He has spent 18 years in Australia enjoying it's freedoms and accepting it's welfare. He has been allowed to voice his opinions quite freely with very little in the way of criticism. He has been allowed to make demands on the Australian People regarding the rights of his own. But still he needs a translator because he refuses to learn the English Language. What does that tell you about him ....

Tells me he is much like thousands of other Australian migrants.

noosard wrote:Getting beside the grand mufti might be your job
Everybody else are trying to distances themselves from him

well said

jackspratt wrote:Tells me he is much like thousands of other Australian migrants.

Who cant speak english after 18 years?

ronan01 wrote:

jackspratt wrote:Tells me he is much like thousands of other Australian migrants.

Who cant speak english after 18 years?

Jack's mate, the Mufti ...

jackspratt wrote:Tells me he is much like thousands of other Australian migrants.

Don't I remember some years back when you criticised others for not speaking Thai when they were living there ??

Aardvark wrote:Don't I remember some years back when you criticised others for not speaking Thai when they were living there ??

If you do, then you "misremember" (sic).

ronan01 wrote:

noosard wrote:Getting beside the grand mufti might be your job
Everybody else are trying to distances themselves from him

well said

Seems Malcolm Turnbull doesn't read UM:

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull earlier said he welcomed a statement from the Australian National Imams Council clarifying Dr Mohammed's remarks on the Paris terrorist attacks.

Speaking to reporters in Manila, Mr Turnbull said he was glad the Grand Mufti had sought to resolve the issue.

"I've seen the controversy reported in the press, I've noted also that he has clarified that initial statement, and that seems to have cleared up the issue but I don't want to, while I'm here in Manila, engage in a textual debate," Mr Turnbull said.

"But I'm pleased to see his condemnation of Daesh [Islamic State] and of that terrorist attack has been made very clear in his subsequent remarks."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-18/t ... ti/6952368

"But there is a problem nonetheless. Muslims in name only can beget real Muslims and sometimes very nasty ones. Malcolm Turnbull on the Insiders (15 November) was more instructive than he imagined. In responding to a question from Barrie Cassidy on the risk of terrorists disguising themselves as refugees he said this: “…the history of terrorist activities in Australia and people of concern in this area is very much for the most part second and third-generation Australians.” He intended this to be comforting. It isn’t.

Go to the Moroccan father of Abdelhamid Abaaoud, who is believed to be the mastermind of the Paris attack. “Why in the name of God, would he want to kill innocent Belgians? Our family owes everything to this country.” Only the daft or the deceptive don’t connect the dots to Islam.

It is reckless to admit more Muslims into Australia (or, so far as it is preventable, into Europe or North America), whether refugees or whatever their status. They might be fine people. Their children might be fine people. Then again they might not. And it not just violence that can undo Western civilization, so can the spread of discordant and intolerant values. Why take a chance when the pall of Islam is ever present waiting its opportunity to hold sway? There are plenty of other migrants to choose from; many in desperate circumstances."

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015 ... sus-ferce/

It would appear the attackers in Paris have sympathizers and they won be in the minority.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... anbul.html

Better man than me:
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews/videos ... 901157217/

Radical islam not a new issue!

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

Winston Churchill

marjamlew wrote:Better man than me:
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews/videos ... 901157217/

Will not make one speck of difference to the filth that Murdered his Wife .....

Aardvark wrote:

marjamlew wrote:Better man than me:
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews/videos ... 901157217/

Will not make one speck of difference to the filth that Murdered his Wife .....

But it is a wonderful response form a civilized person to a tragic and trumatic event. Would you rather he shouted the stereotypical hate speech......? Because that seems to be having a really positive effect on the conflict also.

One mixed up woman:

"Europe's first female suicide bomber shows the jihadi who never read the Koran, liked to drink and smoke and had a reputation for having lots of boyfriends"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3s0E6l58D

Was she a radical Muslim? Or was it some personal psychopathology that really drove her? Undoubtedly very dangerous.

The word Hate,
Hate is good English word and is a naturally evolved feeling for us mere mortals, it is at times, IMO wrongly, thrown around in a disparaging manner against people who are normally pacifist by nature but for some reason have been forced to show this natural hate emotion, at times as a defense mechanism against another group of far greater haters. As an example, the western world against current radical islam.
And yes some of those people who hate are stereotypical, because their bond is one common train of thought together which propagates that hate emotion. Radical islam is far more stereotypical in their hate emotion.

The so called Hate speech description, IMO, which is more and more often directed towards westerner's, pales almost into nothing when you open your ears and compare it to the many radical islam hate speeches from the that group, their speeches are totally constant in their hate theme and absolutely stereotypical in their content and mind set that I find it hard to grasp that they are not continuously shouted down from the roof tops, the same as the supposed western radical islam haters are usually in their own countries.
There is no way that the hate and hate speeches are in any way a balanced argument, radical islam is way in front of any percent based scoring method.
They just hate us 100% of the time. And like any bully will deservedly get their comeuppance in due time.
They have now changed the rules of engagement and bought the war to the general public, but, now as in all war, the non radical islam countries will rightly so try to protect it's citizens with the shield of their armies. In any war there is usually a loser. Lets hope it is radical islam.

When you look at hate crimes which group does the following description make you think of?

"A hate crime is usually defined by state law as one that involves threats, harassment, or physical harm and is motivated by prejudice against someone's race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation or physical or mental disability. Laws vary by state and if hate crimes are provided for by statute, the defintions of hate crimes and penalties imposed vary. States that have hate crime statutes provide harsher penalites for such offenses.
The underlying criminal offenses that are designated in hate crime laws include, but are not limited to, crimes against persons like harassment, terroristic threats, assault and crimes against property like criminal trespass, criminal mischief and arson. It may also include vandalism causing damage to a church, synagogue, cemetery, mortuary, memorial to the dead, school, educational facility, community center, municipal building, courthouse, grounds surrounding such places or personal property located within such places.
The current federal law regarding hate crimes deals with crimes where the offender is motivated by bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or ethnicity/national origin."

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/26/europ ... -radicals/

Loads of readicalised airport workers recently sacked from Charles de Gaulle,just need the UK to start checking Heathrow since UK is about to get involved with the airstrikes in Syria

"Regardless of the constant professing of IS that they act in the name of Allah and the Islamic faith, there is a strong tendency of Western left-wing ideologues to deny the religiosity of the agenda. Such vehement refusal to criticise the religion itself continues to be as baffling as it is frustrating—augmented by the paranoia of the Left that any criticism of Islam amounts to bigotry. More to the point, the lofty attitude of these self-deprecating Westerners does nothing to support the cause of the “unbelievers” enslaved and violated by IS.

To maintain control, IS has developed an intricate bureaucracy of sexual slavery, so stringent in its rules and organisation that the sales contracts are notarised by the IS-run Islamic courts. Men from deeply conservative Islamic communities, in which casual sex is forbidden, see the promise of the sex trade as a golden opportunity to fulfil what they believe is the will of Allah while indulging in a twisted sexual campaign.

It is evident that the sex-slave trade is clinically structured, and this structure is based on religion. There are a number of verses in the Koran and Hadith that support the practice, most notably the accounts that Muhammad himself kept slaves. He also traded in slaves from Africa and other areas, as did many other people in the Arabian Peninsula at the time. One account (among many others), Koran 4:24, states, “And all married women [are forbidden unto you] save those [captives] whom your right hands possess [slaves].”

It is evident that the sex-slave trade is clinically structured, and this structure is based on religion. There are a number of verses in the Koran and Hadith that support the practice, most notably the accounts that Muhammad himself kept slaves. He also traded in slaves from Africa and other areas, as did many other people in the Arabian Peninsula at the time. One account (among many others), Koran 4:24, states, “And all married women [are forbidden unto you] save those [captives] whom your right hands possess [slaves].”

Regardless of the evidence supporting the dangers of Islamic ideology, there is a still a refusal by the Left to address it as the catalyst for Islamic terror.

There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today. Of course not all of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful people. The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25 per cent according to all intelligence services around the world. That leaves 75 per cent [of Muslims] being peaceful people. But when you’re looking at 15-25 per cent … you’re looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilisation. That is as big as the United States.

So why should we worry about the radical 15 to 25 per cent? Because it is the radicals that kill. Because it is the radicals that behead and massacre. When you look throughout history … most Germans were peaceful. Yet the Nazis drove the agenda. And as a result, 60 million people died … the peaceful majority were irrelevant.

Most Russians were peaceful as well. But the Russians were able to kill 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant … When you look at Japan prior to World War II, most Japanese were peaceful people too. Yet Japan was able to butcher its way across South-East Asia, killing 12 million people … the peaceful majority were irrelevant.

On September 11 in the United States we had 2.3 million Arab Muslims living in the US. It took nineteen hijackers—nineteen radicals—to bring America to its knees … and kill almost 3000 Americans. It’s time we take political correctness and throw it in the garbage where it belongs."

http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2015/11 ... l-slavery/

Ten Islamic State militants slipped into Thailand, leaked police memo reveals

"The “urgent” and “secret” memo cited information about ten Syrian members of ISIS that was provided to Thailand authorities by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), according to Bangkok-based news service Khaosod.

It said four suspects had travelled to Pattaya, two Bangkok and two to Phuket, with the remaining two heading to unknown locations.

The memo warned authorities to increase security around venues frequented by or associated with western allies who have joined attacks on ISIS, like the United States, UK and Australia."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/w ... 7634037958

Love secret memos
Especially when they are in the papers