link

"WTF have we come to? A Muslim woman frisking a smacking nun? Go to hell! (Sorry I got a bit carried away there.) And now even the bloody Pope (above) reckons Islam is good and pillow biting is okay. Yet I'm sure I recall a verse somewhere in the Bible saying that "a bloke lying with a bloke, as with a woman, is an abomination". How does the bastard feel about the occasional goat... providing it's the same sex of course?"

And yes, Pickering is right, there are WAY too many Muslims employed in security positions.

The other night when Channel 9 was showing footage of the security check-ups at the airport you could see this tall Arab in the background with an enormous black beard and who was part of the security team.

Thanks herb. I think we should have a serious national debate about whether muslims should be barred from these sorts of sensitive security positions. We can open it up with FD explaining how targeting "muslim looking" applicants and discriminating on the basis of their views on freeeeeedom has nothing to do with religious discrimination.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8^th, 2017 at 8:11am:

Thanks herb. I think we should have a serious national debate about whether muslims should be barred from these sorts of sensitive security positions. We can open it up with FD explaining how targeting "muslim looking" applicants and discriminating on the basis of their views on freeeeeedom has nothing to do with religious discrimination.

If the problem is people who are Muslims, then it's a no-brainer to keep Muslims out of sensitive employment areas where screams of "ALLAHU AKBAR!" might be heard to rent the air just prior to a bomb-blast.

We now have the phenomenon of Western-born Muslims of previously 'moderate' character evolving into mass-murdering martyrs for Islam.

And what THIS means is that our safety cannot be guaranteed for as long as there are home-grown or imported Muslims in our society.

And let me again point out the fact that these Muslim terrorists never target our politicians for annihilation ~ it's always a plane, a sporting ground, a train, etc, but they dare not whack the hornet's nest by going after our politicians.

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 8^th, 2017 at 1:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:11am: Thanks herb. I think we should have a serious national debate about whether muslims should be barred from these sorts of sensitive security positions. We can open it up with FD explaining how targeting "muslim looking" applicants and discriminating on the basis of their views on freeeeeedom has nothing to do with religious discrimination. If the problem is people who are Muslims, then it's a no-brainer to keep Muslims out of sensitive employment areas where screams of "ALLAHU AKBAR!" might be heard to rent the air just prior to a bomb-blast. We now have the phenomenon of Western-born Muslims of previously 'moderate' character evolving into mass-murdering martyrs for Islam. And what THIS means is that our safety cannot be guaranteed for as long as there are home-grown or imported Muslims in our society. And let me again point out the fact that these Muslim terrorists never target our politicians for annihilation ~ it's always a plane, a sporting ground, a train, etc, but they dare not whack the hornet's nest by going after our politicians.

Exactly. That's because they're in cahoots with our snivelling, cowardly politicians, who once we've dealt with the Musel-menace, will be dealt with in the fullness of time.

As FD would say, a plausible theory.

No matter how bad it looks having Muslims in sensitive security positions should be open to debate. Instances have occurred. In the states a Muslim soldier shot up his comrades. Muslim pilots have crashed planes etc etc etc.

Mr Hammer wrote on Aug 9^th, 2017 at 9:46am:

No matter how bad it looks having Muslims in sensitive security positions should be open to debate. Instances have occurred. In the states a Muslim soldier shot up his comrades. Muslim pilots have crashed planes etc etc etc.

Sikhs too, Homo. Indira Gandhi's bodyguards assassinated her. Jews: Mossad agents are known to be in a number of sensitive positions. They steal our passports and blow things up in the Middle East.

Muslims, Sikhs, Jews. That leaves Christians, no?

Wanted: security guard. Non-Christians need not apply.

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 8^th, 2017 at 1:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:11am: Thanks herb. I think we should have a serious national debate about whether muslims should be barred from these sorts of sensitive security positions. We can open it up with FD explaining how targeting "muslim looking" applicants and discriminating on the basis of their views on freeeeeedom has nothing to do with religious discrimination. If the problem is people who are Muslims, then it's a no-brainer to keep Muslims out of sensitive employment areas ...

Why would they be going near any employment areas.

You and your fellow Islamophobes are always telling us that all Muslims are on the dole.

Are you telling us now that you lied?

I'm curious.

You're pathetic.....

Fuzzball wrote on Aug 9^th, 2017 at 11:40am:

You're pathetic.....

It's a good question, Matty. What's the Muslim unemployment rate?

How many have security licenses?

And how many have dodgy medical certificates for bad backs, etc?

Shame on the SMH, they should know better. From Media Watch:


Quote:

Meanwhile, The Sydney Morning Herald was trumpeting a scoop of its own: Men arrested over Sydney 'plane bomb plot' have links to aviation industry — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 That seemed pretty damning too. But if you read the article, you discovered the so-called aviation links involved the son of one of the arrested men. Who had studied aviation management and as the Herald told us he: … has not been arrested and is not facing charges … — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 The Herald also told readers: Fairfax Media is not suggesting he is involved in the allegations and police don't believe the group infiltrated any internal airport systems or staff. — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 In which case why was that a headline story?

Why indeed?

This is the sort of BS misreporting that makes Herb and Gordy salivate.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 9^th, 2017 at 12:48pm:

Shame on the SMH, they should know better. From Media Watch: Quote: Meanwhile, The Sydney Morning Herald was trumpeting a scoop of its own: Men arrested over Sydney 'plane bomb plot' have links to aviation industry — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 That seemed pretty damning too. But if you read the article, you discovered the so-called aviation links involved the son of one of the arrested men. Who had studied aviation management and as the Herald told us he: … has not been arrested and is not facing charges … — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 The Herald also told readers: Fairfax Media is not suggesting he is involved in the allegations and police don't believe the group infiltrated any internal airport systems or staff. — Sydney Morning Herald, 1 August, 2017 In which case why was that a headline story? Why indeed? This is the sort of BS misreporting that makes Herb and Gordy salivate.

The SMH are only following FD's lead, G. Like Herbie and Gordie, they all uphold the use of porkies in their campaign against the Muselman.

Anyway, the post-2007 FD prefers the Australian, although he's been happy with the UK Daily Mail and Pickering's blogs of late.

All good, clean fun.

So it's just a coincidence that the son of a plane bombing terrorist had studied aviation management? Or are you saying our security systems work because he never landed a job in the industry?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 1:07am:

So it's just a coincidence that the son of a plane bombing terrorist had studied aviation management? Or are you saying our security systems work because he never landed a job in the industry?

No, I think Media Watch said the SMH got it wrong, FD.

You?

Got what wrong? The facts or the spin?

No no, that was a question.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 1:07am:

So it's just a coincidence that the son of a plane bombing terrorist had studied aviation management? Or are you saying our security systems work because he never landed a job in the industry?

I suppose coming from the same person who sees no problem with stating as fact that government school funds went to terrorists with no shred of evidence, and then thinking he can justify it by rhetorically asking where else it could have gone - I shouldn't be surprised by this response.

Do you think it is just a coincidence Gandalf?

Karnal wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 1:26pm:

No no, that was a question.

I can feel a tantrum coming on, FD.

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 10^th, 2017 at 1:57pm:

Karnal wrote on Aug 10th, 2017 at 1:26pm: No no, that was a question. I can feel a tantrum coming on, FD.

Practice your breathing exercise, Herbie. You'll be right.