. +++ THE 'RIGHTS'(?) OF WOMEN IN ISLAM e.g. #3 Under ISLAMIC inheritance law. Any daughter receives 1/2 the entitlement of any male heir. e.g. Where there is a son, and a daughter, to inherit an estate. The estate is divided into 3 parts. The son receives 2 parts. The daughter receives 1 part. "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half...." Koran 4.11

Yup.

ISLAMIC law, progressive, and ahead of its time.              :P

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 10:29am:

Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam

Then you don't have any problem with sharia law.

Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Thats the point Ms Yassmin was trying to make to Jacqui when she said "to me Sharia is praying 5 times a day". Jacqui of course refused to listen and preferred to keep shouting and maintaining the outrage.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:39pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Thats the point Ms Yassmin was trying to make to Jacqui when she said "to me Sharia is praying 5 times a day". Jacqui of course refused to listen and preferred to keep shouting and maintaining the outrage.

Cool, but some parts of Sharia aren't so nice and fluffy.

If five year old kids are ordered not to leave their house unless hijabed and all skin covered except hands, if they are lucky, then just who is practicing what.

Gordon wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:45pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 3:39pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Thats the point Ms Yassmin was trying to make to Jacqui when she said "to me Sharia is praying 5 times a day". Jacqui of course refused to listen and preferred to keep shouting and maintaining the outrage. Cool, but some parts of Sharia aren't so nice and fluffy.

Those are the parts of Sharia law, that moslems living in Australia refuse to address and discuss.
.......AS THOUGH THOSE PARTS OF ISLAMIC LAW [SHARIA] DO NOT EXIST!!



Like the authority to kill disbelievers who reject ISLAM [refuse to convert, and refuse to pay jizza].

And the authority to kill anyone who insults Moahmmed, or insults Allah's perfect religion [by putting it under public scrutiny], both     CAPITAL CRIMES     in ISLAMIC law [Sharia].

Indonesia today, Ahok!!!!!!!

Yadda wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:52pm:

Like the authority to kill disbelievers who reject ISLAM [refuse to convert, and refuse to pay jizza jizya].

Google;
Christians who refused to pay the tax would have to either convert to Islam or die.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:39pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc.

Not the point though is it that not all Muslims believe in it? As you just affirm, killing, amputations, bans etc. are part of Sharia law for some. Are they part of Australian law Gandalf? Why do some Muslims wish to live by this barbaric Sharia law?

rhino wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 4:46pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 3:39pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Not the point though is it that not all Muslims believe in it? As you just affirm, killing, amputations, bans etc. are part of Sharia law for some. Are they part of Australian law Gandalf? Why do some Muslims wish to live by this barbaric Sharia law?

Rhino,

IT IS BECAUSE [imo];

Every moslem, is a moslem.

A moslem is a follower of ISLAM.       < -------- dictionary definition.



Google;
Shahada, confession of faith, of a muslim

"There is no god except for Allah alone; and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah."


By definition, every moslem is a follower of ISLAM and is a supporter what ISLAMIC law endorses, promotes, and encourages.


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1484729546/1#1
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1484729546/11#11



Moslems living in Australia, live within a secular nation, a secular nation ruled by secular laws.

And yet, moslems who live in Australia,        choose to identify themselves with ISLAM, and to associate themselves with ISLAM,           and so by definition, moslems who live in Australia choose to support and to associate themselves with what ISLAM's tenets and doctrines undeniably promote.

-------- >

The hatred of everyone who is a disbeliever, and who refuses to convert to ISLAM and to bow down and to worship Allah.

n.b.
'Some moslems' can deny that they themselves     hate    disbelievers.

But no moslem can deny that ISLAM, and its tenets and doctrines, sanction [makes 'holy'] and encourages, the 'holy' hatred of disbelievers.



"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4




.



"....the 'holy' hatred of disbelievers."

-------- >

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2007/01/18/va1237230244821/Sheik-Feiz-Chris-Pavlich-5363339.jpg



Quote:

Use children as troops, says cleric January 18, 2007 SYDNEY'S most influential radical Muslim cleric has been caught on film calling Jews pigs and urging children to die for Allah. Firebrand Sheik Feiz Mohammed, head of the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool [Australia], delivered the hateful rants on a collection of DVDs called the Death Series being sold in Australia and overseas. .........Sheik Feiz says in the video. "We want to have children and offer them as soldiers defending Islam. Teach them this: There is nothing more beloved to me than wanting to die as a mujahid (holy warrior). Put in their soft, tender hearts the zeal of jihad and a love of martyrdom." An Australian citizen born in Sydney who has spent the past year living in Lebanon, Sheik Feiz was exposed this week in a British documentary Undercover Mosque. ......"The peak, the pinnacle, the crest, the highest point, the pivot, the summit of Islam is jihad," he declares in the film, before denouncing "kaffirs" (non-Muslims). "Kaffir is the worst word ever written, a sign of infidelity, disbelief, filth, a sign of dirt." ......Sheik Feiz - who just two weeks ago said he felt like an "alien" in his own country - leads about 4000 followers through his Global Islamic Youth Centre in Sydney's southwest. He also accused Australian authorities of being over-zealous in their approach to clerics like him.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21074839-2,00.html
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014863.php

What are the qualifications do need to be a cleric scholar mufti, does it pay well.

I mock

Johnnie wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 6:55pm:

What are the qualifications do need to be a cleric scholar mufti, does it pay well.

It is a huge pay check Jeez.

Its huge, huge i tell ya,      .....to be an imam in Canberra.

That is what they were fighting over.         ;D

Honest.         ;)



Within Australia...

Quote:

06 May 2007 Mosque violence Tensions boil over after move to replace imam Paul Maley A BITTER factional feud within Canberra's Islamic community has erupted into violence with a leading member being punched repeatedly in the grounds of the mosque at Yarralumla. Secretary of the ACT Islamic Society Kurt Kennedy said he was set upon shortly after announcing the appointment of a new imam to replace the controversial Mohammed Swaiti. He was assaulted while waiting on the mosque grounds for a lift home after announcing Mr Swaiti had been dumped and naming the new imam as Yahya Atay. ......"When our secretary Kurt Kennedy announced ... the new imam will deliver the [Friday speech] before prayer, two people jumped up and grabbed Kurt and pushed him around," he told the Canberra Sunday Times. "They pushed him and wanted to throw him out of the mosque. "Then the imam [Mr Swaiti] started screaming in the middle of the mosque, 'I am the imam of this mosque! I am the imam who will service you people! I will never step down! No one can force me to step down! I will be here until the day I die!"'

http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=general&story_id=582042&category=General

Allah Akbar!!!!    Allah Akbar!!!!    Allah Akbar!!!!   


The article is kosher, but the link is old.

Yadda seems to be on the money.

The Sharia "Law" rubbish is just a very primitive Stone Age substitute for thinking for one's self.

It is quite like extreme Socialism as they both want to control every aspect of what people think and do. Re Nth Korea.

They both want to practice indoctrination of young children.  Think illegal Lefty indoctrination in our schools.

Jacqui is absolutely correct in boring it right up the Dark Person as this Sharia "Law" rubbish is poison in our country and must be stamped out along with the ridiculous burka as these things are used to prevent assimilation into our basically Christian society.

The obvious question is, "Why was this Dark Person even talking about the absurd Sharia "Law" here in Australia ?".

The obvious answer is that the slimy Greenies put her up to it on the ABC Socialist Propaganda Station as they continue their failed attempts at disrupting our traditional Australian society.

You can sign this petition here ...


https://www.change.org/p/abc-network-q-a-and-abc-apologise-to-muslim-community-for-breaching-its-abc-values?recruiter=10304807&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive

Beware there is alien sickness in our midst!!!

And isn't this just the sort of ISLAMIC barbarism we would like to see here in Australia ? Eh slimy Greenies ?

You want your sick Sharia "Law" then go over to the Middle East and see your heads on sticks.




Huge Baghdad car bomb kills at least 45: officials
AFP 2:32am February 17, 2017

http://img7.mynet.com/hbr/2017/02/15/093602709/20170215-2-21874095-18934404-eb-480x270.jpg
Firefighters try to extinguish fire at the site of a suicide car bomb attack in the eastern Habibiya neighbourhood of Baghdad, Iraq. (AFP)
FTBA

A massive car bomb ripped through a used car market in southern Baghdad Thursday, killing at least 45 people in the deadliest such attack this year, security officials said.

The Amaq propaganda agency linked to the Islamic State group (IS), which has claimed nearly all such attacks recently, reported the blast and described it as targeting "a gathering of Shiites".

Mobile phone footage circulated on social media showed charred bodies and extensive destruction in the Bayaa neighbourhood where the explosion went off around 4:15 pm (1315 GMT).

"A terrorist car bomb attack struck near car dealerships in Bayaa and resulted in the deaths of 45 people," a spokesman for the Baghdad Operations Command said in a statement.

An interior ministry official gave the same figure and said at least 60 people were also wounded.

He said the emergency services were struggling to cope with the scope of the attack and warned that the death toll may rise.

The explosion occurred in the same Bayaa neighbourhood in southern Baghdad where a car bomb blast killed at least four people on Tuesday.

At least 11 people were also killed in a suicide car bomb attack claimed by IS Wednesday in a northern neighbourhood of the Iraqi capital.

Baghdad was rocked by a wave of deadly suicide bombings during the first days of 2017 but relatively few explosions had been reported since then until this week.

ak-jmm/dr

© AFP 2017


Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/02/17/02/30/huge-baghdad-car-bomb-kills-at-least-45-officials#kfKoQQ3MXP91VceP.99

It seems the Dark person is covering up the true reality of brutal barbaric ISLAM as the Greenies told her to.



Activist Yassmin Abdel-Magied ‘blind’ to Islam’s treatment of women
RICK MORTON Social Affairs reporter Melbourne RACHEL BAXENDALE Reporter Canberra The Australian 6:01AM February 17, 2017

http://i65.tinypic.com/2j2sqj9.jpg
Yassmin Abdel-Magied triggered a debate over Islam and feminism after a fiery exchange with senator Jacqui Lambie on Q&A. Picture: ABC

The Muslim activist who said on national television that Islam was “the most feminist religion” has been criticised by former prime minister Tony Abbott for being “blindfolded” during a taxpayer-funded speaking tour of the ­Middle East and Africa.

Yassmin Abdel-Magied triggered a debate over Islam and feminism after a fiery exchange with senator Jacqui Lambie on the effects of sharia during ­Monday’s Q&A on ABC TV.

“If she’s right that ‘Islam is a feminist religion’, how come such terrible things are done to women in its name?” Mr Abbott said.

The Australian revealed ­yesterday that the federal government paid for Ms Abdel-Magied to tour some of the world’s most repressive Islamic regimes last November, promoting her book about being a Sudanese-­Egyptian-Australian Muslim woman who wears the hijab.

Mr Abbott said Ms Abdel-­Magied was “entitled to her view” but “she must have been wearing a blindfold on her taxpayer-­funded tour”.

• JOHN LYONS: Sugar-coating the reality of Islam

Her views of Islam as a feminist religion also appear to be at odds with her co-member of the Australian government-funded Council for Arab Australian Relations, Joumanah El Matrah.

In a 2015 submission to Victoria’s Royal Commission into Family Violence, Ms El Matrah, who is also chief executive of the Australian Muslim Women’s Human Rights Centre, said there were “significant problems” in how Islam was interpreted, which caused violence against women.

Ms El Matrah has previously declared that Muslim women and children would be “extremely ­disadvantaged” by any form of sharia court. “Among Muslims, the interpretations and application of ­Islamic doctrine in relation to women varies considerably and, given the diversity of Muslims globally, there is a lack of consensus as to the status of women, and this has a direct impact on their treatment in Islam,” she said. “Orthodox interpretative frameworks allocate women an inferior status to men and this directly affects marital and family relationships, rendering women vulnerable to violence and abuse.”

She said there were “significant problems of interpretation of Islamic doctrine relating to the status of women, how they are to be treated in the home and the level of control permissible by a husband over his wife”.

The Australian’s coverage of Ms Abdel-Magied’s speaking tour was raised in parliament ­yesterday during a debate about section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, on the same day parliament also debated a bill proposed by Senator Lambie to restrict the wearing of the burqa.

Greens senator Nick McKim launched an attack on this newspaper yesterday for publishing details of Ms Abdel-Magied’s tour of the Middle East and North Africa. “It’s a straight, simple character assassination by The Australian, as they always do … when someone dares raise their head above the parapet and make comments with which they disagree,” Senator McKim said. “It is a disgusting, race-baiting rag.”

Liberal backbencher Eric Abetz described Senator McKim’s statements as “outlandish”. “It is a statement of fact that in many of the parts of the Middle East where Ms Abdel-Magied visited, women would be stoned to death for seeking an education and people even suspected of being gay are thrown off buildings,” Senator Abetz said.

Mr Abbott commended The Australian for bringing “common sense to this discussion”.

Senator Lambie said yesterday Muslim women had been “emboldened” by her call to ban the face-covering burqa. “I’ve been told by this person who came to visit me and I trust and respect very much that these Muslim women have been emboldened and given hope by my public comments and the provisions within this bill,” she said during a speech in favour of her bill to ban the burqa yesterday.

The ban is linked to the nat­ional terrorism threat level, kicking in when the threat reaches “probable”. The threat level is currently at “probable”.

Commenting on the debate about feminism and Islam, Australian Muslim Women’s Human Rights Centre chairwoman Tasmeen Chopra said anti-women issues in relation to Islam were “not text-based”.

“To be honest, in Australian Muslims’ lives right now the argument about feminism is not front and centre,” she said.

Sheik Shady Alsuleiman, who attended Malcolm Turnbull’s Iftar dinner last year with Ms Abdel-Magied and has made comments in a lecture saying gay people spread diseases, said last year that Allah gave “authority for men over women” but this meant that they must be “dutiful”.

Sociologist and feminist Eva Cox said there were good and bad parts of Islam and any other religion but that a “farrago of popular nonsense” was responsible for hijacking the debate about the protection of women as a means to impugn all Muslims.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/activist-yassmin-abdelmagied-blind-to-islams-treatment-of-women/news-story/b9312e18fb0601744abdc86732c9351b

rhino wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 4:46pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 3:39pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Not the point though is it that not all Muslims believe in it? As you just affirm, killing, amputations, bans etc. are part of Sharia law for some. Are they part of Australian law Gandalf? Why do some Muslims wish to live by this barbaric Sharia law?

It is you who is missing the point:

1. Jacqui Lambie says that anyone who supports sharia should be deported - without making any distinction between muslims who don't believe it involves amputations, beheadings etc

2. I was responding to a comment that claimed on the one hand there is no place for sharia, and on the other saying he has no problem with muslims practicing Islam - not realising that they are one in the same thing.

Trying to wedge me on the fact that some muslims undeniably do believe that sharia involves amputations etc is neither here nor there.

Do you understand the hurt Lambie is causing with her deportation remarks amongst peace-loving muslims who support an interpretation of Sharia that is different to hers? And furthermore, do you understand the frustration seeing her (and others) refusal to accept that there is a distinction?

wobble on Gandy with your blind political correctness rubbish.

ISLAM in its true form is a horrific barbaric primitive Stone Age Devil Worshiping brutal form of sadism.

It is well known that ISLAMICS initially pretend to be mild and harmless but as their numbers grow they return to ISLAM in its true brutality as is seen in the Middle East.

Jacqui and Pauline are absolutely correct in condemning this barbaric ISLAMIC sadism. We do not want this rubbish here in Australia.

And Donald Trump also recognizes that ISLAM is an untreated flesh eating disease.

It is obvious the slimy Greenies put the Dark Person up to it on the ABC Socialist Propaganda Station.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 17^th, 2017 at 3:43pm:

rhino wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 4:46pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 3:39pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:29am: Sharia law has absolutely no place in this country. None whatsoever. I don't have any problem with Muslims practising Islam Then you don't have any problem with sharia law. Sharia law is quite literally "muslims practicing Islam" - and not all muslims believe it involves killing, amputations, bans etc. Not the point though is it that not all Muslims believe in it? As you just affirm, killing, amputations, bans etc. are part of Sharia law for some. Are they part of Australian law Gandalf? Why do some Muslims wish to live by this barbaric Sharia law? It is you who is missing the point: 1. Jacqui Lambie says that anyone who supports sharia should be deported - without making any distinction between muslims who don't believe it involves amputations, beheadings etc 2. I was responding to a comment that claimed on the one hand there is no place for sharia, and on the other saying he has no problem with muslims practicing Islam - not realising that they are one in the same thing. Trying to wedge me on the fact that some muslims undeniably do believe that sharia involves amputations etc is neither here nor there. Do you understand the hurt Lambie is causing with her deportation remarks amongst peace-loving muslims who support an interpretation of Sharia that is different to hers? And furthermore, do you understand the frustration seeing her (and others) refusal to accept that there is a distinction?

so says a cultist.

If ever there was a put up job this is it and the Greenies stench is all over it.

A WHITE wash by a BLACK person.  This is bulldust with a capital B.

Where is Jacqui and Pauline to put this anti-Australian rubbish where it belongs ?




How do you solve a problem like sharia? Q&A darling says Islamic law is pro-feminism
The Australian12:00AM February 17, 2017

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/8267264-1x1-700x700.jpg
It would be an improvement if the Dark person work a full burka

Yassmin Abdel-Magied takes a break from her taxpayer-funded world tour to appear on Aunty.

Islam is totes feminist says Yassmin Abdel-Magied. Q&A, Monday:

Islam, to me, is one of the most ... is the most feminist religion, right? We got equal rights well before­ the Europeans.

We don’t take our husband’s last names ... the fact is, what is culture is separate from what is faith.

Yassmin’s been running around the super-feminist Muslim world lately. Caroline Overington reports, The Australian, yesterday:

The federal government paid for activist Yassmin Abdel-Magied to tour some of the world’s most repressive Islami­c regimes last Novem­be­r, promoting her book about being a Sudanese-Egypt­ian-Australian Muslim woman who wears the hijab.

Repressive? Nah, they’re the most feminist. So femmo. The Australian, continued:

Her stops included Riyadh, where women who venture outdoors must wear the abaya, or full body covering, and punishments for sexual crimes include flogging and stoning ...

And it’s not sharia law’s fault. Abdel-

Magied speaking to Junkee, Wednesday:

I’m not going to deny, some countries run by Muslims are ­violent and sexist, but that’s not down to sharia. That’s down to the culture and the patriarchy and the politics of those … countries

Like this? The New Yorker, January 11, 2016:

According to Saudi law, which is based on sharia, a Saudi woman’s testimony in court is, with few exceptions, valued at half that of a man.

This Saudi law is inspired by Islam’s Hadith. Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826:

The Prophet said, “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said, “Yes.” He said, “This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.”

Don’t tell Sister Sharia. Abdel-Magied writing in Junkee, October 8, 2014:

Sharia and Islamic law had bestowed women with rights and privileges that were advanced and equalising ...

Feminism is A-OK but gays under sharia ... The Australian, June 17, 2016:

Gay and lesbian people should be put to death or otherwise punished under sharia, according to two imams.

Greens senator Nick McKim didn’t like our coverage of Yassmin’s world trip one bit. Senate chamber, yesterday:

It’s a straight, simple character assassination by The Australian, as they always do when someone dares raise their head above the parapet and make comments with which they ­disagree.

And the senator used it as an excuse to attack this paper’s support for free speech. Senate chamber, yesterday:

I’ve got a suggestion for The Australian and that is where the headline, the name of the paper “The Australian” on the front page, maybe they could put in smaller font just underneath it, “we’re not racists, but…”.

Here’s a suggestion for McKim and his inclusive colleagues. “The Greens are not anti-Israel but ... ” The Daily Telegraph, May 16, 2016:

The Daily Telegraph has learned NSW Greens senator Lee Rhiannon used her Senate printing allowance to print and authorise posters to promote a pro-Palestinian rally in Sydney ... she had printed them on behalf of the Palestine Action Group, which controversially called on the (Australian) government to officially break ties with Israel.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/cutandpaste/how-do-you-solve-a-problem-like-sharia-qa-darling-says-islamic-law-is-profeminism/news-story/884322f5c52a20ead25a96f531af3eff

Most of the time I ignore Private Lambie....My cat has more common sense!!!

;D ;D ;D

I hope Lambie has a good security detail.

Muslims kill to defend their cult from words. There is lots of precedent.

Stay safe, Jacqui.

Jacquie might need to wear a burka in future, a perfect disguise, it might catch on, the bikies may use the burka to trick the cops on anti association laws.

Gordon wrote on Feb 17^th, 2017 at 5:36pm:

I hope Lambie has a good security detail. Muslims kill to defend their cult from words. There is lots of precedent. Stay safe, Jacqui.

What bunkum Gordon.

In Australia Muslims are insulted day in day out. Now reflect on that idiotic statement of yours and ask yourself:

has the likes of Andrew Bolt, Jacqui Lambie, Pauline, Christensen, Bernardi, Q Society/ALA reps etc etc etc *EVER* had their lives threatened as a result of their incessant vitriol?

And here you are suddenly "concerned" for Jacqui's safety - as if this is the first time she has said something hateful towards muslims! Trust me Gordon, she was fine after all those other times she's slagged off at muslims - she'll be fine this time round. Of course you might want to compare that to Anne Aly, who actually did receive death threats after she criticised Peter Dutton over his divisive comments about Lebanese immigration.

And before you predictably retort with examples of Charlie Hebdo and other overseas anecdotes - keep in mind we are talking about Australia.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 18^th, 2017 at 11:37am:

Gordon wrote on Feb 17th, 2017 at 5:36pm: I hope Lambie has a good security detail. Muslims kill to defend their cult from words. There is lots of precedent. Stay safe, Jacqui. What bunkum Gordon. In Australia Muslims are insulted day in day out. Now reflect on that idiotic statement of yours and ask yourself: has the likes of Andrew Bolt, Jacqui Lambie, Pauline, Christensen, Bernardi, Q Society/ALA reps etc etc etc *EVER* had their lives threatened as a result of their incessant vitriol? And here you are suddenly "concerned" for Jacqui's safety - as if this is the first time she has said something hateful towards muslims! And before you predictably retort with examples of Charlie Hebdo and other overseas anecdotes - keep in mind we are talking about Australia.

That's nothing compared to what Muslims have done to Australia.

Muslims in Australia have conducted violent demonstrations, committed terrorism, planed terrorist attacks, joined ISIS,raped, cheated, murdered , their leaders have said horrible things regarding woman etc AND NOW THEY GET OUTRAGED!!!!

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 18^th, 2017 at 11:37am:

Gordon wrote on Feb 17th, 2017 at 5:36pm: I hope Lambie has a good security detail. Muslims kill to defend their cult from words. There is lots of precedent. Stay safe, Jacqui. What bunkum Gordon. In Australia Muslims are insulted day in day out. Now reflect on that idiotic statement of yours and ask yourself: has the likes of Andrew Bolt, Jacqui Lambie, Pauline, Christensen, Bernardi, Q Society/ALA reps etc etc etc *EVER* had their lives threatened......

Don't be ridiculous gandalf.

Of course, some or all of those individuals would have received threats from moslems 'ISLAMISTS' here in Australia.

Most people in their situ,        would be advised not to make that fact publicly known,     ....because doing so, would only encourage others to also make, more threats.




Example, of threats of violence, by moslems......

Within Australia...

06 May 2007
Mosque violence Tensions boil over after move to replace imam
Paul Maley
A BITTER factional feud within Canberra's Islamic community has erupted into violence with a leading member being punched repeatedly in the grounds of the mosque at Yarralumla.
Secretary of the ACT Islamic Society Kurt Kennedy said he was set upon shortly after announcing the appointment of a new imam to replace the controversial Mohammed Swaiti.
He was assaulted while waiting on the mosque grounds for a lift home after announcing Mr Swaiti had been dumped and naming the new imam as Yahya Atay.
......"When our secretary Kurt Kennedy announced ... the new imam will deliver the [Friday speech] before prayer, two people jumped up and grabbed Kurt and pushed him around," he told the Canberra Sunday Times.
"They pushed him and wanted to throw him out of the mosque.
"Then the imam [Mr Swaiti] started screaming in the middle of the mosque, 'I am the imam of this mosque! I am the imam who will service you people! I will never step down! No one can force me to step down! I will be here until the day I die!"'
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=general&story_id=582042&category=General



.



Outspoken moslem seeks police protection  [after he received threats from,    ....moslems]

March 22, 2007
One of Australia's most important Muslim leaders has sought police protection after criticising controversial cleric Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Hilali.
Tom Zreika, president of the Lebanese Muslim Association - and Sheikh Hilali's employer - said he received non-stop phone threats yesterday after he released a document urging greater integration and for Muslims to "mend their ways".
The report, prepared for a national meeting of imams in Sydney this weekend, says some Muslims are "ruining it" for all and that Australians have "had enough" of Muslims.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/outspoken-muslim-seeks-police-protection/2007/03/21/1174153164032.html


The links are old, but these news articles are kosher.

juliar wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 10:11am:

ISLAMICS want to behead Jacqui Lambie

EXACTLY, where did the "beheading" reference come from ?i.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 18^th, 2017 at 1:44pm:

juliar wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 10:11am:   ISLAMICS want to behead Jacqui Lambie EXACTLY, where did the "beheading" reference come from ?

It's how they roll.  :) :)


It has been a while since your last visit.

---

BEHEAD ALL MUSLIMS WHO CALL FOR THE BEHEADING OF ANYONE.

See if they like it.

They can insult whosoever they like, but insulting a barbaric, brutal, primitive, pedophile infested, sociopath, homicidal Cult, who takes its guidance from self confessed sociopath, mentally disturbed, lying, pedophile, murderer who had a god complex, is quit another story..........they go all funny in their pointed little heads.

BEHEAD ALL MUSLIMS WHO CALL FOR BEHEADING OF ANYONE FOR ANYTHING.

Valkie wrote on Feb 18^th, 2017 at 6:27pm:

but insulting a barbaric, brutal, primitive, pedophile infested, sociopath, homicidal Cult, who takes its guidance from self confessed sociopath, mentally disturbed, lying, pedophile, murderer who had a god complex, is quit another story..........they go all funny in their pointed little heads.

You must be so incredibly brave to say this Valkie - as no doubt those 'pointed little head' primitives have already marked you - right?

You know what you are Valkie - you're a martyr. You're a warrior for free speech. When you inevitably get beheaded for this gallant stance for freedom  - I'm going to ask... no demand that FD pin this brave quote of yours as a permanent feature of this web page - as a tribute to all things freedom.

This little tacker could do it, he'd be what, 9 or 10 now?
He's ready to be blooded.

---

http://zanettisview.com/rest/images/4125/w950.png

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 18^th, 2017 at 6:56pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 18th, 2017 at 6:27pm: but insulting a barbaric, brutal, primitive, pedophile infested, sociopath, homicidal Cult, who takes its guidance from self confessed sociopath, mentally disturbed, lying, pedophile, murderer who had a god complex, is quit another story..........they go all funny in their pointed little heads. You must be so incredibly brave to say this Valkie - as no doubt those 'pointed little head' primitives have already marked you - right? You know what you are Valkie - you're a martyr. You're a warrior for free speech. When you inevitably get beheaded for this gallant stance for freedom  - I'm going to ask... no demand that FD pin this brave quote of yours as a permanent feature of this web page - as a tribute to all things freedom.

Be my guest
I FREAR THEM NOT
Muzzos only attack when they have the numbers and the victim cannot defend themselves.
I may not win against a dozen of them, but I guarantee you, most of them will need hospitilization when Im done with them.
I know knives, Im trained to use them and my knives are all razor sharp.
Take me on... expect to be cut

Afterbthe first couple stagger backward trying to hold in their guts or trying to stem the arterial flow from their groin or neck.
The remainder of the cowards will back off.

ALL MUZZOS ARE COWARDS
ALL MUZZOS ARE PARASITIC, PEDOPHILE, SOCIOPATHIC MOOORONS

Valkie is insane.

We all know that, right?

Jacquie wins the day, for that matter the week, she keeps stirring the pot and rightly so.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 19^th, 2017 at 8:58pm:

Valkie is insane. We all know that, right?

Right.

mothra wrote on Feb 19^th, 2017 at 9:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 19th, 2017 at 8:58pm: Valkie is insane. We all know that, right? Sure Right.

---

Jacquie would make mince meat out of the so called prophet if he was to turn up in the apple island.

Johnnie wrote on Feb 19^th, 2017 at 9:16pm:

Jacquie would make mince meat out of the so called profit if he was to turn up in the apple island.

One thing that bugs me. When the ABC refers to Mo they say 'The prophet muhammad '. That seems to indicate he is an actual prophet.  They should say 'The Muslims prophet muhammad '.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 19^th, 2017 at 8:58pm:

Valkie is insane. We all know that, right?

Not insane my friend, simply a man willing to defend his family and himself with the exact same force as is used on me.

I will not stand by and allow my family to be hurt or injured by anyone.

I will not allow a barbarian murderer to have a go at me without consequences.

I;\'m happy to walk away, I honestly do not wish to fight.
If I did I would have joined the armed forces,
but If push comes to shove, I will defend myself.

And after 18 years of training, I assure you I can defend myself quite well.
And these barbarians would cause me no loss of sleep should I have to do so.

Sometimes a man must fight to be a man.

Valkie wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 12:33pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 19th, 2017 at 8:58pm: Valkie is insane. We all know that, right? Not insane my friend, simply a man willing to defend his family and himself with the exact same force as is used on me. I will not stand by and allow my family to be hurt or injured by anyone. I will not allow a barbarian murderer to have a go at me without consequences. I;\'m happy to walk away, I honestly do not wish to fight. If I did I would have joined the armed forces, but If push comes to shove, I will defend myself. And after 18 years of training, I assure you I can defend myself quite well. And these barbarians would cause me no loss of sleep should I have to do so. Sometimes a man must fight to be a man.

Your insanity lies in the false belief that only Muslims are capable of killing.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 12:55pm:

Your insanity lies in the false belief that only Muslims are capable of killing.

Yes those funky peace loving little goat fkkers, always being mis-understood.  ;D ;D ;D

---

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 12:55pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 12:33pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 19th, 2017 at 8:58pm: Valkie is insane. We all know that, right? Not insane my friend, simply a man willing to defend his family and himself with the exact same force as is used on me. I will not stand by and allow my family to be hurt or injured by anyone. I will not allow a barbarian murderer to have a go at me without consequences. I;\'m happy to walk away, I honestly do not wish to fight. If I did I would have joined the armed forces, but If push comes to shove, I will defend myself. And after 18 years of training, I assure you I can defend myself quite well. And these barbarians would cause me no loss of sleep should I have to do so. Sometimes a man must fight to be a man. Your insanity lies in the false belief that only Muslims are capable of killing.

Again my friend, you have misread me.
I dont care who attacks me, I will defend myself and my family.

But I ask you this.
What group is predisposed to threatening to, and actually killing people based on nothing other than the notoriety and terrorism value?
What group is predisposed to being caught out time and again being violent (when they outnumber the victim)
What group is taking over the jail system through violence and threats?

Put it all together.
Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member?

I do not fear them, but as with any snake, you keep your eye on them and be prepared to kill it if it attacks.

The people of the world who have not kept their eyes on them have suffered.
Don't be one of the victims.

This be Valkie:


Quote:

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I am the baddest mother f^cker in the God damn valley!

Valkie wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 3:20pm:

Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member?

You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos.

https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 3:33pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg

What absolute dribble
In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo
I have been verbally abused by a drunk
Threatened by a couple of blokes on a train....they backed down.
And, I think I was abused and threatened by a muzzo at Granville, I cant be sure because he was grunting pig at the time
It went like this

He and a couple of tents went to push me out of the way.
I said
Back off idiot.
He replied
Akakakakakakakakak  throat clear
I said
Thats ok i accept your apology
He replied with a little more anger
Akakakakakakakakak throat clear
I replied
Sorry mate, I dont want one of your women, Im already married
He got even more agitated and screamed
AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR
I said
No really mate, I already have a wife and I know you think Im fantastic, but One wife is enough.
He started screaming again
AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR

It was then I got up in his face and said, very clearly
Speak English you rude pathetic little deviate.
I dont understand a word you are saying......Idiot.

I then walked off laughing to his AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR

There was only one, so i knew I was perfectly safe
These cowards have to outnumber a victim at least 9 to one before they try anything.

COWARDS, PATHETIC, WEAK, PARASITIC COWARDS

Valkie wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 5:29pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo I have been verbally abused by a drunk Threatened by a couple of blokes on a train....they backed down. And, I think I was abused and threatened by a muzzo at Granville, I cant be sure because he was grunting pig at the time It went like this He and a couple of tents went to push me out of the way. I said Back off idiot. He replied Akakakakakakakakak  throat clear I said Thats ok i accept your apology He replied with a little more anger Akakakakakakakakak throat clear I replied Sorry mate, I dont want one of your women, Im already married He got even more agitated and screamed AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR I said No really mate, I already have a wife and I know you think Im fantastic, but One wife is enough. He started screaming again AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR It was then I got up in his face and said, very clearly Speak English you rude pathetic little deviate. I dont understand a word you are saying......Idiot. I then walked off laughing to his AKAKAKAKAKAKAKAKAK THROAT CLEAR There was only one, so i knew I was perfectly safe These cowards have to outnumber a victim at least 9 to one before they try anything. COWARDS, PATHETIC, WEAK, PARASITIC COWARDS

This is who the likes of Karnal and Peccar want in our country and deny the ones here are causing trouble.

I accuse both Karnal and Peccar of treason, reckless endangerment and Islamic enablement.



Constable Carty was stabbed in the heart and kicked and stomped on as he lay dying on the ground.

A post-mortem found he sustained injuries including "an incised wound at the front of the head . . . bruising to the top of the head consistent with having been caused by kicking; an incised wound above the eyebrow caused by a sharp object such as a knife; curved abrasion on the left side of the head; bruising and an abrasion above the left ear, described by the doctor as a combination of various forms of blunt trauma consistent with having been caused by a circular object such as a beer bottle, applied with significant force; further abrasions in the same area, caused by blunt trauma, consistent with kicking or possibly punching; an incised wound to the left of the face, caused by a sharp edged probably straight object that had the effect of cutting off part of the earlobe; two further incised wounds to the left ear . . . bruising and abrasion on the left cheek; a fairly deep incised wound to the left side of the nose, causing the nose to be cut through, . . . a 'scalping' wound to the back of the head, removing the surface of the skin and a tear, possibly caused by a sharp machete; and a shallow wound at the top of the back, possibly caused by a knife or broken glass, or sharp edged machete."


http://www.smh.com.au/news/miranda-devine/when-the-court-overlooks-a-familys-sentence-of-grief/2006/05/06/1146335964776.html

Valkie wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 5:29pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo

You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2017 at 5:38pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist.

NUP
Dont believe you.

Even though 90% of Australia is Australian or 99% are people who now consider themselves Australian and are a part of our culture.
I still think that the Muzzo presents the biggest chance of trouble.

They are involved in crime (as is well known)
They hate us (as is well known)
They are barbaric and violent (as is well known)
And they are on the news almost daily for some serious crime involving violence (as is well known)

Most Yobbos are just noisy and drunk, unless provoked they will simply sleep it off.

Muzzos are just predisposed to violence (Behead....,..add your own caption here)
They strike with no provocation, or some perceived provocation.
They always attack in groups ( as evidenced by their legendary cowardice)
And when they attack in groups the combined IQ is merely a derivative of the sum, not the sum as a whole.
In other words they loose IQ as their numbers grow.
They even rape in packs, just in case they cant handle a single woman on their own (refer cowardice)

Nup, you are safer from Yobbos than Muzzos.

Druggos on the other hand, now there is a totally different kettle of fish.
No one ever knows what is going on in a druggos tiny little, rotted and twisted mind.
But at least they don't travel in packs.

You know, I think I have worked out Muzzos.
They are all frustrated poofs.
Too scared to come out the hide in packs and get very very angry that they cant be free to be themselves.
They isolate themselves from women even dancing with other men.
They hide women under tents so they dont feel so bad.

No wonder they are always so angry.............poor widdle diddums

Valkie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 8:05am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:38pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist. NUP Dont believe you.

Well, that's your problem not mine.

While you're crossing the road to avoid women in burqas, I'll be keeping my eye on drunk, white, 20-something Australians.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 8:27am:

Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:05am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:38pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist. NUP Dont believe you. Well, that's your problem not mine. While you're crossing the road to avoid women in burqas, I'll be keeping my eye on drunk, white, 20-something Australians.

I dont cross the road to avoid burquas, I ignore them and refuse to even see them.
They move for me, not the other way around.

Besides, I avoid areas where these parisites live.
I live in a nice part of the world that has no barbaric muzzos
Its too far away for them to send thier underage wives to get their dole, so they dont live here.
They are all too young to cross the road by themselves.

No mosques, no muzzos, and only a little trouble from druggies who its hard to avoid thanks to all the drug imports that the muzzos bring into Australia.

No trouble from yobbos either,, in fact, in 30 years living here, Im still yet to even see one.

Must be horrible, you living where you fear yobbos, you must live in or near a housing estate.
Might be an idea to move and getvaway from all those big bad yobbos eh?

Valkie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 1:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:27am: Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:05am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:38pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist. NUP Dont believe you. Well, that's your problem not mine. While you're crossing the road to avoid women in burqas, I'll be keeping my eye on drunk, white, 20-something Australians. I dont cross the road to avoid burquas, I ignore them and refuse to even see them.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l41lFhN0QNpix1MIg/giphy.gif

That poor bugger is going to get an awful neck ache

Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 11:58am:

I watched this episode of Q&A and it was the Muslim woman who was being aggressive and spoiling for an argument. Lambie only fired back after this nutter went ballistic at her. Just watch the video.  I'm still trying to work out what it was that Lambie said was offensive?

It doesn't matter if it was 'offensive'. That's freedom of speech. I don't agree with what Lambie said, but I defend her right to say it.

Valkie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 1:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:27am: Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:05am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:38pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist. NUP Dont believe you. Well, that's your problem not mine. While you're crossing the road to avoid women in burqas, I'll be keeping my eye on drunk, white, 20-something Australians. I dont cross the road to avoid burquas, I ignore them and refuse to even see them. They move for me, not the other way around. Besides, I avoid areas where these parisites live. I live in a nice part of the world that has no barbaric muzzos Its too far away for them to send thier underage wives to get their dole, so they dont live here. They are all too young to cross the road by themselves. No mosques, no muzzos, and only a little trouble from druggies who its hard to avoid thanks to all the drug imports that the muzzos bring into Australia. No trouble from yobbos either,, in fact, in 30 years living here, Im still yet to even see one. Must be horrible, you living where you fear yobbos, you must live in or near a housing estate. Might be an idea to move and getvaway from all those big bad yobbos eh?

See, this is the issue. You are essentially advocating authoritarian tactics to impede on the rights of individual to practise their religion. I, of course, have issue with this. If you're going to advocate using authoritarian means, then come out and say that you don't believe in liberty or democracy.

Auggie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 6:52pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Feb 16th, 2017 at 11:58am: I watched this episode of Q&A and it was the Muslim woman who was being aggressive and spoiling for an argument. Lambie only fired back after this nutter went ballistic at her. Just watch the video.  I'm still trying to work out what it was that Lambie said was offensive? It doesn't matter if it was 'offensive'. That's freedom of speech. I don't agree with what Lambie said, but I defend her right to say it.

You bet your ass.

Auggie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 6:54pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 1:19pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:27am: Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:05am: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:38pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:33pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 20th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Who or what would be most likely to attack me for no reason other than I am not a CULT member? You have a far greater chance of being attacked, for no other reason than just being there, by white Australian yobbos. https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2009/01/28/fight_465x288_280109_t620.jpg What absolute dribble In my nearly 60 years of life, I have never been assulted by a yobbo You have more chance of being assaulted by a white Australian yobbo, than you do of being attacked by a Muslim or an Islamic terrorist. NUP Dont believe you. Well, that's your problem not mine. While you're crossing the road to avoid women in burqas, I'll be keeping my eye on drunk, white, 20-something Australians. I dont cross the road to avoid burquas, I ignore them and refuse to even see them. They move for me, not the other way around. Besides, I avoid areas where these parisites live. I live in a nice part of the world that has no barbaric muzzos Its too far away for them to send thier underage wives to get their dole, so they dont live here. They are all too young to cross the road by themselves. No mosques, no muzzos, and only a little trouble from druggies who its hard to avoid thanks to all the drug imports that the muzzos bring into Australia. No trouble from yobbos either,, in fact, in 30 years living here, Im still yet to even see one. Must be horrible, you living where you fear yobbos, you must live in or near a housing estate. Might be an idea to move and getvaway from all those big bad yobbos eh? See, this is the issue. You are essentially advocating authoritarian tactics to impede on the rights of individual to practise their religion. I, of course, have issue with this. If you're going to advocate using authoritarian means, then come out and say that you don't believe in liberty or democracy.

Go to a Muslim infected country and tell me that they believe in allowing the individual to practice your religion.
I believe in liberty and freedom , where that liberty and freedom is not antithetical to the cohesive culture of MY country.
If, by prohibiting freedom to practice abhorrent and illegal activities is repressing to a group or CULT then they are welcome to leave and go where they can practice FGM, Pedophilia, Homosexuality with boy slaves, Honor killing and murder of adult homosexuals.

If this or any group deliberately abuse my countries welfare, create unrest, practice illegal activities as part of their twisted ideals, they should be stopped, by whatever means is available be it authoritarian or not.

This cult does not wish to be a part or contribute to Australia, they are therefore not welcome.

Liberty/ democracy is a two edged sword, you can have it, but you must also accept responsibility for your actions and those actions must be in line with the laws and cultural idiosyncrasies of the country and its people.

If you come into Australia and wish to live here, you follow OUR LAWS, not try and introduce some primitive backward and barbaric cult rules.

If you come to Australia and want to live here , you follow our cultural differences and do not denigrate them or call Australians names.

If you want to come into MY country, you contribute, and become a worthwhile member of the community, not live off our welfare system, rort it and abuse it. You do not get involved in illegal schemes and then try and take over the jail system.

In other words, I do believe in liberty and democracy.
And I do believe in freedom of speech, and do not expect to be labelled just because some Cult voice wishes to silence me.

Valkie wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 8:04pm:

If this or any group deliberately abuse my countries welfare, create unrest, practice illegal activities as part of their twisted ideals, they should be stopped, by whatever means is available be it authoritarian or not.

And they are.

Everyone in Australia is subjected to the same laws.

Everybody is treated the same.

You break the law, you pay the price.

Do you have evidence of anything to the contrary, regarding your Muslim friends?

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21^st, 2017 at 8:17pm:

Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:04pm: If this or any group deliberately abuse my countries welfare, create unrest, practice illegal activities as part of their twisted ideals, they should be stopped, by whatever means is available be it authoritarian or not. And they are. Everyone in Australia is subjected to the same laws. Everybody is treated the same. You break the law, you pay the price. Do you have evidence of anything to the contrary, regarding your Muslim friends?

5

You are kidding , right?????

They break the law daily, its one of the mainstays of the muzzo doctrine

They get away with far too much and when caught, they go to a jail system where they rule.

Examples.
Read the paper any day, every day.

Valkie wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 9:35am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:17pm: Valkie wrote on Feb 21st, 2017 at 8:04pm: If this or any group deliberately abuse my countries welfare, create unrest, practice illegal activities as part of their twisted ideals, they should be stopped, by whatever means is available be it authoritarian or not. And they are. Everyone in Australia is subjected to the same laws. Everybody is treated the same. You break the law, you pay the price. Do you have evidence of anything to the contrary, regarding your Muslim friends? 5 You are kidding , right????? They break the law daily, its one of the mainstays of the muzzo doctrine

All sorts of Australians break the law every day.

Muslims, Catholics, atheists, women, men, children, black, white, Asian ...

Are you saying that when Muslims break the law, the police turn a blind eye?

If so, can you show some examples?

Quote:

Go to a Muslim infected country and tell me that they believe in allowing the individual to practice your religion. I believe in liberty and freedom , where that liberty and freedom is not antithetical to the cohesive culture of MY country. If, by prohibiting freedom to practice abhorrent and illegal activities is repressing to a group or CULT then they are welcome to leave and go where they can practice FGM, Pedophilia, Homosexuality with boy slaves, Honor killing and murder of adult homosexuals. If this or any group deliberately abuse my countries welfare, create unrest, practice illegal activities as part of their twisted ideals, they should be stopped, by whatever means is available be it authoritarian or not. This cult does not wish to be a part or contribute to Australia, they are therefore not welcome. Liberty/ democracy is a two edged sword, you can have it, but you must also accept responsibility for your actions and those actions must be in line with the laws and cultural idiosyncrasies of the country and its people. If you come into Australia and wish to live here, you follow OUR LAWS, not try and introduce some primitive backward and barbaric cult rules. If you come to Australia and want to live here , you follow our cultural differences and do not denigrate them or call Australians names. If you want to come into MY country, you contribute, and become a worthwhile member of the community, not live off our welfare system, rort it and abuse it. You do not get involved in illegal schemes and then try and take over the jail system. In other words, I do believe in liberty and democracy. And I do believe in freedom of speech, and do not expect to be labelled just because some Cult voice wishes to silence me.

Most of the people you are referring to do follow the law. Practising rituals is not illegal, nor should it be.

I agree that they should follow our laws. This also means that women should be allowed to wear hijabs if they wish, since this doesn't harm anyone. Of course, if they are committing criminal acts, then of course they should be punished under the law.

Second, the fact that 'they are living off the welfare system' is not unique to them; there are Australians who rort the system as well.

Third, I don't care if they 'believe' in Sharia law, or even if they believe that sharia law should be 'law' in Australia. I only care if they take violent action to achieve these goals. For e.g. if an American comes to Australia and lives here, and express his desire for Australia to drop the Westminster system and adopt a presidential form of government, should the American be kicked out for believing that Australia would be better off under an American-style Constitution? No, of course not, so why should this logic not apply to a person who 'believes' that Sharia law should be in Australia. As I said, I don't care if they 'believe' it; I only care if they seek to use violent means to achieve their goals.

Quote:

Most of the people you are referring to do follow the law. Practising rituals is not illegal, nor should it be. I agree that they should follow our laws. This also means that women should be allowed to wear hijabs if they wish, since this doesn't harm anyone. Of course, if they are committing criminal acts, then of course they should be punished under the law. Second, the fact that 'they are living off the welfare system' is not unique to them; there are Australians who rort the system as well. Third, I don't care if they 'believe' in Sharia law, or even if they believe that sharia law should be 'law' in Australia. I only care if they take violent action to achieve these goals. For e.g. if an American comes to Australia and lives here, and express his desire for Australia to drop the Westminster system and adopt a presidential form of government, should the American be kicked out for believing that Australia would be better off under an American-style Constitution? No, of course not, so why should this logic not apply to a person who 'believes' that Sharia law should be in Australia. As I said, I don't care if they 'believe' it; I only care if they seek to use violent means to achieve their goals.

That'll do me.

Aussie wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 2:28pm:

Quote: Most of the people you are referring to do follow the law. Practising rituals is not illegal, nor should it be.  Female genital mutilation? I agree that they should follow our laws. But if our laws contradict or are not aligned with Sharia they do not.  Nor are they expected to in Islam. This also means that women should be allowed to wear hijabs if they wish, since this doesn't harm anyone. Of course, if they are committing criminal acts, then of course they should be punished under the law. Personally I find "tents" and the reasons they wear them offensive and insulting? Second, the fact that 'they are living off the welfare system' is not unique to them; there are Australians who rort the system as well.  But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Third, I don't care if they 'believe' in Sharia law, or even if they believe that sharia law should be 'law' in Australia. I only care if they take violent action to achieve these goals. Some do, some have.  How can you tell which ones do and which ones don't?  For e.g. if an American comes to Australia and lives here, and express his desire for Australia to drop the Westminster system and adopt a presidential form of government, should the American be kicked out for believing that Australia would be better off under an American-style Constitution? No, of course not, so why should this logic not apply to a person who 'believes' that Sharia law should be in Australia. As I said, I don't care if they 'believe' it; I only care if they seek to use violent means to achieve their goals. How many Islamic Terrorists do we have in gaol? That'll do me. Really?

Quote:

Female genital mutilation?

That is illegal under Australian Law, yes or no?


Quote:

But if our laws contradict or are not aligned with Sharia they do not.  Nor are they expected to in Islam.

It matters not a jot what they are expected to do under Islam.  They are required to follow and comply with the Law just just everyone in this Country.


Quote:

Personally I find "tents" and the reasons they wear them offensive and insulting?

Why the question mark?  Are you equivocating?  If not, why do you think anyone gives a rat's arse what you find offensive and/or insulting.  I sure don't.  You'd never make it to that Clapham Omnibus standard, Grendel.


Quote:

But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas.

CentreLink recognises de facto relationships, Grendel.  Do you think it ought not?


Quote:

Some do, some have.  How can you tell which ones do and which ones don't?

They look evil.  Can't you pick 'em, Grendel?  You do it the same way you do it for non Muslims, Grendel.  Get it?


Quote:

How many Islamic Terrorists do we have in gaol?

Dunno, Grendel.  You tell me.  You know you want to.


Quote:

Really.

Yes yes, Grendel, I said really.

Quote:

Female genital mutilation?

Hmm, female genital mutilation is a crime. People can do anything they wish provided that they don't harm anyone.


Quote:

But if our laws contradict or are not aligned with Sharia they do not.  Nor are they expected to in Islam.

Doesn't matter. A person can believe something and not do anything about it. I wish for a five-year term of the House of Representatives and won't get it, but I'm not willing to resort to the violence to achieve this goal.


Quote:

Personally I find "tents" and the reasons they wear them offensive and insulting?

Doesn't matter what you believe. If the person chooses to wear to it, then that's their problem, not yours. Does you no harm.


Quote:

But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas.

If that's the case, then that is just stupid, and I can't understand why the government would do that, or how that is even possible?


Quote:

Some do, some have.  How can you tell which ones do and which ones don't?

 

How can you tell that anyone is not a criminal? The person who gets on to a bus could be a criminal. You don't know.


Quote:

How many Islamic Terrorists do we have in gaol?

I don't have any specific figures on me.

Quote:

CentreLink recognises de facto relationships, Grendel.  Do you think it ought not?

That would explain it.

Grendel wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 3:24pm:

But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas.

Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more.

John Smith wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 5:02pm:

Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more.

I don't think Centrelink should pay for each de facto partner in a polyamorous relationship because it puts others at a disadvantage who don't have those kind of relationships. Besides, the Quran says that a man can have two, three or four wives but only on the condition that he can afford to treat each one equally; if the man is receiving Centrelink, then it stands to reason that he cannot treat each 'wife' equally, therefore he should not 'marry' four women.

Auggie wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 5:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:02pm: Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more. I don't think Centrelink should pay for each de facto partner in a polyamorous relationship because it puts others at a disadvantage who don't have those kind of relationships. Besides, the Quran says that a man can have two, three or four wives but only on the condition that he can afford to treat each one equally; if the man is receiving Centrelink, then it stands to reason that he cannot treat each 'wife' equally, therefore he should not 'marry' four women.

If what Mr Smith has posted is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it ~ it costs us less to pay them a benefit as a defacto (even one of many) than as an individual.


Look out for a freight train  on the balance of your comments about equal treatment.  I could easily argue that our system of welfare allows him to treat them all, equally.

How many unemployed "Aussie" blokes shag how many unemployed 'Aussie' women at 'the same' time?  Gee, they could all be living in the same house, you know.

Aussie wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 5:50pm:

Auggie wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:47pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:02pm: Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more. I don't think Centrelink should pay for each de facto partner in a polyamorous relationship because it puts others at a disadvantage who don't have those kind of relationships. Besides, the Quran says that a man can have two, three or four wives but only on the condition that he can afford to treat each one equally; if the man is receiving Centrelink, then it stands to reason that he cannot treat each 'wife' equally, therefore he should not 'marry' four women. If what Mr Smith has posted is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it ~ it costs us less to pay them a benefit as a defacto (even one of many) than as an individual.

Ah, ok. I think I understand now what you both are saying. They're not paying for each individual partner; they're just treating (the whole) as a de facto relationship. In the case, provided that each person is a willing participant in the relationship, then whilst I disagree with it, I see no reason to legislate against it.

Aussie wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 5:50pm:

Auggie wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:47pm: John Smith wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:02pm: Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more. I don't think Centrelink should pay for each de facto partner in a polyamorous relationship because it puts others at a disadvantage who don't have those kind of relationships. Besides, the Quran says that a man can have two, three or four wives but only on the condition that he can afford to treat each one equally; if the man is receiving Centrelink, then it stands to reason that he cannot treat each 'wife' equally, therefore he should not 'marry' four women. If what Mr Smith has posted is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it ~ it costs us less to pay them a benefit as a defacto (even one of many) than as an individual. Look out for a freight train  on the balance of your comments about equal treatment.  I could easily argue that our system of welfare allows him to treat them all, equally. How many unemployed "Aussie" blokes shag how many unemployed 'Aussie' women at 'the same' time?  Gee, they could all be living in the same house, you know.

You make a good point.

There's nothing against the law in having more than one 'partner' and I wouldn't legislate against it.

Anyone the islamics want to behead must be great.

Please Jacqui, please join Paulines party.

Jacquie is setting things straight, if it was not for her and Pauline  Australia would settle into a mindset of, I give up, lets all wear burkas and be poofs.

John Smith wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2017 at 5:02pm:

Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more.

That's right John thank you for repeating what I said previously.

As for you and that other joker Aussie...  puhlease...  do try harder... you just make yourself look like stupid apologists...

Oh wait.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Grendel wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 7:53am:

As for you and that other joker Aussie...  puhlease...  do try harder... you just make yourself look like stupid apologists... Oh wait.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Apologist for what, Grendel?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)

Grendel wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 7:52am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:02pm: Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more. That's right John thank you for repeating what I said previously.

I'm not repeating what you said, I'm stating facts, you on the other hand were having a cry.

Now back to that, would you prefer they pay them each the single rate?

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 2:44pm:

Grendel wrote on Feb 23rd, 2017 at 7:52am: John Smith wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 5:02pm: Grendel wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 3:24pm: But centrelink are paying those in polygamist relationships and accepting by doing so the relationship which in Australia is not legal.  Unless it already existed overseas. Centrelink doesn't care if you claim you are married, it means they pay less. They don't ask for marriage certificates. The alternative is that they treat each partner in the polygamist marriage as a single person which would cost us far more. That's right John thank you for repeating what I said previously. I'm not repeating what you said, I'm stating facts, you on the other hand were having a cry. Now back to that, would you prefer they pay them each the single rate?

YAWN....  yet I posted it way back when the story first came out...   ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
I'd prefer for them to not be polygamist its against the law here isn't it?
I prefer them not to be gaming the system.
You?

Grendel wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 3:54pm:

I'd prefer for them to not be polygamist its against the law here isn't it?

it is against the law here. That's why the govt. doesn't recognise polygamy. However even the all powerful Australian government cannot dictate what is and isn't law overseas. It's no different to gays getting married in NZ, govt' pays them married rate too, are you going to cry about that?

Now you haven't answered the question, would you prefer they were each paid a single rate?

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 4:00pm:

Grendel wrote on Feb 23rd, 2017 at 3:54pm: I'd prefer for them to not be polygamist its against the law here isn't it? it is against the law here. That's why the govt. doesn't recognise polygamy. However even the all powerful Australian government cannot dictate what is and isn't law overseas. It's no different to gays getting married in NZ, govt' pays them married rate too, are you going to cry about that? Now you haven't answered the question, would you prefer they were each paid a single rate?

I don't have to answer the question I've already brought the subject up twice before you... 

Whatever is less expensive for us as taxpayers John...  I've said that again too and as for your ignorance denial and crap...

Quote:

Re: Why are people afraid to acknowledge the danger? Reply #59 - Feb 14th, 2017 at 9:12pm Quote http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/centrelink-legalises-multiple-muslim-w... Quote: CENTRELINK is ignoring Islamic polygamy, paying spousal benefits to Muslim families with multiple wives in an effort to save taxpayers’ money. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/samantha-maiden-polygamists-marrie... Quote: It’s easy to dismiss the polygamy argument as a freak show put up in Australia by opponents of gay marriage. But the reality is that it is happening in Australia and it’s not illegal under the Marriage Act unless someone tries to register it at Births, Deaths and Marriages. And it’s raising some issues for Centrelink when people with interesting arrangements at home rock up asking for a welfare cheque.

yep I did mention it when the story first came out and now you've repeated me twice. :D :D :D :D :D
Don't bother TROLLING me again...  I get it...  you are THE KING OF TROLLS....  you can't help yourself. ::)

Grendel wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 4:12pm:

Whatever is less expensive for us as taxpayers John..

then stop your crying about it. That's what you are getting


Grendel wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 4:12pm:

Don't bother TROLLING me again...  I get it...  you are THE KING OF TROLLS....  you can't help yourself. Roll Eyes

can't help yourself can you? determined to troll every thread.  :D :D

John Smith wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2017 at 5:05pm:

Grendel wrote on Feb 23rd, 2017 at 4:12pm: Whatever is less expensive for us as taxpayers John.. then stop your crying about it. That's what you are getting Grendel wrote on Feb 23rd, 2017 at 4:12pm: Don't bother TROLLING me again...  I get it...  you are THE KING OF TROLLS....  you can't help yourself. Roll Eyes can't help yourself can you? determined to troll every thread.  :D :D

I wasn't crying about it you dishonest doofus.
Honestly... :D :D :D :D :D