Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print
ASIO actions against islamic security concerns (Read 36141 times)
wally1
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2055
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #30 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:16am
 
Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 8:56pm:
freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 12:42pm:
There is no suggestion that Australian Muslims intent on fighting in Syria want to harm Australia.

As long as one doesn't think Islamic Sharia law would harm Australia, since that is what the majority of Muslims around the world want.
Though only a tiny minority would need to want that, armed with beheading knives in one hand to modify the views of their peacenick "hypocrite" brethren, while being perfectly supported by the Quran and Hadith in their other hand.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#muslim_hypocrites

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 12:42pm:
However, it is believed that about a 10th of Islamists who fight overseas return radicalised..........

A better term might be something like "fundamentalized", since they return from the cradle of the religion as true Muslims, that GET Islam, and do what they can to do as Muhammad did and commanded his followers to do.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 12:42pm:
....... to their home country.

I doubt it matters whether they go overseas or not. I am going to guess that in Australia, like here in the U.S., the Saudis are primarily responsible for financing and building Islamic centers and mosques. Especially on or near college campuses, where heads full of mush are as malleable as Play-Doh, as evidenced by the antisemitism and anti-Zionism that is sweeping across college campuses. The Saudis are exporting Islamic sharia law around the world, where it is rapidly replacing laws of sovereign States, like Nigeria. The Saudis OWN Islam worldwide.

I went to hear a speaker that had infiltrated a mosque in the U.S., at which only about 10% of the women wore head coverings (like in Egypt a half century ago).
An Imam came from Saudi Arabia (in essence an emissary from the true owners of the mosque) and literally lived in the mosque for a week or two (I forgot how long, could even be a month). Shortly after he left only about 10% of the women were not wearing head coverings.

"A large majority of mosques in the United States are led by Wahhabi clerics. Wahhabism is an extreme brand of Islam practiced dominantly in Saudi Arabia. According to Muslim estimates, up to 80 percent of mosques in the U.S. are owned, operated and led by Wahhabis."
clarionproject.org/threat/homegrown-threat/us-mosques

The article incorrectly characterizes true fundamental followers of Muhammad, as peddling "an extreme brand" of Islam. Saudis are Sunni Muslims.
jcpa.org/article/sunni-vs-shiite-in-saudi-arabia/

For pity's sake. The Saudis are the ones that profit, off of the rituals "performed" by the "children of the flesh" at the Kaaba, as Arabian pagan's did before Muhammad was ever born.
brotherpete.com/children_flesh.htm

Mosques are the military headquarters of the aggressive, imperialistic, militant, murderous, cult of Muhammadanism.
youtube.com/watch?v=ujUOZyrnewE

The Saudis OWN Islam worldwide. Thus it is perhaps not a stretch to say they either do, or will, OWN the hearts and minds of Muhammad's followers worldwide.


Since your not from Australia and don't know about aussie muslims, australain muslims have very little connection with saudia. Saudia has very little control or influence on aussie muslims.

Saudia Arabia has invested some money in a few schools but all the mosques are independent and are funded by the local community and run usually by volunteers.

If saudia ceased to exist tomorrow everything will just run as normal.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pete Waldo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 503
U.S.
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #31 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:37am
 
Stratos wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 5:26am:
Hilarious. 

In consecutive sentences you say that the head covering wearing is linked to Saudi Imana, and then say that "Just as the same guys built mosques and Islamic centers all around the world, as planning centers for the imperialistic conquest of Islamic Jihad."  and somehow you can't see the link between the two?

Also when I questioned the link between the two in my original post, you disagreed with me,


Ho hum. You see, whether you lie with willful intent, or through negligence or carelessness or even through misunderstanding, doesn't make the lie any less of a lie.

Why not try an answer this time? This is very important for you, since it could help you gain some insight into your dysfunction and self-deception, and perhaps begin to find the road to recovery.

Please copy and paste where I was "
currently claiming
", or made the
claim
at any time,
"that wearing hats leads to Jihad"
.
Please also include a link to the post in which I made that claim.

Again, where did I make the claim that you falsely attributed to me?
Back to top
 

Truth can never be told so as to be understood and not be believed. ~ William Blake
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Stratos
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4725
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #32 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:36am
 
I've shown you twice, and you are refusing to answer questions again. 

Or do you only deal in exact wordings now?
Back to top
 

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15th, 2014 at 11:24pm:
Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act
 
IP Logged
 
Sparky
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1338
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #33 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:50am
 
Why the F do Muslim woman wear head coverings? I know we've talked about it a million times but I still just don't understand.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48833
At my desk.
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #34 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:13am
 
So they don't get raped.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
wally1
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2055
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #35 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:32am
 
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:50am:
Why the F do Muslim woman wear head coverings? I know we've talked about it a million times but I still just don't understand.


who cares if they do.I wouldn't care two stuffs if a hindu wears a turban or a jew wears a skull cap.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #36 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:59am
 
Headscarves in Australia bring terrorism and sharia closer to home Wally - apparently.  Tongue
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Sparky
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1338
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #37 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:57pm
 
wally1 wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:32am:
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:50am:
Why the F do Muslim woman wear head coverings? I know we've talked about it a million times but I still just don't understand.


who cares if they do.I wouldn't care two stuffs if a hindu wears a turban or a jew wears a skull cap.

I'll ask again. Why? I honestly want to know.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #38 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 1:38pm
 
to show she is different.
It's a Mozzie woman's way of saying, 'look at moi, Kimmy, look at moi, I have two words for you, Kimmy, two words: allahu akhbar!'
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
wally1
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2055
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #39 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 2:14pm
 
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:57pm:
wally1 wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:32am:
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:50am:
Why the F do Muslim woman wear head coverings? I know we've talked about it a million times but I still just don't understand.


who cares if they do.I wouldn't care two stuffs if a hindu wears a turban or a jew wears a skull cap.

I'll ask again. Why? I honestly want to know.


A couple of days ago you said that muslims wont follow christinaity and that Christianity wont follow islam.

So them whats the issue if muslims want to cover there head?

Do they impact on your life, family or weekly pay cheque?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #40 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 2:29pm
 
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:57pm:
I'll ask again. Why? I honestly want to know.


Most muslims believe that the quran commands women to wear it.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #41 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:59pm
 
wally1 wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 2:14pm:
So them whats the issue if muslims want to cover there head?

Do they impact on your life, family or weekly pay cheque?



So what's the issue with some cartoons in a Danish newspaper?
What's the issue with an English novelist writing about the Satanic Verses?
What's the issue with an American making a silly video about Mohammed?


Do they impact on your life, family or weekly pay cheque?

Yet Muslims, whose life, family or weekly pay were untouched by all these events went on the rampage across the world, rioting, burning, killing.

WTF!!!!

DO you HAVE to be a hypochrite to be a Muslim?


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #42 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:02pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 2:29pm:
Sparky wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:57pm:
I'll ask again. Why? I honestly want to know.


Most muslims believe that the quran commands women to wear it.


But as all the sophisticated (ahem!)  Muslim like you know full well, it does not.

Leaves you in a moral bind, doesn't it?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pete Waldo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 503
U.S.
Gender: male
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #43 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 11:34pm
 
Stratos wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 8:36am:
I've shown you twice, and you are refusing to answer questions again. 

Or do you only deal in exact wordings now?


It isn't about exact wording. It is about your creating a preposterous claim, and then falsely attributing it to me as if I had made the claim, as a result of your dysfunction.

Stratos wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 11:56pm:
OK, so lets think critically.  Lets look at the evidence that wearing hats leads to Jihad, which is what you are currently claiming.


It is about this lie you told. And no, I will not allow you to distract our conversation with another subject, until I finish helping you see what you did. Since other forum members complain about your antics as well, I felt it was about time that someone took you out to the woodshed and gave you a good sound paddling.

First, would a person with sound cognitive function, and a capacity for critical thought, believe that ANYBODY would CLAIM that ".....that wearing hats leads to Jihad....."?
To a rational person the answer would obviously be no, and thus they would know before they lied, that it would be a bold faced lie, to declare that another person actually made that claim.

This even after you had been exposed to post after post in this forum, in which the CLAIM that I have actually made is that Muhammad through the Quran and Hadith is responsible for the imperialistic conquest of Islamic Jihad that is binding on Muhammad's true followers, and I supported my claims with the Quran and Hadith. My claims are further confirmed by 1400 years of Islamic history, including Muhammad's First Jihad conquering of nearly the whole of the Arabia during his lifetime, and his followers conquest of nearly the whole known world all the way up into France and Austria. My claims are also confirmed by over 22,000 deadly Islamic terror attacks around the world just since 9-11, and the fact that Sunni Muslim terrorists committed “about 70 percent” of the 12,533 terrorist murders in 2011, according to the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). My claims are further confirmed straight from the mouths of a vast number, if not a majority, of Islamic Imams and Muftis all around the world today.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm

Coupled with the fact that Muslims are responsible for the vast majority of the 100,000 to 180,000 Christians martyred around the world every year.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/muslim_persecution_of_christians.htm

Along with the misery of 1400 years of Islamic slavery and dhimmitude that continues unto this day.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/islamic_slavery_dhimmitude.htm

Yet after all that, you took a small part of a post and removed it from context, created a preposterous claim that was completely contrary to the context of the post, and then lied about it being my claim. Your preposterous claim assigned to me being: ".....that wearing hats leads to Jihad, which is what you are currently claiming."

Now a rational person - even if they had not been engaged in many prior post exchanges with me as you have - even solely on the basis of that single post would conclude that I actually claim, that Saudi clerics are responsible spreading Islamic Jihad around the world, as Muhammad commanded. Simply Google - Dispatches: Undercover Mosque

You suffer the dysfunction of denial of simple objective reality. But you even went far beyond that to lie about me.

Now let's consider the post again, but as a person with a normal cognitive function would:
ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1388621936/9#9

The first paragraph indicates that a majority of Muslims are in favor of Islamic sharia law as the law of the land (wherever they live).

The second paragraph regards Muslims that return from the cradle of Islam "fundamentalized", that now GET Islam, and understand it is their duty to engage in imperialistic conquest and subjugation of others to Islam.

The third recognized that Saudis are responsible for financing the majority of Islamic centers and mosques in the U.S., and by extension, the world.

The fifth paragraph quoted: "According to Muslim estimates, up to 80 percent of mosques in the U.S. are owned, operated and led by Wahhabis."

Now back in the fourth paragraph it indicated that when Saudis eventually visit the mosques that western dupes construct for them they "fundamentalize" the congregation. The fact that the women went from 90% not wearing head coverings to 90% wearing head coverings was one outward manifestations of the rapidly fundamentalized congregation.

So, would a rational person with normal cognitive function and a capacity for critical thought conclude that
I
was making the
claim
that:

1. It is Islam itself, the Quran and Hadith, Islam's Imams and Muftis and true Muslims that do as Muhammad did and commanded his people to do are responsible for Islamic Jihad, as confirmed by 1400 years of history and the murder, mayhem and misery spread around the world by Islam today?

Or that based on the evidence I claim that:

2. "Lets look at the evidence that wearing hats leads to Jihad, which is what you are currently claiming."

Which do you think a person with normal cognitive function, and even the most minute capacity for critical thought, would suggest that I actually claim?
Back to top
 

Truth can never be told so as to be understood and not be believed. ~ William Blake
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Stratos
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4725
Re: ASIO actions against islamic security concerns
Reply #44 - Jan 3rd, 2014 at 11:42pm
 
Dear oh dear, more misleading statements that aren't even relevant now.

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 11:34pm:
Coupled with the fact that Muslims are responsible for the vast majority of the 100,000 to 180,000 Christians martyred around the world every year.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24864587

Quote:
More than four million are estimated to have been killed in that war between 2000 and 2010, and CSGC counts 900,000 of them - or 20% - as martyrs.

Over 10 years, that averages out at 90,000 per year.

So when you hear that 100,000 Christians are dying for their faith, you need to keep in mind that the vast majority - 90,000 - are people who were killed in DR Congo.

This means we can say right away that the internet rumours of Muslims being behind the killing of 100,000 Christian martyrs are nonsense. The DRC is a Christian country. In the civil war, Christians were killing Christians.
Back to top
 

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15th, 2014 at 11:24pm:
Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print